To the editor:

With his typical hackneyed vitriol, Sen. Harry Reid recently characterized the prospective partial privatization of Social Security as a “risky scheme.”

I have a question for Mr. Reid and his allies: How is money in a personal account, in my name, that I control, more risky than sending hundreds of dollars each month into a black hole in Washington, D.C., with no guarantee that I will ever see a dime of it again?

Exactly where is this “guarantee” I keep hearing about? The truth is, there is absolutely no guarantee at all within Social Security. Congress has changed the program in the past, and could change benefits, raise taxes, apply a means test or even end the program altogether in the future.

If I am looking for security, I’ll take a personal account any day of the week.

The fundamental thesis of Mr. Reid and the other nanny-state paternalists in Washington is that the American people are neither competent nor capable of running their own lives. They can neither plan for their own retirement nor provide for their own health care. It’s up to “smart” people like Mr. Reid to take care of them. Never mind who pays for it.

Since Mr. Reid views the American people in such a negative light, I wonder why he seems to find no problem with these same Americans voting. Given the results of the last election, perhaps that will change.

Galen Thies,

Lawrence