(The Center Square) – American taxpayers are divided on federal spending and whether significant cuts should be made, but the vast majority support increasing or maintaining current funding levels for entitlement programs such as Medicaid and for national defense.

The Center Square’s Voters’ Voice Poll, conducted April 15-18 by Noble Predictive Insights, surveyed 1,187 Democrats; 1,089 Republicans; and 251 non-leaning Independents. The poll has a +/- 2.0% margin of error.

The majority of Americans do not want the U.S. government to increase spending on its tax collection efforts, foreign aid or DEI programs.

Of the 2,527 poll respondents, only 19% of voters back boosting funds for the Internal Revenue Service and 30% support a decrease. 

Similarly, only 16% support increased funding to the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and other foreign aid, while 39% want to cut spending on foreign aid.

USAID has come under fire for its funding of contraception, LGBTQ+ activism, electric vehicles, armed terrorist groups, and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives around the world. The Department of State effectively assumed control of USAID’s functions after the Trump administration slashed more than 80% of the agency’s contracts. 

In general, DEI remains a fraught topic among voters, with 35% of poll respondents favoring decreasing government spending on DEI initiatives across all agencies. But 23% – mostly fueled by responses from Democrats and Independents – favor an increase, while 31% are content to keep DEI spending as is.

Medicare and Medicaid programs remain the “third rail” of American politics, with 85% of respondents supporting increasing or maintaining federal funding for the entitlement programs. Only 8% support a funding decrease, and 7% are undecided.

The U.S. military enjoys similar support, with 42% of voters supporting a funding increase and 38% content to keep military funding at current levels. Twelve percent want the roughly $850 billion budget to shrink, an unlikely scenario as Trump wants to boost defense spending to $1 trillion annually. 

Voters also approve of boosting resources for those who served in the military, with 51% backing a funding increase for the Department of Veterans Affairs and 33% supporting current funding levels. Only 7% prefer a decrease and 9% are unsure.

Some targets of Trump and the Department of Government Efficiency, including the Department of Education and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), remain relatively popular with Americans.

Compared to 24% of voters who support funding cuts, 69% of voters support increasing or maintaining federal funding for the Department of Education, which Trump effectively dismantled in March via executive order. 

The Trump administration also announced in March it will cut roughly 2,400 CDC employees and recently leaked budget plans that outline future restructuring and funding cuts. But 32% of voters polled support increasing federal spending on the CDC and 42% prefer maintaining funding levels, with 17% backing a funding cut.

The poll shows that while cutting wasteful government spending is “something Americans conceptually support,” DOGE should be “careful about the particulars,” David Byler, head of research at Noble Predictive Insights, told The Center Square.

“If it’s something where there’s an obvious government function going on, it’s a little bit harder to get the decrease there,” Byler said.

Highlighting Byler’s point, roughly 80% of voters back current or increased government spending on both the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Homeland Security. 

The Center Square Voters’ Voice Poll is one of only six national tracking polls in the United States.

(The Center Square) — Legislators rejected eight bills on Tuesday that would have greatly hindered the development of carbon capture and sequestration, a major blow to Louisiana constituents concerned about eminent domain and CO2 leaks.

Only one bill moved through the House Natural Resources Committee. 

Sen. Mike Reese, R-Beauregard, had his measure, Senate Bill 73, pass without objection. The bill requires the commissioner of conservation to give significant weight to local government input when making decisions on carbon dioxide sequestration projects that involve public comments or hearings.

Marketed as a way to reduce carbon emissions, carbon and capture and sequestration allows various industries to market their products as low carbon to international and domestic markets.

According to Louisiana Economic Development, there is currently $23 billion in carbon capture related investments in the state, with a projected 4,500 jobs. 

The committee met for more than 13 hours. 

Opposition to the bills included industry and parish leaders from all over Louisiana such as Anna Johnson, president of the West Baton Rouge Chamber of Commerce, Ray Gregson, executive director of the River Regions Chamber of Commerce, Michael Hecht, president & CEO of Greater New Orleans and representatives from the Louisiana Association of Business and Industry, Entergy, the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association and Landowners Association. 

The technology is a potential “game changing opportunity,” according to the River Region Chamber of Commerce. 

The regional chamber recently announced strong support for carbon capture and sequestration, calling the technology essential to securing billions in industrial investment, creating high-quality jobs, and maintaining Louisiana’s competitive edge in global energy markets.

Citing the 2024-25 Louisiana Economic Forecast by economist Dr. Loren Scott, the chamber emphasized that more than $150 billion in industrial projects across three metro areas are tied to the successful implementation of CCS and access to renewable energy.

Beyond economics, the chamber argued CCS is a proven, safe technology that has operated in the U.S. for decades, with more than 200 million tons of CO₂ safely stored underground since the 1970s. It said supporting CCS can both reduce emissions and modernize the state’s energy infrastructure without relying on restrictive energy policies or mandates.

The chamber also emphasized job creation, noting that the state’s oil and gas sector has lost more than 20,000 jobs since 2015. CCS, they argue, could absorb much of that displaced workforce, especially in areas like welding, operations, and maintenance.

There are currently over 20 bills filed which would’ve greatly limited the technology. Some of them function to give landowners and local communities more power in refusing carbon capture, others impose heavy regulations on the technology itself.

Much of the testimony from witnesses expressed concerns on the use of eminent domain, which several bills aimed to address. 

“You have to give it back to people and let them have the right to vote,” said Renne Savant, representing the Louisiana CO2 Alliance. 

Savant took issue with former Sen. Sharon Hewitt’s 2020 law which extended eminent domain authority to include pipelines transporting CO2 to storage facilities. 

“She said ‘we’re going to take it out of the air, and put it in existing pipelines and sequester it. Never did she mention the hundreds of miles of new pipelines’,” Savant said. “Never did she mention the millions of toxic CO2 byproducts that will be put underground, never mentioned anything about property rights.”

Savant was one of many whose testimony was less than friendly to the burgeoning technology.

Chris Alexander, a Baton Rouge attorney, called CCS “a complete racket that is being paid for with our money and being imposed on citizens throughout this state, whether or not they want it or not, and that, quite frankly, is a disgrace”

Roland Hollins, an Allen Parish Police Jury member, said that parishes are “being forced to take this poison that we don’t want.” 

“I’m not saying I’m for or against [CCS],” Hollins said in an interview with The Center Square. “But our people ought to be the ones who make that decision. Not Baton Rouge, not industry. Right now, the industry has a pistol in their pocket with eminent domain.”

Rep. Shane Mack, R-Livingston, introduced a bill to strengthen safety and environmental protections for carbon dioxide storage and pipeline projects. Schamerhorn introduced a bill that would allow victims of CO2 leaks to claim money for damages.

Opponents argued that Schamerhorn’s bill would drive CO2 investment out of Louisiana by creating legal risks companies wouldn’t accept and that Mack’s bill was superfluous and because the bill imposed broad, open-ended financial liabilities and regulatory obligations on carbon storage operators.

“The benefits do not outweigh the costs,” Schamerhorn said.