WASHINGTON -- There's one thing I think we can all agree on when it comes to President's Bush's proposal to set up personal investment accounts as part of the Social Security program: As the saying goes, the devil is in the details and the details are woefully lacking thus far.
     
Basically, we know that people born in 1950 or later could (they have a choice) divert up to 4 percent of their income subject to Social Security taxes into individual accounts, up to $1,000 the first year. People will only be able to invest their money in a limited, conservative mix of bonds and stock funds.
    
With such a major overhaul of such a critical social program, all the specifics of how the administration sees the program working should be out there for all of us to review. Right now we are just getting bits and pieces and that's not enough. A senior administration official, who agreed to speak on background without attribution, met with reporters recently to brief them on Bush's plan. From the gist of the official's answers, implementing this proposal is going to be problematic. (For a transcript of that briefing go to www.washingtonpost.com. In the search engine type “White House Social Security Briefing.'')
     
I've received hundreds of e-mails from readers, who both support and object to Bush's plan. People want to read more -- not in news reports but from an actual “plan." In fact, here are some of Bush's statements and reader questions regarding them:
-- During his State of the Union address, Bush said: “Your money will grow, over time, at a greater rate than anything the current system can deliver.''
    
Isn't it possible that some people who put money into private accounts will lose some or all of it? “What then?'' asked Ed Buckley of Rochester, N.Y. “Are these people simply out of luck? Do they just fall back into the 'traditional system'? If there is a safety net, which there must be, what is the incentive for prudent investing?''
-- Bush said: “And your account will provide money for retirement over and above the check you will receive from Social Security.''
    
Readers have asked if we should take that statement as a government guarantee. “Can retirees sue the government if they don't get the promised returns?'' Fran Downey of Acworth, Ga., wondered.
-- Bush said: “We'll make sure a personal account cannot be emptied out all at once, but rather paid out over time, as an addition to traditional Social Security benefits.'' 
    
Sylvia Adelman of Wilmington, Del., asked: “If money that is currently paid to Social Security is diverted to private accounts, how will that money be replaced in the budget?'' And Jim Thompson of Pleasant Hill, Calif., wanted to know “what happens to the survivors and disability part of the program?''
-- Bush said: “In addition, you'll be able to pass along the money that accumulates in your personal account, if you wish, to your children and -- or grandchildren.''
    
What happens if someone doesn't have a will and has children from multiple relationships or marriages, asked Allan Lefcowitz of Washington. “Who will decide how the money is divided? Since, theoretically, the monies in the private account would be part of the individual's estate and pass through to heirs, would they not also be part of the assets to be divided in the event of a divorce?" 

Additionally, since a spouse under the current Social Security system is entitled to benefits, would a wife get a reduced benefit if her husband diverts funds to a personal account? According to Bush the money in personal accounts would “belong'' to the individual. So, Lefcowitz wonders if funds placed in the personal accounts can be divided between divorcing spouses. Would private Social Security accounts be exempted from community property laws?
    
By the way, according to the administration official, participants at retirement would be required to buy annuities so that they would have a steady stream of payments over their lifetimes. But if that is the case, realistically how much from the investment accounts would really be left to leave to heirs? “If you buy an annuity and die early, obviously, that limits the amount that you've been able to pass on," the official said.
    
Katrina E. McKinney of Boise, Idaho, said she supports Bush's plan, sort of. “There are too many unanswered questions to be able to make an educated decision,'' she wrote. 

“Why are we being asked to support such massive changes without being given more information?'' asked Susan Vadas of Columbus, Ohio. “That is a huge red flag for me.''
    
Me too. 

Listen to Michelle Singletary discuss personal finance every Tuesday on NPR's ``Day to Day.'' To hear her reports online go to www.npr.org. Readers can write to her c/o The Washington Post, 1150 15th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20071. Her e-mail address is singletarym@washpost.com. Comments and questions are welcome, but due to the volume of mail, personal responses may not be possible. Please also note comments or questions may be used in a future column, with the writer's name, unless a specific request to do otherwise is indicated.
    
     (c) 2005, Washington Post Writers Group