|
|
Katrina and Social Security: A Better Model for Disaster Relief
By Alex Baker*, The Century Foundation
September 14, 2005
Promoting Social Security in the 1930s, Franklin Roosevelt often used the analogy of disaster relief to convince audiences of the wisdom of an old-age insurance program. Just as individuals needed relief from natural disasters, he argued, so too they needed insurance against the economic catastrophes of old age: losing a job, being unable to work, being cut off from family support. While the devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina has been all too literal, the value of the social safety net to the nation's most vulnerable in the face of sudden displacement and income loss is quite clear. Indeed, the disaster underscores how we should be emulating rather than undermining Social Security and the model of government it represents. At the least, it should put the final nail in the coffin of the misguided privatization campaign, which would have jeopardized the many protections now proving essential.
The Social Security Administration notes that among the affected counties in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, there are more than 650,000 Social Security beneficiaries, receiving roughly $530 million each month. Considering rough estimates of 1 million individuals displaced by the storm, income from Social Security will comprise a serious source of support for many of the victims. In response, SSA is drawing on its vast administrative resources to ensure those beneficiaries cut off from their local offices and bank accounts will receive their checks in a timely manner. Beneficiaries are receiving immediate payments at local Social Security offices regardless of identification, and those offices (including a temporary office in the Houston Astrodome) are operating on expanded hours and increased staff (a bit of a contrast with the news that cash relief to the victims will now only be available by direct deposit or by mail). That guaranteed income will ensure beneficiaries least able to quickly find work in an unfamiliar location will have some basic level of security. And as the initial emergency passes, Social Security will also provide lasting support to individuals who lost the most in the disaster. Benefits will be available to children who have lost their parents or caregivers, and to those injured and unable to return to work.
Yet as federal, state, and local authorities scramble to provide for the victims, it is clear the floor of economic security provided by Social Security differs sharply from the kind of government reflected in the troubled disaster response. While uneven planning for the disaster left the fate of large numbers of the poorest and most marginalized residents up to the whims of government officials, Social Security guarantees benefits and insurance to virtually all workers and their families. In contrast to the bureaucratic fumbling and rampant patronage which hobbled the response, Social Security's guaranteed income is backed by a highly professional and efficient public administration committed to delivering benefits when all other supports fall short.
While disaster response and old-age and disability insurance are certainly very different tasks, the kind of government that animates them shouldn't be. The choice is stark: a government that serves people based on ironclad obligations, universal access, and effective delivery, or a government that reinforces inequality and lets the mechanics of government atrophy. As the country goes about rectifying the tragic mistakes of Katrina in the weeks and years ahead, that choice should be at the forefront of the debate.
Alex Baker is a program assistant at The Century Foundation.
|
|
