Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

S 716MBS

Authors

S 716MBS

Tagged with:

Publication PDFs

Database

This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3742 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(12) "S_716MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "739924" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(83506) "PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 Californians & the Environment Mark Baldassare Dean Bonner David Kordus Lunna Lopes CONTENTS Press Release 3 2016 Election and Environmental Issues 6 Climate Change and Energy Policy 13 Regional Map 22 Methodology 23 Questionnaire and Results 25 Supported with funding from The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, the Pisces Foundation, and the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation. The PPIC Statewide Survey provides a voice for the public and likely voters— informing policymakers, encouraging discussion, and raising awareness on critical issues of the day. © 2016 Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC is a public charity. It does not take or support positions on any ballot measures or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provide d that full attribution is given to the source. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or board of directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 3 CONTACT Linda Strean 415 -291 -4412 Serina Correa 415 -291 -4417 News Release EMBARGOED: Do not publish or broadcast until 9:00 p.m. PDT on Wednesday , July 27 , 2016 . Para ver este comunicado de prensa en español, por favor visite nuestra página de internet: www.ppic.org/main/pressreleaseindex.asp PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY: CALIFORNIANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT Strong Support for Global Warming Law and for Expanding Its Goals MOST WILLING TO PAY MORE FOR ELECTRICITY FROM RENEWABLE SO URCES SAN FRANCISCO, July 27 , 2016—Ten years after California enacted AB 32, the landmark law mandating the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, strong majorities of residents support its goals and favor a proposal to expand on them. These are among the key findings in a statewide survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). When Californians are asked if they favor or oppose the law requiring the state to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, 69 percent are in favor (19% oppose, 13% don’t know). Among likely voters, 62 percent favor the law . There is a striking partisan divide . Majorities of Democrats (80%) and independents (56%) favor the law , compared to 44 percent of Republicans. When the survey first asked this question in 2006, support was similar across parties (65% Republicans, 67% De mocrats, 68% independents). With the state on track to meet AB 32’s goals, a proposed new law would set more ambitious targets. It would require a reduction in emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. When asked about this proposal, 68 percent o f adults and 59 percent of likely voters favor it . Across parties, Democrats (78%) are twice as likely as Republicans (39%) to favor the expanded goals (59% independents in favor). Californians couple their support for reducing emissions with an expectation of higher costs. Most adults and likely voters (59% each) say state action to reduce global warming will cause gasoline prices around the state to increase. Among Californians who say gas prices will rise , 64 percent favor AB 32’s goals and 63 percent favor expanding them. Also, m ajorities of adults and likely voters (56% each) say that , to reduce global warming, they are willing to pay more for electricity if it is generated by renewable sources like solar or wind. Democrats (68%) and independents (51%) are more likely to be willing than Republicans (38%) to pay more. “We find strong support today for the state’s greenhouse gas emissions targets set 10 years ago,” s aid Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. “The commitment to help reduce global war ming includes a surprising willingness on the part of majorities of Californians to pay higher prices.” Most Californians don’t expect actions to reduce warming to cost the state jobs: 40 percent of adults say the result will be more jobs and 29 percent predict there will be no effect on the number of jobs. Just 20 percent think there will be fewer jobs because of the state’s actions. Most Favor Cap and Trade A majority of Californians (55%) say they have hear d nothing about the state’s cap-and -trade system — a major part of the effort to achieve AB 32’s emissions reduction goal. After hearing a short description PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 4 of the system, 54 percent of adults say they favor it. Transpo rtation fuels have been included in the cap -and -trade system since 2015, and the Legislative Analyst estimated earlier this year that this has added 11 cents per gallon to the price of gasoline. After hearing this cost estimate along with a brief list of programs that receive state cap -and -trade revenues, 52 percent of adults and 49 percent of likely voters favor including transportation fuels in the system (36% adults, 40% likely v oters oppose). A portion of cap -and -trade revenue is required by law to be s pent on projects to improve environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities. Half of Californians (51%) and 46 percent of likely voters say it is very important to spend some of the revenue this way. Most Californians (81% adults, 75% likely voters) say global warming is a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the state’s future economy and quality of life. And most (64% adults, 64% likely voters) say the effects of warming have already begun, while fewer (25% adults, 21% likely voters) say there will be effects in the future. Far fewer (8% adults, 13% likely voters) say they will never happen. Most residents (65%) say global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires. Clinton Leads Trump 46%–30% ; Environment al Stances Seen as Important With the November election approaching, likely voters were asked about their choices in the presidential and US Senate races and the importance of candidates’ views on the environment. In the presidential race, likely voters favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump (46% to 30%)— a larger margin than in the May survey (49% to 39%) , which did not ask about third -party candidates. Clinton ha s strong support among Democratic likely voters (81%) and leads Trump among independents (37% to 24%). Trump has strong support among Republicans (76%). The race is close among white likely voters, while Clinton has a large lead over Trump among Latinos and other racial/ethnic groups (sample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analysis). Most likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important (45%) or somewhat important (38%) in making their choice. In the US Senate matchup , which pits two Democrats against one another, likely voters prefer Kamala Harris to Loretta Sanchez (38% to 20%) —a larger margin than in May (34% to 26%). Harris has majority support among Democrats (53%) and leads Sanchez among independents (37% to 19%). Half of Republicans (50%) volunteer that they do not plan to vote in this race . Sanchez leads among Latinos, and Harris has large leads among whites and other racial/ethnic groups. Harris leads Sanchez by 25 point s overall (53% to 28%) when excluding the 28 percent of survey respondents who volunteer that they won’t vote in this race. Again, most likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very (40%) or somewhat (43%) important in determining their vote. Majorities Support Brown, Obama The survey also asked about elected leaders at the state and national level.  Governor Jerry Brown. Majorities of adults (54%) and likely voters (53%) approve of the way he is doing his job. About half (49% adults, 51% likely voters) approve of the way he is handling environmental issues.  The state legislature. California lawmakers have a job approval rating of 45 percent among all adults and 42 percent among likely voters. The approval rating for the legislature’s handling of environmental issues is similar (48% adults, 42% likely voters).  Pre sident Barack Obama. Majorities (60% adults, 56% likely voters ) approve of the president’s job performance and have similar opinions of how he is handling environmental issues (60% adults, 55% likely voters ).  US Congress. Congress has much lower approval r atings for job performance (28% adults, 17% likely voters) and handling of environmental issues (31% adults, 17% likely voters). PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 5 Fewer Are Worried about Water , But It’s Still Top Environmental Issue What is the most important environmental issue facing the state? Water supply and drought tops the list among Californians (38%), followed by air pollution (13%). The proportion of residents naming drought and water supply as the top issue has dropped 20 points since July 2015 (58%). Nonetheless, 62 percent of r esidents and 71 percent of likely voters say the supply of water is a big problem in their part of the state. Residents in the Central Valley (71%) are the most likely to hold this view and those in the San Francisco Bay Area (51%) are the least likely. No w that statewide mandatory water reduction targets have been lifted, residents are asked to assess government action on the drought. Majorities (58% adults, 63% likely voters) say state and local governments are not doing enough to respond. “Water supply continues to top the list of environmental issues facing California even after an El Niñ o year,” Baldassare said. “With water restrictions lifted, many Californians are still calling for state and local governments to do more in responding to the drought.” Many See Water, Air Pollution as Health Threat s in Lower -Income Areas Asked about pollution of drinking water, 59 percent of Californians and 48 percent of likely voters say it is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas in their part of the sta te. Latinos (76%), African Americans (65%), and Asian Americans (61%) are more likely than whites (46%) to express this view. On the topic of air pollution, majorities (60% adults, 60% likely voters) say it is a big problem or somewhat of a problem in their part of the state. Latinos (68%) and African Americans (62%) are more likely than whites (54%) and Asian American s (51%) to call it a problem. Half of adults (50%) and 42 percent of likely voters say air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower- income areas than elsewhere in their part of the state. Latinos (65%) are more likely than Asian Americans and African Americans (52% each) to express this view and far more likely than whites (37%). And 53 percent of residents say air pollution is a very serious or somewhat serious threat to themselves and their immediate families . Among racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (62%) and African Americans (61%) are the most likely to hold this view. “Many Californians perceive that lower -income communities face more serious health threats from air and water pollution,” Baldassare said. “Latino residents are the most likely to express these concerns.” Opposition to Fracking Reaches Record High The survey asks a series of questions about energy policy.  Fracking. Majorities (58% adults , 60% likely voters) oppose the increased use of hydraulic fracturing —a record high since the survey first began asking this question in 2013.  Oil drilling. S imilar numbers of Californians (59% adults, 61% likely voters) oppose incr eased oil drilling off the California coast .  Power plant emissions. Strong majorities (74% adults, 69% likely voters) favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants to address climate change.  Solar power. Overwhelming majorities favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California (76% adults, 77% likely voters) and building more solar power stations in the state (85% adults, 79% likely voters).  Electric vehicles. The new state budget does not include money to extend subsidies for electric vehicle purchases. When asked about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for buying an electric vehicle, most adults and likely voters (68% each) are in favor. Most (77% adults, 74% likely voters) also favor buil ding more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles. How many Californians have thought about buying or leasing an electric vehicle? Just under half (47%) say they have seriously considered it. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 6 2016 Election and Environmental Issues Key Findings  Am ong California likely voters, 46 percent would vote for Hillary Clinton in t he presidential election, and 30 percent would vote fo r Donald Trump. Forty-five percent say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important in determining their vote . (page 7)  In the C alifornia US Senate election, 38 percent of likely voters support Kamala Harris, 20 percent support Loretta Sanchez, and 14 percent say they are undecided. More than a quarter volunteer they would not vote in the S enate race. Forty percent say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important in determining their vote . (page 8)  Fifty -s ix percent of likely voters approve of President Obama’s job performance and 55 percent approve of his handling of environmental issues. Seventeen percent of likely voters approve of Congress, both overall and on its handling of environmental issues. (page 9)  Fifty -three percent of likely voters approve of Governor Brown’s job performance and 5 1 percent approve of his handling of environmental issues. Forty-two percent of likely voters approve of the California Legislature overall and on its handling of environmental issues . (page 10)  More than f our in ten likely voters say the drought is the most important environmental issue facing the state ; 10 percent say water pollu tion is most important. (page 11)  Six in ten adults say air pollution is a problem in their part of the state. African Americans and Latinos are more likely than Asian Americans and whites to say that air pollution is a very serious threat to themselves and their families. (page 12) 43 46 46 454755 18 15 18 1620 17 0 20 40 60 80 Jul-11 Jul-12Jul-13Jul-14Jul-15Jul-16 Percent likely voters President Obama US Congress Approval ratings of federal elected officials on environmental issues 36 41 44 464851 24 29 34 333242 0 20 40 60 80 Jul-11 Jul-12Jul-13Jul-14Jul-15Jul-16 Percent likely voters Governor Brown California Legislature Approval ratings of state elected officials on environmental issues 43 101010 0 20 40 60 Water supplyand drought Water pollution Air pollution Global warming Percent likely voters Most important environmental issue PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 7 Presidential Election In the presidential election, eight in ten likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are important (4 5% very, 3 8% somewhat) in determining their vote. Democrats (60%) are far more likely than independents (4 0% ) and Republicans (2 7% ), and Latinos (6 5% ) are far more likely than whites (43%) and other rac ial/ethnic groups (4 2%), to say the environment is very important ( sample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analysis). Among those who plan to vote for Hillary Clinton, 61 percent say that the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important, compared to 2 6 percent among those who plan to vote for Donald Trump. “In thinking about the presidential election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important?” Likely voters only All likely voters Party Race/ Ethnicity Dem Rep Ind Latinos Whites Other groups Very important 45% 60% 27% 40% 65% 43% 42% Somewhat important 38 32 44 41 24 39 43 Not too important 16 8 29 19 10 18 15 Don’t know – – 1 – 2 – – T oday, California likely voters favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for US p resident (46% to 30%) by a larger margin than in our May survey (49% to 39%) when we did not ask about third -party candidates. Clinton has strong support among Democrats (81%) and leads Trump among independents (37% to 24%) . Trump has strong support among Republicans (76%). Clinton leads Trump by a 20 point margin am ong women (49% to 29%) and a 13 point margin among men (43% to 30%). Clinton leads Trump by large margins in Los Angeles (53% to 17%) and the San Francisco Bay Area (57% to 25%) . Trump leads in the Inland Empire (49% to 34%) , while the race is closer in the Central Valley (32% Clinton, 38% Trump ) and Orange/San Diego (40% Clinton, 38% Trump). The race is close among whites (41% Clinton, 37% Trump) , while Clinton has a large lead over Trump among Latinos (68% to 12%) and other racial/ethnic groups (48% to 21%) with sample sizes too small for separate analysis . “ If the November 8 presidential election were being held today, would you vote for : Hillary Clinton, the Democrat; D onald Trump, the Republican; Gary Johnson, the Libertarian; or Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate? ” Likely voters only Hillary Clinton Donald Trump Gary Johnson Jill Stein Someone else (volunteered) Would not vote for president (volunteered) Don’t know All likely voters 46% 30% 7% 6% 2% 2% 7% Party Democrats 81 3 1 6 1 1 6 Republicans 7 76 6 2 1 3 6 Independents 37 24 10 5 7 4 13 Gender Men 43 30 11 6 2 2 5 Women 49 29 3 5 2 2 9 Race/ Ethnicity Latinos 68 12 4 5 4 2 5 Whites 41 37 9 5 1 3 5 Other groups 48 21 2 10 3 1 16 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 8 California US Senate Election Eight in ten likely voters say the US Senate candidates’ positions on the environment are important (4 0% very, 43% somewhat) in determining their vote. Democrats (5 1% ) are much more likely than independents (3 8% ) and Republicans (2 6% ), and Latinos (61%) are far more likely than whites (3 6% ) and other racial/ethnic groups (3 9% ), to say the environment is very important (s ample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analys is). About half of those who plan to vote for Kamala Harris (49%) or Loretta Sanchez (4 7% ) say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important, compared to 2 5 percent for those who volunteer that they would not vote in this race. “In thinki ng about the California U S Senate election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —ver y important, somewhat important, or not too important?” Likely voters only All likely voters Party Race/E thnicity Dem Rep Ind Latinos Whites Other groups Very important 40% 51% 26% 38% 61% 36% 39% Somewhat important 43 43 43 42 28 45 45 Not too important 17 6 30 20 11 18 16 Don’t know – – 1 – – 1 – In the US Senate matchup today , likely voters prefer Kamala Harris over Loretta Sanchez (38 % to 2 0% ) by a larger margin than in May (34% to 26%). Harris has majority support among Democrats (5 3% ) and leads Sanchez among independents ( 37% to 19%) ; Republicans are split (16% to 15%). Notab ly, 50 percent of Republicans and 34 percent of independents say they would not vote in this race. Sanchez leads Harris among Latinos. Harris has large leads among whites and other racial/ethnic groups and in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area . Clinton supporters favor Harris over Sanchez (5 4% to 28 %); 5 1 percent of Trump supporters say they w ould not vote in this race . Harris has a 25 point lead over Sanchez when excluding those who volunteer they would not vote (53% to 28%). “ If the November 8 US Senate election were being held today, would you vote for Kamala Harris, a Democrat or Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat? ” Likely voters only Kamala Harris Loretta Sanchez Would not vote for US senator (volunteered) Don’t know All likely voters 38% 20% 28% 14% Party Democrats 53 26 7 13 Republicans 16 15 50 19 Independents 37 19 34 10 Region Central Valley 31 25 32 13 San Francisco Bay Area 48 15 21 15 Los Angeles 41 21 25 12 Orange/San Diego 31 21 34 14 Inland Empire 31 22 34 12 Race/Ethnicity Latinos 29 45 16 11 Whites 41 14 31 14 Other groups 39 19 24 18 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 9 Approval Ratings of Federal Elected Officials Majorities of California adults (60%) and likely voters (5 6% ) approve of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president. Approval was similar in May (61% adults, 52% likely voters) and last July (57% adults, 51% likely voters). Today, 86 percent of Democrats approve, compared to 49 percent of independents and 1 8 percent of Republicans. Residents living in Los Angeles (7 3% ) and the San Francisco Bay Area (6 4% ) are more likely than those living in other regions to approve. African Americans (87% ), Latinos ( 71 %), and Asian Americans ( 70 %) are more likely than whites (47 %) to approve. The president’s a pprova l rating was at 56 percent in a July ABC News/Washington Post national poll. Majorities of California adults (60%) and likely voters (55%) approve of President Obama’s handling of environmental issues. Approval in this area w as slightly lower last July (53% adults, 47% likely voters). Today, 80 percent of Democrats approve of President Obama’s handling of environmental issues, compared to 4 5 percent of independents and 24 percent of Republicans. San Francisco Bay Area (67%) and Los Angeles (64% ) residents are more likely than those living in other regions to approve . African Americans (7 9% ), Latinos (71 %), and Asian American s (64% ) are more likely than whites (4 9% ) to approve. “Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barack Obama is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind His job as president of the United States Approve 60% 86% 18% 49% 56% Disapprove 35 12 80 44 42 Don't know 4 2 2 7 2 Environmental issues in the United States Approve 60 80 24 45 55 Disapprove 31 13 68 45 39 Don't know 9 8 8 10 6 The US Congress has low approval ratings among Californians (2 8% adults, 1 7% likely voters). Approval of the way the US Congress is handling its job was similar in May (28% adults, 15% likely voters) and last July (29% adults, 17% likely voters). Today, approval of the US Congress is similarly low across parties and also falls short of a majority across all regions and demographic groups. Approval of the US Congress was at 15 percent in a July CBS News/New York Times national poll. The US Congress’ handling of environmental issues also receives low approval ratings (3 1% adults, 1 7% likely voters), which were similar last July (33% adults, 20% likely voters). Today, approval of the US Congress’ handling of environmental issues is similarly low across parties and falls short of a majority across all regional, age, education, and income groups. “Do you approve or disa pprove of the way the US Congress is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Its job Approve 28% 22% 17% 16% 17% Disapprove 66 73 78 78 80 Don't know 6 5 5 6 3 Environmental issues in the United States Approve 31 25 18 19 17 Disapprove 59 67 72 71 75 Don't know 10 9 10 10 8 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 10 Approval Ratings of State Elected Officials Majorities of California adults (54% ) and likely voters (5 3% ) approve of the way Jerry Brown is handling his job as governor of California. Brown’s approval ratings were similar in May (52% adults, 50% likely voters) and last July (53% adults, 55% likely voters). Today , Democrats (71 %) are much more likely than in dependents (4 7% ) and Republicans (28%) to approve. Los Angeles (62%) and San Francisco Bay Area residents (57 %) are more likely than those living in other regions to approve. Latinos (62%) and African Americans (58 %) are slightly more likely than Asian Ame rican s (52%) and whites ( 48%) to approve. About half of Californians approve of the way Governor Brown is handling environmental issues (49 % adults, 5 1% likely voters), similar to last July (47% adults, 48% likely voters). Today, Democrats (6 6% ) are much more likely than independents (39 %) and Republicans (2 7% ) to approve. About half in all regions except for the Central Valley (41%) approve of Brown’s handling of environmental issues. Latinos (55%) are slightly more likely than Asian Americans (47%), whites (47%) and African Americans (44% ) to approve . “Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Jerry Brown is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind His job as governor of California Approve 54% 71% 28% 47% 53% Disapprove 27 14 60 36 36 Don't know 20 16 12 17 11 Environmental issues in California Approve 49 66 27 39 51 Disapprove 29 17 57 40 35 Don't know 22 17 16 21 14 Forty-five percent of adults and 42 percent of likely voters approve of the legislature. Approval was similar in May (43% adults, 38% likely voters) and lower last July (39% adults, 32% likely voters). Today, Democrats (5 7% ) are much more likely than independents (33%) and Republicans (22%) to approve. Across regions, approval is above 50 percent in the Inland Empire (51%) and lower elsewhere (48% San Francisco Bay Area, 44% Central Valley, 44% Los Angeles, 39% Orange/San Diego). Latinos (60 %) are more likely to ex press approval than Asian American s (45%) , African Americans (39%) , and w hites (3 6% ). Approval ratings for the legislature’s handling of environmental issues today (4 8% adults, 4 2% likely voters) are higher than last July (42% adults, 32% likely voters). Today, Democrats (56% ) are much more likely than independents (41 %) and Republicans ( 25%) to express approval. About half in all regions except for the Central Valley (42%) approve of their handling of environmental issues. Latinos (59% ) and Asian American s (5 4% ) are more likely than African Americans (4 5% ) and whites ( 40% ) to approv e. “Do you approve or disapprove of the way the California Legislature is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Its job Approve 45% 57% 22% 33% 42% Disapprove 40 28 73 51 48 Don't know 15 15 5 15 10 Environmental issues in California Approve 48 56 25 41 42 Disapprove 36 27 66 49 46 Don't know 15 16 9 11 13 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 11 Most Important Environmental Issue: Water As the current California drought enters its fifth year, 38 percent of Californians and 43 percent of likely voters say that the most important environmental issue facing California is the drought and water supply . The proportion of Californians naming drought and the water supply has decr eased by 20 percentage points since July 2015 when 58 percent cited it as the most important issue. Nonetheless, when asked specifically about the supply of water in their part of the state, 62 percent of Californians and 71 percent of likely voters say it is a big problem. The share of Californians saying water supply is a big problem was slightly higher last July (68%). Central Valley residents (71%) are the most likely to say the water supply is a big problem in their region , while residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (51%) are the least likely to say this. The likelihood of saying that the water supply is a big problem increases as age and income increase. About seven in 10 Californians across political parties say the supply of water is a big problem. Notably, across racial/ethnic groups, whites (73%) are much more likely than Asian Americans (57%), Latinos (53%), and African Americans (52%) to say the s upply of water is a big problem. “ Next, would you say that the supply of water is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of California? ” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Big problem 62% 71% 51% 64% 59% 63% 71% Somewhat of a problem 24 20 31 25 27 17 22 Not much of a problem 13 9 16 11 13 18 7 Don’t know 1 1 2 – 1 2 – In May, following some improvement of drought conditions , the State Water Resources Control Board lifted the statewide mandatory water reduction target. Today, 58 percent of adults and 63 percent of likely voters say that the state and local governments are not doing enough to respond to the current drought ; th e share holding this view was similar when we last asked this question in January 2015 (59% adults, 63% likely voters). Half or more across the state’s regions today say the state and local governments are not doing enough . “Overall, do you think that the state and local governments are doing too much, the right amount, or not enough to respond to the current drought in California?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Too much 7% 6% 5% 6% 8% 14% 7% The right amount 29 24 34 28 35 21 27 Not enough 58 63 51 63 53 59 63 Don’t know 6 6 11 3 4 6 3 When asked about the pollution of drinking water, 59 percent Californians and 48 percent of likely voters say that it is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas in their part of California. Latinos (76%), African Americans (65%), and Asian Americans (61%) are more likely than whites (46%) to say this. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 12 Air Pollution Thirteen percent of Californians cite air pollution as the most important environmental issue facing California. W hen asked specifically about air pollution in their part of California, six in 10 adults say air pollution is a problem (25% big problem, 35% somewha t). These findings are similar to July 2015 (24 % big problem, 34% somewhat) . Democrats ( 31% big problem, 38% somewhat ) are more likely to say air pollution is a problem than independents or Republicans. Regionally, residents of Los Angeles (39% big problem, 33% somewhat ) are the most likely to say that air pollution is a problem. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (31 % big problem, 37% somewhat ) and African Americans (27% big, 35% somewhat ) are more likely than whites and Asian Americans to view air pollution as a problem. “We are interested in the part of California that you live in. Would you say that air pollution is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in your part of California? ” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Big problem 25% 28% 12% 39% 18% 29% 24% Somewhat of a problem 35 35 43 33 33 34 36 Not a problem 39 35 45 27 47 34 40 Don’t know 1 2 – – 2 3 – Half of California adults and 42 percent of likely voters say that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower- income areas than elsewhere in their part of California. Findings among all adults were similar last July (48% yes, 47% no). There are stark partisan differences with Democrats (58%) much more likely than independents (41 %), and far more likely than Republicans (29%), to say air pollution is a more serious threat in lower -income areas. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (65%) are more likely than Asia n Americans and African Americans (52% each) and far more likely than whites (37%) to hold this view. The likelihood of saying air pollution is a bigger threat in lower -income areas decreases as income increases. While majorities of residents in Los Angele s (58%), Orange/San Diego (54%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (52%) hold this view, majorities in the Central Valley (58%) and the Inland Empire (55%) say air pollution is not a greater threat in lower- income communities. “Do you think that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? ” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Yes 50% 57% 47% 37% 52% 52% 65% 37% No 45 39 47 57 41 41 33 57 Don’t know 6 4 6 6 7 7 2 6 Fifty -three percent of Californians say that air pollution is a serious threat (21% very serious, 32% somewhat serious) to themselves and their immediate families. Across the state’s regions, r esidents of the Los Angeles area (28% very serious, 38% somewhat serious ) are the most likely to say air pollution is a serious threat. Latinos (27% very serious, 35% somewhat serious ) and African Americans (29% very serious, 32% somewhat serious) are far more likely than Asian Americans and whites to see air pollution as a serious threat to themselves and their immediate families . PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 13 Climate Change and Energy Policy Key Findings About two in three Californians say the effects of global warming have already begun, with Democrats and independents far more likely than Republicans to say so. Two in three say global warming has contributed to the current wildfires. (page 14) Sixty -nine perce nt of Californians favor the emission reduction goals of AB 32 and 68 percent favor further reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Fifty -six percent say they are willing to pay more for electricity from renewabl e so urces to reduce glob al warming. (page 15) Two in three Californians favor the state making its own policies to address globa l w arming. A plurality say state efforts would result in more jobs around the state, while six in ten say such efforts would cause gasoline prices to increase. (page 16) Fifty -five percent of adults say they have heard nothing about the state’s cap -and - trade system. After hearing a brief description , 54 percent favor the system. (page 17) Fifty -two percent of Californians favor including transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and -trade system, and about half say it is very important that some cap-and -trad e r evenues are used in lower -income communities. (page 18) At least two in three adults and likely voters favor a series of proposals t o s upport electric vehicles and solar power in California. (pages 19, 20 ) Six in ten adults and likely voters oppose more oil drilling off the coast, and about as many oppose the increased use of fracking. About seven in ten favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants. (pages 20, 21 ) 65 78 73 6667 6771 676869 69 19 14 1723 212122 2223 2019 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent adults FavorOppose AB 32 reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 6070 79 61 0 20 40 60 80 100 African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Percent adults Favor Reducingemissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 55 59 60 40 3837 0 20 40 60 80 100 Under $40,000 $40,000 to under $80,000 $80,000 or more Percent adults Annual household income Willing to pay Not willing to pay Pay more for electricity from renewable sources to reduce global warming PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 14 Perceptions of Global Warming As Governor Brown and state policymakers continue to debate how the state can further reduce greenhouse gas emissions, how do Californians perceive global warming? A solid majority of Californians (64%) say the effects of global warming have already begun, while one in four say they will happen in the future (25%), and relatively few (8%) say they will never happen. Since we began asking this question in July 2005, majorities of Californians have said that the effects have already begun. Adults nationwide in a March Gallup survey held similar opinions (59% already happening, 31% will happen in future, 10% will never happen). California Democra ts (77%) and independents (63%) are far more likely than Republicans (43%) to think the effects have already begun. Notably, one in four Republicans say the effects will never happen. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (72%) are the most likely —and Afric an Americans (54%) the least likely —to say the effects have already begun. “Which of the following statements reflects your view of when the effects of global warming will begin to happen…?” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Already begun 64% 54% 62% 72% 62% 64% Within a few years 5 4 5 7 3 5 Within your lifetime 6 10 4 5 7 3 Not within lifetime, but will affect future 14 21 19 13 12 13 Will never happen 8 8 8 2 13 13 Don’t know 2 2 1 2 3 2 Eight in ten Californians think that global warming is a very serious (54%) or somewhat serious (27%) threat to California’s future economy and quality of life. Since we began asking this question in July 2005, more than seven in ten Californians have said that the threat is at least somewhat serious. Partisan differences are stark , with Democrats (71%) about three times as likely a s Republicans (24%) to call the threat very serious; half of independents (51%) hold this view. About six in ten Latinos (62%) and half in all other racial/ethnic groups think the threat is very serious. “How serious of a threat is global warming to the ec onomy and quality of life for California’s future —do you think that it is a very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious of a threat?” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Very serious 54% 52% 52% 62% 49% 51% Somewhat serious 27 21 36 30 25 24 Not too serious 11 14 7 7 14 11 Not at all serious 7 7 6 1 11 12 Don’t know 1 6 – 1 2 1 Two in three Californians (65%) think that global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires. Democrats (76%) and independents (57%) are far more likely than Republicans (28%) to hold this view. Majorities across regions and demographic groups say it has contributed to cu rrent wildfires. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 15 California’s Emissions Policy As the 10th anniversary of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 approaches , Californians continue to offer positive assessments of this landmark legislation. As they have each July since 2006, a strong majority of Californians (69%) favor AB 32 ’s goal of reduc ing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Sixty -two percent of likely voters are in favor. When we first asked this question in 2006 , there was support across parties (65% Republicans, 67% Democrats, 68% independents). Today there is a striking partisan divide , with majorities of Democrats (80%) and independents (56%) in favor compared to 44 percent of Republicans. Still, it is noteworthy that majorities today across re gional, age, income , and racial/ethnic groups favor the emission targets in AB 32. “Next, to address global warming, do you favor or oppose the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2020? ” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Favor 69% 54% 70% 77% 65% 62% Oppose 19 25 16 13 22 26 Don’t know 13 21 13 10 13 11 The California Air Resources Board has indicated that California is on track to meet the goal set by AB 32. With this initial goal set to be met, policymakers are looking to further reduce emissions. When asked about a proposed state law that requires reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, 68 percent of adults and 59 percent of likely voters are in favor. S upport for this proposal closely mirrors support for the emission targets in AB 32. Democrats (78%) are twice as likely as Republicans (39%) to support the proposed goal. There were similar levels of support for reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 last July (69% adults, 62% likely voters). “To address global warming, the state legislature is currently considering legislation that would require California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. Overall, do you favor or oppose this proposal?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 68% 78% 39% 59% 59% Oppose 22 12 52 28 30 Don’t know 10 10 9 12 10 T o help reduce global warming, a majority of adults and likely voters (56% each) say they are willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources like solar or wind energy. Majorities are willing across age, home ownership , and income groups . Willingness to pay more is higher among Democrats ( 68%) and independents (51 %) than among Republicans (3 8 % ). Adults nationwide in a November CBS News/New York Times poll (55% willing) held similar views to Californians . 67 80 65 44 68 56 0 20 40 60 80 100 2006 2016 Percent DemocratsRepublicansIndependents Supportfor AB 32 emission reduction goal PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 16 Perceived Impact of California’s Emissions Policy Most Californians (67%) and likely voters (65%) support the state making its own policies to address the issue of global warming . Since we first asked this question in July 2005 there has bee n majority support among Californians and likely voters for state action . Majorities of Democrats (78%) and independents (55%) are in favor while Republicans are divided (49% favor, 46% oppose). More than six in ten across regions as well as majorities across demographic groups favor the state making its own policies. Four in ten adults think that California taking action to reduce global warming would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state and three in ten (29%) say it would not affect the number of jobs; two in ten say taking action will result in fewer jobs. A plurality of Californians have said that state action would result in more jobs since we began asking this question in July 2010, with a high point of 47 percent in July 2011 and a low point last year (38%). A plurality of Democrats (49%) say there would be more jobs, a plurality of Republicans (40%) say there would be fewer jobs; independent s’ views are more mixed (33% more jobs, 31% no effect, 23% fewer jobs). Pluralities across regions as well as age, education, and income groups say there would be more jobs. A majority of African Americans (53%) as well as pluralities of Latinos (45%) and whites (37%) say there would be more jobs , while a pluralit y of Asian Americans (43%) say there would be no impact on the number of jobs. “Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state, would cause there to be fewer j obs, or wouldn’t affect the number of jobs for people around the state?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire More jobs 40% 39% 43% 38% 37% 41% 35% Fewer jobs 20 23 12 20 24 26 23 Wouldn’t affect the number of jobs 29 29 34 29 30 25 30 Don’t know 10 9 11 12 9 8 12 M ajorities of Californians a nd likely voters (59% each ) say state action to reduce global warming would increase gasoline prices. Majorities across party, region al, age, education, and income groups say gasoline prices would increase. Latinos (68%) are more likely than whites (58%), African Americans (49%), and Asian Americans (47%) to hold this view . Among thos e who say that state action would increase gasoline prices , six in 10 favor AB 32’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (64%) and the proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (63%). “Do you think that California doing things to reduce glo bal warming in the future would cause gasoline prices at the pump around the state to increase, or to decrease, or wouldn’t affect gasoline prices at the pump around the state?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Increase gasoline prices 59% 66% 54% 54% 65% 70% 59% Decrease gasoline prices 14 13 14 13 16 13 10 Wouldn’t affect gasoline prices 20 15 21 27 14 13 24 Don’t know 7 6 11 6 5 4 7 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 17 Cap and Trade: Awareness and Favorability California’s cap -and -trade system is a major part of the state’s efforts to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction goal of AB 32. Forty-five percent of Californians say they have heard either a lot (12%) or a little (33%) about cap and trade. The share who have heard of the policy has remained steady since 2010, over a period when it has moved from discussion to implementation in Californ ia. Today, Republicans (19%) and independents (18%) are more likely than Democrats (9%) to say they have heard a lot about the policy . “How much, if anything, have you heard about the state government policy called ‘ cap and trade ’ that sets limits on carb on dioxide emissions? Have you heard a lot, a little, or nothing at all?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind A lot 12% 9% 19% 18% 18% A little 33 37 36 46 42 Nothing at all 55 53 44 36 40 Don’t know 1 – – 1 1 After hearing a short description of California’s cap -and -trade system, 54 percent of adults say they favor it. Between 49 and 54 percent of adults have been in favor since 2009. As we have found in previous surveys, s upport among likely voters today is so mewhat lower than among adults overall (46% to 54%). A solid majority of Democrats (62%) and a plurality of independents (47%) favor the system , while a slight majority of Republicans (51%) oppose it . Regionally , majorities in the San Francisco Bay Area (6 1%), Orange/San Diego (58%), and Los Angeles (54%) favor the system , while fewer do so in the Central Valley (49%) and the Inland Empire (41%). Across racial/ethnic groups, support is higher among Asian Americans (64%) and Latinos (58%) than among whites (51%) and African Americans (45%). Support for the cap -and -trade system decreases with age (68% 18 –34, 54% 35 –54, 41% 55 and older). Those who have heard a lot (53%), a little (57%), or nothing at all (53%) about cap and trade are about equally likely to sa y they favor the system after hearing a brief description , although t hose who have heard a little or nothing are more likely to have no opinion than are those w ho have heard a lot . A solid majority of those opposed to the emission reduction goal of AB 32 (61%) also oppose the cap -and -trade system. Among those favoring the emission reduction goal of AB 32, 65 percent favor the system . “ In the system called ‘ cap and trade, ’ the California state government issues permits limiting the amount of greenhouse gas es companies can put out. Companies that do not use all their permits can sell them to other companies. The idea is that many companies will find ways to put out less greenhouse gases, because that will be cheaper than buying permits. Do you favor or oppos e the cap-and-trade system?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 54% 62% 33% 47% 46% Oppose 32 25 51 38 38 Don’t know 13 13 17 15 16 5054 53 5154 45 4245 4545 0 20 40 60 80 2010 201120122013201420152016 Percent adults FavorHave heard about Cap and trade awareness and favorability PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 18 Cap and Trade: Revenues and Spending Transportation fuels have been included in California’s cap -and -trade system since 2015. The Legislative Analyst estimated earlier this year that adding transportation fuels to the cap -and -trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to the cost of gasoline. After hearing that estimate, along with a brief list of programs that receive state cap -and -trade revenue, most adults (52% favor, 36% oppose) and likely voters (49% favor, 40% oppose) express support for including transportation fuels in cap and trade. Notably, majorities across income levels su pport including transportation fuels in the system . Across racial/ethnic groups, Asian Americans (65%) are most likely to be in favor (52% Latinos, 50% whites, 45% African Americans). A strong majority of Democrats (68%) are in favor, while a solid majorit y of Republicans (60%) are opposed; independents are more closely divided (45% favor, 42% oppose). Across regions, San Francisco Bay Area residents (63%) are most likely to be in favor ( 52% Los Angeles, 52% Orange/San Diego, 47% Central Valley , 40% Inland Empire). Among those who favor cap and trade overall, 71 percent favor having transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and -trade system . “Cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as affordable housing near public transit, energy efficiency, high speed rail, and public transit. The Legislative Analyst estimated that having transportation fuels in the cap -and -trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to gasoline costs. Knowing this, do you favor or oppose hav ing transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and-trade system?” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Favor 52% 53% 51% 58% 45% 65% 52% 50% Oppose 36 35 38 35 48 26 37 39 Don’t know 11 12 11 7 7 9 11 11 A portion of cap -and -trade revenues are designated by statute to be spent on projects to improve environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities. Half of Californians (51%) and 46 percent of likely voters say it is very important to spend some of the revenue this way . An additional 30 percent of adults and likely voters say it is somewhat important. Democrats (66%) are far more likely than independents (43% ) or Republicans (24%) to say it is very important. African Americans (75%) and Latinos (65%) are far more likely than whites (43%) and Asian Americans (37%) to say the same. Across regions, Inland Empire residents (60%) are most likely to say it is very important to spend revenues this way (53% San Francisco Bay Area, 53% Los Angeles, 47% Orange/San Diego, 43% Central Valley). The likelihood of saying it is very important to spend cap-and -trade revenue s to improve environmental conditions in lower-income communities decreases with rising income levels . “Next, how important to you is it that some of the cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to improve environmental condi tions in lower-income and disadvantaged communities—very important, somewhat important, or not too important?” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Very important 51% 62% 49% 37% 75% 37% 65% 43% Somewhat important 30 25 37 34 14 42 26 33 Not too important 15 9 14 26 10 20 5 21 Don’t know 3 4 1 2 2 1 4 2 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 19 Electric Vehicles The state budget passed in June did not include funds to extend subsidies for electric vehicle purchases. When asked about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for purchasing electric vehicle s, 68 percent of adults and likely voters are in favor . We found similar levels of support for such incentives a year ago (67% adu lts, 64% likely voters). H alf of Republicans (49%) are in favor, and support is much higher among independents (70%) and Democrats (77%). At least six in ten are in favor across re gional, age, education, and income groups. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (70%) and whites (70%) are more likely than Asian Americans (62%) or African Americans (51%) to be in favor. “How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases in California ? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 68% 77% 49% 70% 68% Oppose 29 20 47 27 29 Don't know 4 3 4 3 3 Overwhelming majorities of Californians (77%) and likely voters (74%) favor building more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles in California. Support was similar last July (81% adults, 75% likely voters). Today, majorities across parties are in favor of building more charging stations and electr ic vehicle infrastructure (84% Democrats, 72% independents, 5 7% Republicans), and at least two in three across region al, racial/ethnic, age, education, and income groups are in favor. “How about building more charging stations and infrastructure to suppor t electric vehicles in California? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 77% 84% 57% 72% 74% Oppose 19 13 38 24 22 Don't know 4 3 5 3 4 Forty -seven percent of Californians say that they have seriously considered getting an electric vehicle the next time they purchase or lease a vehicle and 39 percent say they have not considered it . Younger Californians are far more likely than Californians age 55 and older to say they have seriously considered it (54% 18 –34, 54% 35 –54, 34% 55 and older), and those with annual incomes below $40,000 (46%) are slightly less likely than those with higher incomes (52%) to say they have considered it. Those who have s eriously considered getting an electric vehicle are far more likely than those who have not considered it to favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases (83% to 50%). They are also far more likely to favor building more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles in California (89% to 60%). PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 20 Solar Power Californians are generally supportive of policies which would increase solar power generation within the state. More than three in four California adults (76%) and likely voters (77%) favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California. These findings are similar to those in July 2015 , when 78 percent of adults and likely voters favored this proposal. Though strong majorities across parties support this proposal, Democrats (86%) are more likely than independents (76%) and Republicans (65%) to be in favor. Californians across racial/ethnic groups favor increasing incentives for ro oftop solar (79% whites, 76% Latinos, 73% African Americans, 70% Asian Americans). Indeed, support appears to be widespread : at least seven in ten Californians across all demographic groups say they favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives. Su pport for this proposal is similar among renters (78%) and homeowners (74%). Notably, 66 percent of those who say they are not willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources favor increasing tax credits for rooftop solar pane ls. “How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 76% 86% 65% 76% 77% Oppose 19 12 32 17 19 Don't know 5 2 4 7 5 O verwhelming majorit ies of Californians (85%) and likely voters (79%) favor building more solar power stations in California. Across parties, overwhelming majorities of Democrats (92%) and independents (80%) favor this proposal, along with a strong majority of Republicans (69%). Support for building more solar power stations is widespread, with more than three in four adults across regions and demographic groups saying they favor this proposal. Indeed, it has strong support even among those who say they would not be willing to pa y more for electricity if it were generated from renewable sources (75%) . “ How about building more solar power stations in California ? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 85% 92% 69% 80% 79% Oppose 10 5 26 12 15 Don't know 5 3 4 8 6 Fossil Fuels and Energy Policy Thirty-six percent of Californians support more oil drilling off the California coast. Sup port was similarly low last July (38%), following the oil spill off the Santa Barbara coast, and in 2010 (36%), following the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico. M ajorities of Democrats (72%) and independents (65%) oppose more oil drilling , while a majority of Republicans (55%) are in favor. Majorities across all age, education, income, and racial/ethnic groups are opposed. Opposition is highest in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area (65% each), followed by the Inland Empire (60%), Ce ntral Valley (52%) and Orange/San Diego (49%). Among Californians who oppose the PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 21 emission reduction targets in AB 32, 54 percent favor more offshore drilling. Among those who favor AB 32, 64 percent oppose more offshore drilling . “How about more oil drilli ng off the California coast? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?)” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 36% 27% 55% 25% 35% Oppose 59 72 39 65 61 Don’t know 6 1 6 9 4 Today, 58 percent of Californians and 60 percent of likely voters oppose the increased use of hydraulic fracturing. This marks a record high since we first began asking this question in 2013. Across parties, majorities of Democrats (69%) and independents (61%) oppose fracking, compared to 40 percent of Repu blicans. With the exception of the Inland Empire (40% favor, 44% oppose), majorities across regions oppose the increased use of fracking. Among racial/ethnic groups, whites (63%) are the most likely to oppose, followed by Latinos (56%), Asian Americans (54 %), and African Americans (52%). Majorities across all age, education, and income groups oppose the increased use of fracking. “How about the increased use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a drilling method that uses high-pressure water and chemicals to extract oil and natural gas from underground rock formations? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?)” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 30% 21% 50% 27% 30% Oppose 58 69 40 61 60 Don’t know 12 9 10 13 10 Seventy -four percent of Californians and 69 percent of likely voters favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change. Findings among all adults were similar last July (73% favor) and in July 2014 (75% favor). There are notable partisan differences : an overwhelming majority of Democrats (85%) and strong majority of independents (69%) favor this proposal, while just half of Republicans (51%) say the same. At least seven in ten Californians across regions and across education, inc ome, and racial/ethnic groups are in favor of stricter limits on power plants. Support for stricter emission limits decreases as age increases. Among those who support the emission targets in AB 32, 85 percent favo r stricter power plant emission limits. Am ong those oppose d to the emission targets in AB 32, 42 percent are in favor. “How about setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 74% 85% 51% 69% 69% Oppose 21 12 44 25 27 Don’t know 5 3 5 6 5 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 22 Regional Map PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 23 Methodology The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, president and CEO and survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance from survey research associate David Kordus, project manager for this survey, associate survey director Dean Bonner, and survey research associate Lunna Lopes. This Californians and the Environment survey is supported with funding from The Dirk and Charlene Kab cenell Foundation, the Heising -Simons Foundation, the Pisces Foundation, and the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation. The PPIC Statewide Survey invites input, comments, and suggestions from policy and public opinion experts and from its own advisory committee, b ut survey methods, questions, and content are determined solely by PPIC’s survey team. Findings in this report are based on a survey of 1,70 3 California adult residents, including 85 3 interviewed on landline telephones and 85 0 interviewed on cell phones. I nterviews took an average of 19 minutes to complete. Interviewing took place on weekend days and weekday nights from July 10–19 , 2016. Midway through our fielding period, Donald Trump announced his choice of running mate. Hillary Clinton announced her choi ce afterward. Landline interviews were conducted using a computer- generated random sample of telephone numbers that ensured that both listed and unlisted numbers were called. All landline telephone exchanges in California were eligible for selection, and t he sample telephone numbers were called as many as six times to increase the likelihood of reaching eligible households. Once a household was reached, an adult respondent (age 18 or older) was randomly chosen for interviewing using the “last birthday metho d” to avoid biases in age and gender. Cell phone interviews were conducted using a computer- generated random sample of cell phone numbers. All cell phone numbers with California area codes were eligible for selection, and the sample telephone numbers were called as many as eight times to increase the likelihood of reaching an eligible respondent. Once a cell phone user was reached, it was verified that this person was age 18 or older, a resident of California, and in a safe place to continue the survey (e. g., not driving). Cell phone respondents were offered a small reimbursement to help defray the cost of the call. Cell phone interviews were conducted with adults who have cell phone service only and with those who have both cell phone and landline service in the household. Live landline and cell phone interviews were conducted by Abt SRBI, Inc., in English and Spanish, according to respondents’ preferences. Accent on Languages, Inc., translated new survey questions into Spanish, with assistance from Renat ta DeFever. Abt SRBI uses the US Census Bureau’s 2010– 2014 American Community Survey’s (ACS) Public Use Microdata Series for California (with regional coding information from the University of Minnesota’s Integrated Public Use Microdata Series for Californ ia) to compare certain demographic characteristics of the survey sample —region, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education —with the characteristics of California’s adult population. The survey sample was closely comparable to the ACS figures. To estimate l andline and cell phone service in California, Abt SRBI used 2014 state -level estimates released by the National Center for Health Statistics —which used data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the ACS —and 2015 estimates for the West Census Region in the latest NHIS report. The estimates for California were then compared against landline and cell phone service reported in this survey. We also used voter registration data from the California Secretary of State to compare the party registratio n of registered voters in our sample to party registration statewide. The landline and cell phone samples were then integrated using a frame integration weight, while sample balancing adjusted for differences across regional, age, gender, race/ethnicity, e ducation, telephone service, and party registration groups. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 24 The sampling error, taking design effects from weighting into consideration, is ±3. 5 percent at the 95 percent confidence level for the total unweighted sample of 1,70 3 adults. This means that 95 times out of 100, the results will be within 3. 5 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in California were interviewed. The sampling error for unweighted subgroups is larger: for the 1, 373 registered v oters, the sampling error is ±3.8 perce nt; for the 1, 056 likely voters, it is ±4. 3 percent. Sampling error is only one type of error to which surveys are subject. Results may also be affected by factors such as question wording, question order, and survey timing. We present results for five geographic regions, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the state population. “Central Valley” includes Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. “San Francisco Bay Area” includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. “Los Angeles” refers to Los Angeles County, “Inland Empire” ref ers to Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and “Orange/San Diego” refers to Orange and San Diego Counties. Residents of other geographic areas are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes fo r these less populous areas are not large enough to report separately. We present specific results for non -Hispanic whites, who account for 43 percent of the state’s adult population, and also for Latinos, who account for about a third of the state’s adul t population and constitute one of the fastest- growing voter groups. We also present results for non -Hispanic Asian Americans , who make up about 15 percent of the state’s adult population, and non -Hispanic African Americans , who comprise about 6 percent. In our likely voter findings, we present results for non - Hispanic whites, for Latinos, and for members of all other racial/ethnic groups combined. R esults for other racial/ethnic groups —such as Native Americans —are included in the results reported for all a dults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes are not large enough for separate analysis. We compare the opinions of those who report they are registered Democrats, registered Republicans, and decline -to -state or independent voters; the res ults for those who say they are registered to vote in other parties are not large enough for separate analysis. We also analyze the responses of likely voters —so designated per their responses to voter registration survey questions, previous election participation, and current interest in politics. The percentages presented in the report tables and in the questionnaire may not add to 100 due to rounding. We compare current PPIC Statewide Survey results to those in our earlier surveys and to those in nat ional surveys by ABC News /Washington Post , CBS News /New York Times , and Gallup . Additional details about our methodology can be found at www.ppic.org/content/other/SurveyMethodology .pdf and are available upon request through surveys@ppic.org. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 25 Questionnaire and Results CALIFORNIANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT July 10–19 , 2016 1703 California Adult Residents: English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR ± 3.5% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE PERCENTAGES MAY NOT ADD TO 100 DUE TO RO UNDING First, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Jerry Brown is handling his job as governor of California? 54% approve 27 disapprove 20 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that G overnor Brown is handling environmental issues in California? 49% approve 29 disapprove 22 don’t know Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling its job? 45% approve 40 disapprove 15 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling environmental issues in California? 48% approve 36 disapprove 15 don’t know Next, what do you think is the most important environmental issue facing California today? [code , don’t read] 38 water supply, drought, reservoirs 13 air pollution, vehicle emissions, smog 9 water pollution of ocean, rivers, lakes, streams, beach pollution 7 global warming, climate change, greenhouse gases 3 landfills, garbage, sewage, waste, recycling 2 loss of forests, forest fires, wildfires 2 energy, fossil fuels, solar, nuclear, wind, alternative 2 fracking, hydraulic fracturing 2 pollution in general 14 other (specify) 8 don’t know Next, some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote in California? 62% yes [ask Q6a] 38 no [skip to Q 7b] 6a. Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or are you registered as a decline-to -state or independent voter? 43% Democrat [ask Q7] 28 Republican [skip to Q7a] 5 another party (specify) [skip to Q 8] 24 independent [skip to Q7b] PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 26 Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 61% strong 37 not very strong 2 don’t know [skip to Q8] 7a. Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 56% strong 39 not very strong 5 don’t know [skip to Q8 ] 7 b. Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 22% Republican Party 46 Democratic Party 24 neither (volunteered) 9 don’t know [likely voters only] If the November 8 presidential election were being held today, would you vote for: [rotate] (1) Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, (2) Donald Trump, the Republican, (3) Gary Johnson, the Libertarian, [or] (4) Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate? 46% Hillary Clinton, the Democrat 30 Donald Trump, the Republican 7 Gary Johnson, the Libertarian 6 Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate 2 someone else (specify) 2 would not vote for president (volunteered) 7 don’t know [likely voters only] In thinking about the presidential election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions o n the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important? 45% very important 38 somewhat important 16 not too important – don’t know [likely voters only] How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2016 presidential election —very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? 53% very closely 38 fairly closely 7 not too closely 2 not at all closely – don’t know [likely voters only] If the November 8 election for the U S Senate were being held today, would you vote for: [rotate] (1) Kamala Harris, a Democrat [or] (2) Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat? 38% Kamala Harris, a Democrat 20 Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat 28 neither/would not vote for U S senator (volunteered) 14 don’t know [likely voters only] In thinking about the California U S Senate election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important? 40% very important 43 somewhat important 17 not too important – don’t know Next, would you say that the supply of water is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of Cali fornia? 62% big problem 24 somewhat of a problem 13 not much of a problem 1 don’t know Overall, do you think that the state and local governments are doing too much, the right amount, or not enough to respond to the current drought in California? 7% too much 29 the right amount 58 not enough 6 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 27 Do you think that pollution of drinking water is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? 59% yes 31 no 10 don’t know Next, We are interested in the part of California that you live in. Would you say that air pollution is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in your part of California? 25% big problem 35 somewhat of a problem 39 not a problem 1 don’t know How serious a health threat is air pollution in your region to you and your immediate family —do you think it is a very serious, somewhat serious, or not too serious of a health threat? 21% very serious 32 somewhat serious 45 not too serious 1 not at all serious (volunteered) 1 don’t know Do you think that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? 50% yes 45 no 6 don’t know On another topic, which of the followin g statements reflects your view of when the effects of global warming will begin to happen—[rotate] (1) they have already begun to happen; (2) they will start happening within a few years; (3) they will start happening within your lifetime; (4) they will n ot happen within your lifetime, but they will affect future generations; [or] (5) they will never happen? 64% already begun 5 within a few years 6 within your lifetime 14 not within lifetime, but will affect future generations 8 will never happen 2 don’t know How serious of a threat is global warming to the economy and quality of life for California’s future —do you think that it is a very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious of a threat? 54% very serious 27 somewhat serious 11 not too serious 7 not at all serious 1 don’t know 20a. Do you think global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires or not? 65% yes, has contributed 29 no, has not contributed 6 don’t know Next, to address global warming, do you favor or oppose the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2020? 69% favor 19 oppose 13 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 28 To address global warming, the state legislature is currently considering legislation that would require California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. Overall, do you favor or oppose this proposal? 68% favor 22 oppose 10 don’t know Do you favor or oppose the California stat e government making its own policies, separate from the federal government, to address the issue of global warming? 67% favor 26 oppose 6 don’t know Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state, would cause there to be fewer jobs, or wouldn’t affect the number of jobs for people around the state? 40% more jobs 20 fewer jobs 29 wouldn’t affect the number of jobs 10 don’t know Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause gasoline prices at the pump around the state to increase, or to decrease, or wouldn’t affect gasoline prices at the pump around the state? 59% increase gasoline prices 14 decrease gasoline prices 20 wouldn’t affect gasoline prices 7 don’t know In order to help reduce global warming, would you be willing or not willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources like solar or wind energy? 56% willing 40 not willing 4 don’t know How much, if anything, have you heard about the state government policy called “cap and trade ” that sets limits on carbon dioxide emissions? Have you heard a lot, a little, or nothing at all? 12% a lot 33 a little 55 nothing at all 1 don’t know In the system called “ cap and trade,” the California state government issues permits limiting the amount of greenhouse gases companies can put out. Companies that do not use all their permits can sell them to other companies. The idea is that man y companies will find ways to put out less greenhouse gases, because that will be cheaper than buying permits. Do you favor or oppose the cap-and -trade system? 54% favor 32 oppose 13 don’t know 28a. Cap -and -trade revenues are spent on projects to reduce gre enhouse gas emissions, such as affordable housing near public transit, energy efficiency, high speed rail, and public transit. The Legislative Analyst estimated that having transportation fuels in the cap -and-trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to gasoline costs. Knowing this, do you favor or oppose having transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and-trade system? 52% favor 36 oppose 11 don’t know Next, how important to you is it that some of the cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to imp rove environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities —ver y important, somewhat important, or not too important? 51% very important 30 somewhat important 15 not too important 3 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 29 Next, do you favor or oppose the following proposals? [rotate questions 30 to 33] How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases in California ? 68% favor 29 oppose 4 don’t know How about building more charging stations and infrastructure t o support electric vehicles in California? 77% favor 19 oppose 4 don’t know How about building more solar power stations in California? 85% favor 10 oppose 5 don’t know How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California? 76% favor 19 oppose 5 don’t know Changing topics, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barack Obama is handling his job as president of the United States? 60% approve 35 disapprove 4 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Obama is handling environmental issues in the United States? 60% approve 31 disapprove 9 don’t know Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the US Congress is handling its job? 28% approve 66 disapprove 6 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way the US Congress is handling environmental issues in the United States? 31% approve 59 disapprove 10 don’t know Next, do you favor or oppose the following proposals? [rotate questions 38 to 40] How about more oil drilling off the California coast? 36% favor 59 oppose 6 don’t know How about the increased use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a drilling method that uses high -pressure water and chemicals to extract oil and natural g as from underground rock formations? 30% favor 58 oppose 12 don’t know How about setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change? 74% favor 21 oppose 5 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 30 Next, [asked of a random half sample] How much do you personally worry about global warming —a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or not at all? 35% a great deal 31 a fair amount 17 only a little 16 not at all 1 don’t know 41a. [asked of a random half sample] How much do you personally worry abo ut climate change—a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or not at all? 37% a great deal 29 a fair amount 20 only a little 15 not at all – don’t know Next, would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 13% very liberal 19 somewhat liberal 29 middle -of-the -road 24 somewhat conservative 12 very conservative 4 don’t know Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics —a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or none? 24% great deal 37 fair amount 30 only a little 9 none – don’t know [d1–d5a: demographic questions] D5b. [asked of those employed full - or part -time] How do you usually commute to work — drive alone, carpool, take public bus or transit, walk, or bicycle? 66% drive alone 14 carpool 7 take public bus or transit 4 walk 2 bicycle 6 work at home (volunteered) D5c. Would you say that you have or have not seriously considered getting an electric vehicle the next time you buy or lease a vehicle, or do you a lready have one? 47% have considered 39 have not considered 8 already have one 4 don’t drive/don’t have a car/won’t be buying another vehicle (volunteered) 1 don’t know [D6 -d16: demographic questions] PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ruben Barrales President and CEO GROW Elect Angela Glover Blackwell President and CEO PolicyLink Mollyann Brodie Senior Vice President Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Bruce E. Cain Director B ill Lane Center for the American West Stanford University Jon Cohen Vice President of Survey Research SurveyMonkey Joshua J. Dyck Co-Director Center for Public Opinion University of Massachusetts, Lowell Russell Hancock President and CEO Joint Venture Sil icon Valley Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Professor Sol Price School of Public Policy University of Southern California Robert Lapsley President California Business Roundtable Carol S. Larson President and CEO The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Donna Lucas Chief Executive Officer Lucas Public Affairs Sonja Petek 2016 Master of Public Policy Candidate Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley Lisa Pitney Vice President of Government Relations The Walt Disney Company Mindy Romero Founder and Director California Civic Engagement Project at the UC Davis Center for Regional Change Robert K. Ross, MD President and CEO The California Endowment Most Reverend Jaime Soto Bishop of Sacramento Roman Catholic Diocese of Sacramento Carol Whiteside Principal California Strategies The PPIC Statewide Survey Advisory Committee is a diverse group of experts who provide advice on survey issues. However, survey methods, questions, content, and timing are determined solely by PPIC. PPIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS Donna Lucas, Chair Chief Executive Officer Lucas Public Affairs Mark Baldassare President and CEO Public Policy Institute of California Ruben Barrales President and CEO GROW Elect María Blanco Executive Director Undocumented Student Legal Services Center University of California Office of the President Louise Henry Bryson Chair Emerita, Board of Trustees J. Paul Getty Trust A. Marisa Chun Partner McDermott Will & Emery LLP Phil Isenberg Former Chair Delta Stewardship Council Mas Masumoto Author and Farmer Steven A. Merksamer Senior Partner Nielsen, Merksamer, Parrinello, Gross & Leoni, LLP Gerald L. Parsky Chairman Aurora Capital Group Kim Polese Chairman ClearStreet, Inc. Gaddi H. Vasquez Senior Vice President, Government Affairs Edison International Southern California Edison Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.4400 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG PPIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121" } ["___content":protected]=> string(102) "

S 716MBS

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(107) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-the-environment-july-2016/s_716mbs/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(9013) ["ID"]=> int(9013) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "1" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:43:02" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(4555) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(8) "S 716MBS" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(8) "s_716mbs" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(12) "S_716MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "739924" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(83506) "PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 Californians & the Environment Mark Baldassare Dean Bonner David Kordus Lunna Lopes CONTENTS Press Release 3 2016 Election and Environmental Issues 6 Climate Change and Energy Policy 13 Regional Map 22 Methodology 23 Questionnaire and Results 25 Supported with funding from The Dirk and Charlene Kabcenell Foundation, the Heising-Simons Foundation, the Pisces Foundation, and the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation. The PPIC Statewide Survey provides a voice for the public and likely voters— informing policymakers, encouraging discussion, and raising awareness on critical issues of the day. © 2016 Public Policy Institute of California The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC is a public charity. It does not take or support positions on any ballot measures or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provide d that full attribution is given to the source. Research publications reflect the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or board of directors of the Public Policy Institute of California. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 3 CONTACT Linda Strean 415 -291 -4412 Serina Correa 415 -291 -4417 News Release EMBARGOED: Do not publish or broadcast until 9:00 p.m. PDT on Wednesday , July 27 , 2016 . Para ver este comunicado de prensa en español, por favor visite nuestra página de internet: www.ppic.org/main/pressreleaseindex.asp PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY: CALIFORNIANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT Strong Support for Global Warming Law and for Expanding Its Goals MOST WILLING TO PAY MORE FOR ELECTRICITY FROM RENEWABLE SO URCES SAN FRANCISCO, July 27 , 2016—Ten years after California enacted AB 32, the landmark law mandating the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, strong majorities of residents support its goals and favor a proposal to expand on them. These are among the key findings in a statewide survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). When Californians are asked if they favor or oppose the law requiring the state to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, 69 percent are in favor (19% oppose, 13% don’t know). Among likely voters, 62 percent favor the law . There is a striking partisan divide . Majorities of Democrats (80%) and independents (56%) favor the law , compared to 44 percent of Republicans. When the survey first asked this question in 2006, support was similar across parties (65% Republicans, 67% De mocrats, 68% independents). With the state on track to meet AB 32’s goals, a proposed new law would set more ambitious targets. It would require a reduction in emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. When asked about this proposal, 68 percent o f adults and 59 percent of likely voters favor it . Across parties, Democrats (78%) are twice as likely as Republicans (39%) to favor the expanded goals (59% independents in favor). Californians couple their support for reducing emissions with an expectation of higher costs. Most adults and likely voters (59% each) say state action to reduce global warming will cause gasoline prices around the state to increase. Among Californians who say gas prices will rise , 64 percent favor AB 32’s goals and 63 percent favor expanding them. Also, m ajorities of adults and likely voters (56% each) say that , to reduce global warming, they are willing to pay more for electricity if it is generated by renewable sources like solar or wind. Democrats (68%) and independents (51%) are more likely to be willing than Republicans (38%) to pay more. “We find strong support today for the state’s greenhouse gas emissions targets set 10 years ago,” s aid Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. “The commitment to help reduce global war ming includes a surprising willingness on the part of majorities of Californians to pay higher prices.” Most Californians don’t expect actions to reduce warming to cost the state jobs: 40 percent of adults say the result will be more jobs and 29 percent predict there will be no effect on the number of jobs. Just 20 percent think there will be fewer jobs because of the state’s actions. Most Favor Cap and Trade A majority of Californians (55%) say they have hear d nothing about the state’s cap-and -trade system — a major part of the effort to achieve AB 32’s emissions reduction goal. After hearing a short description PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 4 of the system, 54 percent of adults say they favor it. Transpo rtation fuels have been included in the cap -and -trade system since 2015, and the Legislative Analyst estimated earlier this year that this has added 11 cents per gallon to the price of gasoline. After hearing this cost estimate along with a brief list of programs that receive state cap -and -trade revenues, 52 percent of adults and 49 percent of likely voters favor including transportation fuels in the system (36% adults, 40% likely v oters oppose). A portion of cap -and -trade revenue is required by law to be s pent on projects to improve environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities. Half of Californians (51%) and 46 percent of likely voters say it is very important to spend some of the revenue this way. Most Californians (81% adults, 75% likely voters) say global warming is a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the state’s future economy and quality of life. And most (64% adults, 64% likely voters) say the effects of warming have already begun, while fewer (25% adults, 21% likely voters) say there will be effects in the future. Far fewer (8% adults, 13% likely voters) say they will never happen. Most residents (65%) say global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires. Clinton Leads Trump 46%–30% ; Environment al Stances Seen as Important With the November election approaching, likely voters were asked about their choices in the presidential and US Senate races and the importance of candidates’ views on the environment. In the presidential race, likely voters favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump (46% to 30%)— a larger margin than in the May survey (49% to 39%) , which did not ask about third -party candidates. Clinton ha s strong support among Democratic likely voters (81%) and leads Trump among independents (37% to 24%). Trump has strong support among Republicans (76%). The race is close among white likely voters, while Clinton has a large lead over Trump among Latinos and other racial/ethnic groups (sample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analysis). Most likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important (45%) or somewhat important (38%) in making their choice. In the US Senate matchup , which pits two Democrats against one another, likely voters prefer Kamala Harris to Loretta Sanchez (38% to 20%) —a larger margin than in May (34% to 26%). Harris has majority support among Democrats (53%) and leads Sanchez among independents (37% to 19%). Half of Republicans (50%) volunteer that they do not plan to vote in this race . Sanchez leads among Latinos, and Harris has large leads among whites and other racial/ethnic groups. Harris leads Sanchez by 25 point s overall (53% to 28%) when excluding the 28 percent of survey respondents who volunteer that they won’t vote in this race. Again, most likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very (40%) or somewhat (43%) important in determining their vote. Majorities Support Brown, Obama The survey also asked about elected leaders at the state and national level.  Governor Jerry Brown. Majorities of adults (54%) and likely voters (53%) approve of the way he is doing his job. About half (49% adults, 51% likely voters) approve of the way he is handling environmental issues.  The state legislature. California lawmakers have a job approval rating of 45 percent among all adults and 42 percent among likely voters. The approval rating for the legislature’s handling of environmental issues is similar (48% adults, 42% likely voters).  Pre sident Barack Obama. Majorities (60% adults, 56% likely voters ) approve of the president’s job performance and have similar opinions of how he is handling environmental issues (60% adults, 55% likely voters ).  US Congress. Congress has much lower approval r atings for job performance (28% adults, 17% likely voters) and handling of environmental issues (31% adults, 17% likely voters). PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 5 Fewer Are Worried about Water , But It’s Still Top Environmental Issue What is the most important environmental issue facing the state? Water supply and drought tops the list among Californians (38%), followed by air pollution (13%). The proportion of residents naming drought and water supply as the top issue has dropped 20 points since July 2015 (58%). Nonetheless, 62 percent of r esidents and 71 percent of likely voters say the supply of water is a big problem in their part of the state. Residents in the Central Valley (71%) are the most likely to hold this view and those in the San Francisco Bay Area (51%) are the least likely. No w that statewide mandatory water reduction targets have been lifted, residents are asked to assess government action on the drought. Majorities (58% adults, 63% likely voters) say state and local governments are not doing enough to respond. “Water supply continues to top the list of environmental issues facing California even after an El Niñ o year,” Baldassare said. “With water restrictions lifted, many Californians are still calling for state and local governments to do more in responding to the drought.” Many See Water, Air Pollution as Health Threat s in Lower -Income Areas Asked about pollution of drinking water, 59 percent of Californians and 48 percent of likely voters say it is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas in their part of the sta te. Latinos (76%), African Americans (65%), and Asian Americans (61%) are more likely than whites (46%) to express this view. On the topic of air pollution, majorities (60% adults, 60% likely voters) say it is a big problem or somewhat of a problem in their part of the state. Latinos (68%) and African Americans (62%) are more likely than whites (54%) and Asian American s (51%) to call it a problem. Half of adults (50%) and 42 percent of likely voters say air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower- income areas than elsewhere in their part of the state. Latinos (65%) are more likely than Asian Americans and African Americans (52% each) to express this view and far more likely than whites (37%). And 53 percent of residents say air pollution is a very serious or somewhat serious threat to themselves and their immediate families . Among racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (62%) and African Americans (61%) are the most likely to hold this view. “Many Californians perceive that lower -income communities face more serious health threats from air and water pollution,” Baldassare said. “Latino residents are the most likely to express these concerns.” Opposition to Fracking Reaches Record High The survey asks a series of questions about energy policy.  Fracking. Majorities (58% adults , 60% likely voters) oppose the increased use of hydraulic fracturing —a record high since the survey first began asking this question in 2013.  Oil drilling. S imilar numbers of Californians (59% adults, 61% likely voters) oppose incr eased oil drilling off the California coast .  Power plant emissions. Strong majorities (74% adults, 69% likely voters) favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants to address climate change.  Solar power. Overwhelming majorities favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California (76% adults, 77% likely voters) and building more solar power stations in the state (85% adults, 79% likely voters).  Electric vehicles. The new state budget does not include money to extend subsidies for electric vehicle purchases. When asked about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for buying an electric vehicle, most adults and likely voters (68% each) are in favor. Most (77% adults, 74% likely voters) also favor buil ding more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles. How many Californians have thought about buying or leasing an electric vehicle? Just under half (47%) say they have seriously considered it. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 6 2016 Election and Environmental Issues Key Findings  Am ong California likely voters, 46 percent would vote for Hillary Clinton in t he presidential election, and 30 percent would vote fo r Donald Trump. Forty-five percent say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important in determining their vote . (page 7)  In the C alifornia US Senate election, 38 percent of likely voters support Kamala Harris, 20 percent support Loretta Sanchez, and 14 percent say they are undecided. More than a quarter volunteer they would not vote in the S enate race. Forty percent say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important in determining their vote . (page 8)  Fifty -s ix percent of likely voters approve of President Obama’s job performance and 55 percent approve of his handling of environmental issues. Seventeen percent of likely voters approve of Congress, both overall and on its handling of environmental issues. (page 9)  Fifty -three percent of likely voters approve of Governor Brown’s job performance and 5 1 percent approve of his handling of environmental issues. Forty-two percent of likely voters approve of the California Legislature overall and on its handling of environmental issues . (page 10)  More than f our in ten likely voters say the drought is the most important environmental issue facing the state ; 10 percent say water pollu tion is most important. (page 11)  Six in ten adults say air pollution is a problem in their part of the state. African Americans and Latinos are more likely than Asian Americans and whites to say that air pollution is a very serious threat to themselves and their families. (page 12) 43 46 46 454755 18 15 18 1620 17 0 20 40 60 80 Jul-11 Jul-12Jul-13Jul-14Jul-15Jul-16 Percent likely voters President Obama US Congress Approval ratings of federal elected officials on environmental issues 36 41 44 464851 24 29 34 333242 0 20 40 60 80 Jul-11 Jul-12Jul-13Jul-14Jul-15Jul-16 Percent likely voters Governor Brown California Legislature Approval ratings of state elected officials on environmental issues 43 101010 0 20 40 60 Water supplyand drought Water pollution Air pollution Global warming Percent likely voters Most important environmental issue PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 7 Presidential Election In the presidential election, eight in ten likely voters say the candidates’ positions on the environment are important (4 5% very, 3 8% somewhat) in determining their vote. Democrats (60%) are far more likely than independents (4 0% ) and Republicans (2 7% ), and Latinos (6 5% ) are far more likely than whites (43%) and other rac ial/ethnic groups (4 2%), to say the environment is very important ( sample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analysis). Among those who plan to vote for Hillary Clinton, 61 percent say that the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important, compared to 2 6 percent among those who plan to vote for Donald Trump. “In thinking about the presidential election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important?” Likely voters only All likely voters Party Race/ Ethnicity Dem Rep Ind Latinos Whites Other groups Very important 45% 60% 27% 40% 65% 43% 42% Somewhat important 38 32 44 41 24 39 43 Not too important 16 8 29 19 10 18 15 Don’t know – – 1 – 2 – – T oday, California likely voters favor Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump for US p resident (46% to 30%) by a larger margin than in our May survey (49% to 39%) when we did not ask about third -party candidates. Clinton has strong support among Democrats (81%) and leads Trump among independents (37% to 24%) . Trump has strong support among Republicans (76%). Clinton leads Trump by a 20 point margin am ong women (49% to 29%) and a 13 point margin among men (43% to 30%). Clinton leads Trump by large margins in Los Angeles (53% to 17%) and the San Francisco Bay Area (57% to 25%) . Trump leads in the Inland Empire (49% to 34%) , while the race is closer in the Central Valley (32% Clinton, 38% Trump ) and Orange/San Diego (40% Clinton, 38% Trump). The race is close among whites (41% Clinton, 37% Trump) , while Clinton has a large lead over Trump among Latinos (68% to 12%) and other racial/ethnic groups (48% to 21%) with sample sizes too small for separate analysis . “ If the November 8 presidential election were being held today, would you vote for : Hillary Clinton, the Democrat; D onald Trump, the Republican; Gary Johnson, the Libertarian; or Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate? ” Likely voters only Hillary Clinton Donald Trump Gary Johnson Jill Stein Someone else (volunteered) Would not vote for president (volunteered) Don’t know All likely voters 46% 30% 7% 6% 2% 2% 7% Party Democrats 81 3 1 6 1 1 6 Republicans 7 76 6 2 1 3 6 Independents 37 24 10 5 7 4 13 Gender Men 43 30 11 6 2 2 5 Women 49 29 3 5 2 2 9 Race/ Ethnicity Latinos 68 12 4 5 4 2 5 Whites 41 37 9 5 1 3 5 Other groups 48 21 2 10 3 1 16 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 8 California US Senate Election Eight in ten likely voters say the US Senate candidates’ positions on the environment are important (4 0% very, 43% somewhat) in determining their vote. Democrats (5 1% ) are much more likely than independents (3 8% ) and Republicans (2 6% ), and Latinos (61%) are far more likely than whites (3 6% ) and other racial/ethnic groups (3 9% ), to say the environment is very important (s ample sizes for Asian American and African American likely voters are too small for separate analys is). About half of those who plan to vote for Kamala Harris (49%) or Loretta Sanchez (4 7% ) say the candidates’ positions on the environment are very important, compared to 2 5 percent for those who volunteer that they would not vote in this race. “In thinki ng about the California U S Senate election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —ver y important, somewhat important, or not too important?” Likely voters only All likely voters Party Race/E thnicity Dem Rep Ind Latinos Whites Other groups Very important 40% 51% 26% 38% 61% 36% 39% Somewhat important 43 43 43 42 28 45 45 Not too important 17 6 30 20 11 18 16 Don’t know – – 1 – – 1 – In the US Senate matchup today , likely voters prefer Kamala Harris over Loretta Sanchez (38 % to 2 0% ) by a larger margin than in May (34% to 26%). Harris has majority support among Democrats (5 3% ) and leads Sanchez among independents ( 37% to 19%) ; Republicans are split (16% to 15%). Notab ly, 50 percent of Republicans and 34 percent of independents say they would not vote in this race. Sanchez leads Harris among Latinos. Harris has large leads among whites and other racial/ethnic groups and in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area . Clinton supporters favor Harris over Sanchez (5 4% to 28 %); 5 1 percent of Trump supporters say they w ould not vote in this race . Harris has a 25 point lead over Sanchez when excluding those who volunteer they would not vote (53% to 28%). “ If the November 8 US Senate election were being held today, would you vote for Kamala Harris, a Democrat or Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat? ” Likely voters only Kamala Harris Loretta Sanchez Would not vote for US senator (volunteered) Don’t know All likely voters 38% 20% 28% 14% Party Democrats 53 26 7 13 Republicans 16 15 50 19 Independents 37 19 34 10 Region Central Valley 31 25 32 13 San Francisco Bay Area 48 15 21 15 Los Angeles 41 21 25 12 Orange/San Diego 31 21 34 14 Inland Empire 31 22 34 12 Race/Ethnicity Latinos 29 45 16 11 Whites 41 14 31 14 Other groups 39 19 24 18 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 9 Approval Ratings of Federal Elected Officials Majorities of California adults (60%) and likely voters (5 6% ) approve of the way Barack Obama is handling his job as president. Approval was similar in May (61% adults, 52% likely voters) and last July (57% adults, 51% likely voters). Today, 86 percent of Democrats approve, compared to 49 percent of independents and 1 8 percent of Republicans. Residents living in Los Angeles (7 3% ) and the San Francisco Bay Area (6 4% ) are more likely than those living in other regions to approve. African Americans (87% ), Latinos ( 71 %), and Asian Americans ( 70 %) are more likely than whites (47 %) to approve. The president’s a pprova l rating was at 56 percent in a July ABC News/Washington Post national poll. Majorities of California adults (60%) and likely voters (55%) approve of President Obama’s handling of environmental issues. Approval in this area w as slightly lower last July (53% adults, 47% likely voters). Today, 80 percent of Democrats approve of President Obama’s handling of environmental issues, compared to 4 5 percent of independents and 24 percent of Republicans. San Francisco Bay Area (67%) and Los Angeles (64% ) residents are more likely than those living in other regions to approve . African Americans (7 9% ), Latinos (71 %), and Asian American s (64% ) are more likely than whites (4 9% ) to approve. “Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barack Obama is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind His job as president of the United States Approve 60% 86% 18% 49% 56% Disapprove 35 12 80 44 42 Don't know 4 2 2 7 2 Environmental issues in the United States Approve 60 80 24 45 55 Disapprove 31 13 68 45 39 Don't know 9 8 8 10 6 The US Congress has low approval ratings among Californians (2 8% adults, 1 7% likely voters). Approval of the way the US Congress is handling its job was similar in May (28% adults, 15% likely voters) and last July (29% adults, 17% likely voters). Today, approval of the US Congress is similarly low across parties and also falls short of a majority across all regions and demographic groups. Approval of the US Congress was at 15 percent in a July CBS News/New York Times national poll. The US Congress’ handling of environmental issues also receives low approval ratings (3 1% adults, 1 7% likely voters), which were similar last July (33% adults, 20% likely voters). Today, approval of the US Congress’ handling of environmental issues is similarly low across parties and falls short of a majority across all regional, age, education, and income groups. “Do you approve or disa pprove of the way the US Congress is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Its job Approve 28% 22% 17% 16% 17% Disapprove 66 73 78 78 80 Don't know 6 5 5 6 3 Environmental issues in the United States Approve 31 25 18 19 17 Disapprove 59 67 72 71 75 Don't know 10 9 10 10 8 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 10 Approval Ratings of State Elected Officials Majorities of California adults (54% ) and likely voters (5 3% ) approve of the way Jerry Brown is handling his job as governor of California. Brown’s approval ratings were similar in May (52% adults, 50% likely voters) and last July (53% adults, 55% likely voters). Today , Democrats (71 %) are much more likely than in dependents (4 7% ) and Republicans (28%) to approve. Los Angeles (62%) and San Francisco Bay Area residents (57 %) are more likely than those living in other regions to approve. Latinos (62%) and African Americans (58 %) are slightly more likely than Asian Ame rican s (52%) and whites ( 48%) to approve. About half of Californians approve of the way Governor Brown is handling environmental issues (49 % adults, 5 1% likely voters), similar to last July (47% adults, 48% likely voters). Today, Democrats (6 6% ) are much more likely than independents (39 %) and Republicans (2 7% ) to approve. About half in all regions except for the Central Valley (41%) approve of Brown’s handling of environmental issues. Latinos (55%) are slightly more likely than Asian Americans (47%), whites (47%) and African Americans (44% ) to approve . “Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Jerry Brown is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind His job as governor of California Approve 54% 71% 28% 47% 53% Disapprove 27 14 60 36 36 Don't know 20 16 12 17 11 Environmental issues in California Approve 49 66 27 39 51 Disapprove 29 17 57 40 35 Don't know 22 17 16 21 14 Forty-five percent of adults and 42 percent of likely voters approve of the legislature. Approval was similar in May (43% adults, 38% likely voters) and lower last July (39% adults, 32% likely voters). Today, Democrats (5 7% ) are much more likely than independents (33%) and Republicans (22%) to approve. Across regions, approval is above 50 percent in the Inland Empire (51%) and lower elsewhere (48% San Francisco Bay Area, 44% Central Valley, 44% Los Angeles, 39% Orange/San Diego). Latinos (60 %) are more likely to ex press approval than Asian American s (45%) , African Americans (39%) , and w hites (3 6% ). Approval ratings for the legislature’s handling of environmental issues today (4 8% adults, 4 2% likely voters) are higher than last July (42% adults, 32% likely voters). Today, Democrats (56% ) are much more likely than independents (41 %) and Republicans ( 25%) to express approval. About half in all regions except for the Central Valley (42%) approve of their handling of environmental issues. Latinos (59% ) and Asian American s (5 4% ) are more likely than African Americans (4 5% ) and whites ( 40% ) to approv e. “Do you approve or disapprove of the way the California Legislature is handling…?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Its job Approve 45% 57% 22% 33% 42% Disapprove 40 28 73 51 48 Don't know 15 15 5 15 10 Environmental issues in California Approve 48 56 25 41 42 Disapprove 36 27 66 49 46 Don't know 15 16 9 11 13 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 11 Most Important Environmental Issue: Water As the current California drought enters its fifth year, 38 percent of Californians and 43 percent of likely voters say that the most important environmental issue facing California is the drought and water supply . The proportion of Californians naming drought and the water supply has decr eased by 20 percentage points since July 2015 when 58 percent cited it as the most important issue. Nonetheless, when asked specifically about the supply of water in their part of the state, 62 percent of Californians and 71 percent of likely voters say it is a big problem. The share of Californians saying water supply is a big problem was slightly higher last July (68%). Central Valley residents (71%) are the most likely to say the water supply is a big problem in their region , while residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (51%) are the least likely to say this. The likelihood of saying that the water supply is a big problem increases as age and income increase. About seven in 10 Californians across political parties say the supply of water is a big problem. Notably, across racial/ethnic groups, whites (73%) are much more likely than Asian Americans (57%), Latinos (53%), and African Americans (52%) to say the s upply of water is a big problem. “ Next, would you say that the supply of water is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of California? ” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Big problem 62% 71% 51% 64% 59% 63% 71% Somewhat of a problem 24 20 31 25 27 17 22 Not much of a problem 13 9 16 11 13 18 7 Don’t know 1 1 2 – 1 2 – In May, following some improvement of drought conditions , the State Water Resources Control Board lifted the statewide mandatory water reduction target. Today, 58 percent of adults and 63 percent of likely voters say that the state and local governments are not doing enough to respond to the current drought ; th e share holding this view was similar when we last asked this question in January 2015 (59% adults, 63% likely voters). Half or more across the state’s regions today say the state and local governments are not doing enough . “Overall, do you think that the state and local governments are doing too much, the right amount, or not enough to respond to the current drought in California?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Too much 7% 6% 5% 6% 8% 14% 7% The right amount 29 24 34 28 35 21 27 Not enough 58 63 51 63 53 59 63 Don’t know 6 6 11 3 4 6 3 When asked about the pollution of drinking water, 59 percent Californians and 48 percent of likely voters say that it is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas in their part of California. Latinos (76%), African Americans (65%), and Asian Americans (61%) are more likely than whites (46%) to say this. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 12 Air Pollution Thirteen percent of Californians cite air pollution as the most important environmental issue facing California. W hen asked specifically about air pollution in their part of California, six in 10 adults say air pollution is a problem (25% big problem, 35% somewha t). These findings are similar to July 2015 (24 % big problem, 34% somewhat) . Democrats ( 31% big problem, 38% somewhat ) are more likely to say air pollution is a problem than independents or Republicans. Regionally, residents of Los Angeles (39% big problem, 33% somewhat ) are the most likely to say that air pollution is a problem. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (31 % big problem, 37% somewhat ) and African Americans (27% big, 35% somewhat ) are more likely than whites and Asian Americans to view air pollution as a problem. “We are interested in the part of California that you live in. Would you say that air pollution is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in your part of California? ” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Big problem 25% 28% 12% 39% 18% 29% 24% Somewhat of a problem 35 35 43 33 33 34 36 Not a problem 39 35 45 27 47 34 40 Don’t know 1 2 – – 2 3 – Half of California adults and 42 percent of likely voters say that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower- income areas than elsewhere in their part of California. Findings among all adults were similar last July (48% yes, 47% no). There are stark partisan differences with Democrats (58%) much more likely than independents (41 %), and far more likely than Republicans (29%), to say air pollution is a more serious threat in lower -income areas. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (65%) are more likely than Asia n Americans and African Americans (52% each) and far more likely than whites (37%) to hold this view. The likelihood of saying air pollution is a bigger threat in lower -income areas decreases as income increases. While majorities of residents in Los Angele s (58%), Orange/San Diego (54%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (52%) hold this view, majorities in the Central Valley (58%) and the Inland Empire (55%) say air pollution is not a greater threat in lower- income communities. “Do you think that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? ” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Yes 50% 57% 47% 37% 52% 52% 65% 37% No 45 39 47 57 41 41 33 57 Don’t know 6 4 6 6 7 7 2 6 Fifty -three percent of Californians say that air pollution is a serious threat (21% very serious, 32% somewhat serious) to themselves and their immediate families. Across the state’s regions, r esidents of the Los Angeles area (28% very serious, 38% somewhat serious ) are the most likely to say air pollution is a serious threat. Latinos (27% very serious, 35% somewhat serious ) and African Americans (29% very serious, 32% somewhat serious) are far more likely than Asian Americans and whites to see air pollution as a serious threat to themselves and their immediate families . PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 13 Climate Change and Energy Policy Key Findings About two in three Californians say the effects of global warming have already begun, with Democrats and independents far more likely than Republicans to say so. Two in three say global warming has contributed to the current wildfires. (page 14) Sixty -nine perce nt of Californians favor the emission reduction goals of AB 32 and 68 percent favor further reducing emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Fifty -six percent say they are willing to pay more for electricity from renewabl e so urces to reduce glob al warming. (page 15) Two in three Californians favor the state making its own policies to address globa l w arming. A plurality say state efforts would result in more jobs around the state, while six in ten say such efforts would cause gasoline prices to increase. (page 16) Fifty -five percent of adults say they have heard nothing about the state’s cap -and - trade system. After hearing a brief description , 54 percent favor the system. (page 17) Fifty -two percent of Californians favor including transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and -trade system, and about half say it is very important that some cap-and -trad e r evenues are used in lower -income communities. (page 18) At least two in three adults and likely voters favor a series of proposals t o s upport electric vehicles and solar power in California. (pages 19, 20 ) Six in ten adults and likely voters oppose more oil drilling off the coast, and about as many oppose the increased use of fracking. About seven in ten favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants. (pages 20, 21 ) 65 78 73 6667 6771 676869 69 19 14 1723 212122 2223 2019 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent adults FavorOppose AB 32 reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 6070 79 61 0 20 40 60 80 100 African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Percent adults Favor Reducingemissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 55 59 60 40 3837 0 20 40 60 80 100 Under $40,000 $40,000 to under $80,000 $80,000 or more Percent adults Annual household income Willing to pay Not willing to pay Pay more for electricity from renewable sources to reduce global warming PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 14 Perceptions of Global Warming As Governor Brown and state policymakers continue to debate how the state can further reduce greenhouse gas emissions, how do Californians perceive global warming? A solid majority of Californians (64%) say the effects of global warming have already begun, while one in four say they will happen in the future (25%), and relatively few (8%) say they will never happen. Since we began asking this question in July 2005, majorities of Californians have said that the effects have already begun. Adults nationwide in a March Gallup survey held similar opinions (59% already happening, 31% will happen in future, 10% will never happen). California Democra ts (77%) and independents (63%) are far more likely than Republicans (43%) to think the effects have already begun. Notably, one in four Republicans say the effects will never happen. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (72%) are the most likely —and Afric an Americans (54%) the least likely —to say the effects have already begun. “Which of the following statements reflects your view of when the effects of global warming will begin to happen…?” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Already begun 64% 54% 62% 72% 62% 64% Within a few years 5 4 5 7 3 5 Within your lifetime 6 10 4 5 7 3 Not within lifetime, but will affect future 14 21 19 13 12 13 Will never happen 8 8 8 2 13 13 Don’t know 2 2 1 2 3 2 Eight in ten Californians think that global warming is a very serious (54%) or somewhat serious (27%) threat to California’s future economy and quality of life. Since we began asking this question in July 2005, more than seven in ten Californians have said that the threat is at least somewhat serious. Partisan differences are stark , with Democrats (71%) about three times as likely a s Republicans (24%) to call the threat very serious; half of independents (51%) hold this view. About six in ten Latinos (62%) and half in all other racial/ethnic groups think the threat is very serious. “How serious of a threat is global warming to the ec onomy and quality of life for California’s future —do you think that it is a very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious of a threat?” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Very serious 54% 52% 52% 62% 49% 51% Somewhat serious 27 21 36 30 25 24 Not too serious 11 14 7 7 14 11 Not at all serious 7 7 6 1 11 12 Don’t know 1 6 – 1 2 1 Two in three Californians (65%) think that global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires. Democrats (76%) and independents (57%) are far more likely than Republicans (28%) to hold this view. Majorities across regions and demographic groups say it has contributed to cu rrent wildfires. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 15 California’s Emissions Policy As the 10th anniversary of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 approaches , Californians continue to offer positive assessments of this landmark legislation. As they have each July since 2006, a strong majority of Californians (69%) favor AB 32 ’s goal of reduc ing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Sixty -two percent of likely voters are in favor. When we first asked this question in 2006 , there was support across parties (65% Republicans, 67% Democrats, 68% independents). Today there is a striking partisan divide , with majorities of Democrats (80%) and independents (56%) in favor compared to 44 percent of Republicans. Still, it is noteworthy that majorities today across re gional, age, income , and racial/ethnic groups favor the emission targets in AB 32. “Next, to address global warming, do you favor or oppose the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2020? ” All adults Race/Ethnicity Likely voters African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Favor 69% 54% 70% 77% 65% 62% Oppose 19 25 16 13 22 26 Don’t know 13 21 13 10 13 11 The California Air Resources Board has indicated that California is on track to meet the goal set by AB 32. With this initial goal set to be met, policymakers are looking to further reduce emissions. When asked about a proposed state law that requires reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, 68 percent of adults and 59 percent of likely voters are in favor. S upport for this proposal closely mirrors support for the emission targets in AB 32. Democrats (78%) are twice as likely as Republicans (39%) to support the proposed goal. There were similar levels of support for reducing emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 last July (69% adults, 62% likely voters). “To address global warming, the state legislature is currently considering legislation that would require California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. Overall, do you favor or oppose this proposal?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 68% 78% 39% 59% 59% Oppose 22 12 52 28 30 Don’t know 10 10 9 12 10 T o help reduce global warming, a majority of adults and likely voters (56% each) say they are willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources like solar or wind energy. Majorities are willing across age, home ownership , and income groups . Willingness to pay more is higher among Democrats ( 68%) and independents (51 %) than among Republicans (3 8 % ). Adults nationwide in a November CBS News/New York Times poll (55% willing) held similar views to Californians . 67 80 65 44 68 56 0 20 40 60 80 100 2006 2016 Percent DemocratsRepublicansIndependents Supportfor AB 32 emission reduction goal PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 16 Perceived Impact of California’s Emissions Policy Most Californians (67%) and likely voters (65%) support the state making its own policies to address the issue of global warming . Since we first asked this question in July 2005 there has bee n majority support among Californians and likely voters for state action . Majorities of Democrats (78%) and independents (55%) are in favor while Republicans are divided (49% favor, 46% oppose). More than six in ten across regions as well as majorities across demographic groups favor the state making its own policies. Four in ten adults think that California taking action to reduce global warming would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state and three in ten (29%) say it would not affect the number of jobs; two in ten say taking action will result in fewer jobs. A plurality of Californians have said that state action would result in more jobs since we began asking this question in July 2010, with a high point of 47 percent in July 2011 and a low point last year (38%). A plurality of Democrats (49%) say there would be more jobs, a plurality of Republicans (40%) say there would be fewer jobs; independent s’ views are more mixed (33% more jobs, 31% no effect, 23% fewer jobs). Pluralities across regions as well as age, education, and income groups say there would be more jobs. A majority of African Americans (53%) as well as pluralities of Latinos (45%) and whites (37%) say there would be more jobs , while a pluralit y of Asian Americans (43%) say there would be no impact on the number of jobs. “Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state, would cause there to be fewer j obs, or wouldn’t affect the number of jobs for people around the state?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire More jobs 40% 39% 43% 38% 37% 41% 35% Fewer jobs 20 23 12 20 24 26 23 Wouldn’t affect the number of jobs 29 29 34 29 30 25 30 Don’t know 10 9 11 12 9 8 12 M ajorities of Californians a nd likely voters (59% each ) say state action to reduce global warming would increase gasoline prices. Majorities across party, region al, age, education, and income groups say gasoline prices would increase. Latinos (68%) are more likely than whites (58%), African Americans (49%), and Asian Americans (47%) to hold this view . Among thos e who say that state action would increase gasoline prices , six in 10 favor AB 32’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions (64%) and the proposal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (63%). “Do you think that California doing things to reduce glo bal warming in the future would cause gasoline prices at the pump around the state to increase, or to decrease, or wouldn’t affect gasoline prices at the pump around the state?” All adults Region Likely voters Central Valley San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles Orange/ San Diego Inland Empire Increase gasoline prices 59% 66% 54% 54% 65% 70% 59% Decrease gasoline prices 14 13 14 13 16 13 10 Wouldn’t affect gasoline prices 20 15 21 27 14 13 24 Don’t know 7 6 11 6 5 4 7 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 17 Cap and Trade: Awareness and Favorability California’s cap -and -trade system is a major part of the state’s efforts to achieve the greenhouse gas emission reduction goal of AB 32. Forty-five percent of Californians say they have heard either a lot (12%) or a little (33%) about cap and trade. The share who have heard of the policy has remained steady since 2010, over a period when it has moved from discussion to implementation in Californ ia. Today, Republicans (19%) and independents (18%) are more likely than Democrats (9%) to say they have heard a lot about the policy . “How much, if anything, have you heard about the state government policy called ‘ cap and trade ’ that sets limits on carb on dioxide emissions? Have you heard a lot, a little, or nothing at all?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind A lot 12% 9% 19% 18% 18% A little 33 37 36 46 42 Nothing at all 55 53 44 36 40 Don’t know 1 – – 1 1 After hearing a short description of California’s cap -and -trade system, 54 percent of adults say they favor it. Between 49 and 54 percent of adults have been in favor since 2009. As we have found in previous surveys, s upport among likely voters today is so mewhat lower than among adults overall (46% to 54%). A solid majority of Democrats (62%) and a plurality of independents (47%) favor the system , while a slight majority of Republicans (51%) oppose it . Regionally , majorities in the San Francisco Bay Area (6 1%), Orange/San Diego (58%), and Los Angeles (54%) favor the system , while fewer do so in the Central Valley (49%) and the Inland Empire (41%). Across racial/ethnic groups, support is higher among Asian Americans (64%) and Latinos (58%) than among whites (51%) and African Americans (45%). Support for the cap -and -trade system decreases with age (68% 18 –34, 54% 35 –54, 41% 55 and older). Those who have heard a lot (53%), a little (57%), or nothing at all (53%) about cap and trade are about equally likely to sa y they favor the system after hearing a brief description , although t hose who have heard a little or nothing are more likely to have no opinion than are those w ho have heard a lot . A solid majority of those opposed to the emission reduction goal of AB 32 (61%) also oppose the cap -and -trade system. Among those favoring the emission reduction goal of AB 32, 65 percent favor the system . “ In the system called ‘ cap and trade, ’ the California state government issues permits limiting the amount of greenhouse gas es companies can put out. Companies that do not use all their permits can sell them to other companies. The idea is that many companies will find ways to put out less greenhouse gases, because that will be cheaper than buying permits. Do you favor or oppos e the cap-and-trade system?” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 54% 62% 33% 47% 46% Oppose 32 25 51 38 38 Don’t know 13 13 17 15 16 5054 53 5154 45 4245 4545 0 20 40 60 80 2010 201120122013201420152016 Percent adults FavorHave heard about Cap and trade awareness and favorability PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 18 Cap and Trade: Revenues and Spending Transportation fuels have been included in California’s cap -and -trade system since 2015. The Legislative Analyst estimated earlier this year that adding transportation fuels to the cap -and -trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to the cost of gasoline. After hearing that estimate, along with a brief list of programs that receive state cap -and -trade revenue, most adults (52% favor, 36% oppose) and likely voters (49% favor, 40% oppose) express support for including transportation fuels in cap and trade. Notably, majorities across income levels su pport including transportation fuels in the system . Across racial/ethnic groups, Asian Americans (65%) are most likely to be in favor (52% Latinos, 50% whites, 45% African Americans). A strong majority of Democrats (68%) are in favor, while a solid majorit y of Republicans (60%) are opposed; independents are more closely divided (45% favor, 42% oppose). Across regions, San Francisco Bay Area residents (63%) are most likely to be in favor ( 52% Los Angeles, 52% Orange/San Diego, 47% Central Valley , 40% Inland Empire). Among those who favor cap and trade overall, 71 percent favor having transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and -trade system . “Cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, such as affordable housing near public transit, energy efficiency, high speed rail, and public transit. The Legislative Analyst estimated that having transportation fuels in the cap -and -trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to gasoline costs. Knowing this, do you favor or oppose hav ing transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and-trade system?” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Favor 52% 53% 51% 58% 45% 65% 52% 50% Oppose 36 35 38 35 48 26 37 39 Don’t know 11 12 11 7 7 9 11 11 A portion of cap -and -trade revenues are designated by statute to be spent on projects to improve environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities. Half of Californians (51%) and 46 percent of likely voters say it is very important to spend some of the revenue this way . An additional 30 percent of adults and likely voters say it is somewhat important. Democrats (66%) are far more likely than independents (43% ) or Republicans (24%) to say it is very important. African Americans (75%) and Latinos (65%) are far more likely than whites (43%) and Asian Americans (37%) to say the same. Across regions, Inland Empire residents (60%) are most likely to say it is very important to spend revenues this way (53% San Francisco Bay Area, 53% Los Angeles, 47% Orange/San Diego, 43% Central Valley). The likelihood of saying it is very important to spend cap-and -trade revenue s to improve environmental conditions in lower-income communities decreases with rising income levels . “Next, how important to you is it that some of the cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to improve environmental condi tions in lower-income and disadvantaged communities—very important, somewhat important, or not too important?” All adults Household income Race/Ethnicity Under $40,000 $40,000 to $80,000 $80,000 or more African Americans Asian Americans Latinos Whites Very important 51% 62% 49% 37% 75% 37% 65% 43% Somewhat important 30 25 37 34 14 42 26 33 Not too important 15 9 14 26 10 20 5 21 Don’t know 3 4 1 2 2 1 4 2 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 19 Electric Vehicles The state budget passed in June did not include funds to extend subsidies for electric vehicle purchases. When asked about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for purchasing electric vehicle s, 68 percent of adults and likely voters are in favor . We found similar levels of support for such incentives a year ago (67% adu lts, 64% likely voters). H alf of Republicans (49%) are in favor, and support is much higher among independents (70%) and Democrats (77%). At least six in ten are in favor across re gional, age, education, and income groups. Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (70%) and whites (70%) are more likely than Asian Americans (62%) or African Americans (51%) to be in favor. “How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases in California ? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 68% 77% 49% 70% 68% Oppose 29 20 47 27 29 Don't know 4 3 4 3 3 Overwhelming majorities of Californians (77%) and likely voters (74%) favor building more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles in California. Support was similar last July (81% adults, 75% likely voters). Today, majorities across parties are in favor of building more charging stations and electr ic vehicle infrastructure (84% Democrats, 72% independents, 5 7% Republicans), and at least two in three across region al, racial/ethnic, age, education, and income groups are in favor. “How about building more charging stations and infrastructure to suppor t electric vehicles in California? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 77% 84% 57% 72% 74% Oppose 19 13 38 24 22 Don't know 4 3 5 3 4 Forty -seven percent of Californians say that they have seriously considered getting an electric vehicle the next time they purchase or lease a vehicle and 39 percent say they have not considered it . Younger Californians are far more likely than Californians age 55 and older to say they have seriously considered it (54% 18 –34, 54% 35 –54, 34% 55 and older), and those with annual incomes below $40,000 (46%) are slightly less likely than those with higher incomes (52%) to say they have considered it. Those who have s eriously considered getting an electric vehicle are far more likely than those who have not considered it to favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases (83% to 50%). They are also far more likely to favor building more charging stations and infrastructure to support electric vehicles in California (89% to 60%). PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 20 Solar Power Californians are generally supportive of policies which would increase solar power generation within the state. More than three in four California adults (76%) and likely voters (77%) favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California. These findings are similar to those in July 2015 , when 78 percent of adults and likely voters favored this proposal. Though strong majorities across parties support this proposal, Democrats (86%) are more likely than independents (76%) and Republicans (65%) to be in favor. Californians across racial/ethnic groups favor increasing incentives for ro oftop solar (79% whites, 76% Latinos, 73% African Americans, 70% Asian Americans). Indeed, support appears to be widespread : at least seven in ten Californians across all demographic groups say they favor increasing tax credits and financial incentives. Su pport for this proposal is similar among renters (78%) and homeowners (74%). Notably, 66 percent of those who say they are not willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources favor increasing tax credits for rooftop solar pane ls. “How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 76% 86% 65% 76% 77% Oppose 19 12 32 17 19 Don't know 5 2 4 7 5 O verwhelming majorit ies of Californians (85%) and likely voters (79%) favor building more solar power stations in California. Across parties, overwhelming majorities of Democrats (92%) and independents (80%) favor this proposal, along with a strong majority of Republicans (69%). Support for building more solar power stations is widespread, with more than three in four adults across regions and demographic groups saying they favor this proposal. Indeed, it has strong support even among those who say they would not be willing to pa y more for electricity if it were generated from renewable sources (75%) . “ How about building more solar power stations in California ? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 85% 92% 69% 80% 79% Oppose 10 5 26 12 15 Don't know 5 3 4 8 6 Fossil Fuels and Energy Policy Thirty-six percent of Californians support more oil drilling off the California coast. Sup port was similarly low last July (38%), following the oil spill off the Santa Barbara coast, and in 2010 (36%), following the Deepwater Horizon spill in the Gulf of Mexico. M ajorities of Democrats (72%) and independents (65%) oppose more oil drilling , while a majority of Republicans (55%) are in favor. Majorities across all age, education, income, and racial/ethnic groups are opposed. Opposition is highest in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area (65% each), followed by the Inland Empire (60%), Ce ntral Valley (52%) and Orange/San Diego (49%). Among Californians who oppose the PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 21 emission reduction targets in AB 32, 54 percent favor more offshore drilling. Among those who favor AB 32, 64 percent oppose more offshore drilling . “How about more oil drilli ng off the California coast? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?)” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 36% 27% 55% 25% 35% Oppose 59 72 39 65 61 Don’t know 6 1 6 9 4 Today, 58 percent of Californians and 60 percent of likely voters oppose the increased use of hydraulic fracturing. This marks a record high since we first began asking this question in 2013. Across parties, majorities of Democrats (69%) and independents (61%) oppose fracking, compared to 40 percent of Repu blicans. With the exception of the Inland Empire (40% favor, 44% oppose), majorities across regions oppose the increased use of fracking. Among racial/ethnic groups, whites (63%) are the most likely to oppose, followed by Latinos (56%), Asian Americans (54 %), and African Americans (52%). Majorities across all age, education, and income groups oppose the increased use of fracking. “How about the increased use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a drilling method that uses high-pressure water and chemicals to extract oil and natural gas from underground rock formations? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?)” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 30% 21% 50% 27% 30% Oppose 58 69 40 61 60 Don’t know 12 9 10 13 10 Seventy -four percent of Californians and 69 percent of likely voters favor setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change. Findings among all adults were similar last July (73% favor) and in July 2014 (75% favor). There are notable partisan differences : an overwhelming majority of Democrats (85%) and strong majority of independents (69%) favor this proposal, while just half of Republicans (51%) say the same. At least seven in ten Californians across regions and across education, inc ome, and racial/ethnic groups are in favor of stricter limits on power plants. Support for stricter emission limits decreases as age increases. Among those who support the emission targets in AB 32, 85 percent favo r stricter power plant emission limits. Am ong those oppose d to the emission targets in AB 32, 42 percent are in favor. “How about setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change? (Do you favor or oppose this proposal?) ” All adults Party Likely voters Dem Rep Ind Favor 74% 85% 51% 69% 69% Oppose 21 12 44 25 27 Don’t know 5 3 5 6 5 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 22 Regional Map PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 23 Methodology The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, president and CEO and survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance from survey research associate David Kordus, project manager for this survey, associate survey director Dean Bonner, and survey research associate Lunna Lopes. This Californians and the Environment survey is supported with funding from The Dirk and Charlene Kab cenell Foundation, the Heising -Simons Foundation, the Pisces Foundation, and the S. D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation. The PPIC Statewide Survey invites input, comments, and suggestions from policy and public opinion experts and from its own advisory committee, b ut survey methods, questions, and content are determined solely by PPIC’s survey team. Findings in this report are based on a survey of 1,70 3 California adult residents, including 85 3 interviewed on landline telephones and 85 0 interviewed on cell phones. I nterviews took an average of 19 minutes to complete. Interviewing took place on weekend days and weekday nights from July 10–19 , 2016. Midway through our fielding period, Donald Trump announced his choice of running mate. Hillary Clinton announced her choi ce afterward. Landline interviews were conducted using a computer- generated random sample of telephone numbers that ensured that both listed and unlisted numbers were called. All landline telephone exchanges in California were eligible for selection, and t he sample telephone numbers were called as many as six times to increase the likelihood of reaching eligible households. Once a household was reached, an adult respondent (age 18 or older) was randomly chosen for interviewing using the “last birthday metho d” to avoid biases in age and gender. Cell phone interviews were conducted using a computer- generated random sample of cell phone numbers. All cell phone numbers with California area codes were eligible for selection, and the sample telephone numbers were called as many as eight times to increase the likelihood of reaching an eligible respondent. Once a cell phone user was reached, it was verified that this person was age 18 or older, a resident of California, and in a safe place to continue the survey (e. g., not driving). Cell phone respondents were offered a small reimbursement to help defray the cost of the call. Cell phone interviews were conducted with adults who have cell phone service only and with those who have both cell phone and landline service in the household. Live landline and cell phone interviews were conducted by Abt SRBI, Inc., in English and Spanish, according to respondents’ preferences. Accent on Languages, Inc., translated new survey questions into Spanish, with assistance from Renat ta DeFever. Abt SRBI uses the US Census Bureau’s 2010– 2014 American Community Survey’s (ACS) Public Use Microdata Series for California (with regional coding information from the University of Minnesota’s Integrated Public Use Microdata Series for Californ ia) to compare certain demographic characteristics of the survey sample —region, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education —with the characteristics of California’s adult population. The survey sample was closely comparable to the ACS figures. To estimate l andline and cell phone service in California, Abt SRBI used 2014 state -level estimates released by the National Center for Health Statistics —which used data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the ACS —and 2015 estimates for the West Census Region in the latest NHIS report. The estimates for California were then compared against landline and cell phone service reported in this survey. We also used voter registration data from the California Secretary of State to compare the party registratio n of registered voters in our sample to party registration statewide. The landline and cell phone samples were then integrated using a frame integration weight, while sample balancing adjusted for differences across regional, age, gender, race/ethnicity, e ducation, telephone service, and party registration groups. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 24 The sampling error, taking design effects from weighting into consideration, is ±3. 5 percent at the 95 percent confidence level for the total unweighted sample of 1,70 3 adults. This means that 95 times out of 100, the results will be within 3. 5 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in California were interviewed. The sampling error for unweighted subgroups is larger: for the 1, 373 registered v oters, the sampling error is ±3.8 perce nt; for the 1, 056 likely voters, it is ±4. 3 percent. Sampling error is only one type of error to which surveys are subject. Results may also be affected by factors such as question wording, question order, and survey timing. We present results for five geographic regions, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the state population. “Central Valley” includes Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. “San Francisco Bay Area” includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. “Los Angeles” refers to Los Angeles County, “Inland Empire” ref ers to Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and “Orange/San Diego” refers to Orange and San Diego Counties. Residents of other geographic areas are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes fo r these less populous areas are not large enough to report separately. We present specific results for non -Hispanic whites, who account for 43 percent of the state’s adult population, and also for Latinos, who account for about a third of the state’s adul t population and constitute one of the fastest- growing voter groups. We also present results for non -Hispanic Asian Americans , who make up about 15 percent of the state’s adult population, and non -Hispanic African Americans , who comprise about 6 percent. In our likely voter findings, we present results for non - Hispanic whites, for Latinos, and for members of all other racial/ethnic groups combined. R esults for other racial/ethnic groups —such as Native Americans —are included in the results reported for all a dults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes are not large enough for separate analysis. We compare the opinions of those who report they are registered Democrats, registered Republicans, and decline -to -state or independent voters; the res ults for those who say they are registered to vote in other parties are not large enough for separate analysis. We also analyze the responses of likely voters —so designated per their responses to voter registration survey questions, previous election participation, and current interest in politics. The percentages presented in the report tables and in the questionnaire may not add to 100 due to rounding. We compare current PPIC Statewide Survey results to those in our earlier surveys and to those in nat ional surveys by ABC News /Washington Post , CBS News /New York Times , and Gallup . Additional details about our methodology can be found at www.ppic.org/content/other/SurveyMethodology .pdf and are available upon request through surveys@ppic.org. PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 25 Questionnaire and Results CALIFORNIANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT July 10–19 , 2016 1703 California Adult Residents: English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR ± 3.5% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE PERCENTAGES MAY NOT ADD TO 100 DUE TO RO UNDING First, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Jerry Brown is handling his job as governor of California? 54% approve 27 disapprove 20 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that G overnor Brown is handling environmental issues in California? 49% approve 29 disapprove 22 don’t know Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling its job? 45% approve 40 disapprove 15 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling environmental issues in California? 48% approve 36 disapprove 15 don’t know Next, what do you think is the most important environmental issue facing California today? [code , don’t read] 38 water supply, drought, reservoirs 13 air pollution, vehicle emissions, smog 9 water pollution of ocean, rivers, lakes, streams, beach pollution 7 global warming, climate change, greenhouse gases 3 landfills, garbage, sewage, waste, recycling 2 loss of forests, forest fires, wildfires 2 energy, fossil fuels, solar, nuclear, wind, alternative 2 fracking, hydraulic fracturing 2 pollution in general 14 other (specify) 8 don’t know Next, some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote in California? 62% yes [ask Q6a] 38 no [skip to Q 7b] 6a. Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or are you registered as a decline-to -state or independent voter? 43% Democrat [ask Q7] 28 Republican [skip to Q7a] 5 another party (specify) [skip to Q 8] 24 independent [skip to Q7b] PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 26 Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 61% strong 37 not very strong 2 don’t know [skip to Q8] 7a. Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 56% strong 39 not very strong 5 don’t know [skip to Q8 ] 7 b. Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 22% Republican Party 46 Democratic Party 24 neither (volunteered) 9 don’t know [likely voters only] If the November 8 presidential election were being held today, would you vote for: [rotate] (1) Hillary Clinton, the Democrat, (2) Donald Trump, the Republican, (3) Gary Johnson, the Libertarian, [or] (4) Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate? 46% Hillary Clinton, the Democrat 30 Donald Trump, the Republican 7 Gary Johnson, the Libertarian 6 Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate 2 someone else (specify) 2 would not vote for president (volunteered) 7 don’t know [likely voters only] In thinking about the presidential election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions o n the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important? 45% very important 38 somewhat important 16 not too important – don’t know [likely voters only] How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2016 presidential election —very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? 53% very closely 38 fairly closely 7 not too closely 2 not at all closely – don’t know [likely voters only] If the November 8 election for the U S Senate were being held today, would you vote for: [rotate] (1) Kamala Harris, a Democrat [or] (2) Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat? 38% Kamala Harris, a Democrat 20 Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat 28 neither/would not vote for U S senator (volunteered) 14 don’t know [likely voters only] In thinking about the California U S Senate election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote —very important, somewhat important, or not too important? 40% very important 43 somewhat important 17 not too important – don’t know Next, would you say that the supply of water is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of Cali fornia? 62% big problem 24 somewhat of a problem 13 not much of a problem 1 don’t know Overall, do you think that the state and local governments are doing too much, the right amount, or not enough to respond to the current drought in California? 7% too much 29 the right amount 58 not enough 6 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 27 Do you think that pollution of drinking water is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? 59% yes 31 no 10 don’t know Next, We are interested in the part of California that you live in. Would you say that air pollution is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in your part of California? 25% big problem 35 somewhat of a problem 39 not a problem 1 don’t know How serious a health threat is air pollution in your region to you and your immediate family —do you think it is a very serious, somewhat serious, or not too serious of a health threat? 21% very serious 32 somewhat serious 45 not too serious 1 not at all serious (volunteered) 1 don’t know Do you think that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower -income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not? 50% yes 45 no 6 don’t know On another topic, which of the followin g statements reflects your view of when the effects of global warming will begin to happen—[rotate] (1) they have already begun to happen; (2) they will start happening within a few years; (3) they will start happening within your lifetime; (4) they will n ot happen within your lifetime, but they will affect future generations; [or] (5) they will never happen? 64% already begun 5 within a few years 6 within your lifetime 14 not within lifetime, but will affect future generations 8 will never happen 2 don’t know How serious of a threat is global warming to the economy and quality of life for California’s future —do you think that it is a very serious, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not at all serious of a threat? 54% very serious 27 somewhat serious 11 not too serious 7 not at all serious 1 don’t know 20a. Do you think global warming has contributed to California’s current wildfires or not? 65% yes, has contributed 29 no, has not contributed 6 don’t know Next, to address global warming, do you favor or oppose the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by the year 2020? 69% favor 19 oppose 13 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 28 To address global warming, the state legislature is currently considering legislation that would require California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030. Overall, do you favor or oppose this proposal? 68% favor 22 oppose 10 don’t know Do you favor or oppose the California stat e government making its own policies, separate from the federal government, to address the issue of global warming? 67% favor 26 oppose 6 don’t know Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause there to be more jobs for people around the state, would cause there to be fewer jobs, or wouldn’t affect the number of jobs for people around the state? 40% more jobs 20 fewer jobs 29 wouldn’t affect the number of jobs 10 don’t know Do you think that California doing things to reduce global warming in the future would cause gasoline prices at the pump around the state to increase, or to decrease, or wouldn’t affect gasoline prices at the pump around the state? 59% increase gasoline prices 14 decrease gasoline prices 20 wouldn’t affect gasoline prices 7 don’t know In order to help reduce global warming, would you be willing or not willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources like solar or wind energy? 56% willing 40 not willing 4 don’t know How much, if anything, have you heard about the state government policy called “cap and trade ” that sets limits on carbon dioxide emissions? Have you heard a lot, a little, or nothing at all? 12% a lot 33 a little 55 nothing at all 1 don’t know In the system called “ cap and trade,” the California state government issues permits limiting the amount of greenhouse gases companies can put out. Companies that do not use all their permits can sell them to other companies. The idea is that man y companies will find ways to put out less greenhouse gases, because that will be cheaper than buying permits. Do you favor or oppose the cap-and -trade system? 54% favor 32 oppose 13 don’t know 28a. Cap -and -trade revenues are spent on projects to reduce gre enhouse gas emissions, such as affordable housing near public transit, energy efficiency, high speed rail, and public transit. The Legislative Analyst estimated that having transportation fuels in the cap -and-trade system has added 11 cents per gallon to gasoline costs. Knowing this, do you favor or oppose having transportation fuels in the state’s cap -and-trade system? 52% favor 36 oppose 11 don’t know Next, how important to you is it that some of the cap -and-trade revenues are spent on projects to imp rove environmental conditions in lower -income and disadvantaged communities —ver y important, somewhat important, or not too important? 51% very important 30 somewhat important 15 not too important 3 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 29 Next, do you favor or oppose the following proposals? [rotate questions 30 to 33] How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for electric vehicle purchases in California ? 68% favor 29 oppose 4 don’t know How about building more charging stations and infrastructure t o support electric vehicles in California? 77% favor 19 oppose 4 don’t know How about building more solar power stations in California? 85% favor 10 oppose 5 don’t know How about increasing tax credits and financial incentives for rooftop solar panels in California? 76% favor 19 oppose 5 don’t know Changing topics, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barack Obama is handling his job as president of the United States? 60% approve 35 disapprove 4 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Obama is handling environmental issues in the United States? 60% approve 31 disapprove 9 don’t know Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the US Congress is handling its job? 28% approve 66 disapprove 6 don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way the US Congress is handling environmental issues in the United States? 31% approve 59 disapprove 10 don’t know Next, do you favor or oppose the following proposals? [rotate questions 38 to 40] How about more oil drilling off the California coast? 36% favor 59 oppose 6 don’t know How about the increased use of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a drilling method that uses high -pressure water and chemicals to extract oil and natural g as from underground rock formations? 30% favor 58 oppose 12 don’t know How about setting stricter emission limits on power plants in order to address climate change? 74% favor 21 oppose 5 don’t know PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY JULY 2016 PPIC.ORG/SURVEY Californians and the Environment 30 Next, [asked of a random half sample] How much do you personally worry about global warming —a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or not at all? 35% a great deal 31 a fair amount 17 only a little 16 not at all 1 don’t know 41a. [asked of a random half sample] How much do you personally worry abo ut climate change—a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or not at all? 37% a great deal 29 a fair amount 20 only a little 15 not at all – don’t know Next, would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 13% very liberal 19 somewhat liberal 29 middle -of-the -road 24 somewhat conservative 12 very conservative 4 don’t know Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics —a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or none? 24% great deal 37 fair amount 30 only a little 9 none – don’t know [d1–d5a: demographic questions] D5b. [asked of those employed full - or part -time] How do you usually commute to work — drive alone, carpool, take public bus or transit, walk, or bicycle? 66% drive alone 14 carpool 7 take public bus or transit 4 walk 2 bicycle 6 work at home (volunteered) D5c. Would you say that you have or have not seriously considered getting an electric vehicle the next time you buy or lease a vehicle, or do you a lready have one? 47% have considered 39 have not considered 8 already have one 4 don’t drive/don’t have a car/won’t be buying another vehicle (volunteered) 1 don’t know [D6 -d16: demographic questions] PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Ruben Barrales President and CEO GROW Elect Angela Glover Blackwell President and CEO PolicyLink Mollyann Brodie Senior Vice President Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation Bruce E. Cain Director B ill Lane Center for the American West Stanford University Jon Cohen Vice President of Survey Research SurveyMonkey Joshua J. Dyck Co-Director Center for Public Opinion University of Massachusetts, Lowell Russell Hancock President and CEO Joint Venture Sil icon Valley Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Professor Sol Price School of Public Policy University of Southern California Robert Lapsley President California Business Roundtable Carol S. Larson President and CEO The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Donna Lucas Chief Executive Officer Lucas Public Affairs Sonja Petek 2016 Master of Public Policy Candidate Goldman School of Public Policy, UC Berkeley Lisa Pitney Vice President of Government Relations The Walt Disney Company Mindy Romero Founder and Director California Civic Engagement Project at the UC Davis Center for Regional Change Robert K. Ross, MD President and CEO The California Endowment Most Reverend Jaime Soto Bishop of Sacramento Roman Catholic Diocese of Sacramento Carol Whiteside Principal California Strategies The PPIC Statewide Survey Advisory Committee is a diverse group of experts who provide advice on survey issues. However, survey methods, questions, content, and timing are determined solely by PPIC. PPIC BOARD OF DIRECTORS Donna Lucas, Chair Chief Executive Officer Lucas Public Affairs Mark Baldassare President and CEO Public Policy Institute of California Ruben Barrales President and CEO GROW Elect María Blanco Executive Director Undocumented Student Legal Services Center University of California Office of the President Louise Henry Bryson Chair Emerita, Board of Trustees J. Paul Getty Trust A. Marisa Chun Partner McDermott Will & Emery LLP Phil Isenberg Former Chair Delta Stewardship Council Mas Masumoto Author and Farmer Steven A. Merksamer Senior Partner Nielsen, Merksamer, Parrinello, Gross & Leoni, LLP Gerald L. Parsky Chairman Aurora Capital Group Kim Polese Chairman ClearStreet, Inc. Gaddi H. Vasquez Senior Vice President, Government Affairs Edison International Southern California Edison Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.4400 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG PPIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:43:02" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(8) "s_716mbs" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:43:02" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:43:02" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(50) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/S_716MBS.pdf" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_mime_type"]=> string(15) "application/pdf" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["attachment_authors"]=> bool(false) }