Politics

National Poll Shows the Public Wants EPA to Do More to Reduce Air Pollution

Published on March 21, 2012 by Leave a reply

WASHINGTON – As big polluters and their allies in Congress continue attacks on the Clean Air Act, the American Lung Association released a new bipartisan survey examining public views of the Clean Air Act and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) efforts to update and enforce lifesaving clean air standards, including carbon and mercury emissions from power plants.

The bipartisan survey, conducted by Democratic polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Republican firm Perception Insight, finds that nearly three-quarters of likely voters (73 percent) nationwide support the view that it is possible to protect public health through stronger air quality standards while achieving a healthy economy, over the notion that we must choose between public health or a strong economy. This overwhelming support includes 78 percent of independents, 60 percent of Republicans and 62 percent of conservatives, as well as significant support in Maine, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

The Obama Administration will soon release updated clean air standards for carbon pollution emitted by power plants, and a substantial majority of voters support the EPA implementing these standards, even after hearing opposing arguments that stricter standards will damage the economic recovery.  Initially, 72 percent of voters nationwide support the new protections on carbon emissions from power plants, including overwhelming majorities of both Democrats and independents and a majority of Republicans.

After listening to a balanced debate with messages both for and against setting new carbon standards, support still remained robust with a near 2-to-1 margin (63 percent in favor and 33 percent opposed). Support remained especially robust in Maine and Pennsylvania (64 percent in each state). The majority of Ohio voters (52 percent) also favored new carbon standards, which is notable since the poll was conducted during a period of heavy media attention concerning statewide electricity rate increases and potential power plant shutdowns.

“This bipartisan poll affirms that clean air protections have broad support across the political spectrum,” said Peter Iwanowicz, Assistant Vice President, National Policy and Advocacy with the American Lung Association. “Big polluters and their allies in Congress cannot ignore the facts; more air pollution means more childhood asthma attacks, more illness and more people dying prematurely. It’s time polluters and their Congressional allies drop their attempts to weaken, block or delay clean air protections and listen to the public who overwhelmingly wants the EPA to do more to protect the air we breathe.”

Voters also voiced strong support for stricter standards to control industrial and power sector mercury and toxic air pollution. When asked about setting stricter limits on the amount of mercury that power plants and other facilities emit, 78 percent of likely voters were in favor of the EPA updating these standards.

Strong support was also seen for stricter standards on industrial boilers. Initially, 69 percent of voters supported the EPA implementing stricter standards on boiler emissions. After hearing messaging from both sides of the issue, voters continued to support these standards by nearly a 20-point margin (56 percent favor, 37 percent oppose).

Key poll findings include:

  • Nearly three quarters (73 percent) of voters, say that we do not have to choose between air quality and a strong economy – we can achieve both
  • 2-to-1 majority (60 to 31 percent) believe that strengthening safeguards against pollution will create, rather than destroy, jobs by encouraging innovation
  • About two-thirds of voters (66 percent) favor EPA updating air pollution standards by setting stricter limits
  • 72 percent of voters support new standards for carbon pollution from power plants and support is strong (63 percent) after hearing arguments from both sides of the issue
  • 60 percent of voters support stricter standards for gasoline and limits on the amount of tailpipe emissions from cars and SUVs (particularly strong given all the recent attention to high gasoline prices).

Despite more than a year’s worth of continued attacks on clean air protections from big corporate polluters and their allies in Congress, voters across the political spectrum view the Clean Air Act very positively; with a 2-to-1 favorable to unfavorable ratio. At the same time, feelings toward Congress continue to drop, especially among Democrats and independents. Just 18 percent of voters nationally give Congress a favorable rating, while 56 percent rate Congress unfavorable.  The unfavorable rating of Congress is up 9 percent since the American Lung Association’s last survey released in June 2011.

“The survey clearly indicates that voters reject the notion that we have to choose between strong safeguards against air pollution and economic growth,” said Andrew Bauman, Vice President at Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. “In fact, voters overwhelmingly believe that stronger safeguards against air pollution will create jobs in America.”

“The poll does show there is broad support across partisan lines for new carbon regulations on power plants,” said Marc DelSignore, President of Perception Insight. “However, there is a significant difference in the views regarding the impact regulations may have on the economy, with Republicans expressing higher concern for possible job loss and rising energy prices than Democrats or independents.”

The full survey, along with slides and a memo from Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Perception Insight may be found here.

Methodology: The survey was conducted for the American Lung Association by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner and Perception Insight. The firms conducted a national survey of 2,000 likely 2012 voters, including oversamples of 400 likely voters each in the following states: Maine, Ohio and Pennsylvania. The survey was conducted February 27- March 4, 2012. The margin of error for the full national sample is 3.5%. For each oversample region, it is approximately 4.9% depending on sample size.

###

 

Meet me in Urbana

Published on October 19, 2011 by Leave a reply

This Saturday, I’ll be talking PR, web & communications strategy at Illinois Democratic Women’s “Political Campaign College” in Urbana. Although probably not as thrilling as the Illini thumping the Boilermakers, it should be a fun discussion nonetheless. Contact IDW to reserve your seat at the discussion.

IDW Campaign Training Flier Champaign

 

Video – 35th Ward Aldermanic Forum

Published on February 11, 2011 by 1 Comment

Earlier this week, the Logan Square Chamber of Commerce hosted a forum for 35th ward candidates. Miguel Sotomayor, Nancy Schiavone and incumbent Alderman Rey Colon spoke for 90 minutes on a variety of business and community issues including parking, schools, public safety and that mysterious thing called Menu Money.

Read more

Tom Geoghegan returns to the Hideout

Published on November 3, 2010 by Leave a reply

There’s no better place to hear Tom speak than at Mark Bazer’s “The Interview Show” at  the Hideout, Chicago’s greatest venue for thought-provoking music, community and discussion.

During his run for Congress last year, Tom spoke with Bazer about filibusters, ancient Mesopotamian usury laws, and the merits of beer on the campaign trail. This time around, Tom will talk about his new book, the success of countries with bigger social safety nets, and how a stronger social democracy might be the key to increased competitiveness in the international marketplace.

Other guests include Grammy award-winning hip-hop artist Rhymefest and Chicago folk musicians Sones de Mexico Ensemble.

WHAT: “The Interview Show”  at The Hideout

WHEN: Friday, Nov. 5. 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m.

WHERE: 1354 W. Wabansia Ave., Chicago.

TICKETS: $5 at the door.

You trust her to feed you, now trust her to lead you

Published on September 1, 2010 by Leave a reply

You can follow Ina’s write-in campaign to replace Roland Burris on her Facebook page or on Twitter.

Roll Call

Published on October 22, 2009 by Leave a reply

Roll Call’s “Shop Talk” profiles the Julie Hamos for Congress campaign team:

Hamos has also put her campaign team in place, and the team includes several new aides to the 10-year state Representative.

Campaign manager Julie Sweet most recently managed author Tom Geoghegan’s (D) long-shot special election bid in the 5th district, which was won by now-Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.). Field Director Russell Griffin served in the same capacity for Rep. Donna Edwards’ (D-Md.) triumphant primary bid over then-Rep. Albert Wynn (D-Md.). Political Director Eric Danko is a former campaign aide for Rep. Debbie Halvorson (D-Ill.), while Finance Director Kari Lundstad-Vogt most recently served as a job bank coordinator at EMILY’s List.

They are joined by Press Secretary Christopher Lackner, who most recently worked with Sweet on Geoghegan’s special election bid.

Hamos has also signed up Will Robinson and Tierney Hunt of the New Media Firm to do her media, Diane Feldman and Melissa Diemand of the Feldman Group to do her polling, Lloyd Betourney of the Public Response Group to do her direct mail and Brett Di Resta of the Maccabee Group to do her media.

Read the whole thing here.

What’s in a (policy) name?

Published on April 7, 2009 by Leave a reply

I read this article in Progress Illinois today and it got me thinking.

One of the challenges of nationalized health care is the name itself: Socialized medicine. Single payer health care. Nationalized health care. “European-style” or worse yet, “Canadian-style.” (Canadian-style?! Sure, we’ll give their bacon a whirl… but their policy of providing efficient, effective and comprehensive health and social services to everyone? You keep that on your side of the border, eh!)

In recent years, some advocates have taken to calling it “Medicare for All,” the concept of which was developed by Senator Ted Kennedy and unveiled at a speech to the National Press Club in 2005.

Paul Krugman summed up the merits of this terminology in a subsequent op-ed:

["Medicare for all"] reminds voters that America already has a highly successful, popular single-payer program, albeit only for the elderly. It shows that we’re talking about government insurance, not government-provided health care.

Tom Geoghegan revisited the idea in 2007, complete with a hat tip to Mr. Krugman.

“One thing that Ronald Reagan proved is that people like big, simple ideas: In his era, the big simple idea was tax cuts, and in ours, the big simple idea should be “Medicare for all adults,” and “national coverage of children, too.” (I know it comes out to the same thing, but since single-payer is a big pill to swallow, it’s nice to cut it in two.) Above all, keep it simple. The Democrats seem to specialize in coming up with health-care plans that only Paul Krugman can understand.”

This issue was, of course, one of Tom’s major platforms in his recent run for Congress.

Socialized medicine? Not in my country. But Medicare for All? That sounds awfully American to me.

Amazing inauguration photo

Published on January 23, 2009 by Leave a reply

This photo is a taken by David Bergman using a gigapan camera, which capture unbelievalby high resolution images. Zoom in to see all the familiar faces surrounding Barack Obama as he gave his inaugural address. You can view the full screen version here, and read the photographer’s take on the shot on his blog.

Bonus points for finding Clarence Thomas apparently fast asleep and Yo-Yo Ma taking a snapshot with his iPhone.