Poll: Residents happy, but skeptical

Wisconsin residents are generally happy to be living here overall, but do not express such pride in the quality of their government, says the second in the University of Wisconsin–Madison Survey Center series of Badger Polls.

The poll examines how state residents view their state and its government, and perceptions of the budget proposals made by Gov. Scott McCallum. The center surveyed 524 randomly selected state residents by telephone during June 8-17.

G. Donald Ferree, Jr., associate director for public opinion research at survey center, outlined the key findings as follows:

Overall, residents continue to be happy with Wisconsin as a place to live. One out of four (24 percent) say that it is either the best or one of the very best places to raise a family. Another large group (38 percent) calls it better than most, so these two views together account for more than six respondents in every ten. Virtually all the remainder call it “about average” overall. Only a handful rates it lower.

Women as a group are somewhat less enthusiastic than men (the difference is mostly in the balance between better than most and about average). Enthusiasm increases somewhat as one moves on the partisan spectrum from self-described Democrats to Republicans. There is no sharply defined age-related pattern.

These results are quite similar to responses received during the first Badger Poll, Ferree says.

Traditionally, Wisconsinites have prided themselves especially on the quality of government here. Residents now do not express such pride, although criticism is measured, Ferree says.

For instance, when respondents were asked to compare Wisconsin to other states in terms or how well run the state government is, half (53 percent) say Wisconsin is more or less like other states. Those who perceive a difference split rather closely in terms of whether it is especially well run (22 percent) or especially poorly run (18 percent).

Women are slightly more likely than men to see the state as typical, but, if they do perceive a difference, to think it is relatively well run, but these distinctions are modest.

Partisan groups are similar in that the largest group feels the state is typical, with about four in ten thinking it different. But Republicans are twice as likely to think Wisconsin excels in this dimension as to say it stands out as poorly run.
Democrats and Independents are more closely divided with the former giving a slight edge to especially poorly run while the opposite is true for Independents. Younger respondents (who have less experience) are somewhat more positive than older ones, although again the distinction is relatively modest.

Residents are more critical of the Badger state when it comes to fiscal matters, more precisely “when it comes to spending tax money efficiently.” Again, the largest single group (just under half at 49 percent) feels Wisconsin is more or less like other states.

But one in three (33 percent) thinks Wisconsin is especially wasteful, contrasted with fewer than one in ten (9 percent) who label it especially efficient. Men as a group are more critical than women, with four in ten of the former, but only one in four of the latter calling the state especially wasteful.

Partisanship, perhaps surprisingly, makes little difference. Nor does age, with similar patterns obtaining for all groups. In March, overall results were essentially identical, so the stasis over the state budget has not been accompanied by any greater criticism on this dimension.

Both the earlier and current surveys indicate that Wisconsin’s special heritage of clean government remains very much in doubt. Seven in ten (69 percent) think Wisconsin is “more or less like other states” in terms of honesty and corruption. One in five (19 percent) call it especially honest, while just under half as many (8 percent) say it is especially corrupt. Thus, the fact that Wisconsin is no longer seen as a positive standout means more that it is seen as “merely normal” than high on any corruption measure.

One area where there is some shift, albeit modest, in the past three months, is how the state of the state compares under McCallum with what it was when Tommy Thompson was governor. Now, six in 10 perceive the state as being about as well off, although those who see a difference break disproportionately (31 percent-5 percent) to seeing things as now being worse than they were “compared to before McCallum became governor.”

In March, half of all residents (50 percent) felt the state was essentially in the same shape, and corresponding more (40 percent) felt it was worse, so there has been some tempering of this perception.

Men are a bit more likely than women as a group to see a worsening, although the typical opinion in both groups is that things are now similar. The greater criticism of men is noteworthy in that there is a tendency for criticism to be sharpened as one moves from Republican to Democrat on the partisan spectrum, and women as a group are more Democratic than are men. Perception of worsening deepens modestly as one moves up the age scale until it falls back somewhat among the eldest group (those sixty and over).

For an incumbent, the impact of the comparative “state of the state” will depend in part on how linked it is seen as being to the policies of that incumbent. On balance, Wisconsin residents see that link as rather measured.

Overall, only about one in 10 think “a lot” of any change is “due to Gov. McCallum and his policies.” Adding in the one in three (35 percent) who say “some” accounts for just under half of residents. But on the other side, opinions are almost symmetric — one in three (32 percent) blame (or credit) the “state of the state” to McCallum.

There continues to be a rather one-sided sense that both tax and spending levels are higher than they ought be, Ferree says. More than three in four (77 percent) label the level of state taxes as “too high,” with almost all the remaining respondents (19 percent) calling it about right. There is virtually no opinion that taxes are lower than they ought to be.

On the spending side of the ledger there is a (somewhat weaker) tendency to see state spending as excessive. Just under six in ten (58 percent) call that “too high.” One in four (25 percent) find it appropriate, a handful (5 percent) think it “too low.” March was similar in finding large groups viewing both as too high. But the proportion so labeling taxes was a bit lower while the proportion calling spending too high was a bit lower, so less of a distinction was made then than is now the case.

Groups defined by gender and (perhaps surprisingly) partisanship differ scarcely at all in terms of feeling taxes are two high. There is an increasing tendency as one moves up the age latter (to sixty) to feel this way, at which point it plateaus.

While the state’s fiscal problems have been much in the news, most residents (55 percent) believe that the state can both maintain programs and hold taxes down, while only about one third (34 percent) believe that “a choice must be made between serious service cuts and big increases in taxes” to balance the budget. In March, before three months of back and forth over the budget, the proportion thinking the times required hard choices was slightly lower. But still, the typical sentiment is one of doubts about the reality of the long-term dilemma. Skepticism is widespread, and at generally similar levels across groups; the only exception is the youngest age group.

Considering the level of media attention, it may be surprising that the public is scarcely focusing on questions of the governor’s budget adjustment plan. Sentiment about the plan remains somewhat negative on balance. Thus, while four in 10 favor it (7 percent strongly, 33 percent somewhat), just over half are in opposition (20 percent strongly, 33 percent somewhat). The relative preponderance of “middle positions” suggests something of a lack of passion.

The poll was conducted by the University of Wisconsin Survey Center as part of its ongoing program of research designed to benefit the research community and the people of Wisconsin. Results from this survey have a “margin of error” of a little over +/- 4 percent. This means that, had the center asked every eligible adult in Wisconsin, exactly these questions at the time the survey was conducted, there is a one in 20 chance that the answers would differ by more than that in either direction from what we report here. There could be differences because of changes in question wording, events occurring in the meantime, or any of the practical difficulties involved in taking a scientific survey. Results based on subgroups are subject to a larger “margin of error.”

The survey was made possible by private funds made available by the Chancellor’s Office and University Communications. The Capital Times is a media sponsor.
# # #