Americans overwhelmingly say the nation’s immigration policy is in need of sweeping changes. Overall, 75% say immigration policy needs at least major changes, with 35% saying it needs to be “completely rebuilt”—among the highest of seven policy areas tested.

Yet the broad public agreement that immigration policy should be revamped is not matched by consensus on how to deal with illegal and legal immigration.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted May 1-5 among 1,504 adults, finds that 73% say there should be a way for illegal immigrants already in the United States who meet certain requirements to stay here. But fewer than half (44%) favor allowing those here illegally to apply for U.S. citizenship, while 25% think permanent legal status is more appropriate.

These views are virtually unchanged from March, suggesting that last month’s bombings at the Boston Marathon have had little effect on overall public opinion on this issue. In a survey released last week, 58% said that the Boston attack and the immigration debate are mostly separate issues, while 36% said the attack should be an important part of the debate on the immigration bill.

When it comes to legal immigration, relatively few (31%) see current levels as satisfactory, but there is no consensus as to whether the level of legal immigration should be decreased (36%) or increased (25%)

Meanwhile, securing U.S. borders looms over the debate: 53% of Americans say there is a lot more that the government can be doing to reduce illegal immigration at U.S. borders. Just 13% believe there is little or nothing more the government can do to tighten border security.

Majorities across all demographic and political groups think there is more the government can do to secure the borders, but there are ideological differences over how much: 68% of conservative Republicans say the government can do a lot more on border security, compared with just 37% of liberal Democrats.

While most Americans see immigration policy in need of major changes, last week’s survey found that the public has yet to fully engage with the congressional debate over immigration legislation. About one-in-five (19%) are following the immigration debate very closely. Only about half (46%) know that the immigration bill before Congress would allow people currently in the United States illegally to stay here while applying for citizenship; even fewer (37%) know the bill was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators. And nearly four-in-ten (38%) have no opinion about the immigration legislation before Congress, while 33% favor it and 28% are opposed.

Policies in Several Areas Seen as in Need of Major Changes

Three-quarters of Americans (75%) say that immigration policy either needs to be completely rebuilt or needs major changes. Just 21% say immigration policy works pretty well and needs only minor changes.

Nearly as many (72%) say the nation’s tax system is in need of a complete overhaul or major changes. Majorities also say that the education system (66%), the health care system (64%), the Medicare system (58%) and the Social Security system (54%) should be completely rebuilt or undergo major changes. Fewer (44%) say the Homeland Security system needs a major overhaul.

While there are partisan differences in views of specific policies toward immigration, taxes and other issues, Republicans and Democrats are more in sync when it comes to the need for changes to major polices and national systems. Nearly eight-in-ten Republicans (79%) say that immigration policy should be completely rebuilt or undergo major changes; 76% of independents and 72% of Democrats agree.

Large Majority Say Those in U.S. Illegally Should Be Allowed to Stay

Overall patterns in opinions about how to deal with those in the United States illegally have changed little since late March. (For a full demographic breakdown, see “Most Say Illegal Immigrants Should be Allowed to Stay, But Citizenship Is More Divisive,” March 28, 2013.)

There are partisan and ideological differences in these opinions: While 63% of conservative Republicans favor providing legal status for those in the United States illegally if they meet certain requirements, just 37% say they should be allowed to apply for citizenship. Nearly a quarter of conservative Republicans (23%) say people in the U.S. illegally should be allowed to apply for permanent residency, but not citizenship.

More than eight-in-ten liberal Democrats (85%) favor letting those in the U.S. illegally stay legally. By nearly three-to-one (62% to 22%), liberal Democrats say that those here illegally should be allowed to seek citizenship rather than permanent residency.

Most Don’t Think Legal Status Would “Reward” Those Here Illegally

A majority of Americans (56%) do not feel that giving people in the United States illegally a way to gain legal status would be like rewarding them for doing something wrong. About four-in-ten (37%) say giving them a way to obtain legal status would be tacitly rewarding wrongdoing.

Most Democrats (64%) and independents (58%) say that giving those in the U.S. illegally a way to gain legal status would not amount to a reward for bad behavior. Republicans are divided: 49% say it would be like rewarding them for wrongdoing, while 44% disagree.

As might be expected, those who favor finding a way for those in the U.S. illegally to stay in the country legally do not view a path to legal status as a reward for wrongdoing (by 67% to 27%). By nearly an identical margin (69% to 26%), those who oppose legal status for those here illegally do see it as a tacit reward for wrongdoing.

Half Think the Government Can Do a Lot More to Secure Borders

About half of Americans (53%) say the government can do a lot more to reduce illegal immigration at U.S. borders, while 30% say there is somewhat more the government can do. Just 13% say there is little or nothing more the government can do to reduce illegal immigration at the borders.

Majorities or pluralities across most groups say the government could doing a lot more to tighten border security. Republicans (64%) are more likely to express this view than are independents (53%) or Democrats (45%).

In February, 47% said the priority for dealing with illegal immigration should be to improve border security and strengthen law enforcement, as well as to create a path to citizenship. Fewer said the priority should be just border security and stricter law enforcement or just a path to citizenship (25% each).

Views of Legal Immigration

When asked about the optimal level of legal immigration to the United States, 36% say it should be decreased, 31% say it should be kept at its current level, and 25% say it should be increased.

These views are modestly changed from March 2006, before the last major congressional debate on immigration. At that time, 40% said legal immigration should be decreased, 37% said it should be kept at its current level and 17% favored increasing legal immigration.

Hispanics are divided in views of legal immigration: Approximately equal percentages say it should be decreased (32%), kept at its present level (29%) and increased (28%). A plurality of whites (39%) favor decreasing the level of legal immigration, while just 22% say it should be increased and 32% say it should be kept at its current level.

Democrats are split over the appropriate level of legal immigration. Meanwhile, more Republicans favor cutting back on legal immigration than increasing it (41% to 20%), while 33% favor maintaining the status quo.

As Congress debates a bill to overhaul the nation’s immigration policy, much of the public has yet to form an opinion about the legislation. About as many say they favor (33%) as oppose (28%) the immigration bill before Congress, but fully 38% say they don’t know what they think of the legislation.

At this early stage of debate, the public does not think the bill would have a major impact on the nation’s economy or security. About half say either that the immigration bill would not make much of a difference for the economy (35%) or that they don’t know how the bill would affect the economy (17%). An even greater percentage says the bill would have no impact on the country’s safety from terrorism (57%) or that they don’t know how the country’s security would be affected (16%).

The national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted April 25-28 among 1,003 adults, finds that most do not think the Boston Marathon bombings should be an important factor in the debate over immigration legislation. Nearly six-in-ten (58%) say the Boston attack and the immigration debate are mostly separate issues, while 36% say the attack should be an important factor in the debate.

Overall, the debate over immigration policy has drawn little public attention. Just 19% say they are following the story very closely. And most Americans are unaware of some of the legislation’s visible aspects.

Fewer than half (46%) know that the bill would allow unauthorized immigrants to stay in the country while applying for citizenship. And just 37% know that it was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators.

Views of Immigration Bill

Twice as many Democrats favor (44%) as oppose (22%) the immigration bill currently being debated in Congress, while 33% do not offer an opinion. Republicans are divided with 30% in favor, 34% opposed and 36% not offering an opinion. Independents also are split (28% favor, 31% oppose, 40% don’t know).

Notably, independents who lean to the Republican Party express more opposition to the bill than do self-identified Republicans. About half of Republican-leaning independents (51%) oppose the immigration bill while just 19% favor it.

College graduates support the immigration bill by roughly two-to-one (44% to 21%). Those with lower levels of education are divided over the legislation.

Blacks offer more support (42%) than opposition (22%) to the bill, while 36% offer no opinion. By contrast, whites are divided: 28% favor the proposal, 31% oppose it and 41% do not offer an opinion.

Immigration Bill Seen as Having Limited Impact

The public does not think the immigration bill before Congress would have a major impact on the economy or the country’s safety from terrorism.

When asked how the immigration bill would impact the U.S. economy, as many say it would help the economy (24%) as hurt the economy (23%). A 35% plurality says the bill wouldn’t make much difference for the economy and 17% do not offer an opinion.

In addition, 57% do not think the bill would have an effect on the country’s safety from terrorism. Those who see a potential impact are divided over whether the bill would make the country safer (14%) or less safe (13%); 16% do not offer an opinion.

There are modest partisan differences in these opinions. Overall, somewhat more Democrats say the bill would help (33%) rather than hurt (18%) the U.S. economy, while about a third (34%) say it wouldn’t make much difference. About as many Republicans say the bill would hurt (25%) as help (21%) the economy, while 36% say it wouldn’t make much difference. Independents’ views are similar to those of Republicans.

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say that the immigration bill would make the country less safe from terrorism (20% vs. 8%). But a plurality of Republicans (46%), and majorities of Democrats (62%) and independents (61%), say the bill wouldn’t have much of an effect on the country’s safety from terrorism.

Boston Attack, Immigration Debate Seen as Separate Issues

While there has been discussion in Washington about whether the terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon should impact the debate over immigration, a majority of the public sees the two as separate issues. Nearly six-in-ten (58%) say the bombings and debate over the immigration bill are mostly separate issues, while 36% say the Boston bombings should be an important factor in the debate.

Most independents (62%) and Democrats (59%) see the Boston bombings and immigration debate as separate. Republicans are somewhat more divided: 50% say they are separate issues, 46% say the bombings should be an important factor in the immigration debate.

Most Don’t Know Key Facts about Bill

Most Americans don’t know that the immigration bill before Congress was introduced by a group of Republican and Democratic senators or that the bill stipulates that unauthorized immigrants be allowed to stay in the country while applying for citizenship.

About four-in-ten (37%) correctly say that the bill was introduced by a mix of Republican and Democratic senators; 47% volunteer that they don’t know who introduced the bill, while 9% say it was introduced by a group of Democrats and 7% say it was introduced by a group of Republicans.

Only somewhat more (46%) know that the bill allows unauthorized immigrants to stay in the country while applying for citizenship, 16% think unauthorized immigrants must return to their home country before applying and 37% don’t know.

Just 24% of the public correctly answered both knowledge questions, 35% got one question correct while 41% answered neither question correctly.

Support for Bill among Knowledgeable

People who are relatively knowledgeable about the immigration bill – those able to answer both questions correctly – favor the legislation by 50% to 33%. Those less knowledgeable are more evenly divided.

Among those getting only one knowledge question correct, about as many favor (36%) as oppose (33%) the legislation with 31% not offering an opinion. A majority (57%) of those unable to answer either knowledge question have no opinion of the bill; 21% favor the legislation, while 22% oppose it.

The partisan differences in views of the immigration bill are wider among those who are aware that the bill allows unauthorized immigrants to stay in the U.S while applying for citizenship.

Republicans who know that the bill allows unauthorized immigrants to stay in the U.S. oppose the legislation by nearly two-to-one (52% to 27%). By contrast, Democrats who know this support the bill by three-to-one (60% to 18%).

Democrats who know the bill was introduced by a bipartisan group of senators also favor the bill by a wide margin (63% to 18%). But Republicans who know the legislation was sponsored by a group of Republicans and Democrats are divided (35% favor vs. 42% oppose).

A new survey finds that seven-in-ten Americans (71%) say there should be a way for people in the United States illegally to remain in this country if they meet certain requirements, while 27% say they should not be allowed to stay legally. Most who favor providing illegal immigrants with some form of legal status –43% of the public – say they should be allowed to apply for citizenship, but 24% of the public says they should only be allowed to apply for legal residency.

Majorities across all demographic and political groups say there should be a way for illegal immigrants who meet certain requirements to stay in the U.S. legally. Among those who favor providing legal status, the balance of opinion is in favor of allowing those here illegally who meet the requirements to apply for citizenship. However, no more than about half in any demographic group supports permitting illegal immigrants to apply for citizenship.

In 2011, there were about 40 million immigrants in the United States. Of that total, 11.1 million, or 28%, were in this country illegally. (For more see “Recent Trends in Naturalization, 2000-2011” Feb. 4, 2013.)

The national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted March 13-17 among 1,501 adults, finds that overall attitudes about immigrants in the United States are more positive than negative, despite the nation’s struggling economy.

Thinking about immigrants generally, 49% of Americans say they strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents, while 41% say they are a burden because they take jobs, health care and housing. In a June 2010 poll, 39% said immigrants strengthened the country while 50% said they were a burden.

In addition, more Americans think that the growing number of newcomers in the United States strengthens society than believe that they threaten traditional American customs and values. About half (52%) say the growing number of newcomers in the U.S. strengthens society, while 43% say the influx of newcomers threatens traditional American values and customs.

Broad Support for Legal Status for Illegal Immigrants

Support for granting legal status to illegal immigrants is wide ranging. Eight-in-ten non-Hispanic blacks (82%) and Hispanics (80%) say those in the United States illegally should be allowed to stay if they meet certain requirements; about half of blacks (52%) and Hispanics (49%) say illegal immigrants should be able to apply for citizenship.

Two-thirds of non-Hispanic whites (67%) say illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the country legally, while 31% say they should not. Four-in-ten whites say people in the United States illegally should have the chance to apply for citizenship if they meet certain requirements.

Among whites with no college degree, 61% favor allowing those in the U.S. illegally to stay legally, while 37% disagree. There is more support among white college graduates for permitting illegal immigrants to stay in the country legally (81% say they should, while just 17% say they should not).

The partisan differences over providing some form of legal status for illegal immigrants are modest: 76% of Democrats, 70% of independents and 64% of Republicans say illegal immigrants should be allowed to stay in the United States if they meet certain requirements.

Whites in both parties are divided along educational lines over how to deal with illegal immigrants in the United States: Among white Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, 92% of college graduates favor allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the U.S. legally if they meet certain requirements; support falls to 68% among white Democrats and Democratic leaners who have not completed college. Similarly, there is a 20-point education gap among white Republicans and GOP-leaning independents (75% of college graduates vs. 55% of non-college grads).

Opinions about Immigrants’ Impact on the Country

Currently, 49% agree with the statement “immigrants today strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents.” Somewhat fewer (41%) agree with an opposing statement: “immigrants today are a burden on our country because they take our jobs, housing and health care.”

The balance of opinion on these questions has fluctuated over the years. Two years ago, opinions were evenly divided and in June 2010, more said that immigrants were a burden than a strength for the United States (50% vs. 39%).

Nearly two decades ago, in July 1994, 63% viewed immigrants as a burden, but the percentage expressing this view declined substantially by the end of the 1990s (to 38% in September 2000).

In recent years, there has been little change in opinions about the impact of newcomers from other countries on traditional values. About half (52%) say the growing number of newcomers from to the United States strengthens American society, while 43% say they threaten traditional American customs and values.

Racial, Ethnic, Partisan Differences in Views of Immigrants

While majorities across all groups support legal status for illegal immigrants, there are sharp differences in opinions about the impact of immigrants on the country. Opinions about immigrants have become somewhat more positive among most groups since 2010.

Fully 74% of Hispanics say that immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents. About half of blacks (52%) also say that immigrants strengthen the country, compared with just 41% of whites.

While most Democrats (58%) say that immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents, most Republicans (55%) say they are a burden because they take jobs and health care.

College graduates express far more positive opinions about the impact of immigrants than do those with less education. Fully 67% say immigrants strengthen the country, compared with 41% of those with no more than a high school education.

By a wide margin (59% to 33%), more 18-to-29 year-olds say that immigrants strengthen the country than say they are burden. Among those 65 and older, more say immigrants are a burden (49%) than a strength (37%).

Opinions about whether the growing number of newcomers to the United States strengthens society or threatens American values break down along similar lines. Whites are divided (45% vs. 49%). Majorities of Hispanics (67%) and blacks (62%) say the growing number of newcomers strengthens American society.

Majorities of Democrats (61%) and independents (55%) say that the increasing number of newcomers strengthens society; just 34% of Republicans agree.

Religion and Views of Immigrants

Majorities of all major religious groups say there should be a way for immigrants who are currently in the U.S. illegally and who meet certain requirements to stay in the country.

For the most part, those who favor legal status for illegal immigrants say they should be allowed to apply for citizenship.

Opinions among major religious groups are more divided when it comes to the impact of immigrants on the country.

A majority of white evangelical Protestants (55%) say that immigrants are burden because they take jobs, housing and health care, while about as many (58%) say they threaten traditional American customs and values.

Other religious groups have less negative views of the impact of immigrants. These differences in opinions, however, are largely the result of underlying differences between religious groups in race, political ideology, party identification and other factors; after controlling for these factors, the independent impact of religion is minimal.

After a series of fiscal crises over the past few years, the public is not expressing a particular sense of urgency over the pending March 1 sequester deadline. With little more than a week to go, barely a quarter have heard a lot about the scheduled cuts, while about as many have heard nothing at all.

And if the president and Congress cannot reach a deficit reduction agreement before the deadline, 40% of Americans say it would be better to let the automatic spending cuts go into effect, while 49% say it would be better to delay the cuts. Both Republicans and independents are divided evenly over which approach is better, and even among Democrats, roughly a third favor letting the sequester take effect over any delays.

The new survey, conducted Feb. 13-18, 2013 with 1,504 adults nationwide, is the first in a collaboration between the Pew Research Center and USA TODAY. It finds that, as with previous conflicts over the debt ceiling and fiscal cliff, Obama holds the upper hand politically over congressional Republicans. If there is no deficit deal by March 1, 49% say congressional Republicans would be more to blame while just 31% would mostly blame President Obama.

Moreover, 76% say that the president and Congress should focus on a combination of spending cuts and tax increases to reduce the budget deficit. Just 19% agree with the current Republican position that tax increases should be off the table.

And while Obama’s 51% job approval rating is down slightly from a post-election high of 55%, it remains well above the 25% approval rating for GOP congressional leaders. The job rating for Democratic leaders is higher (37%), though more disapprove (55%) than approve of their performance.

The poll finds new evidence of the public’s concern over the federal budget deficit. Fully 70% say it is essential for the president and Congress to pass major legislation to reduce the federal budget deficit, including wide majorities across party lines. Last month, the Pew Research Center’s annual policy priorities survey found a sharp rise in the percentage rating deficit reduction as a top priority since 2009.

Far fewer say it is essential to act on three other issues that Obama mentioned prominently in his State of the Union address: 51% say it is essential for the president and Congress to act on major immigration legislation; 46% view major gun legislation as essential; just 34% say it is essential to set new federal policies dealing with climate change.

There are wide partisan differences in attitudes about all four issues. This also is the case in views about whether to raise the minimum wage, another proposal Obama raised in his State of the Union.

By a wide margin (71% to 26%), the public favors increasing the minimum wage from its current level of $7.25 per hour to $9.00 an hour. But while large majorities of Democrats (87%) and independents (68%) favor raising the minimum wage, Republicans are evenly divided (50% favor, 47% oppose).

Among all Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, those who agree with the Tea Party oppose the proposed minimum wage hike by two-to-one (64% to 32%). Those who have no opinion of the Tea Party, or disagree with it, favor increasing the minimum wage by 60% to 36%.

Most Want Deficit Efforts Focused Largely on Spending Cuts

A substantial majority of Americans (76%) feel that both spending cuts and tax increases should be a part of the next step in tackling the federal budget deficit. But an equally large proportion believes that the greater share should come from spending cuts, even if tax hikes are also considered.

Overall, 19% say the focus of deficit reduction efforts should be only on spending cuts; just 3% want to concentrate only on tax increases. About four-in-ten Republicans (42%) favor reducing the deficit with spending cuts alone; that compares with 18% of independents and just 6% of Democrats. Even among Republicans, more favor a combination of spending cuts and tax increases to just spending cuts (56% vs. 42%).

When those who favor a balanced approach to reducing the deficit are asked if the focus should mostly be on spending cuts or tax increases, they overwhelmingly say spending cuts. Overall, 73% say efforts by the president and Congress to reduce the deficit should be only or mostly focused on spending cuts while just 19% say the focus should be only or mostly on tax increases.

Immigration: Plurality Favors Border Security and Path to Citizenship

Nearly half (47%) say the priority for illegal immigration is better border security, stronger law enforcement and creating a way for people here illegally to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Just a quarter (25%) favors an enforcement-only approach while an identical percentage says the focus should only be on a so-called path to citizenship. The percentage favoring a dual approach to immigration policy has risen modestly since June, from 42% to 47%.

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say that better border security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws should be the bigger priority, while Democrats are more likely to want the focus to be on creating a way for illegal immigrants already here to become citizens if they meet certain requirements.

Obama holds a sizable advantage over congressional Republicans on immigration. Half (50%) say that Obama has a better approach to dealing with immigration, compared with 33% who say congressional Republicans have a better approach. Obama’s job approval in handling the nation’s immigration policy, in negative territory for most of his presidency, also has improved.

Currently, about as many approve (44%) as disapprove (43%) of Obama’s handling of immigration policy; in seven surveys since 2009, far more disapproved than approved. Hispanics, in particular, are much more positive about Obama’s job performance on immigration: 63% approve currently, up from just 28% in November 2011.

Views on Gun Control Unchanged Since Shortly After Newtown

Gun control and climate change are potentially even more divisive political issues. For Democrats, 71% say it is essential that the president and Congress pass major gun legislation this year – that is slightly higher than the number saying major deficit reduction legislation is essential (65%). But just 19% of Republicans place the same emphasis on gun legislation. Nearly half of Democrats (47%) view action on climate change as essential this year, compared with 15% of Republicans.

Americans remain divided over whether it is more important to control gun ownership (50%) or protect the right of Americans to own guns (46%), with no significant change in attitudes in the two months since shortly after the Newtown shootings. Similarly, there has been no change in public views about banning high capacity clips (53% favor), banning assault weapons (56% favor), or broader background checks (83% favor).

The public is unlikely to be satisfied with the Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling on the 2010 Affordable Care Act – no matter what the Court decides. Whether the Court decides to uphold the entire law, overturn the entire law, or reject the “individual mandate” while allowing the rest of the law to remain in place, fewer than half of Americans say they would be happy with the decision.

The public’s expected reactions track along partisan lines. Most Democrats would be happy if the law is upheld, while most Republicans would be happy if it is thrown out.

But the other widely discussed possibility – that the court could reject the part of the law that requires individuals to have health insurance while keeping the rest – does not satisfy either side. Among Democrats, 35% would be happy with this outcome, while 56% would be unhappy. Republicans, who have consistently opposed the individual mandate, are not much happier: 43% would be happy if the court strips only this provision, while 47% would be unhappy.

For many partisans, only an “all or nothing” outcome will be acceptable. Four-in-ten (40%) Republicans say they will be happy only if the entire law is overturned, while another 29% would be happy with either overturning the entire law or just the mandate. Conversely, 39% of Democrats say they will be happy only if the entire law is upheld, while 17% would be happy with either keeping the entire law or removing the mandate but keeping the other elements.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted June 7-17 among 2,013 adults, finds that none of these outcomes is particularly appealing to independents, though more would like to see the law entirely overturned than kept in place. Half (50%) of independents say they would be happy if the entire law is overturned, while only 35% would be happy if the entire law is upheld. Independents have a divided reaction to the court throwing out the individual mandate while upholding the rest of the law (44% happy, 49% unhappy).

What If the Court Just Struck Down the Mandate?

The prospect that the Supreme Court might strike down the individual insurance mandate while leaving the rest of the law in place draws negative reactions from both supporters and opponents of the 2010 law.

Overall, more continue to disapprove (48%) than approve (43%) of the 2010 health care bill. That is little changed from April (41% approve vs. 49% disapprove). Half (50%) of the law’s opponents, and roughly the same share of its supporters (54%), say they would be unhappy if the court throws out the individual mandate but upholds the rest of the law.

Many Americans do not have a clear understanding of what’s in the health care law. About one-in-five (18%) say they understand the law very well and 49% say they understand it somewhat well; nearly a third (31%) say they understand it not too well or not at all well.

Those who feel they understand the law are the most skeptical of a ruling that just strikes out the individual mandate. By a 61% to 37% margin, those who feel they understand what’s in the law very well – a group that includes roughly equal percentages Republicans and Democrats – say they would be unhappy if the individual mandate alone is thrown out. Among the much larger share of the public that does not understand the law as well, reactions toward striking down the individual mandate while upholding the rest of the law are more mixed.

Most Have Strong Feelings about Health Care Law

More than two years after its passage, the 2010 Affordable Care Act continues to spark strong feelings from most Americans, particularly among opponents. Overall, 35% of Americans say they disapprove of the law very strongly; that represents nearly three-quarters of the 48% who disapprove of the bill. By comparison, 26% of Americans approve of the law very strongly, or about 60% of the bill’s supporters.

Among political independents, more disapprove (55%) than approve (36%) of the law in general, and strong opposition to the measure exceeds strong support by about two-to-one (38% vs. 18%).

Republicans are more likely to disapprove of the law (82%) than Democrats are to approve of it (73%).
The gap in intensity is even larger. Only half (50%) of Democrats strongly approve of the law, compared with strong disapproval from 71% of Republicans.

Immigration Attitudes Little Changed

Before the end of its current term, the Supreme Court also is expected to rule on Arizona’s immigration law, which requires police to determine the immigration status of people they have stopped whom they suspect might be in this country illegally.

Most Americans continue to support the Arizona law: 58% approve while just 38% disapprove. This is slightly less support than the 64% who approved when the law was first passed in 2010.

At the same time, when the public is asked about priorities for dealing with illegal immigration, a plurality (42%) gives equal priority to tighter restrictions on illegal immigration and creating a path to citizenship for people in this country illegally. About a quarter (28%) say tougher border security and stricter law enforcement alone should be the priority; about the same percentage (27%) says developing a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens alone should be the priority. These views have changed little since 2010.

Opinions about Arizona’s immigration law – as well as priorities for dealing with illegal immigration – are divided along ethnic and racial lines. Three-quarters (75%) of Hispanics oppose the law, as do 56% of blacks, while whites support the law by greater than two-to-one (69% to 28%).

Fully 84% of Republicans approve of Arizona’s immigration law, unchanged since 2010. But support has dropped among both Democrats and independents. In June 2010, 65% of independents approved of the recently passed state legislation – that has slipped to 59% today. And in 2010, Democrats were split over the new Arizona law – 50% approved while 46% disapproved. Today, most Democrats disapprove by a 55% to 41% margin.

In terms of priorities for dealing with illegal immigration, 53% of Hispanics say that creating a path to citizenship should be the priority for dealing with illegal immigration; another 35% say the priority should be a path to citizenship, along with better border security and stepped up enforcement of immigration laws.

Most blacks (59%) and a plurality of whites (41%) say that both enforcement and creating a path to citizenship should be given equal priority. One-third (33%) of whites say that better border security and enforcement of immigration laws should be the sole priority.

As Americans head to the polls this November, their values and basic beliefs are more polarized along partisan lines than at any point in the past 25 years. Unlike in 1987, when this series of surveys began, the values gap between Republicans and Democrats is now greater than gender, age, race or class divides.

Overall, there has been much more stability than change across the 48 political values measures that the Pew Research Center has tracked since 1987. But the average partisan gap has nearly doubled over this 25-year period – from 10 percentage points in 1987 to 18 percentage points in the new study.

Nearly all of the increases have occurred during the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. During this period, both parties’ bases have often been critical of their parties for not standing up for their traditional positions. Currently, 71% of Republicans and 58% of Democrats say their parties have not done a good job in this regard.

With regard to the broad spectrum of values, basic demographic divisions – along lines such as gender, race, ethnicity, religion and class – are no wider than they have ever been. Men and women, whites, blacks and Hispanics, the highly religious and the less religious, and those with more and less education differ in many respects. However, these differences have not grown in recent years, and for the most part pale in comparison to the overwhelming partisan divide we see today.

In recent years, both parties have become smaller and more ideologically homogeneous. Republicans are dominated by self-described conservatives, while a smaller but growing number of Democrats call themselves liberals. Among Republicans, conservatives continue to outnumber moderates by about two-to-one. And there are now as many liberal Democrats as moderate Democrats.

But the growing partisan divide over political values is not simply the result of the declining number who identify with the party labels. While many Americans have given up their party identification over the past 25 years and now call themselves independents, the polarization extends also to independents, most of whom lean toward a political party. Even when the definition of the party bases is extended to include these leaning independents, the values gap has about doubled between 1987 and 2012.

Looking ahead to the 2012 election, the largest divides between committed supporters of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are over the scope and role of government in the economic realm. Swing voters, who make up about a quarter of all registered voters, are cross-pressured. Their attitudes on the social safety net and immigration are somewhat closer to those of Romney supporters, while they tilt closer to Obama supporters in opinions about labor unions and some social issues.

In contrast to the widening partisan gap, the new survey finds neither growing class differences in fundamental political values, nor increasing class resentment. As in the past, a substantial majority of Americans agree that “the rich just get richer while the poor get poorer.” Yet there are no indications of increasing hostility toward the rich and successful. And there are no signs that lower-income people have become more cynical about an individual’s power to control their destiny or the value of hard work.

At the same time, the proportion of Americans who see a widening gap in living standards between the poor and middle class has grown since the mid-1980s. But the public sees no greater gap in values differences between the middle class and poor over this period.

The polling finds little support for the broad notion of American “declinism.” As has been the case in previous political values surveys, a large majority agrees that “as Americans we can always find a way to solve our problems and get what we want.” The public’s confidence in the nation has not been dulled, even as Americans have become more skeptical about prospects for economic growth.

These are among the principal findings of the latest Pew Research Center American Values survey, conducted April 4-15, 2012, among 3,008 adults nationwide. The values project, which began in 1987 and has been updated 14 times since then, tracks a wide range of the public’s fundamental beliefs. These questions do not measure opinions about specific policy or political questions, but rather the underlying values that ultimately shape those opinions.

Widening Gaps over Social Safety Net, Environmentalism

The survey covers the public’s attitudes on the role and performance of government, the environment, business, labor, equal opportunity, national security and several other dimensions.

Republicans are most distinguished by their increasingly minimalist views about the role of government and lack of support for environmentalism. Democrats have become more socially liberal and secular. Republicans and Democrats are most similar in their level of political engagement.

On some sets of issues, such as views of the social safety net, there already were sizable partisan gaps in Pew Research’s first political values study in 1987. But these differences have widened considerably. On others, such as measures of religiosity and social conservatism, there were only modest differences initially, but these divides also have grown.

Republicans and Democrats are furthest apart in their opinions about the social safety net. There are partisan differences of 35 points or more in opinions about the government’s responsibility to care for the poor, whether the government should help more needy people if it means adding to the debt and whether the government should guarantee all citizens enough to eat and a place to sleep.

On all three measures, the percentage of Republicans asserting a government responsibility to aid the poor has fallen in recent years to 25-year lows.

Just 40% of Republicans agree that “It is the responsibility of the government to take care of people who can’t take care of themselves,” down 18 points since 2007. In three surveys during the George W. Bush administration, no fewer than half of Republicans said the government had a responsibility to care for those unable to care for themselves. In 1987, during the Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62% expressed this view.

Over the past two decades, the public consensus in favor of tougher environmental restrictions has weakened, also primarily because of changing opinions among Republicans.

For the first time in a Pew Research Center political values survey, only about half of Republicans (47%) agree that “there needs to be stricter laws and regulations to protect the environment.” This represents a decline of 17 points since 2009 and a fall of nearly 40 points, from 86%, since 1992.

The partisan gap over this measure was modest two decades ago. Today, roughly twice as many Democrats as Republicans say stricter environmental laws and regulations are needed (93% vs. 47%).

Democrats More Secular, Socially Liberal

Yet the widening partisan divide in political values is not just the result of changing opinions among Republicans. Democrats have shifted their views in a number of areas in recent years, though less dramatically: They have become more secular, more positive in their views of immigrants and more supportive of policies aimed at achieving equal opportunity.

Roughly three-quarters of Democrats (77%) say they “never doubt the existence of God,” as do 76% of independents. The proportion of Democrats saying they never doubt God’s existence has fallen 11 points over the past decade. Among white Democrats, the decline has been 17 points – from 85% in 2002 to 68% currently.

Independents also are less likely to express firm belief in God than in the past. By contrast, the percentage of Republicans saying they never doubt God’s existence is as large today (92%) as it was a decade ago, or a quarter century ago.

There also has been a substantial decline in the share of Democrats saying they “have old-fashioned values about family and marriage.” Just 60% of Democrats currently agree, down from 70% in 2007 and 86% in the first political values survey. Republicans’ views have shown far less change: Currently, 88% say they have old-fashioned values about marriage and family.

Democratic support for doing whatever is necessary to improve the position of minorities, including the possible use of preferences, has increased in recent years. About half (52%) of Democrats agree that “We should make every effort to improve the position of blacks and other minorities, even if it means giving them preferential treatment” – an 11-point increase since 2007.

Republicans’ views have changed little over this period. Just 12% currently agree that all efforts should be taken, including the use of preferential treatment, to improve the position of minorities. Since 1987, the gap between the two parties has about doubled – from 18 points to 40 points.

Class Divides: No Wider than in 1987

While the partisan gaps in political values have increased substantially, class divisions have not. This does not mean there are not significant differences, particularly when it comes to views about whether hard work leads to success and whether success is within an individual’s control. But these differences are generally no wider today than in recent years, or than they were in the initial political values survey.

For the past 25 years, majorities across most groups have rejected the idea that “hard work offers little guarantee of success.” In the current survey, just 35% agree with this statement while 63% disagree. As in the past, those with less education and lower incomes are more likely than those with more education and higher incomes to say that hard work does not ensure success.

Currently, 45% of those with no more than a high school education agree that hard work offers little guarantee of success, compared with 25% of college graduates. The gap was about as large in Pew Research’s first political values study (35% vs.17%).

Among whites who have not completed college, 36% are skeptical that hard work guarantees success; fewer white college graduates agree (24%). The education gap among whites was comparable in 1987 (29% non-college grad, 16% college grad).

There is greater agreement across socioeconomic lines in views of the gap between the rich and poor in this country.

As has been the case in most values surveys, majorities in all educational and income groups agree that “today it’s really true that the rich just get richer while the poor get poorer.” In the current survey, 76% of the public agrees with this statement, about the same as the 74% that agreed in 1987.

Still, there is evidence that the public sees greater economic inequality today than it did in the 1980s. About six-in-ten (61%) say the gap in living standards between middle class and poor people has widened over the past 10 years, while just 28% say it has narrowed.

In a 1986 survey by Gallup and the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, just 40% said the gap in the standard of living between the middle class and poor had grown, while about as many (39%) said it had narrowed.

Yet there has been far less change in opinions about whether the values of middle class and poor people are growing apart. In the current survey, 47% say the values of the middle class and poor have gotten more similar over the past 10 years; somewhat fewer (41%) say they have gotten more different. That is little changed from the 1986 survey, when 44% said the values of each had gotten more similar and 33% more different.

Economic Views Sour, But No Decline in Optimism

The survey also finds new evidence of the toll taken by the economic downturn, both on people’s personal financial assessments and their views of the country’s economic prospects. Just 53% say they are “pretty well satisfied with the way things are going for me financially.” That matches the lowest percentage ever, reached three years ago. People with family incomes of $75,000 or more express greater satisfaction with their finances than in 2009; financial satisfaction has continued to sag among those with incomes of less than $40,000.

Only about half of Americans (51%) agree with this statement: “I don’t believe that there are any real limits to growth in this country today”; 45% disagree. That is the lowest percentage ever agreeing with this statement, down slightly from 54% in 2009. In the first political values survey, 67% said there were no limits to growth in the United States.

Despite persistent economic pessimism, however, the public remains bullish about the ability of the American people to overcome challenges. Nearly seven-in-ten (69%) agree that “As Americans, we can always find a way to solve our problems and get what we want.” While that is largely unchanged from 2009 (70%), it is up 11 points since 2007 (58%). It also is about the same percentage that agreed with this statement in the first values survey (68%).

Political Values and the 2012 Election

When the values items are combined into indices (grouping measures on common subjects, such as the social safety net, into a single scale), swing voters – who make up 23% of all registered voters – tend to fall about halfway between certain Obama voters and certain Romney voters. Swing voters are either undecided, only lean toward a candidate, or favor a candidate but say there is still a chance they will change their minds.  (For more, see “With Voters Focused on Economy, Obama Lead Narrows,” April 17, 2012).

On views about the scope and performance of government, for example, there is a wide divide between certain Obama and Romney supporters. But the attitudes of swing voters are about equidistant from backers of either candidate. The same is true on several other key indices, including views of business, the environment and national security.

Nonetheless, there are some issues on which the views of swing voters tilt slightly toward the backers of either candidate. On attitudes toward labor and social conservatism, opinion among swing voters comes somewhat closer to that of Obama voters. By contrast, on indices measuring attitudes on the social safety net and immigration, swing voters’ opinions tilt toward those of Romney supporters.

While the views of swing voters generally fall between those of certain Obama and Romney backers, there are a handful of individual questions that show agreement between swing voters and the supporters of one candidate or the other.

For example, on the power of labor unions and admiration of wealthy people, the opinions of swing voters are closer to those of Obama supporters. About half of swing voters (51%) agree that labor unions have too much power, placing them closer to the views of Obama supporters (39% agree) than Romney supporters (82%).

Just 22% of swing voters, and an identical percentage of Obama supporters, say they “admire people who are rich.” A much higher percentage of Romney supporters (38%) agree.

But swing voters are far closer to Romney voters on the question of whether the government should help more needy people even if it means going further into debt: just 19% of Romney voters and 27% of swing voters agree, compared with a 62% majority of Obama voters.

Number of Independents Continues to Grow

While Republicans and Democrats have been moving further apart in their beliefs, both groups have also been shrinking. Pew Research Center polling conducted so far in 2012 has found fewer Americans affiliating with one of the major parties than at any point in the past 25 years. And looking at data from Gallup going back to 1939, it is safe to say that there are more political independents in 2012 than at any point in the last 75 years.

Currently, 38% of Americans identify as independents, while 32% affiliate with the Democratic Party and 24% affiliate with the GOP. That is little changed from recent years, but long-term trends show that both parties have lost support.

The percentage of Americans identifying as Democrats increased from 31% in 2002, following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to 36% in 2008. But over the past four years, Democratic affiliation has fallen to 32%. Republican identification stood at 30% in 2002, but fell to 25% in 2008 and has not recovered since then.

More Conservative Republicans, More Liberal Democrats

Over the past decade, the Republican Party has come to be dominated by conservatives, while liberals make up an increasing share of Democrats.

In surveys conducted this year, 68% of Republicans describe themselves as politically conservative. That is little changed from 2008, but is higher than in 2004 (63%) or 2000 (60%).

Demographically, Republicans remain overwhelmingly white and their average age now approaches 50. Fully 87% of Republicans are non-Hispanic whites, a figure which has changed little since 2000.

Meanwhile, the percentage of Democrats who say their political views are liberal has risen from 28% in 2000 to 34% in 2008 and 38% in 2012 surveys by the Pew Research Center. For the first time, there are as many liberal Democrats as moderate Democrats.

In contrast to Republicans, Democrats have grown increasingly diverse. A narrow majority of Democrats (55%) are non-Hispanic whites, down from 64% in 2000. As in recent years, most Democrats are women (59%). And while the average age of self-described Democrats has risen since 2008 – from 46.9 to 47.7 – Democrats continue to be younger than Republicans on average (47.7 vs. 49.7).

Independents also have become more diverse since 2000: Two-thirds of independents (67%) are non-Hispanic whites, down 12 points from 2000. The proportion of independents who are Hispanic has nearly doubled – from 9% to 16% – over this period.

A plurality of independents (43%) describes their views as moderate, while 30% are conservative and 22% are liberal. These views are largely unchanged from previous election years.

The public continues to support tough measures to crack down on illegal immigration, but also a path to citizenship for those in the country illegally. A plurality (43%) says the priority should be better border security and enforcement, as well as creating a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Fewer say the priority should only be better security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws (29%), or only creating a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in the U.S. (24%). These opinions have not changed substantially over the past year.

Americans are evenly split over whether illegal immigrants who graduate from high school in their state should be eligible for in-state college tuition: 48% say they should be eligible for the in-state tuition rate, while 46% say they should not.

The national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Nov. 9-14 among 2,001 adults finds continuing partisan differences over immigration policy. More than twice as many Republicans as Democrats say the priority for dealing with illegal immigration should only be better border security and stricter law enforcement (47% vs. 22%).

Yet there also are divisions within both parties’ coalitions over the overall priority for U.S. immigration policy and whether illegal immigrants should be eligible for in-state tuition.

There is a substantial age gap over immigration policies in opinions among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. A majority (57%) of Republicans and GOP leaners 65 and older say border security and stricter enforcement alone should be the priority for immigration policy, while 24% favor a dual approach that would include a path to citizenship.

Among Republicans and GOP leaners younger than 30, 42% say the focus should be on tougher border security and enforcement along with a path to citizenship, while 30% say the priority should only be on better border security and stricter enforcement.

Republicans and Republican leaners who agree with the Tea Party are more likely than those who do not to say that better border security and stronger enforcement of immigration laws should be the priority (52% vs. 36%).

There also are differences among Democrats and independents who lean Democratic. About half of Hispanic Democrats and Democratic leaners (52%) say the priority should be to create a way for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Only about a quarter of non-Hispanic whites (27%) and African Americans (24%) agree.

Liberal Democrats and Democratic leaners favor a path to citizenship over stronger enforcement by more than two-to-one (37% vs. 15%) while conservative Democrats are divided (30% prioritize security and enforcement, 28% path to citizenship).

Public Split Over In-State Tuition for Illegal Immigrants

Nearly half of the public (48%) thinks an illegal immigrant who went to high school in their state and is accepted to a public college should be eligible for the in-state tuition rate, while 46% disagree.

About three-quarters of Hispanics (77%) say illegal immigrants should be eligible for in-state tuition, compared with 66% of non-Hispanic blacks and just 40% of non-Hispanic whites .

Most Republicans (63%) say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state college tuition. By contrast, 56% of Democrats say they should be eligible. About half of independents (51%) favor in-state tuition for illegal immigrants while 44% are opposed.

About six-in-ten of those younger than 30 (61%) favor allowing illegal immigrants to be eligible for in-state tuition, compared with 38% of those 65 and older. And while there are no significant educational differences in these views, 58% of those with family incomes of less than $30,000 support this proposal, compared with 45% of those in households earning at least $75,000 a year.

The internal divisions in both parties over immigration policy priorities are generally reflected in opinions about in-state college tuition for illegal immigrants.

Republicans and Republican leaners are divided by age and income. Two-thirds (68%) of Republicans 65 and older say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state college tuition; just 24% say they should be eligible. Republicans under 30 are divided (48% say they should be eligible, 48% say they should not). Republicans with higher family incomes are more opposed to this proposal than are those with family incomes of less than $30,000.

Nearly three-quarters of Republicans who agree with the Tea Party (74%) say illegal immigrants should not be eligible for in-state tuition. Among Republicans who do not agree with the Tea Party movement, fewer (52%) oppose in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.

Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, fully 82% of Hispanics think an illegal immigrant should be eligible for in-state tuition. Smaller majorities of non-Hispanic blacks (65%) and whites (51%) agree. Two-thirds (66%) of Democrats younger than 30 favor in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, compared with 54% of those 50 and older.

With the economy still struggling and the nation involved in multiple military operations overseas, the public’s political mood is fractious. In this environment, many political attitudes have become more doctrinaire at both ends of the ideological spectrum, a polarization that reflects the current atmosphere in Washington.

Yet at the same time, a growing number of Americans are choosing not to identify with either political party, and the center of the political spectrum is increasingly diverse. Rather than being moderate, many of these independents hold extremely strong ideological positions on issues such as the role of government, immigration, the environment and social issues. But they combine these views in ways that defy liberal or conservative orthodoxy.

For political leaders in both parties, the challenge is not only one of appeasing ideological and moderate “wings” within their coalitions, but rather holding together remarkably disparate groups, many of whom have strong disagreements with core principles that have defined each party’s political character in recent years.

The most visible shift in the political landscape since Pew Research’s previous political typology in early 2005 is the emergence of a single bloc of across-the-board conservatives. The long-standing divide between economic, pro-business conservatives and social conservatives has blurred. Today, Staunch Conservatives take extremely conservative positions on nearly all issues – on the size and role of government, on economics, foreign policy, social issues and moral concerns. Most agree with the Tea Party and even more very strongly disapprove of Barack Obama’s job performance. A second core group of Republicans – Main Street Republicans – also is conservative, but less consistently so.

On the left, Solid Liberals express diametrically opposing views from the Staunch Conservatives on virtually every issue. While Solid Liberals are predominantly white, minorities make up greater shares of New Coalition Democrats – who include nearly equal numbers 0f whites, African Americans and Hispanics – and Hard-Pressed Democrats, who are about a third African American. Unlike Solid Liberals, both of these last two groups are highly religious and socially conservative. New Coalition Democrats are distinguished by their upbeat attitudes in the face of economic struggles.

Independents have played a determinative role in the last three national elections. But the three groups in the center of the political typology have very little in common, aside from their avoidance of partisan labels. Libertarians and Post-Moderns are largely white, well-educated and affluent. They also share a relatively secular outlook on some social issues, including homosexuality and abortion. But Republican-oriented Libertarians are far more critical of government, less supportive of environmental regulations, and more supportive of business than are Post-Moderns, most of whom lean Democratic.

Disaffecteds, the other main group of independents, are financially stressed and cynical about politics. Most lean to the Republican Party, though they differ from the core Republican groups in their support for increased government aid to the poor. Another group in the center, Bystanders, largely consign themselves to the political sidelines and for the most part are not included in this analysis.

These are the principal findings of the political typology study by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, which sorts Americans into cohesive groups based on values, political beliefs, and party affiliation. The new study is based on two surveys with a combined sample of 3,029 adults, conducted Feb. 22-Mar. 14, 2011 and a smaller callback survey conducted April 7-10, 2011 with 1,432 of the same respondents.

This is the fifth typology created by the Pew Research Center since 1987. Many of the groups identified in the current analysis are similar to those in past typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values. But there are a number of critical differences as well.

The new groupings underscore the substantial political changes that have occurred since the spring of 2005, when the previous typology was released. Today, there are two core Republican groups, compared with three in 2005, to some extent reflecting a decline in GOP party affiliation. However, Democrats have not made gains in party identification. Rather, there has been a sharp rise in the percentage of independents – from 30% in 2005 to 37% currently. Today, there are three disparate groups of independents, compared with two in 2005.

While Republicans trail the Democrats in party affiliation, they enjoy advantages in other areas: The two core GOP groups are more homogenous – demographically and ideologically – than are the three core Democratic groups. And socioeconomic differences are more apparent on the left: Nearly half of Solid Liberals (49%) are college graduates, compared with 27% of New Coalition Democrats and just 13% of Hard-Pressed Democrats.

The GOP still enjoys an intensity advantage, which proved to be a crucial factor in the Republicans’ victories in the 2010 midterm elections. For example, the GOP’s core groups – Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans – express strongly negative opinions about last year’s health care legislation, while reactions among the Democratic groups are more mixed. Even Solid Liberals offer only tepid support for the bill – 43% say it will have a mostly positive impact on the nation’s health care, while somewhat more (51%) say it will have a mixed effect.

However, maintaining solid support among the GOP-oriented groups in the center of the typology represents a formidable challenge for Republicans. The cross-pressured Disaffecteds highlight this challenge. They were an important part of the GOP coalition in 2010, but were lackluster supporters of John McCain two years earlier.

Like the core GOP groups, most Disaffecteds (73%) view government as nearly always wasteful and inefficient. At the same time, a solid majority of Disaffecteds (61%) say the government should do more to help needy Americans even if that means going deeper into debt.

Libertarians, the other Republican-leaning group, overwhelmingly oppose expanding aid for the poor if it means increasing the nation’s debt. Yet on immigration and homosexuality, Libertarians’ views differ markedly from those of the core Republican groups. Fully 71% of Libertarians say homosexuality should be accepted by society; nearly as many Staunch Conservatives (68%) say it should be discouraged.

Many of the political values and attitudes of Post-Moderns, young, Democratically-oriented independents, fit awkwardly with those of core Democratic groups. Post-Moderns overwhelmingly voted for Obama in 2008, but their turnout fell off dramatically last fall, which contributed to the Democrats’ poor showing in the midterms. Compared with the core Democratic groups, Post-Moderns are less supportive of increased aid for the needy and are far less likely to view racial discrimination as the main obstacle to African American progress.

Partisan Dividing Line: Views of Government

The new typology finds a deep and continuing divide between the two parties, as well as differences within both partisan coalitions. But the nature of the partisan divide has changed substantially over time.

More than in the recent past, attitudes about government separate Democrats from Republicans, and it is these beliefs that are most correlated with political preferences looking ahead to 2012. In 2005, at the height of the Iraq war and shortly after an election in which national security was a dominant issue, opinions about assertiveness in foreign affairs almost completely distinguished Democrats from Republicans. Partisan divisions over national security remain, but in an era when the public’s focus is more inward-looking, they are less pronounced.

As in recent years, beliefs about the environment, business, immigration and the challenges faced by African Americans are important fissures between the parties, though to some extent within them as well.

In general, there is far more agreement across the two core GOP groups than the three core Democratic groups. Staunch Conservatives and Main Street Republicans express highly critical opinions about government performance and are both deeply skeptical of increased government aid to the poor if it means adding to the debt.

Yet Staunch Conservatives have much more positive opinions about business than do Main Street Republicans. Attitudes about the environment also divide the two core GOP groups: 92% of Staunch Conservatives say that stricter environmental laws cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of Main Street Republicans agree.

The differences among core Democratic groups show up across a wider range of fundamental political values. Social and moral issues divide Solid Liberals, who are more secular, from other Democratic groups who are much more religious.

Opinions about business, immigration and the economic impact of environmental laws and regulations also divide the Democratic groups. For instance, more than half of Hard-Pressed Democrats (54%) say that stricter environmental laws and regulations cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; just 22% of New Coalition Democrats and 7% of Solid Liberals share this view.

Race and ethnicity are factors in some of the opinion differences among Democrats. New Coalition Democrats, who are roughly a quarter Hispanic, have positive views of immigrants. Fully 70% say immigrants strengthen the country because of their hard work and talents.

Hard-Pressed Democrats – who are mostly white and African American – take a dim view of immigrants’ contributions. Just 13% say immigrants strengthen the country, while 76% say they are a burden because they take jobs and health care.

Age also is a factor in partisanship and political values. Younger people are more numerous on the left, and older people on the right. However, many young people think of themselves as independents rather than as Democrats. Post-Moderns, Democratic-oriented independents, are by far the youngest group in the typology, but they often deviate from traditional Democratic orthodoxy and are not consistent voters.

Older people, who have increasingly voted Republican in recent years, are found disproportionately in the Staunch Conservative bloc – 61% are 50 or older. And this group is highly politically engaged; 75% say they follow government and public affairs most of the time.

Staunch Conservatives also include by far the largest share of Tea Party supporters – 72% of Staunch Conservatives agree with the movement. The Tea Party’s appeal is deeper than it is wide. There is no other typology group in which a majority agrees with the Tea Party. Aside from Staunch Conservatives, Libertarians are most supportive (44% agree).

The survey suggests that while the Tea Party is a galvanizing force on the right, strong disapproval of Barack Obama is an even more powerful unifying factor among fervent conservatives. No fewer than 84% of Staunch Conservatives strongly disapprove of Obama’s job performance and 70% rate him very unfavorably personally. Ardent support for Obama on the left is no match for this – 64% of Solid Liberals strongly approve of him, and 45% rate him very favorably.

More than two years into office, Obama’s personal image is positive though his job approval ratings are mixed. Yet doubts about Obama’s background and biography persist. More than one-in-five Americans (23%) say, incorrectly, that Obama was born outside the United States; another 22% are not sure where Obama was born. Nearly half of Staunch Conservatives (47%) and 35% of Main Street Republicans say that Obama was born in another country. Only among Solid Liberals is there near total agreement that Obama was, in fact, born in the United States (95%). (NOTE: The survey was conducted before President Obama released his long-form birth certificate on April 27.)

Other Major Findings

• Majorities in most typology groups say the country will need both to cut spending and raise taxes to reduce the budget deficit. Staunch Conservatives are the exception – 59% say the focus should only be on cutting spending.
• Core GOP groups largely prefer elected officials who stick to their positions rather than those who compromise. Solid Liberals overwhelmingly prefer officials who compromise, but the other two Democratic groups do not.
• For Staunch Conservatives it is still “Drill, Baby, Drill” – 72% say that expanding exploration for and production of oil, coal and natural gas is the more important energy priority. In most other typology groups, majorities say developing alternatives is more important.
• Republican groups say the Supreme Court should base rulings on its interpretation of the Constitution “as originally written.” Democratic groups say the Court should base its rulings on what the Constitution means today.
• Main Street Republicans and GOP-oriented Disaffecteds are far more likely than Staunch Conservatives or Libertarians to favor a significant government role in reducing childhood obesity.
• Solid Liberals are the only typology group in which a majority (54%) views democracy as more important than stability in the Middle East. Other groups say stable governments are more important or are divided on this question.
• New Coalition Democrats are more likely than the other core Democratic groups to say that most people can make it if they are willing to work hard.
• More Staunch Conservatives regularly watch Fox News than regularly watch CNN, MSNBC and the nightly network news broadcasts combined.
• There are few points on which all the typology groups can agree, but cynicism about politicians is one. Majorities across all eight groups, as well as Bystanders, say elected officials lose touch with the people pretty quickly.
• Staunch Conservatives overwhelmingly want to get tougher with China on economic issues. Across other typology groups, there is far more support for building stronger economic relations with China.
• The allied airstrikes in Libya divide Democratic groups. Solid Liberals and New Coalition Democrats favor the airstrikes, but about as many Hard-Pressed Democrats favor as oppose the operation.
• Michelle Obama is popular with Main Street Republicans, as well as most other typology groups. But Staunch Conservatives view the first lady unfavorably – and 43% view her very unfavorably.

Making the Typology

The 2011 typology divides the public into eight politically engaged groups, along with a ninth group of less engaged Bystanders. It is the fifth of its kind, following on previous studies in 1987, 1994, 1999 and 2005.

Using a statistical procedure called cluster analysis, individuals are assigned to one of the eight core typology groups based on their position on nine scales of social and political values – each of which is determined by responses to two or three survey questions – as well as their party identification. Several different cluster solutions were evaluated for their effectiveness in producing cohesive groups that are distinct from one another, substantively meaningful and large enough in size to be analytically practical. The final solution selected to produce the political typology was judged to be strongest from a statistical point of view and to be most persuasive from a substantive point of view. As in past typologies, a measure of political attentiveness and voting participation was used to extract the “Bystander” group, people who are largely not engaged or involved in politics, before performing the cluster analysis.

For a more complete description of the methodology used to create the typology, see About the Political Typology. For more information about the survey methodology seen About the Surveys.

The public continues to favor tough measures to crack down on illegal immigration. Yet Americans see no contradiction in supporting both stepped-up border security and a way for people already in the United States illegally to gain citizenship.

The idea of changing the constitution to bar the children of illegal immigrants from becoming citizens also remains unpopular. Nearly six-in-ten (57%) oppose changing the constitution for this purpose, a figure that has changed little since 2006.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Feb. 2-7 among 1,385 adults, finds that in dealing with illegal immigration 42% say the priority should be to tighten border security and more strictly enforce immigration laws but at the same time create a way for people here illegally to become citizens if they meet certain conditions. Somewhat fewer (35%) prioritize better border security and stronger enforcement, while 21% say the priority should be to find a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens.

At the same time, the public remains supportive of Arizona’s controversial immigration law. Roughly six-in-ten (61%) approve of the law, which would require police to verify the legal status of someone stopped or arrested, if the police suspect that person is in the country illegally. These opinions, like other attitudes about illegal immigration, are little changed from last summer.

While the job situation remains the public’s biggest economic worry, jobs are not people’s top concern when it comes to illegal immigration. Four-in-ten (40%) say their biggest concern is that illegal immigration places a burden on government services; 27% say their biggest concern is that it hurts American jobs. Far fewer say their biggest concerns are that illegal immigration contributes to crime (9%) or hurts America’s customs and its way of life.

Pew Research’s annual policy priorities survey in January found that dealing with illegal immigration remains a middle-tier public concern. About half (46%) said it was a top policy priority, placing it far behind the economy (87%), jobs (84%) and a number of other issues.

Opinions about the importance of dealing with illegal immigration – and attitudes toward immigration policies – reflect deep partisan divisions. Fully 61% of Republicans cited dealing with illegal immigration as a top policy priority, compared with 47% of independents and just 33% of Democrats.

Divided Over Immigration Priorities

In the new poll, 55% of Republicans say the priority in dealing with illegal immigration should be on better border security and stricter enforcement of laws against illegal immigration, compared with 34% of independents and just 22% of Democrats.

By contrast, 49% of Democrats and 42% of independents say the priority should be both tougher border security and creating a way for illegal immigrants already in the U.S. to become citizens if they meet certain requirements. Fewer Republicans (33%) favor this approach.

There also are educational differences in these opinions. A plurality of college graduates (43%) say the priority should be both better border security and finding a way for illegal immigrants to become citizens. Among those with less education, about as many say the priority should be primarily on better border security as on both objectives.

Opinions about “Birthright Citizenship”

Conservatives in Congress and several state legislatures have proposed legislation to stop granting U.S. citizenship to children born to illegal immigrants, though many legal scholars say this will require a constitutional amendment. The poll finds that a 57% majority of the public opposes such a constitutional amendment, while 39% favor it. This balance of opinion is essentially unchanged from last year or 2006, when 42% favored changing the constitution and 54% opposed doing so.

Opposition to a constitutional amendment is particularly strong among Hispanics (73%) and people younger than 30 (also 73%). About half of whites (52%) oppose such a change (vs. 43% who favor it), and seniors are divided (45% in favor, 48% opposed).

There also is a sizeable partisan split on the question, with Republicans about evenly split (47% in favor, 49% opposed) and Democrats mostly opposed (66%, vs. 32% in favor). Independents divide in about the same way as the public overall (56% oppose changing the constitution, 39% are in favor).

The strongest level of support for amending the constitution is among Tea Party supporters, 57% of whom favor changing the constitution to eliminate birthright citizenship (38% oppose such a change).

AZ Law Still Broadly Supported

A solid majority of Americans (61%) continues to approve of the immigration law passed last year in Arizona that requires police to verify the legal status of anyone they detain if they suspect that the person is in the country illegally; 34% disapprove of this law. Approval of the Arizona law is essentially unchanged from June of last year.

The Arizona law is supported by 72% of whites, but only 42% of blacks and just 27% of Hispanics. A majority of Democrats (54%) disapprove of the law, while an overwhelming proportion of Republicans (88%) approve of it. Among independents, 62% approve and 34% disapprove.

Top Concerns about Illegal Immigration

Asked to choose among four options, 40% of the public say their biggest concern about illegal immigration is the burden it places on government services. About a quarter (27%) say their biggest concern is the impact on jobs, while fewer cite the impact of illegal immigration on crime (9%) and America’s customs and its way of life (6%).

While there is broad concern about the burden that illegal immigration places on government services African Americans, young people and people with less education are particularly concerned about the impact on jobs. In each of these groups at least as many cite jobs as the burden on government services as their biggest concern about illegal immigration.