Search News
For the Media
For media inquiries, call CWA Communications at 202-434-1168 or email comms@cwa-union.org. To read about CWA Members, Leadership or Industries, visit our About page.
Feel Like Working until You're 70 or older?
If George Bush and Alan Greenspan get their way, get ready to work until you're at least 70 - when you'll finally have the chance to draw full Social Security.
The Federal Reserve Board chairman is proposing that the retirement age be raised so Social Security funds can be diverted to cover the president's soaring deficit, created largely by tax breaks for the wealthy.
"Of all the injustices working families are facing as a result of Bush administration policies, this is a new low," CWA President Morton Bahr said. "Wealthy Americans are getting richer than ever and have the means to retire far sooner, while wage-earners are looking at longer hours today and more years on the job down the road before being able to enjoy a secure retirement."
It's a double-whammy for working families because many don't have any pension plans to rely on beyond Social Security. In 2000, according to a federal survey, just half of all workers were covered by any kind of pension plan, including a 401(k) investment plan.
Not surprisingly, those earning the highest salaries - the top 20 percent of earners - were most likely to have a pension, with 73 percent of them covered. Just 18 percent of the lowest-paid workers had any kind of pension.
Workers today are feeling the squeeze of helping children through college and caring for aging parents while trying to put something away for retirement. Most financial planners advise that workers will need about 80 percent of their annual income to maintain their quality of life in retirement.
Workers, on average, count on Social Security for nearly 47 percent of their total retirement income, but many have no other means. Without Social Security, more than half of all senior citizens would live in poverty.
Senator John Kerry has pledged that if elected president he won't support raising the retirement age, cutting benefits or privatizing the system. Instead, he has plans to make Social Security truly secure and ensure that workers receive the benefits they've earned.
In contrast, Bush policies spell retirement insecurity for most working Americans. To "fix" Social Security, Bush and other government officials want to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. Bush says he doesn't support changes for current retirees or those nearing retirement age, but for everyone else, all bets are off.
Greenspan thinks workers - especially those in the "baby boom" generation - just have to get used to the idea of working longer. In late August, at an annual meeting of economists, academics, bankers and others at a Wyoming retreat, he put workers on notice: be prepared to work to age 70, or even beyond, before being eligible for full Social Security benefits. Currently, people who are now 44 or younger will have to work until age 67 to collect full benefits.
The Bush administration also has a scheme to spend workers' retirement dollars that otherwise would be put safely in the Social Security program. They want to have workers invest in individual stock market accounts. Doing so would take $1.5 trillion out of the Social Security program over ten years - a massive drain in funding that would force even more benefit cuts.
Economists warn that private investment plans are expensive and risky. For Wall Street, banks and insurance companies, all of which are lobbying for privatization, it means profits. For workers, it means risk. By investing in companies like Enron or WorldCom, their life savings could disappear. Even without corporate mismanagement or fraud, a downturn in the market could destroy their retirement fund.
While the Bush plan says the private accounts are "voluntary," workers who don't opt to invest will be penalized with additional benefit cuts.
In 1982, Greenspan had a far different attitude about Social Security. He headed a bipartisan commission that recommended tax increases to keep the program solvent for baby boomers. In fact, the program today has enough revenue to pay all benefits for nearly 40 years.
"What we don't have are funds for the massive debt created by the huge Bush tax cuts for the wealthy," Bahr said. " What we don't have is money earmarked to help seniors. Instead we've got a confusing and expensive Medicare prescription drug plan that is providing a giant windfall for insurance and drug companies."
The proposal to fund the Bush-created shortfalls by robbing Social Security is grossly unfair, Bahr and many economists say. The Social Security payroll tax falls most heavily on lower- and middle-income workers, because everyone pays the same rate. Yet cuts in the program will hurt working families far more than higher-salaried employees.
"Working families are counting on full benefits and a decent retirement at an age where they can enjoy it," Bahr said. "They don't want to wait until age 70 or beyond to use the benefits they've earned."
The Federal Reserve Board chairman is proposing that the retirement age be raised so Social Security funds can be diverted to cover the president's soaring deficit, created largely by tax breaks for the wealthy.
"Of all the injustices working families are facing as a result of Bush administration policies, this is a new low," CWA President Morton Bahr said. "Wealthy Americans are getting richer than ever and have the means to retire far sooner, while wage-earners are looking at longer hours today and more years on the job down the road before being able to enjoy a secure retirement."
It's a double-whammy for working families because many don't have any pension plans to rely on beyond Social Security. In 2000, according to a federal survey, just half of all workers were covered by any kind of pension plan, including a 401(k) investment plan.
Not surprisingly, those earning the highest salaries - the top 20 percent of earners - were most likely to have a pension, with 73 percent of them covered. Just 18 percent of the lowest-paid workers had any kind of pension.
Workers today are feeling the squeeze of helping children through college and caring for aging parents while trying to put something away for retirement. Most financial planners advise that workers will need about 80 percent of their annual income to maintain their quality of life in retirement.
Workers, on average, count on Social Security for nearly 47 percent of their total retirement income, but many have no other means. Without Social Security, more than half of all senior citizens would live in poverty.
Senator John Kerry has pledged that if elected president he won't support raising the retirement age, cutting benefits or privatizing the system. Instead, he has plans to make Social Security truly secure and ensure that workers receive the benefits they've earned.
In contrast, Bush policies spell retirement insecurity for most working Americans. To "fix" Social Security, Bush and other government officials want to cut benefits and raise the retirement age. Bush says he doesn't support changes for current retirees or those nearing retirement age, but for everyone else, all bets are off.
Greenspan thinks workers - especially those in the "baby boom" generation - just have to get used to the idea of working longer. In late August, at an annual meeting of economists, academics, bankers and others at a Wyoming retreat, he put workers on notice: be prepared to work to age 70, or even beyond, before being eligible for full Social Security benefits. Currently, people who are now 44 or younger will have to work until age 67 to collect full benefits.
The Bush administration also has a scheme to spend workers' retirement dollars that otherwise would be put safely in the Social Security program. They want to have workers invest in individual stock market accounts. Doing so would take $1.5 trillion out of the Social Security program over ten years - a massive drain in funding that would force even more benefit cuts.
Economists warn that private investment plans are expensive and risky. For Wall Street, banks and insurance companies, all of which are lobbying for privatization, it means profits. For workers, it means risk. By investing in companies like Enron or WorldCom, their life savings could disappear. Even without corporate mismanagement or fraud, a downturn in the market could destroy their retirement fund.
While the Bush plan says the private accounts are "voluntary," workers who don't opt to invest will be penalized with additional benefit cuts.
In 1982, Greenspan had a far different attitude about Social Security. He headed a bipartisan commission that recommended tax increases to keep the program solvent for baby boomers. In fact, the program today has enough revenue to pay all benefits for nearly 40 years.
"What we don't have are funds for the massive debt created by the huge Bush tax cuts for the wealthy," Bahr said. " What we don't have is money earmarked to help seniors. Instead we've got a confusing and expensive Medicare prescription drug plan that is providing a giant windfall for insurance and drug companies."
The proposal to fund the Bush-created shortfalls by robbing Social Security is grossly unfair, Bahr and many economists say. The Social Security payroll tax falls most heavily on lower- and middle-income workers, because everyone pays the same rate. Yet cuts in the program will hurt working families far more than higher-salaried employees.
"Working families are counting on full benefits and a decent retirement at an age where they can enjoy it," Bahr said. "They don't want to wait until age 70 or beyond to use the benefits they've earned."