In it, but not of it. TPM DC

Another Poll: Wisconsinites Disapprove Of Walker, Want Him To Compromise


The poll also offered this lengthy explanation of Walker's proposal, asking respondents whether they favored it:

As you may know, Governor Scott Walker recently announced a plan that would require public employees to contribute to their own pensions and pay greater amounts for their health insurance, which would, in effect, be a pay reduction. The plan would permit most public employees to negotiate only their wages, and future wage increases above the rate of inflation would have to be approved by a voter referendum. Contracts would be limited to one year. In addition, Walker's plan also changes rules to require public employee unions to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union, stops state or local government from collecting union dues, and allows individual members to decide if they wish to pay union dues. Unions for law enforcement and firefighters would be exempt from the changes.

Do you favor or oppose Governor Walker's plan?

The result: Favor 46%, Oppose 51%.

A later question:

I'm going to read you two statements about the current conflict over public employee benefits and collective bargaining rights, and I want to know which one comes closest to your view. Governor Walker should stand strong for the plan he has proposed no matter how long the protests go on, OR Governor Walker should negotiate with Democrats and public employees' unions in order to find a compromise solution.

And here Walker is really doing badly: Stand strong 33%, Compromise 65%.

From Goldstein's pollster analysis: "Not surprisingly, this is driven largely by partisan dynamics. About 77 percent of Republicans think the governor should stand strong and 94 percent of Democrats want a compromise. The key here is independents. Independents overwhelmingly want the governor to compromise with 68 percent believing he should do so and 29 percent thinking he should stand strong."

Another question:

Some people say that the proposed changes to public employees' collective bargaining rights are a necessary reform because they will give local governments greater flexibility to control their budgets over several years. Others say that public employees are willing to compromise on pensions and benefits, but limiting collective bargaining rights does nothing to address the state's budget situation and is really an just attempt to get rid of public employee unions. Which of these statements comes closest to your point of view?

The result: Necessary reform 43%, an attempt to get rid of public employee unions 50%.