Cutting Government Spending May Be Popular But There is Little Appetite for Cutting Specific Government Programs

NEW YORK, Feb. 16, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Cutting government spending often sounds like a good idea to many people, and it is a popular rallying cry for many Republicans and Conservatives, but a new Harris Poll underlines how difficult it is.  When shown a list of 20 areas of federal government spending, a majority of the public supports cutting only six of them and these do not include the big ticket items that comprise most of the federal budget. Furthermore large majorities oppose cutting Social Security or federal health care programs, which many economists believe are increasing at unsustainable rates.

(Logo:  http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20100517/NY06256LOGO )

One other interesting finding that may be noted by advocates on both sides of this debate: far fewer people support cuts in these 20 programs today than did so in 1980 when Ronald Reagan became president.

These are some of the results of The Harris Poll of 2,566 adults surveyed online between January 17 and 24, 2011 by Harris Interactive.

Majorities of the public support some cuts in government spending, specifically:

• Foreign aid tops the list of programs that most people would like to see cut – foreign economic aid by 75% to 16%, and foreign military aid by 69% to 20%.  (It is important to note, however, that other research in the past has shown that most people greatly overestimate  the small percentage of the budget that is actually spent on foreign aid);
• The four other types of spending that majorities would like to cut are spending by regulatory agencies (by 56% to 28%), space programs (by 54% to 37%), subsidies to business (by 51% to 37%), and federal welfare spending (by 51% to 40%).

However, large majorities oppose cutting some of the biggest government programs including:

• Social Security payments (by 80% to 11%);
• Federal aid to education (by 71% to 21%); and,
• Health care (by 67% to 24%).

Furthermore, majorities of the public also oppose cutting seven other areas: revenue sharing with states (by 55% to 28%), Federal highway spending (by 59% to 31%), Federal jobs programs (by 56% to 33%), Federal aid to cities (by 55% to 34%), spending for mass transportation (by 54% to 35%), pollution control (by 54% to 37%), and the food stamp program (by 51% to 40%).

Pluralities oppose cutting spending on the other four areas in the list: housing programs (by 49% to 41%), defense (by 49% to 41%), farm subsidies (by 47% to 42%) and scientific research programs (by 48% to 42%).

In 1980 things were different

When these identical questions were asked in a Harris Poll in 1980, when President Ronald Reagan was inaugurated, the results were very different.  Many more people wanted to cut all of these areas of government spending than do so today.  Indeed majorities of the public favored cutting 14 of these 20 types of government spending, compared to only 6 in this new poll.  

Those who favor cuts are now more than 20 points lower than they were in 1980 for five areas:  revenue sharing with states (from 53% to 28%), highways (from 59% to 31%), federal jobs programs (from 57% to 33%), federal aid to cities (from 58% to 34%) and the food stamp program (from 65% to 40%).

So What?

These results prompt two thoughts.  The first is that the big picture – cutting government spending, in general – looks very different than the more detailed picture – cutting specific programs.  Many people seem to want to cut down the forest but to keep the trees.  The second is that this is not 1980, when President Reagan came to power.  At that time there was a much greater appetite for cutting many government programs than there is today.  Furthermore it should be noted that, in spite of his rhetoric, Ronald Reagan had great difficulty cutting government spending.

Methodology

This Harris Poll was conducted online within the United States between January 17  to 24, 2011 among 2,566 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region and household income were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population. Propensity score weighting was also used to adjust for respondents' propensity to be online.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling, are subject to multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, Harris Interactive avoids the words "margin of error" as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.

Respondents for this survey were selected from among those who have agreed to participate in Harris Interactive surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the composition of the adult population. Because the sample is based on those who agreed to participate in the Harris Interactive panel, no estimates of theoretical sampling error can be calculated.

These statements conform to the principles of disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls.

The results of this Harris Poll may not be used in advertising, marketing or promotion without the prior written permission of Harris Interactive.

J39369

Q805

The Harris Poll® #21, February 16, 2011

By Humphrey Taylor, Chairman, The Harris Poll

About Harris Interactive

Harris Interactive is one of the world's leading custom market research firms, leveraging research, technology, and business acumen to transform relevant insight into actionable foresight. Known widely for the Harris Poll and for pioneering innovative research methodologies, Harris offers expertise in a wide range of industries including healthcare, technology, public affairs, energy, telecommunications, financial services, insurance, media, retail, restaurant, and consumer package goods. Serving clients in over 215 countries and territories through our North American, European, and Asian offices and a network of independent market research firms, Harris specializes in delivering research solutions that help us – and our clients – stay ahead of what's next. For more information, please visit www.harrisinteractive.com.

SOURCE Harris Interactive