This panel will examine what sorts of decisions the President and Congress – new or old – will have to make following this year’s November elections. Panelists will examine the political landscape and describe the major decisions that have to be made, including on government funding, sequestration, and tax cuts. Special emphasis will be given to the impacts various budget proposals will have on Great Lakes restoration funding.

1. Producing Results in the Great
Lakes
Public Support for Great Lakes Funding and
Protection
September 2012
Opinion Research ■ Strategic Communication

2. Methods
Regional Survey: N=1511 adults in eight states
surrounding the Great Lakes, February
2011, margin of sampling error 2.5 percentage
points
Ohio Survey: N=804 general election voters in
Ohio, May 2012, margin of sampling error 3.5
percentage points
Great Lakes
2012
2

3. Key Findings
 Broad and bipartisan support for
continued funding both regionally and in
Ohio
 Examples of restoration projects seen as
good use of money
 Need to cut for deficit reduction less
compelling than need to protect for our
health
Great Lakes
2012
 Some negative reaction against member
of Congress who votes to cut funding
3

4. Regional Support for Continued Great Lakes
Funding
Strongly Somewhat
D: 79%
Continue funding 52% 23% 75% R: 70%
I: 75%
Reduce funding 11% 13% 24%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Q. Over the last three years, the U.S. federal government has spent over 400 million dollars a year to improve
the condition of the Great Lakes by cleaning up toxic waste and bacteria, protecting and rebuilding wetlands, and
preventing and managing invasive species such as Asian carp. In your opinion, should the federal government
continue that funding for Great Lakes restoration, or should it reduce the funding? Do you feel that way strongly
or somewhat? 4

5. Ohio Support for Continued Great Lakes Funding
Strongly Somewhat
D: 79%
Continue funding 47% 25% 72% R: 63%
I: 72%
Reduce funding 9% 14% 23%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Q. Over the last three years, the U.S. federal government has spent over $300 million dollars a year to improve
the condition of the Great Lakes by cleaning up toxic waste and bacteria, reducing run-off pollution from cities
and farms, and protecting and rebuilding wetlands. In your opinion, should the federal government continue that
funding for Great Lakes restoration, or should it reduce the funding? Follow-up: Do you feel that way strongly or
somewhat? 5

6. Ohio: Majority Rejects Idea Lakes Should be Cut
with Everything Else
Maintain Spending 54%
Cut Along with Everything Else 37%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Q. Which point of view do you agree with more? The government should focus on creating jobs and reducing the
federal budget deficit and the Great Lakes should take a budget cut along with everything else…OR…the
government should maintain spending to keep the Great Lakes healthy and protect the health of the millions of
people who rely on them for drinking water?
6

7. Region: Examples of Success Seen as Good Use of
Money
Excellent Good
Cleaned PCBs from Oswego
River, now safe for 43% 43% 86%
fishing, swimming
Fix sewers in Duluth to keep
44% 40% 84%
sewage out of Lake Superior
Restored Detroit River
30% 43% 73%
wetlands, fish returned
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Here are some examples of how federal tax dollars have been spent on improving the Great Lakes. Please tell
me if you think each one is an excellent, good, fair, poor, or very poor use of federal tax dollars. Q. Cleaned up
contamination such as PCBs and dioxin from the mouth of the Oswego River near Lake Ontario so that now the
area is safe for fishing and swimming again. Q. Fixed outdated sewer systems in Duluth Minnesota to keep
millions of gallons of sewage from entering Lake Superior every year. Q. Removed concrete and steel from the
banks of the Detroit River and rebuilt wetlands, so that now mayflies, yellow perch and lake sturgeon have 7
returned to the river

8. Region: Need to Protect Drinking Water Is More
Compelling Than Need to Reduce Deficit
Very persuasive (10 out of 10)
The Great Lakes are the source of
drinking water for 30 million
people and we need to protect the
52%
Lakes to protect the health of the
people in the region from threats
posed by pollution
With a record federal budget
deficit, we need to cut government
spending across the 14%
board, including for the Great
Lakes.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Please tell me how persuasive each of the following statements is …on a one to ten scale where one means not
at all persuasive and ten means very persuasive. Q. The Great Lakes are the source of drinking water for 30
million people and we need to protect the Lakes to protect the health of the people in the region from threats
posed by pollution. Q. With a record federal budget deficit, we need to cut government spending across the 8
board, including for the Great Lakes.

9. Region: Impact on Member of Congress Who Cuts
Funds
Less likely to support 44%
No difference 42%
More likely to support 13%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Q. If your member of Congress voted to cut the funding for Great Lakes restoration, would it make you more
likely to support his re-election, less likely to support his re-election, or would it make no difference to you?
9

10. Contact Information
Emma White
emmawhite@brspoll.com
1320 - 19th Street, Suite 620
Washington, DC 20036
202.822.6090
Opinion Research ■ Strategic Communication