Social Security Could Collapse Entirely Under Trump, Former Chief Warns
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The former Social Security commissioner has warned that Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) actions at the federal agency could lead to the "collapse of the entire system" that pays benefits to 70 million Americans.
Newsweek has contacted the Social Security Administration (SSA) for comment via email outside of regular working hours.
Why It Matters
DOGE, under the helm of Donald Trump adviser and tech billionaire Elon Musk, began working at the SSA in February, shortly after the Trump administration entered the White House.
Several DOGE mandated changes have taken place, including staffing being cut from 57,000 down to 50,000, closure of some regional offices, and changes to customer services.
What To Know
In conversation with Democracy Now's Amy Goodman, Biden-era commissioner Martin O'Malley said that DOGE cutbacks at the agency could "cascade into a collapse" of the entire Social Security system.
He said that jobs cuts—first announced by the agency in late February—have resulted in "50 percent reduction in the people that keep the IT systems going."
In a press release issued on February 27, the SSA confirmed that it would be undertaking workforce reductions through voluntary early retirement for those over 50 years of age who meet certain service requirements, and resignation for other staff members. Employees who take either of these options would be eligible for voluntary separation incentive payments.
Former Social Security Commissioner Martin O'Malley testifies before the Senate Committee on the Budget at the U.S. Capitol on September 11, 2024 in Washington, D.C.
Former Social Security Commissioner Martin O'Malley testifies before the Senate Committee on the Budget at the U.S. Capitol on September 11, 2024 in Washington, D.C.
Anna Rose Layden/GETTY
The SSA said the "massive reorganizations" would lead to "abolishment of organizations and positions, directed reassignments, and reductions in staffing."
But O'Malley believes these cuts are to blame for issues plaguing the agency. In recent weeks, there have been reports of SSA website crashes, long waits for phone and in-person services, as well as some recipients being incorrectly declared as dead.
"You're seeing...outages in some of the customer-facing aspects of it," O'Malley said. "Those outages are going to become more regular, rather than intermittent. They're going to happen for longer durations."
"Ultimately, you're going to see that cascade into a collapse of the entire system and an interruption for some time of benefits," he continued. "I don't see—with the path that they're on, I believe they've taken probably 90 percent of the actions necessary to accomplish that aim."
O'Malley has made the same warning on numerous occasions. He told CNBC in March that such a collapse could happen "within the next 30 to 90 days."
He also called for legislative action and public pressure, warning that any interruption to payments could lead to political backlash.
"I think many people throughout the country are going to start bringing a lot of heat to members of Congress who have been facilitating, supporting, aiding and abetting the breaking of their Social Security and the interruption of benefits that they work their whole lives to earn," O'Malley said.
What People Are Saying
In a February 28 press release regarding staffing cuts, the SSA said: "These steps prioritize customer service by streamlining redundant layers of management, reducing non-mission critical work, and potential reassignment of employees to customer service positions. Also supporting this priority is looking for efficiencies and other opportunities to reduce costs across all spending categories, including information technology and contractor spending. SSA is committed to ensure this plan has a positive effect on the delivery of Social Security services."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "From a customer service standpoint, it does appear the Social Security Administration is feeling pressure at the moment, as layoffs have meant more work to do for a smaller staff of employees. The distribution of benefits has yet to see any negative effects, but with other aspects of the administration falling behind, it's easy to see why there are concerns future payments could be delayed....Few Americans will tolerate missed payments or slower customer service for a program they paid into for decades."
What Happens Next
No official changes to benefit distributions—which take place monthly—have occurred.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ICE moves to dismiss cases in bid to fast-track deportations after courthouse arrests
As Vadzim Baluty watched his son Aliaksandr Baluty get arrested by six plainclothes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers directly after an immigration court hearing, he had the sinking feeling he'd made a costly mistake. Vadzim Baluty, accompanying his son for his first court appearance in his asylum bid, agreed last month when an ICE prosecutor offered to drop the case against the recent Belarusian migrant, not realizing his son would be swiftly detained as soon as the pair exited the courtroom. 'I felt like we had fallen into a judicial trap,' he said in Russian through an interpreter in an interview with The Hill. 'We left the courtroom and an ICE officer told us our son was going to be deported in three days. Nobody told us the decision that we made — what it was going to cause.' ICE prosecutors across the country are increasingly moving to dismiss cases against migrants in a bid to fast track their deportations. While a dismissal might seem like the end of a battle to remain in the county, some leaving courthouses have instead been met by ICE agents who are then free to arrest them and place them in expedited removal proceedings, speeding their deportation without a court hearing. Rekha Sharma-Crawford, an immigration lawyer and board member with the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) called it a 'bait and switch.' 'The troubling thing here is that people are doing the right thing and going to court. They hear what they think is great news, that their case is dismissed. But instead, they are subject to a bait and switch and a plainclothes ICE agent will then arrest them. They are detained and then they are pressured to sign documents that basically sign away all of their rights, and they are subject to expedited removal and don't have a chance for a full and fair hearing,' she said in a call with reporters. Vadzim Baluty, a 47-year-old Belarusian political activist who was granted asylum in 2022 after fleeing the Lukashenko dictatorship, thought ICE was aware of his petition to bring his children to the country. He also didn't think Aliaksandr Baluty, now 21, would be deported after entering the country legally. His son was permitted to enter the U.S. through Mexico after waiting in the country seven months for an appointment made through the Biden-era CBP One app. Such a dynamic has only become possible with the shift from the Trump administration, which has expanded the scope of expedited removals. While the process previously was used only for migrants within two weeks of their entering the country and within 100 miles of the border, the Trump administration now allows the tool to be used up to two years after a person enters the U.S. regardless of where they are in the country. Critics call the move an end run around due process and fault the administration for using ICE officers who are often not in uniform and may be wearing masks. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) went to an immigration courthouse in his district last week, sitting in on court proceedings and witnessing ICE prosecutors dismiss cases followed by migrants being arrested by plainclothes agents as they exited — something he called 'Gestapo-like behavior.' 'The Department of Homeland Security has implemented, over the last week, a coordinated effort to do an end run around our legal system in order to remove nonviolent, noncriminal immigrants trying to come into this country through a lawful pathway of immigration proceedings, and in many cases, asylum proceedings,' he said at a press conference afterward. 'By recommending dismissal of their cases, the Department of Homeland Security is essentially taking jurisdiction away from the court, removing the asylum application from going forward, and then allowing the immigration agents to arrest these people and put them in a deportation proceeding under a different authority than the one that they just dismissed, which has fewer rights and applies in very few circumstances.' Sharma-Crawford said it's especially confusing for pro se litigants — those representing themselves in court. Not only are they being approached by plainclothes officers, but they may not know what to do next. Those placed in expedited removal are not entitled to a hearing, but they can request an interview with an asylum officer if they fear they will be persecuted if returned to their home country. If they pass that screening, their case could be returned to immigration court. Vadzim Baluty has since hired attorney Malinda Schmiechen to represent his son, who asked for the credible fear interview that would route his case back into the immigration court system. Aliaksandr Baluty told them how during a visit to register for the mandatory draft, military officials in the country made a veiled comment about his father and said they were going to teach him to 'love the motherland.' Another officer in the room said, 'You will be in the army for your father.' 'The draft officer said that I — in the army — I would be punished for my father,' Aliaksandr Baluty told an asylum officer, according to a transcript of the interview his attorney shared with The Hill. At his father's advice, Aliaksandr Baluty fled that night to nearby Georgia. Military officials later showed up at his mother's house with a forged conscription document, saying they would prosecute him as a draft dodger. Schmiechen was informed Thursday night, however, that an asylum officer rejected the claim, calling it 'a betrayal all around.' 'I feel like this is a betrayal against our law, against the America that is a sanctuary for so many, and against young Aliaksandr, who fled for his life and seeks to live peacefully with his family,' Schmiechen told The Hill. 'It's a betrayal because the government attorneys betrayed the law with their motion to dismiss, knowing that it would lead to Aliaksandr's detention. It's a betrayal because the American government is using taxpayer money unnecessarily to detain Aliaksandr, and it's a betrayal to Aliaksandr, whose detention is treating him like a criminal, though he's not one.' The arrests come as the GOP at large has vented frustration at the immigration court system, where cases can languish in a years-long backlog. The Department of Homeland Security defended the courthouse arrests as well as their use of expedited removal. 'Most aliens who illegally entered the United States within the past two years are subject to expedited removals. Biden ignored this legal fact and chose to release millions of illegal aliens, including violent criminals, into the country with a notice to appear before an immigration judge. ICE is now following the law and placing these illegal aliens in expedited removal, as they always should have been,' the department said in a statement. 'If they have a valid credible fear claim, they will continue in immigration proceedings, but if no valid claim is found, aliens will be subject to a swift deportation.' Goldman also criticized ICE for using plainclothes officers, saying that in his observations, agents had printed out photos of those they would be arresting and were often wearing masks. 'When I asked them, 'Why are you wearing a mask?' One person told me, 'Because it's cold.' I asked him if he would testify to that under oath, and he walked away and wouldn't respond to me,' he said. 'Another person admitted that they were wearing masks so that they are not caught on video. And my question to them is: 'If what you are doing is legitimate, is lawful, is totally aboveboard, why do you need to cover your face?'' Schmiechen said she's working quickly to explore other options for Aliaksandr Baluty, including requesting that his credible fear claims be reviewed by an immigration court judge. If that doesn't work, she's planning to make a filing in federal court. 'I just feel like we don't have much time at this point,' she said. To Vadzim Baluty, the whole episode has chilling parallels with what he experienced in Belarus. 'This is how it began,' he said. The arrest of his son, just feet from the courthouse doors, happened in less than 60 seconds and left him in shock. He said he never imagined the words 'stop prosecution' could have led to 'expulsion from the country and separation of father and son.' 'Everything is starting to remind us that we are not in a free country. What is happening today is vaguely reminiscent of the birth of a dictatorship, when they categorically begin to solve the political issue at the moment with immigration,' he said. 'I don't feel safe now. None of the immigrants feel safe in the U.S.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Unpacking rumor that Trump is sending out $5K stimulus checks
According to a rumor that spread online in late May and early June 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump would be sending out $5,000 "stimulus" checks to Americans after his administration uncovered billions of dollars in "wasted money." The viral rumor likely stems from an investment firm CEO's proposal to send some taxpayers so-called "DOGE Dividend" checks. The original proposal for $5,000 checks was based on the assumption that DOGE would achieve $2 trillion in total savings, which is highly unlikely. Trump has previously floated the idea of a "DOGE Dividend," but there was no proof at the time of this writing that he would send $5,000 checks to Americans. Snopes reached out to the White House for clarity but has not received a response. In late May and early June 2025, a rumor on TikTok (archived) claimed that U.S. President Donald Trump was reportedly sending out $5,000 "stimulus" checks to Americans after his administration uncovered $50 billion in "wasted money." "Trump is going to be sending out five grand to everybody and this is because they uncovered $50 billion … of just wasted money," the TikTok video's narrator said. @todaynews919 #fyp #foryou #new #news ♬ original sound - todaynews919 The video's narrator later said the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency initiative allegedly proposed sending money it had "recovered" to the American people. The initiative, spearheaded by tech billionaire Elon Musk before his departure, works to slash government spending through layoffs and cuts to various federal programs. Though Trump has previously floated the idea of a "DOGE Dividend," there was no proof at the time of this writing that he would send $5,000 checks to Americans. Snopes reached out to the White House to ask if the president has any plans to send such checks and is awaiting a response. Since we were not able to definitively prove or disprove this rumor, we have not put a rating on this claim. The viral rumor likely stems from a proposal to send some taxpayers "DOGE Dividend" checks. Trump previously said he would consider such a plan, but his administration has not confirmed that it's sending any checks. The idea for DOGE Dividend checks was originally proposed by James Fishback, the founder and CEO of the investment firm Azoria Partners, in an X post (archived) shared on Feb. 18, 2025: Fishback's post also included a more in-depth proposal based on the assumption that DOGE would achieve $2 trillion in total savings. He suggested that the federal government take 20% of DOGE's presumed savings, or about $400 billion, and return it to approximately 79 million taxpaying households in the form of $5,000 tax refund checks called the DOGE Dividend. Under Fishback's plan, the government would send checks only to "households that will be net payers of federal income tax," meaning those that pay more money in taxes than they get back in tax credits or refunds. That means American households that do not owe federal income tax would not qualify for the proposed payments. In 2025, an estimated 40% of U.S. households will pay no federal individual income tax, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. Most of these households have lower incomes, with about 70% earning less than $75,000 and about 45% earning less than $40,000, the Tax Policy Center estimates. On the same day that Fishback shared his proposal for the $5,000 checks, Musk replied (archived), "Will check with the president." Trump quickly acknowledged the idea as he delivered remarks during a Saudi investors conference in Miami on Feb. 19, 2025. "There's even under consideration a new concept where we give 20% of the DOGE savings to American citizens and 20% goes to paying down debt, because the numbers are incredible, Elon," Trump said at the conference. A reporter also asked Trump about the plan as he flew back to Washington, D.C., aboard Air Force One that day. He said: I love it. A 20% dividend, so to speak, for the money that we're saving by going after the waste and fraud and abuse and all the other things that are happening, I think it's a great idea. The dividend checks would also give taxpayers "an incentive … to go out and report things to use when we can save money," Trump added. Several weeks later, Fishback spoke further about his proposal during a March 2025 podcast appearance. He said if DOGE didn't hit the $2 trillion in projected savings, the amount of money in the dividend checks should be adjusted. "This plan is not predestined to the $5,000 number. If the savings come in above or below that, the check will be reflected accordingly," Fishback said. "So again, if the savings are $1 trillion — which I think is awfully low — the check goes from $5,000 to $2,500." At a town hall in Wisconsin on March 30, 2025, Musk fielded questions about the proposal, ultimately putting the responsibility of approving tax refund checks on Congress and Trump. "It's somewhat up to the Congress and maybe the president … as to whether specific checks are cut," Musk said in response. A search of did not return any results for legislation proposing "DOGE Dividend" tax refund checks. Snopes also could not find any record of Trump sharing additional details about a plan for such checks since February 2025, and we are still awaiting a response from the White House. It's still unclear how much money DOGE might ultimately save. Musk said in October 2024 that he expected to cut "at least $2 trillion" but he later lowered that estimate to $1 trillion. However, both of those estimates were "wildly unrealistic," PolitiFact reported in June 2025. As of June 6, 2025, DOGE's online "wall of receipts" touted an estimated $180 billion in cuts, but analyses by PolitiFact (here and here) and The New York Times found that the online ledger was riddled with errors. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. "Who Will Pay No Federal Individual Income Tax in 2025?" Tax Policy Center, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. Palm Beach Post. "Full Donald Trump Speech at Miami FII Investment Summit Hosted by Saudi Public Investment Fund." YouTube, 19 Feb. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. David Lin. "Will You Get a $5,000 Check? "Doge Dividend" Explained | James Fishback." YouTube, 12 Mar. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul. "LIVE | Elon Musk Holds Town Hall in Wisconsin." YouTube, 30 Mar. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Legislative Search Results." 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. WFAA. "Elon Musk Full Speech at Trump Rally in Madison Square Garden (Oct. 27, 2024)." YouTube, 27 Oct. 2024, Accessed 15 Nov. 2024. X. Accessed 6 June 2025. Clarke, Amelia. "Yes, Musk Said He'd Ask Trump about $5K Checks for US Taxpayers Funded by DOGE Savings." Snopes, 21 Feb. 2025, Czopek, Madison, and Amy Sherman. "Trump and Musk Public Bickering Raises More DOGE Uncertainty." @Politifact, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. DOGE. "DOGE: Department of Government Efficiency." DOGE: Department of Government Efficiency, 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. McCullough, Caleb. "Where Do DOGE's Reported Savings Come From?" @Politifact, 21 Feb. 2025, Fahrenthold, David A, and Jeremy Singer-Vine. "DOGE Is Far Short of Its Goal, and Still Overstating Its Progress." The New York Times, 13 Apr. 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025.
