Americans Want Biden to Go Big on Coronavirus Relief
By Ethan Winter
Earlier this week, Senator Joe Manchin — who occupies one of the crucial pivot points in the U.S. Senate — signaled an openness to the federal government spending up to $4 trillion on infrastructure. From a moderate Senator like Manchin, this is a marked shift of the Democratic Party to the left from where they stood the last time the party wielded a trifecta in the midst of the Great Recession. Following the 2008 financial crisis, Democrats advanced a stimulus package of less than $1 trillion, with many of the benefits purposefully made invisible through a heavy reliance on tax credits. These comments by Manchin suggest the emergence of a new paradigm of bigger spending and more visible governance — one that likely voters are extremely supportive of.
Voters Are Ready for Deficit-Financed Infrastructure Spending
In a new experiment from Data for Progress, we asked likely voters whether or not they would support or oppose “an economic stimulus package that would send stimulus checks to most Americans, renew and extend expanded unemployment insurance, create clean energy jobs, and rebuild the nation's infrastructure while addressing climate change.” Half the sample was told this would cost $2 trillion, while the other half was told this would cost $4 trillion.
We find that both proposals are almost equally popular. Among all likely voters, the $2 trillion plan is backed by a 49-percentage-point margin, while the $4 trillion plan enjoys a 44-point margin of support. Among voters that self-identify as Democrats, the $4 trillion proposal is actually two-points more popular than the $2 trillion proposal. While we find that a $2 trillion package is modestly more popular than the $4 trillion in spending among likely voters that self-identify as Independent / Third Party and Republican, the latter plan still enjoys majority support from both groups.
Although there are some differences in attitudes, they are slight. The real lesson here is that instead of worrying so much about the price tag of the final bill, the emphasis should be on what’s in the package. For Democrats, going big on fiscal stimulus is both a humanitarian imperative and a political one. Coronavirus case counts are surging and the economic recovery is decelerating — the best way to mitigate any losses in the 2022 midterm elections is to run the labor market as hot as possible and move aggressively to contain the pandemic.
There is Strong Support for Expanded Unemployment Benefits
As part of the CARES Act, a massive coronavirus-relief bill passed in the spring of 2020, the federal government enacted a measure that topped off people’s unemployment checks in the order of $600 a week. This provision became known as the superdole and for many it meant that they were collecting more on unemployment than their typical wages. In real terms, this helped arrest the growth of poverty in the United States, even as the coronavirus continued to rage.
As part of a January survey, we tested support for not only whether or not likely voters want this program renewed and extended for the duration of the pandemic but whether they would back making this program permanent. Establishing this top-off would, in effect, establish a wage floor of roughly $19 an hour, as the $600 (meant to approximate one’s earning from a 40 hour work week) is combined with state unemployment benefits (which typically replace 30 to 40 percent of someone’s weekly earnings).
Among all likely voters, extending the program for the duration of the pandemic enjoys a 35-point margin of support, with a permanent expansion netting a 14-point margin of support. Among Democrats, both the temporary and permanent expansions are popular, backed by a 60-point margin and a 48-point margin, respectively. With Independents, a large split emerges: the temporary expansion enjoys a 47-point margin of support while Independents are divided evenly on the idea of a permanent expansion at 44 percent apiece. While Republicans are more skeptical of both proposals they are hardly uniformly opposed: a temporary extension is only narrowly opposed by a two-point margin while a permanent extension is opposed by a 14-point margin, with 40 percent of Republicans supporting the idea.
The Appetite for More Stimulus Checks is Large
We also tested two proposals around $2,000 checks and the coronavirus pandemic. First, we asked likely voters if they would back another one-time payment of $2,000 to be sent to most Americans. Likely voters support this proposal by a 61-point margin. Enthusiasm for another round of stimulus payments extends across party lines: Democrats, Independents, and Republicans support it by margins of 71-points, 69-points, and 46-points, respectively.
We then asked likely voters if they would support making these $2,000 payments recur on a monthly basis for the duration of the pandemic. We find majority backing for this proposal. Among all likely voters it is supported by a 22-point margin of support. A majority of both Democrats (70 percent) and Independents (53 percent) back this proposal. Republicans are evenly divided on the question, opposing it by a narrow two-point margin.
Voters Want Automatic Stabilizers
Data for Progress also asked likely voters if they would support a program ensuring most Americans would automatically be sent a $2,000 payment in the event of a national emergency, be it another pandemic or economic recession. We find considerable levels of support for this proposal, known as automatic stabilizers. Among all likely voters, it is supported by a 36-point margin. Looking at responses broken out by partisanship we see that Democrats back it by a 56-point margin, with Independents doing so by a 33-point margin, and Republicans by a 16-point margin.
Conclusion
Trifectas are rare. It is incumbent upon the Democratic Party to take full advantage of it, especially considering that the Republican advantage in the Senate and Electoral College is only growing and partisan gerrymandering of House districts is being recharged. Minimizing the Democratic Party’s losses in the midterms, an environment where the party in power is historically punished, will require strategic and tactical discipline. Both moderate and especially progressive elements of the party should unite around a shared goal of getting money into the hands of those who need it through direct transfers rather than convoluted tax credit schemes. Democrats must also work to entrench a regime of automatic stabilizers that can keep aid flowing to those who need it, even when the political coalitions that put those stabilizers in place are voted out of office.
This polling points to just one front on which the Democratic Party can get help to people fast, make long-term, massive investments in infrastructure, and build out a system of automatic stabilizers. Within the ranks of the electorate, there is a real desire to spend — Democrats should heed the voice of voters and act.
Ethan Winter (@EthanBWinter) is a senior analyst at Data for Progress. You can email him at ethan@dataforprogress.org.
From January 9 to January 14, 2021, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 1,145 likely voters nationally using web panel respondents. The sample was weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, and voting history. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error is ±2.9 percentage points.
From January 9 to January 10, 2021, Data for Progress conducted a survey of 1,129 likely voters nationally using web panel respondents. The sample was weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, and voting history. The survey was conducted in English. The margin of error is ±2.9 percentage points.