Gallup and the Business of Polling

 Many posts have discussed the problems of surveying public opinion in the 21st century.

Natalie Jackson at National Journal explains why Gallup has stopped polling presidential approval after decades of doing so.  She writes that Gallup was still conducting such polls by telephone, including cellphones -- an expensive practice.

Unlike many public pollsters who use expensive, high-quality methodologies, Gallup is a for-profit company. This is not your grandparents’ Gallup—it has evolved into a global research consultancy. Its website advertises services for clients with nary a mention of U.S. politics.

It’s worth mentioning Gallup has a lot of federal contracts, which could factor into a business decision about presidential approval with a president who likes to sue pollsters. The benefits of publishing presidential approval numbers might still outweigh the risks if there were money to be made from doing it. Yet that isn’t the case in today’s political polling environment. From a business perspective, it is an expensive money drain.

Other pollsters using expensive methodologies—mostly colleges and universities, media, or nonprofits—are not dependent on turning a profit directly from their polling. They are trying to generate attention, clicks, ratings, or reputational perks, or simply provide a public service. Some private pollsters release data publicly so that they will be listed in aggregates to bolster their name recognition. Gallup doesn’t need to do that.

Presidential approval numbers, in particular, are worth less than they used to be. Every poll gets put into aggregates with dozens of other surveys and is forgotten about within a few hours. Every now and then, Gallup’s numbers get widespread attention as a new high or low, but we are decades past the time when the company was offering something in its approval ratings that couldn’t be found elsewhere—except for the decades’ worth of comparative data going back to the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration.

Gallup’s decision isn’t out of nowhere. The company has pulled back from public political polling over the last decade or so, including its decision in 2015 to no longer survey on the presidential election horse race after underestimating the strength of President Obama’s 2012 reelection win. Pew Research also discontinued releasing horse-race questions for the 2016 race, explicitly saying, “Putting resources toward an already saturated market doesn’t make much sense for us.”

Essentially, both Gallup and Pew made a calculation: Why take on the reputational risk of a miss when so many other polls are out there? By 2015, the prevailing logic had become to ignore individual polls and look at aggregates and forecasts anyway.

SCOTUS Retirements and the Ages of Justices

Many posts have discussed the judiciary.

There are rumors that Justice Alito might retire soon.

Bruce Mehlman:

Supreme Court vacancies occur when Justices choose to retire or die in office. They cannot be fired by the President. So far none of the sitting Justices have indicated a desire to depart, and all are well-below the average age of departing modern Justices (79.3 since 1970). On May 7, 2026, Clarence Thomas — the oldest current Justice at 77 — will become the second-longest serving in Court history (12,614 days), with only 745 more days needed to exceed William O. Douglas’ record for longest. The President may not be the only one with eyes on the history books.

 

Immigrants, the Budget, and Social Security

Many posts have discussed immigration.

  David J. Bier, Michael Howard, and Julián Salazar at Cato:

This paper updates a model of these effects first developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to shed light on how immigrants, both legal and illegal, and their children affect government budgets. This analysis is the first to estimate the cumulative fiscal effect of immigrants on federal, state, and local budgets over 30 years.

The government first began gathering detailed information on benefits use by citizenship status in 1994. \

• The data show:For each year from 1994 to 2023, the US immigrant population generated more in taxes than they received in benefits from all levels of government.
• Over that period, immigrants created a cumulative fiscal surplus of $14.5 trillion in real 2024 US dollars, including $3.9 trillion in savings on interest on the debt.
• Without immigrants, US government public debt at all levels would be at least 205 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)—nearly twice its 2023 level.

These results, which do not account for any of immigration’s indirect, tax-revenue-boosting effects on economic growth, represent the lower bound of the positive fiscal effects. Even by this conservative analysis, immigrants may have already prevented a fiscal crisis.

....

 Immigrants cost less as retirees: First, the savings on old-age benefits are not because immigrants are significantly less likely to retire. Instead, it is because they are far less likely to receive a government pension, since they were less likely to have government jobs and thus less likely to receive expensive government pensions. The main reason, though, is that they were simply barred from applying for Social Security and Medicare because they either arrived too late in life to earn the necessary qualifying work history, or they are here illegally or in a temporary status and ineligible for that reason.

A 2024 ITEP report by  Carl Davis, Marco Guzman, Emma Sifre:

• Undocumented immigrants paid $96.7 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in 2022. Most of that amount, $59.4 billion, was paid to the federal government while the remaining $37.3 billion was paid to state and local governments.
• Undocumented immigrants paid federal, state, and local taxes of $8,889 per person in 2022. In other words, for every 1 million undocumented immigrants who reside in the country, public services receive $8.9 billion in additional tax revenue.
• More than a third of the tax dollars paid by undocumented immigrants go toward payroll taxes dedicated to funding programs that these workers are barred from accessing. Undocumented immigrants paid $25.7 billion in Social Security taxes, $6.4 billion in Medicare taxes, and $1.8 billion in unemployment insurance taxes in 2022.

George W. on George W.

Many posts have discussed the presidency.

President George W. Bush at In Pursuit:

Few qualities have inspired me more than Washington’s humility. I have studied the corrupting nature of power, and how retaining power for power’s sake has infected politics for generations. Our first president could have remained all-powerful, but twice he chose not to. In so doing, he set a standard for all presidents to live up to. His life, with all its flaws and achievements, should be studied by all who aspire to leadership. George Washington’s humility in giving up power willingly remains among the most consequential decisions and important examples in American politics.

After leading the United States to victory over Great Britain in the Revolutionary War, George Washington was at the height of his power. Some suggested that he should become king. Instead, General Washington resigned his military commission in 1783. When King George III of Great Britain learned of his vanquisher’s intentions, he reportedly said, “If He did, He will be the greatest man in the world.” What Washington did on that cold December afternoon in Annapolis shaped the foundation and future of American democracy. And he was just getting started.

Universal Nation

Many posts have discussed immigration.

James Pethokoukis at AEI:

Abroad, the American way of life had become, in his phrase, “the pervasive, persuasive, universal model” worldwide, encompassing consumer capitalism, popular entertainment, and democratic institutions. (“Isn’t that what the number one nation is supposed to be about?,” he asked in his 1991 book, The First Universal Nation.) Unlike Rome or Britain, the United States didn’t rule by conquest. It persuaded, absorbed, and broadcast. (And this was before the internet.)

Three decades on, Wattenberg’s framework seems as valid as ever, even if public confidence in it has weakened.

Start with the 2026 Winter Olympics. Of roughly 230 athletes on Team USA, according to The Seattle Times, seven are foreign-born and another 31 are the children of immigrants. Just one story: Top men’s figure skater Ilia Malinin—the American-born son of two former Olympic figure skaters who competed for Uzbekistan. A George Mason University student, he helped push Team USA to gold in the Olympic team event over the weekend. But the medal count here is secondary. On a global stage designed to celebrate peaceful national competition, the US presents itself as a country whose identity is beneficially additive. A success sequence worth celebrating and not screwing up: Global talent enters American institutions and then successfully represents the country back to the world.

Then consider the Super Bowl halftime show headlined by rapper Bad Bunny. The most American of spectacles briefly became a Spanish-language celebration of Puerto Rican identity. Talk about a cultural flex. I doubt many other countries’ signature sporting event would hand its stage to a performer singing anything other than that country’s primary language. What audiences here and globally saw was a country roomy and confident enough to absorb and amplify an identity rather than suppress it. The NFL certainly sees Wattenberg’s universal nation as an asset to its global ambitions.

America today is unsure of itself in ways it likely wasn’t 30 years ago when it became the planet’s only superpower. And our journey toward universality is hardly a walk in the park. It never has been. (Wattenberg: “We are becoming a universal nation at home; we come from everywhere. We are a ‘wondrous race,’ although, Lord knows, it’s not always easy, and we self-inflict more than a few wounds. Still, as demonstrated, it’s worked, and it’s working.”)

Free Speech and Retired Military Members

At Davos a few weeks ago, Trump said: Usually they say, 'He's a horrible dictator-type person,' I'm a dictator. But sometimes you need a dictator

Previous posts have discussed authoritarian moves by the executive branch.

Judge Richard J. Leon of the District Court for the District of Columbia:

United States Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, has been censured by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for voicing certain opinions on military actions and policy. In addition, he has been subjected to proceedings to possibly reduce his retirement rank and pay and threatened with criminal prosecution if he continues to speak out on these issues. Secretary Hegseth relies on the well-established doctrine that military servicemembers enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired servicemembers, much less a retired servicemember serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over the military. This Court will not be the first to do so!

 Worse still, Secretary Hegseth contends that this Court is not yet competent to decide the issues in this case. He and his fellow Defendants argue that military personnel decisions are exempt from judicial review and, in any event, that Senator Kelly should first be required to go through the military appeals process so the military can have the first crack at adjudicating his First Amendment rights. I disagree. This Court has all it needs to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly's First Amendment freedoms and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. After all, as Bob Constitution demands they receive it! I. Dylan famously said, "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows."1 To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our Constitution demands they receive it! 

Senator Kelly's First Amendment claim is not only justiciable; he is likely to succeed on the merits. He has also shown irreparable harm, and the balance of the equities fall decidedly in his favor. As such, his motion for a preliminary injunction on his First Amendment claim is hereby GRANTED.

Deficit and Debt 2026

Many posts have discussed federal deficits and the federal debt. Like previous efforts to reduce the deficit by cutting "waste, fraud, and abuse," DOGE was a failure.

CBO:

In CBO's projections, the federal budget deficit in fiscal year 2026 is $1.9 trillion and grows to $3.1 trillion by 2036. Relative to the size of the economy, the deficit is 5.8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2026 and grows to 6.7 percent in 2036, which is greater than the 3.8 percent deficits averaged over the past 50 years. Rising net interest costs drive much of that increase. The primary deficit, which excludes those net interest costs, totals 2.6 percent of GDP this year and stays below that level through 2036, when it totals 2.1 percent.

...

 From 2026 to 2036, large and growing deficits cause debt to increase. Federal debt held by the public rises from 101 percent of GDP this year to 120 percent in 2036, surpassing its previous high of 106 percent of GDP in 1946.