Question 1: Here are six issues where we could win real victories for working families in 2007. Which of these issues do you think the WFP should work on in 2007?
| Fair Funding for Education | 12.71% |
| Protecting Health Care in New York | 18.59% |
| Paid Sick Leave | 1.71% |
| Reforming Corporate Subsidies | 8.23% |
| Affordable Housing | 13.57% |
| Environmentally-Smart Building Codes | 2.88% |
Question 2: Here are five important long-term issues that may not be finished in 2007. Which of these issues do you think the WFP should work on in 2007?
| Universal Health Care | 39.10% |
| Progressive Taxation | 8.44% |
| Strengthening Unions | 7.05% |
| Family Friendly Workplaces | 3.31% |
| Energy Independence | 9.62% |
Question 3: The WFP was formed both to deliver real victories for working families and to change the terms of the public debate over the long term. In 2007, do you think it's more important for the WFP to focus on the fights we can win this year (the first set of issues) or the long term fights (the second set of issues)?
| Win real victories in 2007 | 55.45% |
| Push long-term issues | 34.40% |
Question 4: The WFP helped Democrats win key elections in New York, but in the year to come we may have disagreements on specific issues. When there's disagreement on specific issues, do you think the WFP should push the progressive position or support Democratic politicians?
| Push the progressive position | 80.66% |
| Support Democratic politicians | 9.29% |
For more details on the issues in the WFP 2007 Priorities Survey, read WFP Policy Director Josh Mason's blog post on possible WFP issues in 2007.
Technorati tags: Working Families Party
4 comments:
You left the most important one out! A real 911 investigation.
There is some confusion in our/your defining the issues. We want to support education, health care housing. The issue always comes down to How do we pay for it? Additional debt? additional property tax? And that's where progressive taxation comes in. It can be a stand alone issue but its real unifying power is demonstrated when we combine it with the substantive issue. We lose support for our issues when we pay for them through regressive sales, payroll, property taxes and fees. We win support when we pay for them through taxes based on ability to pay-- increased state income tax on incomes over 150,000 and over 500,000
One priority I haven't heard mentioned is the social security solvancy debate. From what I can recall from the debates in early 2005 on the issue, no one even mentioned eliminating the ceiling on social security taxes, or selecting an income level above $90,000 where social security taxes are again collect. (for example dollars 0 -90,000 taxed, then all income over 1 million dollars taxed)
I'm surprised more people didn't vote for family friendly workplaces. I would think more people would support changing the workplace to allow on-site daycare and other benefits to mothers as a high priority issue.
Post a Comment