More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Income ($50K-$75K) voters
Last answered 7 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Income ($50K-$75K) voters.
No, the costs of overhauling California's water system should be paid for by wealthy farmers and agricultural business
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)
More stances on this issue
Yes, but spend the money on more storage. Not just tunnels to steal it from the North. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Red Bluff, CA
State should make a concerted effort to educate all citizens in ways to use less water or do without as possible, - there is a great need for true understanding of what is happening world wide with growing populations, changing weather patterns and... 9 years ago from a Democrat in Spreckels, CA
That's a broad statement or request without any information. This is typical of how California's politicians try and get measures passed so that certain special interest groups benefit and the rest get screwed holding the bill. Another big NO!... 9 years ago from a Republican in Alameda, CA
I don't know enough about the subject to answer, not a resident. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Elk Grove, CA
It's not the system that needs an overhaul, it's that development needs to be driven and limited by the amount of water - unfettered development without concern for the supply of water is irresponsible. 9 years ago from a Republican in La Quinta, CA
Possibly, but I don't know enough about the issue to decide right now. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Chula Vista, CA
Only if there are strict guidelines and a non partisan audit is done constantly. 9 years ago from a Republican in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
No, invest in diversifying the water profile instead of going into debt for a dwindling source. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Mill Valley, CA
Water should be limited, no more sweeping with a hose, no more sprinkler systems. We don't have the water we are using now. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Signal Hill, CA
Only if it will affect public health. Who is it going to be borrowed from, though?. 9 years ago from a Socialist in Whittier, CA
It would depend on how the water was being/used allocated. The southern regions need to reform their usage. 9 years ago from a Democrat in Mountain View, CA
Find another way to pay for it that insures clean water without fluoride and other contaminates. 9 years ago from a Green in Oak View, CA
Put it to a bond measure, referendum. 9 years ago from a Republican in Signal Hill, CA
Yes but much like the federal govt there is no accountability in the CA legislature so when the money doesn't go where it is supposed to, and it won't, then the price will go up and we Californians will pay more, and more. 9 years ago from a Republican in Cotati, CA
No, eliminate all roadblocks that crop up that prevents up-grading and allow locals to upgrade the water system. 9 years ago from a Republican in Rohnert Park, CA
No. We should balance the budget and find money using existing tax revenues for these types of projects. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Discovery Bay, CA
Have Pelosi and all the other idiots in charge give back some of the money they transferred to their off shore accounts and that should take care of it. 9 years ago from a Republican in Hemet, CA
As long as it is regulated and the money actually goes for that purpose. 9 years ago from a Republican in El Cajon, CA