primary – Public Policy Institute of California

2020 Primary: Funding Higher Education Facilities

The state legislature recently passed a $15 billion bond measure to fund upgrades to education buildings and facilities. Voters will decide whether to support this bond as part of the March 2020 primary ballot.

For higher education, the measure would provide $6 billion to the state’s three higher education systems, the University of California (UC), the California State University (CSU), and the California Community Colleges (CCC). These funds would be distributed equally ($2 billion each)—even though the systems enroll significantly different numbers of students.

The legislature will approve specific projects as part of the annual budget process. As a condition of making funds available, the bill requires UC and CSU to develop affordable housing plans for their students.

The last time the state proposed and passed a ballot measure supporting higher education was more than a decade ago. Proposition 1D (2006) passed with almost 57% support. The total amount of funding for higher education in that initiative was about half of what is proposed in the current measure ($3.1 billion compared to $6 billion).

During the Great Recession funding for UC, CSU and the community colleges fell. One of the ways the systems responded was to defer maintenance on buildings, foregoing repairs and upgrades as a way to save money in the short run. Our estimate of the cost of addressing the resulting backlog of capital projects tops $30 billion for the UC and CSU systems. The proposed ballot initiative would provide bond authority to cover a little more than 10% of that.

The state’s community colleges are in a slightly different position. Local community college districts can issue their own bonds and make most of their own capital finance decisions. Since passage of Proposition 39 (2000), which made it easier for community colleges to pass bond measures, community college districts have been relatively successful in funding their capital needs. From 2001 to 2016, voters approved $35 billion in borrowing for local community college capital projects. In addition, Proposition 51 (2016) provided community colleges with $2 billion in state bond funding.

We know that bond measures for education generally have the support of voters, and recent PPIC polling suggests that a $15 billion education bond has a slim margin of support. Time will tell whether voters will be persuaded this time around.

Waning Confidence in the Electoral Process

Just ahead of the next Democratic presidential primary debate, and as California heads into a particularly consequential election year, residents express the lowest confidence in the state’s electoral system ever recorded by the PPIC Statewide Survey.

In our most recent survey, 36% of all adults and 42% of likely voters say that they have either a great deal (18% adults, 22% likely voters) or quite a lot (18% adults, 20% likely voters) of confidence in California’s electoral system. Confidence has continually declined since we first asked this question in October 2004.

Levels of confidence in the electoral system differ across partisan lines. Today, Democrats (52%) are slightly more likely than they were in 2004 (45%) to say they have either a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the system. But confidence has declined somewhat among independents (35% today; 47% 2004) and significantly among Republicans (27% today; 76% 2004).

Since 2004, confidence has declined across nearly all age, education, income, and racial/ethnic groups—with the exception of African Americans, who express similar levels of confidence today (37%) as they did in 2004 (32%).

Much recent debate has centered on two opposing concerns about elections: some are concerned about voter fraud, in which ineligible people vote, while others are concerned about voter suppression, in which eligible voters are unable to cast a ballot.

Currently, voter fraud is the stronger concern. A slight majority of Californians (54%) and likely voters (57%) are either very or somewhat concerned that it is too easy for ineligible people to vote. But many still consider voter suppression to be an issue, with 45% of all adults and 42% of likely voters either very or somewhat concerned that it is too hard for eligible people to vote.

Views on these issues differ across party lines. Republicans (79%) are far more likely than independents (53%) or Democrats (43%) to be either very or somewhat concerned about voter fraud. In contrast, Democrats (50%) are more likely than independents (43%) or Republicans (34%) to say voter suppression is either very or somewhat of a concern.

Concern about voter fraud has increased among certain groups since we last asked this question in 2017. In particular, we see increases among likely voters (57% today; 50% 2017), as well as among those age 55 and older (63% today; 53% 2017), Asian Americans (54% today; 43% 2017), and college graduates (48% today; 40% 2017).

Concern about voter suppression has grown among African Americans (66% today; 49% 2017), residents of the Inland Empire (54% today; 35% 2017), and Republicans (34% today; 22% 2017).

Governor Newsom recently signed legislation that will allow voters to register and vote on Election Day anywhere ballots are cast. This is the latest in a number of reforms meant to broaden voter access in the state. Stay tuned as we monitor Californians’ perceptions on these issues throughout this important election season.

Video: Californians and Their Government

As California’s 2020 Democratic presidential primary draws closer, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, and Bernie Sanders lead the rest of the field by a wide margin. However, many voters say they would consider supporting a candidate other than their current choice. These and other key findings from PPIC’s latest statewide survey were outlined by Rachel Lawler in Sacramento last Thursday.

Likely voters identifying as registered Democrats or as Democratic-leaning independents support Elizabeth Warren (23%), Joe Biden (22%), and Bernie Sanders (21%) at levels well above Kamala Harris (8%) and Pete Buttigieg (6%). No other candidate is preferred by more than 3 percent, and 9 percent say they don’t know which candidate they prefer. More than half of voters who expressed a preference would consider supporting another candidate.

The survey asked about a $15 billion bond for school and college construction that has been approved by the legislature for the March 2020 ballot. It has the support of two in three adults—but only 54 percent of likely voters. This narrow margin of support coincides with concern about the state’s economic outlook. Fewer than half (41% adults, 37% likely voters) expect good times financially in California during the next 12 months.

A potential November 2020 ballot measure that would amend Proposition 13 to tax commercial properties at their current market rate and direct some of the new revenue to K–12 public schools is favored by 57 percent of adults. However, fewer than half (47%) of likely voters favor the measure, and this share is down somewhat from April 2019 (54%). A potential state bond measure to fund water infrastructure is favored by 68 percent of adults and 57 percent of likely voters.

Other survey highlights:

Californians are most likely to name homelessness (15% adults, 16% likely voters) and jobs and the economy (15% adults, 13% likely voters) as the top issue facing the state. Other issues named include housing costs, immigration, and the environment.
Most Californians view immigrants as a benefit to the state, and half are at least somewhat worried about someone they know being deported as a result of increased federal immigration enforcement.
Two in three Californians think the Supreme Court should not overturn Roe v. Wade; more than half think some states are making it too difficult to get an abortion.
Half of Californians say they have a disaster plan and six in ten have a disaster supplies kit. Six in ten are very (28%) or somewhat (32%) worried about personal injury, property damage, or a major disruption of their routine as the result of a disaster.

Video: 2020 Election Preview

Now that California’s presidential primary has been moved from June to March, how might the state’s electorate influence the 2020 election, and how are the major parties engaging with voters? At a lunchtime event in Sacramento last week, PPIC president Mark Baldassare provided an overview of voter participation in California and KQED’s Marisa Lagos moderated a lively, wide-ranging discussion of the upcoming election season.

Lagos, who covers California politics and government for KQED, noted that California has long been a “piggy bank” for presidential candidates in both parties. She asked whether the earlier primary date will increase the state’s influence. “Guess what? You’re still the piggy bank!” joked Tamara Keith, White House correspondent for National Public Radio.

More seriously, Keith noted that it isn’t clear whether “California will come into the process soon enough to make a difference or whether things will have started settling out after Iowa and New Hampshire.” She added that because it takes weeks for the state to count its absentee ballots, “there’s a chance that the race will have already advanced a lot by the time California’s results are fully in.”

Rusty Hicks, chair of the California Democratic Party, said that the earlier primary date offers opportunities for presidential candidates to engage voters across the state. “You have top-tier candidates going to the northern rural parts of the state. They’re going to the Central Valley, they’re going to the Inland Empire.” In his view, this is “a real opportunity to showcase the state . . . it’s more than the Bay Area and Los Angeles.”

From the Republican perspective, the early presidential primary doesn’t make a big difference. But Jessica Patterson, chair of the California Republican Party, sees opportunities on the state level. “We have the opportunity to change the entire makeup of the building across the street.” The party is focused on “making sure we’re engaged in communities . . . to talk about the things that are important to them, and really focus on fixing our state.”

While their perspectives differed in many ways, both Patterson and Hicks stressed the importance of working together to empower and represent all Californians. “I think we all have an interest in ensuring that we have an engaged and empowered electorate,” said Hicks. Patterson agreed, adding that “it’s better for all of us when we find ways that we can work together.”

Democrats View Environmental Policy as Critical in Upcoming Primary

Climate change is becoming a defining issue for voters in next year’s presidential election. According to PPIC’s latest statewide survey on the environment, record-high shares of Californians are concerned about the impacts of global warming, overwhelming majorities disapprove of the way President Trump is handling environmental issues, and most likely voters say presidential candidates’ positions on the environment are important in determining their vote next year.

With California’s presidential primary a little more than six months away, eight in ten likely voters say that the candidates’ positions on the environment are important (44% very, 36% somewhat) in determining their vote. Democratic likely voters (64%) are far more likely than independents (34%) and Republicans (20%) to say candidates’ positions on the environment are very important. In addition to partisan divisions, there are significant generational differences—even within parties, Democratic likely voters age 18 to 44 (76%) are much more likely than those age 45 and older (58%) to say candidates’ environmental positions are very important.

With the environment critical for many Democrats, especially younger voters, whom do they support in the 2020 presidential primary? Among likely voters who are registered Democrats or are Democratic-leaning independents, and who say candidates’ environmental positions are very important, support is greatest for Kamala Harris (19%), Elizabeth Warren (18%), Bernie Sanders (12%), and Joe Biden (11%). (Candidates mentioned are those who polled 10% or higher). Notably, nearly a quarter (24%) of those who say the environment is very important are currently undecided. Here, too, there are differences across age groups. Likely voters age 18 to 44 concerned about the environment name Warren (23%), Sanders (20%), and Harris (15%) as their top primary choices, while those age 45 and older name Harris (22%), Biden (16%), and Warren (15%).

When asked about the Green New Deal, a policy proposal in Congress that aims to address climate change and stimulate economic growth, three in four likely voters who are registered Democrats or are Democratic-leaning independents say that candidates’ positions on the proposal are important in determining their vote (35% very, 39% somewhat). Among those who say positions on the Green New Deal are very important, 20% name Harris and Warren, 14% name Sanders, and 10% name Biden as their preferred candidate. Again of note, 20% of voters who say this is very important are undecided. Likely voters age 18 to 44 interested in the Green New Deal support Warren (27%), Sanders (24%), and Harris (15%), while among those age 45 and older support is greatest for Harris (24%), Warren (16%), and Biden (15%).

These findings suggest that Californians will place high importance on environmental issues when making choices at the ballot in the coming year. With the next Democratic presidential debate and climate crisis town hall less than a month away, PPIC will be closely tracking the role of climate policies and other salient issues.

Video: Preview of the Statewide Election

Setting the stage for a year of crucial decisions, the December PPIC Statewide Survey took a first look at the 2018 governor’s race. Two Democrats—Gavin Newsom, the state’s lieutenant governor, and Antonio Villaraigosa, former mayor of Los Angeles—lead among likely voters. But the survey also underscored that it’s early in the campaign to replace retiring governor Jerry Brown. Among likely voters, a third are undecided and just a quarter are following news about the candidates fairly or very closely.

In the US Senate primary, incumbent Dianne Feinstein leads fellow Democrat Kevin de León, state senate president pro tempore, by a two-to-one margin in a matchup of the two candidates. A third of likely voters are undecided in this race, as well.

Dean Bonner, associate survey director at PPIC, presented the key findings at a Sacramento briefing last week. As he noted, the survey findings reflect a divided and unsettled electorate. Likely voters are split on what is more important in a candidate for statewide office: new ideas and a different approach (48%) or experience and a proven record (42%). Asked about how candidates for statewide office should interact with the federal government, half of likely voters (51%) prefer that candidates push back against the Trump administration and 41% prefer that candidates work with the administration.

Learn more
Read the PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Their Government
Learn more about the PPIC Statewide Survey

Commentary: Why We Expect Sanders Voters to Have Impact in November

This commentary was published in the Sacramento Bee on Sunday, July 3, 2016.

What’s next for Bernie Sanders supporters in the wake of a disappointing loss? They will find ballot initiatives – and one in particular – of great interest in California’s November election. For this reason, we expect to see the Sanders voters return to the polls and have a broad impact on election outcomes.

Read the full commentary on sacbee.com.

Worlds Apart: California’s Partisan Divide and the 2016 Election

With the June 7 primary behind us, it’s time to reflect on what we have learned about California’s likely voters as we look ahead to the November 8 election.

The December 2015 PPIC Statewide Survey reported a profound schism between Republicans who wanted “new ideas and a different approach” and Democrats who favored “experience and a proven track record” in a presidential candidate. Last Tuesday’s election provided more evidence of these attitudes. Donald Trump, a businessman with no political experience, won the Republican primary while Hillary Clinton, with a long record of public service, won the Democratic primary. It is now obvious that Californians’ candidate preferences are just one example of a deep partisan fissure that has emerged in the 2016 PPIC Statewide Surveys.

We found another example of this divide when we asked about the mood of the California electorate in 2016. Most Republican likely voters (78%) said the state is going in the wrong direction while most Democratic likely voters (67%) said it is going in the right direction in our May PPIC Statewide Survey. We found a similar divide in views about the direction of the US and about whether California and the US are headed into good economic times or bad ones next year.

The job approval ratings of elected officeholders also largely depend on one’s partisan stripes. President Obama has an 84% approval rating among Democratic likely voters and an 85% disapproval rating among Republican likely voters. This party split is also clear in the approval ratings of the US Supreme Court, California US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, Governor Jerry Brown, the California Legislature, and even local House members and state legislators. The only area of consensus is the overwhelming disapproval of the US Congress (84% Republican, 81% Democrat).

There are also large and consistent partisan divides over the role of government. The vast majority of Republicans—83%— want a smaller government with fewer services, while a strong majority—69%—of Democrats say they prefer a bigger government with more services.

Similar partisan differences are evident when Californians are asked about gun laws, government regulation, and economic inequality. While 64% of Republicans say the government goes too far regulating guns, 79% of Democrats say it does not do enough. A majority of Republicans—66%—say government regulation does more harm than good, while 76% of Democrats say government regulation is necessary to protect the public. And 68% of Republicans say the government should not be doing more to reduce the gap between the rich and poor, while 79% of Democrats say it should be.

Last but not least is the partisan gulf on immigration and race. There are also different perspectives on the proposal to build a wall along the entire Mexico border (60% Republicans favor; 87% Democrats oppose) and whether immigrants are a burden (66% Republicans) or a benefit (78% Democrats) to California. Most Republican likely voters (58%) say there is equal treatment in the criminal justice system while most Democratic likely voters (80%) say that blacks and minorities do not get equal treatment.

Looking ahead to the November ballot, there are starkly different views on extending a temporary income tax on the wealthy, with 68% of Republicans opposing the extension of this Proposition 30 tax and 80% of Democrats in favor of it. The results are similar when our survey asked about a state school bond (50% Republicans no, 82% Democrats yes) and marijuana legalization (56% Republicans oppose, 69% Democrats favor).

How will California’s partisan divide impact the November election? Democrats now have an 18-point edge over Republicans in voter registration (45% to 27%).The PPIC Statewide Surveys this year also indicate that independent voters are leaning in the same direction as Democratic voters in their presidential, US Senate, and ballot choices, and their overall outlook, approval ratings, and policy preferences. In this context, the May PPIC Statewide Survey found that the state’s likely voters favor the presidential candidate who stands for experience and a proven track record over the presidential candidate who stands for new ideas and a different approach. Still, Republicans overwhelmingly support their party’s standard bearer and appear to be aligned with his perspectives and policies.

California seems poised to maintain its blue status this fall. However, the geo-political segregation of the state —with Republican pockets of strength in California’s northern, inland, and rural regions—means that federal and state legislators will be elected to represent the views of voters who are worlds apart. Indeed, the political polarization and antipathy of this year’s election may result in a California Congressional delegation that will contribute to Washington gridlock and a California Legislature that will struggle to find common ground on solutions to the many challenges facing California’s future.

A Turnaround for Voter Turnout?

The recent primary offered signs of improvement for California’s abysmally low voter turnout. Recent elections have seen some of the worst turnout in the state’s history. The 2014 election cycle was particularly dismal, but 2012 also set a new low for a presidential primary election. Moreover, California has been lagging behind other states in both registration and turnout.

However, there has been a large surge in new registrants over the last few months, and the California Secretary of State currently estimates that almost 9 million Californians participated in the 2016 presidential primary election, compared to only 4.5 million in 2014 and 5.3 million in 2012.

If we look at the share of voting-eligible residents who have registered in time for each of the last 18 primary elections, California’s registration rate has always fallen within a fairly narrow band—from a low of 66% in 1988 to a high of 75% in 1996. In this context, the 2016 registration rate might be seen as a disappointment. Compared to the same point in the 2012 primary election cycle, the registration rate has remained largely unchanged, though it is still comparatively high when viewed in the context of the past several decades.

How can we square this result with the reported surge in new registrants? The registration rate typically drops some between elections as county registrars purge voters who have moved or died from the registration rolls, and relatively few new voters sign up to take their place. This decline was especially large between fall 2014 and the beginning of the primary season this year. Given that baseline, a flat registration rate is consistent with a surge of new registrants, and must be considered something of a success.

More to the point, these registrants turned out to vote at a higher rate than we have seen in any primary since 2008. The estimated 8.9 million ballots translates to a turnout rate of about 50% among registered voters. That sits comfortably in the broad average of California’s presidential primary turnout, and marks a considerable improvement over 2012.

In fact, California’s presidential primary turnout now shows no clear sign of decline since 1984; it may even be holding its own relative to other states. But midterm turnout is a different story. There is a much longer downward trend for such elections, both viewed on their own and relative to trends in other states.

On balance, there are signs of recovery from the low turnout levels of 2012 and 2014, despite concerns that California’s late presidential primary would discourage participation. Whether this improvement will be sustained into the fall—and whether things will turn around for midterm elections in 2018—of course remains to be seen.

Video: Californians Weigh in on Presidential Race

The strong partisan divisions prominent in the nation this election year are also evident in California, the latest PPIC Statewide Survey shows. As the primary nears, Democrats and Republicans are deeply divided in their views about the appropriate role and size of government. Dean Bonner, the PPIC survey’s associate director, presented these and other key survey findings in Sacramento last week.

Bonner noted that preferences among California’s likely voter in the upcoming presidential primary are similar to those seen in many states that have already voted. Among Democratic likely voters—including independents who say they will vote in the Democratic primary—48% support Hillary Clinton and 41% support Bernie Sanders. Most young voters support Sanders and most over age 45 support Clinton. Clinton leads among Latinos, women, and those who describe themselves as politically middle of the road, while Sanders leads among men and voters who describe themselves as very liberal.

Donald Trump leads the Republican field with 38%, followed by Ted Cruz with 27% and John Kasich with 14%. Bonner noted evidence in the survey of discontent with the status quo in the nation—signs that may have fueled the candidacies of “outsiders” in both major parties. A majority of likely voters—63%—say the nation is going in the wrong direction and 47% say the US will have bad times financially in the coming year. And Congress’ job performance gets a very low rating—across party lines. Notably, Republicans are more likely to approve of President Obama (20%) than they are to approve of the Republican-led Congress (11%).