October 4, 2018 | By Craig Kafura

Public Support for Foreign Aid Programs

Reflecting the President’s hostility to foreign assistance, the Trump administration has repeatedly sought to curtail US foreign aid spending. Most recently, the administration attempted in August to cancel $3 billion in foreign aid through a process of ‘rescission’—but backed off in the face of pushback from Congress.

Past surveys, including prior Chicago Council Surveys, have found that Americans want to cut US spending on foreign assistance, including both military and economic aid. Yet at the same time, Americans also dramatically overestimate how much the US spends on those programs. When asked to construct their own US budget in the 2018 Chicago Council Survey, Americans allocate far more than the US actually spends, giving 4.9% of the budget to military aid to other nations, 4.3% to economic aid to other nations, and 4.7% to diplomatic programs abroad.

While Americans are generally in agreement on these levels of foreign assistance, there are notable differences in other areas of the budget. Defense spending in particular stands out as an area of partisan disagreement, with Republicans allocating 22 percent of the budget compared to Democrats’ 10 percent and Independents’ 13 percent. Conversely, Democrats allocate more funds to healthcare, environmental protection, and education.

Americans also broadly support a variety of US government programs and efforts abroad. Eight in ten Americans (79%) favor helping a government that is having free elections for the first time by giving it aid and technical assistance. Seven in ten favor sending monitors to certify that elections are conducted fairly and honestly (71%), and bringing students, journalists and political leaders to the US to educate them on how democracy works (70%).

A majority of Americans also support more coercive efforts, such as withholding developmental aid from a government that is not democratic or is not moving toward becoming more democratic (57%) and pressuring a non-democratic government with some economic sanctions such as reduced trade with the US (54%).

However, the US public is more hesitant to involve itself in the internal political conflicts of other nations. Only four in ten Americans (42%) favor the US supporting dissidents in a non-democratic country.

Methodology

This analysis is based on data from the 2018 Chicago Council Survey of the American public on foreign policy. The 2018 Chicago Council Survey was conducted by GfK Custom Research using their large-scale, nationwide online research panel between July 12 and July 31, 2018 among a representative national sample of 2,046 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in all 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The margin of sampling error for the full sample is ±2.37, including a design effect of 1.1954. The margin of error is higher for partisan subgroups or for partial-sample items.

The 2018 Chicago Council Survey is a project of the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy, and is made possible by the generous support of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Korea Foundation, the US-Japan Foundation, the generous support of the Crown family, and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.

About

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs highlights critical shifts in American public thinking on US foreign policy through public opinion surveys and research conducted under the Lester Crown Center on US Foreign Policy. 

The annual Chicago Council Survey, first conducted in 1974, is a valuable resource for policymakers, academics, media, and the general public. The Council also surveys American leaders in government, business, academia, think tanks, and religious organizations biennially to compare trends in their thinking with overall trends. And collaborating with partner organizations, the survey team periodically conducts parallel surveys of public opinion in other regions of the world to compare with US public opinion. 

The Running Numbers blog features regular commentary and analysis from the Council’s public opinion and US foreign policy research team, including a series of flash polls of a select group of foreign policy experts to assess their opinions on critical foreign policy topics driving the news.

Archive

| By Dina Smeltz

Ten Years On, GOP Faithful Less Positive about Iraq War

There have been a lot of retrospective pieces about the Iraq war the past few weeks, but Ole R. Holsti, the George V. Allen Professor of Political Science (Emeritus) at Duke University, has been looking at American attitudes on the Iraq war for quite a while.


| By Dina Smeltz

Popping the Question

Throughout these posts I've tried to highlight the critical impact of question wording on polling results, and how specific wording can influence responses.  


| By Dina Smeltz

Splitting Atoms

Rather than abandoning our dated technology (à la Dr. Frankenstein), should we  "love our monsters," and modernize them for current conditions?





| By Dina Smeltz

It's Not Easy Being Green

The Obama Administration’s energy strategy has evolved over time, viewing the production of natural gas and nuclear energy as a transitional stage in shifting away from dependence on fossil fuels to reliance on cleaner energy sources. 




| By Dina Smeltz

Best Picture (of all time)

In honor of the 85th annual Academy awards (now officially rebranded as The Oscars) being presented on Sunday, this week I am sharing  the results of a 2012 survey of international film critics and directors conducted by Sight and Sound, a British monthly film magazine published by the British Film Institute.


| By Dina Smeltz

Like Father, Like Son

Last summer the New York Times reported that some North Korea watchers wondered whether rising hem lines and heels among women on the streets of downtown Pyongyang signaled that Kim Jong-un would lead the country in a different style than his father, Kim Jong-il.



| By Dina Smeltz

Home Deport

Last week several papers reported that President Obama will seek a comprehensive, not incremental, immigration reform package in his second term and he doesn't want to carry the legacy of Deporter in Chief.