Environmental Measures Struggling, Term Limits Favored, Poll Indicates

Both Propositions 128 and 135, the competing environmental initiatives on the November ballot, are struggling to capture a majority among Orange County voters, but two measures that would limit state legislators’ terms are leading by wide margins, a Times Orange County Poll shows.

Proposition 128--the so-called Big Green initiative that would impose strict regulations on pesticides, air and water, plus authorize $300 million in bonds to buy ancient redwood forests--is leading in the county, 45% to 40%, with 15% undecided, the poll shows.

That lead disappears, however, among those in the county who are likely to vote; they opposed the measure, 44% to 41%.

The county results jibe with those of a recent Times statewide poll that showed voters divided over Proposition 128, with 44% against, 42% in favor and 14% undecided. The margin of error in that poll was plus or minus 3%.

Proposition 135, a less-sweeping environmental measure endorsed by the agriculture industry, fares only marginally better in Orange County, with 46% favoring it, 34% opposing and 20% undecided.

Democrats and Republicans are roughly equal in their support of Proposition 135, but opinion on Big Green--which has been endorsed by Democratic gubernatorial hopeful Dianne Feinstein and opposed by Sen. Pete Wilson, the Republican candidate--splits along party lines. Just 38% of Republicans said they will vote for the measure, against 53% of Democrats.

While an earlier poll had shown much stronger support for Big Green, it has been the subject of intense campaigning recently by foes.

Pollster Mark Baldassare said the latest results spell trouble for both environmental measures.

“What’s important is that they don’t have a majority at this point,” he said. “You look for initiatives to be going in with majority support. . . . They’re very vulnerable to any kind of negative campaigns. If people have the slightest feeling that something is wrong, they’ll vote no.”

The Times Orange County Poll was conducted Monday to Wednesday of last week by Mark Baldassare and Associates. Six hundred registered voters were interviewed by telephone, with a margin for error of plus or minus 4%.

While county voters are apparently reluctant to enact sweeping environmental changes, they seem more than ready to rid Sacramento of multiterm incumbents.

Both Proposition 131 and Proposition 140, which would limit statewide and legislative officeholders’ terms, were favored by more than two-thirds of those polled, with Republicans slightly more likely to support the measures.

Orange County support for the measures is running ahead of support statewide, based on results of a Times statewide poll completed last week. About half of all voters support the measures, with roughly a third opposed and 15% to 19% undecided, that poll found.

Proposition 131, which is supported by Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp and includes provisions for public campaign funding, is leading in the county, 67% to 22%, with 11% undecided. The more-restrictive Proposition 140, which is supported by Wilson and does not include public campaign funding, held a similar edge of 69% to 19%, with 12% undecided.

Supporters of these measures have “really captured the public imagination,” Baldassare said. “I don’t think people are differentiating between 131 and 140 at this point. They’re just looking for any means to have new people in office.”

Desmond Pencock, 61, a Republican from Santa Ana who responded to the poll, said he does not yet know enough about the two measures to distinguish between them.

“I don’t know which one is going to win, but I’m for anything that would limit our people in office,” said Pencock, a librarian at Santa Ana High School. “They just keep hanging on. . . . Cranston has been in office ever since I can remember.”

Another statewide initiative, Proposition 133, which would increase the sales tax one-half cent to pay for drug enforcement and prevention programs, is clinging to a bare majority in Orange County, with 52% favoring the measure, 35% opposing it and 13% undecided.

Women are more likely to support the measure than men; 60% of women said they would vote for it, while the measure trailed, 44% to 46%, among men.

How the Poll Was Conducted

The Times Orange County poll was conducted Oct. 22 through 24 by Mark Baldassare & Associates. The telephone survey of 600 Orange County registered voters was conducted on weekday nights using a computer-generated random sample of telephone numbers.

For a sample of this size, the margin of error is plus or minus 4%. For the subgroup of likely voters, the margin is plus or minus 5%.

Sampling error is just one type of error that can affect opinion polls. Results also can be affected by question wording, survey timing and other variables.

All responses were anonymous, but some agreed to be re-interviewed later for a news story.

Proposition 128 “The so-called Big Green initiative would regulate pesticides, air and water, authorize $300 million in bonds to acquire ancient redwoods and establish the elected position of environmental advocate. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no?”

Don’t Yes No Know Likely Voters 41% 44% 15%

Proposition 135 “The pesticide regulation initiative would expand pesticide monitoring programs for produce and processed foods, eliminate some industry fees for pesticide programs and modify penalties, regulations and training for pesticide users. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no?”

Don’t Yes No Know Likely Voters 44% 36% 20%

Proposition 131 “The term limits and ethics initiative would limit the governor and state officeholders to eight years and state legislators to 12 years in office. It would limit gifts to elected state and local officials, limit campaign contributions and provide public campaign funding. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no?” No: 23% Yes: 67% Don’t Know: 10% Proposition 140 “The terms of office and Legislature initiative would limit statewide officeholders and state senators to two consecutive four-year terms and state Assembly members to three two-year terms. It would reduce the state Legislature’s budget by $70 million and eliminate the Legislature’s pension plan, replacing it with the federal Social Security program. If the election were held today, would you vote yes or no?”

No: 20% Yes: 68% Don’t Know: 12%