Voters Want to Rein in Corporate Price Gouging
By Anika Dandekar, Lew Blank, and Danielle Deiseroth
Over the last several months, Data for Progress has conducted in-depth polling and message testing to better understand voters’ perceptions of the economy, including the disparity between the high popularity of President Biden’s economic policies and voters’ lower levels of awareness that Biden has advocated for them. Despite voters’ low perceptions of the economy, new Data for Progress polling finds that progressive messaging on economic issues is generally effective, especially as it relates to reining in corporations.
For example, we asked if voters prefer active or minimal government regulations on corporations. Half of voters were provided a statement saying the government should take a more active role in reining in corporations that “exploit workers,” while the other half were given a statement about regulating corporations that “unfairly raise prices.” All voters were presented with the same anti-regulation statement that says the federal government should minimize involvement in the private sector.
Both pro-regulation arguments enjoy support from a majority of voters. Voters also have a clear preference toward reining in corporations that unfairly raise prices — a finding that is most prominent among demographic groups typically considered Democratic-leaning, including Black and Latino voters.
This finding is also true among voters in other key demographics. Independents, voters living in a 2024 swing state, suburban women, and voters who have a low interest in politics all prefer the pro-regulation message over the anti-regulation position, with a slightly higher preference for reining in corporations that raise prices.
Voters are classified as living in a “2024 swing state” if they live in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin — the seven states that were decided by less than 3 points in the 2020 presidential election. Voters are classified as having a “low political interest” if they say they are “not very interested” or “not at all interested” in politics.
Then, using nonpartisan language, we presented a typical Democrat’s economic agenda to voters with the following statement:
Some lawmakers are proposing that the federal government should take an active role in regulating the economy, checking the abuses of corporations on consumers and workers, ensuring that markets are competitive, and holding the wealthy accountable for paying their fair share in taxes. They say this would grow the economy from the bottom up and the middle out.
We asked voters if they believe this approach promotes economic freedom by enhancing economic mobility through financial security, or if they think it limits personal economic freedom by burdening job creators with red tape, which will lead to corporations raising prices.
A wide majority of voters, by a +35-point margin, believe the standard regulatory agenda will promote, not limit, personal economic freedom. This is true across parties, with Democrats, Independents, and Republicans believing a nonpartisan description of Democrats’ economic agenda allows for greater financial security.
The belief that Democrats’ agenda promotes, not limits, economic freedom is also strongly held by roughly two-thirds of Latino voters, as well as at least 60% of Black voters, voters in swing states, and voters who have a low interest in politics.
This survey finds that Independent and swing voters would prefer that the federal government actively regulate corporations, especially as it relates to reining in unfair prices. We also find that a description of a progressive economic agenda that centers holding corporations accountable is widely popular.
Anika Dandekar (@AnikaDandekar) is a senior analyst at Data for Progress.
Lew Blank (@LewBlank) is a communications associate at Data for Progress.
Danielle Deiseroth (@danielledeis) is the Executive Director at Data for Progress.
Survey Methodology
From September 8 to October 2, 2023, Data for Progress conducted two surveys totaling 2,439 respondent interviews of likely voters nationally using web panel respondents. The samples were weighted to be representative of likely voters by age, gender, education, race, geography, and voting history. The surveys were conducted in English. The margin of error is ±2 percentage points.