Environmental Polling Roundup – May 19, 2023
HEADLINES
Navigator – The repeal of job-producing clean energy investments is one of many elements that voters find deeply concerning about congressional Republicans’ debt ceiling proposal (Release, Deck)
Yale + GMU – Democrats, younger Americans, and college educated Americans are the mostly likely to discuss global warming with their friends and family; Republicans of all ideologies are the least likely to discuss the issue, even as non-conservative Republicans generally support climate action (Article)
Data for Progress – The public widely supports building direct air capture (DAC) hubs after learning about them; the most appealing features of potential DAC projects include guarantees of re-investment in the community, stable jobs, and funding through taxing polluting industries (Memo, Crosstabs)
US Water Alliance – The public’s prioritization of water issues ranks on par with the economy and inflation; voters’ evaluations of national and local water infrastructure have been declining in recent years (Release, Fact Sheet)
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- In the debt ceiling debate, the repeal of job-producing clean energy investments is one of many potential consequences that resonates with voters. Navigator finds that a statement about congressional Republicans’ proposed cuts to clean energy investments (“[Congressional Republicans’ budget plan] would repeal investments in clean energy that have already created more than 100,000 manufacturing and other jobs across the country”) is deeply concerning to voters. These job-killing clean energy cuts are one of several elements – along with Medicaid cuts that would take coverage away from as many as 21 million Americans, funding cuts for food safety inspectors that could lead to shortages and higher prices for groceries, and cuts to K-12 education that could eliminate 108,000 teachers’ jobs and impact over 32 million kids – that make congressional Republicans’ proposed budget cuts toxic to the public if voters are informed about them.
- Americans need to see that climate investments will produce long-lasting economic benefits for their communities. Data for Progress finds that community reinvestment and long-term, union jobs stand out as important elements for voters when evaluating potential plans for direct air capture (DAC) facilities in their areas. These findings are consistent with other research we’ve seen on federal climate and clean energy investments. Recent qualitative and quantitative research by LCV and Climate Power, for example, underlined the importance of tangible economic benefits such as job growth and cost savings in communications about IRA/IIJA implementation.
- Republicans need to hear that people like them care about climate change. Yale and George Mason find that Republicans rarely discuss global warming with friends and family, and that climate conversations are exceedingly rare even among less ideological Republicans – a segment that tends to support climate action. This finding speaks to the need to normalize climate concern within Republican circles and to make Republicans more comfortable broaching the issue with the people around them. Based on the polling data, pro-climate Republicans are likely to find that their social circles care much more about the issue than they suspect.
GOOD DATA POINTS TO HIGHLIGHT
- [Water] 85% of voters say that ensuring a reliable supply of water is an “extremely” or “”very” important issue for the federal government to address, including 52% who call it “extremely” important [US Water Alliance]
- [Water] 82% of voters say that addressing drinking water contamination is an “extremely” or “very” important issue for the federal government, including 48% who call it “extremely” important [US Water Alliance]
- [DAC] 68% of voters support the U.S. building direct air capture (DAC) facilities after learning what they are, including majorities of Democrats, independents, and Republicans [Data for Progress]
- [Debt Limit + Clean Energy] 70% of voters find it concerning that congressional Republicans’ proposed budget plan would repeal investments in clean energy that have already created more than 100,000 jobs [Navigator]
- [Issue Importance] More Americans name climate change and the environment as the single “most important issue” to them than any other issue aside from inflation/prices, jobs/economy, and health care [The Economist + YouGov]
FULL ROUNDUP
Navigator – The repeal of job-producing clean energy investments is one of many elements that voters find deeply concerning about congressional Republicans’ debt ceiling proposal (Release, Deck)
This Navigator report focuses on the debt ceiling fight and finds that, while voters support raising the debt ceiling in order to avoid default, they are divided in their support of the budget plan put forward by Republicans in Congress (39% support / 38% oppose) upon first learning about it.
However, voters go from being split on congressional Republicans’ budget plan to opposing it by a nearly two-to-one margin (29% support / 58% oppose) after reading that the plan “would cut 22% of funding for almost everything aside from military spending, including health care, schools, and law enforcement, while also protecting tax cuts for the rich.” (And it’s worth noting that other analyses estimate the across-the-board budget costs to be even higher.)
For advocates that want to message against congressional Republicans’ proposed budget cuts from a climate/clean energy angle, the poll also finds that 70% of voters are concerned that the bill would “repeal investments in clean energy that have already created more than 100,000 manufacturing and other jobs across the country.”
More than two in five voters (44%) find the repeal of these clean energy investments “very” concerning, demonstrating a good amount of intensity in response to this proof point.
For those who have the leeway to message against congressional Republicans’ budget cuts from other angles, the poll finds that proof points about health care, education, and the potential impacts on groceries are particularly resonant.
Here are the statements about the budget proposal that voters are most likely to rate as “very concerning”:
- The bill would take Medicaid away from as many as 21 million people according to the Department of Health and Human Services, including kids with disabilities, seniors in assisted living, and pregnant women (62% “very concerning”)
- The bill would cut funding for food safety inspectors, leading to shortages and higher prices on meat, poultry, and eggs (61%)
- The bill would cut funding for K-12 education, eliminating 108,000 teachers’ jobs and impacting over 32 million kids (59%)
Yale + GMU – Democrats, younger Americans, and college educated Americans are the mostly likely to discuss global warming with their friends and family; Republicans of all ideologies are the least likely to discuss the issue, even as non-conservative Republicans generally support climate action (Article)
This new article draws on data from the December 2022 edition of Yale and George Mason’s Climate Change in the American Mind study and highlights the importance of climate conversations in shaping people’s beliefs and attitudes about the issue. Pulling from the article:
“Research has found that non-judgmental one-on-one discussions (e.g., deep-canvassing) can lead to enduring opinion changes about emotionally and politically charged topics by providing an opportunity to exchange personal stories without judgment. Talking about an issue – including global warming – can also lead to deeper processing and understanding, which can motivate people to talk about it with others.
However, most Americans rarely or never talk about global warming currently. According to our latest Climate Change in the American Mind December 2022 survey, only 37% of Americans say they discuss global warming with family and friends either “occasionally” (29%) or “often” (8%), while most (63%) say they either “rarely” (30%) or “never” (33%) discuss it.”
Their survey finds that liberal Democrats discuss global warming with their friends or family far more frequently (68% “often” or “occasionally”) than any other segment of the population. College educated Americans (49% “often” or “occasionally”), moderate-to-conservative Democrats (48%), and urban residents (48%) are also relatively more likely to have these kinds of conservations.
Meanwhile, only 14% of liberal-to-moderate Republicans and just 11% of conservative Republicans say that they at least “occasionally” discuss global warming with family and friends.
Liberal-to-moderate Republicans’ apparent reluctance to discuss global warming is particularly striking because this is not a group that denies the need for climate action. Previous Yale/GMU polling, for example, has found that majorities of liberal-to-moderate Republicans (though relatively few conservative Republicans) support large-scale climate actions such as transitioning the U.S. economy to 100% clean energy by 2050, requiring electric utilities to produce 100% of their electricity from renewables by 2035, and requiring fossil fuel companies to pay a carbon tax.
Polling indicates that Americans dramatically underestimate how much those around them care about climate change, and this may explain a large part of pro-climate Republicans’ reluctance to discuss the topic. Accordingly, normalizing the idea that Republicans care about climate change could go a long way to spurring conversation about the issue in Republican circles and enabling more peer-to-peer persuasion.
It’s important to recognize that there is a big ideological divide within the Republican electorate, and high rates of climate skepticism among conservative Republicans make them a very difficult audience to persuade. However, there is clearly ample opportunity to engage less ideological Republicans in the fight against climate change.
Data for Progress – The public widely supports building direct air capture (DAC) hubs after learning about them; the most appealing features of potential DAC projects include guarantees of re-investment in the community, stable jobs, and funding through taxing polluting industries (Memo, Crosstabs)
For this new project focusing on the equitable deployment of regional direct air capture (DAC) hubs, Data for Progress conducted several on-the-ground workshops with community members in select geographies and also fielded a national survey to assess voters’ attitudes about DAC and potential DAC projects in their areas.
While we’ll focus just on the national survey results here, the full memo linked above is well worth reading to understand how local communities react to these types of projects.
In the survey, Data for Progress finds that Americans overwhelmingly support building DAC facilities in the United States (68% support / 18% oppose) after learning about them.
DAC facilities garner support from three-quarters of Democrats (77% support / 10% oppose) and nearly two-thirds of independents (65% support / 18% oppose), and Republicans also support building DAC facilities by a greater than two-to-one margin (60% support / 26% oppose).
We’ve seen broad, cross-partisan support for carbon capture and removal technologies in other polling, as investments in new climate and clean energy tech tend to attract relatively high support across party lines.
The Data for Progress survey also used a technique called conjoint analysis to determine the relative amount of importance that voters place on different aspects of potential DAC projects. By allowing respondents to choose between alternate versions of DAC project plans, the survey isolated the impacts of specific aspects and found that voters rate the following potential elements of DAC projects as the most important:
- Share of project costs reinvested in the community (i.e., for schools and roads)
- Long-term local jobs guaranteed with unionization commitment
- Funding through taxes on polluting industries
While the findings here are specifically about DAC projects, we’ve seen other recent research underline the importance of clearly communicating the local economic benefits of climate investments.
LCV and Climate Power, for example, conducted both qualitative and quantitative research about the IRA and IIJA around the turn of the year. Their memo from this research highlighted concrete economic outcomes from these bills as an imperative focus for climate advocates to communicate about:
“1) Illustrate progress being made right now. Our research clearly shows that in order to make the promise of future benefits meaningful, voters need to see action and results in real time. The jobs being created by the development of new clean energy projects are currently the most credible and impactful way to show the clean energy plan is already working.
2) Show the outcomes of the affordable clean energy plan on an ongoing and consistent basis. After showing voters the magnitude of action that is taking place, we need to sustain the momentum by continually lifting up stories of how people and communities are benefiting from the clean energy plan. Personal testimonies (about jobs, cost savings, etc.) and a steady drumbeat of stories that show the benefits of clean energy in the real world can help create an ever-building narrative.”
US Water Alliance – The public’s prioritization of water issues ranks on par with the economy and inflation; voters’ evaluations of national and local water infrastructure have been declining in recent years (Release, Fact Sheet)
The US Water Alliance finds that voters rate reliable water supply and addressing drinking water contamination on par with the economy and inflation as priorities for the federal government
More than four in five say that it’s at least “very” important for the federal government to ensure a reliable supply of water (85%, including 52% who say it’s “extremely” important) and to address drinking water contamination (82%, including 48% who say it’s “extremely” important).
For comparison, 85% say that it’s at least “very” important for the federal government to strengthen the economy (including 51% who say it’s “extremely” important) and 84% say that it’s at least “very” important for the federal government to reduce inflation (including 51% who say it’s “extremely” important).
The poll additionally finds that perceptions of water infrastructure at both the national and local levels have been declining for several years.
The percentage of voters who rate their local water infrastructure as “good” now stands at 71%, down from 86% in 2016. Ratings of national water infrastructure have fallen even more: less than half of voters (40%) now say that national water infrastructure is “good,” down from 59% in 2016.
While this poll release doesn’t break out responses by demographic subgroups, recent polling by Gallup found that large majorities of Black and Hispanic adults in particular worry a great deal about drinking water pollution.
Related Resources
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 6th, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 23rd, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.
Environmental Polling Roundup – August 27th, 2021
This post includes a roundup of climate + environment headlines from this week’s public polls, good data points to highlight, and a full roundup including key takeaways from each poll.