Social Security is in Crisis: We Must Resist Efforts to Change It

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on August 19, 2025

Security will mark its 90th anniversary. On that date in 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed the landmark program into law as a safeguard against the “hazards and vicissitudes” of life.

“For a federal program to endure for 90 years and maintain an extremely high level of popularity among the American people is truly extraordinary,” says the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare (NCPSSM). “It is an achievement that should be celebrated far and wide.”

Yet this milestone comes amid growing political controversy that could shape the program’s future.

Privatization Concerns Emerge

Just 15 days before the anniversary, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent made remarks that sent shockwaves through the aging advocacy community. Speaking at a Breitbart News–sponsored event, Bessent described President Trump’s newly enacted “Trump accounts” (also referred to as “Child Savings Accounts” or “Child IRAs”) as potentially serving as a “backdoor for privatizing Social Security.” His comments, made during a Breitbart policy panel on the evening of July 30, were quickly picked up by national media outlets.

Bessent elaborated: “If these accounts grow and you have in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for your retirement, that’s a game-changer too.” He suggested that the success and expansion of these individual retirement accounts—created under President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act—could eventually reduce Americans’ reliance on traditional Social Security benefits.

The law, signed by Trump on July 4, creates a new tax-deferred investment account for children under the age of 18, born in the U.S. between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028. These accounts are seeded with $1,000 in federal funds and allow additional contributions of up to $5,000 annually from parents, family members, or employers. Structured similarly to IRAs, the funds must be invested in low-cost mutual funds or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that track a U.S. stock index.

Max Richtman, NCPSSM President and CEO, quickly issued a public response, calling on Trump to denounce Bessent’s suggestion of a “backdoor” to privatization. “President George W. Bush tried it after his re-election in 2004—and failed miserably. The American people didn’t buy it then, and they won’t buy it now,” Richtman said.

He urged the former president to issue a clear and unequivocal statement: “Make a clear, unequivocal statement (as only you can) that your administration will not try to privatize Social Security.”

John Hishta, Senior Vice President of Campaigns at AARP, also issued a statement and condemned Bessent’s comments. “We have fought any and all efforts to privatize Social Security, and we will continue to,” he said. “President Trump has emphasized many times that Social Security ‘won’t be touched,’ and that he is ‘not going to touch Social Security.’ This must include any and all forms of privatization.”

“Privatization is a terrible idea”, says Nancy Altman, President of Social Security Works in a statement, noting that unlike private savings, Social Security is a guaranteed earned benefit that you can’t outlive. “It has stood strong through wars, recessions, and pandemics. The American people have a message for Trump and Bessent: Keep Wall Street’s hands off our Social Security!,” she says.

Following the backlash, Bessent attempted to clarify his remarks in a post on X (formerly Twitter) the next day: “Trump Baby Accounts are an additive benefit for future generations, which will supplement the sanctity of Social Security’s guaranteed payments. This is not an either-or question. Our administration is committed to protecting Social Security and making sure seniors have more money.”

During her Thursday press briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt emphasized that President Trump remains “wholeheartedly committed” to protecting Social Security—even as Bessent’s earlier comments appeared to contradict that position. “What the Secretary of the Treasury was saying—and what this administration believes—is that these Trump newborn accounts, which are an incredibly creative and positive provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill, are meant to help supplement, not substitute, Social Security,” Leavitt told reporters.

Democrats and Advocacy Groups Push Back

Last Thursday, amid hundreds of events scheduled this month throughout the nation to celebrate SSA’s 90th anniversary, the Washington, D.C.–based Social Security Works hosted a press conference to warn against what they called Trump administration efforts to undermine and dismantle Social Security.

Moderator Nancy Altman, President of SSW, opened the Town Hall by emphasizing the importance of celebrating Social Security’s milestone anniversary and the need to protect and defend the program. Throughout the event, Altman introduced each speaker, describing them as champions dedicated to safeguarding Social Security.

Speakers cited administrative actions such as firing 7,000 employees, closing field offices, and creating a customer service crisis. During the 37-minute press event, prominent Democrats and leaders of progressive advocacy groups argued these steps were part of a deliberate strategy to erode public confidence and justify future benefit cuts or privatization.

They contrasted these actions with proposals to expand benefits and extend the program’s solvency by lifting the cap on taxable income. Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-Vermont), described as a leading champion of earned benefits and author of the Social Security Expansion Act, called Social Security “the most successful federal government program of all time.” This was said to counter claims by critics, like Elon Musk, who have called it a “Ponzi scheme.” Sanders added: “This is a huge fight. We have the American people behind us. Let’s win it.”

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Oregon), Ranking Member of the Senate Finance Committee and a key figure in the Senate’s “Social Security War Room,” said: “Trump’s so-called promise to protect Social Security, in my view, is about as real as his promise to protect Medicaid—no substance.”

Rep. John Larson (D-Connecticut), Ranking Member of the Social Security Subcommittee of the Ways and Means Committee, urged Congress to expand benefits. He noted that the last major expansion was under President Nixon and that millions of seniors still live in or near poverty.

Former Social Security Commissioner under President Biden, Martin O’Malley, charged, “They’re trying to wreck its customer service so they can turn enough Americans against it—and ultimately get away with robbing it.” He described this as the strategic motivation behind what he called the Trump administration’s dismantling of the SSA’s operational capacity.

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Michigan), who helped organize the Expand Social Security Caucus and has deep family ties to the creation of both Social Security and Medicare, declared: “I’ll be damned if anybody’s going to take us back to those days,” recalling the poverty and desperation seniors faced before the program’s enactment.

Judith Brown, a Social Security beneficiary, gave personal testimony underscoring the critical role her monthly check plays in her financial survival.

Keisha Bras, Director of Opportunity, Race, and Justice for the NAACP; Molly Weston Williamson, a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund and an expert on paid leave; and Sarah Francis of Unrig Our Economy rounded out the panel.

A Legacy Under Threat

NCPSSM President Max Richtman warns that while the anniversary is cause for celebration, “we must always defend the program from those who would privatize or outright eliminate it. These forces have been at work ever since Social Security was enacted.”

To educate the public and counter misinformation, NCPSSM has produced a new documentary, Social Security: 90 Years Strong, with funding from AARP. The film tells the story of the program’s creation during the Great Depression and its enduring role for seniors, people with disabilities, and their families.

The documentary features interviews with Senators Tom Harkin and Chuck Grassley, Nancy Altman (Social Security Works), Bill Arnone (formerly of the National Academy of Social Insurance), FDR’s grandson Jim Roosevelt, Tracey Gronniger (Justice in Aging), Kathryn Edwards (Labor Economist), and Giovanna Gray Lockhart (former Director, Frances Perkins Center).

Social Security is often called the “third rail” of American politics—a metaphor drawn from the high-voltage rail powering some trains, where contact can be fatal. In politics, “stepping on the third rail” can mean political death.

“More than 69 million Americans rely on Social Security today and as America ages, we expect at least 13 million more people to rely on it by 2035.” said Myechia Minter-Jordan, Chief Executive Officer at AARP in s July 21 statement announcing the results of a new SSA survey. “For 90 years, Social Security has never missed a payment, and Americans should have confidence that it never will,” she said.

The survey findings indicate that nearly two in three (65%) retired Americans say they rely substantially on Social Security, while another 21 percent say they rely on it somewhat. In 2020, 63% of retired Americans said they relied substantially on Social Security, jumping from 58% in both 2015 and 2010.

Social Security has strong bipartisan support, too. The survey found that that more than two-thirds of Americans (67%) believe Social Security is more important to retirees today than it was five years ago. Overall, 96% consider the program important, with broad bipartisan agreement: 98% of Democrats, 95% of Republicans, and 93% of Independents.

The Social Security Trustees’ 2025 annual report, released in June, projects the program’s trust funds will run short of money by 2034. Without action, beneficiaries could face an estimated 19% cut in monthly payments.

Whether lawmakers who support privatization —while keeping their voter base—if they “step on the third rail” by raising the full retirement age or refusing to raise taxes remains to be seen.

We’ll see.

New study gives Congress a road map to fix Social Security

Published in RINewsToday on February 17, 2025

As Social Security celebrates its 90^th anniversary on Aug. 14, 2025, this essential retirement program has long been facing a significant long-term financing gap. According to the 2024 Social Security trustees report, unless Congress acts the trust funds will be depleted by 2035, forcing the program to reduce benefits by 17%.

With over 70 million retirees and individuals with disabilities receiving Social Security benefits, it is time for Congress to get serious about hammering out a viable bipartisan solution to resolving Social Security’s funding gap. And a recently released report provides the groundwork for a policy that a partisan Congress might just consider.

Last month, the National Academy of Social Insurance (NASI), AARP, the National Institute on Retirement Security (NIRS), and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (USCC) released the results of a qualitative analysis study, on Jan. 29, 2025, detailing American views on Social Security, a federal “social safety net” program that provides income to people who are retired, disabled, or have dependents, helping them to plan for retirement and other life events.

The new, recently released, 72-page report, entitled, Social Security at 90: A Bipartisan Roadmap for the Program’s Future, is a must read for the White House and Congressional lawmakers as they begin to debate specific policies that would make long-term fixes to ensure the long-term solvency of the America’s retirement program.

The NASI survey, fielded by NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonprofit research organization, surveyed 2,243 Americans ages 21 and over.

Unlike most public opinion research on Social Security, which asks about each policy option individually, NASI says that this survey, conducted in partnership with the Washington, DC-based Greenwald Research, a firm having extensive experience in public opinion and consumer preference research, features a unique trade-off analysis that examine which combination of product features – or in this case policy changes- that consumers prefer and are willing to pay for.

The study’s findings are also largely consistent with previous NASI 2012 and 2014 studies, Strengthening Social Security: What Do American’s Want? and Americans Make Hard Choices: A Survey with Trade-off Analysis.

Sending a clear message to Washington

The NASI study’s findings indicate that Americans (across party lines, generations, income and education), strongly support Social Security and see it as the lynchpin for retirement security. Only four percent state that they do not consider it to be an important income to draw on during retirement.

Rather than ensuring the solvency of Social Security through cutting benefits, the survey respondents strongly support strengthening the program’s finances by raising revenues, noting the study’s findings. Eighty-five percent of the respondents call for benefits not being reduced, even if this means raising taxes on some or all Americans.

According to the survey’s findings, the most strongly favored option is eliminating the cap on payroll tax contributions for those earning more than $400,000 per year and their employers, who would contribute to Social Security via payroll taxes on wages above that amount. Those affected would not receive additional benefits.

Additionally, respondents across all groups, including a majority of Republicans, say they are willing to pay more themselves by gradually increasing the payroll tax rate from 6.2 percent to 7.2 percent, to strengthen the program’s finances. Workers earning less than $50,000 per year would not take financial hits. They would only contribute an additional $42 per month.

Don’t touch our benefits!

Given a broad set of policy options available to address Social Security’s financing gap, the respondents also reject benefit reductions such as keeping the full retirement age at 67 instead of further raising. Those surveyed also called for adjusting the annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) to more accurately reflect inflation and spending habits of older adults.

The NASI study also found that Americans want to strengthen Social Security benefits by adding a caregiver credit for workers who take time out of the workforce to care for young children and a “bridge benefit” to protect from the early claiming reduction of those in physically demanding jobs who may be unable to continue working up to full retirement age.

Finally, the study’s findings indicate that overwhelming majority of Americans (90 percent) see the need and valuable of Social Security’s disability benefits, too. These respondents say that they will need Social Security’s disability benefits if they become disabled and unable to support themselves through work, and only four percent support cutting disability benefits. The survey also finds strong bipartisan support for updating outdated rules in Supplemental Security Income, including its $2,000 asset limit.

Statements from NASI and core partners

“At a time when our country is deeply divided, Social Security remains a powerful unifying force,” said Rebecca Vallas, NASI’s Chief Executive Officer. “This survey shows there is strong bipartisan agreement on how the American people want to secure the program’s future, and we urge policymakers to listen,” she says.

“It is rare in today’s political climate to see people unite around anything,” adds AARP Chief Public Policy Officer Deb Whitman, noting that all Americans want their Social Security benefits to be preserved. They are willing to do what it takes to ensure the program continues to provide meaningful support for future generations, she says.

“Social Security is the foundation of retirement security in the United States. This report clearly indicates both the important role that Social Security plays as a source of retirement income for older Americans as well as the priority the American people place on resolving the financing gap so that benefits are not cut indiscriminately,” said Tyler Bond, NIRS’s Research Director. “This research continues a long history of finding strong support for Social Security among the public,” he says.

Finally, stated: “These survey results show that Americans value Social Security and their private sector retirement benefits because they were unwilling to cut those benefits to finance Social Security,” says Chantel Sheaks, USCC’s Vice President of Retirement Policy. “Americans think of these together, and policymakers should as well,” he suggests.

Adding their two cents

“This survey shows that Americans — Democrats, Republicans, and independents alike — absolutely do not want to see cuts to Social Security’s modest benefits,” says Nancy Altman, President of the Washington, DC-based Social Security Works.

“Instead, they want the wealthy to finally start contributing their fair share. If necessary, they are even willing to pay more themselves. Any DC politician who supports benefit cuts is wildly out of step with the American people,” she notes.

“While the study’s findings are consistent with other major surveys on Social Security during the previous years, it is remarkable that despite the current tumultuous political environment, American voters have a deep emotional bond with the program and want to ensure that Congress protects and improves their benefits without cutting them,” says Dan Adcock, director of government relations and policy at the Washington, DC-based National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

The NASI poll sends a strong signal to members of Congress that they should support legislation, like Rep. John Larson (D-CT) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s Social Security 2100 Act, that would extend solvency and improve benefits by having the wealthy pay their fair share of payroll taxes,” says Adcock.

In one of President Trump’s rolling press conferences, he touched upon Social Security saying there were no cuts being proposed – if anything he would make the program stronger.

Social Security and the Ocean State

In 2022, there were more than 233,000 Social Security beneficiaries in Rhode Island, including more than 172,000 retirees, 32,000 disabled workers, and almost 14,000 children,” says NIRS’s Tyler Bond, noting that all of these Rhode Islanders face the prospect of an indiscriminate benefit cut in a decade unless Congress acts to shore up Social Security’s financing.

“This report has one clear takeaway: the American people do not want Social Security benefit cuts, and they are willing to pay more themselves to avoid those potential benefit cuts,” adds Bond.

In conclusion, the NASI report cites 84-year-old Elizabeth R. Virginia, about her personal views on America’s retirement program. “Social Security is one of the most dependable things that we have. You know that it will come again at the same time. Right now, I know the second day of every month, it is there,” she says.

As Virginia knows, she can count on receiving her monthly Social Security check. The program has never missed a payment in nine decades. Congress must now work together to ensure that this never will happen.

For a copy of NASI’s Social Security report, go to www.nasi.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/NASI_SocialSecurityat90.pdf

For copy of NASI’s issue brief, “America’s View on Social Security,” go to www.nirsonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/FINAL-Views-on-SS-July-2024.pdf/

For statistics on RI Social Security beneficiaries, go to Source for RI statistics, go to www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/oasdi_zip/2022/ri.pdf.

“There’s a New Sheriff in Town” at SSA

Published in RINewsToday on June 20, 2020

On June President Joe Biden has asked two political holdovers from the President Trump’s administration, Social Security Commissioner Andrew Saul and his deputy, David Black, who had previously served as the agency’s top lawyer, to resign. Saul ultimately was fired after refusing to resign Friday, July 9, while Black resigned upon the president’s request that day.

Biden named as acting commissioner, Kilolo Kijakazi, whom he earlier had appointed to a lower-level Social Security Administration (SSA) position, deputy commissioner for retirement and disability policy.

The White House affirmed its authority to “remove the SSA Commissioner at will” by citing a Supreme Court ruling and a legal opinion from the Justice Department. Previously, under statute, the president could only remove the SSA commissioner for “neglect of duty” or “malfeasance in office.”

Saul’s term as Social Security Administrator ended in 2025 and according to The Washington Post, he states he plans to dispute the White House firing and continue to work remotely at his New York City home.

“I consider myself the term-protected commissioner of Social Security,” Saul told The Washington Post, calling the attempt to unseat him a “Friday Night Massacre.”

Minority Members of Senate Aging Committee Oppose Firing

Ranking Member Tim Scott (R-South Carolina), Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine), Richard Burr (R-North Carolina), Marco Rubio (R-Fla..), Mike Braun (R-Ind..), Rick Scott (R-Fla..), and Mike Lee (R-Utah) sent a letter July 14 to President Biden urging him to reinstate and honor the Senate confirmed, six-year term of Saul as SSA Commissioner.

Members of the Senate Special Committee on Aging find the politically motivated action especially worrisome as it will have drastic effects on SSA services that help millions of older Americans with basic expenses like housing, food and medicine.

The letter explains “Commissioner Saul was confirmed by the Senate in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote in 2019… led the agency through one of the most trying periods in its history during the COVID-19 pandemic… was confirmed by the Senate to serve a full six-year term that expires in 2025 and he should have remained in his position unless removed for cause, as written in federal law.”

The committee requested the Biden administration explain what authority an acting commissioner—not confirmed by the Senate—would possess to carry out the statutorily obligated duties of the SSA commissioner.

On the Other Side of the Aisle…

“From the beginning of their tenure at the Social Security Administration Andrew Saul and David Black were anti-beneficiary and anti-employee. The Biden Administration made the right move to fire both Saul and Black after they refused to resign, says chairperson John B. Larson (D-CT), of the House Ways and Means Social Security Committee, who had called for Saul and Black’s removal in March 2021. “As [Supreme Court] Justice Alito recently stated, the president needs someone running the agency who will follow their policy agenda,” he says.

According to Larson, since June 17, 2019, Saul’s control over SSA policies have “disproportionately harmed vulnerable Americans like low-income seniors and persons with disabilities, immigrants and people of color.

During Saul’s tenure, Larson noted that the SSA implemented a new rule that denied disability benefits for older, severely disabled workers who are unable to communicate in English, resulting in approximately 100,000 people being denied more than $5 billion in benefits from 2020 to 2029. However, there has been considerable discussion of the misinterpretation of the intent of this change.

SSA also finalized a new regulation that dramatically reduced due process protections for Social Security appeals hearings, by allowing the SSA to use agency attorneys instead of independent judges for the hearings, says Larson.

Larson also expressed concern about SSA proposing to change the disability review process to cut off benefits for some eligible people and proposing to make it significantly harder for older, severely disabled workers to be found eligible for disability benefits.

According to Larson, Saul also advanced the Trump Administration’s anti-immigrant policies by resuming “no-match letters” to employers with even minor discrepancies between their wage reports and their employees’ Social Security records. These letters effectively serve to harass immigrants and their employers, often leading to U.S. citizens and work-authorized immigrants being fired, he said.

Finally, Larson charged that Saul embraced the Trump Administration’s anti-federal employee policies, including forcing harsh union contracts that strip employees of rights and ending telework for thousands of employees just months before the COVID-19 pandemic started – a particularly ill-fated decision given the critical role telework has played in SSA’s ability to continue serving the public during the pandemic.

Thumbs Up from Aging Advocacy Groups

“The Social Security Commissioner should reflect the values and priorities of President Biden, which include improving benefits, extending solvency, improving customer services, reopening field offices, and treating SSA employees and their unions fairly. That was not the case with former Commissioner Saul, and we look forward to President Biden nominating someone who meets that standard,” says Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare.

Adds Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works: “Today is a great day for every current and future Social Security beneficiary. Andrew Saul and David Black were appointed by former President Donald Trump to undermine Social Security. They’ve done their very best to carry out that despicable mission. That includes waging a war on people with disabilities, demoralizing the agency’s workforce, and delaying President Biden’s stimulus checks.”

Introducing New SSA Commissioner, Kilolo Kijakazi…

Kilolo Kijakazi has a Ph.D. in public policy from George Washington University, an MSW from Howard University, and a BA from SUNY Binghamton University. Kijakazi’s Urban Institute bio notes that she served as an Institute Fellow at the Urban Institute, where she “worked with staff across the organization to develop collaborative partnerships with those most affected by economic and social issues, to expand and strengthen Urban’s agenda of rigorous research, to effectively communicate findings to diverse audiences and to recruit and retain a diverse research staff at all levels” while conducting research on economic security, structural racism, and the racial wealth gap.

Kijakazi was previously employed as a program officer at the Ford Foundation, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a program analyst at the Food Nutrition Service of the Department of Agriculture, and an analyst at the National Urban League.

According to Wikipedia, before entering the Biden administration, Kijakazi was a board member of the Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation, the National Academy of Social Insurance and its Study Panel on Economic Security, the Policy Academies and Liberation in a Generation, as well as a member of the DC Equitable Recovery Advisory Group, adviser to Closing the Women’s Wealth Gap, co-chair of the National Advisory Council on Eliminating the Black-White Wealth Gap at the Center for American Progress, and member of the Commission on Retirement Security and Personal Savings at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

“Kilolo has an amazing ability to find and build connections among individuals and institutions that should be working together on critical public policy issues and policy discussions are much better for that inclusionary approach,” says Margaret Simms, an Institute Fellow in the Center on Labor, Human Services, and Population at the Urban Institute.