Seniors will be closely watching senators who won midterm elections because they're now officially in the class of Congress that will determine Social Security's future.
The trust fund that supplements payroll taxes to pay Social Security benefits is forecast to run dry in 2032. If that happens, all beneficiaries will see an automatic 22% pay cut as soon as the fund is empty, according to Social Security's Trustees Report. For a newly retired, average dual-income couple planning to retire in six years, that cut could mean $16,900 less in annual Social Security benefits, according to the nonpartisan, nonprofit Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) think tank.
Since each senate term lasts six years, the 35 newly elected senators who
will take office in January will have responsibility to reform Social Security to preserve full benefits or take no action and let the fund deplete, causing cuts. Below is where some of them stand on Social Security solvency.
Where some of the elected senators stand on Social Security
Senators elected in some of the most hotly contested races favored raising or removing the payroll tax wage cap but didn't always provide details. Raising or eliminating the cap would mean high earners pay more into the program. Currently, only salaries and wages up to $184,500 in 2026 are subject to the payroll tax. In 2027, that threshold, adjusted annually for inflation, rises to $192,300.
Here's what some of them have said:
- Sherrod Brown, Democrat from Ohio, said in an October AARP voter guide video “we need to make sure that billionaires are paying their fair share by raising the tax cap so we can extend the life of the program."
- Troy Jackson, Democrat from Maine, said he would eliminate the wage cap. "Making sure that wealthier people pay the same rate that working class people do would definitely strengthen the social security system overall," he said in a local television interview in September.
- Josh Turek, Democrat from Iowa, said in September at a town hall meeting the wage cap should be eliminated. "I think that it is absolutely ridiculous that individuals like Bill Gates and Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos pay Social Security tax for the first few minutes of the year," he said. "But we have teachers and police officers and nurses that are paying year-round."
- Adam Hamilton, Democrat from Kansas, said in written responses to local news station KSN News's candidate questionnaire that he supports raising the payroll wage cap. "Raising the cap on folks making over $1 million a year is the best initial lever we have to keep the program solvent without cutting benefits," he said.
- Abdul El-Sayed, Democrat from Michigan, said in his platform he would lift the payroll-tax cap for high earners and end taxes on Social Security benefits.
- James Talarico, Democrat from Texas, said in his platform he would eliminate the tax cap for people earning over $400,000.
- Roy Cooper, Democrat from North Carolina, said in August he supported taxing the wealthy to preserve Social Security.
- Chris Pappas, Democrat from New Hampshire, said in October he would support creating a bipartisan commission to come up with proposals, but preferred to raise the payroll tax wage cap. "I think we need to start with people earning more than $1 million a year who are not paying into the system the way working people are," Pappas said.
Are Americans more confident Social Security benefits are safe?
Opinions differed about whether newly elected Senators will be able to prevent Social Security cuts for good.
Mary Johnson, independent Social Security analyst and Social Security beneficiary, leaned optimistc.
"Social Security reform will need as many people as possible co-operating on a solution, and this I feel is a rare window to lay the groundwork for a solution," she said after voting early in Virginia to reelect Democratic Sen. Mark Warner. "Getting to the solution is likely to require time, but I feel that there is quite likely an opportunity to at least make certain changes to 'buy time' to avoid sudden benefit cuts, that I feel the incoming Congress could potentially work on."
Luke Douglas, 77, a Social Security recipient from Smithfield, Kentucky, still has doubts. "My fear is a temporary fix by raising the max income bracket or removing it altogether," he said. Congress should transition Social Security into a retirement program that holds and invests money contributed by workers and employers into their own individual fund, he said. Each fund would be invested primarily in American companies, not government bonds, for higher returns, he said.
"Social Security was doomed from the start," Douglas said. "For one thing, it was never a retirement program, but a program intended for the 'general welfare' of old age citizens."
The idea of swapping government bonds with equities isn't new but over the years, critics have said the switch would introduce greater volatility, risk and possible private market interference, according to the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.
Medora Lee is a money, markets and personal finance reporter at USA TODAY. You can reach her at mjlee@usatoday.com and subscribe to our free Daily Money newsletter for personal finance tips and business news every Monday through Friday morning.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Social Security's under threat. Can new senators save it?
