 |
|
|
|
March 29, 2007 5:15 AM
Much To Learn In New California Poll
Only 31%, notes PPIC director Mark Baldasarre in his statement, back the move to allow legislators to serve up 12 years, all of it in one house. (Currently they can serve 14 years, limited to six years in the Assembly and eight years in the Senate.) This stands in sharp contrast to a private poll by proponents of the term limits change, the results of which they gave to me a few weeks ago. In that poll, 59% favor the change, while only 33% oppose it. What accounts for the discrepancy? Well, putting aside the obvious fact that one poll could be right while the other could be wrong, term limits change proponents point out that their poll, by David Binder and Associates, gave respondents arguments for both sides of the proposition. The PPIC poll asks the question flat out: “Under current term limits, a legislator is allowed to serve six years in the state assembly and eight years in the state senate. Would you favor or oppose a change in term limits that would allow members to serve up to 12 years of total legislative service in either branch?” One advocate pointed out that there is not yet a ballot title or description from California Attorney General Jerry Brown’s office, arguing that that will provide a fairer test. Also in the interim was state Senate leader Don Perata’s widely publicized lockout from their taxpayer-funded offices of three Democratic senators for attending a Moderate Caucus dinner (believe it or not, one top Democrat told me as it was happening that I was “the only person who would pay any attention”) and Schwarzenegger’s slow recovery from his Christmas skiing mishap, which put a serious crimp in his activities. (He’s fine now and walking without support.) Another difference is that the state’s political leaders were much more highly rated in the poll presented by term limit change advocates. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger had a 68% job approval rating from California voters in that poll. In the PPIC poll, his approval has slipped from January, to a still high 56%. The Legislature had a 49% job approval rating as an institution in the private poll. PPIC has it at 39%, a full ten points lower. Still, that is the highest approval for the Legislature since October 2004, when Schwarzenegger’s first phase of bipartisanship was still in full swing before his ill-fated “Year of Reform.” First Lady Maria Shriver is also highly rated, as are new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, at 53% among likely voters, and Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, 59% and 53%, respectively. Yet another difference may be that the PPIC poll shows a darkening mood among California voters, perhaps reflective of their very dark view of the national scene. The halo effect of Schwarzenegger’s landslide re-election victory, in which he inundated the state with feel-good advertising and was constantly moving about talking about how well things were going in the Capitol, is wearing off. And seeping in are California voters’ dark views of the national and global scenes, as well as increasing fears about economic prospects. In January, 55% felt things were on the right track in California. Now only 45% feel that way. 51% now think that bad economic times are ahead, while only 39% felt that way in January. President George W. Bush reached a new low in the PPIC poll, with only 29% job approval among likely voters. It’s even lower among all California adults. Tracking almost exactly with Bush’s thoroughly dismal rating is California’s view of his Iraq policy. California voters like the impact of Bush’s new “surge” strategy in Iraq no better than they did the versions that preceded it. Two months after the surge was announced, 74% say they disapprove of Bush on Iraq. That includes 40% of Republicans. Strikingly, the water from the poisoned well of Iraq has spread to other potential military expeditions. 54% of likely voters say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran than it is to take a firm stand against Iranian actions, a posture backed by only 39%. There’s a sharp partisan divide there, with Democrats and independents strongly opposed — 60% plus — to any conflict with Iran. The PPIC poll is unalloyed good news for backers of redistricting reform, and mostly good news for Schwarzenegger and other advocates of a comprehensive health care package. 66% of likely voters favor an independent commission doing redistricting every 10 years rather than the Legislature; only 22% are in opposition. On health care, 65% of likely voters agree with Schwarzenegger that Californians should be required to have health coverage, with costs shared between employers, providers, and individuals. But breaking out different components of the approach yields a slightly different answer. 67% of likely voters back the employer mandate to provide health insurance or pay into a state fund. 69% would require individuals to have health coverage, with low-income people taken care of by public programs. But only 30% think doctors and hospitals should pay a fee to help cover the costs of health care. Another wrinkle emerges, once again, with attitudes toward illegal immigration, which 21% of voters, the highest of any issue area, regard as the state’s top issue. Illegal immigrant children would be covered in the Schwarzenegger plan. While most think that illegal immigrants should be able to apply for work permits, opposition to drivers licenses for illegal immigrants remains widespread and entrenched. 64% are still opposed. Most also oppose providing health care coverage for illegal immigrants. Now we get to the presidential primary. Tomorrow I will focus heavily on the California presidential primaries for both Republicans and Democrats. For now, here are the quick numbers in the first major California public poll in the new early presidential primary. On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani has a big lead, 33% to 19% over John McCain. Newt Gingrich (not a declared candidate) has 14% and the much ballyhooed Mitt Romney is at 7%. Fred Thompson, who may make a big stir in the race, was not included in the poll. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton enjoys a significant lead over Barack Obama, 35% to 24%. John Edwards is third with 14% and Bill Richardson continues his slow but steady advance from the land of the asterisks with 6%. As I said, much more about the presidentials in tomorrow’s column. Comments (56)Jonas Blane :Bill Bradley :The lead can change, especially if Thompson runs. Of course, if he runs, I don't think Gingrich will. More tomorrow. Ann :Too much information! I'm going to drink some coffee and read this again. kandaharkid :Where are numbers on Afghanistan? Bill Bradley :Afghanistan was not included in the poll. Wilbur :You mean they didn't poll on the credibility of the dead bimbo autopsy results? Don't they know that's the burning issue of the day? Bill Bradley :That is one of the seeming few areas left out of the PPIC poll. But you really shouldn't speak so ill of my late future former ex-wife ... Ann :I can't believe the media are still going on about Anna Nicole Smith. She was in Playboy 10 years ago, who cares now? Wilbur :Great news re: depth of support for redistricting reform. "Redistricting is the one reform proposal that Californians are rallying around. A full two-thirds (66%) of likely voters think the current redistricting process needs at least minor changes. Nearly four in 10 (39%) believe it needs major changes. And 66 percent say they would favor the reform that gives an Opposition was shown at a mere 22%. Bill Bradley :With a strong campaign, that should win. Juan Cortina :My favorite bell weather indicator is not one of these polls. I like going to the CA Dem Convention (nest month) to see which front-runner gets the biggest most enthusiastic response... that's the candidate that's going to lose... big time. Wilbur :The scenario I fear is a fake "Lite" version from the Legislature competing with the real version from Common Cause/LWV et al to split the vote, w/ the status quo vested interests throwing ad money behind the decoy. We've seen that gag before... Bill Bradley :Wilbur, I doubt that would be signed. Bill Bradley :Yes, "Dean for America," unveiled at 2003 convention. Ripped off from The West Wing's "Bartlett for America" as I pointed out in an American Prospect feature at the time! >Juan Cortina : Kandy Kid :A legislative redistricting measure would be a constitutional amendment that does not require the Governor's signature. Clearly Republicans would not provide the votes for such a “Lite” constitutional amendment. The PPIC poll shows that absent a significant, bipartisan reform package, a term limits extension initiative is dead. Fabian should resign himself to finding a better paying job and the campaign to replace him can now ramp up its volume. Of course Gail Kaufman will still collect her consulting fees for the initiative campaign. Ann :I don't buy that poll from Kaufman and company. Wilbur :I was under the impression that Reep legislators were equally enamored of their own "safe" districts and, mindful of broad public support for reform, would thus be motivated to grandstand for a "make-believe" reform not actually threatening their own security. Do I have that wrong? Capitol Boy :Redistricting up, term limits down, health care maybe. Any surprises? Bill Bradley :Wilbur, Republicans probably can't actually control what a redistricting commission comes up with. I have a pretty good idea what a commission will come up with, and I think Schwarzenegger does, too. Wilbur :BB: Republicans probably can't actually control what a redistricting commission comes up with. But they CAN conspire with Dems to draft an alternative empowering pols of both parties to equally divide, in the name of "fairness," the power to appoint obedient flaks to said commission. And then let nature take its course. Brasky :The term limits initiative is an anvil -- it will drag down any reform that it's paired with. Bill Bradley :Arnold is the pivot. Nothing happens without him. Odd as that idea may have seemed a few years ago. >Wilbur : Ann :Term limits are stupid, though. Brasky :"Term limits are stupid, though." Agreed, but lots of stupid things are popular. Just look at George W. Bush's post-9-11 polling numbers for example. Hap Hazard :I think that republicans, despite having conspired with democrats in 2000 to jury rig the reapportionment to ensure smooth running for themselves this decade, understand and believe that a truly independent commission drawing district lines could not hurt their prospects for improving the numbers of republicans in Congress and the Legislature. At worst, it would be a continuation of the status quo, but with perhaps fewer partisan ideologues entering the ranks. Kandy Kid :Many delusional Republicans believe it is the Democrats’ crafty line drawing that has kept them out of legislative power for all but one of nearly 40 years. Their “proof” is the 1994 election conducted under lines drawn by a non-partisan judicial master -- where the national wave that produced the Republican Congress gave the GOP a brief Assembly majority, one they squandered with bad politics and bad policy (the school spanking bill is the most notable example). Instead of looking internally and developing policies and messages that resonate with voters, Republicans blame redistricting for their permanent minority status. It is very unlikely they will support a weak redistricting measure that preserves Democratic party control of the process. The Sellout of 2000 came at insistence of the White House and then-GOP led Congress. Brasky :I just finished Capitol Weekly's piece on early primaries and absentee voting. As I read it, it sounds that if Florida moves to a January primary, Floridians could actually start casting absentee ballots in December of this year?! This is getting out of hand. Barbara :NWN:Another wrinkle emerges, once again, with attitudes toward illegal immigration, which 21% of voters, the highest of any issue area, regard as the state’s top issue.
Brasky :Babs -- you are spot-on. Bill Bradley :Big if, many reasons why that is hypothetical. You'll find that the folks who cast doubt on the early California primary have no connection with presidential politics. They feel left out, as a rule. >Brasky : Ann :No state is bigger than California. larry :Maybe we could have the 2012 primary combined with the February 2008 primary, get it out of the way really early. RM 'Auros' Harman :"most think that illegal immigrants should be able to apply for work permits, opposition to drivers licenses for illegal immigrants remains widespread" This seems sort of bizarre. Shouldn't you just be on one side of that, or the other? I can understand being divided on healthcare, esp for children (I myself would favor including children in any healthcare plan), but what exactly are illegal immigrants supposed to be driving TO, if they're not supposed to be working here (which undercuts labor standards and wages for legal immigrants and citizens)? Given that attitudes of the "comprehensive" reformers on the GOP side are openly seeking to create an underclass, not a goal Dems agree with, I don't see how we can get acceptable reform at this time. I'd rather just give the anti-illegal crowd their fence (let's find out whether the enforcement-first approach works!), and then once we have a Dem president we can work on untangling how to normalize the people already here (whom there is no practical way to deport en masse) while making legal immigration more attractive than illegal immigration, for the future. Re: redistricting, I still say the whole thing is a joke, if it doesn't actually create measurable, mathematical criteria. As long as people have a completely free hand to draw the lines, gerrymandering will inevitably creep back in. Once we define the criteria, we can just let anybody that wants to submit a plan, evaluate them against the criteria (including any Voting Rights Act type criteria!), and let the human beings select among the top-rated 5-10 maps. Bill Bradley :RM, I think the truth is that most California voters remain anti-illegal immigrant. Simple as that. Jonas Blane :Illegal immigrants are not very popular anywhere. If they aren;t popular in California ... Wilbur :Auros: Re: redistricting, I still say the whole thing is a joke, if it doesn't actually create measurable, mathematical criteria. I wish somebody could come up with a math algorithm that would make it almost random yet compliant with federal law, but that doesn't seem to be feasible or somebody would have thrown it on the table by now. The Common Cause et al proposal is now pending review in the AG's office. It can be read at [ag.ca.gov/cms_pdfs/initiatives/2...] It tries to tie the commission's hands from overcreativity by saying census blocks (have those been gerrymandered?) cannot be fragmented unless necessary to comply with the Voting Rights Act and equal-population requirements, restrictions on how you bust up counties and cities, no little peninsulas to wrap around an incumbent's home, etc. And on the appointment side, an elaborate randomized drawing of commissioners from a large candidate pool, rather than direct hand-picking by honchos. Pols still get to pick, but the pool they pick from is randomized beyond their direct control; they can't designate their own "best boys" into the pool. Not perfect, but much better. I hear what you're saying, though: it simply can't be made airtight, and there's nothing on this earthly plane that can't be fudged. richard locicero :On the political front I saw something today over at MYDD that really deserves mention. Obama's website is not just listing the amount of money but also the numbers of people contributing. Their latest figure is over 70,000 individual contributors! To put this in perspective, at the end of 2003 the politcal world was agog that Howard Dean had amased a contributor base of 12,000! Obama's numbers are truly breathtaking. I know that Hillary gets good numbers but something is happening out there with Barack that I do not recall seeing in presidential politics and I've been following the races closely since my high school days and JFK. You ever see anything like this? And anyone know how last night's meet-ups for Edwards went? richard locicero :I think the Dems are foolish to not want an impartial redistricting in 2011 but everyone fears that somehow, someone would put their thumb on the scale. Better the devil you know and all that and I suspect that they smell an Austrian rat in Arnold's being for it. Same as the GOP would if, say a Governor Angelides had proposed it. Alas, I see this going nowhere. Like campaign finance reform its a MEGO issue and easily campaigned against. And in this state the default position on any initiative you're unsure of is "NO" and that is what will happen again here. CADTS :I will not comment on the poll...I will not comment on the poll...I will not comment on the poll... As I sit in sunny LA today, I compelled to write this as I promised not to comment on any polls. So Brasky, you appear to be correct, term limits is deader than Slobodan Milosevic (Dana, he is ACTUALLY dead right?) Barbara :Mr. Bradley:RM, I think the truth is that most California voters remain anti-illegal immigrant. Simple as that.
"Some key points: One of every 15 California residents is an illegal immigrant.
Wilbur :Legislature will either put out a worthless puff piece "reform" or find some excuse to chicken out again as they did last year. I see no point in waiting for them to deliver us from themselves. The one from the roots is the Obi Wan. When the Legislature fails again to produce anything meaningful, GAS will have to get behind the petition-based initiative, if he means what he says, because the Empire will throw big money against it to sustain their profitable status quo. Doug Willis :It is hard to put any faith in polling numbers on a redistricting measure when we don't know what it says or who supports or opposes it. The polling will mean something if and when a specific plan has qualified for the ballot and when we see whose name, other than Schwarzenegger's,appears under the support arguments, and which names appear under under the opposition arguments. If Schwarzenegger's name is paired with a Democratic heavyweight -- ideally Feinstein, but even Jerry Brown could do it -- then it will have a real chance of enacting a meaningful redistricting reform. Wilbur :The Arnold and Jerry Show could be a very dynamic duo indeed... Brasky :"Maybe we could have the 2012 primary combined with the February 2008 primary, get it out of the way really early. " Kind of my thoughts Larry. Don't think that the Florida thing will have much impact on the race -- I just think it's crazy that some folks will be voting for primary candidates 11 months before the general election. A lot of early Florida voters are going to want "do over’s," because they'll have so long to change their mind between ballot cast and outcome. But then again, Florida voters already have a history of butterfly-ballot-based-buyers-remorse. You know you guys in Palm Beach really have a thing for Pat Buchanan – just come to grips with it! Dana :CADTS says: term limits is deader than Slobodan Milosevic (Dana, he is ACTUALLY dead right?) Oh, yes indeed. Enjoying Mai Tais with Francisco Franco in whatever ring of hell is reserved for despots. All you have to do is read that wonderful biography of Phil Burton to realize how much one can get away with monkeying around with redistricting. I question how possible "impartial redistricting" is. Dana :Good lord! just read on John Myers' Capital Notes (the only other blog on state politics I bother with) that Governor Schwarzenegger turned up yesterday at the legislative conference of the California Professional Firefighters, put on an apron, and scooped up scrambled eggs to help serve breakfast to attendees. Talk about Kumbaya! I guess firefighters can read poll numbers and realize the value of shifting alliances. Bill Bradley :Oh, I think he just like to cook eggs ... Ann :What did Schwarzeneger put in those eggs? Capitol Boy :I heard some kids passed out at Cesar Chavez High today in Delano when Schwarzenegger was there. What's up with that? Barbara :Horrendous terrible violent day in Iraq! and to add to that the Iraqi government came clean and contends that it's own police took part in a " massacre of some 70 Sunnis in the northern Iraqi town of Tall Afar" yesterday 3/28 ...the report I just saw claims that this will provide Muqtada al-Sadr's forces, i.e. his Mehdri Army, to argue that they can protect Shi'ites better than the government from the retaliation that is sure to come....this is bad news for US forces as al-Sadrites lying low which is what they have been doing ....is the key to the success of the US Baghdad Security Plan..The President's surge policy is most likely going to be highly tested as this report predicts an UPSUGE in sectarian violence for US troops to deal with... Bill Bradley :Hot weather in the southern San Joaquin Valley. Plus the kids were excited about Schwarzenegger presenting a portrait of Cesar Chavez. > Capitol Boy : Ann :Schwarzeneger and Cesar Chavez, what is Republicanism coming to? lol Jonas Blane :Schwarzenegger is no Republican. Bill Bradley :Post-partisan, baby, post-partisan. Jonas Blane :Schwarzenegger has a post-partisan baby? Where? Ann :Giuliani in fat girl drag, I love it! Comments have been archived for this page. |
Pajamas MediaSocialized Medicine Looks Inevitable Former CIA Agent in Iran Comes In from the Heat Pinning Down Obama on Iraq Beheading Hitler Richardson and Romney Lead PJM Veepstakes Next Clash of Titans: Microsoft vs. Adobe Abortion Is a No-Win Issue for Obama The Sky Is Falling — and Warming! Everybody Panic!
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
RSS FeedsADVERTISEMENT
|
digg this
del.icio.us
That is a big lead for Giuliani.
Mar 29, 2007 05:47 AM