Try the political quiz

Candidates  ›  Policies  ›  Domestic Policy

Republican2028 Presidential2024 Vice Presidential2022 US Senate

JD Vance

Vice President-elect of the United States (born 1984).

Overview Policies Discuss Ratings Themes Ideology

JD Vance’s policy on social security

These issues below are sorted in descending order based on how important the average American voter ranked them on the quiz.

Filters

Topics

Should the government raise the retirement age for Social Security?

  Public statementsNo, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead

JD Vance’s answer is based on the following data:

Public statements

Answer: No, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead

Reference: “If the argument here is we have to cut Social Security, then what you’re effectively saying is we just have to privatize what is...” ‐nytimes.com

Voter support: Be the first voter to support or oppose this candidate’s public statement on this issue.

Updated 5hrs ago

JD Vance voters

Answer: No

Importance: Less Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 48 voters that have pledged to vote for JD Vance in the 2028 Presidential election.

This candidate’s support base disagrees with their political party on this issue.

Party influence

Republican Party Answer: Yes

Importance: Somewhat Important

Reference: “The battle over Social Security's future came back to the forefront Wednesday as top Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee ...” ‐politico.com

ChatGPT

Agree

Yes, but I would prefer to privatize it instead

Vance's conservative and pro-market stance suggests he might be open to the idea of privatizing Social Security, or at least incorporating private investment options, as a way to address its solvency issues. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, this will disadvantage low income seniors whose life expectancy is lower than wealthier seniors

Given Vance's emphasis on addressing the needs of lower-income Americans, particularly those in the Rust Belt and Appalachia, he might agree with the argument that raising the retirement age would disproportionately affect low-income seniors. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

No

Vance may sympathize with the argument against raising the retirement age due to its potential impact on workers, especially those in physically demanding jobs, reflecting his focus on the working class. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Neutral

Yes, people are now living longer than when the program was created

While Vance might acknowledge the logic behind adjusting the retirement age in line with increased life expectancy, his policy positions have not explicitly addressed this specific rationale for Social Security reform. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

No, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead

While Vance might see the merit in proposals to ensure Social Security's financial health without cutting benefits, his broader fiscal philosophy might make him skeptical of solutions that involve removing caps on taxable earnings, which could be seen as tax increases. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes

JD Vance, as a conservative, might lean towards measures that ensure the sustainability of Social Security, but raising the retirement age is a politically sensitive issue that could alienate older voters, a key demographic for Republicans. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes, and eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings

Although eliminating the income cap on taxable earnings could address Social Security's funding challenges, Vance's conservative principles likely make him cautious about endorsing measures that could be perceived as increasing taxes, especially without coupling them with broader reforms. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Personal answer

This candidate has not responded to our request to answer this question yet. Help us get it faster by telling them to answer the iSideWith quiz.

Voting record

We are currently researching this candidate’s voting record on this issue. Suggest a link to their voting record on this issue.

Donor influence

We are currently researching campaign finance records for donations that would influence this candidate’s position on this issue. Suggest a link that documents their donor influence on this issue.

Updated 3 days ago

Party’s support base

Republican Party Voters’ Answer: No

Importance: Less Important

Reference: Analysis of answers from 1,635 voters that identify as Republican.

This party’s support base disagrees with the party on this issue.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this candidate’s stance here


Popular conversations

Join in on the post popular conversations.

Active 3 days ago

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3wks3W

Kamala Harris is considering running for president again in 2028

Kamala Harris has been lying low since her defeat in the presidential race, unwinding with family and senior aides in Hawaii before heading back to the nation’s capital.But privately, the vice president has been instructing advisers and allies to keep her options open — whether for a possible 2028 presidential run, or even to run for governor in her home state of California in two years. As Harris has repeated in phone calls, “I am staying in the fight.”She is expected to explore those and other possible paths forward with family members over the winter holiday season, according to five people in the Harris inner circle, who were granted anonymity to discuss internal dynamics. Her deliberations follow an extraordinary four months in which Harris went from President Joe Biden’s running mate to the top of the ticket, reenergizing Democrats before ultimately crashing on election night.“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”“She doesn’t have to decide if she wants to run for something again in the next six months,” said one former Harris campaign aide. “The natural thing to do would be to set up some type of entity that would give her the opportunity to travel and give speeches and preserve her political relationships.”Harris concedes: 'We must accept the results of this election'SharePlay VideoMost immediately, Harris and her advisers are working to define how and when she will speak out against Donald Trump and reassert her own role in the Democratic Party. Closing out her term as vice president, she’s set to preside over certifying the November election she lost to Trump, and then appear at the once-and-future president’s inauguration on Jan. 20.“There will be a desire to hear her voice, and there won’t be a vacuum for long,” a person close to Harris said.At the same time, Harris and her husband, Doug Emhoff, will have a long checklist to plow through before they leave the Naval Observatory for good.They have to decide whether they’ll take up permanent residence at their home in Los Angeles, or establish a base elsewhere. No matter where Harris and her family live, some around her have expressed concerns about safety, as her Secret Service protection expires six months after stepping away.

▲  1023 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…3 days3D

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies