Water: the message of Election 2010
Jan 13, 2010
No Comments
This Monday I attended a talk that Dr. Richard Bernard gave at the California Endowment. Dr. Bernard is a consultant at Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin & Associates, a public opinion firm based in Santa Monica that has worked on many high-profile campaigns in California. During his 90 minute discussion, he spoke about the political climate in California and the United States and what advocates in California can do in order for measures ranging from the preservation of open space to statewide water initiatives succeed in what is a very challenging environment.Many environmentalists and other sustainability advocates are concerned over the future of their causes. And they should be. In public opinion surveys, the percentage of Americans who believe in global warming has declined about 20% in just two years. Unemployment is at a festering 10%, so folks feel jobs are more important than the environment. The political climate is also polarized, pierced with invective that makes the Clinton years look like a long joyful Cub Scout meeting. I would posit that the folks who are in a tizzy over how their agenda will fare at the ballot box and in Congress should start by taking a look at themselves. While I have believed in sustainability issues long before they became trendy or hip, I have always believed that the problems the environmental movement had is not in the message, but in the messenger. Self described "environmentalists" or "activists" tend to be shrill and sanctimonious, dismissing anyone who disagrees with them as clueless country bumpkins. I know I am generalizing, but attitudes like those are not uncommon.
So what are activists to do this election cycle? Dr. Bernard made some interesting points:
-
"The environment" just does not resonate with voters now--and it did not in 2008. Not one poll crunching the 2008 numbers showed more than 1% of voters stating that the environment was a factor in their vote at the polls.
-
While the raw numbers of people who believe in climate change has dropped, concerns on the environment, and a belief that it is getting worse, are still there as implied in polling numbers.
-
To pass a local or statewide measure at the ballot box, water must somehow be part of the package: Californians are concerned about their water supply and quality and will support measures to that end.
-
Emphasizing financial accountability and transparency in any ballot measure has got to be crystal clear.
-
The choice of words that ballot measure proponents use can make a difference in how voters will respond to it at the polls. Using jargon or clichés like "biodiversity" and even "environment" conjure images of Al Gore and other public figures who are extremely polarizing.
Some of Dr. Bernard's suggestions are as follows:
|
Words to Avoid |
Words to Use |
| Environment | Land, air, and water |
| Ecosystems | Natural areas |
| Urban sprawl | Poorly planned growth or development |
| Regulations | Safeguards and protections |
It is easy to just throw up our hands and assume that the oil companies and financial firms will just have their way. But Dr. Bernard insisted that if San Juan Capistrano, an Orange County Republican stronghold, can pass an open space initiative when they were still paying off another open space bond issuance from 1990, with the right message, and with at least a token approach towards safeguarding California's water supply, the air, land, and renewable energy technologies can win at the ballot box.
In contrast, if a group emphasizes an issue like air quality, they face an uphill battle? Why? While air quality may not be stellar in California, many of us do remember the smog days of the 1960s and 1970s . . . those days are gone, and California has actually done a fair job ensuring that air pollution levels do not get worse. Meanwhile, we are all worried about water, so work it into that ballot measure!
I have always believed that good jobs and a healed earth do not have to be mutually exclusive. But if politicians and advocacy groups muddle the message, voters will turn away from the green d0-gooders in droves.
