Props 66, 68, 70, 71
One-third of Orange County's Likely Voters Favor Passage of Prop 64
"Limits On Private Enforcement of Unfair Business Competition Laws Measure"

(October 27, 2004)

Stem Cells

According to the latest survey conducted by the Cal State Fullerton Center for Public Policy and the Orange County Business Council, Orange County residents narrowly support, by about eight percent, Proposition 71, a measure that would authorize a $3 billion bond measure to fund research into embryonic stem cells. One-fifth of the respondents reported they did not know how they would vote on the measure.

Orange County residents closely parallel California as a whole on this measure (see Table 1 below).

Sixty-two percent of Orange County respondents said they had read or heard something about the measure. With the exception of the two gaming measures on the ballot, this represents the highest level of awareness among respondents that were surveyed on the ballot measures.

“The combination of the margin by which Prop. 71 leads, the high level of public awareness, and the advertising money behind it suggest that opponents face an uphill battle both in Orange County and the state as a whole,” according to Phil Gianos, professor of political science at CSUF and director of the Center for Public Policy. “This is especially true since Gov. Schwarzenegger now supports its passage, though that support came after much of the interviewing for our survey was completed.”

In the Orange County survey, Republicans were significantly more likely than Democrats to oppose Prop. 71.

The Orange County Business Council is on record in support of the initiative. “The Business Council’s endorsement for Prop. 71 is based upon its economic benefits to Orange County and the potential for long-term taxpayer savings with regard to health care expenditures,” said Stan Oftelie, president & CEO. “Prop. 71 would direct research dollars to UCI and other Orange County-based research facilities and has the potential to lead to life-saving cures for serious and disabling diseases that threaten our families’ quality of life.”

Cal State Fullerton does not take positions on ballot measures.

Question wording:

Have you seen, read or heard anything about Proposition 71, which would authorize bonds to fund stem cell research?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

Proposition 71 is called the “Stem Cell Research, Funding, Bonds” initiative. It establishes a bond measure to fund a “California Institute for Regenerative Medicine” that would regulate and fund stem cell research. It also establishes a constitutional right to conduct stem cell research, and establishes an oversight committee to govern the proposed institute. The proposition prohibits funding of human reproductive cloning research. The state legislative analyst’s office estimates a state cost of about 6 billion dollars over 30 years to pay off the bonds. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES, NO or DON’T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD VOTE on Proposition 71?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

“Three Strikes” Limitation

Proposition 66 would, if passed, place limits on the “three strikes” law approved by voters in 1994. In the survey of Orange County residents, the measure leads, though by a significantly slimmer margin than for the state as a whole (see Table 2). There are also more Orange County residents who report they don’t yet know how they might vote on the measure compared with the rest of California.

About half of Orange County respondents said they had heard or read something about the measure.

“If this measure leads, even in conservative Orange County, despite the opposition of a governor who is very popular and the opposition of the state attorney general, the likelihood of its passage is high,” according to Gianos. In the Orange County survey, Republicans were slightly more likely than Democrats to oppose Prop 66, though not to a statistically significantly extent.

Kevin Meehan, assistant professor of criminal justice at CSUF, said, “Although the proportions in favor of the initiative statewide are smaller than previous statewide surveys, they are certainly consistent. Moreover, now that the California Correctional Peace Officers Association (CCPOA) has apparently decided not to commit any further funds to fighting the initiative and the big guns like George Soros are providing financial support in favor of the measure, it seems even more likely to succeed.”

Question wording:

Have you seen, read or heard anything about Proposition 66, having to do with placing limits on the state’s Three Strikes criminal sentencing law?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

. Proposition 66 is called the “Limitations on Three Strikes Law; Sex Crimes, Punishment” initiative. It limits the “Three Strikes” law to violent and/or serious felonies. It also increases punishment for specified sex crimes against children. The state legislative analyst’s office estimates a net savings to the state increasing over time to several hundreds of millions of dollars, primarily in savings to the prison system. The legislative analyst also estimates increases of tens of millions of dollars in costs to counties for local jail and court costs. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES, NO or DON’T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD VOTE on Proposition 66?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

Gaming Measures

Two measures on the ballot—Propositions 68 and 70—deal with proposed changes in the state’s gaming policy. Both of these trail in Orange County and in the state, and the backers of Proposition 68 have decided to suspend their advertising campaign.

Both these measures are well known to the public: 85 percent of Orange County respondents reported they had read or heard something about the measures.

Table 3 presents the results from our Orange County survey and from a statewide sample.

“With only one measure—Prop 70—actively being contested, and with only about a quarter of respondents in Orange County and statewide supporting them, and with Gov. Schwarzenegger actively opposing them both, these measures will probably go down as expensive failures in what is shaping up to be a bad year for propositions in California,” noted Gianos. “If there is a silver lining in this for the proponents of Prop 70, it’s that there are still many people undecided statewide, especially in Orange County.”

In the Orange County survey (see Table 3), Republicans and Democrats did not differ significantly in their views on these measures.

The Orange County Business Council opposes both initiatives. “Propositions 68 and 70 are bad news for California’s infrastructure,” said Stan Oftelie. “They would negate existing compacts that help finance infrastructure projects in California. Prop. 68 in particular could expand gaming in the state without mitigating impacts to communities’ transportation system and water supplies. At a time when California faces serious infrastructure challenges, we need to be more thoughtful about the implications of gaming upon the state.”

Cal State Fullerton does not take positions on ballot measures.

Question wording:

Two initiatives on the November election ballot, Propositions 68 and 70, have to do with Indian gaming and gambling expansion. Have you seen, read or heard anything about these initiatives?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

Proposition 68 is called the “Non-Tribal Commercial Gambling Expansion, Tribal Gaming Compact Amendments” initiative. The proposition authorizes the governor to negotiate tribal compact amendments requiring that Indian tribes pay 25 percent of gaming revenues to a government fund. If the Indian tribes do not unanimously accept the amendments, the proposition authorizes casino gaming for sixteen non-tribal establishments, with a percentage of the gaming revenues to fund government services. The state legislative analyst says the fiscal impact would be increased gambling revenues, potentially over one billion dollars annually, primarily to local governments for specified services such as police, firefighting and child protective services. The state legislative analyst also says that there may be a potential loss of state revenue totaling hundreds of millions of dollars annually. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES, NO or DON’T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD VOTE on Proposition 68?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

Proposition 70 is called the “Tribal Gaming Compact, Exclusive Gaming Rights” initiative. Upon the request of federally recognized Indian tribes, the governor must execute a renewable 99-year compact. The tribes contribute a percentage of their net gaming income to state funds, in exchange for exclusive tribal casino gaming. Payments to the state would end if casino gaming by non-Indian casinos were permitted. The state legislative analyst’s office says the fiscal impact of this proposition is unknown. If the election were being held today, would you vote YES, NO or DON’T YOU KNOW HOW YOU WOULD VOTE on Proposition 70?

YES
NO
DON’T KNOW
REFUSED

###

The current survey was conducted for the CSUF Center for Public Policy/Orange County Business Council team by the Social Science Research Center at California State University, Fullerton (SSRC). The SSRC Director is Gregory Robinson.

Telephone interviews were conducted utilizing Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) equipment and software. The CATI system is an information gathering protocol that contributes to the accuracy of data and to preserving the random nature of the sample.

A draft survey instrument was provided by the Center for Public Policy and refined by the Social Science Research Center for comprehensiveness, flow, length and factors that influence respondent cooperation and interest. Sample design and technical assistance with data analysis was provided by the SSRC.

« back to Community