Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is pressing President Donald Trump to clarify whether his administration is considering raising the Social Security retirement age as the program's funding deadline draws closer. In a letter sent Sunday, Warren cited the latest Social Security Trustees Report, which projects the retirement trust fund will be depleted in late 2032. If Congress takes no action, incoming payroll tax revenue would be enough to pay only 78% of scheduled retirement benefits.

Warren argued that raising the retirement age would effectively reduce benefits for millions of Americans. Social Security's full retirement age is currently 67 for people born in 1960 or later. According to Warren, increasing the retirement age by two years could reduce median monthly retirement benefits by $345 to $741, or roughly 17% to 35%. "Republicans have a history of attempting to increase the retirement age, privatize Social Security, or otherwise cut Social Security benefits," Warren wrote.

White House spokesperson Liz Huston told CNBC that "President Trump will always protect and strengthen Social Security." Warren's letter also comes after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) reportedly told a Louisiana radio station that he plans to push forward next year with efforts to address spending on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Benefit Cut Warning

Experts warn that claiming Social Security at age 62 may feel like the obvious move amid concerns over the program's long-term funding, but locking in benefits too early could permanently shrink retirement income. Under Social Security Administration benefit calculations, workers with a full retirement age of 67 could see monthly benefits reduced by about 30% if they claim at 62, while delaying until 70 could increase benefits by roughly 24%. For example, someone eligible for $2,000 per month at 67 would receive only $1,400 at 62, but about $2,480 at 70.

Fix Gets Political

Joel Eskovitz, senior director of Social Security and savings at the AARP Public Policy Institute, said during a virtual briefing hosted by the National Academy of Social Insurance that raising the retirement age "really doesn't do anything in this short-term conversation." Eskovitz noted that higher retirement ages may disproportionately hurt lower-income Americans and workers in physically demanding jobs, since wealthier Americans generally live longer and may benefit more from delayed retirement.

The political challenge remains steep. A recent Ronald Reagan Institute survey found that only 26% of Americans support raising the retirement age, while 74% oppose it. Recent projections suggest retirees could face benefit cuts of roughly 22% to 24% without legislative action, translating to around a $500 monthly reduction for the average retiree.

Economist Justin Wolfers has argued that Social Security's problem is fundamentally demographic rather than political. As birth rates decline and Americans live longer, fewer workers are supporting a growing number of retirees, increasing pressure on the system.

The United States government has shifted from policy to direct ownership in the mining sector, taking equity stakes in companies to secure critical minerals. Former government advisor Jim Rickards highlights this move as a strategic response to national security risks, noting that the administration took a 10% stake in Trilogy Metals in October 2025 via a $35.6 million investment. This action follows Executive Order 14153, titled "Unleashing Alaska's Extraordinary Resource Potential," which directed agencies to expedite permitting and rescind restrictions. The government's Final 2025 List of Critical Minerals formally ties US import dependence to defense readiness, adding copper, silver, and rhenium for the first time.

Rickards argues the government's stake-taking is a sequence rather than isolated events, pointing to positions in Lithium Americas, MP Materials, and Intel. He identifies a specific deposit containing an estimated 82 million ounces of gold, 371 million ounces of silver, 75 billion pounds of copper, and significant quantities of rhenium and molybdenum. This site, held by a small company trading under $2 per share, has an estimated in-ground value of $2.7 trillion. Rickards describes the asset as nearly 20 times larger than the five biggest nearby mines combined, noting it remains blocked by environmental restrictions despite its potential to reduce import reliance.

Key Mineral Deposit Estimates

The following table details the estimated resources within the domestic deposit highlighted by Rickards.

Strategic Context and Import Reliance

The USGS 2026 Mineral Commodity Summaries indicate the US was 100% net import reliant on 16 nonfuel mineral commodities in 2025 and more than 50% reliant on 50 others. For materials like yttrium, reliance is concentrated in China, which supplied an estimated 93% of US consumption. Rickards suggests the market is mispricing the regulatory risk, drawing parallels to historical precedents like Prudhoe Bay and Cheniere Energy where regulatory shifts unlocked significant value before production began.

New Critical Minerals Designations

The Final 2025 List of Critical Minerals added three commodities, reflecting expanding concerns for supply chains.

• Copper
• Silver
• Rhenium