Voters dislike “government,” like what it does
Last year, U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis (R-S.C.) shared a story from one of his town hall meetings. A constituent stood to demand that Congress keep “government out of my Medicare.” Inglis reminded the constituent that government created and runs Medicare, a truth-telling affront which may help explain why Inglis was defeated by a rightwing tea-party type in the Republican primary a few months ago.
In any event, the constituent’s comment illustrates something I’ve long believed: “government” is just a word for those things voters don’t like. A strong “anti-government” sentiment doesn’t really illustrate that voters want to cut those government programs which benefit them. Alaska, which prides itself on its frontier independence, is the nation’s biggest welfare state.
Now, a new poll has shown just how contradictory voter attitudes are about the role of government and just how difficult it will be for Congress to make significant cuts to government spending. From the WaPo:
A new study by The Washington Post, the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University shows that most Americans who say they want more limited government also call Social Security and Medicare “very important.” They want Washington to be involved in schools and to help reduce poverty. Nearly half want the government to maintain a role in regulating health care.
The study suggests that come January, politicians in both parties will confront a challenging and sometimes contradictory reality about what Americans really think about their government. Although Republicans, and many Democrats, have tried to demonize Washington, they must contend with the fact that most major government programs remain enormously popular, including some that politicians have singled out for stiff criticism. . .
Even as Americans generally hold Washington in low regard, they still like much of the work it does. Support for government action on such issues as national defense, health care and fighting poverty remains high, in some cases just where it was a decade ago.Nearly six in 10 say they want their congressional representatives to fight for additional government spending in their districts to spur job creation; fewer (39 percent) want their member of Congress to cut spending, even if that means not as many local jobs. This is a turnabout from September 1994, when 53 percent said they wanted their representative to battle against spending and 42 percent were on the other side.
This oughtta be interesting.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
315 comments Add your comment
Aquagirl
October 11th, 2010
10:45 am
Oh lordy, the creationists have surfaced. Like it being Monday wasn’t enough….
Tray
October 11th, 2010
10:46 am
@John- Yes, there are charity hospitals; do all the uninsured go there? No, of course not…so that’s a HUGE MUTE POINT! It does not cost more for 1 uninsured person to go to the ER than to cover him/her through Obamacare. My insurance always went up every year just a little, and i was fine with it. This year though…hmmm…a HUGE increase, wonder why? Oh, becaause the Dumbocrats thought they knew what they were doing!
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
10:47 am
Good Grief — You better hope that in your Darwinian theory of society by the strongest, you don’t end up one of the weakest. You may not be so cavalier in offering such a fundamentally insane notion of how societies ought to prosper.
Tray
October 11th, 2010
10:49 am
I swear if you don’t know the difference between THEIR, THERE and THEY’RE, please don’t ever blog again!!!!
John
October 11th, 2010
10:50 am
@atlmom
“perhaps unemployment ins. should exist, but congress just increased the number of weeks that people can collect it to 99 weeks.”
Tell me altmom…how many weeks should it be? Especially when unemployment is so high and it’s through no fault of those who are unemployed. What if it’s several of your neighbors that are unemployed and they are completely cut from unemployment insurance. They all then loose their homes due to foreclosure leaving your neighborhood with many foreclosed, unkept homes. Not only would it be an eyesore but can possibly create other problems as well…not to mention your property possibly losing value.
I am someone, who has been unemployed and benefited from the extensions. While it’s not much especially compared to my income, I was able to hold onto my home. That didn’t just benefit me but it also benefited my neighbors as well.
I never said we should question things but we should also look at the positive and think things clearly of what would happen without some of these programs. And while I am not that naive into thinking there aren’t anyone who would abuse such program, not everyone are moochers as the conservatives try to paint people. Most people aren’t and it gets tiresome and sickening when politicians and others spew that kind of rhetoric. Where have we gone as a society when we don’t look out for our neighbors and feel everyone needs to be completely on their own but as I pointed out, at least some of these programs have benefits we don’t think about.
quod erat demonstrandum
October 11th, 2010
10:51 am
Tray,
Be kind to the lefties – btw it is moot not mute.
hobby
October 11th, 2010
10:52 am
23 DAYS
Aquagirl
October 11th, 2010
10:52 am
Angry, please don’t confuse creationist babble with anything Darwin said. They’re totally unconnected.
Tray, their are many who would agree with you.
Kamchak's gerbil
October 11th, 2010
10:52 am
John – You can get a job – it just may not be the one you want – but you can always get a job – sounds like you like the gov’t teet.
Kamchak
October 11th, 2010
10:54 am
I swear if you don’t know the difference between
THEIR, THERE and THEY’REMUTE and MOOT, please don’t ever blog again!!!!Fixed your typos.
George W
October 11th, 2010
10:54 am
These political blogs are hilarious.
JDW
October 11th, 2010
10:55 am
I have been listening to this Republican mantra of smaller government, lower taxes, fiscal responsibility etc… Since Reagan. I even bought in thru Bush one. Only problem is that in every case Republican Adminstrations have increased the growth of government, lowered taxes to the benefit of the wealthy at the expense of rest of us and created the largest debt in the history of man. The only time of real prosperity in the last thiry years was the Clinton era which was achieved in spite of Republican influence.
When do we start holding Republicans responsible for this gap in promises and preformance?
StJ
October 11th, 2010
10:55 am
“Is someone forcing retirees to accept Medicare?”
No, but they were forced to pay into it…so why would you not accept benefits that were paid for from one’s wages? That’s like buying health insurance and then not using it when you have to get medical care.
Voters dislike government intrusion into their personal affairs (which has come by the boatload the last couple of years). Government is OK for things that cannot be effectively provided for by individuals or businesses; it should stay out of everything else.
Democrats are all for a totalitarian state (see: China, NKorea, Iran, USSR, et al), which is why they are headed for the door.
JKL2
October 11th, 2010
10:57 am
angry- Did you complain about the trillions being spent by the Bush adminsitration to fight the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
Yes, but nearly as much as you do and for different reasons. Money needed to be spent but not necessarily how it was spent.
How about Medicare Part D? Very much so. A useless program Bush took from the Democrats in an effort to appease them. Then of course he gets stabbed in the back for his effort.
TARP. The worst thing he did. Villified by the Democrats right up until they got their hands on the checkbook. Now it was the greatest thing since sliced bread (and everything is still Bush’s fault).
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
10:57 am
QED —-Interesting. And then what does the federal governmnet use to fund, oh let’s say, the Army, Marines, Navy, Coast Guard and Air Force? Or how about the Transportation Security Authority (TSA)? How is that funded? Under a specious 10th Amendment argument, if a state chooses not to spend money on TSA functions, am I less entitled to a safe flight than if my flight is leaving from a state which wants to have full TSA functions? Oh, and by the way, who is responsible for monitioring flights across the continental United States? Or American flights leaving the continental United States? All states or just the ones who choose to do so under a specious 10th Amendment claim? Help clarify some of these for me.
George W
October 11th, 2010
10:57 am
JDW…when you start spelling “performance” correctly. haha
Kamchak's gerbil
October 11th, 2010
10:57 am
Kamy – when you finish fixing typos get the PVC.
Jimmy62
October 11th, 2010
10:58 am
Poverty has risen tremendously since government decided to step in and reduce poverty. Anyone wanting government involved in reducing poverty either doesn’t have a clue, refuses to learn from history, or is deliberately pushing policies they know are bad for the country.
And SS has become welfare, which it was never meant to be. Most retirees end up getting more than what they put in plus interest. Of course old people like it, they are being bribed to like it. That doesn’t mean SS is good for our economy or for anyone else. It’s certainly not good for minorities, as SS has become transfer of wealth from the young to the old (who typically already have more money than the young) and from the dark skinned to the light skinned. If that’s not a program that should be considered evil by progressives, I don’t know what is. But you would certainly think the left would be against a program that takes money from black people and gives it to elderly white people.
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:00 am
JLK2—I’m talking sbout spending money we didn’t have. Dioesn’t it bother you just a wee bit that we’re funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and Medicare part D plan on the same kind of borrowed money you complain that Obama and Democrats have used?
Please clarify.
CYNT U MUST KEEP UR JOB
October 11th, 2010
11:01 am
THEY WANT TAXCUTS FOR THE RICH AND MONEY FOR WARS,THEY ARE THE RETHUGLICANS!
MONEY FOR CORPORATIONS AND MONEY FOR STEM CELL RESEARCH!
BUT NO MONEY FOR THE POOR OR ELDERLY!
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:01 am
Angry as hell…..let me ask you a question. History has proven there is one way to recover a hurting economy. Can you tell me what it is?
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:03 am
CYNT….can you tell me why the poor are poor?
jconservative
October 11th, 2010
11:04 am
Nice column Cynthia. Unfortunately too much truth in it for most folks.
This is a socialist country. Has been for decades. Social Security is a socialist measure straight out of the socialist textbook of Otto von Bismarck’s ” ‘Old Age and Disability Insurance Bill of 1889′…financed by a tax on workers,…designed to provide a pension annuity for workers who reached the age of 65 years.”
Under FDR we established Social Security. Under Johnson we established Medicare/Medicade. Under Nixon, Reagan and G W Bush we expanded both programs way beyond their original identity. Now under Obama we have the beginnings of an eventual universal medical care that von Bismarck only dreamed about.
Latest Gallup Poll on the subject shows 70% of Americans saying Government’s top priority should be “creating jobs”.
We, the USA, have become dependent on looking to the government to “fix” every ill. Republicans bitched all summer about Obama not “fixing” the oil leak in the Gulf.
In a couple of weeks we are going to the polls and kick one party out of power in Congress because they did not “fix” unemployment.
Yet a majority of Americans persist in the fiction that the USA is NOT a Socialist society.
Aquagirl
October 11th, 2010
11:05 am
“How about Medicare Part D? Very much so. A useless program Bush took from the Democrats in an effort to appease them. Then of course he gets stabbed in the back for his effort.”
Is there an award for mental gymnastics? JKL2 really deserves something for this monumental effort.
JDW
October 11th, 2010
11:06 am
George W, as always can’t address the real issue. Want to talk more about the Alabama Nat Guard or spend more time chatting about my iPad typing skills? Neither is relevant to the discussion.
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:06 am
Jimmy62—- We assume you have factual evidence for your statement that “Poverty has risen tremendously since government decided to step in and reduce poverty.” Is this based on a factual studies and other scholarly research or just your gut feeling?
Please site you evidence.
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:07 am
Jconservative….your comments are comical. The reason the Dems will be kicked out of both houses is because they have not listened to the American people. This government has insisted on pushing on with an agenda that the people did not and do not want.
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:08 am
George W—–I’ll bet the answer you want to is “lower taxes and reduced spending.”
Boogie Woogie Booger Boy
October 11th, 2010
11:09 am
Kamchak’s gerbil
October 11th, 2010
10:57 am
LOL!
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:10 am
Angry as Hell…….NOPE the answer is WAR! Dont believe look back in history. I am not saying that a bad economy justifies war but it is the truth.
Lower taxes and reduced spending is just common sense.
Dustin
October 11th, 2010
11:12 am
if only kam was a mute- he already is moot. i will diagram the sentence later.
squirrel fixed your typo that is your sign- here we go around the mindless block again
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:12 am
JDW @ 10:55 am —- You have said it better than anyone has ever said it on this blog. Republicans have been hiding behind this facade of being fiscal conservatives and family values Christians for decades. They have failed dismally on both accounts.
ctucker
October 11th, 2010
11:14 am
jconservative@11:04, I don’t agree that the US is a “socialist” country, but I agree that American voters want a lot more socialism than they’ll admit. (I had dinner last night with a Parisian friend who is a real socialist. We laughed about conservatives calling Obama a “socialist.”)
Gator Joe
October 11th, 2010
11:14 am
Cynthia,
“Government is the Problem,” Reagan said it, Fox “News” progaganda artists repeatedly support this mindless concept, and those who refuse to question, or think for themselves consume it. Without the essential services, funded by taxes, provided by government, both local and federal, most of the Tea Party bigoted, complainers wouldn’t want to live here.
The Leg Lamp is a "major award", much like Cynthia Tucker's Pulitzer and Obama's Nobel.
October 11th, 2010
11:15 am
This from Time Magazine:
“With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle.”
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:15 am
George W.—-I’m going to foward your answer to the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Congressional Budget office and see if we can get them working on this right away. Wow! All this time. Where have the rest of us been? Golly!
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
Cythia you are a complete and utter moron.
JDW
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
Thank you Angry As Hell, love your moniker and share the sentiment
The Leg Lamp is a "major award", much like Cynthia Tucker's Pulitzer and Obama's Nobel.
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
ctucker
October 11th, 2010
11:14 am
Obama’s not a socialist, he’s just inept.
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
sorry…..CYNTHIA
Time For Honesty
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
Aquagirl, people who have a shared history of being locked out and held back showing support for someone who looks like them is a given and a nonissue. What’s your point? Is it to drivel out a little of your bigotry without saying it out loud? Get a life and grow up.
Tray
October 11th, 2010
11:16 am
Yes, i got mute and moot incorrect…can anyone correct this: Obama is a nieve, inexperienced, coward of a leader that doesn’t know his head from his arse.
Correct that! lol
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:18 am
TIME FOR HONESTY……”locked out and held back”….haha that is hilarious. Your name should be “Time for excuses”!!! hahaha
JKL2
October 11th, 2010
11:19 am
angry- Please clarify
Feel free to cut Med D tomorrow. I’m with you. Military spending can be drawn down, but we just can’t leave as you would like us to.
What about all that TARP money sitting around? All you Demwits have been sitting around here laughing that the Republicans want to put it back in the general fund. Let’s keep borrowing money when we already have money sitting in the bank we borrowed and did nothing with. Brilliant!
Liberal Chicks are UGLY
October 11th, 2010
11:20 am
Ug, where do you dig this baseless crap up? Oh, thinkprogress.org, should’ve known. Only people who are dummber than the idiots at thinkprogress are the idiot who believed them.
You drew a conclusion based on polls that do not prove your point. You are a sad crotchty old liberal.
Jimmy62
October 11th, 2010
11:21 am
Angry as hell: I thought it was pretty well known. I’d be happy to look for a citation, but I don’t have the time right now.
BTW, there is a WIDE difference between small/less government, and no government at all. Very few people want to get rid of the government entirely, most of us know that government serves a necessary purpose. I’m tired of being attacked on the grounds that if I am against corporate welfare, for instance, that I also want to get rid of the government’s road building ability or something else that silly.
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:24 am
It is even better when they do not respond and cannot back up their statements. Reps 1 Dems 0
Angry As Hell
October 11th, 2010
11:26 am
Everyone be carefull with George W. Something tells me he’s the overly sensitive type. His frequent use of “hahahahaha” is a bit confusing and strange, but may be indicative of some underlying psychosis, identifying the type of person who is the only one in the room that laughs at his own jokes.
George W
October 11th, 2010
11:30 am
Angry as hell…..that was a great post. It had nothing to do with your comments or a rebuttal to my comments. Shows your true competency with the subject matter. Great job….tard.
JKL2
October 11th, 2010
11:30 am
angry- Republicans have been hiding behind this facade of being fiscal conservatives
Something we can agree on. That’s why we have the Tea Party. It’s time to get rid of all the RINO’s that were screwing up the party under Bush. Just hope there is something left to fix by the time obama get’s done.