PPIC Statewide Survey – Page 2 – Public Policy Institute of California

Video: January PPIC Statewide Survey Briefing

State residents are feeling more optimistic than they have in years—about California’s elected leaders, the direction of the state, and their own economic futures. Dean Bonner, associate survey director, presented these and other key findings at a briefing last week in Sacramento. In addition to asking about government and fiscal issues, the January survey gauged opinions on four important issues being debated at the state and federal level. Among the findings:

Crime, police, and race relations. A solid majority of Californians say the police are doing either an excellent job or good job controlling crime in their communities. But blacks are much less likely than others to hold this view.

Water and drought. A majority of Californians say the supply of water is a big problem in their region, and most say the state and local governments are not doing enough to respond to the current drought.

Health care reform. A record-high 51 percent of Californians have a generally favorable view of the 2010 health care reform law, while 41 percent have an unfavorable view.

Immigration reform. A solid majority of residents support President Obama’s executive action to shield as many as 4 million immigrants from deportation, while about a third are opposed.

Testimony: Building Trust in State Government

Today California’s Little Hoover Commission held its first public hearing on the nature and quality of interactions between state government and the public. The commission invited Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO, to testify about the public’s trust in government. Here are his remarks.

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to your important and timely discussion about improving the delivery of public services and better engaging Californians with their state government. I have been asked in my testimony to set the stage for your work by helping you to better understand current public sentiment toward state government.

Last year, voter turnout in California reached a historic low: 30.9 percent of eligible adults in the November general election and 18.4 percent in the June primary. Millions of Californians who could register to vote did not, and millions of Californians who could vote opted out. These numbers clearly point to a California public that is disconnected from their state government today.

This is consistent with what we have observed in the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) Statewide Survey since we began monitoring Californians’ attitudes toward government in the late 1990s. We have been asking questions about government trust focused on effectiveness, responsiveness, and efficiency at the local, state, and federal levels. And we have found that Californians’ distrust in state government predates the low voter turnouts of the 2014 election.

My purpose is to provide information on the magnitude of public distrust in state government today, the differences among demographic groups, and how current levels of distrust compare with the past. I will also contrast opinions about government at the local, state, and federal levels. Lastly, I will talk about the implications of our findings for state government leaders.

The source of most of my comments about trust in state government today is the PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and the Future report from December 2014, which I coauthored with PPIC colleagues Dean Bonner, Renatta DeFever, Lunna Lopes, and Jui Shrestha. Our latest findings on trust in state government are based on interviews with 1,704 adult residents throughout California from November 10 to November 17, conducted in English or Spanish and by landline or cell phone with a sampling error of ± 3.7 percent.

We asked our tracking question on government effectiveness, “How much of the time do you think you can trust the state government in Sacramento to do what is right?”—and only one in three Californians said just about always (7%) or most of the time (25%). Two in three Californians said that you can trust the state government to do what is right only some of the time (61%), or volunteered that they trust it none of the time (5%). These perceptions are shared across regional and demographic groups. Republican and independent voters express more distrust in state government than Democratic voters do. In our polling a decade ago, the results for this question were similar. However, perceptions have improved somewhat since October 2010 (3% always, 15% most of the time, 67% most, 12% none).

Responding to our tracking question on government responsiveness, 67 percent of California adults said “the state government is pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves,” while only 28 percent said that “it is run for the benefit of all of the people.” Majorities across regional and demographic groups perceive the state government as pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves, and Republican and independent voters are more likely to express this negative view than Democratic voters are. Again, the results were similar a decade ago, while perceptions have improved somewhat since October 2010 (75% big interests, 17% all of the people).

In our tracking question on government efficiency, 54 percent of adults said they “think the people in state government waste a lot of the money that we pay in taxes,” 35 percent said “people in state government waste some of it,” and 8 percent said they “don’t waste very much of it.” Majorities across most regional and demographic groups hold the perception that the people in state government waste a lot of money, while Republican (78%) and independent voters (60%) hold this view much more often than Democratic voters (46%) do. Once again, the results were similar in our polling a decade ago, while perceptions have improved somewhat since October 2010 (66% a lot, 26% some, 6% don’t waste very much).

We asked the same three questions on effectiveness, responsiveness, and efficiency about the federal government in our May 2014 poll and about local government in our May 2011 poll. State government fares only slightly better than the federal government in ratings of trust. Local government fares the best of all levels. Californians are much less likely to say their local governments “waste a lot of the money paid in taxes” or are “pretty much run by a few big interests looking out for themselves.” They are slightly less likely to say that they can trust their local governments “to do what is right only some of the time or none of the time.”

In summary, the negative perceptions about the effectiveness, responsiveness, and efficiency of state government are consistent over time and widely held in the public today. What are the implications of our findings for state government leaders? First, Californians will continue to value the citizens’ initiative process as they seek to have a say in the major decisions made by their state government. Second, many Californians will be skeptical about the need for higher state taxes and more state revenues, given their level of distrust in their state government. Third, proposals to move authority and control to the local level will resonate with Californians, given their higher levels of distrust in state government. Last but not least, civic disengagement will continue to be a problem. We may reach new lows in voter participation given the level of distrust in government.

I’d like to close on a more hopeful note. This commission’s work comes at a time when we are seeing some improvements in all three indicators of trust in state government. In the wake of a growing economy and better fiscal situation, the approval ratings of the governor and state legislature are also on the rise, as our survey results show. The voters have also approved a series of major legislative and fiscal reforms in recent elections. In our polling, the public is signaling their early support for local control of school funding and state-local corrections realignment.

It will take time to see whether these reforms and changes satisfy a distrustful public. I’m optimistic that we are poised to make gains in trust in state government over the next few years, and this is an area where California could lead the nation. New efforts toward building trust in state government will pay dividends in the form of citizen engagement. They are important for the future of all Californians.

California’s Future: Optimists vs. Pessimists

Californians begin the new year divided in their view of the state. According to the December 2014 PPIC Statewide Survey, half of California adults think the state is headed in the right direction (50%) and a similar proportion (52%) expect the state to have good economic times in the next 12 months. More than a third (37%) think California will be a better place to live in 2025, and a similar proportion (37%) believe children growing up in the state will be better off financially than their parents.

While most Californians responded to these questions with a mix of optimism and pessimism, we found some interesting differences between the 14% of Californians who gave positive responses to all four questions—let’s call them the optimists—and the 13% who expressed consistently negative views—the pessimists.

Demographically speaking, the optimists tend to be younger, less educated, and have lower incomes than the pessimists. Optimists are also less likely to have been born in the United States.

Politically, optimists are more likely to be Democrats and pessimists more likely to be Republicans. Optimists are spread across the ideological spectrum, while pessimists tend to be ideologically conservative. Optimists are also far less likely to be registered voters than their pessimistic counterparts.

The differences between the state’s optimists and pessimists are particularly stark when we examine their attitudes toward government. Even though optimists are less likely to be registered to vote, they are more trusting of government than pessimists: 63% of optimists believe that state government is run for the benefit of all the people, while 93% of pessimists think it is run by a few big interests. Moreover, optimists would prefer to pay higher taxes and have a state government that provides more services (71%), while pessimists favor lower taxes and fewer services (69%). More specifically, optimists are more likely than pessimists to support extending Proposition 30 tax increases (68% of optimists favor an extension, 67% of pessimists oppose) and are more likely to say they would be willing to pay more taxes to fund higher education (61%, compared to 23% of pessimists).

Will California’s trusting optimists become more electorally involved? Or is the record-low voter turnout in last November’s election a sign of increasing disengagement? Certainly, one of the state’s key challenges is to get more voters—both optimists and pessimists—to the polls.

California Politics and the Future

Jim Brulte, chair of the California Republican Party, says Governor Brown is “clearly the master of Sacramento.”

Jennifer Medina, national correspondent for the New York Times, says the governor hasn’t talked much about poverty or income inequality— an issue his Republican opponent used in the election this year.

And Garry South, longtime Democratic strategist, says the governor needs to take on the tough issue of fiscal reform because this can only be done by a Democrat.

These are a sample of comments from a panel of experts speaking at a briefing hosted by PPIC in Sacramento this week. The discussion focused on the challenges and opportunities ahead for the governor and legislature. The event began with a presentation of the results of the new PPIC Statewide Survey by Dean Bonner, associate survey director. The survey included a wide range of topics, including tax reform, health care, climate change, and the approval ratings of state leaders.

Timely Talk About California’s Future

Californians are feeling more optimistic about the state’s immediate economic future than they have in years, our December PPIC Statewide Survey shows. Today, 52 percent expect California to have good times financially for the next year. The last time more than half of residents expressed this view was in January 2001. But when Californians are asked to take the longer view, worries about their own economic futures emerge. Most residents—55 percent—think that when California’s children grow up they will be worse off financially than their parents.

The time is right to both build on Californians’ new optimism and address the nagging concerns about the future. After years of economic turmoil, the state has entered a period of reform and reinvention. How can we Californians ensure that the changes will bring about a better future for the state?

With the new legislature sworn in and state leaders developing policy agendas for the months ahead, PPIC is hosting a wide-ranging conversation tomorrow about the choices we need to make today to create a future that benefits all Californians. Registration for the conference, California—State of Change, is closed, but I invite you to watch the live webcast of this full-day event.

Event panels will cover a variety of topics, including the economic, political, and demographic trends driving change in the state; how leaders can best respond to them; and how government can be a partner in the kind of innovation that has made our state a leader in so many areas.

Please join us for a series of timely discussions about our future.

Voters More Optimistic, Less Engaged

A lot has changed since Californians cast ballots just four years ago.

Likely voters today are feeling much better about the direction and economic outlook of the state. In October 2010, most (77%) said that the state was headed in the wrong direction. In our latest survey, likely voters are much more positive about the state’s future—although they are still more likely to say wrong direction (54%) than right direction (40%). Similarly, in October 2010 less than a quarter of likely voters (20%) expected good economic times in the upcoming year and far more (65%) expected bad times. Today, the mood is decidedly different, with 42% expecting good times and 47% expecting bad times. In October 2010, most likely voters (59%) named jobs and the economy as the state’s most important issue. Today, just 30% name it as the top issue, which barely keeps it in first place, while 28% name water and the drought. Further, in September 2010 nearly all likely voters (90%) called the state budget situation a big problem—today, that number is 62%.

This year, likely voters are paying less attention to news about the candidates for governor than they did four years ago, when the race involved an open seat and a high-profile contest. In October 2010, an overwhelming majority were very (39%) or fairly closely (50%) paying attention to news about gubernatorial candidates. In our latest survey, just half of likely voters were doing so (18% very, 34% fairly). In addition, there is a big enthusiasm gap. Fewer voters today say they are “more enthusiastic about voting than usual” (53% 2010, 40% today).

In 2010, when many people were tuned into the top of the ticket race, nearly 60 percent of registered voters turned out to vote. With far fewer voters paying attention to the gubernatorial race—and with the lack of a Congressional senate race—what can we expect in 2014? Will concerns about the drought and the state budget drive people to the polls—and if so, how will this translate into votes on Proposition 1, the water bond, and Proposition 2, the establishment of a rainy day fund? Stay tuned to PPIC as we continue to follow the November 2014 election.

Video Highlights Survey’s Election Findings

The October PPIC Statewide Survey was the focus of a briefing last week in Sacramento, where research associate Jui Shrestha summarized the findings. After her presentation, David Lesher, PPIC’s director of government affairs, pointed to some survey findings to watch as the campaigns and election play out.

The governor’s race: Jerry Brown leads by 16 points among likely voters, but other findings are less overwhelmingly in his favor. Statewide, Brown has the support of just a slim majority of likely voters, 52 percent. And he trails Neel Kashkari among some groups of likely voters—those in Orange/San Diego Counties, for example.

Voter enthusiasm: Likely voters paid much more attention to news of the gubernatorial candidates in 2006—the last election in which there was an incumbent—than they are doing today. Likely voters overall are also showing lower levels of enthusiasm today than in the 2010 or 2012 elections. These findings suggest that low voter turnout is likely, which will color the results.

Proposition 2: Placed on the ballot in a bipartisan vote of the legislature and endorsed by both the California Republican Party and by Governor Brown, this constitutional amendment to create a rainy day fund is struggling for majority support. While support has increased since September, just 49 percent of likely voters favor it today. Less than half of those who live in the San Francisco Bay Area and of those with incomes of $80,000 or more say they would vote yes on Proposition 2.

A Cautionary Tale for Fiscal Reformers

One of the biggest surprises in the PPIC Statewide Surveys this fall has been the inability of Proposition 2 (aka the rainy day fund) to garner majority support from voters. The measure—which was placed on the November ballot by the governor and a unanimous vote of the legislature—allows for annual transfers of revenues into an account to be used only for fiscal emergencies and to pay off state debt.

Support did rise from 43 percent in our September poll to 49 percent in October. This may be a sign that Proposition 2 can defy the conventional political wisdom about ballot measures starting out with less than 50 percent support being doomed to fail. Certainly, its supporters find this trend encouraging. But, given the widespread support for the idea of a rainy day fund in earlier PPIC polls, why is Proposition 2 struggling to achieve majority support? Further analysis of our survey results offers a cautionary tale about the political pitfalls of fiscal reforms.

We have been tracking a wide array of fiscal reforms in our polls, including the idea of a rainy day fund: “Do you favor or oppose increasing the size of the state’s rainy day fund and requiring above-average revenues to be deposited into it for use during economic downturns?” In the five times this question was asked before Proposition 2 was put on the ballot, likely voter support hovered around 70 percent. Today, support for the rainy day fund idea has fallen to 55 percent among likely voters. This suggests a strong link between supporting the rainy day fund concept and voting yes on Proposition 2—in fact, 7 in 10 of those who would vote yes on Proposition 2 express support for a rainy day fund. More important, why has a fiscal reform that was consistently and highly regarded fallen out of favor with so many voters?

We looked at the possibility that Californians are less inclined to support a rainy day fund because the state’s finances have been improving. But our tracking question on state budget perceptions found that slightly more likely voters say that the state budget situation is a big problem today (62%) than in January (56%). Moreover, those who see the state budget as a big problem are less likely to favor a rainy day fund today (48%) than they were in January (65%).

The steep decline in support for a highly popular idea seems to have political overtones. Since January, support for the rainy day fund idea has dropped from a solid majority to below 50 percent among several groups: Republicans (72% January, 47% October), conservatives (69% January, 47% October), those who disapprove of the job performance of both the governor (65% January, 42% October) and the legislature (65% January, 47% October), and those who say the state is going in the wrong direction (67% January, 48% October). Meanwhile, Democratic governor Jerry Brown has been touting the virtues of Proposition 2 on the campaign trail, and Republican leaders who supported it have been silent.

In an election context, the rainy day fund idea has thus become politically polarizing. The governor’s success in rallying his supporters around Proposition 2 is reflected in its recent rise in the polls. But the rainy day fund idea has lost favor among Republicans and conservatives who used to be loyal supporters. Today, support for idea is much higher among Brown voters (68%) than Kashkari voters (43%). Governor Brown may need to do more to reassure the Democratic base of the long-term benefits of a rainy day fund to prevent Proposition 2 from falling short of majority support.

In short, a rainy day fund that once had strong backing across party lines has become a divisive idea. This is a reminder that even a seemingly uncontroversial issue with unanimous support in the legislature is subject to political redefinition in the heat of an election. Future tax and spending reforms may face an even more challenging path if they can’t ride on the coattails of an incumbent governor with a 54 percent approval rating and 52 percent supporting his reelection.

The lesson is that the popularity of any given reform can fade unless voters know that it is supported by leaders who share their partisan views and reflect their political values.

Californians’ Views of Health Care Reform Shift—a Bit

Open enrollment for health insurance through Covered California or HealthCare.gov is set to begin in less than a month, and Californians have had one year of experience obtaining coverage. The Affordable Care Act has divided the state as well as the nation. Have those views shifted? Yes and no.

Before the health insurance marketplace opened, PPIC asked Californians about the law’s potential impact. There was no consensus. About a quarter of respondents in our September 2013 survey said they thought they and their family would be better off (26%) and another quarter thought they would be worse off (24%). More thought the health reform law would not make much difference (43%). Adults nationwide were slightly more negative (24% better off, 32% worse off, 37% no difference), according to a Kaiser Family Foundation poll taken the same month.

Californians were divided along party lines in their opinions of the law’s impact, with half of Democrats (51%) saying the law would not make a difference to them and six in 10 Republicans (61%) saying they would be worse off. Californians without insurance were much more likely than those with insurance to say they would be better off (36% to 23%). Looking more broadly, pluralities across regions and demographic groups said that they expected the health reform law would make no difference to them or their families.

A year later, Californians’ opinions of the health reform law’s impact have shifted. In our latest survey, we asked respondents if it had directly helped them and their family, directly hurt them and their family, or had no direct impact. Most Californians (58%) say the health reform law has had no direct impact. Similar proportions say either it directly helped (20%) or it directly hurt (19%). Adults nationwide are slightly more likely to say the law hurt them (56% no direct impact, 14% helped, 27% hurt), the latest Kaiser Family Foundation poll shows.

Looking across political groups, we see more change. Majorities across parties (55% Democrats, 56% Republicans, 63% independents) say the health reform law has not had a direct impact on them or their family. Similarly, among the insured and the uninsured, 58 percent say the law has not affected them. In fact, majorities across regions and all demographic groups say the law has had no impact.

Although most Californians say they have not felt the law’s effects, they still remain sharply divided along party lines in their general opinion of the law. Six in 10 Democrats have a favorable opinion of the health care law, while eight in 10 Republicans have an unfavorable opinion of the law–almost identical findings to those last December.

Of course, the story of health care reform is far from over. At PPIC, we will continue to monitor Californians’ views of this issue and its impact on their lives.

PPIC’s Role in a Changing State

California is changing quickly and in ways that touch the lives of all of its residents. The state has enrolled millions of people in health insurance under the federal Affordable Care Act. It is moving ahead to expand the cap-and-trade program that is a cornerstone of AB 32, the landmark law mandating a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

In K–12 education, California is implementing two sweeping policy changes at the same time. New English and math standards, called the Common Core, require big changes in what is taught in the classroom. A new school funding formula, the Local Control Funding Formula, gives districts increased flexibility over spending and provides extra money for disadvantaged students.

Historic changes are playing out in the corrections system as well. Realignment, which shifted responsibilities for many offenders from the state to the local level, has had a significant impact on the state, counties, and communities.

Amid these policy shifts, California is coping with a major drought that has focused attention on the state’s need to improve its water management.

These changes are also taking place in an election year—and California’s elections have also undergone major changes. This is the first election in which state constitutional officers, such as governor and controller, will be elected under the top-two primary system.

At PPIC we are focused on monitoring and analyzing the impact of these changes—both short and long term—and examining other steps the state can take to meet its critical challenges. In recent months, we have delivered objective, nonpartisan research on all of these topics. We plan to release many more publications in the months ahead. Our PPIC Statewide Survey will continue to give California residents a voice in the policy changes that affect them, as it has since 1998. The PPIC blog provides regular updates on the impact of the drought, as well as news and analysis on a range of policy topics from our experts.

Through our extensive outreach, we have hosted discussions on these important topics and more. We invited California’s two top legislative leaders to share their priorities for the upcoming session. At another recent event, the two secretary of state candidates talked about how they would improve elections and increase voter participation, if elected. Both of these events were webcast live to engage Californians from all over the state.

We encourage you to sign up for our announcements to learn about future events. We hope you’ll stay up to date with our publications and videos by signing up for our monthly e-bulletin, following us on social media, and subscribing to the PPIC blog.

As always, we welcome your comments and suggestions.