Advertise Here

Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.

Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.

Learn more about ads.

About Us

David Greenwald, Editor. (Contact David.)
CFC Education Foundation, Publisher. (Contact us.)

Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column?
Contact David here.

About California Progress Report.

Founded by Frank D. Russo (Publisher and Editor, 2006-08).

Sponsors

Books

Schwarzenegger and Legislature Rated Low By California Voters: State Seriously Off on Wrong Track Amidst Serious Budget Problems and Declining Confidence They Will Do What is Right to Resolve It

frankrusso-small.jpg By Frank D. Russo

The California Field Poll has just released numbers from its latest survey and California voters are not painting a flattering picture of either the Governor, or as an institution, the Legislature. Record poll levels have not been approached, even in the legislature’s 27% approval rating to 57% disapproval ratings, nor in Governor Schwarzenegger’s 40% approval to 46% disapproval appraisal, nor with the level of those who say the state is seriously off on the wrong track (78%) to those 21% who say we are on the right track, but some more weeks or months of budget gridlock could take care of that.

Mark DiCamillo, Director of the Field Poll, has stated the obvious—that a declining economy and budget deficit with no land in sight of passage of a state budget are among the causes of the low ratings of electeds and the dour mood on the direction of the state. He has noted that Governor Schwarzenegger’s travels around the state where he has been seen with firefighters and other officials have not buoyed his ratings. And he has noted that “For the past twenty-five years the opinions that voters have had of the job performance of the state legislature as a whole has rarely been more positive than negative.”

But let’s take a good look at the numbers before asking the question of “why” the voters feel as they do. And first, a caveat. On the direction of the state and approval of the Governor’s job performance, the poll has a margin of error of 3.9% based on the 809 registered voters interviewed. On the other questions that Field asked, voters were divided into two roughly equal subsamples and the margin of error is 5%.

On the overall job performance of Governor Schwarzenegger, his approval by 40% and disapproval by 46% is statistically the same as his prior 41% approval and 48% disapproval in May. It is, however, substantially lower than the 60% approval he received last December with 31% disapproval and the levels of approval he held throughout 2007 that are in that ballpark. This represents a swing in the last 8 months from a net plus 29 point rating to a net negative 6% level. He’s been up and down in the past—and received his lowest ratings in 2005 in the 36% and 37% levels with 52% to 56% disapproval when he called a special election and his propositions were rejected by the voters. He has had his highest ratings in his first year in office in 2004 when three successive polls by Field showed him to be at a 65% approval level.

His current poll numbers are the result of low marks by Democrats (34% approval to 47% disapproval) and to a lesser degree by non-partisan/others (42% to 45%) and even the state’s Republicans give him a middling 48% to 46% approval.

As to the legislature’s performance as a whole, more than twice as many voters --57%--are disapproving and approval is down to 27% from last May’s 30%. The legislature has received lower ratings—a nadir of 19% approval and 67% disapproval in July of 2003—and other ratings that are lower or in this same statistical range. But this is one of its lowest ratings and lower than it has been in the last two years. The last time the legislature had a positive rating was the relatively balmy 42% approval and 40% disapproval rating of March of 2007 (when Governor Schwarzenegger was also at a 60% approval rating.

Democrats in this latest set of numbers give the legislature its “best” marks, with 35% approval and 47% disapproval. Republicans give it the worst rating at 17% approval and 72% disapproval. And non-partisan/others are in the middle at 24% approval and 57% disapproval.

There is a definite uptick in voters perceiving the state’s budget deficit as being serious. The numbers on this were so sky high when last polled in December where 90% saw this as serious, with only 5% saying it was not serious, that there is little for this number to go up—but it did within the margin of error to 92% saying it was serious. The shift here is that now 68% of voters say the budget deficit is “very serious,” up from 58% who said so in December when this question was last posed largely coming from those who said it was only “somewhat serious.” And the partisan divide on this one is not that great with 71% of Democrats saying it is very serious compared to 66% of Republicans and 65% of non-partisan/others. All of partisan groupings are in the range of 91% to 93% in agreeing that it is serious, to one degree or another.

Confidence in our state government “doing what is right to resolve the state’s budget deficit” is not as high as it was in December and one can read these numbers in different ways beyond that.

Once can say that only 14% express a “great deal” of confidence in the Governor doing the right thing (down from 23% in December) and only an even smaller 4% (down from 7%)--about the lowest number one can get in a poll—say this about the legislature. Or one can combine these numbers with the 44% who say they have “some” confidence in the Governor on this combining to a 58% level of confidence to 41% who say they have “not much” confidence. And one can combine the 42% who say they have “some” confidence in the legislature to say that there is a 46% level of confidence to 52% who say they have “not much” confidence. Last December by a margin of 69% to 29% voters had at least some confidence in Governor Schwarzenegger doing the right thing on the deficit and also had a 55% level of at least some confidence in the legislature in this regard to a 40% level of not much. Clearly, both have dropped by about 10 points in this overall level.

Voters have the most negative view about the state of California’s direction than they have had since 2003, an in this regard, this is shared by all partisan groupings. 68% say we are “seriously” off track in our direction and 21% say we are heading in the right direction. This is down perhaps a tick from the prior 68% wrong track and 23% right track, but well within the margin of error.

The record here is 7% who thought we were on the right track in 1992 with 90% responding with the wrong track answer in 1992. In August of 2003, it was lower at 16% right track and 76% wrong track. The last time Californians thought we were on the right track was in March of 2007 when it was 52% to 38% on the good side of the tracks.

There may be a slight difference with the state’s Republicans and non-partisan/others weighing in at 71% each and Democrats only responding at 64% that we are on the wrong track. But the right track numbers are within the margin of error, hovering between 20% and 23%.

Why?

These are the numbers from Field, a well respected and longstanding non-partisan and non-profit polling organization that is an accurate snapshot of California voters in a scientific survey.

As for analysis of what this means, why the voters respond as they do, these numbers by themselves are a bit like a Rorschach inkblot test. inkblot-test.gif At the right do you see two birds fighting with each other with a dove at the top between them?

I have pointed out in many different poll analyses that legislatures—deliberative bodies—generally do nor rate well with the voting public. But voters have a much higher favorable opinion of their own representatives. Executives, such as the Governor, State Attorney General, or a President, can rise to higher heights, and sometimes lows as low as legislatures generic ratings.

Legislatures are almost always by their nature and composition messy institutions. There is the give and take of accounting for different points of view. There is a byzantine process through which legislation must wend its way—committee hearings, floor votes, and often the need to reconcile differences between two different houses. Even where a majority of legislators support a bill, it may be derailed in a committee dominated by a membership that represents interests focused on that policy area. And in California, we have a supermajority—two-thirds—that is required to pass a state budget and much of what can be done—especially if it involves an appropriation of money, the need for immediate effect of a law, or taxes.

Voters respond to strong executives who can take bold action. Legislatures are often a mush.

And I dare say, the numbers on questions on Congress and the California State Legislature are a muddle as well. Many who hold the political views and opinions on public policy that I believe in are unhappy with the legislature’s inability to solve problems, such as the subprime mortgage mess and the failure to pass laws in this area that may not meet the lending industry’s approval. Or the failure to pass sentencing reform and deal with our overcrowded prisons. Although I approve of some actions taken by the legislature and understand the need for compromise, on any given day I could respond to a poll with either an answer that I approve or disapprove of the California legislature—which I follow in great detail. Others, of a different political set of beliefs are unhappy that the legislature has not passed legislation that I disagree with. The same goes for Congress whether it is “controlled” by Democrats or Republicans—and where there is a 60 vote margin in the Senate required to take action.

One needs to read these polls carefully and in their entirety and to place them in the context of other polls and what is known about voters and their opinions. For instance, answers to questions about who California voters trust on making the tough decisions on the budget—where legislative Democrats and the Governor were preferred over legislative Republicans.

One can go on about these other polls—and perhaps we will in future articles. I’ve asked pollsters if the same people who gave Congress low marks when it was controlled by Republicans are the same folks who give the state legislature low marks when it is controlled by Democrats. They were not able to feather that out from the poll results. My suspicion is that there are a number of those who are critical coming from different points of view—and some that are unhappy for entirely different reasons when it comes to institutions. I’d love to see the results of focus groups or other polls that can help explain this.

If we had a legislature that could take action by majority vote on the budget and other matters, there would be more accountability and one could understand voters’ polling responses better, as we can when it comes to individual members of the legislature or other officeholders. That is, to the extent that the voters being surveyed are following what is going on in Sacramento in any detail.

If readers are aware of any studies of why voters are unhappy with institutions, I would welcome comments and articles to elucidate on this. I am sure I will get many different answers.

Posted on July 23, 2008

Comments

Mr. Russo,

My feelings about how polls are biased by those who take them and/or interpret them are already out there as you know.

But this poll, upon looking at it, may have a good reflection on where the public sits...

However, and point it out please if it does, it says it had 809 folks polled but DID NOT mention how many in that number were of which party or not affiliated with any party.

Theoretically 700-800 of the persons polled were democrats OR republicans. Sure there were relative party percentages placed here, but I didn't see a breakdown of how many polled were from what party.

That would have been another illuminator...

In addition, you say:

"One needs to read these polls carefully and in their entirety and to place them in the context of other polls and what is known about voters and their opinions. For instance, answers to questions about who California voters trust on making the tough decisions on the budget—where legislative Democrats and the Governor were preferred over legislative Republicans."

Are you placing a point subliminally into the readers mind? I don't see any other polls referenced here but this paragraph in the context with those immediately after it does plant the seed that a majority party control (55% can do whatever they want) is what YOU want to see happen, especially as your party is the defacto majority in this state...

You also said: "I’ve asked pollsters if the same people who gave Congress low marks when it was controlled by Republicans are the same folks who give the state legislature low marks when it is controlled by Democrats".

Couldn't that also be asked as those giving Congress low marks when controlled by Democrats (as it is today) are the same folks who gave the state low marks (if true?) when it was controlled by Republicans (so long ago and very breifly).

Recall the California Legislature has in the main been "controlled" by Democrats/Democrat majority for most of its past few decades

Yes, I am questioning the "how" a poll is conducted and the "if" it is biased in it's presentation/discussion to make a politically biased point. I think that benefits everyone when making up their own minds, an issue discussed in detail and viewed from all sides/angles.

.

Posted by: Jay Gould at July 23, 2008 11:30 AM

Jay: I don't know what more to say about the Field Poll other than its reputation, developed over many years. This is truly a non-partisan poll, not paid for by any campaign. You can leave the innuendo hanging out there, but I believe it is unfounded as to Field.

The sample they take, as in all other polls, is weighted to reflect political party registrations and to be representative of all registered voters. In some polls, where indicated it is of likely voters, there is a screen for who is likely to vote based on past history or what the voter says. This is not a sample skewed away from registration--and it is a continuation of other results they have recently released where there are 43% Democrats, 34% Republicans, and 23% other.

And my comments you referenced were not meant to plant any subliminal thoughts--but are questions I have about the "why" behind the reported ratings of legislative bodies. It is true, and I've been open about this, that I think we should have legislation passed by a majority vote--and feel this would result in greater accountability--instead of the current situation.

Posted by: Frank D. Russo at July 23, 2008 01:23 PM

Frank,

Appreciate your reply and it's contents.

I also understand why one party or the other would like a majority in any house of government.

But I don't grasp the part of "greater accountability". This is the theme you and others here have been drumming into your readership. (Of course, California is more likely a democratic majority. What would the democrats in Oklahoma, Alabama, Texas, etc. think about that?)

I thought that all elected officials were already accountable enough...but in California things don't mean what they once did I guess.

I recall "checks & balances" being a theme in our form of government: Why is it that BOTH DEMS and REPS in CA are once again LATE with a budget? BOTH are responsible are they not?

But there is propaganda: This website about a week or so ago posted an article by two Democratic reps from the Legislature. The title alluded to their own "cuts" propsed in the budget...but supplied NO CUTS, NO CUT EXAMPLES in the article. Why? Are they no cuts in their version? Then why did they say there were? Just who are they fooling and is it on purpose or are they stupid?

Politics overrides common sense and doing your job description which here includes a budget on schedule.

If the majority dems put forth some reasonable cuts, my guess is it would place the reps in a place to put forth some reasonable tax increases. But this basic negotiating technique seems to be lost on this crowd. Note: The Dem majority DOES IMPLY LEADERSHIP right now does it not? Committee chairs, Speaker of the Assembly, Senate Pro Tem, etc.

Our state will still play the stupid game of politics, propaganda, and bond issues and "fees" to muddle through another year of fooling ourselves...

Posted by: Jay Gould at July 24, 2008 10:35 AM

THE people of CALIFORNIA that keep our roads and our public safe.ARNOLD wants to cut there pay to 6.55 an hour and undermine and break the willpower of people that want to do a good job for this state.BUT yet as a state employee if i was to want to go to the doctor it would take about 2 weeks to get an appointment.BUT yet an inmate in the state of california once he fills out a medical form has to be seen in 24 hours. what is wrong with this picture?YOU want to save real big money with just 1 item alone.SHUT off all electricity to INMATES in the state of CALIFORNIA from 10pm-to- 6am MONDAY - SUNDAY .WHAT a concept.WHO DO YOU THINK KEEPS ARNOLD SAFE? QUESTION: WOULD YOU TAKE A BULLET FOR ARNOLD FOR $6.55 AN HOUR ??????????????

Posted by: KATHLEEN BRAY at July 29, 2008 05:32 PM

Sorry, comments are temporarily disabled. We're doing a bit of server maintenance on the commenting area. We'll be back up and running shortly. Thank you for your patience.

Get email updates!

Get Email Updates

Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.



© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.

RSS

Stat tracker