Unless Congress acts, Social Security is facing a 22% reduction in benefits in 2032. That cut happens automatically. Nobody has to vote for it. The only way to stop it is for Congress to pass a fix.

Nearly every senator elected this November will still be in office when that fight happens. So States Newsroom did the obvious thing: it asked the candidates in nine close Senate races what changes they'd support.

Here is what eight Republicans on this site said.

Four didn't answer at all

These candidates had no Social Security policy on their campaign websites, and their staff didn't respond to multiple requests for more information:

• Dan Sullivan, running for reelection in Alaska.
• Roger Marshall, running for reelection in Kansas.
• Michael Whatley, running for the open seat in North Carolina.
• Jon Husted, running to keep his appointed seat in Ohio.

(The Democrat in North Carolina, Roy Cooper, didn't answer either. Most of the other Democrats in these races at least pointed to a specific idea — usually making high earners pay Social Security tax on more of their income. Right now, income above $184,500 isn't taxed for Social Security at all.)

That's four sitting or would-be senators who want a six-year term and wouldn't say what they'd do about the single biggest benefit cut facing their retired constituents.

Three gave promises, not plans

Ken Paxton, the nominee in Texas, has no Social Security proposals on his website. A campaign staffer said Paxton "believes we must protect Social Security for the millions of seniors who spent their lives paying into the system." The campaign didn't explain how he'd do that.

Here's what Paxton says when he thinks only lobbyists are listening. Just this week, a leaked recording surfaced of him at a private Capitol Hill fundraiser telling the room that "reasonable cuts to mandatory spending" are unavoidable: "We have to suck it up." About three-quarters of mandatory spending is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. We wrote up that recording here.

Mike Rogers (MI), the nominee in Michigan, has no policy details on his website either. His communications director said Rogers "is committed to protecting social security and Medicare for our seniors" because his parents and his wife's parents depended on it. No plan came with the commitment. Rogers has talked about Social Security before, though — he said A.I. could help decide who has "earned" benefits, and claimed there's "still a lot of fraud" in disability benefits, where overpayments ran under 1% of spending in 2011–2013.

Ashley Hinson, the nominee in Iowa, has a website line about preserving Social Security "while rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse." Her campaign said she "has never and will never cut a penny from Social Security" and will "work with anyone to ensure the long-term solvency of this vital program."

What would that work look like? Hinson got the question in person at her debate on Wednesday night. Asked about keeping Social Security solvent, she said she wouldn't support cutting benefits and suggested a bipartisan commission to send Congress recommendations — the same idea Collins offers below. Pushed on her own line that "all options should be on the table," she turned to younger Americans' bank accounts, Politico reported. The country needed a "serious conversation" about "how young people are saving money," she said, adding: "Millennials are the worst group of savers in the country right now."

Whatever millennials have in their savings accounts, it doesn't change what Social Security can pay retirees in 2032. The question was which options she'd put on the table, and she didn't name one.

One gave a process

Susan Collins of Maine gave States Newsroom the most specific answer of the eight: she supports "creating an independent, bipartisan commission of experts to develop recommendations," like the one in the early 1980s.

A commission isn't a plan. It's a way to hand the plan to someone else. And some versions of that idea are worse than they sound — Rep. Tom Cole's long-running Social Security commission bill, for example, would force Congress into a yes-or-no vote on whatever the commission writes, with amendments prohibited. Collins didn't say which version she backs.

Why "I'll protect it" isn't an answer

Experts in the States Newsroom piece were blunt about this. Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, said more voters now understand that a candidate who promises not to touch Social Security is guaranteeing the automatic cut in 2032.

That's the trap in every "never cut a penny" line. Doing nothing is the cut. The only choices are which fixes to make — more revenue, benefit changes, or some mix — and who pays. A candidate who won't name any of them is asking voters to find out after the election.

What the record shows

Asked by States Newsroom how they would prevent a 22% cut to Social Security benefits in 2032, Republican Senate candidates Dan Sullivan, Roger Marshall, Michael Whatley and Jon Husted didn't respond. Ken Paxton, Mike Rogers (MI) and Ashley Hinson promised to protect the program without saying how, and Hinson, pressed at a debate, floated a commission and then criticized millennials' savings. Susan Collins proposed a commission. Paxton, meanwhile, was recorded at a private fundraiser saying cuts to mandatory spending — mostly Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — are unavoidable.

Source

US Senate candidates in 9 key races quiet about Social Security benefits cliff — States Newsroom, via the Ohio Capital Journal