More Popular Issues
See how voters are siding on other popular political issues...
Results from Facebook voters
Last answered 4 years ago
Distribution of answers submitted by Facebook 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.
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
7 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... 6 years ago from a Republican in Tucson, AZ
Parks should be administered, but they should not be expected to remain unchanged. 6 years ago from a Republican in Pearland, TX
Yes but should allow for individuals to log, mine or access lands for personal NON-commercial use. 6 years ago from a Libertarian in Denver, CO
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... 6 years ago from a Libertarian in Roanoke, LA
Yes, but with no drilling or mining. There should be more publicly available fruit and vegetable plants, and the wildlife and trees should still be protected. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Little Rock, AR
Yes, but allow the states to manage all aspects of the land. The Federal Government should only be involved in an oversight capacity. 7 years ago from a Libertarian in Walton, KY
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
The PEOPLE should protect and preserve the National Parks of their own free will. Instill the values that President Theodore Roosevelt had within our children as well as ourselves. He believed in conservation and so should we otherwise we shall all... 7 years ago from a Green in Pinehurst, TX
Yes, but work with the states to determine how to use the land. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Norman, OK
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. 7 years ago from a Republican in Madison, WI
Give it back to the people who had it first and create an enviormental constitution that protects all national forests parks monuments historical sites ect. ect. ect. logging and the destruction of our enviornment is the problem stopping it is the solution. 7 years ago from a Green in Newcastle, OK
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... 7 years ago from a Democrat in Framingham, MA
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
Yes, with the help of private non profit organizations, while keeping the economy in mind. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Northampton, PA
Long-term agreements should be available to local and state governments as well as certain corporate entities as ANYONE manages more efficiently than the Feds. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Kent, WA
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/. 7 years ago from a Green in Elmira, CA
Our National Parks are a treasure of open lands that should be preserved for as long as is practical to prevent the loss of all of our wilderness areas. 7 years ago from a Democrat in Pflugerville, TX