Projections indicate that, in less than two years, there will be a staggering 2.5 million people in Social Security’s disability backlog. That figure is higher than the population of 20 U.S. states and territories. Thus, as we look to the midterm elections next year, President Trump will be dealing with a very large group of Americans who aren’t receiving timely decisions on their benefit applications.
About 70 percent of the projected backlog at the end of fiscal 2026 will be at the initial level of determination. These determinations are made by state workers under contract with the Social Security Administration. Over the last several years, the average wait time has risen rapidly, with claimants now waiting an average of 240 days for an initial disability decision (up from 111 days in 2018).
The disability backlog and long wait times shine a light on the problematic focus of Trump’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency. When government breaks down, the main outcome is not “waste, fraud, and abuse,” but rather people not being able to access benefits they need.
The backlog could easily turn out to be well above 2.5 million cases if current levels of government staffing decline, assumed productivity gains among government workers fail to materialize, or the country experiences a recession and displaced workers with health problems turn to Social Security for help.
The political pain of a very large backlog will first be felt by mayors and governors, as large numbers of individuals with severe health problems and little money overwhelm state and local resources. Based on studies of approved and denied applicants, where poverty rates without Social Security income range from 45 percent to 63 percent, political leaders can expect between 1.1 million and 1.6 million individuals in the backlog to be living in poverty.
The large backlog will be a national driver of homelessness, a situation that occurs with some frequency among disability applicants.
Governors of both parties will seek to transmit the political pain to the federal level, most likely by demanding that senators “do something” about events unfolding in the states. Governors will feel especially pressured because state workers under contract with Social Security will become overwhelmed by their workloads.
The backlog of 2.5 million individuals will hit some groups hardest. Based on studies of approved and denied applicants, 21 percent to 31 percent of individuals in the backlog will be African American. It will be politically scandalous for both parties when 525,000 to 775,000 African Americans are waiting for help from their government. Mayors, particularly in large cities, will aggressively question representatives in Congress about dysfunction in the federal government.
Other politically sensitive groups affected by a growing backlog will include military veterans. There are 2.6 million veterans in the U.S. labor force who have a service-connected disability. Many of these individuals will apply for Social Security when age or other factors worsen health and employment is no longer possible.
Trump will find it difficult to address a growing backlog, however, because his natural allies in the technology sector and in politics are ill-suited to help him.
Trump’s first instinct may be to look for a technological fix. His executive order creating DOGE stated its purpose as “modernizing federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” In practice, however, DOGE has become focused on personnel policy and cost cutting, rather than bleeding-edge technology.
Social Security recently summarized its DOGE-related activities. If members of the public thought the young engineers of DOGE were going to revolutionize technology in the government, they will be disappointed. The Social Security list is basically composed of budget cuts, including two big items: a reduction in the agency’s technology budget and a hiring freeze applied to federal employees and state workers who help process disability claims.
A hiring freeze, along with DOGE-driven cuts in the technology infrastructure, will leave Trump with few options to deal with a backlog that may well get out of hand.
Without a technology option, the president may look for policy solutions. However, his political allies and subordinates are likely to offer proposals that will make the situation worse. A popular idea among some conservative policy advocates is to conduct more disability reviews to drive individuals off the rolls. But, the staffers who would conduct such reviews are the ones needed to work the backlog of cases.
During his tenure as Commissioner of Social Security, Martin O’Malley employed extraordinary measures to “bend the curve” and successfully reduced the disability backlog. But with the new environment, the backlog will resume its natural trend toward higher levels. By 2033, actuarial estimates suggest 4.5 million Americans will have a claim pending.
If DOGE and policy advocates are not capable of helping, who should President Trump turn to for advice and assistance? Governors. These state leaders, regardless of party, have a more practical orientation than policymakers in Washington, D.C. Further, governors oversee the state workers who make the initial disability determinations for Social Security.
The Trump administration, in particular, could open communications with the National Governors Association. Such discussions could generate practical solutions to reduce the disability backlog and to mitigate its harmful effects.
Even if Trump is unwilling to engage governors, members of Congress should. Senators, in particular, have a natural connection to other state leaders. Even informal discussions with governors will help Congress understand what is happening on the ground regarding the disability backlog — and what can be done to head off an impending breakdown in government.
David A. Weaver, Ph.D., is an economist and retired federal employee who has authored a number of studies on the Social Security program. His views do not necessarily reflect those of any organization.
