Ask dumb questions, you get dumb answers - Penn Pike concession poll
Posted Tue, 2007-06-12 20:07
In an earlier review of opinion surveys about privatization of the Pennsylvania Turnpike we called a Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association (PMTA) "bogus" based on the fact that it was publicized solely on the basis of a press release. The PMTA and the survey company Susquehanna Polling and Research (SP&R) both failed to post the detailed survey to their websites and refused our requests for a copy.
After we'd published they protested our "bogus" characterization and after several days gave us a copy of the survey. We have no apology for calling it "bogus" having made several email and telephone requests, and not being given it. We'd do the same thing again.
The survey, it turns out, is worth a detailed review however. It produces different answers because of the way the questions were asked and the way interviewees are led.
Interviewees are introduced to the Turnpike concession with the statement (Q6) that many states are "considering a move to privatize or 'sell-off'Â to the private sector some of their assets or activities as a way to cut costs or raise revenue."
In fact no sell off is being proposed of tollroads but longterm leasing of the business of the tollroad under a whole set of
contractual conditions, so the pollsters mislead the interviewees upfront.
With that misleading impression the pollsters get 59% opposition to a lease and 31% support. 40% strongly oppose to 14% strongly support a concession. (Q10)
Q11a Supporters are most impressed by the likelihood that the private sector will do a better and more efficient job of maintenance (74%) and only 21% favor it because they think it avoids a tax increase or raises revenue.
Q11b Among opponents of privatization the primary concerns are:
- 35% no reason to change because the state commission's doing a good job
- 28% a private operator would have "no accountability" and be "motivated by profits"
- 22% higher tolls
- 13% the state losing control of maintenance and snow removal
- 13% think transport funding problems won't be solved
- 5% job losses
The interviewer then introduced more items of information asking the interviewees how this would affect their attitude toward privatization.
Q12 Gov Rendell is quoted as estimating that the concession would bring $22 billion (Morgan Stanley his advisers said $12b to $18b) and avoid the need for a $1.7b tax increase strangely makes 40% less likely to want the concession, to 32% more likely.
How to make sense of this? People want to be taxed more? It doesn't make sense.
The interviewers then tap into anti-foreign sentiment with this question:
Q13: "If the state agrees to lease the turnpike, the lease may be awarded to a foreign owned company similar to the firms that have been given lease arrangements to take over highways in other states."
 Spanish, Australian, Portugese and Italian companies have been most active gaining concessions in the US. The lease or concession is likely to be awarded to whichever company or group offers the most money to the state. That is best for the state's taxpayers and motorists if the upfront fee is spent on road improvements. Where the shareholders happen to reside - whether it is "foreign" or not - is of no significance. Shareholders are shareholders.
However the question is posed by SP&R in a way that obscures the issue of the winning bidder paying the state the most in order to focus on the nationality issue.
77% say likely "foreign ownership" makes them less likely to favor a lease, whereas 15% say it has no impact on their thinking, and 5% say it makes it more likely they will favor it. (Anyone but the present mob?)
Q14 asserts that if the Turnpike is leased the state may be asked to create new tolls on I-80 and other interstates so motorists are not tempted to leave the Turnpike in favor of less expensive alternate routes. Another misleading question.
In fact tolling of I-80 and other interstates was proposed by the state's Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission as an alternative to leasing the Turnpike. The interstates in Pennsylvania are so far apart that very little traffic is likely to move from one to another due to tolls. The costs of circuitous routing would be grater than the tolls.
Â
But. the misleading hypothetical question has its impact. By 64% to 11% that proposition makes people less likely to support a lease.
Q15 starts with the classic leading question: "Since leasing the Turnpike may lead to higher tolls..."
They have the issue upside down. The Morgan Stanley modeling done for the Governor's office assumed toll increases about in line with inflation whereas the Turnpike proposes a 25% immediate toll hike plus annual adjustments thereafter, such that for many years at least tolls would be LOWER under a concession.
The question then proceeds to say this will increase diversion to secondary roads.
65% then feel the prospect of higher tolls under a concession makes them less likely to support a lease, 21% say it has no impact on their attitude while 10% - good contrarians - say it makes them more likely to favor a concession.
Leasing the Turnpike means that "the state gives up its right to manage and oversee road maintenance and snow removal," asserts Q16. Not necessarily. It depends on how the concession contract is written, although the concessionaire will have a strong interest in having the turnpike open, safe, and well maintained. Most concession contracts nevertheless have detailed provisions for maintenance and operations.
Still this "question" makes 55% less likely to support a lease.
Q17 asks whether people think the turnpike will be more efficiently managed by experienced private operators. 46% disagree to 40% agree.
Toll rate increases under a lease are the subject of Q18. 75% say no toll increase of any kind is acceptable, 125 say a doubling, 2% a tripling and 1% quadrupling. The choices are unreal. Tolls always increase during a period of inflation. Doubling is rare, tripling and quadrupling unheard of. More common i the kind of toll increases proposed by the Turnpike Commission -25% plus annual adjustments in line with inflation.
At the end of this process of misinformation Q19 opposition to a concession is 66% to support 25%, a movement of about 6 percentage points away from support and an increase in opposition of 7 points (1 undecided picked up) from the earlier Q10.
Interestingly in contrast to the Quinnipiac poll the PMTA poll shows 68% opposition (53% strong opposition) to tolling I-80 to only 30% support (Q9). The question is slightly different. It says "Interstate I-80 and other interstates".
If the turnpike is concessioned the two most important provisions (Q21) to be included in an agreement are:
- 44% getting a commitment to a specific capital program and maintenance
- 37% state control over toll rates
- 37% minimizing job losses
- 30% avoiding non-compete clauses and bars to capacity enhancement
Another question asks whether interviewees what gasoline tax increases they would support as an alternative to a concessioning of the Turnpike. 71% say none, "no increase of any kind", 19% would pay 5 to 7c/gallon extra, 2% 8 to 9c more and 5% 10c or more.
There is strong opposition also to increasing motor vehicle registration and drivers license fees - 68% against to 29% support.
The survey is reported to have been of 800 people who were registered voters. They appear to be a fair sample by income, gender, region, political affiliation etc. They do appear somewhat pessimistic about the state of the state compared to other surveys and if their answers are to be believed they are extraordinarily biased toward use of transit. 25% say they use transit versus less than 10% of the population.
They aren't major users of the Turnpike. Only 3% use it on a daily basis versus 13% who never use it. 54% use the Turnpike a couple of times/year, 22% several times/month, 7% a couple of times/week.
Other polls
Two other polls of Pennsylvanians showed more support for a concession, one by Muhlenberg College 37% support to 49% opposition, another by Quinnipiac University 44% support to 42% opposition.
see http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/162
TOLLROADSnews 2007-06-10
In an earlier review of opinion surveys about privatization of the Pennsylvania Turnpike we called a Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association (PMTA) "bogus" based on the fact that it was publicized solely on the basis of a press release. The PMTA and the survey company Susquehanna Polling and Research (SP&R) both failed to post the detailed survey to their websites and refused our requests for a copy. After we'd published they protested our "bogus" characterization and after several days gave us a copy of the survey. We have no apology for calling it "bogus" having made several email and telephone requests, and not being given it. We'd do the same thing again.
The survey, it turns out, is worth a detailed review however. It produces different answers because of the way the questions were asked and the way interviewees are led.
Interviewees are introduced to the Turnpike concession with the statement (Q6) that many states are "considering a move to privatize or 'sell-off'Â to the private sector some of their assets or activities as a way to cut costs or raise revenue."
In fact no sell off is being proposed of tollroads but longterm leasing of the business of the tollroad under a whole set of
contractual conditions, so the pollsters mislead the interviewees upfront. With that misleading impression the pollsters get 59% opposition to a lease and 31% support. 40% strongly oppose to 14% strongly support a concession. (Q10)
Q11a Supporters are most impressed by the likelihood that the private sector will do a better and more efficient job of maintenance (74%) and only 21% favor it because they think it avoids a tax increase or raises revenue.
Q11b Among opponents of privatization the primary concerns are:
- 35% no reason to change because the state commission's doing a good job
- 28% a private operator would have "no accountability" and be "motivated by profits"
- 22% higher tolls
- 13% the state losing control of maintenance and snow removal
- 13% think transport funding problems won't be solved
- 5% job losses
The interviewer then introduced more items of information asking the interviewees how this would affect their attitude toward privatization.
Q12 Gov Rendell is quoted as estimating that the concession would bring $22 billion (Morgan Stanley his advisers said $12b to $18b) and avoid the need for a $1.7b tax increase strangely makes 40% less likely to want the concession, to 32% more likely.
How to make sense of this? People want to be taxed more? It doesn't make sense.
The interviewers then tap into anti-foreign sentiment with this question:
Q13: "If the state agrees to lease the turnpike, the lease may be awarded to a foreign owned company similar to the firms that have been given lease arrangements to take over highways in other states."
 Spanish, Australian, Portugese and Italian companies have been most active gaining concessions in the US. The lease or concession is likely to be awarded to whichever company or group offers the most money to the state. That is best for the state's taxpayers and motorists if the upfront fee is spent on road improvements. Where the shareholders happen to reside - whether it is "foreign" or not - is of no significance. Shareholders are shareholders.
However the question is posed by SP&R in a way that obscures the issue of the winning bidder paying the state the most in order to focus on the nationality issue. 77% say likely "foreign ownership" makes them less likely to favor a lease, whereas 15% say it has no impact on their thinking, and 5% say it makes it more likely they will favor it. (Anyone but the present mob?)
Q14 asserts that if the Turnpike is leased the state may be asked to create new tolls on I-80 and other interstates so motorists are not tempted to leave the Turnpike in favor of less expensive alternate routes. Another misleading question.
In fact tolling of I-80 and other interstates was proposed by the state's Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission as an alternative to leasing the Turnpike. The interstates in Pennsylvania are so far apart that very little traffic is likely to move from one to another due to tolls. The costs of circuitous routing would be grater than the tolls.
 But. the misleading hypothetical question has its impact. By 64% to 11% that proposition makes people less likely to support a lease.
Q15 starts with the classic leading question: "Since leasing the Turnpike may lead to higher tolls..."
They have the issue upside down. The Morgan Stanley modeling done for the Governor's office assumed toll increases about in line with inflation whereas the Turnpike proposes a 25% immediate toll hike plus annual adjustments thereafter, such that for many years at least tolls would be LOWER under a concession.
The question then proceeds to say this will increase diversion to secondary roads.
65% then feel the prospect of higher tolls under a concession makes them less likely to support a lease, 21% say it has no impact on their attitude while 10% - good contrarians - say it makes them more likely to favor a concession.
Leasing the Turnpike means that "the state gives up its right to manage and oversee road maintenance and snow removal," asserts Q16. Not necessarily. It depends on how the concession contract is written, although the concessionaire will have a strong interest in having the turnpike open, safe, and well maintained. Most concession contracts nevertheless have detailed provisions for maintenance and operations.
Still this "question" makes 55% less likely to support a lease.
Q17 asks whether people think the turnpike will be more efficiently managed by experienced private operators. 46% disagree to 40% agree.
Toll rate increases under a lease are the subject of Q18. 75% say no toll increase of any kind is acceptable, 125 say a doubling, 2% a tripling and 1% quadrupling. The choices are unreal. Tolls always increase during a period of inflation. Doubling is rare, tripling and quadrupling unheard of. More common i the kind of toll increases proposed by the Turnpike Commission -25% plus annual adjustments in line with inflation.
At the end of this process of misinformation Q19 opposition to a concession is 66% to support 25%, a movement of about 6 percentage points away from support and an increase in opposition of 7 points (1 undecided picked up) from the earlier Q10.
Interestingly in contrast to the Quinnipiac poll the PMTA poll shows 68% opposition (53% strong opposition) to tolling I-80 to only 30% support (Q9). The question is slightly different. It says "Interstate I-80 and other interstates".
If the turnpike is concessioned the two most important provisions (Q21) to be included in an agreement are:
- 44% getting a commitment to a specific capital program and maintenance
- 37% state control over toll rates
- 37% minimizing job losses
- 30% avoiding non-compete clauses and bars to capacity enhancement
Another question asks whether interviewees what gasoline tax increases they would support as an alternative to a concessioning of the Turnpike. 71% say none, "no increase of any kind", 19% would pay 5 to 7c/gallon extra, 2% 8 to 9c more and 5% 10c or more.
There is strong opposition also to increasing motor vehicle registration and drivers license fees - 68% against to 29% support.
The survey is reported to have been of 800 people who were registered voters. They appear to be a fair sample by income, gender, region, political affiliation etc. They do appear somewhat pessimistic about the state of the state compared to other surveys and if their answers are to be believed they are extraordinarily biased toward use of transit. 25% say they use transit versus less than 10% of the population.
They aren't major users of the Turnpike. Only 3% use it on a daily basis versus 13% who never use it. 54% use the Turnpike a couple of times/year, 22% several times/month, 7% a couple of times/week.
Other polls
Two other polls of Pennsylvanians showed more support for a concession, one by Muhlenberg College 37% support to 49% opposition, another by Quinnipiac University 44% support to 42% opposition.
see http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/162
TOLLROADSnews 2007-06-10