On the March 6th edition of Meet the Press, moderator Tim Russert spoke to Senator Dick Durbin (D, IL) about this hotly debated topic.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that we currently have a crisis with Social Security?

SEN. DURBIN: I wouldn't use the word crisis. Untouched, Social Security will make every single payment for the next 37 years to every retiree, maybe 47 years. But beyond that, unless the economy grows well and grows us out of the problem, we need to address it. And there are ways to address it in sensible, commonsense approaches today that will play out in 40 or 50 years.

Senator Durbin's Solution
George Bush's political strategy on Social Security is similar to the public rhetoric we witnessed regarding Iraq. He scares Americans into supporting rash action. Bush lied to the world about Saddam's WMDs. Saddam was a brutal dictator, yet Bush's rush to war led to mass confusion in the country, our troops were ill-prepared, we are responsible for tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths, and the United States has suffered a catastrophic loss in American credibility and prestige. Bush now scares Americans again by claiming Social Security faces a crisis.

When speaking with Tim Russert, Senator Durbin announced a most efficient, as well as equitable, option to strengthen Social Security. The Bush administration hopes their scare tactics will prevent you from getting this information.

SEN. DURBIN: But let me add something else. If we decided to take the president's proposed tax cuts for people making over $300,000 a year, if we took those away and put those resources into Social Security, we wouldn't be sitting here today. So the tax cuts -- that are not permanent law -- the president wants for people making over $300,000 a year. The money that takes out of the Treasury is enough to make Social Security solid for 75 years.

Senator Durbin's proposal, to rollback Bush's tax cuts to the Clinton-era level, would affect only the most wealthy ONE percent of Americans. Under the Clinton tax structure, the United States enjoyed the greatest prosperity in recent times. Bush's tax cuts for the most wealthy puts your retirement at risk. Do you make over $300,000 a year? Why do you allow their greed to destroy your retirement?
Contact and Support Senator Durbin and this Proposal

Background on Social Security
Currently the federal government takes about 6.2 percent of your paycheck and applies it to the national Social Security program. It mandates that your employer match that contribution. The government requires most workers and their employers to participate, although there are exemptions for self-employed and some other groups.
Try This Social Security Calculator

Illusion #1: This is not YOUR money. Your contribution does not go into YOUR personal account. The money is used to pay for those who are currently retired. It also helps support Americans who have suffered a debilitating injury and those who have lost their parents. When Bush says he wants to privatize Social Security and create Personal Accounts, we would be required to come up with the money to do this. As the Republicans refuse to raise taxes, they would borrow the money -- about $2 trillion or $2,000,000,000,000 immediately. This comes to about $8,000 for every American man, woman and child alive today. To continue the program, we would need to borrow (or increase taxes) to raise an estimated $10 trillion more over the next couple decades.

Illusion #2: Privatization Solves the Problem. If we were magically able to create the trillions of dollars to create private accounts, as outlined in the previous example, the question remains whether private accounts would be the most appropriate method to fund Social Security. Currently, the money collected from tax payers and businesses is channeled into U.S. Treasury bonds (when that money is not spent for other programs). These are the safest investments on the planet. For years George Bush has argued that citizens should be allowed to invest "as they choose." He suggests either stocks or bonds.

Under Bush's proposal, Americans would be required to spend trillions of dollars to create private accounts. Individuals would make the decision whether to invest in stocks or bonds. Currently, we invest in bonds alone. To privatize the system, we will pay fees to brokers. This is a hidden cost. The second option will be to invest in the stock market. How well do you understand this competitive arena? How much will it cost to get reliable financial advice? What happens to those who lose?
See Chile's Example

Illusion #3: Investment in stocks grow at a faster rate than in bonds. Sometimes this is correct, sometimes not. There are no guarantees in the stock market. You are gambling with your future. More importantly, millions of Americans would be gambling with their retirement money. What happens if 25 million people reach the age of retirement only to find they have lost their life savings? Who pays to support them in that case? You do!

Blue chip stocks are stocks of well-established and stable companies. Blue chip stocks are typically from financially-sound companies that have a good record of producing earnings and paying dividends. The term "blue chip stocks" is derived from poker since the poker chip with the highest value is blue. For example, the 30 companies that make up Dow Jones Industrial Average are some of the bluest of blue chip stocks.

We illustrate the recent history of some of the key blue chip stocks below, including IBM, General Electric, Microsoft, SBC Communications, Coca-Cola (KO) and JP Morgan Chase financial.

Comparing results over the decade, we see five companies did relatively well since 1996. SBC Communcations lost money. Yet if we examine growth since 2000, all six companies lost money. What happens to those who retire in the down periods?

Social Security funds invested in U.S. Treasury bonds grew consistently over both periods. We must expect mixed results for stocks. Do you know enough about the stock market to take this risk? Do you believe most Americans have a sufficient background in investing to make these complex decisions?

All of us should have a mixed-retirement plan. Every investment expert will tell you never keep "all your eggs in one basket." Social Security should be our safety net. Independently, we should add to this retirement program. Does your company offer a 401 Plan? If so, begin making contributions. Do you have an IRA (Individual Retirement Account)? If not, open one this year. By adding 5-10 percent of your paycheck to these programs, along with the required Social Security contributions, you will be on your way to a comfortable future.

The NY Times recently ran a story comparing the progress in stocks to that of home values. This comparision may help you to develop a more diverse and profitable portfolio.

Keep this important fact in mind: Had George W. Bush and the Republicans not pushed through three massive tax cuts in the past four years, Social Security would be in great shape. If just one-third of these tax cuts were allowed to expire, i.e., not made permanent, we could fund Social Security into the 22nd century.

Second, at present, workers and employers only pay Social Security taxes on the first $90,000 of their income. Why don't we increase this limit?

Third, currently, we begin receiving retirement benefits at age 65. Why don't we increase this to 67, or possibly, 70 years of age. We are living longer, and we should work longer.

Fourth, Baby Boomers are the real problem. After WWII, people began to have LOTS of kids. Better medical care led to less infant mortality. From 1945 to about 1964, there was an explosion in population. After that period, families began to become smaller again. Baby Boomers begin retiring in 2008. By 2028, the pressure on Social Security will begin to recede. Republicans fail to mention this.

Using the most conservative estimates, Social Security remains healthy until 2018. It remains fully funded until 2042. Congressional Budget Office estimates show Social Security remains fully funded until 2052. With minor adjustments, we can fully support the program for decades.

Most importantly, privatization will bankrupt the system. It will cost more to create private accounts than to strengthen the current program. And, people will be left with a great deal of risk. We support taking risks. Life is about risk. Yet we want to ensure that ALL Americans have a safety net, allowing them to take risks when they are comfortable. Republicans want to put all our eggs in a risky basket. Don't be fooled!