A looming 22 percent cut to Social Security benefits is pushing voters to prioritize candidates who offer clear plans to reform the program, as the current group of lawmakers will still be in office when the financial crisis is expected to hit in late 2032. A recent survey of 2,500 registered voters by the Peterson Foundation found that over 80 percent of respondents prefer candidates who advocate for changes to Social Security, rather than those who promise to leave the system unchanged. Only 17 percent supported candidates who pledged not to alter the program. The urgency comes from a strict financial deadline. A report by the Social Security Board of Trustees predicts that the trust fund, which helps cover benefits when payroll taxes are insufficient, will be depleted by the end of 2032. If Congress fails to act before then, all beneficiaries will face an immediate 22 percent reduction in their payments. Since the lawmakers currently being elected will still be in office when the trust fund runs out, the upcoming elections are seen as crucial for addressing this issue. According to an analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, 63 million Americans — including 54 million retirees and 9 million dependents and survivors — would be affected by the cuts. On average, each recipient would lose about $500 per month. In key battleground states, the impact varies. Texas would see the largest overall hit, with 4.3 million Social Security recipients losing an average of $489 per month. Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina, and Georgia also face significant losses, with average monthly reductions ranging from $487 to $523. The Peterson Foundation survey revealed that 91 percent of voters supported reforms once informed of the 2032 benefit cuts. Many respondents also linked the urgency of the issue to ongoing inflation, with 85 percent saying the funding shortfall must be resolved quickly. The survey found strong support for various policy changes to keep the program financially stable. For example, 72 percent favored adding a 1 percent payroll tax on income over $184,500, and two-thirds supported capping annual benefits at $100,000 for retired couples. A majority also supported benefit reductions for the top 20 percent of earners, with 65 percent backing a combination of gradual benefit adjustments and tax increases. Voters were strongly opposed to using federal borrowing to address the funding gap. Only 29 percent supported increasing the national debt to cover the shortfall, while 68 percent explicitly rejected adding to the existing $40 trillion deficit. This highlights a clear preference for solutions that do not rely on increasing the national debt.