Trump’s Campaign Pledges Could impact Social Security’s Financial Stability

Published in Blackstone Valley Call & Times on November 4, 2024

When voters go to the polls on Tuesday, they should know that Social Security will only be nine years away from insolvency when the next President takes office.  According to projections by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the law calls for a 23 percent cut in Social Security reductions in fiscal year 2034.  Restoring solvency in the retirement program over the next 75 years would require the equivalent of reducing all future benefits by 24 percent or increasing revenue by 35 percent, says CBO.

As the presidential campaign winds down, with voting taking place on Nov. 4, 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris calls for protecting and expanding Social Security while former President Trump says would “fight for and protect Social Security.” But both candidates don’t provide a specific detail plan as to how to  fix the financially ailing Social Security program, despite the looming $16,500 cut facing a typical couple retiring just before the projected insolvency.

But campaign promises, if enacted, can have a devastating impact on the Social Security Programs ability to pay all future benefits.

Analysis Shows Campaign Promises Weaken Social Security

A new report, “What Would the Trump Campaign’s Mean for Social Security,” released by US Budget Watch 2024, a project the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB), details how former President Donald Trump’s proposed policies, if enacted, would advance Social Security’s insolvency by three years, from FY 2034 to FY 2031 – hastening the next President’s insolvency timeline by one-third.  CRFB is a non-partisan government watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. that analyses the fiscal impact of federal budget and fiscal issues.

According to CRFB’s new report, released on Oct. 21, 2024, Trump campaign pledges  would weaken Social Security’s financial stability by ending taxation of Social Security benefits. This would eliminate a revenue stream currently used to help finance Social Security. If enacted, the analysis notes that Trump’s plans would increase Social Security’s ten-year cash shortfall by $2.3 trillion through FY 2035. Additionally, ending all taxes on overtime pay and tips, would also reduce the payroll taxes accruing to the Social Security trust funds.

CRFB’s analysis also predicted that Trump’s policies would worsen Social Security’s finances by increasing Social Security’s annual shortfall by roughly 50 percentin FY 2035, from 3.6 to 4 percent of payroll.

Trump’s calls for large tariffs on imports, which would either increase cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) through higher inflation or reduce taxable payroll would impact the financial viability of the Social Security program.  Enhancing boarder security and deporting unauthorized immigrants would reduce the number of immigrant workers paying into the Social Security Trust funds.

CRFB also questions whether Trump’s fixes would reduce Social Security’s long-term shortfalls.

From the Sideline…

According to Aimee Picchi is associate managing editor for CBS MoneyWatch, the personal finance website received a statement from Trump spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt disputing the CRFB analysis: “The so-called experts at CRFB have been consistently wrong throughout the years. President Trump delivered on his promise to protect Social Security in his first term, and President Trump will continue to strongly protect Social Security in his second term,” she said.

Additionally,  Leavitt told CBS  Money Watch that Trump’s plans for “unleashing American energy, slashing job-killing regulations, and adopting pro-growth America First tax and trade policies” would put Social Security “on a stronger footing for generations to come.”

“President Trump has said he would close Social Security’s long-term shortfall by increasing drilling for oil and natural gas and by growing the economy. However, we’ve shown that increased energy exploration is unlikely to have a meaningful effect on Social Security – even if the gains were deposited into the trust fund. We’ve also shown that it would require unrealistically fast economic growth to close Social Security’s existing long-term funding gap,” says CRFB’s analysis. .

“Faster growth can reduce Social Security’s shortfall [says Trump]. But based on available analyses and understanding the effects of President Trump’s agenda on the national debt, it is unlikely his plans would significantly boost the size of the economy, and many estimates find his plans would reduce long-term out-put long-term output,” adds CRFB.

Responding to CRFB’s analysis, in a statement Harris-Walz 2024 spokesperson Joseph Costello said: “Vice President Harris is committed to protecting Social Security benefits and is the only candidate who will actually fight for seniors, not just pay them lip service on the campaign trail. 

Expand Social Security Caucus House Co-Chairs Reps. John B. Larso (D -CT), Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), and Debbie Dingell (D – MI) )call Trump’s campaign pledges “a no starter.”  If implemented, they would eliminate revenue streams used to help finance Social Security and accelerate the depletion of Social Security funding,” they say.

“Maintaining the solvency of Social Security is vital for promoting economic security, and a moral obligation to honor the commitments made to those who have contributed to the system throughout their working lives. To safeguard the future of Social Security, we cannot allow for Trump’s policies to gut these hard-earned benefits and instead must engage in a simple reform like the Social Security 2100 Act that fixes insolvency by having the wealthy pay into the system the same as everyone else,” note the Co-Chairs.

And Max Richtman, President and CEO, National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, gives his thought’s to Trump’s campaign pledges: “We oppose his proposal to eliminate the taxes on benefits that help to fund the system, and any other measure that would deprive Social Security of much needed revenue,” he says.

“Once again, Trump postures as a friend of the working class, then puts forward plans that endanger the benefits working people have earned — and depend on in retirement. It is irresponsible for a presidential candidate to advocate plans that would hasten the depletion of the Social Security trust fund reserves, triggering an even larger automatic benefit cut if that happens,” adds Richtman.

According to Richtman, Trump’s plans reveal his “overall recklessness” with Social Security. “He suspended the payroll tax that funds the program during Covid — and hoped it would be eliminated.  His White House budgets would have slashed Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) by billions of dollars.  He said earlier this year that he was ‘open’ to ‘cutting entitlements,’ then tried to walk it back. He once called Social Security a ‘Ponzi Scheme,” he adds.

“Time and again, Trump has chosen political expediency without considering – or caring about – the consequences. Despite his posturing, Donald Trump is no friend to Social Security or American seniors,” charges Richtman.

Looking Back on Efforts to Fix Social Security

“The history and reasoning in both Congress and the White House on protecting Social Security is still important and persuasive– as it was to President Obama, and House and Senate leaders Pelosi and Reid,” says Robert Weiner, former chief of Staff of the House Aging Committee and later a  White House senior staffer

“The great Claude Pepper helped forge the Reagan-O’Neill-Pepper deal of 1983 that stopped cuts and even partial insolvency through 2034,” says Weiner, noting that he remembers Pepper saying “over my dead body” to cabinet officers and congressional leaders who wanted to impose severe cuts. 

Weiner noted that Nancy Pelosi said  “First, do no harm” to the would-be cutters right through all the years of her Speakership and leadership. “’We did that’ to stopping the Social Security cutters, she told Weiner. 

Senate Leader Harry Reid’s staff removed the term ‘reform’ from his Social Security talking points when they were given the documents and realized that the program has a surplus, not a deficit,” noted Weiner. “These great leaders knew that Social Security ‘reform’ meant cuts, breaking Social Security’s promise to American seniors, and that the deficit was a myth and excuse to take from the program and its two-trillion-plus dollar surplus,” he said. 

“And House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer told me that congressional leaders knew that, if necessary, if the time comes, and it’s not now, a slight tweak by Congress to raise the income level for tax payments could fix it, if necessary, if the growing economy hadn’t already maintained full solvency,” says Weiner.

“Let’s hope this kind of sanity and sensitivity continues to prevail,” Weiner concludes.

https://www.crfb.org/blogs/what-would-trump-campaign-plans-mean-social-security

Dems Listening to Calls to Strengthen and Expand Social Security, Medicare

Published in the Woonsocket Call on September 23, 2018

The political clock is ticking…The midterm elections are less than 50 days away and just days ago, the Washington, D.C.-based AARP released a poll of age 50 and older Ohio voters who say they are especially concerned about their health care and personal financial issues.

The Politico-AARP poll, conducted by Morning Consult, surveyed 1,592 registered voters in Ohio from September 2 to 11, 2018 with a margin of error of +/- 2 percentage points. For voters 50 and older, the poll surveyed 841 registered voters and has a margin of error of +/- 3 percentage points.

Don’t Touch Our Social Security, Medicare”

According to the newly released AARP-Politico poll findings, the older voters identified key issues that will influence how they will cast their vote in November at the polls. The respondents viewed health care (81 percent) the most important campaign issue followed by Social Security (80 percent) and Medicare (76 percent) and prescription drugs (65 percent). But, a strong majority (74 percent) support preserving the state’s Medicaid expansion, says the pollsters. .

“With less than 50 days to go before Election Day, candidates in Ohio would be wise to listen to the state’s most powerful voting group: 50-plus voters,” said Nancy LeaMond, AARP’s Executive Vice President and Chief Advocacy & Engagement Officer in a statement releasing the polls findings. “History shows older voters turn out in force in every election, and AARP is making sure they are energized and know where candidates stand on the issues.”

AARP is partnering with Politico to create a series titled “The Deciders,” (www.politico.com/magazine/thedeciders) that integrates original polling focused on 50-plus voters, reporting, data analysis and cutting-edge data visualization tools built by Politico’s specialized interactive team. The third edition in the series is focused on Ohio, a key election battleground state. Other recent polls surveyed voters in Arizona and Florida.

The AARP-Political Ohio poll findings say that 74 percent of age 50-plus voters “strongly support” (42 percent) or “somewhat support” (32 percent) preserving Ohio’s Medicaid expansion which extended Medicaid eligibility for low-income residents under the Affordable Care Act.

Ninety one percent of the older voter respondents say they are “very concerned” (55 percent) or “somewhat concerned” (36 percent) about their utility bills increasing. In addition, 69 percent of these respondents “strongly support” (27 percent) or “somewhat support” (42 percent) creating an Ohio retirement savings plan.

The AARP-Political poll also noted that 74 percent of 50-plus voters say opioid addiction is “a very serious problem” in the state right now, and 61 percent say the government is not doing enough to address it. And, 70 percent of the older voters “strongly agree” that jobs and the economy are major issues this election season. Only one in five (23 percent) feel “well-prepared” to get and keep a job, says the researchers.

Finally, nearly half (46 percent) of 50-plus voters think government is unprepared to prevent a cyber-attack on public infrastructure.

Democrats Zero in on Senior Issues

While poll after poll of older voters sends the message “Don’t touch my Social Security or Medicare” the GOP turns a deaf ear, but the Democrats listen. Following President Donald Trump’s claim that Democrats are trying to cut Social Security at a campaign rally in Montana, Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Reps. John Larson (D-Conn.), Terri A. Sewell (D-Ala.) and Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) on September 13, announced the bicameral Expand Social Security Caucus, over 150 members, including 18 Senators.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) David Cicilline (D-RI) James Langevin (D-RI) are members of the newly formed Expand Social Security Caucus.

Alex Lawson, Executive Director of Social Security Works, an advocacy nonprofit group pushing for expanding Social Security, emceed the press conference and co-authored an opinion piece in The Hill celebrating the caucus launch.

Lawson noted, “We have members in the caucus from all corners of the country, from all parts of the Democratic Party. We’re waiting on some Republicans who might join, but they’ll be welcome when they realize that the American people are united in calling for an expansion of Social Security.”

The mission of this new congressional caucus is to push for the expansion of Social Security, one of the most popular and successful government programs. Last year alone, Social Security lifted 22 million Americans, including more than 15 million seniors, out of poverty. Before Social Security, nearly half of the nation’s seniors were living in poverty, says a caucus press release.

The caucus will ensure that expanding Social Security is a key part of the Democratic agenda before the midterm elections and next year and beyond. Over a dozen bills have already been introduced in the Senate and House to expand Social Security. With the caucus now playing a key role in expanding and strengthening Social Security, look for more bills to be introduced next Congress.

At the official unveiling of the new Congressional caucus, Sanders said, “We are here today to say very loudly and very clearly that at a time when millions of seniors are trying to survive on $12,000 or $13,000 a year, our job is not to cut Social Security. Our job is to expand Social Security so that everyone in America can retire with dignity and respect.” T

“Social Security is a lifeline for seniors and Americans with disabilities. We won’t let it be cut by one cent – and instead we will fight to expand it,” Co-chair Warren said. “The rich and powerful have rigged our economy to make themselves richer, while working families face a massive retirement crisis. If this government really works for the people, it should protect and expand Social Security.”

“A number of bills have been introduced in the Senate and House to expand Social Security, including legislation written by Sanders last year to lift the cap on taxable income that goes into Social Security, requiring the wealthiest Americans – those who make over $250,000 a year – to pay their fair share of Social Security taxes. That bill would increase Social Security benefits and extend the program’s solvency for the next 60 years.

Joining the caucus leadership Thursday were Social Security Works, the Alliance for Retired Americans, the Paralyzed Veterans of America, Latinos for a Secure Retirement, the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare, the American Federation of Government Employees, the Arc of the United States, the Center for Responsible Lending and Global Policy Solutions.

With the midterm elections looming, the progressive and centralists of the Democratic party must put aside their differences to work together to support Democratic Congressional candidates who can win. One unifying political issue may well be supporting the expansion and strengthening of Social Security, Medicare and ensuring that Americans can be covered by affordable health insurance. Stay tuned.