DHM Panel November 2019 Survey Results
December 10, 2019
For last month’s DHM Panel Survey, we took our first look at how opinions are shaping up for next year’s elections. To learn voters’ priorities, we presented panelists with a list of fifteen issues and asked them to choose the three that will be the most important to them when choosing which candidates to vote for in the 2020 Oregon state legislative elections.
These findings come from the November 2019 fielding of our DHM Panel. The survey was conducted from November 13 to 19, 2019, and surveyed 582 Oregonians. The results were weighted by age, gender, area of the state, political party, and level of education to ensure a representative sample of Oregon voters. The margin of error for this survey ranges from ±4.1% to ±4.3%.
Democrats, Republicans and NAV/other voters have different priorities.
Democrats’ top five priorities are climate change, healthcare, environment, homelessness and housing. Among these, just one (homelessness) is one of the top five priorities for Republicans, and only two (healthcare and environment) are in the top five for NAV/other voters.
For Republicans, the top issues include government spending, taxes, gun policy, managing the state budget and homelessness. The top issues for NAV/others are healthcare, taxes, K–12 education, government spending, and the environment.
Jobs and K–12 education are now lower priorities for many voters.
A couple other notable findings are the relatively low prioritization of jobs and K–12 education. In past years, especially during the height of the Great Recession, jobs was consistently the top issue among voters of all political stripes. Historically, too, K–12 education has been a top issue for voters. Here it was the third-rated issue for NAV/other voters, but sixth for Democrats and tenth for Republicans. The relatively low rating of K–12 education could be a result of other issues becoming more urgent to address. It could also be the result of the passage of the Student Success Act, which will add $1 billion per year of new spending to K–12 education. With the new funding, perhaps K–12 education is no longer as urgent of a priority.
Non-affiliated and third-party voter have more trust in Democrats than Republicans on most issues.
NAV/other voters are a rapidly increasing share of the Oregon electorate. They now represent 40% of Oregon voters, compared to registered Democrats (35%) and registered Republicans (25%). Despite this increase in NAV/other voters, all 90 of Oregon’s legislators are Democrats and Republicans. Knowing which party NAV/others trust more on the issues can provide some early insight into 2020 elections.
Among the fifteen issues, we asked all survey participants to indicate if they generally trust the Democratic or Republican party more. Among NAV/other voters, they indicated they trust the Democratic party more on twelve of the issues. The only three that they trusted the Republican party more were government spending, balancing the state budget, and crime. The issues for which they tend to trust the Democrats most were climate change, environment, healthcare, and K–12 education.
DHM Panel October Survey Results
November 14, 2019
Last month, DHM checked in with Oregonians’ regarding their approval of national and state leadership. These findings come from the October 2019 fielding of our DHM Panel. The survey was conducted from October 8 to 15, 2017, and surveyed 591 Oregonians. The results were weighted by age, gender, area of the state, political party, and level of education to ensure a representative sample of Oregon voters. The margin of error for this survey is ±4.0. National polling data of approval averages is from Real Clear Politics. (citation)
Less than half of Oregonians approve of national leaders Trump, Pelosi, and McConnell.
Oregonians’ approval ratings are low for President Donald Trump, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. However, just under half disapprove of Pelosi, compared to the almost seven in ten who disapprove of Trump and McConnell. Oregonians (45%) are more likely to have positive impressions of Pelosi than Americans in general (38%). Conversely, Oregonians are less likely to favor both Trump (31% v. 42%) and McConnell (19% v. 25%) than Americans on average.
Oregonians tend to approve of both Senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley.
Negative impressions of Kate Brown have continued to rise since April 2015, now surpassing rate of approval.
Since DHM first asked Oregonians in April of 2015, disapproval ratings of Governor Brown have tripled. These numbers have been consistently on the rise from 2015 to 2019, while approval ratings have only fluctuated five percentage points during that time. Uncertainty about Brown was at its highest in 2015 (35%) and has consistently declined, to 4%.
Party differences follow a trend for all three state leaders in question, with highest approval coming from Democrats, lowest rates from Republicans, and the other voters falling somewhere in between.
Other than party affiliation, impressions of state leaders are consistent across demographic groups. The only exception is that tri-county residents tend to be more positive about Senator Merkley and Governor Brown than residents of the rest of the state.
From October 8 to 15, 2019, DHM Research conducted a survey of Oregonians. The purpose of the survey was to assess Oregonians’ opinions about notable elected officials and the impeachment inquiry of President Trump.
DHM's Adam Davis joined Clean Water Services' Mark Jockers, Coalition of Communities of Color's Marcus Mundy, and ECONorthwest's John Tapogna to unveil findings from the new Washington County Growing Up study.
The Growing Up study started with Clean Water Services desire to know its customers better. Jockers said the agency has data on its customers dating back 30 years, but it didn't have a complete picture because it lacked data on people of color in the community, which the "Growing Up" study conscientiously worked to include.
The study documents the unfolding story of population growth and rapid demographic change in Washington County. The research delves into socioeconomic trends, the community’s values and beliefs, and residents’ priorities for the future.
Despite the fact that most people like living here, the study revealed the county is experiencing some growing pains. Davis said those surveyed shared their angst or worry about being able to continue to afford to live here, mainly due to housing costs.
Tapogna said Washington County is better off than 2/3 of other counties in America, and we are in the middle of the largest economic expansions in U.S. history, so it is worrisome that people are concerned about their financial health.
The survey showed the area has a low crime rate, a higher rate of two-parent families, relatively low commute times, and is average when it comes to racial integration.
According to Davis, 74 percent of those surveyed said housing is less affordable; 63 percent said the region is getting too crowded; and 53 percent said it's harder to get around.
The panel felt there is still plenty going right in Washington County to keep propelling the region forward. Mundy encouraged people to get involved and engaged at the civic level. The special lunch forum was hosted by the Westside Economic Alliance in partnership with Vision Action Network.
DHM Panel September Survey Results
October 8, 2019
While Western culture has long articulated gender as a binary between men and women (in that order, unfortunately), there have always been people whose identities are not accounted for by this framing. In 2017, Oregon recognized non-binary and gender non-conforming people by becoming the first state to allow a third category of “X” on driver licenses and identification cards.
Non-binary and gender non-conforming people often prefer that others use gender-neutral pronouns such as “they” instead of “he” or “she” when referring to them. This month, we wanted to see how Oregonians compare to the rest of the country when it comes to exposure, familiarity, and comfort with the use of gender-neutral pronouns.
These findings come from the September 2019 fielding of our DHM Panel. The survey was conducted September 10–18, 2019, and surveyed 562 Oregonians. The results were weighted by age, gender, area of the state, political party, and level of education to ensure a representative sample of Oregon voters. The margin of error for this survey is ±4.4%. National data comes from a survey done by Pew Research Center published in January 2019.
Oregonians are more familiar and more comfortable with the use of gender-neutral pronouns than Americans.
Oregonians (47%) are more than twice as likely to say they have heard a lot about gender-neutral and non-binary pronouns than Americans (22%). Additionally, the number of Oregonians (11%) who say they haven’t heard anything about people using gender-neutral pronouns is less than one-third that of Americans who say the same (39%). While the difference is not as stark, Oregonians (37%) are also more likely than Americans (30%) to personally know someone who prefers that others use gender-neutral pronouns when referring to them.
Oregonians (37%) are also more likely than Americans (30%) to say they would feel very comfortable using gender-neutral pronouns if asked to do so. While a majority of Oregonians and Americans would feel comfortable, about one-quarter of all respondents in both groups reported that they would feel very uncomfortable.
Familiarity may be an important factor in determining comfort. Oregonians’ who know someone personally who prefers to go by gender-neutral pronouns are more likely to both have heard a lot about the preference (83%) and to feel comfortable using gender-neutral pronouns (73%)
Exposure, familiarity, and comfort vary based on demographic differences of Oregonians.
Religion is an important factor in determining Oregonians’ level of familiarity and comfort with the use of gender-neutral pronouns. Atheist, agnostic, and others without religious affiliations (45%) are more likely to know someone who prefers to go by gender-neutral pronouns than their Protestant or Roman Catholic counterparts (20%). These Oregonians are also more likely to feel comfortable using gender-neutral pronouns (67% vs. 39%). In addition to religious affiliation, religious salience impacts how comfortable Oregonians feel using gender-neutral pronouns. One-third of those who say religion is important to them (33%) would feel very uncomfortable, compared to only 12% of those who say religion is not important.
Age is also an important factor, with younger Oregonians, those between the ages of 18 and 54 (53%–79%), more likely than their older counterparts (30%) to have been exposed to the preference for use of gender-neutral pronouns.
Trends in political ideology and sexual orientation can be seen across all three items: exposure, familiarity, and comfort. Those with a liberal political ideology are more likely than their counterparts to have heard a lot about (57%), to know someone who prefers (55%), and to be comfortable with (84%), the use of gender-neutral pronouns than their conservative or moderate counterparts. The same trends exist for those whose sexual orientation is something other than straight, as show in the chart.
Introduction & Methodology
From September 10 to 18, 2019, DHM Research and ReputationUs conducted a survey of Oregonians to assess their experiences and opinions about cybersecurity and corporate reputation.
Research Methodology: The online survey consisted of 562 adults in Oregon and took approximately 12 minutes to complete. This is a sufficient sample size to assess opinions generally and to review findings by multiple subgroups.
Respondents were members of a professionally maintained online panel. Panelists are recruited randomly by telephone. Once becoming members of the panel, they are surveyed on a monthly basis about civic, social and cultural affairs.
A variety of quality control measures were employed, including questionnaire pre-testing and validation. A combination of quotas and weighting by age, gender, area of state, and education were used to match the demographic makeup of Oregon’s adult population.
Statement of Limitations: Any sampling of opinions or attitudes is subject to a margin of error. The margin of error is a standard statistical calculation that represents differences between the sample and total population at a confidence interval, or probability, calculated to be 95%. This means that there is a 95% probability that the sample taken for this study would fall within the stated margin of error if compared with the results achieved from surveying the entire population. The margin of error for this survey is ±4.1%.
DHM Research Background: DHM Research has been providing opinion research and consultation throughout the Pacific Northwest and other regions of the United States for over 40 years. The firm is nonpartisan and independent and specializes in research projects to support public policy making.
Oregonians are increasingly victims of cyberattacks and online fraud.
- To provide context to Oregonians’ experiences, the survey started by asking a series of questions from a national study conducted by Pew Research in 2017. There are striking increases in negative experiences over the last two years.
- 73% of Oregonians now report that they been notified that their personal information, such as an account number, has been compromised. In 2017, just 35% of Americans reported that this had happened to them.
- 56% of Oregonians say that they have noticed fraudulent charges on their debit or credit cards, an increase from 41% in the 2017 study.
- And 41% of Oregonians have received a notice that their Social Security number has been compromised. Just 15% of Americans had reported this happening in 2017.
Oregonians believe banks and healthcare providers protect their customers’ personal information. They find internet and cell phone providers the least trusted.
- 84% of Oregonians are at least “somewhat confident” that their bank effectively protects their personal financial information, and 74% are similarly confident that their healthcare provider will protect their medical information. However, this confidence is not absolute. Much smaller percentages say that they are “very” confident in their banks and healthcare providers (33% and 22% respectfully).
- Oregonians have less confidence in the internet (50%) and cell phone (48%) providers.
When companies are hit by cyberattacks, Oregonians are likely to hold the companies partially responsible.
- Survey respondents were given the following scenario: a large corporation is a victim of a cyberattack that exposed their customers’ financial and personal information. They were then asked to allocate responsibility to the corporation and the hacker. Oregonians said the corporation shared 46% of the responsibility and the hacker 54%.
Companies that are not able to keep personal information secure are at risk of losing their customers.
- More than four in ten Oregonians said that it is “very unlikely” that they would remain a customer of a company—even one that they had been loyal to—if their personal information was stolen to: set up a fake credit card account (48%); shared on the internet (43%); or caused their credit score to decline (41%).
Helping cyberattack victims understand their risk is important when communicating about cyberattacks.
- 70% of Oregonians said that they would be more concerned if their bank or credit union information were “one of hundred” stolen in a cyberattack, compared to 19% who said they would be more concerned if their account information was “one of thousands” stolen.
- Oregonians would also be more concerned by an attack from an American cybercriminal (49%) than by an attack carried out by a foreign government (33%).
Companies that communicate the steps they are taking to upgrade their security procedures are more trusted than those that stay silent about attacks and their security.
- Oregonians in this survey were asked which they would trust more to protect their personal information: a large business that was a cyberattack victim but responded by upgrading its security procedures, or a large business than never said whether or not they have been a victim of a cyberattack. By a margin of 60% to 8%, Oregonians said they would have more trust in a business that was attacked and upgraded their systems than a business that kept quiet about the attack.
- An overwhelming 96% of Oregonians would prefer a corporation acknowledge a cyberattack and offer free credit monitoring even if there was no evidence that their personal information was stolen, rather than the corporation not say anything about the attack so as to not unnecessarily worry their customers.
- Given the fact cyberattacks are on the rise, and most Oregonians have some experience of being a victim, they are likely to assume that large businesses are under threat. This result indicates that rather than trying to minimize or be silent about an attack, a more effective approach for businesses is to acknowledge the threat, be upfront about incidents, and aggressively communicate about what they are doing to continually enhance customer safety.
Oregonians do not want companies or their local governments to pay ransoms to cybercriminals.
- In the last few years, there have been high-profile cyberattacks on businesses and local governments. The criminals freeze access to files and records and demand a ransom to unlock them. The City of Baltimore was locked out of much of their computer systems for weeks, and paid $18 million to rebuild their system, rather than paying a $75,000 ransom demand.
- Oregonians were asked what they would like their local government and their bank to do if they experience this kind of attack. A strong majority do not want their local government (73%) or bank (66%) to pay the ransom.
Press Release: New Study Reveals Impact of Cyberattacks on Consumer Confidence, Corporate Reputation
PORTLAND, Ore., October 3, 2019 — ReputationUs (RepUs) and DHM Research released results from a first-of-its-kind study during Cybersecurity Awareness Month (October) that examines the effects of cyberattacks on corporate reputation and consumer confidence. The study, conducted in September 2019, surveyed 562 adults in Oregon. Complete details about the survey, including an analysis of the findings and a list of key insights are available at ReputationUs.com/CyberSurvey and DHMresearch.com/CyberSurvey.
According to the study, consumers trust banks/credit unions, private companies and health care providers most to protect their personal information (e.g., financial, medical). However, if a cyberattack is mishandled, these organizations potentially face a significant loss of customers. The study also substantiates the importance of communications, transparency, and proactively offering customer credit monitoring during and after a cyberattack.
“While consumers hold organizations to high standards, they also understand that cyberattacks do occur,” said Casey Boggs, president of RepUs, a firm specializing in reputation management and cybersecurity preparations. “The key to mitigate against the impact of an attack is proper planning and knowing customers’ expectations in advance.”
“The vast majority of survey participants (73%) indicated that they have had their personal information compromised,” added John Horvick, client relations and political director at DHM Research. “Consumers are increasingly anxious to know more about what companies are doing protect their personal information. Companies that communicate about cyber risks, and how they are protecting customer information, are the most trusted.”
Cybersecurity and Reputation: By the Numbers
- 54% Hacker Vs. 46% Corporation - Who’s to blame if a company is hacked.
- Consumer confidence level by industry to protect private information:
- 84% - Bank/Credit Union
- 74% - Health Care Provider
- 66% - Health Insurance Provider
- 64% - Credit Card Company
- 50% - Internet Provider
- 48% - Mobile Phone Provider
- 96% - Consumers believe companies should publicly acknowledge an attack occurred and offer free credit monitoring for one year, even if there is no evidence that information was stolen.
- Who’s most trustworthy to protect personal information from a cyberattack:
- 44% - Private Company
- 15% - Federal Government
- 13% - Publicly Traded Company
- 60% - Consumers trust a large business that was recently victim of a cyberattack and then upgraded its security procedures after the attack.
- 8% - Consumers trust a corporation that has never said whether it has been a cyberattack victim.
- 48% - Consumers are very unlikely to remain a customer after a cyberattack if the stolen data was used to illegally set-up a credit card in their name.
- 41% - Consumers are very unlikely to remain a customer if their credit score decreased because of stolen information.
- 43% - Consumers are very unlikely to remain a customer if their personal and financial information was shared on the Internet for others to steal.
About ReputationUs
ReputationUs is a firm specializing in reputation management and cybersecurity support for mid- to large-sized businesses and nonprofits. The firm partners with organizations across the United States to closely assess reputations, deliver supportive communications strategies and provide collaborative communication support to enhance, advance and protect their valuable reputations. More information is available at ReputationUs.com.
About DHM Research
DHM Research is a nonpartisan and independent public opinion and policy research firm with offices in Portland and Washington, D.C. The firm has been providing opinion research and consultation throughout the Pacific Northwest and across the United States for more than 40 years. DHM Research is a certified woman-owned minority business. More information is available at dhmresearch.com.
Meet Our New Project Manager
We are pleased to announce Tony Iaccarino, Ph.D., as DHM Research’s new Project Manager. Tony’s experience is wide-ranging, including regional parks and transportation, public education, affordable housing, legislative redistricting, the initiative process, tax policy, pension reform, behavioral health, and criminal sentencing. A former assistant professor of American History at Reed College, he has also served as Policy Director for both the City Club of Portland and Healthy Democracy.
Tony joined DHM in July. While his extensive policy knowledge, research skills, and communications experience have proven him to be an immense asset to our research department, his collaborative and honest nature have endeared him to the entire DHM team.
“Tony’s background and experience will allow DHM to better meet our clients needs. He brings expertise in local and state policy, refined research skills, and an ability to communicate complex information to decision-makers. We are glad to have Tony on our team, and we think you will be too," said DHM's Client Relations and Political Research Director, John Horvick.
Learn more about Tony.
Announcing the Launch of Our New Website
After months of hard work and dedication, we are delighted to announce the launch of our brand-new website. You can see our updated site by going to www.dhmresearch.com
The new website gives visitors better access to our project experience, client and industry updates, and company news. Our current and prospective clients will find useful information about our services and the latest findings from our research on the front page of our website.
Amongst the revamped features the site includes integrated social media buttons for Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram. This will improve communications and the distribution of timely and impactful research. On the website, we will constantly be updating our content with helpful information, articles, newsletters, blogs, company announcements, and client successes in the Updates section.
We hope you find the new website’s fresh look and easy-to-access information helpful and engaging.
DHM Co-presents With ODOT at International Summit
Alongside Judith Gray, Congestion Pricing Project Manager for ODOT, DHM's CEO, Michelle Neiss, Ph.D., participated in a panel on connecting with elected officials at the IBTTA Communication and Change Management Summit.
Using their experience and findings from the recent ODOT Value Pricing study conducted by DHM, Navigating Tough Conversations About Tolling, provided ways to build strong relationships between agencies and elected officials. Michelle discussed the need for elected officials to understand any gaps between what they know and believe and what the public knows and believes, noting that research can help elected officials think through the impact on—or conversations with—different groups within their constituency. Judith led an informative and well-received talk about how her work, as an agency staff person, supports electeds making tough decisions
The International Bridge, Tunnel & Turnpike Association (IBTTA) is the worldwide association for the owners and operators of toll facilities and the businesses that serve them. The summit, Communication Invasion: We Are All In This Together, addressed an array of issues affecting tolling and mobility professionals’ entire workforce.
DHM Becomes a Certified B Corporation
DHM Research is proud to be a Certified B Corp. We are one of only 3,023 companies worldwide to achieve this certification. The rigorous certification process took 18 months to complete and verifies DHM’s high performance standards in social, environmental and public transparency.
“Receiving our B Corporation Certification has meant both affirming our values and becoming a part of a community of like-minded businesses. It was an awesome achievement for us, and we truly look forward to continually challenging ourselves to be better and do better for our people, our community, and the planet,” said DHM's Chief Operating Officer, Megan Wentworth.
Certified B Corporations believe it’s time to expand how success is measured in the business world. For-profit businesses should be a force for good and collectively strive for shared and durable prosperity. Our B Corp certification documents how we’re living our values today and serves as a road map to be the best business we can be.
Learn more about DHM’s values.
DHM Panel August Survey Results
September 10, 2019
Despite abnormally dry conditions in Northwest Oregon in 2019, most of the state has so far remained free of drought. And with the exception of the Milepost 97 Fire, which burned over 13,000 acres south of Roseburg, this year’s wildfire season has been comparatively mild. But most Oregonians still expect the next ten years to bring hotter summers, increased drought, growing conflicts among water users, and a greater number of more severe wildfires.
These findings come from the August 2019 fielding of our DHM Panel. The survey was conducted from August 14 to 21, 2019, and surveyed 552 Oregonians. The results were weighted by age, gender, area of the state, political party, and level of education to ensure a representative sample of Oregonians. The margin of error for this survey is ±4.16%.
Oregonians believe summers will only get hotter.
More than three-quarters (76%) of Oregonians expect hotter summers over the next ten years. These concerns about higher temperatures are shared among Oregonians across the state, but young people, Democrats, and women are the most apprehensive. Young people ages 18–24 (100%) are more likely than their older counterparts (74%) to believe summer temperatures will increase. Democrats (99%), more so than Republicans (33%), also predict hotter summers in coming years, as do women more so than men (83%, 69%).
Oregonians are very worried about the threat of drought and believe the problem will get worse.
While most Oregonians (72%) believe there is enough water in the state to meet current needs, their optimism begins to fade when thinking about the next decade. Less than half of Oregonians (42%) are confident there will be enough water to meet future demand.
Nearly three-quarters (74%) believe Oregon will experience increased conflict between water users during the next ten years, with a slightly smaller majority (60%) worried that water quality will also decline.
Here too, concerns about water quality are felt more strongly among Democrats (83%) than Republicans (26%), among young people ages 18–24 (88%) more than their older counterparts (58%), and among women (71%) more than men (49%).
Despite these high levels of concern, only about a third of Oregonians (31%) are confident that the state’s water agencies can effectively manage water supplies during drought.
Oregonians believe that wildfires pose a serious threat and that such fires will become more frequent and severe.
While a significant minority of residents of the Portland metro area (40%) and Willamette Valley (39%) are concerned about the threat of wildfire to their communities, these concerns are much higher among residents in the rest of the state (82%). An overwhelming majority of Oregonians (85%), however, are in agreement that the number and severity of wildfires will increase—again with young people (96%), Democrats (98%), and women (95%) the most concerned.
There’s plenty of uncertainty about land management practices to minimize the threat of severe wildfires. In general, more Oregonians believe private landholders are managing their lands well (42%) than poorly (21%) when it comes to preventing wildfires, although plenty simply don’t know (22%). But Oregonians’ assessment of state and federal agencies is less complementary. Roughly one-third of Oregonians (34%) say that state government is performing well when it comes to land management to prevent wildfire, with only one-fifth (19%) believing that federal agencies are doing a good job.
Oregonians express a wide range of views when it comes to how to respond to human-caused or nature-caused wildfires in undeveloped areas of the state.
Roughly one-third (33%) of Oregonians endorse a strategy of always fighting wildfires in undeveloped areas, with nearly one-third (32%) believing authorities should lean toward fighting fires, and another third (31%) leaning toward letting fires burn. Few Oregonians think that authorities should almost certainly let fires burn (4%).
When asked to choose among the major approaches above to dealing with wildfires, older residents (44%) and Republicans (51%) prefer always fighting wildfires, Portland metro residents (39%) lean toward fighting fires, and Democrats (39%) are most likely to lean towards letting fires burn.
Most Oregonians anticipate a future with hotter summers, increased severity of drought and wildfire, and growing tensions over water resources. These concerns are widely shared across the state and are most intensely felt among Democrats, women, and young people. But while concerns about severe drought and wildfire are high, confidence in the ability of state and federal agencies to manage them are low.