Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1956
File 024
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Facts Forum. Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1956 - File 024. 1956-01. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. May 28, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/209/show/163.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum. (1956-01). Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1956 - File 024. Facts Forum News, 1955-1956. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/209/show/163

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Facts Forum, Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1956 - File 024, 1956-01, Facts Forum News, 1955-1956, University of Houston Libraries, accessed May 28, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/1352973/item/209/show/163.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Facts Forum News, Vol. 5, No. 1, January 1956
Alternate Title Facts Forum News, Vol. V, No. 1, January 1956
Series Title Facts Forum News
Creator
  • Facts Forum
Publisher Facts Forum
Date January 1956
Language eng
Subject
  • Anti-communist movements
  • Conservatism
  • Politics and government
  • Hunt, H. L.
Place
  • Dallas, Texas
Genre
  • journals (periodicals)
Type
  • Text
Identifier AP2.F146 v. 5 1956; OCLC: 1352973
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries
  • Facts Forum News
Rights No Copyright - United States: This item is in the public domain in the United States and may be used freely in the United States. The item may not be in the public domain under the copyright laws of other countries.
Item Description
Title File 024
Transcript SOCIAL SECURITY (Continued) fit purposes. The rights of totally disabled workers to benefits earned while- they were' well were protected. The retirement test was mollified. In brief, the amendments passed last year put the system in prett) good shape, though there are slill inevitably some minor inequities which should be correct,',1 over the years. However, these improvements seemed to muke the Democrats unhappy. Credit for them belonged rightfully to the Re- publicun administration and the Republican Congress. So lust .lime in a eein- ference held by Speaker Rayburn ami the Democratic majority of lie- Ways and Means Committee-, tluv decided I" do something. \ -uilde'ii announcement wa- made- tbut the Democratic Congress would pass three importanl change- in the system: 1. Immediate payment of the same monthly benefits that they woulel receive if llicv were 65 lo all those- who became permanently and totally disabled: 2. Lowering of lhe retirement age of all women to 62; 3. Continuation of monthly benefits for children who become- permanently and totally disabled before age 1". LACK OF CONSIDERATION EVIDENT They announced that there woulel l„ no public hearings, but that thev expected lo reporl out the bill after three days of executive sessions of tin- Ways and Mi-ems Committee. The lack of consideration which llicy bud given these proposals wei- evident by the fact lhat at a later date llicy were shocked t.> hear from the actuaries of the system that the plan as announced would cosl tbe trust fund at least three bill] le.l- lars annually over the years. Republican members of th,- Committee protested thi- unseemly baste, ami demanded public hearings. \\ hen this wa- turned down by a strict peirtv vote, I made a motion that insurance actuaries be called before the Committee in give- their judgment us to the cosl of the disability program, a mallei with which insurance companies heul some unfortunate experiences. When ibis weis again defeated bv a party vote. I then moved that representatives of doctors' organizations l„- called before the Committee to explain how they cenl.I determine what is per- manent and total disability. Thi- again was turned down by a unanimous vote of tbe Democrat membei-. The Secretary of the Department of Health, Education und Welfare, in a letter to Chairman Cooper of the Committee, also protested the closed bear- Page 22 ings and the hasty consideration that was planned. W hen the ('ommittee met. e-vcu though the Democrats wen- in full control, llicy were not able to curry out their plan for reporting the bill in three eleiv-. Thev seemed somewhat uncertain a- to tin wisdom of some of the' proposals announced; in fact, thev made suggestions for modifications, voted them into tbe bill, and then Filer back-tracked ami voteel them out. In their public statement thev hail made no mention of taxes tei pay the- additional cost, but thev accepted a motion to increase the lax by I per cent next vear. Thev also accepted a Republican motion t.. e-xte-ml coverage to certain self-employed pro- Fessional groups, such eis lawyers ami dentists. Hut alter over six days of executive sessions, the- bill w ils reported lo the House eiml it passed overwhelmingly. Few in the House dared vote againsl anything which woulel increase Social Security benefits for 90 ineinv voters! The bill went oyer to the Senate. There Senator Byrd. Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, announced that be would not consider it without careful studv ami hearings. The Senate is planning to bold these healings next J.um.n v [this month]. BILL COULD WRECK OASI SYSTEM Now many of the objectives of this bill are worthy. We all know ed many individuals whose' cages un- appealing who will benefit by its provisions. But no individual can afford to insure biin- self against all the hazards of human existence, nor can tin- federal government eh, -ee eithe-r by taxing him for this protection. I nder the bill passed bv the House. the- tax rule twenty years from now will rise to 41/> per cent on employer ami I'-j per cent on employee. I nder tin- bill, the- >..i ieil Security leix rate on se-lf- employed w ill then be (>''■, per cent, or $283.50 for tin- individual who is earning SI20H a vear. Thi- will be- more than he will peiy in federal income lax under presenl law, if he is the' average citizen with a wife and two children. The bill troubles me greatly. It seems that we have' casually passed legislation winch may in future wreck the whole contributory 0AS1 system. The tax rate I mentioned i- so high that passage of these increased benefits may well pre- vent any other improvements in the system in future. \le- these three item- the- most i---.ii- tieel changes which should be made? Extending the survivorship payments to disabled children over eighteen has much in its favor anil is eomparat'* i Hi, Lllll ill.- lill IIIMH. 111.' 1II..SI i s^ll proposal as the bill is written is " which reduces the' retirement uge I**1 ' women lo 02. Is this the most imp'1' . change tbat shoulel be made in the_ . tern? Shoulel this have priority everything else'.-' Reducing tin- ij which widow- receive benefits Those whose husbands died after' wives had reached a mature age. cannot get a job al 60. And to redtt age when they will receive benefits'p would be an improvement I hav1'P f advocated. But with lhe growth of the- life einel the- impi-ovemenl in tin- heal our population, is it wise to discO" those w,nn,ai w ho w i-h lo wink the age of 62? If Ibis age is establ for Social Securit) purpose--, will A same pattern be adopted b) industry? You will remember thi dent Eisenhower jusl lust week V,^ business to employ more older C& • .' -ei i • ■ • r K" I he other expensive proposition traru. proposal lo grant Social Security r, - fits to those who become t<>t;ill?0|j,.|(, eilele-.l. Thc original estimate of this proposal by the actuaries Social Security system was cut ' i/r inii-- Icurii Jh'v a to about u billion dollars a year ljL(j ,i m°d.ts wi Ceinunilti-e he originally announced Dem(lvjn„ iroposal which was to peiv beiiej |i(>i. " ibK action of the the prop all permanently and totally ili-eil,l''"nder limiting ll I., those who were •"'" in, . Old. S |1„. irson SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC u,. ,, IMPLICATIONS '""' Bul this proposition, if ei.lvi--' -,-,.;, one we should enter inlo on'* very serious consideration, li i^ ' liia-lv new field. The monev i on*1 by employer and employee was P -j-^ in the trust fund to pay benefit* retirement, in to sun ivors up"" ' Insurance companies have had " Soni perienees in attempting this tvp'iiiu surance. It is the opinion of i*1' 19:' their actuaries that the estimate lined by the S.„ ial Security Vdniin'"' idei as Iii the lost of Ibis plan is feu ''' I he The Administration, eiml I *w |i concur in their program. h-r ' die -Ir.—ing rehabilitation. Nearly '''' '"' |V,i.l5, ".in,,-, 111' dividual, whatever his handicap- '-n I be eibh' to contribute to tic welfare. If a man is lo receive »o2 a stantial cash payment when be disability, is not this going H interfere with his incentive foi"/T,"^< tation? Determination of who |S ;!" •'<■ ubled is one which doctors f< administratively most difficult. ■Ve Facts Fonuxt News, Janinl<rm
File Name uhlib_1352973_v005_n001_024.jpg