With the election coming up in November, many are wondering how Trump and Harris would address the Social Security and Medicare programs supporting America’s retirees.
Retirees aren’t the only ones with skin in the game: A recent Gallup poll found that more than 70% of Americans under the age of 65 are concerned Social Security benefits won’t be available by the time they are eligible to start collecting them.
They might be right: Most recent estimates project that at current benefit levels, the Social Security reserves will be depleted by 2035. With the “silver tsunami” of Baby Boomers expected to enter the program by 2030, the need to address the program’s cracks is more important than ever.
Thus, where presidential candidates fall on Social Security is a matter of importance to all Americans.
Here’s what each candidate has said — and done — about the voter-important issue.
Donald Trump
On the Republican side, Donald Trump has recently called for an end to the taxation of Social Security benefits, which would provide the most savings to those who have additional income beyond just the federal monthly checks.
“We can do a lot of things to help the people,” Trump stated. “People on Social Security are being killed, and one of the things I’m doing is no tax for seniors on Social Security, and I’ll get it done quickly.”
Economists are concerned that this tax cut might accelerate the insolvency of the Social Security and Medicare funds at the federal level, as tax revenue helps fund the program overall. At the very least, without cuts in other areas, the proposal would add to the nation’s burgeoning $35 trillion debt.
Moreover, Social Security benefits are already subject to their own taxation schedules. For the bottom-earning 50%, the total tax savings would amount to $90 or less annually, according to the Tax Policy Center.
In the past, including during his time in the Oval Office, Trump opposed any cuts to Social Security benefits, standing up to some members of his own party.
Though Trump’s tax-free benefit plan has short-term benefits for recipients, it falls short in addressing how it will support the program’s long-term sustainability — especially considering this is hardly the only area Trump plans to cut taxes in. Social Security is dependent on tax revenue to meet its benefit obligations.
One way Trump has pitched to generate replacement revenue is by raising tariffs on international trade. However, the increase in revenue from tariff increases does not even come close to approaching the gap created by his proposed tax cuts, including for corporations.
A Wharton School analysis predicted that Trump’s economic policy proposals would create an additional $4.1 trillion in national deficit over a 10-year period. That type of funding shortage deplete Social Security’s reserves much faster than the current estimate of 2035.
Overall, Trump has advocated and been outspoken about his support for the program, he has also had moments where he entertained making cuts.
“There is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting and in terms of also the theft and the bad management of entitlements,” he told CNBC in 2020.
Later, his campaign clarified that he was referring to cutting the waste in the program’s management — not the program’s benefits
Kamala Harris
On the Democratic side, Kamala Harris has said she wants to protect and strengthen Social Security. Her co-sponsorship of the Social Security Expansion Act in 2019 indicates a commitment to protecting benefits.
The bill generates additional funding for the program, primarily through taxation of the nation’s highest earners. She has made specific policy proposals to this end, including an unrealized wealth gains tax, and closing out tax loopholes that primarily benefit those with high net worths.
Harris supports for cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security payouts and strongly opposes the privatization of the program. She has proposed a comprehensive plan that preserves the program and protects its future.
A catch-22 of Kamala’s proposals, however, is that she will only be able to deliver the resources needed to support the program if she can also pass a number of other proposals, where the funding would come from.
In other words, without a significant “blue wave” at the November polls, Kamala’s ability to meet her campaign promises will be jeopardized.
However, even without the blue wave, Harris is unlikely to cut benefits.
The Voter’s Choice
While Trump may be able to cut taxes on Social Security benefits and increase the take-home amount in the short term, Harris may need more extensive, bipartisan cooperation to implement the changes needed to realize her vision.
For now, neither candidate has proposed cutting benefits or cost-of-living adjustments.
The key question voters should consider is: For how long?
