Every year, we are treated to an annual report by the trustees of our nation’s Social Security fund, and every year, the estimated date of its insolvency shifts. What remains the same is that the money is going to run out.
The fund will be operating in the red by 2020, and Social Security benefits will be cut by up to 20% for everyone on the rolls by 2035. Money for Medicare Part A, covering 60 million Americans, will be gone by 2026. These are the conclusions of the latest trustees’ report, and they are not acceptable.
Social Security represents a fundamental pact in our society that we should be able to eventually retire from work and live out our lives with dignity. Here’s the problem: There is no political will to engage with the facts, make reforms, and redefine the promise of Social Security for the 21st century.
There are a host of reasonable arguments for and against the original concept behind Social Security, dating back to its formation under President Franklin Roosevelt in 1935. Those academic debates should continue, but here and now, we have people entering retirement every day who deserve some more clarity so they can plan for their futures, not to mention what is owed to young workers such as myself, who are paying into Social Security with an even smaller expectation of ever receiving a check.
Congress will have to reform Social Security, and the number of people depending on it is only going to grow. The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that between now and 2040, the over-65 population is going to increase by one-third. Social Security spending will go up by 5%, and Medicare expenses are set to double.
The silence on the part of President Trump and the 2020 Democratic field is telling. No politician wants to touch this issue and be honest with their voters. The Trump era has revealed just how unifying the issue of preserving Social Security is across the political spectrum. Democrats generally support Social Security based on both the function of the program and the principle behind it.
Despite all the crowing from Republicans about government spending, the national debt and redistribution of wealth, the fact is they had to pay into Social Security and want that returned. It’s hard to blame them. Beltway Republicans such as Paul Ryan ignored this for decades in Washington. Trump had a better sense of where Republican voters actually stood when he promised to defend it.
So, here we are. Two political parties dedicated to defending Social Security up until the grand promise is broken for millions who will need those checks. There is another way, a more responsible path, but it will be politically dubious. Congress should reform Social Security to be a genuine safety net program, existing to catch those who are actually in need past the age of 65. Right now, everyone from your average auto mechanic making $35,000 a year to the billionaire Koch Brothers and millionaire Bernie Sanders receives those benefits. The level of need is not the same.
This program was devised for a workforce that looks nothing like what we have today. In 1935, only 24% of women were in the workforce; today, it’s upward of 73%. Life expectancy is near 79 years old, when it once was only 64. One-quarter of the workforce in 1935 worked in agriculture; today, that’s less than 1%. That’s not to say it is no longer relevant, but we must adjust the program to match the needs of our current demography, not commit them a financial arrangement from a world we wouldn’t recognize.
If we cannot manage to reform Social Security, or even broach the subject for fear of angering voters relying on those checks, we are inviting a much worse ending for this program. Americans are reasonable and can think long term when asked about the fortunes of their children and grandchildren, but politicians will have to be more bold. Sacrifices will have to be made, and we should begin by reassessing who Social Security is for and why those people need it.
Stephen Kent (@Stephen_Kent89) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner‘s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the spokesman for Young Voices.
