Stark Divide Between Blacks, Whites on Gun Control and Health Care

United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll finds that contrasting racial attitudes loom as an ever more powerful force in politics.

A semi-automatic handgun and a holster are displayed at a North Little Rock, Ark., gun shop Thursday, Aug. 22, 2013. A march by by advocates of open carrying of guns is planed for Saturday, Aug. 24, in Fort Smith, Ark.
National Journal
Ronald Brownstein
Sept. 26, 2013, 4 p.m.

Im­mig­ra­tion isn’t the only is­sue that rep­res­ents a hurdle for Re­pub­lic­ans hop­ing to im­prove their per­form­ance among His­pan­ics, Asi­ans, Afric­an-Amer­ic­ans, and oth­er minor­ity voters.

This week’s United Tech­no­lo­gies/Na­tion­al Journ­al Con­gres­sion­al Con­nec­tion Poll tested at­ti­tudes about two of the most in­cen­di­ary is­sues now di­vid­ing the parties in Wash­ing­ton: health re­form and gun con­trol. While the sur­vey found sub­stan­tial con­ver­gence between whites and minor­it­ies on some fronts, it also un­der­scored the con­sist­ent tend­ency of minor­it­ies to sup­port a more act­iv­ist role for Wash­ing­ton than many whites now prefer.

The gap was starkest on health care. Both whites and non­whites were du­bi­ous of Re­pub­lic­an threats to shut down the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment, or de­fault on the na­tion­al debt, if Pres­id­ent Obama does not agree to delay or de­fund his health re­form plan. But minor­it­ies were es­pe­cially res­ist­ant. While 33 per­cent of whites said Con­gress should with­hold fund­ing if Obama won’t shelve the Af­ford­able Care Act, only 16 per­cent of minor­it­ies agreed. And while whites di­vided re­l­at­ively closely on wheth­er Con­gress should raise the debt lim­it only if Obama con­cedes on health care — 36 per­cent said yes and 48 per­cent said no — non­whites stam­peded against the idea by ex­actly 3-to-1. Minor­it­ies were also far more likely than whites (53 per­cent to 33 per­cent) to say they would blame Re­pub­lic­ans if a shut­down oc­curs.

The con­trast was even lar­ger on the un­der­ly­ing is­sue of the health care law it­self. A 51 per­cent ma­jor­ity of whites agreed that “Con­gress should re­peal the pro­gram to ex­pand cov­er­age be­cause the gov­ern­ment can’t af­ford it at a time of large budget de­fi­cits,” while only 43 per­cent said “Con­gress should keep the pro­gram to ex­pand cov­er­age be­cause it’s im­port­ant to re­duce the num­ber of Amer­ic­ans without health in­sur­ance.” Minor­it­ies, by com­par­is­on, broke 2-to-1 in fa­vor of the health care law: 62 per­cent said it was more im­port­ant to ex­pand cov­er­age, while only 31 per­cent backed re­peal.

All of this re­in­forces poll res­ults from Ju­ly in which only 27 per­cent of whites, but ex­actly twice as large a share of minor­it­ies (54 per­cent), said the law would be­ne­fit “people like you and your fam­ily.” In that sur­vey, just 16 per­cent of minor­it­ies urged the law’s re­peal, com­pared with 44 per­cent of whites. As The Wash­ing­ton Post‘s Greg Sar­gent noted this week, oth­er polls have re­cor­ded a sim­il­ar dis­par­ity. These at­ti­tudes re­flect the un­der­ly­ing real­ity that Afric­an-Amer­ic­ans and His­pan­ics were nearly twice and three times re­spect­ively as likely as whites to lack health in­sur­ance, as the Census Bur­eau re­por­ted earli­er this month.

On gun vi­ol­ence, the United Tech­no­lo­gies/Na­tion­al Journ­al Con­gres­sion­al Con­nec­tion Poll found broad pub­lic sup­port that tran­scen­ded ra­cial, and in most cases par­tis­an, lines for an all-of-the-above ap­proach that in­cluded ideas tra­di­tion­ally favored by both the Left and the Right. Ma­jor­it­ies of those sur­veyed said each of six ap­proaches tested “would have a ser­i­ous im­pact in re­du­cing mass shoot­ings.”

But minor­it­ies em­braced all of the ideas even more em­phat­ic­ally than whites, with the gap es­pe­cially pro­nounced on ini­ti­at­ives top­ping the pri­or­ity list for gun-con­trol ad­voc­ates. While whites split fairly closely on wheth­er ban­ning as­sault weapons could ser­i­ously re­duce mass shoot­ings (53 per­cent said yes, while 45 per­cent said no), minor­it­ies were un­equi­voc­al: 68 per­cent thought a ban would help, while only 29 per­cent dis­agreed. Just 47 per­cent of whites, com­pared with 67 per­cent of non­whites, thought that lim­it­ing the size of am­muni­tion clips would help. (While half of whites thought such lim­its would not have much im­pact, only one-third of minor­it­ies agreed.) There was broad­er agree­ment on the value of “back­ground checks for all leg­al gun trans­fers, in­clud­ing those between private in­di­vidu­als,” but minor­it­ies were par­tic­u­larly en­thu­si­ast­ic: Fully 84 per­cent of them said it would have an im­pact, while 72 per­cent of whites agreed.

This ra­cial gap per­sisted, but only with­in single di­gits on ap­proaches to gun vi­ol­ence mostly pro­moted by con­ser­vat­ives: minor­it­ies were slightly more likely than whites to con­sider it pos­sible to re­duce mass shoot­ings through more men­tal-health ser­vices, tough­er en­force­ment of ex­ist­ing gun laws, and more armed guards at schools and oth­er pub­lic places. Asked what would do the most to re­duce mass shoot­ings, a plur­al­ity of minor­it­ies picked back­ground checks, fol­lowed by bet­ter men­tal health ser­vices, and then a tie between the as­sault-weapon ban and more armed guards. Whites ranked as their pref­er­ences more men­tal health ser­vices, back­ground checks, more armed guards, and tough­er en­force­ment of ex­ist­ing gun laws.

Oth­er fis­sures mat­ter too in shap­ing at­ti­tudes to­ward gun vi­ol­ence: As the sur­vey re­af­firmed, wo­men are con­sist­ently more likely to sup­port gun-con­trol meas­ures than men. But the ra­cial con­trasts in at­ti­tudes loom as an even more power­ful force in Amer­ic­an polit­ics — es­pe­cially after an elec­tion in which sup­port from four-fifths of minor­ity voters al­lowed Pres­id­ent Obama to tri­umph des­pite los­ing white voters by fully 20 per­cent­age points, a much wider de­fi­cit than any pre­vi­ous win­ning can­did­ate.

The poll, con­duc­ted by Prin­ceton Sur­vey Re­search As­so­ci­ates In­ter­na­tion­al from Sept. 19-22, in­ter­viewed 1,003 adults over land­line and cell phones. It has a mar­gin of er­ror of plus or minus 3.6 per­cent­age points.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
When It Comes to Mining Asteroids, Technology Is Only the First Problem
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Obama Reflects on His Economic Record
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Reagan Families, Allies Lash Out at Will Ferrell
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."

Source:
PEAK CONFIDENCE
Clinton No Longer Running Primary Ads
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-ex­pec­ted primary battle be­hind her, former Sec­ret­ary of State Hil­lary Clin­ton (D) is no longer go­ing on the air in up­com­ing primary states. “Team Clin­ton hasn’t spent a single cent in … Cali­for­nia, In­di­ana, Ken­tucky, Ore­gon and West Vir­gin­ia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “cam­paign has spent a little more than $1 mil­lion in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone back­er in the Sen­ate, said the can­did­ate should end his pres­id­en­tial cam­paign if he’s los­ing to Hil­lary Clin­ton after the primary sea­son con­cludes in June, break­ing sharply with the can­did­ate who is vow­ing to take his in­sur­gent bid to the party con­ven­tion in Phil­adelphia.”

Source:
CITIZENS UNITED PT. 2?
Movie Based on ‘Clinton Cash’ to Debut at Cannes
2 days ago
WHY WE CARE

The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."

Source:
×