More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Income ($150K-$200K) voters
Last answered 3 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Income ($150K-$200K) voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Dec 9, 2013. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Income data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011).
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
Learn more about Rainy Day Fund Increase
The California Rainy Day Budget Stabilization Fund Act would increase the state’s savings from 5% to 10% by setting aside 3% of state revenues. Exceptions would include years when revenues drop below the previous years budget and increasing the amount of savings during years of budget surplus. See recent Rainy Day Fund Increase news
More stances on this issue
They should, after they rescind the temporary sales tax increase. There is no surplus until they no those results. 4 years ago from a Republican in Union City, CA
Kill the dream act in all of its forms and deport ALL illegal immigrants. if they want to return they need to follow procedure then by all means let them return and become part of the system instead of leeching from it. 4 years ago from a Democrat in Folsom, CA
Put money into maintaining and fireproofing wild areas so we don't need contingency funds for fire fighting. 5 years ago from a Republican in Edison, CA
Depends on how trustworthy and secure the rainy day fund is. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Aptos, CA
Yes but the money would not be allowed for anything, unless voted upon by registered voters. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Santa Rosa, CA
I have no knowledge regarding this issue. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Brisbane, CA
Yes, but cut spending and invest into the state infrastructure. 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Toluca Lake, CA
No, spending should be directed to public schools. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Sacramento, CA
Cut spending so that current revenues can accommodate a 1.5% set aside to a rainy day fund. 5 years ago from a Republican in Northridge, CA
Cut the government untill balaned and 10% can be set aside and saved until the goverment does not have to tax due to the intrest on the savings. 5 years ago from a Republican in Escondido, CA
No opinion unless they default on loans to the federal government. 5 years ago from a Republican in Brisbane, CA
Yes but as a part of a balanced budget with reduced income taxes. 5 years ago from a Green in San Carlos, CA
Return the money to the people. 5 years ago from a Libertarian in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
1% would be reasonable. Need to cut state spending. Limit growth to inflation plus legal population growth. 5 years ago from a Republican in Rancho Santa Fe, CA
Not 3%. Too high. Closer to 1.25%. After 4 years, that's 5 percent, after 8 years, that's 10 percent. 5 years ago from a Democrat in Granada Hills, CA
Establish strict limits on new spending -- link legislative salaries to spending control by legislature. 5 years ago from a Republican in Mission Viejo, CA
Just cut taxes. 5 years ago from a Republican in Ridgecrest, CA
No use the funds to pay down pension debt and change govenemnt pensions. They are a disgrace. 5 years ago from a Republican in Mill Valley, CA