Though presidential candidates from opposing parties have starkly different approaches to closing that gap, most Americans, across the ideological spectrum, are opposed to any further benefit reductions, according to a Pew Research Center poll last year. Over all, more than two-thirds said that benefit cuts should not be an option. And majorities in every group, including nearly 59 percent of “consistently conservative” individuals, agreed.

Aware of the public opposition to cuts in Social Security, Governor Christie has emphasized a feature of his plan that eliminates benefits for the wealthiest Americans, arguing that will help ensure the program’s survival for younger workers. But many of his proposals amount to a series of cuts that do little to improve the program’s more immediate solvency issues, according to an analysis by the Urban Institute.

“The Christie proposal does nothing to help Social Security’s solvency problems before 2034, when current law trust fund balances are projected to be depleted,” said Karen Smith, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute, who ran the analysis. “His proposal reduces program revenue and does not reduce benefits enough soon enough to make Social Security solvent.”

It would help lower costs for future generations, in part by gradually raising the full retirement age by two months a year, beginning in 2022, until it reaches 69. Governor Christie would also gradually increase the early retirement age to 64 from 62, which is when retirees can now begin claiming benefits at a reduced rate. Separately, to encourage older people to work longer, he would eliminate payroll taxes for those over age 62.

His plan also introduces a means test: Future retirees with retirement income of more than $80,000 — outside of Social Security benefits — would receive lower benefits on a sliding scale, with benefits phasing out altogether for those with $200,000 or more. Critics, however, say that move would save very little money, while threatening the broad appeal of the program.

“We should worry about turning a program that has gotten its strength from being a program that everyone pays into and gets benefits out of into a welfare program,” said Joan Entmacher, vice president for family economic security at the National Women’s Law Center. Besides, she added, “you can’t get much savings out of means-testing Social Security unless you go after the middle class.”