In this week’s Republican Panel, we asked about two likely reforms that Congress would pursue to reform Medicare and Social Security: raise the retirement age and means-test benefits so the richer you are, the less you get.
The question was worded as follows:
Many Republicans are saying we cannot get spending under control unless we reform Social Security and Medicare. Would you be willing to wait until you’re 70 before receiving benefits from these programs, and willing to receive fewer benefits the wealthier you are when you retire?
Here’s how the panel responded:
- 35% - Yes on both counts
- 26% - I’m willing to receive fewer benefits the wealthier I am when I retire, but not wait until I’m 70 to start receiving them
- 22% - No, I am unwilling on both counts
- 17% - I’m willing to wait until I’m 70 before receiving benefits, but not receive fewer benefits the wealthier I am
The fact that only a third of respondents are willing on both counts, while those who are unwilling on both counts represent more than one-fifth, is somewhat startling.
The Republican Panel consists of conservatives who have repeatedly shown a deep aversion to federal spending. But like most Americans, they are less inclined to oppose federal spending that benefits them.
On another spending issue, panelists show their solid fiscal conservatism in clear terms: state bailouts. When asked what the federal government should do about the growing number of states facing fiscal crises, respondents showed their fiscally conservative stripes.
- Only 4% said the feds should bail out states in certain instances
- 60% said that Congress should pass a law prohibiting the feds from bailing out states
- 25% said Congress should pass a law making state bankruptcy legal
So, when it comes to states' budgets, our panel is as solidly opposed to having the federal government step in and save the day.
