Framing Our Future

Framing Our Future

Talking Points

“Elections 2004: Comparing 2004 with 2000” State By State Analysis: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/elections/2004/2000-2004_comparison.html

“Maps and Cartograms of the 2004 US Presidential Election Results” (full color diagrams and maps of election results, University of Michigan) : http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/

Moral Votes?

· The Zogby poll shows that when voters were asked to list the moral issue that most affected their vote, the Iraq war topped the list (42%) – more than tripling the number that chose abortion (13%) or gay marriage (9%). Also, when asked to choose the most urgent moral crisis facing the U.S., voters chose ‘greed and materialism’ (33%) and ‘poverty and economic justice’ (31%) twice as often as abortion (16%) and gay marriage (12%). (‘Moral Values’ Myth 11/12/04 Wash Post)

· Asked the question of the greatest moral crisis facing our country, 31% of Catholics chose poverty and 31% chose greed, compared to only 20% who chose abortion, and 11% that chose same-sex marriage.

· According to Zogby, 25% of voters said that conservative Catholic messages touting ‘non-negotiable’ issues made them more likely to vote for Sen. John Kerry, whereas only 20% said these messages made them more likely to vote for President George W. Bush. Fifty-six percent said these messages had no effect on them at all. (‘Moral Values’ Myth 11/12/04 Wash Post)

· George Bush increased his vote in 2004 over 2000 by an average of 3.1 percent nationwide. In Ohio the increase was 1 percent -- less than a third of the national average. In the 11 states in which the gay marriage referendums were held, Bush increased his vote by less than he did in the 39 states that did not have the referendum. (‘Moral Values’ Myth 11/12/04 Wash Post)

· Early reports called the 2004 election the “moral values” election citing that 22 percent of the voters in the exit polls gave moral values as their top reason for voting the way they did. First of all that ignores the fact that 70 percent of the voters gave something else. It also ignores that the economy and jobs (20 percent), terrorism (19 percent), and Iraq (15 percent), were close behind. Moreover, as both the LA Times exit poll and the Women’s Vote 2004 poll showed, the exit poll question was very flawed leaving off important issues like Social Security, Medicare, prescription drugs and the deficit. (Celinda Lake Pres Release)

For more on the “‘Moral values’ Myth”, see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44082-2004Nov11.html

For Pax Christi’s response to the ‘moral values’ issue, see: http://www.zogby.com/soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=10389

Media Framing

· The Boston Globe (11/4/04) reported that Bush's victory grants him "a clear mandate to advance a conservative agenda over the next four years." The Los Angeles Times (11/4/04) made the somewhat peculiar observation that "Bush can claim a solid mandate of 51 percent of the vote." USA Today (11/4/04) was more definitive, headlining one story "Clear Mandate Will Boost Bush's Authority, Reach," while reporting that Bush "will begin his second term with a clearer and more commanding mandate than he held for the first." The Washington Post (11/4/04) similarly pointed to Bush's "clearer mandate," implying that the election of 2000, in which Bush failed to get even a plurality of the popular vote, was a mandate of sorts, if an unclear one. (Defining Bush’s Mandate, 11/5/04 FAIR)

· MSNBC host Chris Matthews announced at the top of his November 3 broadcast, "President Bush wins the majority of the vote and a mandate for his second term." CNN's Wolf Blitzer (11/3/04) offered his assessment that Bush is "going to say he's got a mandate from the American people, and by all accounts he does." NPR's Renee Montague (11/3/04) also relayed the White House's spin, before quickly agreeing with it: "The president's people are calling this a mandate. By any definition I think you could call this a mandate." (Defining Bush’s Mandate, 11/5/04 FAIR)

· While White House officials tout the total vote count for Bush as evidence of wide support, the increase in voter turnout and the size of the U.S. population also means that greater than usual numbers of voters opposed the victorious candidate. As Greg Mitchell of Editor & Publisher put it (11/5/04), "It's true that President Bush got more votes than any winning candidate for president in history. He also had more people voting against him than any winning candidate for president in history." (Defining Bush’s Mandate, 11/5/04 FAIR)

· On October 17, the New York Times ran an article on the use of exit polls to identify and prevent election fraud in a number of countries. The article suggested that exit polls might play a similar role in the upcoming U.S. election. A November 5 New York Times article…sang a very different tune, building in as an unargued assumption that the November 2 exit polls had been proved wrong by the official vote counts. The Times' article sought to determine in a very "balanced" and "objective" manner exactly what went wrong with the exit polls, but not whether they were wrong or right. (“Media Blackout” 11/8/04 Free Press)

For More on “The media gives Bush a ‘mandate’” see: http://salon.com/news/feature/2004/11/10/press_mandate/index_np.html

For more on “Media blackout of voting problems,” see: http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=950

Voting Systems

· The deadline Ohio vote certification is December 6^th -- the recount must be completed by that date. The Green and Libertarian parties raised the required $ 113,6000 to hold the recount in less than a week.

· Some voting problems that have been reported in Ohio (and other states) include mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines, and the targeted disenfranchisement of African American Voters. Two separate hearings have been held, taking testimony from voters, poll watchers and election experts by People for the American Way, citizen groups and voting rights groups.

For more on the Ohio recount and Election Day troubles see: “Recount in Ohio a Sure Thing” http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/111604W.shtml

Care for Land, Sea and Air – Talking Points

Artic Indicator: Climate Change at the Poles

(Taken from Impacts of a Warming Artic, published by Cambridge University, www.cambridge.org )

· The Artic is extremely vulnerable to observed and projected climate change and its impacts – it is now experiencing the most rapid and severe climate change on earth. With anticipated acceleration over the next 100 years, climate change will contribute to major physical, ecological social and economic changes.

· In Alaska and Western Canada, winter temperatures are rising more rapidly than summer – and increase a much as 5-7° Fahrenheit in the past 50 years.

· Over the last 30 years, Artic sea ice has decreased about 8% or over 300,000 square miles – that’s an area the size of Texas and Arizona combined.

For more information on Artic Melt and Climate Change visit the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment website at http://www.acia.uaf.edu/

New York Times Articles on the Arctic Climate Assessment Report by Andrew Revkin at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/science/earth/29cnd-arctic.html (subscription)

Effects of Climate Change?

· 19 of the 20 warmest years on record have occurred since 1980.

· Melting polar ice is affecting wildlife that depend on it for survival: Polar bears that rely on dense ice shelves to hunt seals and traverse the artic seas find their hunting grounds reduced by melting ice and some penguin populations have dropped by half due to disappearing ice and snow.

· In the western states, the snow line rises 500 feet higher for every 1.8 degree increase in temperature – by 2050 the water content in critical snow pack will be less than half of today’s total

· The heat wave that hit central and southern Europe last year killed 20,000 people – anticipated temperature increase due to climate change will cause more heat waves and floods.

Current Administration Programs

· According to the Congressional General Accounting Office, President Bush’s 2002 goal to reduce emissions by 18% over the next ten years, would reduce overall emissions by only 2% of what would be achieved with no federal program at all.

· A quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions come from the U.S.

· Currently $1.7 billion dollars a year is spent on climate research – while the administration continues to ignore existing research examining climate change, including a 2001 report done at the request of Congress which was highly lauded by scientists for its independent peer review.

American Opinion on the Environment

· 70% of Americans polled believe global warming is a very serious or somewhat serious problem – just 20% believe global warming does not represent a serious issue.

· 84% of Americans polled said the Unites States should enact stricter emissions and pollution standards for business and industry.

· 67% of American soled say the US government does not do enough about the environment and should do more.

The Roadless Area Conservation Rule….

(from “Protecting America’s National Forests, Saving the Last Wild 30%” Revised Edition)

Issued in January 2001 the Roadless Area Conservation Rule protects 58.5 million acres of wild national forest land from most commercial logging and road-building. It:

· ...Protects 58.5 million acres of national forest land in 39 states, including intact old-growth temperate Rainforests in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest

· ...Maintains current public access and recreational opportunities, including hiking, camping, hunting and fishing

· ...Preserves critical habitat for fish and wildlife, including more than 1,600 threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant and animal species

· ...Safeguards clean water from forest headwaters and streams, the source of drinking water for more than 60 million Americans

· ...Allows for actively managing lands, when necessary, to restore ecological processes, provide habitat for endangered species, or avert catastrophic wildfire

· ...Maintains access to state and private property within national forests

· The Roadless Area Conservation Rule resulted from the most inclusive public rulemaking process ever involving the input of seven Federal agencies, more than 180 Native American tribes, over 600 public meetings held nationwide, half a million public comments on the initial proposal and 1.1 million comments on the final proposal – 95% of which supported the proposal – and seven separate hearings held before the US House and Senate committees and subcommittees.

Impact of eliminating the Roadless Area Rule

· Increased public subsides to private industry: Private timber companies already receive tens of millions of dollars each year to build more forest roads at taxpayer expense, and use those roads to access timber purchased below market prices. Cost of Forest Service timber program to American taxpayers from 1992-1997: $2 billion.

· Increased roads only adds to a road maintenance backlog: The Forest Service cannot adequately maintain the existing 430,000 miles of currently existing roads. Cost of the maintenance backlog with new roads: $10 billion.

· The existing Forest Service’s accountability problem would not be solved: The Government Accountability Office concluded in 2003 that the Forest Service has, “not been able to provide Congress and the public with a clear understanding of what its 30,000 employees accomplish with the approximately $5billion it receives each year.”

For more on the Roadless Area Rule, its protections and impact of elimination see: http://www.ourforests.org/fact/

The proposed rule change is available at:

http://roadless.fs.fed.us/documents/id_07/2004_07_12_state_petition_proposed_rule.html

The period for public comment on the proposed rule began in July and has been extended to Nov. 15, 2004.

Send your comments to: Content Analysis Team, ATTN: Roadless State Petitions, USDA Forest Service, P.O. Box 221090, Salt Lake City, UT 84122 Fax: (801) 517-1014 E-mail: statepetitionroadless@fs.fed.us.

Comments also may be submitted from: http://www.regulations.gov