More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from High School Diploma voters
Last answered 4 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by High School Diploma voters.
Data includes total votes submitted by visitors since Aug 18, 2012. For users that answer more than once (yes we know), only their most recent answer is counted in the total results. Total percentages may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
Education data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011).
Choose a demographic filter
* Data estimated by matching users to U.S. Census data block groups via the American Community Survey (2007-2011)
6 years ago by indiatimes.com
6 years ago by net.au
6 years ago by youtube.com
6 years ago by politicalears.com
8 years ago by youtube.com
Data based on unique submissions (duplicates or multiple submissions are eliminated) per user using a 30-day moving average to reduce daily variance from traffic sources. Totals may not add up to exactly 100% as we allow users to submit "grey area" stances that may not be categorized into yes/no stances.
More stances on this issue
The gov does own too much land. Each state should be able be have eligible voters decide if some land should be opened for recreation or industry, or sale to pay down the national debt (non-citizens or foreign countries should never be allowed to own any... 7 years ago from a Republican in Stewartstown, PA
It is my view parks should have portions that would be farmed for timber for example and refurbished. Use the example of Epcot using hydroponic growth for food. If they were a self sustaining by using their products for monies that would only be given back to the parks. I have seen where trees die because they have not thinned out, so not touching something does not always guarantee the best solution.
Secondly, the states that have these parks should have a vote in the decision making. 7 years ago from a Republican in Ocala, FL
Yes but should allow for individuals to log, mine or access lands for personal NON-commercial use. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Denver, CO
The National Parks should be preserved and protected, but at many times the decisions and policies of the N.P. service show a lack of thought and intelligence. Complacency and Mediocre performance seem to be the case. Also, I'm tired of seeing... 7 years ago from a Republican in Usk, WA
Yes. but let the states have a say in what land is added to the parks registry and i think that more land should be set aside for national parks. i also think that the budget for national parks should be offset by maybe a fee charged to tourist. most... 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Roanoke, LA
Should be a joint non partisan endeavor between each state and the Federal Goverment. 7 years ago from a Republican in Cache, OK
Yes, but no more new acquisitions, the EPA stops over- regulating and the government should sell land back to private citizens whenever feasible. 7 years ago from a Republican in Mission, KS
Yes, but allow states to lease the land to increase profits from the parks and keep the lease holders under tight supervision. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Pinehurst, MA
National Parks should be preserved and protected by the state in which they are located. 7 years ago from a Republican in Vandergrift, PA
The government seems anal about some factors of park management and tends to go more politically based and also more profit based. Their "experts" on fire management, where applicable, appear to be uninformed on issues and make many mistakes on... 7 years ago from a Republican in Mariposa, CA
No, because I think it should be privatized. 7 years ago from a Republican in Nashua, NH
Allow limited logging and possible drilling and mining and allow more public access. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Summerfield, FL
No i believe that the national parks should be privately owned and operated. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Whitehall, PA
With regard to natural state parks (forests, bays, etc.), the federal gov is well-intentioned to manage and protect them from human interference, but past efforts at "preservation" have caused ecological disasters. So yeah, that. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Worcester, MA
The National Parks should be returned to their rightful and legal owner: The Native American Nation. 7 years ago from a Green in Conshohocken, PA
National parks, such as Yosemite should be controlled by the local residents that reside in the states where the parks are located, but should remain protected by the federal government. The preservation should be solely under the control of those who... 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Leo, IN
Yes We should let the government be in charge over the national parks that have a connectrion to the enviorment but let the public have more access over the land and also allow for more logging and mining and other things that can help the enviorment as... 7 years ago from a Republican in Vero Beach, FL
add solar panels and wind turbines. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Newark, NY
No. They should be protected by the private sector but with set guidelines set by the government that do not allow the private sector to sell or exploit the land. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Carterville, IL
No, let private landowners protect them. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Groton, CT
Yes, but manage lands allowing controlled logging and unlimited access. 7 years ago from a Republican in Potwin, KS
Allow for the private sector to make inputs on some National Park lands. If the federal government cannot afford to keep the land, sell to someone or something (denoting a corporation or what have you) who is willing to preserve said property for future... 7 years ago from a Republican in Canton, NY
Let Natural wildfires burn, don't rescue people, leave them free to enter the way Pres. Teddy Roosevelt envisioned. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Spruce Pine, NC
Yes, that is why they are called *NATIONAL* Parks. also let each state determine which *OTHER* areas to protect, but *NOT* practice *EMINENT DOMAIN*. 7 years ago from a Republican in Orangefield, TX
In my opinion, they could perhaps be protected by the state government. That would be one less thing the federal government would have to deal with, giving them more time and energy to focus on making the economy stable and golfing. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Ozark, AR
Yes, with the help of private non profit organizations, while keeping the economy in mind. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Northampton, PA
Yes, but not lower the protection slightly. 7 years ago from a Republican in Blackstone, IL
Yes, but if the gov't is going to lease property within these spaces to private business, they should not be allowed to just shut the privately owned business down. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Capitol Heights, MD