2) Over the past five years, has traffic congestion in your area improved, worsened, or stayed the same

Gonzales/Arscott

Research & Communications, Inc.

Maryland Poll

Part 1 - State Issues

January 2002

Contact: Carol Arscott 410-461-5744

Methodology

Patrick E. Gonzales and Carol A. Arscott formed Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies, Inc. at the beginning of 1999.

Gonzales is a 1981 graduate of the University of Baltimore with deep roots in Anne Arundel County politics. Arscott is a 1977 graduate of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and a former chairman of the Howard County Republican Party.

This survey was conducted by Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies, Inc. from January 9^th through January 12^th, 2002. A total of 833 registered voters in Maryland who indicated they were likely to vote in this year’s general election were interviewed by telephone. A cross-section of calls was made into each jurisdiction within the state to reflect general election voting patterns.

The margin for error, according to customary statistical standards, is no more than plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. This means that there is a 95 percent probability that the “true” figures would fall within this range if the entire survey universe were sampled. The margin for error is higher for any demographic subgroup, such as gender, party registration or race.

This survey also includes an over-sampling of 421 likely September 2002 Democratic primary voters. The margin for error for this primary sample is plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Maryland Statewide Poll Sample Demographics

Gender	Race	Region
Male 415 (50%)	White 630 (76%)	Eastern Shore 92 (11%)
Female 418 (50%)	Black 196 (24%)	Baltimore City 87 (10%)
	Other 7	Baltimore Suburbs 288 (35%)
Party Registration		Washington Suburbs 275 (33%)
Democrat 474 (57%)		Western Maryland 91 (11%)
Republican 265 (32%)
Independent 94 (11%)

Regional Groupings

Eastern Shore - includes voters in these counties: Caroline, Cecil, Dorchester, Kent, Queen Anne’s, Somerset, Talbot, Wicomico, and Worcester.

Baltimore City - includes voters in the City of Baltimore.

Baltimore Suburbs - includes voters in these counties: Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Harford, and Howard.

Washington Suburbs - includes voters in these counties: Montgomery, Prince George’s, Calvert, Charles, and St. Mary’s.

Western Maryland - includes voters in these counties: Allegany, Carroll, Frederick, Garrett, and Washington.

Democratic Gubernatorial Primary

The hopes and prayers of Maryland’s political junkies – who crave a good contest above all else – appear to have been dashed with the results of our first look at the state’s Democratic primary electorate since May of 2001. Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend seems to have righted herself, topping the magic 50% mark and opening up a commanding lead over Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley in a gubernatorial primary match-up. Townsend leads O’Malley by 22 points, 53% to 31%, with 16% undecided. In May, the results for Townsend were uncomfortably close – 47% to 40%, with 13% undecided.

O’Malley’s level of support fell off in three key categories – among voters in Baltimore City, voters in the Baltimore suburbs, and among African Americans. O’Malley’s vote in the City dropped 11 points from 54% to 43% since last spring. In the City’s suburbs, his 53%-35% lead over Townsend narrowed to 42%-39%. Most significantly, O’Malley’s share of the black vote fell precipitously, from 38% to 13%. Meanwhile, Townsend didn’t lose an inch among her core supporters in the DC suburbs and boosted her share of the important African-American vote from 50% to 66% since May. To be sure, O’Malley still looks tough in his home base, but the bleeding from the Townsend campaign has been stanched and she built on her numbers in every demographic category.

In the eight months since our last Democratic primary survey, O’Malley boosted his name ID among primary voters from 68% to 76%. Unfortunately for the Mayor, every bit of this 8-point gain was added to the unfavorable column, pushing his negatives into the territory occupied by your average politician. A 7-to-1 favorable to unfavorable ratio – which O’Malley enjoyed last spring – is unusually high. A 3-to-1 ratio still very good, but closer to the normal range. To be fair, Townsend’s favorables dropped and her negatives went up as well, but her positive rating is still well above the halfway mark at 57%. Her overall ID grew by one point, to 93%.

So, what has happened? Most likely, several things. First, credit the Townsend campaign with a skillful response to the wake up call that jarred their camp last spring. Townsend clearly worked her base in the African-American community to great effect. Second, O’Malley’s quick wit and acid tongue clearly hurt him with these same voters. His public, and profane, scolding of Baltimore State’s Attorney Patricia Jessamy seems to have resonated with a key group of his supporters in his mayoral campaign – African-American women. Third, O’Malley’s ridicule of Townsend seems to have hurt him more than it’s hurt her, illustrating the perils a male candidate faces running against a woman – not to mention a woman with a martyred father. The barbs that delight the political pundits and the conservatives in the suburbs clearly aren’t going over nearly so well with Democratic primary voters.

2002 Gubernatorial General Election

Second District Congressman Bob Ehrlich has narrowed the gap with Kathleen Kennedy Townsend from 23 points in our September 2001 survey to 15 points today. Townsend leads Ehrlich 50% to 35% with 15% undecided. In September, Townsend was comfortably over the 50% mark – 54% to 31% with 15% undecided.

Townsend slipped slightly in every demographic subgroup except independents (up from 34% to 40%), and her loss was Ehrlich’s gain. Ehrlich’s share of the white vote grew from 38% to 45%; his support among women was up to 33% from 28%; and 16% of Democrats gave Ehrlich their vote, up from 11%.

Townsend’s share of the Republican vote dropped from 20% to 14%, but Ehrlich picked up just two points among Republicans (67% to 69%). The rest of the shifting GOPers moved to the undecided column. Ehrlich will need to improve upon those numbers and reestablish his lead with independents to be competitive with Townsend in November but, for Ehrlich, the arrows are moving in the right direction for the first time.

Commensurate with the trends observed in the Townsend-Ehrlich match-up was the movement in their respective name ID figures. Townsend’s favorables among general election voters statewide were down seven points, from 53% to 46%, and her unfavorables were up by six points, from 20% to 26%. Ehrlich’s overall name ID is up to 69%, and his favorable rating rose from 28% to 32% since we last polled in September. His negatives edged up slightly, from 8% to 9%.

An O’Malley-Ehrlich match-up yields results with a similar margin, but with a higher number of undecided voters. O’Malley leads Ehrlich 44% to 30%, with 26% undecided. O’Malley and Ehrlich hold proportional amounts of voters in their own parties and split the independents 37% to 36%.

Parris Glendening

Governor Parris Glendening’s job approval numbers have slipped eight points since last February – from 58%, to 53% in September, to 50% today. Thirty-six percent of Maryland voters said they disapproved of the job Glendening was doing in office, up from 27% in February 2001. The remaining 14% had no opinion.

Glendening’s numbers are buoyed by the support he receives from African-Americans (66%), Democrats (65%), and women (55%). His approval numbers are below 50% in every other demographic subgroup. Whites are almost evenly split – 43% to 44%.

Similarly, the Governor’s name ID numbers also suffered a small drop since our survey taken in May 2001. Glendening’s favorables slipped from 47% to 43% and his unfavorables crept up to 34%, from 31%.

Canceling the Tax Cut

Maryland voters are cool to the notion of balancing the budget with the final phase of the five-year, 10% income tax cut. Fifty-four percent said that the General Assembly should not cancel the tax cut, while 32% said they should. The remaining 14% had no opinion. Sentiment against rescinding the tax cut was over 50% with every demographic subgroup except Democrats, who oppose canceling the cut 48% to 40%.

Most Important Issue

Twenty-five percent of Marylander voters, in response to an open-ended question, said that education was the most important issue facing the Governor and the General Assembly today. Jobs and the economy were most on the minds of 18%. Taxes were the top concern of 12%, followed by crime and drugs at 11%. The state budget shortfall was the primary concern of 9%, followed by 7% who named transportation issues, 5% who cited health care or insurance issues, and 4% who named slots at racetracks or legalized gambling. The remaining 9% gave no answer.

While education topped the charts, money matters – jobs and the economy, taxes, and the budget shortfall – combined to account for 39% of survey respondents. It’s clear that fiscal issues will not only occupy much of the General Assembly’s time, but much of the voters’ attention as well.

Medical Marijuana

Thirty-seven percent of voters statewide said they would be more likely to support a candidate who backs a medical marijuana law, while just 18% said they would be less likely to support a candidate with those views, a two-to-one ratio. Importantly, 40% of voters said a candidate’s position on medical marijuana would have no real effect on their vote. The remaining 5% were undecided.

A medical marijuana law is most popular among independents, 48% of whom would be more likely to vote for a candidate who backs it, as opposed to 21% who would be less likely, showing their typical libertarian bent. But Baltimore City voters (46% to 10%) provide an even larger margin, because fewer said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who backs a medical marijuana law.

Women (39% more likely) are more slightly apt to support the law than men (35%), but also register higher “less likely” numbers (21% to 15%). Whites (39% to 19%) and blacks (30% to 15%) both say they would be more likely to support a candidate who backs a medical marijuana law by a ratio of two-to-one.

Republicans and voters in the most conservative counties in the state are the most ambivalent, with those who would be “more likely” and “less likely” to vote for a given candidate virtually canceling each other out. Among Republicans, 29% said they’d be more likely and 26% less likely. GOPers also registered the biggest number of undecideds, at 10%. On the Eastern Shore, 25% would be more likely, and 26% less likely. And in Western Maryland, 26% would be more likely, and 27% less likely.

There is a clear plurality of support for a candidate advocating medical marijuana use, but not a majority. One might conclude, therefore, that a position in favor of medical marijuana taken by an elected official would, at worst, “do no harm.” But any politician who remembers the experience of Kurt Schmoke is bound to be cautious before treading into the realm of legalizing drugs for any purpose. Doctors on one side of the argument are likely to be opposed by police and prosecutors on the other (not to mention the full force of the federal government) once the debate gets going. Support for a medical marijuana bill is most likely to come from politicians in “safe” districts, where one controversial issue catching fire won’t doom a candidacy. Candidates in more competitive districts, especially those with competitive primaries, are likely to be more risk-adverse. But, by the same token, advocacy of the legalization of marijuana for medical use might be the one issue that separates a candidate from the rest of the pack.

**** 421 Likely 2002 Democratic Primary Voters ****

Name Recognition

I am going to read you the names of several individuals. After I mention each name, I would like you to tell me if you recognize that person. If you do, I would then like you to tell me whether you have a favorable, unfavorable, or neutral opinion of that individual.

Favorable

Unfavorable

Neutral

Don’t Recognize

Kathleen Kennedy Townsend

57%

19%

17%

Martin O’Malley

42%

14%

20%

24%

QUESTION: If the 2002 Democratic primary for Governor were held today, and the candidates were Martin O’Malley and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, for whom would you vote?

Kathleen Kennedy

Townsend

Martin

O’Malley

Undecided

Statewide

53%

31%

16%

Eastern Shore

45%

38%

17%

Baltimore City

49%

43%

Baltimore Suburbs

39%

42%

19%

Washington Suburbs

67%

17%

16%

Western MD

57%

27%

16%

White

47%

40%

13%

African-American

66%

13%

21%

Men

52%

33%

15%

Women

54%

30%

16%

All Voters