Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

S 902MBS

Authors

S 902MBS

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_902MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "336118" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(82506) "PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY SEPTEMBER 2002 Public Policy Institute of California Californians and Their Government ○○○○○ Mark Baldassare Research Director & Survey Director 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, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. 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 state and federal legislation nor does it endorse or support any political parties or candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Raymond L. Watson is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 • San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 291-4400 • Fax: (415) 291-4401 info@ppic.org • www.ppic.org Preface The PPIC Statewide Survey series is designed to provide policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents. Begun in April 1998, the survey series has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 56,000 Californians. The current survey is the eleventh in our Californians and Their Government series, which is conducted on a periodic basis throughout the 2002 election cycle. The series is focusing on the social, economic, and political trends and public policy preferences that underlie ballot choices in statewide races and citizens’ initiatives. This report presents the responses of 2,019 adult residents throughout the state on a wide range of issues: • The California election in 2002, including likely-voter preferences in the governor’s race, the importance of issues, satisfaction with the candidate choices and candidates’ attention to the issues, voters’ attention to news and political advertising, support for state bond measures on the November ballot, and knowledge and attitudes toward state bonds. • Political trends, including approval ratings of President Bush, Governor Davis, and the California legislature, and policy preferences regarding the state budget process. • Economic trends, including overall outlook on the state economy, perceptions of regional economies, personal finances, and perceptions of income inequality in the state. • How growing regions and groups such as the Central Valley, Latinos, and independent voters affect overall statewide trends in ballot choices and policy preferences. This report presents the results of the twenty-eighth PPIC Statewide Survey. The surveys include a number of special editions focusing on particular regions and themes: • The Central Valley (11/99, 3/01, 4/02) • Population Growth (5/01) • San Diego County (7/02) • Land Use (11/01) • Orange County (9/01) • The Environment (6/00, 6/02) • U.S.-Japan Relations (9/01) 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. -i- Contents Preface Press Release California 2002 Elections Political Trends Economic Trends Survey Methodology Survey Questions and Results Survey Advisory Committee i v 1 9 13 19 21 26 - iii - Press Release TUNED IN BUT TURNED OFF: CALIFORNIANS WAITING FOR NEWS THEY CAN USE IN GOVERNOR’S RACE Voters Divided on Timing of Bond Issues; More Californians Today Perceive Gap Between Rich and Poor SAN FRANCISCO, California, September 26, 2002 — Although residents remain far more engaged in the current governor’s race than they were four years ago, they express dissatisfaction with nearly every aspect of the campaign, from the lack of focus on issues to the unhelpfulness of the paid advertising, according to a new survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). Voters are more tuned in to the current race than they were during the last gubernatorial campaign: 80 percent today say they are closely following news about the gubernatorial candidates, compared to 54 percent in September 1998. Voters today are also more likely to have seen political advertising by the candidates for governor: 72 percent say they have seen commercials by Democratic Governor Gray Davis (55%) and his Republican challenger Bill Simon (17%). In September 1998, only 38 percent had seen candidates’ commercials. Still, California voters are finding little to like in the governor’s race: 55 percent express dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates for governor and 69 percent say the television advertisements they have seen have been unhelpful in deciding which candidate to support. While the majority (50%) say they are more interested in learning about where the candidates stand on the issues than about their character (18%), experience (11%), intelligence (7%), or party platform (6%), most voters (64%) also say they are dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are spending on the issues voters care about. Slightly more than half of likely voters (55%) — including majorities of Democrats (57%), Republicans (52%), and independent voters (60%) — say they are less enthusiastic than usual about voting. Among the older, more educated, higher income, and longer-term residents who turn out to vote with the greatest regularity, that lack of enthusiasm is even more pronounced. “We have an electorate that is unhappy with the race so far, and independent voters are the most unhappy of all,” says survey director Mark Baldassare. “If either of the candidates is looking for salvation from the swing vote, they may be sorely disappointed.” Indeed, 73 percent of independent voters say they are not satisfied with the candidates’ attention to the issues that matter most to them. Among likely voters, Davis leads Simon by 8 points (40% to 32%), with no third-party candidate receiving more than 5 percent of the vote. The race has changed little since August, when Davis led Simon 41 percent to 30 percent. Davis still receives strong support from Latinos, women, and independent voters. However, the gender gap is smaller than it was one month ago: Women support Davis over Simon by 11 points (42% to 31%) compared to 19 points in August. Davis currently leads Simon in the San Francisco Bay Area (45% to 22%) and Los Angeles (49% to 27%), the two candidates are virtually tied in the other Southern California counties (35% to 38%), and Simon is beating Davis in the Central Valley (45% to 30%). At this point in the 1998 gubernatorial race, Davis was leading Republican opponent Dan Lungren by 9 points (47% to 38%). As in August, likely voters continue to prefer Davis over Simon on education (53% to 29%), the state budget and taxes (43% to 38%), and maintaining high ethical standards in government (45% to 31%). They are split over which candidate would do a better job on the economy, preferring Simon slightly (42% to 40%), and select Simon over Davis on electricity and energy policy (44% to 38%). -v- Press Release What do voters know about bonds and when do they support them? Voters will decide the fate of $18 billion in state bonds this November. But while they appear generally supportive of issuing bonds to finance big ticket projects, voters are divided about using them in a time of budget deficits and most admit to knowing little about how bonds are paid for. Overall, 69 percent of likely voters say it is a good idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure projects, including majorities of Democrats (77%), Republicans (59%), and independents (67%). However, when asked about the use of state bonds in the current budget climate, only 44 percent say it is a good time to issue bonds and 46 percent say it is a bad time. In this case, Republicans (57%) and independents (50%) oppose issuing bonds, while Democrats (53%) remain supportive. Despite these strong opinions, only 13 percent of likely voters say they know a lot about how state bonds are paid for, while about half (47%) say they know something and 40 percent know either very little or nothing at all. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say they have at least some knowledge about how state bonds are financed (65% to 55%). Proposition 47 — a bond measure that would provide funding for kindergarten through university public education facilities — is currently supported by 59 percent of likely voters, with 32 percent opposed. The measure is favored by majorities of Democrats (72%) and independents (62%), while Republicans oppose it by a narrow margin (46% to 42%). Voters are split in their support for Proposition 50, which would provide funding for water and wetlands projects. Forty-four percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on the measure and 40 percent no. Support for the measure has fallen since June, when 59 percent of voters supported the measure (question wording did not match the ballot label). Democrats favor the measure (54% to 26%), Republicans oppose it (54% to 31%), and independents are divided (44% to 43%). Are residents better off today than they were four years ago? Today, most Californians say they are very (25%) or somewhat (50%) satisfied with their personal financial situation, similar to findings from September 1998 (21% and 54%). However, a greater number of residents today (23%) also say they are worse off than they were one year ago, compared to September 1998 (12%). Indeed, one in four Californians today are either very (15%) or somewhat concerned (12%) that they or someone in their family will lose their job in the next year. Latinos and people with annual household incomes under $40,000 (20% each) are more likely to be very worried about the risk of job loss. Residents today are also far less content with job and housing opportunities in their region. In April 1998, 26 percent of Californians said they were very satisfied with job opportunities in their part of the state, and 22 percent were very satisfied with the availability of affordable housing. Today, far fewer (16% each) are very satisfied with these key measures of quality of life. In fact, dissatisfaction with regional job opportunities has risen 11 points (from 25% to 36%) and dissatisfaction with housing affordability has increased by 21 points (from 35% to 56%). Unhappiness with job opportunities has risen most dramatically in the San Francisco Bay Area (from 11% to 44%), while dissatisfaction with housing affordability has grown most sharply among Los Angeles residents (from 34% to 59%). But the regional economic picture is not entirely grim: Fewer Californians today compared to one month ago believe their region is in a recession (48% to 54%) and a majority (53%) expect good economic conditions in their part of the state in the coming year. While more Californians expect bad rather than good economic conditions to prevail statewide in the next twelve months (46% to 43%), the number that predicts bad times is down 5 points since August. And while they may not be better off today than they were four years ago, residents are more likely today (44%) than in September 1998 (40%) to think that they and their family will be better off a year from now. - vi - Press Release While many Californians are optimistic about their future economic prospects, the perception that some residents have been left behind has increased. Today, 61 percent say that the state is divided into “haves” and “have-nots,” compared to 56 percent in January 1999. Sixty percent of Californians say they are among the “haves,” while 32 percent — including a majority of those with a household income of less than $40,000 — say they are “have-nots.” Despite this income divide, a majority of state residents (52%) believe that people in California have an equal opportunity to succeed, while 43 percent say the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity. More key findings • Overall approval ratings: Bush, Davis, Legislature (pages 9, 10, 12) President Bush: 64 percent of residents approve and 32 percent disapprove, unchanged since August. Governor Davis: 49 percent approve and 44 percent disapprove, down from August (51% to 42%). State Legislature: 45 percent approve and 36 percent disapprove, down from January (49% to 35%). • State budget: Legislature No, Supermajority Yes (page 11) A majority of Californians (54%) disapprove of the legislature’s handling of the state budget. Most (73%) say it is a good thing that a two-thirds vote of the legislature is needed to pass a state budget. And 53 percent say they would oppose an initiative to do away with the supermajority requirement. • Support for President Bush on Iraq (page 12) Fifty-five percent of Californians approve of the way President Bush is dealing with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Nationally, 65 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the crisis. • Corporate corruption widespread (page 24) Sixty-one percent of residents think that the current cases of wrongdoing among chief executives of major businesses represent a widespread problem rather than a problem of a few corrupt individuals (32%). About the survey The purpose of the PPIC Statewide Survey is to develop an in-depth profile of the social, economic, and political forces affecting California elections and public policy preferences. PPIC will conduct large-scale public opinion surveys on a regular basis leading up to the November 2002 election. Findings of the current survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,019 California adult residents interviewed from September 12 to September 21, 2002. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/- 2%. The sampling error for the 1,588 registered voters is +/- 2.5% and for the 1,005 likely voters is +/- 3%. For more information on survey methodology, see page 19. 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 state and federal legislation nor does it endorse or support any political parties or candidates for public office. This report will appear on PPIC’s website (www.ppic.org) on September 26. See graphics next page. ### - vii - If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…? Davis Simon Other Don’t know 17% 11% 40% Are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? More enthusiastic Less enthusiastic Same Don’t know 15% 3% 27% 32% _____________________________P_e_rc_e_n_t_L_ik_e_ly_V__o_te_rs__ Approval Ratings of President Bush Percent Approve 80 64% 60 55% 40 20 0 Overall Iraq and Saddam Hussein ______________________________P_e_r_ce_n_t_A_ll_A_d_u_lts__ Regional Job Dissatisfaction Percentage Point Change Between 1998-2002 40 +33 20 +11 +10 Central Valley 0 All SF Bay LA Adults -8 Area -20 “Not Satisfied” +6 OSC 55% ____________________________P_e_rc_e_n_t _Li_ke_l_y_V_o_te_rs_ Would you vote yes or no on Prop 47, the Kindergarten-University Facilities Bond Act of 2002? Yes No Don’t know 9% 32% 59% Percent Likely Voters _____________________________________ Regional Housing Dissatisfaction Percentage Point Change Between 1998-2002 30 25 +21 +25 20 +14 +15 15 10 5 0 All Central SF Bay LA Adults Valley Area “Not Satisfied” +19 OSC California 2002 Elections Governor’s Race As the campaign for governor enters its final stages, incumbent Governor Gray Davis has an 8point lead over Republican challenger Bill Simon (40% to 32%), a slight decline from the 11-point lead he had in August. However, large numbers of voters are still undecided (17%) or committed to third party candidates (11%). Among the latter, 5 percent favor Peter Camejo of the Green Party, 3 percent support Gary Copeland of the Libertarian Party, 1 percent favor Reinhold Gulke of the American Independent Party, and 2 percent name someone else. To win in a statewide race in California, a Republican candidate must have solid support inside the GOP and also appeal to voters outside the fold. Although Simon has strong support from GOP voters (68%), he has little support among independents (22%) or Democrats (7%). Similarly, Simon is strongly favored over Davis by conservative voters (61% to 18%), but moderates support Davis over Simon (43% to 24%) and liberals give Davis an even bigger lead (62% to 7%). The Democrats have been winning in recent statewide elections because of strong support from women, Latinos, and voters in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Today, Davis leads Simon among women by 11 points (42% to 31%), while he is running nearly even with Simon among men (38% to 34%). Davis is running nearly even with Simon among non-Hispanic whites (35% to 37%), but he holds big leads over Simon among Latinos (58% to 19%). Regionally, Davis leads Simon by large margins in the San Francisco Bay Area (45% to 22%) and Los Angeles (49% to 27%), while Simon has a strong lead in the Central Valley (45% to 30%) and a slight lead in Other Southern California (38% to 35%). Currently, Davis leads Simon among all age groups, among those with and without children at home, and among long-term residents. However, it is noteworthy that neither Davis nor Simon has majority support of the voters in any demographic group. "If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…?" Likely Voters Gray Davis Bill Simon Peter Miguel Camejo Gary Copeland Reinhold Gulke Someone else Don’t know All Likely Voters 40% 32 5 3 1 2 17 Dem 65% 7 6 2 1 2 17 Party Rep 12% 68 2 2 1 2 13 Ind/ Other* 33% 22 9 8 3 2 23 Central Valley 30% 45 5 2 1 2 15 Region SF Bay Area 45% 22 8 4 1 3 17 Los Angeles 49% 27 4 3 1 1 15 Other Southern California 35% 38 3 2 3 3 16 Latino 58% 19 3 2 1 3 14 *In this table, Californians registered to vote as independents (“decline-to-state”) and those registered with “third parties” are combined. In all other tables, independents are reported separately. Party affiliations for the candidates are as follows: Davis (Democrat), Simon (Republican), Camejo (Green), Copeland (Libertarian), and Gulke (American Independent). -1- California 2002 Elections Voters’ Reactions to the Campaign Many Californians are turned off by the current governor’s election, and those who are usually most likely to vote are among the most disaffected. Likely voters who are “less enthusiastic” than usual about voting outnumber those who are “more enthusiastic” about voting, 55 percent to 27 percent. Expression of less enthusiasm is slightly higher among independent voters (60%) and Democrats (57%) than it is among Republicans (52%). In every region of the state, voters who are less enthusiastic about this election outnumber those who are more enthusiastic, with San Francisco Bay Area voters (61%) the most likely to express less enthusiasm than usual. Non-Hispanic whites are more likely than Latinos to say that they are less enthusiastic (58% to 49%). There is no significant difference between men and women. In the demographic groups where turnout is typically highest—older, more educated, higher income, and longer-term residents—voters are more likely than voters in other groups to say that they are less enthusiastic about this election. "Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic?" More enthusiastic Less enthusiastic Same Don’t know All Likely Voters 27% 55 15 3 Democrat 24% 57 17 2 Likely Voters Republican 30% 52 16 2 Independent 26% 60 11 3 Latino 29% 49 20 2 Voters’ satisfaction with the choice of candidates has not changed. A majority of likely voters (55%) say they are not satisfied with the choices for governor, which is similar to findings in our August survey. Dissatisfaction among Democrats (51%) and Republicans (57%) is about the same as in August but is up among independent voters—63 percent as compared to 54 percent last month. There has been a slight increase in Republican voters who say they are satisfied (33% in August versus 37% in September). Regionally, dissatisfaction with the candidates is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area (65%) than in the rest of Southern California (55%), Los Angeles (52%), and the Central Valley (51%). A bare majority of Latinos (50%) say they are satisfied with the candidate choices, while a majority of non-Hispanic whites (60%) indicate that they are not satisfied. Dissatisfaction with the candidate choices tends to increase with age, education, and income. "Would you say that you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 5th?" Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know All Likely Voters 38% 55 7 Democrat 43% 51 6 Likely Voters Republican 37% 57 6 Independent 29% 63 8 Latino 50% 41 9 -2- California 2002 Elections Importance of Issues Californians are more interested in learning about where candidates stand on the issues (50%) than about personal characteristics or party platforms. Only 18 percent report being most interested in hearing about the candidates’ character, 11 percent about the candidates’ experience, 7 percent about the candidates’ intelligence, and 6 percent about the party platforms. This interest in issues holds in every political group, region of the state, and all age, education, and income categories. However, Republicans care more than Democrats (21% to 15%) and conservatives care more than liberals (23% to 10%) about the candidates’ character. Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (17% to 9%) to say that the candidates’ experience is of greatest interest. "What are you most interested in learning about the candidates?" Stands on the issues Character Experience Intelligence Party platform Something else (volunteered) Don’t know All Likely Voters 50% 18 11 7 6 4 4 Likely Voters Democrat 49% 15 13 9 5 4 5 Republican Independent 49% 21 8 6 8 4 4 50% 19 12 4 8 2 5 Latino 43% 10 17 13 7 2 8 While issues matter most to likely voters, only 27 percent of them are satisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are paying to issues they care about the most. Dissatisfaction spans the political spectrum: Republicans (66%) are more dissatisfied than Democrats (58%), and independents (73%) are the most dissatisfied of all with the candidates’ lack of attention to the issues. Moderates (69%) are somewhat more likely than conservatives (63%) and liberals (60%) to say that they are not satisfied with this aspect of the campaign. A majority of residents across the state’s major regions are not satisfied with the attention being paid to the issues, and San Francisco Bay Area voters (68%) are the most dissatisfied. Latinos are more satisfied with attention to the issues than non-Hispanic whites (41% to 24%). The voters’ dissatisfaction with attention to issues tends to increase with education, income, and the presence of children in the home. "Would you say that you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you?" Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know All Likely Voters 27% 64 9 Democrat 34% 58 8 Likely Voters Republican 23% 66 11 Independent 20% 73 7 Latino 41% 50 9 - 3 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Candidate Qualifications In our August survey, nine in 10 voters identified an issue of importance to them in the governor’s election, and four issues topped their lists: education, the economy, electricity, and the state budget and taxes. In this survey, we asked which of the major party candidates would do a better job on these four issues, as well as on maintaining high ethical standards in government. The question of ethics has been a high profile issue for the major party candidates and one that each candidate has tried to use against the other. Davis continues to hold a significant edge over Simon on handling education (53% to 29%) and a more modest edge on handling the state budget and taxes (43% to 38%). Likely voters are split between Davis and Simon when it comes to handling the economy (40% to 42%) and lean toward Simon over Davis on electricity and energy policy (44% to 38%). Davis continues to have a large lead over Simon on the issue of maintaining high ethical standards in government (45% to 31%). "Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of these issues…?" Likely Voters Education Gray Davis Bill Simon Economy Gray Davis Bill Simon Electricity and energy policy Gray Davis Bill Simon State budget and taxes Gray Davis Bill Simon Maintaining high ethical standards in government Gray Davis Bill Simon August 2002 50% 29 40% 40 34% 43 42% 39 43% 28 September 2002 53% 29 40% 42 38% 44 43% 38 45% 31 On education, Davis has much stronger support among Democrats (74%) than Simon has among Republicans (56%), and a majority of independents think that Davis would do a better job than Simon (54% to 22%). On the electricity issue, Simon is rated higher among Republicans (76%) than Davis is among Democrats (57%), and independents are split between Simon and Davis (42% to 38%). When it comes to ethical issues, Democrats are more likely to favor Davis (68%) than Republicans are to favor Simon (60%); independents support Davis over Simon (44% to 29%). Davis and Simon receive similar levels of support within their parties for handling the state budget and taxes, and independents are split (39% to 35%) slightly in favor of Davis. As for the economy, Republicans have more confidence in Simon (76%) than Democrats have in Davis (64%); independents tend to favor Simon over Davis (42% to 37%) on this issue. -4- California 2002 Elections Education Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know The Economy Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know Electricity and energy policy Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know State budget and taxes Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know Maintaining high ethical standards in government Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know "Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of these issues?" Likely Voters All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Central Valley Region SF Bay Area Los Angeles Other Southern California 53% 29 5 13 74% 10 6 10 26% 56 3 15 54% 22 6 18 49% 38 4 9 58% 21 7 14 59% 24 4 13 46% 37 6 11 40% 42 7 11 64% 15 9 12 12% 76 4 8 37% 42 7 14 29% 55 5 11 39% 36 12 13 50% 33 6 11 38% 46 6 10 38% 44 7 11 57% 20 9 14 14% 76 3 7 38% 42 5 15 30% 54 5 11 43% 38 7 12 44% 39 5 12 34% 48 10 8 43% 38 6 13 68% 14 7 11 15% 69 4 12 39% 35 7 19 29% 49 7 15 53% 29 7 11 51% 34 5 10 37% 44 7 12 45% 31 9 15 68% 8 10 14 18% 60 6 16 44% 29 11 16 40% 40 6 14 50% 24 13 13 49% 29 8 14 40% 34 9 17 Latino 64% 19 6 11 52% 24 9 15 51% 26 8 15 56% 22 6 16 58% 19 9 14 - 5 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Voters’ Attention to News and Commercials Attention to news and commercials about the 2002 governor’s election is high: 80 percent of likely voters say they are very closely or fairly closely following news about the candidates in the 2002 governor’s election, and 75 percent say they recall television advertisements by the candidates. In September 1998, by comparison, 54 percent were closely following the election news and 38 percent had seen the gubernatorial candidates’ commercials. Today, more likely voters recall seeing ads from the Davis (55%) than from the Simon (17%) campaign. Davis’ commercials are remembered most often in every political group, region of the state, and demographic group. Republicans (64%) are more likely than Democrats (50%) to recall seeing Davis’ commercials. Non-Hispanic whites (58%) are more likely than Latinos (45%) to remember Davis’ ads. "In the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes: "Whose ads have you seen the most?)" Likely Voters Yes, Davis Yes, Simon Yes, other No All Likely Voters 55% 17 3 25 Dem 50% 21 3 26 Party Rep 64% 11 2 23 Ind 52% 18 4 26 Central Valley 57% 15 3 25 Region SF Bay Area 55% 18 3 24 Los Angeles 57% 18 2 23 Other Southern California 54% 18 3 25 Latino 45% 28 2 25 Although a large majority of likely voters have seen the commercials, only about one-third describe these advertisements as very helpful (12%) or somewhat helpful (19%) in deciding how they will vote. Almost 70 percent say the advertisements have been not too helpful (22%) or not at all helpful (47%) in making that decision. Women are more likely than men (33% to 28%), Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (44% to 27%), and Democrats and more likely than Republicans (39% to 26%) to say the commercials have been helpful. The percentages of respondents who view the commercials as helpful tends to decline with income and education. "So far, have the television advertisements you have seen been very helpful, somewhat helpful, not too helpful, or not at all helpful to you in deciding which candidate to vote for?" (Asked of those seeing advertisements) Likely Voters Very helpful Somewhat helpful Not too helpful Not at all helpful All Likely Voters 12% 19 22 47 Dem 14% 25 22 39 Party Rep 13% 13 22 52 Ind 7% 18 23 52 Central Valley 12% 14 23 51 Region SF Bay Area 11% 25 14 50 Los Angeles 15% 17 24 44 Other Southern California 11% 21 23 45 Latino 15% 29 19 37 -6- California 2002 Elections State Bonds: Propositions 47 and 50 This month, we asked about two of the three state bond measures on the November ballot— Proposition 47 that would provide $13.05 billion for education facilities and Proposition 50 that would provide $3.44 billion for water and wetlands projects. If the election were held today, 59 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on Proposition 47, which would provide funding for kindergarten through university public education facilities. There is solid support for this measure among Democrats (72%) and independent voters (62%), whereas Republicans tend to oppose it (46% to 42%). A majority of voters in every region would vote yes on this bond measure. Latinos (68%) are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (56%) to say they would vote for Proposition 47. Voter support for the school bond declines with age but increases with education and for those with children at home. There are no significant differences in support for the measure across income levels. "If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 47, the Kindergarten to University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002?" Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 59% 32 9 Party Dem 72% 19 9 Rep 42% 46 12 Ind 62% 33 5 Central Valley 55% 38 7 Region SF Bay Area 62% 28 10 Los Angeles 58% 31 11 Other Southern California 60% 32 8 Latino 68% 26 6 Voters are split in their support for Proposition 50, which would provide funding for water and wetlands projects. Currently, 44 percent would vote yes on Proposition 50, 40 percent would vote no, and 16 percent are undecided. The state water bonds measure is favored by Democrats (54%) and opposed by a like percentage of Republicans (54%), while independent voters are evenly split on the measure (44% to 43%). There is no region in the state where a majority of likely voters support Proposition 50. There is a greater tendency to vote no on Proposition 50 as income increases. "If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 50, the Water Quality, Supply and Safe Drinking Water Projects, Coastal Wetlands Purchase and Protection Bonds Initiative?" Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 44% 40 16 Party Dem 54% 26 20 Rep 31% 54 15 Ind 44% 43 13 Central Valley 37% 48 15 Region SF Bay Area 49% 31 20 Los Angeles 47% 38 15 Other Southern California 43% 42 15 Latino 47% 39 14 - 7 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Voters Reactions to State Bonds Because voters will be deciding the fate of about $18 billion in state bonds on the November statewide ballot, it is instructive to understand how Californians perceive state bonds. Only 13 percent of likely voters say they know a lot about how state bonds are paid for, while 47 percent say they know something, and 40 percent know either very little or nothing at all. Republicans are more likely than Democrats (65% to 55%), conservatives more likely than liberals (61% to 57%), and nonHispanic whites more likely than Latinos (64% to 47%) to say they know something about state bond financing. Knowledge about state bonds increases with age, education, and income; but substantial percentages in all groups know little or nothing. Despite this lack of knowledge about how bonds are paid for, 69 percent of likely voters say it is a good idea to pay for infrastructure projects with state bonds. Overall, solid majorities in all political groups, regions of the state, racial and ethnic groups, and demographic categories agree that this is a good use for state bonds. "In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?" Likely Voters Good idea Bad idea Don’t know All Likely Voters 69% 22 9 Party Dem 77% 13 10 Rep 59% 32 9 Ind 67% 24 9 Central Valley 67% 25 8 Region SF Bay Area 72% 17 11 Los Angeles 66% 24 10 Other Southern California 68% 23 9 Latino 74% 19 7 The general enthusiasm for state bonds notwithstanding, when voters are reminded about the projected budget deficit, only 44 percent say this is a good time to issue bonds. The drop-off between general approval of issuing bonds and whether now is a good time is sharp regardless of partisanship: Democrats (77% to 53%), Republicans (59% to 34%), and independent voters (67% to 45%) are all much more likely to think that bonds are generally the right approach than to think that now is a good time to issue them. "The state government is projected to have a large budget deficit over the next few years. Knowing this, is this a good time or a bad time for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?" Likely Voters Good time Bad time Don’t know All Likely Voters 44% 46 10 Party Dem 53% 35 12 Rep 34% 57 9 Ind 45% 50 5 Central Valley 40% 49 11 Region SF Bay Area 46% 43 11 Los Angeles 45% 45 10 Other Southern California 45% 45 10 Latino 46% 45 9 -8- Political Trends Governor’s Ratings Half of California residents (49%) approve of Governor Gray Davis’ overall performance in office, while 44 percent disapprove. Two in three Democrats (63%), half of independents (50%), and only one in four Republicans (23%) approve of the way the governor is handling his job. Davis continues to enjoy more support from Latinos (66%) than from non-Hispanic whites (40%). His approval rating declines as the age, education, and income of survey respondents increase. Those who are likely to vote in November are less likely to approve of his job performance than the overall public: Among likely voters, 42 percent approve and 52 percent disapprove of his performance in office. The governor’s approval ratings among all California adults and likely voters has remained virtually unchanged this year. Forty-five percent of all adults and 42 percent of likely voters approve of the way the governor is handling the issue of jobs and the economy. Democrats (57%) and independents (44%) are less likely to approve of his handling of jobs and the economy than they are of his overall performance, while Republicans (27%) are slightly more likely to approve of his handling of the economy than they are of his overall job performance. Approval of Davis’ overall job performance is higher than his approval rating on handling the economy among Latinos (66% to 58%), residents making less than $40,000 per year (60% to 51%), residents who are younger than 35 years old (59% to 51%), those who are less educated (60% to 55%), and San Francisco Bay Area residents (49% to 42%). Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Governor Davis is handling the issue of jobs and the economy in California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 49% 44 7 63% 29 8 23% 71 6 50% 44 6 42% 52 6 45% 40 15 57% 29 14 27% 60 13 44% 46 10 42% 47 11 Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Sept 00 65% 27 8 Oct 00 61% 30 9 Jan 01 61% 28 11 Likely Voters Dec 01 46% Jan 02 46% 48 49 65 Feb 02 43% 54 3 Aug 02 43% 52 5 Sep 02 42% 52 6 -9- Political Trends California Legislature Ratings Forty-five percent of California’s adult residents approve of the way that the California legislature is doing its job. This approval rating has declined somewhat from January 2002 (49%) and December 2001 (53%). In fact, the ratings today are similar to those seen during the height of the electricity crisis in July 2001 (45%). Among likely voters, 40 percent approve and 45 percent disapprove of the legislature’s performance. Although support for the legislature among Democrats is virtually unchanged since January 2002 (55% to 52% today), there has been a drop in support among Republicans (41% to 34%) and independents (50% to 41%). A majority of Californians (54%) disapprove of how the legislature is handling the state budget. Roughly two-thirds of Republicans (64%) and independents (65%) and a majority of Democrats (51%) disapprove of the legislature’s performance in this area. Only one in four likely voters (23%) approve of the lawmakers’ performance on the budget. Latinos’ ratings are much more positive than those from non-Hispanic whites (45% to 22%), but there is still a large drop in support when Latinos’ ratings on the handling of the state budget (45%) are compared to their overall ratings of the legislature (58%). Only 22 percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents support the legislature’s handling of the budget, and approval in other regions is low as well: Central Valley (27%), Los Angeles (36%), and Other Southern California (28%). Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the job that the California legislature is doing at this time? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling the issue of the state budget? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults 45% 36 19 29% 54 17 Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 52% 30 18 34% 48 18 41% 44 15 40% 45 15 30% 51 19 20% 64 16 25% 65 10 23% 64 13 - 10 - Political Trends State Budget Process Despite majority dissatisfaction with the legislature’s handling of the budget and a recent record-setting 67-day state budget impasse, a large majority of Californians (73%) think it has been a good thing for the state that a two-thirds vote of the legislature is needed to approve a state budget. Three in four likely voters (73%) believe that the supermajority requirement has been good for the state. There is strong support for the two-thirds vote requirement across all political parties and ideologies: Republicans (77%) and conservatives (76%) are only slightly more likely than Democrats (71%) and liberals (72%) to believe that supermajorities for state budget approval have been good for the state. Even among those who disapprove of the legislature’s handling of the budget, 68 percent believe that the current two-thirds requirement has been a good thing. Public support for the state’s supermajority budget requirement is evident across all regions of the state, racial and ethnic groups, and demographic categories. When asked about a possible initiative that would change the required supermajority to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote, only 38 percent of residents and 35 percent of likely voters would vote yes on the proposition. Although opposition to changing the two-thirds vote requirement is found across all political groups, Democrats (42%) and independents (38%) are more likely than Republicans (28%) to support eliminating the required supermajority. Latinos (52%) are much more likely than non-Hispanic whites (32%) to say they would support a proposition calling for a simple majority vote. The current findings are in line with past PPIC surveys on the supermajority vote. Voters have consistently expressed reluctance to eliminate two-thirds vote requirements in favor of simple majority votes on a range of issues, including Proposition 13, property taxes, school bonds, and transportation projects. For example, in February 2000, 58 percent of California residents said they opposed the idea of allowing local sales tax increases to pay for local transportation projects to pass with a simple majority instead of a two-thirds vote. And in May 1998, 56 percent of residents opposed allowing local school districts to raise local taxes with a simple majority vote instead of a two-thirds vote. "The California state constitution requires that two-thirds of the state legislature agree to a state budget for it to pass. Do you think that this has been a good thing or a bad thing for the state?" Good thing Bad thing Don’t know All Adults 73% 18 9 Party Registration Democrat Republican Independent Likely Voters 71% 77% 72% 73% 21 16 20 20 8 7 87 "What if there was an initiative on the state ballot that would change the supermajority or two-thirds vote required for the California legislature to pass the state budget to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote? Would you vote yes or no on this initiative?" All Adults Party Registration Democrat Republican Independent Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know 38% 53 9 42% 49 9 28% 62 10 38% 55 7 35% 56 9 - 11 - September 2002 Political Trends President’s Ratings Two-thirds (64%) of Californians continue to approve of George W. Bush’s performance in office, a percentage virtually unchanged from June (65%) and August (64%). Californians’ support for Bush falls short of that of the nation as a whole; according to a CNN/ USA Today/ Gallup Poll conducted in September, 70 percent of Americans approve of how Bush is handling his job as president. Among likely voters in California, 62 percent approve of President Bush’s job performance, and 36 percent disapprove. Bush has equally strong support from Latinos (64%) and non-Hispanic whites (66%), although he has seen a drop in Latino support since August (72% to 64%). The percentages of Democrats (45%) and Republicans (89%) who approve of Bush’s job performance have remained consistent all summer, but the president’s support has increased among independents (55% in August to 63% today). Fifty-five percent of Californians approve of the way the president is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, a figure considerably lower than his overall approval rating. His approval rating on Iraq is also considerably lower than his 80-plus percent approval rating on handling terrorism and security, as seen consistently since November 2001. According to an ABC News poll this month, 65 percent of Americans approve of Bush’s handling of the issues relating to Saddam Hussein and Iraq. The president’s overall approval ratings are higher than his approval ratings on issues relating to Saddam Hussein and Iraq among likely voters (62% to 54%), and across political party lines: among Democrats (45% to 39%), Republicans (89% to 77%), and independents (63% to 51%). This also holds true across the political spectrum: liberals (42% to 35%), moderates (64% to 54%), and conservatives (84% to 72%). Residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (42%) and Los Angeles (51%) are less approving of Bush on the Iraq issue than Central Valley (62%) and Other Southern California (64%) residents. Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults 64% 32 4 55% 39 6 Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 45% 51 4 89% 9 2 63% 33 4 62% 36 2 39% 55 6 77% 18 5 51% 45 4 54% 41 5 - 12 - Economic Trends Overall Economic Mood Californians are slightly more pessimistic than optimistic about the state’s short-term economic prospects. Asked to assess the state’s general financial outlook over the next twelve months, a plurality of the state’s residents (46%) said they think we are in for bad financial times. Only in the Central Valley are more residents optimistic (47%) than pessimistic (42%) about the state's shortterm economic situation. In the San Francisco Bay Area, by contrast, those who see bad times ahead significantly outnumber those who see good times (53% to 40%). "Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times?" Good times Bad times Don’t know All Adults 43% 46 11 Central Valley 47% 42 11 Region SF Bay Area 40% 53 7 Los Angeles 43% 47 10 Other Southern California 44% 44 12 Latino 53% 38 9 The regional differences in outlook toward the state’s financial situation reflect the fact that economic performance normally differs across the state’s major regions. The perception of regional advantage appeared when we asked respondents to assess their regions’ general financial outlook. Overall, Californians are much more optimistic about their regional economies than about the state’s. A majority of the state’s residents (53%) believe that financial good times lie ahead for their regions, compared to only 43 percent who feel similarly sanguine about California’s economic prospects. Across the entire state, residents are more confident in their regions’ financial outlook than they are in California’s: The disparity is especially pronounced in Other Southern California, where 62 percent of residents see good times ahead for their region, while only 44 percent of the region’s residents feel optimistic about the prospects for California’s economy. On regional outlook, San Francisco Bay Area residents (43%) are again the least likely to think that there are good economic times ahead. "How about the economic conditions in your part of California? Do you think that during the next 12 months your region will have good times financially or bad times?" Good times Bad times Don’t know All Adults 53% 39 8 Central Valley 57% 35 8 Region SF Bay Area 43% 49 8 Los Angeles 51% 41 8 Other Southern California 62% 31 7 Latino 57% 35 8 - 13 - Economic Trends Regional Economies Although Californians are relatively upbeat about their regions’ economic prospects over the next year, nearly half of the state’s residents (48%) believe that their regions are in economic recession. As with regional economic optimism, residents across the state’s major regions vary widely in their assignment of the term “recession” to their regional economies. Sixty-seven percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents perceive that their region is in a recession, with a majority thinking that this regional recession is either serious (22%) or moderate (29%). Those who report that their regions are in a recession are much more likely than those who do not think their regions are in a recession to see bad financial times ahead in their region (58% to 20%). Moreover, negative outlook about regional economies increases as people’s assessments of the severity of the recession increases, from 41 percent of those who see their regions’ recession as mild, to 60 percent of those who see it as moderate, to 72 percent of those who call it severe. "Would you say that your region is in an economic recession or not?" Yes, serious recession Yes, moderate recession Yes, mild recession Not in a recession Don’t know All Adults 11% 24 13 47 5 Central Valley 8% 23 13 51 5 Region SF Bay Area 22% 29 16 31 2 Los Angeles 9% 28 13 45 5 Other Southern California 7% 17 11 60 5 Latino 10% 24 16 45 5 There are other important signs of economic pessimism in California’s regions today: Few people are very satisfied with the job opportunities (16%) or the availability of affordable housing (16%) in their regions. Once again, economic attitudes vary widely by region. San Francisco Bay Area residents are the least satisfied with their job opportunities (11% very satisfied) and the most dissatisfied with the availability of housing they can afford (73% not satisfied). Of all the state’s adult residents, those living in the Central Valley (70%) and Other Southern California (71%) are the most likely to be at least somewhat satisfied with job opportunities. Central Valley residents (66%) are also the most likely to be at least somewhat satisfied with housing affordability, whereas a majority of residents in Los Angeles (59%) and Other Southern California (50%) are not satisfied with the affordability of housing in their regions. - 14 - Economic Trends All Central Adults Valley How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied 16% 48 36 20% 50 30 How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied 16% 28 56 30% 36 34 Region SF Bay Area Los Angeles Other Southern California Latino 11% 45 44 16% 49 35 20% 51 29 18% 51 31 8% 19 73 12% 29 59 19% 31 50 17% 31 52 Changes in these regional satisfaction measures since April 1998 (the first PPIC Statewide Survey) provide a context for the current regional differences in economic outlook. Satisfaction with both jobs and housing—common indicators of regional economic strength—are down statewide from 1998 when 26 percent of Californians were very satisfied with job opportunities available in their regions and 22 percent were very satisfied with housing affordability. Since 1998, statewide dissatisfaction with regional job opportunities has risen by 11 percentage points, and dissatisfaction with housing has increased by 21 points. Intra-regional changes in satisfaction with job opportunities and housing affordability are dramatic. In the San Francisco Bay Area, satisfaction with job opportunities has fallen considerably: In 1998, 47 percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents were very satisfied with their job opportunities, whereas today only 11 percent are very satisfied. Dissatisfaction with housing affordability has also risen sharply in all regions over this time period: The percentage of residents who say they are not satisfied with the availability of housing they can afford increased significantly in Los Angeles (up by 25 percentage points), Other Southern California (+19), the San Francisco Bay Area (+15), and the Central Valley (+14). Change in Percentage Points April 1998 - September 2002 How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied All Central Adults Valley Region SF Bay Los Area Angeles Other Southern California -10 +1 -36 -7 -1 +7 +3 -3 +11 -8 +33 +10 -2 -4 +6 -6 -1 -2 -11 -6 -15 -13 -13 -14 -13 +21 +14 +15 +25 +19 - 15 - September 2002 Economic Trends Personal Finances Are Californians better off today than they were four years ago? Certainly they are much more dissatisfied with job opportunities and the availability of affordable housing. Similarly, the reports of personal financial well-being are more negative. In September 1998, only 12 percent of Californians felt they were worse off at that time than in the previous year; today, nearly one in four (23%) reports being worse off than he or she was one year ago. Californians are more optimistic about the year to come than they are positive about their financial progress over the past year. Forty-four percent believe that a year from now they will be financially better off than they are today, whereas only 30 percent believe that they are better off today than they were one year ago. Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites to think that they are better off now than a year ago (37% to 29%) and more likely to expect to be better off a year from now (58% to 40%). Younger Californians, those with children at home, and those with higher household incomes (more than $80,000) are more likely than older residents, those without children in the house, and those with household incomes under $80,000 to say they are better off than they were a year ago. Younger Californians and those with children at home also tend to be the most optimistic about their financial future. Optimism is equally high across all income groups. As far as your own situation, would you say that you and your family are financially better off or worse off or just about the same as you were a year ago? Better off All Adults Sep 98 Sep 99 Sep 00 Dec 01 Sep 02 33% 36% 42% 21% 30% Worse off About the same Don’t know Looking ahead, do you think that a year from now you and your family will be better off or worse off or just about the same as now? Better off Worse off About the same Don’t know 12 54 1 40% 7 51 2 12 52 0 44% 6 48 2 10 48 0 48% 4 43 5 26 53 0 41% 9 47 3 23 45 2 44% 7 44 5 Today, three in four Californians say that they are very (25%) or somewhat (50%) satisfied with their personal financial situations. These percentages are similar to those reported in the September survey preceding the 1998 gubernatorial election (21% and 54%). Older and more educated Californians are somewhat more likely to be satisfied with their personal financial situations, but the greatest difference across residents is by income group. Only 11 percent of those who have annual household incomes of $80,000 or more are dissatisfied with their personal financial situations. By contrast, 23 percent of those with household incomes between $40,000 and $79,999 and 38 percent of those with incomes under $40,000 say that they are not satisfied with their financial situations. - 16 - Economic Trends "In general, how satisfied are you with your current financial situation?" Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied All Adults 25% 50 25 Annual Household income <$40K $40,000 79,999 $80,000K+ 13% 23% 43% 49 54 38 23 46 11 Latino 20% 52 28 Overall, just one-third of California residents say that their household incomes are sufficient to allow them to save money or buy some extras. About half (51%) of Californians say that their incomes supply just enough to meet their bills and obligations, while 16 percent say that their incomes do not supply enough money to meet their bills and obligations. Despite the starkly different economic conditions between 1998 and 2002, these percentages virtually mirror those from the April 1998 Statewide Survey. As expected, the biggest difference among Californians’ opinions about the adequacy of household income relates to their level of income. Twenty-eight percent of Californians with household incomes under $40,000 say that they don’t make enough to meet their bills and obligations, compared to only 3 percent of those whose income is $80,000 or more. Twenty-seven percent of Californians say they are concerned that they or a family member will lose a job in the coming year. Latinos tend to be more concerned than non-Hispanic whites about the risk of job loss (35% to 21%), as are those under age 55 compared to those over 55 (28% to 19%). College graduates (23%) are less likely to say they are very worried about the risk of job loss than those with a high school degree or less (30%). People with household incomes under $40,000 (20%) are much more likely than those with incomes of $80,000 or more (9%) to say that they are very worried that they or someone in their families will lose their job. Regionally, concern about job loss is directly related to perceptions of general economic conditions and recession. San Francisco Bay Area (32%) and Los Angeles residents (31%) are much more likely to be concerned about job loss than those who live in Other Southern California (22%) and the Central Valley (18%), just as people in those urban coastal regions are more pessimistic about their regional economies over the next 12 months and more likely to consider their regions in a recession. "Are you concerned that you or someone in your family will lose their job in the next year or not?" Yes, very concerned Yes, somewhat concerned Not concerned All Adults 15% 12 73 Central Valley 11% 7 82 Region SF Bay Area 18% 14 68 Los Angeles 18% 13 69 Other Southern California 11% 11 78 Latino 20% 15 65 - 17 - September 2002 Economic Trends Economic Equity How has the economic downturn affected people’s perceptions of economic inequality in California? Today, 61 percent think that the state is divided into haves and have-nots, and 34 percent believe that it is not divided that way. By comparison, our January 1999 survey found that 56 percent of residents thought that California is divided into economic groups, the haves and havenots, while 41 percent said that there wasn't such an economic divide in the state. Today, among the state’s major geographic regions, residents in Los Angeles (62%) and the San Francisco Bay Area (64%) are the most likely to see an economically divided state, while Central Valley residents (54%) are the least likely to report an economic division. Seventy percent of liberals perceive that the state is divided economically, significantly higher than the percentage of conservatives (53%) who view the state as divided. Democrats are 14 percentage points more likely than Republicans (66% to 52%) to view California as being economically divided into haves and havenots. Notably, income is not significantly related to perception of an economically divided California. "Do you think that California is divided into haves and have-nots, or do you think that California is not divided that way?" Divided into haves and have-nots Not divided that way Don’t know All Central Adults Valley 61% 54% 34 39 57 Region SF Bay Area 64% 32 4 Los Angeles 62% 34 4 Other Southern California 59% 35 6 Latino 60% 35 5 Sixty percent of Californians report that they are among the state’s “haves,” and 32 percent describe themselves as being among the state’s “have-nots.” Four years ago, 57 percent described themselves as among the state’s “haves” and 35 percent said they were among the “have-nots.” In the current survey, non-Hispanic whites are much more likely than Latinos to describe themselves as haves (68% to 44%). Older, more educated, and higher-income Californians are also much more likely to categorize themselves as haves than are younger, less educated, and lower income residents. "If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in— the haves or have-nots?" Haves Have-nots Don't know All Adults 60% 32 8 Annual Household Income <$40K $40,000 79,999 $80,000K+ 39% 64% 88% 54 27 7 7 95 Latino 44% 47 9 As for policies to deal with income inequality, 52 percent of residents report in another survey question that they think that people in California have an equal opportunity to get ahead, while 43 percent think that the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity (responses in 1998 were nearly identical). Democrats (52%) and independents (45%) are much more likely than Republicans (24%) to say that the government should do more. Latinos (56%) are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (35%) to say that the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity. - 18 - Survey Methodology The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, research director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance in research and writing from Jon Cohen, survey research manager, and Dorie Apollonio and Lisa Cole, survey research associates. The findings of this survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,019 California adult residents interviewed between September 12 and September 21, 2002. 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 telephone numbers were called. All telephone exchanges in California were eligible for calling. Telephone numbers in the survey sample were called up to ten times to increase the likelihood of reaching eligible households. Once a household was reached, an adult respondent (18 or older) was randomly chosen for interviewing by using the “last birthday method” to avoid biases in age and gender. Each interview took an average of 18 minutes to complete. Interviewing was conducted in English or Spanish. Casa Hispana translated the survey into Spanish. 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 2,019 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. The sampling error for the 1,588 registered voters is +/- 2.5 percent. The sampling error for the 1,005 likely voters is +/- 3 percent. Sampling error is just 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 refer to four geographic regions. “Central Valley” includes Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. “SF 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 the mostly suburban regions of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. These four regions were chosen for analysis because they are the major population centers of the state, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the state population; moreover, the growth of the Central Valley and “Other Southern California” regions have given them increasing political significance. We present specific results for Latinos because they account for about 28 percent of the state’s adult population and constitute one of the fastest growing voter groups. The sample sizes for the African American and Asian subgroups are not large enough for separate statistical analysis. We do contrast the opinions of registered Democrats, Republicans, and independents. The “independents” category, except where noted, includes only those who are registered to vote as “decline to state.” In some cases, we compare PPIC Statewide Survey responses to responses recorded in national surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center in June 2002, ABC News Poll in September 2002, CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll in September 2002, and NBC News/ Wall Street Journal in July 2002. We used earlier PPIC Statewide Surveys to analyze trends over time in California. - 19 - - 20 - PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY: CALIFORNIANS AND THEIR GOVERNMENT SEPTEMBER 12 – SEPTEMBER 21, 2002 2,019 CALIFORNIA ADULTS RESIDENTS; ENGLISH AND SPANISH MARGIN OF ERROR +/- 2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-18 are from likely voters only. All other responses are from all adults.] 1. If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for [rotate] (1) Gray Davis, the Democrat; (2) Bill Simon, the Republican, (3) Gary Copeland, the Libertarian, (4) Reinhold Gulke, the American Independent, (5) Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green Party, or someone else? 40% Gray Davis 32 Bill Simon 5 Peter Miguel Camejo 3 Gary David Copeland 1 Reinhold Gulke 2 someone else (specify) 17 don’t know 2. Would you say that you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 5th? 38% satisfied 55 not satisfied 7 don’t know 3. Overall, would you say you are most interested in learning about the candidates’ [rotate] (1) stands on the issues; (2) experience; (3) character; (4) intelligence; (5) party platform? 50% stands on the issues 18 character 11 experience 7 intelligence 6 party platform 4 something else (volunteered) 4 don’t know 4. Would you say that you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you? 27% satisfied 64 not satisfied 9 don’t know Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of the following issues— Gray Davis or Bill Simon? [rotate questions 5 through 9]. 5. How about education? 53 Gray Davis 29 Bill Simon 5 other/neither (volunteered) 13 don’t know 6. How about the economy? 40% Gray Davis 42 Bill Simon 7 other/neither (volunteered) 11 don’t know 7. How about electricity and energy policy? 38% Gray Davis 44 Bill Simon 7 other/neither (volunteered) 11 don’t know 8. How about the state budget and taxes? 43% Gray Davis 38 Bill Simon 6 other/neither (volunteered) 13 don’t know 9. How about maintaining high ethical standards in government? 45% Gray Davis 31 Bill Simon 9 other/neither (volunteered) 15 don’t know 10. How closely do you follow news about candidates for the 2002 governor’s election—very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? 28% very closely 52 fairly closely 16 not too closely 4 not at all closely - 21 - 11. In the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes: Whose ads have you seen the most)? 55% yes, Gray Davis 17 yes, Bill Simon 3 yes, other answer [specify] 25 no [skip to q.13] 12. [Asked of those who have seen ads] So far, have the television advertisements you have seen been very helpful, somewhat helpful, not too helpful, or not at all helpful to you in deciding which candidate to vote for? 12% very helpful 19 somewhat helpful 22 not too helpful 47 not at all helpful 13. Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? 27% more enthusiastic 55 less enthusiastic 15 same 3 don’t know 14. Also on the November ballot is Proposition 47, the "Kindergarten to University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002.” This $13.05 billion bond issue will provide funding for necessary education facilities to relieve overcrowding and to repair older schools. The funds will be targeted to areas of greatest need. Funds will also be used to upgrade and build new classrooms in the California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California. The projected fiscal impact includes a state cost of about $26.2 billion over 30 years to pay off the bonds, with payments of about $873 million annually. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 47? 59% yes 32 no 9 don’t know 15. Proposition 50 on the November ballot, the “Water Quality, Supply and Safe Drinking Water Projects, Coastal Wetlands Purchase and Protection Bonds Initiative” authorizes $3.44 billion general obligation bonds to fund a variety of specified water and wetlands projects. The fiscal impact includes a state cost of up to $6.9 billion over 30 years to repay the bonds. The reduction in local property tax revenues will be up to roughly $10 million annually, partially offset by state funds. There are also unknown state and local operation and maintenance costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 50? 44% yes 40 no 16 don’t know 16. Some people know a lot about state finance, and others do not. How much do you know about how state bonds are paid for in California—a lot, some, very little, or nothing? 13% a lot 47 some 34 very little 6 nothing 17. In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 69% good idea 22 bad idea 9 don’t know 18. The state government is projected to have a large budget deficit over the next few years. Knowing this, is this a good time or a bad time for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 44% good time 46 bad time 10 don’t know 19. Some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote? (if yes: Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent?) 36% yes, Democrat (skip to q.21) 28 yes, Republican (skip to q.22) 4 yes, other party (skip to q.23) 14 yes, independent (ask q.20) 15 no, not registered (ask q.20) 3 don’t know (ask q.20) - 22 - 20. (if independent, not registered, don’t know on q.19) Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican party or Democratic party? 28% Republican party (skip to q.23) 43 Democratic party (skip to q.23) 20 neither (volunteered) (skip to q.23) 9 don’t know (skip to q.23) 21. (if Democrat on q.19) Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 50% strong (skip to q.23) 47 not very strong (skip to q.23) 3 don’t know (skip to q.23) 22. (if Republican on q.19) Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 50% strong 48 not very strong 2 don’t know 23. On another topic, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States? 64% approve 32 disapprove 4 don’t know 24. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein? 55% approve 39 disapprove 6 don’t know 25. And turning to the state, overall do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? 49% approve 44 disapprove 7 don’t know 26. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Governor Davis is handling the issue of jobs and the economy in California? 45% approve 40 disapprove 15 don’t know 27. Do you approve or disapprove of the job that the California legislature is doing at this time? 45% approve 36 disapprove 19 don’t know 28. Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature has been handling the issue of the state budget? 29% approve 54 disapprove 17 don’t know 29. The California state constitution requires that twothirds of the state legislature agree to a state budget for it to pass. Do you think that this has been a good thing or a bad thing for the state? 73% good for the state 18 bad for the state 9 don’t know 30. What if there was an initiative on the state ballot that would change the supermajority or two-thirds vote required for the California legislature to pass the state budget to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote? Would you vote yes or no on this initiative? 38% yes 53 no 9 don’t know 31. On another topic, do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 54% right direction 37 wrong direction 9 don’t know 32. Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 43% good times 46 bad times 11 don’t know 33. How about the economic conditions in your part of California? Do you think that during the next 12 months your region will have good times financially or bad times? 53% good times 39 bad times 8 don’t know 34. Would you say that your region is in an economic recession or not? (if yes: Do you think it is in a serious, a moderate, or a mild recession?) 11% yes, serious recession 24 yes, moderate recession 13 yes, mild recession 47 no 5 don’t know - 23 - September 2002 35. How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 16% very satisfied 48 somewhat satisfied 36 not satisfied 36. How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 16% very satisfied 28 somewhat satisfied 56 not satisfied 37. In general, how satisfied are you with your current financial situation? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 25% very satisfied 50 somewhat satisfied 25 not satisfied 38. Thinking about your household income, would you say that you have more than enough so that you can save money or buy some extras, just enough to meet your bills and obligations, or not enough to meet your bills and obligations? 33% more than enough 51 just enough 16 not enough 39. As far as your own situation, would you say that you and your family are financially better off or worse off or just about the same as you were a year ago? 30% better off 23 worse off 45 same 2 don’t know 40. Looking ahead, do you think that a year from now you and your family will be better off or worse off or just about the same as now? 44% better off 7 worse off 44 same 5 don’t know 41. Are you concerned that you or someone in your family will lose their job in the next year or not? (if yes: Are you very concerned or somewhat concerned?) 15% yes, very concerned 12 yes, somewhat concerned 73 no 42. On another topic, some people think that California is divided into economic groups, the haves and have-nots, while others think it is not divided that way. Do you think that California is divided into haves and have-nots, or do you think that California is not divided that way? 61% divided into haves and have-nots 34 not divided that way 5 don’t know 43. If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in—the haves or have-nots? 60% haves 32 have-nots 8 don’t know 44. Do you think that in California today [rotate] (a) all people have an equal opportunity to get ahead, or (b) the government should do more to make sure that all Californians have an equal opportunity to get ahead? 52% people have equal opportunity 43 government should do more 1 both (volunteered) 2 neither (volunteered) 2 don’t know 45. On another topic, do you think that the current cases of wrongdoing among chief executives of major businesses represent [rotate] (a) a problem of a few corrupt individuals in a system that is mostly honest and above board [or] (b) a widespread problem in which many business executives are taking advantage of a system that is failing? 32% a few corrupt individuals 61 widespread problem 7 don’t know 46. Which of these comes closer to your point of view? [rotate] (a) the stock market is a fair and open way to invest one’s money [or] (b) because of corporate corruption and broker practices, the stock market is no longer a fair and open way to invest one’s money. 42% stock market is fair and open 49 stock market is no longer fair and open 9 don’t know - 24 - 47. On another topic, would you consider yourself to be politically very liberal, somewhat liberal, middle-ofthe-road, somewhat conservative, or very conservative? 10% very liberal 20 somewhat liberal 30 middle-of-the-road 27 somewhat conservative 10 very conservative 3 don’t know 48. How do you get most of your news—from television, newspapers, radio, the Internet, magazines, or talking to other people? (if television: Would that be major network TV, local TV, or cable news stations such as CNN or MSNBC?) 11% network TV 15 local TV 19 cable TV 25 newspapers 13 radio 9 Internet 5 talking to other people 2 magazines 1 other/ don’t know 49. Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics—a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or none? 21% great deal 44 fair amount 29 only a little 6 none 50. How often would you say you vote—always, nearly always, part of the time, seldom, or never? 50% always 24 nearly always 11 part of the time 6 seldom 9 never I am going to read you a list of examples of the many different areas in which people do volunteer activity. By volunteer activity I mean not just belonging to a service organization, but actually working in some way to help others for no monetary pay. In which, if any, of these areas have you done some volunteer work in the past twelve months? [rotate questions 51 to 57] 51. How about education or school-related, such as tutoring, mentoring, or the parent teachers organization (PTA)? 45% yes 55 no 52. How about arts and culture, such as museums or performing arts organizations? 19% yes 81 no 53. How about human service organizations, such as those for children and seniors or people with special needs? 36% yes 64 no 54. How about churches and religious organizations? 39% yes 61 no 55. How about sports and recreation activities, such as soccer teams or baseball leagues? 29% yes 71 no 56. How about ethnic, racial, or immigrant associations? 15% yes 85 no 57. How about health organizations, such as hospitals or those concerned with disease prevention? 21% yes 79 no [58-69: demographic questions] - 25 - September 2002 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY Advisory Committee Mary Bitterman President The James Irvine Foundation Angela Blackwell President Policy Link 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 Matt Fong Chairman Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Advisory Committee William Hauck President California Business Roundtable Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Senior Scholar School of Policy, Planning, and Development University of Southern California Monica Lozano President and Chief Operating Officer La Opinión Donna Lucas President NCG Porter Novelli Max Neiman Director Center for Social and Behavioral Research University of California, Riverside Dan Rosenheim News Director KPIX-TV Richard Schlosberg President and CEO The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Carol Stogsdill President Stogsdill Consulting Cathy Taylor Vice President and Editorial Commentary Director Orange County Register Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center - 26 - PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA Board of Directors Raymond L. Watson, Chair Vice Chairman of the Board The Irvine Company William K. Coblentz Partner Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass, LLP Edward K. Hamilton Chairman Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler, Inc. Walter B. Hewlett Director Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities David W. Lyon President and CEO Public Policy Institute of California Cheryl White Mason Chief, Civil Liability Management Office of the City Attorney Los Angeles, California Arjay Miller Dean Emeritus Graduate School of Business Stanford University Ki Suh Park Design and Managing Partner Gruen Associates A. Alan Post Former State Legislative Analyst State of California Constance L. Rice Co-Director The Advancement Project Thomas C. Sutton Chairman & CEO Pacific Life Insurance Company Cynthia A. Telles Department of Psychiatry UCLA School of Medicine Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center Harold M. Williams President Emeritus The J. Paul Getty Trust and Of Counsel Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Advisory Council Clifford W. Graves Vice Chancellor, Physical Planning University of California, Merced 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, Berkeley 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 Sacramento Bee James P. Smith Senior Economist RAND 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 info@ppic.org" } ["___content":protected]=> string(102) "

S 902MBS

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(113) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/ppic-statewide-survey-californians-and-their-government-september-2002/s_902mbs/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(8176) ["ID"]=> int(8176) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "1" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:35:30" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(3314) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(8) "S 902MBS" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(8) "s_902mbs" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(12) "S_902MBS.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(6) "336118" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(82506) "PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY SEPTEMBER 2002 Public Policy Institute of California Californians and Their Government ○○○○○ Mark Baldassare Research Director & Survey Director 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, including education, health care, immigration, income distribution, welfare, urban growth, and state and local finance. 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 state and federal legislation nor does it endorse or support any political parties or candidates for public office. David W. Lyon is founding President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Raymond L. Watson is Chairman of the Board of Directors. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 800 • San Francisco, California 94111 Telephone: (415) 291-4400 • Fax: (415) 291-4401 info@ppic.org • www.ppic.org Preface The PPIC Statewide Survey series is designed to provide policymakers, the media, and the general public with objective, advocacy-free information on the perceptions, opinions, and public policy preferences of California residents. Begun in April 1998, the survey series has generated a database that includes the responses of more than 56,000 Californians. The current survey is the eleventh in our Californians and Their Government series, which is conducted on a periodic basis throughout the 2002 election cycle. The series is focusing on the social, economic, and political trends and public policy preferences that underlie ballot choices in statewide races and citizens’ initiatives. This report presents the responses of 2,019 adult residents throughout the state on a wide range of issues: • The California election in 2002, including likely-voter preferences in the governor’s race, the importance of issues, satisfaction with the candidate choices and candidates’ attention to the issues, voters’ attention to news and political advertising, support for state bond measures on the November ballot, and knowledge and attitudes toward state bonds. • Political trends, including approval ratings of President Bush, Governor Davis, and the California legislature, and policy preferences regarding the state budget process. • Economic trends, including overall outlook on the state economy, perceptions of regional economies, personal finances, and perceptions of income inequality in the state. • How growing regions and groups such as the Central Valley, Latinos, and independent voters affect overall statewide trends in ballot choices and policy preferences. This report presents the results of the twenty-eighth PPIC Statewide Survey. The surveys include a number of special editions focusing on particular regions and themes: • The Central Valley (11/99, 3/01, 4/02) • Population Growth (5/01) • San Diego County (7/02) • Land Use (11/01) • Orange County (9/01) • The Environment (6/00, 6/02) • U.S.-Japan Relations (9/01) 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. -i- Contents Preface Press Release California 2002 Elections Political Trends Economic Trends Survey Methodology Survey Questions and Results Survey Advisory Committee i v 1 9 13 19 21 26 - iii - Press Release TUNED IN BUT TURNED OFF: CALIFORNIANS WAITING FOR NEWS THEY CAN USE IN GOVERNOR’S RACE Voters Divided on Timing of Bond Issues; More Californians Today Perceive Gap Between Rich and Poor SAN FRANCISCO, California, September 26, 2002 — Although residents remain far more engaged in the current governor’s race than they were four years ago, they express dissatisfaction with nearly every aspect of the campaign, from the lack of focus on issues to the unhelpfulness of the paid advertising, according to a new survey released today by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). Voters are more tuned in to the current race than they were during the last gubernatorial campaign: 80 percent today say they are closely following news about the gubernatorial candidates, compared to 54 percent in September 1998. Voters today are also more likely to have seen political advertising by the candidates for governor: 72 percent say they have seen commercials by Democratic Governor Gray Davis (55%) and his Republican challenger Bill Simon (17%). In September 1998, only 38 percent had seen candidates’ commercials. Still, California voters are finding little to like in the governor’s race: 55 percent express dissatisfaction with the choice of candidates for governor and 69 percent say the television advertisements they have seen have been unhelpful in deciding which candidate to support. While the majority (50%) say they are more interested in learning about where the candidates stand on the issues than about their character (18%), experience (11%), intelligence (7%), or party platform (6%), most voters (64%) also say they are dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are spending on the issues voters care about. Slightly more than half of likely voters (55%) — including majorities of Democrats (57%), Republicans (52%), and independent voters (60%) — say they are less enthusiastic than usual about voting. Among the older, more educated, higher income, and longer-term residents who turn out to vote with the greatest regularity, that lack of enthusiasm is even more pronounced. “We have an electorate that is unhappy with the race so far, and independent voters are the most unhappy of all,” says survey director Mark Baldassare. “If either of the candidates is looking for salvation from the swing vote, they may be sorely disappointed.” Indeed, 73 percent of independent voters say they are not satisfied with the candidates’ attention to the issues that matter most to them. Among likely voters, Davis leads Simon by 8 points (40% to 32%), with no third-party candidate receiving more than 5 percent of the vote. The race has changed little since August, when Davis led Simon 41 percent to 30 percent. Davis still receives strong support from Latinos, women, and independent voters. However, the gender gap is smaller than it was one month ago: Women support Davis over Simon by 11 points (42% to 31%) compared to 19 points in August. Davis currently leads Simon in the San Francisco Bay Area (45% to 22%) and Los Angeles (49% to 27%), the two candidates are virtually tied in the other Southern California counties (35% to 38%), and Simon is beating Davis in the Central Valley (45% to 30%). At this point in the 1998 gubernatorial race, Davis was leading Republican opponent Dan Lungren by 9 points (47% to 38%). As in August, likely voters continue to prefer Davis over Simon on education (53% to 29%), the state budget and taxes (43% to 38%), and maintaining high ethical standards in government (45% to 31%). They are split over which candidate would do a better job on the economy, preferring Simon slightly (42% to 40%), and select Simon over Davis on electricity and energy policy (44% to 38%). -v- Press Release What do voters know about bonds and when do they support them? Voters will decide the fate of $18 billion in state bonds this November. But while they appear generally supportive of issuing bonds to finance big ticket projects, voters are divided about using them in a time of budget deficits and most admit to knowing little about how bonds are paid for. Overall, 69 percent of likely voters say it is a good idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure projects, including majorities of Democrats (77%), Republicans (59%), and independents (67%). However, when asked about the use of state bonds in the current budget climate, only 44 percent say it is a good time to issue bonds and 46 percent say it is a bad time. In this case, Republicans (57%) and independents (50%) oppose issuing bonds, while Democrats (53%) remain supportive. Despite these strong opinions, only 13 percent of likely voters say they know a lot about how state bonds are paid for, while about half (47%) say they know something and 40 percent know either very little or nothing at all. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say they have at least some knowledge about how state bonds are financed (65% to 55%). Proposition 47 — a bond measure that would provide funding for kindergarten through university public education facilities — is currently supported by 59 percent of likely voters, with 32 percent opposed. The measure is favored by majorities of Democrats (72%) and independents (62%), while Republicans oppose it by a narrow margin (46% to 42%). Voters are split in their support for Proposition 50, which would provide funding for water and wetlands projects. Forty-four percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on the measure and 40 percent no. Support for the measure has fallen since June, when 59 percent of voters supported the measure (question wording did not match the ballot label). Democrats favor the measure (54% to 26%), Republicans oppose it (54% to 31%), and independents are divided (44% to 43%). Are residents better off today than they were four years ago? Today, most Californians say they are very (25%) or somewhat (50%) satisfied with their personal financial situation, similar to findings from September 1998 (21% and 54%). However, a greater number of residents today (23%) also say they are worse off than they were one year ago, compared to September 1998 (12%). Indeed, one in four Californians today are either very (15%) or somewhat concerned (12%) that they or someone in their family will lose their job in the next year. Latinos and people with annual household incomes under $40,000 (20% each) are more likely to be very worried about the risk of job loss. Residents today are also far less content with job and housing opportunities in their region. In April 1998, 26 percent of Californians said they were very satisfied with job opportunities in their part of the state, and 22 percent were very satisfied with the availability of affordable housing. Today, far fewer (16% each) are very satisfied with these key measures of quality of life. In fact, dissatisfaction with regional job opportunities has risen 11 points (from 25% to 36%) and dissatisfaction with housing affordability has increased by 21 points (from 35% to 56%). Unhappiness with job opportunities has risen most dramatically in the San Francisco Bay Area (from 11% to 44%), while dissatisfaction with housing affordability has grown most sharply among Los Angeles residents (from 34% to 59%). But the regional economic picture is not entirely grim: Fewer Californians today compared to one month ago believe their region is in a recession (48% to 54%) and a majority (53%) expect good economic conditions in their part of the state in the coming year. While more Californians expect bad rather than good economic conditions to prevail statewide in the next twelve months (46% to 43%), the number that predicts bad times is down 5 points since August. And while they may not be better off today than they were four years ago, residents are more likely today (44%) than in September 1998 (40%) to think that they and their family will be better off a year from now. - vi - Press Release While many Californians are optimistic about their future economic prospects, the perception that some residents have been left behind has increased. Today, 61 percent say that the state is divided into “haves” and “have-nots,” compared to 56 percent in January 1999. Sixty percent of Californians say they are among the “haves,” while 32 percent — including a majority of those with a household income of less than $40,000 — say they are “have-nots.” Despite this income divide, a majority of state residents (52%) believe that people in California have an equal opportunity to succeed, while 43 percent say the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity. More key findings • Overall approval ratings: Bush, Davis, Legislature (pages 9, 10, 12) President Bush: 64 percent of residents approve and 32 percent disapprove, unchanged since August. Governor Davis: 49 percent approve and 44 percent disapprove, down from August (51% to 42%). State Legislature: 45 percent approve and 36 percent disapprove, down from January (49% to 35%). • State budget: Legislature No, Supermajority Yes (page 11) A majority of Californians (54%) disapprove of the legislature’s handling of the state budget. Most (73%) say it is a good thing that a two-thirds vote of the legislature is needed to pass a state budget. And 53 percent say they would oppose an initiative to do away with the supermajority requirement. • Support for President Bush on Iraq (page 12) Fifty-five percent of Californians approve of the way President Bush is dealing with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Nationally, 65 percent of Americans approve of his handling of the crisis. • Corporate corruption widespread (page 24) Sixty-one percent of residents think that the current cases of wrongdoing among chief executives of major businesses represent a widespread problem rather than a problem of a few corrupt individuals (32%). About the survey The purpose of the PPIC Statewide Survey is to develop an in-depth profile of the social, economic, and political forces affecting California elections and public policy preferences. PPIC will conduct large-scale public opinion surveys on a regular basis leading up to the November 2002 election. Findings of the current survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,019 California adult residents interviewed from September 12 to September 21, 2002. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish. The sampling error for the total sample is +/- 2%. The sampling error for the 1,588 registered voters is +/- 2.5% and for the 1,005 likely voters is +/- 3%. For more information on survey methodology, see page 19. 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 state and federal legislation nor does it endorse or support any political parties or candidates for public office. This report will appear on PPIC’s website (www.ppic.org) on September 26. See graphics next page. ### - vii - If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…? Davis Simon Other Don’t know 17% 11% 40% Are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? More enthusiastic Less enthusiastic Same Don’t know 15% 3% 27% 32% _____________________________P_e_rc_e_n_t_L_ik_e_ly_V__o_te_rs__ Approval Ratings of President Bush Percent Approve 80 64% 60 55% 40 20 0 Overall Iraq and Saddam Hussein ______________________________P_e_r_ce_n_t_A_ll_A_d_u_lts__ Regional Job Dissatisfaction Percentage Point Change Between 1998-2002 40 +33 20 +11 +10 Central Valley 0 All SF Bay LA Adults -8 Area -20 “Not Satisfied” +6 OSC 55% ____________________________P_e_rc_e_n_t _Li_ke_l_y_V_o_te_rs_ Would you vote yes or no on Prop 47, the Kindergarten-University Facilities Bond Act of 2002? Yes No Don’t know 9% 32% 59% Percent Likely Voters _____________________________________ Regional Housing Dissatisfaction Percentage Point Change Between 1998-2002 30 25 +21 +25 20 +14 +15 15 10 5 0 All Central SF Bay LA Adults Valley Area “Not Satisfied” +19 OSC California 2002 Elections Governor’s Race As the campaign for governor enters its final stages, incumbent Governor Gray Davis has an 8point lead over Republican challenger Bill Simon (40% to 32%), a slight decline from the 11-point lead he had in August. However, large numbers of voters are still undecided (17%) or committed to third party candidates (11%). Among the latter, 5 percent favor Peter Camejo of the Green Party, 3 percent support Gary Copeland of the Libertarian Party, 1 percent favor Reinhold Gulke of the American Independent Party, and 2 percent name someone else. To win in a statewide race in California, a Republican candidate must have solid support inside the GOP and also appeal to voters outside the fold. Although Simon has strong support from GOP voters (68%), he has little support among independents (22%) or Democrats (7%). Similarly, Simon is strongly favored over Davis by conservative voters (61% to 18%), but moderates support Davis over Simon (43% to 24%) and liberals give Davis an even bigger lead (62% to 7%). The Democrats have been winning in recent statewide elections because of strong support from women, Latinos, and voters in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Today, Davis leads Simon among women by 11 points (42% to 31%), while he is running nearly even with Simon among men (38% to 34%). Davis is running nearly even with Simon among non-Hispanic whites (35% to 37%), but he holds big leads over Simon among Latinos (58% to 19%). Regionally, Davis leads Simon by large margins in the San Francisco Bay Area (45% to 22%) and Los Angeles (49% to 27%), while Simon has a strong lead in the Central Valley (45% to 30%) and a slight lead in Other Southern California (38% to 35%). Currently, Davis leads Simon among all age groups, among those with and without children at home, and among long-term residents. However, it is noteworthy that neither Davis nor Simon has majority support of the voters in any demographic group. "If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for…?" Likely Voters Gray Davis Bill Simon Peter Miguel Camejo Gary Copeland Reinhold Gulke Someone else Don’t know All Likely Voters 40% 32 5 3 1 2 17 Dem 65% 7 6 2 1 2 17 Party Rep 12% 68 2 2 1 2 13 Ind/ Other* 33% 22 9 8 3 2 23 Central Valley 30% 45 5 2 1 2 15 Region SF Bay Area 45% 22 8 4 1 3 17 Los Angeles 49% 27 4 3 1 1 15 Other Southern California 35% 38 3 2 3 3 16 Latino 58% 19 3 2 1 3 14 *In this table, Californians registered to vote as independents (“decline-to-state”) and those registered with “third parties” are combined. In all other tables, independents are reported separately. Party affiliations for the candidates are as follows: Davis (Democrat), Simon (Republican), Camejo (Green), Copeland (Libertarian), and Gulke (American Independent). -1- California 2002 Elections Voters’ Reactions to the Campaign Many Californians are turned off by the current governor’s election, and those who are usually most likely to vote are among the most disaffected. Likely voters who are “less enthusiastic” than usual about voting outnumber those who are “more enthusiastic” about voting, 55 percent to 27 percent. Expression of less enthusiasm is slightly higher among independent voters (60%) and Democrats (57%) than it is among Republicans (52%). In every region of the state, voters who are less enthusiastic about this election outnumber those who are more enthusiastic, with San Francisco Bay Area voters (61%) the most likely to express less enthusiasm than usual. Non-Hispanic whites are more likely than Latinos to say that they are less enthusiastic (58% to 49%). There is no significant difference between men and women. In the demographic groups where turnout is typically highest—older, more educated, higher income, and longer-term residents—voters are more likely than voters in other groups to say that they are less enthusiastic about this election. "Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic?" More enthusiastic Less enthusiastic Same Don’t know All Likely Voters 27% 55 15 3 Democrat 24% 57 17 2 Likely Voters Republican 30% 52 16 2 Independent 26% 60 11 3 Latino 29% 49 20 2 Voters’ satisfaction with the choice of candidates has not changed. A majority of likely voters (55%) say they are not satisfied with the choices for governor, which is similar to findings in our August survey. Dissatisfaction among Democrats (51%) and Republicans (57%) is about the same as in August but is up among independent voters—63 percent as compared to 54 percent last month. There has been a slight increase in Republican voters who say they are satisfied (33% in August versus 37% in September). Regionally, dissatisfaction with the candidates is higher in the San Francisco Bay Area (65%) than in the rest of Southern California (55%), Los Angeles (52%), and the Central Valley (51%). A bare majority of Latinos (50%) say they are satisfied with the candidate choices, while a majority of non-Hispanic whites (60%) indicate that they are not satisfied. Dissatisfaction with the candidate choices tends to increase with age, education, and income. "Would you say that you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 5th?" Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know All Likely Voters 38% 55 7 Democrat 43% 51 6 Likely Voters Republican 37% 57 6 Independent 29% 63 8 Latino 50% 41 9 -2- California 2002 Elections Importance of Issues Californians are more interested in learning about where candidates stand on the issues (50%) than about personal characteristics or party platforms. Only 18 percent report being most interested in hearing about the candidates’ character, 11 percent about the candidates’ experience, 7 percent about the candidates’ intelligence, and 6 percent about the party platforms. This interest in issues holds in every political group, region of the state, and all age, education, and income categories. However, Republicans care more than Democrats (21% to 15%) and conservatives care more than liberals (23% to 10%) about the candidates’ character. Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (17% to 9%) to say that the candidates’ experience is of greatest interest. "What are you most interested in learning about the candidates?" Stands on the issues Character Experience Intelligence Party platform Something else (volunteered) Don’t know All Likely Voters 50% 18 11 7 6 4 4 Likely Voters Democrat 49% 15 13 9 5 4 5 Republican Independent 49% 21 8 6 8 4 4 50% 19 12 4 8 2 5 Latino 43% 10 17 13 7 2 8 While issues matter most to likely voters, only 27 percent of them are satisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates are paying to issues they care about the most. Dissatisfaction spans the political spectrum: Republicans (66%) are more dissatisfied than Democrats (58%), and independents (73%) are the most dissatisfied of all with the candidates’ lack of attention to the issues. Moderates (69%) are somewhat more likely than conservatives (63%) and liberals (60%) to say that they are not satisfied with this aspect of the campaign. A majority of residents across the state’s major regions are not satisfied with the attention being paid to the issues, and San Francisco Bay Area voters (68%) are the most dissatisfied. Latinos are more satisfied with attention to the issues than non-Hispanic whites (41% to 24%). The voters’ dissatisfaction with attention to issues tends to increase with education, income, and the presence of children in the home. "Would you say that you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you?" Satisfied Not satisfied Don’t know All Likely Voters 27% 64 9 Democrat 34% 58 8 Likely Voters Republican 23% 66 11 Independent 20% 73 7 Latino 41% 50 9 - 3 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Candidate Qualifications In our August survey, nine in 10 voters identified an issue of importance to them in the governor’s election, and four issues topped their lists: education, the economy, electricity, and the state budget and taxes. In this survey, we asked which of the major party candidates would do a better job on these four issues, as well as on maintaining high ethical standards in government. The question of ethics has been a high profile issue for the major party candidates and one that each candidate has tried to use against the other. Davis continues to hold a significant edge over Simon on handling education (53% to 29%) and a more modest edge on handling the state budget and taxes (43% to 38%). Likely voters are split between Davis and Simon when it comes to handling the economy (40% to 42%) and lean toward Simon over Davis on electricity and energy policy (44% to 38%). Davis continues to have a large lead over Simon on the issue of maintaining high ethical standards in government (45% to 31%). "Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of these issues…?" Likely Voters Education Gray Davis Bill Simon Economy Gray Davis Bill Simon Electricity and energy policy Gray Davis Bill Simon State budget and taxes Gray Davis Bill Simon Maintaining high ethical standards in government Gray Davis Bill Simon August 2002 50% 29 40% 40 34% 43 42% 39 43% 28 September 2002 53% 29 40% 42 38% 44 43% 38 45% 31 On education, Davis has much stronger support among Democrats (74%) than Simon has among Republicans (56%), and a majority of independents think that Davis would do a better job than Simon (54% to 22%). On the electricity issue, Simon is rated higher among Republicans (76%) than Davis is among Democrats (57%), and independents are split between Simon and Davis (42% to 38%). When it comes to ethical issues, Democrats are more likely to favor Davis (68%) than Republicans are to favor Simon (60%); independents support Davis over Simon (44% to 29%). Davis and Simon receive similar levels of support within their parties for handling the state budget and taxes, and independents are split (39% to 35%) slightly in favor of Davis. As for the economy, Republicans have more confidence in Simon (76%) than Democrats have in Davis (64%); independents tend to favor Simon over Davis (42% to 37%) on this issue. -4- California 2002 Elections Education Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know The Economy Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know Electricity and energy policy Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know State budget and taxes Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know Maintaining high ethical standards in government Gray Davis Bill Simon Other/Neither Don’t know "Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of these issues?" Likely Voters All Likely Voters Dem Party Rep Ind Central Valley Region SF Bay Area Los Angeles Other Southern California 53% 29 5 13 74% 10 6 10 26% 56 3 15 54% 22 6 18 49% 38 4 9 58% 21 7 14 59% 24 4 13 46% 37 6 11 40% 42 7 11 64% 15 9 12 12% 76 4 8 37% 42 7 14 29% 55 5 11 39% 36 12 13 50% 33 6 11 38% 46 6 10 38% 44 7 11 57% 20 9 14 14% 76 3 7 38% 42 5 15 30% 54 5 11 43% 38 7 12 44% 39 5 12 34% 48 10 8 43% 38 6 13 68% 14 7 11 15% 69 4 12 39% 35 7 19 29% 49 7 15 53% 29 7 11 51% 34 5 10 37% 44 7 12 45% 31 9 15 68% 8 10 14 18% 60 6 16 44% 29 11 16 40% 40 6 14 50% 24 13 13 49% 29 8 14 40% 34 9 17 Latino 64% 19 6 11 52% 24 9 15 51% 26 8 15 56% 22 6 16 58% 19 9 14 - 5 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Voters’ Attention to News and Commercials Attention to news and commercials about the 2002 governor’s election is high: 80 percent of likely voters say they are very closely or fairly closely following news about the candidates in the 2002 governor’s election, and 75 percent say they recall television advertisements by the candidates. In September 1998, by comparison, 54 percent were closely following the election news and 38 percent had seen the gubernatorial candidates’ commercials. Today, more likely voters recall seeing ads from the Davis (55%) than from the Simon (17%) campaign. Davis’ commercials are remembered most often in every political group, region of the state, and demographic group. Republicans (64%) are more likely than Democrats (50%) to recall seeing Davis’ commercials. Non-Hispanic whites (58%) are more likely than Latinos (45%) to remember Davis’ ads. "In the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes: "Whose ads have you seen the most?)" Likely Voters Yes, Davis Yes, Simon Yes, other No All Likely Voters 55% 17 3 25 Dem 50% 21 3 26 Party Rep 64% 11 2 23 Ind 52% 18 4 26 Central Valley 57% 15 3 25 Region SF Bay Area 55% 18 3 24 Los Angeles 57% 18 2 23 Other Southern California 54% 18 3 25 Latino 45% 28 2 25 Although a large majority of likely voters have seen the commercials, only about one-third describe these advertisements as very helpful (12%) or somewhat helpful (19%) in deciding how they will vote. Almost 70 percent say the advertisements have been not too helpful (22%) or not at all helpful (47%) in making that decision. Women are more likely than men (33% to 28%), Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (44% to 27%), and Democrats and more likely than Republicans (39% to 26%) to say the commercials have been helpful. The percentages of respondents who view the commercials as helpful tends to decline with income and education. "So far, have the television advertisements you have seen been very helpful, somewhat helpful, not too helpful, or not at all helpful to you in deciding which candidate to vote for?" (Asked of those seeing advertisements) Likely Voters Very helpful Somewhat helpful Not too helpful Not at all helpful All Likely Voters 12% 19 22 47 Dem 14% 25 22 39 Party Rep 13% 13 22 52 Ind 7% 18 23 52 Central Valley 12% 14 23 51 Region SF Bay Area 11% 25 14 50 Los Angeles 15% 17 24 44 Other Southern California 11% 21 23 45 Latino 15% 29 19 37 -6- California 2002 Elections State Bonds: Propositions 47 and 50 This month, we asked about two of the three state bond measures on the November ballot— Proposition 47 that would provide $13.05 billion for education facilities and Proposition 50 that would provide $3.44 billion for water and wetlands projects. If the election were held today, 59 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes on Proposition 47, which would provide funding for kindergarten through university public education facilities. There is solid support for this measure among Democrats (72%) and independent voters (62%), whereas Republicans tend to oppose it (46% to 42%). A majority of voters in every region would vote yes on this bond measure. Latinos (68%) are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (56%) to say they would vote for Proposition 47. Voter support for the school bond declines with age but increases with education and for those with children at home. There are no significant differences in support for the measure across income levels. "If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 47, the Kindergarten to University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002?" Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 59% 32 9 Party Dem 72% 19 9 Rep 42% 46 12 Ind 62% 33 5 Central Valley 55% 38 7 Region SF Bay Area 62% 28 10 Los Angeles 58% 31 11 Other Southern California 60% 32 8 Latino 68% 26 6 Voters are split in their support for Proposition 50, which would provide funding for water and wetlands projects. Currently, 44 percent would vote yes on Proposition 50, 40 percent would vote no, and 16 percent are undecided. The state water bonds measure is favored by Democrats (54%) and opposed by a like percentage of Republicans (54%), while independent voters are evenly split on the measure (44% to 43%). There is no region in the state where a majority of likely voters support Proposition 50. There is a greater tendency to vote no on Proposition 50 as income increases. "If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 50, the Water Quality, Supply and Safe Drinking Water Projects, Coastal Wetlands Purchase and Protection Bonds Initiative?" Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know All Likely Voters 44% 40 16 Party Dem 54% 26 20 Rep 31% 54 15 Ind 44% 43 13 Central Valley 37% 48 15 Region SF Bay Area 49% 31 20 Los Angeles 47% 38 15 Other Southern California 43% 42 15 Latino 47% 39 14 - 7 - September 2002 California 2002 Elections Voters Reactions to State Bonds Because voters will be deciding the fate of about $18 billion in state bonds on the November statewide ballot, it is instructive to understand how Californians perceive state bonds. Only 13 percent of likely voters say they know a lot about how state bonds are paid for, while 47 percent say they know something, and 40 percent know either very little or nothing at all. Republicans are more likely than Democrats (65% to 55%), conservatives more likely than liberals (61% to 57%), and nonHispanic whites more likely than Latinos (64% to 47%) to say they know something about state bond financing. Knowledge about state bonds increases with age, education, and income; but substantial percentages in all groups know little or nothing. Despite this lack of knowledge about how bonds are paid for, 69 percent of likely voters say it is a good idea to pay for infrastructure projects with state bonds. Overall, solid majorities in all political groups, regions of the state, racial and ethnic groups, and demographic categories agree that this is a good use for state bonds. "In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?" Likely Voters Good idea Bad idea Don’t know All Likely Voters 69% 22 9 Party Dem 77% 13 10 Rep 59% 32 9 Ind 67% 24 9 Central Valley 67% 25 8 Region SF Bay Area 72% 17 11 Los Angeles 66% 24 10 Other Southern California 68% 23 9 Latino 74% 19 7 The general enthusiasm for state bonds notwithstanding, when voters are reminded about the projected budget deficit, only 44 percent say this is a good time to issue bonds. The drop-off between general approval of issuing bonds and whether now is a good time is sharp regardless of partisanship: Democrats (77% to 53%), Republicans (59% to 34%), and independent voters (67% to 45%) are all much more likely to think that bonds are generally the right approach than to think that now is a good time to issue them. "The state government is projected to have a large budget deficit over the next few years. Knowing this, is this a good time or a bad time for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects?" Likely Voters Good time Bad time Don’t know All Likely Voters 44% 46 10 Party Dem 53% 35 12 Rep 34% 57 9 Ind 45% 50 5 Central Valley 40% 49 11 Region SF Bay Area 46% 43 11 Los Angeles 45% 45 10 Other Southern California 45% 45 10 Latino 46% 45 9 -8- Political Trends Governor’s Ratings Half of California residents (49%) approve of Governor Gray Davis’ overall performance in office, while 44 percent disapprove. Two in three Democrats (63%), half of independents (50%), and only one in four Republicans (23%) approve of the way the governor is handling his job. Davis continues to enjoy more support from Latinos (66%) than from non-Hispanic whites (40%). His approval rating declines as the age, education, and income of survey respondents increase. Those who are likely to vote in November are less likely to approve of his job performance than the overall public: Among likely voters, 42 percent approve and 52 percent disapprove of his performance in office. The governor’s approval ratings among all California adults and likely voters has remained virtually unchanged this year. Forty-five percent of all adults and 42 percent of likely voters approve of the way the governor is handling the issue of jobs and the economy. Democrats (57%) and independents (44%) are less likely to approve of his handling of jobs and the economy than they are of his overall performance, while Republicans (27%) are slightly more likely to approve of his handling of the economy than they are of his overall job performance. Approval of Davis’ overall job performance is higher than his approval rating on handling the economy among Latinos (66% to 58%), residents making less than $40,000 per year (60% to 51%), residents who are younger than 35 years old (59% to 51%), those who are less educated (60% to 55%), and San Francisco Bay Area residents (49% to 42%). Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Governor Davis is handling the issue of jobs and the economy in California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 49% 44 7 63% 29 8 23% 71 6 50% 44 6 42% 52 6 45% 40 15 57% 29 14 27% 60 13 44% 46 10 42% 47 11 Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Sept 00 65% 27 8 Oct 00 61% 30 9 Jan 01 61% 28 11 Likely Voters Dec 01 46% Jan 02 46% 48 49 65 Feb 02 43% 54 3 Aug 02 43% 52 5 Sep 02 42% 52 6 -9- Political Trends California Legislature Ratings Forty-five percent of California’s adult residents approve of the way that the California legislature is doing its job. This approval rating has declined somewhat from January 2002 (49%) and December 2001 (53%). In fact, the ratings today are similar to those seen during the height of the electricity crisis in July 2001 (45%). Among likely voters, 40 percent approve and 45 percent disapprove of the legislature’s performance. Although support for the legislature among Democrats is virtually unchanged since January 2002 (55% to 52% today), there has been a drop in support among Republicans (41% to 34%) and independents (50% to 41%). A majority of Californians (54%) disapprove of how the legislature is handling the state budget. Roughly two-thirds of Republicans (64%) and independents (65%) and a majority of Democrats (51%) disapprove of the legislature’s performance in this area. Only one in four likely voters (23%) approve of the lawmakers’ performance on the budget. Latinos’ ratings are much more positive than those from non-Hispanic whites (45% to 22%), but there is still a large drop in support when Latinos’ ratings on the handling of the state budget (45%) are compared to their overall ratings of the legislature (58%). Only 22 percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents support the legislature’s handling of the budget, and approval in other regions is low as well: Central Valley (27%), Los Angeles (36%), and Other Southern California (28%). Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the job that the California legislature is doing at this time? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature is handling the issue of the state budget? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults 45% 36 19 29% 54 17 Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 52% 30 18 34% 48 18 41% 44 15 40% 45 15 30% 51 19 20% 64 16 25% 65 10 23% 64 13 - 10 - Political Trends State Budget Process Despite majority dissatisfaction with the legislature’s handling of the budget and a recent record-setting 67-day state budget impasse, a large majority of Californians (73%) think it has been a good thing for the state that a two-thirds vote of the legislature is needed to approve a state budget. Three in four likely voters (73%) believe that the supermajority requirement has been good for the state. There is strong support for the two-thirds vote requirement across all political parties and ideologies: Republicans (77%) and conservatives (76%) are only slightly more likely than Democrats (71%) and liberals (72%) to believe that supermajorities for state budget approval have been good for the state. Even among those who disapprove of the legislature’s handling of the budget, 68 percent believe that the current two-thirds requirement has been a good thing. Public support for the state’s supermajority budget requirement is evident across all regions of the state, racial and ethnic groups, and demographic categories. When asked about a possible initiative that would change the required supermajority to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote, only 38 percent of residents and 35 percent of likely voters would vote yes on the proposition. Although opposition to changing the two-thirds vote requirement is found across all political groups, Democrats (42%) and independents (38%) are more likely than Republicans (28%) to support eliminating the required supermajority. Latinos (52%) are much more likely than non-Hispanic whites (32%) to say they would support a proposition calling for a simple majority vote. The current findings are in line with past PPIC surveys on the supermajority vote. Voters have consistently expressed reluctance to eliminate two-thirds vote requirements in favor of simple majority votes on a range of issues, including Proposition 13, property taxes, school bonds, and transportation projects. For example, in February 2000, 58 percent of California residents said they opposed the idea of allowing local sales tax increases to pay for local transportation projects to pass with a simple majority instead of a two-thirds vote. And in May 1998, 56 percent of residents opposed allowing local school districts to raise local taxes with a simple majority vote instead of a two-thirds vote. "The California state constitution requires that two-thirds of the state legislature agree to a state budget for it to pass. Do you think that this has been a good thing or a bad thing for the state?" Good thing Bad thing Don’t know All Adults 73% 18 9 Party Registration Democrat Republican Independent Likely Voters 71% 77% 72% 73% 21 16 20 20 8 7 87 "What if there was an initiative on the state ballot that would change the supermajority or two-thirds vote required for the California legislature to pass the state budget to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote? Would you vote yes or no on this initiative?" All Adults Party Registration Democrat Republican Independent Likely Voters Yes No Don’t know 38% 53 9 42% 49 9 28% 62 10 38% 55 7 35% 56 9 - 11 - September 2002 Political Trends President’s Ratings Two-thirds (64%) of Californians continue to approve of George W. Bush’s performance in office, a percentage virtually unchanged from June (65%) and August (64%). Californians’ support for Bush falls short of that of the nation as a whole; according to a CNN/ USA Today/ Gallup Poll conducted in September, 70 percent of Americans approve of how Bush is handling his job as president. Among likely voters in California, 62 percent approve of President Bush’s job performance, and 36 percent disapprove. Bush has equally strong support from Latinos (64%) and non-Hispanic whites (66%), although he has seen a drop in Latino support since August (72% to 64%). The percentages of Democrats (45%) and Republicans (89%) who approve of Bush’s job performance have remained consistent all summer, but the president’s support has increased among independents (55% in August to 63% today). Fifty-five percent of Californians approve of the way the president is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, a figure considerably lower than his overall approval rating. His approval rating on Iraq is also considerably lower than his 80-plus percent approval rating on handling terrorism and security, as seen consistently since November 2001. According to an ABC News poll this month, 65 percent of Americans approve of Bush’s handling of the issues relating to Saddam Hussein and Iraq. The president’s overall approval ratings are higher than his approval ratings on issues relating to Saddam Hussein and Iraq among likely voters (62% to 54%), and across political party lines: among Democrats (45% to 39%), Republicans (89% to 77%), and independents (63% to 51%). This also holds true across the political spectrum: liberals (42% to 35%), moderates (64% to 54%), and conservatives (84% to 72%). Residents of the San Francisco Bay Area (42%) and Los Angeles (51%) are less approving of Bush on the Iraq issue than Central Valley (62%) and Other Southern California (64%) residents. Party Registration Do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president? Approve Disapprove Don’t know Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein? Approve Disapprove Don’t know All Adults 64% 32 4 55% 39 6 Likely Democrat Republican Independent Voters 45% 51 4 89% 9 2 63% 33 4 62% 36 2 39% 55 6 77% 18 5 51% 45 4 54% 41 5 - 12 - Economic Trends Overall Economic Mood Californians are slightly more pessimistic than optimistic about the state’s short-term economic prospects. Asked to assess the state’s general financial outlook over the next twelve months, a plurality of the state’s residents (46%) said they think we are in for bad financial times. Only in the Central Valley are more residents optimistic (47%) than pessimistic (42%) about the state's shortterm economic situation. In the San Francisco Bay Area, by contrast, those who see bad times ahead significantly outnumber those who see good times (53% to 40%). "Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times?" Good times Bad times Don’t know All Adults 43% 46 11 Central Valley 47% 42 11 Region SF Bay Area 40% 53 7 Los Angeles 43% 47 10 Other Southern California 44% 44 12 Latino 53% 38 9 The regional differences in outlook toward the state’s financial situation reflect the fact that economic performance normally differs across the state’s major regions. The perception of regional advantage appeared when we asked respondents to assess their regions’ general financial outlook. Overall, Californians are much more optimistic about their regional economies than about the state’s. A majority of the state’s residents (53%) believe that financial good times lie ahead for their regions, compared to only 43 percent who feel similarly sanguine about California’s economic prospects. Across the entire state, residents are more confident in their regions’ financial outlook than they are in California’s: The disparity is especially pronounced in Other Southern California, where 62 percent of residents see good times ahead for their region, while only 44 percent of the region’s residents feel optimistic about the prospects for California’s economy. On regional outlook, San Francisco Bay Area residents (43%) are again the least likely to think that there are good economic times ahead. "How about the economic conditions in your part of California? Do you think that during the next 12 months your region will have good times financially or bad times?" Good times Bad times Don’t know All Adults 53% 39 8 Central Valley 57% 35 8 Region SF Bay Area 43% 49 8 Los Angeles 51% 41 8 Other Southern California 62% 31 7 Latino 57% 35 8 - 13 - Economic Trends Regional Economies Although Californians are relatively upbeat about their regions’ economic prospects over the next year, nearly half of the state’s residents (48%) believe that their regions are in economic recession. As with regional economic optimism, residents across the state’s major regions vary widely in their assignment of the term “recession” to their regional economies. Sixty-seven percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents perceive that their region is in a recession, with a majority thinking that this regional recession is either serious (22%) or moderate (29%). Those who report that their regions are in a recession are much more likely than those who do not think their regions are in a recession to see bad financial times ahead in their region (58% to 20%). Moreover, negative outlook about regional economies increases as people’s assessments of the severity of the recession increases, from 41 percent of those who see their regions’ recession as mild, to 60 percent of those who see it as moderate, to 72 percent of those who call it severe. "Would you say that your region is in an economic recession or not?" Yes, serious recession Yes, moderate recession Yes, mild recession Not in a recession Don’t know All Adults 11% 24 13 47 5 Central Valley 8% 23 13 51 5 Region SF Bay Area 22% 29 16 31 2 Los Angeles 9% 28 13 45 5 Other Southern California 7% 17 11 60 5 Latino 10% 24 16 45 5 There are other important signs of economic pessimism in California’s regions today: Few people are very satisfied with the job opportunities (16%) or the availability of affordable housing (16%) in their regions. Once again, economic attitudes vary widely by region. San Francisco Bay Area residents are the least satisfied with their job opportunities (11% very satisfied) and the most dissatisfied with the availability of housing they can afford (73% not satisfied). Of all the state’s adult residents, those living in the Central Valley (70%) and Other Southern California (71%) are the most likely to be at least somewhat satisfied with job opportunities. Central Valley residents (66%) are also the most likely to be at least somewhat satisfied with housing affordability, whereas a majority of residents in Los Angeles (59%) and Other Southern California (50%) are not satisfied with the affordability of housing in their regions. - 14 - Economic Trends All Central Adults Valley How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied 16% 48 36 20% 50 30 How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied 16% 28 56 30% 36 34 Region SF Bay Area Los Angeles Other Southern California Latino 11% 45 44 16% 49 35 20% 51 29 18% 51 31 8% 19 73 12% 29 59 19% 31 50 17% 31 52 Changes in these regional satisfaction measures since April 1998 (the first PPIC Statewide Survey) provide a context for the current regional differences in economic outlook. Satisfaction with both jobs and housing—common indicators of regional economic strength—are down statewide from 1998 when 26 percent of Californians were very satisfied with job opportunities available in their regions and 22 percent were very satisfied with housing affordability. Since 1998, statewide dissatisfaction with regional job opportunities has risen by 11 percentage points, and dissatisfaction with housing has increased by 21 points. Intra-regional changes in satisfaction with job opportunities and housing affordability are dramatic. In the San Francisco Bay Area, satisfaction with job opportunities has fallen considerably: In 1998, 47 percent of San Francisco Bay Area residents were very satisfied with their job opportunities, whereas today only 11 percent are very satisfied. Dissatisfaction with housing affordability has also risen sharply in all regions over this time period: The percentage of residents who say they are not satisfied with the availability of housing they can afford increased significantly in Los Angeles (up by 25 percentage points), Other Southern California (+19), the San Francisco Bay Area (+15), and the Central Valley (+14). Change in Percentage Points April 1998 - September 2002 How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied All Central Adults Valley Region SF Bay Los Area Angeles Other Southern California -10 +1 -36 -7 -1 +7 +3 -3 +11 -8 +33 +10 -2 -4 +6 -6 -1 -2 -11 -6 -15 -13 -13 -14 -13 +21 +14 +15 +25 +19 - 15 - September 2002 Economic Trends Personal Finances Are Californians better off today than they were four years ago? Certainly they are much more dissatisfied with job opportunities and the availability of affordable housing. Similarly, the reports of personal financial well-being are more negative. In September 1998, only 12 percent of Californians felt they were worse off at that time than in the previous year; today, nearly one in four (23%) reports being worse off than he or she was one year ago. Californians are more optimistic about the year to come than they are positive about their financial progress over the past year. Forty-four percent believe that a year from now they will be financially better off than they are today, whereas only 30 percent believe that they are better off today than they were one year ago. Latinos are more likely than non-Hispanic whites to think that they are better off now than a year ago (37% to 29%) and more likely to expect to be better off a year from now (58% to 40%). Younger Californians, those with children at home, and those with higher household incomes (more than $80,000) are more likely than older residents, those without children in the house, and those with household incomes under $80,000 to say they are better off than they were a year ago. Younger Californians and those with children at home also tend to be the most optimistic about their financial future. Optimism is equally high across all income groups. As far as your own situation, would you say that you and your family are financially better off or worse off or just about the same as you were a year ago? Better off All Adults Sep 98 Sep 99 Sep 00 Dec 01 Sep 02 33% 36% 42% 21% 30% Worse off About the same Don’t know Looking ahead, do you think that a year from now you and your family will be better off or worse off or just about the same as now? Better off Worse off About the same Don’t know 12 54 1 40% 7 51 2 12 52 0 44% 6 48 2 10 48 0 48% 4 43 5 26 53 0 41% 9 47 3 23 45 2 44% 7 44 5 Today, three in four Californians say that they are very (25%) or somewhat (50%) satisfied with their personal financial situations. These percentages are similar to those reported in the September survey preceding the 1998 gubernatorial election (21% and 54%). Older and more educated Californians are somewhat more likely to be satisfied with their personal financial situations, but the greatest difference across residents is by income group. Only 11 percent of those who have annual household incomes of $80,000 or more are dissatisfied with their personal financial situations. By contrast, 23 percent of those with household incomes between $40,000 and $79,999 and 38 percent of those with incomes under $40,000 say that they are not satisfied with their financial situations. - 16 - Economic Trends "In general, how satisfied are you with your current financial situation?" Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Not satisfied All Adults 25% 50 25 Annual Household income <$40K $40,000 79,999 $80,000K+ 13% 23% 43% 49 54 38 23 46 11 Latino 20% 52 28 Overall, just one-third of California residents say that their household incomes are sufficient to allow them to save money or buy some extras. About half (51%) of Californians say that their incomes supply just enough to meet their bills and obligations, while 16 percent say that their incomes do not supply enough money to meet their bills and obligations. Despite the starkly different economic conditions between 1998 and 2002, these percentages virtually mirror those from the April 1998 Statewide Survey. As expected, the biggest difference among Californians’ opinions about the adequacy of household income relates to their level of income. Twenty-eight percent of Californians with household incomes under $40,000 say that they don’t make enough to meet their bills and obligations, compared to only 3 percent of those whose income is $80,000 or more. Twenty-seven percent of Californians say they are concerned that they or a family member will lose a job in the coming year. Latinos tend to be more concerned than non-Hispanic whites about the risk of job loss (35% to 21%), as are those under age 55 compared to those over 55 (28% to 19%). College graduates (23%) are less likely to say they are very worried about the risk of job loss than those with a high school degree or less (30%). People with household incomes under $40,000 (20%) are much more likely than those with incomes of $80,000 or more (9%) to say that they are very worried that they or someone in their families will lose their job. Regionally, concern about job loss is directly related to perceptions of general economic conditions and recession. San Francisco Bay Area (32%) and Los Angeles residents (31%) are much more likely to be concerned about job loss than those who live in Other Southern California (22%) and the Central Valley (18%), just as people in those urban coastal regions are more pessimistic about their regional economies over the next 12 months and more likely to consider their regions in a recession. "Are you concerned that you or someone in your family will lose their job in the next year or not?" Yes, very concerned Yes, somewhat concerned Not concerned All Adults 15% 12 73 Central Valley 11% 7 82 Region SF Bay Area 18% 14 68 Los Angeles 18% 13 69 Other Southern California 11% 11 78 Latino 20% 15 65 - 17 - September 2002 Economic Trends Economic Equity How has the economic downturn affected people’s perceptions of economic inequality in California? Today, 61 percent think that the state is divided into haves and have-nots, and 34 percent believe that it is not divided that way. By comparison, our January 1999 survey found that 56 percent of residents thought that California is divided into economic groups, the haves and havenots, while 41 percent said that there wasn't such an economic divide in the state. Today, among the state’s major geographic regions, residents in Los Angeles (62%) and the San Francisco Bay Area (64%) are the most likely to see an economically divided state, while Central Valley residents (54%) are the least likely to report an economic division. Seventy percent of liberals perceive that the state is divided economically, significantly higher than the percentage of conservatives (53%) who view the state as divided. Democrats are 14 percentage points more likely than Republicans (66% to 52%) to view California as being economically divided into haves and havenots. Notably, income is not significantly related to perception of an economically divided California. "Do you think that California is divided into haves and have-nots, or do you think that California is not divided that way?" Divided into haves and have-nots Not divided that way Don’t know All Central Adults Valley 61% 54% 34 39 57 Region SF Bay Area 64% 32 4 Los Angeles 62% 34 4 Other Southern California 59% 35 6 Latino 60% 35 5 Sixty percent of Californians report that they are among the state’s “haves,” and 32 percent describe themselves as being among the state’s “have-nots.” Four years ago, 57 percent described themselves as among the state’s “haves” and 35 percent said they were among the “have-nots.” In the current survey, non-Hispanic whites are much more likely than Latinos to describe themselves as haves (68% to 44%). Older, more educated, and higher-income Californians are also much more likely to categorize themselves as haves than are younger, less educated, and lower income residents. "If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in— the haves or have-nots?" Haves Have-nots Don't know All Adults 60% 32 8 Annual Household Income <$40K $40,000 79,999 $80,000K+ 39% 64% 88% 54 27 7 7 95 Latino 44% 47 9 As for policies to deal with income inequality, 52 percent of residents report in another survey question that they think that people in California have an equal opportunity to get ahead, while 43 percent think that the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity (responses in 1998 were nearly identical). Democrats (52%) and independents (45%) are much more likely than Republicans (24%) to say that the government should do more. Latinos (56%) are more likely than non-Hispanic whites (35%) to say that the government should do more to ensure equal opportunity. - 18 - Survey Methodology The PPIC Statewide Survey is directed by Mark Baldassare, research director at the Public Policy Institute of California, with assistance in research and writing from Jon Cohen, survey research manager, and Dorie Apollonio and Lisa Cole, survey research associates. The findings of this survey are based on a telephone survey of 2,019 California adult residents interviewed between September 12 and September 21, 2002. 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 telephone numbers were called. All telephone exchanges in California were eligible for calling. Telephone numbers in the survey sample were called up to ten times to increase the likelihood of reaching eligible households. Once a household was reached, an adult respondent (18 or older) was randomly chosen for interviewing by using the “last birthday method” to avoid biases in age and gender. Each interview took an average of 18 minutes to complete. Interviewing was conducted in English or Spanish. Casa Hispana translated the survey into Spanish. 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 2,019 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. The sampling error for the 1,588 registered voters is +/- 2.5 percent. The sampling error for the 1,005 likely voters is +/- 3 percent. Sampling error is just 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 refer to four geographic regions. “Central Valley” includes Butte, Colusa, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. “SF 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 the mostly suburban regions of Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. These four regions were chosen for analysis because they are the major population centers of the state, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the state population; moreover, the growth of the Central Valley and “Other Southern California” regions have given them increasing political significance. We present specific results for Latinos because they account for about 28 percent of the state’s adult population and constitute one of the fastest growing voter groups. The sample sizes for the African American and Asian subgroups are not large enough for separate statistical analysis. We do contrast the opinions of registered Democrats, Republicans, and independents. The “independents” category, except where noted, includes only those who are registered to vote as “decline to state.” In some cases, we compare PPIC Statewide Survey responses to responses recorded in national surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center in June 2002, ABC News Poll in September 2002, CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll in September 2002, and NBC News/ Wall Street Journal in July 2002. We used earlier PPIC Statewide Surveys to analyze trends over time in California. - 19 - - 20 - PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY: CALIFORNIANS AND THEIR GOVERNMENT SEPTEMBER 12 – SEPTEMBER 21, 2002 2,019 CALIFORNIA ADULTS RESIDENTS; ENGLISH AND SPANISH MARGIN OF ERROR +/- 2% AT 95% CONFIDENCE LEVEL FOR TOTAL SAMPLE [Responses recorded for questions 1-18 are from likely voters only. All other responses are from all adults.] 1. If the election for governor were being held today, would you vote for [rotate] (1) Gray Davis, the Democrat; (2) Bill Simon, the Republican, (3) Gary Copeland, the Libertarian, (4) Reinhold Gulke, the American Independent, (5) Peter Miguel Camejo, the Green Party, or someone else? 40% Gray Davis 32 Bill Simon 5 Peter Miguel Camejo 3 Gary David Copeland 1 Reinhold Gulke 2 someone else (specify) 17 don’t know 2. Would you say that you are satisfied or not satisfied with the choices of candidates in the election for governor on November 5th? 38% satisfied 55 not satisfied 7 don’t know 3. Overall, would you say you are most interested in learning about the candidates’ [rotate] (1) stands on the issues; (2) experience; (3) character; (4) intelligence; (5) party platform? 50% stands on the issues 18 character 11 experience 7 intelligence 6 party platform 4 something else (volunteered) 4 don’t know 4. Would you say that you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the amount of attention that the candidates for governor are spending on the issues most important to you? 27% satisfied 64 not satisfied 9 don’t know Regardless of your choice for governor, which of these candidates would do a better job on each of the following issues— Gray Davis or Bill Simon? [rotate questions 5 through 9]. 5. How about education? 53 Gray Davis 29 Bill Simon 5 other/neither (volunteered) 13 don’t know 6. How about the economy? 40% Gray Davis 42 Bill Simon 7 other/neither (volunteered) 11 don’t know 7. How about electricity and energy policy? 38% Gray Davis 44 Bill Simon 7 other/neither (volunteered) 11 don’t know 8. How about the state budget and taxes? 43% Gray Davis 38 Bill Simon 6 other/neither (volunteered) 13 don’t know 9. How about maintaining high ethical standards in government? 45% Gray Davis 31 Bill Simon 9 other/neither (volunteered) 15 don’t know 10. How closely do you follow news about candidates for the 2002 governor’s election—very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely? 28% very closely 52 fairly closely 16 not too closely 4 not at all closely - 21 - 11. In the past month, have you seen any television advertisements by the candidates for governor? (if yes: Whose ads have you seen the most)? 55% yes, Gray Davis 17 yes, Bill Simon 3 yes, other answer [specify] 25 no [skip to q.13] 12. [Asked of those who have seen ads] So far, have the television advertisements you have seen been very helpful, somewhat helpful, not too helpful, or not at all helpful to you in deciding which candidate to vote for? 12% very helpful 19 somewhat helpful 22 not too helpful 47 not at all helpful 13. Thinking about the governor’s election that will be held this November, are you more enthusiastic about voting than usual, or less enthusiastic? 27% more enthusiastic 55 less enthusiastic 15 same 3 don’t know 14. Also on the November ballot is Proposition 47, the "Kindergarten to University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2002.” This $13.05 billion bond issue will provide funding for necessary education facilities to relieve overcrowding and to repair older schools. The funds will be targeted to areas of greatest need. Funds will also be used to upgrade and build new classrooms in the California Community Colleges, California State University, and the University of California. The projected fiscal impact includes a state cost of about $26.2 billion over 30 years to pay off the bonds, with payments of about $873 million annually. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 47? 59% yes 32 no 9 don’t know 15. Proposition 50 on the November ballot, the “Water Quality, Supply and Safe Drinking Water Projects, Coastal Wetlands Purchase and Protection Bonds Initiative” authorizes $3.44 billion general obligation bonds to fund a variety of specified water and wetlands projects. The fiscal impact includes a state cost of up to $6.9 billion over 30 years to repay the bonds. The reduction in local property tax revenues will be up to roughly $10 million annually, partially offset by state funds. There are also unknown state and local operation and maintenance costs. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no on Proposition 50? 44% yes 40 no 16 don’t know 16. Some people know a lot about state finance, and others do not. How much do you know about how state bonds are paid for in California—a lot, some, very little, or nothing? 13% a lot 47 some 34 very little 6 nothing 17. In general, do you think it is a good idea or a bad idea for the state government to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 69% good idea 22 bad idea 9 don’t know 18. The state government is projected to have a large budget deficit over the next few years. Knowing this, is this a good time or a bad time for the state to issue bonds to pay for infrastructure improvements such as schools, roads, and water projects? 44% good time 46 bad time 10 don’t know 19. Some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote? (if yes: Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or as an independent?) 36% yes, Democrat (skip to q.21) 28 yes, Republican (skip to q.22) 4 yes, other party (skip to q.23) 14 yes, independent (ask q.20) 15 no, not registered (ask q.20) 3 don’t know (ask q.20) - 22 - 20. (if independent, not registered, don’t know on q.19) Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican party or Democratic party? 28% Republican party (skip to q.23) 43 Democratic party (skip to q.23) 20 neither (volunteered) (skip to q.23) 9 don’t know (skip to q.23) 21. (if Democrat on q.19) Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat? 50% strong (skip to q.23) 47 not very strong (skip to q.23) 3 don’t know (skip to q.23) 22. (if Republican on q.19) Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican? 50% strong 48 not very strong 2 don’t know 23. On another topic, overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that George W. Bush is handling his job as president of the United States? 64% approve 32 disapprove 4 don’t know 24. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation with Iraq and Saddam Hussein? 55% approve 39 disapprove 6 don’t know 25. And turning to the state, overall do you approve or disapprove of the way that Gray Davis is handling his job as governor of California? 49% approve 44 disapprove 7 don’t know 26. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Governor Davis is handling the issue of jobs and the economy in California? 45% approve 40 disapprove 15 don’t know 27. Do you approve or disapprove of the job that the California legislature is doing at this time? 45% approve 36 disapprove 19 don’t know 28. Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California legislature has been handling the issue of the state budget? 29% approve 54 disapprove 17 don’t know 29. The California state constitution requires that twothirds of the state legislature agree to a state budget for it to pass. Do you think that this has been a good thing or a bad thing for the state? 73% good for the state 18 bad for the state 9 don’t know 30. What if there was an initiative on the state ballot that would change the supermajority or two-thirds vote required for the California legislature to pass the state budget to a simple majority or 50 percent plus one vote? Would you vote yes or no on this initiative? 38% yes 53 no 9 don’t know 31. On another topic, do you think things in California are generally going in the right direction or the wrong direction? 54% right direction 37 wrong direction 9 don’t know 32. Turning to economic conditions in California, do you think that during the next 12 months we will have good times financially or bad times? 43% good times 46 bad times 11 don’t know 33. How about the economic conditions in your part of California? Do you think that during the next 12 months your region will have good times financially or bad times? 53% good times 39 bad times 8 don’t know 34. Would you say that your region is in an economic recession or not? (if yes: Do you think it is in a serious, a moderate, or a mild recession?) 11% yes, serious recession 24 yes, moderate recession 13 yes, mild recession 47 no 5 don’t know - 23 - September 2002 35. How do you feel about the job opportunities that are available in your region? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 16% very satisfied 48 somewhat satisfied 36 not satisfied 36. How do you feel about the availability of housing that you can afford in your region? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 16% very satisfied 28 somewhat satisfied 56 not satisfied 37. In general, how satisfied are you with your current financial situation? Are you very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, or not satisfied? 25% very satisfied 50 somewhat satisfied 25 not satisfied 38. Thinking about your household income, would you say that you have more than enough so that you can save money or buy some extras, just enough to meet your bills and obligations, or not enough to meet your bills and obligations? 33% more than enough 51 just enough 16 not enough 39. As far as your own situation, would you say that you and your family are financially better off or worse off or just about the same as you were a year ago? 30% better off 23 worse off 45 same 2 don’t know 40. Looking ahead, do you think that a year from now you and your family will be better off or worse off or just about the same as now? 44% better off 7 worse off 44 same 5 don’t know 41. Are you concerned that you or someone in your family will lose their job in the next year or not? (if yes: Are you very concerned or somewhat concerned?) 15% yes, very concerned 12 yes, somewhat concerned 73 no 42. On another topic, some people think that California is divided into economic groups, the haves and have-nots, while others think it is not divided that way. Do you think that California is divided into haves and have-nots, or do you think that California is not divided that way? 61% divided into haves and have-nots 34 not divided that way 5 don’t know 43. If you had to choose, which of these groups are you in—the haves or have-nots? 60% haves 32 have-nots 8 don’t know 44. Do you think that in California today [rotate] (a) all people have an equal opportunity to get ahead, or (b) the government should do more to make sure that all Californians have an equal opportunity to get ahead? 52% people have equal opportunity 43 government should do more 1 both (volunteered) 2 neither (volunteered) 2 don’t know 45. On another topic, do you think that the current cases of wrongdoing among chief executives of major businesses represent [rotate] (a) a problem of a few corrupt individuals in a system that is mostly honest and above board [or] (b) a widespread problem in which many business executives are taking advantage of a system that is failing? 32% a few corrupt individuals 61 widespread problem 7 don’t know 46. Which of these comes closer to your point of view? [rotate] (a) the stock market is a fair and open way to invest one’s money [or] (b) because of corporate corruption and broker practices, the stock market is no longer a fair and open way to invest one’s money. 42% stock market is fair and open 49 stock market is no longer fair and open 9 don’t know - 24 - 47. On another topic, would you consider yourself to be politically very liberal, somewhat liberal, middle-ofthe-road, somewhat conservative, or very conservative? 10% very liberal 20 somewhat liberal 30 middle-of-the-road 27 somewhat conservative 10 very conservative 3 don’t know 48. How do you get most of your news—from television, newspapers, radio, the Internet, magazines, or talking to other people? (if television: Would that be major network TV, local TV, or cable news stations such as CNN or MSNBC?) 11% network TV 15 local TV 19 cable TV 25 newspapers 13 radio 9 Internet 5 talking to other people 2 magazines 1 other/ don’t know 49. Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics—a great deal, a fair amount, only a little, or none? 21% great deal 44 fair amount 29 only a little 6 none 50. How often would you say you vote—always, nearly always, part of the time, seldom, or never? 50% always 24 nearly always 11 part of the time 6 seldom 9 never I am going to read you a list of examples of the many different areas in which people do volunteer activity. By volunteer activity I mean not just belonging to a service organization, but actually working in some way to help others for no monetary pay. In which, if any, of these areas have you done some volunteer work in the past twelve months? [rotate questions 51 to 57] 51. How about education or school-related, such as tutoring, mentoring, or the parent teachers organization (PTA)? 45% yes 55 no 52. How about arts and culture, such as museums or performing arts organizations? 19% yes 81 no 53. How about human service organizations, such as those for children and seniors or people with special needs? 36% yes 64 no 54. How about churches and religious organizations? 39% yes 61 no 55. How about sports and recreation activities, such as soccer teams or baseball leagues? 29% yes 71 no 56. How about ethnic, racial, or immigrant associations? 15% yes 85 no 57. How about health organizations, such as hospitals or those concerned with disease prevention? 21% yes 79 no [58-69: demographic questions] - 25 - September 2002 PPIC STATEWIDE SURVEY Advisory Committee Mary Bitterman President The James Irvine Foundation Angela Blackwell President Policy Link 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 Matt Fong Chairman Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation Advisory Committee William Hauck President California Business Roundtable Sherry Bebitch Jeffe Senior Scholar School of Policy, Planning, and Development University of Southern California Monica Lozano President and Chief Operating Officer La Opinión Donna Lucas President NCG Porter Novelli Max Neiman Director Center for Social and Behavioral Research University of California, Riverside Dan Rosenheim News Director KPIX-TV Richard Schlosberg President and CEO The David and Lucile Packard Foundation Carol Stogsdill President Stogsdill Consulting Cathy Taylor Vice President and Editorial Commentary Director Orange County Register Raymond L. Watson Vice Chairman of the Board The Irvine Company Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center - 26 - PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA Board of Directors Raymond L. Watson, Chair Vice Chairman of the Board The Irvine Company William K. Coblentz Partner Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass, LLP Edward K. Hamilton Chairman Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler, Inc. Walter B. Hewlett Director Center for Computer Assisted Research in the Humanities David W. Lyon President and CEO Public Policy Institute of California Cheryl White Mason Chief, Civil Liability Management Office of the City Attorney Los Angeles, California Arjay Miller Dean Emeritus Graduate School of Business Stanford University Ki Suh Park Design and Managing Partner Gruen Associates A. Alan Post Former State Legislative Analyst State of California Constance L. Rice Co-Director The Advancement Project Thomas C. Sutton Chairman & CEO Pacific Life Insurance Company Cynthia A. Telles Department of Psychiatry UCLA School of Medicine Carol Whiteside President Great Valley Center Harold M. Williams President Emeritus The J. Paul Getty Trust and Of Counsel Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP Advisory Council Clifford W. Graves Vice Chancellor, Physical Planning University of California, Merced 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, Berkeley 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 Sacramento Bee James P. Smith Senior Economist RAND 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 info@ppic.org" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:35:30" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(8) "s_902mbs" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 02:35:30" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2017-05-20 09:35:30" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(50) "http://148.62.4.17/wp-content/uploads/S_902MBS.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) }