A report today out of the U.S. Senate reveals that the United States has spent $3.7 trillion on welfare over the last 5 years.
What do Americans think about this issue? YG Network public opinion research sheds some light on the topic:
For instance, when we asked in a national poll this March which federal programs should be cut to reduce spending, welfare programs (44%) far outweighed military (32%), Social Security (8%) and Medicare (6%) (March Poll).
In our national poll this May, 82% agreed that the 3.5 million able-bodied adults with no dependents who receive food stamps risk long-term dependency and should be obligated to work or actively seek employment in exchange for food stamps (May poll). This included 91% of conservatives, 83% of moderates, and 73% of liberals. In that same May poll, 63% of respondents said welfare programs should be available to provide temporary assistance, but the safety net can become a dependency trap by discouraging self-sufficiency—including 82% of conservatives, 61% of moderates, and 44% of liberals.
And as the Wall Street Journal reported of YG Network’s focus groups of middle-class Swing and Tea Party participants:
…[W]hile there was general consensus among both groups that government should “care for the needy,” there was similar agreement that those benefits should be limited. Swing voters and tea-party types agreed that any federal assistance should be temporary, and there are widespread concerns that some poor people might be too dependent on the federal safety net. “People should have to work to receive food stamps, with few exceptions,” said one swing voter in Minneapolis.
YG Network also conducted a series of dial tests in August and September on this issue which reinforce our previous findings that while most Americans—again, Tea Party and Swing alike—recognize that sometimes people need a helping hand from government when they experience difficult circumstances, they do not believe that this “helping hand” should go on indefinitely and with no strings attached.