The supercommittee was tasked with removing $1.2 trillion from the federal budget. Since it couldn't come up with a proposal, the Budget Control Act's automatic budget cuts will do the job for them, splitting the pain between security and non-security budgets.

The supercommittee's indecision was "not just good for Social Security, but for the 56 million people who draw benefits or the merchants who get those benefits spent in their stores," said Merton Bernstein, an expert on Social Security and the Walter D. Coles Professor Emeritus at Washington University in St. Louis. "These benefits are not just for the recipients. They are good for the economy and cutting them is bad for the economy, especially now when we are in the doldrums. If this was an attempted end run around the democratic process, then, happily, it failed."

Bernstein maintains that Social Security does not add to the deficit and should not but cut as part of debt-reducing measures. "Many have assumed that if you cut Social Security benefits, you have done something about deficits. Social Security pays its way. It has always paid its way. It has never contributed to deficits," he says.

Brian Graff, executive director and CEO of the American Society of Pension Professionals & Actuaries, agreed that "Social Security is an important part of the overall retirement savings picture for American workers. Now, the issue of Social Security is generally separated from the issue of the incentives for private retirement savings, and I don't think that's going to change. They will be viewed separately, even though practically they work together and both are important in helping Americans save for retirement."

ASPPA has been very involved in tax reform legislation, especially as it pertains to tax incentives for retirement savings. The organization and its members want to make it clear to Congress that tax incentives for workers who put money away in employer-sponsored retirement plans, like 401(k)s, are crucial. Without them, companies wouldn't be compelled to offer retirement programs and workers would not save as much.

"Frankly, we really didn't think that the supercommittee, whether it was able to agree or not, was going to directly address retirement savings," Graff said. "We always felt it was going to be kind of a tax reform exercise. Pretty remote."

He added that ASPPA believes the issue will come up again as part of tax reform proposals next year.

"The chance of tax reform getting enacted in an election year is questionable. We do expect the House, and perhaps the Senate, to do tax reform bills. Therefore we have concerns whether those proposals will negatively impact retirement savings," Graff said.

"Polls show that Democrats, Republicans and Independents, the majorities of all three groups, oppose cutting benefits," Bernstein said. So why is Congress still trying to cut them? "It is hard to ascribe a motive, but Social Security has been a target for Republicans since it was enacted in 1935 and they haven't let up."

He added that the program has "majority support in both parties and among independents. It has its own resources. The government bonds that the Social Security system holds are callable whenever Social Security wants to call them. If they cash them in, the Treasury will have to honor them. It is unthinkable they would not."

Opponents of Social Security and its surplus call the surplus "worthless IOUs," Bernstein said. "They aren't worthless, but they are IOUs. These IOUs are the best in the world. They are backed by the credit of the U.S. When the economy worldwide gets into trouble, investors flock, run to buy U.S. government bonds and that's what has been happening as recently as the aftermath of the battle over raising the debt limit."

Social Security began running a surplus in 1983 because it was taking in more resources than it was paying out, Bernstein said. "Recently, people have tried to say that Social Security is running at a deficit. That was not true. It was true that due to the recession it was paying out more than it was getting in on FICA taxes, just the way it is supposed to work. Social Security and unemployment insurance are supposed to boost the economy when the economy is slow and that's what it has been doing. It used to be recognized that social insurance was countercyclical, putting money into the economy when it needed it."

Graff said he doesn't believe there will be a discussion or debate about Social Security reform next year.

"There will be tax reform discussions, but no Social Security discussions. It is a tough discussion to take on in an election year. I don't see members of Congress taking that one on," he said.