As GOP pushes spending cuts, many say Medicaid and food stamps are underfunded: AP-NORC poll
WASHINGTON — As Republican senators consider President Donald Trump's big bill that could slash federal spending and extend tax cuts, a new survey shows most U.S. adults don't think the government is overspending on the programs the GOP has focused on cutting, like Medicaid and food stamps.
Americans broadly support increasing or maintaining existing levels of funding for popular safety net programs, including Social Security and Medicare, according to the poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research. They're more divided on spending around the military and border security, and most think the government is spending too much on foreign aid.
The poll points to a disconnect between Republicans' policy agenda and public sentiment around the domestic programs that are up for debate in the coming weeks.
Here's the latest polling data on how Americans view federal funding:
Many Americans see Medicaid and food assistance programs as underfunded — even as Congress proposes significant cuts to Medicaid and food and nutrition assistance programs — and few say 'too much' money is going to these programs.
About half of U.S. adults say 'too little' funding goes to Medicaid, which is a government health care coverage program for low-income people and people with certain disabilities. Nearly half, 45%, say food and nutrition assistance programs like food stamps, SNAP or EBT cards are underfunded, according to the poll. About 3 in 10 U.S. adults in each case say those programs are receiving 'about the right amount' of funding, indicating that most Americans likely do not want to see significant cuts to the two programs.
About 2 in 10 say Medicaid is overfunded, while about one-quarter say that about food assistance programs.
Republicans are especially likely to say 'too much' is spent on food and nutrition assistance programs when compared with Democrats and independents — 46% of Republicans say this, compared with about 1 in 10 Democrats and independents.
When it comes to Medicaid, fewer Republicans, about one-third, say the government is spending 'too much.'
About 6 in 10 Americans say there is not enough government money going toward Social Security, Medicare or education broadly. But Democrats overwhelmingly think 'too little' money is allocated to these areas, while Republicans are happier with the status quo.
Very few think Medicare, Social Security and education are getting 'too much' funding. Only about 1 in 10 Republicans say this about either Medicare or Social Security. Roughly one-quarter of Republicans say too much is spent on education.
When it comes to Social Security, about half of Republicans say 'too little' is spent, compared with about 7 in 10 Democrats.
Americans are more divided on whether the government is devoting too much money to the military or border security.
About 3 in 10 say the government is spending 'too much' on the military, while a similar share say the government is spending 'too little.' Close to 4 in 10 say the government is spending 'about the right amount.'
Republicans are much less likely to say 'too little' is being spent on border security than they were before Trump took office again in January. Now, 45% of Republicans say 'too little' is being spent, down from 79% in a January AP-NORC poll.
On the other hand, Democrats are more likely to say that 'too much' is being spent on border security. About half of Democrats now say this, compared with about 3 in 10 in January.
The Trump administration has asked Congress for deep reductions to foreign aid programs, including cuts to global health programs and refugee resettlement initiatives.
Foreign aid is one area with more general agreement that there is 'too much' federal spending. Most U.S. adults, 56%, say the U.S. government is spending too much on assistance to other countries, which is down from 69% in an AP-NORC poll from March 2023.
There is a deep partisan divide on the issue, though. About 8 in 10 Republicans say the country is overspending on foreign aid, compared with about one-third of Democrats.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
31 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Medicaid enrollees fear losing health coverage if Congress enacts work requirements
It took Crystal Strickland years to qualify for Medicaid, which she needs for a heart condition. Strickland, who's unable to work due to her condition, chafed when she learned that the U.S. House has passed a bill that would impose a work requirement for many able-bodied people to get health insurance coverage through the low-cost, government-run plan for lower-income people. 'What sense does that make?' she asked. 'What about the people who can't work but can't afford a doctor?' The measure is part of the version of President Trump's 'Big Beautiful' bill that cleared the House last month and is now up for consideration in the Senate. Trump is seeking to have it passed by July 4. The bill as it stands would cut taxes and government spending — and also upend portions of the nation's social safety net. For proponents, the ideas behind the work requirement are simple: Crack down on fraud and stand on the principle that taxpayer-provided health coverage isn't for those who can work but aren't. The measure includes exceptions for those who are under 19 or over 64, those with disabilities, pregnant women, main caregivers for young children, people recently released from prisons or jails — or during certain emergencies. It would apply only to adults who receive Medicaid through expansions that 40 states chose to undertake as part of the 2010 health insurance overhaul. Many details of how the changes would work would be developed later, leaving several unknowns and causing anxiety among recipients who worry that their illnesses might not be enough to exempt them. Advocates and sick and disabled enrollees worry — based largely on their past experience — that even those who might be exempted from work requirements under the law could still lose benefits because of increased or hard-to-meet paperwork mandates. Strickland, a 44-year-old former server, cook and construction worker who lives in Fairmont, North Carolina, said she could not afford to go to a doctor for years because she wasn't able to work. She finally received a letter this month saying she would receive Medicaid coverage, she said. 'It's already kind of tough to get on Medicaid,' said Strickland, who has lived in a tent and times and subsisted on nonperishable food thrown out by stores. 'If they make it harder to get on, they're not going to be helping.' Steve Furman is concerned that his 43-year-old son, who has autism, could lose coverage. The bill the House adopted would require Medicaid enrollees to show that they work, volunteer or go to school at least 80 hours a month to continue to qualify. A disability exception would likely apply to Furman's son, who previously worked in an eyeglasses plant in Illinois for 15 years despite behavioral issues that may have gotten him fired elsewhere. Furman said government bureaucracies are already impossible for his son to navigate, even with help. It took him a year to help get his son onto Arizona's Medicaid system when they moved to Scottsdale in 2022, and it took time to set up food benefits. But he and his wife, who are retired, say they don't have the means to support his son fully. 'Should I expect the government to take care of him?' he asked. 'I don't know, but I do expect them to have humanity.' About 71 million adults are enrolled in Medicaid now. And most of them — around 92% — are working, caregiving, attending school or disabled. Earlier estimates of the budget bill from the Congressional Budget Office found that about 5 million people stand to lose coverage. A KFF tracking poll conducted in May found that the enrollees come from across the political spectrum. About one-fourth are Republicans; roughly one-third are Democrats. The poll found that about 7 in 10 adults are worried that federal spending reductions on Medicaid will lead to more uninsured people and would strain health care providers in their area. About half said they were worried reductions would hurt the ability of them or their family to get and pay for health care. Amaya Diana, an analyst at KFF, points to work requirements launched in Arkansas and Georgia as keeping people off Medicaid without increasing employment. Amber Bellazaire, a policy analyst at the Michigan League for Public Policy, said the process to verify that Medicaid enrollees meet the work requirements could be a key reason people would be denied or lose eligibility. 'Massive coverage losses just due to an administrative burden rather than ineligibility is a significant concern,' she said. One KFF poll respondent, Virginia Bell, a retiree in Starkville, Mississippi, said she's seen sick family members struggle to get onto Medicaid, including one who died recently without coverage. She said she doesn't mind a work requirement for those who are able — but worries about how that would be sorted out. 'It's kind of hard to determine who needs it and who doesn't need it,' she said. Lexy Mealing, 54 of Westbury, New York, who was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2021 and underwent a double mastectomy and reconstruction surgeries, said she fears she may lose the medical benefits she has come to rely on, though people with 'serious or complex' medical conditions could be granted exceptions. She now works about 15 hours a week in 'gig' jobs but isn't sure she can work more as she deals with the physical and mental toll of the cancer. Mealing, who used to work as a medical receptionist in a pediatric neurosurgeon's office before her diagnosis and now volunteers for the American Cancer Society, went on Medicaid after going on short-term disability. 'I can't even imagine going through treatments right now and surgeries and the uncertainty of just not being able to work and not have health insurance,' she said. Felix White, who has Type I diabetes, first qualified for Medicaid after losing his job as a computer programmer several years ago. The Oreland, Pennsylvania, man has been looking for a job, but finds that at 61, it's hard to land one. Medicaid, meanwhile, pays for a continuous glucose monitor and insulin and funded foot surgeries last year, including one that kept him in the hospital for 12 days. 'There's no way I could have afforded that,' he said. 'I would have lost my foot and probably died.' Mulvihill writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Susan Haigh in Hartford, Conn., contributed to this report.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iranian National TV Headquarters Hit By Israeli Airstrike During Live Broadcast
The headquarters of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting in Tehran was hit by an Israeli airstrike during a live broadcast Monday, setting the building on fire and knocking the network off the air for a short time. Footage shows a female anchor speaking on-air on the state-run broadcaster as the bomb from an Israeli fighter jet struck. A loud boom was heard, shaking the camera and knocking out the stage lights as the anchor hurriedly left the desk. More from Deadline What To Know About Saturday's Army Parade, Donald Trump's Birthday And The No Kings Protests Networks Return To Special Reports On Iran's Retaliatory Strikes On Israel - Update House Votes To Rescind PBS, NPR And Public Broadcasting Station Funding - Update Israel's defense minister confirmed the attack on the building, which houses Iran's state TV operations, calling the IRIB a 'propaganda and incitement broadcasting authority' in a post on X. Al Jazeera is reporting the anchor on the air at the time of the attack is Sahar Emami, referring to her 'one of the most famous state TV presenters in the country.' The IRIB said in a statement that 'live programs were briefly halted at the IRIB News Network but returned to normal a few minutes afterwards.' It added that 'it was not immediately clear if and how many personnel had been wounded or killed.' Video online showed the building on fire. Israeli officials and Iranian journalists on the ground confirmed there were evacuation warnings issued for that part of Tehran ahead of the strikes, which come on the fourth day of an Israeli offensive across Iran in response to intelligence that warned of Iran's increasing nuclear capability. The two countries have been trading bombing attacks using aircraft, ballistic missiles and drones since Sunday, with air raid sirens heard across Israel and civilians fleeing Tehran. Best of Deadline 'Bachelor in Paradise' Cast Announcement: See Who Is Headed To The Beach For Season 10 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery
Washington Post
35 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Watchdog: Trump administration violated Impoundment Act a second time
The Government Accountability Office said Monday that the Trump administration had violated the Impoundment Act by withholding congressionally appropriated funds to the agency responsible for supporting libraries and museums across the country. The congressional watchdog found that funds were withheld by Institute of Museum and Library Services, with the GAO calling the act a violation of a law that blocks presidents from withholding funding Congress has approved. This is the second time the GAO has told Congress that the administration unlawfully withheld funds after the administration froze funds for electric vehicles, which the White House previously denied. When asked about the latest GAO finding, the White House Office of Management and Budget referred The Washington Post to its previous response to the GAO's finding about cuts to electric vehicle funding. 'All of OMB's actions have been consistent with the President's authorities under the Constitution and laws,' OMB general counsel Mark Paoletta wrote in a letter last month to GAO. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are feuding with the administration over whether the president can cancel spending without the approval of the legislative branch. The White House has maintained that spending cuts have been in 'full compliance' with federal budget law as it reshaped federal spending through the U.S. DOGE Service changes and executive actions — including halting investments in green energy, aid to foreign nations and grants to promote diversity, equity and inclusion. When asked about investigating the Trump administration's efforts to withhold funding, GAO leader Gene L. Dodaro told senators in April that his office had opened nearly 40 separate inquiries. Staff from the Institute of Museum and Library Services were placed on administrative leave in April after Trump issued an executive order March 14 to make cuts to the agency. The American Library Association and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees sued the administration in a case that is playing out in a U.S. District Court in D.C. The Institute of Museum and Library Services, an independent government agency, was created in 1996 by an act of Congress and submitted a budget request of $280 million for fiscal 2025. New York, one of the states that opposed the executive order, received $8 million through the institute last year to fund literacy programs for children and adults, improve internet access in libraries and train library employees and pay for the salaries of two-thirds of state library staff, according to the state. GAO investigators found that the agency's spending has been slashed by more than half in the first five months of this year, according to federal spending data. The finding came from publicly available data because the investigators said the agency has been unresponsive to questions since May. Democrats have sought to stop the cuts, arguing that grants awarded through agencies such as the Institute of Museum and Library Services have benefited communities directly that might not otherwise have the resources to support their own library and museum programs. Nearly a dozen attorneys general had asked a court to halt Trump's initial executive order on the dismantling of the institute and other independent agencies, arguing that the cuts are unlawful. Jeff Stein, Carolyn Y. Johnson and Niha Masih contributed to this report.
