Star Parker Speaks on Social Security BY: Gerard Balan

This week, I was fortunate enough to attend a talk on Social Security reform by Star Parker in Cabot Auditorium of Tufts University. As one can judge from her choice of titles for her books, include "Pimps, Whores and Welfare Brats: From Welfare Cheat to Conservative Messenger" and " Uncle Sam's Plantation: How Big Government Enslaves America's Poor and What We Can Do About It," Parker is one of the more pugnacious of "black conservatives." So, yes, Ann Coulter may have some competition. However, Parker speaks from experience. She has more credibility criticizing welfare because she has been on it. She can speak on topics of abortion and denounce the practice because she has been there. While living the life of a single mother and "welfare queen," she had four. After finding herself and religion, she became a born-again conservative bomb-thrower and founded the Coalition for Urban Renewal and Education (CURE), and makes monthly presentations to Congress. As a fan of her syndicated column, I was eager to see her in person.

Parker questioned the validity of the entire concept of welfare. Such a system has "replaced the moral framework ... [that made] people responsible [and] replaced the natural consequences of bad decisions with a safety net," she said. In specific relation to the retirement portion of Social Security, Parker criticized it for operating as a "one size fits all" program that ends up taking a person's retirement out of their hands. Parker argued that a non-transferable retirement fund is especially detrimental for blacks, as a large number of blacks die before the retirement age, and a portion of their money is lost to the system before they receive the benefits for which they have paid. In addition, members of these low-income socioeconomic groups are often unable to pass on the portion of their inheritance that has gone to Social Security.

"I'm sorry. I'm a radical. I was with the folks who wanted to abolish the Department of Education"

Parker also contends that Social Security also tends to discourage marriage, which she said she believes makes for more stable households, citing a statistic that less than eight percent of homes based around a married couple live in poverty.

By attempting to raise the retirement age to ensure the future viability of the social security fund, Parker said she sees politicians telling the black community, "We want you dead before we have to repay what we owe you." She pointed out that the large swell in the number of retiring baby boomers, reaching 70 million within the next twenty years, will bring the Social Security program an early death.

Parker rejected the proposed attempts to gradually remedy the problems with the system, such as increases in the Social Security tax, raising the minimum retirement age, or slightly decreasing benefits. She said that politicians often "manipulate different changes so they can keep the current system," essentially avoiding the problem until a future time.

She advocated privatizing Social Security, allowing workers to have their own personal investment accounts. This would allow people direct control of their money and more flexibility in leaving it to their children.

During the question and answer period, Parker expressed her libertarian views on education, which she argued should be totally privatized so that poor parents can have the freedom to raise their children in an educational environment with a moral framework. Of course, she advocated school vouchers as a stepping stone in that direction as poor people will have the means to choose a an appropriate, quality school rather than being locked into a poorly funded one.

Another question pressed Parker on the rise in African-American Republican votes in this past presidential election. When taking into account the number of new voters that voted for the current President, Parker argued that the black Republican vote rose 18.5%, a number rarely reported in the media. She credits the issue of gay marriage as bringing many African-Americans to the conservative side. She stressed that blacks are angry that homosexual activists are equating gay rights with civil rights which is, in their minds, equating an unchangeable identity to a lifestyle choice. Oddly, she also commented on the different ways black and white people react to the question of gay marriage. "Whites will reason the thing out," she said, while "blacks come at it from a more emotional perspective," leading them to believe that it is inherently wrong.

I am unsure if I agree with that last wild, generalization, but I got the opportunity to ask her to respond to the AARP's common refutation of the sentiment that social security is unfair to blacks. Conservatives argue that since blacks live longer, few of them are around long enough to collect their Social Security checks. The AARP counters that this is true, but that disparity is countered by the fact that a disproportionate percentage of blacks benefit from the programs disability programs. For example, most people can count on retiring at 65, but one can hardly predict if he or she will become disabled. What if you get in a car accident and become paralyzed at 21? Investing in private accounts may get you a return after several years, but in the meantime, you are getting less than you would under the current system because a portion of the payouts are earmarked for investment.

Parker's response was disappointing. She essentially argued that the language of retirement and disability should be separated from the debate, but how can you when Social Security reform will effect both? When pressed further, she argued that disability should be taken out of Social Security and under welfare since disability and retirement do not really go together anyway. Hmm. The AARP is a political powerhouse. I hope conservatives can come up with a better answer than that! Then again, the specifics of Bush's plan still have not been laid out yet. So, we will have to wait and hope.

-Gerard Balan

**The talk was sponsored by our friends, hosted by the Tufts Republicans and we would like to thank them for the invitation.**