Posted on 09/18/2026 7:28:15 AM PDT by Presbyterian Reporter
Senators elected this November are slated to be in office in the fourth quarter of 2032 — the projected depletion date for the trust fund Social Security relies on to help pay retirement benefits.
Without action by Congress, that depletion may prompt a 22% cut to benefits for eligible retired workers, their spouses and children and survivors of deceased workers.
A new survey from the Peter G. Peterson Foundation finds that 81% of respondents in states with competitive Senate races say they are more likely to vote for candidates with plans to avoid automatic Social Security benefit cuts than for a candidate “who promises not to touch Social Security.”
The online survey from the Peterson Foundation, a nonpartisan organization focused on addressing America’s long-term fiscal challenges, included 2,500 registered voters in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas — states with Senate contests the group said it anticipates will be broadly competitive come November.
The survey, which was fielded between Aug. 20 and Aug. 27, had a margin of error of 4.4%.
Taxing high earners to help fund Social Security gains bipartisan attention Trump announces $500 Obamacare refunds for nearly 1 million people As Republicans tout Trump’s ‘big beautiful bill,’ here’s who the tax breaks benefited IRS tax debt agreements have plummeted: ‘I’ve never seen a number that low’ CNBC’s Financial Advisor 100: Best financial advisors, top firms ranked CNBC Elite Advisors: Top ultra-high net worth wealth management firms for 2026 Once Peterson Foundation interviewers told those surveyed voters in Senate battleground states about the projected benefit cuts in 2032, the share who said they support Social Security reforms rose to 91% from 49%.
“Awareness with the public is still relatively low, although it’s growing,” Brett Loper, executive vice president of policy at the Peterson Foundation, said of Social Security’s looming funding shortfall.
“If we can raise the awareness level amongst the population, they’re in turn going to hopefully raise it with the candidates who are running for office,” Loper said.
The 91% of all respondents in support of Social Security reforms includes 92% of Republicans surveyed and 90% of Democrats, according to the Peterson Foundation’s poll results. It also includes 94% of respondents age 65 and over; 92% of those ages 45 to 64; and 87% of those ages 18 to 44.
How voters feel about possible Social Security reforms To help shore up benefits, lawmakers have several options. Generally, that may include raising taxes, cutting benefits or a combination of both.
The Peterson Foundation survey did not ask about all Social Security reform proposals that lawmakers and policy experts have suggested.
Of those solutions it queried potential voters about, the highest share of respondents — 72% — said they support increasing the payroll tax cap by 1% for all income above $184,500. Currently, employees and employers each contribute 6.2% toward Social Security on earnings up to $184,500, a threshold that changes every year to keep pace with average wages.
About two-thirds of respondents — 66% — said they favor capping Social Security benefits so that no retired couple would receive more than $100,000 per year, the poll found.
Meanwhile, 65% of respondents said they back reducing benefits for the top 20% of earners, and 65% support gradual benefit adjustments and tax increases.
Just 29% of potential voters the Peterson Foundation surveyed said they would be in favor of government borrowing to avoid automatic benefit cuts.
Why America’s retirement system gets a C+ rating A separate survey of 2,243 Americans conducted in October and November of 2024 found the policy option that received the most support was eliminating the payroll tax cap for earnings over $400,000 without providing benefit increases in exchange for the additional money paid into the program. That survey, which had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points, was by the National Academy of Social Insurance, AARP, the National Institute on Retirement Security and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce with Greenwald Research.
Another popular policy choice, according to the 2024 survey, was gradually raising the payroll tax rate to 7.2% from 6.2% for both workers and employers.
That 2024 survey also found certain benefit increases — such as changing the way the annual cost-of-living adjustment is measured to more accurately reflect inflation, providing a caregiver credit, or providing a bridge benefit for older workers who had careers in physically demanding occupations — were also popular with respondents.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Are you in favor of the government eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse in Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid to insure there is enough money in those funds without reducing benefits or increasing payroll taxes?
Why do I believe 90% of the public want to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse and the other 10% want waste fraud abuse to continue as those 10% are the beneficiaries?
A major cause of the debt is all facets of the give-away government has bolted on more and more eligibility with less and less (intentionally) verification of eligibility AND any continuation of benefits re-verified at least once a year.
Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, loans, food supplements, housing, on and on and on.....
No politician is going near that 3rd rail of political certain death.
No SSAdmin reform needed. Just get rid of the 20M illegal alien parasites and most of the 50M visa holders.
This is simple supply/demand. That is why the whiny arses going on about affordability are the same ones whining about illegals. They WANT prices high so they can blame DJTrump.
— they are more likely to vote for candidates with plans to avoid automatic Social Security benefit cuts than for a candidate “who promises not to touch Social Security.”
Wait until they see what the “plan” is
There is no magic money tree so we can either raise more money “taxes”
or spend less money “cut social security”
“”This is simple supply/demand. That is why the whiny arses going on about affordability are the same ones whining about illegals. They WANT prices high so they can blame DJTrump.””
***
And... their support for the Democrat leftist policies (open borders, free stuff for illegals, etc.) is what caused the “unaffordability” problems in the first place. They voted against their own best interests, as usual. They’re just stupid that way.
Because we were just kidding when we said "lock box".
A new survey finds that people are more likely to vote for candidates who actually do their jobs rather than take perpetual junkets and vacations, trade on insider knowledge and then pass last minute continuing resolutions instead of debating the budget because they ran out the clock on a year of doing nothing productive.
No one has provided a shred of evidence of waste fraud and abuse in social security. What is needed is an honest conversation about solvency, and where benefit cuts and revenue increases can happen. The American public is far too stupid to HAVE that conversation, though, so the incipient train wreck has been inevitable since the last reform in the 1980s.
The illegal alien parasites pay into social security, and get no benefits. They have improved solvency.
👍👍👍👍👍
Legal immigrants over age 65 get free social security supplemental checks, even though they have not paid any social security taxes. There are more than 10 million such seniors collecting benefits. I personally know a few.
The illegal alien parasites pay into social security, and get no benefits
🙃 O, please.
They get plenty of benefits.
They get pay back via:
FREE healthcare
FREE housing
FREE groceries
FREE education
Democrats are scaring seniors again. Page 92 of the DNC playbook.
There is no SS trust fund. Back in the 80s a senator from Delaware named Biden introduced the bill that rolled SS into the general fund.
There is no magic money tree so we can either raise more money “taxes”
or spend less money “cut social security”
*************
As usual the “solution” will be to increase taxes on the makers to support the takers.
As usual the “solution” will be to increase taxes on the makers to support the takers.
...and the band played on....
Upside-down head to you, too. None of those alleged costs come from the social security system.
Republicans need to play offense on this and other pocketbook issues. Crime, immigration, and transgenderization won’t be enough.
And yet find a way to pay for Somalis to go to adult day care in Minnesota...
We have been abandoned
A. the p.o.s. was not talking about legal immigrants.
B. Legal immigrants are not eligible for SSI simply by residing in the U.S. legally:
Work History Requirement: Most lawful permanent residents (green card holders) must earn 40 qualifying work credits (roughly 10 years of work) where they or their spouses/parents paid taxes into the system.
Means Testing: Applicants must still pass strict federal income and resource limits ($2,000 for individuals, $3,000 for couples), regardless of legal status
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.