Tea Party Republican Debate

I just don't think any of the current candidates for the Republican presidential ticket have any understanding of what 1) the REAL truth means and 2) what the American people, much less the Tea Party people want to hear from them.  What really got me upset was when the moderator, Wolf, ask the very direct question; "Is Social Security Unconstitutional?"

The answer is simple: YES!  But certainly needs to be followed up with an explanation to the way forward for the program.

There is nothing, I repeat NOTHING in the US Constitution that allows for the federal government to redistribute money from one tax payer to other taxpayers.  The authority just isn't there.  To quote one of our founding fathers: "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”  James Madison said this in 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia while standing on the floor of the House.

The Tenth Amendment – "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people", again, expressly denies that right to the federal government.

And even Ron Paul capitulated.  Politics and Politicians!!!

I was simply looking for one of them to stand for the truth.  I believe it would have gone a long way to solidifying the Tea Party vote.  And yes, even those currently on or soon to be on Social Security.

Because after stating that it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, they would have succinctly stated that the program has been in place for over 70 years and to think I could walk into the White House on day one and eliminate the program would be ludicrous.  But we do need to fix it.  How?

Simple.  This already paying into or receiving benefits have a simple choice of staying in the program or opting out.  The "Opt-Out", while not completely defined here, would be a graduated system where those closer to retirement keep paying the full SS taxes while those just starting in the workforce has all of their funds diverted to an Privately-held Social Security program (IRA).  The assumption is that those closer to retirement age would not opt-out.

The first thought that might come to many of your minds is: "Great, with funds starting to be diverted, how to we continue funding for those they choose not to Opt-Out?"  In my estimation if we take the ideas of Ron Paul (bringing most of our troops home from around the world), Newt Gingrich (modernizing the federal government) and all of the candidates (repeal ObamaCare) then the federal government has more than enough funds to fund Social Security until no-one is on or needs a federally funded Social Security system.

And lastly, I would establish a wealth cap for those receiving Social Security.  Social Security was started as a help-meet for those in need during there retirement years and has morphed into and expectation of retirement income.  And although it is not justifiable I would not continue to pay SS benefits to those who have no need for them (i.e. the wealthy).  On a side note:  I'd also eliminate the Congressional Retirement plan.  Why do we have a retirement plan for millionaires?!?!?

Okay, I've ranted.  Time to do other things.  Till next time.