What are the Social Security Proposals that candidates have made for the 2026 Midterm Elections?
With Social Security's main trust fund projected to run short in 2032, candidates are facing growing pressure to explain how they would protect benefits
The issue has become particularly important in Senate contests because the lawmakers elected in November will still be serving when the funding deadline arrives.
Under current projections, the programme will not be able to pay the full benefits currently promised if Congress fails to act. The Peter G. Peterson Foundation cites a potential immediate reduction of 22% for beneficiaries once the main trust fund is depleted.
Scripps News puts the projected cut at approximately 20%, while other estimates vary depending on the assumptions used.
The financial challenge is partly driven by demographic changes. As the American population ages, more people are claiming retirement benefits while the number of workers paying into the system has not increased at the same pace.
Social Security therefore faces growing pressure to balance incoming contributions with payments to retirees, disabled people and surviving family members.
One of the most prominent proposals is to increase or completely remove the cap on earnings subject to Social Security payroll taxes.
In 2026, the taxable maximum is $184,500, meaning earnings above that threshold are not subject to the programme's standard payroll tax.
Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan supports removing the limit, arguing that higher earners should contribute more.
His Republican opponent, Mike Rogers , has highlighted the importance of tackling fraud when discussing potential improvements to the programme.
The same debate is playing out in Maine, where Democratic candidate Troy Jackson has pledged to eliminate the cap. He told CBS News: "People who work hard their entire lives should be able to retire with dignity," Jackson said in a statement to CBS News.
"While Susan Collins has repeatedly voted to weaken Social Security , I'll work to scrap the cap because billionaires should pay into Social Security at the same rate teachers and loggers do. Social Security is a promise, and I intend to keep it."
Which other candidates have offered plans to protect Social Security?
Republican Senator Susan Collins , who is facing Jackson in Maine, has suggested a different route.
She has called for a bipartisan commission to examine possible solutions to the programme's financial difficulties, including "such as potentially raising the earnings cap for Social Security taxes." Collins has also said she does not support cutting benefits.
Her position illustrates how some Republicans are open to increasing the amount of income subject to payroll taxes, even if they have not endorsed the same approach as their Democratic opponents.
Collins previously worked with Democrat Sherrod Brown on the Social Security Fairness Act, which became law in 2025 and removed rules that had reduced certain public-sector retirees' benefits.
The debate over the taxable maximum extends beyond Michigan and Maine. An analysis published by economist Jon Schwabish on October 27 examined 41 candidates across 20 Senate races. It found that 20 candidates had supported raising or eliminating the cap.
Thirteen of the 17 Democrats included in the research backed such a change, alongside all four independent candidates. Only three of the 20 Republicans had publicly endorsed it.
Among the Republicans who support changing the limit are Collins, Massachusetts candidate John Deaton and Kansas Senator Roger Marshall . Marshall has said he would "eliminate the cap altogether."
In contrast, Ohio Republican Jon Husted has opposed the approach, saying he was "not on board" with eliminating the limit. Democrat Sherrod Brown supports raising it.
Other candidates have discussed asking wealthier Americans to contribute more without committing to a precise change. North Carolina Democrat Roy Cooper and New Hampshire Democrat Chris Pappas have both expressed support for higher contributions from affluent earners, but have not endorsed a specific adjustment to the taxable maximum.
Georgia Democrat Jon Ossoff has focused instead on repealing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which he argues brought forward the projected funding deadline.
Not every proposal involves raising taxes. Potential alternatives include gradually increasing the retirement age, reducing benefits for higher-income retirees, introducing limits on the maximum payments households can receive, or finding additional revenue through other sources.
These options remain politically contentious because they could shift costs onto particular groups of workers or beneficiaries.
The political pressure to produce a credible plan is clear. A September survey commissioned by the Peterson Foundation found that 81% of voters in five competitive Senate states were more likely to support a candidate with a plan to prevent automatic benefit cuts than one who simply promised not to change Social Security.
Overall, 91% supported reform, while 77% said delaying action made the problem harder to solve.
Despite the range of ideas, there is no single agreed solution across the candidates. Some want higher earners to pay more, others favour commissions or tackling fraud, while many have promised to protect benefits without explaining exactly how they would finance them.
The November elections will determine who has a role in shaping the next stage of the debate, but preventing the projected cuts will ultimately require congressional action.
