Voters in Battleground States Overwhelmingly Oppose Scheduled Tax Increases and Lame Duck Session of Congress
Published on
July 26, 2010
Overview
Voters in the dozen states with 2010 U.S. Senate races designated as "toss ups" by the Cook Political Report overwhelmingly oppose tax increases scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2011, and do not believe Members of Congress should address important legislation in a lame duck session of Congress after the November elections, according to Resurgent Republic's analysis. These dozen states - Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington - are very likely to determine which party controls the U.S. Senate in 2011.
Resurgent Republic's most recent survey of 1000 likely voters was conducted from July 17 to 20, 2010
Tax Increases
On January 1, 2011, the largest tax increase in the nation’s history will go into effect unless Congress acts to prevent it, but the Democratic Congressional leadership has yet to schedule legislation to stop the tax hikes.
Somewhat surprisingly, only a little over half of all voters (54 percent) are aware of the looming tax increases. There is an interesting partisan divide in the awareness, however: 70 percent of Republican voters in these states and 57 percent of Independents have heard about the impending tax increases, compared to only 38 percent of Democrats.
Would you say you have heard or have not heard about a significant increase in federal income taxes that is scheduled to occur on January 1, 2011?
Regardless of whether they have heard about the impending increases, a majority of these voters opposes bringing back the “marriage penalty” (87 percent), raising the tax rate on dividend income (79 percent), reducing the child tax credit (74 percent), raising income tax rate on all wage earners (73 percent), reviving the “death tax” (63 percent), raising capital gains tax (61 percent) and increasing the number of families paying the alternative minimum tax (50 percent).
If the Democrats who control Congress do not stop or delay these scheduled tax increases before the November election, 55 percent of the voters in these states would be less likely to vote for Democratic candidates for the House or Senate, including 57 percent of Independents.
Among the partisan groups, a majority of Republicans and Independents opposes all seven of these tax increases, compared to Democrats who support raising the capital gains tax (56 to 41 percent), the “death tax” (50 to 46 percent) and split on the alternative minimum tax (40 to 40 percent). Failure to extend all the tax relief slated to expire will once again put Democrats at odds with Independent voters.
If the Democrats who control Congress do not act to stop or delay these scheduled tax increases before the election, would that make you more likely or less likely to vote for Democratic candidates for House and Senate?
How did these voters respond to all seven tax increases tested? Read the full report here.
Reducing the Deficit
Widespread opposition to tax increases is grounded in the perception that the federal deficit is driven by too much spending rather than too little revenue. The survey posed two alternative statements:
We need more tax revenue as well as spending cuts to reduce the federal deficit. We will never get the deficit under control unless we make the difficult but necessary decision to raise taxes.
Our federal deficit is a result of too much spending in Washington, not too little tax revenue. Instead of raising taxes on anyone, Congress should make the difficult but necessary decisions to get spending under control.
The debate over whether additional tax revenue is needed to address record deficits might still be alive in Washington, but it is already settled with voters.
These voters prefer the second statement over the first by 73 to 24 percent, with a majority of all three partisan groups believing that the deficit is primarily a spending rather than a revenue problem. The debate over whether additional tax revenue is needed to address record deficits might still be alive in Washington, but it is already settled with voters.
Lame Duck Congressional Session
Voters in these toss-up Senate states believe it is a bad idea to pass major legislation in a lame duck session of congress. Three-fourths of Republicans and two-thirds of both Independents and Democrats agree that "a lame duck session of Congress is a bad idea. Members of Congress should cast votes on important bills before facing the voters, not wait until after an election to cast those votes."
A majority of voters in these states believes that if Congress does not vote on tax increases, card check, cap-and-trade legislation or immigration reform before the November elections it is because Democrats are afraid their positions will be unpopular with voters, not because they think Republicans are obstructing the political process. The critical swing group of Independents blames any failure to address these issues on Democratic fears rather than Republican obstruction by 57 to 32 percent.
By a margin of 63 to 19 percent, voters in toss-up Senate states would be less likely to vote for their member of Congress if he or she refused to rule out voting on important issues like tax increases, immigration reform, cap-and-trade legislation or card check in a lame duck session of Congress, including 69 to 19 percent among Republicans, 63 to 19 percent among Independents, and 59 to 21 percent among Democrats.
If your member of Congress refused to rule out voting for those important bills in a lame duck session of Congress, would that make you more or less likely to vote to re-elect him?
When should Congress address these issues if they fail to do so before November? Read the full report here.
Conclusion
Speaker Pelosi only last week refused to rule out a lame duck session of Congress to consider controversial legislation, seeking to set up Republicans for blame if they do, citing obstructionism. She is cutting against the grain of public opinion in key swing states, and Republicans should reinforce voter wariness of a possible lame duck session of Congress.
Yesterday, Treasury Secretary Geithner rejected extending all of the tax relief measures saying, “I don’t believe it should and I don’t believe it will.” If Democrats enact only targeted tax relief (i.e., marriage penalty, child tax credit, 10% bracket only) they will be opposed by the vast majority of Independents on the tax cuts they do not extend, while making clear not only whose taxes will remain at current levels but also whose will be going up. Yet, failing to enact any tax relief before adjourning for the November elections will make voters less likely to vote for Democrats.
Lastly, all incumbents in both parties seeking re-election should be asked if they will pledge not to vote for controversial bills like tax increases, cap-and-trade legislation, card check or immigration reform in a lame duck session of Congress after the elections. Democrats who do so will make it harder for the current majority to pass such bad policies (and will make clear to liberal voters that any secret plan to do so is not viable). If they don’t, their voters will be able to cast an informed vote on their incumbent congressman or senator.