Field’s upbeat Prop. 30 poll at odds with insiders’ assumptions

01 Nov, 2012 by CalWatchdog Staff

Print this article Font size -16+

Nov. 1, 2012

By Chris Reed

Has the fog that’s settled over national polling because of the gap between Nate Silver’s 538 blog and the Gallup/Rasmussen numbers arrived in California? Maybe. On Proposition 30, we’re seeing plenty of “precriminations,” as Andrew Sullivan would say. Pro-30 Los Angeles Times columnist George Skelton faulted Gov. Jerry Brown’s strategy in this morning’s newspaper.

“There hasn’t been a consistent, coherent message to voters about why they should back the measure, which would temporarily boost income taxes for single-filers earning more than $250,000 and couples making more than $500,000. There’d also be a tiny quarter-cent sales tax hike.

“Start with those details, which were designed to provide the campaign with a populist “soak the rich” argument it has failed to really use.

“You don’t hear in TV ads that only 1% of income tax filers, according to the legislative analyst, would pay the higher rates. Neither is there an effort to put the puny sales tax increase in perspective.”

The buzz in California’s chattering class has also been downbeat on Prop. 30’s chances since it went below 50 percent in polling a month ago.

A 10 percent edge — with 14 percent undecided

But the Field Poll released today shows it winning 48 percent to 38 percent, with 14 percent of voters undecided. I’d much rather be on the pro-30 side of those numbers than the anti-30 side.

What the anti-30 side may need, oddly enough, is for Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom to do more interviews. Newsom continues to be seen by some as a handsome empty suit. But he’s practically the only state Democrat to be honest about California’s anti-business climate. Now his candor extends to critiquing the governor’s dishonest sales tactics in support of 30.

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom two weeks ago criticized Gov. Jerry Brown’s tax initiative approach, suggesting to KGO Radio in San Francisco that the governor was slow to hit the campaign trail and that he was telling college students ‘something that’s not true.'”

“Newsom, who sits on the University of California Board of Regents and the California State University Board of Trustees, emphasized several times in a four-minute interview that Brown was misleading college students by suggesting Prop. 30 would avert tuition increases. That has since become a central part of Brown’s campaign message.

“‘My big concern is, we went down yesterday and said there will be no tuition increase if you support this,’ Newsom said. ‘That’s just not true. You can’t say things like this.’

“He went on to explain that Brown is relying on a ‘technical point’ that tuition would not increase this 2012-13 school year at UC and CSU if Prop. 30 passes. But Newsom said that even if it does, UC would still likely raise tuition in 2013-14 and students may feel ‘lied to.’ Newsom suggested that UC would consider a 2013-14 tuition hike as soon as its next meeting in November regardless of what voters decide.”

Newspapers buy shallow narrative on cuts

Meanwhile, the media continue to treat it as certain that the trigger cuts are real and not just a political prop for the pro-30 campaign. Anyone who believes the CTA is going to accept an 8 percent pay cut — which is what would happen were the school year cut from 175 to 161 days — please get in touch. I’ve got a subdivision in Murrieta that I think you’d like.