Many dissatisfied with the government's spending priorities - AP-NORC
By: AP-NORC
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Education, health care, Social Security, infrastructure, assistance to the poor, and Medicare top a long list of public policy issues that the public says the government is spending too little on.
Topline ResultsPublic Use FilesMethodology
March 29, 2023
Asked generally about government spending, 60% of the public says the U.S. government is spending too much, 16% think it is spending too little and only 22% say it is spending the right amount.
There has been a significant increase in the perception that the U.S. government is spending too much since February 2020, when 37% said the government was overspending.
Most Republicans say the government is spending too much. Democrats, however, are more evenly split on their views on government spending. Older adults are more likely to think the government is overspending than younger adults.
Education, health care, Social Security, infrastructure, assistance to the poor, and Medicare top a long list of public policy issues that the public says the government is spending too little on, while two-thirds of the public say the government is overspending on assistance to other countries or foreign aid.
Partisanship is predictably correlated with attitudes toward government spending for most issues. Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say the government is spending too little on the environment, assistance to the poor, childcare, drug rehabilitation, education, or health care. Republicans would prefer increased government spending on the military, border security, and law enforcement.
Yet, Democrats and Republicans agree the government spends too little on infrastructure and Social Security, and they think there is overspending in assistance to other countries and space exploration.
The public is split on the size of government they prefer. Democrats and younger adults prefer a bigger government providing more services, while Republicans and older adults would rather have a smaller government.
Only 34% approve the way Joe Biden is handling the federal budget compared to 65% who disapprove. Sixty-five percent of Democrats approve the way president Biden is handling this issue, while 94% of Republicans disapprove.
The nationwide poll was conducted March 16-20, 2023 using the AmeriSpeak® Panel, the probability-based panel of NORC at the University of Chicago. Online and telephone interviews using landlines and cell phones were conducted with 1,081 adults. The margin of sampling error is +/- 4.0 percentage points.
- Suggested Citation: AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. (March 2023). "Many dissatisfied with the government's spending priorities" https://apnorc.org/projects/many-dissatisfied-with-the-governments-spending-priorities
Tags
Who is online
326 visitors
On this article we are in agreement. Nice to see a article that is fairly balanced without accusatory finger pointing to or by either side. Thank you for posting this John.
I don’t think people generally understand how much we spend on social security and other entitlements. We already can’t afford what we spend, and simply maintaining current levels will cause massive tax increases in the near future.
what we really spend “too much” on is interest because of the profligate spending we’ve already engaged in, but there’s nothing that can be done about that. Soon enough we will be spending more in interest than we do on the military.
People don't want to hear those programs called "entitlements" because they have been paying into them for their entire working lives and feel that money is rightfully theirs. They miss that all they are really doing is paying into a legal ponzi scheme. But you are correct, those systems are going broke within the next ten years and will start to take more money from higher taxes as they go along because people will not be happy when the reduced payments start to come. But they bitch about potential changes that could make the systems again solvent.
Wonder how people will react when interest payments become the largest payout item in the federal budget...
There are fixes to social security. I for one would welcome the chance to invest some of my SS taxes into a mutual fund. They could also raise the cap. I don't think that someone earning 400K should pay the same SS tax as someone who earns 200K
Agreed, there are many changes that should happen. I don't know your age but some of the changes would only apply to those in their 20's and 30's. Those within 20 years of retirement would probably not see many changes made. But some changes I would agree with
These changes would greatly extend the lifespan of both Social Security and Medicare as both systems are close to running out of money to be able to pay full benefits. But I'm sure there are plenty just on this chat board that would argue against any of the suggestions about. When Social Security was first set up with a full retirement age of 65, the average lifespan at the time was 64.5. Now the average lifespan is around 72. The system when set up also had something like 22 people paying in for every 1 person taking out, now it's about 3 to 1.
I don't know your age but I doubt you are in your 20's so the ability for you to invest some of your SS tax into a mutual fund would not bring much of a return at this point. Investment is a long-term project and if you are within 10 years of retirement I seriously doubt that you could bring in as much income as you would need to offset the reduction in SS payments required by pulling some of your earnings out of the ponzi system. But I do hope that you have been saving and investing for your retirement in addition to paying into SS as SS is only on average able to cover 40% of your pre-retirement income. I was fortunate that I planned well and my SS payments are more than my requirements so I'm not drawing that much from my retirement savings and my investments are still sitting there not being touched (except by inflation and the damn market).
What about those that are already retired/disabled and on Medicare above the age of 67? Where would they fit in?
Just like those who were already retired/disabled and on Medicare at age 65 when the full retirement age was increased to 67, they would be grandfathered in and would not see any changes in their benefits. When SS was changed in 1983 to increase the full retirement age, it was slowly increased and it impacted people of a specific age group. When it was enacted, anybody born in 1937 or earlier would not see their full retirement age change. And those people would be 45 or older at the time so nobody within 20 years of retirement saw any changes.
I've included a link below that explains how the retirement age was increased.
I'm 61 and want to retire in 2 years. I won't be able to get full SS until 67 but that's fine. With my retirement and my spouse's we'll be fine
I hope you and hubby enjoy a long and happy retirement. I retired only nine months ago and I'm having a better life than I though I would, best decision that I've made in a long time.
And I hope that Washington gets their act together and fixes the long-term health of the systems. There won't be any large impact to my lifestyle but there are many people who rely on SS payments for a great portion of their retirement and in ten years when the payments are reduced by 22% due to the lack of money those people will be hit very hard. This inflation is already greatly impacting them, not sure how much more they can take as we already have stories of retirees being forced out on the street because they cannot afford the rent. Or having to chose between medications or food.
IMO there are two systems that are in need of immediate change to fix them. The SS system with some of the changes I outlined above and the education system. People need to be taught about finance and money, too many people in this country spend too much money chasing a dream and forget to plan for the future. Social Security payments can never fully cover living expenses all by themselves and too many people do not know how to plan their financial future. Unfortunately with partisan political parties and unions in charge I don't hold out a lot of hope for either system.
I can agree with all of that except the Medicare eligibility age. By 65, medical insurance is nearly prohibitively expensive for many, since premiums are based on age. By 67, many won't physically be able to work enough to afford insurance, if it's not paid mostly by their employers. If we're to push back eligibility, we really need to address the cost of private insurance.
Ok, then Washington needs to fix the revenue problem that Medicare has as that plan is supposed to empty the fund in five years.
While Medicare won't be "broke", the Part A portion will only have funding to pay 90% of current costs. The need to increase revenue is clear as there are only so many cuts they can force in payments before hospitals and facilities stop accepting the payments. We saw a part of the issue in the early years of Covid, where some hospitals ended up closing as they were only taking in Covid patients and the feds were paying at Medicare rates and the hospitals were not seeing enough revenue to cover costs.
This is the system we have. And unless a brand new system is built up to replace it, it will be difficult for all the up and coming retirees to be able to be funded with what is left of the current system.
I agree that we need to fix Medicare funding.
Some people are just wore out at 62, especially those who did physical work
Foreign aid and space exploration combined account for around 1.2% of the budget.
Here is a link to a site were you can graphically see how much is spent and where
It's mostly spent in the Defense Department
Actually, DoD is 4th on the list I am looking at.
Where does the VA fall on the list?
Depends if you are looking at the agencies or categories. It is 6th in the "agency" category, and 8th in the "category" category...
I am not sure of just how they parse that data.