Social Security trust fund to run out in 2034, a year earlier than thought
The Social Security trust fund is on track to run out of money in nine years, its trustees said in a new report Wednesday, a year sooner than the last projection.
Why it matters: The U.S. faces a major fiscal reckoning in the early 2030s, as retirement benefits would be on track to be slashed automatically, if Congress does not act to preserve the benefits on which millions of Americans rely.
A law enacted at the start of this year expanding Social Security for railroad and public pension recipients was the main reason for the quicker drawdown.
By the numbers: The new Social Security and Medicare Trustees report, the government's formal annual estimate of the programs' finances, finds that the trust fund for the Social Security retirement program is set to go bust in 2033, the same as last year.
At that time, its incoming tax revenues would be enough to pay only 77% of scheduled benefits, barring a change by Congress.
Combining the old-age and disability programs would buy future Congresses another year, with the combined programs able to pay 81% of scheduled benefits starting in 2034 — not 2035, as estimated a year ago.
State of play: The trustees attributed the earlier shortfall in large part to the Social Security Fairness Act, passed by large bipartisan majorities and signed by former President Biden on Jan. 5.
The trustees also cut their estimates of fertility rates and adjusted their estimate of the long-term share of GDP paid as wages.
Of note: Medicare's hospital insurance trust fund is also scheduled to run out in 2033, three years earlier than reported last year, and would then only be able to pay 89% of benefits absent changes.
Speaking with reporters Wednesday, a government official said Wednesday that hospital usage surged in 2024 after lower rates in the immediate aftermath of the pandemic.
"Was that foregone services from the COVID-related experience… or is there some broader change in terms of how health care is being dispensed?" the official said. "Obviously something we will continue to monitor."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
31 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Senate Republicans hold hearing on Biden's mental fitness as Democrats boycott
WASHINGTON — Nearly six months after Joe Biden left the White House, Senate Republicans are still scrutinizing his presidency, kicking off the first in what's expected to be a series of congressional hearings this year on his mental fitness in office. Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee brought in three witnesses Wednesday — none of whom served in Biden's administration — to scrutinize his time in office, arguing that the former president, his staff and the media must be held accountable. Democrats boycotted the hearing and criticized Republicans for 'armchair-diagnosing' Biden when the committee could be looking into serious matters. Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who co-chaired the hearing, said that they will aim to 'shine a light on exactly what went on in the White House during Biden's presidency.' 'We simply cannot ignore what transpired because President Biden is no longer in office,' Cornyn said. A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment on the hearing. It was the first in what could be several hearings about Biden in the coming months. Over in the House, the Oversight Committee has subpoenaed several of Biden's former staff members, along with his White House doctor, ordering him to testify at a June 27 hearing 'as part of the investigation into the cover-up of President Joe Biden's cognitive decline.' Questions about Biden's age and fitness erupted in the summer after his disastrous performance in a debate against Republican challenger Donald Trump, which ultimately led to the Democrat's withdrawal from the race. Even after Trump won back the presidency in November, Republicans have continued to hammer on Biden's age, citing in part new reporting about Biden that was published this year. Trump now alleges that Biden administration officials may have forged the former president's signature and taken sweeping actions without his knowledge, though he provided no evidence of that happening. Trump has ordered lawyers at the White House and the Justice Department to investigate. Republicans played clips during the hearing Wednesday of Democrats defending Biden. In the montage, the Democrats talk about how Biden was mentally sharp when he was in office. 'Most Democrats on this committee have chosen to all but boycott the hearing and have failed to call a single witness,' Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) said. 'They have chosen to ignore this issue, like they ignored President Biden's decline.' Sen. Dick Durbin, the committee's top Democrat, criticized Republicans for holding a hearing on the last president at a time when there are 'numerous critical challenges facing the nation that are under our jurisdiction.' 'Apparently armchair-diagnosing former President Biden is more important than the issues of grave concern,' said Durbin of Illinois. After his opening remarks, Durbin played a video montage of his own — but with clips of Trump speaking that he said reflected the 'cognitive ability' of the current president. Durbin left the hearing after his opening remarks. Three witnesses testified: former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, former White House official Theodore Wold and University of Virginia law professor John Harrison. Spicer and Wold both served under Trump. Much of the focus was on Biden's alleged use of an autopen. Trump has repeated long-standing allegations that the Biden White House relied on an autopen to sign presidential pardons, executive orders and other key documents, claiming that its use cast doubt on their validity. Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.) also questioned Spicer on 'what mechanisms should we put in place' to hold the media accountable 'for not actually following what is clearly in front of them.' Cappelletti writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Iran War Talk Testing His Ties With MAGA Loyalists
(Bloomberg) -- Donald Trump's hints that he may dispatch the US military to help Israel destroy Iran's nuclear program has spurred a revolt from his typically faithful America First base, further dividing a party already struggling to unite around the president's second-term agenda. Security Concerns Hit Some of the World's 'Most Livable Cities' JFK AirTrain Cuts Fares 50% This Summer to Lure Riders Off Roads How E-Scooters Conquered (Most of) Europe Taser-Maker Axon Triggers a NIMBY Backlash in its Hometown Trump continues to be non-committal on what he'll ultimately decide, but his rhetoric toward Iran has grown more belligerent in the six days since Israel launched its offensive — pushing the US closer to involvement in a foreign war. That's firmly at odds with a central tenet of Trump's own 'Make America Great Again' movement, fashioned during his political ascent amid voter frustration with decades of US military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump sharpened his anti-war stance during the 2024 election as he hit President Joe Biden over the haphazard US withdrawal from Afghanistan and pledged to avoid conflicts overseas. As recently as last month — and speaking in the Middle East, where he's currently building up US forces for potential engagement — Trump lambasted the US 'neocons' for the wars they fought in the region. He said he wants the Mideast to be a place 'where people of different nations, religions and creeds are building cities together, not bombing each other out of existence.' Now, as Trump agitates on Iran, the intra-MAGA fault lines are deepening. Trump and conservative media personality Tucker Carlson have traded barbs over the 'America First' doctrine as the former Fox News host calls for the US to steer clear of the Israel-Iran conflict. Laura Loomer, a right-wing social media influencer and staunch Trump supporter, jumped into the fray in Trump's defense. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who has long pushed for a US attack on Iran, said that he's spoken to Trump and urged him to act. Graham played down the GOP divide, saying 90% of Republicans support Trump helping Israel and most Americans believe stopping Iran's nuclear ambitions is 'absolutely essential,' even if it involves the use of force. Graham's numbers, however, may be overly optimistic. Even as half of Americans view Iran as an enemy of the US, some 60% say that the US shouldn't get involved militarily in the Israeli war, according to a YouGov poll conducted between June 13 and June 16. That includes 53% of of Republicans, the poll showed. In a sign of how Trump is in some ways talking himself into the war — or at least rationalizing the option to do so — he's increasingly pointing to his long-held position that Iran shouldn't have a nuclear weapon. While Trump himself during his first term pulled out of a global agreement aimed at ensuring that Iran can't get atomic bombs, he's cast the prospect that it might do so as an existential threat to the US and its allies alike. Vice President JD Vance, a Marine Corps veteran who's also advocated for a more isolationist US, has pointed to Trump's consistency on the topic as he seeks to defend his boss against the base. The president acknowledged the split among Republicans in response to reporters' questions Wednesday morning on the White House lawn. 'So I may have some people that are a little bit unhappy now, but I have some people that are very happy,' Trump said. 'And I have people outside of the base who can't believe that this is happening, they're so happy.' Later, Trump told reporters that Carlson had called him. The president said that the commentator wanted to apologize for his language and said he believed Carlson on some level accepted the argument that Iran should not be allowed to have a nuclear weapon. He also dismissed the notion the flap could divide his base. 'My supporters are for me. My supporters are America first,' Trump said. Steve Bannon, a longtime Trump ally and early disciple of Trump's populist doctrine, said there's no urgency for the US to join Israel's campaign as it already succeeded in gaining control of Iranian airspace. He said that American involvement should be determined by US intelligence and not Israel's, and he stressed several times that this is Israel's fight to finish. But even as Trump's base bristles at the notion of the president taking the US into a war, Bannon said he'll ultimately retain support. 'The MAGA movement, the Marjorie Taylor Greene's, Matt Gaetz, we will fight it up until the end to make sure he's got the full information. But if he has more intelligence and makes that case to the American people, the MAGA movement will support President Trump,' Bannon said. Tumult in the Middle East has driven oil prices higher. Under the most extreme scenario, should the US join Israel in the strikes and the Strait of Hormuz is shut, crude could surge past $130 a barrel, weigh on the global economy and drive up consumer prices, according to a Bloomberg Economics analysis. The debate between Trump allies calling for US involvement in the conflict and those urging him to steer clear was encapsulated in a recorded exchange between Carlson and Ted Cruz for Carlson's show. Carlson stumped Cruz on a question about Iran's population, saying that it's an important metric to know for anyone agitating for war with a country. Cruz, who spoke to Trump about Iran over the weekend, on Wednesday told reporters he doesn't envision US troops on the ground in Iran, but suggested a limited bombing strike to take out a nuclear weapons facility could be on the table for Trump. 'And if he does so, it will make Americans substantially safer,' Cruz said. The political ramifications will play out in Congress, either as part of the ongoing push-and-pull over executive branch powers or with the looming 2026 midterm election cycle. Only Congress has the constitutional authority to authorize war, but lawmakers have ceded that power to the president for more than two decades. The last authorization for use of military force approved by Congress was in 2002 for the Iraq war, and that came back to bite lawmakers politically. Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat, has introduced legislation that would force a vote on any US war with Iran. He was joined in the House by Republican Thomas Massie, who has already publicly sparred with Trump over the president's legislative agenda. Senate Majority Leader John Thune acknowledged the ideological split within his party and defended Trump's war powers, signaling he doesn't intend to take up Kaine's bill anytime soon. 'We have people in our party, as you know, that have different views about America's role in the world,' Thune said. 'But I think the president is well within his authority, understands what's at stake in insuring Iran never has a nuclear weapon, and will do everything he can to protect America and American interests.' (Updates to include Trump remarks on Carlson in paragraphs 13-14. A previous version of this story corrected spelling of Marjorie Taylor Greene's name and that the Cruz-Carlson exchange took place on Carlson's platform.) Ken Griffin on Trump, Harvard and Why Novice Investors Won't Beat the Pros Is Mark Cuban the Loudmouth Billionaire that Democrats Need for 2028? How a Tiny Middleman Could Access Two-Factor Login Codes From Tech Giants Can 'MAMUWT' Be to Musk What 'TACO' Is to Trump? American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Miami Herald
38 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Will Israel-Iran war make US safer — or less safe — in long term? What poll says
Few Americans believe the Israel-Iran war will ultimately be good for U.S. and global security, according to new polling. In the latest YouGov survey, respondents were asked whether 'recent attacks by Israel and Iran on each other will make' the U.S., Israel, the Middle East and the world safer or less safe 'in the long run.' On all four counts, pluralities or majorities of respondents said they think the recent conflict will reduce safety, rather than bolster it. The survey comes after Israel launched a preemptive strike on Iran on June 13, which Israeli officials justified by saying Iran's nuclear program posed an imminent threat. Iran — which denies pursuing nuclear weapons — responded by carrying out its own missile strikes on Israel. Following this, President Donald Trump, who said he had advance knowledge of the attack, suggested he may ramp up American involvement by instructing the U.S. military to strike nuclear sites in Iran. 'I may do it, I may not do it,' Trump told reporters on June 18, according to The Hill. 'I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' In the poll — which sampled 3,471 U.S. adults on June 17 — just 14% of respondents said the Israel-Iran conflict will make the U.S. more safe in the future, while 37% said it will make the country less safe. When asked about Israel, responses were similar. Just 19% said the recent attacks will make the Middle Eastern nation safer, while 40% said they will reduce safety. When it came to the broader region and the world, Americans were even more pessimistic. A slim majority, 51%, said they believe the conflict will reduce safety in the Middle East, while 15% said it will bolster safety. And, on the global scale, 50% said the fighting will reduce safety, while 15% said it will increase it. Republicans were significantly more likely than Democrats to believe the Israel-Iran conflict would shore up safety in the long term, according to the poll, which has a margin of error of 2.1 percentage points. For example, 27% of GOP respondents said the war will ultimately make the U.S. safer, while 4% of Democrats and 13% of independents said the same. And 28% of Republicans said it will make the world safer, compared to 5% of Democrats and 14% of independents.
