Social Security Senate races put 2032 trust fund deadline in focus

The 2026 Social Security Senate races are drawing attention because most winners will hold office when the retirement and survivors trust fund is projected to run short of reserves. CNBC identified nine competitive contests where candidates have discussed the program, though detailed policy positions remain scarce in much of the field.

Thirty-five Senate seats are on the ballot in November, including special elections in Florida and Ohio. CNBC’s list of competitive races tied to the Social Security debate includes Alaska, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas.

For investors and households planning retirement, the election does not settle Social Security’s finances. It determines part of the Senate that could be in place as Congress confronts the projected deadline.

Why do Social Security Senate races matter for 2032?

A senator elected to a regular six-year term in November 2026 would serve until January 2033. The Social Security Trustees project that the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance, or OASI, trust fund can pay full scheduled benefits until the fourth quarter of 2032 under their intermediate assumptions. After that point, CNBC says 78% of scheduled retirement benefits would be payable, a 22% gap from scheduled benefits.

The Ohio race has a different timetable. It is a special election for a term ending in January 2029, so its winner would not necessarily be serving under that term when the OASI projection reaches late 2032. Florida is also a special election, but it is not among CNBC’s nine listed battlegrounds.

The OASI forecast should not be confused with the outlook for Social Security’s combined retirement, survivor and disability funds. The Trustees project a hypothetical combined OASDI fund would reach reserve depletion in the third quarter of 2034, with 83% of scheduled benefits payable. Combining those funds would require a legal change, according to the Trustees. The disability trust fund alone is projected to pay full scheduled benefits through at least 2100.

What have candidates said about Social Security?

The campaign record supplied for the nine competitive races is limited. CNBC’s reporting names Republican Rep. Ashley Hinson and Democratic state Rep. Josh Turek in Iowa, and Republican Sen. Susan Collins and Democrat Troy Jackson in Maine. It says many candidates’ platforms lack detailed plans.

MS NOW reported that Collins and Jackson both support raising the payroll-tax cap. In 2026, wages above $184,500 are not subject to the Social Security payroll tax, according to the outlet. Raising or eliminating that cap would subject more earnings to the tax, but it is a policy proposal rather than an established fix.

Separately, MS NOW reported that Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall supports eliminating the cap, while Democratic challenger Adam Hamilton supports raising it without eliminating it. Kansas is not on CNBC’s list of nine competitive contests.

What voters told the Peterson Foundation

A Peter G. Peterson Foundation poll of 2,500 registered voters in Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Texas found that 81% were more likely to support a candidate with a plan to prevent automatic Social Security benefit cuts than one who promised not to change the program. The online survey, conducted Aug. 20 through Aug. 27, reported a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

CNBC also modeled the possible state-level effect using December 2025 benefit levels. Its figures cover retirement and survivor benefits, exclude disability benefits and are not forecasts of 2032 payments. The model estimated annualized reductions of about $11.7 billion in Ohio, $10.9 billion in North Carolina and $22.7 billion in Texas if a 22% reduction were applied to those 2025 payment levels.

This story draws on original reporting from CNBC.