周二最戏剧性的时刻国情咨文当几名共和党人对乔·拜登总统发出嘘声时，众议员马乔里·泰勒·格林甚至大喊他是“骗子”。
他们愤怒的原因:他声称“一些共和党人”想要对社会保障做什么。
拜登指责共和党中的一些人想要改变6500万美国人目前依赖的福利计划，包括将支出的钱付诸表决。
考虑到这个话题的政治敏感性，共和党的反击很快，拜登很快扭转了局面。
“所以，伙计们，我们显然都同意，社会保障和医疗保险现在不在账本上，对吗?他们不能碰吗?”拜登回击道。“好吧。好吧。我们取得了一致意见。”
这种反复代表了民主党人和共和党人之间的争论参与了几个月的社会保障，尤其是在政府支出和债务上限方面。共和党人要求削减支出，以换取提高债务上限和避免违约，但该党并没有具体列出它想要的削减。
周二晚上的比赛是这样的:
拜登指的是什么提议?
尽管拜登在演讲中表示，他“礼貌地没有点名”任何一位议员，但佛罗里达州参议员里克·斯科特(Rick Scott)去年提议每五年“搁置”所有联邦项目，除非国会投票延长这些项目。理论上，社会保障将属于这一大类。
“任何对此有疑问的人，请联系我的办公室。我会给你一份。我会给你一份提案的副本，”拜登说，以反击“骗子”的喊声。
倾向自由派的城市研究所退休政策项目主任、高级研究员理查德·约翰逊说，很难想象斯科特的提议是“可行的”
“这肯定会破坏对该计划的信心，”约翰逊告诉美国广播公司新闻。“这确实会给人们未来的退休福利带来很多不确定性。”
共和党人支持斯科特的计划吗?
这个提议并没有受到热烈欢迎。参议院少数党领袖米奇·麦康奈尔。在斯科特的计划发布后，他很快称之为“不可行”。
他当时表示:“我们的议程中不会包括一项对半数美国人增税、并在五年内取消社会保障和医疗保险的法案。”。
斯科特辩护他在周三的提议中表示，他不希望削减社会保障，他“不会被华盛顿当局压制”
共和党人对社会保障说了些什么?
倾向保守的美国企业研究所高级研究员安德鲁·比格斯说，虽然民主党人一贯反对削减社会保障，但共和党人的立场有点模糊。
“这只是因为他们没有用一个声音说话，共和党人对他们想要的政策和他们倡导的实现该政策的策略有不同的看法，”比格斯告诉美国广播公司新闻。
除了斯科特的计划，威斯康星州共和党参议员罗恩·约翰逊(Ron Johnson)曾建议，让该计划的资金自由支配，而不是强制性的，并每年获得批准。约翰逊说，目的是更好地跟踪社会保障资金，但专家担心这可能会使该项目陷入旷日持久的预算战。
代表众议院共和党人最大团体的共和党研究委员会，先前呼叫将年轻工人的社会保障年龄提高到70岁，并削减高收入者的辅助福利以削减成本。
当债务上限问题开始时，一些寻求削减支出的共和党人提议考虑如何改变社会保障制度。上一财年，社会保障制度占联邦支出的近20%，即1.22万亿美元。
在债务上限辩论中，社会保障站在哪一边?
在共和党赢回众议院的控制权之前，众议院议长凯文·麦卡锡表示告诉Punchbowl新闻10月，他没有“预先确定”改革福利计划是否会成为谈判的一部分。
但麦卡锡此后表示，削减社会保障和医疗保险不会成为共和党在债务上限谈判中的要求。
“削减医疗保险和社会保障，他们不在讨论范围内，”他在拜登发表国情咨文前夕告诉记者。
社保面临的问题呢?
随着民主党人和共和党人的交锋继续由于面临长期资金短缺，国会最终将需要在社会保障方面采取行动。
随着退休人员比工作人员多，社会保障信托基金估计，到2034年，它只能覆盖77%的计划福利。他们已经要求国会在事情发展到那一步之前解决这个问题。
可能的解决方案包括提高退休年龄，增加工资税，减少高收入者的福利等等。与共和党的提议相反，民主党人迄今为止普遍围绕富人的社会保障税增加，同时大幅增加福利。
“国会一直是这个项目的糟糕管理者，从某种意义上说，他们只是推迟了对偿付能力问题的行动，很明显，他们推迟是出于政治目的，因为他们不想做出艰难的决定，”比格斯说。
“但它不能永远把罐子踢下去。你拖延的时间越长，就越难。”
Why Biden, Republicans fought over Social Security at State of the Union
The most dramatic moment of Tuesday's State of the Union address came when several Republicans audibly booed President Joe Biden, with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene even shouting he's a "liar."
The cause of their anger: what he claims "some Republicans" want to do to Social Security.
Biden accused some in the GOP of wanting to make changes to the entitlement program, which 65 million Americans currently rely on, including putting the money spent to a vote.
Given how politically sensitive the subject is, the Republican pushback was swift, and Biden quickly turned the tables.
"So, folks, as we all apparently agree, Social Security and Medicare is off the books now, right? They're not to be touched?" Biden shot back. "All right. All right. We got unanimity."
The back-and-forth represented a debate Democrats and Republicans have been engaged in for months over Social Security, especially when it comes to government spending and the debt ceiling. Republicans have demanded spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling and avoiding default, but the party has not laid out exactly what cuts it wants.
Here's what Tuesday night's fight is all about:
What proposal was Biden referencing?
While Biden said in his speech he was "politely not naming" any one lawmaker, Sen. Rick Scott of Florida last year proposed "sunsetting" all federal programs every five years, unless Congress votes to renew them. Social Security would theoretically fall under that broad umbrella.
"Anybody who doubts it, contact my office. I'll give you a copy. I'll give you a copy of the proposal," Biden said to counter the shouts of "liar."
Richard Johnson, a senior fellow and director of the retirement policy program at liberal-leaning Urban Institute, said it's hard to imagine Scott's proposal would be "workable."
"It would certainly undermine confidence in the program," Johnson told ABC News. "It would really create a lot of uncertainty about people's retirement benefits in the future."
Do Republicans support Scott's plan?
The proposal wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., was quick to call Scott's plan a "nonstarter" after it was released.
"We will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half of the American people and sunsets Social Security and Medicare within five years," he said at the time.
Scott defended his proposal on Wednesday, stating he doesn't want cuts to Social Security and that he "will not be silenced by the Washington establishment."
What have Republicans said about Social Security?
Andrew Biggs, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said while Democrats have been consistent in their views against cuts to Social Security, Republicans' positions are a bit murkier.
"That's simply because they're not speaking with one voice, and there's different views among Republicans both on the policy they would want and the strategy they would advocate to get to that policy," Biggs told ABC News.
Along with Scott's plan, Wisconsin GOP Sen. Ron Johnson had suggested making the program's funding discretionary rather than mandatory and up for approval every year. Johnson said the intent is to better track Social Security funding, but experts have worried it could subject the program to protracted budget battles.
The Republican Study Committee, which represents the largest group of House Republicans, previously called for raising the age for Social Security to 70 for younger workers and trimming auxiliary benefits for high-income earners in order to cut costs.
When the debt ceiling issue began, some Republicans seeking spending cuts proposed thinking about how Social Security -- which accounted for nearly 20% of federal spending, or $1.22 trillion, last fiscal year -- could be altered.
Where does Social Security stand in the debt ceiling debate?
House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, before Republicans won back control of the House, raised eyebrows when he told Punchbowl News in October he wouldn't "predetermine" whether reforming the entitlement program would be part of the negotiations.
But McCarthy's since said cuts to Social Security and Medicare won't be part of GOP demands in the debt ceiling talks.
"Cuts to Medicare and Social Security, they're off the table," he told reporters on the eve of Biden's State of the Union address.
What about the problems facing Social Security?
As the back-and-forth between Democrats and Republicans continues, Congress will eventually need to act on Social Security as it faces a long-term funding shortfall.
With more retirees taking out the system than there are workers putting into it, the Social Security trust fund has estimated that by 2034 it would be able to cover only 77% of scheduled benefits. They've asked Congress to address the issue before it gets to that point.
Possible solutions include raising the full retirement age, increasing the payroll tax, reducing benefits for higher earners and more. In contrast to GOP proposals, Democrats have so far generally coalesced around Social Security tax increases for the wealthy, while significantly increasing benefits.
"Congress has been a poor steward of this program, in the sense that they simply delayed acting on the solvency issue and it's clear they're delaying and for political purposes because they don't want to make the difficult decisions," Biggs said.
"But it can't kick the can down the road forever. And the longer you kick it down the road, the harder it gets."
