How U.S. Citizens Want to Balance the Budget, July 2011
Chart: (Survey conducted July 7-10, 2011, with a random sample of 1,016 adults, For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.)
19.
What does this graph suggest about the costs and benefits of balancing the budget?
20.
If most Americans favor cutting spending or raising taxes to balance the budget, why have politicians not taken either of these steps to do so?
20. The fact is that we do not agree on what spending to cut, or whether to cut or increase taxes, or on whom. Unless a majority of the state legislature or the Congress agrees, and the governor or president, also agrees, nothing happens.
To answer question 19, we need to analyze the graph provided. However, since the graph is not available, I can't provide a specific answer. However, I can explain how to interpret a graph like this.
Typically, in a graph regarding balancing the budget, the vertical axis would represent the percentage of people in favor of a particular approach (e.g., cutting spending, raising taxes, etc.). The horizontal axis would represent different approaches to balancing the budget.
To understand the costs and benefits of balancing the budget, one would need to analyze the distribution of responses on the graph. For example, if the graph shows a significant portion of people favoring cutting spending over raising taxes, it may suggest that people perceive the benefits of reduced government spending outweighing the costs. Conversely, if there is a significant portion favoring raising taxes, it may indicate that people believe the benefits of increasing revenue outweigh the costs.
To answer question 20, there could be several reasons why politicians haven't taken steps to cut spending or raise taxes, despite public opinion. These reasons may include:
1. Political considerations: Politicians may be reluctant to implement unpopular measures that could harm their chances of re-election. They might prioritize short-term political gains over long-term fiscal responsibility.
2. Lobbying and special interests: Powerful interest groups may exert influence over politicians, making it difficult for them to pursue certain budgetary measures. These groups may have a vested interest in maintaining current spending levels or opposing tax increases.
3. Complex decision-making: Balancing the budget involves making difficult choices that can have far-reaching consequences. Politicians may be reluctant to make these tough decisions due to the potential backlash and the complexity of economic trade-offs.
4. Partisan gridlock: In a politically polarized environment, opposing parties may struggle to find common ground on budgetary issues. This gridlock can hinder progress in implementing necessary measures to balance the budget.
These are just some of the potential reasons why politicians may not have taken steps to cut spending or raise taxes despite public opinion. The specific circumstances and political dynamics at any given time can influence decision-making on budgetary matters.