• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Presidential election and land use issues

Goatman

NAXJA Forum User
NAXJA Member
Location
Bakersfield, CA
Just for information to those who might be interested. This is a note just sent out by United Four Wheel Drive Assoc.

FROM: United Four Wheel Drive Associations

Carla Boucher, Attorney

Statistically, more people than not decide who to vote for based on one or two specific issues and the stand the candidates take on those issues.

If you base your vote on the issue of the environment, or more specifically, on the issue of access opportunities for motorized recreation, United urges those of you in the U.S. (eligible to vote) to vote for George W. Bush/Dick Cheney for President on Nov. 2, 2004.

Here’s why+:

John Kerry’s position on the environment, access, and motorized use:
* Wants immediate crackdown on car emissions, which can jeopardize the availability of future models of light trucks, SUVs and Jeep-type vehicles.
* He has one of the most pro-environmentalist records in the Senate.
* He supports the “Clean Power Act” with substantially more stringent limits on emissions for greenhouse gases, despite the fact that the global warming theory has been disproved by credible peer reviewed science.
* Plans a “Restore America’s Waters’” campaign that would, among other things, instruct all federal agencies that net losses of wetlands will not be tolerated, despite other considerations that agencies must legally make.
* Did not vote on Pres. Bush’s Healthy Forests Initiative (Healthy Forest Restoration Act) and later said he would have voted against the initiative had he voted.
* Supported Clinton’s Roadless Rule and has stated he would “revisit” the rule.
* Promises to end the logging of old-growth trees on public lands, despite any considerations to the contrary that the health of the forest may depend on thinning of old-growth trees.

George Bush’s position on the environment, access, and motorized use:
* Opposes mandatory cuts in carbon dioxide and does not support the Kyoto treaty.
* Initiated a “clear skies initiative” to replace the “Clean Air Act” with a market-based system to encourage companies to cut emissions voluntarily.
* Passed the Healthy Forests Initiative to thin forests to reduce the risk of wildfire.
*Suspended, then proposed replacing, the Clinton Roadless Rule. The proposed replacement would leave road building and other roadless area management decisions to the states.
* 2005 budget will address his promises to eliminate forest and park maintenance backlog.


Thank you,

Carla

Carla Boucher, Attorney
United Four Wheel Drive Associations
P.O. Box 15696
Chesapeake, VA 23328
(757) 546-7969


+Information taken from Voter Guide, The Virginian-Pilot, Section V, October 24, 2004, researched by Bill Bartel and Erica Smith, copyright 2004
 
My vote doesn't need any more reinforcement. ;)

Carla is a very nice lady, as she is the President of my local club, Tidewater Fourwheelers. She also heads up the entire trail ride part of Camp Jeep.

Thanks for posting.

:thumbup:
 
I think that Shrub should have signed onto the Kyoto Accord, but Klinton's "Roadless Initiative" was (is) one of the most arrogant, back-stabbing, illegitimate land grabs I've ever encountered.

I'm in that group of people who think this election boils down to a choice between two rather poor candidates. Now that that's on the table, I also think it's clear which of the two is by far the "worser" of the two. If this off-roading and Jeeping hobby is at all important to you, you really have no choice in this election. Go Shrub.
 
Eagle said:
I think that Shrub should have signed onto the Kyoto Accord, but Klinton's "Roadless Initiative" was (is) one of the most arrogant, back-stabbing, illegitimate land grabs I've ever encountered.

I'm in that group of people who think this election boils down to a choice between two rather poor candidates. Now that that's on the table, I also think it's clear which of the two is by far the "worser" of the two. If this off-roading and Jeeping hobby is at all important to you, you really have no choice in this election. Go Shrub.


LOL at Eagle, but I agree in general.

I voted early, and I was never in need of any convincing... but for those that are, it's my opinion that the current administration is the better choice to continue to address a few issues that are important to me: National Defense, management of public lands, and tax relief for individuals, families and small businesses.
 
It was cool i went to pargon last weekend and they had all these nice political looking sgns under the glass... "offroaders for bush" i thought it was very simple yet fitting..
 
Simple as this in my mind
Kerry=more govt'
Bush= more people control


There is topics that are of major interest to me, taxes for small business (i own one), health care (my business). Land use issues (our hobby). Stem cell research, nat. defense & home land security. All major issues to me. Not the mention the economy. I just don't like the voting records of the Kerry side, the "PLAN". I still haven't seen what the hell these plans' are. Nor do I really want too.
I knew the way I was going months ago, the debates just really tied it all together for me. Go Shrub as Eagle stated. Juice
 
Eagle said:
I think that Shrub should have signed onto the Kyoto Accord...
WAY too many problems with it. Perhaps the intent was good, but...

It reminds me of those decent bills submitted to Congress that get so much pork attached to them that congressman end up voting against the bill they once supported.
 
Could someone inform this ignorant voter of what the Kyoto Accord is? I've already made up my mind a long time ago. Kerry just doesn't support the troops, no matter how much he swears he does.
 
SteelblueSteve said:
Bush=moron who couldn't get accepted to U. of Houston law school.
Kerry=less of a moron who probably actually drove a Jeep, maybe in combat duty,which Bush can never say. My 2 cents worth.
Uh oh. Crap, I am not even gonna start on you here. Sorry to see you disrespect the President, and that you are a Kerry fan. I will stop now, before I unload.
 
SteelblueSteve said:
Bush=moron who couldn't get accepted to U. of Houston law school.
Kerry=less of a moron who probably actually drove a Jeep, maybe in combat duty,which Bush can never say. My 2 cents worth.

Well...M. Jordan didnt make his high school basketball team either, did he. And, Im not planning on basing my plans on who should be the next pres on whether or not they drove a Jeep for goodness's sake!

Im voting for the one who has stood by his ideals and values and promises from day one, and anyone who knows anything about either one of the candidates knows who that is.
 
Well .... at least you know what it's worth!!! :roflmao:
SteelblueSteve said:
Bush=moron who couldn't get accepted to U. of Houston law school.
Kerry=less of a moron who probably actually drove a Jeep, maybe in combat duty,which Bush can never say. My 2 cents worth.
 
SteelblueSteve said:
My 2 cents worth.

Ditto!!

That's what that opinion is worth. Not much to go on to choose a president.........

Moron........an interesting word......and unfortunately it applies to way too many uninformed voters.
 
Land use is only one piece of a huge pie. Anyone who votes for someone based on only one aspect of their agenda is a moron. You should know where all parties stand on every issue before voting.

Maybe a candidate will let you drive anywhere and everywhere you want, but because the price of gas is through the roof, you can't. Or the they screwed heath care up so much, your work could not afford to cover you, and you get injured while 4 wheeling causing you to have a medical bill over $10k and you have to sell the Jeep to pay for it.

Maybe the other candidate will restrict where you wheel, but create more jobs and boost the economy to where you now are getting paid more so you can take more vacations to wheeling destinations like Moab or the Rubicon. Gas prices go down, so driving to your wheeling destination is not so expensive.

To me, it is completely asinine to say "I am voting for so-and-so because of this one reason, I don't care where he stands on anything else". That is basically what many of you are saying (maybe not in this thread, but on the numerous other threads).

What about the right to choose? Your daughter gets slipped roofies and gets date raped and gets pregnant, but "someone" has outlawed abortions.

Why not let the gays get married? They already let them adopt, so it's ok to let them adopt a child and raise it in a family where the parents are not married?

I don't have kids, and I'm not gay, so they don't affect me, but they are still issues (along with many others, those are just the easy ones) that need to be resolved.

I don't think either candidate has a good plan for social security.

Health care sucks, and so do both parties thoughts on it.

You people need to take a look at your priorities. If wheeling is your number one priority, then I pity the pathetic life you must lead. Sure, it is a hobby and passion for most of us, but my family, health, job, and personal life come way before wheeling. You need to look at those priorities and weigh where each candidate stand on them and how their decisions will effect you before deciding to elect one or the other.

Think about it,
Steve
 
I see no problem with outlawing abortion. Yeah, it kinda sucks if you're daughter is drugged and impregnated, but you're still ending the life of another.
Willis said:
Health care sucks, and so do both parties thoughts on it.
You said that what if "someone" screwed up health care. Then you say this. First you imply that Bush is gonna screw health care up to the point where we no longer have coverage and have to pay our own way. Then you say neither has a clue about what to do. At first I just figured you were a Kerry supporter and therefore Kerry will fix all things and Bush will ruin all things. But that confuses me :confused:
The first half sounds like you're just saying Kerry is the answer. And that's your right to say. But while looking at the parties and their stance, just make sure that when trashing one candidate you aren't making another seem great when he can't even maintain one viewpoint.
 
Willis said:
Land use is only one piece of a huge pie. Anyone who votes for someone based on only one aspect of their agenda is a moron. You should know where all parties stand on every issue before voting.

For some people land access and land issues are HUGE issues, they're livelyhood depends upon it. The off-road vehicle industry employs lots of people. How much sales tax revenue is generated by off-roaders buying equipment going on trips? How many people's salaries are paid or supported by off-road enthusiast's $$$. How many rural communites are helped by the influx of the off-roaders pocketbook. The majority are small business owners, fab shops, gear shops, your local 4wd store. Think of how much money you spend on a wheelin' trip. Food, gas, Lodging, souveniers, etc.

There's a lot of money spent in recreation and goes to promote business, keeping people employed and tax revenue. Don't discount it as a non-issue.

Think about it

I suggest you do the same.
 
Willis said:
You people need to take a look at your priorities. If wheeling is your number one priority, then I pity the pathetic life you must lead. Sure, it is a hobby and passion for most of us, but my family, health, job, and personal life come way before wheeling. You need to look at those priorities and weigh where each candidate stand on them and how their decisions will effect you before deciding to elect one or the other.

Steve
Land use issues is the main issue for me right in front of tuition prices. As a college student going after a degree in mechanical engineering I know I won't be able to get a job involving ME right away after I graduate reguardless of whos the president, and I will probably work a crappy low paying job for a year or two. Healthcare isn't an issue for me, but I don't have a family to provide for. I don't think I live a pathetic life and I don't want your pitty just because I live a different life than you do right now. Too many people get stuck on themselves and assume everyone is like them. That's why we vote, so many different groups are represented. The republican party is the one out of major two that shares more of my philisophical views, but I vote Libertarian a lot also. I can't wait till tuesday so all this political ranting will be over. Don't get me wrong political debate is a sign of a strong democracy, but I am tired of it.
 
Willis said:
Maybe the other candidate will restrict where you wheel, but create more jobs and boost the economy to where you now are getting paid more so you can take more vacations to wheeling destinations like Moab or the Rubicon. Gas prices go down, so driving to your wheeling destination is not so expensive.

The hard-core enviroDems have proved otherwise. Kerry voted for the California Desert Protection Act which locked up 100's of 1000's of acres of land to off-road travel. The NPS (who administers the East Mojave NP) is now trying to limit hunting on those same lands, stabbing the hunting community in the back who compromises allowed the CDPA to get through Congress.

Barbara Boxer, one of California's Senators, currently has a bill on the floor of the Senate that would create thousands of acres more wilderness in California.

Areas like Moab and the Rubicon are under constant threat of closure and restriction.

Think about it
I suggest you do the same.
 
Back
Top