Washington voters rate environmental issues a top priority for elected leaders, and environmental actions figure strongly in voting decisions, says a new poll released today.

The Evans/McDonough poll of five hundred likely November 2000 voters indicates a strong commitment to environmental protection by voters in all parts of the state and across party lines. The poll was taken October 14 -18, 1999 for the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund.

"Washington voters understand the strong connection between a healthy environment and a strong economy. They believe we can have both. And the majority of voters, eighty percent, consider environmental issues when deciding how to vote," said Teresa Purcell, Northwest Regional Director for the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund.

A strong majority of voters -- including Republicans -- believe environmental issues should be a high priority for state spending
• Eight out of ten (82%) likely voters think "protecting our streams, rivers, and lakes so that we have clean drinking water" should be a high priority for state spending. This includes 93% of Democrats, 82% of Independents, and 72% of Republicans. This issue cuts across age, gender, education, and geographic differences.
• Six-in-ten (61%) voters think "providing funds for strict enforcement of existing environmental regulations" should be a high priority for state spending.
• Six-in-ten (59%) voters think "purchasing land along streams and shorelines to protect critical salmon habitat" should be a high priority for state spending. A strong majority of voters say environmental issues are important to them when deciding for whom to vote
• Eight out of ten (80%) likely voters say conservation or environmental issues are very or somewhat important to them when deciding how to vote. One-third (34%) say environmental issues are "a primary factor in deciding how to vote."
• A strong majority of Independents (80%) say environmental issues are important when deciding how to vote. One-third (33%) say it's a primary factor.
• Environmental issues are an equally important voting factor for men (79% important, 34% very important) and women (82% important, 34% very important) and for voters under age 50 (83%, 34%) and over age 50 (78%, 34%). Voters' prefer a "pro-environment" candidate over a "fewer regulations" candidate by a significant margin.
• Likely voters prefer a candidate who "has fought to protect our environment including efforts to safeguard our air and drinking water and has received high ratings from leading environmental organizations" over a candidate who "feels there are too many government regulations that control how we live our lives and tends to side more with business and agricultural interests" by a 16-point margin (52% to 36%).
• That margin increases to 40 points (63% to 23%) when voters are given the additional information that "Candidate B has also taken campaign contributions from big developers and corporations that are known polluters."
• In the first comparison, both Democrats (76% to 16%) and Independents (51% to 35%) prefer the pro-environment candidate to the fewer regulations candidate by a significant margin.
• In the second comparison, the margin is about the same among Democrats (77% to 14%), but increases dramatically among Independents (63% to 18%). Republican voters prefer the pro-environment candidate to the fewer regulations candidate (49% to 37%) in the second comparison.

A property rights argument is only effective with roughly a third of voters.
• By a 45% to 37% margin, voters pick the statement: "protecting the environment even if it means restricting what some property owners can do with the land they own" over "protecting property rights of individuals even if some environmentally sensitive areas might be harmed."
• Independents pick the pro-environment statement by a 42% to 34% margin over the pro-property rights statement. Two-thirds (66%) of voters think reducing the risk of oil spills from tankers by requiring escort tugs should be an important issue for their elected officials.
• Two-thirds (68%) of voters overall -- including a majority of Independents (64%) and Republicans (53%) -- think tug escorts for oil tankers is an important issue for their elected officials to work on.
• Two-thirds (68%) of voters overall -- including a majority of Independents (67%) and Republicans (56%) -- find the following argument persuasive:
• "After the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska's Prince William Sound, prevention measures were increased there to include triple tug escorts for oil tankers, rescue tugs and strong citizen oversight of oil shipping. However, the oil and shipping industry has successfully blocked similar measures in Washington state. We need to require mandatory tugboat escorts and rescue tugs in Washington state waters before a similar disaster happens here"

Methodology
This memo is based on the findings of a telephone survey conducted October 14-18, 1999. Five hundred (500) likely November 2000 general election voters in Washington state, were selected at random and interviewed by trained, professional telephone interviewers. The margin of error for the overall survey results is ±4.2 points at the 95% confidence interval.

Click here to download the PDF version of the Washington poll summary!