American Thought Leaders - Ralph Norman Outlines Plan for Social Security Reform and Fiscal Overhaul

Episode Date: August 25, 2026

Ahead of the Republican Senate primary runoff tomorrow in South Carolina, I’m sitting down with Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) as he and Sen. Darline Graham make their final appeals to South Carolinian voters.In this episode, Norman dives into his core political priorities, emphasizing fiscal conservatism, securing the integrity of elections through the SAVE America Act, and reforming major entitlement programs.Drawing on his background in the private sector, Norman said Washington needs more business-minded leaders who understand how to balance a budget and tackle national debt.Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

We have got a huge dilemma, a huge cancer in this country, and it's called deficit. It's called overspending. Ralph Norman is U.S. representative for South Carolina's fifth congressional district and a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate. All of my money has come from either my bank account or has come from the people of South Carolina. That's who I represent, not the deep state and not the Washington elite. Ahead of the primary runoff election on August 25th, he and Senator Darlene Graham are made. making their final pitches to South Carolina voters. I want to recruit people in office that really want to help the system rather than gain the system.

This is American Thought Leaders, and I'm Yanya Kellick. Congressman Ralph Norman, such a pleasure to have you back on American Thought Leaders. Glad to be with you, Jan. I appreciate what you do. So, you know, for decades here, Lindsay Graham has really set the tone on foreign policy. out of this seat that you are now running for in the runoff. And you've been calling, as an example, as in for an end to endless wars, you've voted against some federal defense spending bills in the past.

I guess I want to get a sense from you. How will your foreign policy differ from Senator Graham's, and how will you explain those defense votes in the past and so forth to a state that has so many military bases? Well, overall, Jan, what I would say is I believe in peace through strength. I believe that Donald Trump has brought that back. It's been non-existent under Joe Biden. Under Barack Obama, they were empty suits.

They were paper tigers that no one took seriously. Now with what's happened in Iran, this president has got us back on the, I guess, the the thought that he's not just giving empty rhetoric. He backs up American goals and protecting this democracy as we have with taking out one that would take this country out in Iran. They were the number one sponsor of terror. That being said, we have got a huge dilemma, a huge cancer in this country, and it's called deficit.

It's called overspending. It's called, you know, you know, not focusing on things and spending dollars on things that we cannot continue. And we cannot be police the world. Endless wars, I don't think the people in America won't continue to do. But we need to protect, take out the threats like Iran, and we need to help our, the only democracy in the Middle East, which is Israel. Taiwan is our trading partner and friend.

And we're at war with a socialist party that's trying to take over this country. And it's down the line. And they're similar to what's happening in what has happened in China, Russia, and other countries that don't have our best interests at heart, and will take this country over. So that being said, where I would differ with Senator Graham, I don't want to write blank checks. everything that we spend now has got to be in the vein of to get the cancer in this country

where it's curable. $40 trillion is not curable. I will talk about it. I will bring it up. I will act on it when I get into the Senate. So it's going to differ with that. But we have to remain strong. But if you're bankrupt and if no one is buying our bonds, you don't remain strong. So one of the things that a lot of the people are talking about when it comes to this is where President Trump's endorsement has landed. And you've called that a head scratcher. Explain to me how you see you can overcome the lack of that endorsement at the moment. Well, it's an endorsement I asked for, and it's an endorsement that it comes from a man that I fully

support it. I mean, I will always be grateful and would be indebted to President Trump from saving this country. Yon, can you imagine if Kamala Harris had taken the reins over from a totally in-depth, Joe Biden? It's totally disastrous. So what he did was save the country, and I will always support him on that, and I still will. When he did support me with Darling Graham, it was a head scratcher. She's been bankrolled by the Washington elite and lobbyists, the people we fight against that support give to causes like moving.

on.org. They're coming after South Carolina and me because they know what they get with me. I've got an anti-spending. I've got an anti-I've got an inversion to socialism and communism

is the best way to say it. And the fact that the candidate that he picked is a candidate that is beholden to them that is fighting Donald Trump. The deep state, the Washington elite, is broken. Washington is just broken.

And the fact that they've endorsed and really taken an interest in this race is concerning. And so all of my money has come from either my bank account or has come from the people of South Carolina. That's who I represent, not the deep state and not to Washington elite. You've mentioned basically tackling that deficit a number of times.

Give me your kind of picture of what you want to really accomplish in the Senate. if you were you to be elected. Right now, it's the Save America Act, verifying our elections. That's it. You know, that's the number one priority of President Trump, and the Senate has chosen not to pass it.

We've got a 53 to 47 majority in the Senate of so-called Republicans, and when they take off of five weeks and don't deal with it, when the House has passed it three times, and it's a quagmire with the Senate. And not just this bill, Yon, It's every good bill we send over there from the budget,

which the House has responsibility on the budget. It's appropriated in the Senate. And the fact that the conservatism leaves the stage when it goes to the Senate. And I'm simply going to highlight that and be a vote against that. And to be a vote for solvency and making sure this country is for future generations, We're not heading in the right directions. And we can do that. I want every dollar accounted for when South Carolina citizens send their dollars to Washington, D.C.,

I want to know where it's being spent. And I want to make sure that we start the path of paying off the debt. That's not a figment of our imagination. I mean, it's a hard number. They can say it's not. But the sad part about it, John, it's not just the $40 trillion. it's the Highway Trust Fund. It's Social Security.

It's Medicaid, Medicare. And you've got to tackle each agency like Doge did. He was demagogued for doing that. But he did the right thing. So let's talk about Social Security then. What's your vision for that? There's going to be a transition there. What is your vision for how to accomplish that?

It's going to have to be some hard changes. All we've got is worthless notes. They're talking about at the end of this six-year term, a 25, 28% cut in Social Security. That's our money. It's not their money, but they're spending it as if there is their money, the government, I mean. First thing I would do is the $147,000 limit on Social Security ought to be raised or the limits ought to be taken off. Secondly, we have over a million new cards issued each year. we ought to have some fee based for the new recipients

instead of just eating that. And there are a host of other reforms, but we know we cannot keep the reforms that we're going now because there are no reforms. The politicians have been scared because we've been demagogue by the media when you do anything with Social Security. What about the novel idea of invested the 6.2% that we pay

and the 6.2% that the businesses pay? What about? letting us invest that not send it to Washington as a crutch those are just some of the things that i will be proposing and putting on the table and trying to get the congress the senate and the house to buy into it but if we continue the same path we know where it leads it's a dead end path and you know senator graham has uh advocated for job transition programs to keep people paying into the system and so forth but i i the way i read your view is more of a kind of a market-based structural changes.

Why do you think that's necessarily a better approach? Well, the approach we're having now is not working. Nothing we're doing now is working with Social Security. The people coming into the system, the money's getting confiscated, and it's a novel idea to let us invest our own money. What could be worse than what the system that we now have with no reforms? and so the things I've mentioned is just the beginning point.

You know, you've talked about a means-based system that I don't know whether that works, that the wealthy would bear some of the burden. I don't know if that's the right way to go, but we can come up with a way that gets it solved or at least starts it on the path to solvency. The ones that are collecting checks that are no longer living, that was one of Elon Musk's main issues

that he put. on and effectively showed, but what do we do about it? Nothing. Look, there's a way to verify who's getting a check from the government. And if you have a system that is not even challenged or not even any new solutions put on the table, then you'll have the 22 to 28% confiscated by the government. And cuts in Social Security, a lot of people live on that. It's not like people can just say that's not important.

It is to many Americans. One of the things that I see being talked about a lot is increased disclosure and laws around increased disclosure for PACs, for political action committees, and outside groups. What do you think about that? Absolutely. The outside groups and funding my opponent are people who, again, have funded orders that are contrary to our Constitution and contrary to what we believe as a democracy. And so exposing that for, you call it dark money, call it whatever you want.

But it's money we don't have control of. We don't know where it came from. And we don't know why they're funding it. But again, in my case, the dark money is totally financing a campaign for somebody that, that is unknown and you don't know what they're going to do when they get there, but they will owe some allegiance to who put them there. And that's the dark money that needs to be exposed and identified. So, of course, you've been part of the House Freedom Caucus for a while.

And the House Freedom Caucus has been, you know, some people have kind of accused it of being kind of in this adversarial mode, sort of more focused on, I guess people might say, political fights as opposed to actually getting legislation passed. In the Senate, you need 60 votes typically. So what's your approach going to be in the Senate and how will you deliver for South Carolina in this new kind of mode, I guess, in the Senate? What I'll deliver for South Carolina is really taking focus and really dialing down on the one that is at hand is safe and secure elections to save America Act. And we may not have the, I think there's a lot of people in the Senate,

even though we've got a 53 to 4 and 7 majority that don't believe in that. They're somehow profiting off the system or don't want integrity. Well, I've got a problem with that. Now, the only way I deal with it is try to meet common ground and move forward on some things. But if you can't do that, you have to replace them. And I will work to do that. And just like they're trying to keep me out here in South Carolina because they know that they don't want their gravy train cut off, which is a broken Washington, D.C. system that they want to keep going. That's why they're dialing down on my campaign.

But it's more of a problem nationwide as well. Some more than other. California, New Jersey, Oregon, New York. are states that will cease to exist in the way that they've known it. Because socialism and communism has never worked. It's not going to work now. Do you think that President Trump was given bad advice by national strategists in terms of deciding to back Senator Graham?

You know, I don't know why he decided that. It's been a head scratcher for me. I don't understand it. I've got the highest rating in my delegation. I've stuck with him. Now, I haven't been a puppet, but I'll give you an example, the Big Beautiful Bill has some things on the budget committee.

We stopped it and delayed it a day, which is in politics, that's nothing. And we made the bill better. I will use the leverage of stopping passage to get better bills that are more conservative for the taxpayers. That was a perfect example. and the specific that I named during the debate was I was fighting to get the tax subsidies for electric cars and solar panels and, you know, wind and solar that we shouldn't have been spending

money on. We were successful. We moved that bill more so that it's more conservative. And so I will do that as a senator and call attention to it to make changes that will put money back into the taxpayers' hands. So let me see. From our discussion, I'm thinking, you know, number one on your priorities is to make secure elections. Number two, fiscal responsibility. I mean, maybe just because I asked specifically about this, but social security, meaningful social security reform and transition number three. What, can you round that out for me a little more with your other, you know, kind of key areas? Yeah. I mean, the umbrella is financial solid. That's the umbrella. As a subset, the Passing the Save America Act for secure elections. We have got to keep a focus on energy independence. We cannot depend on China in other countries. Or in the case of manufacturing, China is making way too many products that we ought to be making here in America.

Got to keep our businesses strong. But it's peace through strength with our military, which has got to be funded. And the dollars have got to continue to go there while making sure all of our agencies have been slimmed down to making sure they're functioning at the highest level. Anybody, and I would compare it to any business goes through an analysis. They cut where they need to cut, and yet they spend money for investment. We've got where we, most of a lot of over 30 to 50% of our taxes go for things that are, are not necessary when it comes to getting us in a financial shape to pay off our debt and start our infrastructure in all over this country that was, quite frankly, is dilapidated because we've started in the 40s, 50s and 60s.

You know, one thing that I keep seeing coming up, right, is always the sort of the looming prospect of the government shutdown, right? We seem to be, we often ending up in these situation. So if you're in a situation where Senate leadership asks for compromise on a budget deal, for example, which is the kind of thing that we do see, how would you handle that kind of pressure? The pressure doesn't bother me, but the Democrats, as we saw last year, will shut the government down at any circumstance. They will actually put the health and welfare of the people that elects them. Food in the mouth of babies, as they said.

But they'll shut it down. And as they did before, where ICE agents were not paid. Our TSA agents, checking the security in the airports, were not paid. They would do that. So I will just have to deal with it

when it comes to the Senate floor. It's a little bit different than the House floor because on the Budget Committee, you can do that. I would love to be on the Budget Committee in the House as well, I mean in the Senate, as well as other oversight committees that can take a hard look at the monies going out versus the income coming in. We've talked about the Save America Act a number of times now through as we've been talking.

And so like how would you actually get it across the finish line? Because this is like a lot of us out here are scratching our heads around this. It's not going to be easy. but to just drift along and say we don't have the votes to me is unacceptable. You do something. When you're drowning, you try to get to the top and swim. So we've got to swim, and it takes change in minds. I don't know whether Mr. Thune can do it.

I don't know whether Glenn McConnell or the leadership in the Senate can do it. I know Ron Johnson, head of the budget, will be a physical hawk when it comes to, our money's being spent. You just take it, it involves people, Yon, and it's going to take a totally different change in strategy to do that. And maybe we can't do it with the people we have, but we have to work with who's in there now. They have six-year terms, and you have turnover.

But with the Senate, it's a difficult body to work with, but I'm not content not to put anything on the table as a proposal, like with Social Security, like with Medicaid, Medicare, like with Highway Trust Fund. That type thing, you can't let sit and just say things will get better on their own. I've never seen a cancer that's cured with aspirin, and that's what we're trying to do. So one of the things I hear talked about a lot, increasingly almost like every year or every election is term limits. Where do you stand on that? For example, Senate term limits.

I put the bill up every year. Howie Rich out of New York has been great at promoting this. But the term limit bill that most politicians signed three terms in the House, six years, two terms in the Senate, 12 years. Look, the founders didn't intend for politicians of either Democrat or Republican or independent party to go up and live forever. Those are, it's an 80-20 issue with the American people, but it's just hard to get it passed because people want to stay there forever. I've always term limited myself. I will sign the term limit pledge for the Senate, only two terms and come home. But everybody ought to be doing that. You need business people in charge, not professional politicians. Let's talk about what day one in the Senate you're elected, what that would look like.

let's assume in this case that the Save America Act has been passed. Okay, I don't know if we can assume that or not, but let's say it has day one in the Senate. What are you doing? I would be a static if that happens. But as you know, we're toward the end of the year. We take office in January, or at least in my case, my vote won't count until I actually assume the office. It will be getting with the true conservatives who have been there, Rick Scott, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and my main focus will be on the budget, will be on spending,

we'll be on making bills that come up from the House more conservative. And to that end, I will work, and it's going to take a lot of work. Let's talk a little bit about your background. I mean, you've spent decades as a real estate development. maybe tell me a little bit about what, you know, the lessons you've gleaned from being in the private sector like this in terms of what you would apply in your office. Yeah, the benefit that I have is that I have made money and I've lost money. In the business arena, that's what you do. You're familiar with that. You've got to balance a checkbook. You've got to balance income and expenditures. And you've got to have a product that people are willing to buy.

That's whether you're a physician, whether you're a developer. It doesn't matter the business. You've got to appeal to the customer. That's democracy. And that's what a lot of bureaucrats just don't understand that have never been in the private sector. I've got the benefit of knowing what it takes for hard work, knowing what it takes to make sure that it's sustainable

financially and having the courage to make those changes. And government has got to the point now. It's really out of control when it comes to Washington, D.C. And it literally is broken because of that. People do not take it to take the job seriously. They make decisions based on what's going to return them to office so that they can milk the government and go on CODALs, which are congressional delegations to all over the country,

whether they can just keep their lives. lifestyle and I'm tired of that. There's nothing politics can give me that I haven't already got from hard work and from running a business. It ought to be a prerequisite before you run for office. So, you know, that's my background and that's, I think you need people in office that don't need the job. I want to recruit people in office to run for office that really want to help the system rather than gain the system. There is a difference. What would you say would be the biggest difference

with your being in office versus Senator Graham, the biggest difference that voters will see? Senator Graham has been part of government. She's had a paycheck from the government. I think it's the blind, commission of the blind. A great agency, but she's, you know, she hasn't had her, She hasn't had the luxury of putting a lot of things at risk where any entrepreneur, any business owner, takes a risk that they will not have a paycheck or they had to pay their employees before they get a paycheck. And so that's the benefit of starting a company, regardless of what the company is, and regardless of the field that you go on.

But she's got an head of a governmental agency that does not require that as a private. industry and building a company up that you either succeed or fail. And people ought to have that right to succeed or to fail. What about from your time in the House? Is there anything that you regret how things were done there and like maybe or maybe lessons learned that that to do things differently that you could apply in the Senate? Well, one of the things that attracted me to the Freedom Caucus, they ask questions. nothing is sacrosanct that they can't ask

and you get answers and we had a lot of times it's been it's been hard to get true answers particularly when it relates to funding and you to really know where the money goes I'll apply their same principles when I go to the Senate and it won't be you won't be a no one will be surprised of what I do

because of my history and the only thing people have to go on that separates me from Ms. Graham. One, you don't know what you're going to get because she's an unknown. You do know that she's being bankrupted by the Washington establishment. I'm not. And you do know, based on my record, what I will do.

And I don't think you get a job based on your butt lines. I think you get a job from being proficient, being an expert in what you do, and loving what you do. And it couldn't come at a better time in a history of this. country than to dig in and take part now and make a change whenever we need it. The brokenness

of Washington has got to be fixed. Congressman Norman really appreciate you taking the time here to speak with me. Perhaps a final thought as we finish? One, we've got a great country. We've got to protect our democracy. We've got to reject socialism that's never worked, communism that's never work. We have to stand up against Sharia law and the Muslims. We have to stand up and fight for the country. That's my duty. That's our job. If you look at the 56 signers of Declaration of Independence, they did that. They lost their farms, their families, their wherewithal. It's now time to put that on the line and to make changes. And I will do that. Congressman Norman, Thank you so much for joining us today.

And everyone watching, thank you for watching American Thought Leaders. I'm your host, Yanya Kellick.