Will Social Security Be There After 2035? Biden's Budget Chief: 'It's Going to Take Bipartisanship' (March 10, 2023)

The day after President Joe Biden released his budget, a reporter asked his budget director what it offered younger Americans counting on Social Security. “I’m wondering, though, for folks who are planning on retirement after 2035, when the Congressional Research Service estimates that that program could be approaching insolvency — you know, for folks who are expecting to retire, you know, in the next decades ahead, is — what is the President’s message to them? Can they rely on this program? Will it be around for them after they pay into it?” the reporter asked [1].

“Remember, it takes — it’s going to take bipartisanship in order to deal with the longer-term issues here,” said Office of Management and Budget Director Shalanda Young. “And right now, unfortunately, the debate is centered around the current benefits in the program.” [1]

“But we have some who have said they want to cut Social Security. That is why this President, in his budget, made very clear that he is not going to allow that to happen on his watch. And that’s full stop,” Young said [1].

The video above shows the March 10, 2023, White House briefing. Quotes are from the official White House transcript [1].

”Who Are You Going to Listen To?”

Another reporter pointed out what was missing. “His budget yesterday does not advance any plan to adjust the payroll tax for wealthier individuals,” the reporter said, asking about Biden’s “commitment going forward to ensuring the continued solvency of Social Security” [1].

“So, the deal is, this President will not accept benefit cuts,” Young said [1].

“But, if I can just follow up, I mean, the — the thinking is that Social Security only has about 12 more years of solvency left,” the reporter said. “This seems like a good opportunity — isn’t it? — with a divided government, for the President to make a proposal and hope for a compromise? He doesn’t seem to be interested in doing that.” [1]

“Well, you assume the debate is from cutting no benefits and moving forward. We’re trying to protect the benefits that are there now,” Young answered [1].

“But the President is not making a proposal here to extend the solvency of Social Security. He’s proposing not to accept any benefit cuts. But the Republican leaders say they’re not proposing benefit cuts,” the reporter said. “Who are you going to listen to?” Young replied. “You’re going to listen to the Freedom Caucus who put out something different than what other people have been saying?” [1]

“I Hope She’s With Us”

A reporter Jean-Pierre called on as Nancy noted that the budget had a plan for Medicare. “So why no proposal for extending Social Security’s solvency, which is almost as dire,” the reporter asked [1].

“We believe the greatest existential threat to Social Security today is those who want to cut it,” Young said [1].

Young had talked about her “94-and-a-half-year-old grandmother in South Louisiana.” “So will the President have a proposal in the future for extending Social Security’s lifeline so that people like your grandmother will be able to get their full benefits come 10, 15, 20 years from now?” the reporter asked. “I hope she’s with us — (laughter) — that long. I really do,” Young said [1].

”How Is That Not a Cut in Real Terms?”

The first reporter also asked about defense. “For the Pentagon, the President is requesting $842 billion. That’s a 3.2 increase — 3.2 percent increase from last year, but inflation is at 6 percent currently. So, how is that not a cut in real terms?” [1]

“So, remember, it matters what we spend the resources on,” Young said. “As you can imagine, we tend to get from Congress a lot of things that this administration did not prioritize.” [1]

“Republicans Say It’s Dead on Arrival”

A reporter Jean-Pierre called on as Kristen noted that Biden’s Medicare plan “includes increasing taxes, which is something that Republicans have called a nonstarter.” When CEA Chair Cecilia Rouse began to answer that the budget “is a start of a conversation,” the reporter cut in: “Republicans say it’s dead on arrival, though.” [1]

“Look, the net income tax was always supposed to go to Medicare. We’re correcting something that should have happened a long time ago. Are we asking those making over $400,000 to pay more? We are — to extend,” Young said [1].

”COVID Ornges [Sic]”

A reporter Jean-Pierre called Seung Min asked about a COVID bill. “Will the President sign the legislation that would declassify information about the origins of COVID?” [1]

“So, look, I know that it was just passed — if I remember — if I’m remembering correctly, it was just passed out of the House today. Right?” Jean-Pierre said. “So we’re taking a look at the bill.” [1]

She said Biden knew “how important it is to get to the bottom of COVID ornges [sic] — we will — origins.” [1]

“But the Senate also passed it unanimously. So why would President Biden not — something that literally —” the reporter said, then finished: ”— got no opposition in Congress?” [1]

“I totally understand. It is the right of the President of the United States to look at the legislation that are — that is going to be coming before him,” Jean-Pierre said [1].

By the Numbers

2035: when the reporter said Social Security could approach insolvency [1].
12 years: of solvency left, per another reporter [1].
$842 billion: Biden’s Pentagon request, a 3.2 percent increase [1].
$400,000: the income level above which Young said Biden wanted people to pay more for Medicare [1].

What Happened Next

Seniors got a tax break. On July 4, 2025, President Donald Trump signed Public Law 119-21. It allows “a deduction in an amount equal to $6,000 for each qualified individual,” meaning taxpayers who have “attained age 65,” for tax years beginning before Jan. 1, 2029 [2].

The deduction shrinks “by 6 percent of so much of the taxpayer’s modified adjusted gross income as exceeds $75,000 ($150,000 in the case of a joint return),” the law says [2].

For the same Social Security question at an earlier briefing, see HYGO News’ page on Jan. 20, 2023. For Biden’s top economist at the March 10 briefing, see the page on Cecilia Rouse.

Biden signed the COVID bill. Ten days after the briefing, on March 20, 2023, the COVID-19 Origin Act became Public Law 118-2. It says “there is reason to believe the COVID-19 pandemic may have originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” [3]

The Trump White House went further. It now hosts a page titled “Lab Leak: The True Origins of Covid-19,” which says: “A lab-related incident involving gain-of-function research is the most likely origin of COVID-19.” [4]