Exploring the Relationship between Attitudes Toward Poverty, Belief in Structural Racism, and Support for Guaranteed Income: Results from a 2024 Nationally Representative Survey

Background and Purpose

There is growing interest in guaranteed income (GI) as a poverty solution. Guaranteed income provides a regular, unconditional, unrestricted cash payment monthly (usually $500-$1000) to low-income people who meet certain eligibility criteria. Many GI pilot programs are being tested in the US with reported positive impacts on participants’ economic, mental, and emotional well-being. However, it is unclear whether support for GI exists among the general public. Additionally, it is also unclear whether beliefs about the “undeserving poor” that have historically influenced public support for welfare programs also influence support for guaranteed income. This study explores the factors that may influence public support for GI, with a specific focus on the influence of negative poverty narratives.

Methods

We surveyed a nationally representative sample (unweighted N=1050) through the AmeriSpeak Omnibus panel in March 2024. To gauge support for GI, we developed a question about overall support for GI with input from GI experts and through cognitive interviews with the general public. This study focuses on assessing overall support for GI and explores associations with demographic characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, and political orientation), attitudes toward poverty, and belief in structural racism. The 21-item Attitudes Toward Poverty (ATP) scale measures beliefs about poverty (domains: personal deficiency, stigma, and structural perspective). We took the mean of each ATP subscale (between 1-5) with higher scores indicating greater belief (e.g., higher mean score on the “personal deficiency” subscale indicates greater belief in “personal deficiency” as causing poverty). The 11-item Structural Racism Index score, used to measure belief in structural racism, is scaled from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating a greater belief in structural racism. We assessed these relationships using adjusted logistic regression, accounting for complex sampling design.

Results

Support for guaranteed income among participants was nearly split, with 47.28% opposing and 52.72% supporting GI. Overall mean scores for the Attitudes Toward Poverty subscales—personal deficiency, stigma, and structural perspective—were 2.08, 2.93, and 3.31, respectively. GI supporters generally scored lower on personal deficiency (1.92) and stigma (2.47) but higher on structural perspectives (3.72), while opponents scored higher on personal deficiency and stigma (2.25, 3.44, respectively) and lower on structural perspectives (2.84). The mean Structural Racism Index was 0.37 overall, with supporters and opponents scoring 0.29 and 0.46, respectively. Participants who leaned Democrat, were younger (18-25 years-old), identified as Black or Hispanic, and had obtained less education were more likely to support guaranteed income.

Conclusions and Implications

Findings suggest that attitudes toward poverty (belief in personal versus structural reasons and stigma around poverty) and belief in structural racism are associated with support of GI. Understanding how narratives around deservedness inform these associations is crucial for policymakers and advocates seeking to build broader support for GI.