This site has conducted an unscientific survey on various issues since July of 1998. The results, while interesting in most cases, are to be taken with a grain of salt - the results can easily be skewed by an individual or group of individuals; the sample is, by nature, not representative (because it consists only of Web users who visit my site and bother to view the survey page and submit an opinion).
This page includes results from 2002. For results from other years, please go to the Main Results Page.
Question 54, December 2002 With the election of Dwight Eisenhower in 1952, presidents have had a two-term limit. Many have called for some limit for Representatives and Senators, though the Supreme Court has blocked all efforts at implementing a limit. Regardless, do you support term limits for members of Congress?
|Yes, there should be national term limits for members of Congress.||117||54.17|
|States should be allowed to set term limits for members of Congress if they wish.||50||23.15|
|No, I do not support Congressional term limits.||49||22.69|
Question 53, November 2002 From voting problems in Florida and Georgia in 2000, to the New Jersey and Minnesota Senatorial races in 2002, it seems that one of the biggest problems with voting in the United States today is the reliance on old technology and a lack of hard, fast, and consistent rules. What should be done about it?
|Voting and elections rules and regulations should be nationalized, so that every one knows the rules.||90||55.56|
|Only the states can properly regulate their voting and election rules. The laws must remain with the states.||72||44.44|
Question 52, October 2002 Election Day is coming - how do you plan to vote for your members of Congress (House and Senate)?
|Democrat||Republican||Other Party||No Election|
|Still Undecided: 16|
|Not Voting: 22|
Question 51, September 2002 The White House insists that it has the authority to invade Iraq at will, while Congressional authorities from both parties insist that the President must consult with Congress before taking any offensive action. Who is right?
|The President must be allowed to start hostilities if he deems it necessary.||183||27.60|
|There may be ample reason to invade Iraq, but those reasons must be shared with Congress and the people before any action.||154||23.23|
|The Congress, and only the Congress, has the power to declare war. The decision cannot be made by the President alone.||326||49.17|
Question 50, August 2002 Our annual access survey - how did you come to this site today?
|BBS/Message Board Posting||4||1.47|
|College class syllabus||32||11.72|
|High school class site||1||0.37|
Question 49, July 2002 What is your opinion of the use of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance?
|This is a Christian nation, and something as basic as the Pledge must reflect that.||516||50.10|
|I'm not sure I'd have added the words to the Pledge, but I have no problem with them being there.||128||12.43|
|Though many people in America believe in God, we must respect the beliefs of all, including those who do not believe - the words should go.||210||20.39|
|There must be no mention of any deity in any national motto, creed, pledge, song, or anthem.||176||17.09|
Question 48, June 2002 Efforts are underway to revamp the FBI, to give the agency more power to detect and prevent domestic terrorism. One of the changes is to allow field agents to conduct searches of public records, via the Internet and via the attendance of public meetings. Currently, such activities by an agent must be approved by the central headquarters. Specifically, are you worried about agents being able to investigate people and groups using public sources of information?
|Yes, I am worried - the ability of agents to infiltrate gatherings will have a chilling effect on free speech and free assembly.||68||48.23|
|I am worried, but I think if properly monitored, such surveillance makes sense.||13||9.22|
|I was surprised to learn an agent could not search the web for information with out permission - they should be able to, just like I can.||23||16.31|
|The FBI must be able to freely use every tool available to protect us from terrorism.||37||26.24|
Question 47, May 2002 - A survey from Columbia Law that showed that 83% of those surveyed had confidence in the Supreme Court. We ask the same question Columbia Law asked: "Even though I sometimes disagree with or dislike the rulings of the United States Supreme Court in particular cases, the fact that the Supreme Court can strike down unconstitutional laws is a good feature of the American system of government."
Question 46, April 2002 - After two failed attempts to censor online pornography and other objectionable material, the government is set to implement CIPA (Children's Internet Protection Act) in July. CIPA aims to block access to objectionable material at libraries by requiring them to install blocking software, or else lose access to all federal funds. Libraries are challenging the law by saying that it thwarts First Amendment rights, is an example of prior restraint, and that it will place an undue burden on libraries. They also note that it is futile to try to block the objectionable sites, and the inevitably, valid sites are blocked. What do you think?
|The kids have to be protected from online peddlers of smut. The law should stand.||9||10.23|
|Though I'm concerned with the limitations of technology, the law should stand, and better solutions should be created.||9||10.23|
|While protecting kids from this stuff is a valiant goal, it is also too easy to tread on precious rights. Libraries should set their own policies, and not have the government do it for them.||38||43.18|
|Information want to be free - strike down all censorship laws.||32||36.36|
Question 45, March 2002 - The Washington Post has reported that a cold war plan known as "Continuity in Government" had been implemented for the first time on the morning of September 11, and has run ever since. The program maintains a "shadow government" in two undisclosed locations on the East Coast, ready to take over if Washington is wiped off the map by a terrorist nuclear attack. It took five months for this information to make its way to the public - what more do you want to know about it?
|Knowing anything gives the terrorists an advantage - I want to know nothing more.||25||18.52|
|We need to know how our money is being spent - but they don't need to reveal all our secrets in order to keep us informed.||59||43.70|
|One of the best ways to spend our money without accountability is to label the expenditures "classified" - I want full disclosure.||22||16.30|
|This is just one more step towards World Government and the New World Order.||29||21.48|
Question 44, February 2002 - Vice President Dick Cheney is opposing GAO efforts to get information about meetings he held to help set the Bush Administration's energy policy. The GAO says the information it wants it is entitled to have; Cheney is claimed executive privilege, stating that unless the information can be kept secret, the executive branch will have trouble getting opinions from industry leaders. Who is right?
|The GAO seems to be within its jurisdiction, and the administration should cooperate.||78||45.88|
|Cheney is right, the GAO is asking for too much information.||55||32.35|
|It is a tricky question - we should let the courts decide.||15||8.82|
|Frankly, I don't care.||22||12.94|
Question 43, January 2002 - Even after the fall of the Taliban, the war against terrorism continues in Afghanistan, with more war to be waged in other corners of the globe. How long do you think this war will last?
|It will be done by the end of 2002.||10||6.85|
|It will take several years - but end by 2003.||10||6.85|
|It will likely last as long as George W. Bush is President.||32||21.92|
|We're in for the long haul - at least until 2010.||32||21.92|
|This is a war that will never end.||62||42.47|