Social Security was only mentioned once during the vice presidential debate

While Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance and Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz sparred over several issues during Tuesday’s vice presidential debate, Social Security was noticeably absent from the conversation.

The Social Security Administration’s looming financial crisis is one of the most pressing policy issues facing candidates. A recent survey by Bloomberg/Morning Consult found that the issue of Social Security and Medicare is “very important” because it helps 63 percent of voters decide who to vote for in the upcoming presidential election between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump .

Introducing himself, Vance reiterated that when he was growing up, his grandmother needed Social Security benefits to put food on the table. This was the only mention of ZUS during the entire debate.

Before the debate, Vance made several statements about his view of the Social Security program.

“If the argument is that we need to cut Social Security, then you are effectively saying that we need to just privatize what is currently a public problem about who pays for the older generation,” Vance previously said New York Times. “And I don’t know why people think that a lot of problems are solved by taking a bunch of older people and saying, ‘You’re on your own.'”

The Social Security Administration has long warned that the program could become financially insolvent as early as 2033. At that point, beneficiaries will be unable to receive full payments as more baby boomers retire and too few younger Americans retire. constitutes the current workforce.

Yet Vance remains opposed to cuts to Social Security.

“It’s walking a tightrope between traditional Republican Party views and some pretty good ideas,” said Michael Ryan, a financial expert and founder of michaelryanmoney.com Newsweek.

“Vance does not support cutting Social Security benefits. This is a departure from the usual Republican “entitlement reform” playbook. Instead, he proposes some unconventional solutions.”

Vance said if more people work, Social Security funds will benefit.

“More revenue comes from tariffs, yes, but from more people in the labor market, from higher productivity growth, from higher wages, from young people who are not working moving into the labor market,” Vance said.

However, experts say that this is definitely not enough to solve the problem of insolvency.

“It’s not a crazy idea, but it’s not a silver bullet either,” Ryan said.

Vance also suggested that higher import taxes could help fund the program and that middle- and upper-income earners should rely less on Social Security.

Democrats, on the other hand, want to expand Social Security while raising taxes on the wealthy to pay for it.

“Most Republicans support cutting benefits to address the deficit,” Ryan said. “Vance is trying to carve out a middle path, but it is narrow.”

Walz has made clear that he is strongly opposed to cutting benefits and has also made statements indicating that he would like to eliminate Social Security taxes for about 90 percent of recipients. By creating a relatively small group, wealthy people would see more of their money go to the program.

“This move could put more money into the pockets of middle-class retirees,” Ryan said. “He wants the ultra-rich to continue contributing to the system even after the current limit is reached. “It’s a controversial move, but it could help strengthen the program’s finances.”

As governor, Walz eliminated the state income tax on Social Security benefits for couples earning less than $100,000 a year and for individuals earning less than $78,000. This covered about 75 percent of the beneficiaries in the state.

Alex Beene, a financial literacy professor at the University of Tennessee at Martin, said Vance’s approach to Social Security generally mirrors Trump’s position in that he opposes cuts to the existing program.

“Raising taxes on the middle class – I don’t like that idea for obvious reasons,” Vance previously said. “You can get some revenue by raising taxes on wealthy Americans, but there is no way to keep the economy growing structurally at around 1 percent with deteriorating demographics and solve the problem by taxing rich people, you have to solve the fundamental problem.”

However, there are some concerns about some policies that could increase funding for the program.

“At the same time, Vance has expressed hesitation in supporting new taxes to fund the program,” Beene said Newsweek. “Instead, he wants to fund benefits by expanding the nation’s workforce, repeating on numerous occasions that more people in the workforce will make fully funding Social Security an easier endeavor.”

Vance also pointed out that increasing the birth rate would help alleviate some of the long-term pressures on Social Security.

“Vance’s view is more long-term and focuses on social changes such as labor force growth and birth rates, which would not provide immediate solutions,” said Kevin Thompson, financial expert and founder and CEO of 9i Capital Group. Newsweek.

“J.D. Vance can look in his side mirrors where things like Social Security are closer than you might think.”

Newsweek reached out to Vance and Walz’s office for comment via email.