Copy
View this email in your browser
Release #2022-20                                                        Friday, November 4, 2022

Props. 1 (reproductive rights) and 31 (upholding ban on flavored tobacco) favored for passage; Sports wagering initiatives appear headed for defeat.  Prop. 30 (millionaires tax) still in play.  
-- Newsom maintains big lead in his bid for re-election -- 
 


by Mark DiCamillo, Director, Berkeley IGS Poll
(c) 415-602-5594

 
The results of a new Berkeley IGS Poll completed one week before the November general election measured voter preferences in the governor’s race and on five of the seven state ballot propositions that Californians will be asked to decide in the election.  Following is a summary of the survey’s main findings:
 
  • Incumbent Governor Gavin Newsom continues to hold a formidable lead over his Republican opponent, State Senator Brian Dahle. The poll finds likely voters preferring Newsom over Dahle by a twenty-one-point margin, 58% to 37%.  
  • Underpinning Newsom’s large preference lead is the fact that while the Governor is nearly universally known to the voting public and maintains a positive image rating with voters, greater than four in ten likely voters (42%) have no opinion of Dahle.
  • Two of the five state ballot propositions measured are favored for passage.  These include Proposition 1, a state constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights for women, which is currently favored 64% to 27%, and Proposition 31, a referendum to uphold the existing ban on flavored tobacco products, which leads 58% to 32%.
  • On the other hand, the two sports wagering initiatives, Propositions 26 and 27, appear headed for defeat.  The poll finds voters rejecting Proposition 26 to allow in-person sports wagering on tribal lands by a 53% to 30% margin.  An even larger proportion of voters are lining up on the No side on Proposition 27 that would permit online sports wagering in the state.  It currently trails nearly three to one (64% No vs. 22% Yes).  Significantly, the size of the No vote on each initiative has increased by eleven points since the poll’s late September survey.
  • One ballot measure that still seems to be in play is Proposition 30, tax on millionaires to fund air pollution reduction infrastructure and wildfire prevention.  While it was clinging to a narrow 47% to 41% lead in the poll, passage requires achieving a 50% majority of the vote, and opposition appears to be growing.
IGS C-Director, G. Cristina Mora, notes that “the results confirm what many have suspected for some time – that Newsom would continue to hold a commanding place in California politics, and that California would likely move to quickly protect a woman’s right to choose in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v Wade.”
 
Newsom continues to hold huge lead over Dahle in the Governor’s race


The final pre-election Berkeley IGS Poll finds Newsom the choice of 58% of likely voters, while just 37% favor Dahle. Preferences are highly partisan, with nearly nine in ten Democrats (89%) backing Newsom. The percentages are reversed among Republicans, with 89% backing Dahle. Yet, because just 27% of the state’s likely voters are Republicans while 48% are Democrats Newsom’s re-election does not appear to be in jeopardy.

Voters living in different regions of the state display differing voting preferences in the governor’s race.  Newsom’s strongest regions of support come from voters in the state’s two largest metropolitan areas, Los Angeles County, and the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.  By contrast, Dahle leads among voters in the San Joaquin Valley and runs about even with the Governor in Orange County and the Inland Empire.

 
Almost all voters have an opinion of Newsom and most view him positively, while nearly half of the electorate has no opinion of Dahle 


A big factor underpinning Newsom’s preference lead over Dahle is that virtually all voters are familiar with the Governor and most view him positively. By contrast, Dahle remains largely unknown to many voters just one week prior to the election (42%).  This includes 58% of Democrats and 44% of voters as No Party Preference or with a minor party. 
Of five state ballot propositions measured by the poll, two appear headed for passage, two trail badly and one remains in play


The poll finds that two of the five state ballot propositions measured appear headed for passage.  These include Proposition 1, a state constitutional amendment to safeguard women’s rights to abortion and contraception, which leads 64% to 27%, and Proposition 31, a referendum to uphold the existing state ban on flavored tobacco products, which is favored 58% to 32%.

On the other hand, the two sports wagering initiatives, Propositions 26 and 27, both trail badly. Proposition 26, which would allow in-person sports wagering on Indian lands trails 53% to 30% in the current poll, while Proposition 27, to allow online sports wagering, is even further behind, with 64% of likely voters intending to vote No and just 22% voting Yes.  In addition, the size of the No vote on both initiatives has increased by eleven points over the past month.

The one ballot measure that still seems to be in play is Proposition 30, which would tax millionaires to fund air pollution reduction infrastructure and wildfire prevention programs.  The latest poll finds less than half of likely voters (47%) backing the initiative while 41% are voting No and another 12% are undecided.

 
About the Survey

The findings in this report are based on a Berkeley IGS Poll completed by the Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) at the University of California, Berkeley. The poll was administered online in English and Spanish October 25 - October 31, 2022, among 7,602 California registered voters, of whom 5,972 were considered likely to vote or had already voted in the state’s November general election.  Funding for the poll was provided in part by the Los Angeles Times.

The poll was administered by distributing email invitations to stratified random samples of the state’s registered voters. The latest poll also included an oversampling of registered voters in Los Angeles County, administered using the same methods, to enable the poll to examine specific issues of interest to voters in Los Angeles and to the Times.  After the completion of data collection, the results were weighted to realign the Los Angeles County oversample to its actual share of the statewide registered voter population.

Each email invited voters to participate in a non-partisan survey conducted by the University and provided a link to the IGS website where the survey was housed. Reminder emails were distributed to non-responding voters and an opt out link was provided for voters not wishing to receive further email invitations.

Samples of registered voters with email addresses were provided to IGS by Political Data, Inc., a leading supplier of registered voter lists in California and were derived from information contained on the state’s official voter registration rolls. Prior to distribution of the emails, the overall sample was stratified by age and gender to obtain a proper balance of survey respondents.

To protect the anonymity of respondents, voters’ email addresses and all other personally identifiable information derived from the original voter listing were purged from the data file and replaced with a unique and anonymous identification number during data processing.  In addition, after the completion of data collection, post-stratification weights were applied to the survey data file to align the sample of registered voters to population characteristics of the registered voters statewide and within major regions of the state.  

The sampling error associated with the survey results are difficult to calculate precisely because of sample stratification and the post-stratification weighting. Nevertheless, it is likely that findings based on the overall sample of likely voters are subject to a sampling error of approximately +/-2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. 


Each email invited voters to participate in a non-partisan survey conducted by the University and provided a link to the IGS website where the survey was housed. Reminder emails were distributed to non-responding voters and an opt out link was provided for voters not wishing to receive further email invitations.

Samples of registered voters with email addresses were provided to IGS by Political Data, Inc., a leading supplier of registered voter lists in California and were derived from information contained on the voter registration rolls. Prior to the distribution of emails, the overall sample was stratified by age and gender to obtain a proper balance of survey respondents across major segments of the registered voter population.

To protect the anonymity of survey respondents, voters’ email addresses and all other personally identifiable information derived from the original voter listing were purged from the data file and replaced with a unique and anonymous identification number during data processing.  In addition, post-stratification weights were applied to align the sample of registered voters responding to the survey to population characteristics of the state’s registered voters.  

The sampling error associated with the results from the survey are difficult to calculate precisely because of sample stratification and the post-stratification weighting. Nevertheless, it is likely that findings based on the overall sample of registered voters are subject to a sampling error of approximately +/-2 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. 

 
Question wording

 Below are the candidates in the election for Governor of California.
(ordering rotated)
     Gavin Newsom, Governor, Democrat 
       Brian Dahle, Senator/Farmer, Republican
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today for Governor, whom would you vote?
If already voted: For whom did you vote for Governor of California? 
 
Regardless of whom you (support) (supported) in the election for Governor, is your opinion of (Gavin Newsom, Governor) (Brian Dahle, Senator/Farmer) generally favorable or unfavorable, or don’t you know enough about him to say?  (ordering rotated)

California’s election ballot also included a number of statewide propositions. The following is a summary of some of them exactly as they appeared on the ballot. 
If have not yet voted: For each please indicate how you would vote on each if the election were held today.
If already voted: Please indicate how you voted on each of these ballot propositions.

PROPOSITION 1: CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM. LEGISLATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.  Amends California’s Constitution to expressly include an individual’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom, which includes the fundamental right to choose to have an abortion and the fundamental right to choose or refuse contraceptives.  This amendment does not narrow or limit the existing rights to privacy and equal protection under the California Constitution. Fiscal Impact: No direct fiscal effect because reproductive rights already are protected by state law.
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today, how would you vote on Proposition 1?  
If already voted: How did you vote on Proposition 1?

PROPOSITION 26: ALLOWS IN-PERSON ROULETTE, DICE GAMES, SPORTS WAGERING ON TRIBAL LANDS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Also allows sports wagering at certain horseracing tracks; private lawsuits to enforce certain gambling laws. Directs revenues to General Fund, problem-gambling programs, enforcement. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly reaching tens of millions of dollars annually. Some of these revenues would support increased state regulatory and enforcement costs that could reach the low tens of millions of dollars annually.   
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today, how would you vote on Proposition 26?  
If already voted: How did you vote on Proposition 26?

PROPOSITION 27:  ALLOWS ONLINE AND MOBILE SPORTS WAGERING OUTSIDE TRIBAL LANDS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Allows Indian tribes and affiliated businesses to operate online/mobile sports wagering outside tribal lands. Directs revenues to regulatory costs, homelessness programs, nonparticipating tribes. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues, possibly in the hundreds of millions of dollars but not likely to exceed $500 million annually. Some revenues would support state regulatory costs, possibly reaching the mid-tens of millions of dollars annually.  
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today, how would you vote on Proposition 27?  
If already voted: How did you vote on Proposition 27?

PROPOSITION 30: PROVIDES FUNDING FOR PROGRAMS TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION AND PREVENT WILDFIRES BY INCREASING TAX ON PERSONAL INCOME OVER $2 MILLION. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Allocates tax revenues to zero-emission vehicle purchase incentives, vehicle charging stations, and wildfire prevention. Fiscal Impact: Increased state tax revenue ranging from $3.5 billion to $5 billion annually, with the new funding used to support zero-emission vehicle programs and wildfire response and prevention activities. 
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today, how would you vote on Proposition 30?  
If already voted: How did you vote on Proposition 30?

PROPOSITION 31: REFERENDUM ON 2020 LAW THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE RETAIL SALE OF CERTAIN FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS. A “Yes” vote approves, and a “No” vote rejects, a 2020 law prohibiting retail sale of certain flavored tobacco products. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state tobacco tax revenues ranging from tens of millions of dollars annually to around $100 million annually
If have not yet voted: If you were voting today, how would you vote on Proposition 31?  If already voted: How did you vote on Proposition 31?
 
About the Institute of Governmental Studies

 
The Institute of Governmental Studies (IGS) is an interdisciplinary organized research unit that pursues a vigorous program of research, education, publication and public service.  A component of the University of California (UC) system’s flagship Berkeley campus, IGS is the oldest organized research unit in the UC system and the oldest public policy research center in the state.  The co-directors of the Institute of Governmental Studies are Professor Eric Schickler and Associate Professor Cristina Mora.
 
IGS conducts periodic surveys of public opinion in California on matters of politics and public policy through its Berkeley IGS Poll. The poll, which is disseminated widely, seeks to provide a broad measure of contemporary public opinion, and to generate data for subsequent scholarly analysis.  The director of the Berkeley IGS Poll is Mark DiCamillo. For a complete listing of stories issued by the Berkeley IGS Poll go to https://igs.berkeley.edu/igs-poll/berkeley-igs-poll.
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram
LinkedIn
Website
Copyright © 2018 Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley, All rights reserved. 
You are receiving this email as a courtesy of the Institute of Governmental Studies. 

Our mailing address is: 
Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley
109 Moses Hall
UC Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720-2370
Add us to your address book

Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list