Orrin Hatch: “Furthermore, to nail the point home, the nonpartisan Concord Coalition entered the fray. In a memorandum dated February…”

“Furthermore, to nail the point home, the nonpartisan Concord Coalition entered the fray. In a memorandum dated February 18, 1997, the Coalition concluded that the Senate position--that if the balanced budget amendment does not exempt Social Security it will somehow nullify Social Security benefits and prevent payments of benefits to retired baby boomers--is, and I quote, ``nonsense.'' Let me quote further. ``What the balanced budget amendment would do is to raise national savings, and thus make Social Security--along with the myriad other claims on tomorrow's economy--more affordable. It would be ironic indeed if concern about funding Social Security, whether real or pretended, turns out to be the issue that sinks the balanced budget amendment.'' ``Let us be clear,'' they go on to say, ``The balanced budget amendment would in no way alter the status of the Social Security trust funds.''”