An International Conference on Social Security Reform in Selected OECD Countries

The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders.

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

The text below is a portion of the complete document.

BOB REISCHAUER: Good morning. I'm Bob Reischauer, the president of the Urban Institute. I want to welcome you all to this conference on Social Security reform in selected OECD countries.

Justice Lewis Brandeis once referred to the American states as laboratories for democracy, and what he was meaning in that was that states could experiment with policies and programs often sooner than the federal government because of the political dynamics within the state, and then we could watch these programs and policies as they developed in their early years and to the extent that some succeeded and were appropriate for application at the national level, the federal government could take the lessons and then put them into action across the country.

In a very real way, the developed democracies of the OECD can serve the same function for the United States when it comes to Social Security reform. Most are far ahead of us in their efforts to grapple with these problems. Most face the same kind demographic economic and programmatic challenges that we face, and we can look and see what they are doing and learn from that.

To be sure, there is a lot of differences with respect to the details of their programs and the specifics of the reforms that might be politically viable and the government systems that bring those about, but nevertheless, it is a very fruitful area for those involved in Social Security reform here in the United States to look to for lessons.

And so I think it's important that we in the United States continually test the waters, see what is happening abroad, see whether anything that is happening in Japan, Sweden, Canada, wherever, is applicable to us. And so I look forward and I think all of us do to learning a whole lot as the day goes on.

Rudy.

RUDOLPH G. PENNER: Well, thank you, and welcome, everybody. Unfortunately the debate over Social Security reform died an ignoble death last year in this country. I'm a little shaky on my Catholic theology but I believe that it went to purgatory. (Laughter.) But we do know that at some point there has to be a miraculous resurrection because the current system must be changed. And we also know unfortunately that every day that we wait, the changes are going to be more painful.

So I hope this conference makes some modest contribut ions to keeping the discussion alive in this country. As Bob said, I'm a strong believer that different countries have a lot to teach us both about what to do and about what not to do when you are reforming a system. And all of the countries represented here have had major reforms in recent years.

I'm sure I have insulted—(chuckles)—a lot of countries by not bringing them here because reform has been going on around the world. But in choosing countries to be represented I thought that we had the most to learn from countries that had established systems. But that of course leaves out some very interesting reforms going on in emerging economies, places like Chile obviously, and in the countries like the formerly communist countries.

But in countries like that the systems were in considerable disarray before you have reform and I just have a feeling it's a lot harder when you have a generous system in place already.

Another thing that Gene and I are particularly interested in is automatic mechanisms that would balance the system. We put out a proposal for this country that is at your places. Bob Reischauer has a farther-ranging proposal that would affect the whole budget, and Belle Sawhill at Brookings has a variant on that theme. And a couple of the countries represented here do have automatic mechanisms of that sort.

So we start with Canada and Sweden which take different approaches to making their systems sustainable. Let us start with my old home country of Canada. Real Bouchard is currently the general director of federal provincial relations and social policy branch at the Canadian Department of Finance. He graduated from Laval University. He has been a civil servant in Canada for a very long time, almost the entire time working on pension policy in one way or another.

Note: This report is available in its entirety in the Portable Document Format (PDF).

Usage and reprints: Most publications may be downloaded free of charge from the web site and may be used and copies made for research, academic, policy or other non-commercial purposes. Proper attribution is required. Posting UI research papers on other websites is permitted subject to prior approval from the Urban Institute—contact [email protected].

If you are unable to access or print the PDF document please contact us or call the Publications Office at (202) 261-5687.

Disclaimer: The nonpartisan Urban Institute publishes studies, reports, and books on timely topics worthy of public consideration. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the Urban Institute, its trustees, or its funders. Copyright of the written materials contained within the Urban Institute website is owned or controlled by the Urban Institute.