Survey of Americans - EKOS Politics · expectations of the state to act as a guardian of risk or risk manager. The 2006-7 study continues to focus on the evolving safety and security

Survey of AmericansSurvey of AmericansSurvey of AmericansSurvey of Americans

Survey of AmericansSurvey of AmericansSurvey of AmericansSurvey of Americans

U.S. Wave of the Security MonitorSecurity MonitorSecurity MonitorSecurity Monitor 2006-7 Study

July 2007

The Security Monitor is protected by copyright. No part of the report or other findings from the study may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from EKOS Research Associates Inc. Organizations that subscribed to the study are permitted to distribute the findings internally for their own internal uses.

Table of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of Contents

Introduction................................................................................................................................ 1

Overview..................................................................................................................................... 2

Current Landscape ...................................................................................................................... 9

Government Responses ............................................................................................................. 19

Security & Civil Liberties............................................................................................................. 25

Perception of Threat.................................................................................................................. 37

Borders ..................................................................................................................................... 49

Canada-U.S. Relations ............................................................................................................... 61

Foreign Affairs........................................................................................................................... 71

Appendix A: Research Methodology .......................................................................................... 85

Appendix B: Detailed Tables ...................................................................................................... 89

1111

IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroduction

n the immediate aftermath of the September 11th terrorist attacks, EKOS launched

its Security Monitor study. Now in its sixth year, the study continues to demonstrate

how dynamic the safety and security landscape is in Canada. These shifts are sometimes

unexpected and can alter the public context in terms of policy and the delivery of

security services.

The salience of security and threat is much higher today than it was at the close of the

last decade and issues related to public security are increasingly critical to the evaluation

of broad government performance. Security issues are also becoming crucial yardsticks

by which citizens measure the performance of governments.

Today, the Security Monitor study is one of the most important examinations of the

public’s perceptions of issues of safety and security in Canada. Findings from the past

year’s Monitor reinforced the need for ongoing monitoring of the public’s continually

evolving outlook. Pertinent events such as the London transit bombings, rising chaos in

Iraq, gun violence in Toronto, Hurricane Katrina, the changing role of the Canadian

Forces, and the global focus on a potential influenza pandemic have all had an impact

on the public’s outlook. Likewise, the continued, intense, and rising concerns about

threats linked to climate and the environment demonstrated the breadth of concerns

about the nature of threats today. Events such as these have reinforced the dominance

of what we have labelled the “security ethic” which has implications for the public’s

expectations of the state to act as a guardian of risk or risk manager.

The 2006-7 study continues to focus on the evolving safety and security landscape in

Canada. However, as with previous years, we have also supplemented the research with

data from two other populations: Canadian decision-makers and the American general

public. The results of this wave are based on a survey with a national random sample of

1,000 Americans undertaken at the end of May 2007. The methodological details are

shown in the appendix to this report.

I

2222

OverviewOverviewOverviewOverview

There is no single area of public opinion that is as complex and as important as the U.S.-

Canada relationship; for Canadians, that is. That is why a book entitled, “Fire and Ice” by

Michael Adams became enormously influential: by telling Canadians that we are indeed

profoundly, perhaps even elementally different than Americans. At the same time the

Canadian public themselves tell us that they believe (contrary to their inner aspirations)

that we are becoming ever more similar to Americans. Much of today’s serious scholarly

research, and our own extensive internal research, suggest that similarities are far more

significant than differences and that we are drawing closer, not further apart.

In this new research we revisit the issue of the U.S.-Canada relationship from the

vantage point of the broad issue of security. In our view, North Americans are living in

an era which we have characterized as being dominated by a “security ethic”.1

Undoubtedly, the catalyst for this new era was September 11, but other factors such as

the unusual demographic skew to aging boomers (who are more prone to risk than

optimism), the geopolitical instability evident in the Middle East, and what has been

called the “clash of civilizations” are also likely at play.

Whatever the genesis, there is little doubt that any proper understanding of the U.S.-

Canada relationship must prominently consider the role of threat and security. This is

important for policy makers in Canada to understand because there is no more crucial

and difficult area of public opinion today. Moreover, recent trends in the American

public such as rising isolationism and protectionism are particularly germane to the

economic well-being and broader interests of Canada. In a period where American

public outlook has shifted radically from the exuberant internationalism which followed

the shock of September 11, to a darker and guarded mood where the impulse is to pull

up the drawbridge, it is imperative to understand the shifting public outlook in the

United States and how Canada is regarded. The purpose of this report is to capture that

outlook.

A Dark and Divided AmericaA Dark and Divided AmericaA Dark and Divided AmericaA Dark and Divided America

The portrait of America emerging from this survey is surprisingly similar to last year. The

surprise lies in the continuation of a period of national disharmony which might well

have been regarded as an ephemeral blip, but now appears to be a much graver

phenomenon.

1 As we have noted in the past, the “security ethic” refers to a broad constellation of values,

attitudes, and behaviours which reflect an unusual emphasis on issues of threat and security.

3333

By a margin of over two to one, Americans believe that their country is moving in the

wrong direction. These grim numbers are reflected in equally dismal ratings of the

overall performance of the federal government. Coupled with growing economic

anxieties, we now see Americans expressing fundamental doubts and divisions which are

simply not symptomatic of societal health. The persistence of such numbers suggests

this may be more than simply deep disaffection with the current Bush administration. If

this continues much longer, we begin to move from the realm of unpopularity to a

looming legitimacy crisis.

Canadians’ outlook on their country can best be characterized as one of tepid

satisfaction. Against the backdrop of American discontent, however, Canadians are

relatively rosy. There has been a modest erosion of confidence in the federal

management of security issues in Canada but it pales in comparison to the precipitous

drop in confidence in federal stewardship of security issues that has occurred in the

United States. This has gone from being the singular highest area of federal achievement

in the American public’s mind to an area where the public are now convinced that

overall security efforts, particularly in the realm of foreign affairs, are actually worsening

the very problems they were designed to solve. Despite strong disagreement on how to

achieve national security, the salience of national security as a societal priority remains

one of the few points of public consensus in America.

Reciprocal imagery of Americans and CanadianReciprocal imagery of Americans and CanadianReciprocal imagery of Americans and CanadianReciprocal imagery of Americans and Canadianssss

There are some significant shifts occurring in how Americans and Canadians regard each

other. It is, however, important to disentangle Canada–specific changes in American

outlook from generalized shifts in new American views of the external world.

Over the past several years, the Pew organization and others have recorded a marked

decline in U.S. outlook on the external world. This shift follows an earlier decline in

world outlook on the U.S., which continues to this day. Eroding external views of the

United States are principally linked to declining confidence in the federal administration

and wide-based disaffection with President Bush. Interestingly, one could argue that the

precipitous decline in global outlook on America (from a generally sympathetic and

favourable outlook following September 11) has been mirrored by the steep internal

decline of American confidence in its own administration and its broad national

direction.

Although still a point of some controversy, it is our view, from both our research and the

broader literature, that the cumulative expression of this more guarded and inward

looking America is a new period of isolationism. The key factors at work are: i) a

collective cognitive balancing of external outlook driven by a recognition of the broader

disaffection of the external world towards the United States (you don’t like us; well we

don’t like you either); ii) markedly declining confidence in the U.S. national security

strategy and the “War on Terror” (along with a broad belief that these efforts are

exacerbating the very problems they were designed to alleviate); and iii) continued

4444

preoccupation with threat and security which leads most Americans to believe that the

external world is rife with risk.

So how does Canada fit into this new outlook? First of all, it is essential that Canada

recognize the potentially troubling impacts of isolationism in America. Arguably, no

other country is more susceptible to deleterious economic impacts than Canada. On the

surface, American outlook on Canada is much less favourable than at any recent period

in U.S. – Canada relations. While there was a slight rise in the incidence of Americans

rating Canada favourably over the past year – and overall favourable ratings still

dramatically outweigh unfavourable –favourability rating have nonetheless declined

substantially since the outset of the decade. More pointedly, Canada’s traditional

position as America’s closest friend and ally has been definitively displaced by the U.K.,

which now holds a decisive and fairly stable advantage. Ironically, declining outlook on

the U.S. has been much steeper in the U.K. than amongst Canadians. Canadians still cite

the U.S. as their best friend, but unfavourable impressions now outweigh favourable

impression by a significant margin.

The backdrop of a mutually declining outlook coupled with a new isolationist sentiment

in the United States – linked to strong protectionist sentiments and a steep rise in

opposition to immigration – is a troubling pattern. Yet, it is also important to not

overstate the significance of these trends to date and note some contrary patterns.

First of all, Canada is seen as the most benign foreign country by the Americans. Second,

there is strong majority support for strengthening the relationship in both countries,

which extends to greater cooperation and coordination of security efforts. Finally, it is

crucial to recognize that the declining patterns in U.S.-Canada reciprocal outlook are

actually milder than those evident for virtually all other advanced Western nations.

Segmenting the American PublicSegmenting the American PublicSegmenting the American PublicSegmenting the American Public

The current research provides some novel insights into how American attitudes to

Canada are segmented in the U.S. We can also see the basic fault lines and divisions in

American society based on broad attitudes to security, threats and the external world.

Based on a series of multivariate statistical analyses (factor analysis, cluster analysis and

backward demographic and attitudinal profiling) we can distil four basic “types” of

Americans. As seen in Exhibit 1, the four types represent the combination of polar

positions on two axes: sense of vulnerability (particularly to terror) and an open or closed

orientation to the external world. Two of the four groups exhibit very high levels of

perceived threat, but vary dramatically in their sense of open or closed attitude to the

external world (isolationists vs. internationalists, if you like). The other two groups are

much more blasé or skeptical about the real threat levels associated with terror, but also

vary dramatically in their domestic vs. cosmopolitan world views. It is notable that there

is no centre terrain group and that the middle-of-the-road has been displaced by a

starkly divided America.

5555

Exhibit 1: TypologyExhibit 1: TypologyExhibit 1: TypologyExhibit 1: Typology of the American Public of the American Public of the American Public of the American Public Orientation to the World: Orientation to the World: Orientation to the World: Orientation to the World:

OPENOPENOPENOPEN

Sense of Sense of Sense of Sense of Vulnerability:Vulnerability:Vulnerability:Vulnerability:

LOWLOWLOWLOW

Orientation to the World:Orientation to the World:Orientation to the World:Orientation to the World:

CLOSEDCLOSEDCLOSEDCLOSED

Concerned Concerned Concerned Concerned ModeratesModeratesModeratesModerates

20.8 %20.8 %20.8 %20.8 %CosmopolitanCosmopolitanCosmopolitanCosmopolitanProgressivesProgressivesProgressivesProgressives

21.5 %21.5 %21.5 %21.5 %

SkepticalSkepticalSkepticalSkepticalConservativesConservativesConservativesConservatives

23.8 %23.8 %23.8 %23.8 % Angry Angry Angry Angry IsolationistsIsolationistsIsolationistsIsolationists

33.9 %33.9 %33.9 %33.9 %

Sense of Sense of Sense of Sense of Vulnerability:Vulnerability:Vulnerability:Vulnerability:

HIGHHIGHHIGHHIGH

There are many other attitudinal and demographic correlations which help describe and

explain the source of those key fault lines in contemporary America.2 The segments also

help to chart the routes to current and potential outlooks on Canada. The following

section provides a brief overview of each of the four segments.

1. Cosmopolitan Progressives

With roughly twenty-two per cent of the American public falling into this category, the

Cosmopolitan Progressives represent the main foothold of liberalism in America. In sharp

contrast to other segments, this segment is much younger and progressive in its

outlook. It is also the most educated and most likely to hold a passport. Their inherent

cosmopolitanism and progressive outlook does not lead to a particularly favourable view

of Canada, which may have surrendered its status as poster child for lost liberalism in

America in recent years. Internet immersed, optimistic and relatively open to the external

2 Detailed tables on the four different segments can be found in Appendix B.

6666

world, this segment is also the most blasé about terror risks. These attitudes, and greater

receptivity to immigration, render this younger segment something of a solitude or

island in fortress America. Yet, their youth and socioeconomic clout may render this a

powerful force shaping post-isolationist America. (America has always oscillated through

cycles of internationalism and isolationism.)

Given the potential resonance with Canada, contrasted with fairly low awareness and

favourability ratings, this would be an obvious group to attempt to strengthen Canadian

awareness and image. This is particularly important given this segment’s plausible role of

even greater political efficacy in future America.

2. Concerned Moderates

Concerned moderates are notable by the seemingly incongruous blend of high perceived

threat with a receptive and open posture to the external world. This group is also by far

the most favourably disposed segment vis-à-vis Canada. The “Canaphile” segment also

reveals some unique demographic and psychographic features.

In addition to an exaggerated sense of terror threats, the group is a well-educated

segment with an unusually high concentration of women (perhaps the Hillary Clinton

segment?). It is also the least Caucasian-dominated segment and the segment with a

higher representation of those with greater optimism about their economic future.

Perhaps by virtue of their ethnic diversity and economic confidence, they are the most

receptive group towards immigration. They also have the highest claimed awareness of

Canada, the most favourable attitudes to Canada and are the strongest proponents of a

stronger U.S. – Canada relationship, particularly in the area of security (which is a strong

preoccupation).

3. Skeptical Conservatives

The final two segments share a relatively closed and domestic-first orientation. The

Skeptical Conservatives display a much more blasé and cynical attitude to threats.

This group is highly conservative in their ideological orientation and quite hawkish. They

are, however, skeptical about both the level of threat currently facing America and the

effectiveness of the current security strategy. Their external outlook is very guarded and

closed and this is rooted in economic pessimism and mistrust of current foreign policy.

They are, however, relatively favourably disposed to Canada.

7777

Demographically, this group is somewhat older and is the most Caucasian concentrated.

Like the final segment (the Angry Isolationists), literally no one in this segment favours

increased immigration. Their overall tone leans more to skepticism than the outright

hostility evident in the final group.

4. Angry Isolationists

The largest and most cantankerous segment has extremely negative views of both the

external world and their own national direction. This is a highly pessimistic group

dominated by angry baby boomers that are extremely fearful of global terror threats, yet

very unhappy with national security and foreign policy. They are extremely closed to

further immigration (or even maintaining current levels). Isolationists are protectionist by

nature, this is the home terrain for xenophobia in America. Their attitudes to Canada

range from indifferent to negative. This group reflects a worrisome trend to a darker

mood which does not bode very well for Canadian interests. The fact that they are the

largest segment and now capture significant momentum in the American public opinion

trajectory is also troubling.

Final ThoughtsFinal ThoughtsFinal ThoughtsFinal Thoughts

A number of trends point to potential problems in the future U.S. – Canada relationship.

Percolation isolationism, declining favourability ratings, stern and growing opposition to

immigration (contrary to Canadians attitudes) all coalesce to pose challenges for Canada.

Coupled with some (more weakly) mirrored trends in Canada, and high awareness and

concern over WHTI (at least amongst land travellers), there are reasons to worry about

the impacts on what have been highly favourable attitudes to trade liberalization and

the free reciprocal movement of people and goods across our borders.

Yet, there is more than ample common ground and good will and the recent trends are

not deeply rooted. Citizens of both countries shared strong commitments to security and

are highly supportive of better security through greater cooperation and new

technologies. We predict national biometric identity systems will be inevitable and

welcome outcomes of current trends in both countries.

While directional patterns in terms of mutual U.S. – Canada outlook are troubling,

broader comparative analysis with other countries, and the deeper reservoir of shared

values and interests, would suggest these irritants should not be overstated. Nor,

however, should they be discounted.

9999

Current LandscapeCurrent LandscapeCurrent LandscapeCurrent Landscape

PART OF THE SECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITOR STUDYPART OF THE SECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITORSECURITY MONITOR STUDY

10101010

The United States is currently experiencing a rather difficult period in its

history due to factors such as an underperforming economy and

growing discontent with its foreign efforts in places such as Iraq. Given

these trends, it is not surprising to find that Americans continue to

have a far more negative outlook on their country than Canadians.

Relatively unchanged from 2006, only about 1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans (29 per

cent) believes that their country is moving in the “right directionright directionright directionright direction”,

compared to 1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians (58 per cent). Indeed, it is a strong and

stable majority of Americansmajority of Americansmajority of Americansmajority of Americans (62 per cent) that believes that their believes that their believes that their believes that their

country is headed in the country is headed in the country is headed in the country is headed in the ““““wrong directionwrong directionwrong directionwrong direction”””” (only 30 per cent of

Canadians disapproves of the direction of the country).

There is a strong correlation between Americans’ self-identified political

ideology and their satisfaction with direction of their country. Here we

find that 3 in 4 liberals (76 per cent) say the United States is headed in

the “wrong direction”; somewhat surprisingly, even half of

conservatives (52 per cent) concur with this view.

11111111

29292929

62626262

9999

58585858

30303030

12121212

0

20

40

60

80

100

Right direction Wrong direction DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Direction of the countryDirection of the countryDirection of the countryDirection of the countryQ:Q:Q:Q: All things considered, would you say the country is moving in the right direction or the wrong direction?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, May 07 n=half sample

30303030

63636363

6666

29292929

62626262

9999

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, Apr./ May 07; n=half sample

Tracking direction of country: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction of country: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction of country: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction of country: the U.S. vs. Canada

Americans

60606060

26262626

14141414

58585858

30303030

12121212

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: All things considered, would you say the country is moving in the right direction or the wrong direction?

12121212

Although the United States dollar continues to perform below

expectations, a plurality of AmericansAmericansAmericansAmericans leans towards believing that

their personal financial situationpersonal financial situationpersonal financial situationpersonal financial situation will be will be will be will be ““““betterbetterbetterbetter”””” in the coming year

(38 per cent). That said, almost as many believe that things will be

“worse” (31 per cent), or at the very least, no different (30 per cent).

CanadiansCanadiansCanadiansCanadians, on the other hand, are generally more optimisticmore optimisticmore optimisticmore optimistic. By a

margin of more than 2 to 1, Canadians believe that their finances will

improve (42 per cent) or stay about the same (39 per cent) rather than

worsen (17 per cent) over the next year.

With opponents of the U.S. federal administration's current

immigration bill arguing that amnesty for illegals would take jobs away

from lower income Americans, it is not surprising to see that the

economically vulnerable (i.e. those who think that their financial

situation will be “worse” in the coming year) are more likely to feel

threatened by immigration (34 per cent say there “too many

immigrants” and only 22 per cent feel that the number of immigrants

coming to the U.S. is “about right”). Economically vulnerable

Americans are also more likely to disapprove of the government’s

direction (41 per cent vs. 16 per cent who approve).

13131313

31313131 3030303038383838

1111

17171717

39393939 42424242

11110

20

40

60

80

100

Worse (1-3) About the same (4) Better (5-7) DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Personal financial situationPersonal financial situationPersonal financial situationPersonal financial situationQ:Q:Q:Q: Thinking ahead over the next year or so, do you think your personal financial situation will be better or

worse than it is today? Please respond using a 7-point scale where 1 means much worse, 7 means much better and the mid-point 4 means about the same.

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, May 07 n=1006

14141414

33333333

56565656

11111111

55555555

37373737

8888

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Direction of governmentDirection of governmentDirection of governmentDirection of governmentQ:Q:Q:Q: All things considered, would you say the federal government is moving in the right direction or the

wrong direction?


There is some divergence on government directiondivergence on government directiondivergence on government directiondivergence on government direction as well. A majority majority majority majority

of Americans of Americans of Americans of Americans views their federal government as moving in the ““““wrong wrong wrong wrong

directiondirectiondirectiondirection”””” (56 per cent), and only about 1 in 3 approves of government

direction (33 per cent). The results are the mirror image in Canadaresults are the mirror image in Canadaresults are the mirror image in Canadaresults are the mirror image in Canada (55

per cent approves and 37 per cent disapproves). Despite differing views

on direction of their respective governments, both Canadians and Canadians and Canadians and Canadians and

Americans would prefer a more visionaryAmericans would prefer a more visionaryAmericans would prefer a more visionaryAmericans would prefer a more visionary approachapproachapproachapproach to the federal

administration of their country. Indeed, only 1 in 4 Americans and

Canadians (24 per cent) thinks their governments are providing a “bold

new vision for the future of the country”, but majorities would prefer

this approach (56 per cent of Americans and 61 per cent of Canadians).

15151515

49494949

24242424 27272727

64646464

24242424

12121212

0

20

40

60

80

100

. . .following a careful, stead-as-she-goes approach

. . .providing a bold new visionfor the future of the country

DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Approaches Approaches Approaches Approaches totototo federal government federal government federal government federal government operationsoperationsoperationsoperationsQ:Q:Q:Q: Which of the following BEST describes the way the [United States / Canadian] federal government is

currently operating? Is it...

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, May 07 n=half sample

33333333

56565656

10101010

35353535

61616161

5555

0

20

40

60

80

100

Following a careful, stead-as-she-goes approach

Providing a bold new vision forthe future of the country

DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Perceptions of how the government Perceptions of how the government Perceptions of how the government Perceptions of how the government shouldshouldshouldshould operateoperateoperateoperateQ:Q:Q:Q: And which way would you PREFER the [United States / Canadian] federal government to operate?


16161616

Attitudes to immigration are also tracking in opposite directionAttitudes to immigration are also tracking in opposite directionAttitudes to immigration are also tracking in opposite directionAttitudes to immigration are also tracking in opposite directionssss. While

opposition to immigration rose sharply in both countries following the

events of September 11th (to 41 per cent in Canada and 51 per cent in

the U.S.), the proportion of Canadians believing that there are “too

many” immigrants has since receded and has never again reached the

4 in 10 opposed mark. Americans, on the other hand, have increasingly

believed that “too many” immigrants are allowed to come to the

United States. Over the past year, however, this trend seem to have

largely stabilized, with 6 in 10 registering opposition (which represents

and increase of only one percentage point since 2006).

Within the United States, opposition to immigration rises consistently

with age (starting at 41 per cent among youth and rising to 72 per

cent among seniors). Education has the reverse effect: 70 per cent of

the least educated think there are “too many” immigrants compared to

63 per cent of the college-educated and 54 per cent of the university

educated. Similar patterns are also evident in Canada.

17171717

7777

20202020

61616161

1212121215151515

47474747

29292929

9999

0

20

40

60

80

100

Too few About right Too many DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Attitudes towards immigrationAttitudes towards immigrationAttitudes towards immigrationAttitudes towards immigrationQ:Q:Q:Q: In your opinion do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants

coming to the [United States / Canada]?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=1018

Base:Base:Base:Base: Most recent data points, Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=1018

61616161

2828282824242424

3232323229292929

606060605656565654545454

5151515145454545

252525252424242426262626

35353535

2424242426262626

27272727

2222222226262626

30303030313131313333333329292929

32323232

3030303032323232

34343434

27272727

3939393937373737

41414141

31313131

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

O-00 F-01 J-01 O-01 F-02 J-02 O-02 F-03 J-03 O-03 F-04 J-04 O-04 F-05 J-05 O-05 F-06 J-06 O-06 F-07

Americans Canadians

% “ too many”

Sep. 11th

Tracking opposition to immigrationTracking opposition to immigrationTracking opposition to immigrationTracking opposition to immigrationQ:Q:Q:Q: In your opinion do you feel that there are too many, too few or about the right number of immigrants

coming to [the United States / Canada]?

18181818

19191919

Government Responses Government Responses Government Responses Government Responses


20202020

The differences in Canadians’ and Americans’ outlook on their

respective governmentgovernmentgovernmentgovernment’’’’s handling of national securitys handling of national securitys handling of national securitys handling of national security are also striking.

As we have seen in other areas, Americans lean to disapprovalAmericans lean to disapprovalAmericans lean to disapprovalAmericans lean to disapproval

(50 per cent say “wrong direction” vs. 38 per cent “right direction”),

whereas Canadians lean to approvalCanadians lean to approvalCanadians lean to approvalCanadians lean to approval (53 per cent “right direction” vs.

29 per cent “wrong direction”). Moreover, the proportion of

Americans approvingAmericans approvingAmericans approvingAmericans approving of their governments handling of national

security has fallen significantly in the past yearhas fallen significantly in the past yearhas fallen significantly in the past yearhas fallen significantly in the past year (down 8 percentage

points since 2006).

Ideology also seems to be a significant factor in American attitudes

towards government’s handling of national security, with only 1 in 5

self-reported liberals (21 per cent) approving of the direction taken by

the U.S. federal administration compared to 1 in 2 conservatives

(52 per cent).

21212121

38383838

50505050

12121212

53535353

29292929

18181818

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Direction of government on national securityDirection of government on national securityDirection of government on national securityDirection of government on national securityQ:Q:Q:Q: All things considered, would you say that the [federal government / Government of Canada] is moving

in the right direction or the wrong direction in terms of national security?


46464646 47474747

7777

38383838

50505050

12121212

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007


Tracking direction on national security: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction on national security: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction on national security: the U.S. vs. CanadaTracking direction on national security: the U.S. vs. Canada

Americans

56565656

23232323 21212121

53535353

29292929

18181818

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: All things considered, would you say that the [federal government/Government of Canada] is moving in the right direction or the wrong direction in terms of national security?

22222222

Despite diverging views on the government’s handling of national

security, citizens in both countries lean towards wanting their lean towards wanting their lean towards wanting their lean towards wanting their

governments do more to deal with security issuesgovernments do more to deal with security issuesgovernments do more to deal with security issuesgovernments do more to deal with security issues. Indeed, about half

of Americans (50 per cent) and a plurality of Canadians (41 per cent)

says the government is moving “too slowly” in this area. At the other

end of the spectrum, it is only about 1 in 10 Canadians and Americans

that perceives the rate of changes as being “too quick” (both at 12 per

cent). As with other areas, Canadians are more likely to be happy with

their government’s activities (39 per cent approve of the pace of

changes compared to 31 per cent of their American counterparts ).

While Canadians have shifted around on this indicator over the past

year (with the plurality position moving from approval to “too slow”),

Americans have remained remarkably stable. Interestingly, Americans

who feel that a terrorist attack is imminent are more likely to feel that

the government is moving “too slowly” on the security front (59 per

cent compared to 39 per cent who do not believe that it is only a

matter of time before there is a terrorist attack). Those who disapprove

of the direction of government overall are also more likely to feel that

the government is moving “too slowly” (59 per cent vs. 40 per cent

“right direction”).

23232323

12121212

31313131

50505050

777712121212

39393939 41414141

8888

0

20

40

60

80

100

. . .too quickly . . .about the right pace . . .too slowly DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Attitudes to amount / pace of changes on securityAttitudes to amount / pace of changes on securityAttitudes to amount / pace of changes on securityAttitudes to amount / pace of changes on securityQ:Q:Q:Q: Thinking about the amount and pace of changes the [federal government / Government of Canada]

has announced to deal with security issues, do you think they are moving...


13131313

28282828

52525252

666612121212

31313131

50505050

7777

0

20

40

60

80

100

Too quick Right pace Too slow DK/NR

2006 2007


Tracking attitudes to amount / pace of changes: the U.S. vs. CanTracking attitudes to amount / pace of changes: the U.S. vs. CanTracking attitudes to amount / pace of changes: the U.S. vs. CanTracking attitudes to amount / pace of changes: the U.S. vs. Canadaadaadaada

Americans

12121212

43434343

33333333

1212121212121212

39393939 41414141

8888

0

20

40

60

80

100

Too quick Right pace Too slow DK/NR

2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: Thinking about the amount and pace of changes the [federal government / Government of Canada] has announced to deal with security issues, do you think they are moving...

24242424

25252525

Security & Civil Liberties Security & Civil Liberties Security & Civil Liberties Security & Civil Liberties


26262626

Canadians and Americans place similar emphasis Canadians and Americans place similar emphasis Canadians and Americans place similar emphasis Canadians and Americans place similar emphasis on the protection of

public security over the guarantee of civil libertiespublic security over the guarantee of civil libertiespublic security over the guarantee of civil libertiespublic security over the guarantee of civil liberties. Americans, however,

lean much more to the security side of the equation: approximately

2 in 3 (62 per cent) believes there should be more of an emphasis on

protecting public security, whereas only about 1 in 4 (28 per cent) feels

that government should place more of an emphasis on civil liberties – a

difference of 34 percentage points. Canadians, on the other hand, are

slightly more evenly divided: 38 per cent place an emphasis on civil

liberties compared to 52 per cent who prefer security – a difference of

14 percentage points. Not only are Americans much more likely to lean

towards security, the emphasis placed on civil liberties has declined over

the past year (down seven percentage points).

Similar to results we see in Canada, support for placing an emphasis on

civil liberties increases with level of educational attainment among

Americans (22 per cent of high school graduates favour civil liberties vs.

29 per cent of college graduates and 33 per cent of university

graduates).

27272727

62626262

28282828

3333 6666

52525252

38383838

6666 4444

0

20

40

60

80

100

. . .protecting publicsecurity

. . .guaranteeing civilliberties

. . .neither DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Civil liberties / security tradeCivil liberties / security tradeCivil liberties / security tradeCivil liberties / security trade----offoffoffoffQ:Q:Q:Q: Recognizing that both are important in today's world, which of the following do you feel the [federal

government / Government of Canada] should place the most emphasis on . . . or . . . ?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, May 07 n= half sample

60606060

35353535

2222

62626262

28282828

6666

0

20

40

60

80

100

. . .protectingpublic security

. . .guaranteeingcivil liberties

DK/NR

2006 2007


Tracking civil liberties / security tradeTracking civil liberties / security tradeTracking civil liberties / security tradeTracking civil liberties / security trade----off: the U.S. vs. Canadaoff: the U.S. vs. Canadaoff: the U.S. vs. Canadaoff: the U.S. vs. Canada

Americans

54545454

41414141

3333

52525252

38383838

4444

0

20

40

60

80

100

. . .protectingpublic security

. . .guaranteeingcivil liberties

DK/NR

2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: Recognizing that both are important in today's world, which of the following do you feel the federal government should place the most emphasis on . . . or . . . ?

28282828

Although citizens in the United States and Canada place more of an

emphasis on security, both also overwhelmingly agree that the

government must find the right balance between guaranteeing civigovernment must find the right balance between guaranteeing civigovernment must find the right balance between guaranteeing civigovernment must find the right balance between guaranteeing civil l l l

liberties and protecting public securityliberties and protecting public securityliberties and protecting public securityliberties and protecting public security (75 per cent of Americans and

78 per cent of Canadians).

29292929

78787878

100Americans Canadians

Focus on protecting security and guaranteeing civil libertiesFocus on protecting security and guaranteeing civil libertiesFocus on protecting security and guaranteeing civil libertiesFocus on protecting security and guaranteeing civil libertiesQ: Q: Q: Q: Which of the following two statements is closest to your own point of view?

The government must choose to focuschoose to focuschoose to focuschoose to focus on either protecting security or guaranteeing civil liberties because you cannot achieve both at the same time.

The government needs to find the right balancefind the right balancefind the right balancefind the right balance between guaranteeing civil liberties and protecting public security because both are equally important

21212121

75757575

4444

19191919

78787878

22220

20

40

60

80

100

Choose to focus Find the right balance DK/NR

Americans Canadians


Q: Q: Q: Q: Which of the following two statements is closest to your own point of view?

The government must choose to focuschoose to focuschoose to focuschoose to focus on either protecting security or guaranteeing civil liberties because you cannot achieve both at the same time.

The government needs to find the right balancefind the right balancefind the right balancefind the right balance between guaranteeing civil liberties and protecting public security because both are equally important

30303030

40404040

19191919

4040404043434343

16161616

41414141

0

20

40

60

80

100

Disagree Neither Agree

Americans Canadians

Necessity of granting additional security powersNecessity of granting additional security powersNecessity of granting additional security powersNecessity of granting additional security powersQ:Q:Q:Q: Police and intelligence agencies should have more powers to ensure security even if it means

[Americans / Canadians] have to give up some personal privacy safeguards.


Canadians and Americans are similarly divided similarly divided similarly divided similarly divided on the issue of providing providing providing providing

more powers to policemore powers to policemore powers to policemore powers to police and intelligence agencies at theat theat theat the risk of personal risk of personal risk of personal risk of personal

privacyprivacyprivacyprivacy: approximately 40 per cent are in favour and 40 per cent are

opposed. Somewhat surprisingly, there has, for the most part, been

greater backlash in the United States. In fact, this is first time since

2002 that a plurality of Americans has not opposed this idea.

Canadians, on the other hand, have tended to lean towards supporting

additional powers for security reasons. Similar to results found in

Canada, American women (44 per cent) and seniors (47 per cent) are

the most likely to endorse greater police powers.

31313131

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

M-02 J-02 S-02 D-02 M-03 J-03 S-03 D-03 M-04 J-04 S-04 D-04 M-05 J-05 S-05 D-05 M-06 J-06 S-06 D-06 M-07


Tracking necessity of granting additional powers in the U.S.Tracking necessity of granting additional powers in the U.S.Tracking necessity of granting additional powers in the U.S.Tracking necessity of granting additional powers in the U.S.Q:Q:Q:Q: Police and intelligence agencies should have more powers to ensure security even if it

means [Americans / Canadians] have to give up some personal privacy safeguards.

Base:Base:Base:Base: Most recent data point; Americans May 07 n=1000

Americans

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

O-01 J-02 A-02 J-02 O-02 J-03 A-03 J-03 O-03 J-04 A-04 J-04 O-04 J-05 A-05 J-05 O-05 J-06 A-06 J-06 O-06 J-07 A-07


Tracking necessity of granting additional security powers in CanTracking necessity of granting additional security powers in CanTracking necessity of granting additional security powers in CanTracking necessity of granting additional security powers in CanadaadaadaadaQ:Q:Q:Q: Police and intelligence agencies should have more powers to ensure security even if it means

Canadians have to give up some personal privacy safeguards.

Base:Base:Base:Base: Most recent data point; Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians May 07 n=1006

Canadians

32323232

Canadians and Americans also share a similar outlook on privacysimilar outlook on privacysimilar outlook on privacysimilar outlook on privacy. As in

previous years, pluralities in both nations agrees they have less personal less personal less personal less personal

privacy than they did two years agoprivacy than they did two years agoprivacy than they did two years agoprivacy than they did two years ago (42 per cent of Americans and 40

per cent of Canadians). There is, however, a significant proportion of

citizens in both countries that disagrees with this notion (36 per cent of

Americans and 33 per cent of Canadians). Results from this question

are remarkably similar to last year’s findings.

Given that partisan politics played an integral role in passing

controversial legislation such as the Patriot Act (which critics argue

challenges an individuals right to privacy), it is not entirely surprising to

see that perceptions of personal privacy loss fall along ideological (and

perhaps political) lines in the United States. Overall, we see that 1 in 2

(53 per cent) self-identified liberals feels they have less personal privacy

than 2 years ago, compared to 1 in 3 (35 per cent) self-identified

conservatives.

33333333

36363636

21212121

4242424233333333

26262626

40404040

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Perceptions of personal privacyPerceptions of personal privacyPerceptions of personal privacyPerceptions of personal privacyQ:Q:Q:Q: I feel I have less personal privacy in my daily life than I did two years ago.


37373737

21212121

4242424236363636

21212121

42424242

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007


Tracking perceptions of personal privacy loss: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceptions of personal privacy loss: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceptions of personal privacy loss: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceptions of personal privacy loss: the U.S. vs. Canadadadada

Americans

37373737

22222222

4040404033333333

26262626

40404040

0

20

40

60

80

100


2005 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: I feel I have less personal privacy in my daily life than I did two years ago.

34343434

Despite holding similar views on privacy, there is significantsignificantsignificantsignificant divergencedivergencedivergencedivergence

between Canadians and Americans in regards to whether or not the

government can be trusted to balance security and civil libertiegovernment can be trusted to balance security and civil libertiegovernment can be trusted to balance security and civil libertiegovernment can be trusted to balance security and civil libertiessss. Here

we find that almost half of all Americans (49 per cent) disagrees that

government can be trusted, and fewer than 1 in 3 (29 per cent) agrees.

In Canada, the trends are almost the reverse: a slight plurality (41 per

cent) trusts the government to balance security and civil liberties,

whereas slightly fewer (34 per cent) does not trust the government in

this regard. Although Canadians are more trusting compared to

Americans, distrust of the Canadian government has grown over the

past year (proportion agreeing decreased from 49 to 41 per cent).

Given the other patterns we’ve seen, it is not surprising to find that

self-identified liberals are more likely to express distrust in government:

67 per cent says they cannot trust the government to balance security

and civil liberties, whereas only about 1 in 3 (36 per cent) self-identified

conservatives takes this view.

35353535

49494949

2121212129292929

1111

34343434

23232323

41414141

11110

20

40

60

80

100

Disagree Neither Agree DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Trust in balancing security and civil libertiesTrust in balancing security and civil libertiesTrust in balancing security and civil libertiesTrust in balancing security and civil libertiesQ:Q:Q:Q: I can trust the federal government to strike the right balance of security and civil liberties.


49494949

18181818

32323232

1111

49494949

2121212129292929

11110

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians May 07 n=half sample

Tracking Tracking Tracking Tracking trust in balancing security / civil libertiestrust in balancing security / civil libertiestrust in balancing security / civil libertiestrust in balancing security / civil liberties: the U.S. vs. Canada: the U.S. vs. Canada: the U.S. vs. Canada: the U.S. vs. Canada

Americans

25252525 25252525

49494949

1111

34343434

23232323

41414141

11110

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: I can trust the federal government to strike the right balance of security and civil liberties.

36363636

37373737

Perception of Threat Perception of Threat Perception of Threat Perception of Threat


38383838

As we saw last year, Americans possess a heightened sense of riskAmericans possess a heightened sense of riskAmericans possess a heightened sense of riskAmericans possess a heightened sense of risk from

threats such as terrorism. Given the events of September 11th, this is

not entirely unexpected. What is surprising, however, is that Canadians Canadians Canadians Canadians

also have elevated concernsalso have elevated concernsalso have elevated concernsalso have elevated concerns. For example, although a majority of

Americans (58 per cent) believes that it is inevitable that their country

will experience another terrorist attack, almost 1 in 2 Canadians (45 per

cent) thinks this will happen in Canada. Further, while the perception

that an attack is inevitable has declined in the U.S. over the past year

(down 7 percentage points), the belief that Canada will not experience

this type of event has also deteriorated (down 7 percentage points).

39393939

19191919 21212121

58585858

2222

33333333

21212121

45454545

22220

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Perceived inevitability of a terrorist attackPerceived inevitability of a terrorist attackPerceived inevitability of a terrorist attackPerceived inevitability of a terrorist attackQ:Q:Q:Q: It's just a matter of time before there is a major terrorist attack on [ American / Canadian ] soil.


17171717 18181818

65656565

1111

19191919 21212121

58585858

22220

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007


Tracking perceived inevitability of terrorism: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceived inevitability of terrorism: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceived inevitability of terrorism: the U.S. vs. CanaTracking perceived inevitability of terrorism: the U.S. vs. Canadadadada

Americans

40404040

16161616

43434343

1111

33333333

21212121

45454545

22220

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: It's just a matter of time before there is a major terrorist attack on [ American / Canadian ] soil.

40404040

Americans also rate their personal risk from terrorism slightly Americans also rate their personal risk from terrorism slightly Americans also rate their personal risk from terrorism slightly Americans also rate their personal risk from terrorism slightly higher higher higher higher

than Canadiansthan Canadiansthan Canadiansthan Canadians: 51 per cent think it is “moderately” to “very likely” that

they will be personally affected by a terror event in the next two years

compared to 37 per cent of Canadians. While Americans sense of

personal risk has remained relatively unchanged from 2006, Canadians Canadians Canadians Canadians

sense of vulnerability has increasedsense of vulnerability has increasedsense of vulnerability has increasedsense of vulnerability has increased. Although it is still a majority of

Canadians (62 per cent) that says it is “not likely” that they or a family

member will suffer from a terrorist attack, the proportion taking this

view has dropped 12 percentage points over the past year.

41414141

4545454541414141

10101010

62626262

33333333

4444

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not likely (1-2) Moderately likely (3-5) Very likely (6-7)

Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= 1000; Canadians, Apr./May 07 n=1018

Likelihood of personally being affected by terrorismLikelihood of personally being affected by terrorismLikelihood of personally being affected by terrorismLikelihood of personally being affected by terrorismQ:Q:Q:Q: How likely do you think it is that you and your family will suffer from a terrorist attack in the next two

years?

4444444449494949

6666

4545454541414141

10101010

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not likely Moderately likely Very likely

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr./ May 07 n=1018

Americans

74747474

23232323

2222

62626262

33333333

4444

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Tracking likelihood of being personally affected by terrorismTracking likelihood of being personally affected by terrorismTracking likelihood of being personally affected by terrorismTracking likelihood of being personally affected by terrorismQ:Q:Q:Q: How likely do you think it is that you and your family will suffer from a terrorist attack in the next two

years?

42424242

Americans and Canadians share more similar views on the likelihood of more similar views on the likelihood of more similar views on the likelihood of more similar views on the likelihood of

the U.S. being targetedthe U.S. being targetedthe U.S. being targetedthe U.S. being targeted for a terrorist attack. About 8 in 10 Americans

(86 per cent) and Canadians (84 per cent) thinks it is “moderately” to

“very likely” that U.S. could be attacked in the coming year. Somewhat

surprisingly, Canadians are more likely to think an attack is Canadians are more likely to think an attack is Canadians are more likely to think an attack is Canadians are more likely to think an attack is ““““very likelyvery likelyvery likelyvery likely””””

(34 per cent vs. 23 per cent of Americans). These views are unchanged

from 2006.

43434343

20202020

53535353

23232323

12121212

50505050

34343434

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not likely (1-2) Moderately likely (3-5) Very likely (6-7)

Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=half sample

Likelihood of U.S. being targeted for terrorist attackLikelihood of U.S. being targeted for terrorist attackLikelihood of U.S. being targeted for terrorist attackLikelihood of U.S. being targeted for terrorist attackQ:Q:Q:Q: Using the same scale, how likely do you think it is that the U.S. will suffer from a terrorist attack in the

coming year?

22222222

53535353

2424242420202020

53535353

23232323

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr./ May 07 n=half sample

Americans

11111111

51515151

37373737

12121212

50505050

34343434

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Tracking likelihood of U.S. being targeted for a terrorist attacTracking likelihood of U.S. being targeted for a terrorist attacTracking likelihood of U.S. being targeted for a terrorist attacTracking likelihood of U.S. being targeted for a terrorist attackkkkQ:Q:Q:Q: Using the same scale, how likely do you think it is that the U.S. will suffer from a terrorist attack in the

coming year?

44444444

10101010

26262626

63636363

11115555

38383838

56565656

11110

20

40

60

80

100

Safer About the same More dangerous DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Perceptions of the safety of the worldPerceptions of the safety of the worldPerceptions of the safety of the worldPerceptions of the safety of the world

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, May 07 n=1006

Q:Q:Q:Q: From your own point of view, do you feel that, overall, the world is safer, more dangerous, or about the same as it was five years ago?

8888

29292929

62626262

10101010

26262626

63636363

0

20

40

60

80

100

Safer About the same More dangerous

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, Apr./ May 07 n=1006

Americans

5555

41414141

53535353

5555

38383838

56565656

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Tracking perceptions of the safety of the worldTracking perceptions of the safety of the worldTracking perceptions of the safety of the worldTracking perceptions of the safety of the worldQ:Q:Q:Q: From your own point of view, do you feel that, overall, the world is safer, more dangerous, or about the

same as it was five years ago?

45454545

Reasons why the world is Reasons why the world is Reasons why the world is Reasons why the world is ““““more dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerous””””

5U.S. foreign policy

24Military aggression / war

2Proliferation of nuclear weapons

6Lack of proper screening of immigrants

14Politics / power struggles b/w countries

4

6

16

24

May 07

Crime and violence on the rise

Americans

DK/NR

Other

Terrorism

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans who think the world is “more dangerous”, May 07 n=325; Canadians who think the world is “more dangerous”; Oct. 06 n=637

Q:Q:Q:Q: What is the MAIN reason why you believe the world is more dangerous today?

6Tolerance levels in decline7Politics / power struggle b/w countries

9Military aggression / war

12Crime and violence on the rise

3

312

18

38

Oct. 06

Proliferation of nuclear weapons

U.S. foreign policy

Lack of proper screening of immigrants

Canadians

DK/NR

Other

Terrorism

A majority of both Americans (63 per cent) and Canadians (56 per

cent) continue to perceive the world as world as world as world as ““““more dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerous”””” than five than five than five than five

years agoyears agoyears agoyears ago. When asked to explain this gloomy global outlookexplain this gloomy global outlookexplain this gloomy global outlookexplain this gloomy global outlook, similar

reasons emerges with terrorism topping the list in both countriesterrorism topping the list in both countriesterrorism topping the list in both countriesterrorism topping the list in both countries (cited

by 24 per cent of Americans and 38 per cent of Canadians). Americans,

however, are as likely to cite military aggression and war (24 per cent),

while Canadians are more likely to fault U.S. foreign policy (18 per cent

vs. 5 per cent of Americans). There are also concerns with rising crime

in both countries (mentioned by 16 per cent of Americans and 12 per

cent of Canadians).

46464646

23232323

39393939 36363636

12121212

54545454

34343434

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Perceptions of the safety of the U.S. / CanadaPerceptions of the safety of the U.S. / CanadaPerceptions of the safety of the U.S. / CanadaPerceptions of the safety of the U.S. / Canada

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, Apr./May 07 n= 1018

Q:Q:Q:Q: From your own point of view, do you feel that, overall, [the United States / Canada] is safer, more dangerous, or about the same as it was five years ago?

27272727

3939393933333333

23232323

39393939 36363636

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007


Americans

11111111

57575757

31313131

12121212

54545454

34343434

0

20

40

60

80

100


2006 2007

Canadians

Tracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaQ:Q:Q:Q: From your own point of view, do you feel that, overall, [the United States / Canada] is safer, more

dangerous, or about the same as it was five years ago?

47474747

Reasons for why the U.S. is Reasons for why the U.S. is Reasons for why the U.S. is Reasons for why the U.S. is ““““more dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerous””””


24Lack of resources due to war

2Concern over specific crimes

11Bush administration

13Lack of proper screening of immigrants

1

6

14

25

May 07

Threat of terrorism / terrorist action

Americans

DK/NR

Other

Loss of allies / more enemies

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans who think the U.S. is “more dangerous”, May 07 n=202; Canadians who think Canada is “more dangerous”, Dec. 06 n=350

Q:Q:Q:Q: What is the MAIN reason why you believe the United States is more dangerous today?

5Drug-related crime


4Organized crime

8Laws not being enforced properly

8Gang crime

4

1

12

36

Dec. 06

Lack of proper screening of immigrants

Canadians

DK/NR

Other

Threat of terrorism

When it comes to perceptions of the safety / danger of their countryperceptions of the safety / danger of their countryperceptions of the safety / danger of their countryperceptions of the safety / danger of their country, a

majority of Canadians (54 per cent) and a slight plurality of Americans

(39 per cent) see things as unchanged from five years agounchanged from five years agounchanged from five years agounchanged from five years ago. Those who

think things have changed, however, lean to seeing their country as lean to seeing their country as lean to seeing their country as lean to seeing their country as

““““more dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerousmore dangerous”””” (36 per cent of Americans and 34 per cent of

Canadians). For Canadians, the threat of terrorism is most worrisome

(cited by 36 per cent), followed by crime and violence (23 per cent).

Americans, on the other hand, are more likely to blame loss of allies /

more enemies (25 per cent) and a lack of resources as a result of the

war effort (24 per cent) for making their country “more dangerous”.

48484848

49494949

BordersBordersBordersBorders


50505050

51515151

The Security Monitor has been tracking Canadians’ awareness of the

Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI) for over a year now. With

the air travel requirements coming into effect this past winter, and with

the land implementation set to take effect in the coming year, we

thought it an opportune time to examine Americans’ attitudes towards

this policy.

52525252

Despite the fact that the WHTI is an American initiative, Canadians’

have a greater understanding of this policy. Overall, over 9 in 10 9 in 10 9 in 10 9 in 10

CanadiansCanadiansCanadiansCanadians (92 per cent) are aware that a passport is currently required aware that a passport is currently required aware that a passport is currently required aware that a passport is currently required

for air travelfor air travelfor air travelfor air travel into the United States, compared to just 2 in 3 Americanscompared to just 2 in 3 Americanscompared to just 2 in 3 Americanscompared to just 2 in 3 Americans

(68 per cent). Although the passport requirement for land travel has yet

to take effect, 3 in 4 Canadians (78 per cent) are engaged on this issue

as well. By comparison, fewer than half of Americans (45 per cent) has

heard anything about the land implementation of WHTI.

Americans who have visited Canada in the past and who have a current

passport are more likely to be aware of both the current and pending

passport regulations under the WHTI. Those who do not have an up-to-

date passport but are planning on obtaining are also more likely to be

aware of these requirements.

53535353

60606060

8888

32323232

82828282

10101010 8888

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes, definitely Yes, maybe No

Americans Canadians

Awareness of WHTI: current and future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: current and future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: current and future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: current and future requirements

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Feb. / Mar. 07 n=1003

Q:Q:Q:Q: Since January 23, 2007, the United States has required all travelers, including American and Canadian citizens, to present a passport when FLYING INTO the U.S. Before this survey, had you ever read or heard anything about this new requirement?

36363636

9999

54545454

65656565

1313131321212121

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Awareness of WHTI: future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: future requirementsAwareness of WHTI: future requirementsQ:Q:Q:Q: And, have you ever read or heard anything about the United States extending this new requirement to

all travelers entering the U.S. by other modes of transportation by 2009 (e.g. land, air and sea)?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Feb. / Mar. 07 n=1003

54545454

The primary objective of the WHTI is to help secure the United States’

borders. Findings indicate most Americans believes that the mandatory

passport requirements will in fact improve border securitypassport requirements will in fact improve border securitypassport requirements will in fact improve border securitypassport requirements will in fact improve border security (59 per cent

“definitely” and 21 per cent “maybe”). While Canadians also lean to

believing that security will be improved (40 per cent “definitely and 25

per cent “maybe”), they are more likely to think the new requirements

will do nothing (33 per cent vs. 17 per cent of Americans).

Although their views on the effectiveness of the WHTI diverge slightly,

large majorities of both Americans (79 per cent) and Canadians (73 per

cent) say that the new passport requirements will not impact their new passport requirements will not impact their new passport requirements will not impact their new passport requirements will not impact their

travel planstravel planstravel planstravel plans. Even with the implementation of the air travel component,

this figure has remained virtually unchanged over the past year. It is

important to note, however, that there is still 1 in 5 Americans (20 per

cent) and close to 1 in 4 Canadians (24 per cent) who say they will not

travel between the two countries as a result of the passport

requirement.

55555555

59595959

2121212117171717

3333

40404040

2525252533333333

22220

20

40

60

80

100

Yes, definitely Maybe No DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Impact of WHTIImpact of WHTIImpact of WHTIImpact of WHTIQ:Q:Q:Q: If it were mandatory to have a passport or another type of secure identity travel document to cross the

Canada-U.S. border by any mode of transportation, do you think this would improve border security?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Feb./ Mar. 07 n=1003

111111117777

81818181

131313137777

79797979

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes, definitely Maybe No

2006 2007


Americans

17171717

8888

73737373

151515159999

73737373

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes, definitely Maybe No

2006 2007

Canadians

Tracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaTracking perceptions of the safety of the U.S. CanadaQ:Q:Q:Q: From your own point of view, do you feel that, overall, [the United States / Canada] is safer, more

dangerous, or about the same as it was five years ago? Q:Q:Q:Q: If it were mandatory to have a passport or another type of secure identity travel document to cross the

Canada-U.S. border by any mode of transportation, would you be less likely to go to [the United States / Canada] for either business or pleasure reasons?*

* Question wording slightly different in 2006: “If it was mandatory to have a passport or a new type of travel document* to cross the border, would you be any less likely to go to [Canada / the U.S.] for either business or pleasure reasons?

56565656

35353535

63636363

2222

51515151 48484848

11110

20

40

60

80

100

Yes No DK/NR

Americans Canadians


UpUpUpUp----totototo----date passport ownership: Canada vs. the United Statesdate passport ownership: Canada vs. the United Statesdate passport ownership: Canada vs. the United Statesdate passport ownership: Canada vs. the United StatesQ:Q:Q:Q: Do you have an up-to-date [Canadian / American] passport?

2020202015151515

65656565

35353535

13131313

49494949

0

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, May 07 n=1006 / * Americans without a passport, May 07 n=636; Canadians without a passport, Jun. 07 n=492

Plans to get a passportPlans to get a passportPlans to get a passportPlans to get a passportQ:Q:Q:Q: Do you plan on getting a passport in the next 12 months?*

57575757

83838383

7777 4444 66661111

82828282

4444 3333 66661111

0

20

40

60

80

100

No need Too costly No time Other DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans who do not plan on getting a passport, May 07 n=425; Canadians who do not plan on getting a passport, Jun. 07 n=259

Reasons for not getting a passportReasons for not getting a passportReasons for not getting a passportReasons for not getting a passport

Q:Q:Q:Q: Which of the following would you say is the main reason why you do not plan on getting a passport?*

Another way of examining the potential impact of the WHTI is to look

at current rates of passport ownership. Overall, 1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans1 in 3 Americans

(35 per cent) and 1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians1 in 2 Canadians (51 per cent) report having upupupup----totototo----

date passportsdate passportsdate passportsdate passports. This means that, under the current WHTI regulations,

close to 2 in 3 Americans and 1 in 2 Canadians are not permitted to

travel throughout North America by plane. And despite the new and

pending passport requirements, large proportions of these individuals

(69 per cent in the United States and 49 per cent in Canada) have no

intention of acquiring a passport. It may be difficult to convince these

individuals to get passports, as 8 in 10 see no need to obtain this type

of document.

58585858

19191919

3939393934343434

8888

2222222226262626

43434343

8888

0

20

40

60

80

100

Poor (1-3) Neither (4) Good (5-7) DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Security on the American side of the CanadaSecurity on the American side of the CanadaSecurity on the American side of the CanadaSecurity on the American side of the Canada----US borderUS borderUS borderUS border

Q:Q:Q:Q: How would you rate security on the [ American / Canadian ] side of the Canada-U.S. border?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Mar. 07 n=1003

Given the context of the WHTI and the reasons behind its

implementation, it is remarkable to find that Americans and Canadians Americans and Canadians Americans and Canadians Americans and Canadians

do not seem overly concerned about security at their shared borddo not seem overly concerned about security at their shared borddo not seem overly concerned about security at their shared borddo not seem overly concerned about security at their shared borderererer.

Indeed, it is only about 1 in 5 Americans (19 per cent) and Canadians

(22 per cent) that rates security on their side of the Canada-U.S. border

as “poor”. There remains, however, a strong shared desire to see strong shared desire to see strong shared desire to see strong shared desire to see

greater cooperation in this areagreater cooperation in this areagreater cooperation in this areagreater cooperation in this area. While only about 1 in 5 Americans

(20 per cent) and Canadians thinks the their governments currently

work together in the area of border security to a “high extent”, 3 in 4

wish this was the case.

59595959

7777

66666666

20202020

77777777

64646464

24242424

4444

0

20

40

60

80

100

Little extent (1-2) Moderate extent (3-5) High extent (6-7) DK/NR

Americans Canadians

CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada----U.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityQ:Q:Q:Q: To what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United States CURRENTLY

work together in the area of border security?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, Mar. 07 n=1003

4444

22222222

72727272

22224444

19191919

75757575

22220

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada----U.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityU.S. cooperation on border securityQ:Q:Q:Q: To what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United SHOULD work

together in the area of border security?

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=half sample; Canadians, Mar. 07 n=1003

60606060

61616161

\

CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada----U.S. RelationsU.S. RelationsU.S. RelationsU.S. Relations


62626262

Although Canada and the United States may be closest in terms of

geography, only 1 in 4 Americans (25 per cent) considers Canada the

United States “closest friend” and just 1 in 10 name Canada as their

country’s “closest ally”. Rather, it is Great Britain that overwhelmingly

takes these titles (65 per cent “closest friend” and 66 per cent “closest

ally”). Moreover, Americans are increasingly likely to consider Great Great Great Great

Britain the United StatesBritain the United StatesBritain the United StatesBritain the United States’’’’ closest friendclosest friendclosest friendclosest friend (up from 18 percentage points

since 2006). The fact that Great Britain has been one of the only

countries to support the United States in Iraq since the start of the

conflict is most likely the driving force behind these views.

Personal political ideology seems plays an important role in perceptions

of international friendships. For example, Americans who self-identify

as liberals are more likely to name Canada as the United States’ closest

friend (38 per cent vs. 19 per cent of self-identified conservatives).

Likewise, Americans who self-identify as conservatives are more likely to

name Great Britain is America’s best friend (73 per cent vs. 54 per cent

of self-identified liberals). Interestingly, there are no ideological

differences when it comes to perceptions of America’s closest ally, with

both self-identified liberals and conservatives equally likely to name

Great Britain.

63636363

47474747

24242424

4444 6666

65656565

25252525

3333 5555

0

20

40

60

80

100

Great Britain Canada Mexico Other*

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, most recent data point May 07 n= half sample

AmericaAmericaAmericaAmerica’’’’s closest friends / allies s closest friends / allies s closest friends / allies s closest friends / allies Q:Q:Q:Q: Which country would you say is America’s closest FRIEND?

*Category includes the following responses: Western Europe (2%), Eastern Europe (1%),South Asia (1%), and Israel (1%).

66666666

101010103333

777714141414

0

20

40

60

80

100

Great Britain Canada Mexico Other* DK/NR

May 07

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= half sample

AmericaAmericaAmericaAmerica’’’’s closest allys closest allys closest allys closest ally

Q:Q:Q:Q: Which country would you say is America’s closest ALLY?

*Category includes the following responses: Eastern Europe (2%), Western Europe (1%), South Asia (1%), Israel (1%), Australia (1%) and Japan (1%).

64646464

12121212

23232323

62626262

2222

45454545

2323232331313131

22220

20

40

60

80

100

Unfavourable Neither Favourable DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Reciprocal impressionsReciprocal impressionsReciprocal impressionsReciprocal impressions


Q:Q:Q:Q: In general, would you describe your opinion of [Canada / the United States] as favourable or unfavourable?

Although they may not regard Canada as their country’s closest friend

or ally, a majority of Americans majority of Americans majority of Americans majority of Americans (62 per cent) have a ““““favourablefavourablefavourablefavourable””””

impression of their neighbours to the northimpression of their neighbours to the northimpression of their neighbours to the northimpression of their neighbours to the north. In fact, only about 1 in 10

Americans (12 per cent) has an “unfavourable” opinion of Canada. The

results in Canada are almost the complete opposite. Only 1 in 3 (31 per

cent) describes their impression of the U.S. as being “favourable”, and

a plurality (45 per cent) leans towards having an “unfavourable”

impression of the United States. These results show a rebound in

Americans’ views of Canada, with favourable impressions rising 10 per

cent since March 2006. Canadians views of the U.S., on the other

hand, continue to deteriorate, with favourable impressions down nine

per cent over this same period.

65656565

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

O-03 J-04 A-04 J-04 O-04 J-05 A-05 J-05 O-05 J-06 A-06 J-06 O-06 J-07 A-07

Unfavourable Neither Favourable

Q:Q:Q:Q: In general, would you describe your opinion of CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada as favourable or unfavourable?

Tracking reciprocal impressionsTracking reciprocal impressionsTracking reciprocal impressionsTracking reciprocal impressions

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, most recent data point May 07 n=1000

Americans

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

O-03 J-04 A-04 J-04 O-04 J-05 A-05 J-05 O-05 J-06 A-06 J-06 O-06 J-07 A-07

Unfavourable Neither Favourable

Q:Q:Q:Q: In general, would you describe your opinion of the United Statesthe United Statesthe United Statesthe United States as favourable or unfavourable?

Tracking reciprocal impressions: CanadiansTracking reciprocal impressions: CanadiansTracking reciprocal impressions: CanadiansTracking reciprocal impressions: Canadians’’’’ views of the U.S.views of the U.S.views of the U.S.views of the U.S.

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, most recent data point May 07 n=1000; Canadians, most recent data point May 07 n=1006

Canadians

66666666

Despite divergent reciprocal impressions, over 9 in 10 Americans

(40 per cent “moderately important” and 53 per cent “important”) and

Canadians (43 per cent “moderately important” and 48 per cent

“important”) think it is important to improveimportant to improveimportant to improveimportant to improve the quality of U.S.the quality of U.S.the quality of U.S.the quality of U.S.––––

Canada relationsCanada relationsCanada relationsCanada relations. These opinions have shown little fluctuation since

2006. It is interesting to note that the importance placed on improving

this relationship is higher among older Americans (64 per cent of

seniors say it is “important” vs. 39 per cent of youth).

67676767

5555

40404040

53535353

22228888

4343434348484848

11110

20

40

60

80

100

Not important (1-2)

Moderately important (3-5)

Important (6-7)

DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Importance of improving CanadaImportance of improving CanadaImportance of improving CanadaImportance of improving Canada----US relationsUS relationsUS relationsUS relationsQ:Q:Q:Q: How important do you think it is to improve the quality of U.S.-Canada relations?


3333

42424242

55555555

5555

40404040

53535353

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not important Moderately Important

2006 2007


Tracking importance of improving CanadaTracking importance of improving CanadaTracking importance of improving CanadaTracking importance of improving Canada----U.S. relationsU.S. relationsU.S. relationsU.S. relations

Americans

5555

4545454550505050

8888

4343434348484848

0

20

40

60

80

100

Not important Moderately Important

2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: How important do you think it is to improve the quality of U.S.-Canada relations?

68686868

12121212

63636363

1515151577778888

65656565

23232323

33330

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: To what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United States currently work together in the area of NATIONAL SECURITY?


CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada----U.S. cooperation on national securityU.S. cooperation on national securityU.S. cooperation on national securityU.S. cooperation on national security

2222

26262626

69696969

22226666

36363636

56565656

22220

20

40

60

80

100


Americans Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: And using the same scale, to what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United States SHOULD work together in the area of NATIONAL SECURITY?


CanadaCanadaCanadaCanada----U.S. cooperation on national security: preferredU.S. cooperation on national security: preferredU.S. cooperation on national security: preferredU.S. cooperation on national security: preferred

69696969

9999

70707070

2020202012121212

63636363

15151515

0

20

40

60

80

100

Little extent Moderate extent High extent

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Most recent data point; Americans, May 07 n=1000

Tracking views on cooperation on national security in the U.S.Tracking views on cooperation on national security in the U.S.Tracking views on cooperation on national security in the U.S.Tracking views on cooperation on national security in the U.S.

3333

32323232

66666666

2222

26262626

69696969

0

20

40

60

80

100

Little extent Moderate extent High extent

2006 2007

Q:Q:Q:Q: To what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United States CURRENTLY work together in the area of national security?

Q:Q:Q:Q: To what extent do you think the federal governments in Canada and the United States SHOULD work together in the area of national security?

One way ofOne way ofOne way ofOne way of forging closer ties could be in the area of national securityforging closer ties could be in the area of national securityforging closer ties could be in the area of national securityforging closer ties could be in the area of national security

where, as we saw earlier with border security, there is a strong desire to

see greater cooperation between the two countries. This desire is

particularly strong in the United States where 2 in 3 (69 per cent) thinks

their government should work with the Canadian government in this

area to a “high extent” (compared to 56 per cent of Canadians who

express this sentiment). Americans’ views on this matter are virtually

unchanged from 2006.

70707070

71717171

Foreign AffairsForeign AffairsForeign AffairsForeign Affairs


72727272

73737373

In this last chapter, we explore American and Canadian perceptions of

their respective roles on the world stage and on major issues of the day

such as the war in Iraq and growing tensions between the United

States and Iran.

74747474

13131313

383838384444444443434343 42424242

12121212

0

20

40

60

80

100

Pacifist (1-3) Neither (4) Militaristic (5-7)

Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= 1000; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=1018

American / Canadian outlook American / Canadian outlook American / Canadian outlook American / Canadian outlook –––– militaristic or pacifist?militaristic or pacifist?militaristic or pacifist?militaristic or pacifist?Q:Q:Q:Q: Generally speaking, how would you describe [Americans / Canadians] outlook on a scale where 1 is

strongly pacifist, 7 is strongly militaristic, and the mid-point 4 is neither.

Although both the United States and Canada have a long tradition of

military service, the two countries are distinctly different in their

outlook, with Canadians leaning to pacifismCanadians leaning to pacifismCanadians leaning to pacifismCanadians leaning to pacifism (43 per cent) and

Americans to militarismAmericans to militarismAmericans to militarismAmericans to militarism (44 per cent). Both also seem aware of these

differences, as Canadians describe themselves as “more pacifist than

Americans”, and Americans as “more militaristic than Canadians”.

While both countries have become involved in armed conflict over the

past five years (the U.S. in Iraq and Canada in Afghanistan), a plurality

Americans (41 per cent) and a majority of Canadians (51 per cent) say

that the outlook of their country has not changed over this timeframe.

There is, however, about 1 in 3 in the U.S. (35 per cent) and Canada

(36 per cent) that say the outlook has become more militaristic.

75757575

35353535

20202020

4141414136363636

11111111

51515151

0

20

40

60

80

100

More militaristic More pacifist The same

Americans Canadians


Comparing American and Canadian levels of militarismComparing American and Canadian levels of militarismComparing American and Canadian levels of militarismComparing American and Canadian levels of militarismQ:Q:Q:Q: And compared to five years ago, would you say Americans/Canadians are more militaristic in their

outlook, more pacifist or about the same?

54545454

8888

28282828

4444

77777777

17171717

0

20

40

60

80

100

More militaristic More pacifist The same

Americans Canadians

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= half sample; Canadians, May 07 n=half sample

Americans vs. Canadians: which is more militaristic? Americans vs. Canadians: which is more militaristic? Americans vs. Canadians: which is more militaristic? Americans vs. Canadians: which is more militaristic? Q:Q:Q:Q: And compared to [Canadians / Americans], would you say [Americans / Canadians] are more

militaristic in their outlook, more pacifist or about the same?

76767676

Perhaps because their countries currently have significant roles on the

world stage, majorities of Americans (63 per cent) and Canadians

(55 per cent) say they would like to see a greater focus on domestic greater focus on domestic greater focus on domestic greater focus on domestic

rather than foreign issuesrather than foreign issuesrather than foreign issuesrather than foreign issues. Further, preference for a more internal focus

has grown over the past year (up six per cent in the United States and

five per cent in Canada). Americans who feel that their financial

situation will be worse in the coming year are particularly likely to want

to look inward (71 per cent favour a domestic focus vs. 57 per cent

that believe their financial situation will improve).

77777777

63636363

21212121

111111115555

55555555

35353535

77773333

0

20

40

60

80

100

Domestic Balance Foreign DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Increasing isolationism in North AmericaIncreasing isolationism in North AmericaIncreasing isolationism in North AmericaIncreasing isolationism in North AmericaQ:Q:Q:Q: Given our current values and interests, do you think [the United States / Canada] should be:

1) Focusing more on domestic issues within our borders;

2) Focusing more on foreign affairs outside our borders; or

3) Maintaining the current balance


57575757

9999

31313131

3333

63636363

11111111

21212121

5555

0

20

40

60

80

100

Domestic Foreign Balance DK/NR

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; Canadians, Apr./ May 07 n=1018

Growing isolationism in North America?Growing isolationism in North America?Growing isolationism in North America?Growing isolationism in North America?

Americans

50505050

9999

40404040

2222

55555555

7777

35353535

33330

20

40

60

80

100

Domestic Foreign Balance DK/NR2006 2007

Canadians

Q:Q:Q:Q: Given our current values and interests, do you think [the United States / Canada] should be:

1) Focusing more on domestic issues within our borders;

2) Focusing more on foreign affairs outside our borders; or

3) Maintaining the current balance

78787878

10101010

60606060

2424242415151515

51515151

27272727

0

20

40

60

80

100

Less likely to be a target ofterrorism

More likely to be a target ofterrorism

No impact one way or another

Americans Canadians

Impact of foreign policy on likelihood of terrorismImpact of foreign policy on likelihood of terrorismImpact of foreign policy on likelihood of terrorismImpact of foreign policy on likelihood of terrorism

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= 1000; Canadians, Apr./May 07 n=half sample

Q:Q:Q:Q: In your opinion, does [America's / Canada’s] current foreign policy make us more or less likely to be a target of terrorism, or does it have no impact one way or another?

Given their preference for a more internal focus, it not entirely

unexpected to find that Americans and Canadians fear that foreign Americans and Canadians fear that foreign Americans and Canadians fear that foreign Americans and Canadians fear that foreign

involvement causes more harm than goodinvolvement causes more harm than goodinvolvement causes more harm than goodinvolvement causes more harm than good. Indeed, a majority of both

Americans (60 per cent) and Canadians (51 per cent) believe their

current foreign policies are making their country a “target of terrorism.

Only about 1 in 4 in either country that feels that their present foreign

involvement has no impact, and just 1 in 10 thinks it reduces the

likelihood that their country will be targeted. In the United States, self

identified liberals are the most likely to believe that America’s current

foreign policy is having an adverse effect (80 per cent vs. 49 per cent of

self-identified conservatives).

79797979

With few signs that the war in Iraqwar in Iraqwar in Iraqwar in Iraq will end anytime in the near future,

we find only minority support for the U.S. invasionminority support for the U.S. invasionminority support for the U.S. invasionminority support for the U.S. invasion of this country, with

just 1 in 3 Americans (39 per cent) and 1 in 5 Canadians (21 per cent)

feeling that the United States was justified in its decision. Over the past

year, American opposition to this endeavor has risen slightly (from 50

to 54 per cent). While opposition in Canada remains relatively

unchanged from the previous year (stable at 73 per cent), it is

important to note that Canadians were far more divided closer to the

start of the conflict (e.g., in April 2003, 40 per cent supported the

decision and 53 per cent opposed).

80808080

39393939

54545454

8888

21212121

73737373

7777

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes No DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Justification for the invasion of IraqJustification for the invasion of IraqJustification for the invasion of IraqJustification for the invasion of Iraq


Q:Q:Q:Q: In hindsight, do you think that the United States was justified in its decision to invade Iraq?

81818181

4646464650505050

4444

39393939

54545454

8888

0

20

40

60

80

100

Yes No DK/NR

2006 2007

Base:Base:Base:Base: All Americans; most recent data point May 07 n=1000

Tracking the perceived justification of the Iraq warTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq warTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq warTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq war

Q:Q:Q:Q: In hindsight, do you think that the United States was justified in its decision to invade Iraq?

Americans

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

A-03

J-03

A-03

O-03

D-03

F-04

A-04

J-04

A-04

O-04

D-04

F-05

A-05

J-05

A-05

O-05

D-05

F-06

A-06

J-06

A-06

O-06

D-06

F-07

A-07

Yes No

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n=1000; All Canadians, most recent data point May 07 n=1006

Tracking the perceived justification of the Iraq war in CanadaTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq war in CanadaTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq war in CanadaTracking the perceived justification of the Iraq war in CanadaQ:Q:Q:Q: In hindsight, do you think that the United States was justified in its decision to invade Iraq?

Canadians

82828282

The current tensions between the United States and Iran has both

Canadians and Americans concerned. It is shocking to find that fewer

than 1 in 10 in either country feels that it is unlikely that the situation unlikely that the situation unlikely that the situation unlikely that the situation

will will will will not not not not escalate, escalate, escalate, escalate, ultimately disruptingultimately disruptingultimately disruptingultimately disrupting both the global economy and both the global economy and both the global economy and both the global economy and

world securityworld securityworld securityworld security.

83838383

4444

44444444 46464646

66665555

56565656

37373737

33330

20

40

60

80

100

Not likely (1-2) Somewhat likely (3-5) Very likely (6-7) DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Affects of escalation in the American Affects of escalation in the American Affects of escalation in the American Affects of escalation in the American –––– Iranian conflictIranian conflictIranian conflictIranian conflict

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= half sample; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=half sample

Q: Q: Q: Q: How likely do you think it is that the current tensions between the United States and Iran will escalate and cause major problems for the economy of the world?

6666

44444444 47474747

22225555

5050505042424242

33330

20

40

60

80

100

Not likely (1-2) Somewhat likely (3-5) Very likely (6-7) DK/NR

Americans Canadians

Likelihood of AmericanLikelihood of AmericanLikelihood of AmericanLikelihood of American----Iranian escalation: global security effectIranian escalation: global security effectIranian escalation: global security effectIranian escalation: global security effect

Base:Base:Base:Base: Americans, May 07 n= half sample; Canadians, Apr. / May 07 n=half sample

Q: Q: Q: Q: How likely do you think it is that the current tensions between the United States and Iran will escalate and cause major problems for the security of the world?

84848484

85858585

Appendix A: Research Methodology Appendix A: Research Methodology Appendix A: Research Methodology Appendix A: Research Methodology


86868686

87878787

Research MethodologyResearch MethodologyResearch MethodologyResearch Methodology

The methodology planned for the 2006-7 Security Monitor study involves a total of nine

waves of research to be conducted over the course of the study.

• Six regular waves involving a telephone survey with a national random sample of

1,000 Canadians.

• One benchmarking wave (near the beginning of the study). This wave focuses on

core issues and designed to develop a better profile of Canadians in the

safety/security space. This survey involves a sample of 2,000 Canadians.

• One survey with a national random sample of 1,000 Americans.

• One survey with Canadian public and private sector decision-makers.

The results from the final wave are based on the following:

• A telephone survey completed with a stratified national random sample of 1,000

Americans aged 18 and over undertaken between May 16 and May 30, 2007.

• The findings were statistically weighted by age, gender and region to ensure that

the findings are representative of the American public aged 18 and over.

• In areas, the survey was designed to randomize questions in order to test

differences in attitudes across various indicators as well as to minimize response

burden.

• Findings from questions posed on the full sample may be considered accurate

within

+/-3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20. The margin of error for questions

posed on a half sample is +/- 4.4 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Field Dates Surveys Margin of error

Wave 1 Oct. 20-30, 2006 1,008 +/-3.1 percentage points

Wave 2 Dec. 11-17, 2006 1,012 +/-3.1 percentage points

Wave 3 Jan. 17 – 24, 2007 2,018 +/-2.2 percentage points

Wave 4 Feb. 27-Mar. 8, 2007 1,003 +/-3.1 percentage points

Wave 5 Apr. 25 – May 1, 2007 1,018 +/-3.1 percentage points

Wave 6 May 14-18, 2007 1,006 +/-3.1 percentage points

Wave 7 Jun. 21 -30, 2007 1,013 +/-3.1 percentage points

U.S. Wave May 16-30, 2007 1,000 +/-3.1 percentage points

88888888

89898989

Appendix Appendix Appendix Appendix B: Detailed Tables B: Detailed Tables B: Detailed Tables B: Detailed Tables


90909090

91919191

Table 1 Table 1 Table 1 Table 1 –––– Demographic / Background Differences Demographic / Background Differences Demographic / Background Differences Demographic / Background Differences

Key differencesKey differencesKey differencesKey differences TotalTotalTotalTotal Skeptical Skeptical Skeptical Skeptical

ConservativesConservativesConservativesConservatives Cosmopolitan Cosmopolitan Cosmopolitan Cosmopolitan ProgressivesProgressivesProgressivesProgressives


Angry Angry Angry Angry IsolationistsIsolationistsIsolationistsIsolationists

Overall compositionOverall compositionOverall compositionOverall composition 100100100100 23.823.823.823.8 21.521.521.521.5 20.820.820.820.8 33.933.933.933.9

Region

Midwest 23 25 18 27 23

Northeast 19 16 18 15 23*

South 36 36 39 35 34

West 23 23 25 23 20

Gender

Male 48 51 52 37* 50

Female 52 49 48 63* 50

Age

<25 13 11 22* 11 7*

25-44 39 39 42 41 37

45-64 28 28 25 28 32

65+ 16 19 10* 16 19

Education

High School or Less 34 34 30 29* 42*

College 32 33 30 38* 30

University 31 31 39* 30 25*

Visible/Non-visible Minority

Caucasian 73 80* 69 66* 77*

Hispanic / Latin American 5 5 8* 4 5

African American 8 5 7 12* 8

Other 10 8 14* 11 4*

Financial Outlook (coming year)

Worse 31 46* 9* 6* 54*

Same 30 31 33 27 28

Better 38 20* 58* 67* 17*

Passport

Yes 35 26* 48* 42* 28*

No 63 73* 52* 56* 69*

Ideology

Liberal 25 20* 35* 25 21*

Neither 31 29 31 25* 35

Conservative 40 47* 31* 45 39

Description of Americans

Pacifist 13 15 15 9 12

Neither 38 45* 38 32* 36

Militaristic 44 34* 44 55* 45

* Differences are statistically significant from overall average.

92929292

Table 2a Table 2a Table 2a Table 2a –––– Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences






Risk/ThreatsRisk/ThreatsRisk/ThreatsRisk/Threats

Likelihood of terrorist attack on them/family

Not likely (1-2) 45 72* 72* 20* 21*

Somewhat likely (3-5) 41 25* 25* 53* 58*

Very likely (6-7) 10 1* 1* 22* 15*

Matter of time for attack on American soil

Disagree 19 31* 38* 5* 5*

Neither 21 32* 31* 13* 9*

Agree 58 34* 28* 80* 85*

U.S. safer/more dangerous

Safer 23 31* 34* 18 11*

About the same 39 39 45 35 37

More dangerous 36 29* 20* 45* 47*

Government ResponseGovernment ResponseGovernment ResponseGovernment Response

Government direction (in general)

Right direction 33 26 41* 39 29

Wrong direction 56 59 49 50 62*

DK/NR 11 15 11 11 9

Area to focus

Domestic issues 63 66 54* 61 69*

Foreign issues 11 8 15* 11 10

Maintain current balance 21 19 26* 25 17*

Government direction on national security

Right direction 38 41 42 41 30*

Wrong direction 50 44* 46 51 57*

DK/NR 12 15 12 8* 13

Pace of changes on security

Too quick 12 15 13 10 12

About right 31 34 44* 30 18*

Too slow 50 43* 38* 53 64*

Attitudes to ImmigrationAttitudes to ImmigrationAttitudes to ImmigrationAttitudes to Immigration

Immigration

Too few 7 0* 11* 20* 0*

About right 20 6* 43* 31* 5*

Too many 61 81* 28* 33* 92*


93939393

Table 2b Table 2b Table 2b Table 2b –––– Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences Key Attitudinal Differences






Civil Liberties &Civil Liberties &Civil Liberties &Civil Liberties & Privacy Privacy Privacy Privacy

Emphasis

Protecting public security 62 61 54* 65 67*

Protecting civil liberties 28 31 36* 24 23*

Neither 3 2 4 3 3

DK/NR 6 5 6 8 7

Trust fed govt to balance security/civil liberties

Disagree 49 46 53 41* 53*

Neither 21 18 22 26* 19

Agree 29 34* 25 32 25

Police and intelligence should have more powers …

Disagree 40 37 53* 36 33*

Neither 19 20 16 16 21

Agree 40 42 30* 46* 44*

Less personal privacy than two years ago

Disagree 36 32 47* 33 32*

Neither 21 22 20 20 22

Agree 42 44 32* 46 46

Canada/US RelationsCanada/US RelationsCanada/US RelationsCanada/US Relations

Opinion of Canada

Unfavourable 12 10 12 7* 17*

Neither 23 18* 27* 20 26

Favourable 62 69* 58 71* 54*

Self-rated knowledge of Canada

Low 29 24* 39* 24 30

Moderate 61 68* 56 59 60

High 8 7 6 13* 7

Importance of improving relations

Not important 5 3 7 4 6

Moderately important 40 36 48* 32* 41

Very important 53 59* 44* 63* 48

Extent Canada-US should work together (nat. security)

Low 2 1 2 1 5*

Moderate 26 28 39* 13* 21

High 69 70 58 83* 70


Documents

Survey of Americans - EKOS Politics · expectations of the state to act as a guardian of risk or risk manager. The 2006-7 study continues to focus on the evolving safety and security