Dear Commons Community,

For the past several of months we have been inundated by various polls predicting who would win the presidential election – Harris or Trump.  Many of these polls also include preferences on which candidate would be better for the economy, on abortion, on immigration security, etc.  I tend to ignore these polls mainly because it is too early to matter and many voters will likely change their minds by election day or whenever they vote.  However, I saw a poll yesterday conducted by GOBankingRates that examined voter preferences for the candidate who would do a better job of administering the social security program.  As a senior citizen, who receives social security benefits, I found it interesting.  Below is a summary of the results, courtesy of GOBankingRates.

Tony

—————————————–

Since it was signed into law in the mid-1930s, Social Security has been a staple for Americans. The program was established to provide a financial safety net for retired workers over age 64. As of December 2023, an estimated 67 million Americans received Social Security.

For some Americans, Social Security is their main source of income. For others, it’s merely a supplement to cover any financial gaps from other sources.

With the upcoming presidential election, many people are worried about what will happen to Social Security and which presidential candidate would better protect the program. While any changes can take time to implement, it doesn’t hurt to be prepared.

GOBankingRates surveyed more than 1,000 Americans ages 18 and up to find out who they believe would do a better job protecting Social Security. These are the results, as well as key changes that could be coming to the program.

Which Presidential Candidate Could Best Protect Social Security?

In the recent GOBankingRates survey, here’s who respondents said they believe would protect Social Security the best if elected this November.

• Of those surveyed, 35.06% think Donald Trump’s policies would be better for the program.
• A total of 46.81% of respondents think Kamala Harris’ policies would protect the program better.
• Of those asked, 3.09% said either candidate could protect Social Security.
• A total of 7.87% believe neither presidential candidate would necessarily be good for the program.
• And 7.17% indicated they don’t know.

However, responses were further broken down by gender.

• A total of 38.03% of men believe Trump’s policies would protect Social Security the best, while just 32.15% of women said the same.
• Alternatively, 47.28% of men think Harris’ policies would be better for Social Security, and 46.35% of women agreed.
• Nearly 7% of men said they don’t think either presidential candidate would protect Social Security, while 9% of women said the same.
• Around 3% of men and women think either candidate could be equally good for the program.

Responses were further broken down by age range.

• Ages 18 to 24: More respondents think Trump’s policies would be better than Harris’ (43.37% vs. 33.73%).
• Ages 25 to 34: Nearly 46% of respondents think Harris’ policies would be better, while 35.92% think Trump’s would be better.
• Ages 35 to 44: More Americans think Harris would be better than Trump for Social Security (44.60% vs. 35.21%).

While the gap isn’t quite as big in these younger age ranges, those who are closer to the time when they could start collecting benefits tended to favor Harris.

• Ages 55 to 64: Nearly 51% of respondents believe Harris’ policies would protect the program, while 31% believe Trump’s would better protect the program.
• Ages 65-plus: A little over 52% of respondents think Harris’ policies would be better for Social Security than Trump’s (33.15%).

Whose Proposals Better Align With Preserving the Program?

The Social Security Board of Trustees has predicted that, by 2035, Social Security recipients will get only 75% of their scheduled benefits. This is due to a combination of factors, including rising costs, the aging population and dropping birth rates.

For this to change, the next U.S. president likely would have to make some serious changes.

It’s hard to say with certainty whether Harris or Trump would do a better job of protecting Social Security. Neither candidate has been very direct about their plans yet, though Trump has mentioned possibly cutting taxes on Social Security, while Harris has stated an interest in protecting and strengthening Social Security.

GOBankingRates spoke to Tim Rosenberger, a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute, to get his thoughts on the matter.

“Trump/Vance have proposed a platform better aligned with the operation of Social Security,” he said. “If the Social Security trust becomes insolvent, serious cutbacks are in store for retirees.” He also noted that Trump’s proposals are more geared toward stalling the program’s predicted insolvency.

However, as Forbes reported, tax experts have criticized Trump’s proposal. “If that lost tax revenue isn’t made up through other funding sources, that means those programs will run out of money and become insolvent sooner,” per Forbes. Additionally, it reported that “tax experts project Trump’s proposed tax cut on Social Security would not provide that much benefit to middle-class Americans.”

Other policies could also potentially address the issue.

Trump “would likely have the relationships with Congress to either subsidize Social Security from general revenues or to reform Social Security in ways that would prolong its solvency,” Rosenberger said.

As for Harris, here’s what she recently posted on social media: “For 89 years, Social Security has made the difference between poverty or peace of mind for millions of seniors, people with disabilities, and other beneficiaries … As President, I will protect and expand them.”

Again, the details are unclear for now, so the American population will just have to wait and see.

Bottom Line

Regardless of who becomes the next U.S. president, they’re going to face some serious challenges in finding ways to sustain — or reform — the Social Security program in ways that benefit the American people. This could mean implementing new policies, making changes to taxation, generating additional revenue, or a balancing act of all of these and more.