Posted on 06/27/2006 6:15:30 PM PDT by Jean S
There are two ways to ask questions about “the most important issue or problem.”
The more common technique asks about the most important issue or problem “facing the nation today” (or state or community). The second, less-used approach is to ask about the issue or problem that “your own family worries most about.” Two very different lists of issues or problems result.
The first question identifies issues that are officially “most important.” These are the issues politicians and the media talk about, “hot” issues like Iraq, immigration and global warming. The second question uncovers issues real people and families actually worry about. These are what I call “morning issues,” the concerns Americans typically fret about when they open their eyes in the morning. These are issues that keep them tossing and turning and grinding their teeth through the night.
If a politician wants to connect with voters and separate himself from the status quo, he or she would be advised to spend more time talking about these morning issues and less time on the official-issue agenda. It’s called being in touch.
Congress and the national media are often completely out of touch with these morning issues, especially because these personal concerns are often local in nature. They may involve traffic, drought and water restrictions, local crimes or school issues. But sometimes personal issues are genuinely national in their impact.
Consider something as ubiquitous as the Internet. According to a recent Harris poll, 77 percent of all U.S. adults are going online. The survey found that the average time spent on the Internet is nine hours per week. That’s a lot of time. And people care a lot about the things that occupy their time. Therefore, I’d argue that Internet-related issues are more important than Washington insiders might suspect. Or at least they could be if someone in government focused on them.
If politicians, for example, developed serious plans to do things like limit spam or provide free wi-fi service, as some municipalities are doing, they would enjoy considerable public support. In this vein, Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) may be onto something with their Federal Research Public Access Act of 2006, which would require online disclosure of federally funded research. A Harris poll conducted in April found that 82 percent of Americans believe that “if tax dollars pay for scientific research, people should have free access to the results of the research on the Internet.”
Besides improved Internet access, the Cornyn-Lieberman bill plays to another morning issue, health fears. Consider the anxiety many people fear about Alzheimer’s disease. A recent Met Life Foundation survey found that many Americans worry a lot about getting Alzheimer’s and feel unprepared to deal with its onset. Wouldn’t fostering free access to federal research into ways that people can avoid Alzheimer’s be a feather in someone’s cap?
Weight loss is another significant health-related concern of most Americans. Federally funded research results telling us what works and doesn’t work would be welcomed by many overweight Web users.
It’s these under-the-radar issues that the public really cares about and that Congress might act on if members just took a closer look at Americans’ real concerns in their polls rather than cataloging the “official” issues of Washington insiders.
Consider the National Do-Not-Call Registry as a proof of concept. Real people once experienced genuine angst about having their family dinners interrupted by telemarketers. Government responded to the squeaky wheel. Now you can get off the telemarketers’ lists. A politician who could realistically claim credit for the registry could probably run for president and win.
Someone in government actually did something that real people really care about. More politicians should try it.
Hill is director of Hill Research Consultants, a Texas-based firm that has polled for GOP candidates and causes since 1988.
If the 'Rats want me to vote for them, they could have one of my Senators stop by and make one for me (they could stop by the night before or in the morning as their schedule allowed).
I'm not kidding! ;-)
Not being blown up by a bomb.
That would not tend to be a recurring issue for a given individual.
I quite agree. I haven't seen any of those people polled by Zogby or Rasmussen.
How much do you know about John Wayne's wife?
I don't know anyting about his wife but if Ronald Reagan respeced him, so do I.
or, maybe...wives?
'He lived with his third wife, Pilar Palette Wayne, who was born in Peru, in an 11-room, seven-bathroom, $175,000 house in Newport Beach, Calif., where he had a 135-foot yacht. He owned cattle ranches in Stanfield and Springerville, Ariz.
Mr. Wayne's first two marriages, to Josephine Saenz and Esperanzo Bauer, also Latin Americans, ended in divorces. He had seven children from his marriages, and more than 15 grandchildren.'
I respect him, too. Just wondering about what some other, more (cough) extreme freepers would feel.
Oh, great. And then we could have the US Legislature instead of just the MA Legislature spending all of our tax money debating whether Fluffernutter is ok.
NOT!
When he chose to marry the Latin ladies, there wasn't such a huge problem with illegal aliens refusing to honor the laws of the land, running drug gangs, or demanding services they are not entitled to, not to mention posing the national security threat that we (finally) recognize...
Oh, come on... Can't you just let it be?
Hey, Congressmen! Hey, RNC! I have a problem with consultants for the GOP who propose unConstitutional action by the federal government.
Let's see them solve THAT problem.
The Duke spoke fluent Spanish, and had a house in Mexico. He also had wives who were Mexican-American and Peruvian.
Yawn.
I just read #15, I understand what you meant now. I never knew that.
Well, as a John Wayne fan, I know this makes me feel a whole helluva lot about the entire illegal alien invasion.
Now I can actually smile as my country accepts the castoffs from a corrupt Mexican political and economic system.
In the years when he married them (1933, 1946, 1954) they were considered attractive and exotic, as was, say, Desi Arnaz. Latin culture, Cuba, etc - it was hot.
I could care less whom he married - I liked the guy a lot.
I doubt that even he visualized the future immigration debacle, and he died in 1979.
You misinterpreted my post, FRiends, the pic was supposed to illustrate one of the responses most Americans' give to the question, "identify issues that are officially “most important".........
and a response to the "morning issues", "the concerns Americans typically fret about when they open their eyes in the morning", might include 'their fellows' crankiness'.
Other than that, the most important thing to me is that the time on my coffee machine works.
I was polled once, in the MORNING, and I told them never to call again. It was for the 2002 New York gubernatorial election.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.