Please Help Congressman Reichert Save Social Security

From the Dave Reichert Website, the entirety of his entry on the subject of Social Security:

Congressman Reichert has never voted to change or cut Social Security benefits. Congressman Reichert believes the Social Security problem should be addressed in a bi-partisan way and that we have to protect the system.

I believe we must ensure the solvency of Social Security into the future. However, I do not support any solution that includes the following:

Raising the retirement age
Cutting Social Security benefits
Increasing Social Security taxes
Privatizing Social Security

According to the Social Security Trustees, in 2017 Social Security will start paying out more than it takes in and will be sufficient to finance only 74 percent of scheduled annual benefits in 2040, when the combined OASDI trust fund is projected to be exhausted.

Before I came to Congress, I indicated I would consider all of the options to make sure that Social Security is solvent into the future. However, I was able to examine some of the options, and I’m wary of some and have rejected other outright.  

I will continue to investigate possible solutions for the challenges facing Social Security. It is an important benefit and must be protected.

There you have it. After promising to "consider all of the options" to save Social Security from insolvency, three years into his Legislative career, Dave Reichert has seemingly ruled out every option that could possibly protect it.

Without providing any specifics, Reichert implies the existence of some magical solutions to the Social Security math equation that include neither an increase in revenues, nor decrease in expenses.

Instead of just complaining, which is my habit, I decided to try for something more constructive. There are a lot of smart Kossacks out there that know the issues. Excluding those he has ruled out, why don't we come up with some Social Security solutions that Dave Reichert might be able to support? After all, "It is an important benefit and must be protected."

I'll start: Mandatory euthanasia at age 90.