THE TIMES POLL : Hayden’s Name a Black Mark on ‘Big Green’

Called “Big Green” by its sponsors and “The Hayden initiative” by its detractors, the sweeping environmental protection measure that officially is designated Proposition 128 seems to have California voters in a quandary, The Times Poll has found.

The public image of its controversial chairman, Assemblyman Tom Hayden (D-Santa Monica), clearly is hurting the measure’s cause, the survey showed.

The electorate is virtually split down the middle on the initiative, which will appear on the Nov. 6 ballot. A statewide survey by The Times Poll found 44% of the voters in favor of the proposal, 42% against and 14% undecided.

Meanwhile, the voters’ impression of Hayden--the one-time anti-war radical detested by many conservatives--is 5 to 3 negative. By strongly linking Hayden to the initiative, opponents of the measure have hit a responsive nerve with voters, the survey indicated.

The survey also found that distrust of Sacramento--aggravated by a bitter, monthlong brouhaha over the state budget in July--is contributing to strong support for a ballot initiative sponsored by Los Angeles County Supervisor Pete Schabarum that would limit the terms of state officials, reduce legislators’ retirement benefits and cut the Legislature’s operating funds.

Two ballot measures that would raise liquor taxes also are currently favored by voters, the survey showed.

The Times Poll interviewed 1,586 registered voters by telephone over a six-day period ending Wednesday night. The margin of error for the statewide survey is three percentage points in either direction. The poll was supervised by Susan Pinkus, Times assistant poll director.

A similar poll in late June found voters narrowly supporting Proposition 128 by 46% to 38%. Since then, it has been the target of extensive radio advertising sponsored by a well-heeled opposition campaign--financed in large part by agriculture and chemical interests--aimed at portraying the proposal as “trying to do too much” and identifying it as “the Hayden initiative.”

The initiative seeks to solve several environmental dilemmas. Among other things, it would ban cancer-causing chemicals in food, save old-growth redwoods, tax oil companies to pay for potential oil spills, and reduce gases that contribute to global warming and depletion of the ozone layer.

“Everyone is an environmentalist,” Times political analyst William Schneider said, “but the more they hear the arguments for and against this particular measure--the more doubts they have.”

Hayden is one of the arguments being used against the proposal. Opponents, among other things, point out that the liberal assemblyman has his eye on running for the new state office of environmental advocate that the initiative would create.

Voters surveyed by The Times initially were asked merely for their “impression of Proposition 128, the Environmental Protection Act of 1990, also known as the Big Green initiative.” Nearly half the people had not formed an opinion, but among the rest, their impressions were favorable by more than 2 to 1.

Interviewers then read a lengthy description of the measure, including highlights of the campaign arguments by supporters and opponents, ending with the Hayden connection. Voters who had a negative image of Hayden were initially divided evenly in their impression of Proposition 128. After hearing a description of the measure, including Hayden’s involvement, they turned more than 2 to 1 against it.

Voters who had a positive image of Hayden were very favorably impressed with Proposition 128 to begin with and, after hearing of his connection, wound up supporting the proposal by 3 to 1. On the other hand, people with no attitude toward Hayden ended up supporting the measure by roughly 4 to 3.

Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dianne Feinstein has tried to make her support of Proposition 128 a “defining issue”--one that clearly separates her from the Republican nominee, Sen. Pete Wilson, who opposes the measure. The two candidates clearly are in sync with their constituents: Feinstein’s supporters favor the initiative by roughly 5 to 3 and Wilson’s backers oppose it by a similar ratio.

Regionally, there is a big split between urban and rural areas. A majority of voters in Los Angeles County and the San Francisco Bay Area support Proposition 128. Californians living outside these two big urban centers oppose the measure, with the strongest opposition being generated in the farm-belt Central Valley.

Besides Hayden, another co-sponsor of Proposition 128 is state Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp. He has taken a back seat in the initiative campaign after losing to Feinstein in the Democratic gubernatorial primary.

Van de Kamp also is pushing Proposition 131, a wide-ranging government ethics initiative. It would limit state officials to two four-year terms and legislators to terms totaling 12 years. It would permit candidates for state office to help finance their campaigns with tax money if they adhered to spending limits and it would limit gifts and honorariums, among other things.

When those surveyed were asked how they plan to vote on the measure, the response was 47% for, 34% against and 19% undecided.

There was more support for Schabarum’s initiative, Proposition 140. It would hit legislators with tighter term limits--three two-year stints for members of the Assembly and two four-year terms for senators. The governor and other elected state officials could serve two four-year terms. Schabarum’s plan would also cut back on legislative pensions and expenses.

Voters favored this proposal by 52% to 27%, with 21% undecided.

Gov. George Deukmejian’s job rating seems to have suffered from the July budget brawl. He now elicits 50% approval, 42% disapproval and 8% not sure. Last February, there was more voter uncertainty about the governor, but he drew only 30% disapproval along with 44% approval.

Asked who they blame for the budget fiasco--in which state government went one month into the new fiscal year without adopting a spending plan--64% of the voters faulted “all of them equally.”

Voter Preferences Following are results from a Los Angeles Times poll of 1,586 registered voters. Respondents were asked how they would vote on key statewide propositions if the election were held today. Prop. 126-Alcohol Proposition 126 would boost the per gallon tax on table wine and beer to 20 cents and on liquor to $3.30 Don’t know: 13% Vote against: 38% Vote for: 49% Prop. 128-Environment Proposition 128, known as Big Green among proponents, is a sweeping measure that addresses a long list of environmental issues. Don’t know: 14% Vote against: 42% Vote for: 44% Prop. 134 Alcohol Proposition 134 would hike per gallon taxes on table wine from a penny to $1.29; on beer from 4 cents to 57.3 cents and on liquor from $2 to $8.40. Don’t know: 16% Vote against: 37% Vote for: 47% Source: L.A. Times Poll