Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

S 906MBS

Authors

S 906MBS

Tagged with:

Publication PDFs

Database

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

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3711 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(12) "S_906MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(7) "3931190" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(97400) " 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 23 30 31 33 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 71st PPIC Statewide Survey in a series that has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 148,000 Californians. This survey is the second in a series of four 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 Congressional representatives. The state ballot will also present the voters with 13 state propositions on a wide range of topics, including funding for the state’s infrastructure and various tax and spending issues. In addition, the ballot has four state bond measures, placed before the voters by the legislature, that total about $37 billion, for transportation, education, water, and housing. 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 of the state ballot measures, and the role of government trust both in shaping public opinion about ballot choices and in 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 2,003 California adults on a wide range of issues: „ The November 7th election, including preferences in the governor’s election, satisfaction with the candidates’ attention to the issues, awareness of election news and paid advertising, the importance of public debates, enthusiasm for voting in the upcoming election, support for the infrastructure bond measures placed on the ballot by the state legislature (Propositions 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E) and for a citizens’ initiative that would provide public financing for political campaigns (Proposition 89), and voters’ attitudes towards the financing of political campaigns. „ State issues, including approval ratings for Governor Schwarzenegger and the state legislature, attitudes towards the initiative process, preferences for public funding and planning for the state’s infrastructure, and perceptions of the future of California, including the outlook for 2025 for the conditions of surface transportation, education, water facilities, and housing. „ National issues, including approval ratings for President Bush, U.S. Senator Feinstein, U.S. Senator Boxer, and representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, and attitudes towards policy issues such as Iraq, terrorism, immigration, abortion, and same-sex marriage. „ 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, state issues, and national 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 Upcoming Debate May Be Best Hope For Angelides as Schwarzenegger Popularity—and Lead—Swells FATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS UNCERTAIN, PROP 89 SINKING; PESSIMISM DRIVING VOTER DECISIONS; BUSH APPROVAL NEARS ALL-TIME LOW WITH VOTERS SAN FRANCISCO, California, September 27, 2006 — Next week’s televised debate could be Democratic challenger Phil Angelides’ best hope to gain momentum in the race for governor—given voter disgust with the major candidates’ silence on policy issues of importance to them. Still, no matter how eloquent a performance Angelides gives, turning the tide of Governor Schwarzenegger’s widening lead and surging approval ratings will be a daunting challenge, according to a survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The James Irvine Foundation. Among likely voters, Schwarzenegger’s lead over Angelides has jumped to 17 points (48% to 31%)—four points higher than it was last month. Only 15 percent of likely voters remain undecided. Angelides has majority support among Democrats (57%), but it is not overwhelming. And although he leads Schwarzenegger among Latino likely voters (42% to 30%), that support falls short of a majority. The governor’s overall approval ratings have also risen. Today, 53 percent of likely voters approve of his job performance, a sharp contrast to his 33 percent approval ratings in September 2005. The increase may reflect Californians’ generally increasing optimism about where the state is headed: Although, they are evenly split over whether California is going in the right or wrong direction (45% each), those numbers represent a major upturn from one year ago when 60 percent of residents thought the state was going in the wrong direction and only 31 percent believed it was going in the right direction. Despite the recent optimism, likely voters remain anxious about the challenges facing the state and are dissatisfied with the amount of attention being focused on serious issues in the campaign. Over half of likely voters (54%) think the leading gubernatorial candidates are not paying enough attention to the issues and policies that are most important to them. The disgruntlement could make the upcoming candidates’ debate pivotal. Nearly three-fourths of likely voters (72%) say what they hear in the debate will be important to how they vote. “Voters are so thirsty for a serious discussion of relevant issues that the debate could give Angelides a chance to get a stronger footing in the race—or for Schwarzenegger to slam the door shut,” says PPIC survey director Mark Baldassare. Voters Tuning In… and Turning Off? Whether driven by antipathy or disbelief, many likely voters simply aren’t buying the messages being sent in the race. Case in point: Linking Schwarzenegger to George W. Bush has been a recurrent theme in Angelides’ campaign advertising. This might seem like a promising strategy, given that the president’s approval ratings are near an all-time low with California voters this month (35% approve, 63% disapprove). However, even among those who disapprove of the president, the Bush-Schwarzenegger theme hasn’t been compelling enough to give Angelides a majority edge over the incumbent governor (46% to 30%). Disenchantment with the candidates’ messages could explain why 40 percent of likely voters say they are less enthusiastic than usual about going to the polls. And this malaise seems to be well informed: Most (74%) say they are following election news either fairly or very closely. Ironically, some findings suggest that hearing more from a candidate could have negative consequences: Likely voters say they have seen more Angelides than Schwarzenegger ads (32% to 27%), yet the Democrat lags badly. “It’s a telling comment on 3 Californians and the Future California’s political times and mood,” says Baldassare. “Voters are engaged, are following election and candidate news—yet they are not only uninspired, they are turned off to the point where they may turn away.” Infrastructure Bonds Ahead but Facing Resistance; Prop 89 Facing Rejection As for November’s measures, the $37 billion in infrastructure bonds put on the ballot by the legislature, and championed by Governor Schwarzenegger, are all ahead—but far from being home free, because undecided voters could still tip the scales. The bond to fund affordable housing (Proposition 1C) has the most comfortable lead (57% yes, 30% no, 13% undecided), and the water facilities bond (Proposition 1E) is a close second (55% yes, 30% no, 15% undecided). But prospects are more uncertain for the transportation bond (51% yes, 36% no, 13% undecided) and the education facilities bond (49% yes, 40% no, 11% undecided)—Propositions 1B and 1D, respectively. In contrast, Proposition 89, the citizens’ initiative to provide public financing for political campaigns by taxing corporations and financial institutions, faces a definite uphill battle: Among likely voters, 61 percent would vote no, 25 percent would vote yes, and 14 percent are undecided. Opponents outnumber supporters among Republicans (73% no, 15% yes), independents (63% no, 27% yes), and Democrats (50% no, 34% yes). These views fit strangely with the opinion of 61 percent of likely voters that campaign contributions have a bad effect on public policy decisions (only 6 percent say they have a good effect,and 21 percent say they make no difference). “Voters clearly cast a jaundiced eye on the current system of campaign contributions,” says Baldassare. “It’s likely that opposition to Prop 89 has more to do with distrust of how the state manages taxpayer money, skepticism over whether such changes would do any good, and possibly—because likely voters are more involved in the system—a reluctance to change the status quo.” Residents Less Enthusiastic About Initiative Process, Ambivalent About Future Conditions Overall, Californians’ seemingly rock-solid faith in the citizens’ initiative may be waning. Residents’ preference that the initiative process have more influence than the legislature or the governor over public policy has dropped since last September (39% to 33%). Moreover, two in three residents think the initiative process needs either major (37%) or minor (31%) changes. Most residents (59%) somewhat or strongly agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot—and an even greater number (77%) think the wording for initiatives on ballots is too complicated to make their consequences clear. Californians have mixed views about specific challenges facing the state—despite the fact that a growing percentage think the state is headed in the right direction. Looking ahead to the year 2025, a majority of residents (53%) believe the state’s water and flood control system will improve (32% say it will get worse), and they are divided over whether public education will improve (47%) or get worse (44%). But residents have a decidedly pessimistic outlook about traffic and affordable housing. Nearly three-fourths (74%) of adults and even larger numbers of likely voters (82%) think traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse in the next 20 years. Most adults (72%) and likely voters (74%) also think the availability of affordable housing will get worse. Rock Bottom: Approval for Bush, Congress Dropping Although President Bush’s approval ratings have recently increased nationally (44% approval, Gallup Poll, September 2006), they are near an all-time low among California voters this month (35% approve, 63% disapprove). While there are the expected partisan divisions—with overwhelming majorities of Democrats (86%) and independents (73%) disapproving of President Bush’s performance—one-third (34%) of Republicans also disapprove. As the November elections loom, California’s likely voters are just as unimpressed with the job the U.S. Congress is doing (31% approve, 63% disapprove). Nationally, congressional approval is even lower (25% approval, CBS News/New York Times Poll, September 2006). But California’s own representatives can breathe easier: Sixty percent of the state’s likely voters say they approve of the way their own congressperson is handling his or her job. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who faces GOP challenger Richard Mountjoy in November, also enjoys majority approval among voters (53%). 4 PPIC Statewide Survey Press Release MORE KEY FINDINGS „ Latino voters engaged, more enthusiastic — Pages 9, 10 Seventy-nine percent of likely Latino voters say they have seen televised ads by one or both of the two major gubernatorial candidates. Latino voters are also more enthusiastic about going to the polls than voters in general (38% to 32%)—and are more than twice as likely as whites (52% to 26%) to say the upcoming debate is very important to how they will vote. „ Low approval ratings still dog legislature — Page 17 Half of all Californians disapprove of the job state lawmakers are doing (34% approve, 50% disapprove). This is virtually unchanged from where it was one year ago (32% approve, 53% disapprove, September 2005). However, approval has risen more among some groups (Republicans 21% to 30%, independents 32% to 40%). „ Harsh assessment of Iraq — Pages 24, 27 Seventy-three percent of Californians say the war in Iraq is not going well; 26 percent say things are going well. Approval of President Bush’s handling of Iraq is dismal (68% disapprove, 28% approve), although he gets higher marks on terrorism and homeland security (54% disapprove, 42% approve). Well over half of residents (59%) believe the conflict in Iraq is separate from the war on terrorism. „ Work permits for illegal immigrants gaining support — Page 28 Today, nearly two-thirds (65%) of Californians believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits in order to stay in the U.S.—a 5-point jump from one year ago (60%). „ Have shifts in supreme court justices spurred abortion defense? — Page 29 Since last October—when the U.S. Supreme Court began changing in composition—the share of Californians who want the court to make it harder to get an abortion has dropped nine points (35% to 26%); a majority (54%) want access to stay the same, and 16 percent want it to become easier. „ Same-sex marriage continues to divide — Page 29 Likely voters are divided over whether gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to legally marry (46% oppose, 47% favor). There are wide attitudinal differences between Republicans (66% oppose, 27% favor) and Democrats (35% oppose, 58% favor), while independents fall in between (43% oppose, 49% favor). ABOUT THE SURVEY This edition of the PPIC Statewide Survey – a pre-election survey that looks at Californians and the future – is the second 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 2,003 California adult residents interviewed between September 13 and September 20, 2006. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/2%. The sampling error for subgroups is larger. For more information on methodology, see page 31. 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. September 2006 5 NOVEMBER ELECTION KEY FINDINGS „ Arnold Schwarzenegger has a 17-point lead over Phil Angelides in the governor’s race, with 15 percent still undecided. (page 8) „ More than half of likely voters say they are not satisfied with the amount of attention that the gubernatorial candidates are spending on important issues, and four in 10 are less enthusiastic about voting this year. (page 9) „ Eight in 10 have noticed the gubernatorial candidates’ television ads, and 72 percent say that their debate performances are at least somewhat important in deciding how to vote. (page 10, 11) „ Each of the four infrastructure bonds placed on the ballot by the legislature is ahead, with affordable housing and disaster/flood control supported by wider margins than transportation and education. (page 11, 12) „ Support for Proposition 89, an initiative to implement public financing of political campaigns, is weak across all party groups. A majority are also unwilling to support a public funding system using taxpayer dollars, although six in 10 say campaign contributions have a bad effect on state policymaking. (page 13) 89-11CE-aB-DimTrspaaains11tsgCDe--nprfo,SHricfotnlhuaaotosinoioolcndnsseg Governor's Race 15 6 48 31 Likely Voters Schwarzenegger Angelides Other candidates Don't know Percent Likely Voters Percent Voting Yes on Propositions 80 70 60 51 57 49 55 50 40 30 25 20 10 0 7 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S RACE Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger now has a 17-point lead over State Treasurer Phil Angelides in the governor’s race (48% to 31%). The incumbent GOP governor previously led his Democratic challenger by a 13-point margin in our August (45% to 32%) and July surveys (43% to 30%). In the current survey, 15 percent of likely voters are still undecided and six percent name another candidate. Schwarzenegger holds the lead today because he is favored by 82 percent of Republicans, and is ahead of Angelides by 15 points among independents (42% to 27%). Meanwhile, 57 percent of Democrats support Angelides, while 21 percent favor Schwarzenegger. Significantly, many Democrats (17%) and independents (21%) still say they are undecided in the governor’s race. Nearly six in 10 liberals favor Angelides, and seven in 10 conservatives support Schwarzenegger, while the majority of political moderates favor the GOP incumbent (50% Schwarzenegger, 29% Angelides). Among those who disapprove of President Bush, Angelides is favored over Schwarzenegger by 16 points (46% Angelides, 30% Schwarzenegger), while most voters who approve of Bush overwhelmingly support the incumbent over the challenger (80% Schwarzenegger, 5% Angelides). “If the election for governor were being held today, who would you vote for…?” * Likely voters only Arnold Schwarzenegger Phil Angelides Other Candidates Don’t know All Likely Voters 48% 31% 6% 15% Democrat 21 57 5 17 Party Republican 82 4 59 Independent 42 27 10 21 Central Valley 57 28 69 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 39 41 39 34 6 16 8 17 Other Southern California 56 21 7 16 Gender Men Women 54 27 41 34 7 12 5 20 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites * For complete text of question, see p. 33. 30 42 56 25 7 21 6 13 Schwarzenegger holds a 29-point lead over Angelides in the Central Valley and a 35-point lead in the Other Southern California region. The race is close in the Democratic-leaning areas of the San Francisco Bay Area (39% for both Angelides and Schwarzenegger) and Los Angeles (41% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides). Schwarzenegger receives more support from men (54%) than women (41%), while Angelides has more support among women (34%) than men (27%). There are also racial/ethnic differences, with whites supporting Schwarzenegger over Angelides by more than a two-to-one margin (56% to 25%), while Latinos favor Angelides over Schwarzenegger by a 12-point margin (42% to 30%). Support for Schwarzenegger is higher among homeowners than renters, and increases with age and income. 8 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election GOVERNOR’S RACE (CONTINUED) The gubernatorial campaign seems to be generating some voter unhappiness, especially over its substance. More than half of likely voters say they are dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are spending on the issues that they consider to be most important, while just one in three are satisfied. Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to express dissatisfaction. Similar levels of dissatisfaction are expressed across all racial/ethnic and gender groups; complaints about attention to issues rise with education levels and decrease with age. In our September 2002 survey, during the campaign between Gray Davis and Bill Simon, 27 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 64 percent dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates were spending on important issues. Democrats are as likely today as they were four years ago (59% to 58%) to say they are not satisfied, while Republicans (47% to 66%) and independents (58% to 73%) are less likely to say so. “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 Ind Satisfied 32% 26% 40% 31% Dissatisfied 54 59 47 58 Don't know 14 15 13 11 Moreover, four in 10 likely voters say they are less enthusiastic about voting in the governor’s election this year than usual. About one in three say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year, while one in four volunteer that their level of enthusiasm for voting today is about the same as in the past. Fortyfour percent of Republicans say they are less enthusiastic about voting this year, compared to fewer than four in 10 Democrats and independents. Voter enthusiasm tends to decrease as age increases. Whites are more likely than Latinos (43% to 33%), and women are more likely than men (44% to 36%) to say they are less enthusiastic about voting this year. In our September 2002 survey, we found that 55 percent of likely voters said they were less enthusiastic and 27 percent were more enthusiastic about voting in the governor’s election, with majorities in all party groups expressing less enthusiasm than usual about voting. “Thinking about the governor's election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind More enthusiastic 32% 36% 26% 33% Less enthusiastic 40 38 44 36 Same (volunteered) 25 23 26 27 Don't know 3344 Latinos 38% 33 24 5 September 2006 9 Californians and the Future VOTER ATTENTION There is a high level of awareness of the paid advertisements produced by the gubernatorial campaigns, with 81 percent of likely voters saying they have recently seen television ads by the candidates. At this juncture, neither major party candidate seems to have a significant advantage in terms of whose ads are seen the most, and about one in five voters volunteers that they remember seeing them equally. Republicans are more likely to say that they remember seeing Angelides ads the most, and Democrats are more likely to say they remember seeing Schwarzenegger ads the most. In our September 2002 survey, slightly fewer (75%) respondents than today recalled seeing ads for the governor’s race, with the most saying they saw more ads from Davis than from Simon (55% to 17%). “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?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Yes, Phil Angelides' ads 32% 27% 41% 28% 25% Yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger's ads 27 33 19 26 37 Yes, both equally (volunteered) 22 21 20 25 17 No 17 15 16 19 18 Don't know 24423 The governor’s race is generating more interest now than a month ago, with 74 percent of likely voters saying they are very (17%) or fairly closely (57%) following news about the candidates today, compared to 64 percent in August. Still, the percentage of voters who expressed interest was slightly higher in September 2002, when 80 percent of likely voters were either very (28%) or fairly (52%) closely following the news about the governor’s election. “How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor's election?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Very closely 17% 17% 19% 13% Fairly closely 57 59 52 63 Not too closely 20 18 22 18 Not at all closely 6676 The major party candidates for governor are scheduled to meet in a televised debate on October 7th,one month before the election. How important are public debates to voters this year? About seven in 10 likely voters say that the candidates’ performances in public debates are at least somewhat important, with 32 percent describing performances as very important. Democrats (39%) and independents (32%) are more likely than Republicans (23%) to rate debates as very important to their decision process. The perception that debates are very important tends to decrease as age, education, and income increase, is higher for renters than homeowners, and does not vary between men and women. Latinos (52%) are twice as likely as whites (26%) to say debates are very important in deciding who to vote for in the governor’s election. 10 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election VOTER ATTENTION (CONTINUED) “In deciding who to vote for in the November 7th governor’s election, how important to you are the candidates' performances in public debates?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Very important 32% 39% 23% Somewhat important 40 39 39 Not too important 17 15 23 Not at all important 10 6 14 Don't know 111 Ind 32% 48 13 6 1 INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS As they were last month, the four infrastructure bonds placed on the November ballot for funding transportation (1B), affordable housing (1C), education facilities (1D), and water and flood control (1E) are ahead when likely voters were read each of the ballot titles and labels in its entirety. But voter support does vary significantly on the four bond measures. The biggest margins of support are for affordable housing (27 points) and water and flood controls (25 points), the two measures with lower total dollar amounts, followed by transportation (15 points) and education facilities (9 points) which propose higher levels of debt. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on…?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don't know 51% 62% 41% 36 25 47 13 13 12 Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don't know 57 30 13 69 44 18 43 13 13 Proposition 1D Education facilities Yes No Don't know 49 40 11 63 34 26 56 11 10 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don't know 55 30 15 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 34-35. 61 48 23 37 16 15 Ind 50% 38 12 56 33 11 47 41 12 51 34 15 September 2006 11 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) Proposition 1B, the transportation bond (about $19.9 billion), is favored by 51 percent of likely voters and opposed by 36 percent, similar to last month’s survey (50% yes, 38% no). Today, 62 percent of Democrats, compared to half of independents and 41 percent of Republicans, would vote yes on 1B. Proposition 1C, the affordable housing bond ($2.85 billion), is supported by 57 percent of likely voters, while 30 percent would vote no—almost identical to the results last month (57% yes, 32% no). In this month’s survey, 69 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents would vote yes on 1C, compared to 44 percent of Republicans. Proposition 1D, the education facilities bond (about $10.4 billion), is supported by 49 percent of likely voters and opposed by 40 percent, similar to last month’s survey (51% yes, 39% no). Today, 63 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of independents would vote yes on 1D. Republicans oppose 1D by a wide margin (56% no, 34% yes). Proposition 1E, the water and flood control bond (about $4.1 billion), receives a 55 percent yes vote and a 30 percent no vote, while last month 56 percent were in favor and 35 percent were opposed. Today, 61 percent of Democrats and 51 percent of independents favor the bond measure. Republicans have a more favorable response to 1E (48% yes, 37% no) than to the other three bond measures. Across the state’s regions, Propositions 1B (transportation) and 1C (affordable housing) have the most support in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Proposition 1D (education) has the most support in the San Francisco Bay Area and the least support in the Other Southern California region. Proposition 1E (water and flood controls) has more support in the Central Valley, Los Angeles, and San Francisco Bay Area than in the Other Southern California region. Support for all four of the bonds is lower among homeowners than renters, and support decreases with higher education and income. Approval for the bond measures is lower in each case among whites than Latinos, and support for the transportation and education bonds is lower among older than younger voters. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on…?” * Likely voters only Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don't know All Likely Voters 51% 36 13 Central Valley 48% 39 13 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 55% 57% Other Southern California 48% 31 32 41 14 11 11 Proposition 1C Yes 57 54 59 63 54 No 30 34 27 26 34 Affordable housing Don't know 13 12 14 11 12 Proposition 1D Yes 49 50 55 51 42 No 40 40 33 40 46 Education facilities Don't know 11 10 12 9 12 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don't know 55 30 15 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 34-35. 60 24 16 58 60 46 27 26 38 15 14 16 12 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election PROPOSITION 89: PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS Californians will also vote on a citizens’ initiative that would provide public financing for political campaigns, with funding coming from a tax on corporations and financial institutions. When read the ballot title and label in its entirety, 25 percent would vote yes and 61 percent would vote no on Proposition 89. While opponents outnumber supporters across political parties, Republicans are more likely to say they will vote no. Majorities in all regions and across age, education, gender, and income groups say they will vote no on Proposition 89. Latinos are more likely than whites (37% to 23%) to favor Proposition 89, but majorities in both groups are opposed. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on Proposition 89?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Yes 25% 34% 15% No 61 50 73 Don't know 14 16 12 * For complete text of proposition questions, see p. 36. Ind 27% 63 10 A majority of likely voters would also oppose having a system of public funding for state political campaigns if it cost taxpayers a few dollars a year to run, while 37 percent would be in favor of this proposal. In May, 51 percent of likely voters said they would favor a public financing system that would cost each taxpayer a few dollars. Democrats are divided on this issue today while independents are opposed, as are Republicans, by more than a two-to-one margin. “Would you favor or oppose having a system of public funding for state and legislative campaigns in California if it cost each taxpayer a few dollars a year to run?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Favor 37% 45% 27% 37% Oppose 53 43 64 51 Don't know 10 12 9 12 Nonetheless, most likely voters today believe that private campaign contributions are having a bad effect on public policy decisions, a finding similar to those in October 2005 (64% bad effect) and September 1999 (66% bad effect). Today, majorities across age, income, and homeownership groups believe that campaign contributions have a bad effect. This view is more common among Democrats and independents than among Republicans, and increases with education. “Do you think that campaign contributions are currently having a good effect or a bad effect on the public policy decisions made by state elected officials in Sacramento, or are campaign contributions making no difference?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Good effect 6% 7% 7% Bad effect 61 66 53 No difference 21 19 24 Both (volunteered) 224 Don't know 10 6 12 Ind 4% 65 20 1 10 September 2006 13 STATE ISSUES KEY FINDINGS „ Governor Schwarzenegger’s job approval ratings among likely voters (53%) today are significantly higher than they were in PPIC’s September 2005 survey (38%), when they were at a low point. (page 16) „ The legislature’s approval ratings remain low among likely voters (32%), but 44 percent approve of the job their own state legislators are doing. (page 17) „ Many Californians prefer the initiative process to have the most policy influence but believe that changes are needed. Many agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot and that ballot language is confusing. (page 19) „ Half of Californians believe that there is not enough local funding for infrastructure projects. But residents are deeply divided across political groups when asked if they would prefer to pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more on infrastructure projects. (page 20) „ Residents are pessimistic about traffic congestion and affordable housing in the future but are more optimismitic about improvement in education and water and flood controls. (page 21, 22) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters Governor's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Sept Jan Sept Jan Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 California Legislature's Approval Ratings 80 Approve Disapprove 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Sept Jan Sept Jan Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 15 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S APPROVAL RATINGS Approval of Governor Schwarzenegger’s overall job performance continues to increase as the November election draws near. Today, all adults are as likely to approve as disapprove (46% each) of his overall job performance, a dramatic improvement compared to last September (33% approve, 58% disapprove). Among likely voters, 53 percent approve and 39 percent disapprove, a sharp reversal from just one year ago when he announced his reelection plans (38% approve, 55% disapprove). Sizeable differences in the governor’s approval ratings continue to be evident across political groups. Three in four Republicans approve (75%) of the governor’s performance while 59 percent of Democrats disapprove; independents are divided (46% approve, 42% disapprove). Today, 34 percent of Democrats approve of the governor’s job performance, compared to 14 percent in September 2005. Moreover, 34 percent of those who disapprove of President Bush’s job performance today say they approve of the governor’s performance. What are the implications of these approval ratings for the election? Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Schwarzenegger, 88 percent approve of his job as governor. Of likely voters who plan to vote for Phil Angelides, 81 percent disapprove of the governor’s job performance. Residents are evenly divided over whether the state is headed in the right direction or the wrong direction (45% each) today—also a major improvement from a year ago (31% right direction, 60% wrong direction)—and 64 percent who say the state is headed in the right direction approve of the governor’s job performance. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 46% 34% 46 59 87 75% 46% 53% 19 42 39 6 12 8 Across regions, residents in the Other Southern California region and the Central Valley (52% each) are the most likely to approve of the governor’s performance, while residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (41%) and Los Angeles (40%) are the least likely to approve. Approval of the governor’s job performance is higher among whites than Latinos (57% to 27%) and men than women (49% to 42%). LEGISLATURE’S APPROVAL RATINGS Today, after the close of the 2006 legislative session, 34 percent of all adults and 32 percent of likely voters voice their approval of the legislature. At least half of all adults (50%) and likely voters (55%) disapprove of the way that the legislature is handling its job. Last month, approval ratings of the legislature were at 31 percent for all adults and 27 percent for likely voters. With the large bond package placed on the November ballot, and a budget and several high profile bills passed by the legislature and signed by the governor, how do the legislature’s approval ratings today compare to a year ago? The legislature’s approval ratings among all adults (32% 2005, 34% today) and likely voters (28% 2005, 32% today) have not changed much since last September. 16 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues LEGISLATURE’S APPROVAL RATINGS (CONTINUED) A strong majority of Republicans (60%) disapprove of the job the legislature is doing, but fewer independents (45%) disapprove. Although Democrats control the state legislature, 50 percent of Democrats in the state still disapprove of the legislature’s performance. Compared to last year, approval ratings today are notably higher among Republicans (21% 2005, 30% today) and independents (32% 2005, 40% today). Approval ratings of the legislature among Democrats remain unchanged from last year (35% each time). Across regions, approval ratings are slightly higher in the Central Valley (39%) and San Francisco Bay Area (37%) than in the Other Southern California region and Los Angeles (32% each). Approval of the legislature’s job performance is somewhat higher among Latinos (38%) than whites (33%). Disapproval of the legislature increases with age, education, income, and homeownership. Among those who disapprove of Governor Schwarzenegger’s job performance, 60 percent also disapprove of the job the legislature is doing at this time, while among those who approve of the governor, opinions of the legislature are divided (45% approve, 43% disapprove). Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 34% 35% 30% 40% 50 50 60 45 16 15 10 15 Likely Voters 32% 55 13 When asked about their own representatives to the state assembly and state senate, all Californians (45%) and likely voters (44%) are much more approving. In our May survey, these job approval ratings were 39 percent for all adults and 41 percent among likely voters. Approval ratings for residents’ own state legislators are similar across parties today, with Democrats (48%) slightly more approving than independents (44%) and Republicans (43%). Across regions, residents in the Central Valley and San Francisco Bay Area (50% each) are somewhat more approving of their representatives than are residents of the Other Southern California (44%) and Los Angeles (43%) regions. Latinos are more likely than whites to express approval (50% to 43%). “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the job that the state legislators representing your assembly and state senate districts are doing at this time?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve Disapprove Don’t know 45% 48% 43% 44% 44% 36 36 42 39 41 19 16 15 17 15 September 2006 17 Californians and the Future THE INITIATIVE PROCESS Would Californians prefer the governor, the legislature, or the initiative process to have the most influence over public policy? About one third of all adults say initiatives (33%) or the legislature (32%), with fewer choosing the governor. Likely voters express similar preferences. Last month, when we asked residents who they believe actually has the most influence over public policy, 41 percent of residents said the legislature, and about one in four said the governor and initiatives on the state ballot (24% each). Across political groups today, Democrats would prefer the legislature (43%) to have more influence than other sources, Republicans are divided between initiatives (36%) and the governor (32%), and independents are divided between initiatives (35%) and the legislature (33%). Since last September, California residents’ preference for initiatives has decreased slightly (39% 2005, 33% today), their preference for the legislature remains unchanged (32% each time), and their preference for the governor has increased somewhat (18% 2005, 23% today). PPIC’s recent surveys differ from earlier ones, in which higher percentages of residents preferred the initiative process over the legislature and the governor in having the most influence over public policy. “In California state government today, which of the following would you prefer to have the most influence over public policy?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind The governor The legislature Initiatives on the state ballot Other Don’t know 23% 17% 32% 24% 32 43 26 33 33 33 36 35 1 112 11 6 5 6 Likely Voters 20% 38 36 1 5 Many Californians perceive the initiative process as flawed. Two in three adults say the initiative process needs either major (37%) or minor (31%) changes. An equal proportion of likely voters say major (37%) or minor (31%) changes are needed. About one in four adults and likely voters say the initiative process in California is fine the way it is. Strong majorities across political parties think that major or minor changes are needed in the initiative process. Democrats (40%) are more likely than independents (33%) and Republicans (32%), and Latinos (49%) are more likely than whites (32%), to see a need for major changes in ballot initiatives. “Do you think the citizens’ initiative process in California is in need of major changes or minor changes or that it is basically fine the way it is at this time?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Major changes Minor changes 37% 40% 32% 33% 37% 31 31 32 33 31 Fine the way it is 25 23 30 30 27 Don’t know 7 664 5 18 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues THE INITIATIVE PROCESS (CONTINUED) Thirteen state propositions are on this November’s state ballot, including eight citizens’ initiatives. What do Californians think about the number of propositions on state ballots? Six in 10 residents (59%) and likely voters (58%) agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Last year, a similar proportion of residents (62%) and likely voters (61%) agreed there were too many propositions prior to the special election, which had eight statewide propositions on the ballot. Majorities of Democrats (61%), Republicans (59%), and independents (56%) agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Residents over 55 (65%) are more likely than residents age 3554 (60%) or those under 34 (53%) to hold this perception. Latinos and whites, and men and women, hold similar perceptions on this issue. San Francisco Bay Area residents (65%) are more likely than those living in other regions to say there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know “There are too many propositions on the state ballot…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 28% 31% 29% 24% 31 30 30 32 25 22 26 30 11 13 11 11 5 443 Likely Voters 29% 29 25 13 4 An even more widely held negative perception of the initiative process is that the ballot wording is often too complicated and confusing. Nearly eight in 10 residents (77%) and likely voters (79%) agree with this perception, with about half of all adults (48%) and likely voters (52%) strongly agreeing. The percentage who strongly agree with this statement has increased slightly by 5 points since August 2004 (43% to 48%). Solid majorities of Democrats (81%), Republicans (77%), and independents (76%) agree with this perception, and this perception increases with age and income. Over seven in 10 across education groups agree that the wording for ballot initiatives is often too complicated and confusing. “The ballot wording for citizens’ initiatives is often too complicated and confusing for voters to understand what happens if the initiative passes…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know 48% 55% 47% 49% 52% 29 26 30 27 27 14 12 16 15 13 6 569 6 3 210 2 September 2006 19 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND FUNDING As Californians go to the polls in November to vote on a package of state infrastructure bonds, half of all adults and likely voters do not think their local governments have adequate funding for infrastructure projects needed to prepare for growth in their region. Majorities of Democrats (57%) and independents (55%) believe that local infrastructure funding is inadequate, while 50 percent of Republicans believe that funding is adequate. In August 2004, residents were more negative about local funding prospects (33% adequate, 60% not), while in May of 2001 residents’ opinions (43% adequate, 48% not) were similar to those today. Across regions, majorities of San Francisco Bay Area (54%) and Central Valley (52%) residents say local infrastructure funding is inadequate, compared to 42 percent in Los Angeles and 48 percent in the Other Southern California region. “Overall, do you think your local government does or does not have adequate funding for infrastructure projects that are needed to prepare for future growth in your part of California?” Does have adequate funding Does not have adequate funding Don’t know All Adults 42% 49 9 Central Valley 38% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 36% 47% 52 54 42 10 10 11 Likely Voters Other Southern California 43% 39% 48 51 9 10 Forty-four percent of Californians say they would rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects, while 47 percent say they prefer to pay lower taxes and have less money spent on infrastructure projects. Likely voters have similar responses to all adults on this fiscal question. A majority of Democrats today (54%) would prefer higher taxes and more spending, a majority of Republicans (59%) would prefer lower taxes and less spending, and independents are divided (46% higher taxes, 47% lower taxes). In August 2004, 49 percent of residents chose higher taxes and more spending, and 43 percent chose lower taxes and less spending. Today, San Francisco Bay Area residents (51%) are more likely than others to say they would prefer higher taxes and more spending; about half of the adults living in other regions would rather pay lower taxes and spend less. Willingness to pay higher taxes increases with education and income. Of those who believe their local governments have adequate funding for infrastructure projects, 59 percent would rather pay lower taxes and have less funding; of those who think their local governments do not have adequate funding, 54 percent would rather pay higher taxes and have more funding. “In general, which of the following statements do you agree with more…?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind I’d rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects I’d rather pay lower taxes and have the state government spend less money on infrastructure projects Don’t know 44% 47 9 54% 31% 46% 38 59 47 8 10 7 Likely Voters 45% 47 8 20 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues OUTLOOK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION, WATER AND FLOOD CONTROL IN 2025 Looking ahead to 2025, are residents optimistic or pessimistic about California’s future? Adults are somewhat divided (47% improve, 44% get worse) over whether the public education system in their region will improve or get worse, but tend to be somewhat more positive than likely voters (42% improve, 50% get worse). Residents’ optimism about the state’s public education system was comparable in August 2004 (45% improve, 46% get worse). Across political parties today, there is little difference in expectations about the future of public education. Across regions, San Francisco Bay Area residents are the most pessimistic (53% get worse), while about half in other regions think the public education system will improve. Latinos are more likely than whites to expect improvement (56% to 44%), as are parents of public school children compared to others (56% to 43%). Of likely voters who think the education system will improve, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1D (education facilities). Of those who think it will get worse, half would vote no on Proposition 1D and only 40 percent would vote yes. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” The public education system will improve The public education system will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults 47% 44 2 7 Central Valley 50% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 37% 48% 43 53 44 22 2 58 6 Likely Voters Other Southern California 51% 42% 42 50 22 56 Majorities of all adults and likely voters (53% each) believe the water and flood control systems in their region will improve by 2025. Majorities of Democrats and Republicans (55% each) hold this view, and about half of independents (49%) agree. Over half of residents across the major regions are optimistic about their future water and flood control systems. Across racial/ethnic groups, over half think water and flood control systems will improve, but Latinos (57%) are somewhat more optimistic than whites (51%). Majorities of men and women, residents across income groups, and homeowners and renters believe their water systems will improve. This positive expectation, however, declines with age. Of likely voters who think water and flood control systems will improve, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1E (water facilities). Of those who think it will get worse, 55 percent would also vote yes. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” The water and flood control systems will improve The water and flood control systems will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 53% 55% 53% 52% Likely Voters Other Southern California 55% 53% 32 32 34 33 31 33 44 4 4 34 11 9 9 11 11 10 September 2006 21 Californians and the Future OUTLOOK FOR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 2025 Californians are not so hopeful about traffic conditions on freeways and major roads in their region. Three in four of all adults (74%) and over eight in 10 likely voters (82%) believe traffic conditions in their region will get worse by 2025. Although these responses are very pessimistic, the findings among all adults in August 2004 were even more dismal (81% get worse). Today, over seven in 10 across parties, regions, and gender groups believe that traffic conditions will worsen. As education and income rise, pessimism increases. Whites (83%) are far more likely than Latinos (57%) to expect worse conditions, and homeowners (80%) are more likely than renters (68%) to feel this way. Of likely voters who think traffic conditions will get worse, 50 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1B (transportation). Of those who think conditions will improve, 63 percent would vote yes. Regardless of their choice on Proposition 1B, likely voters are pessimistic: Of those who would vote yes, and of those who would vote no, over three in four likely voters believe traffic conditions will get worse. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will improve Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 22% 21% 22% 22% Likely Voters Other Southern California 19% 15% 74 73 74 74 77 82 22 1 1 11 24 3 3 32 Californians also express negative views about the availability of affordable housing in their region. Over seven in 10 adults (72%) and likely voters (74%) believe the availability of affordable housing will get worse, while only about two in 10 think it will improve. Compared to August 2004 (78% get worse), residents today are slightly less pessimistic. Strong majorities across parties, regions, racial/ethnic, gender, age, education, and income groups today say the availability of affordable housing will worsen. Of likely voters who think the availability of affordable housing will get worse, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1C (affordable housing). Of those who think availability will improve, a similar 55 percent would also vote yes. Again, regardless of their choice on Proposition 1C, over two in three yes voters and no voters say the availability of affordable housing will get worse in the future. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California?” The availability of affordable housing will improve The availability of affordable housing will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults 22% 72 1 5 Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 28% 23% 21% 66 72 11 54 74 2 3 Likely Voters Other Southern California 23% 21% 73 74 12 33 22 PPIC Statewide Survey NATIONAL ISSUES KEY FINDINGS „ President Bush’s approval ratings among all adults for his overall job performance (33%) and for his handling both of the situation in Iraq (28%) and of terrorism and homeland security (42%) are at new lows. (page 24) „ Majorities of adults (51%) and likely voters (53%) approve of the job performance of Senator Feinstein. Nearly half of all adults (46%) and likely voters (47%) approve of Senator Boxer. (page 25) „ Most Californians (55%) and likely voters (60%) approve of the job performance of their representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, while Congress as a whole has much lower marks. (page 26) „ Pessimism about the U.S. effort in Iraq has increased among Californians, with 45 percent say it is going “not at all well.” Six in 10 think of the Iraq conflict as separate from the war on terrorism, and half say the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going at least somewhat well. (page 27) „ A majority of Californians continue to believe immigrants benefit the state, and 65 percent favor the idea of allowing illegal immigrants to apply for work permits that would allow them to remain and work in this country. (page 28) „ Seven in 10 adults want abortion access to remain the same (54%) or become easier (16%), while one in four want access to become more difficult. Californians are divided and deeply split along partisan lines on allowing same-sex marriages. (page 29) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters President Bush's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 Senator Feinstein's Approval Ratings 80 Approve Disapprove 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 23 Californians and the Future PRESIDENT’S APPROVAL RATINGS President Bush’s approval ratings with the California public reached an all time low this month, even as his standing improved in recent national surveys. Thirty-three percent of Californians approve of the way he is handling his job as president, while 64 percent say they disapprove. His approval ratings have remained below 40 percent since January 2005, and are far lower than his high of 80 percent in the wake of September 11th. In a recent Gallup Poll, 44 percent of Americans approved of the president’s job performance. Strong partisan and regional differences underlie the California ratings. Democrats (86%) and independents (73%) disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job, while nearly two in three Republicans (63%) approve. Across California’s regions, approval is higher in the Central Valley (43%) and the Other Southern California region (36%) than in Los Angeles (31%) or the San Francisco Bay Area (21%). Whites (37%) are more likely than Latinos (31%) to approve of the way Bush is handling his job. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling his job as President of the United States?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 33% 12% 64 86 32 63% 25% 34 73 32 Likely Voters 35% 63 2 On the issue of Iraq, President Bush’s approval ratings have also reached a new low, declining from 33 percent in January to 28 percent today. Californians are more negative than Americans in general, who gave Bush a 41 percent approval rating on Iraq in an ABC News poll earlier this month. Strong partisan differences, as usual, are apparent in California: Democrats (11%) and independents (22%) are far less approving of Bush’s war efforts than Republicans (59%). Whites (35%) and Latinos (23%) also differ in their approval ratings. Approval of Bush’s handling of Iraq increases with age and income. Approval of President Bush’s handling of terrorism and homeland security has also reached a new low among California adults (42%). Bush’s approval ratings on this issue were at 45 percent in January and have been below 50 percent since August 2004. Republicans (72%) are far more likely than independents (34%) or Democrats (22%) to approve of Bush’s performance in this area. Whites (45%) are more likely than Latinos (39%), and men (46%) are more likely than women (38%), to approve. A recent ABC News poll found a 53 percent approval rating on this issue among all Americans. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind The situation in Iraq? Approve Disapprove Don’t know 28% 68 4 11% 88 1 59% 22% 32% 38 74 66 3 42 Terrorism and homeland security issues? Approve Disapprove Don’t know 42 54 4 22 75 3 72 34 42 25 63 55 3 33 24 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues RATINGS OF CALIFORNIA’S U.S. SENATORS Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein will be facing GOP challenger Richard Mountjoy on the November ballot. Today, 51 percent of California adults and 53 percent of likely voters approve of the senator’s job performance. Her approval ratings were similar in March (51% adults, 56% likely voters) and last October (50% adults, 55% likely voters) and have remained around 50 percent or higher in every PPIC survey. As with other elected officials in this survey, partisan and regional differences are apparent in approval ratings of the U.S. Senator. Democrats (72%) and independents (57%) are much more likely than Republicans (31%) to approve of the way Feinstein is handling her job. Residents in the Other Southern California area (43%) are less likely to approve of Feinstein than residents in the Central Valley (50%), Los Angeles (53%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (64%). There are no significant differences in approval ratings across gender and age groups. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Dianne Feinstein is handling her job as U.S. Senator?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 51% 72% 30 17 19 11 31% 57% 54 25 15 18 Likely Voters 53% 35 12 Senator Barbara Boxer receives approval ratings of 46 percent from adults and 47 percent from likely voters. Her approval ratings were similar in March (48% adults, 50% likely voters) and last October (48% adults, 50% likely voters) and have remained around 50 percent since May 2005. Boxer’s approval ratings are lower now than they were in October 2004, just before her reelection (53% adults, 54% likely voters). Approval ratings of Boxer differ sharply across political groups, with Democrats (69%) and independents (52%) more likely than Republicans (21%) to approve of the senator’s job performance. Approval of Boxer is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area (56%) and Los Angeles (50%) than in the Central Valley (44%) and the Other Southern California region (37%). Latinos (52%) are more likely than whites (42%), and women (49%) are more likely than men (44%), to approve of Boxer. Approval ratings are similar across age groups. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barbara Boxer is handling her job as U.S. Senator?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 46% 69% 33 16 21 15 21% 52% 62 31 17 17 Likely Voters 47% 41 12 September 2006 25 Californians and the Future RATINGS OF CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AND CONGRESS When asked to rate their own representative in the U.S. House of Representatives, 55 percent of California adults and 60 percent of likely voters say they approve. These findings are similar to March (52% adults, 59% likely voters) and last October (53% adults, 57% likely voters). In a recent CBS/New York Times poll, 53 percent of Americans approved of the job that their own congressional representative was doing. Partisan differences exist, but they are considerably smaller than those we find in the approval ratings of the president and senators. Across parties, Democrats (62%) are more likely than Republicans (57%) or independents (55%) to approve of their representative’s job performance. Majorities of residents across California’s four major regions approve of their congressional representative. Whites (58%) are more likely than Latinos (50%) to express approval, and approval ratings also increase with age, education, and income. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that your own representative to the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress is handling his or her job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve Disapprove Don’t know 55% 62% 25 23 20 15 57% 55% 60% 24 28 25 19 17 15 With the November election looming, Californian’s approval of the U.S. Congress remains low: 37 percent of Californians and only 31 percent of likely voters approve of the way the Congress is handling its job. According to a recent CBS News/New York Times Poll, only 25 percent of Americans approve of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job. Approval of the Republican-controlled Congress is low across all political groups in California; however, it is somewhat higher among Republicans (41%) than among independents (35%) or Democrats (29%). Residents of the Central Valley (42%), the Other Southern California region (41%), and Los Angeles (39%) are more likely than residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (28%) to approve of the way Congress is performing. Approval of Congress is higher among Latinos (46%) than among whites (33%). There are no differences in the ratings given by men and women. However, approval ratings of Congressional performance decline with age, education, and income. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 37% 29% 54 63 98 41% 35% 52 57 78 Likely Voters 31% 63 6 26 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues U.S. EFFORTS IN IRAQ AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM California’s pessimism about the U.S. efforts in Iraq continues to grow: Only 26 percent of adults say things are going very well (3%) or somewhat well (23%); 73 percent say things are going not too well (28%) or not at all well (45%). Fewer Californians today than in January 2006 (35%), August 2005 (30%), and August 2004 (33%) believe that the U.S. situation in Iraq is going at least somewhat well. Today, Democrats (63%) and independents (49%) are much more likely than Republicans (22%) to say things are not going at all well. Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (57%) and Los Angeles (46%) are more likely than those in the Central Valley (39%) or the Other Southern California region (37%) to hold this negative opinion. Latinos and whites are similar in their opinions of the U.S. situation in Iraq. Sixty-five percent of Californians now say that it was not worth going to war in Iraq, similar to the PPIC Statewide Surveys in the past two years (61% August 2004, 64% August 2005, 62% January 2006). The belief that it was not worth going to war in Iraq is held today by most Democrats (83%) and independents (74%), while 60 percent of Republicans say it was worth it and 34 percent say it was not. Very well Somewhat well Not too well Not at all well Don’t know “In general, how would you say things are going for the U.S. in Iraq?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 3% 1% 23 10 28 25 45 63 11 6% 1% 42 16 29 32 22 49 12 Likely Voters 3% 23 28 46 0 About four in 10 California adults (37%) think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, while 59 percent view it as a separate issue. Opinions are similar for likely voters. In a recent ABC News poll, 57 percent of adults nationwide said they think of the Iraq war as part of the war against terrorism, while 41 percent said it is separate from the war against terrorism. Republicans (65%) are much more likely than independents (35%) or Democrats (22%) to view the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. Regionally, residents in the Central Valley (44%) and the Other Southern California region (43%) are more likely than those in Los Angeles (35%) or the San Francisco Bay Area (27%) to see it this way. Whites (41%) are more likely than Latinos (32%) to think of the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. “Do you think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, or do you think of it as separate from the war on terrorism?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Part of the war on terrorism Separate from the war on terrorism Don’t know 37% 59 4 22% 76 2 65% 35% 32 61 34 Likely Voters 40% 57 3 Half of Californians (49%) think that the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going very well (8%) or somewhat well (41%). Republicans (70%) are more likely than independents (47%) or Democrats (38%) to say that the war on terrorism is going at least somewhat well. In a recent ABC News poll, 52 percent of Americans said the war on terrorism was going very well (7%) or fairly well (45%). September 2006 27 Californians and the Future IMMIGRATION As immigration policy remains a contentious issue at the national level, 58 percent of California adults believe that immigrants are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills, while 35 percent considers immigrants a burden because they use public services. Positive perceptions of immigrants are similar today to when we first asked this question in February 2000 (54% benefit, 34% burden) and most recently in August 2005 (56% benefit, 36% burden). Across political groups today, Democrats (62%) and independents (61%) are much more likely than Republicans (37%) to say that immigrants are a benefit to California. A majority of residents across the state’s four regions view immigrants as a benefit. Latinos (83%) are much more likely than whites (47%) to think immigrants are beneficial to California. Seventy-one percent of U.S. citizens born outside of the United States think that immigrants are a benefit to California, compared to 50 percent of those born in the United States. The perception that immigrants are a benefit declines as age and income increase. “Please indicate which statement comes closest to your own view—even if neither is exactly right…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Immigrants are a benefit to California 58% 62% 37% 61% because of their hard work and job skills Immigrants are a burden to California because they use public services 35 31 55 31 Don’t know 77 8 8 Latinos 83% 14 3 In the recent immigration debate in Washington, a major point of controversy has been a proposal for work permits. Today, 65 percent of Californians think that immigrants who are in the United States illegally should be allowed to apply for work permits, which would allow them to work in this country. Last September, 60 percent said that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. While there is support for this proposal across party lines, Democrats (67%) and independents (62%) are more likely than Republicans (51%) to say that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. Regionally, over six in 10 residents in the four major regions of California say that work permits should be granted. Latinos (89%) are more likely than whites (55%) to support work permits. Three in four citizens born outside the U.S. support work permits, compared to 58 percent of those born in the U.S. The belief that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits declines with age and income. More than eight in 10 adults who believe that immigrants are a benefit say that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. “Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn’t they be allowed to do that?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Should be allowed Should not be allowed Don’t know 65% 32 3 67% 29 4 51% 62% 89% 46 35 10 3 31 28 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues ABORTION RIGHTS AND SAME-SEX MARRIAGE California residents have consistently expressed support in our surveys fort the right to an abortion. In our current survey, seven in 10 adults would like the Supreme Court to ensure that a woman’s access to abortion is left the same (54%) or made easier than it is now (16%); one in four (26%) believes the court should make it more difficult to get an abortion. Since last October, the proportion wanting the court to make it more difficult to get an abortion has dropped by 9 points, from 35 percent to 26 percent. About eight in 10 Democrats (81%) and independents (79%) and six in 10 Republicans (60%) want the Supreme Court to maintain a woman’s current access to abortion or make it easier to receive the procedure. Across regions, over six in 10 residents want access to abortion to remain the same or become easier. Latinos (39%) are more likely than whites (20%) to want to make it more difficult to obtain an abortion; however, majorities in both groups want access to remain the same or made easier. Support for maintaining or increasing access to abortion rises with education and income. “Would you like to see the Supreme Court make it harder to get an abortion than it is now, make it easier to get an abortion than it is now, or leave the ability to get an abortion the same as it is now?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Harder Easier Same 26% 14% 16 21 54 60 36% 19% 22% 9 19 17 51 60 57 Don’t know 45 4 24 Forty-four percent of Californians are in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married, while 48 percent are opposed. Support for same-sex marriage has been at 44 percent among state residents over the past two and a half years, but it has increased since January 2000 (38% in favor). A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 35 percent of U.S. adults favor allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry while 56 percent are opposed. Likely voters are divided (47% favor, 46% oppose) on this issue. A majority of Democrats (58%) favor allowing same-sex marriages while two in three Republicans (66%) oppose this idea. Among independents, 49 percent are in favor and 43 percent are opposed. Six in 10 residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (61%) favor same-sex marriage while about half of those in other regions are opposed. Women are more likely than men (48% to 39%) to favor this idea, as are whites compared to Latinos (47% to 38%). Favor for same-sex marriage is higher among younger than older adults. Favor Oppose Don’t know “Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 44% 58% 48 35 27% 49% 47% 66 43 46 87 7 87 September 2006 29 REGIONAL MAP 30 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 Dean Bonner, project manager for this survey, and survey research associates Jennifer Paluch and Sonja Petek. The survey and focus groups 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 2,003 California adult residents interviewed September 13-20, 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 2,003 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 1,566 registered voters, it is +/- 2.5 percent; for the 1091 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 ABC News, Gallup, CBS News/New York Times, and the Pew Research Center. 31 QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE September 13-20, 2006 2,003 California Adult Residents: English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR +/-2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-12 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 7 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 31 Phil Angelides, the Democrat, State Treasurer 3 Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green, Financial Advisor 1 Art Olivier, the Libertarian, Engineer 1 Edward C. Noonan, the American Independent, Computer Shop Owner 1 someone else (specify) 15 don’t know 2. 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? 32% satisfied 54 dissatisfied 14 don’t know 3. How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor’s election? 17% very closely 57 fairly closely 20 not too closely 6 not at all closely 4. 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? 32% yes, Phil Angelides’ 27 yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 22 yes, both equally (volunteered) 17 no 2 don’t know 4b.In deciding who to vote for in the November 7th governor’s election, how important to you are the candidates' performances in public debates? 32% very important 40 somewhat important 17 not too important 10 not at all important 1 don’t know September 2006 33 Californians and the Future 5. Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? 32% more enthusiastic 40 less enthusiastic 25 same (volunteered) 3 don’t know Next, we have a few questions to ask you about some of the propositions on the November ballot. [rotate questions 6 to 9] 6. 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 for 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 36 no 13 don’t know 7. 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? 57% yes 30 no 13 don’t know 34 PPIC Statewide Survey 8. 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? 49% yes 40 no 11 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 9. 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? 55% yes 30 no 15 don’t know September 2006 35 Californians and the Future 10.Proposition 89 is called the “Political Campaigns Public Financing Corporate Tax Increase and Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Limits Initiative Statute.” It provides that eligible candidates for state elective office may receive public campaign funding. It increases tax on corporations and financial institutions by point two (.2) percent to fund the program and imposes new campaign contribution/expenditures limits. Fiscal impacts include increased revenues primarily from increased taxes on corporation and financial institutions totaling more than $200 million annually to pay for the public financing of political campaigns. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 89? 25% yes 61 no 14 don’t know Changing topics, [rotate questions 11 and 12] 11.Do you think that campaign contributions are currently having a good effect or a bad effect on the public policy decisions made by state elected officials in Sacramento, or are campaign contributions making no difference? 6% good effect 61 bad effect 21 making no difference 2 both (volunteered) 10 don’t know 12.Would you favor or oppose having a system of public funding for state and legislative campaigns in California if it cost each taxpayer a few dollars a year to run? 37% favor 53 oppose 10 don’t know Changing topics, 13.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California? 46% approve 46 disapprove 8 don’t know 14.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job? 34% approve 50 disapprove 16 don’t know 15.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the job that the state legislators representing your assembly and state senate districts are doing at this time? 45% approve 36 disapprove 19 don’t know 16.Do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 45% right direction 45 wrong direction 10 don’t know 17.Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 45% good times 43 bad times 12 don’t know As you may know, the term "infrastructure" refers to a variety of public works projects such as surface transportation, school facilities, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing. [rotate questions 18 and 19] 36 PPIC Statewide Survey 18.Overall, do you think your local government does or does not have adequate funding for infrastructure projects that are needed to prepare for future growth in your part of California? 42% does have adequate funding 49 does not have adequate funding 9 don’t know 19.In general, which of the following statements do you agree with more— [rotate] (1) I’d rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects; [or] (2) I’d rather pay lower taxes and have the state government spend less money on infrastructure projects? 44% higher taxes and more money for infrastructure projects 47 lower taxes and less money for infrastructure projects 9 don’t know Looking ahead to the year 2025, as I read each of the following pairs of statements, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California. [rotate questions 20 to 23 and statements] 20.(1) The public education system will improve; [or] (2) The public education system will get worse. 47% improve 44 get worse 2 neither, no change (volunteered) 7 don’t know 21.(1) The water and flood control systems will improve; [or] (2) The water and flood control systems will get worse. 53% improve 32 get worse 4 neither, no change (volunteered) 11 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 22.(1) Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will improve; [or] (2) Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse. 22% improve 74 get worse 2 neither, no change (volunteered) 2 don’t know 23.(1) the availability of affordable housing will improve; [or] (2) the availability of affordable housing will get worse. 22% improve 72 get worse 1 neither, no change (volunteered) 5 don’t know 24.On another topic, in California state government today, which of the following would you prefer to have the most influence over public policy—[rotate] (1) the governor, (2) the legislature, [or] (3) initiatives on the state ballot? 23% the governor 32 the legislature 33 initiatives on the state ballot 1 other (specify) 11 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. 25.Do you think the citizens’ initiative process in California is in need of major changes or minor changes or that it is basically fine the way it is at this time? 37% major changes 31 minor changes 25 fine the way it is 7 don’t know September 2006 37 Californians and the Future For the following items, please say if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. [rotate questions 26 and 27] 26.There are too many propositions on the state ballot. 28% strongly agree 31 somewhat agree 25 somewhat disagree 11 strongly disagree 5 don’t know 27.The ballot wording for citizens’ initiatives is often too complicated and confusing for voters to understand what happens if the initiative passes. 48% strongly agree 29 somewhat agree 14 somewhat disagree 6 strongly disagree 3 don’t know 28.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? 33% approve 64 disapprove 3 don’t know [rotate questions 29 and 30] 29.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq? 28% approve 68 disapprove 4 don’t know 30.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling terrorism and homeland security issues? 42% approve 54 disapprove 4 don’t know [rotate questions 31 and 32] 31.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Dianne Feinstein is handling her job as U.S. Senator? 51% approve 30 disapprove 19 don’t know 32.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barbara Boxer is handling her job as U.S. Senator? 46% approve 33 disapprove 21 don’t know 33.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way your own representative to the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress is handling his or her job? 55% approve 25 disapprove 20 don’t know 34.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job? 37% approve 54 disapprove 9 don’t know 35.In general, how would you say things are going for the U.S. in Iraq? 3% very well 23 somewhat well 28 not too well 45 not at all well 1 don’t know 36.All in all, do you think it was worth going to war in Iraq, or not? 30% worth it 65 not worth it 5 don’t know 38 PPIC Statewide Survey 36a.Do you think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, or do you think of it as separate from the war on terrorism? 37% part of 59 separate 4 don’t know 36b.In general, do you think the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going very well, somewhat well, not too well or not at all well? 8% very well 41 somewhat well 25 not too well 23 not at all well 2 don’t know Please indicate which statement comes closest to your own view—even if neither is exactly right. 37.[rotate] (1) Immigrants today are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills [or] (2) Immigrants today are a burden to California because they use public services. 58% immigrants are a benefit to California 35 immigrants are a burden to California 7 don’t know 38.Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn’t they be allowed to do that? 65% should be allowed 32 should not be allowed 3 don’t know [rotate questions 39 and 40] Questionnaire and Results 39.Would you like to see the Supreme Court make it harder to get an abortion than it is now, make it easier to get an abortion than it is now, or leave the ability to get an abortion the same as it is now? 26% harder 16 easier 54 same 4 don’t know 40.Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married? 44% favor 48 oppose 8 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? 78% yes [ask q42] 21 no [skip to q42a] 1 don’t know [skip to q42a] 42.Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent? 43% Democrat [skip to q42b] 35 Republican [skip to q42c] 20 independent [ask q42a] 2 another party (specify) [skip to q43] 42a.Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 21% Republican Party 46 Democratic Party 25 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know [go to q43] September 2006 39 Californians and the Future 42b.Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 49% strong 48 not very strong 3 don’t know [go to q43] 42c.Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 51% strong 46 not very strong 3 don’t know 43.On another topic, would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 9% very liberal 20 somewhat liberal 32 middle-of-the-road 25 somewhat conservative 10 very conservative 4 don’t know 44.Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics? 25% great deal 42 fair amount 28 only a little 5 none [D1-D12: demographic questions] 40 PPIC Statewide Survey 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 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 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(102) "

S 906MBS

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(107) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-the-future-september-2006/s_906mbs/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(8568) ["ID"]=> int(8568) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "1" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:44" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(3794) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(8) "S 906MBS" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(8) "s_906mbs" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(12) "S_906MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(7) "3931190" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(97400) " 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 23 30 31 33 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 71st PPIC Statewide Survey in a series that has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 148,000 Californians. This survey is the second in a series of four 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 Congressional representatives. The state ballot will also present the voters with 13 state propositions on a wide range of topics, including funding for the state’s infrastructure and various tax and spending issues. In addition, the ballot has four state bond measures, placed before the voters by the legislature, that total about $37 billion, for transportation, education, water, and housing. 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 of the state ballot measures, and the role of government trust both in shaping public opinion about ballot choices and in 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 2,003 California adults on a wide range of issues: „ The November 7th election, including preferences in the governor’s election, satisfaction with the candidates’ attention to the issues, awareness of election news and paid advertising, the importance of public debates, enthusiasm for voting in the upcoming election, support for the infrastructure bond measures placed on the ballot by the state legislature (Propositions 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E) and for a citizens’ initiative that would provide public financing for political campaigns (Proposition 89), and voters’ attitudes towards the financing of political campaigns. „ State issues, including approval ratings for Governor Schwarzenegger and the state legislature, attitudes towards the initiative process, preferences for public funding and planning for the state’s infrastructure, and perceptions of the future of California, including the outlook for 2025 for the conditions of surface transportation, education, water facilities, and housing. „ National issues, including approval ratings for President Bush, U.S. Senator Feinstein, U.S. Senator Boxer, and representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, and attitudes towards policy issues such as Iraq, terrorism, immigration, abortion, and same-sex marriage. „ 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, state issues, and national 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 Upcoming Debate May Be Best Hope For Angelides as Schwarzenegger Popularity—and Lead—Swells FATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS UNCERTAIN, PROP 89 SINKING; PESSIMISM DRIVING VOTER DECISIONS; BUSH APPROVAL NEARS ALL-TIME LOW WITH VOTERS SAN FRANCISCO, California, September 27, 2006 — Next week’s televised debate could be Democratic challenger Phil Angelides’ best hope to gain momentum in the race for governor—given voter disgust with the major candidates’ silence on policy issues of importance to them. Still, no matter how eloquent a performance Angelides gives, turning the tide of Governor Schwarzenegger’s widening lead and surging approval ratings will be a daunting challenge, according to a survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The James Irvine Foundation. Among likely voters, Schwarzenegger’s lead over Angelides has jumped to 17 points (48% to 31%)—four points higher than it was last month. Only 15 percent of likely voters remain undecided. Angelides has majority support among Democrats (57%), but it is not overwhelming. And although he leads Schwarzenegger among Latino likely voters (42% to 30%), that support falls short of a majority. The governor’s overall approval ratings have also risen. Today, 53 percent of likely voters approve of his job performance, a sharp contrast to his 33 percent approval ratings in September 2005. The increase may reflect Californians’ generally increasing optimism about where the state is headed: Although, they are evenly split over whether California is going in the right or wrong direction (45% each), those numbers represent a major upturn from one year ago when 60 percent of residents thought the state was going in the wrong direction and only 31 percent believed it was going in the right direction. Despite the recent optimism, likely voters remain anxious about the challenges facing the state and are dissatisfied with the amount of attention being focused on serious issues in the campaign. Over half of likely voters (54%) think the leading gubernatorial candidates are not paying enough attention to the issues and policies that are most important to them. The disgruntlement could make the upcoming candidates’ debate pivotal. Nearly three-fourths of likely voters (72%) say what they hear in the debate will be important to how they vote. “Voters are so thirsty for a serious discussion of relevant issues that the debate could give Angelides a chance to get a stronger footing in the race—or for Schwarzenegger to slam the door shut,” says PPIC survey director Mark Baldassare. Voters Tuning In… and Turning Off? Whether driven by antipathy or disbelief, many likely voters simply aren’t buying the messages being sent in the race. Case in point: Linking Schwarzenegger to George W. Bush has been a recurrent theme in Angelides’ campaign advertising. This might seem like a promising strategy, given that the president’s approval ratings are near an all-time low with California voters this month (35% approve, 63% disapprove). However, even among those who disapprove of the president, the Bush-Schwarzenegger theme hasn’t been compelling enough to give Angelides a majority edge over the incumbent governor (46% to 30%). Disenchantment with the candidates’ messages could explain why 40 percent of likely voters say they are less enthusiastic than usual about going to the polls. And this malaise seems to be well informed: Most (74%) say they are following election news either fairly or very closely. Ironically, some findings suggest that hearing more from a candidate could have negative consequences: Likely voters say they have seen more Angelides than Schwarzenegger ads (32% to 27%), yet the Democrat lags badly. “It’s a telling comment on 3 Californians and the Future California’s political times and mood,” says Baldassare. “Voters are engaged, are following election and candidate news—yet they are not only uninspired, they are turned off to the point where they may turn away.” Infrastructure Bonds Ahead but Facing Resistance; Prop 89 Facing Rejection As for November’s measures, the $37 billion in infrastructure bonds put on the ballot by the legislature, and championed by Governor Schwarzenegger, are all ahead—but far from being home free, because undecided voters could still tip the scales. The bond to fund affordable housing (Proposition 1C) has the most comfortable lead (57% yes, 30% no, 13% undecided), and the water facilities bond (Proposition 1E) is a close second (55% yes, 30% no, 15% undecided). But prospects are more uncertain for the transportation bond (51% yes, 36% no, 13% undecided) and the education facilities bond (49% yes, 40% no, 11% undecided)—Propositions 1B and 1D, respectively. In contrast, Proposition 89, the citizens’ initiative to provide public financing for political campaigns by taxing corporations and financial institutions, faces a definite uphill battle: Among likely voters, 61 percent would vote no, 25 percent would vote yes, and 14 percent are undecided. Opponents outnumber supporters among Republicans (73% no, 15% yes), independents (63% no, 27% yes), and Democrats (50% no, 34% yes). These views fit strangely with the opinion of 61 percent of likely voters that campaign contributions have a bad effect on public policy decisions (only 6 percent say they have a good effect,and 21 percent say they make no difference). “Voters clearly cast a jaundiced eye on the current system of campaign contributions,” says Baldassare. “It’s likely that opposition to Prop 89 has more to do with distrust of how the state manages taxpayer money, skepticism over whether such changes would do any good, and possibly—because likely voters are more involved in the system—a reluctance to change the status quo.” Residents Less Enthusiastic About Initiative Process, Ambivalent About Future Conditions Overall, Californians’ seemingly rock-solid faith in the citizens’ initiative may be waning. Residents’ preference that the initiative process have more influence than the legislature or the governor over public policy has dropped since last September (39% to 33%). Moreover, two in three residents think the initiative process needs either major (37%) or minor (31%) changes. Most residents (59%) somewhat or strongly agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot—and an even greater number (77%) think the wording for initiatives on ballots is too complicated to make their consequences clear. Californians have mixed views about specific challenges facing the state—despite the fact that a growing percentage think the state is headed in the right direction. Looking ahead to the year 2025, a majority of residents (53%) believe the state’s water and flood control system will improve (32% say it will get worse), and they are divided over whether public education will improve (47%) or get worse (44%). But residents have a decidedly pessimistic outlook about traffic and affordable housing. Nearly three-fourths (74%) of adults and even larger numbers of likely voters (82%) think traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse in the next 20 years. Most adults (72%) and likely voters (74%) also think the availability of affordable housing will get worse. Rock Bottom: Approval for Bush, Congress Dropping Although President Bush’s approval ratings have recently increased nationally (44% approval, Gallup Poll, September 2006), they are near an all-time low among California voters this month (35% approve, 63% disapprove). While there are the expected partisan divisions—with overwhelming majorities of Democrats (86%) and independents (73%) disapproving of President Bush’s performance—one-third (34%) of Republicans also disapprove. As the November elections loom, California’s likely voters are just as unimpressed with the job the U.S. Congress is doing (31% approve, 63% disapprove). Nationally, congressional approval is even lower (25% approval, CBS News/New York Times Poll, September 2006). But California’s own representatives can breathe easier: Sixty percent of the state’s likely voters say they approve of the way their own congressperson is handling his or her job. Senator Dianne Feinstein, who faces GOP challenger Richard Mountjoy in November, also enjoys majority approval among voters (53%). 4 PPIC Statewide Survey Press Release MORE KEY FINDINGS „ Latino voters engaged, more enthusiastic — Pages 9, 10 Seventy-nine percent of likely Latino voters say they have seen televised ads by one or both of the two major gubernatorial candidates. Latino voters are also more enthusiastic about going to the polls than voters in general (38% to 32%)—and are more than twice as likely as whites (52% to 26%) to say the upcoming debate is very important to how they will vote. „ Low approval ratings still dog legislature — Page 17 Half of all Californians disapprove of the job state lawmakers are doing (34% approve, 50% disapprove). This is virtually unchanged from where it was one year ago (32% approve, 53% disapprove, September 2005). However, approval has risen more among some groups (Republicans 21% to 30%, independents 32% to 40%). „ Harsh assessment of Iraq — Pages 24, 27 Seventy-three percent of Californians say the war in Iraq is not going well; 26 percent say things are going well. Approval of President Bush’s handling of Iraq is dismal (68% disapprove, 28% approve), although he gets higher marks on terrorism and homeland security (54% disapprove, 42% approve). Well over half of residents (59%) believe the conflict in Iraq is separate from the war on terrorism. „ Work permits for illegal immigrants gaining support — Page 28 Today, nearly two-thirds (65%) of Californians believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits in order to stay in the U.S.—a 5-point jump from one year ago (60%). „ Have shifts in supreme court justices spurred abortion defense? — Page 29 Since last October—when the U.S. Supreme Court began changing in composition—the share of Californians who want the court to make it harder to get an abortion has dropped nine points (35% to 26%); a majority (54%) want access to stay the same, and 16 percent want it to become easier. „ Same-sex marriage continues to divide — Page 29 Likely voters are divided over whether gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to legally marry (46% oppose, 47% favor). There are wide attitudinal differences between Republicans (66% oppose, 27% favor) and Democrats (35% oppose, 58% favor), while independents fall in between (43% oppose, 49% favor). ABOUT THE SURVEY This edition of the PPIC Statewide Survey – a pre-election survey that looks at Californians and the future – is the second 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 2,003 California adult residents interviewed between September 13 and September 20, 2006. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/2%. The sampling error for subgroups is larger. For more information on methodology, see page 31. 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. September 2006 5 NOVEMBER ELECTION KEY FINDINGS „ Arnold Schwarzenegger has a 17-point lead over Phil Angelides in the governor’s race, with 15 percent still undecided. (page 8) „ More than half of likely voters say they are not satisfied with the amount of attention that the gubernatorial candidates are spending on important issues, and four in 10 are less enthusiastic about voting this year. (page 9) „ Eight in 10 have noticed the gubernatorial candidates’ television ads, and 72 percent say that their debate performances are at least somewhat important in deciding how to vote. (page 10, 11) „ Each of the four infrastructure bonds placed on the ballot by the legislature is ahead, with affordable housing and disaster/flood control supported by wider margins than transportation and education. (page 11, 12) „ Support for Proposition 89, an initiative to implement public financing of political campaigns, is weak across all party groups. A majority are also unwilling to support a public funding system using taxpayer dollars, although six in 10 say campaign contributions have a bad effect on state policymaking. (page 13) 89-11CE-aB-DimTrspaaains11tsgCDe--nprfo,SHricfotnlhuaaotosinoioolcndnsseg Governor's Race 15 6 48 31 Likely Voters Schwarzenegger Angelides Other candidates Don't know Percent Likely Voters Percent Voting Yes on Propositions 80 70 60 51 57 49 55 50 40 30 25 20 10 0 7 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S RACE Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger now has a 17-point lead over State Treasurer Phil Angelides in the governor’s race (48% to 31%). The incumbent GOP governor previously led his Democratic challenger by a 13-point margin in our August (45% to 32%) and July surveys (43% to 30%). In the current survey, 15 percent of likely voters are still undecided and six percent name another candidate. Schwarzenegger holds the lead today because he is favored by 82 percent of Republicans, and is ahead of Angelides by 15 points among independents (42% to 27%). Meanwhile, 57 percent of Democrats support Angelides, while 21 percent favor Schwarzenegger. Significantly, many Democrats (17%) and independents (21%) still say they are undecided in the governor’s race. Nearly six in 10 liberals favor Angelides, and seven in 10 conservatives support Schwarzenegger, while the majority of political moderates favor the GOP incumbent (50% Schwarzenegger, 29% Angelides). Among those who disapprove of President Bush, Angelides is favored over Schwarzenegger by 16 points (46% Angelides, 30% Schwarzenegger), while most voters who approve of Bush overwhelmingly support the incumbent over the challenger (80% Schwarzenegger, 5% Angelides). “If the election for governor were being held today, who would you vote for…?” * Likely voters only Arnold Schwarzenegger Phil Angelides Other Candidates Don’t know All Likely Voters 48% 31% 6% 15% Democrat 21 57 5 17 Party Republican 82 4 59 Independent 42 27 10 21 Central Valley 57 28 69 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 39 41 39 34 6 16 8 17 Other Southern California 56 21 7 16 Gender Men Women 54 27 41 34 7 12 5 20 Race/Ethnicity Latinos Whites * For complete text of question, see p. 33. 30 42 56 25 7 21 6 13 Schwarzenegger holds a 29-point lead over Angelides in the Central Valley and a 35-point lead in the Other Southern California region. The race is close in the Democratic-leaning areas of the San Francisco Bay Area (39% for both Angelides and Schwarzenegger) and Los Angeles (41% Schwarzenegger, 34% Angelides). Schwarzenegger receives more support from men (54%) than women (41%), while Angelides has more support among women (34%) than men (27%). There are also racial/ethnic differences, with whites supporting Schwarzenegger over Angelides by more than a two-to-one margin (56% to 25%), while Latinos favor Angelides over Schwarzenegger by a 12-point margin (42% to 30%). Support for Schwarzenegger is higher among homeowners than renters, and increases with age and income. 8 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election GOVERNOR’S RACE (CONTINUED) The gubernatorial campaign seems to be generating some voter unhappiness, especially over its substance. More than half of likely voters say they are dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are spending on the issues that they consider to be most important, while just one in three are satisfied. Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to express dissatisfaction. Similar levels of dissatisfaction are expressed across all racial/ethnic and gender groups; complaints about attention to issues rise with education levels and decrease with age. In our September 2002 survey, during the campaign between Gray Davis and Bill Simon, 27 percent of likely voters were satisfied and 64 percent dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates were spending on important issues. Democrats are as likely today as they were four years ago (59% to 58%) to say they are not satisfied, while Republicans (47% to 66%) and independents (58% to 73%) are less likely to say so. “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 Ind Satisfied 32% 26% 40% 31% Dissatisfied 54 59 47 58 Don't know 14 15 13 11 Moreover, four in 10 likely voters say they are less enthusiastic about voting in the governor’s election this year than usual. About one in three say they are more enthusiastic about voting this year, while one in four volunteer that their level of enthusiasm for voting today is about the same as in the past. Fortyfour percent of Republicans say they are less enthusiastic about voting this year, compared to fewer than four in 10 Democrats and independents. Voter enthusiasm tends to decrease as age increases. Whites are more likely than Latinos (43% to 33%), and women are more likely than men (44% to 36%) to say they are less enthusiastic about voting this year. In our September 2002 survey, we found that 55 percent of likely voters said they were less enthusiastic and 27 percent were more enthusiastic about voting in the governor’s election, with majorities in all party groups expressing less enthusiasm than usual about voting. “Thinking about the governor's election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind More enthusiastic 32% 36% 26% 33% Less enthusiastic 40 38 44 36 Same (volunteered) 25 23 26 27 Don't know 3344 Latinos 38% 33 24 5 September 2006 9 Californians and the Future VOTER ATTENTION There is a high level of awareness of the paid advertisements produced by the gubernatorial campaigns, with 81 percent of likely voters saying they have recently seen television ads by the candidates. At this juncture, neither major party candidate seems to have a significant advantage in terms of whose ads are seen the most, and about one in five voters volunteers that they remember seeing them equally. Republicans are more likely to say that they remember seeing Angelides ads the most, and Democrats are more likely to say they remember seeing Schwarzenegger ads the most. In our September 2002 survey, slightly fewer (75%) respondents than today recalled seeing ads for the governor’s race, with the most saying they saw more ads from Davis than from Simon (55% to 17%). “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?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Yes, Phil Angelides' ads 32% 27% 41% 28% 25% Yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger's ads 27 33 19 26 37 Yes, both equally (volunteered) 22 21 20 25 17 No 17 15 16 19 18 Don't know 24423 The governor’s race is generating more interest now than a month ago, with 74 percent of likely voters saying they are very (17%) or fairly closely (57%) following news about the candidates today, compared to 64 percent in August. Still, the percentage of voters who expressed interest was slightly higher in September 2002, when 80 percent of likely voters were either very (28%) or fairly (52%) closely following the news about the governor’s election. “How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor's election?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Very closely 17% 17% 19% 13% Fairly closely 57 59 52 63 Not too closely 20 18 22 18 Not at all closely 6676 The major party candidates for governor are scheduled to meet in a televised debate on October 7th,one month before the election. How important are public debates to voters this year? About seven in 10 likely voters say that the candidates’ performances in public debates are at least somewhat important, with 32 percent describing performances as very important. Democrats (39%) and independents (32%) are more likely than Republicans (23%) to rate debates as very important to their decision process. The perception that debates are very important tends to decrease as age, education, and income increase, is higher for renters than homeowners, and does not vary between men and women. Latinos (52%) are twice as likely as whites (26%) to say debates are very important in deciding who to vote for in the governor’s election. 10 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election VOTER ATTENTION (CONTINUED) “In deciding who to vote for in the November 7th governor’s election, how important to you are the candidates' performances in public debates?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Very important 32% 39% 23% Somewhat important 40 39 39 Not too important 17 15 23 Not at all important 10 6 14 Don't know 111 Ind 32% 48 13 6 1 INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS As they were last month, the four infrastructure bonds placed on the November ballot for funding transportation (1B), affordable housing (1C), education facilities (1D), and water and flood control (1E) are ahead when likely voters were read each of the ballot titles and labels in its entirety. But voter support does vary significantly on the four bond measures. The biggest margins of support are for affordable housing (27 points) and water and flood controls (25 points), the two measures with lower total dollar amounts, followed by transportation (15 points) and education facilities (9 points) which propose higher levels of debt. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on…?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don't know 51% 62% 41% 36 25 47 13 13 12 Proposition 1C Affordable housing Yes No Don't know 57 30 13 69 44 18 43 13 13 Proposition 1D Education facilities Yes No Don't know 49 40 11 63 34 26 56 11 10 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don't know 55 30 15 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 34-35. 61 48 23 37 16 15 Ind 50% 38 12 56 33 11 47 41 12 51 34 15 September 2006 11 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE BONDS (CONTINUED) Proposition 1B, the transportation bond (about $19.9 billion), is favored by 51 percent of likely voters and opposed by 36 percent, similar to last month’s survey (50% yes, 38% no). Today, 62 percent of Democrats, compared to half of independents and 41 percent of Republicans, would vote yes on 1B. Proposition 1C, the affordable housing bond ($2.85 billion), is supported by 57 percent of likely voters, while 30 percent would vote no—almost identical to the results last month (57% yes, 32% no). In this month’s survey, 69 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents would vote yes on 1C, compared to 44 percent of Republicans. Proposition 1D, the education facilities bond (about $10.4 billion), is supported by 49 percent of likely voters and opposed by 40 percent, similar to last month’s survey (51% yes, 39% no). Today, 63 percent of Democrats and 47 percent of independents would vote yes on 1D. Republicans oppose 1D by a wide margin (56% no, 34% yes). Proposition 1E, the water and flood control bond (about $4.1 billion), receives a 55 percent yes vote and a 30 percent no vote, while last month 56 percent were in favor and 35 percent were opposed. Today, 61 percent of Democrats and 51 percent of independents favor the bond measure. Republicans have a more favorable response to 1E (48% yes, 37% no) than to the other three bond measures. Across the state’s regions, Propositions 1B (transportation) and 1C (affordable housing) have the most support in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Proposition 1D (education) has the most support in the San Francisco Bay Area and the least support in the Other Southern California region. Proposition 1E (water and flood controls) has more support in the Central Valley, Los Angeles, and San Francisco Bay Area than in the Other Southern California region. Support for all four of the bonds is lower among homeowners than renters, and support decreases with higher education and income. Approval for the bond measures is lower in each case among whites than Latinos, and support for the transportation and education bonds is lower among older than younger voters. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on…?” * Likely voters only Proposition 1B Transportation Yes No Don't know All Likely Voters 51% 36 13 Central Valley 48% 39 13 Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 55% 57% Other Southern California 48% 31 32 41 14 11 11 Proposition 1C Yes 57 54 59 63 54 No 30 34 27 26 34 Affordable housing Don't know 13 12 14 11 12 Proposition 1D Yes 49 50 55 51 42 No 40 40 33 40 46 Education facilities Don't know 11 10 12 9 12 Proposition 1E Water facilities Yes No Don't know 55 30 15 * For complete text of proposition questions, see pp. 34-35. 60 24 16 58 60 46 27 26 38 15 14 16 12 PPIC Statewide Survey November Election PROPOSITION 89: PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS Californians will also vote on a citizens’ initiative that would provide public financing for political campaigns, with funding coming from a tax on corporations and financial institutions. When read the ballot title and label in its entirety, 25 percent would vote yes and 61 percent would vote no on Proposition 89. While opponents outnumber supporters across political parties, Republicans are more likely to say they will vote no. Majorities in all regions and across age, education, gender, and income groups say they will vote no on Proposition 89. Latinos are more likely than whites (37% to 23%) to favor Proposition 89, but majorities in both groups are opposed. “If the election were held today, how would you vote on Proposition 89?” * Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Yes 25% 34% 15% No 61 50 73 Don't know 14 16 12 * For complete text of proposition questions, see p. 36. Ind 27% 63 10 A majority of likely voters would also oppose having a system of public funding for state political campaigns if it cost taxpayers a few dollars a year to run, while 37 percent would be in favor of this proposal. In May, 51 percent of likely voters said they would favor a public financing system that would cost each taxpayer a few dollars. Democrats are divided on this issue today while independents are opposed, as are Republicans, by more than a two-to-one margin. “Would you favor or oppose having a system of public funding for state and legislative campaigns in California if it cost each taxpayer a few dollars a year to run?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Favor 37% 45% 27% 37% Oppose 53 43 64 51 Don't know 10 12 9 12 Nonetheless, most likely voters today believe that private campaign contributions are having a bad effect on public policy decisions, a finding similar to those in October 2005 (64% bad effect) and September 1999 (66% bad effect). Today, majorities across age, income, and homeownership groups believe that campaign contributions have a bad effect. This view is more common among Democrats and independents than among Republicans, and increases with education. “Do you think that campaign contributions are currently having a good effect or a bad effect on the public policy decisions made by state elected officials in Sacramento, or are campaign contributions making no difference?” Likely voters only All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Good effect 6% 7% 7% Bad effect 61 66 53 No difference 21 19 24 Both (volunteered) 224 Don't know 10 6 12 Ind 4% 65 20 1 10 September 2006 13 STATE ISSUES KEY FINDINGS „ Governor Schwarzenegger’s job approval ratings among likely voters (53%) today are significantly higher than they were in PPIC’s September 2005 survey (38%), when they were at a low point. (page 16) „ The legislature’s approval ratings remain low among likely voters (32%), but 44 percent approve of the job their own state legislators are doing. (page 17) „ Many Californians prefer the initiative process to have the most policy influence but believe that changes are needed. Many agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot and that ballot language is confusing. (page 19) „ Half of Californians believe that there is not enough local funding for infrastructure projects. But residents are deeply divided across political groups when asked if they would prefer to pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more on infrastructure projects. (page 20) „ Residents are pessimistic about traffic congestion and affordable housing in the future but are more optimismitic about improvement in education and water and flood controls. (page 21, 22) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters Governor's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Sept Jan Sept Jan Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 California Legislature's Approval Ratings 80 Approve Disapprove 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan Sept Jan Sept Jan Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 15 Californians and the Future GOVERNOR’S APPROVAL RATINGS Approval of Governor Schwarzenegger’s overall job performance continues to increase as the November election draws near. Today, all adults are as likely to approve as disapprove (46% each) of his overall job performance, a dramatic improvement compared to last September (33% approve, 58% disapprove). Among likely voters, 53 percent approve and 39 percent disapprove, a sharp reversal from just one year ago when he announced his reelection plans (38% approve, 55% disapprove). Sizeable differences in the governor’s approval ratings continue to be evident across political groups. Three in four Republicans approve (75%) of the governor’s performance while 59 percent of Democrats disapprove; independents are divided (46% approve, 42% disapprove). Today, 34 percent of Democrats approve of the governor’s job performance, compared to 14 percent in September 2005. Moreover, 34 percent of those who disapprove of President Bush’s job performance today say they approve of the governor’s performance. What are the implications of these approval ratings for the election? Of the likely voters who plan to vote for Schwarzenegger, 88 percent approve of his job as governor. Of likely voters who plan to vote for Phil Angelides, 81 percent disapprove of the governor’s job performance. Residents are evenly divided over whether the state is headed in the right direction or the wrong direction (45% each) today—also a major improvement from a year ago (31% right direction, 60% wrong direction)—and 64 percent who say the state is headed in the right direction approve of the governor’s job performance. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 46% 34% 46 59 87 75% 46% 53% 19 42 39 6 12 8 Across regions, residents in the Other Southern California region and the Central Valley (52% each) are the most likely to approve of the governor’s performance, while residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (41%) and Los Angeles (40%) are the least likely to approve. Approval of the governor’s job performance is higher among whites than Latinos (57% to 27%) and men than women (49% to 42%). LEGISLATURE’S APPROVAL RATINGS Today, after the close of the 2006 legislative session, 34 percent of all adults and 32 percent of likely voters voice their approval of the legislature. At least half of all adults (50%) and likely voters (55%) disapprove of the way that the legislature is handling its job. Last month, approval ratings of the legislature were at 31 percent for all adults and 27 percent for likely voters. With the large bond package placed on the November ballot, and a budget and several high profile bills passed by the legislature and signed by the governor, how do the legislature’s approval ratings today compare to a year ago? The legislature’s approval ratings among all adults (32% 2005, 34% today) and likely voters (28% 2005, 32% today) have not changed much since last September. 16 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues LEGISLATURE’S APPROVAL RATINGS (CONTINUED) A strong majority of Republicans (60%) disapprove of the job the legislature is doing, but fewer independents (45%) disapprove. Although Democrats control the state legislature, 50 percent of Democrats in the state still disapprove of the legislature’s performance. Compared to last year, approval ratings today are notably higher among Republicans (21% 2005, 30% today) and independents (32% 2005, 40% today). Approval ratings of the legislature among Democrats remain unchanged from last year (35% each time). Across regions, approval ratings are slightly higher in the Central Valley (39%) and San Francisco Bay Area (37%) than in the Other Southern California region and Los Angeles (32% each). Approval of the legislature’s job performance is somewhat higher among Latinos (38%) than whites (33%). Disapproval of the legislature increases with age, education, income, and homeownership. Among those who disapprove of Governor Schwarzenegger’s job performance, 60 percent also disapprove of the job the legislature is doing at this time, while among those who approve of the governor, opinions of the legislature are divided (45% approve, 43% disapprove). Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 34% 35% 30% 40% 50 50 60 45 16 15 10 15 Likely Voters 32% 55 13 When asked about their own representatives to the state assembly and state senate, all Californians (45%) and likely voters (44%) are much more approving. In our May survey, these job approval ratings were 39 percent for all adults and 41 percent among likely voters. Approval ratings for residents’ own state legislators are similar across parties today, with Democrats (48%) slightly more approving than independents (44%) and Republicans (43%). Across regions, residents in the Central Valley and San Francisco Bay Area (50% each) are somewhat more approving of their representatives than are residents of the Other Southern California (44%) and Los Angeles (43%) regions. Latinos are more likely than whites to express approval (50% to 43%). “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the job that the state legislators representing your assembly and state senate districts are doing at this time?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve Disapprove Don’t know 45% 48% 43% 44% 44% 36 36 42 39 41 19 16 15 17 15 September 2006 17 Californians and the Future THE INITIATIVE PROCESS Would Californians prefer the governor, the legislature, or the initiative process to have the most influence over public policy? About one third of all adults say initiatives (33%) or the legislature (32%), with fewer choosing the governor. Likely voters express similar preferences. Last month, when we asked residents who they believe actually has the most influence over public policy, 41 percent of residents said the legislature, and about one in four said the governor and initiatives on the state ballot (24% each). Across political groups today, Democrats would prefer the legislature (43%) to have more influence than other sources, Republicans are divided between initiatives (36%) and the governor (32%), and independents are divided between initiatives (35%) and the legislature (33%). Since last September, California residents’ preference for initiatives has decreased slightly (39% 2005, 33% today), their preference for the legislature remains unchanged (32% each time), and their preference for the governor has increased somewhat (18% 2005, 23% today). PPIC’s recent surveys differ from earlier ones, in which higher percentages of residents preferred the initiative process over the legislature and the governor in having the most influence over public policy. “In California state government today, which of the following would you prefer to have the most influence over public policy?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind The governor The legislature Initiatives on the state ballot Other Don’t know 23% 17% 32% 24% 32 43 26 33 33 33 36 35 1 112 11 6 5 6 Likely Voters 20% 38 36 1 5 Many Californians perceive the initiative process as flawed. Two in three adults say the initiative process needs either major (37%) or minor (31%) changes. An equal proportion of likely voters say major (37%) or minor (31%) changes are needed. About one in four adults and likely voters say the initiative process in California is fine the way it is. Strong majorities across political parties think that major or minor changes are needed in the initiative process. Democrats (40%) are more likely than independents (33%) and Republicans (32%), and Latinos (49%) are more likely than whites (32%), to see a need for major changes in ballot initiatives. “Do you think the citizens’ initiative process in California is in need of major changes or minor changes or that it is basically fine the way it is at this time?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Major changes Minor changes 37% 40% 32% 33% 37% 31 31 32 33 31 Fine the way it is 25 23 30 30 27 Don’t know 7 664 5 18 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues THE INITIATIVE PROCESS (CONTINUED) Thirteen state propositions are on this November’s state ballot, including eight citizens’ initiatives. What do Californians think about the number of propositions on state ballots? Six in 10 residents (59%) and likely voters (58%) agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Last year, a similar proportion of residents (62%) and likely voters (61%) agreed there were too many propositions prior to the special election, which had eight statewide propositions on the ballot. Majorities of Democrats (61%), Republicans (59%), and independents (56%) agree that there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Residents over 55 (65%) are more likely than residents age 3554 (60%) or those under 34 (53%) to hold this perception. Latinos and whites, and men and women, hold similar perceptions on this issue. San Francisco Bay Area residents (65%) are more likely than those living in other regions to say there are too many propositions on the state ballot. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know “There are too many propositions on the state ballot…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 28% 31% 29% 24% 31 30 30 32 25 22 26 30 11 13 11 11 5 443 Likely Voters 29% 29 25 13 4 An even more widely held negative perception of the initiative process is that the ballot wording is often too complicated and confusing. Nearly eight in 10 residents (77%) and likely voters (79%) agree with this perception, with about half of all adults (48%) and likely voters (52%) strongly agreeing. The percentage who strongly agree with this statement has increased slightly by 5 points since August 2004 (43% to 48%). Solid majorities of Democrats (81%), Republicans (77%), and independents (76%) agree with this perception, and this perception increases with age and income. Over seven in 10 across education groups agree that the wording for ballot initiatives is often too complicated and confusing. “The ballot wording for citizens’ initiatives is often too complicated and confusing for voters to understand what happens if the initiative passes…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know 48% 55% 47% 49% 52% 29 26 30 27 27 14 12 16 15 13 6 569 6 3 210 2 September 2006 19 Californians and the Future INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND FUNDING As Californians go to the polls in November to vote on a package of state infrastructure bonds, half of all adults and likely voters do not think their local governments have adequate funding for infrastructure projects needed to prepare for growth in their region. Majorities of Democrats (57%) and independents (55%) believe that local infrastructure funding is inadequate, while 50 percent of Republicans believe that funding is adequate. In August 2004, residents were more negative about local funding prospects (33% adequate, 60% not), while in May of 2001 residents’ opinions (43% adequate, 48% not) were similar to those today. Across regions, majorities of San Francisco Bay Area (54%) and Central Valley (52%) residents say local infrastructure funding is inadequate, compared to 42 percent in Los Angeles and 48 percent in the Other Southern California region. “Overall, do you think your local government does or does not have adequate funding for infrastructure projects that are needed to prepare for future growth in your part of California?” Does have adequate funding Does not have adequate funding Don’t know All Adults 42% 49 9 Central Valley 38% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 36% 47% 52 54 42 10 10 11 Likely Voters Other Southern California 43% 39% 48 51 9 10 Forty-four percent of Californians say they would rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects, while 47 percent say they prefer to pay lower taxes and have less money spent on infrastructure projects. Likely voters have similar responses to all adults on this fiscal question. A majority of Democrats today (54%) would prefer higher taxes and more spending, a majority of Republicans (59%) would prefer lower taxes and less spending, and independents are divided (46% higher taxes, 47% lower taxes). In August 2004, 49 percent of residents chose higher taxes and more spending, and 43 percent chose lower taxes and less spending. Today, San Francisco Bay Area residents (51%) are more likely than others to say they would prefer higher taxes and more spending; about half of the adults living in other regions would rather pay lower taxes and spend less. Willingness to pay higher taxes increases with education and income. Of those who believe their local governments have adequate funding for infrastructure projects, 59 percent would rather pay lower taxes and have less funding; of those who think their local governments do not have adequate funding, 54 percent would rather pay higher taxes and have more funding. “In general, which of the following statements do you agree with more…?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind I’d rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects I’d rather pay lower taxes and have the state government spend less money on infrastructure projects Don’t know 44% 47 9 54% 31% 46% 38 59 47 8 10 7 Likely Voters 45% 47 8 20 PPIC Statewide Survey State Issues OUTLOOK FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION, WATER AND FLOOD CONTROL IN 2025 Looking ahead to 2025, are residents optimistic or pessimistic about California’s future? Adults are somewhat divided (47% improve, 44% get worse) over whether the public education system in their region will improve or get worse, but tend to be somewhat more positive than likely voters (42% improve, 50% get worse). Residents’ optimism about the state’s public education system was comparable in August 2004 (45% improve, 46% get worse). Across political parties today, there is little difference in expectations about the future of public education. Across regions, San Francisco Bay Area residents are the most pessimistic (53% get worse), while about half in other regions think the public education system will improve. Latinos are more likely than whites to expect improvement (56% to 44%), as are parents of public school children compared to others (56% to 43%). Of likely voters who think the education system will improve, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1D (education facilities). Of those who think it will get worse, half would vote no on Proposition 1D and only 40 percent would vote yes. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” The public education system will improve The public education system will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults 47% 44 2 7 Central Valley 50% Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 37% 48% 43 53 44 22 2 58 6 Likely Voters Other Southern California 51% 42% 42 50 22 56 Majorities of all adults and likely voters (53% each) believe the water and flood control systems in their region will improve by 2025. Majorities of Democrats and Republicans (55% each) hold this view, and about half of independents (49%) agree. Over half of residents across the major regions are optimistic about their future water and flood control systems. Across racial/ethnic groups, over half think water and flood control systems will improve, but Latinos (57%) are somewhat more optimistic than whites (51%). Majorities of men and women, residents across income groups, and homeowners and renters believe their water systems will improve. This positive expectation, however, declines with age. Of likely voters who think water and flood control systems will improve, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1E (water facilities). Of those who think it will get worse, 55 percent would also vote yes. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” The water and flood control systems will improve The water and flood control systems will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 53% 55% 53% 52% Likely Voters Other Southern California 55% 53% 32 32 34 33 31 33 44 4 4 34 11 9 9 11 11 10 September 2006 21 Californians and the Future OUTLOOK FOR TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN 2025 Californians are not so hopeful about traffic conditions on freeways and major roads in their region. Three in four of all adults (74%) and over eight in 10 likely voters (82%) believe traffic conditions in their region will get worse by 2025. Although these responses are very pessimistic, the findings among all adults in August 2004 were even more dismal (81% get worse). Today, over seven in 10 across parties, regions, and gender groups believe that traffic conditions will worsen. As education and income rise, pessimism increases. Whites (83%) are far more likely than Latinos (57%) to expect worse conditions, and homeowners (80%) are more likely than renters (68%) to feel this way. Of likely voters who think traffic conditions will get worse, 50 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1B (transportation). Of those who think conditions will improve, 63 percent would vote yes. Regardless of their choice on Proposition 1B, likely voters are pessimistic: Of those who would vote yes, and of those who would vote no, over three in four likely voters believe traffic conditions will get worse. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California.” Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will improve Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 22% 21% 22% 22% Likely Voters Other Southern California 19% 15% 74 73 74 74 77 82 22 1 1 11 24 3 3 32 Californians also express negative views about the availability of affordable housing in their region. Over seven in 10 adults (72%) and likely voters (74%) believe the availability of affordable housing will get worse, while only about two in 10 think it will improve. Compared to August 2004 (78% get worse), residents today are slightly less pessimistic. Strong majorities across parties, regions, racial/ethnic, gender, age, education, and income groups today say the availability of affordable housing will worsen. Of likely voters who think the availability of affordable housing will get worse, 60 percent would vote yes on Proposition 1C (affordable housing). Of those who think availability will improve, a similar 55 percent would also vote yes. Again, regardless of their choice on Proposition 1C, over two in three yes voters and no voters say the availability of affordable housing will get worse in the future. “Looking ahead to the year 2025, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California?” The availability of affordable housing will improve The availability of affordable housing will get worse Neither, no change (volunteered) Don’t know All Adults 22% 72 1 5 Central Valley Region San Francisco Bay Area Los Angeles 28% 23% 21% 66 72 11 54 74 2 3 Likely Voters Other Southern California 23% 21% 73 74 12 33 22 PPIC Statewide Survey NATIONAL ISSUES KEY FINDINGS „ President Bush’s approval ratings among all adults for his overall job performance (33%) and for his handling both of the situation in Iraq (28%) and of terrorism and homeland security (42%) are at new lows. (page 24) „ Majorities of adults (51%) and likely voters (53%) approve of the job performance of Senator Feinstein. Nearly half of all adults (46%) and likely voters (47%) approve of Senator Boxer. (page 25) „ Most Californians (55%) and likely voters (60%) approve of the job performance of their representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, while Congress as a whole has much lower marks. (page 26) „ Pessimism about the U.S. effort in Iraq has increased among Californians, with 45 percent say it is going “not at all well.” Six in 10 think of the Iraq conflict as separate from the war on terrorism, and half say the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going at least somewhat well. (page 27) „ A majority of Californians continue to believe immigrants benefit the state, and 65 percent favor the idea of allowing illegal immigrants to apply for work permits that would allow them to remain and work in this country. (page 28) „ Seven in 10 adults want abortion access to remain the same (54%) or become easier (16%), while one in four want access to become more difficult. Californians are divided and deeply split along partisan lines on allowing same-sex marriages. (page 29) Percent Likely Voters Percent Likely Voters President Bush's Approval Ratings 80 Approve 70 Disapprove 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 Senator Feinstein's Approval Ratings 80 Approve Disapprove 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Feb Oct May Oct Mar Sept 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 23 Californians and the Future PRESIDENT’S APPROVAL RATINGS President Bush’s approval ratings with the California public reached an all time low this month, even as his standing improved in recent national surveys. Thirty-three percent of Californians approve of the way he is handling his job as president, while 64 percent say they disapprove. His approval ratings have remained below 40 percent since January 2005, and are far lower than his high of 80 percent in the wake of September 11th. In a recent Gallup Poll, 44 percent of Americans approved of the president’s job performance. Strong partisan and regional differences underlie the California ratings. Democrats (86%) and independents (73%) disapprove of the way Bush is handling his job, while nearly two in three Republicans (63%) approve. Across California’s regions, approval is higher in the Central Valley (43%) and the Other Southern California region (36%) than in Los Angeles (31%) or the San Francisco Bay Area (21%). Whites (37%) are more likely than Latinos (31%) to approve of the way Bush is handling his job. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling his job as President of the United States?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 33% 12% 64 86 32 63% 25% 34 73 32 Likely Voters 35% 63 2 On the issue of Iraq, President Bush’s approval ratings have also reached a new low, declining from 33 percent in January to 28 percent today. Californians are more negative than Americans in general, who gave Bush a 41 percent approval rating on Iraq in an ABC News poll earlier this month. Strong partisan differences, as usual, are apparent in California: Democrats (11%) and independents (22%) are far less approving of Bush’s war efforts than Republicans (59%). Whites (35%) and Latinos (23%) also differ in their approval ratings. Approval of Bush’s handling of Iraq increases with age and income. Approval of President Bush’s handling of terrorism and homeland security has also reached a new low among California adults (42%). Bush’s approval ratings on this issue were at 45 percent in January and have been below 50 percent since August 2004. Republicans (72%) are far more likely than independents (34%) or Democrats (22%) to approve of Bush’s performance in this area. Whites (45%) are more likely than Latinos (39%), and men (46%) are more likely than women (38%), to approve. A recent ABC News poll found a 53 percent approval rating on this issue among all Americans. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind The situation in Iraq? Approve Disapprove Don’t know 28% 68 4 11% 88 1 59% 22% 32% 38 74 66 3 42 Terrorism and homeland security issues? Approve Disapprove Don’t know 42 54 4 22 75 3 72 34 42 25 63 55 3 33 24 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues RATINGS OF CALIFORNIA’S U.S. SENATORS Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein will be facing GOP challenger Richard Mountjoy on the November ballot. Today, 51 percent of California adults and 53 percent of likely voters approve of the senator’s job performance. Her approval ratings were similar in March (51% adults, 56% likely voters) and last October (50% adults, 55% likely voters) and have remained around 50 percent or higher in every PPIC survey. As with other elected officials in this survey, partisan and regional differences are apparent in approval ratings of the U.S. Senator. Democrats (72%) and independents (57%) are much more likely than Republicans (31%) to approve of the way Feinstein is handling her job. Residents in the Other Southern California area (43%) are less likely to approve of Feinstein than residents in the Central Valley (50%), Los Angeles (53%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (64%). There are no significant differences in approval ratings across gender and age groups. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Dianne Feinstein is handling her job as U.S. Senator?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 51% 72% 30 17 19 11 31% 57% 54 25 15 18 Likely Voters 53% 35 12 Senator Barbara Boxer receives approval ratings of 46 percent from adults and 47 percent from likely voters. Her approval ratings were similar in March (48% adults, 50% likely voters) and last October (48% adults, 50% likely voters) and have remained around 50 percent since May 2005. Boxer’s approval ratings are lower now than they were in October 2004, just before her reelection (53% adults, 54% likely voters). Approval ratings of Boxer differ sharply across political groups, with Democrats (69%) and independents (52%) more likely than Republicans (21%) to approve of the senator’s job performance. Approval of Boxer is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area (56%) and Los Angeles (50%) than in the Central Valley (44%) and the Other Southern California region (37%). Latinos (52%) are more likely than whites (42%), and women (49%) are more likely than men (44%), to approve of Boxer. Approval ratings are similar across age groups. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barbara Boxer is handling her job as U.S. Senator?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 46% 69% 33 16 21 15 21% 52% 62 31 17 17 Likely Voters 47% 41 12 September 2006 25 Californians and the Future RATINGS OF CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AND CONGRESS When asked to rate their own representative in the U.S. House of Representatives, 55 percent of California adults and 60 percent of likely voters say they approve. These findings are similar to March (52% adults, 59% likely voters) and last October (53% adults, 57% likely voters). In a recent CBS/New York Times poll, 53 percent of Americans approved of the job that their own congressional representative was doing. Partisan differences exist, but they are considerably smaller than those we find in the approval ratings of the president and senators. Across parties, Democrats (62%) are more likely than Republicans (57%) or independents (55%) to approve of their representative’s job performance. Majorities of residents across California’s four major regions approve of their congressional representative. Whites (58%) are more likely than Latinos (50%) to express approval, and approval ratings also increase with age, education, and income. “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that your own representative to the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress is handling his or her job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Approve Disapprove Don’t know 55% 62% 25 23 20 15 57% 55% 60% 24 28 25 19 17 15 With the November election looming, Californian’s approval of the U.S. Congress remains low: 37 percent of Californians and only 31 percent of likely voters approve of the way the Congress is handling its job. According to a recent CBS News/New York Times Poll, only 25 percent of Americans approve of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job. Approval of the Republican-controlled Congress is low across all political groups in California; however, it is somewhat higher among Republicans (41%) than among independents (35%) or Democrats (29%). Residents of the Central Valley (42%), the Other Southern California region (41%), and Los Angeles (39%) are more likely than residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (28%) to approve of the way Congress is performing. Approval of Congress is higher among Latinos (46%) than among whites (33%). There are no differences in the ratings given by men and women. However, approval ratings of Congressional performance decline with age, education, and income. Approve Disapprove Don’t know “Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 37% 29% 54 63 98 41% 35% 52 57 78 Likely Voters 31% 63 6 26 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues U.S. EFFORTS IN IRAQ AND THE WAR ON TERRORISM California’s pessimism about the U.S. efforts in Iraq continues to grow: Only 26 percent of adults say things are going very well (3%) or somewhat well (23%); 73 percent say things are going not too well (28%) or not at all well (45%). Fewer Californians today than in January 2006 (35%), August 2005 (30%), and August 2004 (33%) believe that the U.S. situation in Iraq is going at least somewhat well. Today, Democrats (63%) and independents (49%) are much more likely than Republicans (22%) to say things are not going at all well. Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (57%) and Los Angeles (46%) are more likely than those in the Central Valley (39%) or the Other Southern California region (37%) to hold this negative opinion. Latinos and whites are similar in their opinions of the U.S. situation in Iraq. Sixty-five percent of Californians now say that it was not worth going to war in Iraq, similar to the PPIC Statewide Surveys in the past two years (61% August 2004, 64% August 2005, 62% January 2006). The belief that it was not worth going to war in Iraq is held today by most Democrats (83%) and independents (74%), while 60 percent of Republicans say it was worth it and 34 percent say it was not. Very well Somewhat well Not too well Not at all well Don’t know “In general, how would you say things are going for the U.S. in Iraq?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind 3% 1% 23 10 28 25 45 63 11 6% 1% 42 16 29 32 22 49 12 Likely Voters 3% 23 28 46 0 About four in 10 California adults (37%) think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, while 59 percent view it as a separate issue. Opinions are similar for likely voters. In a recent ABC News poll, 57 percent of adults nationwide said they think of the Iraq war as part of the war against terrorism, while 41 percent said it is separate from the war against terrorism. Republicans (65%) are much more likely than independents (35%) or Democrats (22%) to view the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. Regionally, residents in the Central Valley (44%) and the Other Southern California region (43%) are more likely than those in Los Angeles (35%) or the San Francisco Bay Area (27%) to see it this way. Whites (41%) are more likely than Latinos (32%) to think of the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. “Do you think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, or do you think of it as separate from the war on terrorism?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Part of the war on terrorism Separate from the war on terrorism Don’t know 37% 59 4 22% 76 2 65% 35% 32 61 34 Likely Voters 40% 57 3 Half of Californians (49%) think that the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going very well (8%) or somewhat well (41%). Republicans (70%) are more likely than independents (47%) or Democrats (38%) to say that the war on terrorism is going at least somewhat well. In a recent ABC News poll, 52 percent of Americans said the war on terrorism was going very well (7%) or fairly well (45%). September 2006 27 Californians and the Future IMMIGRATION As immigration policy remains a contentious issue at the national level, 58 percent of California adults believe that immigrants are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills, while 35 percent considers immigrants a burden because they use public services. Positive perceptions of immigrants are similar today to when we first asked this question in February 2000 (54% benefit, 34% burden) and most recently in August 2005 (56% benefit, 36% burden). Across political groups today, Democrats (62%) and independents (61%) are much more likely than Republicans (37%) to say that immigrants are a benefit to California. A majority of residents across the state’s four regions view immigrants as a benefit. Latinos (83%) are much more likely than whites (47%) to think immigrants are beneficial to California. Seventy-one percent of U.S. citizens born outside of the United States think that immigrants are a benefit to California, compared to 50 percent of those born in the United States. The perception that immigrants are a benefit declines as age and income increase. “Please indicate which statement comes closest to your own view—even if neither is exactly right…” All Adults Dem Party Rep Ind Immigrants are a benefit to California 58% 62% 37% 61% because of their hard work and job skills Immigrants are a burden to California because they use public services 35 31 55 31 Don’t know 77 8 8 Latinos 83% 14 3 In the recent immigration debate in Washington, a major point of controversy has been a proposal for work permits. Today, 65 percent of Californians think that immigrants who are in the United States illegally should be allowed to apply for work permits, which would allow them to work in this country. Last September, 60 percent said that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. While there is support for this proposal across party lines, Democrats (67%) and independents (62%) are more likely than Republicans (51%) to say that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. Regionally, over six in 10 residents in the four major regions of California say that work permits should be granted. Latinos (89%) are more likely than whites (55%) to support work permits. Three in four citizens born outside the U.S. support work permits, compared to 58 percent of those born in the U.S. The belief that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits declines with age and income. More than eight in 10 adults who believe that immigrants are a benefit say that illegal immigrants should be allowed to apply for work permits. “Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn’t they be allowed to do that?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Latinos Ind Should be allowed Should not be allowed Don’t know 65% 32 3 67% 29 4 51% 62% 89% 46 35 10 3 31 28 PPIC Statewide Survey National Issues ABORTION RIGHTS AND SAME-SEX MARRIAGE California residents have consistently expressed support in our surveys fort the right to an abortion. In our current survey, seven in 10 adults would like the Supreme Court to ensure that a woman’s access to abortion is left the same (54%) or made easier than it is now (16%); one in four (26%) believes the court should make it more difficult to get an abortion. Since last October, the proportion wanting the court to make it more difficult to get an abortion has dropped by 9 points, from 35 percent to 26 percent. About eight in 10 Democrats (81%) and independents (79%) and six in 10 Republicans (60%) want the Supreme Court to maintain a woman’s current access to abortion or make it easier to receive the procedure. Across regions, over six in 10 residents want access to abortion to remain the same or become easier. Latinos (39%) are more likely than whites (20%) to want to make it more difficult to obtain an abortion; however, majorities in both groups want access to remain the same or made easier. Support for maintaining or increasing access to abortion rises with education and income. “Would you like to see the Supreme Court make it harder to get an abortion than it is now, make it easier to get an abortion than it is now, or leave the ability to get an abortion the same as it is now?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind Harder Easier Same 26% 14% 16 21 54 60 36% 19% 22% 9 19 17 51 60 57 Don’t know 45 4 24 Forty-four percent of Californians are in favor of allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married, while 48 percent are opposed. Support for same-sex marriage has been at 44 percent among state residents over the past two and a half years, but it has increased since January 2000 (38% in favor). A recent Pew Research Center survey found that 35 percent of U.S. adults favor allowing gays and lesbians to legally marry while 56 percent are opposed. Likely voters are divided (47% favor, 46% oppose) on this issue. A majority of Democrats (58%) favor allowing same-sex marriages while two in three Republicans (66%) oppose this idea. Among independents, 49 percent are in favor and 43 percent are opposed. Six in 10 residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (61%) favor same-sex marriage while about half of those in other regions are opposed. Women are more likely than men (48% to 39%) to favor this idea, as are whites compared to Latinos (47% to 38%). Favor for same-sex marriage is higher among younger than older adults. Favor Oppose Don’t know “Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married?” All Adults Dem Party Rep Likely Voters Ind 44% 58% 48 35 27% 49% 47% 66 43 46 87 7 87 September 2006 29 REGIONAL MAP 30 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 Dean Bonner, project manager for this survey, and survey research associates Jennifer Paluch and Sonja Petek. The survey and focus groups 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 2,003 California adult residents interviewed September 13-20, 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 2,003 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 1,566 registered voters, it is +/- 2.5 percent; for the 1091 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 ABC News, Gallup, CBS News/New York Times, and the Pew Research Center. 31 QUESTIONNAIRE AND RESULTS CALIFORNIANS AND THE FUTURE September 13-20, 2006 2,003 California Adult Residents: English, Spanish MARGIN OF ERROR +/-2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-12 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 7 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 31 Phil Angelides, the Democrat, State Treasurer 3 Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green, Financial Advisor 1 Art Olivier, the Libertarian, Engineer 1 Edward C. Noonan, the American Independent, Computer Shop Owner 1 someone else (specify) 15 don’t know 2. 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? 32% satisfied 54 dissatisfied 14 don’t know 3. How closely are you following news about candidates for the 2006 governor’s election? 17% very closely 57 fairly closely 20 not too closely 6 not at all closely 4. 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? 32% yes, Phil Angelides’ 27 yes, Arnold Schwarzenegger’s 22 yes, both equally (volunteered) 17 no 2 don’t know 4b.In deciding who to vote for in the November 7th governor’s election, how important to you are the candidates' performances in public debates? 32% very important 40 somewhat important 17 not too important 10 not at all important 1 don’t know September 2006 33 Californians and the Future 5. Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? 32% more enthusiastic 40 less enthusiastic 25 same (volunteered) 3 don’t know Next, we have a few questions to ask you about some of the propositions on the November ballot. [rotate questions 6 to 9] 6. 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 for 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 36 no 13 don’t know 7. 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? 57% yes 30 no 13 don’t know 34 PPIC Statewide Survey 8. 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? 49% yes 40 no 11 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 9. 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? 55% yes 30 no 15 don’t know September 2006 35 Californians and the Future 10.Proposition 89 is called the “Political Campaigns Public Financing Corporate Tax Increase and Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Limits Initiative Statute.” It provides that eligible candidates for state elective office may receive public campaign funding. It increases tax on corporations and financial institutions by point two (.2) percent to fund the program and imposes new campaign contribution/expenditures limits. Fiscal impacts include increased revenues primarily from increased taxes on corporation and financial institutions totaling more than $200 million annually to pay for the public financing of political campaigns. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 89? 25% yes 61 no 14 don’t know Changing topics, [rotate questions 11 and 12] 11.Do you think that campaign contributions are currently having a good effect or a bad effect on the public policy decisions made by state elected officials in Sacramento, or are campaign contributions making no difference? 6% good effect 61 bad effect 21 making no difference 2 both (volunteered) 10 don’t know 12.Would you favor or oppose having a system of public funding for state and legislative campaigns in California if it cost each taxpayer a few dollars a year to run? 37% favor 53 oppose 10 don’t know Changing topics, 13.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Arnold Schwarzenegger is handling his job as governor of California? 46% approve 46 disapprove 8 don’t know 14.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling its job? 34% approve 50 disapprove 16 don’t know 15.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the job that the state legislators representing your assembly and state senate districts are doing at this time? 45% approve 36 disapprove 19 don’t know 16.Do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 45% right direction 45 wrong direction 10 don’t know 17.Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 45% good times 43 bad times 12 don’t know As you may know, the term "infrastructure" refers to a variety of public works projects such as surface transportation, school facilities, water systems and flood control, and affordable housing. [rotate questions 18 and 19] 36 PPIC Statewide Survey 18.Overall, do you think your local government does or does not have adequate funding for infrastructure projects that are needed to prepare for future growth in your part of California? 42% does have adequate funding 49 does not have adequate funding 9 don’t know 19.In general, which of the following statements do you agree with more— [rotate] (1) I’d rather pay higher taxes and have the state government spend more money on infrastructure projects; [or] (2) I’d rather pay lower taxes and have the state government spend less money on infrastructure projects? 44% higher taxes and more money for infrastructure projects 47 lower taxes and less money for infrastructure projects 9 don’t know Looking ahead to the year 2025, as I read each of the following pairs of statements, please tell me which is more likely to happen in your part of California. [rotate questions 20 to 23 and statements] 20.(1) The public education system will improve; [or] (2) The public education system will get worse. 47% improve 44 get worse 2 neither, no change (volunteered) 7 don’t know 21.(1) The water and flood control systems will improve; [or] (2) The water and flood control systems will get worse. 53% improve 32 get worse 4 neither, no change (volunteered) 11 don’t know Questionnaire and Results 22.(1) Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will improve; [or] (2) Traffic conditions on freeways and major roads will get worse. 22% improve 74 get worse 2 neither, no change (volunteered) 2 don’t know 23.(1) the availability of affordable housing will improve; [or] (2) the availability of affordable housing will get worse. 22% improve 72 get worse 1 neither, no change (volunteered) 5 don’t know 24.On another topic, in California state government today, which of the following would you prefer to have the most influence over public policy—[rotate] (1) the governor, (2) the legislature, [or] (3) initiatives on the state ballot? 23% the governor 32 the legislature 33 initiatives on the state ballot 1 other (specify) 11 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. 25.Do you think the citizens’ initiative process in California is in need of major changes or minor changes or that it is basically fine the way it is at this time? 37% major changes 31 minor changes 25 fine the way it is 7 don’t know September 2006 37 Californians and the Future For the following items, please say if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree. [rotate questions 26 and 27] 26.There are too many propositions on the state ballot. 28% strongly agree 31 somewhat agree 25 somewhat disagree 11 strongly disagree 5 don’t know 27.The ballot wording for citizens’ initiatives is often too complicated and confusing for voters to understand what happens if the initiative passes. 48% strongly agree 29 somewhat agree 14 somewhat disagree 6 strongly disagree 3 don’t know 28.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? 33% approve 64 disapprove 3 don’t know [rotate questions 29 and 30] 29.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq? 28% approve 68 disapprove 4 don’t know 30.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling terrorism and homeland security issues? 42% approve 54 disapprove 4 don’t know [rotate questions 31 and 32] 31.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Dianne Feinstein is handling her job as U.S. Senator? 51% approve 30 disapprove 19 don’t know 32.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that Barbara Boxer is handling her job as U.S. Senator? 46% approve 33 disapprove 21 don’t know 33.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way your own representative to the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress is handling his or her job? 55% approve 25 disapprove 20 don’t know 34.Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way the U.S. Congress is handling its job? 37% approve 54 disapprove 9 don’t know 35.In general, how would you say things are going for the U.S. in Iraq? 3% very well 23 somewhat well 28 not too well 45 not at all well 1 don’t know 36.All in all, do you think it was worth going to war in Iraq, or not? 30% worth it 65 not worth it 5 don’t know 38 PPIC Statewide Survey 36a.Do you think of the war with Iraq as part of the war on terrorism, or do you think of it as separate from the war on terrorism? 37% part of 59 separate 4 don’t know 36b.In general, do you think the U.S. campaign against terrorism is going very well, somewhat well, not too well or not at all well? 8% very well 41 somewhat well 25 not too well 23 not at all well 2 don’t know Please indicate which statement comes closest to your own view—even if neither is exactly right. 37.[rotate] (1) Immigrants today are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills [or] (2) Immigrants today are a burden to California because they use public services. 58% immigrants are a benefit to California 35 immigrants are a burden to California 7 don’t know 38.Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn’t they be allowed to do that? 65% should be allowed 32 should not be allowed 3 don’t know [rotate questions 39 and 40] Questionnaire and Results 39.Would you like to see the Supreme Court make it harder to get an abortion than it is now, make it easier to get an abortion than it is now, or leave the ability to get an abortion the same as it is now? 26% harder 16 easier 54 same 4 don’t know 40.Do you favor or oppose allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married? 44% favor 48 oppose 8 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? 78% yes [ask q42] 21 no [skip to q42a] 1 don’t know [skip to q42a] 42.Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent? 43% Democrat [skip to q42b] 35 Republican [skip to q42c] 20 independent [ask q42a] 2 another party (specify) [skip to q43] 42a.Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party? 21% Republican Party 46 Democratic Party 25 neither (volunteered) 8 don’t know [go to q43] September 2006 39 Californians and the Future 42b.Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 49% strong 48 not very strong 3 don’t know [go to q43] 42c.Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 51% strong 46 not very strong 3 don’t know 43.On another topic, would you consider yourself to be politically: [read list, rotate order top to bottom] 9% very liberal 20 somewhat liberal 32 middle-of-the-road 25 somewhat conservative 10 very conservative 4 don’t know 44.Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics? 25% great deal 42 fair amount 28 only a little 5 none [D1-D12: demographic questions] 40 PPIC Statewide Survey 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 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 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 09:38:44" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(8) "s_906mbs" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:38:44" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:38:44" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(50) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/S_906MBS.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) }