LANSING – The first publicly-released public opinion poll on the controversial Reform Michigan Government Now! proposal shows that 70 percent of those queried support the broad measure that would dramatically reform legislative redistricting, cut the number of legislators and Supreme Court and Court of Appeals judges, and require financial disclosure.

While Republican officials have pilloried the proposal as a Democratic attempt to take over government, 73 percent of the Republicans polled support the proposal as well, according to a spokesperson for the campaign. However, most of the polling was done before the public discovery of a PowerPoint presentation that said the proposal would help Democrats.

But a spokesperson for the opposition coalition called the survey a “bogus mountain of garbage” that does not truthfully detail the expansive proposition.

The survey was actually part of a survey commissioned by the Michigan Democratic Party, and Dianne Byrum, spokesperson for the proposal, said the organization’s campaign statement would show the Democrats giving an in-kind contribution to cover the cost of the survey.

Byrum said despite all the attention given to who wrote the proposal and how it gathered signatures, the poll shows the public likes the proposal and thinks it is fair.

A spokesperson for Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, the Washington, D.C.-based firm that conducted the poll, said the results were reflective of the frustration and anger Michigan voters were feeling overall and specifically towards state government.

The poll was conducted of 600 individuals identifying themselves as likely voters in November, and conducted from July 15 to July 17. The margin of error in the poll is 4 percent.

Specifically those polled were asked: “There may be an initiative to amend the state constitution on the ballot in Michigan in November. This initiative would reduce the number of state legislators and the number of state boards and commissions. It would reduce the number of judges on the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court while increasing the number of judges in the lower courts. It would reduce salaries for the governor, state legislators, and judges, require elected officials to disclose their personal income and assets, and limit retired elected officials’ health care to be the same as retired state employees. It would require elected officials to wait two years after leaving office before working as a lobbyist. Finally, this initiative would allow registered voters to vote absentee without giving a reason and create a non-partisan commission to redraw legislative districts.” (For those counting, the question totals 136 words, and just the section specifically describing the amendment totals 119 words and does not include any reference to not allowing illegal aliens to vote, prohibiting fraudulent petition gathering, barring redistricting officials from running for office for 10 years, allowing individuals to sue to protect the environment as well as other provisions in the proposal. The Constitution requires that the ballot impartially describe a proposed amendment in no more than 100 words.)

While specific cross-tabulations of the results were not released, the survey showed that Democrats at 67 percent had the lowest level of support, 71 percent of independents polled support it, while 73 percent of Republicans support the proposal.

The proposal was opposed by 22 percent of those polled; the remainder were undecided.

The poll also posed two questions to determine how best people felt about whether judges should rule on whether the proposal should go on the ballot. Of those two questions, 69 percent said they agree more with the statement that said, “Every judge in the state may be affected by the initiative and has a conflict of interest” and therefore should not rule on the proposal.

The second question said that judges take oaths to be fair and impartial and therefore the courts should decide the proposal.

Respondents were also asked if they would support a proposal possibly putting on the November ballot a call for a new constitutional convention, and 63 percent of the respondents said no (30 percent said yes). Byrum said the voters no longer trust elected officials to fairly make changes and they want the ability to enact the changes themselves.

And the level of support the proposal has should give opponents pause, Byrum said. The public wants to vote on the proposal, she said.

But Bob Kolt, a Democratic consultant working for the opposition group Citizens Protecting Michigan’s Constitution, said the poll continues to hurt the credibility of the supporters.

Nor was he impressed by its level of support. Should the proposal get on the November ballot, “there’s plenty of time to tell the public the truth.” The support for the proposal is not that strong, he said.

As a Democrat, Kolt said he would prefer the party spend money on getting candidates elected rather than on this proposal. “I think it’s an embarrassment and I think Democrats statewide are running away from it,” he said.

While the poll released on Monday is the first public results on voter preferences, sources earlier had indicated that polling had been done earlier in the year which showed the same level of wide support.

This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com

a>>