Show of
hands: who believes that lawmakers in Washington, D.C., are doing a good job
governing our country? If this
fictitious exercise actually took place, I feel safe in predicting that most
hands would remain firmly at our sides, in our laps, or perhaps in the
arms-crossed pose that our children see when they have misbehaved. In other words, not too many approving hands raised.
There are
certainly those who believe that the current gridlock we are witnessing in our
nation’s capitol is a net positive, and that failure to enact laws at the
federal level means less government intrusion in our lives, a goal some feel is
always worth seeking. While it may be
true that our lives are sometimes over-regulated and interfered with and that
“less is more,” our world truly is much more complex economically, socially and
politically than the world our country’s founders faced when they set up our
form of government. While less
government intrusion may be desired, it still takes a functioning government to
keep our nation strong, competitive, and in-step with the rest of the world. Few would characterize the current lack of
cooperation, the intolerance for differences of opinion, and sometimes outright
bitterness in Washington, as conducive to a functioning government.
One notable
exception to this partisan dysfunction is being demonstrated by two lawmakers,
each from a different party, and each from a different body of Congress. They are perhaps more visible to those in our
industry because they share a legislative priority—retirement security—that is
vital to us. But, even putting any
special interest aside, they seem to behave like statesmen of old; respectful,
constructive, realistic, practical lawmakers who want to get a job done. A job they believe is in the best interest of
the American taxpayer.
Rep. Richard
Neal (D-MA) and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) have each introduced similar, if not
quite “matching bookends” legislation in their respective congressional bodies,
bills primarily intended to simplify and enhance retirement saving. And, hoped for as a natural outcome, to yield
better retirement preparedness for American workers.
The details
of their bills, H.R. 2117 and S. 1270, are not the point to be made here. Suffice it to say they share more
similarities than differences, are geared toward making employer-sponsored
plans more available to American workers, to make plan administration simpler
and more straightforward, and provide genuine incentives to put away more
dollars for retirement purposes.
Perhaps the
most encouraging thing about these long-time lawmakers is that they “get it”
when it comes to the real impact retirement saving has on the U.S. budget. Some lawmakers, journalists and policy wonks
label retirement saving as a cost—a loss—in terms of federal tax revenue, and a
significant contributor to our federal budget deficit. Some of these lawmakers would
greatly curtail tax-advantaged retirement saving. Hatch and Neal recognize that tax-deferred
saving is not a loss to the budget, but simply moving taxation “down the lunch
line,” to be taxed in a later year when assets are withdrawn by a retiree, or
by a saver who needs these assets prior to leaving employment. Never mind the fact that retirement saving is
a HUGE contributor to the capital formation upon which much business and
personal lending is based, and is there for, a great cog in our country’s economic engine.
Imagine,
lawmakers who have truly done their homework on an issue that is vital to our
citizens’ security, and to our economy as a whole; lawmakers whose vision
reaches across party lines, and across congressional boundaries. Show of hands if you’d like to see more
lawmakers in Washington, D.C., govern like these guys. Thought so!
