Senate candidates won't be able to ignore Social Security's funding crisis this November, a Peterson Foundation survey shows.
Battleground state voters in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas said Social Security will be a deciding factor in their choice this fall, and they are far more likely to vote for a candidate who has a plan to reform the benefits program, the nonprofit researcher found. It surveyed 2,500 registered voters nationwide between August 20 and August 27.
More than 8 of 10 voters said they're more likely to support a candidate with a plan to prevent automatic Social Security benefit cuts over a candidate who promises not to touch Social Security (17%), data showed.
The trust fund that supplements incoming payroll
taxes to pay monthly Social Security benefits is projected to be depleted in the last three months of 2032, which would force an immediate across-the-board 22% benefits cut, the Board of Trustees report said. Since that's only about six years away, all elections from this November forward take on a new urgency, analysts said. U.S. senators elected this year, and the president elected in 2028, will be in office when the trust fund runs dry.
“The voters who will determine the balance of the U. S. Senate are calling on candidates to strengthen the future of Social Security,” said Michael Peterson, chief executive of the Peterson Foundation, which is generally seen as centrist but fiscally conservative. “Senators elected this fall will be in office in 2032 when Social Security recipients will face immediate 22% cuts, so all candidates should be putting forth solutions in this campaign to prevent this catastrophic result."
What's at stake?
No state and no Social Security recipient would be spared if Social Security benefits have to be cut at the end of 2032, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) said in an analysis.
Nationally, one-in-five Americans, or 63 million including 54 million retired workers and 9 million survivors and dependents, would be affected by Social Securty cuts, it said. Nationally, the average monthly cutwould be $500, which is more than what the average retired household spends on groceries each month.
But in these five particular battleground states, here is what's at stake each month if Congress continues to do nothing to prevent the trust fund from going insolvent in 2032, CRFB said:
- Georgia: 1.7 million people would see on average a $487 monthly decline in Social Security benefits
- Michigan: 2 million Social Security beneficiaries would see an average loss of $523 monthly
- North Carolina: 2 million Americans would see an average monthly pay cut of $501
- Ohio: 2.2 million residents would lose $487 each month
- Texas: 4.3 million Social Security recipents would see an average cut of $489 every month
What do battleground voters want?
Voters said they want Congress to focus on Social Security's problems and fix them.
Nearly 9 of 10 also said current lawmakers should talk more about this problem, and more than three-quarters said lawmakers who promise not to touch Social Security are making the problem worse, the survey said. Delaying action makes the problem harder to fix, they said.
A whopping 91% said they support Social Security reforms once they're aware that automatc cuts are slated in 2032 if Congress doesn't act, Peterson's survey said. With inflation still elevated, pushing up the cost of living, 85% said it's more important than ever for lawmakers to fix the federal government benefits plan.
What Social Security solutions would battleground voters support?
"Voters want this problem addressed, and there is strong bipartisan support for many available solutions that would sustain this essential program," Peterson said.
The most popular proposals voters support, the survey showed, include:
- 72% - raising the payroll tax cap by an additional 1% on all incomes above $184,500
- 66% - capping annual Social Security benefits, so that no retired couple receives more than $100,000 annually
- 65% - reducing the benefits received by the top 20% of earners
- 65% - a balanced approach of gradual benefit adjustments and tax increases to preserve Social Security
What do voters not want to see?
Importantly, voters overwhelmingly do not want government to borrow more to prevent expected Social Security benefit cuts in 2032, the survey said. Only 29% of voters would support such a move, and that ranked lowest overall and across each demographic group, the foundation said.
By comparison, 68% of battleground voters opposed adding to the record $40 trillion U.S. deficit, the survey said.
“Pay close attention to the debate over Social Security solvency now,” said Mary Johnson, an independent Social Security and Medicare analyst. "It’s important for midterm voters to understand the changes to Social Security that members of Congress face to shore up the program."
A proposal for a “flat-rate" COLA, which would give every recipient the same dollar amount based on the COLA received by the lowest 20% of beneficiaries, has recently gained some attention, for example. But analysts warned it would erode the purchasing power of most Americans, including millions in the middle class.
"The proposal would also affect all future retirees, because COLAs are used in the Social Security benefit formula to calculate an individual’s initial benefit at retirement," Johnson said. "A flat COLA would reduce the initial benefit amount for most new retirees and significantly cut lifetime Social Security income for future Social Security retirees."
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 becomes an urgent issue for Americans this midterms season
