The Hidden History of Social Security: A job for only the Tea Party to fix


When critics of the Tea Party point and say that they (the Tea Party) “resist everything, and are stuck in the past,” the context for what Tea Party members are weary of is never explored.  The issue of why they are against most new laws, every act of the political do-gooder, and insist on a return to American founding principles gets lost in the debate because more often than not the critics have no sense of history and are limited in knowledge to the shallow depths of knowledge in their own lifetimes. The more issues of governance is explored, the more evident it becomes that without a group of patriots who function not out of a love for political power, a thinly disguised grab for power, networking connections, or just a desire to be socially destructive, that politics in a democratic republic deteriorate quickly without such a presence.  There needs to a group in America that can use wisdom and a firm adherence to The American Constitution to keep politics as honest as possible.   Without such wisdom, without the prying eyes of a neutral party, all the well intended programs that government invents today become tomorrow’s tyranny, and now that there is a clear history in America, it is now clear that all laws created by government end up becoming monsters of self fulfilled destruction shortly after passage.


For proof of how slowly, and how destructive an idea created by government can become a social monstrosity, look no further than the Social Security system and witness the gradual erosion of that socialist oriented program which should have never of happened.  These things do not become terrors in one lifetime, but over two or three lifetimes, so many of the laws created within the last 20 years in government cannot yet be measured.  In that context, read the below history of Social Security, and take note of why the Tea Party is a needed–why political skepticism should be valued so that American politics can avoid a peril similar to the fall of the Roman Empire, the decline of English Imperialism, or the decline of Greek society.  The decline of American society will occur without addressing the erosion of moral order currently embracing The United States or a return to Constitutional principles.  And to date, it is the Tea Party that is committed to returning America to the formula that made the greatest nation on the face of the Earth over all of human history. Such a formula is valuable, and needs careful adherence.  So study carefully the below history of Social Security to see how quickly it became one of the most corrosive socialist programs the world has yet seen. 

Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised: 1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary, No longer Voluntary.

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program, Now 7.65% on the first $90,000.

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,  No longer tax deductible.

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and, Under Johnson the money was moved to The General Fund and Spent.

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Under Clinton & Gore Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.  

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.   

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the  US  

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.    Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it.

The same kind of distortion will happen with Obama Care, it has already happened with Medicare, and is present in every program that has the government’s name tag on it.  Now that the government created Social Security—which was an obvious—and costly mistake, they have tried to correct the error with more rules, which has only dug the hole deeper.  The only way to fix the problem of Social Security would be to reset the political system before the failure occurred, and this is what the Tea Party is starting to advocate in response to the many errors that are beginning to show up as these socialist programs are beginning to fail.  The position may be unpopular, but it is the desire to come up with a populist solution that created Social Security in the first place and has made it a mandatory program that is used for personal identification tracking and an extraordinary pay check contributions at 7.65%.  At the rate of decline that Social Security has deteriorated in just 70 years, it is obvious that 70 more years will lead to a total collapse of that particular program.  After all, the American demographic is changing.  People are living longer, the young people are not getting married at age 19 and staying married for 50 years like they did when Social Security was created—so socially the adult population of tomorrow will be much more unstable, and not able to sustain Social Security without it encompassing even more than the current contribution rate.  So there are copious amounts of evidence that Social Security will change much more radically in the coming years than it has in the past—which is quite a bit—because of the decline in social quality of the participants. 


Social Security is just one example of a program that started with good intentions, as it was a direct response to the Red Decade of the 1930’s push for communism, but quickly degenerated into a corrosive social element that most of American society is addicted to.  Stating that such a program should be abolished or radically reformed at a minimum is the task of scholarly groups like the Tea Party who are committed to education above radical protest and social unrest to move society in the proper direction.  But it will make factions of society very upset because many of them have signed their name behind the support of more programs like Social Security and if such a thing were ever abolished, it would mean that their lives have little meaning—because that is at the heart behind most new laws, small-minded men and women looking for a way to leave behind a legacy—a way for future generations to think fondly of their time on planet Earth.  That is not a good reason to protect a program that is functionally against everything that being an American is supposed to represent—self reliance.  Going against that current will be unpopular, but often the truth usually is.  But that doesn’t make the action invalid.  Instead—it’s quite the opposite. 

Rich Hoffman