February, 23 2011, 02:40pm EDT
20 Surveys: Strong Opposition Nationally and in Key Districts to U.S. House Members' Actions to Block Public Health Protections
National Survey Shows Bipartisan Public Support for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
WASHINGTON
A strong majority of registered voters across the United States - including those in all 19 key Congressional Districts polled - oppose the U.S. House votes last week to block the Environmental Protection Agency from updating clean air safeguards needed to protect the health of Americans, according to major new Public Policy Polling (PPP) survey results released today by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
The survey results show that all 19 of the House members - including U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Tea Party leader Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn - who supported blocking the EPA are out of step with their constituents.
Nationwide, about six out of 10 Americans (58 percent) - including 55 percent of Independents and roughly half (48 percent) of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution," according to the survey of 784 registered voters conducted February18-20, 2011 by PPP for NRDC. Additionally, more than two thirds of Americans (68 percent) - including 54 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
In separate surveys conducted in 19 Congressional Districts, PPP asked registered voters if they agreed with their member of Congress' decision to vote for legislation barring the EPA from updating clean air safeguards. In all 19 districts polled, respondents across the political spectrum said they oppose their representative's votes to handcuff the EPA and think instead that Congress should let the agency do its job of protecting public health and the environment.
The average level of public opposition to the anti-EPA votes across the 19 Congressional Districts was 66 percent - including 45 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents. For a full overview of the 19 surveys, go to https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20Poll%20Table.pdf.
PPP polled registered voters in the following Congressional districts in eight states: Illinois (Reps. Joe Walsh, IL-8, Robert Dold, IL-10, and Bobby Schilling, IL-17); Michigan (Reps. Daniel Benishek, MI-1, and Mike Rogers, MI-8); Minnesota (Reps. Michele Bachmann, MN-6, and Chip Cravaack, MN-8); Montana (Rep. Denny Rehberg (MT-At Large); Ohio (House Speaker John Boehner, OH-8, and Reps. Patrick Tiberi, OH-12, and Jim Renacci, OH-16); Pennsylvania (Reps. Jason Altmire, PA-4, Jim Gerlach, PA-6, Patrick Meehan, PA-7, Lou Barletta, PA-11); Virginia (Reps. Robert Hurt, VA-5, Scott Rigell, VA-2); and Wisconsin (Reps. Reid Ribble, WI-8, and Sean Duffy, WI-7).
"The message here is as clear as clean air: In every district we polled, Americans want their elected representatives to let the EPA do its job instead of putting the profit-driven agenda of big polluters ahead of the health of their children," said Peter Altman, Climate Campaign Director for the Natural Resources Defense Council. "Politicians who are considering blocking the EPA and updates to Clean Air Act safeguards should understand that doing so is very unpopular. Americans know where these actions will lead and they want their kids to be able to grow up breathing clean air."
"Americans are clearly persuaded that their health needs should take priority over the profits of polluters" said Tom Jensen, director of Public Policy Polling. "Political affiliation doesn't appear to count for much when constituents are asked whether their representatives in Congress should be siding with the public's health or the political clout of polluters."
The national and 19 Congressional District findings are consistent with national polling released over the last few weeks by the American Lung Association https://www.lungusa.org/about-us/our-impact/top-stories/clean-air-survey.html and the Natural Resources Defense Council https://www.nrdc.org/media/2011/110210.asp and https://www.nrdc.org/media/2011/110202.asp.
The poll was timed to ask several questions about positions lawmakers took during last week's debate over the federal budget. During that debate, House members cast a number of votes that would severely limit the Environmental Protection Agency's ability to protect public health from water and air pollution. The Continuing Resolution (CR) itself cut 30 percent of the EPA's budget. The CR also contained policy provisions to block EPA from setting limits for carbon dioxide pollution. In addition, several amendments were passed that also would block the EPA from doing its job of protecting public health, including Representative Ted Poe's (R-TX) amendment to bar the EPA from taking any actions to reduce carbon dioxide pollution for any reason, Representative John Carter's (R-TX) amendment to prevent the EPA from reducing toxic pollution such as arsenic and mercury from cement kilns and Representative Mike Pompeo's amendment to prevent EPA from collecting data about carbon and other pollution.
Keeping with tradition, Speaker of the House John Boehner did not actually vote on the bill or the amendments, but supported the bill's passage as amended. Every other member whose district was polled voted for the EPA-blocking amendments, and every member except for Rep. Jason Altmire (D-PA) voted for the final package.
For more information on how individual members voted and how the votes put public health at risk, see https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/19%20Member%20Votes%20on%20CR.pdf and https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/strong_opposition_nationally_a.html.
FINDINGS FROM NATIONAL SURVEY
The national survey of American registered voters also showed the following
*69 percent of Americans - including 59 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents - think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*64 percent of Americans - including 57 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only about a third of Americans (36 percent).
*One of the poll questions revealed particularly strong support for clean air updates the EPA is putting forward today: 66 percent of Americans -- including 54 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- favor the EPA requiring stricter limits on the amount of toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead, and arsenic that coal power plants and other industrial facilities release.
*78 percent of Americans - including 69 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
*66 percent support "requiring stricter limits on the amount of toxic chemicals such as mercury, lead, and arsenic that coal power plants and other industrial facilities release."
*65 percent support "limiting the amount of carbon pollution that big power plants and other industrial facilities release."
*64 percent favor "requiring stricter limits on the amount of smog that vehicles and industrial facilities release."
FINDINGS FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS
The following 19 Congressional Districts illustrate the broad public support for the Environmental Protection Agency and the EPA's planned updates to key anti-pollution safeguards for the protection of the health of Americans:
Illinois -- Rep. Joe Walsh, IL-8, 571 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.1%
*68 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 57 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*73 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*80 percent - including 74 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 24 percent.
*83 percent - including 74 percent of Republicans and 81 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Illinois - Rep. Robert Dold, IL-10, 690 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.7%
*74 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 53 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*77 percent -- including 65 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*80 percent - including 67 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*77 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 78 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 23 percent.
*83 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Illinois - Rep. Bobby Schilling, IL-17, 931 registered voters, 2/19-2/20, margin of error 3.2%
*65 percent - including 64 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*71 percent -- including 59 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*73 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 27 percent.
*81 percent - including 72 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Michigan - Rep. Daniel Benishek, MI-1, 1,135 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 2.9%
*62 percent - including 55 percent of Independents and 42 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*66 percent -- including 52 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*74 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*69 percent of Americans - including 56 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
*78 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Michigan - Rep. Mike Rogers, MI-8, 754 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.6%
*64 percent - including 63 percent of Independents and 40 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*67 percent -- including 45 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*77 percent - including 61 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*74 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 26 percent.
*80 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 82 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Minnesota - Rep. Michele Bachmann, MN-6, 956 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.2%
*64 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 35 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*69 percent -- including 47 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*73 percent - including 58 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*70 percent - including 50 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 30 percent.
*78 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Minnesota - Rep. Chip Cravaack, MN-8, 1,022 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.1%
*67 percent - including 58 percent of Independents and 36 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*69 percent -- including 38 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*73 percent - including 53 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*71 percent of Americans - including 50 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 29 percent.
*79 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Montana - Rep. Denny Rehberg, MT-At Large, 1,065 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3%
*58 percent - including 54 percent of Independents and 32 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*58 percent -- including 32 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*67 percent - including 39 percent of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*62 percent - including 41 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 38 percent.
*72 percent - including 56 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio - U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, OH-8, 805 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.5%
*56 percent - including 51 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*62 percent -- including 49 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*71 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*66 percent - including 56 percent of Republicans and 60 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 34 percent.
*75 percent - including 66 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio -- Rep. Patrick Tiberi, OH-12, 729 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 3.6%
*65 percent - including 57 percent of Independents and 44 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*67 percent -- including 48 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*73 percent - including 58 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*69 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
*77 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Ohio - Rep. Jim Renacci, OH-16, 705 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.7%
*59 percent - including 48 percent of Independents and 41 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*64 percent -- including 48 percent of Republicans and 50 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*71 percent - including 57 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*68 percent - including 52 percent of Republicans and 59 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 32 percent.
*76 percent - including 65 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Jason Altmire, P-4, 867 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.3%
*61 percent - including 56 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*66 percent -- including 52 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*72 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*70 percent - including 60 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 30 percent.
*80 percent - including 71 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Jim Gerlach, PA-6, 839 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.4%
*72 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 48 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*76 percent -- including 57 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*78 percent - including 62 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*76 percent of Americans - including 58 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 24 percent.
*86 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 83 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Patrick Meehan, PA-7, 542 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.2%
*76 percent - including 80 percent of Independents and 57 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*80 percent -- including 62 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*84 percent - including 79 percent of Republicans and 79 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*80 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 20 percent.
*87 percent - including 76 percent of Republicans and 83 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Pennsylvania - Rep. Lou Barletta, PA-11, 859 registered voters, 2/20-2/21, margin of error 3.3%
*70 percent - including 58 percent of Independents and 53 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*79 percent -- including 68 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*82 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 76 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*79 percent - including 68 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 21 percent.
*88 percent - including 82 percent of Republicans and 84 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Virginia - Rep. Robert Hurt, VA-5, 767 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 3.5%
*68 percent - including 69 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*73 percent -- including 55 percent of Republicans and 64 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*74 percent - including 61 percent of Republicans and 72 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*73 percent - including 52 percent of Republicans and 70 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 27 percent.
*83 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 80 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Virginia - Rep. Scott Rigell, VA-2, 556 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 4.2%
*66 percent - including 67 percent of Independents and 49 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*74 percent -- including 62 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*79 percent - including 75 percent of Republicans and 73 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*79 percent - including 70 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 21 percent.
*81 percent - including 71 percent of Republicans and 77 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Wisconsin -- Rep. Reid Ribble, WI-8, 1,398 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 2.6%
*64 percent - including 60 percent of Independents and 46 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*70 percent -- including 60 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*74 percent - including 69 percent of Republicans and 69 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*71 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 65 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 29 percent.
*79 percent - including 72 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
Wisconsin - Rep. Sean Duffy, WI-7, 1,578 registered voters, 2/18-2/19, margin of error 2.5%
*62 percent - including 55 percent of Independents and 37 percent of Republicans - oppose the U.S. House vote to "block the EPA from limiting carbon dioxide pollution."
*66 percent -- including 44 percent of Republicans and 56 percent of Independents -- said the EPA should move ahead to "reduce carbon pollution without delay."
*74 percent - including 64 percent of Republicans and 66 percent of Independents -- think EPA scientists, not Congress, should decide what pollution limits are needed.
*69 percent - including 51 percent of Republicans and 61 percent of Independents -- think "Congress should let the EPA do its job" versus "Congress should decide when and how greenhouse gases should be regulated," which was favored by only 31 percent.
*79 percent - including 63 percent of Republicans and 74 percent of Independents -- support the EPA's mission of "protect(ing) the air we breathe and the water we drink with safeguards that hold corporate polluters accountable for the pollution they release into our environment."
The national survey by PPP for NRDC was conducted February 18-20, 2011, with a sample size of 784 registered voters and a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percent. Full reports on the national and district-level polling results, including sample sizes, polling dates and the margin of errors associated with each of the surveys can be found at https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20Poll%20Table.pdf and https://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/paltman/2-23%20PPP%20Poll%20National%20and%20District%20Results.zip.
For all 20 of the national and Congressional District surveys, PPP conducted automated telephone surveys of registered voters using voter lists provided by Aristotle Inc. At least three attempts were made to reach every potential respondent.
NRDC works to safeguard the earth--its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. We combine the power of more than three million members and online activists with the expertise of some 700 scientists, lawyers, and policy advocates across the globe to ensure the rights of all people to the air, the water, and the wild.
(212) 727-2700LATEST NEWS
Endorsing Biden, Building Trades Union Slams Trump as Lackey for 'His Billionaire Buddies'
"He does not care about anybody in this world except Donald Trump," said the president of North America's Building Trades Unions. "His dark side is very, very dark."
Apr 24, 2024
The leadership of a union that represents more than 3 million building trades workers in the U.S. and Canada endorsed President Joe Biden's reelection bid on Wednesday, slamming presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump for catering to the needs of billionaires like himself during his first four years in the White House.
"When Trump was elected, we took him at his word that he would have a worker-centered agenda and deliver on long-stalled issues such as infrastructure investment," said Sean McGarvey, president of North America's Building Trades Unions (NABTU), whose governing board voted to endorse Biden on Tuesday.
"Instead of delivering," McGarvey added, Trump "aligned himself with his billionaire buddies to enact tax cuts that raised costs for our members. Simply put, he failed to deliver. Given our experience and knowing his track record, the choice is clear."
Building trades unions and their rank-and-file members are generally seen as more conservative and pro-Trump than other elements of the U.S. labor movement. In 2017, McGarvey celebrated Trump's effort to advance construction work on the Keystone XL pipeline, a massive fossil fuel project that Biden effectively killed in 2021 after years of organizing by environmentalists and Indigenous tribes.
But NABTU's leadership endorsed Clinton over Trump in the 2016 presidential election and Biden over Trump in 2020.
In a five-minute ad released Wednesday, the union highlights Trump's pledge to be a dictator on "day one" and condemns the former president as a dangerous egomaniac.
NABTU called for Trump's resignation after the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
"Donald Trump, he's not a good man. He's not a good person. He does not care about anybody in this world except Donald Trump," McGarvey says in the new ad. "His dark side is very, very dark."
Wow. You may have seen a short version of the North America Building Trade Union ( @NABTU) video endorsement of Biden. The full video is incredible and absolutely devastating for Trump. They did not hold back. A must watch till the end. pic.twitter.com/stL7b7JazP
— MeidasTouch (@MeidasTouch) April 24, 2024
In his statement Wednesday announcing NABTU's endorsement, McGarvey cites the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Chips and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act as key legislative achievements that "brought life-changing, opportunity-creating, generational change focused on the working men and women of this great country who have for far too long been clamoring for a leader to finally keep their word."
"In the coming months," he added, "we will continue to engage our membership and their families directly, member to member, door to door, and jobsite to jobsite, with an unprecedented field program in key battleground states, to tell them how important President Biden and his policies have been to them, their economic security, and their freedoms."
But McGarvey said in an appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" on Wednesday that the union does not intend to "waste a lot of time talking to every American that supports Donald Trump" or "some of our members that support Donald Trump, because we're not gonna change their minds."
Speaking at NABTU's annual legislative conference on Wednesday, Biden welcomed the union's endorsement and said that "Donald Trump's vision of America is one of revenge and retribution, a defeated former president who sees the world from Mar-a-Lago, who bows down to billionaires and looks down on union workers."
NABTU is the latest major union to back Biden as he prepares for his high-stakes rematch with Trump in November. In January, Biden secured the support of the emboldened United Auto Workers, whose president called Trump a "scab" who "stands against everything we stand for as a union."
"Donald Trump is a billionaire," said UAW president Shawn Fain, "and that's who he represents."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Tennessee GOP Shuts Down Debate, Passes Bill Allowing Handguns for Teachers
"Instead of protecting kids," said one Democratic lawmaker, "they've protected guns again."
Apr 24, 2024
A Democratic leader in the Tennessee House on Tuesday warned that a bill pushed through by Republicans to permit teachers to carry concealed handguns was "nothing but a bad disaster and tragedy waiting to happen," after the GOP cut off a debate and refused to include amendments that aimed to add safety measures to the legislation.
House Bill 1202 passed in a 68-28 vote, and Republican Gov. Bill Lee, who has never vetoed legislation, is expected to sign it, clearing the way for the state to require school districts to allow teachers to carry firearms without notifying students' parents.
According toThe Tennessean, the legislation does not allow schools or school districts to opt out of the program and requires administrators "to consider every individual who wants to carry."
The legislation was passed just over a year after a shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville killed six people, including three children.
"Our children's lives are at stake," said House Democratic Caucus Chair John Ray Clemmons (D-55).
After last year's shooting, the Tennessee Legislature garnered national attention when Republicans voted to expel expel state Reps. Justin Jones (D-52) and Justin Pearson (D-86) for joining outraged students in a chant for gun control during a protest. Jones and Pearson were soon reinstated.
Following Tuesday's vote on arming teachers, Republicans voted to bar Jones from speaking in House proceedings for two days after he was accused of committing three rules violations, including recording on the chamber's floor—something a GOP member was also accused of doing.
Jones applauded Tennessee residents for speaking out against H.B. 1202 in the House chamber.
"Despite my Republican colleagues' best effort, the power of the people cannot and will not be stopped," said the lawmaker.
The GOP ended the debate over the legislation after one teacher, Lauren Shipman-Dorrance, cried out from the viewing section. Shipman-Dorrance was removed by state troopers on orders from House Speaker Cameron Sexton (R-25).
After the bill passed overwhelmingly—despite four Republicans who joined the Democrats and three who abstained—the remaining protesters chanted, "Blood on your hands!" before the GOP ordered state troopers to remove them.
Sarah Shoop Neumann, whose children attend Covenant Day School, delivered a letter with more than 5,300 signatures to the House on Monday demanding that lawmakers defeat the bill and warning that the legislation "ignores research that shows the presence of a gun increases the risks posed to children."
Shoop Neumann toldThe Tennessean that the bill's passage was "disgraceful."
"We worked with the Senate and representative sponsors of this bill to make it even a little bit safer—anything, really—and I'm utterly disappointed that that was not taken into consideration," she told the outlet.
Kris Brown, president of gun violence prevention group Brady, pointed out that "multiple teachers were armed at [the Covenant School], yet that was not enough to stop six children and school employees from being murdered."
"The Tennessee Legislature has just dishonored all who were killed at the Covenant School shooting last year by choosing to promote the proliferation of firearms in classrooms," said Brown. "H.B. 1202 is especially egregious as it has no safe storage requirements, meaning firearms could potentially fall into a child's hands."
"If we want to be free of this uniquely American crisis, we cannot continue to perpetuate the deadly norms that got us here by adding more unsecured firearms in spaces where children should be safe to learn and grow," she added. "We urge Gov. Lee to veto this bill and ask him to work alongside us, teachers, and gun safety advocates to craft meaningful reforms across the Volunteer State."
Democrats proposed amendments to require that teachers lock up their handguns and only remove them during a security breach, that teachers be held civilly liable for using their guns, and that schools inform parents if guns are on campus, but the GOP rejected all of the proposals.
"I can assure you these people have never experienced an actual working high school classroom or they wouldn't be passing this nonsense," said one Tennessee teacher. "A child will die because of this."
Pearson said the passage of the bill marked "an awful day for Tennessee, our kids, our teachers, and communities."
"Instead of protecting kids," said the lawmaker, "they've protected guns again."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'All States Will Be Impacted' by US Supreme Court's Idaho Abortion Case
"At its core, this Supreme Court decision will reflect who we are becoming as a society."
Apr 24, 2024
Less than a month after a key abortion pill hearing, the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments for another major reproductive rights case—one out of Idaho that could impact healthcare for pregnant women and people across the country.
Idaho is among the over 20 states that have tightened restrictions on abortion since the high court's right-wing majority reversedRoe v. Wade nearly two years ago with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Since August 2022, abortions have been banned in the state except for reported cases of rape or incest or when "necessary to prevent the death" of the pregnant person.
"If the court does not uphold emergency abortion care protections, this ruling will have devastating consequences for pregnant people."
Before Idaho's near-total ban on abortion took effect, U.S. District Judge B. Lynn Winmill barred enforcement of it to the extent that it conflicts with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), a 1986 federal law requiring emergency departments that accept Medicare to provide "necessary stabilizing treatment" to any patient with an emergency medical condition.
The Biden administration argues that such care includes abortion; Idaho's Republican policymakers—backed by the far-right Christian Alliance Defending Freedom—disagree. The U.S. Supreme Court in January paused Winmill's order and agreed to hear arguments in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States.
As The New York Timesreported Wednesday:
In a lively argument, questions by the justices suggested a divide along ideological lines, as well as a possible split by gender on the court. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a conservative, appeared skeptical that Idaho's law, which bars doctors from providing abortions unless a woman's life is in danger or in specific nonviable pregnancies, superseded the federal law.
The argument also raised a broader question about whether some of the conservative justices, particularly Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., may be prepared to embrace language of fetal personhood, that is, the notion that a fetus would have the same rights as a pregnant woman.
Also noting Barrett's apparent alignment with the three liberal women on the court, Law Dork's Chris Geidner predicted "it comes down to" Chief Justice John Roberts and fellow right-winger Brett Kavanaugh.
"Already, we see women miscarrying and giving birth to stillborn infants in restrooms and in their cars after hospitals have turned them away, and medical professionals put in impossible positions by extremist lawmakers," said MomsRising executive director and CEO Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, citing Associated Pressreporting from last week.
"Of all the horrors SCOTUS unleashed with its appalling, dangerous, massively unpopular ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, the threat that pregnant people—most of whom are moms—will be denied emergency medical care is among the worst," she asserted. "An adverse ruling in this case will mean emergency rooms can deny urgently needed care to people experiencing serious pregnancy complications that can destroy their health, end their fertility, and take their lives."
Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project, similarly stressed that under a decision that favors the Idaho GOP, "pregnant people will suffer severe, life-altering health consequences, and even death."
"We're already seeing the devastating impact of this case play out in Idaho, where medical evacuations to transport patients to other states for the care they need have dramatically spiked since the Supreme Court allowed state politicians to block emergency abortion care," she noted.
The has also been an exodus of healthcare providers. Pointing out that those who violate Idaho's ban face five years in prison, The Guardianreported Wednesday that "between 2022, when Roe was overturned, and 2023, about 50 OB-GYNs moved out of the state."
As Republican lawmakers in various states have ramped up attacks on reproductive freedom since Dobbs, states that still allow abortions have seen an influx of "healthcare refugees." A Planned Parenthood spokesperson confirmed in January that about 30% of its abortion patients in Nevada—which borders Idaho—are from other states.
"With several of Nevada's bordering states enforcing abortion bans, pushing many people seeking care to our state, we've seen firsthand the devastation that anti-abortion policies are already wreaking,"
Reproductive Freedom for All director of Nevada campaigns Denise Lopez said Tuesday. "The Supreme Court must not allow us to spiral further into this healthcare crisis."
If the high court rules in favor of Idaho's Republican lawmakers, she warned, "all states will be impacted, even in places like Nevada with more than 4 in 5 voters supporting reproductive freedom."
Destiny Lopez, acting co-CEO of the Guttmacher Institute, declared that "at its core, this Supreme Court decision will reflect who we are becoming as a society: Are we okay with requiring pregnant individuals who face severe complications to suffer life-threatening health consequences rather than granting them access to abortion? Are we okay with forcing doctors to choose between violating federal law by not providing emergency abortion care or violating state law if they do?"
"If the court does not uphold emergency abortion care protections, this ruling will have devastating consequences for pregnant people—particularly Black and Brown folks, immigrants, people with lower incomes, those without health insurance, and LGBTQ+ communities—while further emboldening extremists," she emphasized.
Arguments in the case have sparked multiple demonstrations, from a weekend rally in Boise, Idaho to a Wednesday gathering outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., where Women's March organized a die-in to highlight the potential consequences of the forthcoming ruling.
"It's a horrifying time to be someone who needs critical abortion care in America right now," said Women's March executive director Rachel O'Leary Carmona. "The GOP is chipping away at women's bodily autonomy and livelihoods one illegitimate court case at a time—from fast-tracking a case on the authorization of a medication that's been safely administered for decades last month, to now bringing the fate of emergency abortion care to a Supreme Court captured by their radical, anti-choice agenda."
"We know what these cases really are: They're part of a series of efforts by Christian nationalist politicians to do anything they can to control women's bodies and cut back women's decisions about their healthcare, their family planning, and their lives," she added.
Similar warnings about far-right Christian nationalist attacks on a range of rights have dominated political contests this cycle—including the race for the White House. In November, Democratic President Joe Biden, who supports access to abortion care, is set to face former Republican President Donald Trump, who brags about appointing three of the six justices who reversed Roe.
The case has renewed arguments for considering changes to the country's top court, which over the past few years has not only seen plummeting levels of public trust but also been rocked by repeated ethics scandals.
"Idaho's abortion ban is a direct consequence of the court's radical decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and allow partisan state legislatures to determine Americans' access to abortion care," said Stand Up America managing director of policy and political affairs Brett Edkins. "If the Supreme Court once again sides with anti-abortion extremists, it will be further proof that this court is radically out of touch with the American people and must be reformed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular