Political Landscape – Page 12 – Public Policy Institute of California

Tax Day: Californians Feel Overburdened

Tax day is here, and Californians are feeling particularly burdened.

A record-high number of adults (72%) say that California ranks above average or near the top in per capita state and local tax burden compared to other states. This perception is close to the fiscal facts: a Tax Foundation report ranked California’s 2014 state and local tax collections per capita as 13th-highest in the nation.

Taxes are not only perceived to be high, but they are also viewed as disproportionate: a majority of Californians (56%) say they pay more taxes to state and local governments than they feel they should (37% much more, 19% somewhat more). Californians’ views were similar last March (58%), following an extension of income tax increases on high-earning residents. Today, traditionally tax-opposed Republicans (78%) are much more likely than independents (63%) and far more likely than Democrats (47%) to say that they pay much or somewhat more than they should. This perception is also more common across higher-income groups (65% $80,000 or more, 58% $40,000 to under $80,000). Lower-income groups are more divided: among residents with household incomes under $40,000, 47% say they pay more or somewhat more than they should, while 40% say they pay the right amount.

How do these views align with approval ratings of state elected officials? Among those who say they pay much more than they should, 50 percent disapprove of the way Jerry Brown is handling his job, 60 percent disapprove of the California Legislature, and 57 percent disapprove of the way that the state legislators representing their assembly and senate districts are doing at this time.

Nonetheless, legislators are moving forward with more tax proposals. According to a recent California Tax Foundation Report, the state legislature introduced 33 bills and constitutional amendments since the start of the 2017–18 legislative session that could increase taxes and fees by over $269 billion annually, though few are likely to become law. The most expensive proposals include a government-run healthcare tax, a sales tax on services, and a new tax on California businesses. These proposals come in the midst of an election year and expected state budget reserve of nearly $16 billion.

Californians will soon have the opportunity to make significant decisions at the ballot box—choosing new leaders and helping to shape the state’s future. Stay tuned to the PPIC Statewide Survey for timely coverage of this year’s election and Californians’ leadership preferences.

Video: Californians and Education

In the wake of the Parkland, Florida, killings, the latest PPIC survey finds an overwhelming majority of Californians are concerned about a possible shooting in their local schools. But most oppose having teachers carry guns in school facilities.

Lunna Lopes, PPIC researcher, detailed these and other key findings at a Sacramento briefing last week.

When asked about school shootings, 73 percent of California adults and 82 percent of public school parents say they are very or somewhat concerned. Yet two-thirds of adults (67%) and public school parents (68%) oppose allowing more teachers and school officials to carry guns in schools. Strong partisan differences emerge on this issue. An overwhelming majority of Democrats (86%) and a strong majority of independents (69%) are opposed to arming teachers and school officials, while a solid majority of Republicans (60%) favor the idea.

A few other survey highlights include:

Californians (65%) support having local school districts declared sanctuary safe zones for undocumented students, but there are deep partisan divisions.
California adults and likely voters continue to see the state’s K–12 funding as inadequate. Solid majorities (60%) of likely voters favor local school bonds, while fewer (48%) support local parcel taxes for schools.
Across parties, majorities of likely voters agree that gubernatorial candidates’ positions on K–12 education are very important.
Among likely voters in the gubernatorial race, Democrat Gavin Newsom maintains his lead (26%), followed by Republican John Cox (15%) and Antonio Villaraigosa (13%). Nearly a quarter of likely voters (22%) remain undecided.

The PPIC Statewide Survey: Reflections at the 20th Anniversary

Mark Baldassare, president and CEO and survey director, and Abby Cook, vice president of communications, at the Public Policy Institute of California have worked on every PPIC Statewide Survey.

This year, the 20th anniversary of the PPIC Statewide Survey, is an important one in California. The state is at the forefront of many major national issues, and our voters will be electing new leaders across the board. Over the past two decades, PPIC has conducted nearly 175 public opinion surveys, interviewing more than 350,000 Californians—allowing us to see how the attitudes of state residents have evolved and providing valuable context for today’s policy landscape.

Our surveys show that Californians have long had a progressive streak when it comes to such topics as environmental protection, gun restrictions, and a woman’s access to abortion. However, views on other key issues have undergone significant change. Among them:

The perception that immigrants are a net benefit to California has been steadily climbing. In 1998—the first year of the PPIC survey—46% of Californians said that immigrants are a benefit to California because of their hard work and job skills; 42% said immigrants are a burden because they use public services. Last year, 76% said immigrants are a benefit, while 20% said they are a burden.
Majority support for legalizing same-sex marriage is now the norm. In 2000, we asked whether Californians favored or opposed allowing gay and lesbian couples to be legally married. Just 38% were in favor and most (55%) were opposed. By 2014, opinions reversed. A majority—56%—were in favor and 36% were opposed.

State action to combat climate change has evolved from a bipartisan issue to a partisan one. The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, landmark legislation that required the state to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, enjoyed the support of a strong majority of Californians (65%)—including more than six in ten adults across parties—the year it passed. By 2016, support was similar (69%), but there was a wide partisan divide: majorities of Democrats (80%) and independents (56%) expressed support, while fewer than half of Republicans (44%) did so.

At the same time, the survey shows Californians holding steadfast on other issues:

The citizens’ initiative process in lawmaking is highly valued. In 2000, 68% of Californians were somewhat or very satisfied with the initiative process. By 2016, that figure had changed little (64%).
Californians express unwavering praise for Proposition 13. In 2003, the 25th anniversary of the landmark ballot measure, 57% of Californians said it had been mostly a good thing. This year, the 40th anniversary, that number remains the same.
Distrust of government is a constant undercurrent in voter sentiments. In April 1998, 74% of Californians said they trusted the federal government to do what is right only some or none of the time. In 2017, a similar percentage—69%—expressed that view.

Above all, the survey has revealed that the most persistent element in California policymaking is what we call the state’s “exclusive electorate.” California voters tend to be older, white, affluent, homeowners, and college educated. Nonvoters tend to be younger, Latino, less affluent, renters, and less likely to be college educated than likely voters. Voters make significant policy decisions at the ballot box—but nonvoters provide a unique perspective on the role of government. At a time when economic inequality has become one of most important policy issues in the state, this divide is a key reason we conduct the PPIC Statewide Survey as we do. Our survey gives all Californians—nonvoters and registered voters alike—a real-time voice on current topics, political leaders, and public institutions.

PPIC is unique in California in its ability to combine state-of-the-art polling with an institutional commitment to tackling major issues affecting Californians. We are often asked about how we conduct the survey and the philosophy behind it. Here is a brief look behind the scenes.

First, our surveys adhere to the high-quality standards set by the most respected nonpartisan polling organizations that conduct national surveys—such as the Pew Research Center, the Washington Post, ABC, CBS, CNN, and Gallup. Like these organizations, we use a random digit dialing (RDD) methodology. Despite changes in the polling landscape, this method remains the most effective way to reach all adults. It allows for random sampling of households within California, meaning that each person in the population has an equal probability of being selected. Our surveys include live telephone interviews with adults (age 18+) in English and Spanish. After each survey is completed, we compare the survey sample to census statistics and make any necessary statistically weighted adjustments to achieve a representative sample.

Second, while our methods remain the same, our approach has changed in response to the challenges of reaching people by phone. Since 2003, we have worked exclusively with interviewing firms that conduct surveys for our national peers. Starting in 2008, we have conducted both landline and cell phone interviews. After the 2016 election, based on extensive analyses of the performance of online surveys and live telephone surveys, we decided to maintain our RDD methodology and increase our cell phone interviewing (65% in 2017, 70% in 2018).

Third, every survey is designed with the intent of delivering accurate, independent, nonpartisan information on the perceptions, attitudes, policy preferences, and ballot choices of California residents. Our core audiences are policymakers, the media, and other engaged Californians—all of whom have come to depend upon the PPIC Statewide Survey as a critical barometer of public opinion in the state. And amid the partisan rancor of political debate, PPIC’s surveys also point out areas of consensus among the state’s diverse residents, providing valuable information to policymakers.

Fourth, PPIC produces a range of products in conjunction with each survey—including blog posts, fact sheets, and a survey report with crosstabs. Large sample sizes (currently 1,700 adults) allow us to accurately report the findings of key subgroups, such as likely voters, partisan groups, major regions, and age, income, and racial and ethnic groups.

Finally, our surveys are free of charge and available to all. We disseminate the findings through outreach activities that include public briefings in Sacramento—videotaped and posted on our YouTube channel—and broad use of social media, where our followers include state legislators, nonprofit and business leaders, and reporters from major media outlets. We also convene forums around the state for constructive discussion of the issues raised in our surveys. As a result, the PPIC Statewide Survey has had a significant impact on informing policymaking, as measured by activities such as bill citations in the state legislature.

We are grateful to many PPIC colleagues who have worked diligently over the years to produce surveys that are timely, relevant, and accessible. For every survey, the staff makes the call on survey methods and questions, and the content of reports and press releases. We benefit greatly from the leadership of the PPIC board of directors, which is dedicated to maintaining the institute’s mission and values, and a survey advisory committee that provides substantive input and expertise. Lastly, we would not have arrived at the 20-year mark without grant support from foundation partners—the James Irvine Foundation for the “Californians and Their Government” survey series and the consortium who fund the annual education and environment surveys. These ingredients make it possible for PPIC to conduct independent, nonpartisan, high-quality polling that provides a voice for the public and likely voters.

The 20th year of the PPIC Statewide Survey is shaping up to be the most important to date. We are monitoring the attitudes of California adults on a host of critical issues while tracking the ballot choices of California likely voters in the 2018 election. We look forward to keeping you well informed during a consequential election year—and into the future.

The Gender Gap in California Politics

In the past year, women have led large-scale political protests nationwide and an increasing number are running for elected office. In California, likely women voters have a numeric edge over men (53% to 47%), according to PPIC’s analysis. With the midterm elections quickly approaching, will women make a pivotal difference?

PPIC’s March 2018 survey offers some insight: nearly six in ten women (58%) support the Democratic candidate on the generic ballot for the U.S. House of Representatives—a 9-point increase since 2014. Preferences among men are unchanged.

Although PPIC surveys show female likely voters are much more likely than their male counterparts to disapprove of President Trump (67% to 52%), issues like immigration policy, gun control, and taxes also reveal degrees of a gender gap. Examples include:

Immigration policy. Six in ten female (62%) likely voters are in favor of state and local governments making their own policies—separate from the federal government—to protect the rights of undocumented immigrants; fewer than half of men (46%) are in favor.
Gun control. While solid majorities of men and women think laws covering the sale of guns should be stricter, more women (78%) than men (60%) hold that view.
Federal tax law. Differences are also apparent between women (49%) and men (29%) who believe that the tax laws will have a negative impact on their families in the coming years.

However, it is important to note the role that party plays in policy preferences. For each of the aforementioned issues, there are sizable differences between Democratic women and Republican women. It’s also notable that among Republican likely voters, more women (54%) than men (38%) think gun laws should be stricter.

California is often mentioned as a battleground state in the 2018 elections, and tension between the federal and state governments is palpable. California’s government stands in opposition to many policies coming out of Washington and several of its congressional seats could be up for grabs—potentially determining the party that will lead the next US Congress. As a result, the nation will be watching California. And the PPIC Statewide Survey will continue to follow the perceptions and preferences of California’s likely voters, with particular interest in the gender gap.

California’s Immigrants and the 2018 Election Context

This piece is excerpted from a presentation at the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism given on March 30, 2018, in Los Angeles.

Many eyes will be on California in this midterm election year, especially since control of Congress may hinge on the outcome of 10 competitive House races in the Golden State. Currently, more than a quarter of the state’s residents are born outside the US—and one in five immigrants make up what we consider likely voters in California elections. With federal immigration policy playing a lead role in today’s polarized political discussions, will California’s immigrants have an impact—and to who’s advantage—in the 2018 election?

Typically, California’s immigrants are less interested in politics than their US born counterparts. But not when it comes to the 2018 election cycle. Among likely voters in our current survey, immigrants and nonimmigrants are similarly likely to be following the news about gubernatorial candidates “very” or “fairly” closely (51% immigrants, 48% US born). Both groups say that voting this year is more important than in past midterm elections (47% immigrants, 51% US born). Perhaps most telling for this year, both likely voter groups mention immigration and illegal immigration when asked about the issue that they would most like to hear the gubernatorial candidates talk about before the June primary (23% immigrants, 23% US born).

When it comes to current candidate choices, we do see some divergence between immigrant and US-born likely voters:

Democrat Gavin Newsom slightly trails Democrat Antonio Villaraigosa among immigrants (17% to 23%), while he is favored by three to one over Villaraigosa among nonimmigrants (30% to 9%).
Republican John Cox does equally well with both groups (15% immigrants, 14% US born).
Democrat Dianne Feinstein is favored by large margins over Democrat Kevin de León both among immigrants (50% to 18%) and nonimmigrants (40% to 16%). She has a higher approval rating among immigrants than nonimmigrants (68% to 51%).
Immigrants are more likely than nonimmigrants to favor the Democratic candidates in their local House races (63% to 51%) and less likely to favor the Republican candidates (30% to 41%). Immigrants also give higher approval ratings than nonimmigrants to their current local House member (59% to 51%).

Despite these differences, immigrant and nonimmigrant Californians are aligned in their views of the current policy landscape. Majorities in both likely voter groups disapprove of President Donald Trump (63% immigrants, 60% US born), oppose the new federal tax law (65% immigrants, 56% US born), want gun laws to be stricter (82% immigrants, 67% US born), and oppose building a wall along the entire border with Mexico (71% immigrants, 60% US born). When it comes to state and local governments making their own policies and taking action separate from the federal government, majorities in both likely voter groups say they are in favor of protecting the legal rights of undocumented immigrants (66% immigrants, 52% US born).

One of the political wildcards in this California mid-term election is whether the strong opposition to federal immigration policy will motivate more naturalized citizens to vote and more noncitizens to become citizens and register to vote. As noted earlier, immigrants make up a larger share of the state’s population than is reflected in the likely voter group—leaving much room for growth that could transform the state’s electorate. The PPIC Statewide Survey will be closely monitoring the trends in political engagement and ballot choices in this consequential election for California and the nation.

The 2020 Census Is Critical for California

The decennial census plays an essential role in American democracy. Most fundamentally, it ensures that communities get the right number of representatives in government. Less well known is the role it plays in determining how hundreds of billions of federal dollars are allocated to states and localities for a wide range of public services, including health care and child nutrition programs.

Although census information is essential, the Census Bureau is currently budget constrained, behind schedule, and scaling back the number of full-scale test runs it was planning. This is of particular concern since several key changes to the census process are in the works: the majority of census information will be collected online, resources for door-to-door outreach may be reduced, and a question about immigration status will be added to the official questionnaire. These and other factors increase the potential for an undercount, especially among vulnerable populations. Just today, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra has filed a lawsuit over this issue.

Why are the stakes so high? A significant undercount could cost California political representation in Congress at a time of record polarization and a deep partisan divide over the direction of the state and the nation. Critical decisions that affect California’s future will be determined to a large extent by federal rules on such issues as climate change, health care, and immigration.

An undercount also means that an important amount of federal funding could dry up. Federal, state, and local government programs that target disadvantaged neighborhoods or populations rely critically on census surveys to identify those in need and distribute funds accordingly. For example, two programs crucial to the health and well-being of children in California—the Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Women, Infants, and Children program—rely on population estimates that use the decennial census count as a baseline for population estimates with which they aim to accurately allocate funds across states.

The impact on California could be huge—and 2020 is fast approaching. At a time when objective facts and information are in short supply, PPIC will be working to raise awareness about the importance of the 2020 Census for California and motivate elected leaders and organizations across the state to work together to ensure an accurate count. Stay tuned for more facts and analysis of the 2020 Census from PPIC.

Video: Preview of the California Primary

As California’s June 5 primary approaches, the latest PPIC survey finds Democrat Gavin Newsom gaining ground over Antonio Villaraigosa in the governor’s race, while support for Republican John Cox rises among likely voters. In the US Senate race, Dianne Feinstein holds her double-digit lead over fellow Democrat Kevin de León.

Dean Bonner, PPIC associate survey director, detailed the findings at a Sacramento briefing last week.

The survey shows Newsom (28%) as the top choice among likely voters, followed by Cox (14%), Democrat Villaraigosa (12%), Republican Travis Allen (10%), and Democrats John Chiang (6%) and Delaine Eastin (5%). Yet a quarter of likely voters are still undecided, which raises questions about what will happen in the top-two primary.

A few other highlights include:

Governor Jerry Brown’s approval rating (54%) has held steady, despite state-federal tension over immigration policy. The legislature’s approval rating (45%) has also stayed consistent, in spite of sexual misconduct reports last fall.
The top issue voters would like gubernatorial candidates to talk about before the June primary is immigration, followed by guns or school safety.
Nearly half of Republicans (48%) are now joining an overwhelming number of Democrats (87%) and independents (68%) in saying there should be stricter gun controls.
Bipartisan support emerged for a water bond measure, with two-thirds of likely voters saying they would vote yes. Partisans were more divided on affordable housing projects.

Video: Assessing California’s Redistricting Commission

The creation of the Citizen Redistricting Commission (CRC) in 2008 marked a radical departure for California. This shift of responsibility for drawing state assembly, state senate, and US congressional districts from the state legislature to an independent commission also put California ahead of the national curve. Very few states have adopted a similar model, though many may be considering it—particularly in light of two US Supreme Court cases that could establish a legal standard for partisan gerrymandering. For California and for other states, partisan fairness and competitiveness should be important aims of redistricting reform.

A new PPIC report examines whether the commission’s first plan achieved these aims by analyzing recent election outcomes and putting them in national context. Researcher Eric McGhee described his analysis in Sacramento last week and outlined some key findings.

The CRC largely satisfied expectations that it would draw state legislative and congressional districts that are fair to the major parties and increase electoral competitiveness.
While Democrats have a greater advantage under the CRC plan than they did under the 2001 plan drawn by the legislature, this advantage is very small.
The CRC districts are somewhat more competitive than the districts drawn by the legislature. Competitiveness in state legislative districts remains low compared to other states, but the CRC congressional plan is among the most competitive in the country.

The report also notes that the CRC has moved California in the opposite direction from the rest of the country: other state plans are on average more favorable to Republicans and less competitive than plans from the last round of redistricting.

McGhee recommends that future commissions use more data to help them produce competitive and fair maps. He also recommends using sophisticated methods for automatically drawing redistricting plans.

Californians and Sacramento’s Handling of Misconduct

During fall 2017, the #MeToo movement took the entertainment, sports, and business worlds by storm. Statehouses across the nation were also affected. Here in California, allegations of sexual harassment came to light and have led to resignations, including the recent resignation of State Senator Tony Mendoza, who was on the precipice of a formal expulsion vote. No member of the California Legislature has been expelled since 1905.

In our January survey, prior to this latest development, we found that nearly half of Californians are following news about sexual harassment and misconduct in the state legislature very (18%) or fairly (28%) closely. Women (49%) and men (43%) are similar in how closely they were following the news.

Interest in this topic is bipartisan: most Democrats (56%) and Republicans (56%) are closely following this story. However, Democrats are about twice as likely to be following it very closely.

Interest is also widespread: more likely voters (59%) are closely following news about sexual harassment than about candidates for governor (30%).

How are Democratic leaders handling the issue of sexual harassment in the statehouse? Californians’ opinions are divided (39% approve, 36% disapprove), with 25 percent unsure. Notably, women (40% approve) and men (38% approve) hold similar views. Similarly, fewer than half of Californians across regions and age, education, income, and racial/ethnic groups approve of the way Democratic leaders are handling the issue. Not too surprisingly, Democrats (52%) are nearly twice as likely as independents (28%) and three times as likely as Republicans (18%) to approve.

So far, the issue of sexual harassment in Sacramento hasn’t played a large role in the primary races. Stay tuned to see if that changes as the June election draws closer.