.
April 12th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Should basic citizenship test be part of voter registration?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: SAUL LOEB/AFP/GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

One of the requirements for becoming a citizen of the United States is passing a written civics test. Questions include: What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress? Who is Commander in Chief of the military? What is the highest court in the United States?

Pretty easy, right?

Well last month, Newsweek gave 1,000 Americans the U.S. citizenship test to see if they could pass it if they had to. 38% failed. Questions like why we fought the Cold War stumped 73%. Defining the Bill of Rights tripped up 44%. 29% couldn't name our current vice president. And 6% weren't sure when we celebrate Independence Day.

But it's not just civics and American history many Americans aren't "getting." There is a general disconnect between what many voters think and what actually goes on in Washington. According to a CNN poll, most Americans think that the government spends a lot more money on programs like foreign aid and public broadcasting than it actually does. Many Americans support cuts to those programs even though they amount to very little of the overall budget. When it comes to entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicaid - the ones that really cost our government the big bucks - most Americans want to avoid cuts.

In a column for CNN.com, contributor LZ Granderson says that too many ignorant voters in this country may be to blame for too many incompetent men and women in Congress. Granderson suggests weeding out "some of the ignorant by making people who want to vote first pass a test." He suggests the same citizenship test immigrants must pass.

Here’s my question to you: Should a basic citizenship test be part of the voter registration process?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Voter Registration
April 12th, 2011
05:00 PM ET

What should Pres. Obama say in tomorrow's budget speech?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Without question, it's the most serious problem facing this country. And if it isn't addressed in a meaningful way and soon, we're not going to have a country.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/12/art.obama.flag.jpg caption=""]
We're talking about the national debt at $14.3 trillion. Annual deficits of $1.5 trillion. And the inability of our federal government to even go near addressing this stuff in a meaningful way.

It took the threat of government shutdown to get them to free a paltry $38.5 billion dollars in cuts for this year's budget. That's chump change.

Critics say that President Obama has failed to lead on this issue. Perhaps until now. He's scheduled to give what is billed as a major speech tomorrow on our budget crisis. This is the same President Obama who appointed a deficit reduction commission almost a year ago and then has ignored their recommendations which were given to him last December, conveniently after the midterm elections. Tomorrow however, he is expected to release his plan to reduce the deficit which will build on those recommendations. It's about time.

Like them or not, if it wasn't for the pressure being brought to bear on this subject by the Tea Party, my guess is Washington would just continue to kick the can down the road. Tomorrow's speech could be a defining moment for the president. If Americans are not convinced that he and the Congress take our economic crisis as seriously as the rest of us do, they may all be looking for a job in 18 months. And maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing either.

Here's my question to you: What should the president say in his budget speech tomorrow?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Budget cuts • President Barack Obama
April 11th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Is Pres. Obama's birth certificate still a legitimate issue?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The so-called "birther" movement has been back in the news ever since Donald Trump has started talking about running for president in 2012.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/11/art.obama.jpg caption=""]
Trump says he's not convinced President Obama was born in this country and, therefore, is constitutionally ineligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief. Last week Trump told NBC's Today Show that he's sent his own investigators to Hawaii to dig a little deeper on the Obama-birth issue. Trump wants more proof than what the Administration and State of Hawaii has already provided.

On ABC's "This Week," a chief adviser to President Obama mocked Trump's birther focus and possible run for president in 2012 saying, quote, "That's not leadership. That's kind of sideshow behavior."

But Trump fired back today saying that if he ran for president, he'd be the Obama campaign's worst nightmare.

Former Alaska governor and 2008 candidate for vice president Sarah Palin defended Trump for hiring investigators. She says she believes the president was born here but that, because his real birth certificate is not available, the president may be hiding something.

Trump's been climbing in the polls lately, second only to former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. And the birther issue certainly makes Trump stand out in a field of possible Republican presidential candidates that include Romney, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty and Congresswoman and Tea Party leader Michele Bachmann.

And whether he ultimately decides to run or not, it's also a great way to get a lot of free publicity for his television show. Which may be what this has been about all along.

But that's not the question. This is: Is President Obama's birth certificate still a legitimate issue?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: President Barack Obama
April 11th, 2011
05:00 PM ET

Threat of govt shutdown cut $38B: How will serious deficit reduction ever be accomplished?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

It was close, but less than two hours before the federal government was set to shut down Friday night, Republicans and Democrats came to an agreement on $38.5 billion in spending cuts to the 2011 fiscal budget.

All the expected self-congratulatory back-patting and smiles accompanied the deal. Some even touted the measure as creating the largest spending cuts in American history. But let's not forget the fiscal year is half over already, and they've been putting this off for six months. Let's also not forget that when it comes to the debt crisis in this country, the 2011 budget is only the tip of the iceberg. In the eight days leading up to the vote Friday night alone, our national debt rose by $54 billion. We are anticipated to run a deficit of $1.4 trillion this year, so $38.5 billion is chump change.

The next big fight on Capitol Hill will be over raising the nation's debt ceiling. The Treasury Department says we'll reach that limit of $14.3 trillion dollars around May 16. Starting this weekend, Congress will be on a two-week spring break. That makes a lot of sense. That means when they return, they'll only have about two weeks to hammer out a deal before the country runs out of money. Many Republicans have said they will not vote to raise the debt ceiling under any circumstances. Period.

President Barack Obama is expected weigh in on all of this Wednesday in a speech that will lay out his plan for reducing the deficit. The president will propose cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and call for reforms to Social Security. He will also suggest raising taxes for Americans making more than $250,000 a year.

All things we've heard before. All things that are needed and, of course, nothing's been done. But Congress is going on vacation.

Here’s my question to you: If it takes the threat of a government shutdown to cut $38 billion, how will serious deficit reduction ever be accomplished?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Deficit • Government
April 7th, 2011
05:00 PM ET

Do you believe you're being told the truth about the nuclear accident in Japan?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: YASUYOSHI CHIBA/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

A 7.1 magnitude earthquake shook northeastern Japan today, the strongest aftershock since the massive 9.0 earthquake and tsunami that followed devastated the nation four weeks ago.

One of the big concerns of course is possible further damage to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. The Tokyo Electric Power Company - or TEPCO which runs the plant - said there were no serious incidents as a result of the aftershock.

Or so they say...

Radioactivity from the plant has poisoned the surrounding land, air and ocean. Millions of people have been exposed. And millions more could be… as radioactivity has been picked up in food and drinking water. And detected in faraway places like California.

This week, workers plugged a crack at the plant that had been gushing contaminated water into the ocean for weeks. As a result, TEPCO says radiation levels in the water off the coast there have dropped dramatically.

Yesterday, the head of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation said the Fukushima accident is not expected to have any serious impact to the health of the Japanese people. He said "We have seen traces of iodine in the air all over the world now, but they are much, much, much lower than traces we have seen at similar distances after Chernobyl."

But not everyone is feeling so certain.

In South Korea, more than 130 primary schools and kindergartens were closed today outside Seoul. People there are worried that windy, rainy weather could be carrying radioactive material from nearby Japan. North Korea also aired warnings on television for its people to stay indoors during the rain and to take a full shower if caught outside in a storm. Even here in the United States, some chefs are using sensors to test levels of radiation in the fish they plan to serve in restaurants.

Here’s my question to you: Do you believe you're being told the truth about the nuclear accident in Japan?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Japan earthquake • Nuclear power
April 7th, 2011
04:56 PM ET

How much do you care if there is a gov't shutdown?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Our government is broken. The Democratic Congress under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid chose not to bother passing a budget in September, when it was due.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/07/art.pelosi.jpg caption="House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi speaks during a press conference about the possible government shutdown."]
Now, because of disagreement over a few billion in spending cuts when we are running trillion-dollar-plus deficits, the federal government is set to shut down Friday night.

And we go around telling other countries how they should conduct their affairs.

A new Gallup Poll says nearly 60% of Americans want lawmakers to vote for a compromise on these budget cuts and avoid a government shutdown rather than continuing to hold out for a budget they agree with. Not surprisingly, when you break it down by party, more Republican voters than Democratic voters want their party leaders to stick to their guns and not give in.

Fifty-one percent of Republican voters say their leaders should hold out for the budget plan they want, even if it means a government shutdown. And 44% said they should agree to a compromise.

But only 27% of Democrats say their leaders should hold out for the plan they want even if it means a shutdown, while 68% say Democratic lawmakers should compromise, even if it means passing a budget they disagree with.

The Gallup Poll also found that Americans think President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress are doing the better job on the budget than the Republicans are – 41% to 34%. But 20% of those polled had no opinion.
Here’s my question to you: How much do you care if there is a government shutdown?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Government
April 6th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

What does it mean that the U.S. government spent 8 times more than it took in in March?

ALT TEXT

Committee Chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) (C) speaks during a markup hearing before the House Budget Committee on Capitol Hill. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The clock is ticking. The federal government will shut down Friday night if Congress does not agree on a 2011 budget. Republicans in the House and Democrats in the Senate appear to be billions of dollars apart on spending cuts and a deal is nowhere in sight.

Pretty pathetic.

Oh, and President Obama is off fundraising in Pennsylvania and New York tonight. But apparently they are all going to try to get together at the White House when the president gets back there later.

But our problems with debt and spending are staggering. And our lawmakers' failure to address the issue in any meaningful way borders on being criminal.

Try this on. According to the Treasury Department, the federal government spent more than eight times what it brought in in the month of March. Eight times.

And by the end of this fiscal year in September, the national debt will exceed $15.4 trillion.

How did we get here?

Well for one, the size of government has gotten out of hand: More people now work for the government - 22.5 million Americans - than work in the manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities industries combined.

Republican Congressman Paul Ryan from Wisconsin, the new chairman of the House Budget Committee, says that the United States is at a "tipping point" in its debt crisis. He says the Congressional Budget Office predicts our economy will simply be unable to continue past 2037 if something serious isn't done soon.

Here’s my question to you: What does it mean that the U.S. government spent 8 times more than it took in in March?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 6pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: Government
April 6th, 2011
05:00 PM ET

Does America need a wild card like Donald Trump in 2012 presidential race?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

He's got big bucks, weird hair, a big-time reality show franchise and lots of buildings with his name on them. He's outspoken and has never shied away from a television camera. But does any of that make billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump a good fit for the Oval Office?
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/06/art.trump.jpg caption=""]
He seems to think so. What a surprise.

While he hasn't officially announced he's running for president, he's putting more than his toe in the water.

For one thing, he has managed to reignite the Obama "birther" debate. Trump wants to see an official Barack Obama birth certificate. He says by not producing one he thinks President Obama has something to hide.

Trump is scheduled to speak at several political events in early primary states: a Tea Party rally in south Florida next weekend, a dinner held by the Iowa Republican Party in Des Moines later this spring, and he'll be part of the traditional "Politics and Eggs" breakfast series in New Hampshire in June.

Speaking of New Hampshire, a poll of primary voters in that state shows Trump running a close second to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and well ahead of other well-known Republicans.

"The Donald" says some wacky things that likely make political strategists in Washington cringe, but a run by the New York billionaire has the potential to shake up the 2012 presidential race. Some are even comparing his possible entry to the run independent Ross Perot, himself a wealthy businessman, made in 1992. Perot got 19% of the popular vote, running on the platforms of smaller government and greater fiscal responsibility, two issues Trump has talked a lot about. And two issues that still have not been addressed.

Here’s my question to you: Does America need a wild card like Donald Trump in the 2012 presidential race?

Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.

And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.


Filed under: 2012 Election • Donald Trump
April 5th, 2011
06:00 PM ET

Do you think Hillary Clinton could beat President Obama next year?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

A radio host in Southern California named John Phillips wrote a piece in the Los Angeles Times titled "Why Hillary Clinton Must Run in 2012."
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/images/04/05/art.clinton.jpg caption=""]
In it, he lays out why he thinks Clinton could win the Oval Office this time around. He points to approval ratings– President Obama at just 42% in a new Quinnipiac University poll, Secretary of State Clinton at 66% in a similar poll conducted by Gallup.

Phillips also talks about dissatisfied Clinton backers from the 2008 primaries who never really fell in love with Obama. To quote, "They just fell in line." And Phillips suggests these folks are so fed up with Obama they could be persuaded to vote for a Republican rather than vote to re-elect the president.

But why is Hillary Clinton suddenly so much more attractive as a candidate? Phillips says the military action in Libya was Hillary's "I told you so" moment with "Hillary serving as the realistic, aggressive war hawk and Obama being a not-ready-for-prime-time waffler."

While Phillips might be on to something, the secretary of state has said repeatedly that she is not interested in running for president again.

When Wolf Blitzer asked her in Cairo if she'd want to be president in 2012, she quickly said no.

What about 2016? She said:

"I am doing what I want to do right now and I have no intention or any idea even of running again. I'm going to do the best I can at this job for the next two years."

Of course 2012 is still a ways off, and in politics, as we have seen, stranger things have happened.

Here’s my question to you: Do you think Hillary Clinton could beat President Obama next year?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST

April 5th, 2011
05:00 PM ET

Should Moammar Gadhafi be allowed to remain in Libya?

ALT TEXT

(PHOTO CREDIT: MAHMUD TURKIA/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

There's little chance U.S. military involvement in Libya will be considered a success if Moammar Gadhafi is not removed from power.

President Obama has called on Gadhafi to step down over and over again. So has the United Nations and the opposition forces fighting Gadhafi in Libya have as well; but that hasn't happened and it doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon.

A government spokesman for Gadhafi's regime said yesterday that Libya is ready to reform its political system and even hold democratic elections, but that Gadhafi will not step aside. The spokesman said the Libyan people must decide whether their leader for the past 42 years, Gadhafi, should stay in power.

Gadhafi's second son, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, echoed all of this to the BBC in an interview today. He says sweeping changes are possible in Libya - But he scoffed at the idea of his family leaving the country or going into exile.

He told the BBC, "It's our country you want us to leave? To where? The Maldives? To the Caribbean? We are Libyans."

The Libyan government insists that the Gadhafi regime is not attacking civilians. Nobody believes that. And I don't think anyone is going to buy the "ready for reform" line either.

Here’s my question to you: Should Moammar Gadhafi be allowed to remain in Libya?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

FULL POST


Filed under: Libya
« older posts
newer posts »