Republican Jr Senator; previously Representative (SC-4)
Right to own a personal Social Security account
Socialists use the perceived victim status of groups to promote a collectivist or group-oriented approach to government, even when government is responsible for the injustice. The contrast between America's social and political philosophies is the most
distinct on this point. Those with socialist leanings generally push for group-oriented, universal, government-directed solutions to societal problems. Those who believe in freedom believe government should facilitate free choices and equal treatment for
all individuals. I'll mention a few examples.
Those who see individuals as incapable of making good decisions want a universal, government-owned, national pension plan (Social Security) with all retired Americans dependent (at least in part) on the
government for their income. Those who understand how freedom works will fight for the right of every American to have a personal Social Security account they own and the government can't spend.
Social Security program is built on debt and dependency
Social Security is a promise to seniors America must keep, but it is another government program built on debt and dependency. Today's generation of seniors is happy with Social Security because they will, on average, get more from the program than they
put in. But the federal government has not saved one penny of the 12.5% it takes out of every American's paycheck. In 2017 Social Security taxes will no longer pay promised retirement benefits, and there is no money in the so-called Trust Fund.
Source: Saving Freedom, by Jim DeMint, p. 80
, Jul 4, 2009
People should own their Social Security accounts
Two years before the 1998 elections, I decided I would run for Congress. I ran as a Republican because their ideas of personal responsibility, limited government, and more freedom matched what I personally experienced as the reasons for
America's greatness. My campaign slogan was "Bring Freedom Home." For me it was all about bringing dollars and decisions back to individuals, families, and communities.
My campaign platform was bold and na‹ve. People should own their Social
Security accounts, and the money they pay in Social Security taxes should be saved in a personal account the government can't spend. People should have the freedom to own a health insurance policy they can afford and keep from job to job.
Parents should have many more choices of schools, and the money we spend on public education should follow the student and not be reserved solely for government-run schools. And finally, we should eliminate the personal income tax and the IRS.
Voted YES on establishing reserve funds & pre-funding for Social Security.
Voting YES would:
require that the Federal Old Age and Survivors Trust Fund be used only to finance retirement income of future beneficiaries;
ensure that there is no change to benefits for individuals born before January 1, 1951
provide participants with the benefits of savings and investment while permitting the pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits; and
ensure that the funds made available to finance such legislation do not exceed the amounts estimated to be actuarially available.
Proponents recommend voting YES because:
Perhaps the worst example of wasteful spending is when we take the taxes people pay for Social Security and, instead of saving them, we spend them on other things. Even worse than spending Social Security on other things is we do not count it as debt when we talk about the deficit every year. So using the Social Security money is actually a way to hide even more wasteful spending without counting it as debt.
This Amendment would change that.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
This amendment has a fatal flaw. It leaves the door open for private Social Security accounts by providing participants with the option of "pre-funding of at least some portion of future benefits."
This body has already closed the door on the President's ill-conceived plan for private Social Security accounts. The opposition to privatization is well-known:
Privatizing Social Security does nothing to extend the solvency of the program.
Transition costs would put our Nation in greater debt by as much as $4.9 trillion.
Creating private accounts would mean benefit cuts for retirees, by as much as 40%.
Half of all American workers today have no pension plan from their employers. It is critical that we protect this safety net.
Make no mistake about it, this is a stalking-horse for Social Security. It looks good on the surface, but this is an amendment to privatize Social Security.
Voted YES on raising 401(k) limits & making pension plans more portable.
Comprehensive Retirement Security and Pension Reform Act of 2001: Vote to pass a bill that would raise the amount individuals may contribute to traditional and Roth Individual Retirement Accounts and to 401[k] plans and make pensions plans more portable
Reference: Bill sponsored by Portman, R-OH;
Bill HR 10
; vote number 2001-96
on May 2, 2001
Voted YES on reducing tax payments on Social Security benefits.
Vote to pass a bill that would reduce the percentage of Social Security benefits that is taxable from 85 to 50 percent for single taxpayers with incomes over $25,000 and married couples with incomes over $32,000. The revenues that would be lost for the Medicare trust fund would be replaced by money from the general fund.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Archer, R-TX;
Bill HR 4865
; vote number 2000-450
on Jul 27, 2000
Voted NO on strengthening the Social Security Lockbox.
Amending the Social Security Lockbox bill to require that any budget surplus cannot be spent until the solvency of Social Security and Medicare is guaranteed.
Reference: Motion to Recommit introduced by Rangel, D-NY;
Bill HR 1259
; vote number 1999-163
on May 26, 1999
Create personal retirement accounts within Social Security.
DeMint co-sponsored creating personal retirement accounts within Social Security
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:
Amends Social Security Act to add a new tax-exempt "Personal Retirement Account Program".
Designates a personal retirement account for each such individual that is funded by deposits from amounts in the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund not otherwise required for immediate withdrawal, and by rollover and other contributions made by eligible individuals.
Directs the SEC to report to Congress on personal retirement account reinsurance.
Amends the tax code to provide for: (1) annual $300 contributions (tax credits) on behalf of each eligible individual to a personal retirement account; and (2) an excise tax on excess contributions to such accounts.
SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT: One of the things I have consistently heard from folks back home is the very simple idea that the first part of saving Social Security is making sure that Social Security taxes stay with Social Security.
That is what this bill does because it takes the Social Security surplus, whatever that happens to be, and simply rebates it back to the people paying Social Security taxes, not to go out and fix up the car or buy a refrigerator with it, but instead to go into their own personal Social Security savings account that would be held by a fiduciary like the local bank.
The individual could not get their hands on the money until they turn 65, but they would get a monthly statement and for the first time, because of the private property rights that come with an account like that, for the first time have a firewall created between political forces in D.C. and their Social Security surplus.
LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means; never called for a House vote.
Source: Personal Lockbox Act (H.R.4839) 00-HR4839 on Jul 12, 2000
Rated 33% by the ARA, indicating a mixed record on senior issues.
DeMint scores 33% by the ARA on senior issues
The mission of the Alliance for Retired Americans is to ensure social and economic justice and full civil rights for all citizens so that they may enjoy lives of dignity, personal and family fulfillment and security. The Alliance believes that all older and retired persons have a responsibility to strive to create a society that incorporates these goals and rights and that retirement provides them with opportunities to pursue new and expanded activities with their unions, civic organizations and their communities.
The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
DeMint supports the CC survey question on private retirement accounts
The Christian Coalition voter guide [is] one of the most powerful tools Christians have ever had to impact our society during elections. This simple tool has helped educate tens of millions of citizens across this nation as to where candidates for public office stand on key faith and family issues.
The CC survey summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Allowing individuals to invest a portion of their Social Security tax in private retirement accounts"
Source: Christian Coalition Survey 10-CC-q6 on Aug 11, 2010
