The Social Security Administration’s short- and long-term future has faced turmoil over the past days, as President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) committee pushes out workers and drives uncertainty with beneficiaries.
An official SSA press release on Feb. 28 announced that it would lay off roughly 7,000 people working at the agency, sparking concerns from Democratic lawmakers and Social Security advocates on how the cuts could impact incoming benefit checks.
Former Social Security Commissioner Martin O’Malley stated his fears behind the staff reduction, adding that it could worsen delays and limit critical services for beneficiaries.
Meanwhile, acting Social Security Commissioner Lee Dudek, a relatively unknown mid-level official in the agency who stepped into the role after former Acting Commissioner Michelle King resigned, defended the size reduction by stating the move would restore billions of dollars for the agency.
“For too long, SSA has operated on autopilot,” said Dudek. “We have spent billions annually doing the same things the same way, leading to bureaucratic stagnation, inefficiency, and a lack of meaningful service improvements. It is time to change just that.”
So, what do the experts of Social Security make of all of this?
A recent panel at The American College of Financial Services’ Horizon 2025 conference featured several agency specialists, including former Deputy Commissioners of the Social Security Administration Andrew Biggs and Jason Fichtner, to discuss the commotion within the organization and whether its impact could heavily impact beneficiaries. Biggs formerly served under President George W. Bush while Fichtner served his role under Presidents Bush and Barack Obama.
Fichtner, who is also a chief economist and senior fellow with the Bipartisan Policy Center, doesn’t anticipate much change for existing benefit recipients. However, he warned of longer wait times for those filing disability claims or for those calling into the agency’s administrative office.
“I don’t think it will impact current beneficiaries, but for those who have to file a claim with disability, they will probably have to wait a little longer,” he said during the panel. “I don’t think benefits will be interrupted in the next 60 days. The concern will mainly be those who are trying to get service in the administrative department.”
Panelists also commented on billionaire Elon Musk’s claim that “millions” of deceased centenarians are continuing to receive Social Security benefits. Trump would later double-down on the claim in an address to Congress on Tuesday.
Biggs, now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, noted that while there may be deceased individuals who continue to receive benefits, it’s nowhere near the millions figure claimed by Musk and Trump. Rather, it’s around 40,000. “You do have 19 million Social Security numbers from people who were born over 100 years ago. 44,000 are actually receiving benefits from that. In the early years of the program, it wasn’t electronic, and [the administration wasn’t] great at death reporting,” he added. “The amount of fraud in that incident is very, very small.”
Instead, Biggs said he’s more concerned about the state of the agency’s solvency in the coming decade, especially with the recent passage of the Social Security Fairness Act. While the law would provide benefits for union workers with a non-covered pension, it would also add an estimated $380 billion to U.S. debt.
Its passage signals a larger problem within Congress and the state of lawmaking today compared to decades ago, he said. Rather than relying on testimony from policy experts, more Congress members are choosing to hear from industry advocates or activists filing their own agenda, Biggs observed.
Other lawmakers used the Act to advance their own political standing rather than warn of its effects on insolvency, Biggs later claimed. “It points toward the lack of policymaker chomp on Congress now. We are still promising more in benefits than [the public] paid in taxes. Members of Congress were much more informed back then,” he said.
Ultimately, Fichtner said he doesn’t anticipate abrupt cuts to Social Security, adding that he “can’t see Congress allowing an immediate 20% benefit cut,” and “no one wants to touch the benefits.” Instead, he projects a 2%-point increase in the revenue tax with the full retirement age (FRA) being pushed out over a 20-to-30-year period. The government could raise the federal payroll tax from 12.4% to 15.4% today or 16.4% in 2033, he added.
Panelists agreed it’s unlikely a solution to Social Security’s imminent insolvency will transpire under a Republican administration and Congress. Instead, the public could see further action after the mid-term elections in 2026, in the case the House of Representatives or Senate switch to a Democratic leadership.
If Democrats don’t take either part of the legislative branch in two years, then a solution could be introduced within the next presidency in 2028. However, that would give lawmakers just five years to devise a plausible solution until beneficiaries begin to see cuts, panelists warned.
SEE ALSO:
Biden Signs Social Security Fairness Act
Social Security Administration Cutting 7,000 Jobs in DOGE-Initiated Restructuring
Top Social Security Official Resigns in Wake of Clash with Musk’s DOGE
Amanda Umpierrez is the Managing Editor of 401(k) Specialist magazine. She is a financial services reporter with over six years of experience and a passion for telling stories and reporting news. Amanda received her degree in journalism and government and politics at St. John’s University. She is originally from Queens, New York, but now resides in Denver, Colorado with her partner. In her free time, Amanda enjoys running, cooking, and watching the latest drama show.
