The Times Poll : Bird Losing Ground in Retention Effort

Rose Elizabeth Bird is losing ground in her uphill struggle to win reelection as California’s chief justice--and she is political poison for other candidates who might support her, the Los Angeles Times Poll has found.

If either Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley or U.S. Sen. Alan Cranston, for example, were to side with their longtime liberal constituencies and endorse Bird, it could turn substantial numbers of voters against them, the survey showed. Neither veteran Democrat so far has taken a public stand on her reelection.

Bird’s efforts to win another term on the state Supreme Court are posing ticklish problems for Democratic politicians, her natural allies, and are offering a potential bonanza for probable Republican candidates--among them Gov. George Deukmejian, one of her most outspoken critics. The reasons for this political volatility were clearly illustrated by Times Poll interviews with 1,263 registered voters.

The statewide telephone survey, under the supervision of Times Poll Director I. A. Lewis, was conducted over a seven-day period from Jan. 29 through Tuesday. The margin of error for this size of sample is 4%.

The poll found Bird to be dropping farther behind in her battle for voter support, despite her own personal and determined political efforts in recent months. She has, for instance, stepped up her public appearances and has given interviews to news media, while creating a professional campaign organization.

When those surveyed were asked whether they would vote--if the election were held today--to retain Bird or to remove her, the result was a lopsided 52% for removal, 29% for retention and 19% not sure. That represents a negative spread of 23 points--even greater than the 17 points she was down in a similar Times poll last June, when the result was 44% to 27%.

Similarly, the voters’ impression of Bird was decidedly negative--51% unfavorable to only 24% favorable. Again, this was worse for her than last June, when the impressions were unfavorable by 43% to 25%.

Bird’s unpopularity, however, does not seem to be rubbing off significantly on other members of the state Supreme Court who also will face the voters in November. While the court as a whole--presumably due to its connection with Bird--managed to record only a 45%-36% favorable impression, individual justices fared better. In fact, they all improved their standings with the voters since last June.

Five associate justices are up for voter approval, along with Bird, and less than half the people surveyed knew enough about any of them to express an opinion. But none of the jurists, at least at this early stage of the campaign, seemed to be in serious political trouble.

When voters were asked whether they should be retained, the results were Joseph P. Grodin--25% yes, 13% no; Malcolm M. Lucas--28% yes, 10% no; Stanley Mosk--34% yes, 12% no; Edward A. Panelli--28% yes, 8% no; Cruz Reynoso--26% yes, 16% no. Reynoso and Grodin also are being targeted by the major anti-Bird forces.

It is hard to find a solid base of support for Bird.

People under age 40 were almost equally divided on whether she should be kept on the court. But people over age 40 opposed her by a 5-2 ratio. Women opposed her less than men, but they still opposed her--by 4 to 3.

People who say that their friends think they are “yuppies” were only slightly against her. But blue-collar workers were against her by about 5 to 3. So were white-collar workers.

People who unfailingly vote Democrat--never split their ticket--are among Bird’s biggest supporters, siding with her by 5 to 3. But they amount to only 8% of the electorate. Persistent ticket-splitters of both parties, representing nearly a third of the registered voters, opposed her by nearly 3 to 1.

Liberals are Bird’s staunchest backers, siding with her by 2 to 1. But the much larger group of middle-of-the-road voters opposed her by 5 to 2. Conservatives, who outnumber liberals these days, opposed her by 4 to 1.

These facts of political life have many Democratic politicians in a dither, trying to figure out just how close they can afford to get to Bird.

Bradley, who plans to run for governor against Deukmejian, is in a special bind: He was a key leader of Bird’s campaign in 1978. This time, Bradley is on the fence, awaiting advice from a committee he has appointed to assess the situation.

When the Times Poll asked people whether they would be more likely or less likely to vote for Bradley if he supported Bird, the responses indicated that an endorsement could put him in personal political peril. Although roughly half the voters said it would not affect their vote, a third said they would be less likely to vote for him. And only a tenth said they would be more likely.

The answers were similar when voters were asked what their reactions would be to a Cranston endorsement of Bird. But Cranston, a wily veteran of many California political wars who now is running for reelection to a fourth term, already has announced that he has no intention of getting involved in the Bird campaign.

Deukmejian, however, clearly benefits politically from his adamant criticism of Bird. When those surveyed were asked whether they were more likely or less likely to vote for the governor because of his criticism of the chief justice, the responses were 32% more likely and only 13% less likely. Half the people said it would make no difference.

Voters in this poll, as in virtually all others, cited Bird’s rulings against the death penalty as their primary objection to her remaining on the bench.

The death penalty, which has not been used in California in nearly 19 years, continues to be strongly advocated. Of those surveyed, 74% favored capital punishment; only 11% opposed it.

ROSE BIRD AND THE VOTERS

These Los Angeles Times Poll results on the scheduled November vote on whether to reconfirm Rose Elizabeth Bird as Chief Justice of California are based on telephone interviews with 1,263 registered California voters during the week from Jan. 29 through Tuesday. Results will not total 100% in all cases.

Voters were asked their “impression” of Rose Bird:

(based on a scale of 0% -- 100%) “Favorable”--February, 1986 . . . 24%

“Favorable”--June, 1985 . . . 25%

“Unfavorable”--February, 1986. . . 51%

“Unfavorable”--June, 1985. . . 43%

Voters were asked if they would vote to reconfirm Rose Bird if the election were held today:

Date For Against Don’t Know February, 1986 29% 52% 19% June, 1985 27% 44% 29%

Voters were asked about votes for other politicians who announce support for Bird:

33% of voters said they would be “less likely” to vote for Alan Cranston, left, for Senate, or Tom Bradley, right, for governor, if either decides to support Bird. Another 10% said they would be “more likely” to vote for Cranston and Bradley, and more than half the voters said their vote would be unaffected.