Conservation Voters of PA

Josh McNeil, Executive Director

Public Opinion Polling,

Gas Infrastructure, and

Babies in Halloween Costumes

2

Keystone XL

3

Keystone XL

4

Keystone XL

5

62% believe it will be good for the U.S. economy if the pipeline is built. That’s up from 56% at the beginning of the year and also a new high.

Unchanged are the 10% who think the pipeline will be bad for the economy.

Twelve percent (12%) say it will have no impact, while 16% are not sure.

National Survey - April 23, 2014

Keystone XL

6

Thirty-two percent (32%) think the pipeline will be bad for the environment.

54% disagree, with 13% who feel it will be good for the environment and 41% who say it will have no environmental impact.

Fourteen percent (14%) are not sure.

April 23, 2014

Keystone XL

7

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of voters say the pipeline is at least somewhat important to how they will vote in the next congressional election, with 23% who say it is Very Important.

Thirty-eight percent (38%) say the Keystone project is not important to their vote, including 11% who say it is Not at All Important.

April 23, 2014

The NIMBY Image

8

Geography

9

Geography

10

Baby Charlie Brown

11

Methodology

• The following presentation is based on results of a survey of 1,151

registered voters reached via landline or cell phone in Pennsylvania.

This includes a base of 601 voters, and oversamples of 100 Rising

American Electorate voters, and 150 voters that live in each of the 3

watersheds: Middle Schuylkill, Upstream Suburban Philadelphia,

and Upper Lehigh.

• The survey was conducted between October 2 to 9, 2013 and

carries an overall margin of error of +/- 4.0 percentage points at a 95

percent confidence level. The margin of error within the RAE is +/-

4.7 and within the combined watershed definition it is +/- 4.2. The

margin or error within each watershed definition is approximately +/-

7.4.

12

November 15, 2011

35

50

45

48

39

54

50

45

31

45

30

42

72

83

78

85

74

82

83

81

68

78

66

77

Women

Men

Republicans

Independents

Democrats

Wells*

West

Rest of State

Philedelphia Metro

Watersheds

RAE

Total

% Heard a lot % Heard some

Pennsylvanians Hearing a Good Deal

About Fracking

As you may know, there is currently a debate going on in Pennsylvania about a natural gas drilling technique called "hydraulic

fracturing" or "fracking." Let me ask you, how much have you heard about this issue - would you say you've heard a lot, some, not

that much, or nothing at all about fracking?

13*Well regions include the Outer Pittsburgh and Scranton-Wilkes-New York Market Region. Please

see Appendix for map of regions.

November 15, 2011Strong Support for Tighter Regulations –

Holds After Messaging

18

52

17

8

16

55

19

7

Moratorium Tighten As Is Loosen

Initial Vote Final Vote

Now I’m going to read you four different positions that some people in Pennsylvania have taken on fracking. After I read all four,

please tell me which one is closest to your view, even if none of them are exactly right.

Stricter: 69%

Not Stricter: 25%

DK/None: 6%

14

Stricter: 71%

Not Stricter: 27%

DK/None: 2%

November 15, 2011

Initial Final Change PID PERF

Moratorium 18 16 -2 -- --

Tighten 52 55 +3 -- --

As Is 17 19 +2 -- --

Loosen 8 7 -1 -- --

None 3 1 -2 -- --

Don’t Know 3 1 -2 -- --

Total Tighter 69 71 +2 -- --

Total Not Tighter 25 26 +1 -- --

Net +44 +45 +1 +10 +35

RAE +53 +53 -- +39 +14

Watersheds +51 +50 -1 +14 +37

Democrat +67 +68 +1 -- --

Independent +43 +48 +6 +4 +39

Republican +17 +15 -2 -- --

*Performance (PERF) = (Tighter – Not) – (Dem – Rep)

15

Fracking position progression and

performance

November 15, 2011Fracking position progression and

performance, continued

Initial Final Change PID PERF

College +52 +53 +1 +16 +36

Non-college +38 +38 - +5 +34

18-29 +49 +57 +9 +26 +23

Seniors +49 +42 -7 0 +49

White +45 +44 -1 0 +45

Non-white +46 +53 +7 +60 -19

Heard a lot +37 +33 -4 +4 +33

Heard some +55 +53 -2 +13 +42

Heard not much +52 +66 +15 +5 +46

Heard nothing +28 +41 +13 +27 -2

Indoor (0-3 Activities) +46 +50 +4 +20 +26

Outdoor (4-6 Activities) +42 +38 -4 -6 +48

Hurt Jobs/Help Health +46 +53 +7 +9 +37

16

Baby Lobster

17

20

24

27

29

47

49

27

30

28

29

16

16

50

33

53

33

50

41

48

42

30

62

26

66

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Strongly disagree Somewhat disagree

Voters: Stricter Regulations Will Have Big Impact on Health, not Jobs

18

(PUBLIC HEALTH) Tighter regulations on

fracking would significantly improve and

protect public health in Pennsylvania.

(WATER QUALITY) Tighter regulations on

fracking would significantly improve and

protect drinking water quality in Pennsylvania.

(JOBS) Tighter regulations on fracking would

have a significant impact on Pennsylvania’s

economy and destroy jobs.**

(PERSONAL IMPACT) Fracking has created

jobs, lowered energy prices, or created other

economic befits for people I know personally.

(STRICT REGS) Right now, we have strict

and effective regulations on fracking in

Pennsylvania.

(ENERGY PRICES) Tighter regulations on

fracking would cause significantly higher gas

and electricity prices for me and my family.

10

8

7

9

17

14

DK

-6

+40

+32

-9

-17

-20

Net

**Regressions suggest that this dimension is the strongest driver of overall position on fracking.

Energy Independence Easily Strongest Anti-Regulation Message

19

22

26

34

48

54

57

64

72

Fracking is Safe

Prices and Choices

Economy and Jobs

Energy Independence

Very convincing Somewhat convincing

*See appendix for full statement text

Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who say that we should NOT place stricter limits on natural gas

fracking in Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing

or not at all a reason to continue to allow fracking without any new limits in Pennsylvania.

Tier 1

Tier 2

Tier 3

Health and Water, Loose Regulations Lead Strong Pro-Limits Messages

20

39

43

48

49

65

66

70

71

Exports

Regulations notEnforced

Health and Water

Not Regulated



Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who think we should place stricter limits on fracking in

Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing or not at

all a reason to place stricter limits on fracking in Pennsylvania.

Tier 1

Tier 2

21

32

33

36

58

63

64

Jobs - Importedworkers

Jobs - Other states

Habitat and wildlife



Now, I am going to read you some statements from people who think we should place stricter limits on fracking in

Pennsylvania. For each, please tell me whether this is a very convincing, somewhat convincing, a little convincing or not at

all a reason to place stricter limits on fracking in Pennsylvania.

Tier 3

Tier 3 Messages Not Weak, but Below Others

Open-End Shows Health and Water Dominate the Reasons to Support Stricter Limits

22

4

5

6

3

18

20

28

29

Don't Know

None

Other

Don't know the consequences

Need better regulations

Protect parks, forests, lakes, orwildlife

Improve or protect drinking waterquality

Improve or protect the public orfamily's health

*This was asked as an open-ended question. Results reflect pre-coded responses.

Thinking about everything you now know about fracking, what would you say is the best reason to place stricter limits on fracking in

Pennsylvania?

Baby in a burrito costume

23

24

4 4 8

7 7 10

80 80 74

91 90 87

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose

Strongly oppose Somewhat oppose Strongly favor Somewhat favor

Strong Support for Most Proposals. More

Tepid for Moratorium (Tier 1)

+83 +84 +77

(EXEMPT) Require natural gas

companies to follow the Clean Water

Act and Safe Drinking Water Act, from

which they are currently exempt.

(DISCLOSE) Require natural gas

companies to publicly disclose the

chemicals they inject into water in the

fracking process.

(PENALTY) Increase penalties on natural

gas companies that violate environmental

laws and use the resources to properly

enforce fracking regulations and clean up

pollution.

Now I'm going to read you a few proposals that have been made about fracking here in Pennsylvania, and I'd like you to tell me if you

favor or oppose the proposal.

10 13 10

16 19 19

68 6457

81 78 76

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose Favor Oppose


(FEE) Increase the fee that natural gas

companies must pay to frack for gas and

use the resources to properly enforce

fracking regulations and clean up

pollution.

25



+65 +59 +57

(PROHIBIT) Prohibit fracking within

500 feet of homes, schools and

hospitals.

(LOCAL POWER) Allow local

governments to implement stricter

limits on fracking near homes, schools

and hospitals.



Even in Texas

5. Texas cities should have the right to limit how close gas drilling, equipment and pipelines can be to homes, schools, hospitals and businesses.

Strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know/depends

Strongly Agree 812

Somewhat Agree 231

Somewhat Disagree 52

Strongly Disagree 50

Don’t Know/Depends 55

Total 1200 26

From a September 2014 Poll by the Texas League of Conservation Voters in the Dallas/Ft. Worth Area

27 24

45 45

37 36

52 52

Favor Oppose Favor Oppose


27



+7 +7

(MORATORIUM) Place a moratorium on

fracking in the state until we have a full

understanding of the risks.

(SUSPEND) Suspend new fracking in the state

until we have a full understanding of the risks.



Recommendations

28

Our central message is about health and water quality, with the lack of current and enforced regulations a strong secondary message.

However, they also show that an argument about the loopholes that Big Oil and Gas have negotiated to keep fracking from being properly regulated can be powerful.

Push regulations to require disclosure of chemicals, close the loopholes that exempt gas companies from the Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Air Act, and increased penalties for companies that violate environmental rules.

Baby in a yard gnome costume

29

How it’s playing locally

30

Where do public officials stand on gas pipeline project? Most on the fence – Lancaster Online, August 18, 2014


“It is a threat to our health, safety, well being and our environment, as well as an intrusion on our land. Our community will receive no benefit from this pipeline. It will not create local jobs, but it will increase the price of gas domestically.”

Tom Houghton

Candidate for Congress (D-PA 16)

31


Public Policy Polling 2912 Highwoods Blvd. Raleigh, NC 27604

Phone: 888 621-6988 Web: www.publicpolicypolling.com Email: [email protected]

From: Dustin Ingalls, Public Policy Polling

To: Interested parties

Subject: Pitts’ support for pipeline project drops him to a tie with Houghton

Date: 9/12/14

In PPP’s latest poll in Pennsylvania’s 16th

Congressional District, longtime incumbent Joe Pitts

starts with an eight-point lead head-to-head with his Democratic challenger this fall, Tom

Houghton, 44-36. When given basic biographical information about each candidate in a follow-

up question, that lead shrinks to five points, 42-37.

But the real story is in Lancaster County, which makes up about two-thirds of the district, and

which is more conservative than the overall district. In a separate oversample, we polled an

additional 447 voters in Lancaster, for 816 total voters in that county’s portion of the district, and

when read information about Pitts’ support for a proposed gas pipeline and contributions to Pitts

from the company that wants to build it, and Houghton’s opposition to the project, voters there

move from an initial 48-36 preference for Pitts to a 41-41 draw between the two candidates.

That 12-point movement on the margin from one message comes almost entirely with

Republicans and, to a lesser extent, independents. Pitts’ support with his base drops 14 points

from the initial horse race (75% to 61%), while Houghton moves up five with Republicans in

Lancaster (10% to 15%), for a total shrinkage of 19 points on the margin with the GOP. Among

independents, Pitts drops only a point (38% to 37%), but previously undecided independents

move eight points toward Houghton (39% to 47%), for a nine-point marginal shift. Democrats in

Lancaster County, meanwhile, bump up from 77-10 support for their nominee to 79-10. So

Houghton has his base locked up, but Pitts is on rocky ground with his over the pipeline project.

Initially in Lancaster, there is little gender gap in candidate support. Pitts wins women by 10

points and men by 13. But women move nine points more than men do on the pipeline message,

16 points versus seven. After hearing about Pitts’ pipeline stance, women favor Houghton by six

points and men stick with Pitts by only six. There has been a lot of discussion about Democrats

using so-called women’s issues to increase the gender gap and drive down support for

Republican candidates among women, but at least in this district, the pipeline project issue has

just as much if not more potential to do that than anything else.

PPP surveyed 678 likely voters in Pennsylvania’s 16th Congressional District,including an oversample of

816 likely voters in the Lancaster County portion of the district, from September 9th to 10

th. The margin

of error for the overall sample is +/-3.8%, and +/-3.4% for the oversample. This poll was sponsored by

Friends of Tom Houghton for Congress.






Date: 9/12/14





























th. The margin








Date: 9/12/14





























th. The margin



Legislative Polling – July 2014

“Candidate A knows that corporations are getting tax breaks while property taxes are rising for local families. Candidate A will make Marcellus drillers pay their fair share.”

– 36% much more likely to support

33

Statewide Polling – Spring 2014

Statewide poll for a PA gubernatorial candidate:

“Governor Corbett received over $1 million from the gas industry and overturned local control of gas drilling.“

• 40% much less likely to support.

Baby in Dalai Lama costume

35

Three issues: Polling Data

36

The kind of research we need

• Nearly three in four (72%) Pennsylvania voters favor the EPA’s proposed regulations to limit the amount of carbon pollution that power plants can release into the air.

• By more than four to one, Pennsylvanians say they have more trust in the EPA to decide whether there should be regulations on carbon pollution (59%) than the United States Congress (13%, a difference of 46 points).

• A 53% majority of Pennsylvanians say they would feel more favorable toward an elected official who supported the new regulations. Just 19% say they would feel less favorable.

37

LCV Poll – June 3, 2014

Recommendations

• Conduct region-specific polling on gas infrastructure.

• In the meantime, focus on the direct health impacts of pipelines and infrastructure.

• For the general public and elected officials, talk about regulation, not outright bans.

• Pay close attention to local control.

38

Environment

Conservation Voters of PA