California

Reason-Rupe Poll: California Props 30 and 32 Too Close to Call, Prop 38 Trailing

|

The latest Reason-Rupe poll interviewed 696 Californians, including 508 likely voters, between October 11-15th and asked about several of California's ballot initiatives.

On November 6th Californians will vote on Proposition 30, which increases taxes on higher-income Californians and the sales tax in order to raise $6 billion in revenue to allocate to K-12 education and higher education. Reason-Rupe finds this ballot measure is too close to call with 50 percent of likely voters in favor and 46 percent against, with a 5.1 percent margin of error. Nevertheless, this data reveals the race is tightening: although those in favor have remained fairly constant, there are an increasing number of those opposed. For instance, in mid September the Field Poll found 36 percent opposed the measure; a month later opposition has risen ten points to 46 percent.

Source: Ballotpedia and Reason-Rupe California Poll

Proposition 32 prohibits unions, corporations, and government contractors from donating to political candidates and from deducting money from workers' paychecks to use for political purposes. This ballot measure is also too close to call with 48 percent of likely voters intending to vote no and 45 percent voting yes.

Some view Prop 32 as a method to significantly curb the power of public employee unions in the state. Despite divided support for this measure, Reason-Rupe finds a majority of California voters think public sector unions have too much power when negotiating their contracts, 67 percent think they get better retirement benefits than similarly employed private sector workers, and three quarters think taxpayers should vote on increases to public employees' pensions and benefits.

Source: Ballotpedia and Reason-Rupe California Poll

Proposition 38 would also raise taxes for education and other programs, but would raise taxes on most Californians, rather than only upper-income households. The proposition is currently trailing 42 to 52 percent, and opposition may be increasing. Rising opposition may in part be explained by the presence of a competing tax ballot measure, Proposition 30.

Source: Ballotpedia and Reason-Rupe California Poll

Reason-Rupe found that 29 percent of likely voters plan to vote yes on both Prop 30 and Prop 38 and 33 percent plan to vote no on both. Eighteen percent plan to vote yes on Prop 30 but no on 38, and 12 percent plan to vote yes on Prop 38 and no on Prop 30. In other words, 59 percent support some kind of tax increase on some group of Californians. 

California telephone poll conducted October 11th-15th on both landline and cell phones, 696 adults, margin of error +/- 3.8%. The sample also includes 508 likely voters, with a margin of error of +/- 5.1%. Columns may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Full methodology can be found here. Full poll results found here.

NEXT: AZ Senate Candidate Says Male Moderator Is "Prettier" Than Candy Crowley

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Could it be that the Golden State is realizing class warfare ain’t all it’s cracked up to be? Chasing high earners out of your tax base is one lesson France can teach us.

    I still think the “will someone please think of the children?” crowd will win the day and education in California will be saved with just a little more taxpayer dough.

    1. The only hope we fiscally sane residents of California have is that at some point, the tax on high earners becomes so onerous that the Lakers have difficulty attracting top free agents and voters demand change on that basis alone.

      1. The sad thing is you’re probably actually right. Then again, all the people in the Bay Area and the Valley (plus the 3 Clipper fans) would be even more likely to vote for tax increases

    2. 32 is polling to win. Anyone who believes the govt of california doesn’t have enough money in the budget to educate the kids is a useful idiot.

  2. …which increases taxes on higher-income Californians and the sales tax…

    I understand why they want to increase taxes on the monocle-wearing rich.

    But why increased taxes on the innocent sales tax? What has it done to deserve that kind of treatment?

    1. Yeah, if they’re pushing this as a “soak the rich” scheme, it doesn’t exactly make sense to throw the sales tax in there too – unless they’re counting on people failing to understand that that is a tax on everybody… nah, that couldn’t be.

      1. But that’s how they’re getting it through. They know there ain’t enough riches left in the state to pillage, so they increase the sales tax. They throw the EAT THE RICH portion in there simply as a means to shroud who the real victims of the tax are and to appeal to the great unwashed of the state that envy all vestiges of financial success.

    2. Because everyone here is a fucking idiot. The legislators knew damn well that the increase on the rich would be pinner relative to the money they needed. So they throw in 0.25% increase in the sales tax.

      When the idiots among us (read: 9 out of 10 Californians) go to the polls, they see the EAT THE RICH, 0.25% sales tax increase, and $6 billion/year, and they all think that the lion’s share comes from the EAT THE RICH portion. The truth is that the portion from the sales tax increase is likely going to be the lion’s share.

      1. Don’t you see how important throwing $6B at public schools is to the lives of even the poorest Californians?

        It is for the children!

  3. I’m more interested in the much more dangerous proposals in Michigan. Any news on how those are faring?

  4. I’ll be particpating in a student debate on Prop 30, the day after our school’s student body council is organizing a huge rally in support of Prop 30 and 32. No doubt the people on the no panel will be facing a hostile crowd.

    1. I seriously recommend looking into finding out how much of the projected increase in revenue is from the sales tax, and how much is from the upper income tax bracket increases. I looked for the info briefly for my points above, but was unable to locate it.

      I think if you could find that, you’d be able to really hammer that point home: this is not a narrow tax increase on the evil rich, it is broadly a tax on ordinary people, with a few class warfare gems thrown in to con the plebes.

      1. Easy. Take all sales tax revenues for the state, divide by 29*. that is approximately how much extra money they are proposing to take from mostly the poor and working class.

        * current rate is 7.25 , .25 is 1/29th of that.

        1. Ok I did it for you.

          2011 revenues were ~27B.

          So, the extra .25% of sales tax should bring in approximately .93 billion give or take depending an increase/decrease in consumer spending in 2013.

  5. Decisions you make on Nov 6 determine California’s course for years. We are kidding ourselves by believing that education funding shortfalls disappear with Prop 30, Prop 38.
    Prop 30, Prop 38 levy significant taxes on each one of us. The wounds that Prop 30, 38 are to heal have been self inflicted largely by our elected Sacramento politicians who simply do not say no to any influential interest group be they, University of California (29% increase in salaries last 6 years), public employees, business, teachers, or other unions or lobbyists.
    And now Prop 30, 38 are used by Sacramento politicians and lobbyists to blackmail us.

    1. education funding shortfalls

      There are no education funding shortfalls. Only budget gimmickry to make it look so.

      If we just cut a check to every child in the state equal to the average cost of private school in their area (which would STILL be way too much because the costs would plummet), we’d SAVE money.

  6. I read somewhere that prop 30 started to well in the polls after they changed the wording to remove references to tax increases.

    I doubt prop 32 will change much. Unions would have to get permission from their members, and they will get it because just like those stock voting forms, most people don’t vote so the default board recommendations is your vote, and the same would happen with unions.

    What we need to do is repeal SB400.

  7. Examples of how Prop 30, 38 educations funds will be spent. UC Berkeley Chancellor Birgeneau ($450,000), Provost Breslauer ($306,000) pick pockets of in-state students, their parents clean. Birgeneau’s, Provost’s tuition increases ranked public Cal. the # 1 most expensive (during the greatest recession of modern times) for in-state students. B B’s 14% annual tuition increases (2006 ? 20012) illustrates an out of touch, self-serving Cal. senior management.
    Robert J Birgeneau and Provost forget they are public servants, stewards of the public money, not overseers of their own fiefdom. Let’s review how they used tax funding:
    Pay ex-politician $300,000 for several lectures; Recruit affluent foreign affluent out of state students who displace qualified instate applicants; Spend millions (prominent East Coast university accomplishing same at 0 cost) for OE consultants to remove Chancellor, Provost created inefficiencies but prevent OE from examining Cal. senior management.
    Email opinion marsha.kelman@ucop.edu Calif. State Senators, Assembly Members (The author has 35 years’ management consulting, has taught at Cal. where he observed the culture ways of senior management yes was not fired)

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.