Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

​2023 ballot initiatives show value of policy polls for legislators

Sign supporting reproductive rights ballot measure in Vermont

Polling on abortion-related ballot measures has generally lined up with voting results in recent years.

Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images

Lewitus is a research analyst at the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation.

The reputation of election polls has taken a hard hit in the last several years due to some major mis-calls of close races. Some people have questioned polls on public policy as well. But the results of ballot initiatives over the last decade, including those just passed in Ohio and Maine, have been consistently in line with the polls.

This confirms that policy polls can and should be an important tool for policymakers to use in a well-functioning democracy. That is, of course, only if legislators pay attention to them and value the will of the majority over their own wishes, which some lawmakers have been reluctant to do.


The Ohio ballot measure to enshrine into the state Constitution the legality of abortions, up until fetal viability, passed with 57 percent of voters’ support. A poll of Ohio voters conducted one month before the vote found 58 percent support for the ballot measure. A national survey conducted in 2022 by the University of Maryland’s Program for Public Consultation found that 57 percent opposed criminalizing abortion, including 52 percent in very red congressional districts. Other surveys in 2022 found that 61 percent believed abortion should be legal in all or most cases and 64 percent opposed the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

The level of support for abortion rights found in polls matches up to outcomes in five other ballot measures last year, when adjusted to match each state’s partisan and demographic makeup.

Even for an issue that has not been nearly as salient or polled-on as abortion, such as the campaign finance reform initiative in Maine, polling has proved accurate. Eighty-six percent of voters in Maine supported prohibiting foreign spending to influence ballot measures and candidate elections. A 2022 survey by PPC found roughly the same level of support nationwide (79 percent), with little variation between very red and very blue districts.

On numerous other issues, polling has been congruent with ballot results. Polls have shown consistent majority support for term limits, decriminalizing marijuana and increasing the minimum wage. All ballot measures on those policy proposals over the last decade have passed.

Policy polls are not only just as accurate as ballot initiatives in revealing public opinion, but they are far more cost-efficient. The average cost of getting a measure on the ballot is $4 million, and then there are the administrative costs for the government, as well as the millions of dollars spent by groups trying to influence the outcome.

Legislators may believe that national polling is not indicative of public opinion in their area because their constituents are particularly unique. However, public opinion research has shown that this is very unlikely. PPC analyzed dozens of large-sample surveys and found the differences between very red and very blue congressional districts is much less than policymakers imagine. When support for a position was 60 percent or more nationally, there was always majority support in both very red and very blue districts.

For many issues, however, standard polling may be inadequate. Citizens often do not have enough information to make an informed decision, or the proposed policy may be too detailed or nuanced to accurately describe in a standard poll. Fortunately, there are forms of “public consultation” that give representative samples of citizens the information and range of arguments necessary to understand the issue. Public consultation surveys do this in an online format, which is inexpensive and fully transparent. Events like citizen assemblies are also a well-tested option, as are deliberative polls and myriad other methods used in democracies across the world.

What is striking is that on many issues these public consultation methods reveal a striking amount of bipartisan common ground, far more than legislatures tend to find. Voice of the People has identified more than 200 bipartisan common ground positions on a wide range of policy positions that divide Congress on partisan lines. When the parties are polarized, the people may offer a path forward.

Ballot initiatives have proven to be a good way to give the people a voice. But if legislatures were really doing their job, they may not be as necessary. When an abundance of polling exists, legislators should be listening. Where sufficient polling does not exist, the government could commission nonpartisan policy polls, especially public-consultation-style surveys that ensure citizens have correct information.

In numerous polls, the American public has complained that government does not listen to and is not responsive to the people, undermining confidence in the democratic process. This lack of responsiveness by elected officials has been on full display across the country, with state policymakers attempting to block and prevent ballot initiatives. Most recently in Ohio, several legislators are attempting to over-rule the results of the ballot measure on abortion.

The public is not asking that elected officials simply follow the polls in a robotic fashion, but they do insist that elected officials listen to the people and value their opinion. And if they do not, the public will continue to rise up and use direct democratic approaches, such as ballot initiatives, to be heard.

Read More

The Second Dimension of Our Current Politics

Donkey V Elephant

Getty Images//Stock Photo

The Second Dimension of Our Current Politics

Politics has felt weird for a while now. From Donald Trump himself to the noteworthy rise of populist sentiment that is affecting both parties, many informed people are left scratching their heads trying to understand what has come over the country. The American economy, historically the number one issue for voters, is the “envy of the world” according to a recent special report by The Economist; crime and illegal immigration are also down. Yet the 2024 presidential election was a decisive rebuke of the current administration, resulting in Trump leading the Republican party to its largest win in a presidential election since 1988.

Many postmortem conversations have focused on whether Kamala Harris should have run further to the right or the left and focused more attention during her abbreviated campaign on popular social or economic issues. This one-dimensional view of the right-left political spectrum, with traditional conservatism on one end and redistributive socialism on the other, comes up short in describing our current politics. It is only through recognizing the class dimension of political appeal, whereby some candidates tailor their message to the priorities of the educated, cosmopolitan class, and others tailor their message to the concerns of the working class that recent political contests can be better understood.

Keep ReadingShow less
Examining Why DEI Efforts Often Fall Short and How to Foster Effective Change

Diversity illustration concept shows different ethnicity and style of people walking on the street, the contrast of people showing individuality characteristics.

Getty Images//Stock Photo

Examining Why DEI Efforts Often Fall Short and How to Foster Effective Change

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” - Buckminster Fuller

What if I told you that most organizations’ DEI initiatives were doomed from the start? That their failure could have been predicted and even avoided?

Keep ReadingShow less
Meta ditches fact-checkers: What it means for the rest of us

CEO of Meta, Mark Zuckerberg is seen during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing with representatives of social media companies at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Wednesday January 31, 2024 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Matt McClain/The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Meta ditches fact-checkers: What it means for the rest of us

This week, Meta announced that it would be ending relationships with its vast global network of fact-checking partners – organizations like Factcheck.org, Politifact, and the Associated Press that have been flagging falsehoods on the platform since 2017. In making the announcement, CEO Mark Zuckerberg claimed these partners were making “mistakes” and engaging in “censorship” and that it was time to “restore free expression” across Meta properties.

Platforms, journalists, civil society organizations and regular folks have long relied on fact-checkers to debunk the falsehoods polluting our information ecosystem. These journalists are trained to research claims and report the facts in accordance with standards set by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) and its European counterpart, the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN). All of Meta’s fact-checking partners were IFCN-approved; none took down content themselves.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Untold Costs of AI: The West Is Paying for the Future That Hasn’t Arrived

robot, technology, future, futuristic, business, tree, symbol

Getty Images//Stock Photo

The Untold Costs of AI: The West Is Paying for the Future That Hasn’t Arrived

Artificial intelligence (AI) has been heralded as a technological revolution that will transform our world. From curing diseases to automating dangerous jobs to discovering new inventions, the possibilities are tantalizing. We’re told that AI could bring unprecedented good—if only we continue to invest in its development and allow labs to seize precious, finite natural resources.

Yet, despite these grand promises, most Americans haven’t experienced any meaningful benefits from AI. It’s yet to meaningfully address most health issues, and for many, It’s not significantly improving our everyday lives, excluding drafting emails and making bad memes. In fact, AI usage is still largely confined to a narrow segment of the population: highly educated professionals in tech hubs and urban centers. An August 2024 survey by the Federal Reserve and Harvard Kennedy School found that while 39.4% of U.S. adults aged 18-64 reported using generative AI, adoption rates vary significantly. Workers with a bachelor's degree or higher are twice as likely to use AI at work compared to those without a college degree (40% vs. 20%), and usage is highest in computer/mathematical occupations (49.6%) and management roles (49.0%).

Keep ReadingShow less