Vice President Kamala Harris is widely expected to be the Democratic nominee for the 2024 presidential election. As the Democratic National Convention approaches, voters may be curious about her stance on Social Security and Medicare — two critical programs for millions of Americans, especially seniors, who make up a key voting demographic.

And if Republican nominee Donald Trump and Harris debate this fall, questions on Social Security and Medicare are certain to take center stage. 

We’ll break down where Kamala Harris and Donald Trump stand and dive into Joe Biden’s positions since Harris’ campaign appears to be closely mirroring the president’s platform, with little time left to introduce bold new promises before Election Day.

Understanding each candidate’s views on these issues is crucial for voters. Here’s what you need to know. 

Social Security

Social Security, established in 1935, is a cornerstone of the American social safety net, providing financial support to retirees, disabled individuals and others. 

However, the program faces significant challenges. The Social Security Trust Fund is projected to be depleted by 2035, which could result in reduced benefits if action isn’t taken.

The looming insolvency is driven by demographic shifts, including an aging population and lower birth rates, which have resulted in fewer workers supporting more retirees.

“Addressing those financial challenges will require the political will in both parties to raise revenues for Social Security,” says Christian Weller, a senior economist and professor of public policy at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Where Harris stands on Social Security

Harris said very little about Social Security during her 2020 run in the Democratic primary, which in some ways is the only reference point for voters on where Harris stands on the issue, aside from Biden’s platform. 

Several news stories published during her 2020 bid for the White House quoted the candidate calling for a “need to expand Social Security” to provide beneficiaries “with greater dignity and peace of mind.”

In February 2019, then-Senator Harris co-sponsored the Social Security Expansion Act, legislation introduced by fellow senator and Democratic hopeful Bernie Sanders. The bill proposed extending the Social Security payroll tax to incomes over $250,000 a year. At the time, the amount of income subject to payroll taxes capped out at $132,900. (The cap has been adjusted for inflation since then, and is at $168,600 in 2024). 

Harris hasn’t released detailed policy proposals yet, including her plans for Social Security. However, she’s expected to continue championing Biden’s agenda. Here’s a closer look at his policy positions and proposals. 

Where Biden stands on Social Security 

Biden has consistently pledged not to cut Social Security benefits. During his 2020 presidential campaign and his time in office, he emphasized his commitment to protecting and strengthening the program.

Biden has proposed raising taxes on wealthy Americans to ensure the program’s solvency. Specifically, he’s suggested subjecting earnings over $400,000 to Social Security payroll taxes. 

In his June debate with Trump, Biden said he would “make the very wealthy begin to pay their fair share” to save Social Security. 

However, Biden’s promises to raise taxes on the wealthy haven’t come to fruition. Similarly, he hasn’t implemented significant changes to Social Security during his presidency. 

Where Trump stands on Social Security

Trump has taken a more ambiguous stance on Social Security. During his presidency and recent campaign, he said he would protect Social Security benefits. However, he hasn’t offered details on how he would ensure the program’s long-term solvency without cutting benefits or raising taxes.

Trump’s approach often hinges on the belief that a stronger economy would naturally bolster Social Security. He argues that economic growth and job creation would boost payroll tax revenues, thereby supporting the program.

Still, many experts say economic growth alone won’t be a panacea for Social Security.

“Faster economic growth can certainly help Social Security’s finances,” says Weller. “But it can only translate into better Social Security finances if it also goes along with strong wage growth.”

At various points, Trump has made statements suggesting he might be open to cutting Social Security benefits. However, he has walked back many of those comments, emphasizing his commitment to protecting benefits. More recently, he’s talked about eliminating federal taxes on Social Security income, which could speed up insolvency.

He’s also suggested combating fraud and waste within Social Security and Medicare, which he argues could save money without reducing benefits.

Earlier in his career, Trump referred to Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme” and advocated for its privatization. However, he abandoned this stance during his first presidential campaign, along with his earlier support for raising the retirement age to 70. Currently, the retirement age for individuals born in 1960 or later is 67.

However, the idea of bumping up the retirement age past 67 persists in conservative groups like The Heritage Foundation, which published Project 2025, a conservative policy guide for a potential Republican president. It recommends increasing the full retirement age to 69 or 70, which would reduce lifetime benefits, according to the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 

“I can’t think of any benefit cut less popular than an increase in the retirement age,” says Weller.

Medicare

Medicare, the federal health insurance program primarily for people ages 65 and older, faces its own set of challenges.

The program is projected to deplete its Hospital Insurance Trust Fund by 2036, unless action is taken to maintain solvency. Rising health care costs, an aging population and increased enrollment are the major factors contributing to Medicare’s financial strain.

Where Harris stands on Medicare

As the presumptive nominee, Harris has yet to solidify her own stance on Medicare, the federal government’s largest health care program. However, she’s expected to advance Biden’s agenda.

As a Democratic candidate in the 2020 election cycle, Harris focused more on the principles of her Medicare For All plan than describing how she planned to keep the program solvent for its more than 67 million current beneficiaries. 

In a July 2019 Medium post, Harris outlined features of her Medicare For All program, including: 

  • Universal coverage: Aim to insure more Americans and create a cost-effective public system.
  • Private insurers: Allow private insurers to offer Medicare plans — much like private insurers offer Medicare Advantage plans today — but enforce strict Medicare rules on costs and benefits. Private plans would also face tougher consumer protection standards.
  • Supplemental insurance: Options for purchasing additional coverage for services not included in Medicare.
  • Prescription drug reform: Cap profits for drug and insurance companies. Conduct audits to ensure pharmaceutical companies aren’t overcharging compared to other countries.

To pay for her Medicare For All program, Harris proposed: 

  • A Wall Street tax: Tax stock trades at 0.2 percent, bond trades at 0.1 percent and derivatives at 0.002 percent. For example, a $1,000 trade would incur a $2 fee.
  • End tax shelters: Tax offshore corporate income at the same rate as domestic income.
  • Progressive taxation: Higher taxes on the top 1 percent, corporations and implementing a more progressive income, payroll and estate tax.

But with less than 100 days until the election, Harris is much more likely to stand behind Biden’s moderate Medicare platform than to revert back to her 2019 and 2020 Medicare For All talking points. Still, there’s overlap between Biden and Harris on certain Medicare-related issues, such as cracking down on pharmaceutical companies and drug prices. 

Where Biden stands on Medicare

Biden has been proactive in addressing Medicare’s shortfall. One of his major legislative achievements, the Inflation Reduction Act, included provisions to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare beneficiaries. It was the first major reform to Medicare since prescription drug coverage (Part D) was added to the program during the Bush administration in 2006. 

The Inflation Reduction Act allows Medicare to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies, a move expected to save billions of dollars for both the federal government and beneficiaries over the next decade. 

Harris, alongside other 2020 candidates like Sanders, specifically called for this kind of reform on the campaign trail five years ago. In her 2019 Medium post, Harris said her plan for Medicare “will also allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate for lower prescription drug prices.”

But the Inflation Reduction Act goes further. It requires drug companies to make payments to Medicare if they increase prices faster than inflation. It also caps out-of-pocket expenses for beneficiaries, providing financial relief for those with high drug costs. Biden has called for directing savings from these measures into Medicare’s Hospital Insurance Trust Fund to extend its solvency.

Biden has also proposed raising the Medicare payroll tax for people earning more than $400,000 from 0.9 percent to 2.1 percent to further support the program.

During his 2020 campaign, Biden proposed lowering the Medicare eligibility age from 65 to 60 in an effort to expand health coverage to more Americans. However, he never pursued this during his presidency.

Where Trump stands on Medicare

Trump’s stance on Medicare mirrors his approach to Social Security: He promises to protect benefits but provides limited details on how he would achieve this.

During his presidency, Trump did not implement significant reforms to address Medicare’s financial challenges.

His administration did propose various changes aimed at reducing health care costs for Medicare beneficiaries, such as efforts to increase price transparency, reduce prescription drug prices and lower the cost of insulin. But these initiatives had limited impact on Medicare’s long-term funding issues.

Trump has made statements opposing any cuts to Medicare benefits, positioning himself as a defender of the program. He also suggested that waste, fraud and abuse within the system should be addressed to save money.

During his administration, Medicare Fee-For-Service improper payment rates declined modestly as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) led efforts to identify causes of improper payments and implement action plans.

In 2023, Trump criticized Republicans who considered cutting Medicare to offset federal spending, arguing such cuts were unnecessary.

Older Americans are a solid voting bloc in presidential elections, and savvy politicians know those votes can influence the outcome of a race.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, people ages 65 and older made up 25.7 percent of the voting population in the 2020 presidential election. Meanwhile, people ages 18–29 made up just 16.5 percent of the voting population. Younger voters were underrepresented compared to the general population, while older Americans were overrepresented, the report found.

In short, seniors turn out to vote.

Experts say this causes many candidates to concentrate on issues central to older Americans — like Social Security benefits, Medicare and prescription drug costs — during election years. Proposals to alter these programs are widely unpopular with voters.

“People contribute to Social Security all of their careers in expectation of getting benefits in the future,” says Weller.

He adds: “Messing with Social Security’s benefits is rightfully seen as breaking a promise.”

How much control does the president have over Social Security?

Social Security’s tax rate and benefits are set by law. So to tweak them, Congress must first change the law, and the president then needs to sign it.

“While a president does not have legislative power, he has a lot of influence to introduce and push for large-scale changes,” says Weller.

Social Security is treated separately from the rest of the federal budget for accounting purposes since it’s a mandatory program, says Weller. The Social Security Board of Trustees only administers the program — it doesn’t have any legislative power over Social Security.

Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have proposed reforms to Social Security over the last decade, from lowering (or raising) the retirement age to tweaking how the program is funded.

Despite numerous bills introduced in the House and Senate, none of the measures have been signed into law.

“The two sides are too far apart on their proposals and there’s no urgent need to act since Social Security can still pay full benefits for the next decade,” says Weller.

Bottom line

Social Security and Medicare are important safety nets for millions of Americans. Trump and Harris are likely to face questions on the future of both programs, though voters should remember that candidate promises don’t always translate to concrete action after Election Day.

While voters should pay attention to both candidates’ positions, they should also remember that Congress — not the president — holds the ultimate power to reform Social Security and Medicare.