The year is quickly drawing to a close, and politicians and pollsters are already looking over the horizon to next year’s midterm elections. Despite the breakneck pace of an ever-changing news cycle, early indications suggest the issue at the front of voters’ minds is a familiar one: the economy.
Affordability is dominating the political discourse in this country, driven by persistent inflation and the rising cost of everyday goods. While both sides in Washington continue the blame game over high prices, the fact is there’s an even bigger fiscal issue looming ahead that politicians are actively trying to avoid — and if they succeed in doing so, it will bring a whole new meaning to the affordability crisis in America.
The issue is the future of Social Security, a program that supports more than 68 million Americans. Because the program operates as an internally funded program walled off from the rest of the federal budget — funded by payroll taxes and taxation of benefits — many Americans are unaware of how the program is doing financially.
But earlier this year, the Social Security trustees issued a dire wake-up call: they project that the trust fund that allows the program to currently pay full promised benefits will be exhausted in late 2032. That’s less than seven years from now, when today’s 60-year-olds reach the full retirement age.
Now here’s the really concerning part.
When that happens, by law, an across-the-board benefit cut immediately goes into effect for all beneficiaries. The trustees estimate the cut to be 24% — or put another way, this will result in annual benefit cuts of $18,400 for an average dual-income couple retiring in early 2033.
That brings us back to the affordability issue. Think about what a 24% cut, or having $18,400 less, could mean to you or someone you know who depends on Social Security. Think about what it could mean to those planning to retire in seven years, and for future generations to come, to have that much less to live on in their retirement.
At this point, the more than 400,000 Utahns receiving Social Security benefits are probably asking a perfectly valid question in response to this news: “So what is being done about this?”
The answer: not much.
Ask any elected official, regardless of party, what their plan is to save Social Security, and you’ll likely get the same response: They’ll pledge to protect the program by not touching it. None will acknowledge that doing so ensures the cut will go into effect.
That’s why as candidates begin to crisscross the state campaigning for office, it’s essential that voters press them to tell the truth when it comes to Social Security. For far too long the program has been the object of outright lies, half-truths and demagoguery. No longer can we continue to ignore reality through false promises and scaremongering, especially when the consequences of doing so could financially impact millions of Americans.
If there is a silver lining to the issue, it’s this: We know what the solutions are. Seven years may seem like a long time, but in reality, it’s really not. The sooner we act to address the shortfall, the more palatable the reforms will be, the longer current and future recipients will have to adjust, and the greater the relief for the millions who depend on Social Security.
We can’t keep ignoring reality — especially when that reality will directly affect the people who rely on these resources to make ends meet. Allowing a 24% cut in annual retirement benefits in just seven years is no way to address affordability. Instead, our elected officials should start by being honest about Social Security and, while they’re at it, put forward their own plan to secure this vital program for future generations.