More Evidence The Federal Budget Debate Is Not Rational

Originally posted at Capital Gains and Games. [1]

The ever-watchful CG&G alum Bruce Bartlett sent this new You Gov poll [2] constructed by Dartmouth (home to another CG&G alum, Andrew Samwick) Associate Professor Benjamin Valentino.

The poll covers a number of issues but it was question #7 ("Which of the following would you support as ways to reduce the nation's budget deficit?") that caught Bruce's and my eye.

1. More than half (55%) said they would support tax increases on higher-income Americans.
2. More than a third (35.4%) said they would support "major" cuts in military spending.
3. Less than a tenth (9.7% said they would support "major" cuts in Social Security.
4. Less than 12% said they would support "major" cuts in Medicare.
5. Almost 30% said none of the above are acceptable to them.

In other words:

1. There is significant support in the country for doing something to reduce the deficit -- tax increases on the wealthy -- the GOP in Congress absolutely refuses to do.
2. Only one-third of the country is in favor of the reductions in military spending that are part of the sequester that will occur on January 2.
3. Close to 90% of the country opposes the type of changes in Medicare that are one of the cornerstone's of the Republican budget proposed by budget committee chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) that passed earlier this year.
4. Almost a third of the country is against tax increases and reductions in Social Security, Medicare and military spending. That leaves only about $750 billion left to deal with a deficit that will exceed $1 trillion this year.

As I've said before [3] and this poll at least hints at once again, Americans don't want less government, they just want government that costs less. That makes for a debate in Washington that can't possibly be...and obviously isn't...considered rational.