In an intereview about a Deliberative Poll that found support for a difficult tax increase in order to avoid the privatization of the nation's underfunded pension system, Jim Fishkin explains how the public came to view the problem.
"This is another case where policy experts had very strong views about how the so-called "funded system" or what, in the United States, would have been called a "privatized system" of pensions, was an appropriate solution. But, the public did not want the risk of such a solution. There was a gap between the experts and the people.
"But, the public realized that there is a big problem, but they were very interested in the particular problem of the failure of collective action, the problem that--because of the Japanese concern with privacy--it's very difficult to know whether people are really paying into the pension system in the way that they’re supposed to.
"There's a fairness issue that's very fundamental in the Japanese system. The indication, to me, that the people were really, seriously, deliberating is that there was a strong movement, I think 19 points or something, in the direction of increasing the consumption tax in order to keep the "pay-as-you-go system" solvent.
"Well, that’s a big sacrifice! Anytime people are willing to support a big sacrifice like a tax increase, that gets my attention because they're weighing very difficult choices."
Read the entire interview by clicking here.
Jim Fishkin writes about that today at the New York Times website:
"Our project, known as What’s Next California?, was the first statewide deliberative poll — a poll that gathers a scientific sample of respondents to answer questions both before and after they have had a chance to deliberate competing arguments and trade-offs. It provides a window on what voters think of direct democracy and what changes they would, and would not, support. Despite the evident problems, California voters have more confidence in the ballot initiative than they do in other elements of their state government. After spending a weekend immersing themselves in the issues and questioning competing experts about possible reforms, 65 percent of the sample expressed disappointment with California’s state government in general and 70 percent expressed disappointment in the Legislature, but only 37 percent were disappointed in the ballot initiative."
You can read the full article here.
In the next month, viewers online and in California can view the PBS By the People broadcast of the first ever statewide Deliberative Poll on California governance reform, conducted in Torrance, CA on June 24-26, 2011.
Moderated by Judy Woodruff, the special reports the outcomes of the deliberations on four topics:
Broadcast
Digital
On June 24-26, 2011 a scientifically selected random sample of 412 registered voters from throughout California participated in the first ever statewide Deliberative Poll on governance reform, in Torrance, CA. They convened for an open and honest discussion of a wide range of reforms to the state’s legislature, initiative process, local government and tax and fiscal policy.
A total of 30 proposals were considered in these four areas. The participants explored their ideas in moderated small group discussions that covered the critical pros and cons. The participants also posed questions to experts from across the ideological spectrum. Over the course of the weekend’s deliberations participants became more informed and in many cases changed their views significantly. What did they think should be done to fix the state?
Legislative reform: Participants overwhelmingly supported steps to improve public oversight and increase accountability, including requiring the legislature to establish and track performance goals, perform economic impact analysis of major legislation, and publish long-term projections prior to budget votes.
Initiative reform: Participants strongly supported changes to help voters better understand the consequences of initiatives, and they had little interest in permitting the legislature to affect initiatives’ content in any way.
State-local restructuring: Participants wanted to give cities and counties greater control over financing of their programs, in return for establishment and tracking of performance goals. At the same time, slightly more participants after deliberation thought the state should be responsible for the most important policy decisions, although they were evenly split on how much taxation authority should be authorized to the state versus the cities and counties.
Tax and fiscal policy: Participants indicated strong support for fiscal transparency and accountability, but preferences for tax policy remained split.
To learn more about the results, visit the website of the Center for Deliberative Democracy at Stanford University, or listen to this podcast from Jim Fishkin, one of the organizers of the California Deliberative Poll.
