JONATHAN CHAIT MARCH 3, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Interesting findings from the NBC/WSJ poll. Asked about deficit reducing options, the options the public overwhelmingly favors are ones Democrats favor, and the options they overwhelmingly oppose are ones Republicans are promising to propose:
[The survey] listed 26 different ways to reduce the federal budget deficit. The most popular: placing a surtax on federal income taxes for those who make more than $1 million per year (81 percent said that was acceptable), eliminating spending on earmarks (78 percent), eliminating funding for weapons systems the Defense Department says aren’t necessary (76 percent) and eliminating tax credits for the oil and gas industries (74 percent).
The least popular: cutting funding for Medicaid, the federal government health-care program for the poor (32 percent said that was acceptable); cutting funding for Medicare, the federal government health-care program for seniors (23 percent); cutting funding for K-12 education (22 percent); and cutting funding for Social Security (22 percent).
But the public demands deficit reduction, right? Well, actually, they care more about jobs:
In the poll, eight in 10 respondents say they are concerned about the growing federal deficit and the national debt, but more than 60 percent — including key swing-voter groups — are concerned that major cuts from Congress could impact their lives and their families.
What’s more, while Americans find some budget cuts acceptable, they are adamantly opposed to cuts in Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security and K-12 education.
And although a combined 22 percent of poll-takers name the deficit/government spending as the top issue the federal government should address, 37 percent believe job creation/economic growth is the No. 1 issue.
Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted the survey with Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, says these results are a “cautionary sign” for a Republican Party pursuing deep budget cuts.
He points out that the Americans who are most concerned about spending cuts are core Republicans and Tea Party supporters, not independents and swing voters.
“It may be hard to understand why a person might jump off a cliff, unless you understand they’re being chased by a tiger,” he said. “That tiger is the Tea Party.”
By the standards of these things, those are extremely sharp comments from McInturff. Leaders are usually more worried about internal threats than external threats. Boehner needs to make sure he doesn't get deposed as speaker before he worries about winning a showdown with Democrats.
The specifics of the fight -- Republicans promising to cut overwhelmingly popular programs, being willing to shut down the government, and pushing a plan that private analysts predict will reduce jobs -- put them in a very tough position. Republicans are working really hard to buck each other up and ignore data about public opinion. Democrats have the upper hand here. President Obama may decide to cut a deficit deal, but both the politics and the policy say he should hand the Republicans their head first.
16 comments
I think this what you meant - at 0:53" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMZlr5Gf9yY It was one of your earlier posts - the Republicans are not so much ignoring data about public opinion as think any data that does not match their preconceived notions as 1) wrong; 2) a lie; or 3) an outlier. Many of them actually thing the 2008 election stolen, so what should they believe a mere poll that tell them they might be wrong?
- icarusr
March 3, 2011 at 1:13am
Wait... so the last election was NOT a massive popular embrace of austrian economics? Who knew?!
- foxericf
March 3, 2011 at 1:13am
Icarusr Is correct that the idea of an elephant stampede is misleading. It's more like cows that chew grass and look up when you drive by. The democrats need to go Halloween on the cuts.
- Nusholtz
March 3, 2011 at 7:46am
Consistently Republicans have been wanting and saying one thing, and achieving a different thing. So, they wanted balanced budgets and small government. So they implemented tax-cuts first, then started two wars, ballooning both the deficit and the size of Government. So, they wanted the Free Market to regulate itself and produce prosperity. So they passed deregulation and enabled the CDO Ponzi Scheme, resulting in the greatest market crash since the Great Depression. So now they want to stimulate the economy. So they're trying to cut jobs, cut Federal Funding to the states, and even cut taxes further. These are very lemming-like Elephants, it seems to me.
- AllanL5
March 3, 2011 at 8:44am
Allan: Republicans have only "wanted" two things. Political power and helping the rich. The say anything to get elected, but the actual object of Republican politics is far more basic than all of what.
- icarusr
March 3, 2011 at 9:25am
Icaruser correctly distilled the Republican governing philosophy into a single sentence: "Political power and helping the rich." The only point even arguable about that is to distill their philosphy to: "Political power to help the rich." I think Icaruser has it right though, Republicans crave power as an end in itself.
- spd1955
March 3, 2011 at 9:45am
But Jonathan, these numbers cannot possibly be correct. The Republicans shellacked the Democrats last November, remember? Icar is absolutely correct.
- liberalref
March 3, 2011 at 9:58am
“It may be hard to understand why a person might jump off a cliff, unless you understand they’re being chased by a tiger,” he said. “That tiger is the Tea Party.” ABOLISH PLURALITY VOTING! Imagine this, a politician who is clearly identifiable as Republican who is the universal choice among Democratic voters over all other Republicans. That is exactly what we need to restore sanity to our political discourse. However, under our two-stage plurality electoral system, such a politician would have zero chance of succeeding (note how no Republicans bother trying to convince Democrats of anything other than ceasing to be Democrats). Under pairwise-ranking, such a politician could be guaranteed the top Republican performer in the general election depending on the relative strength of the parties. ABOLISH PLURALITY VOTING!
- sighthnd
March 3, 2011 at 10:20am
Another explanation is that if the economy goes into the toilet because of too many budget cuts, Obama can be blamed for it. The Republicans have already demonstrated their excellence at blocking needed legislation, then blaming the Democrats for not passing it. So it's more like the elephant pushing the donkey (and America) off the cliff, then blaming the donkey for America's woes. Worked in 2010, after all.
- AllanL5
March 3, 2011 at 12:06pm
This must be why Obama popularity now tanking. If Obama can ignore the majority of the US and pass perhaps the worst bill in history with absolutely no support from Republicans or the private sectors types that will pay for it... .. Republicans can do whatever they want
- mr_rationale
March 3, 2011 at 12:14pm
Rat: it is amusing, to say the least, that you can utter two lies, an irrelevancy, a non sequitur and a moral monstrosity in the space of three sentences. More than that - it is a veritable feat. Popularity tanking? By what measure? Worst bill in history? Really? Since when is Republican support for anything a measure of good policy or good politics, or a democratic requirement? What does the fact that a program is paid for out of taxes have anything to do with anything? And so, assuming all of the above is relevant and correct ... it means that "Republicans can do whatever they want"? Really? "Whatever"?
- icarusr
March 3, 2011 at 1:04pm
"Tis folly to take the Heritage program seriously.
- liberalref
March 3, 2011 at 2:02pm
He does need to hand them their heads on this. They can't hide behind the Orwellian phrase "small government" anymore. They have to actually cut things like cancer research to save their precious Any Ranidan corporate tax cuts and subsidies. Draw the contrasts Democrats! Michael Barone is over at "National Review" saying that a shutdown won't be so bad for the GOP. I think they really buy this or are bucking themselves up or something.
- MikeB.
March 3, 2011 at 4:16pm
I'm not so sanguine about the situation. Yes, substantial majorities oppose cuts that Republicans apparently want to make. But there's also a majority for reducing the deficit. While some measures have popular support, such as a surtax on income over $1 million and eliminating earmarks, those won't be enough to meet deficit reduction goals. Taking Medicaid and Medicare off the table makes the task nearly impossible. Fiscal responsibility is going to require doing things that are unpopular. But it seems that much of the pubic are not willing to make those choices themselves, choices that would require having themselves pay more taxes, or cutting services that they benefit from. And when unmeetable demands fail to be met, they'll take out their frustration on both parties. I'd guess that Democrats have the upper hand at the moment, but until there's the leadership to end the free lunch mentality, both parties have some risk because there's no easy way out. Governing requires making choices; being an angry constituent does not.
- dsimon
March 3, 2011 at 5:03pm
Over at Frum: "And the poll exposes the hypocrisy of many of the Tea Party movement who claim to be for smaller government and a return to a libertarian Nirvana that never existed in the first place. Consider: by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, self-described Tea Partiers (who tend to be older and whiter than the population as a whole) declared significant cuts to Social Security “unacceptable.” Gee, there’s a shock."
- icarusr
March 3, 2011 at 5:08pm
The Tea Party is rife with fiscal frauds, indeed, icar.
- liberalref
March 3, 2011 at 10:41pm