Wisconsin Polls Prove Wording Matters

The summer reading assignment for my introductory statistics class was a short little book entitled How to Lie with Statistics. Before we ever took our first random sample or ran our first regression line, we learned how questions and numbers can be used to affirm any position (and yet for some reason the professor docked us points if we tried to do such on exams).

In the recent Wisconsin budget saga, pundits and politicos on both sides of the debate have attempted to reinforce their positions with public opinion numbers and statistics. Rachael Maddow has led off numerous shows in the past couple weeks with the latest poll from Wisconsin, and Nate Silver has critiqued Rasmussen’s early poll on Walker and unions. This week, the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute added another statewide poll to the mix. Partisans may and have cherry picked numbers out of it like “65 percent think Governor Walker should compromise” or that a majority disapprove of Senate Democrats’ leaving the state. Fortunately, there is more information within the poll release than partisan positioning.

Two aspects of WPRI’s release make it notable over previous polls on the subject; they included two questions in an “experiment to examine responses to different ways of framing a key element of the budget repair bill, specifically collective bargaining, and they released the full crosstabs of their data, revealing the beliefs of different demographic groups. Question framing and wording are often cited as reasons to dismiss poll results when they are unagreeable, though rarely is there a direct comparative sample to see if such dismissals are correct.

The first question in the experiment asked if respondents strongly or somewhat favor or somewhat or strongly oppose the following Walker-friendly statement (let’s call it statement A); “Limiting most public employees' ability to negotiate over non-wage issues in order to prevent local union affiliates from obstructing the budgeting process for local governments.” The results found a statistical tie: 47 percent were strongly or somewhat in favor of the statement, while 50 percent somewhat or strongly oppose the statement.

And yet, when the other half of the sample is asked about favoring or opposing the second union friendly statement (statement B), “Stripping most public employees of their right to collectively bargain over benefits and working conditions as part of a ploy to eliminate public employee unions altogether,” there is a 25-point swing in the favor/oppose margin! Only 32 percent favor the second statement while 58 percent oppose it.






An interesting demographic aspect is the shift in opinion among the college educated between the two statements. 40 percent of those with an undergraduate or higher degree favor the first statement, statement A. When we turn to statement B, where overall favorability fell by 15 points, the favorability of those with college or graduate degrees marginally increased (42 percent). The best educated were more inclined to favor a statement of “stripping … rights to collective bargaining” that is supposed to be engender sympathy for the unions than the Walker-friendly statement. These results suggest that the college educated are more impervious to the phraseology of poll questions.

Gallup discovered a similar occurrence regarding the wording and results in their union questions. On February 21st, they found that only 33 percent of Americans favored the Wisconsin bill “that would take away some of the collective bargaining rights of most public unions, including the state teachers’ union,” and 61 percent opposed it. Less than two weeks later (March 3-6), a question on the same subject found 49 percent favored “changing state laws to limit the bargaining power of state employee unions,” and 45 percent opposed. The 34-point swing between the two Gallup questions is even larger than the swing between the two WPRI experiment questions.

The essential difference in both sets of questions is the wording “collective bargaining rights”; statements with those words in some order suggest clear support for unions, where as questions omitting the words “collectively” or “right” show mixed opinion. Gallup observes that their “differing results likely reflect Americans' sensitivity to nuances in how the debate can be framed. They may also indicate the high and low boundaries of support for setting new limits on collective bargaining.”

Question wording matters, not just the percentages that follow them. So, too, does looking beyond the state level responses to see how different groups react. The certain take away from these polls reaffirms the old adage popularized by Mark Twain; there are “lies, damned lies, and statistics.”

Obama shifts on Gitmo, joins public opinion

Yesterday, the Obama administration reversed course and announced they would restart trials at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  While not surprising, it is one of the administration's clearest admissions of err thus far.  Remember, this is the same President whose first executive order (just hours after being inaugurated) was to fully close the Gitmo prison in a year, signed two years ago.

The situation is an apt time to quote the late Irving Kristol, who noted a neoconservative is "a liberal mugged by reality."  Obama clearly took an ideological stance on Gitmo while in the Senate and during his campaign.  When he took on governing realities for the first time, reality quickly educated him on the phrase "necessary evils."  His terrorism policies are not all to different than his much maligned predecessor.

As for the public, majorities generally favor keeping Gitmo open.  While a slim majority (51%) favored closely the facility in January 2009 (during the publicity of Obama ordering its closure), 60 percent thought it should continue operations a little over a year later in March 2010 (CNN).  The latest poll on the subject was a Fox/OD poll in January, finding 53 percent of people "would you like Obama to change his position and keep the prison at Guantanamo open" where as only 31 percent "want Obama to keep his promise and close Guantanamo."

Gitmo is a necessary reality that finally forced Obama to surrender his ideological pretensions.

What's the Matter with Mississippi?

That’s the question many commentators were asking last week, when Gallup released their 2010 averages of Obama’s presidential approval ratings, broken down by state. Nate Silver over at Five Thirty Eight found that President Obama’s approval rating has only increased (when compared to his 2008 vote share) in states that voted for McCain. Most surprisingly, Mississippi was at the top of this list. Obama’s 2010 approval rating is more than 4 points higher than the votes he received there in 2008, 47.1 percent to 43 percent.

Continuing with this analysis, last year New Hampshire gave Obama the lowest approval rating of any state that voted for him in 2008 (41.3 percent) and experienced the second largest drop from Obama’s 2008 vote totals (Vermont experienced the largest drop). Conversely, Mississippi gave Obama the highest approval of all the states that voted for McCain in 2008. The article is summarily titled “Is Mississippi the new New Hampshire?”

Yet, two days later, Gallup released another set of polling numbers, examining the average number of self-identified conservatives, moderates, and liberals in each state in 2010. Mississippi is again at the top of the list, this time for being home to the highest percent of conservatives (50.5 percent). Conservatives have a numbers advantage over liberals in all fifty states, ranging from a 36.7 point gap in Mississippi to a 0.2 point gap in Vermont. So if over 50 percent of Mississippians identify as conservative, and over 47 percent approve of Obama, what’s the matter with Mississippi?

Examining the ideological spectrum nationally, Pew found 38 percent of people identify as conservative or very conservative, 33 percent as moderate, and 24 percent as liberal or very liberal in August and September of 2010. Despite the common perception that identifying as conservative equates to being or voting Republican, this is not an absolute. Though only 6 percent of Republicans identify themselves as liberal or very liberal, 24 percent of Democrats identify as conservative or very conservative nationally according to the same Pew poll. Furthermore, moderates are more likely to identify as a Democrat over a Republican by a 3 to 2 ratio (33 to 22 percent). So, despite conservatives boasting pluralities in every state, those pluralities do not translate to a unified Republican voting bloc across the map. Even with his increased popularity in the state, Obama shouldn’t be pegging his reelection hopes on Mississippi any time soon.

The Paradox of Public Opinion towards Budget Cutting

As President Obama released his 2012 budget this week, the ongoing federal deficit debate has turned from electoral rhetoric to governing reality. Both Republican leadership in the House and President Obama have publicly discussed the need to examine cuts in defense and entitlement funding, but neither one have made a meaningful opening gambit. This month, a CBS poll finds that the American public is evenly split on who they trust more, Obama or House Republicans, when it come to making the right decisions about reducing the deficit. Each side holds the trust of 42 percent of Americans. This is consistent from last month, where AP-Gfk found 41 percent trusted each party.

For Republicans, public confidence in handling the deficit has fallen since last fall, when they were regularly trusted more than Democrats by roughly 7 points. Gallup’s polling shows the public’s approval of how Obama is handling the budget deficit has also fallen, from 49 percent approval in March of 2009 to 27 percent this month.

The federal deficit is of increasing concern to Americans. In Pew’s poll, 64 percent of Americans rank “reducing the budget deficit” as a top priority this January, whereas only 35 percent did so in January of 2002. The last time the budget deficit was a top priority for nearly two-thirds (65%) of Americans was in December of 1994, on the heels of the Contract with America and right before the only years of budget surpluses in modern history. In December 2010, the Wall Street Journal found a slim majority, 51 to 45, think the deficit needs to be addressed now as opposed to waiting until the economy improves. Though a large majority of Americans view the deficit as a top priority and a majority wants it addressed now, the public is sending mixed signals on how exactly they would address the national balance sheet.

In January 2011, CBS found Americans overwhelming prefer spending cuts (77%) over tax increases (9%) to reduce the deficit. When the Wall Street Journal offered the option in December, 19 percent were comfortable with letting the deficit increase. But in the same CBS poll where 77 percent favored spending cuts, only 38 percent of Americans answered “Yes” when asked if there was a specific program they would cut. While 86 percent of Americans prefer lowering the debt through spending cuts or a combination of cuts and tax raises, 35 percent in another question responded there was no program they would cut and 27 percent did not know what they would cut. When the responses of the two questions are combined, one can infer that twenty-one percent of Americans who prefer cuts in some fashion don’t want to cut anything! In this respect, politicians are representing their constituencies pretty well.

When asked about specific programs, Americans are reluctant to cut funding in most areas. The only popular cut is to the foreign aid budget. Education, Social Security, and Medicare are at the bottom of everyone’s list of acceptable cuts, and a majority of Americans from both parties oppose any cuts to education or Social Security according to Kaiser. When CBS pressed the issue in January and asks if people would rather raise taxes or reduce benefits to bring down the cost of Medicare, 64 percent favored raising taxes while 24 percent favored a reduction in benefits. The numbers for Social Security are almost exactly the same (63 and 25 percent).

Defense spending, a significant portion of the budget, is receiving increased scrutiny as the deficit is looming larger every year. Support for cutting defense spending hovers between 40 and 50 percent depending on the poll. When Kaiser breaks down this question by party, 52 percent of Republicans oppose any cuts while only a third of Independents and Democrats oppose any cuts. When Harris compared the favorability of cutting spending on twenty different programs in 1980 and again in 2011, defense spending was the only category where people are more willing to cut spending today than thirty years ago (34 to 41 percent). When CBS and the New York Times asked how they would reduce defense spending, 55 percent of Americans said they would reduce the number of American troops stationed in Europe and Asia and only 7 percent would reduce the size of military branches.

When spending cuts and tax increases directly affect those asked, respondents were slightly more tepid in their enthusiasm. CBS finds a plurality (49%) of Americans agree that “it will be necessary to cut programs that benefit people like [themselves] to lower the deficit” (as opposed to 77% who favored general spending cuts), but only 37 percent think it will be necessary to raise taxes on people like them to lower the deficit. Overall, spending cuts seem slightly more tenable than tax increases to Americans when directly affected.

There is no clear public opinion mandate for politicians to act upon when tackling the deficit. Even though most Americans favor cutting spending, programs that cost the most are the most popular. At the state level, governors are already making cuts and some retain popular support in the face of drastic spending reductions. At the national level, politicians will have to take unpopular actions to make a meaningful impact on reducing the deficit.

Budget Cuts and Governors’ Political Fortunes

Wednesday, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie spoke to a packed house at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington D.C. His remarks were entitled “It’s Time To Do Big Things,” and he addressed the need for states and Washington to make painful decisions in order to balance government budgets. Governor Christie has gained national attention from his tough stance towards public unions (specifically teachers’ unions) in righting his state’s budget.

Thursday, fifteen school systems in Wisconsin are closed due to a massive “sick-out,” where teachers have called in sick in order to continue protests at the state capitol over newly elected Governor Scott Walker’s bill to reduce the benefit packages of public sector employees. The bill asks teachers to contribute towards their retirement pensions and health care premiums in order to combat a pending $3.6 billion state deficit. Similar protests occurred when California raised tuition fees at state universities.

Most states, unlike the federal government, are constitutionally required to balance their budgets every year. A year ago, the Pew Center on the States reported that states are facing a trillion dollar gap between their pension assets and liabilities. The public understands the shape of their state economies; CBS reports 74 percent say their state’s budget is in bad shape and Pew finds that 81 percent agree their state is facing budget problems.

In the face of these looming budget gaps, Governors are being forced to make tough decisions about where precious state funds go. Illinois Governor Pat Quinn raised taxes by 67 percent. New governors in Wisconsin, Ohio, and Florida have rejected billions in federal money for high speed rail because they fear that project overages and maintenance costs will burden their state treasuries. Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels leased a state highway to a private company for the next 75 years, for a onetime fee of just under $4 billion.

CBS finds that 68 percent of the public think that focusing on both cutting major programs and increasing taxes is the best way to handle the budget. When asked about budget correcting actions, “decreasing the pension plans of government employees” received the most support with 47 percent favoring the action. Nothing garners a majority, so any action a governor could take is seemingly be unpopular. Cutting K-12 school funding is the least popular action; only 18 percent approve of doing it to balance the budget.

Yet, governors are being rewarded for their decisive action. As Governor Christie mentioned in his speech, Governor Cuomo enjoys an approval rating in the 70s. While not as popular, Quinnipiac finds that Governor Christie has a 52 percent approval rating after his first year of budget cuts. Governor Daniels, who brought Indiana from a $600 million deficit to a $300 million surplus in his first year, had a 42 percent approval rating when he proposed program cuts, modest tax increases, and privatization. But he went on to win reelection by 18 points in 2008 in a state that also voted for Obama (Daniels is a Republican), and he now enjoys an approval rating near 70 percent amongst Hoosiers.

Americans know that state budgets are in bad shape, and they will reward strong, decisive leadership. Despite the fact that most budget saving actions garner support from less than a third of citizens, governors who take action to fix budgets are viewed favorably. New governors will face loud criticism over cuts, especially from those affected the most. But if New York, New Jersey, and Indiana are any guide, Governors who take the lead in reducing budgets are rewarded in the court of public opinion.

Football, Fan Favorites, and Financial Indicators

Originally appeared at The American, AEI's blog.

Two things that Americans love are football and winners. Professional football has grown in popularity over the past 25 years. In 1985, pro football edged out baseball as America’s most popular sport by just 1 percentage point in Harris’s polling, 24 percent to 23 percent. As of this season, football opened up a 19-point gap over the second-ranked baseball, 35 percent to 16 percent. If you factor in college football, the sport is the favorite sport of half of all Americans. Gallup shows that the majority of Americans identify themselves as pro football fans throughout the last decade. The Wall Street Journal has recently found that across all metrics (ticket sales, TV viewership, merchandise sales), the NFL is at its “zenith.”

Beyond just liking football, Americans like teams who win. Asking respondents to name their two favorite teams every year, Harris has tracked team rankings since 1998 (2000 and 2001 excluded). Only two teams, the Dallas Cowboys and the Green Bay Packers, have consistently been ranked in the top ten, and the number-one spot has gone to either the Packers or the Cowboys all but once. The Pittsburgh Steelers captured that remaining number-one spot after winning the Super Bowl in 2006, and have not slipped out of the top four since. This year’s Super Bowl contenders are already fan favorites.

More interesting to observe are the crescendos in popularity following historically underperforming teams making a playoff run or the slow decline of powerhouse teams from the 1990s. The Indianapolis Colts hovered around the 24th spot (out of 32) until 2002. Since 2002, they have made the playoffs a record-breaking nine times in a row, and not surprisingly have been ranked on average as the third favorite team for the past five years. Similarly, the New Orleans Saints have consistently appeared at the end of the list. After winning the Super Bowl last year, the team shot up from their usual 24th spot in 2009 to sixth favorite in 2010. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers jumped 14 spots to number 4 in 2003 after winning the Super Bowl and the Arizona Cardinals have climbed 13 spots since their 2009 appearance. After their unexpected playoff run, we can expect the Seattle Seahawks to show some upward mobility from a bottom-scrapping 31st spot this year. Americans like winners.

Lack of success also has a significant impact; both the Denver Broncos and the San Francisco 49ers have witnessed a slow but steady decline over the last decade after repeat visits to the Super Bowl in the 1990s. The Jacksonville Jaguars, one of four teams to never reach the Super Bowl, have been at the bottom of the list five out of the last six years.

Looking at another historical trend, the stock market has gained on average 15.2 percent the years the NFC wins the Super Bowl and only 7.3 percent in years the AFC wins. Have no fear though; in the years that either the Packers or Steelers have appeared in a Super Bowl, the stock market has gained on average 25.3 percent. The game this year is already a contest between two fan favorites, and all indicators point to it being a market favorite as well.