Public opinion is relevant to entitlement reform
because it bears upon issues of political feasibility. Proposals
that go against the strongly held views of ordinary citizens are
not likely to be politically feasible. In addition, we may consider
public opinion especially well-informed, deliberative opinion
relevant to what policy makers ought to do in a democracy. The
available data indicate that the American public, as a collectivity,
knows quite a bit about Social Security and rather firmly holds
a number of opinions that have been highly stable over many years.
This is particularly true of general support for the program.
Since 1984, for example, more than 90% of Americans have regularly
indicated a desire to keep the program the same or expand it.
At the same time, most Americans are aware of impending financial
shortfalls in the program and acknowledge that major changes must
be made. Proposals of benefit cuts have generally aroused considerable
public opposition, whether in the context of reducing budget deficits
or preserving the program. This is true not only of across-the
board cuts but also of reducing COLAs, extending the retirement
age, or even < as best we can tell < more technical program changes.
(Only cutting benefits of the well-to-do wins substantial public
support.) Resistance to benefit cuts may possibly decline with
further deliberation, but this does not appear likely. Most members
of the public prefer other solutions. General increases in payroll
taxes are also quite unpopular, but large majorities of the public
say they prefer tax increases to benefit cuts. Some data suggest
that there is support for using general revenues. The public"s
willingness to tax the benefits of higher-income retirees also
indicates possible receptiveness to a more progressive financial
system through such measures as removing the ceiling on income
subject to payroll taxes but more survey questions on this matter
are needed. Privatization is an area in which opinions are much
less well formed. There is considerable interest in the idea of
receiving greater returns on Social Security contributions and
in having individual choice about investments. But support for
privatization drops sharply when issues of risk are raised and
when other costs and limitations (administrative costs, limits
on choice, obligations to current retirees) are mentioned. As
debate continues and as the public becomes more aware of such
costs it is possible that public investment in equities currently
less popular than private investment may gain in appeal, especially
if it is insulated from the political process. More time and more
data are needed before we can judge.
Benjamin I. Page, Department
of Political Science, Northwestern University
Click on
the working paper title at the top of this
page to download a free pdf of the paper.*
If You Need to Order a Hard Copy: Hard copies
of IPR working papers cost $5.00 each (international orders are $10 each). We only accept checks drawn on U.S. bank and payable in U.S. funds. Checks or money orders should be made
payable to Northwestern University and sent to the following address:
Publications Department - WP Orders
Institute for Policy Research
2040 Sheridan Rd., Evanston, IL 60208-4100.
For information, call 847-491-8712 or email ipr@northwestern.edu.
Please note that we do not accept credit cards.
*Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0 (or higher) is needed to read the Acrobat pdf.
If you need to install Acrobat Reader, click the button below. Once the file
has downloaded onto your desktop, run it to install the reader on your hard
drive.
