Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA)
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/10116
Browse
15 results
Search Results
Item Americans on Solving the Medicare Shortfall(2017-10-31) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Williams, AntjeGiven current policy crosscurrents, it is little wonder that even raising the subject of Medicare policy seems to open the door to anxiety among the public and among Medicare recipients. This consultation seeks to provide a framework that lets the public consider multiple possible changes that experts have evaluated and scored, without being locked into an “either/or” choice of keeping everything the same versus changing the nature of Medicare. DEVELOPMENT OF THE POLICYMAKING SIMULATION The present policymaking simulation includes eleven different options estimated to aid Medicare’s fiscal condition over the next 25 years, as the babyboomer generation passes through the program. These options selected were previously scored by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), except for one scored by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission or MEDPAC, another independent agency that advises Congress. They considered sixteen reform options which fell under four categories: Reducing Medicare’s Net Payments for Benefits Reducing Payments to Providers Increasing Revenues Controlling Costs in Other WaysItem Large Scale Study Finds Majorities in Very Red Districts Oppose Key Provisions in Tax Reform Bill(2017-11-29) Kull, Steven; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Martens, Francesca; Koeppel, AustinAn in-depth survey on tax reform finds that majorities in very red districts, as well as very blue districts, oppose key provisions in the Republican tax reform bills including reducing taxes on the wealthy, reducing the corporate tax, eliminating or limiting state and local tax deductions, and eliminating the tax on income from subsidiaries in other countries. However, very red districts favor, while very blue districts oppose, eliminating the estate tax, lowering the tax on pass-through businesses, lowering the cap on the mortgage deduction, and allowing immediate expensing by businesses for a five year period. The study, conducted by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation (PPC), was released by Voice of the People, a nonpartisan organization seeking to give citizens a greater voice in public policy. The sample of 2,637 registered voters was large enough to make it possible to divide the sample six ways according to the partisan dominance of the respondent’s district, ranging from very red (Republican) to very blue (Democrat), based on Cook’s PVI ratings.Item Americans on Tax Reform(2017-11-21) Kull, Steven; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Martens, Francesca; Koeppel, AustinINDIVIDUAL INCOME TAXES Income Taxes on the Wealthy ‐ When presented the effective tax rates for different income brackets, for incomes over $200,000, less than a quarter favored reductions, including fewer than four in ten Republicans and less than a third in very red districts. Rather an overall majority favored increasing taxes by 5% or more for incomes over $200,000, with this majority increasing at progressively higher income brackets. Among Republicans, nearly half favored increases on incomes over $500,000, while in very red districts this was a majority. Income Taxes on the Middle Class ‐ Modest majorities proposed reducing taxes on those with incomes from $30,000 to $50,000 by 5%. This included a substantial majority of Republicans, only half of Democrats, but a modest majority in very blue districts. For income of $50,000 to $100,000 there was no majority support for increases or decreases, but a majority of Republicans cut taxes by 5%. Deducting State and Local Taxes ‐ Nearly seven in ten, including a majority of Republicans and six in ten in very red districts, opposed the proposal in the House bill to eliminate the deductions for state and local taxes on individual federal income taxes, including property taxes. Six in ten opposed the proposal in the Senate bill to eliminate the deductions for state and local taxes, with an exception for $10,000 for property taxes. In this case, a majority of Republicans favored the proposal, but a substantial majority in very red districts were opposed. Mortgage Deduction ‐ Views were divided on the proposal to lower the maximum amount of deductible interest for new mortgages to the interest paid on $500,000 on all home mortgages. Six in ten Republicans favored the proposal, while six in ten Democrats were opposed. Very red and very blue districts were similarly polarized. Reducing and Then Eliminating the Estate Tax ‐ A modest majority opposed eliminating the estate tax in six years and in the meantime doubling the amount that can be transferred tax‐free. Three quarters of Democrats and six in ten independents opposed the proposal while three-quarters of Republicans favored it. In blue districts, majorities were opposed, including six in ten in very blue districts. In very red districts a majority favored it, but in other red districts views were divided. CORPORATE TAXES Corporate Tax Rates ‐ Six in ten opposed lowering the top corporate tax rate from 35% to 20%, including eight in 10 Democrats and two-thirds of independents. Two-thirds of Republicans favored the idea, but majorities opposed it in red districts, including nearly six in ten in very red districts. Territorial Tax ‐ The least popular proposal, opposed by nearly seven in ten, is to eliminate the U.S. corporate income tax on profits made by their subsidiaries in other countries. More than eight in ten Democrats and nearly seven in ten independents were opposed. Republicans were evenly divided, but in very red districts nearly seven in ten were opposed. Pass‐Through Businesses ‐ Overall views were divided about the proposal in the House bill to set a new maximum tax rate for owners of 'pass‐through' businesses at 25%. Three quarters of Democrats and a slight majority of independents were opposed while three-quarters of Republicans were in favor. Very red districts were in favor, while very blue districts were opposed. Immediate Expensing ‐ Views are divided on the proposal to allow businesses for the next five years to deduct the full amount of their investments (other than buildings) in the year they make the investments. Three‐quarters of Republicans favor the proposal, while nearly three-quarters of Democrats are opposed. Very red districts were in favor, while very blue districts were opposed.Item Assessing the Iran Deal(2015-09) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Gallagher, Nancy; Pierce, EricA majority of a national citizen advisory panel, made up of a representative sample of American registered voters, recommends Congress approve the deal recently negotiated between Iran, the United States and other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (plus Germany) on Iran’s nuclear program. After assessing strong critiques of the terms of the deal – including rebuttals – and then evaluating the pros and cons of alternatives, 55 percent concluded that Congress should approve the agreement, despite serious concerns about some of its details. Twenty-three percent recommended ratcheting up sanctions instead, 14 percent favored renewing negotiations to get better terms, and 7 percent recommended threatening Iran with military strikes unless they agree to better terms.Item As Candidates Prepare to Debate Social Security, Americans Agree On a Path to Fix It(2016-10-18) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Williams, AntjeAccording to the Social Security Trustees’ Report, if no steps are taken by Congress to reform Social Security, its trust fund will be exhausted in 2033, and after that, the program will only be able to deliver benefits based on current receipts--which would result in a 23% benefit cut to retirees. A major reason that Social Security has not been addressed is a widespread assumption that the American public is not willing or able to face the issue and thus bringing it up is too politically risky. Social Security has been called a ‘third rail,’ implying that it is political suicide to address it. Much of the existing polling data tends to reinforce the belief that the public’s attitudes toward Social Security are too conflicted and anxious to support any kind of constructive action. While majorities believe that Social Security is headed for a crisis, when asked, in separate questions, about raising the retirement age, cutting benefits, or raising taxes, majorities often say they do not find these options appealing. Citizen Cabinet surveys take a different approach that goes beyond initial reactions. Rather than a series of separate questions, respondents go through a process called a ‘policymaking simulation’ in which they are asked to go into a problem‐solving mode. The objective is to put respondents in the shoes of a policymaker. Respondents are given a background briefing, presented arguments for and against policy options, and then finally make their recommendations.Item How Americans Would Fix the U. S. Postal Service: A Survey of the Citizen Cabinet, Nationally and in Maryland, Oklahoma, and Virginia(2015-11) Kull, Steven; Ramsey, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Pierce, Eric; Williams, AntjeCitizen Cabinet surveys are unique in that they take respondents through a process called a ‘policymaking simulation’ which seeks to simulate the process that policymakers go through in making a policy decision. The focus of this policymaking simulation is a series of reform options for the U.S. Postal Service, including ones that would mitigate or end the prefunding requirement for retiree benefits, increase revenues, or reduce operating costs. These options were based on proposals from the Postmaster General, the Inspector General, and bills under consideration in the Senate and House.Item How the American Public Would Deal with the Budget Deficit: A Study by the Program for Public Consultation and Knowledge Networks(2011-02) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Subias, StefanA Study by the Program for Public Consultation and Knowledge Networks. The purpose of this study was to give a representative sample of Americans the chance to deal with the problem of the budget in such an integrated framework, one in which they would make tradeoffs. The goal was to have respondents face the kinds of challenges that policymakers face when making a budget. In this way we can see whether Americans are able to deal with such a challenge, and whether they in fact know what their value priorities are.Item Consulting the American People on the 2001/2003 Tax Cuts: A Study by the Program for Public Consultation and Knowledge Networks(2012-02) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Subias, StefanThese are the results of a poll conducted by The Program for Public Consultation on public opinion of 2013 U.S. proposed tax cuts. It is part of a series of in-depth consultations on issues relating to the American economy—including a major study, released in February 2011, on how the public would deal with the budget deficit, and a study on temporary payroll tax cuts for employees and employers (December 2011). Please contact PPC if you would like a detailed sample design.Item Consulting Americans on the Payroll Tax Cut for Employees and Employers: A Study by the Program for Public Consultation and Knowledge Networks(2011-12) Kull, Steven; Ramsay, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Subias, StefanThese are the results of a poll conducted by The Program for Public Consultation on public opinion of 2012 payroll tax cuts. The poll was fielded from December 3 to 9, 2011 as part of a larger study with a sample of 907 adult Americans. Please contact PPC if you would like a detailed sample design.Item Americans on Israel and the Iranian Nuclear Program: A Study of American Public Opinion(2012-03) Kull, Steven; Telhami, Shibley; Ramsey, Clay; Lewis (aka Fehsenfeld), Evan; Subias, StefanThese are the results of a poll of the American Public conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and the Anwar Sadat Chair to better understand American public attitudes on Israel and the Iranian Nuclear Program.