Key Findings

Californians have been facing a record heat wave and wildfires across the state this summer. The state’s multibillion-dollar budget deficit prompted spending cuts for climate and energy programs. In response, the legislature approved a $10 billion state bond for the November ballot that asks voters to approve more funding for drought, floods, wildfires, coastal resilience, and extreme heat mitigation. The deep partisan divide on climate and energy policies surfaced in the presidential debate on June 27.

These are the key findings of the Californians and the Environment survey on local, state, and national issues and coastal and inland topics that was conducted June 24–July 2, 2024:

Joe Biden (D) leads Donald Trump (R) by a wide margin (55% to 30%) in the presidential race. Adam Schiff (D) leads Steve Garvey (R) by a 31 point margin (64% to 33%) in the US Senate race. Democratic candidates lead Republican candidates in local House district races (62% to 36%). An overwhelming majority say that candidates’ positions on the environment are important in determining their vote; Democrats are more likely to say the environment is “very important.” A majority say they would vote “yes” on a $10 billion state bond for climate resiliency projects. →
Californians are most likely to name climate change, forest fires and wildfires, and water supply and drought as the most important environmental issues facing the state today. Most believe that the effects of climate change have already begun and that climate change is a threat to the economy and quality of life for California’s future. Most Californians say that it is more important to address climate mitigation than climate adaptation. Forty-seven percent say they are very concerned that home insurance will become more expensive due to climate change risks. →
Forty percent of Californians think there will be more jobs for people around the state as a result of California doing things to reduce climate change in the future. Sixty-six percent favor the state law requiring that all electricity come from renewable energy sources by 2045, while 44 percent are willing to pay more for electricity from renewable sources. About six in ten believe that stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost, while partisans are divided on this issue. →
Most Californians say that plastics and marine debris, declining marine life, and overfishing are problems in the part of the California coast that is close to them. Eighty-one percent favor the expansion of Marine Protected Areas off the coast. An overwhelming majority favors allowing wind power and wave energy projects, while a strong majority opposes more oil drilling off the California coast. Fifty-seven percent view the conditions of oceans and beaches as very important to the economy and quality of life for the state’s future. →
Thirty-nine percent of Californians say the threat of wildfires is a big problem in their part of California, while 35 percent have been personally affected by extreme weather events in the past two years. Majorities have “only some” confidence in the government’s readiness to respond to wildfires and extreme weather events. Sixty-five percent have not prepared for disasters and 24 percent have considered moving to a different home to avoid the impacts of global warming. →
About half approve of Governor Newsom and President Biden when it comes to their handling of environmental issues. Partisans are deeply divided. About half approve of the California Legislature and about one in four approve of the US Congress when it comes to their handling of environmental issues. Partisans agree in their disapproval of Congress. Forty-four percent say they can trust the state government always or most of the time when it comes to environmental issues, and 29 percent say the same about the federal government. →

November Election

The statewide ballot in the November election will include the presidential race, the US Senate race, and 52 US House district races that will help to decide the party in control of a closely divided Congress. Proposition 4, a $10 billion state bond placed on the November ballot by the legislature, would fund a variety of state programs for a changing climate. How important are environmental issues for California voters in this election year?

US presidential race. This summer, the Republican Party convention in July and the Democratic Party convention in August are setting the political context for the presidential race in 2024. California likely voters say they would choose Joe Biden (D) over Donald Trump (R) by a wide margin (55% to 30%) if the November election were held today. Preferences were similar in June (55% Biden, 31% Trump) and in April (54% Biden, 31% Trump) and, for historical perspective, in May 2020. (57% Biden, 33% Trump). National polls indicate a close race. (Note: presidential preferences in the PPIC Survey were similar before and after the June 27 debate.)

Today, partisans continue to support their party’s presidential candidate: 84 percent of Democrats support Biden, and 82 percent of Republicans favor Trump. Independent voters lean toward the Democratic candidate (45% Biden, 26% Trump). Biden leads Trump across age, gender, homeownership, household income, and racial/ethnic groups, and also across the state’s major regions. Eleven percent of likely voters would vote for “someone else” for president, including 6 percent of Democrats, 5 percent of Republicans, and 21 percent of independents.

Seventy-eight percent of likely voters say that the presidential candidates’ positions on the environment are important (42% very, 36% somewhat) in determining their vote. Majorities across partisan and demographic groups and regions of the state hold this view. Partisans are divided: 56 percent of Democrats say the candidates’ environment views are very important, compared to 24 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of independents. Biden supporters (56%) are far more likely than Trump supporters (26%) to express this opinion. Before the 2020 election, 83 percent of likely voters said that the presidential candidates’ positions on the environment were important (43% very, 40% somewhat) in determining their vote.

Joe Biden leads Donald Trump by a wide margin in the presidential race in California

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

NOTES: Among likely voters only.

US Senate race. California likely voters favor Adam Schiff (D) over Steve Garvey (R) by a wide margin (64% to 33%) in the US Senate race. Preferences were similar in June (62% Schiff, 37% Garvey) and April (61% Schiff, 37% Garvey). Today, partisans overwhelmingly choose their party’s candidate for the US Senate, while independents lean toward the Democratic candidate. Majorities across demographic groups and state regions favor Schiff over Garvey.

Seventy-nine percent say that the US Senate candidates’ positions on the environment are important (39% very, 40% somewhat) in determining their vote. Majorities across partisan and demographic groups and regions of the state hold this view. Partisans differ on whether the candidates’ environmental positions are very important (53% Democrat, 19% Republican, 34% independent). Schiff supporters (52%) are far more likely than Garvey supporters (16%) to say this is very important.

A solid majority of California likely voters would opt for Adam Schiff if the Senate election were held today

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

NOTES: Among likely voters only.

House races. When asked about their House district race, most likely voters say they would vote for the Democratic candidate over the Republican candidate by a wide margin (62% to 36%). Likely voter preferences were similar in June (62% Democrat, 36% Republican) and April (60% Democrat, 38% Republican) and, for historical perspective, in May 2020 (59% Democrat, 34% Republican). Today, more than nine in ten Democratic and Republican likely voters would choose their party’s House candidate, and independents lean toward voting for the Democratic House candidate. In the 10 competitive districts in California (as defined by the Cook Political Report), the Democratic candidate leads the Republican candidate (63% to 36%). Half or more say they would vote for the Democratic candidate over the Republican candidate across regions and demographic groups.

Seventy-nine percent of likely voters say that House candidates’ positions on the environment are important (37% very, 42% somewhat) in determining their vote. Majorities across partisan and demographic groups and regions of the state hold this view. Partisans differ on whether the environment is “very” important to them (52% Democrat, 16% Republican, 32% independent).

State bond. Fifty-nine percent of California likely voters say they would vote “yes” on a $10 billion state bond measure for the November 2024 ballot to pay for flood protection and climate resiliency projects. (Note: the Proposition 4 ballot title and label were not available in time for this survey.) Voter support varies across partisan groups (78% Democrats, 25% Republicans, 55% independents), but about half or more say they would vote “yes” across demographic groups and state regions. In the July 2023 survey, 65 percent of California likely voters said they would vote for a $6 billion state bond for the November ballot to pay for flood protection and climate resiliency projects.

Eighty percent of likely voters say that it is a “good thing” that a majority of California voters can make laws and change policies on environmental issues in California. Sixty-two percent say it is “very important” to them to vote on ballot measures that address environmental issues in California. Majorities across regions, parties, and demographic groups hold these views; Democrats (70%) are more likely than Republicans (55%) and independents (57%) to say that voting on environmental issues is very important to them.

A majority say they would vote yes on a $10 billion bond to pay for flood protection and climate resiliency projects

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

NOTES: Among likely voters only.

Climate Change Perceptions and Policies

Californians name climate change (17%) as the state’s most important environmental issue, followed by wildfires (15%) and water supply (14%). About a quarter of California adults (23%) and likely voters (24%) say that addressing climate is a top concern for them personally. Majorities say it is one of several important concerns (55% adults, 53% likely voters), while about a quarter say it is not an important concern (22% adults, 23% likely voters). A solid majority of adults (64%) and likely voters (66%) say the effects of climate change have already begun. Majorities across parties, regions, and demographic groups say the effects of climate change have begun, with the exception of Republicans (36%).

Most Californians say climate change is either a very (41% adults, 42% likely voters) or somewhat (36% adults and likely voters) serious threat to the economy and quality of life for California’s future. Nearly all Democrats and an overwhelming majority of independents believe climate change is a threat, while only 44 percent of Republicans hold this view. Across regions, overwhelming majorities say that climate change is at least a somewhat serious threat. However, residents in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles are more likely than those in the Central Valley or Orange/San Diego to say it is a very serious threat. Seven in ten or more across demographic groups hold this view.

Most Californians say climate change is a threat to the economy and quality of life for California's future

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

An overwhelming majority of Californians say they worry a great deal (36% adults, 37% likely voters) or a fair amount (35% adults and likely voters) about global climate change. A third of Republicans (33%) say they worry at least a fair amount, compared to far larger shares of independents (71%) and Democrats (91%). Residents in the San Francisco Bay Area (75%) and Los Angeles (74%) are slightly more likely than residents elsewhere to worry about climate change (69% Orange/San Diego, 67% Central Valley, 66% Inland Empire).

For some Californians, worries about climate change may be related to concern about their homes and local communities. About eight in ten are at least somewhat concerned that home insurance will become more expensive due to climate change risks; this includes close to half of adults (47%) and a majority of likely voters (54%). Overwhelming majorities across parties, regions, and demographic groups are at least somewhat concerned but there are some differences in the degree of concern. Democrats and independents are more likely than Republicans to be very concerned. Majorities of residents in the Inland Empire, Asian Americans, college graduates, and those earning more than $80,000 express high levels of concern. Notably, homeowners (56%) are much more likely than renters (37%) to be very concerned. About a quarter of adults and likely voters (24% each) say climate change is affecting their local community a great deal. This sentiment is most common among residents earning less than $40,000 (32%), Democrats (31%), Latinos (28%), and women (28%).

Eight in ten Californians are concerned that home insurance will become more expensive due to climate change risks

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24-July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

About six in ten adults and likely voters say it is more important for climate policies to address climate mitigation, or reducing greenhouse gases, while less than four in ten say it is more important to address climate adaptation, or adapting to a harsher climate. Very few volunteer that mitigation and adaptation are equally important or that neither is important. Three quarters of Democrats and six in ten independents say that it is more important for policies to address reducing greenhouse gases, while a solid majority of Republicans think climate adaptation policies are more important. Majorities across regions and demographic groups think policies should focus on climate mitigation.

Seven in ten adults and likely voters favor the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Some examples of climate mitigation policies may include banning the sale of all new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035 (39% favor, 60% oppose), taxing corporations based on their carbon emissions (74% favor, 25% oppose), providing a tax credit to businesses developing carbon capture technology (77% favor, 22% oppose), and requiring most new buildings to be powered only by electricity with no gas lines (49% favor, 50% oppose).

Regarding the state’s climate adaptation plan, most say it is important to prioritize social equity, tribal nations, and disadvantaged communities (36% very, 38% somewhat important); to support wildfire prone communities by expanding fire capacity programs (49% very, 41% somewhat); and to help regions prepare for new flood patterns (41% very, 44% somewhat).

Californians think it is more important for policies to address climate mitigation than climate adaptation

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Economy and Environment

About four in ten adults and likely voters say that California doing things to reduce climate change in the future would lead to more jobs in the state; about one in three say it wouldn’t affect the number of jobs; and a quarter say there would be fewer jobs. The share saying there will be more jobs is similar to a year ago (41% July 2023), and about four in ten or more adults have said more jobs would be created since PPIC first asked this question in 2010 (45%). Today, partisans differ on this issue, with a majority of Democrats saying there would be more jobs, a majority of Republicans saying there would be fewer jobs, and independents more divided. African Americans (56%) are the only demographic group with a majority share saying there would be more jobs. The share saying there would be more jobs falls as age increases and rises as educational attainment increases. Half of San Francisco Bay Area residents hold this view, compared to fewer in other regions.

Four in ten adults say there will be more jobs as a result of California doing things to reduce climate change

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Majorities of adults and likely voters say stricter environmental laws and regulations are worth the cost (58% each), while about four in ten say stricter environmental laws and regulations in California cost too many jobs and hurt the economy (40% adults, 41% likely voters). These shares were similar a year ago. Partisans today are widely divided on this issue, with an overwhelming majority of Democrats saying stricter laws and regulations are worth the cost, while an overwhelming majority of Republicans say they cost too many jobs and hurt the economy; independents are more divided. Majorities across demographic groups and regions say stricter environmental regulation is worth the cost.

Majorities of adults and likely voters say stricter environmental regulations are worth the cost

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Two in three Californians say environmental protection should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth (66% adults, 67% likely voters), while about three in ten say economic growth should be given priority even if the environment suffers to some extent (32% of both adults and likely voters). Today, six in ten or more across most partisan, demographic, and regional groups say the environment should be the priority—with some exceptions. These exceptions are Republicans—a solid majority say the economy should take priority—and Inland Empire residents, whose opinions are more divided.

Two in three adults (66%) and likely voters (67%) favor the state law that requires 100 percent of the state’s electricity to come from renewable energy sources by the year 2045; one in three are opposed (33% of both adults and likely voters). The share in favor was similar a year ago. Today, majorities of Democrats and independents are in favor, while most Republicans are opposed. Majorities across demographic and regional groups favor the state’s renewable energy requirement.

However, when asked if they would be willing to pay more for electricity generated by renewable sources—such as solar or wind energy—in order to help reduce climate change, majorities of adults and likely voters say they would not be willing. Six in ten Democrats say they are willing, while about eight in ten Republicans and about six in ten independents say they are not willing. Majorities among demographic and regional groups are unwilling, and the share who say they are willing breaches half only among Asian Americans (51%), college graduates (51%), and San Francisco Bay Area residents (54%).

A majority of California adults are unwilling to pay more for renewable energy in order to reduce climate change

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Ocean, Coast, and Marine Life

More than nine in ten adults and likely voters say the condition of oceans and beaches are at least somewhat important to the economy and quality of life for California’s future, including majorities who say it is very important (57% adults, 63% likely voters). Very few say it is not too or not at all important. Still, the share saying it is very important has declined from a year ago, when two in three adults said this (67%). Today, majorities across partisan, demographic, and regional groups say ocean and beach conditions are very important. This share increases as income and age rise. Coastal residents are about as likely as inland residents to hold this view.

A majority of Californians say the condition of oceans and beaches are very important to the economy and quality of life for state's future

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Overwhelming majorities of adults (78%) and likely voters (81%) favor allowing wind power and wave energy projects off the California coast; two in ten are opposed (20% adults, 18% likely voters). The share in support was similar a year ago (83% adults), and overwhelming majorities have been in favor since PPIC first asked this question in 2017.

When it comes to expanding the rules and boundaries of national marine sanctuaries and California Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to protect fish, wildlife, and their habitat off the state’s coast, eight in ten or more adults (81%) and likely voters (85%) are in favor.

However, two in three adults (67%) and likely voters (68%) oppose allowing more oil drilling off the California coast, compared to about three in ten in favor (31% adults and likely voters each). Majorities have opposed offshore oil drilling since 2013 (54%).

Most Californians oppose expanding hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking” for oil and natural gas (65% adults, 66% likely voters); about a third are in favor (32% adults, 33% likely voters). Six in ten or more have opposed fracking since 2021.

Most continue to favor wind power and wave energy, while most oppose allowing more oil drilling off the California coast

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Surveys, 2017-2024.

Nine in ten adults say ocean and beach pollution along the California coast is at least somewhat of a problem, including about four in ten who say it is a big problem (41%). The share of adults saying this is a big problem has declined from the 50 percent who said this a year ago.

Over nine in ten adults in the state say plastics and marine debris is at least somewhat of a problem in the part of the California coast that is closest to them, including six in ten (60%) who say it is a big problem. The share saying it is a big problem has fluctuated in the past few years, but majorities have said this since 2019.

Over eight in ten adults say declining marine life is at least somewhat of a problem in the part of the California coast closest to them, including 46 percent of adults who say it is a big problem. A year ago, far more adults said this was a big problem (60% July 2023); the share holding this view hadn’t dropped below a majority since July 2017 (45%).

When it comes to overfishing, or depleting the fishing stock, about eight in ten adults say it is at least somewhat of a problem, including roughly three in ten who say it is a big problem (32%)—a lower share than on other coastal and marine life issues. The share saying this is a big problem decreased sharply from a year ago (45% July 2023) and is comparable to findings in 2019, when 35 percent said overfishing was a big problem.

A solid majority of adults say plastics and marine debris are a big problem; less than half say the same about marine life, ocean pollution, and overfishing

% big problem

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Extreme Weather Events

California continues to face many extreme weather events and natural disasters—including severe dry periods, heat waves, and wildfires. Many Californians believe these events are connected to climate change. Overwhelming majorities are concerned that climate change will cause heat waves (79% very or somewhat concerned), drought (82% very or somewhat concerned), and wildfires (82% very or somewhat concerned) that are more severe.

About a quarter of adults and a fifth of likely voters say they have considered moving to a different home to avoid the impacts of global warming, including sea-level rise, flooding, heat waves, and wildfires. About three in ten Democrats (29%) report this, compared to only 12 percent of Republicans. Residents in the Central Valley (28%) are the most likely to say they have considered moving, while those in Orange/San Diego (16%) are the least likely. Among demographic groups, residents making less than $40,000 (33%), young adults ages 18 to 34 (31%), and Latinos (29%) are most likely to say they have considered moving because of global warming. Notably, renters (31%) are more likely than homeowners (17%) to say this.

About a quarter of adults say they have considered moving to a different home to avoid the impacts of global warming

% yes

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

About a third of adults (35%) say they have personally been affected by an extreme weather event in the past two years. This share was higher last July, when 45 percent said the same. About four in ten Central Valley (41%) and San Francisco Bay area (39%) residents report being affected by extreme weather, compared fewer than four in ten in the Inland Empire (36%), Los Angeles (31%), and Orange/San Diego (28%).

About eight in ten Californians say the threat of wildfires is a big problem (39%) or somewhat of a problem (40%) in their part of the state. The share of residents saying this is particularly high in the Inland Empire (37% big, 51% somewhat). About a quarter of adults (26%) say wildfires in their part of California are a very serious threat to their personal and economic well-being. This feeling is more prevalent among residents in the Inland Empire (32%) and the Central Valley (30%) than among those in the coastal regions of Los Angeles (27%), Orange/San Diego (23%), and the San Francisco Bay Area (17%). The share holding this view declines with rising income and is highest among Latinos (32%) compared to other racial or ethnic groups.

Fewer than four in ten Californians say they have been personally affected by an extreme weather event in the last two years

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

About two in ten Californians have a great deal of confidence in the government’s readiness to respond to extreme weather events in their part of California. About six in ten have some confidence, while about a quarter have hardly any confidence. The share with a great deal of confidence is higher among Democrats (29% great deal) than among independents (13%) and Republicans (11%). Across regional and demographic groups, residents in Orange/San Diego (24%) and African Americans (29%) have the most confidence in the government’s extreme weather response.

When asked if they are personally prepared for a disaster themselves, only 35 percent of adults say they are prepared for a disaster, while 45 percent say they intend to prepare in the next six months (23%) or the next year (22%), and 20 percent say they do not intend to prepare for a disaster in the next year. Californians are more likely to say they are prepared for a disaster than Americans overall: according to FEMA’s 2023 National Household Survey, 51 percent of Americans said they were prepared for a disaster.

In California, about half of Republicans say they are prepared for a disaster, compared to smaller shares of independents and Democrats. Across regions, about four in ten residents in Orange/San Diego and the San Francisco Bay Area say they are prepared, while smaller shares in Los Angeles, the Central Valley, and the Inland Empire say the same. Similar shares of men and women report being prepared for a disaster. Whites are more likely than African Americans, Asian Americans, and Latinos to say they are prepared. The share reporting preparedness for a disaster increases with rising income; homeowners (42%) are more likely to say they are prepared than renters (27%).

Only a fifth of Californians have a great deal of confidence in the government response to extreme weather events, while fewer than four in ten say they are personally prepared for a disaster

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

State and Federal Approval Ratings

In 2022, Governor Newsom and the legislature agreed on a comprehensive plan to address climate change: the California Climate Commitment. Since the passage of this $54 billion package, cuts totaling more than $9 billion have been made to help close budget deficits. When asked about their handling of environmental issues today, Californians offer mixed reviews of the governor (52% approve, 45% disapprove) and the legislature (49% approve, 48% disapprove). Approval of Governor Newsom’s handling of the environment is down 6 percentage points since last July (58%) and down 17 points since July 2020 (69%). Approval of the legislature is down 5 points since last July (54%), and down 13 points since July 2020 (62%).

Approval of Governor Newsom’s handling of environmental issues is far higher among Democrats (78%) than among independents (44%) and Republicans (15%). Across regions, his approval is highest in the San Francisco Bay Area (62%), followed by Los Angeles (57%), Orange/San Diego (51%), the Inland Empire (47%), and the Central Valley (43%). African Americans (64%), Asian Americans (58%), and Latinos (55%) are more likely than whites (46%) to approve, and half or more across age and income groups hold this view.

Views on the legislature’s handling of environmental issues follow similar patterns. There is a wide partisan divide (72% Democrats, 44% independents, 13% Republicans), and approval is highest in the San Francisco Bay Area (61%) and lowest in the Inland Empire (41%) and the Central Valley (40%; 53% Los Angeles, 48% Orange/San Diego). African Americans (59%) and Asian Americans (57%) are the most likely to approve of the legislature’s handling of environmental issues (Latinos 51%; whites 44%).

About half of adults approve of the governor's and state legislature's handling of environmental issues

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, 2011–2024.

Californians are divided on President Biden’s handling of environmental issues (49% approve, 48% disapprove)—similar to findings in July 2023 (47%) and July 2022 (49%), but down 12 points since July 2021 (61%). There is a wide partisan divide (74% Democrats, 46% independents, 18% Republicans), and across regions, approval surpasses 50 percent only in the San Francisco Bay Area (59%; 50% Los Angeles, 47% Orange/San Diego, 43% Inland Empire, 41% Central Valley). African Americans (59%) and Asian Americans (56%) are more likely than Latinos (48%) and whites (46%) to approve, while approval is higher among older Californians and those with higher incomes and educational attainment.

Just one in four Californians (24%) approve of Congress’s handling of environmental issues, while overwhelming majorities (73%) disapprove. Views have been similar in recent years, and approval has never been higher than 35 percent since we began asking this question in July 2011. Today, approval is no higher than 35 percent across parties (28% Democrats, 18% independents, 14% Republicans), regions, and demographic groups.

About half of adults approve of the president's handling of environmental issues, while one in four approve of Congress on these issues

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, 2011-2024.

Californians are even less likely to trust the state and federal governments to do what is right when it comes to handling environmental issues. Forty-four percent say they trust the state government to do what is right just about always (6%) or most of the time (38%), while a majority (55%) say they trust only some of the time. Trust today is down slightly from recent years and down 9 points since July 2020 (53% just about always or most of the time). Today, two in three Democrats express trust, compared to far fewer independents and Republicans. The share of Californians saying they trust the state government’s handling of environmental issues at least most of the time reaches a majority only among residents in the San Francisco Bay Area, Asian Americans, African Americans, and college graduates (50%).

Only about three in ten Californians say they trust the federal government to do what is right just about always (3%) or most of the time (26%), while an overwhelming majority (70%) say they trust it only some of the time. While Democrats are nearly twice as trusting as Republicans and independents: just one in three Democrats say they trust the federal government always or most of the time. Looking beyond parties, fewer than four in ten across regions and demographic groups—with the exception of Latinos—say they trust the federal government’s handling of environmental issues at least most of the time.

Californians trust the state government more than the federal government to do what is right when it comes to handling environmental issues

% saying just about always or most of the time

SOURCE: PPIC Statewide Survey, July 2024. Survey was fielded from June 24–July 2, 2024 (n=1,648 adults, n=1,261 likely voters).

Regional Map

Methodology

This is the 26th year of the PPIC Statewide Survey. Coauthors of this report include survey director Mark Baldassare, who holds the Miller Chair in Public Policy; associate survey director and research fellow Dean Bonner; survey analyst Lauren Mora, who was project manager for this survey; and survey analyst Deja Thomas. The Californians and the Environment survey is supported with funding from the Arjay R. and Frances F. Miller Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, and the Windy Hill Fund. The PPIC Statewide Survey invites input, comments, and suggestions from policy and public opinion experts and from its own advisory committee, but survey methods, questions, and content are determined solely by PPIC’s survey team.

Findings in this report are based on a survey of 1,648 California adult residents. The median time to complete the survey was 18.9 minutes. Interviews were conducted from June 24–July 2, 2024.

The survey was conducted by Ipsos, using its online KnowledgePanel, in English and Spanish according to respondents’ preferences. KnowledgePanel members are recruited through probability-based sampling and include both those with internet access and those without. KnowledgePanel provides internet access for those who do not have it and, if needed, a device to access the internet when they join the panel. KnowledgePanel members are primarily recruited using address-based sampling (ABS) methodology, which improves population coverage, particularly for hard-to-reach populations such as young adults and minority groups. ABS-recruited Latinos are supplemented with a dual-frame random digit dialing (RDD) sampling methodology that targets telephone exchanges associated with areas with a higher concentration of Latinos to provide the capability to conduct representative online surveys with Latinos, including those who speak only Spanish. KnowledgePanel’s recruitment was originally based on a national RDD frame and switched to the primarily ABS-based methodology in 2009. KnowledgePanel includes households with landlines and cell phones, including those with cellphones only and those without phones. ABS allows probability-based sampling of addresses from the US Postal Service’s Delivery Sequence File (DSF). The DSF-based sampling frame used for address selection is enhanced with a series of refinements—such as the appendage of various ancillary data to each address from commercial and government data sources—to facilitate complex stratification plans. Taking advantage of such refinements, quarterly samples are selected using a stratified sampling methodology that aims to retain the representativeness of the panel. KnowledgePanel recruits new panel members throughout the year to offset panel attrition.

To qualify for the survey, a panel member must be age 18 or older and reside in California. A general population sample of Californians was selected using Ipsos’s PPS (probability proportional to size) sampling procedure to select study-specific samples. Briefly, to select such samples, the panel is first weighted to population benchmarks and those panel weights are used as the measure of size for a PPS sample selection that yields a fully representative sample. A total of 1,726 respondents completed the survey out of 3,081 panelists who were sampled, for a response rate of 56 percent. To ensure the highest data quality, we flagged respondents who sped through the survey, which we defined as completing the survey in one-fourth of the overall median time (less than 4.7 minutes). We also flagged respondents if their self-reported age or gender did not match the data stored in their profile. A total of 78 cases were removed after this review process, resulting in 1,648 total qualified and valid cases.

Accent on Languages, Inc., translated new survey questions into Spanish, with assistance from Renatta DeFever.

Ipsos uses the US Census Bureau’s 2018–2022 American Community Survey’s (ACS) Public Use Microdata Series for California (with regional coding information from the University of Minnesota’s Integrated Public Use Microdata Series for California) to compare certain demographic characteristics of the survey sample—region, age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education—with the characteristics of California’s adult population. The survey sample was closely comparable to the ACS figures. We also used voter registration data from the California Secretary of State to compare the party registration of registered voters in our sample to party registration statewide. The sample of Californians is first weighted using an initial sampling or base weight that corrects for any differences in the probability of selecting various segments of the KnowledgePanel sample. This base weight is further adjusted using an iterative proportional fitting (raking) procedure that aligns sample demographics to population benchmarks from the 2018–2022 ACS data as well as party registration benchmarks from the California Secretary of State’s voter registration file.

The sampling error, taking design effects from weighting into consideration, is ±3.2 percent at the 95 percent confidence level for the total unweighted sample of 1,648 adults. This means that 95 times out of 100, the results will be within 3.2 percentage points of what they would be if all adults in California were interviewed. The sampling error for unweighted subgroups is larger: for the 1,402 registered voters, the sampling error is ±3.4 percent; for the 1,261 likely voters, it is ±3.7 percent; for the 218 likely voters in competitive districts (as defined by the Cook Political Report), it is ±8.9 percent. Sampling error is only one type of error to which surveys are subject. Results may also be affected by factors such as question wording, question order, and survey timing.

We present results for five geographic regions, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the state population. “Central Valley” includes Butte, Colusa, El Dorado, Fresno, Glenn, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Placer, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Shasta, Stanislaus, Sutter, Tehama, Tulare, Yolo, and Yuba Counties. “San Francisco Bay Area” includes Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. “Los Angeles” refers to Los Angeles County, “Inland Empire” refers to Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and “Orange/San Diego” refers to Orange and San Diego Counties. Residents of other geographic areas are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes for these less-populous areas are not large enough to report separately.

Additionally, in several places, we refer to coastal and inland counties. Within coastal counties, the “north and central coast” region refers to the counties along the California coast from San Luis Obispo County northward to Del Norte County, including all of the San Francisco Bay Area counties. The “south coast” region includes Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Counties. All other counties are included in the “inland” region.

We present results for non-Hispanic whites, who account for 38 percent of the state’s adult population, and also for Latinos, who account for 36 percent of the state’s adult population and constitute one of the fastest-growing voter groups. We also present results for non-Hispanic Asian Americans, who make up about 16 percent of the state’s adult population, and non-Hispanic African Americans, who comprise about 5 percent. Results for other racial/ethnic groups—such as Native Americans—are included in the results reported for all adults, registered voters, and likely voters, but sample sizes are not large enough for separate analysis. Results for African American and Asian American likely voters are combined with those of other racial/ethnic groups because sample sizes for African American and Asian American likely voters are too small for separate analysis. We compare the opinions of those who report they are registered Democrats, registered Republicans, and decline-to-state or independent voters; the results for those who say they are registered to vote in other parties are not large enough for separate analysis. We also analyze the responses of likely voters—so designated per their responses to survey questions about voter registration, previous election participation, intentions to vote this year, attention to election news, and current interest in politics.

Sample sizes and margins of error for each subgroup are presented in the table below.

The percentages presented in the report tables and in the questionnaire may not add to 100 due to rounding.

We compare current PPIC Statewide Survey results to those in our earlier surveys and national surveys conducted by Gallup, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and Pew Research Center. Numerous questions were adapted from the national surveys by CNN, Gallup, Ipsos, and Pew Research Center. Additional details about our methodology can be found at www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/SurveyMethodology.pdf and are available upon request through surveys@ppic.org.

Methodology

Findings in this report are based on a survey of 1,648 California adult residents. The median time to complete the survey was 18.9 minutes. Interviews were conducted from June 24–July 2, 2024.

Accent on Languages, Inc., translated new survey questions into Spanish, with assistance from Renatta DeFever.

Sample sizes and margins of error for each subgroup are presented in the table below.

The percentages presented in the report tables and in the questionnaire may not add to 100 due to rounding.

table - Unweighted N-size and margin of error

Questions and Responses

June 24–July 2, 2024
1,648 California adult residents
English, Spanish

Margin of error ±3.2% at 95% confidence level for total sample
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding

1. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that Governor Newsom is handling environmental issues in California?

52% approve
45% disapprove
2% don’t know

2. Do you approve or disapprove of the way that the California Legislature is handling environmental issues in California?

49% approve
48% disapprove
3% don’t know

3. How much of the time can you trust the state government to do what is right when it comes to handling environmental issues in California?

6% just about always
38% most of the time
55% only some of the time
– don’t know

4. Next, what do you think is the most important environmental issue facing California today?

17% global warming, climate change, greenhouse gases
15% loss of forests, forest fires, wildfires
14% water supply, drought, reservoirs
6% air pollution, vehicle emissions, smog
6% homelessness
5% pollution in general
5% landfills, garbage, sewage, waste, recycling
3% energy, fossil fuels, solar, nuclear, wind, alternative energy
2% government regulation—too much, overregulation, politicians, environmentalists
22% other (specify)
4% don’t know

5. Which of these statements comes closer to your view, even if neither is exactly right? [rotate response options]

40% stricter environmental laws and regulations in California cost too many jobs and hurt the economy
58% stricter environmental laws and regulations in California are worth the cost
2% don’t know

6. With which one of these statements about the environment and the economy do you most agree? [rotate response options]

66% protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth
32% economic growth should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent
1% don’t know

Changing topics…

7. Would you say that the supply of water is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of California?

42% big problem
43% somewhat of a problem
15% not much of a problem
– don’t know

8. Do you think that pollution of drinking water is a more serious health threat in lower-income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not?

71% yes
28% no
1% don’t know

9. How serious a health threat is pollution of drinking water in your part of California to you and your immediate family?

18% very serious
37% somewhat serious
45% not too serious
– don’t know

10. In order for everyone in your local area to have access to clean water, would you be willing or not willing to pay a little more on your water bill?

58% yes
41% no
1% don’t know

11. Next, would you say that air pollution is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not much of a problem in your part of California?

31% big problem
48% somewhat of a problem
21% not much of a problem
– don’t know

12. Do you think that air pollution is a more serious health threat in lower-income areas than other areas in your part of California, or not?

54% yes
45% no
1% don’t know

Moving on…

13. In the past two years, have you personally been affected by an extreme weather event where you live, or not?

35% yes
65% no
– don’t know

14. How much confidence do you have in the government in terms of its readiness to respond to extreme weather events in your part of California?

18% a great deal
59% only some
23% hardly any
– don’t know

15. Thinking about preparing yourself for a disaster, which of the following best represents your degree of preparedness? [rotate response options]

20% I am NOT prepared, and I do not intend to prepare in the next year
22% I am NOT prepared, but I intend to start preparing in the next year
23% I am NOT prepared, but I intend to get prepared in the next six months
11% I have been prepared for less than a year
24% I have been prepared for more than a year
– don’t know

16. Next, how much of a problem is the threat of wildfires in your part of California? Is it:

39% big problem
40% somewhat of a problem
21% not much of a problem
– don’t know

17. How serious is the threat of wildfires in your part of California to your personal and economic well-being?

26% very serious
40% somewhat serious
34% not too serious
– don’t know

18. How much confidence do you have in the government in terms of its readiness to respond to wildfires in your part of California?

32% a great deal
52% only some
15% hardly any
– don’t know

19. On another topic, which of the following statements reflect your view of when the effects of climate change will begin to happen? [rotate response options]

64% they have already begun to happen
5% they will start happening within a few years
12% they will start happening within your lifetime
9% they will not happen within your lifetime, but they will affect future generations
9% they will never happen
1% don’t know

And thinking about issues and activities that some people care deeply about and others do not…

20. Compared with other issues, would you say addressing global climate change is… [rotate response options]

23% a top concern to me personally
55% one of several important concerns to me
22% not an important concern to me
– don’t know

21. How serious of a threat is climate change to the economy and quality of life for California’s future?

41% very serious
36% somewhat serious
12% not too serious
10% not at all serious
– don’t know

22. How worried are you about global climate change?

36% a great deal
35% only some
16% only a little
13% not at all
– don’t know

23. How much, if at all, do you think global climate change is currently affecting your local community?

24% a great deal
43% only some
19% hardly any
13% not at all
– don’t know

24. Have you ever considered moving to a different home to avoid the impacts of global warming, such as sea-level rise, flooding, heat waves, or wildfires?

24% yes
76% no
– don’t know

25. Which of the following two statements comes closer to your views—even if neither is exactly right? [rotate response options]

46% the state government should ease current land use and environmental restrictions to increase the supply of housing
53% the state government should maintain current land use and environmental restrictions, even if it increases the cost of new housing
2% don’t know

26. As you may know, the state government has passed several laws over the last year aimed at building affordable housing. How much should climate adaptation to extreme weather, such as flooding, heatwaves, and wildfires, be considered when planning where to build new affordable units?

41% a great deal
40% a fair amount
12% only a little
7% not at all
1% don’t know

27. How concerned are you that home insurance will become more expensive due to climate change risks?

47% very concerned
34% somewhat concerned
12% not too concerned
7% not at all concerned
– don’t know

The following is a list of a few of the possible impacts of climate change in the future in California. Please answer whether you are very concerned, somewhat concerned, not too concerned, or not at all concerned about each one.

[rotate questions 28 through 31]

28. How about increased flooding? Are you…

17% very concerned
35% somewhat concerned
33% not too concerned
15% not at all concerned
– don’t know

29. How about heat waves that are more severe? Are you…

44% very concerned
35% somewhat concerned
13% not too concerned
8% not at all concerned
– don’t know

30. How about droughts that are more severe? Are you…

46% very concerned
36% somewhat concerned
12% not too concerned
6% not at all concerned
– don’t know

31. How about wildfires that are more severe? Are you…

45% very concerned
37% somewhat concerned
12% not too concerned
6% not at all concerned
– don’t know

32. As you may know, scientists recently reported that 2023 was the Earth’s warmest year on record. Have you heard about these reports before now, or not?

63% yes, I have heard
36% no, I have not heard
– don’t know

Changing subjects…

33. When it comes to climate policies, which do you think is more important to address: [rotate] [1] climate change mitigation, meaning policies focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions [or] [2] climate adaptation, meaning policies focused on adapting to a warming, more extreme climate?

62% climate change mitigation, meaning policies focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions
35% climate adaptation, meaning policies focused on adapting to a warming, more extreme climate
1% both equally (volunteered)
1% neither (volunteered)
1% don’t know

34. Next, to address climate change, do you favor or oppose the state law that requires California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by the year 2030?

70% favor
29% oppose
2% don’t know

35. Do you favor or oppose the state law that requires 100 percent of the state’s electricity to come from renewable energy sources by the year 2045?

66% favor
33% oppose
1% don’t know

[rotate questions 36 through 39]

36. How about Governor Newsom’s executive order banning the sale of all new gasoline-powered vehicles in California by 2035? Do you favor or oppose this idea?

39% favor
60% oppose
1% don’t know

37. How about taxing corporations based on the amount of carbon emissions they produce? Do you favor or oppose this idea?

74% favor
25% oppose
1% don’t know

38. How about providing a tax credit to encourage businesses to develop technology which captures and stores carbon emissions so they do not enter the atmosphere? Do you favor or oppose this idea?

77% favor
22% oppose
1% don’t know

39. How about requiring most new buildings to be run only on electricity with no gas lines? Do you favor or oppose this idea?

49% favor
50% oppose
1% don’t know

Moving on, how important are each of the following actions in considering the state of California’s climate adaptation strategy?

[rotate questions 40 through 42]

40. Prioritizing social equity, tribal nations, and disadvantaged communities in climate adaptation planning and strategies.

36% very important
38% somewhat important
16% not too important
9% not at all important
1% don’t know

41. Supporting wildfire prone communities by expanding the Regional Forest and Fire Capacity Program throughout the state and increasing local and regional governments’ capacity to build and maintain a pipeline of forest health and fire prevention projects.

49% very important
41% somewhat important
6% not too important
3% not at all important
1% don’t know

42. Reducing flood risk in California by helping regions prepare for new flood patterns.

41% very important
44% somewhat important
10% not too important
4% not at all important
1% don’t know

Moving on…

43. Do you favor or oppose the California state government making its own policies, separate from the federal government, to address the issue of climate change?

66% favor
32% oppose
2% don’t know

44. When it comes to efforts to fight climate change, how important is it to you that California acts as a leader around the world?

35% very important
32% somewhat important
16% not too important
17% not at all important
– don’t know

45. Next, do you think that California doing things to reduce climate change in the future would cause there to be (more jobs) for people around the state, would cause there to be (fewer jobs), or wouldn’t affect the number of jobs for people around the state? [rotate response options]

40% more jobs
25% fewer jobs
32% wouldn’t affect the number of jobs
3% don’t know

46. In order to help reduce climate change, would you be willing or not willing to pay more for electricity if it were generated by renewable sources like solar or wind energy?

44% willing
56% not willing
1% don’t know

On another topic,

47. Would you say that you have or have not seriously considered getting an electric vehicle the next time you buy or lease a vehicle, or do you already have one?

38% have considered
52% have not considered
10% already have one
– don’t know

48. How confident are you that the state will build the charging stations and infrastructure needed to support large numbers of electric vehicles on the roads?

6% extremely confident
16% very confident
35% somewhat confident
21% not too confident
22% not at all confident
– don’t know

49. How much do you think the use of electric vehicles helps address climate change?

13% a great deal
33% a fair amount
34% only a little
19% not at all
1% don’t know

Changing topics…

50. Next, how important is the condition of oceans and beaches to the economy and quality of life for California’s future?

57% very important
35% somewhat important
6% not too important
2% not at all important
– don’t know

51. Do you think that ocean and beach pollution along the California coast is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in California today?

41% big problem
49% somewhat of a problem
10% not a problem
1% don’t know

Following is a list of specific problems that some people say affect our ocean and marine life in California. After each, please indicate whether you think it is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in the part of the California coast that is closest to you.

[rotate questions 52 through 54]

52. How about plastics and marine debris? Do you think this is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in the part of the California coast that is closest to you?

60% big problem
34% somewhat of a problem
6% not a problem
1% don’t know

53. How about declining marine life? Do you think this is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in the part of the California coast that is closest to you?

46% big problem
41% somewhat of a problem
13% not a problem
1% don’t know

54. How about overfishing, or depleting the fishing stock by fishing? Do you think this is a big problem, somewhat of a problem, or not a problem in the part of the California coast that is closest to you?

32% big problem
46% somewhat of a problem
20% not a problem
2% don’t know

55. Do you favor or oppose expanding California Marine Protected Areas—or MPAs—to protect fish, wildlife, and their habitat off the California coast?

81% favor
18% oppose
1% don’t know

Next, please indicate if you favor or oppose the following proposals.

[rotate questions 56 through 58]

56. How about allowing more oil drilling off the California coast? Do you favor or oppose this proposal?

31% favor
67% oppose
2% don’t know

57. How about allowing wind power and wave energy projects off the California coast? Do you favor or oppose this proposal?

78% favor
20% oppose
2% don’t know

58. How about hydraulic fracturing, sometimes called “fracking,” for oil and natural gas? Do you favor or oppose this proposal?

32% favor
65% oppose
3% don’t know

On a different topic…

59. Do you approve or disapprove of the way President Biden is handling environmental issues in the United States?

49% approve
48% disapprove
3% don’t know

60. Do you approve or disapprove of the way the US Congress is handling environmental issues in the United States?

24% approve
73% disapprove
3% don’t know

61. How much of the time can you trust the federal government to do what is right when it comes to handling environmental issues in the United States?

3% just about always
26% most of the time
70% only some of the time
1% never (volunteered)
1% don’t know

62. Do you support or oppose the US participating in international efforts to help reduce the effects of global climate charge?

43% strongly support
33% somewhat support
12% somewhat oppose
11% strongly oppose
1% don’t know

63. How likely is it that countries around the world, including the US, will collectively do enough to avoid the worst impacts from climate change?

[rotate order top to bottom]

5% will definitely happen
28% will probably happen
46% will probably NOT happen
13% will definitely NOT happen
7% climate change impacts are not a problem
1% don’t know

64. Some people are registered to vote and others are not. Are you absolutely certain that you are registered to vote in California?

75% yes [ask q64a]
25% no [skip to q65b]

64a. Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, another party, or are you registered as a decline-to-state or independent voter?

47% Democrat [ask q65]
25% Republican [skip to q65a]
2% another party (please specify) [skip to q65b]
26% decline-to-state/independent [skip to q65b]

[likely voters only]

48% Democrat [ask q65]
24% Republican [skip to q65a]
2% another party (please specify) [skip to q65b]
26% decline-to-state/independent [skip to q65b]

65. Would you call yourself a strong Democrat or not a very strong Democrat?

54% strong
46% not very strong
– don’t know

[skip to q66]

65a. Would you call yourself a strong Republican or not a very strong Republican?

53% strong
47% not very strong
– don’t know

[skip to q66]

65b. Do you think of yourself as closer to the Republican Party or Democratic Party?

15% Republican Party
35% Democratic Party
40% neither
10% don’t know

66. [likely voters only] If the 2024 presidential election were being held today, and these were the candidates, who would you vote for?

55% Joe Biden
30% Donald Trump
11% someone else (specify)
1% neither/would not vote for President (volunteered)
3% don’t know

67. [likely voters only] In thinking about the presidential election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote?

42% very important
36% somewhat important
22% not too important
– don’t know

68. [likely voters only] If the November 5th US Senate election were being held today, would you vote for:

64% Adam Schiff, a Democrat, United States Representative
33% Steve Garvey, a Republican, Professional Baseball Representative
2% don’t know

69. [likely voters only] In thinking about the US Senate election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote?

39% very important
40% somewhat important
20% not too important
– don’t know

70. [likely voters only] If the 2024 election for US House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for [rotate] [1] the Republican candidate [or] [2] the Democratic candidate in your district?

36% Republican candidate/lean Republican
62% Democratic candidate/lean Democratic
2% don’t know

71. [likely voters only] In thinking about the US House of Representatives election in November, how important to you are the candidates’ positions on the environment in determining your vote?

37% very important
42% somewhat important
20% not too important
– don’t know

72. [likely voters only] In general, do you think it is a good thing or a bad thing that a majority of voters can make laws and change public policies about environmental issues in California by passing ballot measures?

80% good thing
20% bad thing
– don’t know

73. [likely voters only] How important is it to you personally to vote on ballot measures that will make laws and change public policies about environmental issues in California?

62% very important
31% somewhat important
7% not too important
– don’t know

74. [likely voters only] The legislature is considering a $10 billion bond measure for the November 2024 ballot to pay for flood protection and climate resiliency projects. If the election were being held today, would you vote yes or no?

59% yes
40% no
2% don’t know

75. [likely voters only] There will be a referendum on the November 2024 ballot challenging the 2022 law that prohibits new oil and gas wells near homes, schools, and hospitals. If the election were being held today, would you vote yes to approve the law or no to reject the law?

76% yes, approve the law
23% no, to reject the law
1% don’t know

76. [likely voters only] Do you favor or oppose having a citizens’ assembly on the environmental issues facing the state, where about 100 citizens would be randomly chosen and invited by state government officials to represent the profile of the public and, after hearing from experts, reviewing materials, and deliberating among themselves, would make recommendations to the governor and legislature on laws and ballot measures on environmental issues in California?

62% favor
37% oppose
1% don’t know

77. [likely voters only] Do you favor or oppose having a citizens’ initiative review commission where a representative group of about 24 citizens would be randomly chosen and invited by state government officials to participate in several public meetings, and given the task of choosing the citizens’ initiatives to review, holding public hearings in which both yes and no campaigns, along with policy experts, deliberate on the initiatives’ pros and cons, and then make ballot recommendations in the Secretary of State’s voter information guide?

56% favor
42% oppose
2% don’t know

78. Would you consider yourself to be politically: [rotate order top to bottom]

12% very liberal
20% somewhat liberal
42% middle-of-the-road
17% somewhat conservative
8% very conservative
1% don’t know

79. Generally speaking, how much interest would you say you have in politics?

36% a great deal
39% a fair amount
23% only a little
– none
1% don’t know

[d1–d15 demographic questions]