Conservation Voters of PA

Josh McNeil, Executive Director

Public Opinion Polling,
Gas Infrastructure, and
Babies in Halloween Costumes
2

Keystone XL
5
62% believe it will be good for the U.S. economy if the
pipeline is built. That’s up from 56% at the beginning of
the year and also a new high.
Unchanged are the 10% who think the pipeline will be
bad for the economy.
Twelve percent (12%) say it will have no impact, while
16% are not sure.
National Survey - April 23, 2014

Keystone XL
6
Thirty-two percent (32%) think the pipeline will be bad
for the environment.
54% disagree, with 13% who feel it will be good for the
environment and 41% who say it will have no
environmental impact.
Fourteen percent (14%) are not sure.
April 23, 2014

Keystone XL
7
Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters say the pipeline is at
least somewhat important to how they will vote in the
next congressional election, with 23% who say it is Very
Important.
Thirty-eight percent (38%) say the Keystone project is
not important to their vote, including 11% who say it is
Not at All Important.
April 23, 2014

Methodology
• The following presentation is based on results of a survey of 1,151
registered voters reached via landline or cell phone in Pennsylvania.
This includes a base of 601 voters, and oversamples of 100 Rising
American Electorate voters, and 150 voters that live in each of the 3
watersheds: Middle Schuylkill, Upstream Suburban Philadelphia,
and Upper Lehigh.
• The survey was conducted between October 2 to 9, 2013 and
carries an overall margin of error of +/- 4.0 percentage points at a 95
percent confidence level. The margin of error within the RAE is +/-
4.7 and within the combined watershed definition it is +/- 4.2. The
margin or error within each watershed definition is approximately +/-
7.4.
12

November 15, 2011
35
50
45
48
39
54
50
45
31
45
30
42
72
83
78
85
74
82
83
81
68
78
66
77
Women
Men
Republicans
Independents
Democrats
Wells*
West
Rest of State
Philedelphia Metro
Watersheds
RAE
Total
% Heard a lot % Heard some
Pennsylvanians Hearing a Good Deal
About Fracking
As you may know, there is currently a debate going on in Pennsylvania about a natural gas drilling technique called "hydraulic
fracturing" or "fracking." Let me ask you, how much have you heard about this issue - would you say you've heard a lot, some, not
that much, or nothing at all about fracking?
13
*Well regions include the Outer Pittsburgh and Scranton-Wilkes-New York Market Region. Please
see Appendix for map of regions.

November 15, 2011
Strong Support for Tighter Regulations –
Holds After Messaging
18
52
17
8
16
55
19
7
Moratorium Tighten As Is Loosen
Initial Vote Final Vote
Now I’m going to read you four different positions that some people in Pennsylvania have taken on fracking. After I read all four,
please tell me which one is closest to your view, even if none of them are exactly right.
Stricter: 69%
Not Stricter: 25%
DK/None: 6%
14
Stricter: 71%
Not Stricter: 27%
DK/None: 2%

November 15, 2011
Initial Final Change PID PERF
Moratorium 18 16 -2 -- --
Tighten 52 55 +3 -- --
As Is 17 19 +2 -- --
Loosen 8 7 -1 -- --
None 3 1 -2 -- --
Don’t Know 3 1 -2 -- --
Total Tighter 69 71 +2 -- --
Total Not Tighter 25 26 +1 -- --
Net +44 +45 +1 +10 +35
RAE +53 +53 -- +39 +14
Watersheds +51 +50 -1 +14 +37
Democrat +67 +68 +1 -- --
Independent +43 +48 +6 +4 +39
Republican +17 +15 -2 -- --
*Performance (PERF) = (Tighter – Not) – (Dem – Rep)
15
Fracking position progression and
performance

November 15, 2011
Fracking position progression and
performance, continued
Initial Final Change PID PERF
College +52 +53 +1 +16 +36
Non-college +38 +38 - +5 +34
18-29 +49 +57 +9 +26 +23
Seniors +49 +42 -7 0 +49
White +45 +44 -1 0 +45
Non-white +46 +53 +7 +60 -19
Heard a lot +37 +33 -4 +4 +33
Heard some +55 +53 -2 +13 +42
Heard not much +52 +66 +15 +5 +46
Heard nothing +28 +41 +13 +27 -2
Indoor (0-3 Activities) +46 +50 +4 +20 +26
Outdoor (4-6 Activities) +42 +38 -4 -6 +48
Hurt Jobs/Help Health +46 +53 +7 +9 +37
16

20
24
27
29
47
49
27
30
28
29
16
16
50
33
53
33
50
41
48
42
30
62
26
66
Strongly agree Somewhat agree Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree
Voters: Stricter Regulations Will Have Big
Impact on Health, not Jobs
18
(PUBLIC HEALTH) Tighter regulations on
fracking would significantly improve and
protect public health in Pennsylvania.
(WATER QUALITY) Tighter regulations on
fracking would significantly improve and
protect drinking water quality in Pennsylvania.
(JOBS) Tighter regulations on fracking would
have a significant impact on Pennsylvania’s
economy and destroy jobs.**
(PERSONAL IMPACT) Fracking has created
jobs, lowered energy prices, or created other
economic befits for people I know personally.
(STRICT REGS) Right now, we have strict
and effective regulations on fracking in
Pennsylvania.
(ENERGY PRICES) Tighter regulations on
fracking would cause significantly higher gas
and electricity prices for me and my family.
10
8
7
9
17
14
DK
-6
+40
+32
-9
-17
-20
Net
**Regressions suggest that this dimension is the strongest driver of overall position on fracking.

Energy Independence Easily Strongest Anti-Regulation
Message
19
22
26
34
48
54
57
64
72
Fracking is Safe
Prices and Choices
Economy and Jobs
Energy Independence
Very convincing Somewhat convincing
*See appendix for full statement text
Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who say that we should NOT place stricter limits on natural gas
fracking in Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing
or not at all a reason to continue to allow fracking without any new limits in Pennsylvania.
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3

Health and Water, Loose Regulations Lead
Strong Pro-Limits Messages
20
39
43
48
49
65
66
70
71
Exports
Regulations not
Enforced
Health and Water
Not Regulated
Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who think we should place stricter limits on fracking in
Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing or not at
all a reason to place stricter limits on fracking in Pennsylvania.
Tier 1
Tier 2

21
32
33
36
58
63
64
Jobs - Imported
workers
Jobs - Other states
Habitat and wildlife
Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who think we should place stricter limits on fracking in
Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing or not at
all a reason to place stricter limits on fracking in Pennsylvania.
Tier 3
Tier 3 Messages Not Weak, but Below Others

Open-End Shows Health and Water Dominate
the Reasons to Support Stricter Limits
22
4
5
6
3
18
20
28
29
Don't Know
None
Other
Don't know the consequences
Need better regulations
Protect parks, forests, lakes, or
wildlife
Improve or protect drinking water
quality
Improve or protect the public or
family's health
*This was asked as an open-ended question. Results reflect pre-coded responses.
Thinking about everything you now know about fracking, what would you say is the best reason to place stricter limits on fracking in
Pennsylvania?

24
4 4 8
7 7 10
80 80 74
91 90 87
Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose
Strongly oppose Somewhat oppose Strongly favor Somewhat favor
Strong Support for Most Proposals. More
Tepid for Moratorium (Tier 1)
+83 +84 +77
(EXEMPT) Require natural gas
companies to follow the Clean Water
Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, from
which they are currently exempt.
(DISCLOSE) Require natural gas
companies to publicly disclose the
chemicals they inject into water in the
fracking process.
(PENALTY) Increase penalties on natural
gas companies that violate environmental
laws and use the resources to properly
enforce fracking regulations and clean up
pollution.
Now I'm going to read you a few proposals that have been made about fracking here in Pennsylvania, and I'd like you to tell me if you
favor or oppose the proposal.

10 13 10
16 19 19
68 64 57
81 78 76
Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose
(FEE) Increase the fee that natural gas
companies must pay to frack for gas and
use the resources to properly enforce
fracking regulations and clean up
pollution.
25
+65 +59 +57
(PROHIBIT) Prohibit fracking within
500 feet of homes, schools and
hospitals.
(LOCAL POWER) Allow local
governments to implement stricter
limits on fracking near homes, schools
and hospitals.

Even in Texas
5. Texas cities should have the right to limit how close gas
drilling, equipment and pipelines can be to homes, schools,
hospitals and businesses.
Strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, strongly
disagree, don’t know/depends
Strongly Agree 812
Somewhat Agree 231
Somewhat Disagree 52
Strongly Disagree 50
Don’t Know/Depends 55
Total 1200 26
From a September 2014 Poll by the Texas League of Conservation Voters in the Dallas/Ft.
Worth Area

27 24
45 45
37 36
52 52
Favor Oppose Favor Oppose
27
+7 +7
(MORATORIUM) Place a moratorium on
fracking in the state until we have a full
understanding of the risks.
(SUSPEND) Suspend new fracking in the state
until we have a full understanding of the risks.

Recommendations
28
 Our central message is about health and water quality, with the
lack of current and enforced regulations a strong secondary
message.
 However, they also show that an argument about the loopholes
that Big Oil and Gas have negotiated to keep fracking from being
properly regulated can be powerful.
 Push regulations to require disclosure of chemicals, close the
loopholes that exempt gas companies from the Safe Drinking
Water Act and Clean Air Act, and increased penalties for
companies that violate environmental rules.

Baby in a yard gnome costume
29

How it’s playing locally
30
Where do public officials stand on gas pipeline project? Most on the
fence – Lancaster Online, August 18, 2014

“It is a threat to our health, safety, well being
and our environment, as well as an intrusion on
our land. Our community will receive no benefit
from this pipeline. It will not create local jobs,
but it will increase the price of gas domestically.”
Tom Houghton
Candidate for Congress (D-PA 16)
31

From: Dustin Ingalls, Public Policy Polling
To: Interested parties
Subject: Pitts’ support for pipeline project drops him to a tie with Houghton
Date: 9/12/14
In PPP’s latest poll in Pennsylvania’s 16th
Congressional District, longtime incumbent Joe Pitts
starts with an eight-point lead head-to-head with his Democratic challenger this fall, Tom
Houghton, 44-36. When given basic biographical information about each candidate in a follow-
up question, that lead shrinks to five points, 42-37.
But the real story is in Lancaster County, which makes up about two-thirds of the district, and
which is more conservative than the overall district. In a separate oversample, we polled an
additional 447 voters in Lancaster, for 816 total voters in that county’s portion of the district, and
when read information about Pitts’ support for a proposed gas pipeline and contributions to Pitts
from the company that wants to build it, and Houghton’s opposition to the project, voters there
move from an initial 48-36 preference for Pitts to a 41-41 draw between the two candidates.
That 12-point movement on the margin from one message comes almost entirely with
Republicans and, to a lesser extent, independents. Pitts’ support with his base drops 14 points
from the initial horse race (75% to 61%), while Houghton moves up five with Republicans in
Lancaster (10% to 15%), for a total shrinkage of 19 points on the margin with the GOP. Among
independents, Pitts drops only a point (38% to 37%), but previously undecided independents
move eight points toward Houghton (39% to 47%), for a nine-point marginal shift. Democrats in
Lancaster County, meanwhile, bump up from 77-10 support for their nominee to 79-10. So
Houghton has his base locked up, but Pitts is on rocky ground with his over the pipeline project.
Initially in Lancaster, there is little gender gap in candidate support. Pitts wins women by 10
points and men by 13. But women move nine points more than men do on the pipeline message,
16 points versus seven. After hearing about Pitts’ pipeline stance, women favor Houghton by six
points and men stick with Pitts by only six. There has been a lot of discussion about Democrats
From: Dustin Ingalls, Public Policy Polling
To: Interested parties
Subject: Pitts’ support for pipeline project drops him to a tie with Houghton
Date: 9/12/14
In PPP’s latest poll in Pennsylvania’s 16th
Congressional District, longtime incumbent Joe Pitts
starts with an eight-point lead head-to-head with his Democratic challenger this fall, Tom
Houghton, 44-36. When given basic biographical information about each candidate in a follow-
up question, that lead shrinks to five points, 42-37.
But the real story is in Lancaster County, which makes up about two-thirds of the district, and
which is more conservative than the overall district. In a separate oversample, we polled an
additional 447 voters in Lancaster, for 816 total voters in that county’s portion of the district, and
Public Policy Polling Phone: 888 621-6988
move eight points toward Houghton (39% to 47%), for a nine-point marginal shift. Democrats in
Lancaster County, meanwhile, bump up from 77-10 support for their nominee to 79-10. So
Houghton has his base locked up, but Pitts is on rocky ground with his over the pipeline project.
Initially in Lancaster, there is little gender gap in candidate support. Pitts wins women by 10
points and men by 13. But women move nine points more than men do on the pipeline message,
16 points versus seven. After hearing about Pitts’ pipeline stance, women favor Houghton by six
points and men stick with Pitts by only six. There has been a lot of discussion about Democrats
using so-called women’s issues to increase the gender gap and drive down support for
Republican candidates among women, but at least in this district, the pipeline project issue has
just as much if not more potential to do that than anything else.
PPP surveyed 678 likely voters in Pennsylvania’s 16th
Congressional District,including an oversample of
816 likely voters in the Lancaster County portion of the district, from September 9th
to 10th
. The margin
of error for the overall sample is +/-3.8%, and +/-3.4% for the oversample. This poll was sponsored by
Friends of Tom Houghton for Congress.

Legislative Polling – July 2014
“Candidate A knows that corporations are
getting tax breaks while property taxes are rising
for local families. Candidate A will make
Marcellus drillers pay their fair share.”
– 36% much more likely to support
33

Statewide Polling – Spring 2014
Statewide poll for a PA gubernatorial candidate:
“Governor Corbett received over $1 million from
the gas industry and overturned local control of
gas drilling.“
• 40% much less likely to support.

The kind of research we need
• Nearly three in four (72%) Pennsylvania voters favor the EPA’s proposed
regulations to limit the amount of carbon pollution that power plants can
release into the air.
• By more than four to one, Pennsylvanians say they have more trust in the
EPA to decide whether there should be regulations on carbon pollution
(59%) than the United States Congress (13%, a difference of 46 points).
• A 53% majority of Pennsylvanians say they would feel more favorable
toward an elected official who supported the new regulations. Just 19%
say they would feel less favorable.
37
LCV Poll – June 3, 2014

Recommendations
• Conduct region-specific polling on gas
infrastructure.
• In the meantime, focus on the direct health
impacts of pipelines and infrastructure.
• For the general public and elected officials,
talk about regulation, not outright bans.
• Pay close attention to local control.
38

Conservation Voters of PA

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Conservation Voters of PA

Similar to Conservation Voters of PA (16)

More from Kim Beidler

More from Kim Beidler (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Conservation Voters of PA