Public Confidence High But Concern About West Bank Violence Grows
Updated April 26, 2002
Public confidence in the war on terrorism remains high, but the escalating violence on the West Bank has complicated U.S. efforts. More than half of Americans (54 percent) say U.S. support for Israel is hurting the U.S. war on terrorism, and a growing number say the U.S. isn't doing enough to win over Muslims. Yet 60 percent also say the U.S. should maintain its current level of support for Israel.
Most Americans believe the public unity and compassion shown to victims of the Sept. 11 attacks has changed the nation for the better. Yet many doubt the changes will last - except, perhaps, for one.
Public Agenda, in our Aggravating Circumstances study on civility, found 74 percent said people became "more caring and thoughtful" after the terrorist attacks. But nearly half (46 percent) said that thoughtfulness would only last a few months. Only a third (34 percent) said it would last a long while, and 18 percent said it was already over.
If any change in attitudes lingers from the tragedy of Sept. 11, the public believes it may be the one symbolized by the flags flying on porches and cars aerials -- a stronger sense of patriotism. Nearly nine in 10 (87 percent) said Americans came to appreciate their country more after the attacks. More than half (54 percent) said the greater appreciation of America they saw around them would last a long time. Only 6 percent thought that attitude had already faded.
Bin Laden, Prisoners of War and Military Tribunals
After criticism by human rights groups and European allies, the Bush administration has decided to apply Geneva Convention protections to Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan but not members of al Qaeda. Several legal groups continue to try and have the detainees face civilian courts, rather than the proposed military tribunals.
Most Americans (72 percent in the Gallup poll taken Jan. 25-27) say the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo is "acceptable." Gallup also asked questions describing the treatment of a detainee who was held "outdoors in an 8 foot by 8 foot cell, and when traveling … was blindfolded and his hands bound." Three-quarters told Gallup that it would be acceptable to hold a Taliban soldier under those conditions. Half of those surveyed (49 percent) said that would also be acceptable treatment for an American soldier captured in war; 46 percent said it would be unacceptable.
One of the most controversial strategies to fight terrorism has been President Bush's order permitting non-citizens accused of terrorism to be tried by special military tribunals, which could be closed to the public and offer defendants fewer rights than in a criminal court or a conventional military court-martial. The primary candidates for such a trial, of course, are Osama bin Laden and captured members of his al Qaeda network. While bin Laden is still at large, more than 350 suspected al Qaeda and Taliban fighters are being held in U.S. custody.
Public opinion has not changed on military tribunals since the idea was announced. The ABC News/Washington Post poll on Jan. 27 found 60 percent in favor, almost identical to results in November. A more detailed November question giving arguments for tribunals (protecting ongoing probes and that civilian jurors might be afraid to convict) and against (closed proceedings that singled out non-citizens) also showed virtually the same results.
It's worth noting that surveys regularly find that the military is one of the most trusted public institutions, and ranks considerably higher in surveys than the criminal justice system. In any event, 77 percent of those surveyed by Fox News on Jan. 11 said they were "very" or "somewhat" confident accused terrorists would receive fair trials.
As a U.S. citizen, the so-called "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh is facing a civilian trial on charges of conspiring to kill Americans overseas and providing support to a terrorist organization. The Bush administration chose not to charge Lindh with treason, which is more difficult to prove. Sixty percent told Gallup they disagree with the government's decision not to pursue treason charges. Lindh's lawyers say statements he made to interrogators in Afghanistan without a lawyer present should be thrown out. Seventy-one percent of Americans told Gallup the statements should be allowed in evidence.
When it comes to the fate of bin Laden himself, however, the public does not completely reject the idea of a civilian or international trial. President Bush has said the U.S. wants bin Laden "dead or alive," and a Gallup survey on Nov. 26-27 found 54 percent who said it would be better for the U.S. if he was killed.
If bin Laden is taken alive, however, 62 percent told Gallup they want to see him put on trial, compared with 35 percent who would execute him immediately. Some 59 percent say he should be tried by the U.S., rather than an international court (37 percent). If tried by the U.S., 54 percent surveyed Dec. 14-16 say bin Laden should face a military tribunal and 41 percent said a regular civilian court. At this point, the public would apply the same principles to any terrorists; a Gallup question that asked how any suspected terrorists should be tried found almost exactly the same results.
If convicted, 69 percent in the Gallup survey say bin Laden should get the death penalty; 28 percent preferred a life sentence without parole.
For many Americans, getting hold of bin Laden himself has consistently been a key war aim. But the number who say the U.S. must capture or kill bin Laden for the war to be a success has fallen: 50 percent in the April 18-21 ABC News/Washington Post survey, up slightly from March but down compared to 64 percent on Dec. 19. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) told the ABC/Post survey in March that attacking al Qaeda in general is more important than getting bin Laden specifically, and 54 percent say it isn't worth a "large number" of U.S. casualties to get him.
The Washington Post speculated that fewer people are focused on bin Laden because they believe the U.S. has successfully curtailed bin Laden's ability to maintain his terrorist group, with 82 percent saying the U.S. has been at least somewhat effective in this. Yet most people say they're at least somewhat confident the U.S. will catch bin Laden (60 percent in the ABC/Washington Post poll, 73 percent in the CBS/New York Times survey).
Immigration and Civil Liberties
Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Justice Department are coming in for stiff criticism from Congress and civil liberties groups over some of the actions taken to pursue terrorists. So far, surveys show most Americans support specific elements of the crackdown, but polls also suggest the public is beginning to struggle with concerns about fairness and civil liberties.
From the very first surveys after the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, most Americans told pollsters that the country would have to give up some rights to fight terrorism (79 percent in a CBS/New York Times poll in September). More recent surveys show some shifts and qualifications in public attitudes, particularly as time passes without any new attacks. The Gallup survey on Jan. 25-27 found the public split: 47 percent said the government should take "all steps necessary" to prevent terrorism even if "basic civil liberties" were violated, while 49 percent disagreed. In November, Newsweek found 72 percent who said the Bush administration was "about right" in its approach to civil liberties, but in its Jan. 31- Feb. 1 survey that number fell to 59 percent.
Public Agenda has found in the past that the public supports civil liberties in the abstract, but often hasn't spent much time thinking about the tradeoffs and precedents that might be set. (See our Red Flags on Internet Free Speech and Privacy). Also, personal experience is always a potent factor in public attitudes, and few Americans have ever lived under the restrictions that worry civil libertarians.
The public also has a long history of trusting the police more than the criminal justice system, and valuing being tough on criminals over the rights of the accused. There are important racial differences in those attitudes, however, and the ABC/Washington Post survey did find that minorities are less likely to be supportive of restrictions. (For an analysis on the issue of racial profiling, see the section on The View of Islam at Home).
But surveys also find that when asked what should be done to prevent terrorism, the public's strongest instincts are for measures such as metal detectors in public buildings and tighter airport security. Only a third want increased electronic eavesdropping and even fewer support random searches by police.
The way survey questions are worded seems to make a difference in the response -- usually a warning sign that public attitudes can change depending on events or as people learn more about an issue. When CBS/Times researchers simply asked whether it's a good or bad idea to allow the government to listen in on conversations between suspected terrorists in jail and their lawyers, 72 percent thought it was a good idea. But when researchers rephrased the question to add that attorney-client conversations have always been private, only 30 percent said it was a good idea.
A Nov. 27 ABC/Washington Post poll also found 86 percent who said the government was justified in detaining immigrants who had overstayed their visas or otherwise violated immigration laws. Those alleged violations may provide important context to public attitudes about the hundreds who have been detained during federal investigations. Historically, the public has mixed views on immigration, but usually makes a clear distinction between legal and illegal immigrants -- with a far tougher stance on illegal immigrants. (See our Red Flags on Immigration).
There is evidence of a spike in opposition to immigration since Sept. 11, with 58 percent of the public telling Gallup researchers last month that immigration should be decreased -- a 20-point change since a year ago. Fox found 65 percent willing to temporarily stop all immigration as an anti-terrorist measure. This could be a short-term reaction, since support for immigration had generally been increasing since 1995, or it could signal the beginning of a long-term reconsideration.
Afghanistan, the West Bank and the 'Axis of Evil'
The Bush administration's plans to follow up military success in Afghanistan with action against Iraq or other nations accused of sponsoring terrorism has been sidetracked by the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has proved increasingly violent and intractable. U.S. efforts to broker a settlement have proved fruitless so far, while Middle Eastern governments insist a settlement must precede any expansion of the war on terror.
Six in 10 Americans (61 percent) told the ABC News/Washington Post poll on April 18-21 that U.S. vital interests are at stake in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Given a choice, most Americans think the situation should be a priority for President Bush. In a Fox News survey on April 16-17, 21 percent said Bush should focus on the West Bank situation; 35 percent said the war on terrorism elsewhere and 33 percent said he should focus on both equally. Yet 54 percent also say they'd prefer the U.S. leave a peace settlement to the two sides, rather than take a leading role, according to the ABC/Post poll.
Historically, surveys show the public sympathizes more with the Israelis than the Palestinians, but would rather not take a side. In the latest Fox News poll, 12 percent blame the Israelis for the failure to reach peace, 33 percent blame the Palestinians, and 36 percent blame both.
Two-thirds (66 percent) told the ABC/Post poll that Israel's military action in response to a series of suicide bombings is justified, and three-quarters believe Yasser Arafat is responsible for the terrorist attacks. Nine in 10 say Arafat can do more to end those attacks. But there is some public unease with Israel's actions, with 61 percent who say Israel "should have done more" to avoid civilian casualties in its offensive. Four in 10 (43 percent) say the U.S. should apply more pressure on Israel to negotiate.
The public is divided on what more the U.S. can do. The ABC/Washington Post survey found the public split on whether to cut military aid to Israel if it fails to withdraw from Palestinian areas (47 percent in favor, 48 percent opposed). The public is just as split on whether to provide the Palestinians with economic aid in exchange for a peace deal (47 percent both for and against). Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) told Fox News they would oppose sending U.S. troops to bring about a ceasefire, but 48 percent would support sending U.S. peacekeepers after a treaty has been signed. [Additional detail is available in the section on "The View of Islam Abroad."]
In his State of the Union address, President Bush cited Iraq, Iran and North Korea as terrorist sponsors and an "axis of evil" that would be the next stage of the war on terrorism. Nearly seven in 10 Americans (68 percent) say the U.S. should lead military attacks "in other countries where it believes terrorists are hiding" such as Iraq, Somalia and the Philippines, according to the CBS News poll conducted April 1-2. Fifty-eight percent said they would still approve of U.S. attacks if other countries refused to support the action. Yet in other situations, surveys have shown that the public doesn't automatically expect the U.S. to take a leading role in world affairs, and should at least consider the views of allies before using force.
Almost as many (71 percent) would support military action to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, according to the ABC News/Washington Post survey on Jan. 27. Then again, many Americans have always said the U.S. should have removed Hussein during the Gulf War, ranging from 70 percent in 1993 to 52 percent last February.
Most of the public supports using U.S. troops as peacekeepers in Afghanistan (78 percent in a late-November Gallup poll, 73 percent in a December ABC/Washington Post poll). In addition, 71 percent told ABC the U.S. should take a "leading" or "large" role in sending food and economic aid to Afghanistan, and 64 percent said the U.S. should help establish a new government there.
But the public may not automatically view further military action as the next step. When Gallup asked how the U.S. should wage the "war on terrorism" after achieving its goals in Afghanistan, more than half chose economic and diplomatic efforts (54 percent) compared to 39 percent for "direct military action."
The U.S. public continues to strongly support the military campaign in Afghanistan, as it has since the beginning. The very first surveys in September found nine in 10 Americans supported a military response, and the most recent CBS News poll found 88 percent in favor of the Afghan campaign. Surveys have also consistently found that two-thirds or more of the public has been in favor of military action even in the event of a lengthy conflict, a recession or further terror attacks.
The Home Front and Victims Compensation
Surveys show a widespread belief that the nation has been changed by the Sept. 11 atttacks, but also show widespread doubt that the changes will last -- except, perhaps, for one.
Eight in 10 Americans told the ABC News/Washington Post poll on March 7-10 the country has been changed by Sept. 11, and 78 percent said it has been a change for the better. More than half (57 percent) say their personal life has changed "in a lasting way," and a majority of those (73 percent) say the change has been in the way they feel, rather than how they live their day-to-day lives. Of those who say they've changed personally, 73 percent say the changes have been for the better.
Public Agenda, in our Aggravating Circumstances study on civility, found 74 percent who said in January that people became "more caring and thoughtful toward each other" after the attacks. But nearly half (46 percent) said that thoughtfulness would only last a few months. Only a third (34 percent) said it would last a long while, and 18 percent said it was already over.
The change that may linger, according to Public Agenda's survey, is a greater appreciation for America. Some 87 percent said Americans came to appreciate their country more after the attacks, and more than half (54 percent) said the feeling would last a long time. Only 6 percent thought it was already over.
While many commentators spoke of a greater sense of community since Sept. 11, the public is apparently skeptical that will translate into success for President Bush's call for greater volunteerism. Thirty percent of those surveyed told Newsweek that "very few" will get more involved, and another 34 percent said "only some" would act. Most Americans have acted in one area: Nearly two-thirds (65 percent) told ABC/Washington Post researchers in March that they were still displaying an American flag at home or on their car.
One way in which day-to day behavior hasn't changed is in attendance at religious services. While there were news reports of large attendance at church and at memorial services after the terror attacks, Gallup reports that polls only showed a small increase in weekly religious attendance. By December, Gallup found weekly religious attendance had dropped to 41 percent -- about average for Americans.
Overall fear of terrorism seems to be dropping in surveys, as more time passes without a new attack. Only 28 percent told the CBS News poll on April 1-2 that they considered another terrorist attack "very likely" during the next few months, compared to 53 percent in a CBS/New York Times survey in late October. Another 46 percent, however, said another attack was "somewhat likely," and the same number also worry that the current violence on the West Bank makes another terrorist attack more likely.
Overall, the government has been getting lower marks for its handling of terrorism at home than for the war in Afghanistan. Fifty-five percent expressed at least some confidence in the government's ability to prevent further terrorism, compared to 44 percent who weren't confident in the March 7-10 ABC/Washington Post poll. Yet two-thirds (66 percent) also said the government was doing "all it reasonably can."
Greater unease with flying has been seen both in surveys and in actual travel bookings since Sept. 11. From the very first surveys after the attacks, the public has said tighter security would be a major deterrent to terrorism. In late October, however, the CBS/New York Times poll found 51 percent who believed the airlines hadn't done enough to improve airport security, and 42 percent who thought the federal government hadn't done enough.
Numerous surveys have found only very small numbers of Americans ever sought out antibiotics in fear of bioterrorism. Shortly after the first anthrax cases were reported, the ABC News/Washington Post poll found 5 percent had spoken to a doctor about anthrax and 2 percent said they had actually bought antibiotics. Still, with the Postal Service advising caution in opening mail, 31 percent told Newsweek on Oct. 25-26 that they'd actually thrown out mail they didn't recognize. Yet as recently as Feb. 12-13, three-quarters admitted to Fox News that they were worried about bioterrorism -- a slight increase over October.
The charitable response to Sept. 11 gets mixed reviews from the public. When a Public Agenda survey in January asked about the use of Sept. 11 charity funds, 55 percent said "much of the money will be misused or get to the wrong people." Half of the public told Fox News they are at least "somewhat" confident the charity funds are being spent properly, but 43 percent expressed doubts.
Survivors of those killed on Sept. 11 have criticized the government's compensation plan, designed to provide up to $1.6 million per victim, with families waiving the right to sue. The government plans to subtract any insurance or other compensation from the federal payment, which has been sharply criticized by victims' families. The public may or may not have grappled with the complexities of the plan, but their first reaction in surveys is that the plan seems fair. Seventy-two percent of those surveyed in the ABC/Washington Post poll said families should be compensated, and 54 percent agree that insurance benefits should be deducted from the total.
The Economy
With the war in Afghanistan proceeding well and no further terrorist attacks to unsettle the public, the public now considers the economy a greater problem (54 percent) than terrorism (43 percent), according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post survey. However, it's important to note that there have been no terrorist attacks since the October anthrax scare, and public concern could shift quickly if new attacks occur.
There have been some recent signs of greater public optimism on the economy. The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll on Jan. 18-21 found 47 percent who said "the worst is over" for the recession, compared to 41 percent who said the worst is yet to come. By comparison, the Dec. 6-9 Gallup poll found 44 percent of the public who said the economy is getting better, which itself was an increase of 14 points from a poll in early November.
Public attitudes were becoming more pessimistic about the economy even before Sept. 11, and afterwards most Americans said they were at least somewhat worried the terrorist attacks will hurt the economy. And those findings were before unemployment figures were released that showed the largest one-month jump in joblessness for two decades. Surveys consistently show that for most people, the unemployment and inflation rates are the most important measures of the economy's health. Significantly, 54 percent told Gallup in December they personally knew someone who had lost their job. But 67 percent told the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in January that it's "not very likely" that they would lose their own job.
Congress has been sharply divided on how to stimulate the economy. In early October, Gallup found the public thought most of the suggestions had merit, including extending unemployment benefits (94 percent in favor), passing new tax cuts for low- and moderate-income workers (86 percent), increased government spending for job training and construction (75 percent), and new tax cuts for business (61 percent).
When asked to choose in the most recent Gallup survey (Jan. 7-9), the public was divided: 46 percent favored increased government spending to spur the economy and 41 percent wanted additional tax cuts. But two-thirds (67 percent) said the tax cut passed last year by Congress should go into effect.
One key factor in the stimulus debate has been that the federal budget surplus of the past several years has turned into a deficit. When asked what caused the deficit, Fox News found 34 percent who blamed increased spending to deal with terrorism, 26 percent who blamed the tax cuts, and 13 percent who believed both were to blame. But a substantial 21 percent said they didn't know.
Another sign of public priorities lies in President Bush's approval ratings. His overall approval rating remains quite high, but in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, only 62 percent approved of his handling of the economy, compared to 88 percent approval for his handling of terrorism.
The View of Islam Abroad. . .
One issue that does concern Americans is the possibility that the "war on terrorism" will become what Osama bin Laden claimed it was: a war pitting Islamic and Arab nations against the U.S. and its allies.And a growing number of Americans tell survey researchers they doubt the U.S. is doing enough to win over the Islamic world.
In October, 69 percent told the ABC/Washington Post poll that the U.S. was doing enough to win the support of Muslims, and only 18 percent disagreed. By April 18-21, that had declined to 49 percent, with 43 percent saying the U.S. needed to do more. For many, a wider war is still possible, with 34 percent telling CBS News on April 1-2 that it was "very likely" the fighting in Afghanistan would spread to a larger war between Western and Muslim countries. Another 43 percent said that was "somewhat likely."
Both domestic and international critics argue that U.S. policies, such as support for Israel and sanctions against Iraq, helped spur extremism in the Middle East. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become more pressing to the U.S. war on terrorism, as violence escalates and many Middle Eastern governments say they won't support action against Iraq without progress on the West Bank.
Substantial numbers of Americans are at least considering those arguments. On April 2-3, Fox News found more than half of Americans (54 percent) say "the U.S. needs to find a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as part of winning the war on terrorism." Some 54 percent also told the ABC/Washington Post poll on April 18-21 that U.S. support for Israel is hurting the war on terrorism. And 46 percent told CBS News that the current West Bank fighting makes a terrorist attack against the U.S. more likely (but 40 percent say it will make no difference).
Back in the fall, 55 percent of Americans told the ABC/Washington Post poll this fall they believed most Arabs and Muslims had a negative view of the U.S., and cited support for Israel (68 percent), the spread of Western culture (64 percent), and the presence of U.S. forces in the Mideast (63 percent) as the reasons. Nearly half (48 percent) told Newsweek in early December that U.S. support for "friendly but dictatorial" regimes played a role in increasing support for Islamic militants. But more than one-fifth (22 percent) said they didn't know.
Yet Americans don't necessarily want to change those policies: six in 10 told ABC/Washington Post researchers the U.S. should keep its current level of support for Israel, and they're divided on whether the U.S. should apply more pressure on the Israelis for a peace settlement (46 percent say the U.S. has applied enough pressure; 43 percent say the U.S. should apply more). Back in October, only 29 percent told Newsweek "the U.S. should reduce its ties to Israel in order to lessen the acts of terrorism against us." The public was divided when Newsweek asked if the U.S. should pressure Middle Eastern countries toward democracy, "even if it means Islamic extremists might win power." Again, 48 percent said yes, but 40 percent said no. [Survey data on the West Bank situation is also available in the section on "Afghanistan, the West Bank and the 'Axis of Evil.'"]
Public Agenda's focus is on public opinion in the United States, but Gallup's newly released survey of opinion in nine Islamic countries is noteworthy. Majorities in eight of nine countries surveyed condemned the Sept. 11 attacks. But most also considered the U.S. military response "morally unjustifiable," including 80 percent of Pakistanis, 89 percent of Indonesians and 69 percent of Kuwaitis, according to Gallup. Majorities in five nations told Gallup researchers they don't believe Arab groups were behind the Sept. 11 attacks. The full report is available through Gallup.
. . . and The View of Islam at Home
After the Sept. 11 attacks, there were reports of hate crimes around the country against Arabs, Muslims and even Sikhs (who are neither Arabs nor Muslims but who wear distinctive turbans). While the Bush administration has strongly condemned hate crimes, Muslim American groups have also expressed concern about "racial profiling" by federal agents and airport security guards looking for suspected terrorists. Survey results over many years indicate that most Americans believe in religious tolerance. But just as clearly, Americans are still wrestling with fears surrounding a religion most admit they don't understand.
Surveys conducted in September found tolerance bending under the emotional strain of the attacks. About 35 percent of those surveyed the week of Sept. 11 said they had less trust in Arab-Americans since the attack. Several questions show the public's fear and frustration right after the trade center attack, with 58 percent saying Arabs should undergo special security checks before boarding planes and 49 percent saying they should carry special identification. In a Zogby International poll of Arab-Americans in early October, 20 percent said they personally had experienced discrimination since Sept. 11, and 45 percent said they knew someone else who had faced discrimination.
Six months later, there's evidence that most Americans view racial profiling of Arabs and Muslims as regrettable but not intolerable. In January, Public Agenda researchers found two-thirds of Americans agreed that racial profiling of Middle Easterners is "understandable, but you wish it didn't happen." Only 11 percent found "nothing particularly wrong" with profiling, but also only 21 percent said "there's no excuse for this."
By contrast, Public Agenda found half of Americans (52 percent) say there's no excuse for racial profiling of African-Americans. Black Americans are twice as likely to say there's no excuse for racial profiling of Middle Easterners (35 percent among blacks, compared to 18 percent among whites). Yet a solid majority (59 percent) of African-Americans also say that profiling of Middle Easterners is "understandable, but you wish it didn't happen."
A somewhat larger number of Americans reject "jokes or negative remarks about Arabs and Muslims" in Public Agenda's survey. Half say there's no excuse for it, but 44 percent consider it understandable.
In two Public Agenda surveys conducted prior to Sept. 11, one on religion and public life and another on the values parents want to teach their children, we found Americans voiced a firm belief in religious and social tolerance. Most parents, for example, consider intolerance the mark of a bad citizen. Yet we also found in January 2001 that only 7 percent of Americans said they understand Islam well - perhaps not surprising since Muslims only make up 2 percent of the U.S. population.
Even now, many Americans don't know what to make of Islam. In an ABC News/Beliefnet survey on Jan. 6, more than one-third (35 percent) chose "no opinion" when asked if they had a favorable or unfavorable view of Islam. Only 14 percent said they believed "mainstream Islam" encourages violence, and 57 percent said they considered it a "peaceful religion," but 29 percent were undecided. And when ABC News asked about violent extremists, 38 percent said Islam had more extremists than other religions, while 41 percent said Islam had no more than other religions. Only 5 percent said Islam had fewer extremists, and 17 percent were unsure. All these questions found an extremely high level of undecideds - usually anything over 10 percent is considered a sign of public volatility.
There are conflicting results, however, on whether concern about Arab and Muslim Americans is rising or falling. The CBS/New York Times survey found the numbers who think Arab-Americans are "more sympathetic" to terrorists may have increased by early December, from 28 percent on Sept. 13-14 to 33 percent by Dec. 7-10. The later survey was taken in the aftermath of a series of suicide bombings in Israel, which may have affected public attitudes. Yet the ABC News/Washington Post survey found the number who said they were "personally suspicious" of people of Arab descent fell from 43 percent on Sept. 13 to 31 percent on Dec. 19. The difference might be because the two surveys focus on slightly different aspects of the issue; perhaps the public is making a distinction between feeling someone is sympathetic to a cause and actually feeling threatened.
Still, in early April Fox News found only 24 percent of Americans think American Muslims are "doing enough" to help authorities track down terrorist cells; 44 percent say they're not doing enough.
Trust in Government
Americans consistently join ranks behind their leaders in the initial stages of a crisis, and approval ratings for President Bush have been remarkably high and steady since the fall. More surprising are survey results about trust in government in general, which fell during the years of Vietnam and Watergate and never recovered, regardless of how popular a particular president happened to be. In late September, the ABC News/Washington Post survey found 64 percent said they trust the government to do the right thing "most of the time" or "just about always," the highest rating since the 1960s. The Jan. 21-24 CBS/New York Times poll found 46 percent who said the government did the right thing "just about always" or "most of the time" (compared with 26 percent in 1998). While this high trust level almost certainly reflects the sense of unity in the country, it would still be unique and should be watched carefully. Even during the Gulf War, when approval ratings for both the war and for President Bush's father were at high levels, the trust in government rating never exceeded 45 percent.
But there are signs the public is skeptical about long-term change in Washington's political climate. More than half (55 percent) of those surveyed in Public Agenda's Aggravating Circumstances study during January said elected officials had "put politics aside and [paid] more attention to what was good for the country" after the attacks. When asked how long politicians would keep that new attitude, however, the public showed more doubt. Only 30 percent said elected officials would keep that attitude for a long time, while 45 percent said it would last a few months and 23 percent said it was already over.
Eight in 10 Americans approve of how President Bush is handling his job according to Fox News and CBS News surveys released in early April. That approval rating has remained high in all surveys since the fall.
When asked about specific issues, however, the approval ratings are weaker. In the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, 88 percent approved of President Bush's handing of terrorism, but only 62 percent approved of his handling of the economy. In a Newsweek survey on Jan. 31-Feb. 1, 54 percent said President Bush's opponents should "go along" with his policies on terrorism, compared to 38 percent who said opponents should "push for a full debate." But on the economy and other domestic issues, the percentages were almost exactly reversed: 54 percent wanted a full debate, compared to 39 percent who wanted the opposition to go along on domestic policy.
Read previous editions of our running analysis of public reaction to the attacks.
|
