The Trump Administration’s reported plans to overhaul Social Security disability benefits have ignited a fierce debate in Washington and across the country, with lawmakers, policy experts, and advocacy groups warning that hundreds of thousands of vulnerable Americans could be at risk of losing crucial support. The controversy centers on a proposal to eliminate age as a factor in determining eligibility for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), a move that would mark one of the most significant changes to the program in decades.
According to reporting by The Washington Post and The Daily Beast, the Social Security Administration (SSA) is considering either removing age as a consideration entirely or raising the threshold from 50 to 60 years old. Currently, the SSA weighs an applicant’s age, work experience, and education when deciding if a person can transition to other forms of work. This system has historically allowed older applicants—those over 50, in particular—a greater chance of qualifying for benefits, recognizing the challenges of retraining or starting new careers later in life.
Connecticut Congressman John B. Larson, the ranking member of the House Social Security Subcommittee, has emerged as a leading critic of the proposal. On October 5, 2025, he condemned the plan, calling it “cruel, reckless, and proof that Donald Trump never met a benefit he didn’t want to cut.” In a statement cited by The Hartford Courant, Larson argued, “Now he wants to go after Americans with disabilities – people who have worked their entire lives – only to be told they are on their own when they need help most.” He further charged that the proposal “follows last month’s plan by the White House to cut Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits for up to 400,000 people,” including an estimated 4,300 Connecticut residents.
The architect of the proposed overhaul is reportedly Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a key figure behind Project 2025, a conservative policy blueprint for a potential second Trump term. Vought’s involvement has drawn scrutiny from Democrats, who see the changes as part of a broader effort to reduce social safety net spending. Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the top Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, did not mince words, telling The Daily Beast, “This is Phase One of the Republican campaign to force Americans to work into old age to access their earned Social Security benefits, and represents the largest cut to disability insurance in American history.” Wyden insisted, “Americans with disabilities have worked and paid into Social Security just like everybody else, and they do not deserve the indignity of more bureaucratic water torture to get what they paid for.”
The numbers at stake are significant. Jack Smalligan, a senior policy fellow at the Urban Institute and former OMB official, estimated that if eligibility were reduced by just 10 percent, roughly 750,000 people could lose benefits over the next decade. An additional 80,000 widows and children could lose benefits tied to a disabled spouse or parent. As of 2022, nearly 42 percent of disability applicants were found eligible due to their age—a factor that would be severely curtailed or eliminated under the new plan, according to Larson and other critics.
Supporters of reform, particularly among fiscal conservatives, argue that changes are necessary as Americans live longer and as the workforce evolves. They suggest that many disabled workers could transition to less physically demanding jobs, such as office or desk work, if given the opportunity. This viewpoint sees the current system as outdated and inefficient, potentially encouraging dependency rather than self-sufficiency. However, Smalligan’s research, as cited by The Daily Beast, suggests that older people who lose their disability benefits often struggle to find new roles and are sometimes forced to tap into their retirement savings earlier than planned, putting additional strain on other social programs.
The Trump Administration has pushed back against the criticism. White House spokesman Kush Desai told The Hartford Courant and The Daily Beast, “President Trump will always protect and defend Social Security for American citizens. The only policy change to Social Security is President Trump’s working families tax cut legislation that eliminated taxation of Social Security for almost all beneficiaries—which every single Democrat voted against.” Desai’s comments echo the Administration’s position that no formal changes to disability eligibility have been enacted, and that any future proposals would be subject to public comment and rigorous review.
The Social Security Administration itself has acknowledged that changes are under consideration but has emphasized the preliminary nature of the discussions. SSA spokesman Barton Mackey told The Washington Post that the agency is working to “propose improvements to the disability adjudication process to ensure our disability program remains current and can be more efficiently administered.” Mackey added, “This includes proposing policy updates to occupational data sources and optimizing their use to serve our customers and preserve the trust funds. Once the proposal is fully developed, we will share it publicly and request public comment through the standard rulemaking process. … As with any rulemaking, we will consider and analyze public comments before deciding whether to finalize the rule.”
For now, the eligibility criteria for Social Security disability remain unchanged. According to the SSA, applicants must have worked in jobs covered by Social Security and have a medical condition that meets the agency’s strict definition of disability. This condition must significantly limit the ability to perform basic work-related activities such as lifting, standing, walking, sitting, or remembering. If an applicant cannot perform their previous work, the SSA then considers whether there is other work the individual could do, taking into account medical conditions, age, education, past work experience, and transferable skills.
The debate over Social Security reform is far from new, but the current proposal has brought it back into sharp focus, especially for older Americans and those with disabilities who rely on these benefits as a lifeline. Larson and other Democrats have vowed to fight any cuts, declaring, “These programs are not giveaways, they are promises. Breaking those promises – that’s not leadership – it’s betrayal. Not on our watch!”
As the SSA prepares to unveil its formal proposals and seek public input, the battle lines are clearly drawn. With millions of Americans watching closely, the outcome will likely shape the future of disability support for years to come.
