I know that the primary focus of our brief visit this afternoon is on government expenditure, it is on truth in advertising, if you want to call it that, because the government has been, I think, disingenuous with the way it has called this a surplus, because this is not what folks at home would call a surplus, it is not what business would call a surplus. But tied to it is this issue of Social Security. There is one point that I think is worth mentioning, because it frankly sounds alluring. As you mentioned earlier, which is not related to reserving the surplus for Social Security but in the larger context of the Social Security problem, that the trustees, not what I say, not what you say, not what the gentleman from Michigan says but what the trustees have said is that if we do nothing to save Social Security, it is going to have real problems down the line. The choices are fairly limited as we all know. You can cut current benefits, you can raise taxes, or you can grow the assets of the trust fund at a higher rate than they are now growing at.
Marshall Sanford: “I know that the primary focus of our brief visit this afternoon is on government expenditure, it is on truth in…”
On the recordMarch 3, 1999
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing government expenditure and the implications for Social Security.
Share
More from Marshall Sanford
Apr 26, 2018
I thank the chairman and ranking member for taking our amendment and including it in the en bloc amendment. It is a GAO study of revenue diversion by airports. I think it is important for three different reasons: One, it ties to the very…
Jun 6, 2018
I thank Chairman Shuster for agreeing to the amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford). The amendment was agreed to…
Jul 24, 2018
In a trust-based political system, the idea that you institutionalize lying is a real problem.





