Bipartisan majorities of Nevadans support raising taxes and/or cutting benefits to maintain the solvency of Social Security — defying conventional wisdom that changes to the popular retirement program are politically unthinkable.
Eighty-three percent of Nevadans say they have a positive view of Social Security, according to a new poll. But the beloved entitlement program faces a longevity challenge — its trustees project that its fund will become exhausted by 2033, at which point beneficiaries will see a reduction as much as 21 percent in their monthly payments without any changes.
The poll was conducted by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy and is one of several issue-focused polls the group is conducting ahead of the election in swing states. This survey polled 604 Nevadans in online opt-in panels from Aug. 2-17, and has a margin of error of 4.5 percent.
Dr. Steven Kull, a political psychologist at the University of Maryland and director of the Program for Public Consultation, said that when polled directly, majorities of voters say they do not want to see the retirement age raised or payroll taxes increase — often convincing politicians that the topic is an untouchable third rail.
But when voters went through the policymaking simulation in this poll, in which they were given context about the impending shortfall, presented with arguments and given the choice of what size of a change they would like to make (including keeping the status quo), they were much more willing to do things that are facially unpopular.
“They’re able to deal with it,” Kull said. “You don’t have simply Republicans want[ing] to cut benefits and Democrats want[ing] to increase taxes. There is this natural convergence.”
Support for varying types of Social Security policy changes is not reflected among the candidates in the presidential race. Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris have each advocated against cutting benefits or raising the retirement age; Democratic proposals in Congress have focused on raising the income cap for payroll taxes and increasing benefits, while Republican ones identify raising the retirement age for younger people and phasing out benefits for high earners still far from retirement.
Nevadans polled were presented with four potential solutions to the shortfall:
- Lowering benefits for higher-earning Americans
- Raising the retirement age
- Taxing income beyond the current threshold
- Increasing the Social Security payroll tax rate.
Nevadans were slightly more convinced by arguments against solutions that required cutting benefits — raising the retirement age or means-testing Social Security benefits. Even so, they were still willing to make modest cuts. Eighty-eight percent of Nevadans — including equal majorities in each party — said they were willing to gradually raise the retirement age to 68 by 2033 in order to reduce the shortfall by 15 percent. And 91 percent of Nevadans supported reducing benefits to the upper 20 percent of earners, with near even support among Republicans and Democrats.
In each case, support dwindled as the proposed benefit cut got harsher. Only 19 percent were willing to cut benefits for the top half of earners, and only 20 percent were comfortable raising the retirement age to 70.
Support did not vary much across age and income brackets for the more modest proposals, while it started to differ for the more aggressive ones. Eighty-eight percent of Nevadans earning more than $150,000 in annual income supported reducing benefits for the top 20 percent of earners compared to 92 percent of those making less than $50,000 — but that 4 percent difference widened to 19 percentage points when asked if benefits should be reduced for the top 40 percent of earners.
“When people deal with public policy issues, sometimes there’s a little bit of a self-interested effect, but it’s not very strong,” Kull said. “They generally think about what’s needed. They put on their lawmaker hat.”
A similar scenario played out when Nevadans were asked about revenue raisers. When asked about a proposal to make wages over $400,000 taxable as well (Social Security payroll tax is only applied to income up to $169,000), 87 percent of Nevadans, including 81 percent of Republicans, agreed. And 85 percent of Nevadans supported raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from its current 6.2 percent rate to 6.5 percent during a six-year period.
Again, support dropped off as the tax hikes became more aggressive. A 6.9 percent tax rate was supported by 52 percent of Nevadans, while a 7.2 percent tax rate garnered the support of just 41 percent.
Social Security’s solvency could also be partially addressed by increasing the program’s revenue through expanding the tax base — such as through increased immigration — or raising incomes, though the poll did not address these more nebulous policy aims.
While Nevadans want to see the Social Security shortfall addressed — and are willing to pay more in taxes and raise the retirement age to do so — they also want to see the benefit’s floor increased. Though each proposal would increase the shortfall, 73 percent of Nevadans want to see the minimum monthly benefit for those who worked more than 30 years raised from $1,066 to $1,570, while 68 percent of Nevadans want the cost-of-living adjustment formula changed to increase the amount retirees receive. People younger than 29 were most supportive of raising the minimum monthly benefit (80 percent), while retirees already collecting Social Security were the least convinced (62 percent).
Nevadans also believe Social Security payments should be raised for people older than 85 — two-thirds of Nevadans would support an $100 monthly increase for the so-called “oldest of the old.”
Social Security, a traditional area of political strength for Democrats — President Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) created the program in 1935 during the New Deal era — has regularly come up on the campaign trail, particularly in Nevada’s Senate race and Congressional District 3.
There, Democrats have criticized Republican congressional hopeful Drew Johnson, a tax analyst, for public statements supporting raising the retirement age. In an interview in June, Johnson said he now believes the shortfall can be addressed without doing so by auditing the Social Security Disability Insurance rolls and cutting government spending elsewhere.
The issue has come up in the Senate race as well, with Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) claiming her Republican challenger Sam Brown embraced a plan to sunset the entitlement. The Brown campaign has said he is against cuts to Social Security.
Brown and Trump have also pledged to end federal taxation of Social Security benefits, without saying how the loss of revenue would be made up. Democrats in Nevada have campaigned against raising the retirement age or privatizing Social Security.
