Budget Busters?

The U.S. public shows little appetite for making the spending cuts often discussed as part of a “grand bargain” on the federal budget, according to a national survey by the Pew Research Center conducted in December 2013. The survey found that majorities say it is more important to maintain spending on Social Security and Medicare (69 percent) and programs to help the poor (59 percent) than to take steps to reduce the deficit. About half of Americans (51 percent) say reducing the deficit is more important than keeping military spending at current levels. Pew reports that views of tradeoffs between government spending and deficit reduction are divided along partisan lines with 84 percent of Democrats prioritizing spending on programs that aid the poor and needy over deficit reduction and 55 percent of Republicans prioritizing deficit reduction.

Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.
Paul Stolz
4 years 9 months ago
Why is there an assumption that simply because the federal goverment funds a social program that is actually helping the poor? While if they make cuts its harmful? Is it not at all possible that we should look at all the spending, determine which programs are effective and which are not, determine what is wasteful or what services are duplicative, and then channel resources in a more effective manner?

Advertisement
Advertisement

The latest from america

Catherine Pakaluk, who currently teaches at the Catholic University of America and holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Harvard University, describes her tweet to Mr. Macron as “spirited” and “playful.”
Emma Winters October 19, 2018
A new proposal from the Department of Homeland Security could make it much more difficult for legal immigrants to get green cards in the United States. But even before its implementation, the proposal has led immigrants to avoid receiving public benefits.
J.D. Long-GarcíaOctober 19, 2018
 Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, then nuncio to the United States, and then-Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington, are seen in a combination photo during the beatification Mass of Blessed Miriam Teresa Demjanovich at the Cathedral Basilica of the Sacred Heart in Newark, N.J., Oct. 4, 2014. (CNS photo/Gregory A. Shemitz)
In this third letter Archbishop Viganò no longer insists, as he did so forcefully in his first letter, that the restrictions that he claimed Benedict XVI had imposed on Archbishop McCarrick—one he alleges that Pope Francis later lifted—can be understood as “sanctions.”
Gerard O’ConnellOctober 19, 2018
Kevin Clarke tells us about his reporting from Iraq.
Olga SeguraOctober 19, 2018