Chris Christie, former governor of New Jersey and 2024 GOP presidential hopeful, slammed the current political indecision to resolve the social security crisis—warning the welfare program will be bankrupt in 11 years.
If we don’t deal with entitlements like social security and Medicare, the country’s national debt of $32 trillion is going to get “bigger, and bigger, and bigger,” Mr. Christie said during a conference in Atlanta on Saturday. “The most disgusting part of Joe Biden’s State of the Union address this year was when he stood up, and he said, ‘We’ll all agree, right? We’re not going to do anything to Social Security?’ And both sides got up and cheered. A group of liars and cowards because they know that in 10 years, Medicare will be bankrupt. And in 11 years, Social Security will be bankrupt.”
“I want you to imagine, for those who are on social security right now and depend on it and for those of you who are looking towards it, what it would be like to cut that benefit by 25 percent in one fell swoop. There would be people in this country who wouldn’t be able to pay their rent or their mortgage, wouldn’t be able to buy food, wouldn’t be able to heat their homes. Cataclysmic stuff.”
Mr. Christie insisted that there is an urgent need to “have this conversation” about entitlements. However, “other than me, no one in this race is willing to talk about it,” he said, referring to the 2024 presidential election. “It’s ridiculous.”
At that point in time, “All 70 million retirees, dependents, and survivors—regardless of age, income, or need—will see their benefits cut by 23 percent.”
Solving Social Security Crisis
During the conference, Mr. Christie pointed out that there were three variables to social security—taxes, eligibility, and age. He rejected raising taxes as a way to solve the social funding crisis, pointing out that they are “too high already.”Mr. Christie proposed that any social security changes should not be imposed on individuals aged 50 and above as they are too old to adapt to the situation. He wants changes only applicable to younger workers with three decades or more left for retirement.
The 2024 GOP presidential candidate also supported means-testing for social security, pointing out that people like Warren Buffet, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg do not need the benefits of the program.
“So maybe we can start [all the way up] there so no one is offended, okay? And then let’s start having a discussion to work our way down,” he said.
Means-testing is a controversial proposal due to the possibility that benefits received by a person may be reduced in case they have a good income post-retirement. Some participants may not get any benefit at all.
In an interview with Princeton University last year, Douglas Arnold, a professor of politics and public affairs at the university, explained how legislators fixed the two social security solvency crises America faced in 1977 and 1983.
“The first time, they simply raised the payroll tax rate by 25 percent and the maximum taxable wage base by 68 percent,” he said.
“Six years later, they switched course. They effectively cut benefits by raising the full retirement age from 65 to 67, phasing it in over four decades. So, those are the two basic options: raise taxes or cut benefits.”
Political Push to Resolve Crisis
All leading 2024 presidential candidates from both sides of the political spectrum, including President Biden, former President Donald Trump, and Florida’s Republican Governor Ron DeSantis, have said they have no intention of touching social security.Politicians have shied away from addressing the problem with social security funds because any solution to the issue—whether it be raising the taxes, raising the eligibility age, or means-testing—would trigger an immediate negative reaction from the public.
This could be damaging for political parties as they try to secure as many votes as they can during elections.
Mr. Arnold pointed out that legislators do not face the urgency this time with social security funds like the previous two occasions.
“In both 1977 and 1983, legislators had to act quickly because the trust fund was tiny. This time, the huge trust fund, built up over four decades, is shielding them from the need for quick action,” he said.
“The trust fund can continue to give legislators a free ride for another dozen years. Then—poof!—the trust fund disappears, and legislators will have to act.”
A March poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research showed that 79 percent of respondents opposed reducing the size of social security benefits.
The majority of survey participants also opposed raising the eligibility age for social security benefits from 67 to 70, increasing Medicare premiums or raising the eligibility age for Medicare benefits from 65 to 67.
