SOCIAL SECURITY SHORTCHANGES WOMEN RAISING CHILDREN ALONE

Right now fourteen million women who divorced or never married are raising children on their own. These women work 24/7 and don't have the benefit of a partner who can share the financial and emotional demands of child rearing. To make matter worse, Social Security penalizes these women. How can that be?

Women who are fortunate enough to be stay-at-home moms do not pay into the Social Security system, but they receive very generous Social Security benefits in retirement based on their husband's work history. To be eligible for the spousal benefit (an additional 50% of her husband's benefit) and survivor benefits, a woman has to have been married for at least ten years. If a woman's marriage lasted 9 years and 364 days or less, she is entitled to nothing.

Census Bureau data says that half of the marriages in this country end in divorce. The average duration of those ended marriages is 8 years. So, in addition to the emotional turmoil of divorce, our Social Security system penalizes these women for not being married at least ten years.

Here's an example: Clair is an 82 year-old widow who never earned income nor paid a penny into the Social Security system, yet she has received substantial benefits for twenty years. She lives in a nice home and doesn't need the money. Her monthly Social Security check is automatically deposited into a bank account she rarely takes the time to notice. Twice a month - on Fridays - Mary comes to clean Clair's house. Mary is a 29 year-old single mother raising two boys and working two jobs. Mary's husband - the boys' father - divorced her after 8 years of marriage. Now, Mary pays one of every eight dollars she earns into Social Security so Clair can receive her benefit. Mary isn't eligible for the spousal and survivor benefits that Clair receives because she wasn't married the required ten years. Even worse, not one penny of Mary's Social Security taxes is saved for her own retirement. Congress spends it on other government projects.

Everyone knows Social Security was created to protect our most vulnerable citizens from poverty, but it is now terribly outdated and unfair. Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute, said, "A single head of household can work more, pay more in taxes and raise more children, yet receive less in benefits than a spouse who does not work, does not raise children and does not pay taxes."

Amazing.

Even more amazing is that women's advocacy groups, such as the National Organization of Women and the Feminist Majority, are inexplicably silent on this issue. Sometimes they sound as if Social Security is the retirement Holy Grail for women. Whatever the reason, in their desire for no real changes to the program, these organizations are not speaking for single and divorced women who are penalized by the Social Security system.

What would help these women?

First we should make sure that the minimum benefit for years of hard work is above the poverty line. Mothers who worked hard and played by the rules shouldn't be punished by poverty.

Second, allow couples and singles to put a portion of their Social Security taxes into a Social Security individual account that they own. At least that portion would be set-aside for their retirement and not spent on other government projects. And, if the couple divorced at any time-not after an arbitrary ten years-the assets in the accounts would be split 50-50.

In Mary's case, at least she'd have a nest egg. Her husband wiped out her Social Security's retirement benefits when he left her.

We have an obligation to help those who can least afford to help themselves. Making sure the needs of single and divorced parents are addressed by any attempts to modernize Social Security should be a high priority for Congress.

Back to Unfair