The Social Security Debate rages on, but did you know.....Sixty percent of Social Security beneficiaries are women. A quarter of all women 65 and over depend on the program as their sole income and most of these women are poor.

Already the Bush administration has brought a WMD-like fervour to their “concerns” about Social Security. The crisis in the program, they say, is large and looming, and the program's collapse is imminent.

The Cato Institute has been promoting privatizing Social Security for the past 25 years. A policy paper on its web site claims the average annual real return on U.S. stocks from 1926 through 1996 was more than 7 percent. It describes privatization as a "choice" that all retirees should have, and women in particular.

The Institute's Michael Tanner also considers it downright sexist to suppose that those less experienced in investing – those with lower incomes, and thus disproportionately women – can't make investments that are equally lucrative as those of more experienced investors. Tanner says women will benefit because everyone will benefit (historically the return on the stock market is higher than the return on bonds, which is where Social Security funds are invested now) and women will benefit disproportionately because women make up 60 percent of the beneficiaries.

But Sunhwa Lee, who specializes in older women's economic issues for the Institute for Women's Policy Research, say privatizing runs too much of a risk of increasing poverty among the elderly.

"I think the Cato claim is painting too rosy a picture about our stock market performance, which we all know is not true given our recent experience," Lee told Women's eNews. Already there is a grass-roots campaign against President Bush's Social Security plan, arguing that scandal-ridden financial services firms in Boston and other cities should not be entrusted with private retirement accounts.

Some major players in the financial services industry support the Bush plan, including Fidelity Investments, the Boston mutual fund giant.

According to Bloomberg News, Fidelity is part of group of major companies that also includes Boeing Co. and Pfizer Inc. that plans to spend ''significantly more" than $5 million to promote the Bush Social Security proposal.

Medicare's problems are worse, and come sooner. If Social Security has rough water ahead, Medicare faces a financial tsunami.

Medicare trust fund that covers hospital expenses will be exhausted by 2019, according to the most recent report of the program's trustees. Add in doctors' bills, and Medicare expenditures will exceed Social Security's by 2024. Medicare costs will be double those of Social Security by 2078.

John Rother, policy director for AARP, the group that lobbies for seniors, noted that Medicare beneficiaries already pay "an incredible amount out of pocket, on average more than one-fifth of their total incomes," for health care. Seniors were hit last year by a 17 percent increase in Medicare premiums. Those increases are likely to continue, he said, eating into Social Security benefits no matter how either program is reformed.

With AARP's staunch opposition, some Florida Republicans are walking a fine line, eager to stay loyal to the president but loath to offend a powerful constituency.

Asked for her view on the president's plan, U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris (of the voter fraud fame), a Sarasota Republican whose district has one of the state's largest numbers of retirees, was quick to refer to her respect for the AARP.

All that remains is to gut Social Security, medicare is already in a downward spiral, and then make a few more small changes in the U.S. Constitution — just remove “We the people” and add “Hooray for me and screw you.”