Tennant vote makes sense

To the editor:

The issue of Social Security can best be explained using jars of pennies. The people had been saving their pennies in a jar since 1935. In 1982-83, a well-meaning bipartisan commission, the Democratic Congress and the Reagan administration, came to a compromise that said it would be necessary for the people to start to save two pennies instead of one each year for all the baby boomers who would retire after 2010.

And so, the people began putting two pennies in the jar each year.

Along comes George W. Bush, who saw all the pennies in the jar and gave a tax break and all the pennies in the jar to the richest 1 percent. U.S. Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-Charleston, said this was a great idea, and she voted to give the pennies away. Now, the Republicans say the jar is empty for people who need Social Security in the future, so let’s privatize it. We’ll take the security out of Social Security and replace it with market risk.

The pennies that the people have been saving since 1935 have been invested in U.S. Treasury Bonds, which the government backs with the full faith and credit in itself. They remain the safest investment on Earth. Keep in mind they have those tanks and airplanes to back them up. If the pennies were put into the stock market, it could go down – remember 1929. But perhaps, and even more important, the treasury would have to borrow the money from another source to finance the deficit.

Keep in mind that when we pay interest to the Social Security Trust Fund, we pay ourselves back, like taking the pennies from your wallet and putting them in your pocket. If we borrow the money from China or the Arab states, we not only go into debt to them, but worse, much worse, we pay them interest as well.

Voting for Natalie Tennant for U.S. senator makes sense, since Capito voted to give away all the pennies the people saved to 1 percent of the richest people.

Michael Traubert