Congress Struggling To Find Plan For Keeping Social Security Solvent

Two senators on their way out the door are the ones doing the actual work on Social Security. That tells you something about how this Congress operates. Durbin and Cassidy don't have to face voters again, and maybe that's exactly why they're the ones willing to touch a program every other lawmaker treats like a live wire. Everybody else is content to let the trust fund run down the clock while they campaign on not cutting benefits and not raising taxes and somehow also not doing anything.

The math here isn't mysterious. The trustees have been putting out the same warning for years: benefits get cut automatically sometime in the early 2030s unless Congress acts. That's not a partisan talking point, it's arithmetic. And yet the plan on offer, whatever Durbin and Cassidy land on, will probably die the moment it's actually specific enough to make someone unhappy. Raise the payroll cap, raise the retirement age, means-test benefits, invest part of the fund in the market, every option has a built-in attack ad against whoever proposes it.

What's frustrating is that this isn't a case where nobody knows what could work. There are a dozen serious proposals floating around Washington think tanks and have been for a decade. The problem isn't ideas, it's that fixing Social Security requires someone to accept blame now for a crisis that hits later, and our political incentives point the exact opposite direction. Durbin and Cassidy get to be honest because they're leaving. The people sticking around don't have that luxury, and that's the real story here.

If this program goes off the rails, it won't be because the problem crept up on anyone. It will be because a functioning legislature couldn't bring itself to act until the bill came due, and by then the choices left will be far worse than the ones on the table today.