By Rita Cook
Correspondent
Texas Metro News
AUSTIN — Ken Paxton may have a political problem on his hands after leaked audio from a September fundraiser sparked some backlash from Texas retirees over his remarks about cutting federal spending.
In the recording, Paxton argued that cuts to mandatory federal spending would be necessary to address the national deficit.
“There’s no doubt we have to cut some of the mandatory spending,” he said during the private discussion.
The Texas Alliance for Retired Americans took issue with the remarks, arguing that retirees depend on these programs to pay bills, obtain medical care and afford prescriptions.
Gene Lantz, president of the alliance, accused Paxton of dismissing the concerns of working Americans who spent their lives earning retirement benefits.
“There is no ‘reasonable’ amount to cut from the Social Security checks retirees depend on to pay their bills,” Lantz said, also warning that Medicare cuts could threaten access to health care.
The key distinction to be made, however, whether you are a Paxton lover or hater is the leaked recording did not specify which programs he would cut or by how much. His critics have said that places Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid at risk; Paxton says he has not proposed taking away benefits people have earned.
Paxton also pushed back against the reporting, calling it “fake news” and accusing the media of using “cherry-picked audio” out of context.
“I have never said I would take away entitlements from those who deserve or earned them,” Paxton said in his response. “We have to solve the national debt while keeping the promises we made to everyone who paid into these programs.”
The real heart of the debate is how does Washington address the national debt without putting retirement security and health care benefits at risk for millions of Americans?
The numbers help explain why the issue carries weight in Texas. Social Security Administration figures show nearly 5 million Texans receive Social Security benefits, while federal Medicare enrollment figures put the state at approximately 4.9 million beneficiaries.
Social Security Works Executive Director Alex Lawson was far less restrained in his criticism, accusing Paxton of treating potential benefit cuts as a joke while overlooking the consequences for working families and retirees.
Lawson also cited an estimated 1.3 million Texans whom Social Security keeps out of poverty. That figure should be understood as the organization’s claim unless independently confirmed against its original source.
The Congressional Budget Office reported that mandatory federal spending totaled approximately $4.2 trillion in fiscal year 2025. Roughly three-quarters went toward Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, underscoring the scale of the challenge facing anyone proposing reductions.
Social Security’s financial outlook adds another layer to the debate. The 2026 trustees’ projections put depletion of the retirement and survivors trust fund in the fourth quarter of 2032. Without legislative changes, continuing income would cover an estimated 78% of scheduled benefits — not eliminate payments altogether.
So, what exactly does Paxton mean by cutting mandatory spending? Which programs would be affected, and what protections would remain for people who paid into them for decades? Those are reasonable questions, regardless of political affiliation. If Paxton really wants Texans to trust his position on retirement security, he needs to explain what he would cut — and what he would protect.
