Moreover, majorities of all groups (Democrats, Independents, EVEN Republicans) who learned about distributional effects of the bill said they would be LESS likely for their senator in the future if they were to vote YES on the budget bill

Even Republicans who learned about the regressivity of the bill became overwhelmingly opposed

61 percent of Republicans in this group opposed the bill, with less than one-quarter supporting

But among those who learned about how regressive the bill is, opposition increased drastically, to 78 percent

In fact, opposition outnumbered support by a ratio of 7 to 1!

@jacobhacker.bsky.social and I found similar results in a recent survey we conducted, examining Americans' attitudes towards the GOP's budget bill

Among those who were asked directly for their opinions, opposition already outpaced support by nearly 20 percentage points

We also examined how the effects of this information varied by respondents' political affiliation.

Opposition increased for all groups (Dems, Independents, Reps) who received information on the bill's regressivity.

However, the effects of this information were largest among Republicans

Amongst respondents in our study that were asked directly for their opinions (our "control" group), opposition already outnumbered support (47 to 28).

But for those who learned about how regressive the bill was (our "treatment" group), opposition increased to 78% (and support dropped to 11%).

Finally, we examined how the effects of our information varied by partisanship. We found that relative to our control group, support dropped by over half amongst all three groups (Democrats, Independents, and Republicans), and opposition increased significantly.

We found that relative to the “control” group, who were just asked about their attitudes about the bill directly, opposition in the group which received information on the regressivity of the bill increased dramatically, by 31 percentage points.

However, we also presented another random group of respondents with information on how the bill would affect the incomes after-taxes-and-spending for those in the top 1% percent and the poorest Americans (those in the bottom 20%)

First, and in line with recent polling, we found opposition already largely outnumbered support amongst a group of respondents who were asked directly about their opinions of the OBBBA.

Should the Trump administration’s reported goal of slashing IRS staff by 50 percent (~50k workers) come to fruition, and noncompliance increase as a result, our colleagues at @budgetlab.bsky.social estimate the amount of unpaid taxes (aka “tax gap”) could increase by $2.4 trillion over 10 years.

Combined with an additional 5.1 million losing coverage due to expiring premium tax credits for insurance purchased in ACA marketplaces and executive action, these total losses of 16 million rival the 23 million that was projected as part of the failed Republican “repeal and replace” effort of 2017.

A permanent, and expanded deduction on “pass-through” business income, for instance, would result in an average tax cut for those in the top 0.1% of over $120,000. This group would also be the largest beneficiary of this provision in terms of percent increase in after-tax income.