What’s at stake?

November 1, 2012

This year’s PBS Election special, What’s at Stake, presents viewers with an up-to-the-minute review of this year’s top campaign issues and considers how the outcome of the election could impact voters’ lives.

In the past few years the United States has suffered from unusual weather; from the worse drought in over sixty years to Tropical Storm Sandy, extreme weather could eventually affect the way Americans live.

Election 2012: What’s at Stake examines why climate change rarely comes up on the campaign trail.

Plus, with 23 million Americans unemployed, probably no other issue has received more attention than jobs and taxes. Massive unemployment leaves a big drag on the economy and experts say neither candidate has a quick fix for America’s sluggish job market.

Last modified: November 1, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Tags: , , , , , ,
 
SUGGESTED STORIES
  • thumb
    Main Street: Findlay, Ohio
    Need to Know travels to Ohio to assess how workers are faring after the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs over the past 35 years.
  • thumb
    Following the money: Tax breaks
    New CBO report echoes the findings of Need to Know's "A tale or four tax returns."
  • thumb
      Certifiably employable
    Rick Karr recently visited Seattle to look at a program designed to give the unemployed the skills they need to find jobs in one of the country’s fastest-growing industries.

Comments

  • http://www.facebook.com/jesse.garrett.182 Jesse Garrett

    The 2nd amendment was not established to protect the guns of hunters. It was not even established so people can protect their life and property from other individuals. It was established so that people could protect their liberty from their GOVERNMENT. Look it up.

  • http://twitter.com/questionAGW Russell Cook

    NORM ORNSTEIN, at the 2:10 point of the above Climate Change segment: “… And Romney had to pass a litmus test during the primaries, which, was in effect ’climate change is a hoax. Don’t trust the scientists.”

    Mr Ornstein may offer this egregiously simplistic spin all he wants to, but arguably the PBS NewsHour itself could tell its viewers a much more accurate story: namely that Romney and the other conservatives have valid questions about the scientists on the side of Al Gore and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who essentially say the science is settled on the topic of man-caused global warming, because this idea is contradicted by skeptic climate scientists and other science experts in various reports that cite peer-reviewed science journal-publish papers to reach the conclusion that the IPCC has not proven its conclusion and also operates under rather questionable methodology. The NIPCC Reports ( http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2011/2011report.html ) are one such example, while Donna LaFramboise’s book ( http://nofrakkingconsensus.com/my-book/ ) and Steve McIntyre’s web site ( http://climateaudit.org/ ) dive deeply into the way the IPCC works and its questionable methods.

    Romney and other conservatives see two sides to the issue, while the NewsHour apparently does not (“PBS NewsHour global warming coverage: IPCC/NOAA Scientists – 18; Skeptic Scientists – 0″ http://junkscience.com/2012/07/13/pbs-newshour-global-warming-coverage-ipccnoaa-scientists-18-skeptic-scientists-0/ ), and further does not yet offer an explanation for what appears to be a 16 year+ exclusion of skeptic climate scientists from its program (“PBS and Global Warming Skeptics’ Lockout” http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/pbs_and_global_warming_skeptics_lockout.html )

    Since the existence of widespread scientific skepticism is easily found on the issue, we are left to wonder why this PBS program allowed such an egregiously simplistic and demonstrably misleading statement from Norm Ornstein go through unquestioned.