ROCKEFELLERROCKEFELLERSocial Security offered last week during debates on the unfunded mandates legislation, and in the future in regard to the balanced budget amendment. Such confusion is understandable. Both sides tend to claim to be protecting Social Security.
Last week, I voted for Senator Harkin's amendment to the S. 1, the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995, instead of Senator Kempthorne's amendment, because I believed that the language of the Harkin amendment was much stronger language to protect Social Security trust funds if a constitutional amendment to balance the budget is adopted.
Personally, I oppose a balanced budget amendment, and I hope that over the course, of time people will understand how such an amendment will affect programs that are vital to the citizens in their States and that such a balanced budget amendment will not be added to the Constitution.
But because the fate of a constitutional amendment to balance the budget remains unclear, the Harkin amendment is a very important symbol of the intention of the Senate not to jeopardize or play games with Social Security or use the Social Security trust fund in calculations to balance the budget.
I voted last week for Senator Harkin's amendment which says that Social Security should be exempt in any calculations required by a balanced budget. I did it to protect the Social Security trust funds and to reassure senior citizens who rely on Social Security benefits. My record in fighting to protect Social Security and senior citizens is clear.