Constituent Survey Summary Analysis
THE VOTERS SPEAK:
24th DISTRICT CONSTITUENT SURVEY ANALYSIS
During March and April, voter opinion surveys were mailed and emailed to 24th District constituent households. Our purpose was to gauge district voter sentiments on some of the main issues facing the Missouri legislature now and in the future.
You can read the full survey and detailed results here or email me at chris@chriskelly24.com if you would like a personal copy emailed to you.
First, the disclaimers!
The survey is not scientific. Constituent households received the survey by email or post, but those who chose to respond may or may not be representative of all voters in the district. We received 1064 responses, of which 951 were by mail and 113 were by email. The responses are reported in total and divided by the method of response. While the numbers of email responses are too small to draw strong conclusions, in some cases there are wide differences in opinion between the two respondent groups.
A SUMMARY ANALYSIS
Education:
Two questions focused on educational funding. The first asked about higher education and the second looked at PK-12 funding. In both cases, about 60% of the respondents preferred stable or lower funding for education, with about 40% preferring an increase. In both of these cases, the email respondents were quite different from the mail respondents. Why? The 24th District has a disproportionate representation of university and public school employees, who are more likely to use email than are other segments of the population.
“While I certainly understand the economic difficulties that our state faces, I am committed to enhancing our educational institutions at all levels. Only three states fund education at a lower per capita level than Missouri. If we want to compete economically, we must compete educationally.”
Tax Incentives for Jobs or Social Services:
Two questions focused on tax incentives and tax credits for economic development. Over 60% of respondents favored using tax incentives to bring new businesses, and presumably jobs, to Missouri. Similarly, when asked about the use of tax credits, attracting and retaining business and industry was overwhelming favored in comparison with credits for social services, low-income housing, and historic preservation. Nearly one-third of respondents, however, thought that most tax credits should be eliminated.
“Tax incentives are necessary in some limited situations to entice or maintain a key employer. However, tax incentives are lost revenue to the state, and we must be judicious in granting favored treatment and assure ourselves that the cost-benefit works for taxpayers.”
Taxes:
Two questions asked about Missouri’s tax system. Respondents favored a more progressive income tax structure, with those with higher incomes paying higher rates, but only by a slight margin. In this case, the email respondents differed from the mail respondents by favoring a more progressive system––61% as compared to 52%. Respondents overwhelming preferred a combined income and sales tax system to one based on sales tax only.
“I continue to be interested in evaluating a sales tax system with (p)rebates at low income levels and a continued income tax on high earners. I believe our current tax structure is in need of major overhaul. Incorporating a consumption tax, along with a revised income tax, is worthy of consideration. I recognize, however, the many obstacles to enacting a progressive and equitable system, while keeping in mind the regressivity of our current system in which everyone earning more than $9000 pays a flat 6%.”
The Political Process in Missouri:
Three questions surveyed opinions on the political environment in Missouri—term limits, early voting, and campaign contribution limits. About three-quarters of respondents favor some version of term limits for legislators, though nearly 30% would increase the term to 12 years from 8. Respondents were equally split on whether to permit early voting or maintain the current absentee system. On campaign finance limits, 82% favored reinstating the voter-approved limits that were repealed by the legislature in 2008.
“I strongly favor reinstating campaign finance limits. Not only did almost three-fourths of the voters favor the limits in a ballot initiative, but the huge donations made to candidates raise questions about the future political independence of those receiving such financial support.”
I also favor longer term limits. Too much institutional knowledge is lost under the present system and too many legislators spend their time positioning themselves for a campaign for another office instead of representing their constituents.
Finally, I do favor a more relaxed approach to early voting. Restricting voting to thirteen hours on a few Tuesdays is an arcane remnant of our political past. Democracy is never enhanced by making it more difficult for voters to participate in the political process.”
Dog Breeding:
Proposition B passed by a small margin in the November, 2010 election. Our survey showed that 24% favored retaining it and 32% favored modifying it to enhance enforcement, while 39% believed it should be repealed.
“The recent compromise reached between the legislature and the governor increases oversight and enforcement of dog breeding in Missouri while making some concessions to legitimate breeders. Let’s give it a chance before we determine if further action is necessary. I should add that, while I believe that a vote of the people should not be overturned by the legislature, enough votes were present in the legislature for repeal. That prompted my efforts to work for modification of the law while upholding the intent of the voters.”
Energy:
Nearly 80% of survey respondents favored taking additional steps to enhance alternative energy production in Missouri. They did differ in which forms of alternative energy they preferred. Respondents were evenly split on the question of studying the potential of hydroelectric plants on Missouri rivers, with 42% in favor and 44% opposed. Almost 60% favored additional nuclear reactors in Missouri, even if they resulted in a rate increase. (Note: This survey was conducted before the earthquake and tsunami in Japan.)
“I support the building of a second reactor at the Callaway plant and have urged the Governor to call for a special session in order to bring this issue to a vote of the people. Callaway II would be the biggest construction project in Missouri history and provide stable base energy for our future. At the same time, we must tie any legislation promoting Callaway II to continued development of wind, solar, and biomass research and resources.
“We will undoubtedly learn a great deal from the nuclear event in Japan, which will further enhance our ability to safely and reliably produce nuclear power as one source in a diverse energy spectrum.”
See complete survey results here .
