Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

FDR's statement on the 1939 amendments to the Social Security Act of 1935

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:22 PM
Original message
FDR's statement on the 1939 amendments to the Social Security Act of 1935
IT WILL be exactly four years ago on the fourteenth day of this month that I signed the original Social Security Act. As I indicated at that time and on various occasions since that time, we must expect a great program of social legislation, such as is represented in the Social Security Act, to be improved and strengthened in the light of additional experience and understanding. These amendments to the Act represent another tremendous step forward in providing greater security for the people of this country. This is especially true in the case of the federal old age insurance system which has now been converted into a system of old age and survivors' insurance providing life-time family security instead of only individual old age security to the workers in insured occupations. In addition to the worker himself, millions of widows and orphans will now be afforded some degree of protection in the event of his death whether before or after his retirement.

The size of the benefits to be paid during the early years will be far more adequate than under the present law. However, a reasonable relationship is retained between wage loss sustained and benefits received. This is a most important distinguishing characteristic of social insurance as contrasted with any system of flat pensions.

Payment of old age benefits will begin on January 1, 1940, instead of January 1, 1942. Increase in pay-roll taxes, scheduled to take place in January, 1940, is deferred. Benefit payments in the early years are substantially increased.

I am glad that the insurance benefits have been extended to cover workers in some occupations that have previously not been covered. However, workers in other occupations have been excluded. In my opinion, it is imperative that these insurance benefits be extended to workers in all occupations.


The Federal-State system of providing assistance to the needy aged, the needy blind, and dependent children, has also been strengthened by increasing the federal aid. I am particularly gratified that the Federal matching ratio to States for aid to dependent children has been increased from one-third to one-half of the aid granted. I am also happy that greater Federal contributions will be made for public health, maternal and child welfare, crippled children, and vocational rehabilitation. These changes will make still more effective the Federal-State cooperative relationship upon which the Social Security Act is based and which constitutes its great strength. It is important to note in this connection that the increased assistance the States will now be able to give will continue to be furnished on the basis of individual need, thus affording the greatest degree of protection within reasonable financial bounds.

As regards administration, probably the most important change that has been made is to require that State agencies administering any part of the Social Security Act coming within the jurisdiction of the Social Security Board and the Children's Bureau shall set up a merit system for their employees. An essential element of any merit system is that employees shall be selected on a non-political basis and shall function on a non-political basis.

In 1934 I appointed a committee called the Committee on Economic Security made up of Government officials to study the whole problem of economic and social security and to develop a legislative program for the same. The present law is the result of its deliberations. That committee is still in existence and has considered and recommended the present amendments. In order to give reality and coordination to the study of any further developments that appear necessary I am asking the committee to continue its life and to make active study of various proposals which may be made for amendments or developments to the Social Security Act.

link


Some of those excluded:

Most women and minorities were excluded from the benefits of unemployment insurance and old age pensions. Employment definitions reflected typical white male categories and patterns.<11> Job categories that were not covered by the act included workers in agricultural labor, domestic service, government employees, and many teachers, nurses, hospital employees, librarians, and social workers.<12> The act also denied coverage to individuals who worked intermittently.<13> These jobs were dominated by women and minorities. For example, women made up 90% of domestic labor in 1940 and two-thirds of all employed black women were in domestic service.<14> Exclusions exempted nearly half the working population.<13> Nearly two-thirds of all African Americans in the labor force, 70 to 80% in some areas in the South, and just over half of all women employed were not covered by Social Security.<15><16> At the time, the NAACP protested the Social Security Act, describing it as “a sieve with holes just big enough for the majority of Negroes to fall through.”<16>

link


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
activa8tr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you for that! I was not alive back then but some of my older
family members were, and remember FDR well. But even his most important contribution to older Americans was flawed when it started.

Thanks again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. We must never do better than our predessors in the first place.
Even though we know better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Actually,
by signing health care reform, the President is doing better than his predecessors. On financial reform he's doing better than all his predecessors back to FDR.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. He gave you vinegar and you thanked him for it. Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. No, he gave you vinegar.
Stuff tastes like sweet victory to me.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. They were right to protest against that injustice.
A center, or center-left, absolutely needs a disciplined, militant left strongly advocating for its positions. It is an indispensable reservoir of (critical) support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Of course they were, but
Edited on Thu Jul-15-10 05:50 PM by ProSense
politics always gets in the way and protest shouldn't stand in the way of significant progress. Do you think anyone wanted to kill the Social Security bill for not going far enough?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. "for not going far enough"
Do you think thats why people wanted to kill the insurance reform? Maybe it wasn't about how far it was going, but in what direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. "Maybe it wasn't about how far it was going, but in what direction."
What, worse than the status quo? Killing it and leaving the status quo in place was better?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oregone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Time will tell
That just may be the case. Keep your eye on per capita health costs, the national average actuarial values, and the average amount employers will be contributing (along with the benefits associated), etc.

Time will tell
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David__77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-15-10 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. I don't think they did.
But if you are making a historical analogy to the current affairs, then this is another question indeed. I think to favor opening the door of macroeconomic control regardless of some adverse consequences that may accompany benefits in the short term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. What exactly are you saying? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peacetrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
15. K&R..Knowledge of "actual" history and not what we think things were is the first step
Edited on Fri Jul-16-10 10:16 AM by Peacetrain
in actually being able to accomplish things.. thank you for that op Prosense
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
16. K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 09:03 PM
Response to Original message
17. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Thanks
Are you okay?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-10 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. doing great i want GD:P to only have your posts!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC