In answer to a second question demonstrating residents’ perceptions of the risk posed by global climate change, eight in ten in July 2006 said that global warming was a very serious or somewhat serious threat to the economy and quality of life for California’s future (see Figure 2). And while the 75 percent who agreed it was an at least somewhat serious threat in July 2005 was only four percentage points lower than in the following year, the proportion saying “very serious” jumped ten points, from 39 percent to 49 percent.

A strong majority of Democrats (63 percent) said the threat was very serious, compared to 49 percent of independents and 25 percent of Republicans. In fact, four in ten Republicans called it not too serious (19 percent) or not at all serious (21 percent). Racial and ethnic differences also emerged on this question, with greater proportions of African Americans and Latinos saying global warming posed a very serious threat than non-Hispanic whites and Asian-Americans.

In a third question assessing the perceived threat of global warming, 79 percent of Californians in July 2006 said it was necessary to take steps right away to counter the effects of global warming, compared to 17 percent who said it was not necessary yet.

Although most Californians have said immediate action is necessary since this question was first asked, the proportion has gradually increased, from 73 percent in July 2003, to 76 percent in July 2004, and 79 percent in July 2006. Solid majorities of 91 percent of Democrats, 80 percent of independents, and 59 percent of Republicans agreed in 2006, as did over seven in ten residents across regions and demographic groups.

For an issue that was garnering such concern among Californians but had not gained much regulatory ground at the federal level, it is not surprising that two in three residents in July 2006 said they would favor the California state government making its own policies, separate from the federal government, to address global warming (see Figure 4). The proportion supporting unilateral action by the state rose eleven points, from 54 percent in July 2005. At least six in ten across regions and political parties favored the idea in 2006.

In July 2006, residents were asked if they would favor or oppose three policy measures that could be used to address the effects of global warming in California. The first two were related to a piece of state legislation that was pending at the time, Assembly Bill 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which was later signed into law by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on September 27, 2006. This law, sponsored by Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (D-Los Angeles) and Assemblywoman Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills), intends to roll back California’s greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent to 1990-levels by the year 2020. About two-thirds of Californians, likely voters, Democrats, Republicans, and independents were all in favor of this proposal. One in five adults (19 percent) opposed the measure, while 16 percent were unsure.

The Global Warming Solutions Act also stipulates that mandatory emissions limits be imposed on industry as a way to achieve the 2020 goal. About three in four residents and likely voters and large majorities across political parties said they would favor a policy to establish such limits for oil, electric, and natural gas facilities. Sixteen percent of adults were opposed, and 8 percent were unsure.