2150 River Plaza Drive, Suite 150 Sacramento, CA tel: fax:

Transcription

1 Date: August 22, 2016 To: Interested Parties From: Val Smith, PhD, SmithJohnson Research Re: Proposition River Plaza Drive, Suite 150 Sacramento, CA tel: fax: MEMORANDUM SmithJohnson Research conducted a statewide survey of 500 California 2016 likely voters on August The live interviews were completed via landline and cell phones. The sampling error for this sample size is +/-4.4%. The survey included a question about the U.S. Senate race between Democrats Loretta Sanchez and Kamala Harris. The Attorney General leads the Congresswoman by a 26-point margin. Graph 1: U.S. Senate Track The survey of 500 likely voters in California measured the level of support for Proposition 64 using the following question: 1

2 Proposition 64, on the November 2016 California ballot, legalizes recreational marijuana for use by adults 21 years old and older. It places a sales tax of 15% on retail sales, in addition to taxes on cultivation. The state fiscal analysis predicts it could result in tens of millions of dollars in savings and increase tax revenue from hundreds of millions of dollars to over one billion annually. It gives local government the right to ban local sales, and establishes a state system of regulation and licensure. If the election was held today, would you definitely vote for Proposition 64, probably vote for Proposition 64, probably vote against Proposition 64, or definitely vote against Proposition 64? The survey found that 56% supported Proposition 64. Support broke down into 36% definitely voting for legalization of recreational marijuana and 20% probably voting for Proposition 64. In opposition, 28% are definitely voting no and 12 % are probably voting against the measure, for a total of 40% opposition. Five percent volunteered that they were completely undecided on the issue. The survey then asked a second ballot question after highlighting the issue of television ads promoting recreational marijuana, as provided for by the initiative. The second ballot asked: Proponents and opponents of Proposition 64 sued one another over ballot pamphlet arguments that claimed the initiative would, in effect, end a 45-year ban on smoking ads on television. After hearing arguments from both sides, the Sacramento Superior Court ruled as acceptable the following argument against Proposition 64 - quote These marijuana smoking ads can appear during the Olympics, on The Voice, The Big Bang Theory, and hundreds of other programs popular with children and teen viewers. These marijuana smoking ads could be allowed on all broadcast primetime shows, and approximately 95 percent of all broadcast television programming. Children could be exposed to ads promoting marijuana gummy candy and brownies-the same products blamed for a spike in emergency room visits in Colorado. Having heard this additional information, if the election was held today, would you definitely vote for Proposition 64, probably vote for Proposition 64, probably vote against Proposition 64, or definitely vote against Proposition 64? The change from the first ballot to the second was dramatic, shifting from a majority favoring Proposition 64 to a majority opposing the measure. The second ballot yielded 43% support compared to 52% opposition. 2

3 Graph 2: Comparison of 1 st and 2 nd Ballots By way of interpretation, two things seem clear. First, support for Proposition is very soft. A single opposition argument would not normally produce such a dramatic effect, and certainly not across every demographic variable. Opinions in favor of Proposition 64 are, therefore, not well anchored, and all of the movement from the first to second ballot was in the direction of opposition. Second, support for Proposition 64 is firm only among those under the age of 45. Graph #2 shows the age breakdown of Proposition 64 on the 1 st ballot. Note that opposition exceeds support only among those over the age of 75. Graph #3, however, shows the same age breakdown for the 2 nd ballot test. Here opponents exceed supporters by a wide margin in every age group above 44. Graph 3: 1 st Ballot by Age 3

4 Graph 4: 2 nd Ballot by Age Ideology was a strong driver of opinions on Prop 64. Conservatives were largely opposed and liberals were largely supportive of the measure. Prop 64 was leading among those who identified as middle-ofthe-road by greater than a 2-to-1 margin. After the second ballot, they were roughly split on the issue. Graph 5: 1 st Ballot by Ideology 4

5 Graph 6: 2 nd Ballot by Ideology White and Latino voters reversed their positions on Prop 64. On the first ballot 53% of Latinos and 57% of Whites were voting for the measure. After the second ballot support dropped to 41% and 43%, respectively, with majorities in both groups voting against the proposition. Graph 7: Ballot migration among Latinos 5

6 Graph 8: Ballot migration among Caucasians Initial support on Prop 64 also dropped for both male and female voters. The measure was particularly popular among men, with a 26-point margin in favor. After the second ballot support trailed opposition 47%-51%. Graph 9: 1 st Ballot by Sex Graph 10: 2 nd Ballot by Sex 6

7 Every income quintile in the sample went from, on net, support to opposition. Respondents in the two lowest income quintiles of the sample moved the most. The first quintile went from a 21-point margin in favor to a 14-point margin against Prop 64. Graph 11: Migration among 1 st Quintile Graph 12: Migration among 2 nd Quintile 7