New senators face Social Security funding deadline, with varied proposals

Social Security cannot be changed through budget reconciliation, so a fix will likely need 60 votes and support from both parties.

Several Democrats favor raising or eliminating the $184,500 cap on wages subject to Social Security payroll taxes. Juliana Stratton of Illinois said she would eliminate the cap. Eliminating it starting in 2027 without increasing benefits for the additional earnings taxed would close an estimated 58% of the projected 75-year funding shortfall, according to Social Security Administration actuaries. Josh Turek of Iowa said he would lift the cap, while Adam Hamilton of Kansas would raise it rather than eliminate it, arguing that someone earning $1 million should not pay the same Social Security tax as someone earning $184,500. Abdul El-Sayed of Michigan said the cap should be removed and benefits should not be taxed. According to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, eliminating taxes on benefits without replacing the revenue would cost Social Security about $1 trillion over 10 years.

Some Republicans have offered other approaches. Kurt Alme of Montana said savings from cutting waste, fraud, and abuse elsewhere in government should go toward Social Security; in an October debate, he did not propose changes to the cap or benefit formula. Barry Moore of Alabama cosponsored a bill that would remove Social Security benefits from taxable income and replace the lost revenue with general funds. Harriet Hageman of Wyoming said growing the economy, creating jobs and getting more people into the workforce would help shore up the program.

Some proposals cross party lines: Annie Andrews of South Carolina, a Democrat, supports eliminating taxes on Social Security benefits. Andy Barr of Kentucky, a Republican, opposed changes for people already retired. Democrats Chris Pappas of New Hampshire and Roy Cooper of North Carolina oppose benefit cuts.