Kansas Speaks 2014 Statewide Public Opinion Survey

Prepared For The Citizens of Kansas By The Docking Institute of Public Affairs Fort Hays State University

Gary Brinker, PhD Michael S. Walker, MS Director Assistant Director

Jian Sun, PhD Lynette Ottley Research Scientist Administrative Specialist

Bradley Pendergast, MPA Survey Center Manager

Mission:

To Facilitate Effective Public Policy Decision-Making.

The staff of the Docking Institute of Public Affairs and its University Center for Survey Research are dedicated to serving the people of Kansas and surrounding states.

Kansas Speaks 2014

Prepared By:

Jian Sun, Ph.D. Research Scientist

Gary Brinker, Ph.D. Chapman Rackaway, Ph.D. Director Policy Fellow

Ryan L. Swayne Student Research Assistant

Docking Institute of Public Affairs

Prepared For:

The Citizens of Kansas In pursuit of Fort Hays State University’s Public Affairs Mission

Table of Contents

List of Figures ...... ii Executive Summary ...... 1 Introduction and Methods ...... 5 Analysis ...... 6 Section 1: Overall Quality of Life in Kansas ...... 6 Section 2: Economy ...... 10 Section 3: Taxes...... 19 Section 4: State Government and Politicians ...... 30 Section 5: Energy Policy ...... 39 Section 6: Public Policy Issues ...... 45 Section 7: Election ...... 53 Appendix A: Demographic Characteristics of the Sample ...... 60

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs: Kansas Speaks 2014 Page i

List of Figures

Figure 1: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live...... 6 Figure 2: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live by Party Affiliation ...... 7 Figure 3: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live by Race ...... 7 Figure 4: Rating of Kansas Economy ...... 8 Figure5: Rating of Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation ...... 8 Figure 6: Satisfaction with Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy ...... 9 Figure 7: Satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation ...... 10 Figure 8: Satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Age ...... 10 Figure 9: Satisfaction with the Democratic Party Leader’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation ...... 11 Figure 10: Satisfaction with the Democratic Party Leader’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Mexican or Hispanic Origin ...... 11 Figure 11: Satisfaction with the Republican Party Leader’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation ...... 12 Figure 12: Satisfaction with the Republican Party Leader’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Age ...... 13 Figure 13: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare ...... 14 Figure 14: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Party Affiliation ...... 14 Figure 15: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Level of Education ...... 15 Figure 16: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Income ...... 15 Figure 17: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Gender ...... 16 Figure 18: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Age ...... 16 Figure 19: Belief about Kansas Government Spending ...... 17 Figure 20: Belief about Kansas Government Taxes and Spending ...... 17 Figure 21: Preferences for Increasing Taxes and Spending (Percent Yes) ...... 18 Figure 22: Preferences for Decreasing Taxes and Spending (Percent Yes) ...... 19 Figure 23: Increase Income Tax by Party Affiliation ...... 20 Figure 24 Increase Sales Tax by Age ...... 20

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs: Kansas Speaks 2014 Page ii

Figure 25: Increase Property Tax by Income ...... 21 Figure 26: Increase Higher Education Funding by Party Affiliation...... 12 Figure 27: Increasing Higher Education Funding by Age ...... 22 Figure 28: Decreasing Income Tax by Party Affiliation ...... 23 Figure 29: Decreasing Income Tax by Education ...... 23 Figure 30: Decrease Income tax by Income ...... 24 Figure 31: Decrease K-12 Funding by Party Affiliation ...... 24 Figure 32: Decreasing Higher Education Funding by Party Affiliation ...... 25 Figure 33: Decrease Higher Education Funding by Age ...... 25 Figure 34: Decrease Social Services Funding by Party Affiliation ...... 26 Figure 35: Tax Changes on Various Groups ...... 26 Figure 36: Tax Changes on Top Income Earners by Party Affiliation ...... 27 Figure 37: Tax Changes on Top Income Earners by Level of Education ...... 28 Figure 38: Tax Changes on Middle Class by Party Affiliation ...... 28 Figure 39: Tax Changes on Large Corporations by Party Affiliation ...... 29 Figure 40: Tax Change on Small Businesses by Party Affiliation ...... 29 Figure 41: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of the Kansas Government ...... 30 Figure 42: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of Kansas Legislature by Party Affiliation ...... 31 Figure 43: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of U.S. Congressperson by Party Affiliation ...... 32 Figure 44: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of U.S. Congressperson by Level of Education ...... 32 Figure 45: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of State Senator by Party Affiliation ...... 33 Figure 46: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of State Representative by Party Affiliation ...... 33 Figure 47: Approval of Government Officials in Office ...... 34 Figure 48: Approval of Pat Roberts as Senator by Party Affiliation ...... 35 Figure 49: Approval of Pat Roberts as Senator by Age ...... 35 Figure 50: Approval of Jerry Moran as Senator by Party Affiliation ...... 36 Figure 51: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Party Affiliation ...... 36 Figure 52: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Gender ...... 37 Figure 53: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Age ...... 37 Figure 54: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Party Affiliation ...... 38 Figure 55: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Hispanic Origin ...... 38 Figure 56: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Race ...... 39 Figure 57: Opinion on Devoting Resources to the Development of Coal, Oil, Wind Energy, and Biofuel ...... 39 Figure 58: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Coal Development by Party Affiliation ...... 40 Figure 59: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Coal Development by Level of Education ...... 41

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs: Kansas Speaks 2014 Page iii

Figure 60: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Oil Development by Party Affiliation ...... 41 Figure 61: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Oil Development by Level of Education ...... 42 Figure 62: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Wind Energy Development by Party Affiliation ...... 42 Figure 63: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Biofuel Development by Age ...... 43 Figure 64: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas ...... 44 Figure 65: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas by Party Affiliation ...... 44 Figure 66: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas by Level of Education ...... 45 Figure 67: Belief about Kansas Teachers Right to Due Process ...... 46 Figure 68: Belief about Kansas Teachers Right to Due Process by Party Affiliation ...... 46 Figure 69: Opinion on Therapeutic use of Marijuana in Kansas ...... 47 Figure 70: Opinion on Therapeutic Use of Marijuana in Kansas by Party Affiliation ...... 47 Figure 71: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas ...... 48 Figure 72: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Party Affiliation ...... 49 Figure 73: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Age ...... 49 Figure 74: Support Open Carry of Weapons in Kansas ...... 50 Figure 75: Opinion of Open Carry of Weapons in Kansas by Party Affiliation ...... 50 Figure 76: Opinion of Open Carry of Weapons in Kansas by Gender ...... 51 Figure 77: Opinion of Open Carry of Weapons in Kansas by Age ...... 51 Figure 78: Opinion of Policy Regarding Undocumented Aliens ...... 52 Figure 79: Opinion of Policy Regarding Undocumented Aliens by Party Affiliation ...... 52 Figure 80: Opinion of Policy Regarding Undocumented Aliens by Hispanic Origin ...... 53 Figure 81: Vote for Kansas Governor in November ...... 54 Figure 82: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Party Affiliation ...... 54 Figure 83: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Gender ...... 55 Figure 84: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Age ...... 55 Figure 85: Vote for Kansas Secretary of State in November ...... 56 Figure 86: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Party Affiliation ...... 57 Figure 87: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Race ...... 57 Figure 88: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Opinion on Undocumented Aliens ...... 58 Figure 89: Voting Behavior in November 2012 Election ...... 58 Figure 90: Registration Status ...... 59 Figure 91: Reason for Not Registered ...... 59

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs: Kansas Speaks 2014 Page iv

Executive Summary

The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University conducted the 2014 Kansas Speaks survey from September 10 to September 27, 2014. A random sample of adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older was surveyed by telephone to assess their attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens. The survey finds:  The majority (85%) of respondents felt Kansas is at least a “good” place to live, and only 3% felt it is a “poor” or “very poor” place to live. The rating was higher among Republican respondents and respondents who were Asian or white.  Half (50%) of respondents said the Kansas economy was at least in good condition. Republicans and Independent voters leaning Republican tended to rate the state’s economy more highly.  One-third (33%) of respondents were satisfied with Governor Brownback’s efforts to improve the Kansas economy, and 47% were dissatisfied. Satisfaction was higher among the younger and Republican respondents.  Just under one-third (31%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with Republican leaders’ efforts to improve the Kansas economy, while 43% were “very” or “moderately dissatisfied.” Dissatisfaction was higher among the older and Democratic respondents.  One-third (33%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with Democratic leaders’ efforts to improve the Kansas economy, while 37% were “very” or “moderately dissatisfied.” The rating was higher among Democrats and those respondents of Hispanic ethnicity.  More than sixty percent (61%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately concerned” that economic conditions in Kansas will threaten their families’ welfare. Concerns tended to be higher among the Democratic, older, less-educated, female, and lower-income respondents.  When asked about Kansas government spending only, 29% percent of respondents said that Kansas government spending should be “increased,” 35% said it should be “decreased,” and 37% said it should “remain the same.”  When asked about Kansas government spending together with taxation, 50% of respondents favor “somewhat” or “much lower” taxes and spending, 24% favored “somewhat” or “much higher” taxes and spending, and 26% favored “no change.”  Among those respondents who favored “somewhat” or “much higher” taxes and spending, 74% preferred income tax “increase,” 49% preferred sales tax “increase,” 32% preferred property tax “increase,” 97% supported “increased” funding for grades kindergarten through high school (K- 12), 82% supported” increased” funding for state colleges and universities, and 89% supported 1

“increased” funding for social services. Support for income tax increase was higher among Democrats. In general, younger respondents tended to be more supportive of sales tax “increase.” Property tax increase received higher support among high-income respondents. Support for “increased” funding for state colleges and universities was higher among Democratic and older respondents.  Among those respondents who favored “somewhat” or “lower” taxes and spending, 72% preferred income tax cut, 57% preferred sales tax cut, 80% preferred property tax cut, 16% supported funding cut for grades kindergarten through high school (K-12), 33% supported a funding cut for state colleges and universities, and 17% supported a funding cut for social services. Support for income tax cut was higher among Republican respondents and those with higher education and higher incomes. Republicans were more likely to support funding cut for K- 12, higher education and social services. The support for a funding cut for state colleges and universities was also higher among older respondents.  Two-thirds (66%) of respondents favored increasing taxes on large corporations. The support for increasing taxes was higher among Democrats, Independent voters leaning Democratic and Independent voters.  More than half (58%) of respondents favored “increasing” taxes on top income earners. Republicans and less-educated tended to be more supportive of “decreasing” taxes on top income earners.  Only 7% of respondents favored “increased” taxes on the middle class. Democrats and those respondents leaning Democratic were more likely to support tax “increase.”  Only 6% of respondents favored increased taxes on small businesses. Republicans, Independent voters leaning Republican and Independent voters were more likely to support “decreasing” taxes on small businesses.  One-fourth (25%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with the performance of the Kansas Legislature, while 43% were “very” or “moderately dissatisfied.” The ratings of the Kansas Legislature tended to be lower among Democratic respondents.  More than one-third (37%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with the performance of their U.S. Congresspersons. The satisfaction level was lower among upper- educated and Democratic respondents.  Almost forty percent (38%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with their state senators. The rating was lower among Democrats, respondents leaning Democratic and Independent voters.

 More than forty percent (44%) of respondents were “very” or “moderately satisfied” with their state representative. The rating was lower among Democrats, respondents leaning Democratic and Independent voters.  The job approval rating for U.S. Senator Pat Roberts was 35%. The rating was higher among Republican and younger respondents.  The job approval rating for U.S. Senator Jerry Moran was 44%. The rating was higher among Republicans, Independent voters leaning Republican, and Independent voters.  The job approval rating for Governor Sam Brownback was 34%. The rating was higher among Republicans, male and younger respondents.  The job approval rating for President Barack Obama was 30%. The rating was higher among Democrats, African-American respondents and respondents of Hispanic ethnicity.  Three-fourths (75%) of respondents felt it was “extremely important” or “important” for Kansas to devote resources to the development of wind energy. The support level was higher among those respondents who were Democrats, leaning Democratic and Independent.  Sixty percent (60%) of respondents felt it was “extremely important” or “important” for Kansas to devote resources to the development of oil energy, and 44% felt so for the development of coal. The support levels of oil and coal were higher among those less educated and Republican respondents.  More than half (52%) of respondents felt it was “extremely important” or “important” for Kansas to devote resources to the development of biofuel. Younger respondents were more likely to say developing biofuel was “extremely important” or “important.”  Only 4% of respondents felt the drought and severe storms experienced in Kansas recently were due exclusively to the burning of fossil fuels, while 54% thought the erratic weather patterns were due “mostly” or “exclusively” to natural causes. In general, the less-educated and Republican respondents were more likely to feel the erratic weathers pattern were due “exclusively” or “mostly” to natural causes.  More than eighty percent (82%) of respondents “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that Kansas teachers should have the right to appeal dismissals by their administrators through a due process hearing, whereas 18% “disagreed” or “strongly disagreed.” Republicans and those respondents leaning Republican were less supportive of this right.  About sixty percent (59%) of respondents believed that Kansas physicians should be allowed to prescribe marijuana to patients for the therapeutic benefits, whereas 30% opposed allowing

therapeutic use of marijuana. The support for therapeutic use of marijuana was lower among Republicans.  A majority (58%) of respondents favored criminalizing recreational possession and consumption of marijuana as either felony or misdemeanor, and 42% support decriminalizing the recreational possession and consumption. The support for decriminalization was higher among Democratic and younger respondents. Thirty-one percent (31%) favored a policy similar to Colorado.  Almost half (48%) of respondents “strongly” or “somewhat” supported allowing weapons to be openly carried in public, and 38% opposed that. The support for open carry was higher among Republicans, male respondents and those who were younger than 55 years.  A little more than half (53%) of respondents favored deporting “all” or “most” undocumented aliens, and 47% favored deporting “some” or “allowing all to stay” in the U.S. Democratic respondents and those respondents of Hispanic ethnicity were more likely to favor deporting some undocumented alien or allowing all to stay.  When asked about voting choice for the gubernatorial election in November, 36% of respondents indicated they would vote for incumbent Governors Sam Brownback and Jeff Colyer, 37% would vote for Democratic nominees Paul Davis and Jill Docking, and 9% would vote for the Libertarian nominees Keen Umbehr and Josh Umbehr. Brownback and Colyer received higher support among Republican and male respondents. Davis and Docking received higher support among Democrats, female respondents, and those who were 55 years and older.  When asked about their choices in the Secretary of State election in November, 44% of respondents said they would vote for the incumbent Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, and 39% said they would vote for the Democratic candidate Jean Schodorf. Support for Kobach was higher among Republican and white respondents. Support for Schodorf was higher among Democrats and non-white respondents. Those who favored deporting all or most undocumented aliens were more likely to vote for Kobach.  Twenty percent (20%) of respondents did not vote in the November 2012 election. Among them, 45% were not registered. Among those who were not registered, 31% chose not to register, 12% did not register by the deadline and 12% did not have the proper proof of citizenship documents.

Introduction and Methods The Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University surveyed a random sample of adult residents of Kansas age 18 and older to assess attitudes and opinions regarding various issues of interest to Kansas citizens. The survey sample consists of random Kansas landline telephone numbers and cellphone numbers. From September 10 to September 27, a total of 1,777 Kansas residents were contacted through either landline telephone or cellphone, and 952 of them completed the survey, resulting in a 53.6% response rate (952/1,777). At a 95% confidence level, the margin of error for the full sample of 952 is 3.2%. A margin of error of 3.2% means that there is a 95% probability that findings among the sample vary no more than +/- 3.2% from the value that would be found if the entire population of interest (adult Kansas residents) were surveyed, assuming no response bias. Sample demographics were compared to known Census-based distributions (see Appendix A). The sample matches closely with all Census-based distributions except race, Hispanic origin and age. The survey had higher response rates among Kansas residents who are white, non-Hispanic and those over 55. Therefore, the overall population estimates are biased toward the opinions of white, non-Hispanic and older Kansans.

The following analysis contains seven sections: 1) Overall Quality of Life in Kansas. This section shows how Kansans generally feel about Kansas as a place to live. 2) Economy. This section shows results to questions addressing various economic concerns to citizens. 3) Taxes. This section shows results to opinion questions regarding fair and effective personal and business taxation policies. 4) State Government and Politicians. This section presents the results of citizens’ ratings of the state government in general, as well as their state elected officials and politicians. 5) Energy Policy. A key component of this study is to assess the level of citizen support for public resources being devoted to developing various sources of energy production, including oil, coal, wind, and biofuel. 6) Public Policy Issues. This section looks at citizens’ opinions on several key policy issues, such as Kansas teachers’ collective bargaining rights, climate change, openly carrying weapons in public places, recreational use of marijuana, and undocumented aliens.

7) Election. This section presents citizens’ intended choice of the next Governor and Secretary of State of Kansas and their voter registration status as related to the requirement of proof of citizenship.

These sections present not only descriptive analyses of respondents’ answers to each question, but also statistically significant relationships with key demographic variables to see how citizens in various social categories differ in their opinions and policy preferences on various issues. Except for the questions asking about respondents’ demographic information, all the survey questions are displayed verbatim under those graphs presenting descriptive analyses.

Analysis Section 1: Overall Quality of Life in Kansas Respondents were asked to rate Kansas generally as a place to live. Among those 948 respondents who provided valid answers to this question, 85% rated Kansas as a “good” or better place to live. Only 3% rated Kansas as a “poor” or “very poor” place to live (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live

2% As a place to live, Kansas is 23% 33% 29% 12% 1% (n=948)

Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Question: In general, how would you rate Kansas as a place to live?

Respondent’s opinions of the quality of life in Kansas were significantly related to respondent’s party affiliation. Compared with Democratic respondents, Independent voters leaning Democratic, and Independent voters, Republican respondents and those leaning Republican were more likely to feel that Kansas was at least a “good” place to live. More than three-fourths (76%) of respondents who considered themselves strong Republicans said that Kansas was an “excellent” or “very good” place to live. In contrast, less than half (44%) of respondents who considered themselves strong Democrats rated the same (Figure 2). Respondents’ opinion of the quality of live in Kansas also varied among different races. All Asian respondents rated Kansas as a “good” or “very good” place to live. White respondents were more likely to rate Kansas as a “good” or better place to live than biracial, American Indians, or Black or African Americans (Figure 3).

Figure 2: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live by Party Affiliation

1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 100% 4% 2% 4% 2% 3% 6% 6% 8% 90% 15% 15% 17% 15% 17% 80% 28% 29% 70% 30% 41% 34% 60% 37% Very Poor 43% Poor 50% 37% 34% Fair 40% 30% Good 28% 30% 30% 22% Very Good Excellent 20% 33% 25% 29% 21% 19% 10% 12% 16% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=168) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=105) (n=83) (n=140) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 3: Rating of Kansas as a Place to Live by Race

1% 2% 3% 3% 100% 3% 6% 10% 13% 10% 90% 13% 80% 32% 31% 29% 57% 29% 70% Very Poor 60% 38% Poor 50% 32% 31% Fair 34% 32% 40% Good Very Good 30% 25% 16% 19% 43% Excellent 20% 24% 26% 10% 13% 13% 13% 0% White (n=747) Black or African Biracial (n=16) Asian (n=7) American Other (n=31) American Indian (n=16) (n=31)

Section 2: Economy When asked to rate the Kansas economy, half (50%) of 924 respondents who provided valid answers said it was at least “good,” while only 15% said Kansas had a “poor” or “very poor” economy (Figure 4). Rating of the economy was significantly associated with respondent’s party affiliation. Republicans and Independent voters leaning Republican were more likely to rate the Kansas economy “good” or better than Democrats, Independent voters leaning Democratic, and Independent voters (Figure 5).

Figure 4: Rating of Kansas Economy

The economy of 12% 36% 35% 12% 3% Kansas is (n=924)

Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Question: In general, how would you rate the Kansas economy?

Figure 5: Rating of Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation

100% 2% 1% 2% 5% 7% 2% 3% 7% 9% 8% 14% 90% 14% 14% 23% 80% 26% 33% 31% 70% 41% 39% Very Poor 60% 40% 35% Poor 50% 41% Fair 40% 38% 49% Good 30% 29% Very Good 31% 29% 30% 20% Excellent 19% 10% 17% 12% 10% 8% 10% 9% 4% 1% 3% 2% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=155) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=164) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=102) (n=76) (n=139) (n=107) (n=58)

When asked how satisfied respondents were with efforts made by Governor Brownback to improve the health of the Kansas economy, 33% indicated that they were at least “moderately satisfied.” Thirty-one percent (31%) indicated they were at least “moderately satisfied” with Republican Party leaders’ ideas to improve the health of the Kansas Economy, and 33% indicated they were at least “moderately satisfied” with the Democratic Party leaders’ ideas to improve the health of the Kansas Economy (Figure 6).

Figure 6: Satisfaction with Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy

Satisfaction with Governor Brownback's Efforts to 8% 25% 20% 20% 27% Improve Kansas Economy (n=905)

Satisfaction With Republican Party Leaders' Ideas to 7% 24% 26% 21% 22% Improve Kansas Economy (n=822)

Satisfaction with Democratic Leaders' Ideas to 6% 27% 30% 19% 18% Improve Kansas Economy (n=801)

Very Satisfied Moderately Satisfied Neutral Moderately Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Question: How satisfied are you with Governor Brownback’s efforts to improve the health of the Kansas economy? How satisfied are you with the Kansas Republican Party Leader’s ideas and the Kansas Democratic Party Leader’s ideas to improve the health of the Kansas economy?

Significant differences were found in satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s efforts to improve the health of the Kansas economy with regard to party affiliation. In general, Democrats and Independent voters leaning Democratic were more likely to be dissatisfied with Governor Brownback’s efforts to improve the health of the Kansas economy as compared to Republicans and Independent voters leaning Republican (Figure 7). Strong correlation exists between age and satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s efforts to improve the health of the Kansas economy. Older respondents were more likely to be moderately or strongly dissatisfied than younger respondents (Figure 8).

Figure 7: Satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation

100% 11% 13% 90% 19% 8% 30% 33% 80% 23% 50% 19% 54% 70% 22%

60% 24% 25% 22% 17% Very Dissatisfied 50% Moderately Dissatisfied 40% 40% 22% 27% 20% Neutral 30% 26% Moderately Satisfied 35% 32% 11% Very Satisfied 20% 19% 14% 22% 10% 16% 11% 6% 10% 5% 8% 5% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=147) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=166) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=102) (n=77) (n=139) (n=106) (n=57)

Figure 8: Satisfaction with Governor Brownback’s Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Age

100% 8% 16% 90% 21% 18% 29% 33% 34% 80% 20% 70% 24% Very Dissatisfied 25% 23% 60% 18% 20% Moderately Dissatisfied 26% 50% Neutral 22% Moderately Satisfied 40% 20% 20% 15% Very Satisfied 30% 38% 30% 19% 23% 20% 27% 25% 10% 10% 10% 8% 5% 4% 8% 0% 18-24 (n=60) 25-34 (n=76) 35-44 (n=94) 45-54 (n=122) 55-64 (n=182) 65+ (n=289)

A strong correlation was found between party affiliation and satisfaction with the Kansas Democratic Party leader’s ideas to improve the health of the Kansas economy. Democrats and Independent voters leaning Democratic were much more likely to be moderately or very satisfied with Democratic Party leader’s ideas than Republicans, Independent voters leaning Republican, and

Independent voters (Figure 9). A correlation was also found with regard to Hispanic or Mexican ethnicity and satisfaction with the Kansas Democratic Party Leader’s ideas to improve the health of the Kansas economy. More than half (53%) of Hispanic respondents reported at least moderate satisfaction, compared to only 31% of non-Hispanic respondents (Figure 10).

Figure 9: Satisfaction with the Democratic Party Leaders’ Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation

100% 5% 5% 6% 16% 90% 20% 22% 9% 11% 7% 37% 80% 19% 20% 25% 70% 23% 31% 29% 60% Very Dissatisfied

50% 25% Moderately Dissatisfied 38% 53% Neutral 40% 39% Moderately Satisfied 34% 55% 42% 30% Very Satisfied 27% 20% 23% 10% 17% 14% 8% 11% 15% 3% 4% 5% 0% 1% 1% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=132) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=146) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=99) (n=70) (n=119) (n=95) (n=55)

Figure 10: Satisfaction with the Democratic Party Leaders’ Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Mexican or Hispanic Origin

100% 5% 10% 19% 90% 80% 20% 70% 33% Very Dissatisfied 60% Moderately Dissatisfied 50% 30% Neutral 40% Moderately Satisfied 30% 48% Very Satisfied 20% 26% 10% 5% 5% 0% Mexican or Not Mexican or Hispanic (n=42) Hispanic (n=699)

Figure 11 and Figure 12 show how people’s satisfaction with Republican Party leader’s efforts to improve the health of the Kansas economy varies by party affiliation and age. Republicans and Independent voters leaning Republican were more likely to be satisfied with Republican Party leaders’ efforts than Democrats, Independent leaning Democratic, and Independent voters (Figure 11). In general, older respondents were more likely to express strong and moderate dissatisfaction than younger respondents (Figure 12).

Figure 11: Satisfaction with Republican Party Leaders’ Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Party Affiliation

100% 6% 8% 10% 90% 7% 23% 15% 28% 80% 16% 24% 44% 51% 70% 19% 32% 60% Very Dissatisfied 28% 37% 50% Moderately Dissatisfied 52% 26% Neutral 40% 42% 26% Moderately Satisfied 30% Very Satisfied 38% 24% 30% 20% 20% 15% 10% 19% 12% 9% 9% 6% 7% 7% 5% 2% 0% 1% 2% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=132) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=154) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=98) (n=72) (n=128) (n=100) (n=54)

Figure 12: Satisfaction with Republican Party Leaders’ Efforts to Improve the Health of the Kansas Economy by Age

100% 10% 13% 16% 90% 20% 27% 29% 14% 15% 80% 15% 17% 70% 22% Very Dissatisfied 60% 28% 26% 39% Moderately Dissatisfied 50% 40% 31% Neutral 19% Moderately Satisfied 40% 18% Very Satisfied 30% 33% 33% 24% 20% 24% 26% 19%

10% 11% 4% 5% 5% 8% 7% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=54) (n=70) (n=87) (n=115) (n=171) (n=258)

Respondents were asked how concerned they were that the Kansas economy would seriously threaten their personal or their family’s welfare in the coming year. Almost one-third (32%) of respondents indicated that they were “very concerned,” and 29% were “moderately concerned” (Figure 13). Respondent’s concern level is associated with party affiliation, education, family income, gender and age. Democrats and independent voters leaning Democratic were more likely to be “moderately” or “very concerned” (Figure 14). In general, respondents with higher education were less likely to be “moderately” or “very concerned” (Figure 15). Respondents with lower family incomes tended to express a higher level of concern (Figure 16). A higher percentage of females (67%) indicated that they were “moderately” or “very concerned” as compared to males (54%) (Figure 17). In general, younger respondents expressed a lower level of concern than older respondents (Figure 18).

Figure 13: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare

Concerned That the Kansas Economy will Threaten 32% 29% 20% 19% You or Your Familly's Welfare (n=909)

Very Concerned Moderately Concerned Slightly Concerned Not Concerned

Question: How concerned are you that the Kansas economy will seriously threated you or your family’s welfare in the coming year?

Figure 14: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Party Affiliation

100% 16% 11% 14% 10% 90% 19% 31% 26% 15% 16% 80% 19% 21% 70% 24% 21% 60% 23% 31% 41% Not Concerned 50% 27% 34% 24% Slightly Concerned 40% 27% 25% Moderately Concerned 30% Very Concerned 43% 20% 33% 37% 33% 34% 26% 10% 21%

0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=153) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=169) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=104) (n=81) (n=139) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 15: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Level of Education

100% 13% 14% 18% 19% 90% 20% 22% 4% 35% 80% 17% 18% 70% 22% 25% 36% 24% 60% 28% 19% Not Concerned 50% 35% 28% 23% Slightly Concerned 27% 40% Moderately Concerned 27% 30% Very Concerned 46% 42% 20% 34% 29% 31% 27% 10% 19%

0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=28) equivalency (n=224) degree (n=204) (n=106) (n=26) (n=171) (n=87)

Figure 16: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Income

100% 11% 13% 90% 19% 19% 19% 25% 29% 12% 38% 80% 18% 13% 70% 10% 25% 26% 27% 60% 22% 31% 14% Not Concerned 34% 50% Slightly Concerned 40% 31% 29% Moderately Concerned 27% 65% Very Concerned 30% 21% 50% 46% 20% 35% 25% 26% 22% 10% 20%

0% Less than $10,000- $25,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $150,000 $10,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 or more (n=20) (n=84) (n=72) (n=125) (n=166) (n=120) (n=91) (n=37)

Figure 17: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Gender

100% 15% 90% 23% 80% 18% Not Concerned 70% 22% Slightly Concerned 60% 32% 50% 25% Moderately Concerned 40% 30% Very Concerned 20% 35% 29% 10% 0% Female (n=441) Male (n=396)

Figure 18: Level of Concern with the Threat from Economic Conditions in Kansas to Individuals’ or Families’ Welfare by Age

100% 11% 16% 18% 90% 26% 26% 23% 80% 27% 16% 16% 70% 22% 24% 60% 31% Not Concerned 32% 50% 24% 34% Slightly Concerned 24% 40% 21% Moderately Concerned 30% 27% Very Concerned 20% 38% 37% 29% 31% 32% 10% 16% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=62) (n=76) (n=100) (n=123) (n=187) (n=292)

Section 3: Taxes and Spending When asked about Kansas government spending, 29% of respondents said that Kansas government spending should be increased, 35% said it should be decreased, and 37% said it should remain the same. Respondents were then informed that the Kansas Government has to produce tax revenue for every dollar it spends. Some people would prefer the government to have lower taxes and less spending, while others would prefer the government to have higher taxes and more spending. When “taxes” appeared together with “spending” in the question, the support for decreased spending (in conjunction with lower taxes) increased. Half (50%) of respondents favor somewhat or much lower taxes and spending. About one-fourth (24%) said they favor somewhat or much higher taxes and spending, and 26% said they would favor keeping the current level of taxes and spending (Figure 20).

Figure 19: Belief about Kansas Government Spending

Kansas Government Spending Should 29% 37% 35% (n=804)

Be Increased Remain the Same Be Decreased

Question: Do you believe that Kansas government spending should be increased, remain the same, or be decreased?

Figure 20: Belief about Kansas Government Taxes and Spending

3% Kansas Government Taxes and Spending Should 21% 26% 31% 19% be (n=914)

Much Higher Somewhat Higher Remain the Same Somewhat Lower Much Lower

Question: Kansas Government has to produce tax revenue for every dollar it spends. Some people prefer the government to have lower taxes and less spending. Others favor higher taxes and more government spending. Which of the following do you prefer?

Respondents were asked a different set of questions with regard to their beliefs about Kansas government taxes and spending on several specific categories. Among those who preferred much or somewhat higher level of taxes and spending, 74% indicated that they preferred an increase in income tax, 49% preferred sales tax increase, and 32% preferred property tax increases. Almost all (97%) respondents who preferred higher taxes and spending indicated that they would like an increase in the funding for grades kindergarten through high school (K-12), 89% preferred increased funding for social services and 82% preferred increased funding for state colleges and universities (Figure 21). Among those who preferred much or somewhat lower taxes and spending, 80% favored lower property tax, 72% favored lower income tax, 57% favored lower sales tax, 33% favored lower spending in higher education, 17% favored lower spending in social service and 16% favored lower spending in K-12 education (Figure 22).

Figure 21: Preferences for Increasing Taxes and Spending

Income Tax (n=202) 74%

Sales Tax (n=208) 49%

Property Tax (n=205) 32%

Funding for K-12 (n=213) 97%

Funding for Higher Education (n=205) 82%

Funding for Social Services (n=205) 89%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Question: Would you increase Income, Sales, or Property tax? Would you increase state education funding for grades K-12? Would you increase state education funding for colleges and universities? Would you increase state funding for social services, such as senior and disability services?

Figure 22: Preferences for Decreasing Taxes and Spending

Income Tax (n=435) 72%

Sales Tax (n=436) 57%

Property Tax (n=435) 80%

Funding for K-12 (n=439) 16%

Funding for Higher Education (n=428) 33%

Funding for Social Services (n=435) 17%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Question: Would you decrease Income, Sales, or Property tax? Would you decrease state education funding for grades K-12? Would you decrease state education funding for colleges and universities? Would you decrease state funding for social services, such as senior and disability services?

Among those respondents who favored higher taxes and spending, Democrats and Independent voters were more likely to favor an increase in income tax than Republicans (Figure 23). Younger respondents were more likely to be supportive of sales tax increase than older respondents, with the exception of the 25-34 age group (Figure 24). Respondents with higher family income tended to be more supportive of property tax increase than those with lower family income (Figure 25). In terms of preference for increased spending, Democrats were more likely to support increasing funding for higher education than Republicans (Figure 26). In general, respondents who were older than 35 years tended to be more supportive of a spending increase in higher education than younger respondents (Figure 27).

Figure 23: Preference for Increasing Income Tax by Party Affiliation

100% 13% 90% 29% 28% 25% 32% 80% 42% 70% 58% 60% 50% 87% 40% 71% 72% 75% 68% 30% 58% 20% 42% 10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=29) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=12) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=46) (n=12) (n=17) (n=52) (n=25) Yes No

Figure 24: Preference for Increasing Sales Tax by Age

100% 23% 38% 80% 43% 44% 67% 64% 60%

40% 77% 63% 57% 56% 20% 33% 36%

0% 18-24 (n=13) 25-34 (n=21) 35-44 (n=24) 45-54 (n=23) 55-64 (n=45) 65+ (n=77) Yes No

Figure 25: Preference for Increasing Property Tax by Income

100% 90% 29% 80% 52% 70% 65% 77% 74% 60% 80% 81% 50% 100% 40% 71% 30% 48% 20% 35% 23% 26% 10% 20% 19% 0% 0% Less than $10,000- $25,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $150,000 or $10,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 more (n=20) (n=84) (n=72) (n=125) (n=166) (n=120) (n=91) (n=37) Yes No

Figure 26: Preference for Increasing Higher Education Funding by Party Affiliation

100% 2% 13% 18% 16% 90% 25% 28% 80% 70% 58% 60% 50% 98% 87% 82% 84% 40% 75% 72% 30% 20% 42% 10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=29) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=12) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=48) (n=12) (n=15) Yes No (n=56) (n=25)

Figure 27: Preference for Increasing Higher Education Funding by Age

100% 7% 17% 13% 90% 27% 26% 80% 42% 70% 60% 50% 93% 83% 87% 40% 73% 74% 30% 58% 20% 10% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=15) (n=19) (n=23) (n=24) (n=45) (n=75) Yes No

Among those respondents who favored lower taxes and spending, Republican respondents and those leaning Republican tended to favor a decrease in income tax more often than not very strong Democrats and those leaning Democratic. Strong Democrats fell in the same range as Republicans in terms of their support for decreased income taxes (Figure 28). In general respondents with higher education levels were more likely to favor an income tax decrease (Figure 29). Similarly, respondents with higher family incomes were generally more supportive of an income tax decrease (Figure 30). Respondents who favored lower taxes and spending in general did not favor decreasing education funding for K-12 schools. However, the support level of respondents with different party affiliations still varied significantly. Republicans, those leaning Republican and Independent voters were more likely to favor lower spending on K-12 schools, as compared with Democrats and those leaning Democratic (Figure 31). Republicans and those respondents leaning Republican were also more likely to support lower spending on higher education (Figure 32). Generally, younger respondents were less likely to support lower funding for higher education than older respondents (Figure 33). Republican respondents were much more likely to support lower funding for social services than Independent voters (no matter if they were leaning Republican or leaning Democratic) and Democratic respondents (Figure 34).

Figure 28: Preference for Decreasing Income Tax by Party Affiliation

100% 17% 90% 30% 24% 32% 30% 80% 45% 55% 70% 60% 50% 83% 40% 70% 76% 68% 70% 30% 55% 45% 20% 10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=79) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=109) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=27) (n=40) (n=83) Yes No (n=22) (n=20)

Figure 29: Preference for Decreasing Income Tax by Education

100% 15% 13% 90% 30% 36% 32% 80% 50% 70% 60% 100% 50% 85% 87% 40% 70% 64% 68% 30% 50% 20% 10% 0% Less than High school Some college Associates or Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or (n=111) Technical degree law degree degree (n=4) (n=14) equivalency degree (n=99) (n=30) (n=102) (n=44)

Yes No

Figure 30: Preference for Decreasing Income Tax by Income

100% 15% 8% 90% 21% 24% 25% 27% 80% 41% 70% 73% 60% 50% 85% 92% 40% 79% 76% 75% 73% 30% 59% 20% 27% 10% 0% Less than $10,000- $25,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $150,000 $10,000 $24,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,999 or more (n=11) (n=49) (n=33) (n=62) (n=64) (n=55) (n=41) (n=13)

Yes No

Figure 31: Preference for Decreasing K-12 Funding by Party Affiliation

100% 90% 80% 70% 74% 60% 87% 87% 88% 96% 90% 90% 50% 40% 30% 20% 26% 10% 13% 13% 13% 4% 10% 10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=80) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=106) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=31) (n=39) (n=85) Yes No (n=23) (n=21)

Figure 32: Preference for Decreasing Higher Education Funding by Party Affiliation

100% 90% 80% 55% 70% 65% 70% 73% 77% 60% 81% 81% 50% 40% 30% 45% 20% 35% 30% 27% 23% 10% 19% 19% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=77) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=106) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=27) (n=37) (n=83) Yes No (n=22) (n=21)

Figure 33: Preference for Decreasing Higher Education Funding by Age

100% 90% 80% 52% 70% 68% 69% 77% 73% 60% 96% 50% 40% 30% 48% 20% 32% 31% 23% 27% 10% 4% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=28) (n=39) (n=48) (n=62) (n=99) (n=114) Yes No

Figure 34: Preference for Decreasing Social Services Funding by Party Affiliation

100% 90% 80% 70% 68% 78% 60% 86% 89% 91% 95% 93% 50% 40% 30% 20% 32% 22% 10% 14% 11% 9% 5% 7% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=79) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=111) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=30) (n=38) (n=83) Yes No (n=23) (n=21)

Tax increases and reductions can be targeted at different people or businesses. Respondents were asked their opinions about tax increases and reductions targeted at large corporations, top income earners, the middle class, and small businesses. About two-thirds (66%) of respondents believed that taxes on large corporations should be increased, and 58% believed that taxes on top income earners should be increased. In contrast, a majority (52%) of respondents felt taxes on small businesses should be decreased, and 58% thought taxes on the middle class should remain the same (Figure 35).

Figure 35: Tax Changes on Various Groups

Taxes on Large Corporations 66% 23% 12% (n=858)

Taxes on Top Income Earners 58% 33% 9% (n=868)

Taxes on the Middle Class 7% 58% 35% (n=877)

Taxes on Small Businesses 6% 42% 52% (n=869) Increased Remain the Same Decreased

Question: Tax increases and reductions can be targeted at different people or businesses. Please tell us whether you think taxes on the following groups should increase, remain the same, or decrease.

Republicans and Independent voters leaning Republican were less likely to support a tax increase on top income earners, as compared with Democratic respondents, those leaning Democratic, and Independent voters. As Figure 36 shows, 36% of respondents who considered themselves strong Republicans believed that taxes on top income earners should be increased, whereas the percentages among Democrats and those Independent voters leaning Democratic were all more than 80%. Respondents with lower levels of education were more likely to support tax cuts on top income earners than those with higher education (Figure 37). Democrats and Independent voters leaning Democratic were more likely to support tax increases on both the middle class and large corporations, although the support for tax increases on the middle class was, in general, much lower than the support for tax increases on large corporations (Figures 38 and 39). Democratic respondents and those leaning Democratic were less likely to support a tax reduction on small businesses than Republican respondents, those leaning Republican and Independent voters (Figure 40).

Figure 36: Tax Changes on Top Income Earners by Party Affiliation

100% 9% 6% 3% 3% 4% 17% 13% 90% 16% 14% 16% 80% 30%

70% 42% 49% 46% 60% Decreased 50% 83% 40% 81% 81% Remained The 63% Same 30% 45% 42% 20% 36% Increased 10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=145) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=162) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=103) (n=78) (n=138) (n=107) (n=58)

Figure 37: Tax Changes on Top Income Earners by Level of Education

100% 7% 4% 13% 8% 9% 8% 90% 23% 26% 80% 34% 28% 39% 37% 35% 70% 31% Decreased 60%

50% Remained The Same 40% 70% Increased 59% 59% 30% 53% 54% 58% 46% 20%

10%

0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=26) equivalency (n=218) degree (n=198) (n=104) (n=26) (n=169) (n=83)

Figure 38: Tax Changes on the Middle Class by Party Affiliation

100%

90% 27% 25% 34% 35% 32% 80% 42% 40% Decreased 70% 60% Remained The 50% Same 61% 65% 40% 59% 59% Increased 52% 61% 30% 56% 20% 10% 7% 12% 11% 9% 2% 5% 7% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=147) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=165) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=103) (n=82) (n=140) (n=107) (n=57)

Figure 39: Tax Changes on Large Corporations by Party Affiliation

3% 4% 100% 9% 5% 15% 13% 8% 21% 8% 90% 21% 21% 80% 28% 70% 35% 32% 60%

50% Decreased 90% 87% Remained The Same 40% 71% 75% 30% 57% Increased 47% 51% 20%

10% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=146) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=161) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=101) (n=79) (n=136) (n=105) (n=57)

Figure 40: Tax Changes on Small Businesses by Party Affiliation

100%

90% 34% 34% 38% 80% 55% 54% 70% 67% 70% 60% Decreased

50% Remained The Same

40% 56% 60% 55% Increased 30% 38% 38% 20% 30% 29% 10% 10% 4% 7% 7% 5% 7% 0% 1% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=147) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=165) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=101) (n=80) (n=137) (n=107) (n=58)

Section 4: Government and Politicians When asked to evaluate the performance of the Kansas Legislature, 43% of respondents indicated they were “very” or “moderately dissatisfied”; only 25% indicated some level of satisfaction. Thirty- seven percent (37%) of respondents said that they were “moderately” or “very satisfied” with the overall performance of their U.S. Congressperson, and 38% said they were “moderately” or “very dissatisfied.” Thirty-eight percent (38%) of respondents were “moderately” or “very satisfied” with their state senators, while 33% were “moderately” or “very dissatisfied.” When asked about level of satisfaction with regard to their state representatives, 44% of respondents said they were at least “moderately satisfied,” and only 27% expressed some level of dissatisfaction (Figure 41).

Figure 41: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of the Kansas Government

Kansas Legislature 4% 21% 33% 22% 21% (n=912)

U.S. Congressperson 10% 27% 23% 18% 21% (n=859)

State Senator (n=830) 11% 27% 28% 16% 17%

State Representative 12% 32% 29% 13% 14% (n=824)

Very Satisfied Moderately Satisfied Neutral Moderately Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

Question: How satisfied are you with the overall performance of… the Kansas Legislature? your U.S. congressperson? the state senator in your district? the state representative in your district?

Respondents’ satisfaction with the overall performance of the Kansas Legislature is related to their party affiliation. Republicans and those respondents leaning Republican were more likely to be moderately or very satisfied with the performance of Kansas Legislature than Democratic respondents, those leaning Democratic and Independent voters (Figure 42).

The satisfaction level with the overall performance of U.S. Congressperson is associated with party affiliation and education. Republican respondents and those leaning Republican expressed much higher satisfaction (moderately or very satisfied) than Democrats, those leaning Democratic and Independent voters (Figure 43). In general, respondents with higher levels of education were more likely

to be dissatisfied than those with lower levels of education (Figure 44). Party affiliation is also strongly correlated with respondents’ satisfaction with the overall performance of their state senator and representative. Republican respondents and those leaning Republican expressed much lower dissatisfaction with the performance of their state senator and representative (Figures 45 and 46).

Figure 42: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of the Kansas Legislature by Party Affiliation

100% 5% 11% 10% 90% 17% 24% 41% 39% 80% 22% 23% 48% 70% 22% 22% Very Dissatisfied 60% Moderately 21% Dissatisfied 50% 38% 39% 31% 19% Neutral 40% 40% 44% Moderately 30% 32% Satisfied 22% Very Satisfied 20% 25% 23% 23% 10% 13% 12% 7% 11% 4% 4% 6% 2% 0% 1% 1% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=147) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=166) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=101) (n=81) (n=137) (n=106) (n=57)

Figure 43: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of U.S. Congressperson by Party Affiliation

100% 9% 10% 11% 90% 27% 32% 14% 16% 37% 80% 19% 43% Very 70% 18% Dissatisfied 18% 22% 19% Moderately 60% 21% Dissatisfied 24% 50% 16% Neutral 27% 40% 37% 35% 26% 16% Moderately 43% 30% 25% Satisfied 20% Very Satisfied 24% 21% 22% 15% 10% 17% 13% 9% 4% 6% 4% 0% 1% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=135) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=158) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=100) (n=77) (n=132) (n=102) (n=53)

Figure 44: Satisfaction with Overall Performance of U.S. Congressperson by Level of Education

100% 9% 16% 90% 20% 21% 21% 36% 80% 43% Very Dissatisfied 14% 20% 16% 70% 41% 21% Moderately 60% Dissatisfied 28% 25% 25% 22% 50% 19% 22% Neutral 40% 11% 32% Moderately Satisfied 30% 24% 13% 26% 31% 28% 20% 24% 13% Very Satisfied 10% 18% 14% 12% 8% 11% 6% 9% 0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=22) equivalency (n=208) degree (n=192) (n=99) (n=23) (n=156) (n=83)

Figure 45: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of State Senator by Party Affiliation

100% 9% 10% 8% 22% 90% 10% 13% 29% 28% 18% 36% 80% Very 17% Dissatisfied 70% 17% 30% 15% 22% Moderately 60% Dissatisfied 40% 21% 50% 36% 30% Neutral 40% 25% 38% 38% 23% Moderately 30% Satisfied 20% 25% 25% 28% 21% Very Satisfied 15% 16% 10% 11% 8% 6% 4% 4% 4% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=132) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=150) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=92) (n=73) (n=126) (n=97) (n=53)

Figure 46: Satisfaction with the Overall Performance of State Representative by Party Affiliation

100% 3% 7% 11% 16% 11% 22% 22% 90% 4% 10% 28% 80% 20% 15% Very Dissatisfied 70% 28% 16% 41% 23% 16% 60% Moderately 28% Dissatisfied 50% 39% 20% 23% 39% Neutral 40% 40% 30% 33% 32% Moderately 29% 20% 27% Satisfied 27% 16% 10% 10% 14% Very Satisfied 9% 4% 8% 6% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=134) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=151) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=93) (n=70) (n=125) (n=94) (n=51)

Respondents were asked if they approve or disapprove of the jobs certain government officials were doing in office, including U.S. Senators Jerry Moran and Pat Roberts, Governor Sam Brownback and President Obama. Figure 47 shows that U.S. Senator Jerry Moran had an approval rate of 44%, the highest among those four political figures. President Obama had the lowest approval rate, which was 30%.

Figure 47: Approval of Government Officials in Office

Pat Roberts 35% 18% 46% (n=948)

Jerry Moran 44% 31% 25% (n=947)

Sam Brownback 34% 16% 50% (n=948)

Barack Obama 30% 11% 59% (n=943)

Approve Not Sure Disapprove

Question: Do you approve or disapprove of… the job Pat Roberts is doing as United States Senator? the job Jerry Moran is doing as United States Senator? the job Sam Brownback is doing as Governor? the job Barack Obama is doing as President?

The job approval rating for Senator Pat Roberts varied significantly by party affiliation and age. The rating was much higher among Republican respondents as compared with Independent voters and Democrats (Figure 48). The rating went down as the age variable increased (Figure 49). Party affiliation is also related with the ratings for Senator Jerry Moran and Governor Sam Brownback. The ratings for both Senator Moran and Governor Brownback were higher among Republican respondents and those leaning Republican (Figures 50 and 51). The approval ratings for Governor Brownback were also higher among male respondents, as compared with female respondents, and among younger age groups, especially among those younger than 35 years (Figures 52 and 53). President Obama’s rating is significantly related with party affiliation, Hispanic origin and race. He received much higher ratings among Democrats and those leaning Democratic, African-American respondents and respondents of Hispanic ethnicity (Figures 54, 55 and 56).

Figure 48: Approval of Pat Roberts as Senator by Party Affiliation

100%

90% 27% 28% 80% 40% 50% 69% 56% 70% 12% 12% 71% 60%

50% 19% Disapprove Not Sure 40% 22% 17% 69% Approve 30% 61% 60% 13% 20% 40% 28% 27% 10% 16% 16% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=170) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=105) (n=83) (n=139) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 49: Approval of Pat Roberts as Senator by Age

100% 90% 22% 29% 35% 80% 49% 49% 56% 70% 30% 60% 29% 24% Disapprove 50% 12% 19% Not Sure 40% 12% Approve 30% 48% 42% 42% 38% 20% 31% 32% 10% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=63) (n=76) (n=101) (n=124) (n=188) (n=298)

Figure 50: Approval of Jerry Moran as Senator by Party Affiliation

100% 13% 90% 18% 19% 26% 31% 40% 80% 19% 49% 70% 28% 33% 60% 34% 34% 50% Disapprove 31% Not Sure 40% 21% 68% Approve 30% 54% 48% 20% 40% 36% 29% 30% 10%

0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=155) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=170) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=105) (n=83) (n=140) (n=108) (n=59)

Figure 51: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Party Affiliation

100%

90% 22% 35% 80% 45% 11% 53% 70% 68% 81% 78% 60% 18% 50% 15% Disapprove

40% Not Sure 67% 28% Approve 30% 5% 47% 20% 40% 9% 10% 27% 10% 20% 8% 13% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=170) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=105) (n=83) (n=138) (n=108) (n=59)

Figure 52: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Gender

100% 90% 80% 47% 54% 70% Disapprove 60% Not Sure 50% 16% Approve 40% 15% 30% 20% 30% 37% 10% 0% Female (n=448) Male (n=399)

Figure 53: Approval of Sam Brownback as Governor by Age

100% 90% 36% 80% 39% 43% 54% 53% 58% 70%

60% Disapprove 22% 17% 50% 24% Not Sure 40% 17% 17% 10% Approve 30% 42% 43% 20% 34% 29% 30% 32% 10% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=64) (n=76) (n=101) (n=124) (n=187) (n=298)

Figure 54: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Party Affiliation

100% 13% 90% 19% 31% 11% 80%

70% 58% 21% 10% 80% Disapprove 60% 86% 94% 50% Not Sure 40% 76% 15% 30% 59% 59% Approve 20% 7% 27% 10% 8% 2% 13% 4% 6% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=169) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=104) (n=83) (n=139) (n=108) (n=59)

Figure 55: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Hispanic Origin

100% 90% 80% 40% 70% 61% 60% Disapprove 50% 20% Not Sure 40% 10% Approve 30% 40% 20% 29% 10% 0% Mexican or Not Mexican or Hispanic (n=45) Hispanic (n=814)

Figure 56: Approval of Barack Obama as President by Race

100% 17% 90% 19% 34% 80% 44% 44% 13% 70% 63% 60% 50% 28% 50% 19% 13% Disapprove 40% Not Sure 10% 68% 30% Approve 44% 20% 38% 38% 27% 33% 10% 0% White Black or Biracial Asian (n=6) American Other (n=747) African (n=16) Indian (n=32) American (n=16) (n=31)

Section 5: Energy Policy The survey asked about the importance for Kansas to develop coal, oil, wind and biofuel energy. Respondent’s support for the development of wind energy was very high; 75% said it was “extremely important” or “important.” Support for the development of oil was nearly as high, with 60% saying it was “extremely important” or “important.” More than half (52%) of respondents felt developing biofuel was “extremely important” or “important.” Coal had the lowest support; 44% of respondents believed it was “extremely important” or “important” (Figure 57).

Figure 57: Opinion on Devoting Resources to the Development of Coal, Oil, Wind Energy, and Biofuel

Wind 45% 30% 18% 7.20% (n=845)

Oil 25% 35% 25% 15% (n=843)

Biofuel 24% 28% 29% 20% (n=802)

Coal 17% 27% 32% 23% (n=806)

Extremely Important Important Somewhat Important Not at all Important Question: How important is it for Kansas to devote resources to the development of the following energy sources: Coal, Oil, Wind, Biofuel (ethanol biodiesel)?

Respondents’ opinions on devoting resources to coal and oil varied by party affiliation and education. Democrats and those respondents leaning Democratic were less likely to think developing coal and oil was “important” or “extremely important” than Republicans, those leaning Republican and Independent voters (Figures 58 and 60). In general, respondents with higher levels of education were less likely to think developing coal and oil is “important” or “extremely important” than those with lower levels of education (Figures 59 and 61). Republicans and those leaning Republican tended to be less supportive of wind energy than Democrats, those leaning Democratic and Independent voters (Figure 62). In general, younger respondents tended to have higher levels of support for biofuel than older respondents (Figure 63).

Figure 58: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Coal Development by Party Affiliation

100% 8% 11% 90% 21% 30% 29% 37% 38% 80% 32% 70% 42% Not at all 31% Important 60% 30% 33% Somewhat Important 50% 35% 31% 35% 40% Important 26% 28% 30% 30% 24% Extremely 18% 20% 16% Important 25% 10% 21% 20% 10% 12% 13% 14% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=142) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=156) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=95) (n=72) (n=132) (n=98) (n=55)

Figure 59: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Coal Development by Level of Education

100% 4% 15% 90% 23% 22% 25% 36% 80% 40% 43% 70% 33% 30% 60% 38% 34% Not at all Important 50% 29% 32% Somewhat 40% 33% Important 35% 30% 30% 24% 25% Important 24% 12% 20% Extremely 20% 10% 17% 17% 16% 17% 11% 16% Important 0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=26) equivalency (n=218) degree (n=198) (n=104) (n=26) (n=169) (n=83)

Figure 60: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Oil Development by Party Affiliation

100% 4% 9% 9% 17% 90% 19% 25% 22% 23% 80% 24% 25% 27% 70% 24% 27% Not at all 30% 60% 39% Important Somewhat 50% 37% 34% Important Important 40% 39% 32% 33% Extremely 31% 30% Important 20% 38% 29% 33% 22% 10% 16% 14% 16% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=146) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=164) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=99) (n=75) (n=134) (n=104) (n=59)

Figure 61: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Oil Development by Level of Education

100% 8% 10% 12% 18% 15% 16% 90% 24%

80% 27% 25% 19% 70% 28% 29% Not at all 26% 36% Important 60% Somewhat 50% 36% 42% Important 42% 40% 28% 34% Important 31% 32% 30% Extremely 20% Important 29% 23% 27% 26% 23% 10% 20% 16%

0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=26) equivalency (n=216) degree (n=200) (n=101) (n=25) (n=163) (n=85)

Figure 62: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Wind Energy Development by Party Affiliation 1% 100% 6% 5% 13% 9% 8% 8% 9% 90% 15% 13% 14% 80% 24% 23% 23% 34% 70% 27% 31% 26% Not at all 60% Important 25% 26% 33% Somewhat 50% Important Important 40%

30% 54% 56% Extremely 48% 53% 43% Important 20% 38% 36% 10%

0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=151) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=163) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=100) (n=80) (n=132) (n=104) (n=59)

Figure 63: Opinion on Devoting Resources to Biofuel Development by Age

100% 10% 15% 15% 16% 90% 22% 25% 80% 21% 28% 70% 36% 29% 32% 27% Not at all Important 60% 35% 50% Somewhat Important 31% 40% 22% 29% Important 24% 28% 30% Extremely Important 20% 34% 27% 27% 26% 10% 22% 20% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=62) (n=73) (n=94) (n=120) (n=176) (n=248)

Respondents were asked if they thought the drought and severe storms recently experienced in Kansas were the result of natural causes or due to extensive burning of fossil fuels. More than half (54%) of respondents believe that the erratic weather in Kansas is caused mostly or exclusively by natural causes. Only sixteen percent (16%) believe the erratic weather in Kansas is due mostly or exclusively to the burning of fossil fuels (Figure 64). Democrats and those leaning Democratic were much more likely to think the burning of fossil fuels was the cause of the erratic weather than Republicans, those leaning Republican and Independent voters (Figure 65). Respondents with higher levels of education were more likely to think the burning of fossil fuels contributed to the erratic weather than those with lower levels of education (Figure 66).

Figure 64: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas (n=817) 4% Due Exclusively to the Burning of Fossil Fuels Mostly Due to the Burning of Fossil Fuels 27% 12% Due to Natural Causes and the Burning of 30% Fossil Fuels Equally 27% Mostly Due to Natural Causes

Due Exclusively to Natural Causes

Question: Some people believe the drought and severe storms Kansas is experiencing are the result of natural causes. Others believe it is the result of extensive burning of fossil fuels. Do you believe this erratic weather pattern is: due exclusively to the burning of fossil fuels, mostly due to the burning of fossil fuels, due to natural causes and the burning of fossil fuels equally, mostly due to natural causes, or due exclusively to natural causes?

Figure 65: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas by Party Affiliation

100% 11% 16% 18% 90% 26% 23% 33% 80% 18% 48% 16% 13% Exclusively Natural 70% Causes 28% 60% Mostly Natural Causes 30% 40% 38% 50% 36% 40% Fossil Fuels and Natural Causes 40% 31% 34% Equally 30% Mostly Fossil Fuels 26% 27% 20% 29% 24% 29% 15% Exclusively Fossil 9% Fuels 10% 1% 9% 4% 5% 6% 3% 5% 4% 0% 1% 1% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=142) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=157) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=98) (n=76) (n=134) (n=102) (n=55)

Figure 66: Belief about the Cause of Erratic Weather in Kansas by Level of Education

100% 12% 90% 23% 22% 28% 29% 31% Exclusively Natural Causes 80% 46% 27% 70% 20% Mostly Natural Causes 31% 60% 27% 23% 27% 50% 31% Fossil Fuels and Natural 25% 32% Causes Equally 40% 28% 30% 32% 30% 29% Mostly Fossil Fuels

20% 27% 29% 23% 13% 10% 10% 7% 12% Exclusively Fossil Fuels 7% 5% 4% 3% 2% 4% 0% Less than High school Some Associates Bachelors Masters or Doctoral high school diploma or college or Technical degree law degree degree (n=24) equivalency (n=208) degree (n=200) (n=103) (n=26) (n=153) (n=82)

Section 6: Public Policy Issues The Kansas National Education Association (KNEA) recently filed suit claiming that the 2014 school funding bill unfairly restricted the collective bargaining rights of Kansas teachers, and that teachers should have the right to appeal dismissals by their administrators through a due process hearing. Respondents were asked if they agree or disagree that Kansas teachers should have this right. The question was asked in two versions. The first version was used from September 10 to September 19, and it informed the respondents of the law suit. The second version was used after September 20, which did not inform the respondents of the law suit. Figure 67 shows that once the law suit information was taken out of the question, respondents’ support of teachers’ right to due process decreased. Among the respondents who participated in the survey before September 20, 38% strongly agreed that teachers should have the right to appeal dismissals through a due process hearing, and 5% strongly disagreed. Among the respondents who participated since September 20, 31% strongly agree that teachers should have the right, and 6% strongly disagreed. Overall, 82% of respondents said they “agree” or “strongly agree” that teachers should have the right to a due process hearing, and 18% “disagreed” or “strongly disagreed.” Republican respondents and those leaning Republican were less supportive of this right than Democrats, Independent voters leaning Democratic and Independent voters (Figure 68).

Figure 67: Belief about Kansas Teacher’s Right to Due Process

Version 1, KNEA Law Suit Mentioned (n=477) 38% 44% 14% 5%

Version 2, KNEA Law Suit Not Mentioned (n=317) 31% 53% 10% 6%

Combined (n=794) 35% 47% 13% 5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

Question Version 1: Kansas National Education Association recently filed suit claiming the 2014 school funding bill unfairly restricted the collective bargaining rights of Kansas teachers, claiming that teachers should have the right to appeal dismissals by their administrators through a due process hearing. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree that Kansas teachers should have this right? Question Version 2: Kansas National Education Association argues that Kansas teachers should have the right to appeal dismissals by their administrators through a due process hearing. Do you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree?

Figure 68: Belief about Kansas Teacher’s Right to Due Process by Party Affiliation

4% 1% 2% 100% 4% 4% 11% 6% 8% 2% 8% 11% 90% 15% 19% 80% 24% 40% 70% 42% 51% 60% 54% 51% Strongly Disagree 44% 50% Disagree 48% 40% Agree Strongly Agree 30% 54% 45% 20% 41% 30% 31% 34% 10% 18%

0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=135) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=153) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=96) (n=74) (n=124) (n=106) (n=56)

Respondents were asked their opinion on allowing Kansas physicians to prescribe marijuana to their patients for the therapeutic benefits. Figure 69 shows that 59% of respondents favored therapeutic use of marijuana, and 30% opposed such use. Opinion on therapeutic use of marijuana varied by respondents’ party affiliation. Republicans were much less likely to support therapeutic use of marijuana as compared with Democrats and Independent voters (Figure 70).

Figure 69: Opinion on Therapeutic Use of Marijuana in Kansas

Doctors Prescribe Marijuana for 59% 10% 30% Therapeutic Use

Favor Don't Know Oppose

Question: Do you favor or oppose allowing Kansas physicians to prescribe marijuana to their patients for the therapeutic benefits?

Figure 70: Opinion on Therapeutic Use of Marijuana in Kansas by Party Affiliation

100% 19% 20% 19% 90% 26% 32% 80% 44% 47% 8% 10% 14% 70% 10% 6% 60% 12% Oppose 50% 13% Don't Know 40% 72% 69% Favor 64% 67% 30% 62% 44% 20% 40%

10%

0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=154) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=167) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=105) (n=83) (n=139) (n=108) (n=59)

Colorado recently legalized the recreational use of marijuana by adults over the age of 21. Respondents were asked what their public policy preference is for the recreational use of marijuana in Kansas. Overall, 58% of respondents wanted to criminalize possession or consumption of marijuana in Kansas as either a misdemeanor or felony, 11% preferred decriminalization of possession or consumption of recreational marijuana by person over 21, and 31% preferred a policy similar to the one in Colorado, which allows the sale of recreational marijuana with a substantial state tax (Figure 71). The support for criminalization was higher among Republican respondents and those leaning Republican, with more than two-thirds favoring punishing possession or consumption of marijuana as a misdemeanor or felony. Less than 50% of respondents who were Democrats or leaning Democratic supported criminalization (Figure 72). In general, older respondents were more likely to favor criminalizing possession or consumption of marijuana, and younger respondents were more likely to favor decriminalize possession and consumption of marijuana. The majority of respondents under the age of 45 believed Kansas should adopt a policy similar to Colorado. Less than one-fourth of respondents younger than 45 believed that possession or consumption of marijuana in Kansas should remain a felony (Figure 73).

Figure 71: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas (n=821)

33% 25% 11% 31%

Possession or Consumption Should Remain a Felony

Changing Punishment for Marijuana Possession or Consumption from Felony to Misdemeanor

Decriminalization of Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Persons over 21, NOT Allowing Retail Marijuana Stores

Remove All Criminal Penalties for Possession or Consumption of Marijuana by Persons over 21, Similar to Policy in Colorado

Question: Colorado recently legalizes the recreational use of marijuana by adults over the age of 21. Which best describes your policy preference for the recreational use of marijuana in Kansas? Possession or consumption of marijuana should remain a felony in Kansas, Changing the punishment for marijuana possession or consumption from a felony to a misdemeanor, or removing all criminal penalties for the possession or consumption of marijuana in Kansas by persons over 21, similar to the policy in Colorado.

Figure 72: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Party Affiliation

100% 21% 21% 23% 34% 4% 41% 39% 42% 80% 7% 8% 24% 28% 12% 60% 32% 17% 16% 17% 24% 40% 26% 25% 20% 49% 47% 20% 37% 30% 17% 20% 22% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=147) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=156) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=96) (n=78) (n=136) (n=103) (n=56) Remove All Criminal Penalties for Possession or Consumption of Marijuana by Persons over 21, Similar to Policy in Colorado Decriminalization of Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Persons over 21, NOT Allowing Retail Marijuana Stores Changing Punishment for Marijuana Possession or Consumption from Felony to Misdemeanor Possession or Consumption Should Remain a Felony

Figure 73: Policy Preference for Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Age

100% 15% 90% 30% 34% 10% 80% 48% 43% 47% 70% 13% 11% 60% 30% 15% 50% 11% 10% 22% 26% 40% 21% 20% 21% 30% 45% 35% 20% 29% 20% 23% 22% 10% 0% 18-24 (n=61) 25-34 (n=75) 35-44 (n=94) 45-54 (n=120) 55-64 (n=180) 65+ (n=271)

Remove All Criminal Penalties for Possession or Consumption of Marijuana by Persons over 21, Similar to Policy in Colorado Decriminalization of Recreational Marijuana in Kansas by Persons over 21, NOT Allowing Retail Marijuana Stores Changing Punishment for Marijuana Possession or Consumption from Felony to Misdemeanor Possession or Consumption Should Remain a Felony

When asked about their opinions regarding openly carrying weapons in public, 48% of respondents strongly or somewhat supported allowing weapons to be openly carried in public, whereas 38% opposed it (Figure 74). The support of open carry was much higher among Republican respondents, those leaning Republican, and Independent voters than among Democrats and those leaning Democratic (Figure 75). Male respondents were more supportive of open carry than female respondents (Figure 76), and respondents who were younger than 55 years were more supportive than those who were older (Figure 77).

Figure 74: Opinion on Openly Carrying Weapons in Kansas

Openly Carrying Weapons in Public 33% 15% 15% 12% 26% (n=859)

Strongly Support Somewhat Support Neutral Somewhat Oppose Strongly Oppose

Question: Legal gun owners in Kansas can currently carry their weapons openly in public. Do you strongly support, somewhat support, are neutral, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose allowing weapons to be openly carried in public?

Figure 75: Opinion on Openly Carrying Weapons in Kansas by Party Affiliation

100% 6% 7% 18% 17% 90% 26% 80% 14% 9% 41% 12% 47% 53% 70% 9% 15% 13% 17% 60% 15% Strongly Oppose Somewhat Oppose 50% 19% 19% 24% 14% 16% 40% 16% Neutral 14% 58% 11% Somewhat Support 30% 12% Strongly Support 20% 37% 38% 34% 11% 15% 7% 10% 12% 10% 13% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=155) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=168) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=102) (n=83) (n=140) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 76: Opinion on Openly Carrying Weapons in Kansas by Gender

100% 20% 90% 33% 80% 9% Strongly Oppose 70% 17% 15% 60% Somewhat Oppose 50% 13% 14% Neutral 40% Somewhat Support 15% 30% Strongly Support 41% 20% 25% 10% 0% Female (n=444) Male (n=397)

Figure 77: Opinion on Openly Carrying Weapons in Kansas by Age

100% 9% 12% 13% 90% 19% 14% 28% 12% 14% 40% 80% 8% 70% 11% 10% 23% 24% 15% Strongly Oppose 60% 14% 19% 15% 13% Somewhat Oppose 50% 19% 14% Neutral 15% 11% 40% Somewhat Support 13% 30% Strongly Support 45% 38% 42% 20% 34% 32% 23% 10% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=64) (n=76) (n=101) (n=124) (n=186) (n=294)

Respondents were asked about their opinion on policies regarding undocumented aliens. More than a third (39%) of respondents favored deporting all undocumented aliens, and only 10% of respondents favored allowing all undocumented aliens to remain in the United States (Figure 78). Democrats and those leaning Democratic were more likely to say “deport some undocumented aliens” or “allow all undocumented aliens to remain in the U.S.” than Republicans, those leaning Republican and Independent voters (Figure 79). Respondents of Mexican or Hispanic ethnicity were much more likely to favor a policy that only deported some undocumented aliens or allowed them to remain in the U.S. than non-Hispanic respondents (Figure 80).

Figure 78: Opinion on Policies Regarding Undocumented Aliens

Opinion on Undocumented 39% 14% 37% 10% Aliens (n=800)

Deport All Deport Most Deport Some Allow All to Remain in the U.S

Question: Which of the following best describes your opinion on policies regarding undocumented aliens? Would you support: deporting all undocumented aliens, deporting most undocumented aliens, deporting some undocumented aliens, or allowing all undocumented aliens to remain in the U.S.?

Figure 79: Opinion of Policy Regarding Undocumented Aliens by Party Affiliation

100% 4% 7% 5% 12% 13% 17% 90% 19% 21% 80% 31% 35% 70% 16% 34% 60% 60% 52% 55% 50% 29% 19% 13% 40% 30% 61% 6% 5% 41% 42% 12% 20% 33% 22% 10% 16% 21% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=149) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=159) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=94) (n=75) (n=133) (n=102) (n=52)

Allowing All Undocumented Aliens to Remain in the US Deporting Some Undocumented Aliens Deporting Most Undocumented Aliens Deporting All Undocumented Aliens

Figure 80: Opinion of Policy Regarding Undocumented Aliens by Hispanic Ethnicity

100% 9% 90% 27% Allowing All 80% Undocumented Aliens 36% 70% to Remain in the US Deporting Some 60% Undocumented Aliens 50% 51% 15% Deporting Most 40% Undocumented Aliens 30% Deporting All 2% 40% 20% Undocumented Aliens 20% 10%

0% Hispanic Origin Non- Hispanic (n=41) Origin (n=755)

Section 7: Election When asked about their voting choice for the gubernatorial election in November, 36% of respondents indicated that they would vote for incumbent Governors Sam Brownback and Jeff Colyer, 37% said they would vote for Democratic nominees Paul Davis and Jill Docking, 9% would vote for the Libertarian nominees Keen Umbehr and Josh Umbehr and 18% had not decided (Figure 81). Support for Brownback and Colyer was higher among Republican respondents and those leaning Republican, and Davis and Docking received higher support among Independent voters, Democratic respondents, and those leaning Democratic (Figure 82). Female respondents were more likely to support Davis and Docking, and male respondents were more likely to support Brownback and Colyer (Figure 83). Respondents who were 55 years and older were more likely to vote for Davis and Docking than those respondents under 55 years (Figure 84).

Figure 81: Vote for Kansas Governor in November (n=862)

18% Brownback/Colyer 36% 9% Davis/Docking

Umbehr/Umbehr

Don't Know 37%

Question: If the November election for Kansas Governor were today, and the tickets on the ballot were the Republican ticket of Sam Brownback and Jeff Colyer, the Democratic ticket of Paul Davis and Jill Docking, and the Libertarian ticket of Keen Umbehr and Josh Umbehr, which ticket would you vote for?

Figure 82: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Party Affiliation

100% 8% 13% 10% 20% 19% 90% 5% 2% 23% 3% 33% 11% 80% 5% 7% 13% 70% 16% 60% 18% 17% Don't Know 50% 83% Umbehr/Umbehr 85% 69% 40% 72% Davis/Docking 33% 30% Brownback/Colyer 54% 50% 20% 10% 16% 4% 7% 4% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=170) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=103) (n=83) (n=136) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 83: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Gender

100% 18% 90% 21% 80% 8% 10% 70% Don't Know 60% 32% 41% 50% Umbehr/Umbehr 40% Davis/Docking 30% Brownback/Colyer 40% 20% 30% 10% 0% Female Male (n=441) (n=396)

Figure 84: Vote for Kansas Governor in November by Age

100% 15% 22% 23% 21% 17% 90% 29% 80% 10% 5% 12% 11% 8% 70% 17% Don't Know 60% 39% 26% 28% 33% 45% 50% Umbehr/Umbehr 22% 40% Davis/Docking 30% Brownback/Colyer 39% 39% 20% 32% 37% 36% 32% 10% 0% 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ (n=63) (n=76) (n=101) (n=121) (n=186) (n=293)

When asked about their choices in the Secretary of State election in November, 44% of respondents said they would vote for the incumbent Secretary of State, Kris Kobach, 39% said they would vote for the Democratic candidate Jean Schodorf, and 16% had not decided (Figure 85). Republican respondents and those leaning Republican were more likely to vote for Kris Kobach, and Democratic respondents and those leaning Democratic were more likely to vote for Jean Schodorf (Figure 86). White respondents were more likely to vote for Kris Kobach, while other races were more likely to vote for Jean Schodorf. Support for Jean Schodorf was much higher among African-American respondents as compared with other races (Figure 87). Due to Secretary of State Kobach’s controversial stands on the immigration issue, respondents’ preference for Secretary of State was related to their view on immigration. As Figure 88 shows, those who favored deporting all or most undocumented aliens were more likely to vote for Kris Kobach, and Jean Schodorf received almost equal support from those who wanted to deported few or no undocumented aliens.

Figure 85: Vote for Kansas Secretary of State in November (n=860)

16% 44% Kris Kobach

Jean Schodorf 39% Don't Know

Question: If the November election for Kansas Secretary of State were today, and the candidates on the ballot were Republican Kris Kobach and Democrat Jean Schodorf, who would you vote for?

Figure 86: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Party Affiliation

100% 8% 14% 10% 14% 11% 90% 5% 22% 33% 80% 20% 70% 18%

60% Don't Know 50% 35% 81% 75% 82% 87% 40% Jean 66% Schodorf 30% 60% Kris Kobach 20% 32% 10% 8% 12% 8% 0% Strong Not Very Independent, Independent Independent, Not Very Strong Republican Strong Leaning (n=156) Leaning Strong Democrat (n=170) Republican Republican Democrat Democrat (n=103) (n=83) (n=136) (n=107) (n=59)

Figure 87: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Race

100% 18% 20% 13% 19% 90% 32% 80% 43% 70% 37% 50% Don't Know 60% 50% 35% 50% 70% 40% 43% Jean Schodorf 30% 45% 20% 38% 31% 32% Kris Kobach 10% 10% 14% 0% White Black or Biracial Asian American Other (n=740) African (n=16) (n=7) Indian (n=31) American (n=16) (n=30)

Figure 88: Kansas Secretary of State Election by Opinion on Undocumented Aliens

100% 13% 21% 19% 17% 90% 80% 22% Undecided 70% 20% 58% 60% 60% 50% Jean Schodorf 40% 60% 59% 30% Kris Kobach 20% 29% 23% 10% 0% Deport All Deport Most Deport Some Allow All Undocumented Undocumented Undocumented Undocumented Aliens Aliens Aliens Alines to Remain in the U.S.

Respondents were asked if they voted in the November 2012 election, 20% said they did not vote (Figure 89). The survey then asked those who did not vote in 2012 whether they were registered to vote in Kansas, and 45% of them said they were not registered (Figure 90). Among those who were not registered, 31% said they chose not to register, 12% did not register by the deadline, 12% said they did not have the proper proof of citizenship documents, and 45% did not register due to some other reason (Figure 91).

Figure 89: Voting Behavior in November 2012 Election (n=868)

20%

Voted in November 2012

Did Not Vote in 80% November 2012

Question: Did you vote in the November 2012 election?

Figure 90: Registration Status (n=170)

45% Registered to Vote 55% Not Registered to Vote

Question: Are you registered to vote in the state of Kansas?

Figure 91: Reason for Not Registered (n=75)

Chose Not to Register

31% 45% Did Not Register by the Deadline 12% 12% Do Not Have the Proper Proof of Citizenship Documents Some Other reason

Question: If No, which of the following best describes the reason you are not registered? Is it because you chose not to register, you did not register by the deadline, you do not have the proper proof of citizenship documents, or some other reason?

Appendix A: Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Study Social Indicators Sample Population* (n=850) Gender Male 47.2% 49.6% Female 52.8% 50.4% (n=863) Hispanic Origin 5.2% 10.5% (n=852) White 88.0% 83.8% Black or African American 3.6% 5.9% Race Biracial 1.9% 3.0% Asian 0.8% 2.4% American Indian 1.9% 1.0% Other 3.8% 3.9% (n=723) Less than $10,000 2.8% 7.0% $10,000-$24,999 11.9% 17.6% $25,000- $34,999 10.2% 11.5% Household Income $35,000-$49,999 17.6% 15.5% $50,000-$74,999 23.1% 19.9% $75,000-$99,999 16.6% 12.0% $100,000-$149,999 12.6% 10.8% $150,000 or more 5.3% 5.8% (n=860) Less Than High School 3.5% 10.8% High School Diploma 20.3% 27.8% Education Some College 26.5% 24.2% Associates or Technical Degree 10.3% 7.4% Bachlor's Degree 24.0% 19.3% Masters, Law Degree, or Doctoral Degree 15.3% 10.5% (n=853) 18-24 Years Old 7.5% 13.6% 25-34 Years Old 8.9% 17.8% Age 35-44 Years Old 11.8% 16.3% 45-54 Years Old 14.5% 19.1% 55-64 Years Old 22.2% 15.6% 65 Years and Older 35.1% 17.7%

Appendix A (cont.): Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Study Social Indicators Sample Population* (n=821) Strong Republican 20.7% n/a Not Very Strong Republican 10.1% n/a Political Party Independent Leaning Republican 17.1% n/a Affiliation Independent 19.0% n/a Independent Leaning Democratic 13.2% n/a Not Very Strong Democrat 7.2% n/a Strong Democrat 12.8% n/a (n=854) 1 to 20 Years 19.6% n/a Years Living in Kansas 21 to 40 Years 28.8% n/a 41 to 60 Years 27.4% n/a More Than 60 Years 24.2% n/a * Source: U.S. Census Bureau