Michigan’s next Senator will face Social Security insolvency deadline

The deadline for Congress to fix Social Security so recipients won’t see a benefits reduction is looming. 

A division of the program, Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI), serves just over two million Michigan residents, or roughly one in five. According to a June 9 report, the OASI trust fund is in such a state that if nothing changes by 2032, recipients will see benefits cut by almost a quarter. By law, the program’s paid-out benefits cannot exceed revenue once its trust fund is drained, causing the projected 22% reduction.

One of the candidates running for Michigan’s open U.S. Senate seat, either Abdul El-Sayed or Mike Rogers, will be in office and making decisions regarding the program.

Michigan is one of the ten states that are most vulnerable to the change, according to a report from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. 

The issue isn’t new. For the past 16 years, the cost of Social Security’s retirement program has outpaced the amount of cash coming in, triggering the use of trust fund reserves to pay benefits in full. 

Steven Haider, a professor of economics and department chair at Michigan State University, said the leading cause is the change in the worker-to-retiree ratio. In 1945, there were 42 workers per retiree. Over seventy years later, it’s less than three to one. 

Lower birth rates and longer life expectancies threw the ratio out of whack, Haider said. “Life expectancy when we passed the Social Security Act in 1935 was about 62. It’s now about 78.”

The Board said the program’s anticipated insolvency date is coming sooner than previously thought. 

While lower birth rates and longer life expectancies have contributed to the discrepancy, a provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2025, played a part in the shrinking timeline. According to the report, tax cuts from the law would lead to less income tax paid on Social Security benefits, cutting off even more revenue to the program.

There are a variety of solutions policymakers could make, but Haider said it boils down to increasing taxes or reducing benefits. “All the various policies that have been put forward are a riff on one of those two things,” he said. “The sentiment among Americans to fix the program is extremely strong.”

One solution is to raise the retirement age by one year, which is a type of benefits reduction. In the same vein, Haider said reducing benefits for higher earners is a possibility. 

El-Sayed has called for eliminating Social Security’s tax cap – a version of increasing taxes.

Income earned beyond the tax cap isn’t subject to the Social Security tax. In 2026, the maximum is $184,500. 

“[He] understands the urgency of the Social Security solvency crisis and is prepared to act on day one,” Campaign spokesperson Cole Wozniak said. 

In a statement, Alyssa Brouillet, a spokesperson for Rogers’s campaign, offered another solution. “While Abdul’s reckless ‘Medicare for All’ plan quadruples costs and bankrupts Social Security, Mike Rogers is committed to protecting Social Security and Medicare for our seniors. He will take on the healthcare industry and insurance companies to increase transparency while bringing down costs – as he has for his entire career.”

A bipartisan proposal from Senators Bernie Moreno (R-OH) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) that recommended raising the taxable maximum was criticized and called “flawed” by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center (TPC). 

TPC’s critiques included the rupture of the “contribution-benefit link.” Increasing the taxable maximum would increase a retiree’s expectations of matched benefits, according to the organization.

“I strongly encourage people not to think about the Social Security system as being the same as a pension,” Haider said. 

Social Security is a crucial part of the proverbial “three-legged stool” of retirement. While it might not pay out enough for someone to have a winter refuge in Florida, it is a guaranteed income for retirees. 

It is designed to provide a minimum standard of living, Haider said, and it’s an important part of someone’s portfolio. 

“Everyone knows they’re going to be a part of it, and the fact that it’s a well-functioning annuity that pays until you die,” he said, “is incredibly valuable.”

A benefits cut would affect those who rely solely on Social Security for income the most, or “anybody that doesn’t have a well-funded 401K or IRA or other appreciable assets that they’re living on,” Haider told City Pulse. 

Other social safety net programs would also be strained, he said. 

A bipartisan group of senators introduced the Protect Retirement Opportunities and Maintaining Income Security for Everyone (PROMISE) Act in July. While the bill does not propose any specific solutions, it would create a process to start Congressional action on Social Security before the trust fund is depleted.

Under the bill, the Social Security Advisory Board would send Congress a base bill after collecting public input. Any legislative recommendations in the base bill would have to support at least 50 years of solvency for Social Security.

If a Social Security funding shortfall is projected, the PROMISE Act would also establish a solvency review process every 10 years that would initiate floor proceedings outlined in the bill.

Surveys performed by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation in 2026, 2024 and 2022 suggest that Americans across the aisle are willing to make changes to the program. 

In the most recent public consultation survey, conducted earlier this year with almost 20,000 Americans, 83% of Democrats and 77% of Republicans surveyed nationally favored increasing the taxable maximum. 

Reducing benefits for the top 20% of lifetime earners also received bipartisan support: 69% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans surveyed nationally. 

Gradually increasing the payroll tax from the current rate of 6.2% to 6.5% ranked slightly lower, but still had large bipartisan support. Two-thirds of Democrats and just over three-fifths of Republicans favored the option.

Haider said that a combination of certain adjustments, like raising the tax cap and retirement age, would help the program. “These minor changes are well worth making so that it’s internally solvent … for another 90 years.”