The eight candidates described in an August 2023 account proposed or endorsed markedly different directions for Social Security: changing eligibility or benefit rules, directing some contributions to private accounts, protecting existing commitments, or bringing more workers into the system. Those approaches could affect different generations and parts of the program, but the account provides no comparable actuarial scores. The latest cited Trustees projections offer a current-law baseline—not an estimate of what any candidate’s ideas would do.
What the 2026 Trustees projections say about Social Security’s finances
The Social Security Board of Trustees’ 2026 summary projects that the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) fund will deplete its reserves in the fourth quarter of 2032. Under the Trustees’ intermediate assumptions, continuing income would then cover 78% of scheduled benefits. Depletion does not mean that benefits stop: it means reserves are exhausted, while incoming revenue would still finance a portion of benefits under current-law financing.
The combined Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) projection is different. The Trustees project combined reserves depleted in 2034, with 83% of scheduled benefits payable at that point. OASI and OASDI are separate measures; their depletion dates and payable-benefit percentages should not be treated as interchangeable.
The Trustees’ 2026–2100 estimates distinguish benefits scheduled under current law from the amounts payable under current-law financing. They are actuarial projections based on assumptions, not observed future outcomes or candidate-specific analyses. Legislation could change the results. (Sources: Social Security Board of Trustees, Trustees Report Summary: A Summary of the 2026 Annual Social Security and Medicare Trust Fund Reports, June 9, 2026; and 2026 OASDI Trustees Report, E. Conclusion, June 9, 2026.)
The Tool Desk
Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →#1 Best Overall
What the eight candidates were reported to support in 2023
The table summarizes positions attributed to the candidates in GOBankingRates’ August 23, 2023 article, published during the 2024 Republican primary debate cycle. These are descriptions of positions at that time, not verified current positions or complete policy plans.
| Candidate | Position reported in the August 2023 article | Policy lever or scope |
|---|---|---|
| Ron DeSantis | After saying Republicans would not “mess with Social Security,” he was reported as open to changes for people in their 30s and 40s to keep the program viable. | Potential changes affecting younger workers; no specific design was supplied. |
| Mike Pence | The article reported a proposal to let younger Americans put some Social Security withholdings into private savings accounts. | Account structure and the treatment of contributions; details were not supplied. |
| Nikki Haley | The article reported raising the retirement age for younger workers to reflect life expectancy and limiting benefits for wealthy people. | Eligibility timing and distribution of benefits. |
| Chris Christie | The article reported raising the eligibility age for people under 50 and described his argument that age changes could produce long-term savings. | Eligibility timing for a specified age group; no detailed transition rules were supplied. |
| Tim Scott | The article said he would not touch Social Security or Medicare benefits, while also calling for examination of entitlements. | Benefit protection alongside a broad call to examine entitlements; no financing mechanism was given. |
| Vivek Ramaswamy | The article reported that he said the government should honor commitments to people who had paid into the system and characterized reform proposals as well-intentioned. | General commitment to honor existing obligations, rather than a defined policy design. |
| Doug Burgum | The article reported that he signed North Dakota legislation ending state taxation of Social Security income and said the federal government should honor its commitment. | State income taxation and a general federal commitment; the state tax measure is not a federal trust-fund financing plan. |
| Asa Hutchinson | The article reported that he opposed raising the retirement age for all workers, citing different effects on workers, and argued that more workers were needed. | Opposition to a uniform age change and a broad emphasis on expanding the workforce. |
Donald Trump did not participate in the Milwaukee debate discussed in the article and is not one of the eight candidates in this comparison.
How these policy levers could affect workers and benefits
Eligibility age and benefit rules
Changing an eligibility age can shift when affected workers qualify for benefits; depending on the design, it can also change the benefits people receive over time. A proposal’s scope matters: a rule applying only to younger workers or people under 50 would treat age groups differently from a change applying to everyone. The 2023 article does not specify enough detail to calculate those effects for Haley’s or Christie’s reported proposals, or to describe a complete DeSantis plan.
Limiting benefits for wealthy people would change who receives benefits or the amount they receive, depending on how the limit was defined. The article does not establish the income threshold, formula, or implementation details for Haley’s reported idea.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Private accounts
Allowing some withholdings to go into private accounts would change how part of an individual’s contributions is held or invested. The effects on Social Security’s financing and on participants’ eventual income would depend on details such as the share redirected, transition arrangements, account rules, and treatment of promised benefits. The reported Pence proposal does not provide those specifications, so investment returns, transition costs, or changes to benefits cannot be inferred from it.
Commitments, revenue, and adding workers
Promises to protect benefits or honor commitments state a priority, but do not by themselves identify how to finance scheduled benefits. The article gives no detailed financing mechanism for Scott’s position, and Ramaswamy’s reported commitment is not a policy formula. Burgum’s North Dakota tax law concerns state taxation of Social Security income; the article provides no estimate of its effect on federal trust-fund finances.
Bringing more people into work could, in principle, increase the number of workers contributing to the system, depending on how a policy affects employment and covered earnings. Hutchinson’s reported call for more workers is a broad direction, not a specified federal proposal, and the article supplies no estimate of additional revenue or solvency effects.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What can—and cannot—be concluded from the comparison
The eight reported positions point to different choices about who might be affected, when changes might apply, and whether the focus is benefit rules, account structure, protecting commitments, or workforce size. Those distinctions matter: a change limited to younger workers is not equivalent to one affecting current beneficiaries, and a state tax change is not the same as a federal financing change.
Best Value
Neither the August 2023 article nor the cited 2026 Trustees materials provide comparable estimates of how these candidates’ ideas would change taxes, benefits, or Social Security’s finances. The Trustees’ projections are a current-law baseline, not a score of any candidate proposal. The August 2023 article is secondary reporting; it does not establish each candidate’s later or present-day position, nor does the evidence cited here independently verify the original campaign statements against transcripts or policy platforms.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
