Note: A new report is available as of Aug. 26, 2024: “The Political Values of Harris and Trump Supporters.” The report and its accompanying detailed tables update the material in this report, examining how these issues are viewed by supporters of Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

Vote preference used in the new report was measured in a survey conducted Aug. 5-11, 2024, after Joe Biden had exited the presidential race. The values data in the new report was measured in the same survey used in this report, conducted April 8-14.

The patterns of opinion in the new report are largely the same as those discussed in this report (which used Biden/Trump preferences as of April).

While the economy, immigration and abortion have emerged as major issues in the 2024 election, Joe Biden and Donald Trump also have dramatically different ideas about the size and role of government.

These differences reflect decades-old divisions between Democrats and Republicans over the scope of government.

Among registered voters, large majorities of Biden supporters – roughly three-quarters or more – favor a bigger, more activist government.

• 74% say they would rather have a bigger government providing more services.
• 76% say government should do more to solve problems.
• 80% say government aid to the poor “does more good than harm.”

Trump supporters, by comparable margins, take the opposing view on all three questions.

The Pew Research Center survey of 8,709 adults – including 7,166 registered voters – conducted April 8-14, 2024, examines Americans’ views of the role and scope of government, the social safety net and long-term trends in trust in the federal government.

Democratic support for bigger government is little changed in the last five years but remains higher than it was a decade ago. Republicans’ views have shifted less over the last 10 years.

Among all adults, about three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents favor a bigger government, up from about six-in-ten in 2014 and 2015. The share of Republicans and Republican leaners who prefer a bigger government has increased only modestly over the same period.

Democratic support for bigger government, while slightly lower than in 2021 (78%), remains at nearly its highest level in five decades. During Bill Clinton’s presidency in the 1990s, fewer than half of Democrats said they preferred a bigger government with more services.

Voters continue to express very different views about government’s role in specific areas than about the government generally.

A large majority of voters (80%) – including 82% of Biden supporters and 78% of Trump supporters – say that in thinking about the long-term future of Social Security, benefits should not be reduced in any way.

However, Biden supporters are more likely than Trump supporters to say Social Security should cover more people with greater benefits.

• 46% of Biden supporters favor expanding Social Security coverage and benefits, compared with 28% of Trump supporters.

Most Americans (65%) continue to say the federal government has a responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage.

Democrats overwhelmingly (88%) say the federal government has this responsibility, compared with 40% of Republicans.

The share of Republicans who say the government has a responsibility to provide health coverage has increased 8 percentage points since 2021, from 32% to 40%.

There are wide income differences among Republicans in opinions about the government’s role in health care:

• 56% of Republicans with lower family incomes say the government has a responsibility to provide health coverage for all, compared with 36% of those with middle incomes and 29% of higher-income Republicans.

When asked how the government should provide health coverage, 36% of Americans say it should be provided through a single national program, while 28% say it should be through a mix of government and private programs. These views have changed little in recent years.

Democrats continue to be more likely than Republicans to favor a “single payer” government health insurance program (53% vs. 18%).

Other key findings in this report

• Americans’ trust in the federal government remains low but has modestly increased since last year. Today, 22% of American adults say they trust the government to do what is right always or most of the time, which is up from 16% in June 2023.
• While the public overall is divided over the nation’s ability to solve important problems, young adults are notably pessimistic about the country’s ability to solve problems. About half of Americans (52%) say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while 47% say it can find a way to solve problems and get what it wants. Roughly six-in-ten adults under age 30 (62%) say the nation can’t solve major problems, the highest share in any age group and 16 points higher than two years ago.

Americans are evenly divided in their preferences for the size of government. Yet a somewhat greater share wants the government to do more to solve problems than say it is doing too much better left to others.

There is a persistent belief that government is wasteful: 56% say it is “almost always wasteful and inefficient.”

However, a majority of Americans (58%) say government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public good.

Divisions on government’s size, scope

Overall, 49% say they would prefer a smaller government providing fewer services, while 48% say they would rather have a bigger government providing more services.

Most Democrats prefer a larger government. For nearly half a century, Democrats and Republicans have differed in their preferences for the size of government. Today, those differences are as wide as they have ever been:

• Nearly three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (74%) favor a bigger government, providing more services. By comparison, in 2015, a smaller majority of Democrats (59%) said they preferred a bigger government.
• Just 20% of Republicans and Republican leaners prefer a bigger government; nearly four times as many want smaller government with fewer services. Republicans’ views of the size of government have changed less than Democrats’. Still, when George W. Bush was running for reelection in 2004, roughly a third of Republicans favored a bigger government.

When asked about the proper role of government, about half of Americans (53%) say the government should do more to solve problems, while 46% say the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.

An overwhelming share of Democrats (76%) say government should do more to solve problems, while about a quarter (23%) say it is doing too many things better left to individuals and businesses.

By contrast, Republicans prefer a more limited role for government: 71% say government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, while 28% say government should do more to solve problems.

There are also sizable demographic differences in these views:

• White adults (54%) are the most likely to say government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals, while smaller shares of Asian (34%), Black (31%) and Hispanic (29%) adults say the same.
• Younger adults are more likely than older adults to favor a larger role for government, with adults ages 18 to 29 (66%) being the most likely to say government should do more to solve problems.
• Among income groups, a majority of lower-income adults (61%) say government should do more to solve problems, while smaller shares of upper- and middle-income adults (53% and 48%, respectively) say the same.

Views among partisans by race, ethnicity and income

Among partisans, there are wide demographic differences on the preferred role of government – especially among Republicans.

Hispanic Republicans (58%) are much more likely than White Republicans (21%) to favor a larger role for government.

Views among Democrats are much less divided, with at least seven-in-ten Democrats in each racial and ethnic group saying government should do more to solve problems.

Nearly half of lower-income Republicans (46%) say that the government should do more to solve problems, while smaller shares of middle- (22%) and upper-income (19%) Republicans say the same.

Wide majorities of Democrats across income groups say government should do more to solve problems.

Views on the efficiency of government

In assessments of the efficiency of the government, a majority of Americans (56%) find it to be “almost always wasteful and inefficient.” A smaller share (42%) say government “often does a better job than people give it credit for.”

Overall, views on the efficiency of government have remained somewhat steady since 2019, with views today mirroring those five years ago.

Among partisans, a majority of Democrats (63%) say the government often does a better job than people give it credit for, while a large majority of Republicans (77%) say government is often wasteful and inefficient.

Views on the efficiency of government in both parties have remained steady since 2021.

While Democrats are generally more likely than Republicans to say government does not get enough credit, these views vary somewhat depending on which party holds the presidency:

• Democrats are now more likely to give credit to the government than they were during the Trump administration.
• Among Republicans, views of government efficiency were more positive during the Trump administration.

This is consistent with shifts in views during prior administrations.

Views on the government’s regulation of business

On the topic of government regulation of business, about six-in-ten Americans (58%) say that government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest. Four-in-ten, however, say government regulation of business usually does more harm than good.

These views have remained largely unchanged since 2017.

As with other attitudes about government, Republicans and Democrats differ on the impact of government regulation of business:

• About two-thirds of Republicans (65%) say government regulation does more harm than good.
• Roughly eight-in-ten Democrats (82%) say government regulation is necessary to protect the public interest.

Among other demographic differences:

• White adults (45%) are the most likely to say government regulation does more harm than good, while smaller shares of Hispanic (32%), Asian (29%) and Black (27%) adults say the same.
• Younger adults are more likely than older adults to say government regulation of business is necessary to protect the public interest, with adults ages 18 to 29 (64%) being the most likely to say this.

Confidence in the nation’s ability to solve problems

Americans are divided in their views on the country’s ability to solve important problems. About half (52%) of Americans say “this country can’t solve many of its important problems,” while 47% say that “as Americans, we can always find ways to solve our problems and get what we want.”

More Americans express confidence in the country’s ability to solve problems now than a year ago (47% now, 43% then). Still, the share saying this is lower than it was from 2019 to 2022.

Unlike assessments of government, there are no partisan differences in views on the country’s ability to solve its important problems.

In both parties, about half say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while slightly narrower shares say Americans can always find ways to solve the country’s problems.

Views among age groups

Among age groups, younger adults are the most likely to express skepticism in the country’s ability to solve its important problems. About six-in-ten adults ages 18 to 29 (62%) say the U.S. can’t solve many of its important problems, while smaller shares of older adults say the same.

Overall, the shares of adults in each age group who voice skepticism on the country’s ability to solve its problems remain higher than they were in 2022.

However, older adults have grown slightly more optimistic on this issue in the past year. Views among the youngest adults are relatively unchanged from 2022.

Majorities of Americans see a role for government on several safety net issues.

• 65% say the government has a responsibility to ensure all Americans have health care coverage.
• 55% say government aid to the poor does more good than harm.
• 79% say Social Security benefits should not be reduced in any way.

Views on the effect of government aid to the poor

A majority of Americans (55%) say that, overall, government aid to the poor does more good than harm, while about four-in-ten (43%) say it does more harm than good.

Republicans and Republican-leaning independents continue to be critical of government aid to the poor:

• 65% say government aid does more harm than good, while 34% say it does more good than harm.
• However, the share of Republicans saying government aid has a positive effect is up 6 percentage points since 2022.

As in past years, about three-quarters of Democrats (76%) say government aid to the poor has an overall positive effect (23% say it does more harm).

About half of Americans (52%) now say the government should do more to help the needy, even if it means going deeper into debt. By comparison, 45% say the government can’t afford to do much more to help the needy.

Support for doing more to help those in need, even if the debt increases, is 6 percentage points lower than it was in June 2020, in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

• About seven-in-ten Democrats (72%) say the government should do more to help the needy, down from 79% who said the same in 2020.
• A far smaller share of Republicans – 33% – say the government should do more even if it leads to additional debt. Views among Republicans are largely unchanged since 2020.

Government assistance to people in need

About four-in-ten Americans (41%) say the government should provide more assistance to people in need, while about a quarter say it should provide less (27%). Three-in-ten say the government is providing about the right amount of assistance.

Like other attitudes about social safety net policies, there are wide partisan differences.

Six-in-ten Democrats say the government should provide more assistance to people in need. Just one-in-ten say it should provide less, while three-in-ten say the current level is about right.

By comparison, 46% of Republicans say the government should provide less assistance, while 21% say it should provide more.Three-in-ten say the government is providing the right amount of assistance.

There are other demographic differences:

• Two-thirds of Black adults say the government should provide more assistance to people in need, while smaller shares of Asian (40%), Hispanic (39%) and White (37%) adults say the same.
• Younger adults are more likely than older adults to say the government should provide more assistance.
• A majority of lower-income adults (56%) say the government should provide more assistance. Smaller shares of middle- (36%) and upper-income (31%) adults say the same.

Views on government’s role in health care

About two-thirds of Americans (65%) say it is the federal government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage, while roughly a third (34%) say it does not.

Americans are slightly more likely to say it is the government’s responsibility to ensure health care coverage for all than they were a few years ago (62% in 2021). While Democratic opinion has not changed over this period, the share of Republicans who say government has this responsibility has grown.

• Four-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents now say it is the government’s responsibility to ensure health care coverage for all, up from 32% who said this in 2022. Six-in-ten say it is not the government’s responsibility, down from 68% who said the same three years ago.
• Democrats and Democratic leaners overwhelmingly hold the view that the government has a responsibility to ensure health care coverage: 88% say this. Democrats’ views on this question are largely unchanged in recent years.

Views by party and income

Majorities of adults at all income levels say the government is responsible for ensuring health care coverage. However, lower-income adults (73%) are more likely than upper- (63%) or middle-income (62%) adults to say this.

Among Republicans, there are differences within income groups on whether government is responsible for ensuring all Americans have health care coverage:

• 56% of lower-income Republicans say it is the government’s responsibility to make sure all Americans have health care coverage, including about a quarter (24%) who say this should be done through a single national government program.
• Middle-income (36%) and upper-income Republicans (29%) are far less likely to say the government has a responsibility to ensure people have health care coverage. Majorities in both of these groups say it is not the government’s responsibility.

By comparison, more than eight-in-ten Democrats across all income levels say the government is responsible for ensuring all Americans have health care coverage.

• Overall, about half of Democrats (53%) say this should be done through a single national government program. About six-in-ten upper-income (57%) and middle-income (58%) Democrats say this, compared with about four-in-ten lower-income Democrats (43%).

Views on the future of Social Security

Americans overwhelmingly (79%) say Social Security benefits should not be reduced in any way, including four-in-ten who say it should cover more people with greater benefits. Roughly two-in-ten (19%) say some future reductions need to be considered.

Wide majorities of both Republicans and Democrats do not support Social Security benefit reductions: 77% of Republicans and 83% of Democrats say Social Security benefits should not be reduced in any way.

However, Democrats (51%) are more likely than Republicans (29%) to say Social Security should be expanded.

Across demographic groups there is broad opposition to Social Security benefit cuts. But there are more sizable differences in support for expanding benefits:

• Black (58%) and Hispanic (51%) adults are more likely than White (33%) and Asian (38%) adults to say benefits should be expanded.
• Older adults are less likely than those in other age groups to say benefits should be expanded to cover more people with greater benefits: 26% of those 65 and older say this. By comparison, adults under 30 (51%) are most likely to favor expansion. 
• Lower-income adults are the most supportive of expanding Social Security benefits: 53% say this, compared with 39% of those in middle-income families and 23% of upper-income adults.

Americans’ trust in the federal government, which has hovered at or near record lows for nearly 20 years, has modestly increased over the last year. Still, only about two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right.

Frustration also remains the dominant feeling among the public, as it has for two decades – with a 60% majority now saying this. Far smaller shares say the federal government makes them feel either content or angry.

Trust in government

Roughly two-in-ten Americans (22%) say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always or most of the time.

A majority of Americans say they trust the federal government “only some of the time” (59%), while 17% say they never trust it.

Trust in the federal government is up from a year ago, when 16% said they trusted the government at least most of the time.

Trust in the federal government has been consistently low for the last several decades, and today’s level is comparable to levels of trust in 2022 and 2021.

For more on trust in the federal government over the last 70 years, please visit our trust interactive.

Partisan and demographic differences in trust in government

Americans tend to trust the federal government more when the party they associate with holds the White House. Today, 35% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say they trust the government almost always or most of the time, a somewhat larger share than in recent years. As has been the case since the beginning of Joe Biden’s administration, only about one-in-ten Republicans and Republican leaners say they trust the government to do what is right.

• Throughout Biden’s presidency, Democrats have been more likely than Republicans to trust the federal government.
• During Donald Trump’s administration, Republicans expressed higher levels of trust than Democrats did.
• 7% of conservative Republicans trust the government all or most of the time, compared with 17% of moderate and liberal Republicans.
• There are no substantial ideological differences among Democrats on this question.

Asian (36%), Hispanic (30%) and Black (27%) adults are more likely than White adults (19%) to say they trust the government all or most of the time.

Age and educational differences in trust in government are relatively modest.

Adults under age 50 express somewhat less trust in the federal government than those who are older (20% always/most of the time vs. 25%).

Americans without a college degree (21%) are somewhat less likely than those with a college degree (26%) to say they trust the federal government all or most of the time.

Feelings toward the federal government

A majority of Americans say they feel frustrated – rather than angry or content – with the federal government. This has been the dominant emotion for much of the last several decades – with the sole exception being the period shortly after Sept. 11, 2001.

Today, six-in-ten Americans say they feel frustration toward the federal government, while 21% say they feel anger and 18% say they feel basically content.

The balance of Americans’ feelings toward the federal government have been largely unchanged in the last few years.

Partisans’ feelings toward the federal government shift with the occupants of the White House

Frustration toward the federal government is the dominant emotion for both Republicans and Democrats, regardless of which party is in control of the White House. But partisans’ anger with government is higher when administrations from the other party are in power. Contentment is higher among people who favor the party of the president.

Today, 28% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say they are content. Just 8% of Republicans and Republican leaners say this.

Conversely, 34% of Republicans currently say they feel anger toward the government in Washington. Only one-in-ten Democrats say they are angry.

This report is a collaborative effort based on the input and analysis of the following individuals:

Research team

Carroll Doherty, Director, Political Research
Jocelyn Kiley, Associate Director, Political Research
Baxter Oliphant, Senior Researcher
Hannah Hartig, Senior Researcher
Gabe Borelli, Research Associate
Andrew Daniller, Research Associate
Joseph Copeland, Research Analyst
Ted Van Green, Research Analyst
Andy Cerda, Research Assistant
Shanay Gracia, Research Assistant

Communications and editorial

Nida Asheer, Senior Communications Manager
Talia Price, Communications Associate
David Kent, Senior Copy Editor

Graphic design and web publishing

Alissa Scheller, Senior Information Graphics Designer
Reem Nadeem, Digital Production

Methodology

Andrew Mercer, Senior Research Methodologist
Dorene Asare-Marfo, Panel Manager
Dana Popky, Associate Panel Manager
Arnold Lau, Research Methodologist

The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Overview

The American Trends Panel (ATP), created by Pew Research Center, is a nationally representative panel of randomly selected U.S. adults. Panelists participate via self-administered web surveys. Panelists who do not have internet access at home are provided with a tablet and wireless internet connection. Interviews are conducted in both English and Spanish. The panel is being managed by Ipsos.

Data in this report is drawn from ATP Wave 146, conducted from April 8 to April 14, 2024. It includes oversamples of non-Hispanic Asian adults, non-Hispanic Black adults, Hispanic adults, and adults ages 18 to 29 in order to provide more precise estimates of the opinions and experiences of these smaller demographic subgroups. It also included an oversample of validated 2016 and 2020 “vote switchers,” who either voted for Donald Trump in 2020 but not in 2016, or who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but not for Hillary Clinton in 2016. These oversampled groups are weighted back to reflect their correct proportions in the population.

A total of 8,709 panelists responded out of 9,527 who were sampled, for a response rate of 91%. The cumulative response rate accounting for nonresponse to the recruitment surveys and attrition is 3%. The break-off rate among panelists who logged on to the survey and completed at least one item is less than 1%. The margin of sampling error for the full sample of 8,709 respondents is plus or minus 1.5 percentage points.

Panel recruitment

The ATP was created in 2014, with the first cohort of panelists invited to join the panel at the end of a large, national, landline and cellphone random-digit-dial survey that was conducted in both English and Spanish. Two additional recruitments were conducted using the same method in 2015 and 2017, respectively. Across these three surveys, a total of 19,718 adults were invited to join the ATP, of whom 9,942 (50%) agreed to participate.

In August 2018, the ATP switched from telephone to address-based sampling (ABS) recruitment. A study cover letter and a pre-incentive are mailed to a stratified, random sample of households selected from the U.S. Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File. This Postal Service file has been estimated to cover as much as 98% of the population, although some studies suggest that the coverage could be in the low 90% range.¹ Within each sampled household, the adult with the next birthday is asked to participate. Other details of the ABS recruitment protocol have changed over time but are available upon request.²

We have recruited a national sample of U.S. adults to the ATP approximately once per year since 2014. In some years, the recruitment has included additional efforts (known as an “oversample”) to boost sample size with underrepresented groups. For example, Hispanic adults, Black adults and Asian adults were oversampled in 2019, 2022 and 2023, respectively.

Across the six address-based recruitments, a total of 23,862 adults were invited to join the ATP, of whom 20,917 agreed to join the panel and completed an initial profile survey. Of the 30,859 individuals who have ever joined the ATP, 11,902 remained active panelists and continued to receive survey invitations at the time this survey was conducted.

The American Trends Panel never uses breakout routers or chains that direct respondents to additional surveys.

Sample design

The overall target population for this survey was noninstitutionalized persons ages 18 and older living in the U.S., including Alaska and Hawaii. It featured a stratified random sample from the ATP in which the following groups were selected with certainty:

• Non-Hispanic Asian adults
• Non-Hispanic Black adults
• Hispanic adults
• Adults ages 18-29
• Validated 2016 and 2020 voters³ who voted for Donald Trump in 2020 but voted for a different candidate in 2016
• Validated 2016 and 2020 voters who voted for Joe Biden in 2020 but did not vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016.

The remaining panelists were sampled at rates designed to ensure that the share of respondents in each stratum is proportional to its share of the U.S. adult population to the greatest extent possible. Respondent weights are adjusted to account for differential probabilities of selection as described in the Weighting section below.

Questionnaire development and testing

The questionnaire was developed by Pew Research Center in consultation with Ipsos. The web program was rigorously tested on both PC and mobile devices by the Ipsos project management team and Pew Research Center researchers. The Ipsos project management team also populated test data that was analyzed in SPSS to ensure the logic and randomizations were working as intended before launching the survey.

Incentives

All respondents were offered a post-paid incentive for their participation. Respondents could choose to receive the post-paid incentive in the form of a check or a gift code to Amazon.com or could choose to decline the incentive. Incentive amounts ranged from $5 to $20 depending on whether the respondent belongs to a part of the population that is harder or easier to reach. Differential incentive amounts were designed to increase panel survey participation among groups that traditionally have low survey response propensities.

Data collection protocol

The data collection field period for this survey was April 8 to April 14, 2024. Postcard notifications were mailed to a subset of ATP panelists⁴ with a known residential address on April 8. 

Invitations were sent out in two separate launches: soft launch and full launch. Sixty panelists were included in the soft launch, which began with an initial invitation sent on April 8. The ATP panelists chosen for the initial soft launch were known responders who had completed previous ATP surveys within one day of receiving their invitation. All remaining English- and Spanish-speaking sampled panelists were included in the full launch and were sent an invitation on April 9.

All panelists with an email address received an email invitation and up to two email reminders if they did not respond to the survey. All ATP panelists who consented to SMS messages received an SMS invitation and up to two SMS reminders.

Data quality checks

To ensure high-quality data, the Center’s researchers performed data quality checks to identify any respondents showing clear patterns of satisficing. This includes checking for whether respondents left questions blank at very high rates or always selected the first or last answer presented. As a result of this checking, three ATP respondents were removed from the survey dataset prior to weighting and analysis.

Weighting

The ATP data is weighted in a multistep process that accounts for multiple stages of sampling and nonresponse that occur at different points in the survey process.

First, each panelist begins with a base weight that reflects their probability of selection for their initial recruitment survey. These weights are then rescaled and adjusted to account for changes in the design of ATP recruitment surveys from year to year. Finally, the weights are calibrated to align with the population benchmarks in the accompanying table to correct for nonresponse to recruitment surveys and panel attrition. If only a subsample of panelists was invited to participate in the wave, this weight is adjusted to account for any differential probabilities of selection.

Among the panelists who completed the survey, this weight is then calibrated again to align with the population benchmarks identified in the accompanying table and trimmed at the 2nd and 98th percentiles to reduce the loss in precision stemming from variance in the weights. This trimming is performed separately among non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic Asian, Hispanic and all other respondents. Sampling errors and tests of statistical significance take into account the effect of weighting.

The following table shows the unweighted sample sizes and the error attributable to sampling that would be expected at the 95% level of confidence for different groups in the survey.

Sample sizes and sampling errors for other subgroups are available upon request. In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Additional wave methodology

This report also features questions fielded in a later survey, ATP Wave 148. Further information for those questions can be found here.

Dispositions and response rates

© Pew Research Center 2024

How family income tiers are calculated

Family income data reported in this study is adjusted for household size and cost-of-living differences by geography. Panelists then are assigned to income tiers that are based on the median adjusted family income of all American Trends Panel members. The process uses the following steps:

1. First, panelists are assigned to the midpoint of the income range they selected in a family income question that was measured on either the most recent annual profile survey or, for newly recruited panelists, their recruitment survey. This provides an approximate income value that can be used in calculations for the adjustment.
2. Next, these income values are adjusted for the cost of living in the geographic area where the panelist lives. This is calculated using price indexes published by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. These indexes, known as Regional Price Parities (RPP), compare the prices of goods and services across all U.S. metropolitan statistical areas as well as non-metro areas with the national average prices for the same goods and services. The most recent available data at the time of the annual profile survey is from 2021. Those who fall outside of metropolitan statistical areas are assigned the overall RPP for their state’s non-metropolitan area.
3. Family incomes are further adjusted for the number of people in a household using the methodology from Pew Research Center’s previous work on the American middle class. This is done because a four-person household with an income of say, $50,000, faces a tighter budget constraint than a two-person household with the same income.
4. Panelists are then assigned an income tier. “Middle-income” adults are in families with adjusted family incomes that are between two-thirds and double the median adjusted family income for the full ATP at the time of the most recent annual profile survey. The median adjusted family income for the panel is roughly $71,800. Using this median income, the middle-income range is about $47,900 to $143,600. Lower-income families have adjusted incomes less than $47,900 and upper-income families have adjusted incomes greater than $143,600 (all figures expressed in 2022 dollars and scaled to a household size of three). If a panelist did not provide their income and/or their household size, they are assigned “no answer” in the income tier variable.

Two examples of how a given area’s cost-of-living adjustment was calculated are as follows: the Anniston-Oxford metropolitan area in Alabama is a relatively inexpensive area, with a price level that is 16.2% less than the national average. The San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley metropolitan area in California is one of the most expensive areas, with a price level that is 19.8% higher than the national average. Income in the sample is adjusted to make up for this difference. As a result, a family with an income of $41,900 in the Anniston-Oxford area is as well off financially as a family of the same size with an income of $59,900 in San Francisco.