Tag: initiatives

California Is Different

Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO and director of the PPIC Statewide Survey, spoke to the Sacramento Press Club today (November 16, 2016). Here are his prepared remarks before a post-election discussion with Mark DiCamillo, senior vice president of Field Research Corporation and director of the Field Poll.

With the stunning victory of Donald Trump in the presidential election, it is easy to overlook the significance of the California vote. The political experience here was starkly different from the US in ways that went beyond our normal “blue state” election performance. I’m going to focus on election and polling trends that caught my attention—including citizen engagement, presidential preference, the state ballot measures, the role of government, and voter turnout. My colleague Eric McGhee has an excellent analysis of the top-two legislative races in another PPIC blog post. I’ll close with a look toward next year and the 2018 California election in light of the changing political landscape in California and the US.

Citizen engagement. The California voter rolls grew by 2.15 million in 2016 to reach a historic high of 19.4 million before the November 8 election. According to the California Secretary of State, the voter registration surge was largely a Democratic Party phenomenon, resulting in a 19-point gap between the Democrats and Republicans (45% to 26%)—the largest since 1976. Clearly, online registration and social media brought in new voters. But Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump shaped those voters’ party choices. One of the Republican candidate’s main messages—on immigration—simply did not resonate here. The 2016 PPIC Statewide Surveys consistently found that most Californians viewed immigrants as a benefit, favored a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and opposed building a wall on the US–Mexico border.

Presidential preference. Democrat Hillary Clinton is currently defeating Republican Donald Trump by a 29-point margin in California. Clinton’s margin is higher than President Barack Obama’s in 2008 (+24) and 2012 (+23), while Trump’s support (33%) is lower than every Republican presidential candidate since 1992. Clinton is running up big margins in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area, while Trump is running behind even in Republican-leaning Orange County and “purple” areas of the state such as Fresno, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties. This was occurring in California even as blue areas turned red in the nation’s swing states. The margin for the presidential race in the October PPIC survey was 26 points, indicating that polls were accurate in accounting for Trump and Clinton supporters here.

State ballot measures. California also distinguished itself from the rest of the nation by asking voters to be the deciders on 17 state propositions. The September PPIC survey found satisfaction with the initiative process but unhappiness with the scale and complexity of state measures, and the oversized role of special interests in the process. Would voters just say no to all measures or skip this portion of the ballot? They did neither. They are currently approving 12 of the 17 state propositions and, in saying yes to at least 9 of the 14 citizens’ initiatives, exceeding the historical pass rate. Apparently, and in line with PPIC reports, California voters are up to the challenge of making policy at the ballot box.

Role of government. The big surprise in the 2016 California election is a sea change in voter preferences for the role of government. Californians reversed course in terms of their own previous decisions and stood apart from a number of national trends.

  • Californians passed both a cigarette tax increase (64%, Proposition 56) and marijuana legalization (56%, Proposition 64), both of which failed at the ballot earlier.

  • Years after they instituted a tough-on-crime three strikes law and mandated that schools teach only in English, the state’s voters passed criminal sentencing reform (64%, Proposition 57) and bilingual education (73%, Proposition 58).

  • While second-amendment rights were a litmus test for presidential candidates in other states, Californians expanded firearms restrictions (63%, Proposition 63).

  • Voters may be known for their distrust in state government, but they endorsed the plastic bag ban that was passed earlier by the legislature, at the same time reinforcing their “green” credentials (53%, Proposition 67).

  • Californians showed a generous streak by passing state school bonds (54%, Proposition 51), Medi-Cal funding (70%, Proposition 52), and a tax extension (62%, Proposition 55).

Notably, voter support for tax and spending propositions that we tracked in the September and October surveys were both stable and close to the election results, indicating that opinions were unmoved by the “no” campaigns. “Calexit” has become shorthand for the idea of California leaving the US. Instead, it may end up referring to Californians leaving behind the tax revolt that started here.

Voter turnout. The California Secretary of State is reporting a record-setting 15.18 million counted and unprocessed ballots in the November election. This vote count also reflects gains in the turnout among registered voters and eligible adults compared to the 2012 presidential election. Turnout rates were somewhat higher in the 2008 election. The October PPIC survey showed a high level of interest in the presidential election, and California seems to have bucked the national trend of depressed turnout. Still, only about half of the approximately 30 million California adults voted in this election. As noted in a recent PPIC report, nonvoters are mostly Latino, immigrants, lower-income, and young adults. In other words, those who don’t vote are among the most affected by changes in the role of government.

The voters have spoken and the awkward result is a conflicting policy agenda for the state government and the federal government. How will Governor Brown and the state legislature respond when the Republican president and US Congress shift gears on immigration, the Affordable Care Act, climate change, and abortion rights policies favored by California residents?

As the priorities, plans, and programs of the new president and Congress take shape, the mission of the PPIC Statewide Survey—­­to provide a voice for both adults and likely voters—takes on even greater importance.

And as we look further ahead, the next California governor will play a challenging role in managing the federal and state relationship. PPIC will invite the 2018 gubernatorial candidates to public forums next year to learn what we can about their leadership style and their vision for the state’s future in the changing political landscape in California and the US.

Video: A High-Interest Election

By many measures, this is an unusual election year. In the presidential race between a businessman/reality TV star and the first woman nominated by a major party, most likely voters have made up their minds, the latest PPIC Statewide Survey shows. Yet interest in the election is high and satisfaction with the choice of candidates is low.

Two candidates from the same party are vying for an open US Senate for the first time since the state adopted the top-two primary system. About a quarter of likely voters say they won’t vote for either Democrat, and 19 percent are still undecided.

These are just two of the consequential choices Californians are being asked to make. There are 17 statewide initiatives on the ballot and in many communities, a number of local measures.

This all adds up to an election worth watching.

Dean Bonner, associate survey director, presented key findings from the survey to a Sacramento audience last week.

Commentary: Coping with 17 State Ballot Propositions


This commentary was published in the Los Angeles Times today. Thursday, August 18, 2016.

This fall, Californians will face the daunting task of determining the fate of 17 state propositions. Local ballots will add their own initiatives to this burden. It’s been a dozen years since a ballot was as challenging. How will voters respond?

Read the full commentary on latimes.com.

Learn more

PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Their Government (May 2016) 

Primary Takeaways

With the release of the official Statement of the Vote on Friday, the 2016 California primary is now in the history books. The final tally by the Secretary of State offers many new insights for those of us who closely follow elections and polling in California. This year’s results deserve a particularly close look because of the extraordinary presidential primaries and the first-ever top-two primary for an open US Senate seat.

My colleague Eric McGhee has provided an excellent analysis of primary turnout and the outcomes of top-two legislative district races in two earlier PPIC blog posts. I’m going to focus on some trends that caught my attention in the final numbers regarding the presidential primaries, the top-two US Senate primary, the state ballot measure, voter engagement, and turnout in key regions. 

  • Presidential primaries. Secretary Hillary Clinton (2.75 million) and US Senator Bernie Sanders (2.38 million) were the top-two vote-getters in the state’s presidential primaries. These two Democrats had much more support in their party’s open primary than businessman Donald Trump (1.67 million) had in a closed Republican primary with no active opposition. In addition to facing a sizeable disadvantage in voter registration (45% Democrat, 27% Republican), the presumptive Republican nominee starts the fall election season with one million fewer voters in the state’s primary than the presumptive Democratic nominee. For Republicans, this raises questions about their presidential selection process and whether to have an open primary in the future that invites independent voters to participate. For Democrats, the immediate issue is how many of those devoted, young Sanders supporters will show up to vote this fall.
  • US Senate top-two primary. Attorney General Kamala Harris won more votes (3.00 million) in the primary for the open US Senate seat than Clinton did at the top of the ballot. US Representative Loretta Sanchez finished a distant second (1.42 million) to Harris, setting up the first single-party race for US Senate in the top-two era. As a group, the 12 Republican candidates received more votes (2.15 million) than the second-place Democratic finisher. For Republicans, this raises questions about future strategies to ensure that their party’s voters have a candidate who can qualify for a top-two spot in November. And the question of how many Republicans will opt out of voting for a US Senator this fall will ultimately affect both parties.
  • State ballot measure. Proposition 50 was the biggest vote-getter (5.60 million votes, 76% yes) on the June ballot. A byproduct of recent political scandals, it allows the legislature, with a two-thirds vote, to suspend members without salary and benefits. The legislature placed it on the June ballot with bipartisan support. Proposition 50 received scant media mention and little organized opposition. Its success is consistent with the historically high pass rate for legislative ballot measures found in a recent PPIC report. This trend bodes well for state bonds to fund parks and housing that the legislature may place on the ballot in the fall. Citizens’ initiatives and referenda have been moved to the November general election, and these types of state propositions have a much lower pass rate. That means voters face a cluttered ballot this fall that includes 14 citizens’ initiatives, two legislative initiatives, and one referendum, in addition to local measures. How many will voters decide are worthy of their interest and support? 

In Los Angeles and two of the state’s fastest-growing areas, turnout among registered voters was lower than the state average.

  • Voter engagement. There was a surge in online voter registration as Californians waited for their say in the presidential primaries. Voter engagement was a welcome development after primary turnout reached a new low in June 2014 (4.46 million, 25% registered voters, 18% eligible adults). Turnout this June (8.55 million, 47.7% registered voters, 34.5% eligible adults) reflected a turnaround, although it was well short of the record-setting February 2008 presidential primary (9.07 million, 58% registered voters, 40% eligible adults). Turnout was probably depressed by two events: the elimination of Trump’s competition weeks earlier and the declaration on the day before the primary that Clinton was the presumptive Democratic nominee. Once again, there will be questions about whether it’s in California’s best interests to vote at the end of the primary season in the presidential sweepstakes.
  • Turnout in key regions. Five major counties had lower registered voter turnout than the state average: Los Angeles (41%), Fresno (41%), Kern (41%), Riverside (44%), and San Bernardino (43%). Five less populous counties in the Central Valley also had below-average turnout (41% Kings, 42% Merced, 42% San Joaquin, 44% Stanislaus, 45% Tulare). Moreover, fewer than one in three eligible adults voted in the primary in all 10 of these counties. In sum, these are troubling trends in the state’s most populous county (Los Angeles) and its two fastest-growing areas (the Central Valley and Inland Empire). Are there practical impediments to voting in these regions or is this a symptom of a deeper civic malaise? Until they are fully addressed, these regional disconnects will seriously limit the size and diversity of the state’s electorate.

The 2016 primary results point to several trends to watch in the November general election and beyond. Furthermore, the issues that surfaced this June will likely have longer-term reverberations on the primary process and civic engagement going forward.

At PPIC, the race for US Senate stands out as uniquely worthy of public attention. We invited the two candidates to participate in a conversation with me about the future of California on September 16. Stay tuned for more information about whether the candidates accept our invitation and how you can attend or watch this PPIC event.

Public Opinion and Sentencing Reform

Governor Brown has proposed a ballot initiative that would reform prison sentencing in California, increasing parole opportunities for non-violent felons. Our January PPIC Statewide Survey findings show a public opinion environment that may be favorable to the governor’s proposal.

Our survey shows that many Californians believe—incorrectly—that prisons and corrections account for the largest share of state spending. When asked to select the largest spending area of the state budget, California likely voters are most likely to choose prisons and corrections (41%)—this is consistent with our findings over the past several years. In fact, the allocation for prisons and corrections in the governor’s 2016–17 budget proposal ($10.6 billion) comes in behind higher education ($14.6 billion), health and human services ($33.7 billion), and K–12 education ($51.2 billion).

If the governor’s sentencing reform proposal is perceived as a way to reduce spending on prisons and corrections, it could benefit from this overestimation of state corrections spending. The proposal could also benefit from a contrasting opinion: only 3 percent of likely voters say that prisons and corrections should be the highest spending priority.

Californians’ current attitudes toward crime may also bode well for sentencing reform. Just 3 percent of likely voters name crime, gangs, or drugs as the most important issue for the governor and legislature to work on this year. And only 15 percent of likely voters say violence and street crime are a big problem in their communities today—down somewhat from January 2015 (22%). Furthermore, a solid majority of likely voters (63%) say that the criminal justice system is biased against blacks and other minorities, a share that is somewhat larger than it was last January (55%).

Given these attitudes toward crime and the criminal justice system, along with Californians’ desire to see less spending on prisons and corrections, the governor’s proposal for sentencing reform could be well received.

New Era for Initiatives?

California’s exceptional nature was on display again last Tuesday, as Democratic candidates swept the statewide races while Republicans scored big victories in the national midterm elections. An analysis by my PPIC colleagues Eric McGhee and Daniel Krimm shows that the state’s legislative races were closer this time around and a few competitive seats switched parties. In the end, though, the California Legislature and U.S. House delegation remain firmly in the Democratic column.

The exit polls confirmed what we reported in 2014 PPIC pre-election surveys and analyses of likely voters’ profiles. The 15 point voter registration gap between Democrats and Republicans (43% to 28%) narrowed somewhat in this midterm election but not by enough to challenge the deep-blue nature of California politics. The final voter tally is still weeks away, but this election year will likely stand out in California history for record-low turnouts in both the June primary and the November general election.

The search for the cause of voter apathy has mainly focused on the governor’s race, but I would like to call attention to another exceptional feature of this election: the drop-off in state propositions and citizens’ initiatives, which have often captured media attention and voter interest in the past. It may mark the beginning of a trend with profound implications for voter engagement and state policymaking.

This year, there were only eight state propositions on the June and the November ballots, including four legislative measures, three citizens’ initiatives, and one referenda. Both legislative measures on the June ballot, Propositions 41 and 42, passed with more than 60 percent of the vote and little fanfare. On the November ballot, two legislative measures, Propositions 1 and 2, also garnered more than 60 percent of the vote. Governor Brown sold them as a package with a “Save Water, Save Money” campaign, tapping into concerns about the state drought and budget shortfalls. Proposition 47, a citizens’ initiative on criminal sentencing, passed with almost 60 percent at a time when fear of crime does not loom large among Californians. The three measures that failed—two citizens’ initiatives on health care, Propositions 45 and 46, and a referendum on Indian gaming, Proposition 48—faced well-funded opponents. Although money was clearly a factor in the outcomes on ballot measures, the $151 million in total spending represents a down year for the campaign consultants in the California initiative business.

To place this year in context, there were 100 state propositions on state ballots between 2003 and 2013, including 68 citizens’ initiatives, 25 legislative measures, 6 referenda, and the governor’s recall. Total spending for and against the 68 citizens’ initiatives was about $1.8 billion. In fact, since the Proposition 13 era began in 1978, the numbers of state propositions and citizens’ initiatives in midterm and presidential election years has never been lower than in the 2014 election cycle. Why the dramatic change in voter decision making at the ballot box?

One contributing factor is SB 202, which had the intended consequence of keeping citizens’ initiatives off the June primary ballot for the first time in decades. Passed by the legislature and signed by the governor in late 2011, this law limits citizens’ initiatives and referenda to the November election, when more voters typically cast ballots. A PPIC report pointed to another potential effect of the law: turnout could fall by 3 to 7 points without initiatives on the primary ballot. While the legislature can still place its proposals on the primary ballot, as it did with Propositions 41 and 42 this June, these measures can lack the sizzle and drama of initiative campaigns. In other words, SB 202 could have the unintended consequence of lower primary turnout.

SB 202 was expected to result in more initiatives on the November ballot, but that did not happen this year. It is possible that some interest groups shied away from the ballot because their causes were more likely to succeed in a primary with a smaller, older, and more conservative electorate. Others may have decided to wait until the presidential election in November 2016 because their causes are better aligned with a larger, younger, and more liberal electorate. Or maybe initiatives have simply become too expensive, even for the interest groups that operate in this arena. In any case, fewer initiative campaigns gave Californians fewer reasons—and fewer televised reminders—to vote this fall.

Because of another new law, SB 1253, we can expect further declines in the number of initiatives on state ballots. Passed by the legislature and signed by the governor this fall, the law offers proponents more opportunities to amend and withdraw their measures, and it requires the legislature to hold public hearings to review initiatives. These types of process changes have strong public support in PPIC Statewide Surveys. By allowing time for reconsideration and providing opportunities for collaboration between initiative proponents and the legislature, SB 1253 may result in fewer citizens’ initiatives and more legislative measures—which would be a throwback to the pre- term limits era before 1990. Such a trend might improve the initiative process, but it could also make elections less interesting for voters.

An early test of SB 1253 will be the marijuana legalization initiative that is on course for the November 2016 ballot. A previous marijuana legalization initiative failed with a 46 percent yes vote in 2010. The October 2014 PPIC Statewide Survey found that 50 percent of likely voters are in favor of legalizing marijuana, so it is far from certain that a 2016 initiative would pass.

Will legislators and proponents search for a compromise before the initiative goes to the voters? Legislators may want to find ways to connect with younger voters in 2016, while proponents may want to bypass costly and risky campaigns. Another reason to think there may be a compromise: the pass rate for legislative measures (71%) has been much higher than the pass rate for citizens’ initiatives (38%) over the past 40 years. If a deal is struck on this high-profile, controversial issue, initiative compromise leading to legislative measures could become the new hybrid model for making policy at the ballot box.

How will voters respond to primaries and general elections with fewer citizens’ initiatives on the ballot? It seems likely that presidential elections will still hold their interest, but primaries and midterm elections might be less compelling. In other words, tinkering with the citizens’ initiative process may unintentionally produce new historic lows in voter turnout. Looking for other tools to engage Californians in elections while improving the initiative process will keep secretary of state–elect Alex Padilla busy over the next four years.