1011 Arlington Blvd. ♦ Suite 300 ♦ Arlington, VA. 22209
703-894-6222 ♦ (Fax) 703-894-6231 ♦ concordcoalition.org

July 23, 2003

The Honorable Lindsey Graham
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Jim Kolbe
The Honorable Charles Stenholm
United States House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Graham, Mr. Kolbe and Mr. Stenholm,

The Concord Coalition has long maintained that lawmakers should come together in a bipartisan manner to make the tough choices needed to put Social Security on a fiscally sustainable path for future generations. Before that can happen, political leaders of both parties must end their escalating competition of free lunch proposals and engage in the kind of open, honest discussion called for in the letter you sent today to the congressional campaign leadership.

We strongly support the aim of your letter and commend your initiative in organizing a bipartisan coalition to help enforce a political “ceasefire” on this vital issue. Regardless of how Americans feel about specific reform proposals--and there is certainly plenty of room for discussion--we must not ignore the fact that Social Security's current financial condition is unsustainable. Moreover, the window of opportunity to gradually phase in reforms is rapidly closing.

It is no secret that Social Security promises more in future benefits than current law can afford. Changes of some sort must be made to protect future generations from sudden deep benefit cuts, steep tax increases or crushing debt. The case for reform is not a matter of ideology - it is a matter of arithmetic.

Correcting the imbalance will not be easy because it requires sacrifice, such as reduced benefit promises, additional contributions and greater national savings. Hard as it may be to make these choices, it will be impossible if all realistic options are taken off the table for fear of political retribution. As Concord's Co-Chairs former Senators Warren Rudman and Bob Kerrey said in an op-ed piece for the Washington Post: “No realistic reform plan looks good when compared with the false hypothetical of a perfectly solvent system. Reformers have the burden of saying what changes they would make to a system that is popular but unsustainable. Critics can sit back and take pot shots at politically painful options without having to say what they would do instead. However, if we do not have the political will to solve the Social Security problem now, we can't hope to do so when the baby boomers start collecting benefits.”

Unfortunately, the highly volatile atmosphere that surrounds Social Security reform encourages support for the most popular plan in Washington - the “Do Nothing Plan.” That is not an acceptable option. Your letter is an important step toward an improved political environment in which we can address the Social Security challenge now instead of handing off an even bigger challenge to our children and grandchildren.

Sincerely,

Robert L. Bixby, Executive Director
The Concord Coalition