More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Master's Degree voters
Last answered 6 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Master's Degree 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)
8 years ago by indiatimes.com
8 years ago by net.au
8 years ago by youtube.com
9 years ago by politicalears.com
10 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
Yes, but allow more public access, have more reasonable fees to go to a park, fees are to high for the average family and parks are for all citizens--even the poor ones; limited logging to prevent large forest fires, and stop drilling and mining. National... 9 years ago from a Republican in Tucson, AZ
Parks should be administered, but they should not be expected to remain unchanged. 9 years ago from a Republican in Pearland, TX
Yes, but allow states to lease the land to increase profits from the parks and keep the lease holders under tight supervision. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Pinehurst, MA
State governments should control parks, not the federal government. 9 years ago from a Republican in Rancho Cucamonga, CA
No, and they shouldn't be government property in the first place. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Annapolis, MD
Yes, expand the government's domain to protect more land and stop logging, drilling and mining. 9 years ago from a Democrat in San Luis Obispo, CA
Yes they should be preserved but should be public land. 9 years ago from a Libertarian in Incline Village, NV
Yes, but the BLM should be forced to follow Federal law regarding wild horses and burros, allowing them to remain on lands designated for them. Thy should do away with holding facilities and return captured horses to the wild. 9 years ago from a Republican in Harrods Creek, KY
While the national government should preserve the parks, the state governments should have the ability to prevent the feds from federalizing an excessive amount of their land. 9 years ago from a Republican in Madison, WI
Sell the land to private owners on the condition that they keep the Parks for their previously intended purpose as a preserved land and a tourist attraction. The new owners can hire staff to work at and maintain the Parks. Creates jobs and saves the... 9 years ago from a Democrat in Framingham, MA
Yes, but the concessionaire/vendor rights, etc. which have been bought by other countries, mainly Japan, should be bought back/controlled by the US gov't/. 9 years ago from a Green in Elmira, CA
Allow the Indigenous peoples in a given area decide through consensus how the land should be treated. 9 years ago from a Green in Tempe, AZ