Social Security: A state issue?

During a speech in Northwest Arkansas yesterday, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for governor, Bill Halter, brought up the topic of Social Security privatization:

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Halter contends privatizing Social Security would hurt Arkansas, where beneficiaries draw about $1 billion more money annually than Arkansans pay into the program.

As governor, Halter said Tuesday, he would use the “bully pulpit” to fight privatization of Social Security. ...

He noted that Bush recently resurrected his Social Security plan in his proposed budget. If successful, the president’s proposal could hurt not just individual beneficiaries, but cost Arkansas as a whole, Halter said.

Afterward, Halter said in an interview that he arrived at his economic benefit figure by comparing the aggregate amount that Arkansas workers pay into Social Security through payroll taxes with the aggregate amount that the state’s Social Security beneficiaries draw from the program.

In 2003, Arkansans received roughly $5 billion in benefits, compared with about $4 billion the program gleaned in Social Security taxes in Arkansas, according to statistics from the Social Security Administration’s press office and Web site.

“There are counties [in Arkansas ] where as much as 9 percent of the income was from Social Security,” Halter said, referring to total incomes from salaries, wages and benefits.

This is notable because other Southern states are surely in the same position as Arkansas, drawing disproportionate benefits and income from Social Security.

With this being the first major election year since President Bush introduced his privatization proposal, could we see other Southern candidates raising Social Security as a state issue?