S 1006MBS
Database
This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.
object(Timber\Post)#3875 (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(13) "S_1006MBS.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(6) "762806"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(91352) " The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC’s research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns: California in the global economy; demography; education; employment and income; environment, growth, and infrastructure; government and public finance; health and social policy; immigrants and immigration; key sectors in the California economy; and political participation. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens—William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller—recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Thomas C. Sutton is Chair of the Board of Directors. PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111 phone: 415.291.4400 fax: 415.291.4401 www.ppic.org survey@ppic.org TABLE OF CONTENTS About the Survey Press Release November Election State Issues National Issues Regional Map Methodology Questionnaire and Results 1 3 7 15 21 28 29 31 ABOUT THE SURVEY The PPIC Statewide Survey series provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents. Inaugurated in April 1998, this is the 72nd PPIC Statewide Survey in a series that has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 150,000 Californians. The current survey is the third in a series of four surveys on the topic of “Californians and the Future,” supported by funding from The James Irvine Foundation. California has 37 million residents today and is expected to add about 10 million more people over the next 20 years, according to the Department of Finance. On November 7th, California voters will make important decisions about the state’s future in a statewide election that involves the selection of a governor and members of other executive branch offices, 100 members of the California Legislature, one U.S. senator, and 53 members of the House of Representatives. The state ballot will also present the voters with 13 state propositions on a wide range of topics, including funding for state infrastructure and public works projects. The November ballot has five state bond measures, placed there through the legislative and citizens’ initiative process and totaling about $43 billion, for surface transportation, education facilities, water and flood controls, affordable housing, and water and parks. The other propositions on the state ballot include citizens’ initiatives that call for tax, spending, and regulatory measures in other areas. The three pre-election surveys that we are conducting in August, September, and October are designed to provide information on Californians’ attitudes toward the future, their perceptions of the November election and support for state ballot measures, and the role of trust in government in shaping public opinion about ballot choices and attitudes toward the future. This survey series seeks to raise public awareness, inform decisionmakers, and stimulate public discussion about the state’s future, current governance and fiscal systems, and fiscal and governance reforms. This report presents the responses of 2,002 California adults on a wide range of issues: The November 7th election, including preferences in the governor’s election, views about the most important issues, satisfaction with the candidates and their attention to the most important issues, awareness of election news and paid advertising, and voters’ attitudes toward state bonds in general and the bond measures placed on the ballot by the state legislature (Propositions 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E), and the initiative process (Proposition 84). State issues, including approval ratings for Governor Schwarzenegger and the state legislature, the general direction of the state and outlook for the state’s economy, the perceived importance of infrastructure, and preferences for legislative and initiative reforms. National issues, including party preferences in the elections for the U.S. House of Representatives, approval ratings for President Bush, the general direction of the nation and outlook for the nation’s economy, trust in the federal government including its effectiveness and fiscal efficiency, and perceptions of the major parties and preferences for a third party. The extent to which Californians – based on their political party affiliation, region of residence, race/ethnicity, and other demographics – may differ with regard to perceptions, attitudes, and preferences involving the November election, the state’s future, and current state issues. Copies of this report may be ordered by e-mail (order@ppic.org) or phone (415-291-4400). Copies of this and earlier reports are posted on the publications page of the PPIC web site (www.ppic.org). For questions about the survey, please contact survey@ppic.org. 1 PRESS RELEASE Para ver este comunicado de prensa en español, por favor visite nuestra página de internet: http://www.ppic.org/main/pressreleaseindex.asp SURVEY ON CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE What Election? Candidates Skirt the Issues, Voters Tune Out VOTERS REMAIN SKEPTICAL ABOUT COST OF BOND MEASURES; MAJORITY WANT DEMOCRATS TO CONTROL CONGRESS, BUT ALSO WANT THIRD PARTY SAN FRANCISCO, California, October 25, 2006 — As gubernatorial candidates barnstorm the state and bombard the airwaves, they are failing to heed the central message from California’s voters: Talk about the issues. The result? An electorate that is turned off and tuned out, according to a survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The James Irvine Foundation. Likely voters continue to name immigration (21%) and education (19%) as the issues they most want the candidates for governor to discuss, followed by the state budget and taxes (10%), and jobs and the economy (7%). But two weeks before Election Day, and in the wake of the sole gubernatorial debate, most voters (60%), and at least half of Democrats (67%), Republicans (50%), and independents (60%), say they are dissatisfied with the attention that gubernatorial candidates are giving to the issues. And the level of frustration has grown since September, when 54 percent of voters said the candidates weren’t spending enough time talking about important issues. This neglect of issues may have affected voter engagement: Although 74 percent of voters say they are following news about the election, only 19 percent say they are following this news very closely. That is similar to interest levels prior to the historic low turnout in November 2002 (22% in October 2002) but down significantly from more recent years (49% in September 2003, 61% in October 2004, and 31% in October 2005). “The voters’ frustration is palpable,” says PPIC statewide survey director Mark Baldassare. “Immigration is their most important issue, yet the candidates have studiously avoided it. That may work as an election tactic but it has long-term consequences. Disengagement and distrust only make it more difficult for leaders, once they are elected, to govern effectively.” Among likely voters, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s lead over Democratic challenger and State Treasurer Phil Angelides has remained steady. Angelides trails Schwarzenegger by 18 points (30% to 48%), similar to last month’s margin of 17 points (31% to 48%). Thirteen percent of voters remain undecided. However, since last month, Angelides has lost some ground in the San Francisco Bay Area, a key Democratic stronghold: Although the candidates were tied in this region one month ago (39% each), Schwarzenegger now leads Angelides by a six-point margin (40% to 34%). Schwarzenegger continues to pull much greater support from Republicans (86%) than Angelides does from Democrats (57%), and Republicans remain far more satisfied than Democrats with their choice of candidates (66% to 44%). A bright spot for Angelides? His support among Latino voters has soared: He is now favored over Schwarzenegger by a two-to-one margin (52% to 25%), compared to a 12-point margin in September (42% to 30%). Little Interest, Lackluster Support for Infrastructure Bonds Strong support for Governor Schwarzenegger’s reelection bid does not necessarily translate into votes for the ballot measures he is backing. Although each of the four infrastructure measures that the governor and state legislature put on the ballot are supported by at least 50 percent of likely voters, that support is less than overwhelming. The key reason? Republicans are not sold on the bonds. The evidence? Support for the four measures follows the same pattern – double-digit leads from Democrats and independents and less-than-majority support from Republicans. 3 Californians and the Future Proposition 1B ($19.9 billion transportation bond): Despite the fact that 80 percent of likely voters say it is very or somewhat important for the state to be spending public funds on surface transportation projects in their part of the state, this measure is favored by a bare majority of voters (51%) and 38 percent oppose it. Support for Proposition 1B is unchanged from last month (51%). Proposition 1C ($2.85 billion affordable housing bond): 56 percent of likely voters support this measure, while 34 percent are opposed. Support was similar in September (57%). Sixty-seven percent of likely voters say it is important that the state spend public funds on affordable housing projects in their region. Proposition 1D ($10.4 billion education facilities bond): 87 percent of likely voters consider state spending on school facilities important to their region, and 61 percent say it is very important. However, the fate of Proposition 1D is uncertain, with 51 percent of likely voters favoring the measure and 39 percent opposing it. Support for the measure has changed little since last month (49%). Proposition 1E ($4.1 billion water and flood control bond): 53 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on this measure, while 36 percent oppose it. Support for this measure has changed little since September (55%). Despite the lukewarm support for the measure, most likely voters (77%) believe state spending on water and flood control is important for their region. A fifth measure – Proposition 84 -- would provide about $5.4 billion in state bonds for water, flood control, natural resources, parks, and conservation projects. Voters remain split over this initiative (42% yes, 43% no). Overall, Californians show more support for the general concept of using state bonds to pay for infrastructure than they do for any of the specific measures on the November ballot: 61 percent of likely voters think it is a good idea for the state government to pay for infrastructure improvements by issuing bonds. The sheer size of the package may help explain the disconnect: 58 percent of likely voters say the $43 billion price tag for the five measures on the ballot is too much. “The fate of all these measures hangs in the balance and it’s up to state leaders to explain to the voters why the cost is justified,” says Baldassare. The challenge? Lack of voter interest and attention. Of the 58 percent of voters who are able to cite a specific ballot measure that interests them the most, less than one in 10 name one of the bond measures. Voters are most likely to express interest in Proposition 87, the alternative energy initiative (28%). How Low Can It Go? As Trust in Feds Drops, Californians Seek Change Californians find little to cheer about as they consider the national scene. Six in 10 state residents (62%) say things are going in the wrong direction. They are divided about the nation’s economic outlook, with 46 percent anticipating bad times and 44 percent expecting good times. And approval ratings for President George W. Bush remain very low: Far more state residents and likely voters disapprove (62% each) than approve (32% all residents, 34% likely voters) of his performance in office. Could it get any worse? It just did. Trust in the federal government reached a new low this month: Only 26 percent of state residents – and 23 percent of likely voters – say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always or most of the time. That is down from 46 percent in January 2002 and 29 percent in October 2005. Consistent with their harsh assessment of federal leadership, most Californians (65%) and likely voters (69%) say the federal government wastes a lot of their tax dollars. Against this bleak backdrop, Californians want to see change at the national level come this November. A majority of likely voters (55%) say they would prefer to see Democrats control Congress. Statewide, Democratic congressional candidates hold a 12-point edge over Republican candidates (48% to 36%). This represents an increase in the Democratic advantage since October 2000, when Democrats held a sevenpoint statewide lead among likely voters (47% to 40%). Another example of the desire for change? In four key areas of federal leadership, Democrats are now seen as more capable than Republicans. Californians believe they would do a better job of managing the economy (47% Democrats, 37% Republicans), handling the situation in Iraq (45% Democrats, 34% Republicans), handling immigration (41% Democrats, 36% Republicans), and protecting the environment (56% Democrats, 28% Republicans). 4 PPIC Statewide Survey Press Release The current favor for Democrats notwithstanding, a long-term challenge looms for the two-party system. Majorities of Californians (53%) and likely voters (56%) believe that the Republican and Democratic parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. Independents (72%) are far more likely than Democrats (52%) and Republicans (45%) to believe a third party is needed, but the numbers of voters who hold this view are significant across the board. “The growing numbers of independent voters may drive this change, but the fact is that many Californians question the relevance of the current system,” says Baldassare. More Key Findings As optimism about state’s prospects grows… — Page 17 Californians are divided about the direction of the state, with 44 percent saying it is headed in the right direction and 46 percent believing it is headed in the wrong direction. One year ago, perceptions of the direction of the state were far more negative (30% right, 60% wrong in October 2005). The view of the state economy is also brighter today: Half of state residents (50%) and likely voters (52%) expect good times in the coming year. Last October, only 34 percent of Californians and 35 percent of likely voters expressed optimism about the state’s economic future. … so do approval ratings for some state officials — Pages 16 and 17 Among likely voters today, 52 percent approve and 41 percent disapprove of the way Governor Schwarzenegger is doing his job – a dramatic improvement from one year ago (38% approve, 57% disapprove). Likely voters are far less forgiving when it comes to the state legislature: Today, only 26 percent approve and 61 percent disapprove of its performance. In October 2005, 21 percent of likely voters approved and 65 percent disapproved of the way the legislature was doing its job. Not a winning combo: Redistricting reform sort of hot, term limits reform not — Page 19 Earlier this year, lawmakers considered the idea of a ballot measure combining redistricting reform and term limits reform. How would such a measure fare in today’s political climate? Today, majorities of state residents (54%) and likely voters (59%) favor redistricting reform that would require an independent commission of citizens, rather than the governor and state legislature, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each Census. However, there is little support for even modest changes to term limits laws. Seven in 10 Californians (72%) and likely voters (73%) oppose the idea of allowing members of the state legislature to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either the assembly or senate. Californians open to initiative process reforms — Page 20 Californians’ affection for the initiative process is strong, but it is not blind. State residents are open to several significant reforms. More than seven in 10 residents (72%) and likely voters (73%) favor a system of review and revision of proposed initiatives in order to avoid legal and drafting errors. Similar numbers of residents and likely voters (75% each) favor having a period of time during which the sponsor of a proposed initiative and the legislature could meet to seek a compromise before the initiative goes to the ballot. Most Californians (75%) and likely voters (82%) favor public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering efforts and initiative campaigns. Finally, 53 percent of state residents and 48 percent of likely voters favor extending the amount of time a sponsor has to gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot. About the Survey This edition of the PPIC Statewide Survey – a pre-election survey that looks at Californians and the future – is the third in a series of four surveys supported by funding from The James Irvine Foundation. This survey is intended to raise public awareness, inform decisionmakers, and stimulate public discussions about Californians’ attitudes toward the future and the November 2006 election. Findings are based on a telephone survey of 2,002 California adult residents interviewed between October 15 and October 22, 2006. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/2%. The sampling error for the 1076 likely voters is +/- 3%. For more information on methodology, see page 29. October 2006 5 Californians and the Future Mark Baldassare is research director at PPIC, where he holds the Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Chair in Public Policy. He is founder of the PPIC Statewide Survey, which he has directed since 1998. PPIC is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to improving public policy through objective, nonpartisan research on the economic, social, and political issues that affect Californians. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. 6 PPIC Statewide Survey NOVEMBER ELECTION KEY FINDINGS Arnold Schwarzenegger has an 18-point lead over Phil Angelides in the closing weeks of the governor’s election. About half of Democrats and independents say they are not satisfied with the choice of gubernatorial candidates. (pages 8, 9) Immigration and education continue to be the issues that voters would most like to hear the candidates talk about before the election. Most voters are dissatisfied with the amount of attention candidates are paying to important issues. (pages 9, 10) The four bond measures placed on the ballot by the legislature are still ahead, with housing (1C) having more support than transportation (1B), schools (1D) or water and flood controls (1E). Voters are divided on Proposition 84, the water and parks bond initiative. (pages 10, 11, 12) Unchanged since our August survey, six in 10 likely voters say it is a good idea to issue state bonds for infrastructure projects, but six in 10 also say that the $43 billion amount on the ballot is too much. Many of those who believe the overall amount on the ballot is too much say they will vote against each of the five bond measures. (page 13) Governor's Race 13 9 48 30 Likely Voters Schwarzenegger Angelides Other candidates Don't know Percent Likely Voters Percent Voting Yes on Propositions 80 70 60 51 56 51 53 50 42 40 30 20 10 0 11E-B8-Di4T-rsaaWns11atstCDe--perro,SH,rcfotlphuaoatosrioioolnkdnsssg 7 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S RACE As the campaign enters the final stretch, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger remains ahead of State Treasurer Phil Angelides by a substantial 18-point margin (48% to 30%), similar to last month (48% to 31%). The incumbent GOP governor has had a double-digit lead over the Democratic challenger in all of our monthly surveys since July. Currently, 13 percent of likely voters remain undecided and 9 percent would vote for someone other than a major party candidate. Reflecting partisan differences that have surfaced in previous surveys, 86 percent of Republicans favor Schwarzenegger, while just 57 percent of Democrats support Angelides. Independents favor Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin, but many name other candidates or are undecided. A majority of self-described liberal voters favors Angelides for governor (57%), while Schwarzenegger is supported by most moderates (49%) and is strongly favored by conservative voters (72%). The race is closest in the Democratic-leaning regions of Los Angeles (40% Angelides, 38% Schwarzenegger) and the San Francisco Bay Area (40% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides). Schwarzenegger has large leads over Angelides in the Central Valley and the Other Southern California regions. Men favor Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin (53% to 26%) with few undecideds (9%), but the race is closer among women (44% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides) with many undecideds (16%). Angelides is ahead of Schwarzenegger by a large margin among Latinos (52% to 25%), while whites support Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin (56% to 23%). Schwarzenegger is favored over Angelides across all age, education, and income categories. Likely voters only All Likely Voters “If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…?” * Arnold Schwarzenegger Phil Angelides Other Candidates 48% 30% 9% Don’t know 13% Party Democrat Republican Independent 21 57 8 14 86 4 46 43 24 13 20 Central Valley 56 23 11 10 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 40 38 34 40 9 17 8 14 Other Southern California 63 21 97 Gender Men Women 53 26 12 9 44 34 6 16 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 25 52 56 23 7 16 9 12 * For complete text of question, see p. 31. Are voters paying attention to news about the governor’s election? Seventy-four percent are very closely (19%) or fairly closely (55%) following the news, an increase from 64 percent in August (15% very closely, 49% fairly closely). The proportion of voters who are very closely following the election news today is comparable to October 2002 (22%) but well below what we observed before the 2003 governor’s recall (49%), the 2004 presidential election (61%), and the 2005 special election (31%). 8 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election GOVERNOR’S RACE (CONTINUED) By a nine-point margin, more likely voters say they are satisfied than not with the choice of candidates for governor this year (51% to 42%). In August, 47 percent of likely voters said they were satisfied and 42 percent were not satisfied. Two in three Republicans are satisfied with the choice of candidates, while about half of Democrats and independents are dissatisfied. Schwarzenegger’s supporters (65%) are more likely than Angelides’ supporters (48%) to express satisfaction with the choice of candidates. Similarly, conservative voters (59%) express satisfaction with the gubernatorial candidate choices more often than liberal or moderate voters (47% each). Despite sharp differences in preferences for gubernatorial candidates, Latinos (51%) and whites (53%) have similar levels of satisfaction with the choice of candidates. In our October 2002 survey, during the campaign between Gray Davis and Bill Simon, 38 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 57 percent were dissatisfied with the choice of candidates for governor. Likely voters only Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know “Would you say you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 7th?” All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind 51% 44% 66% 42% 42 50 28 52 76 6 6 Latinos 51% 41 8 VOTER PRIORITIES Likely voters continue to name immigration (21%) and education (19%) as the issues they would most like the candidates for governor to talk about this year. Fewer name any other single issue, including the state budget and taxes, jobs and the economy, health care and costs, and the environment. The prioritization of top election-year issues in our May and August surveys were similar. Today, there are stark partisan differences in priorities. Democrats are most interested in hearing about education, while Republicans are most interested in hearing about immigration. Independents are just as likely to name education or immigration as their top issue. Latinos (26%) are much more likely than whites (15%) to want to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about education. In our October 2002 survey, the top issues for the governor’s election were education (21%), jobs and the economy (14%), and the state budget and taxes (14%). Only two percent named immigration. “Which one issue would you most like to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about before the November 7th election?” Top six issues mentioned All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Immigration, illegal immigration Education, schools 21% 13% 31% 18% 19 24 13 18 State budget, deficit, taxes 10 7 12 11 Jobs, economy 77 6 9 Environment, pollution 4 6 2 5 Healthcare, health costs 4 7 2 4 Latinos 20% 26 5 13 4 4 October 2006 9 Californians and the Future VOTER PRIORITIES (CONTINUED) Voter unhappiness with the amount of attention the gubernatorial candidates are spending on certain issues has grown since our last survey. Today, in the wake of the sole gubernatorial debate on October 7th, just three in 10 likely voters are satisfied, and six in 10 are dissatisfied, with the amount of attention spent on the issues that voters find most important. In our September survey, 32 percent were satisfied and 54 percent were dissatisfied with this aspect of the governor’s election. Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to express dissatisfaction with the candidates’ attention to the issues. Majorities across all age, education, income groups, and regions of the state express dissatisfaction. Only three in 10 whites and Latinos, and men and women, say they are satisfied with the amount of attention spent by the candidates on important issues. In our October 2002 survey, during the final weeks of the Gray Davis–Bill Simon campaign, 24 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 66 percent were dissatisfied with the amount of attention the candidates were spending on important issues. “Would you say you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Satisfied Dissatisfied Don’t know 30% 24% 60 67 10 9 39% 50 11 30% 31% 60 59 10 10 STATE PROPOSITIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS The November election includes 13 state propositions, including five measures placed on the ballot by the legislature and eight citizens’ initiatives. There are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion, a number of tax increases earmarked for state programs, and new government regulations. Which state propositions are of the most interest to voters? In August, 31 percent of likely voters were able to name a top interest. Today, two months later, 58 percent are able to do so. Voters are most likely to express interest in Proposition 87, the alternative energy initiative (12% August, 28% October), which has had active campaigns and expensive television advertising from both sides. Less than one in 10 likely voters is most interested in any one of the bond measures (6% August, 7% October). The legislature placed four infrastructure bonds on the ballot for funding transportation, affordable housing, education facilities, and water and flood control. Voters’ support for these measures varies from 51 percent to 56 percent, after hearing each of the ballot titles and labels in their entirety. Since August, these bond measures have not had any major gains in voter support. Proposition 1B, the transportation bond (about $19.9 billion), is supported by 51 percent of voters and opposed by 38 percent. Support was about the same in August (50%) and September (51%). This measure, the biggest on the ballot, is now favored by a 27-point margin by Democrats (57% yes, 30% no) and by about half of independents (52% yes, 38% no). Republicans are divided (44% yes, 46% no). 10 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) Proposition 1C, the affordable housing bond ($2.85 billion), is favored by 56 percent of likely voters, while 34 percent are opposed. Support was similar in August (57%) and September (57%). This bond measure is strongly favored today by Democrats (68% yes, 23% no) and a majority of independents (54% yes, 32% no), while Republicans are divided (43% yes, 48% no). Proposition 1D, the education facilities bond (about $10.4 billion), has the support of 51 percent of likely voters, with 39 percent opposed. Support was comparable in August (51%) and September (49%). Today, Democrats strongly support this bond (61% yes, 29% no) and independents also favor it (55% yes, 35% no). Republicans are more likely to be opposed than in favor of it (37% yes, 54% no). Proposition 1E, the water and flood control bond (about $4.1 billion), receives 53 percent support and 36 percent opposition from likely voters. Support for this bond measure was 56 percent in August and 55 percent in September. Democrats now favor this measure by a 27-point margin (58% yes, 31% no). Independents also support it (54% yes, 33% no) while Republicans remain divided (44% yes, 43% no). “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on…?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don’t know 51% 57% 44% 52% 38 30 46 38 11 13 10 10 Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don’t know 56 68 43 54 34 23 48 32 10 9 9 14 Proposition 1D Education facilities Yes No Don’t know 51 61 37 55 39 29 54 35 10 10 9 10 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don’t know 53 36 11 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 32-34. 58 44 31 43 11 13 54 33 13 Voter support for all of these bond measures continues to vary across the state’s regions. Proposition 1B (transportation) has the most support in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the Other Southern California region; it has the most opposition in the Central Valley. Proposition 1C (affordable housing) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles than elsewhere. Proposition 1D (school facilities) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area than anywhere else. Proposition 1E (water and flood controls) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area than elsewhere, while 40 percent of likely voters in the Other Southern California region oppose it. October 2006 11 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on…?” * Likely voters only Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don’t know Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 51% 38 11 56 34 10 Central Valley 46% 43 11 53 37 10 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 51% 54% 38 32 11 14 61 60 27 30 12 10 Proposition 1D Yes 51 49 56 53 No 39 41 33 37 Education facilities Don’t know 10 10 11 10 Proposition 1E Yes 53 54 63 52 No 36 35 28 36 Water facilities Don’t know 11 11 9 12 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 32-34. Other Southern California 51% 38 11 50 40 10 51 41 8 47 40 13 PROPOSITION 84: WATER AND PARKS BOND INITIATIVE Proposition 84 is a citizens’ initiative that would provide about $5.4 billion in state bonds for water, flood control, natural resources, parks, and conservation projects. When read the ballot title and label for Proposition 84, voters today are divided (42% yes, 43% no), which is similar to August (40% yes, 45% no). Currently, half of Democrats are in favor of this bond initiative, while a majority of Republicans are opposed to it. Independents are divided (42% yes, 42% no). Support for Proposition 84 falls short of a majority among Latinos and whites, as well as in all age, homeownership, and education groups. Support also declines with income. Proposition 84 has more supporters in the San Francisco Bay Area (47%) than elsewhere (41% Central Valley, 41% Other Southern California, 40% Los Angeles). “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 84?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Yes 42% 50% 33% 42% No 43 35 54 42 Don’t know 15 15 13 16 * For complete text of proposition question, see p. 34. 12 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election ATTITUDES TOWARD STATE BONDS Californians show more support for the idea of using state bonds to pay for infrastructure than they do for any of the actual state bonds on the ballot. Six in 10 say that it is a good idea to issue state bonds to pay for schools, roads, and water projects. About three in 10 think it is a bad idea. This general attitude towards state bonds was similar in August (59% good idea, 31% bad idea). Support for issuing state bonds is lower today than it was in September 2002 (69% good idea, 22% bad idea), when state propositions involving billions of dollars in state bonds were on the ballot. Today, majorities in all regions across the state say that it is a good idea for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure. Most Democrats (63%), independents (60%), and Republicans (58%) think it’s a good idea. Majorities across age, education, gender, homeownership, income, and racial/ethnic groups agree. Among the six in 10 likely voters who think state infrastructure bonds are a good idea, there is majority support for the five bonds on the November ballot (65% for 1B, 66% for 1C, 67% for 1D, 65% for 1E, 55% for 84). “In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?” Likely voters only Good idea All Likely Voters 61% Central Valley 60% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 63% 62% Other Southern California 61% Bad idea 28 30 26 26 30 Don’t know 11 10 11 12 9 Despite general support for the idea of state bonds for infrastructure, voters are balking at the total of $43 billion for the five state bonds on the upcoming ballot. Nearly six in 10 likely voters think this amount is too much, similar to what we found in August (59%). Most likely voters across regional, party, age, education, and income groups say the amount is too much. For the six in 10 likely voters who say it is a good idea to issue bonds to build infrastructure, 46 percent say the total amount of the current bonds is too much. Among the six in 10 who say it is too much, 48 percent say it is a good idea for the state to issue such bonds. Perceptions of the $43 billion total on the ballot are associated with support for individual bond measures. Many of the likely voters who think that this amount is too much say they will vote no on the five bonds on the November ballot (53% for 1B, 48% for 1C, 55% for 1D, 50% for 1E, 58% for 84). “On the November ballot, there are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion. Do you think this bond amount is …?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Too much 58% 50% 67% 59% Too little 33 2 3 Right amount 21 24 14 22 Don’t know 18 23 17 16 October 2006 13 STATE ISSUES KEY FINDINGS Governor Schwarzenegger’s approval ratings among adults (47%) and likely voters (52%) are similar to last month and much higher than they were a year ago, while majorities of all adults (52%) and likely voters (61%) continue to disapprove of the legislature. (pages 16, 17) Californians offer a mixed view of the direction of the state today (a considerable improvement from a year ago) and they are more likely to expect good economic times than bad economic times for the state in the next year. (page 17) When asked about how important they think it is for the state to spend funds on four different types of infrastructure projects in their part of California, residents rank school facilities more highly than surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing. (page 18) A majority of Californians favor a proposal for an independent citizens’ commission to undertake legislative redistricting, while most reject a proposal to change legislative term limits. (page 19) About three in four Californians approve of reforms to the initiative process, such as increasing public disclosure of funding sources, prior review of ballot language, and providing time to reach a legislative compromise before measures reach the ballot. A majority of voters also favor allowing more time to gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot. (page 20) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters Governor's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Oct Jan Oct Jan Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 Direction of the State 80 Right direction Wrong direction 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Oct Jan Oct Jan Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 15 Californians and the Future STATE OFFICIALS’ APPROVAL RATINGS As the November election approaches, California adults are evenly divided when asked to rate the job performance of Governor Schwarzenegger. Today, 47 percent of Californians approve of his job performance, while 45 percent disapprove. His approval rating has increased since last October when 33 percent of Californians approved of the way he was handling his job and 58 percent disapproved. Among likely voters today, 52 percent approve and 41 percent disapprove of his job performance – also a dramatic improvement from a year ago (38% approve, 57% disapprove). Considerable partisan differences continue to exist. Eight in 10 Republicans (81%) approve of the governor’s job performance, while six in 10 Democrats (60%) disapprove, and independents remain divided (45% approve, 47% disapprove). Approval of the governor’s job performance has increased in all party groups in the past year, but most dramatically among Democrats (12% October 2005, 31% today). Across regions, residents in the Central Valley (57%) and the Other Southern California region (53%) are more likely than residents in Los Angeles and in the San Francisco Bay Area (40% each) to approve of the job performance of Governor Schwarzenegger. Approval of the governor’s job performance is higher among whites than Latinos (58% to 30%) and among men than women (51% to 42%). These approval ratings have important implications for the upcoming governor’s election. Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Schwarzenegger, 87 percent approve of his job performance. Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Angelides, 78 percent disapprove of the governor’s job performance. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California?” Approve Disapprove Don't know All Adults 47% 45% 8% Likely Voters 52 41 7 Democrat 31 60 9 Party Republican 81 14 5 Independent 45 47 8 Central Valley 57 36 7 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 40 40 51 54 9 6 Other Southern California 53 39 8 Gender Men Women 51 41 42 50 8 8 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 30 62 58 35 8 7 16 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues STATE OFFICIALS’ APPROVAL RATINGS (CONTINUED) With less than a month before the November election in which 100 legislative seats will be decided, approval of the California legislature remains low, with three in 10 adults (30%) voicing approval and just over half (52%) voicing disapproval. The legislature’s approval rating among all adults has improved slightly from a year ago (25% approve, 56% disapprove). Today, likely voters are more negative than all adults, with only one in four likely voters approving of the legislature and six in 10 disapproving. While approval is low across all party groups, it is somewhat higher among Democrats (32%) and independents (29%) and remains lowest among Republicans (23%). Across regions, the approval rating of the legislature is similarly low in the Other Southern California region (29%), followed by the San Francisco Bay Area (30%), Los Angeles (31%), and the Central Valley (34%). Latinos are more likely than whites to approve of the job the legislature is doing (37% to 27%). “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve 30% 32% 23% 29% 26% Disapprove 52 51 63 57 61 Don't know 18 17 14 14 13 DIRECTION OF THE STATE As Californians face a November ballot including state propositions and statewide candidates, they are divided about the direction of the state. Forty-four percent think the state is heading in the right direction while 46 percent say it is heading in the wrong direction. Last October, perceptions of the direction of the state were much more negative (30% right, 60% wrong). Today, Republicans (48%) more often than Democrats (43%) or independents (40%) say the state is headed in the right direction. Views about the state economy are somewhat brighter. Half of California adults and likely voters think that over the next 12 months, California will experience a healthy economic climate. Last October, only 34 percent expected good economic times. Partisan differences are evident: Republicans (59%) are more likely than Democrats (46%) and independents (44%) to be optimistic. Across regions, optimism about California’s economic future is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area and in the Central Valley (55% each) than in the Other Southern California region (50%) and Los Angeles (42%). Positive views of the state’s direction and economic outlook are correlated with support for the incumbent governor. Among those who think the state is headed in the right direction, 59 percent plan to vote for Schwarzenegger. Among those who expect good economic times, 63 percent will vote for him. Good times Bad times Don't know “Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 50% 46% 59% 44% 52% 37 41 27 41 35 13 13 14 15 13 October 2006 17 Californians and the Future THE STATE’S FUTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING As Californians prepare to vote on the infrastructure bond package, how important is it to residents that the state spends funds on these four types of public works projects in their part of California? Large majorities say it is at least somewhat important for the state to be spending on school facilities (89%), surface transportation (80%), water systems and flood controls (79%), and affordable housing (73%). Six in 10 adults (66%) and likely voters (61%) say that state spending on school facilities is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1D (school facilities), 83 percent say that spending on school facilities is very important. Four in 10 adults (43%) and likely voters (44%) believe that state funding for transportation projects is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1B (transportation), 56 percent say that spending on transportation projects is very important. In the case of water systems and flood control, four in 10 adults (43%) and likely voters (41%) believe that state funds are very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1E (water and flood control), 53 percent say that spending on water systems and flood control is very important. When it comes to rating affordable housing, four in 10 adults (43%) and one in three likely voters (35%) say that state spending is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1C (affordable housing), 49 percent say that state spending on affordable housing is very important. Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say that state spending on school facilities, surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing is very important in their area of California. Six in 10 or more residents across Los Angeles (70%), the San Francisco Bay Area (69%), the Central Valley (66%), and Other Southern California (64%) regions say that state spending on school facilities is very important, while fewer across these regions rate state funding of surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing as highly important. “How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on _______________ in your part of California?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Very important 66% 72% 49% 70% Somewhat important 23 21 32 20 School facilities Not too important 9 6 17 9 Don't know 2121 Very important 43 48 36 46 Surface Somewhat important 37 35 37 38 transportation projects Not too important 18 15 24 13 Don't know 2233 Very important 43 48 35 36 Water systems Somewhat important 36 34 36 40 and flood control Not too important 19 17 26 23 Don't know 2131 Very important 43 52 23 38 Affordable Somewhat important 30 31 34 33 housing Not too important 24 16 40 28 Don't know 3131 Likely Voters 61% 26 12 1 44 36 17 3 41 36 22 1 35 32 31 2 18 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues LEGISLATIVE REFORMS In a special election last fall, California voters soundly rejected the governor’s initiative that would take the responsibility of political redistricting out of the hands of elected officials and give the decision to a panel of retired judges. Today, a majority of all adults (54%) and likely voters (59%) support the idea of an independent citizens’ commission taking responsibility for the redistricting process. In May, we also found majority support for this independent redistricting proposal among all adults (60%) and likely voters (62%). Majority support for redistricting reform is present across political groups, and supporters outnumber opponents of this proposal in all regions. Support is higher among whites (59%) than Latinos (45%). “Would you favor or oppose a redistricting reform that requires an independent commission of citizens, instead of the state legislature and governor, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each census?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Favor 54% 54% 61% 61% 59% Oppose 30 31 27 25 28 Don’t know 16 15 12 14 13 There were some discussions among legislators this year about placing a measure on the November ballot that would combine redistricting reform and legislative term limits reform. While majorities of voters support independent redistricting, majorities oppose a relatively modest change in term limits. Seven in 10 adults and likely voters oppose the idea of allowing legislators to serve up to 14 years of total service in either branch of the legislature. This is consistent with the majority opposition we found in our October 2005 and May 2006 surveys. Today, solid majorities of Republicans, independents, and Democrats are opposed to this suggested change in legislative term limits. Opposition to this proposal is substantial throughout the Other Southern California region (76%), the Central Valley (72%), Los Angeles (70%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (66%). We find solid majority opposition to this proposal in all age, education, homeownership, income, and racial/ethnic categories. Only 14 percent of likely voters favor both redistricting and term limits reform, while 20 percent oppose both reforms. “Under current term limits, a legislator is allowed to serve six years in the state assembly and eight years in the state senate. Would you favor or oppose a change in term limits that would allow members to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either branch?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Favor 22% 29% 17% 19% 23% Oppose 72 67 79 74 73 Don’t know 6 4 4 74 October 2006 19 Californians and the Future INITIATIVE REFORMS Californians are voting on eight initiatives on the fall ballot, including tax and spending increases and regulatory decisions, and they are watching active and expensive campaigns for and against several of these initiatives. Are there changes in the initiative process they would support? An overwhelming majority of adults (75%) and likely voters (82%) favor increasing public disclosure of funding sources for initiative campaigns and signature gathering. Solid majorities of Democrats (79%), Republicans (80%), and independents (76%) favor this reform, and solid majorities across regions and age, education, and income groups also favor increased disclosure. These findings are similar to those in our October survey last year, when a majority of adults (74%) and likely voters (82%) favored increasing public disclosure. Many Californians also favor a proposal to make it easier to qualify initiatives by increasing the amount of time allowed for a sponsor to gather signatures to place an initiative on the ballot: 53 percent of all adults and 48 percent of likely voters favor this reform. About half of independents and Democrats favor this idea; Republicans, with less than majority support, remain divided. Support among all adults was similar a year ago (50% favor, 38% oppose). Would you favor or oppose increasing… Public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering and initiative campaigns? Favor Oppose Don’t know The amount of time a sponsor may gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot? Favor Oppose Don’t know All Adults 75% 18 7 53 36 11 Dem 79% 15 6 53 35 12 Party Rep 80% 15 5 46 44 10 Likely Ind Voters 76% 82% 19 14 54 51 48 39 40 10 12 Californians would like to see changes in the process leading up to placing an initiative on the ballot. More than seven in 10 adults (72%) and likely voters (73%) favor having a system of review and revision in order to avoid legal and drafting errors before initiatives are placed on the ballot. A similarly high proportion of adults and likely voters (75% each) favor changing the period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet in attempts to reach a compromise. There is majority support for both of these reforms across political and demographic groups and regions, although Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to support these reforms. Likewise, in our October 2005 survey, we found solid support among adults and likely voters, and across political and demographic groups, for these two initiative reforms. Would you favor or oppose having… A system of review and revision of proposed initiatives to try to avoid legal issues and drafting errors? A period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet to see if there is a compromise solution before initiatives go to the ballot? Favor Oppose Don’t know Favor Oppose Don’t know 20 PPIC Statewide Survey All Adults 72% 18 10 75 17 8 Dem 75% 15 10 82 12 6 Party Rep 71% 20 9 69 25 6 Likely Ind Voters 74% 73% 19 17 7 10 76 75 17 18 77 NATIONAL ISSUES KEY FINDINGS Californians are more likely to vote for the Democrat than the Republican in their Congressional district, and most want a Congress controlled by the Democrats. Party loyalty is equally strong among Democrats and Republicans. (page 22) Six in 10 California adults and likely voters disapprove of the job performance of President Bush, including one in four Republican voters. (page 23) Six in 10 Californians believe the nation is headed in the wrong direction, while views about the U.S. economy are mixed. Perceptions are starkly different between Democrats and Republicans. (page 24) Trust in the federal government is at a new low. One in four says they trust the federal government to do what is right just about always or most of the time. Two in three say the federal government wastes a lot of the money we pay in taxes. (page 25) More Californians think the Democratic Party could do better than the Republican Party in handling the economy, Iraq, and immigration, and particularly the environment. Still, most Californians think the major parties do a poor job in representing the American people and that a third party is needed. (page 26) Vote Intention in Congressional Elections 25 52 41 Likely voters Democratic/lean Democratic Republican/lean Republican Other Don't know Percent Likely Voters President Bush's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 21 Californians and the Future CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS The battle for control of the U.S. House of Representatives is heating up in the last weeks before the mid-term election. Democratic candidates hold an 11-point lead over Republican candidates in California, 52% to 41%, including “leaners,”—those who are asked a follow-up question on party preference if they don’t initially name a major party. Voters’ preferences are strongly related to party registration, while half of independents would favor a Democrat if the election were held today. National surveys have shown the Democrats ahead by a wider margin. A recent CNN poll found the Democratic candidates led the Republican candidates by 17 points (57% to 40%). In October 2000, which was the last time we asked this question in a PPIC Statewide Survey, the Democrats held a seven-point edge among likely voters (47% to 40% without leaners). Without leaners included today, Democratic candidates lead Republicans by 12 points (48% to 36%). “If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives was being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party's candidate or the Democratic Party's candidate for the House in your district?” (responses include leaners) Likely voters only Republican Democrat Other Don’t know All Likely Voters 41% 52% 2% 5% Democrat 10 86 1 3 Party Republican 83 12 1 4 Independent 34 51 3 12 Central Valley 51 41 3 5 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 26 35 66 59 2 2 6 4 Other Southern California 53 41 3 3 Gender Men Women 45 47 37 56 3 2 5 5 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 22 74 47 46 2 2 2 5 Across regions, Congressional Republican candidates lead Democratic candidates in the Central Valley (51% to 41%) and the Other Southern California region (53% to 41%), while Democrats lead Republicans in the San Francisco Bay Area (66% to 26%) and Los Angeles (59% to 35%). Latinos favor Democrats over Republicans (74% to 22%) while whites are divided (46% Democrat to 47% Republican). Men are also divided (45% Democrat to 47% Republican), while women strongly favor Democrats (56% to 37%). When asked their preference for the outcome of this year’s Congressional elections, majorities of adults (57%) and likely voters (55%) say they would prefer a Congress controlled by Democrats, while fewer than four in 10 in each group (32% adults, 37% likely voters) would prefer a Republican-controlled Congress. According to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 52 percent of registered voters nationwide would prefer the Democrats to control Congress, while 37 percent would prefer Republicans. The president’s approval ratings are related to election preferences in California. Among likely voters who approve of the president’s job performance, 86 percent prefer the Republican candidate and 79 percent want a Republican-controlled Congress; of those who disapprove of his job performance, 77 percent prefer the Democratic candidate and 80 percent want a Democratic-controlled Congress. 22 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues PRESIDENT’S APPROVAL RATINGS President Bush’s approval ratings with the California public remain at an all time low this month. Thirtytwo percent of Californians approve of the way he is handling his job as president, while 62 percent disapprove. President Bush’s approval ratings have been below 40 percent since July 2005. In a recent CNN Poll, 39 percent of Americans said they approved, and 58 percent said they disapproved of the way that George W. Bush was handling his job as president. Across the state’s regions, residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (21%) are the least likely to approve of him, followed by Los Angeles (29%), Other Southern California (40%), and Central Valley (42%) residents. Disapproval of President Bush is slightly higher among Latinos than whites (65% to 60%) and is similar between men and women (62% to 63%). There are sharp partisan differences, with most Republicans (68%) approving of the job performance of President Bush, while most Democrats (85%) and independents (69%) say they disapprove of the way he is handling his job. These partisan differences extend to the electoral arena, where 71 percent of likely voters who favor the Republican in the upcoming congressional election also approve of the president, while 92 percent of likely voters who favor the Democrat also say that they disapprove of President Bush. Moreover, 68 percent of Californians who would prefer a Congress controlled by Republicans say they approve of the way President Bush is handling his job, while 85 percent of those who would prefer Congress controlled by Democrats after the November elections disapprove of the president’s performance in office. All Adults Likely Voters Party Region Gender Race/Ethnicity “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States?” Approve Disapprove 32% 62% 34 62 Democrat 11 85 Republican 68 26 Independent 25 69 Central Valley 42 53 San Francisco Bay Area 21 77 Los Angeles 29 64 Other Southern California 40 55 Men 33 62 Women 32 63 Latinos 31 65 Whites 34 60 Don't know 6% 4 4 6 6 5 2 7 5 5 5 4 6 October 2006 23 Californians and the Future OVERALL MOOD Californians remain pessimistic about the overall direction of the country. Six in 10 adults and likely voters say things are going in the wrong direction, while three in 10 say they are going in right direction. Levels of pessimism were similar in September 2005 (34% right direction, 62% wrong direction). A recent Associated Press-Ipsos Poll found that 31 percent of adults nationwide thought things were headed in the right direction, while 64 percent thought things were off on the wrong track. In California today, a majority of Republicans (57%) believes things are headed in the right direction; in every other party and demographic group however, majorities believe things are headed in the wrong direction. Across regions, residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (73%) are the most likely to say things are headed in the wrong direction while majorities, but fewer residents, hold this view in Los Angeles (64%), the Other Southern California region (56%) and the Central Valley (54%). Negative views about the direction of the country are related to attitudes towards the national political leadership. Of those who disapprove of the President’s job performance, 86 percent think things are headed in the wrong direction. And of those who believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, 73 percent would prefer Democrats to take control of the U.S. Congress after the November election. Right direction Wrong direction Don't know “Do you think things in the United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 31% 15% 57% 29% 62 82 33 64 7 3 10 7 Likely Voters 31% 62 7 Californians are more divided about nation’s economic forecast. Forty-four percent expect economic good times ahead while 46 percent expect bad times. Likely voters have similar perspectives (49% good times, 42% bad times). However, opinions today are much rosier than in September 2005, when 30 percent were expecting good economic times and 63 percent were predicting bad economic times. There is a wide partisan gap in perceptions of the future of the U.S. economy. Two in three Republicans predict good times compared to majorities of Democrats (58%) and independents (52%) who say bad times. Across regions, the proportion expecting good economic times is higher in the Other Southern California region and the Central Valley (49% each) than in the San Francisco Bay Area (41%) and Los Angeles (40%). Men (52%) are much more likely than women (37%) to expect economic good times. Good times Bad times Don't know “Turning to economic conditions, do you think that during the next 12 months the United States will have good times financially or bad times?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 44% 31% 66% 42% 49% 46 58 26 52 42 10 11 8 6 9 24 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues TRUST IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Reflecting Californians’ downbeat mood about the national direction, trust in the federal government today is at a new low. Only 26 percent of all adults and 23 percent of likely voters say they can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right just about always or most of the time. About one in three adults said they trust the federal government either always or most of the time in our surveys between December 1999 and October 2000. Trust in the federal government reached a high point in January 2002 (46%) and has been trending downward since that time. Last October was the prior low point, when 29 percent said they trust the federal government always or most of the time. Californians today are about as likely as adults nationwide (28% always/most of the time) to say they trust the federal government, according to a recent New York Times/CBS poll. While trust is low across California’s political and demographic groups, Republicans are more than twice as likely as Democrats (38% to 16%) to say they can trust the federal government always or mostly. Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area are less likely than residents in other regions to express trust in the federal government and Latinos are more trusting than whites (34% to 24%). Among those who approve of President Bush, half (50%) express trust compared to only 15 percent of those who disapprove of the president. And among those who would prefer Republicans to retain control of Congress, 41 percent say they can trust the federal government to do what is right, compared to only 19 percent of those favoring a Democratic takeover. “People have different ideas about the government in Washington. How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Just about always 5% 3% 5% 2% 4% Most of the time 21 13 33 14 19 Only some of the time 62 69 55 67 64 None of the time (volunteered) 10 13 5 15 12 Don’t know 22221 Negative views of Washington extend to fiscal performance. Two in three residents (65%) and 69 percent of likely voters think the federal government wastes a lot of tax money. Similar attitudes were expressed a year ago (67% a lot, 27% some) when this measure of distrust reached a new high point. Strong majorities across political and demographic groups say the federal government wastes a lot of tax money, but this view is more widely held among residents age 55 and older (73%) than among those aged 35-54 (67%) and 18-34 (57%). Those who disapprove of President Bush’s job performance are more likely than those who approve to hold this view (72% to 54%). “Do you think the people in the federal government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don’t waste very much of it?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind A lot 65% 69% 62% 70% Some 28 27 33 24 Don’t waste very much 4322 Don’t know 3134 Likely Voters 69% 28 2 1 October 2006 25 Californians and the Future POLITICAL PARTY PERCEPTIONS We asked which political party could do a better job in four areas: handling the economy, handling the situation in Iraq, handling immigration, and protecting the environment. The Democratic Party is seen as more capable in all four areas, with a 28-point edge on protecting the environment (56% to 28%), 11 points on handling the situation in Iraq (45% to 34%), and 10 points on handling the economy (47% to 37%). In the area of handling immigration (41% to 36%), the Democratic lead is slight. According to a recent nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center, the Democratic Party has the edge over the Republican Party by 38 points on the environment (57% to 19%), 14 points on the economy (46% to 32%), seven points on Iraq (40% to 33%), and five points on immigration (37% to 32%). In California, voters’ perceptions of which of the parties would do a better job tend to reflect their party affiliation. However, when asked about the environment, Republicans are slightly more likely to say the Democratic (43%) than the Republican (39%) party. Independents choose the Democrats over the Republicans for the environment (56% to 26%), Iraq (43% to 32%), and the economy (44% to 33%), while they choose the parties equally on the issue of immigration (37% Democrats, 37% Republicans). For each of these policy issues, many independents say both, neither, or undecided. “Please tell me if you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party could do a better job in each of the following areas. Which party could do a better job of…?” All adults Democratic Party Handling the economy 47% Handling the situation in Iraq 45% Handling immigration 41% Protecting the environment 56% Republican Party 37 34 36 28 Both equally (volunteered) 3 2 3 4 Neither (volunteered) 5 9 10 4 Don't know 8 10 10 8 Beyond these differences in perceptions between the Democratic and Republican parties, there is overall dissatisfaction with the two parties. A majority of Californians (53%) believes that the Republican and Democratic parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed, and only 38 percent believe the two parties do an adequate job in representing the people. In September 2004, Californians were divided on this issue (48% adequate job, 46% third party needed). Independents (72%) are much more likely than Democrats (52%) and Republicans (45%) to believe a third party is needed. This belief is more prevalent among college-educated and upper-income residents than others, while whites are more likely than Latinos to hold this view (57% to 40%). Of those who trust the federal government to do what is right only some of the time or none of the time, 61 percent believe a third party is needed. “In your view, do the Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people, or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Adequate job 38% 39% 44% 21% 34% Third party needed 53 52 45 72 56 Don’t know 9 9 11 7 10 26 PPIC Statewide Survey REGIONAL MAP 28 METHODOLOGY The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, research director and survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance in research and writing from Sonja Petek, project manager for this survey, and survey research associates Dean Bonner, Jennifer Paluch, and Renatta DeFever. The surveys were conducted with funding from The James Irvine Foundation and benefited from discussions with foundation staff and grantees; however, survey methods, questions, and content of this report were solely determined by Mark Baldassare. The findings of this survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,002 California adult residents interviewed October 15-22, 2006. Interviewing took place on weekday nights and weekend days, using a computer-generated random sample of telephone numbers that ensured that both listed and unlisted numbers were called. All telephone exchanges in California were eligible. Telephone numbers in the survey sample were called up to 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 method” to avoid biases in age and gender. Each interview took an average of 19 minutes to complete. Interviewing was conducted in English or Spanish. Accent on Languages translated the survey into Spanish with assistance from Renatta DeFever. Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas, Inc. conducted the telephone interviewing. We used recent U.S. Census and state figures to compare the demographic characteristics of the survey sample with characteristics of California’s adult population. The survey sample was closely comparable to the census and state figures. The survey data in this report were statistically weighted to account for any demographic differences. The sampling error for the total sample of 2,002 adults is +/- 2 percent at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that 95 times out of 100, the results will be within 2 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in California were interviewed. The sampling error for subgroups is larger: For the 1,572 registered voters, it is +/- 2.5 percent; for the 1,076 likely voters it is +/- 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. Throughout the report, we present results for four 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, and “Other Southern California” includes Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. Residents from other geographic areas are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters. However, sample sizes for these less populated areas are not large enough to report separately in tables and text. We present specific results for Latinos because they account for about 30 percent of the state’s adult population and constitute one of the fastest growing voter groups. The sample sizes for African Americans and Asians are not large enough for separate statistical analysis. We do compare the opinions of registered Democrats, Republicans, and independents (those who are registered to vote as “decline to state”). We also include the responses of “likely voters”— those who are most likely to vote in the state’s elections based on past voting, current interest, and vote intentions. We compare current PPIC Statewide Survey responses to earlier PPIC Statewide Surveys and we compare PPIC Statewide Survey responses to those in national surveys by Associated Press-Ipsos, CNN, NBC News/Wall Street Journal, New York Times/CBS News, and the Pew Research Center. 29 QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE October 15-22, 2006 2,002 California Adult Residents English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR +/- 2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-14 are for likely voters only. All other responses are from all adults, except where noted.] 1. First, I have a few questions about the November 7th general election. If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…? [rotate names, then ask “or someone else”] 48% Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Republican, Governor 30 Phil Angelides, the Democrat, State Treasurer 4 Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green, Financial Advisor 2 Art Olivier, the Libertarian, Engineer 2 Edward C. Noonan, the American Independent, Computer Shop Owner 1 someone else (specify) 13 don’t know 2. Would you say you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 7th? 51% satisfied 42 not satisfied 7 don’t know 3. Which one issue would you most like to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about before the November 7th election? [code don’t read] 21% immigration, illegal immigration 19 education, schools 10 state budget, deficit, taxes 7 jobs, economy 4 environment, pollution 4 health care, health costs 2 abortion 2 electricity costs, energy 2 gas prices 2 infrastructure 14 other 13 don’t know 4. Would you say you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you? 30% satisfied 60 dissatisfied 10 don’t know 5. How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor’s election? 19% very closely 55 fairly closely 20 not too closely 5 not at all closely 1 don’t know October 2006 31 Californians and the Future 6. And, in the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes): Whose ads have you seen the most—Phil Angelides' or Arnold Schwarzenegger's? 37% yes, Phil Angelides’ 25 yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 23 yes, both equally (volunteered) 12 no 3 don’t know Next, we have a few questions to ask you about some of the propositions on the November ballot. 7. Which one of the state propositions on the November 7th ballot are you most interested in? [code, don’t read] 2% Proposition 1A 2 Proposition 1B 1 Proposition 1C 1 Proposition 1D 1 Proposition 1E 2 Proposition 83 2 Proposition 84 5 Proposition 85 8 Proposition 86 28 Proposition 87 1 Proposition 88 2 Proposition 89 3 Proposition 90 8 none of them 3 all equally 2 other answer (specify) 29 don’t know [rotate questions 8 to 12] 8. Proposition 1B is called the “Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006.” This act makes safety improvements and repairs to state highways, upgrades freeways to reduce congestion, repairs local streets and roads, upgrades highways along major transportation corridors, improves seismic safety of local bridges, expands public transit, helps complete the state’s network of carpool lanes, reduces air pollution, and improves anti-terrorism security at shipping ports by providing for a bond issue not to exceed nineteen billion nine hundred twenty-five million dollars ($19,925,000,000). There would be state costs of approximately $38.9 billion over 30 years to repay bonds and additional unknown state and local operations and maintenance costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1B? 51% yes 38 no 11 don’t know 32 PPIC Statewide Survey 9. Proposition 1C is called the “Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006.” For the purpose of providing shelters for battered women and their children; clean and safe housing for lowincome senior citizens; homeownership assistance for the disabled, military veterans, and working families; and repairs and accessibility improvements to apartment for families and disabled citizens, the state shall issue bonds totaling two billion eight hundred fifty million dollars ($2,850,000,000) paid from existing state funds at an average annual cost of two hundred and four million dollars ($204,000,000) per year over the 30-year life of the bonds. Requires reporting and publication of annual independent audited reports showing use of funds and limits administration and overhead costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1C? 56% yes 34 no 10 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 10.Proposition 1D is called the “Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006.” This ten billion four hundred sixteen million dollar ($10,416,000,000) bond issue will provide needed funding to relieve public school overcrowding and to repair older schools. It will improve earthquake safety and fund vocational educational facilities in public schools, and bond funds must be spent according to strict accountability measures. Funds will also be used to repair and upgrade existing public college and university buildings and to build new classrooms to accommodate the growing student enrollment in the California Community Colleges, the University of California, and the California State University. Fiscal impacts are state costs of about $20.3 billion to pay off both the principal ($10.4 billion) and interest ($9.9 billion) on the bonds and payments of about $680 million per year. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1D? 51% yes 39 no 10 don’t know October 2006 33 Californians and the Future 11.Proposition 1E is called the “Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006.” This act rebuilds and repairs California’s most vulnerable flood control structures to protect homes and prevent loss of life from flood-related disasters, including levee failures, flash floods, and mudslides; it protects California’s drinking water supply system by rebuilding delta levees that are vulnerable to earthquakes and storms; by authorizing a $4.09 billion ($4,090,000,000) bond act. Fiscal impacts are state costs of approximately $8 billion over 30 years to repay bonds, reduction in local property tax revenues of potentially up to several million dollars annually and additional unknown state and local operations costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1E? 53% yes 36 no 11 don’t know 12.Proposition 84 is called the “Water Quality, Safety and Supply. Flood Control. Natural Resource Protection. Park Improvements. Bonds. Initiative Statute.” It funds water, flood control, natural resources, park and conservation projects by authorizing $5,388,000,000 in general obligation bonds. Includes emergency drinking water safety provisions. Fiscal impacts include a state cost of $10.5 billion over 30 years to repay bonds, reduced local property tax revenues of several million dollars annually and unknown state and local operations and maintenance costs, potentially tens of million of dollars annually. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 84? 42% yes 43 no 15 don’t know 34 PPIC Statewide Survey [rotate questions 13 and 14] 13.In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 61% good idea 28 bad idea 11 don’t know 14.On the November ballot there are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion. Do you think this bond amount is too much, too little or the right amount? 58% too much 3 too little 21 right amount 18 don’t know Changing topics, 15.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California? 47% approve 45 disapprove 8 don’t know 16.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job? 30% approve 52 disapprove 18 don’t know 17.Do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 44% right direction 46 wrong direction 10 don’t know 18.Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 50% good times 37 bad times 13 don’t know Next, please tell me how important you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on each of the following infrastructure projects as your part of California gets ready for future population growth. [rotate questions 19 to 22] 19.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on surface transportation projects in your part of California? 43% very important 37 somewhat important 18 not too important 2 don’t know 20.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on school facilities in your part of California? 66% very important 23 somewhat important 9 not too important 2 don’t know 21.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on water systems and flood control in your part of California? 43% very important 36 somewhat important 19 not too important 2 don’t know 22.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on affordable housing in your part of California? 43% very important 30 somewhat important 24 not too important 3 don’t know On another topic, reforms have been suggested to address legislative issues such as term limits and redistricting. Please tell me if you would favor or oppose the following proposals. [rotate questions 23 and 24] Questionnaire and Results 23.Would you favor or oppose a redistricting reform that requires an independent commission of citizens, instead of the state legislature and governor, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each census? 54% favor 30 oppose 16 don’t know 24.Under current term limits, a legislator is allowed to serve six years in the state assembly and eight years in the state senate. Would you favor or oppose a change in term limits that would allow members to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either branch? 22% favor 72 oppose 6 don’t know California uses the direct initiative process, which enables voters to bypass the legislature and have issues put on the ballot—as state propositions—for voter approval or rejection. Reforms have been suggested to address issues that arise in the initiative process. Please say whether you would favor or oppose each of the following reform proposals. [rotate questions 25 to 28] 25.Would you favor or oppose increasing public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering and initiative campaigns? 75% favor 18 oppose 7 don’t know 26.Would you favor or oppose increasing the amount of time a sponsor may gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot? 53% favor 36 oppose 11 don’t know October 2006 35 Californians and the Future 27.Would you favor or oppose having a system of review and revision of proposed initiatives to try to avoid legal issues and drafting errors? 72% favor 18 oppose 10 don’t know 28.Would you favor or oppose having a period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet to see if there is a compromise solution before initiatives go to the ballot? 75% favor 17 oppose 8 don’t know 29.Changing topics, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States? 32% approve 62 disapprove 6 don’t know 30.Do you think things in the United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 31% right direction 62 wrong direction 7 don’t know 31.Turning to economic conditions, do you think that during the next 12 months the United States will have good times financially or bad times? 44% good times 46 bad times 10 don’t know 32.Next, people have different ideas about the government in Washington. How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right? 5% just about always 21 most of the time 62 only some of the time 10 none of the time (volunteered) 2 don’t know 36 PPIC Statewide Survey 33.Do you think the people in the federal government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don’t waste very much of it? 65% a lot 28 some 4 don’t waste very much 3 don’t know [Responses recorded for questions 34 and 34a are for likely voters only.] 34.On another topic, if the election for the U.S. House of Representatives was being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party's candidate or the Democratic Party's candidate for the House in your district? [options rotated] 36% Republican [skip to q35] 48 Democrat [skip to q35] 5 other (specify) [ask q34a] 11 don’t know [ask q34a] 34a.As of today, do you lean more to [rotate] the Republican [or] the Democrat? 31% Republican 24 Democrat 14 other (specify) 31 don’t know Next, please tell me if you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party [options rotated] could do a better job in each of the following areas. First… [rotate questions 35 to 38] 35.Which party could do a better job of handling the economy? 37% Republican Party 47 Democratic Party 3 both equally (volunteered) 5 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know 36.Which party could do a better job of handling the situation in Iraq? 34% Republican Party 45 Democratic Party 2 both equally (volunteered) 9 neither (volunteered) 10 don’t know 37.Which party could do a better job of handling immigration? 36% Republican Party 41 Democratic Party 3 both equally (volunteered) 10 neither (volunteered) 10 don’t know 38.Which party could do a better job of protecting the environment? 28% Republican Party 56 Democratic Party 4 both equally (volunteered) 4 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know 39.What is your preference for the outcome of this year's congressional elections: [rotate] a Congress controlled by Republicans [or] a Congress controlled by Democrats? 32% controlled by Republicans 57 controlled by Democrats 11 don’t know 40.In your view, do the Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people, or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed? 38% adequate job 53 third party needed 9 don’t know 41.On another topic, some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote? 79% yes [ask q42] 21 no [skip to q42a] 42.Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent? 42% Democrat [skip to q42b] 32 Republican [skip to q42c] 5 another party (specify) [skip to q43] 21 independent [ask q42a] Questionnaire and Results 42a.Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 27% Republican Party 49 Democratic Party 17 neither 7 don’t know [go to q43] 42b.Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 52% strong 44 not very strong 4 don’t know [go to q43] 42c.Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 56% strong 40 not very strong 4 don’t know 43.Would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 10% very liberal 19 somewhat liberal 32 middle-of-the-road 24 somewhat conservative 12 very conservative 3 don’t know 44.Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics? 27% great deal 43 fair amount 24 only a little 5 none 1 don’t know [D1-D13: demographic questions] October 2006 37 PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas C. Sutton, Chair Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Pacific Life Insurance Company Linda Griego President and Chief Executive Officer Griego Enterprises, Inc. Edward K. Hamilton Chairman Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler, Inc. Gary K. Hart Founder Institute for Education Reform California State University, Sacramento Walter B. Hewlett Director Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities ADVISORY COUNCIL Stuart A. Gabriel Director and Lusk Chair Lusk Center for Real Estate University of Southern California Clifford W. Graves Elizabeth G. Hill Legislative Analyst State of California Hilary W. Hoynes Associate Professor Department of Economics University of California, Davis Andrés E. Jiménez Director California Policy Research Center University of California Office of the President Norman R. King Director, University Transportation Center California State University, San Bernardino David W. Lyon President and Chief Executive Officer Public Policy Institute of California Ki Suh Park Design and Managing Partner Gruen Associates Constance L. Rice Co-Director The Advancement Project Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board Emeritus The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center Dean Misczynski Director California Research Bureau Rudolf Nothenberg Chief Administrative Officer (Retired) City and County of San Francisco Manuel Pastor Professor, Latin American & Latino Studies University of California, Santa Cruz Peter Schrag Contributing Editor The Sacramento Bee James P. Smith Senior Economist RAND Corporation PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Angela Blackwell Founder and Chief Executive Officer PolicyLink Paul Brest President The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Mollyann Brodie Vice President Kaiser Family Foundation Bruce E. Cain Director Institute of Governmental Studies University of California, Berkeley James E. Canales President The James Irvine Foundation Matthew K. Fong President Strategic Advisory Group William Hauck President California Business Roundtable Dennis A. Hunt Vice President Communications and Public Affairs The California Endowment Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Senior Scholar School of Policy, Planning, and Development University of Southern California Carol S. Larson President and Chief Executive Officer The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Monica Lozano Publisher and Chief Executive Officer La Opinión Donna Lucas CEO Lucas Public Affairs Dan Rosenheim News Director KPIX-TV Carol Stogsdill President Stogsdill Consulting Cathy Taylor Vice President and Editorial Commentary Director Orange County Register Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board Emeritus The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center The PPIC Statewide Survey Advisory Committee is diverse group of experts who provide advice on survey issues. However, survey methods, questions, content, and timing are determined solely by PPIC. PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111 phone: 415.291.4400 fax: 415.291.4401 www.ppic.org survey@ppic.org"
}
["___content":protected]=>
string(104) "
"
["_permalink":protected]=>
string(106) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-the-future-october-2006/s_1006mbs/"
["_next":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_prev":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_css_class":protected]=>
NULL
["id"]=>
int(8574)
["ID"]=>
int(8574)
["post_author"]=>
string(1) "1"
["post_content"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_date"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:48"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(3801)
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "inherit"
["post_title"]=>
string(9) "S 1006MBS"
["post_type"]=>
string(10) "attachment"
["slug"]=>
string(9) "s_1006mbs"
["__type":protected]=>
NULL
["_wp_attached_file"]=>
string(13) "S_1006MBS.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(6) "762806"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(91352) " The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) is a private operating foundation established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. The Institute is dedicated to improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. PPIC’s research agenda focuses on three program areas: population, economy, and governance and public finance. Studies within these programs are examining the underlying forces shaping California’s future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns: California in the global economy; demography; education; employment and income; environment, growth, and infrastructure; government and public finance; health and social policy; immigrants and immigration; key sectors in the California economy; and political participation. PPIC was created because three concerned citizens—William R. Hewlett, Roger W. Heyns, and Arjay Miller—recognized the need for linking objective research to the realities of California public policy. Their goal was to help the state’s leaders better understand the intricacies and implications of contemporary issues and make informed public policy decisions when confronted with challenges in the future. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Thomas C. Sutton is Chair of the Board of Directors. PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111 phone: 415.291.4400 fax: 415.291.4401 www.ppic.org survey@ppic.org TABLE OF CONTENTS About the Survey Press Release November Election State Issues National Issues Regional Map Methodology Questionnaire and Results 1 3 7 15 21 28 29 31 ABOUT THE SURVEY The PPIC Statewide Survey series provides policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents. Inaugurated in April 1998, this is the 72nd PPIC Statewide Survey in a series that has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 150,000 Californians. The current survey is the third in a series of four surveys on the topic of “Californians and the Future,” supported by funding from The James Irvine Foundation. California has 37 million residents today and is expected to add about 10 million more people over the next 20 years, according to the Department of Finance. On November 7th, California voters will make important decisions about the state’s future in a statewide election that involves the selection of a governor and members of other executive branch offices, 100 members of the California Legislature, one U.S. senator, and 53 members of the House of Representatives. The state ballot will also present the voters with 13 state propositions on a wide range of topics, including funding for state infrastructure and public works projects. The November ballot has five state bond measures, placed there through the legislative and citizens’ initiative process and totaling about $43 billion, for surface transportation, education facilities, water and flood controls, affordable housing, and water and parks. The other propositions on the state ballot include citizens’ initiatives that call for tax, spending, and regulatory measures in other areas. The three pre-election surveys that we are conducting in August, September, and October are designed to provide information on Californians’ attitudes toward the future, their perceptions of the November election and support for state ballot measures, and the role of trust in government in shaping public opinion about ballot choices and attitudes toward the future. This survey series seeks to raise public awareness, inform decisionmakers, and stimulate public discussion about the state’s future, current governance and fiscal systems, and fiscal and governance reforms. This report presents the responses of 2,002 California adults on a wide range of issues: The November 7th election, including preferences in the governor’s election, views about the most important issues, satisfaction with the candidates and their attention to the most important issues, awareness of election news and paid advertising, and voters’ attitudes toward state bonds in general and the bond measures placed on the ballot by the state legislature (Propositions 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E), and the initiative process (Proposition 84). State issues, including approval ratings for Governor Schwarzenegger and the state legislature, the general direction of the state and outlook for the state’s economy, the perceived importance of infrastructure, and preferences for legislative and initiative reforms. National issues, including party preferences in the elections for the U.S. House of Representatives, approval ratings for President Bush, the general direction of the nation and outlook for the nation’s economy, trust in the federal government including its effectiveness and fiscal efficiency, and perceptions of the major parties and preferences for a third party. The extent to which Californians – based on their political party affiliation, region of residence, race/ethnicity, and other demographics – may differ with regard to perceptions, attitudes, and preferences involving the November election, the state’s future, and current state issues. Copies of this report may be ordered by e-mail (order@ppic.org) or phone (415-291-4400). Copies of this and earlier reports are posted on the publications page of the PPIC web site (www.ppic.org). For questions about the survey, please contact survey@ppic.org. 1 PRESS RELEASE Para ver este comunicado de prensa en español, por favor visite nuestra página de internet: http://www.ppic.org/main/pressreleaseindex.asp SURVEY ON CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE What Election? Candidates Skirt the Issues, Voters Tune Out VOTERS REMAIN SKEPTICAL ABOUT COST OF BOND MEASURES; MAJORITY WANT DEMOCRATS TO CONTROL CONGRESS, BUT ALSO WANT THIRD PARTY SAN FRANCISCO, California, October 25, 2006 — As gubernatorial candidates barnstorm the state and bombard the airwaves, they are failing to heed the central message from California’s voters: Talk about the issues. The result? An electorate that is turned off and tuned out, according to a survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The James Irvine Foundation. Likely voters continue to name immigration (21%) and education (19%) as the issues they most want the candidates for governor to discuss, followed by the state budget and taxes (10%), and jobs and the economy (7%). But two weeks before Election Day, and in the wake of the sole gubernatorial debate, most voters (60%), and at least half of Democrats (67%), Republicans (50%), and independents (60%), say they are dissatisfied with the attention that gubernatorial candidates are giving to the issues. And the level of frustration has grown since September, when 54 percent of voters said the candidates weren’t spending enough time talking about important issues. This neglect of issues may have affected voter engagement: Although 74 percent of voters say they are following news about the election, only 19 percent say they are following this news very closely. That is similar to interest levels prior to the historic low turnout in November 2002 (22% in October 2002) but down significantly from more recent years (49% in September 2003, 61% in October 2004, and 31% in October 2005). “The voters’ frustration is palpable,” says PPIC statewide survey director Mark Baldassare. “Immigration is their most important issue, yet the candidates have studiously avoided it. That may work as an election tactic but it has long-term consequences. Disengagement and distrust only make it more difficult for leaders, once they are elected, to govern effectively.” Among likely voters, Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s lead over Democratic challenger and State Treasurer Phil Angelides has remained steady. Angelides trails Schwarzenegger by 18 points (30% to 48%), similar to last month’s margin of 17 points (31% to 48%). Thirteen percent of voters remain undecided. However, since last month, Angelides has lost some ground in the San Francisco Bay Area, a key Democratic stronghold: Although the candidates were tied in this region one month ago (39% each), Schwarzenegger now leads Angelides by a six-point margin (40% to 34%). Schwarzenegger continues to pull much greater support from Republicans (86%) than Angelides does from Democrats (57%), and Republicans remain far more satisfied than Democrats with their choice of candidates (66% to 44%). A bright spot for Angelides? His support among Latino voters has soared: He is now favored over Schwarzenegger by a two-to-one margin (52% to 25%), compared to a 12-point margin in September (42% to 30%). Little Interest, Lackluster Support for Infrastructure Bonds Strong support for Governor Schwarzenegger’s reelection bid does not necessarily translate into votes for the ballot measures he is backing. Although each of the four infrastructure measures that the governor and state legislature put on the ballot are supported by at least 50 percent of likely voters, that support is less than overwhelming. The key reason? Republicans are not sold on the bonds. The evidence? Support for the four measures follows the same pattern – double-digit leads from Democrats and independents and less-than-majority support from Republicans. 3 Californians and the Future Proposition 1B ($19.9 billion transportation bond): Despite the fact that 80 percent of likely voters say it is very or somewhat important for the state to be spending public funds on surface transportation projects in their part of the state, this measure is favored by a bare majority of voters (51%) and 38 percent oppose it. Support for Proposition 1B is unchanged from last month (51%). Proposition 1C ($2.85 billion affordable housing bond): 56 percent of likely voters support this measure, while 34 percent are opposed. Support was similar in September (57%). Sixty-seven percent of likely voters say it is important that the state spend public funds on affordable housing projects in their region. Proposition 1D ($10.4 billion education facilities bond): 87 percent of likely voters consider state spending on school facilities important to their region, and 61 percent say it is very important. However, the fate of Proposition 1D is uncertain, with 51 percent of likely voters favoring the measure and 39 percent opposing it. Support for the measure has changed little since last month (49%). Proposition 1E ($4.1 billion water and flood control bond): 53 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on this measure, while 36 percent oppose it. Support for this measure has changed little since September (55%). Despite the lukewarm support for the measure, most likely voters (77%) believe state spending on water and flood control is important for their region. A fifth measure – Proposition 84 -- would provide about $5.4 billion in state bonds for water, flood control, natural resources, parks, and conservation projects. Voters remain split over this initiative (42% yes, 43% no). Overall, Californians show more support for the general concept of using state bonds to pay for infrastructure than they do for any of the specific measures on the November ballot: 61 percent of likely voters think it is a good idea for the state government to pay for infrastructure improvements by issuing bonds. The sheer size of the package may help explain the disconnect: 58 percent of likely voters say the $43 billion price tag for the five measures on the ballot is too much. “The fate of all these measures hangs in the balance and it’s up to state leaders to explain to the voters why the cost is justified,” says Baldassare. The challenge? Lack of voter interest and attention. Of the 58 percent of voters who are able to cite a specific ballot measure that interests them the most, less than one in 10 name one of the bond measures. Voters are most likely to express interest in Proposition 87, the alternative energy initiative (28%). How Low Can It Go? As Trust in Feds Drops, Californians Seek Change Californians find little to cheer about as they consider the national scene. Six in 10 state residents (62%) say things are going in the wrong direction. They are divided about the nation’s economic outlook, with 46 percent anticipating bad times and 44 percent expecting good times. And approval ratings for President George W. Bush remain very low: Far more state residents and likely voters disapprove (62% each) than approve (32% all residents, 34% likely voters) of his performance in office. Could it get any worse? It just did. Trust in the federal government reached a new low this month: Only 26 percent of state residents – and 23 percent of likely voters – say they can trust the government in Washington to do what is right just about always or most of the time. That is down from 46 percent in January 2002 and 29 percent in October 2005. Consistent with their harsh assessment of federal leadership, most Californians (65%) and likely voters (69%) say the federal government wastes a lot of their tax dollars. Against this bleak backdrop, Californians want to see change at the national level come this November. A majority of likely voters (55%) say they would prefer to see Democrats control Congress. Statewide, Democratic congressional candidates hold a 12-point edge over Republican candidates (48% to 36%). This represents an increase in the Democratic advantage since October 2000, when Democrats held a sevenpoint statewide lead among likely voters (47% to 40%). Another example of the desire for change? In four key areas of federal leadership, Democrats are now seen as more capable than Republicans. Californians believe they would do a better job of managing the economy (47% Democrats, 37% Republicans), handling the situation in Iraq (45% Democrats, 34% Republicans), handling immigration (41% Democrats, 36% Republicans), and protecting the environment (56% Democrats, 28% Republicans). 4 PPIC Statewide Survey Press Release The current favor for Democrats notwithstanding, a long-term challenge looms for the two-party system. Majorities of Californians (53%) and likely voters (56%) believe that the Republican and Democratic parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed. Independents (72%) are far more likely than Democrats (52%) and Republicans (45%) to believe a third party is needed, but the numbers of voters who hold this view are significant across the board. “The growing numbers of independent voters may drive this change, but the fact is that many Californians question the relevance of the current system,” says Baldassare. More Key Findings As optimism about state’s prospects grows… — Page 17 Californians are divided about the direction of the state, with 44 percent saying it is headed in the right direction and 46 percent believing it is headed in the wrong direction. One year ago, perceptions of the direction of the state were far more negative (30% right, 60% wrong in October 2005). The view of the state economy is also brighter today: Half of state residents (50%) and likely voters (52%) expect good times in the coming year. Last October, only 34 percent of Californians and 35 percent of likely voters expressed optimism about the state’s economic future. … so do approval ratings for some state officials — Pages 16 and 17 Among likely voters today, 52 percent approve and 41 percent disapprove of the way Governor Schwarzenegger is doing his job – a dramatic improvement from one year ago (38% approve, 57% disapprove). Likely voters are far less forgiving when it comes to the state legislature: Today, only 26 percent approve and 61 percent disapprove of its performance. In October 2005, 21 percent of likely voters approved and 65 percent disapproved of the way the legislature was doing its job. Not a winning combo: Redistricting reform sort of hot, term limits reform not — Page 19 Earlier this year, lawmakers considered the idea of a ballot measure combining redistricting reform and term limits reform. How would such a measure fare in today’s political climate? Today, majorities of state residents (54%) and likely voters (59%) favor redistricting reform that would require an independent commission of citizens, rather than the governor and state legislature, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each Census. However, there is little support for even modest changes to term limits laws. Seven in 10 Californians (72%) and likely voters (73%) oppose the idea of allowing members of the state legislature to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either the assembly or senate. Californians open to initiative process reforms — Page 20 Californians’ affection for the initiative process is strong, but it is not blind. State residents are open to several significant reforms. More than seven in 10 residents (72%) and likely voters (73%) favor a system of review and revision of proposed initiatives in order to avoid legal and drafting errors. Similar numbers of residents and likely voters (75% each) favor having a period of time during which the sponsor of a proposed initiative and the legislature could meet to seek a compromise before the initiative goes to the ballot. Most Californians (75%) and likely voters (82%) favor public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering efforts and initiative campaigns. Finally, 53 percent of state residents and 48 percent of likely voters favor extending the amount of time a sponsor has to gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot. About the Survey This edition of the PPIC Statewide Survey – a pre-election survey that looks at Californians and the future – is the third in a series of four surveys supported by funding from The James Irvine Foundation. This survey is intended to raise public awareness, inform decisionmakers, and stimulate public discussions about Californians’ attitudes toward the future and the November 2006 election. Findings are based on a telephone survey of 2,002 California adult residents interviewed between October 15 and October 22, 2006. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/2%. The sampling error for the 1076 likely voters is +/- 3%. For more information on methodology, see page 29. October 2006 5 Californians and the Future Mark Baldassare is research director at PPIC, where he holds the Arjay and Frances Fearing Miller Chair in Public Policy. He is founder of the PPIC Statewide Survey, which he has directed since 1998. PPIC is a private, nonprofit organization dedicated to improving public policy through objective, nonpartisan research on the economic, social, and political issues that affect Californians. The institute was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. PPIC does not take or support positions on any ballot measure or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. 6 PPIC Statewide Survey NOVEMBER ELECTION KEY FINDINGS Arnold Schwarzenegger has an 18-point lead over Phil Angelides in the closing weeks of the governor’s election. About half of Democrats and independents say they are not satisfied with the choice of gubernatorial candidates. (pages 8, 9) Immigration and education continue to be the issues that voters would most like to hear the candidates talk about before the election. Most voters are dissatisfied with the amount of attention candidates are paying to important issues. (pages 9, 10) The four bond measures placed on the ballot by the legislature are still ahead, with housing (1C) having more support than transportation (1B), schools (1D) or water and flood controls (1E). Voters are divided on Proposition 84, the water and parks bond initiative. (pages 10, 11, 12) Unchanged since our August survey, six in 10 likely voters say it is a good idea to issue state bonds for infrastructure projects, but six in 10 also say that the $43 billion amount on the ballot is too much. Many of those who believe the overall amount on the ballot is too much say they will vote against each of the five bond measures. (page 13) Governor's Race 13 9 48 30 Likely Voters Schwarzenegger Angelides Other candidates Don't know Percent Likely Voters Percent Voting Yes on Propositions 80 70 60 51 56 51 53 50 42 40 30 20 10 0 11E-B8-Di4T-rsaaWns11atstCDe--perro,SH,rcfotlphuaoatosrioioolnkdnsssg 7 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S RACE As the campaign enters the final stretch, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger remains ahead of State Treasurer Phil Angelides by a substantial 18-point margin (48% to 30%), similar to last month (48% to 31%). The incumbent GOP governor has had a double-digit lead over the Democratic challenger in all of our monthly surveys since July. Currently, 13 percent of likely voters remain undecided and 9 percent would vote for someone other than a major party candidate. Reflecting partisan differences that have surfaced in previous surveys, 86 percent of Republicans favor Schwarzenegger, while just 57 percent of Democrats support Angelides. Independents favor Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin, but many name other candidates or are undecided. A majority of self-described liberal voters favors Angelides for governor (57%), while Schwarzenegger is supported by most moderates (49%) and is strongly favored by conservative voters (72%). The race is closest in the Democratic-leaning regions of Los Angeles (40% Angelides, 38% Schwarzenegger) and the San Francisco Bay Area (40% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides). Schwarzenegger has large leads over Angelides in the Central Valley and the Other Southern California regions. Men favor Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin (53% to 26%) with few undecideds (9%), but the race is closer among women (44% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides) with many undecideds (16%). Angelides is ahead of Schwarzenegger by a large margin among Latinos (52% to 25%), while whites support Schwarzenegger over Angelides by a wide margin (56% to 23%). Schwarzenegger is favored over Angelides across all age, education, and income categories. Likely voters only All Likely Voters “If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…?” * Arnold Schwarzenegger Phil Angelides Other Candidates 48% 30% 9% Don’t know 13% Party Democrat Republican Independent 21 57 8 14 86 4 46 43 24 13 20 Central Valley 56 23 11 10 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 40 38 34 40 9 17 8 14 Other Southern California 63 21 97 Gender Men Women 53 26 12 9 44 34 6 16 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 25 52 56 23 7 16 9 12 * For complete text of question, see p. 31. Are voters paying attention to news about the governor’s election? Seventy-four percent are very closely (19%) or fairly closely (55%) following the news, an increase from 64 percent in August (15% very closely, 49% fairly closely). The proportion of voters who are very closely following the election news today is comparable to October 2002 (22%) but well below what we observed before the 2003 governor’s recall (49%), the 2004 presidential election (61%), and the 2005 special election (31%). 8 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election GOVERNOR’S RACE (CONTINUED) By a nine-point margin, more likely voters say they are satisfied than not with the choice of candidates for governor this year (51% to 42%). In August, 47 percent of likely voters said they were satisfied and 42 percent were not satisfied. Two in three Republicans are satisfied with the choice of candidates, while about half of Democrats and independents are dissatisfied. Schwarzenegger’s supporters (65%) are more likely than Angelides’ supporters (48%) to express satisfaction with the choice of candidates. Similarly, conservative voters (59%) express satisfaction with the gubernatorial candidate choices more often than liberal or moderate voters (47% each). Despite sharp differences in preferences for gubernatorial candidates, Latinos (51%) and whites (53%) have similar levels of satisfaction with the choice of candidates. In our October 2002 survey, during the campaign between Gray Davis and Bill Simon, 38 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 57 percent were dissatisfied with the choice of candidates for governor. Likely voters only Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know “Would you say you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 7th?” All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind 51% 44% 66% 42% 42 50 28 52 76 6 6 Latinos 51% 41 8 VOTER PRIORITIES Likely voters continue to name immigration (21%) and education (19%) as the issues they would most like the candidates for governor to talk about this year. Fewer name any other single issue, including the state budget and taxes, jobs and the economy, health care and costs, and the environment. The prioritization of top election-year issues in our May and August surveys were similar. Today, there are stark partisan differences in priorities. Democrats are most interested in hearing about education, while Republicans are most interested in hearing about immigration. Independents are just as likely to name education or immigration as their top issue. Latinos (26%) are much more likely than whites (15%) to want to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about education. In our October 2002 survey, the top issues for the governor’s election were education (21%), jobs and the economy (14%), and the state budget and taxes (14%). Only two percent named immigration. “Which one issue would you most like to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about before the November 7th election?” Top six issues mentioned All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Immigration, illegal immigration Education, schools 21% 13% 31% 18% 19 24 13 18 State budget, deficit, taxes 10 7 12 11 Jobs, economy 77 6 9 Environment, pollution 4 6 2 5 Healthcare, health costs 4 7 2 4 Latinos 20% 26 5 13 4 4 October 2006 9 Californians and the Future VOTER PRIORITIES (CONTINUED) Voter unhappiness with the amount of attention the gubernatorial candidates are spending on certain issues has grown since our last survey. Today, in the wake of the sole gubernatorial debate on October 7th, just three in 10 likely voters are satisfied, and six in 10 are dissatisfied, with the amount of attention spent on the issues that voters find most important. In our September survey, 32 percent were satisfied and 54 percent were dissatisfied with this aspect of the governor’s election. Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to express dissatisfaction with the candidates’ attention to the issues. Majorities across all age, education, income groups, and regions of the state express dissatisfaction. Only three in 10 whites and Latinos, and men and women, say they are satisfied with the amount of attention spent by the candidates on important issues. In our October 2002 survey, during the final weeks of the Gray Davis–Bill Simon campaign, 24 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 66 percent were dissatisfied with the amount of attention the candidates were spending on important issues. “Would you say you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Satisfied Dissatisfied Don’t know 30% 24% 60 67 10 9 39% 50 11 30% 31% 60 59 10 10 STATE PROPOSITIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS The November election includes 13 state propositions, including five measures placed on the ballot by the legislature and eight citizens’ initiatives. There are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion, a number of tax increases earmarked for state programs, and new government regulations. Which state propositions are of the most interest to voters? In August, 31 percent of likely voters were able to name a top interest. Today, two months later, 58 percent are able to do so. Voters are most likely to express interest in Proposition 87, the alternative energy initiative (12% August, 28% October), which has had active campaigns and expensive television advertising from both sides. Less than one in 10 likely voters is most interested in any one of the bond measures (6% August, 7% October). The legislature placed four infrastructure bonds on the ballot for funding transportation, affordable housing, education facilities, and water and flood control. Voters’ support for these measures varies from 51 percent to 56 percent, after hearing each of the ballot titles and labels in their entirety. Since August, these bond measures have not had any major gains in voter support. Proposition 1B, the transportation bond (about $19.9 billion), is supported by 51 percent of voters and opposed by 38 percent. Support was about the same in August (50%) and September (51%). This measure, the biggest on the ballot, is now favored by a 27-point margin by Democrats (57% yes, 30% no) and by about half of independents (52% yes, 38% no). Republicans are divided (44% yes, 46% no). 10 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) Proposition 1C, the affordable housing bond ($2.85 billion), is favored by 56 percent of likely voters, while 34 percent are opposed. Support was similar in August (57%) and September (57%). This bond measure is strongly favored today by Democrats (68% yes, 23% no) and a majority of independents (54% yes, 32% no), while Republicans are divided (43% yes, 48% no). Proposition 1D, the education facilities bond (about $10.4 billion), has the support of 51 percent of likely voters, with 39 percent opposed. Support was comparable in August (51%) and September (49%). Today, Democrats strongly support this bond (61% yes, 29% no) and independents also favor it (55% yes, 35% no). Republicans are more likely to be opposed than in favor of it (37% yes, 54% no). Proposition 1E, the water and flood control bond (about $4.1 billion), receives 53 percent support and 36 percent opposition from likely voters. Support for this bond measure was 56 percent in August and 55 percent in September. Democrats now favor this measure by a 27-point margin (58% yes, 31% no). Independents also support it (54% yes, 33% no) while Republicans remain divided (44% yes, 43% no). “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on…?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don’t know 51% 57% 44% 52% 38 30 46 38 11 13 10 10 Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don’t know 56 68 43 54 34 23 48 32 10 9 9 14 Proposition 1D Education facilities Yes No Don’t know 51 61 37 55 39 29 54 35 10 10 9 10 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don’t know 53 36 11 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 32-34. 58 44 31 43 11 13 54 33 13 Voter support for all of these bond measures continues to vary across the state’s regions. Proposition 1B (transportation) has the most support in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area, and the Other Southern California region; it has the most opposition in the Central Valley. Proposition 1C (affordable housing) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles than elsewhere. Proposition 1D (school facilities) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area than anywhere else. Proposition 1E (water and flood controls) has more support in the San Francisco Bay Area than elsewhere, while 40 percent of likely voters in the Other Southern California region oppose it. October 2006 11 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on…?” * Likely voters only Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don’t know Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 51% 38 11 56 34 10 Central Valley 46% 43 11 53 37 10 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 51% 54% 38 32 11 14 61 60 27 30 12 10 Proposition 1D Yes 51 49 56 53 No 39 41 33 37 Education facilities Don’t know 10 10 11 10 Proposition 1E Yes 53 54 63 52 No 36 35 28 36 Water facilities Don’t know 11 11 9 12 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 32-34. Other Southern California 51% 38 11 50 40 10 51 41 8 47 40 13 PROPOSITION 84: WATER AND PARKS BOND INITIATIVE Proposition 84 is a citizens’ initiative that would provide about $5.4 billion in state bonds for water, flood control, natural resources, parks, and conservation projects. When read the ballot title and label for Proposition 84, voters today are divided (42% yes, 43% no), which is similar to August (40% yes, 45% no). Currently, half of Democrats are in favor of this bond initiative, while a majority of Republicans are opposed to it. Independents are divided (42% yes, 42% no). Support for Proposition 84 falls short of a majority among Latinos and whites, as well as in all age, homeownership, and education groups. Support also declines with income. Proposition 84 has more supporters in the San Francisco Bay Area (47%) than elsewhere (41% Central Valley, 41% Other Southern California, 40% Los Angeles). “If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 84?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Yes 42% 50% 33% 42% No 43 35 54 42 Don’t know 15 15 13 16 * For complete text of proposition question, see p. 34. 12 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election ATTITUDES TOWARD STATE BONDS Californians show more support for the idea of using state bonds to pay for infrastructure than they do for any of the actual state bonds on the ballot. Six in 10 say that it is a good idea to issue state bonds to pay for schools, roads, and water projects. About three in 10 think it is a bad idea. This general attitude towards state bonds was similar in August (59% good idea, 31% bad idea). Support for issuing state bonds is lower today than it was in September 2002 (69% good idea, 22% bad idea), when state propositions involving billions of dollars in state bonds were on the ballot. Today, majorities in all regions across the state say that it is a good idea for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure. Most Democrats (63%), independents (60%), and Republicans (58%) think it’s a good idea. Majorities across age, education, gender, homeownership, income, and racial/ethnic groups agree. Among the six in 10 likely voters who think state infrastructure bonds are a good idea, there is majority support for the five bonds on the November ballot (65% for 1B, 66% for 1C, 67% for 1D, 65% for 1E, 55% for 84). “In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?” Likely voters only Good idea All Likely Voters 61% Central Valley 60% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 63% 62% Other Southern California 61% Bad idea 28 30 26 26 30 Don’t know 11 10 11 12 9 Despite general support for the idea of state bonds for infrastructure, voters are balking at the total of $43 billion for the five state bonds on the upcoming ballot. Nearly six in 10 likely voters think this amount is too much, similar to what we found in August (59%). Most likely voters across regional, party, age, education, and income groups say the amount is too much. For the six in 10 likely voters who say it is a good idea to issue bonds to build infrastructure, 46 percent say the total amount of the current bonds is too much. Among the six in 10 who say it is too much, 48 percent say it is a good idea for the state to issue such bonds. Perceptions of the $43 billion total on the ballot are associated with support for individual bond measures. Many of the likely voters who think that this amount is too much say they will vote no on the five bonds on the November ballot (53% for 1B, 48% for 1C, 55% for 1D, 50% for 1E, 58% for 84). “On the November ballot, there are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion. Do you think this bond amount is …?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Too much 58% 50% 67% 59% Too little 33 2 3 Right amount 21 24 14 22 Don’t know 18 23 17 16 October 2006 13 STATE ISSUES KEY FINDINGS Governor Schwarzenegger’s approval ratings among adults (47%) and likely voters (52%) are similar to last month and much higher than they were a year ago, while majorities of all adults (52%) and likely voters (61%) continue to disapprove of the legislature. (pages 16, 17) Californians offer a mixed view of the direction of the state today (a considerable improvement from a year ago) and they are more likely to expect good economic times than bad economic times for the state in the next year. (page 17) When asked about how important they think it is for the state to spend funds on four different types of infrastructure projects in their part of California, residents rank school facilities more highly than surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing. (page 18) A majority of Californians favor a proposal for an independent citizens’ commission to undertake legislative redistricting, while most reject a proposal to change legislative term limits. (page 19) About three in four Californians approve of reforms to the initiative process, such as increasing public disclosure of funding sources, prior review of ballot language, and providing time to reach a legislative compromise before measures reach the ballot. A majority of voters also favor allowing more time to gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot. (page 20) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters Governor's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Oct Jan Oct Jan Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 Direction of the State 80 Right direction Wrong direction 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Oct Jan Oct Jan Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 15 Californians and the Future STATE OFFICIALS’ APPROVAL RATINGS As the November election approaches, California adults are evenly divided when asked to rate the job performance of Governor Schwarzenegger. Today, 47 percent of Californians approve of his job performance, while 45 percent disapprove. His approval rating has increased since last October when 33 percent of Californians approved of the way he was handling his job and 58 percent disapproved. Among likely voters today, 52 percent approve and 41 percent disapprove of his job performance – also a dramatic improvement from a year ago (38% approve, 57% disapprove). Considerable partisan differences continue to exist. Eight in 10 Republicans (81%) approve of the governor’s job performance, while six in 10 Democrats (60%) disapprove, and independents remain divided (45% approve, 47% disapprove). Approval of the governor’s job performance has increased in all party groups in the past year, but most dramatically among Democrats (12% October 2005, 31% today). Across regions, residents in the Central Valley (57%) and the Other Southern California region (53%) are more likely than residents in Los Angeles and in the San Francisco Bay Area (40% each) to approve of the job performance of Governor Schwarzenegger. Approval of the governor’s job performance is higher among whites than Latinos (58% to 30%) and among men than women (51% to 42%). These approval ratings have important implications for the upcoming governor’s election. Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Schwarzenegger, 87 percent approve of his job performance. Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Angelides, 78 percent disapprove of the governor’s job performance. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California?” Approve Disapprove Don't know All Adults 47% 45% 8% Likely Voters 52 41 7 Democrat 31 60 9 Party Republican 81 14 5 Independent 45 47 8 Central Valley 57 36 7 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 40 40 51 54 9 6 Other Southern California 53 39 8 Gender Men Women 51 41 42 50 8 8 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 30 62 58 35 8 7 16 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues STATE OFFICIALS’ APPROVAL RATINGS (CONTINUED) With less than a month before the November election in which 100 legislative seats will be decided, approval of the California legislature remains low, with three in 10 adults (30%) voicing approval and just over half (52%) voicing disapproval. The legislature’s approval rating among all adults has improved slightly from a year ago (25% approve, 56% disapprove). Today, likely voters are more negative than all adults, with only one in four likely voters approving of the legislature and six in 10 disapproving. While approval is low across all party groups, it is somewhat higher among Democrats (32%) and independents (29%) and remains lowest among Republicans (23%). Across regions, the approval rating of the legislature is similarly low in the Other Southern California region (29%), followed by the San Francisco Bay Area (30%), Los Angeles (31%), and the Central Valley (34%). Latinos are more likely than whites to approve of the job the legislature is doing (37% to 27%). “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve 30% 32% 23% 29% 26% Disapprove 52 51 63 57 61 Don't know 18 17 14 14 13 DIRECTION OF THE STATE As Californians face a November ballot including state propositions and statewide candidates, they are divided about the direction of the state. Forty-four percent think the state is heading in the right direction while 46 percent say it is heading in the wrong direction. Last October, perceptions of the direction of the state were much more negative (30% right, 60% wrong). Today, Republicans (48%) more often than Democrats (43%) or independents (40%) say the state is headed in the right direction. Views about the state economy are somewhat brighter. Half of California adults and likely voters think that over the next 12 months, California will experience a healthy economic climate. Last October, only 34 percent expected good economic times. Partisan differences are evident: Republicans (59%) are more likely than Democrats (46%) and independents (44%) to be optimistic. Across regions, optimism about California’s economic future is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area and in the Central Valley (55% each) than in the Other Southern California region (50%) and Los Angeles (42%). Positive views of the state’s direction and economic outlook are correlated with support for the incumbent governor. Among those who think the state is headed in the right direction, 59 percent plan to vote for Schwarzenegger. Among those who expect good economic times, 63 percent will vote for him. Good times Bad times Don't know “Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 50% 46% 59% 44% 52% 37 41 27 41 35 13 13 14 15 13 October 2006 17 Californians and the Future THE STATE’S FUTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE SPENDING As Californians prepare to vote on the infrastructure bond package, how important is it to residents that the state spends funds on these four types of public works projects in their part of California? Large majorities say it is at least somewhat important for the state to be spending on school facilities (89%), surface transportation (80%), water systems and flood controls (79%), and affordable housing (73%). Six in 10 adults (66%) and likely voters (61%) say that state spending on school facilities is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1D (school facilities), 83 percent say that spending on school facilities is very important. Four in 10 adults (43%) and likely voters (44%) believe that state funding for transportation projects is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1B (transportation), 56 percent say that spending on transportation projects is very important. In the case of water systems and flood control, four in 10 adults (43%) and likely voters (41%) believe that state funds are very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1E (water and flood control), 53 percent say that spending on water systems and flood control is very important. When it comes to rating affordable housing, four in 10 adults (43%) and one in three likely voters (35%) say that state spending is very important to their region. Of those who plan to vote yes on Proposition 1C (affordable housing), 49 percent say that state spending on affordable housing is very important. Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say that state spending on school facilities, surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing is very important in their area of California. Six in 10 or more residents across Los Angeles (70%), the San Francisco Bay Area (69%), the Central Valley (66%), and Other Southern California (64%) regions say that state spending on school facilities is very important, while fewer across these regions rate state funding of surface transportation, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing as highly important. “How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on _______________ in your part of California?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Very important 66% 72% 49% 70% Somewhat important 23 21 32 20 School facilities Not too important 9 6 17 9 Don't know 2121 Very important 43 48 36 46 Surface Somewhat important 37 35 37 38 transportation projects Not too important 18 15 24 13 Don't know 2233 Very important 43 48 35 36 Water systems Somewhat important 36 34 36 40 and flood control Not too important 19 17 26 23 Don't know 2131 Very important 43 52 23 38 Affordable Somewhat important 30 31 34 33 housing Not too important 24 16 40 28 Don't know 3131 Likely Voters 61% 26 12 1 44 36 17 3 41 36 22 1 35 32 31 2 18 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues LEGISLATIVE REFORMS In a special election last fall, California voters soundly rejected the governor’s initiative that would take the responsibility of political redistricting out of the hands of elected officials and give the decision to a panel of retired judges. Today, a majority of all adults (54%) and likely voters (59%) support the idea of an independent citizens’ commission taking responsibility for the redistricting process. In May, we also found majority support for this independent redistricting proposal among all adults (60%) and likely voters (62%). Majority support for redistricting reform is present across political groups, and supporters outnumber opponents of this proposal in all regions. Support is higher among whites (59%) than Latinos (45%). “Would you favor or oppose a redistricting reform that requires an independent commission of citizens, instead of the state legislature and governor, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each census?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Favor 54% 54% 61% 61% 59% Oppose 30 31 27 25 28 Don’t know 16 15 12 14 13 There were some discussions among legislators this year about placing a measure on the November ballot that would combine redistricting reform and legislative term limits reform. While majorities of voters support independent redistricting, majorities oppose a relatively modest change in term limits. Seven in 10 adults and likely voters oppose the idea of allowing legislators to serve up to 14 years of total service in either branch of the legislature. This is consistent with the majority opposition we found in our October 2005 and May 2006 surveys. Today, solid majorities of Republicans, independents, and Democrats are opposed to this suggested change in legislative term limits. Opposition to this proposal is substantial throughout the Other Southern California region (76%), the Central Valley (72%), Los Angeles (70%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (66%). We find solid majority opposition to this proposal in all age, education, homeownership, income, and racial/ethnic categories. Only 14 percent of likely voters favor both redistricting and term limits reform, while 20 percent oppose both reforms. “Under current term limits, a legislator is allowed to serve six years in the state assembly and eight years in the state senate. Would you favor or oppose a change in term limits that would allow members to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either branch?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Favor 22% 29% 17% 19% 23% Oppose 72 67 79 74 73 Don’t know 6 4 4 74 October 2006 19 Californians and the Future INITIATIVE REFORMS Californians are voting on eight initiatives on the fall ballot, including tax and spending increases and regulatory decisions, and they are watching active and expensive campaigns for and against several of these initiatives. Are there changes in the initiative process they would support? An overwhelming majority of adults (75%) and likely voters (82%) favor increasing public disclosure of funding sources for initiative campaigns and signature gathering. Solid majorities of Democrats (79%), Republicans (80%), and independents (76%) favor this reform, and solid majorities across regions and age, education, and income groups also favor increased disclosure. These findings are similar to those in our October survey last year, when a majority of adults (74%) and likely voters (82%) favored increasing public disclosure. Many Californians also favor a proposal to make it easier to qualify initiatives by increasing the amount of time allowed for a sponsor to gather signatures to place an initiative on the ballot: 53 percent of all adults and 48 percent of likely voters favor this reform. About half of independents and Democrats favor this idea; Republicans, with less than majority support, remain divided. Support among all adults was similar a year ago (50% favor, 38% oppose). Would you favor or oppose increasing… Public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering and initiative campaigns? Favor Oppose Don’t know The amount of time a sponsor may gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot? Favor Oppose Don’t know All Adults 75% 18 7 53 36 11 Dem 79% 15 6 53 35 12 Party Rep 80% 15 5 46 44 10 Likely Ind Voters 76% 82% 19 14 54 51 48 39 40 10 12 Californians would like to see changes in the process leading up to placing an initiative on the ballot. More than seven in 10 adults (72%) and likely voters (73%) favor having a system of review and revision in order to avoid legal and drafting errors before initiatives are placed on the ballot. A similarly high proportion of adults and likely voters (75% each) favor changing the period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet in attempts to reach a compromise. There is majority support for both of these reforms across political and demographic groups and regions, although Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to support these reforms. Likewise, in our October 2005 survey, we found solid support among adults and likely voters, and across political and demographic groups, for these two initiative reforms. Would you favor or oppose having… A system of review and revision of proposed initiatives to try to avoid legal issues and drafting errors? A period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet to see if there is a compromise solution before initiatives go to the ballot? Favor Oppose Don’t know Favor Oppose Don’t know 20 PPIC Statewide Survey All Adults 72% 18 10 75 17 8 Dem 75% 15 10 82 12 6 Party Rep 71% 20 9 69 25 6 Likely Ind Voters 74% 73% 19 17 7 10 76 75 17 18 77 NATIONAL ISSUES KEY FINDINGS Californians are more likely to vote for the Democrat than the Republican in their Congressional district, and most want a Congress controlled by the Democrats. Party loyalty is equally strong among Democrats and Republicans. (page 22) Six in 10 California adults and likely voters disapprove of the job performance of President Bush, including one in four Republican voters. (page 23) Six in 10 Californians believe the nation is headed in the wrong direction, while views about the U.S. economy are mixed. Perceptions are starkly different between Democrats and Republicans. (page 24) Trust in the federal government is at a new low. One in four says they trust the federal government to do what is right just about always or most of the time. Two in three say the federal government wastes a lot of the money we pay in taxes. (page 25) More Californians think the Democratic Party could do better than the Republican Party in handling the economy, Iraq, and immigration, and particularly the environment. Still, most Californians think the major parties do a poor job in representing the American people and that a third party is needed. (page 26) Vote Intention in Congressional Elections 25 52 41 Likely voters Democratic/lean Democratic Republican/lean Republican Other Don't know Percent Likely Voters President Bush's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Oct 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 21 Californians and the Future CONGRESSIONAL ELECTIONS The battle for control of the U.S. House of Representatives is heating up in the last weeks before the mid-term election. Democratic candidates hold an 11-point lead over Republican candidates in California, 52% to 41%, including “leaners,”—those who are asked a follow-up question on party preference if they don’t initially name a major party. Voters’ preferences are strongly related to party registration, while half of independents would favor a Democrat if the election were held today. National surveys have shown the Democrats ahead by a wider margin. A recent CNN poll found the Democratic candidates led the Republican candidates by 17 points (57% to 40%). In October 2000, which was the last time we asked this question in a PPIC Statewide Survey, the Democrats held a seven-point edge among likely voters (47% to 40% without leaners). Without leaners included today, Democratic candidates lead Republicans by 12 points (48% to 36%). “If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives was being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party's candidate or the Democratic Party's candidate for the House in your district?” (responses include leaners) Likely voters only Republican Democrat Other Don’t know All Likely Voters 41% 52% 2% 5% Democrat 10 86 1 3 Party Republican 83 12 1 4 Independent 34 51 3 12 Central Valley 51 41 3 5 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 26 35 66 59 2 2 6 4 Other Southern California 53 41 3 3 Gender Men Women 45 47 37 56 3 2 5 5 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites 22 74 47 46 2 2 2 5 Across regions, Congressional Republican candidates lead Democratic candidates in the Central Valley (51% to 41%) and the Other Southern California region (53% to 41%), while Democrats lead Republicans in the San Francisco Bay Area (66% to 26%) and Los Angeles (59% to 35%). Latinos favor Democrats over Republicans (74% to 22%) while whites are divided (46% Democrat to 47% Republican). Men are also divided (45% Democrat to 47% Republican), while women strongly favor Democrats (56% to 37%). When asked their preference for the outcome of this year’s Congressional elections, majorities of adults (57%) and likely voters (55%) say they would prefer a Congress controlled by Democrats, while fewer than four in 10 in each group (32% adults, 37% likely voters) would prefer a Republican-controlled Congress. According to a recent NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 52 percent of registered voters nationwide would prefer the Democrats to control Congress, while 37 percent would prefer Republicans. The president’s approval ratings are related to election preferences in California. Among likely voters who approve of the president’s job performance, 86 percent prefer the Republican candidate and 79 percent want a Republican-controlled Congress; of those who disapprove of his job performance, 77 percent prefer the Democratic candidate and 80 percent want a Democratic-controlled Congress. 22 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues PRESIDENT’S APPROVAL RATINGS President Bush’s approval ratings with the California public remain at an all time low this month. Thirtytwo percent of Californians approve of the way he is handling his job as president, while 62 percent disapprove. President Bush’s approval ratings have been below 40 percent since July 2005. In a recent CNN Poll, 39 percent of Americans said they approved, and 58 percent said they disapproved of the way that George W. Bush was handling his job as president. Across the state’s regions, residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (21%) are the least likely to approve of him, followed by Los Angeles (29%), Other Southern California (40%), and Central Valley (42%) residents. Disapproval of President Bush is slightly higher among Latinos than whites (65% to 60%) and is similar between men and women (62% to 63%). There are sharp partisan differences, with most Republicans (68%) approving of the job performance of President Bush, while most Democrats (85%) and independents (69%) say they disapprove of the way he is handling his job. These partisan differences extend to the electoral arena, where 71 percent of likely voters who favor the Republican in the upcoming congressional election also approve of the president, while 92 percent of likely voters who favor the Democrat also say that they disapprove of President Bush. Moreover, 68 percent of Californians who would prefer a Congress controlled by Republicans say they approve of the way President Bush is handling his job, while 85 percent of those who would prefer Congress controlled by Democrats after the November elections disapprove of the president’s performance in office. All Adults Likely Voters Party Region Gender Race/Ethnicity “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States?” Approve Disapprove 32% 62% 34 62 Democrat 11 85 Republican 68 26 Independent 25 69 Central Valley 42 53 San Francisco Bay Area 21 77 Los Angeles 29 64 Other Southern California 40 55 Men 33 62 Women 32 63 Latinos 31 65 Whites 34 60 Don't know 6% 4 4 6 6 5 2 7 5 5 5 4 6 October 2006 23 Californians and the Future OVERALL MOOD Californians remain pessimistic about the overall direction of the country. Six in 10 adults and likely voters say things are going in the wrong direction, while three in 10 say they are going in right direction. Levels of pessimism were similar in September 2005 (34% right direction, 62% wrong direction). A recent Associated Press-Ipsos Poll found that 31 percent of adults nationwide thought things were headed in the right direction, while 64 percent thought things were off on the wrong track. In California today, a majority of Republicans (57%) believes things are headed in the right direction; in every other party and demographic group however, majorities believe things are headed in the wrong direction. Across regions, residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (73%) are the most likely to say things are headed in the wrong direction while majorities, but fewer residents, hold this view in Los Angeles (64%), the Other Southern California region (56%) and the Central Valley (54%). Negative views about the direction of the country are related to attitudes towards the national political leadership. Of those who disapprove of the President’s job performance, 86 percent think things are headed in the wrong direction. And of those who believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, 73 percent would prefer Democrats to take control of the U.S. Congress after the November election. Right direction Wrong direction Don't know “Do you think things in the United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 31% 15% 57% 29% 62 82 33 64 7 3 10 7 Likely Voters 31% 62 7 Californians are more divided about nation’s economic forecast. Forty-four percent expect economic good times ahead while 46 percent expect bad times. Likely voters have similar perspectives (49% good times, 42% bad times). However, opinions today are much rosier than in September 2005, when 30 percent were expecting good economic times and 63 percent were predicting bad economic times. There is a wide partisan gap in perceptions of the future of the U.S. economy. Two in three Republicans predict good times compared to majorities of Democrats (58%) and independents (52%) who say bad times. Across regions, the proportion expecting good economic times is higher in the Other Southern California region and the Central Valley (49% each) than in the San Francisco Bay Area (41%) and Los Angeles (40%). Men (52%) are much more likely than women (37%) to expect economic good times. Good times Bad times Don't know “Turning to economic conditions, do you think that during the next 12 months the United States will have good times financially or bad times?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 44% 31% 66% 42% 49% 46 58 26 52 42 10 11 8 6 9 24 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues TRUST IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT Reflecting Californians’ downbeat mood about the national direction, trust in the federal government today is at a new low. Only 26 percent of all adults and 23 percent of likely voters say they can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right just about always or most of the time. About one in three adults said they trust the federal government either always or most of the time in our surveys between December 1999 and October 2000. Trust in the federal government reached a high point in January 2002 (46%) and has been trending downward since that time. Last October was the prior low point, when 29 percent said they trust the federal government always or most of the time. Californians today are about as likely as adults nationwide (28% always/most of the time) to say they trust the federal government, according to a recent New York Times/CBS poll. While trust is low across California’s political and demographic groups, Republicans are more than twice as likely as Democrats (38% to 16%) to say they can trust the federal government always or mostly. Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area are less likely than residents in other regions to express trust in the federal government and Latinos are more trusting than whites (34% to 24%). Among those who approve of President Bush, half (50%) express trust compared to only 15 percent of those who disapprove of the president. And among those who would prefer Republicans to retain control of Congress, 41 percent say they can trust the federal government to do what is right, compared to only 19 percent of those favoring a Democratic takeover. “People have different ideas about the government in Washington. How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Just about always 5% 3% 5% 2% 4% Most of the time 21 13 33 14 19 Only some of the time 62 69 55 67 64 None of the time (volunteered) 10 13 5 15 12 Don’t know 22221 Negative views of Washington extend to fiscal performance. Two in three residents (65%) and 69 percent of likely voters think the federal government wastes a lot of tax money. Similar attitudes were expressed a year ago (67% a lot, 27% some) when this measure of distrust reached a new high point. Strong majorities across political and demographic groups say the federal government wastes a lot of tax money, but this view is more widely held among residents age 55 and older (73%) than among those aged 35-54 (67%) and 18-34 (57%). Those who disapprove of President Bush’s job performance are more likely than those who approve to hold this view (72% to 54%). “Do you think the people in the federal government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don’t waste very much of it?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind A lot 65% 69% 62% 70% Some 28 27 33 24 Don’t waste very much 4322 Don’t know 3134 Likely Voters 69% 28 2 1 October 2006 25 Californians and the Future POLITICAL PARTY PERCEPTIONS We asked which political party could do a better job in four areas: handling the economy, handling the situation in Iraq, handling immigration, and protecting the environment. The Democratic Party is seen as more capable in all four areas, with a 28-point edge on protecting the environment (56% to 28%), 11 points on handling the situation in Iraq (45% to 34%), and 10 points on handling the economy (47% to 37%). In the area of handling immigration (41% to 36%), the Democratic lead is slight. According to a recent nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center, the Democratic Party has the edge over the Republican Party by 38 points on the environment (57% to 19%), 14 points on the economy (46% to 32%), seven points on Iraq (40% to 33%), and five points on immigration (37% to 32%). In California, voters’ perceptions of which of the parties would do a better job tend to reflect their party affiliation. However, when asked about the environment, Republicans are slightly more likely to say the Democratic (43%) than the Republican (39%) party. Independents choose the Democrats over the Republicans for the environment (56% to 26%), Iraq (43% to 32%), and the economy (44% to 33%), while they choose the parties equally on the issue of immigration (37% Democrats, 37% Republicans). For each of these policy issues, many independents say both, neither, or undecided. “Please tell me if you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party could do a better job in each of the following areas. Which party could do a better job of…?” All adults Democratic Party Handling the economy 47% Handling the situation in Iraq 45% Handling immigration 41% Protecting the environment 56% Republican Party 37 34 36 28 Both equally (volunteered) 3 2 3 4 Neither (volunteered) 5 9 10 4 Don't know 8 10 10 8 Beyond these differences in perceptions between the Democratic and Republican parties, there is overall dissatisfaction with the two parties. A majority of Californians (53%) believes that the Republican and Democratic parties do such a poor job of representing the American people that a third major party is needed, and only 38 percent believe the two parties do an adequate job in representing the people. In September 2004, Californians were divided on this issue (48% adequate job, 46% third party needed). Independents (72%) are much more likely than Democrats (52%) and Republicans (45%) to believe a third party is needed. This belief is more prevalent among college-educated and upper-income residents than others, while whites are more likely than Latinos to hold this view (57% to 40%). Of those who trust the federal government to do what is right only some of the time or none of the time, 61 percent believe a third party is needed. “In your view, do the Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people, or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Adequate job 38% 39% 44% 21% 34% Third party needed 53 52 45 72 56 Don’t know 9 9 11 7 10 26 PPIC Statewide Survey REGIONAL MAP 28 METHODOLOGY The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, research director and survey director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance in research and writing from Sonja Petek, project manager for this survey, and survey research associates Dean Bonner, Jennifer Paluch, and Renatta DeFever. The surveys were conducted with funding from The James Irvine Foundation and benefited from discussions with foundation staff and grantees; however, survey methods, questions, and content of this report were solely determined by Mark Baldassare. The findings of this survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,002 California adult residents interviewed October 15-22, 2006. Interviewing took place on weekday nights and weekend days, using a computer-generated random sample of telephone numbers that ensured that both listed and unlisted numbers were called. All telephone exchanges in California were eligible. Telephone numbers in the survey sample were called up to 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 method” to avoid biases in age and gender. Each interview took an average of 19 minutes to complete. Interviewing was conducted in English or Spanish. Accent on Languages translated the survey into Spanish with assistance from Renatta DeFever. Schulman, Ronca & Bucuvalas, Inc. conducted the telephone interviewing. We used recent U.S. Census and state figures to compare the demographic characteristics of the survey sample with characteristics of California’s adult population. The survey sample was closely comparable to the census and state figures. The survey data in this report were statistically weighted to account for any demographic differences. The sampling error for the total sample of 2,002 adults is +/- 2 percent at the 95 percent confidence level. This means that 95 times out of 100, the results will be within 2 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in California were interviewed. The sampling error for subgroups is larger: For the 1,572 registered voters, it is +/- 2.5 percent; for the 1,076 likely voters it is +/- 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. Throughout the report, we present results for four 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, and “Other Southern California” includes Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. Residents from other geographic areas are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters. However, sample sizes for these less populated areas are not large enough to report separately in tables and text. We present specific results for Latinos because they account for about 30 percent of the state’s adult population and constitute one of the fastest growing voter groups. The sample sizes for African Americans and Asians are not large enough for separate statistical analysis. We do compare the opinions of registered Democrats, Republicans, and independents (those who are registered to vote as “decline to state”). We also include the responses of “likely voters”— those who are most likely to vote in the state’s elections based on past voting, current interest, and vote intentions. We compare current PPIC Statewide Survey responses to earlier PPIC Statewide Surveys and we compare PPIC Statewide Survey responses to those in national surveys by Associated Press-Ipsos, CNN, NBC News/Wall Street Journal, New York Times/CBS News, and the Pew Research Center. 29 QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE October 15-22, 2006 2,002 California Adult Residents English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR +/- 2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-14 are for likely voters only. All other responses are from all adults, except where noted.] 1. First, I have a few questions about the November 7th general election. If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…? [rotate names, then ask “or someone else”] 48% Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Republican, Governor 30 Phil Angelides, the Democrat, State Treasurer 4 Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green, Financial Advisor 2 Art Olivier, the Libertarian, Engineer 2 Edward C. Noonan, the American Independent, Computer Shop Owner 1 someone else (specify) 13 don’t know 2. Would you say you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 7th? 51% satisfied 42 not satisfied 7 don’t know 3. Which one issue would you most like to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about before the November 7th election? [code don’t read] 21% immigration, illegal immigration 19 education, schools 10 state budget, deficit, taxes 7 jobs, economy 4 environment, pollution 4 health care, health costs 2 abortion 2 electricity costs, energy 2 gas prices 2 infrastructure 14 other 13 don’t know 4. Would you say you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you? 30% satisfied 60 dissatisfied 10 don’t know 5. How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor’s election? 19% very closely 55 fairly closely 20 not too closely 5 not at all closely 1 don’t know October 2006 31 Californians and the Future 6. And, in the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes): Whose ads have you seen the most—Phil Angelides' or Arnold Schwarzenegger's? 37% yes, Phil Angelides’ 25 yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 23 yes, both equally (volunteered) 12 no 3 don’t know Next, we have a few questions to ask you about some of the propositions on the November ballot. 7. Which one of the state propositions on the November 7th ballot are you most interested in? [code, don’t read] 2% Proposition 1A 2 Proposition 1B 1 Proposition 1C 1 Proposition 1D 1 Proposition 1E 2 Proposition 83 2 Proposition 84 5 Proposition 85 8 Proposition 86 28 Proposition 87 1 Proposition 88 2 Proposition 89 3 Proposition 90 8 none of them 3 all equally 2 other answer (specify) 29 don’t know [rotate questions 8 to 12] 8. Proposition 1B is called the “Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006.” This act makes safety improvements and repairs to state highways, upgrades freeways to reduce congestion, repairs local streets and roads, upgrades highways along major transportation corridors, improves seismic safety of local bridges, expands public transit, helps complete the state’s network of carpool lanes, reduces air pollution, and improves anti-terrorism security at shipping ports by providing for a bond issue not to exceed nineteen billion nine hundred twenty-five million dollars ($19,925,000,000). There would be state costs of approximately $38.9 billion over 30 years to repay bonds and additional unknown state and local operations and maintenance costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1B? 51% yes 38 no 11 don’t know 32 PPIC Statewide Survey 9. Proposition 1C is called the “Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund Act of 2006.” For the purpose of providing shelters for battered women and their children; clean and safe housing for lowincome senior citizens; homeownership assistance for the disabled, military veterans, and working families; and repairs and accessibility improvements to apartment for families and disabled citizens, the state shall issue bonds totaling two billion eight hundred fifty million dollars ($2,850,000,000) paid from existing state funds at an average annual cost of two hundred and four million dollars ($204,000,000) per year over the 30-year life of the bonds. Requires reporting and publication of annual independent audited reports showing use of funds and limits administration and overhead costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1C? 56% yes 34 no 10 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 10.Proposition 1D is called the “Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2006.” This ten billion four hundred sixteen million dollar ($10,416,000,000) bond issue will provide needed funding to relieve public school overcrowding and to repair older schools. It will improve earthquake safety and fund vocational educational facilities in public schools, and bond funds must be spent according to strict accountability measures. Funds will also be used to repair and upgrade existing public college and university buildings and to build new classrooms to accommodate the growing student enrollment in the California Community Colleges, the University of California, and the California State University. Fiscal impacts are state costs of about $20.3 billion to pay off both the principal ($10.4 billion) and interest ($9.9 billion) on the bonds and payments of about $680 million per year. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1D? 51% yes 39 no 10 don’t know October 2006 33 Californians and the Future 11.Proposition 1E is called the “Disaster Preparedness and Flood Prevention Bond Act of 2006.” This act rebuilds and repairs California’s most vulnerable flood control structures to protect homes and prevent loss of life from flood-related disasters, including levee failures, flash floods, and mudslides; it protects California’s drinking water supply system by rebuilding delta levees that are vulnerable to earthquakes and storms; by authorizing a $4.09 billion ($4,090,000,000) bond act. Fiscal impacts are state costs of approximately $8 billion over 30 years to repay bonds, reduction in local property tax revenues of potentially up to several million dollars annually and additional unknown state and local operations costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 1E? 53% yes 36 no 11 don’t know 12.Proposition 84 is called the “Water Quality, Safety and Supply. Flood Control. Natural Resource Protection. Park Improvements. Bonds. Initiative Statute.” It funds water, flood control, natural resources, park and conservation projects by authorizing $5,388,000,000 in general obligation bonds. Includes emergency drinking water safety provisions. Fiscal impacts include a state cost of $10.5 billion over 30 years to repay bonds, reduced local property tax revenues of several million dollars annually and unknown state and local operations and maintenance costs, potentially tens of million of dollars annually. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 84? 42% yes 43 no 15 don’t know 34 PPIC Statewide Survey [rotate questions 13 and 14] 13.In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 61% good idea 28 bad idea 11 don’t know 14.On the November ballot there are five bond measures totaling about $43 billion. Do you think this bond amount is too much, too little or the right amount? 58% too much 3 too little 21 right amount 18 don’t know Changing topics, 15.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California? 47% approve 45 disapprove 8 don’t know 16.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job? 30% approve 52 disapprove 18 don’t know 17.Do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 44% right direction 46 wrong direction 10 don’t know 18.Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 50% good times 37 bad times 13 don’t know Next, please tell me how important you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on each of the following infrastructure projects as your part of California gets ready for future population growth. [rotate questions 19 to 22] 19.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on surface transportation projects in your part of California? 43% very important 37 somewhat important 18 not too important 2 don’t know 20.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on school facilities in your part of California? 66% very important 23 somewhat important 9 not too important 2 don’t know 21.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on water systems and flood control in your part of California? 43% very important 36 somewhat important 19 not too important 2 don’t know 22.How important do you think it is for the state to be spending public funds on affordable housing in your part of California? 43% very important 30 somewhat important 24 not too important 3 don’t know On another topic, reforms have been suggested to address legislative issues such as term limits and redistricting. Please tell me if you would favor or oppose the following proposals. [rotate questions 23 and 24] Questionnaire and Results 23.Would you favor or oppose a redistricting reform that requires an independent commission of citizens, instead of the state legislature and governor, to adopt a new redistricting plan after each census? 54% favor 30 oppose 16 don’t know 24.Under current term limits, a legislator is allowed to serve six years in the state assembly and eight years in the state senate. Would you favor or oppose a change in term limits that would allow members to serve up to 14 years of total legislative service in either branch? 22% favor 72 oppose 6 don’t know California uses the direct initiative process, which enables voters to bypass the legislature and have issues put on the ballot—as state propositions—for voter approval or rejection. Reforms have been suggested to address issues that arise in the initiative process. Please say whether you would favor or oppose each of the following reform proposals. [rotate questions 25 to 28] 25.Would you favor or oppose increasing public disclosure of funding sources for signature gathering and initiative campaigns? 75% favor 18 oppose 7 don’t know 26.Would you favor or oppose increasing the amount of time a sponsor may gather signatures to qualify an initiative for the ballot? 53% favor 36 oppose 11 don’t know October 2006 35 Californians and the Future 27.Would you favor or oppose having a system of review and revision of proposed initiatives to try to avoid legal issues and drafting errors? 72% favor 18 oppose 10 don’t know 28.Would you favor or oppose having a period of time in which the initiative sponsor and the legislature could meet to see if there is a compromise solution before initiatives go to the ballot? 75% favor 17 oppose 8 don’t know 29.Changing topics, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States? 32% approve 62 disapprove 6 don’t know 30.Do you think things in the United States are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 31% right direction 62 wrong direction 7 don’t know 31.Turning to economic conditions, do you think that during the next 12 months the United States will have good times financially or bad times? 44% good times 46 bad times 10 don’t know 32.Next, people have different ideas about the government in Washington. How much of the time do you think you can trust the government in Washington today to do what is right? 5% just about always 21 most of the time 62 only some of the time 10 none of the time (volunteered) 2 don’t know 36 PPIC Statewide Survey 33.Do you think the people in the federal government waste a lot of the money we pay in taxes, waste some of it, or don’t waste very much of it? 65% a lot 28 some 4 don’t waste very much 3 don’t know [Responses recorded for questions 34 and 34a are for likely voters only.] 34.On another topic, if the election for the U.S. House of Representatives was being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party's candidate or the Democratic Party's candidate for the House in your district? [options rotated] 36% Republican [skip to q35] 48 Democrat [skip to q35] 5 other (specify) [ask q34a] 11 don’t know [ask q34a] 34a.As of today, do you lean more to [rotate] the Republican [or] the Democrat? 31% Republican 24 Democrat 14 other (specify) 31 don’t know Next, please tell me if you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party [options rotated] could do a better job in each of the following areas. First… [rotate questions 35 to 38] 35.Which party could do a better job of handling the economy? 37% Republican Party 47 Democratic Party 3 both equally (volunteered) 5 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know 36.Which party could do a better job of handling the situation in Iraq? 34% Republican Party 45 Democratic Party 2 both equally (volunteered) 9 neither (volunteered) 10 don’t know 37.Which party could do a better job of handling immigration? 36% Republican Party 41 Democratic Party 3 both equally (volunteered) 10 neither (volunteered) 10 don’t know 38.Which party could do a better job of protecting the environment? 28% Republican Party 56 Democratic Party 4 both equally (volunteered) 4 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know 39.What is your preference for the outcome of this year's congressional elections: [rotate] a Congress controlled by Republicans [or] a Congress controlled by Democrats? 32% controlled by Republicans 57 controlled by Democrats 11 don’t know 40.In your view, do the Republican and Democratic parties do an adequate job representing the American people, or do they do such a poor job that a third major party is needed? 38% adequate job 53 third party needed 9 don’t know 41.On another topic, some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote? 79% yes [ask q42] 21 no [skip to q42a] 42.Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent? 42% Democrat [skip to q42b] 32 Republican [skip to q42c] 5 another party (specify) [skip to q43] 21 independent [ask q42a] Questionnaire and Results 42a.Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 27% Republican Party 49 Democratic Party 17 neither 7 don’t know [go to q43] 42b.Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 52% strong 44 not very strong 4 don’t know [go to q43] 42c.Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 56% strong 40 not very strong 4 don’t know 43.Would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 10% very liberal 19 somewhat liberal 32 middle-of-the-road 24 somewhat conservative 12 very conservative 3 don’t know 44.Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics? 27% great deal 43 fair amount 24 only a little 5 none 1 don’t know [D1-D13: demographic questions] October 2006 37 PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA BOARD OF DIRECTORS Thomas C. Sutton, Chair Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Pacific Life Insurance Company Linda Griego President and Chief Executive Officer Griego Enterprises, Inc. Edward K. Hamilton Chairman Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler, Inc. Gary K. Hart Founder Institute for Education Reform California State University, Sacramento Walter B. Hewlett Director Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities ADVISORY COUNCIL Stuart A. Gabriel Director and Lusk Chair Lusk Center for Real Estate University of Southern California Clifford W. Graves Elizabeth G. Hill Legislative Analyst State of California Hilary W. Hoynes Associate Professor Department of Economics University of California, Davis Andrés E. Jiménez Director California Policy Research Center University of California Office of the President Norman R. King Director, University Transportation Center California State University, San Bernardino David W. Lyon President and Chief Executive Officer Public Policy Institute of California Ki Suh Park Design and Managing Partner Gruen Associates Constance L. Rice Co-Director The Advancement Project Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board Emeritus The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center Dean Misczynski Director California Research Bureau Rudolf Nothenberg Chief Administrative Officer (Retired) City and County of San Francisco Manuel Pastor Professor, Latin American & Latino Studies University of California, Santa Cruz Peter Schrag Contributing Editor The Sacramento Bee James P. Smith Senior Economist RAND Corporation PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Angela Blackwell Founder and Chief Executive Officer PolicyLink Paul Brest President The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation Mollyann Brodie Vice President Kaiser Family Foundation Bruce E. Cain Director Institute of Governmental Studies University of California, Berkeley James E. Canales President The James Irvine Foundation Matthew K. Fong President Strategic Advisory Group William Hauck President California Business Roundtable Dennis A. Hunt Vice President Communications and Public Affairs The California Endowment Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Senior Scholar School of Policy, Planning, and Development University of Southern California Carol S. Larson President and Chief Executive Officer The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Monica Lozano Publisher and Chief Executive Officer La Opinión Donna Lucas CEO Lucas Public Affairs Dan Rosenheim News Director KPIX-TV Carol Stogsdill President Stogsdill Consulting Cathy Taylor Vice President and Editorial Commentary Director Orange County Register Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board Emeritus The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center The PPIC Statewide Survey Advisory Committee is diverse group of experts who provide advice on survey issues. However, survey methods, questions, content, and timing are determined solely by PPIC. PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, California 94111 phone: 415.291.4400 fax: 415.291.4401 www.ppic.org survey@ppic.org"
["post_date_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 09:38:48"
["comment_status"]=>
string(4) "open"
["ping_status"]=>
string(6) "closed"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(9) "s_1006mbs"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:48"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2017-05-20 09:38:48"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["guid"]=>
string(51) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/S_1006MBS.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)
}