OCR Text |
Show lafoii Manors giiQsfions ou 8.8., Qfmo reduction people in this country who are aged, who depend upon Social Security. QUESTION: Can you tell us about the arms reduction talks going on in Geneva, and how are you involved in the peace process? HATCH: The talks in Geneva ' are significant for several reasons. One, this is the first time that we will be entering into negotiations with the Soviet Union with the intention inten-tion of reducing the number of weapons as opposed to just limiting them which has been the case in the past. Second, President Reagan has demonstrated to the Soviet Sov-iet Union that he is willing to match them in an arms build up if they fail to negotiate nego-tiate in good faith. In the past, we have come to the negotiating nego-tiating table unilaterally disarming dis-arming ourselves and allowing allow-ing them unilaterally to build up. Thirdly, the President has linked these talks to further discussions to the entire spectrum of security issues affecting Europe and the world. He mentioned this in his statement on nuclear and suggested that the Conference Con-ference on Security and Cooperation Co-operation in Europe be the forum for these discussions. As a commissioner to this conference, I'm one of six Senators so designated, I was pleased to seethe President Pres-ident place an emphasis on this process. All our fellow Utahns should be interested in this because the Commission Commis-sion for Security and Cooperation Co-operation in Europe is an organization which is an outgrowth out-growth of the Helsinksi Conference Con-ference and monitors a wide range of issues including the important issue of hum an rights. The ball is right now in the Soviet Union's court. The President has laid down . the gauntlet of an arms race and beside it he has laid the flower of peace. It is up to the Soviets as to which one they will pick up. QUESTION: Why does a couple's combined income result in a retirement pay that is less than an individual's indi-vidual's whose salary equals that of the couple? In other words, if two people are paying pay-ing in as much as one person, per-son, why isn't the return the same? HATCH: I think this law in the Social Security system was written when few married mar-ried people worked. And it wasn't considered discriminatory discrim-inatory at that time. Obviously, Ob-viously, I think the law is antiquated. The next likely thing to do would be to change the law, bring it up-to-date, and do what's right for women wo-men as well as men. I might add that President Presi-dent Reagan and this Administration Ad-ministration tried to completely com-pletely redo the Social Security Sec-urity system and make it more effective, bring it up to date, and do away with provisions just like this very one. As you recall, his opponents op-ponents in the Congress rebelled re-belled so strongly at even touching the Social Security system that President Reagan Rea-gan realized that the Congress Con-gress wasn't going to take any action on It, so he put the revisions on Ice. In two years when we get back to Social Security revamping, re-vamping, we'll be faced with these very same problems again, but it's going to be more difficult to change at that time. One thing to keep in mind for the immediate future is that even if a revision re-vision regarding this very law were proposed, I doubt that it would succeed.The Social Security Fund is already al-ready so burdened that without with-out fundamental reform, I don't think that it could handle one more burden like paying more retirement to married couples, even though I would like to see that happen. Another thing to remember remem-ber is that the Social Se- ' curity fund is not based on actuarlly sound basis. The Social Security taxes that we pay now don-'t even begin be-gin to pay for the benefits we receive. We have to face the problem prob-lem that by the end of next year ourSocialSecuritySys-tem ourSocialSecuritySys-tem will be technically bankrupt. bank-rupt. President Reagan wants to face the problem, but members of Congress don't. In the process, they made it a big, political football foot-ball when It really shouldn't have been made that. They were unwilling to do what really is right for all of our |