In
the history of misleading newspaper headlines, it’s not exactly "Dewey Defeats Truman", but this weekend the Los Angeles Times put itself on the
medal stand. "Voters want tax plan to go on the ballot", blares the Times’ front page headline, supposedly describing the
results of the newspaper’s poll, co-sponsored by USC’s Dornsife College. The
headline of the story’s follow-through page proclaims, "State voters favor
taxes." Catching only these declarations at your Starbuck’s newsstand, or
casually flipping through the paper looking for news on Andrew Bynum’s knee
troubles, you may conclude that those radical partisans (usually those who hew
right-of-center) in Sacramento are preventing a moderate path through the
state’s fiscal disaster.
But
is this what the survey results actually shows?
The
headlines seem to rely on responses to a trio of survey questions. The first –
"To close the remaining $14 billion of the budget deficit, which approach do
you favor?" – reveals that while 33% of respondents supported "cutting spending"
only, a full 53% back a "combination of both" cuts and tax increases. A paltry 9% of respondents supported a "taxes
only" plan to balance the budget. The first response has indeed diminished by
11 percentage points from the answers Californians gave last November.
This
datapoint is combined with the answer to a second question: "Do you favor or
oppose holding an election after June 30 on whether to renew the income tax,
sales tax and vehicle fee increases that will have expired?" On this, 60% of
respondents supported conducting an election on taxes. The Times hails these
responses as, "clear support for Brown’s budget agenda." But do these responses
indicate agreement with the Governor’s desire to raise taxes or his attempt to
put the issue before voters? Do they endorse policy or process?
A
third question – "Do you favor or oppose cutting $14 billion more, some of it
from K through 12 schools?" is opposed by 71% of respondents. This is a straw man question in some ways
because the "cuts only" budget appears to be off the table for Republicans and
it is far too vague on what the K-12 cuts would be. While the response appears
to indicate an aversion to both a cuts only budget and cuts to K-12 spending specifically,
would the results be the same for the question, "Do you favor/oppose cutting
$14 billion more with some of it from public sector pensions and benefits?"
Bringing
the survey into some focus is the response to the question, "Do you favor or
oppose passage of a bill in the state Legislature before June 30 to increase
the income tax and to extend increases in the sales tax and vehicle fees that
are set to expire?" This direction was opposed by a majority of Californians
(53%) – the same percentage that indicated a willingness to support the combo
plan. The Times reports that this answer means, "Voters clearly do not want the
taxes extended without their say, however."
Really?
Taken together, couldn’t these responses instead mean that voters want the
opportunity reject tax increases? At
the very least the response fails to warrant the aforementioned headline,
"State voters favor taxes." (Especially when only 9% of the sample supported a
"taxes only" solution.)
Pressing
on to the third page of the Times’ article, the reader finally stumbles upon another
survey result that seems to indicate voters are actually leaning towards a
ballot package proposed by some California Republicans. The question "Do you
favor or oppose capping state spending so it can’t increase by more than the
cost of living each year?" received the
largest response in favor -80% – of any question cited by the Time’s
piece. This result is noted in the same
paragraph with another – not fully announced by the Times until the evening edition – that 70% of survey
respondents also favor a cap on public sector pensions.
So
let me get this straight: a representative group of California voters want the
opportunity to vote on a package of revenue raising measures, while an
overwhelming majority support a cap on state spending and public sector
pensions. Isn’t this closer to the Republican plan than the Governor’s current
proposal?
Here’s
what Joe Justin, Sen. Bill Emmerson’s (R-Hemet) chief of staff recently told KPCC radio: "We think the
people do have the right to vote on taxes. We think they have the right to vote
on pension reform. We think they have the right to vote on a spending cap." The
Times allows, "Brown wants to enact
both policies, but Democrats in the Legislature have been resisting."
Talk
about "burying the lead." Let me propose another: "California Voters Want to
Vote on Republican Ballot Package."