Elway Poll Transportation 010814

8/10/2019 Elway Poll Transportation 010814

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/elway-poll-transportation-010814 1/3

©THE ELWAY POLL 8 JAN 15

8 JANUARY 2015

© THE ELWAY POLL 2014. Excerpts may be quoted with attribution.

Providing what constutes a glimmer of hope to advocates of a legislave transportaon package, Washing-

ton voters interviewed for The Elway Poll last week were evenly split over whether we could aff ord to raise

taxes for state transportaon improvements.

45% said “we cannot aff ord to raise taxes for transportaon improvements at this me,” while

47% said “we cannot aff ord not to improve the transportaon system, so taxes will have to be raised.”

That is a 16-point net swing since 2013, when 54% said we could not aff ord the taxes needed for trans-

portaon improvements and 40% said we had to raise taxes to improve the system.

Whether the glimmer of hope is a mirage depends in part on support for actual taxes required to fund a

transportaon package. As usual, here is where the glimmer starts to fade.

Four potenal taxes were tested in this survey: two new ones and two familiar ones. For each, respond-

ents were asked whether they 1) favored that tax, 2) thought it could be an acceptable part of a solu

on, 3)were inclined to oppose it or 4) found it unacceptable.

Only two of the four—one new and one familiar—were deemed even potenally acceptable as part of a

soluon to most respondents:

70% said a carbon tax was acceptable, including 45% who favored that tax (more on the carbon below);

53% said it could be acceptable to let counes raise car tabs for local road improvements. Only 25% favored

that approach outright, however, while 44% opposed it.

Of the other two taxes:

62% opposed an increase in the gas tax, the tradional source of transportaon funds; and

55% opposed a tax on miles travelled, a new concept gaining some aenon in Olympia.

There was some thought that lower gas prices might ease opposion to a gas tax hike. Opposion may

have eased , but it has not diminished. Overall opposion was virtually idencal to results in 2013 when 63%

were opposed. The proporon who found it “unacceptable” did go down, however, from 44% to 37%.

FUNDING RELATED TO PERCEPTIONS OF DOT

Opinions about transportaon funding were related to

opinions about the transportaon system and, especially

about the Department of Transportaon.

Respondents were asked to grade the state transportaon

system. It received a solid “C” average, essenally unchanged

since 2013. Only 4% gave the system and “A” grade. Every-

one else was asked what prevented them from giving the

system a higher grade. Equivalent proporons chose 3 of the

4 reasons off ered:Waste and mismanagement by the Department of Transpor-

taon (28%);

The populaon is growing faster than the transportaon

system can keep up (27%);

Too much transportaon money is spent on the wrong pro-

jects (26%).

The reason least likely to be chosen is the one most cited by

transportaon experts: “Gas taxes no longer generate

enough money to pay for transportaon needs” (14%).

Glimmer of Hope for a Transportation Package

19

16

25

45

37

33

25

18

Gas Tax

MilesTravelled

County Car Tabs

Carbon Tax

FAVOR ACCEPT OPPOSE UNACCEPTABLE

37

41

53

70 28

44

55

62

5 4

4 5

4 0

4 7

2013

2015

Can't afford taxes

Can't afford NOT to improve transportation

TAXES INCREASE FOR TRANSPORTATION ?

TAXES FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS




2

Taken together, 54% of respondent blamed factors internal to the DOT (waste and mismanagement

plus wrong priories), while 41% cited the external factors of populaon growth and diminishing revenue.

Voters who cited internal management issues were far less open to new transportaon taxes than were

those who cited external factors for their grade of the system. Management crics were

Nearly twice as likely to find a gas tax increase unacceptable (48% vs.25%);

Twice as likely to find a car tab increase unacceptable (32% vs. 16%); and

Significantly more likely to oppose a “miles travelled” tax (63% vs. 50%).A majority of those who faulted DOT management were favorably inclined toward a carbon tax on pol-

luon industries (61%), but less so than those who cited external reasons for the system’s grade (83%).

There was a strong parsan nge to these findings, which will make agreeing on any of them difficult in

legislature where the two houses are controlled by opposing pares:

55% of Democrats said a gas tax increase was at least acceptable; 80% of Republicans were opposed;

63% of Democrats could accept an increase in car tabs; 64% of Republicans were opposed;

62% of Democrats favored outright a carbon tax on industry (another 25% found it acceptable); 57% of

Republicans were opposed.

50% could accept a miles-travelled tax; 72% of Republicans were opposed, including 47% who called it

unacceptable.

WHAT ABOUT THIS CARBON TAX

The governor’s proposed carbon tax was included twice

in this survey: once as part of the governor’s budget pro-

posal (discussed in 1/6/14 report); the second me as a trans-

portaon funding source. Both mes the tax was one of a

list of proposed taxes. The overall results were similar both

mes: 7 in 10 responded favorably.

The carbon tax was described much as press reports

described it in summaries of the Governor’s budget:

Instute a new carbon tax on industries that release the

most pollutants into the air. 51% favored; 20% said it was

acceptable; 10% opposed; 18% said unacceptable.

Instute that new carbon tax we talked about earlier,

on industries that release pollutants into the air. 45% fa-

vored; 25% acceptable; 10% opposed; 18% unacceptable.

Obviously, this is a general descripon of a complex pro-

posal. But given that this is likely the first me most of

these voters had heard of it, and given that this is a com-

mon descripon in the media, it represents a fair assess-

ment of inial pubic response to the idea.

Opinion measurement on a new proposal is typically

unstable because the public has not thought the issue

through. In this early stage, changes in queson wording

can have a significant impact on the poll answer. Even here,

there was a 6-point drop in the proporon favoring the car-

bon tax when it was changed from releasing the most pollu-

tants into the air” to just “releasing pollutants into the air.”

Later, when the public has heard more of the pro and

con arguments and has come to a more considered opin-

ion, slight changes in queson wording have less impact on

the answer.

GRADING THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

5

14

26

27

28

No Opin

Gas Tax Not Enough

Wrong Priorities

Population Growth

Waste &Mismanagement

WHY NOT HIGHER GRADE, BY GRADE GIVEN

WHAT PREVENTS A HIGHER GRADE

4

4

24

28

48

38

16

17

8

7

1

6

DEC '14

PA= 2.02

MAR '13

GPA= 1.98

"A" "B" "C " "D" "F"

2426

29

55

31

24

34

16

25

32

20

1114 14

18

8

"B " "C " "D" "F"

Waste & MismanagementPopulation growth

Wrong projects

Gas tax not keeping up




3

The Elway Poll

Sa mple Profile

The Elway Poll is an independent, non-partisan analysis of publicopinion in Washington and the Northwest.

PROPRIETARY QUESTIONS: Each quarter, space is reserved in

the questionnaire to allow for proprietary questions. The fee forproprietary questions is $1000 per question. You will receivethe results of your question(s) with full crosstabulations withinthree days after the interviews are completed.

CROSSTABS: A full set of cross-tabulation tables is available for

$100.

T h e E l w a y P o l l7035 Palatine N.

S e a t t l e , W A 9 8 1 0 3

2 0 6 / 2 6 4 - 1 5 0 0 F A X : 2 6 4 - 0 3 0 1

[email protected]

502 registered voters, selected at random from registered voter lists in Washingtonstate, were interviewed Dec. 27-30, 2014 by live, professional interviewers. 19% of the

interviews were conducted on cell phones. The margin of sampling error is ±4.5% at the

95% level of confidence. This means, in theory, had this same survey been conducted 100

times, the results would be within ±4.5% of the results reported here at least 95 times.

REGION

King County ........................................ 31%Pierce + Kitsap .................................... 15%North Sound (Snohomish to Whatcom) ........16%Western Washington (Clallam to Clark) ....18%Eastern Washington ............................ 20%

GENDER

Male .................................................... 48%Female ................................................ 52%

AGE

18-35 ..................................................... 7%36-50 ................................................... 23%51-64 ................................................... 42%65+ ...................................................... 26%

PARTY IDENTIFICATION

Democrat ............................................ 32%Republican ......................................... 20%Independent ........................................ 47%

EDUCATION

High School ......................................... 17%Some College ..................................... 24%College Graduate ................................ 39%Post Graduate ..................................... 20%

HOUSEHOLD INCOME

<$50,000 ............................................. 22%$50 - 74,000 ........................................ 23%$75 - 99,000 ........................................ 20%$100,000+ ........................................... 19% No Answer .......................................... 17%

QUESTION WORDING

These next questions are about transportation. The state transportation systemincludes roads, bridges, railways, ferries and barges – all the ways to move peopleand freight. Overall, how would you rate Washington State’s current transportationsystem? Using the letter grades again, would you say: "F" for failing; "D" forunsatisfactory; "C" for satisfactory; "B" for good; "A" for excellent"

IF NOT 4 ("A"): In your opinion, which of these factors contributes most to keep-ing the transportation system from getting a higher grade:1) Gas taxes no longer generate enough money to pay for transportation needs2) Waste and mismanagement by the Department of Transportation3) The population is growing faster than the transportation system can keep up4) Too much transportation money is spent on the wrong projects

The governor has proposed a package of transportation improvements that in-cludes: Finishing the 520 bridge in Seattle, widening 405 between Bellevue andRenton, improving the Highway 395 North Spokane corridor, Highway 167 fromPuyallup to the Port of Tacoma, I-90 at Snoqualmie Pass and others.Of course, transportation projects are expensive and take a long time to complete.So one question is always how to pay for them. First, which of these statementscomes closest to your opinion:1) We cannot afford to raise taxes for transportation improvements at this time.2) We cannot affordnot to improve the transportation system, so taxes will have tobe raised.

The next questions are about paying for transportation improvements. As I readeach suggestion, tell me whether you: 1) Favor that proposal, 2) think it could bean Acceptable part of a solution, 3) are inclined to Oppose, or 4) find it Unaccepta-ble. Again, I realize you don’t have all the details, but how are you inclined asthings stand today? The first one is…1) Increase the gasoline tax2) Allow counties to increase the car tab tax to pay for local roads and bridges3) Institute a new tax, based on miles travelled, and reduce the tax on gasoline4) Institute that new carbon tax we talked about earlier, on industries that releasepollutants into the air

If other factors are included (not just wording

changes) diff erent results can be expected. Indeed,

other polling suggests that support drops considera-

bly if voters think they will be paying the tax, either

directly or indirectly, not just pollung industries.

For carbon tax proponents, 70% posive re-

sponse is a good place to start. But the public debateover this tax has not really begun. The early rounds

will be about how the tax is described.

Elway Poll Transportation 010814

Documents

Transcript of Elway Poll Transportation 010814