Tag Archives: Election 08

Abstinence only programs aren't effective – Vote Obama

pregnantgirl

The United States continues to have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world—almost twice as high as those of England, Wales and Canada, and eight times as high as those of the Netherlands and Japan.  Every year, roughly nine million new sexually transmitted infections (STIs) occur among teens and young adults in the United States. Compared with rates among teens in Canada and Western Europe, rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia among U.S. teens are extremely high.

According to the US National Vital Statistics Reports, the most recently reported teen pregnancy rate from 2004 is 72.2 per 1000 teens or 7.2 percent.

Bush expanded community-based abstinence education during his term, including a $28 million budget increase for 2009 in an effort to “Teach both abstinence and contraception to teens.”

Obama concurred in April when he said: “We want to make sure that, even as we are teaching responsible sexuality and we are teaching abstinence to children, that we are also making sure that they’ve got enough understanding about contraception.”

Republican John McCain, whose running mate Sarah Palin disclosed that her unmarried 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, has opposed proposals to spend federal money on teen-pregnancy prevention programs.

In Senate votes, McCain has opposed some proposals to pay for teen-pregnancy prevention programs. In 2006, McCain joined fellow Republicans in voting against a Senate Democratic proposal to send $100 million to communities for teen-pregnancy prevention programs that would have included sex education about contraceptives.

In 2005, McCain opposed a Senate Democratic proposal that would have spent tens of millions of dollars to pay for pregnancy prevention programs other than abstinence-only education, including education on emergency contraception such as the morning-after pill. The bill also would have required insurance companies that cover Viagra to also pay for prescription contraception.

pregnant teen Hodges: Dealing with abstinence-only programs
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential pick, backs abstinence-only sex education in schools. Palin revealed that her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is five months pregnant. Critics point to her daughter’s predicament as proof this type of education does not work.

Proponents of abstinence-only are against comprehensive sex education mainly because they believe that such programs subtly encourage children to engage in sexual intercourse. On the other hand, opponents point out that federal government studies have shown students in abstinence-only programs are just as likely to have sex as those not enrolled in such programs.

Abstinence-only sexuality programs don’t work. There is little evidence that teens who participate in abstinence-only programs abstain from intercourse longer than others. It is known, however that when they do become sexually active, teens who received abstinence-only education often fail to use condoms or other contraceptives. In fact, 88 percent of students who pledged virginity in middle school and high school still engage in premarital sex. The students who break this pledge are less likely to use contraception at first intercourse, and they have similar rates of sexually transmitted infections as non-pledgers (Bearman and Brueckner, 2001; Walters, 2005).

Only 26 states, including Michigan, accept these grants, which must be matched by state funds. Birth rates among 15- to 19-year-olds have plunged since 1991 when it was 61.8 births per 1,000. In 2006, the rate was 41.9, even after a slight rise in 2005.

Decline in teenage pregnancy rates precedes abstinence only until marriage funding
To date no NO valuation supports the effectiveness of abstinence only programs. None the less abstinence only programs that censor information on contraception has increased over 3,000% since 1996 reaching $83 million by 2000. And, states have enacted 34 legislative promoting or mandating abstinence only until marriage programming since 1998.

Using data from a 2002 national survey, researchers found that among more than 1,700 unmarried, heterosexual teens between 15 and 19 years old, those who’d received comprehensive sex ed in school were 60 percent less likely to have been pregnant or gotten someone pregnant than teens who’d had no formal sex education.

The study found that teens who’d been through abstinence-only programs were less likely than those who’d received no sex ed to have been pregnant. However, the difference was not significant in statistical terms, which means the finding could have been due to chance.

In addition, there was no evidence that comprehensive sex education increased the likelihood of teen sex or boosted rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) — a concern of people who oppose teaching birth control in schools.

Lead researcher Pamela K. Kohler, of the Center for AIDS and STD at the University of Washington in Seattle told Reuters Health the study “also solidly debunks the myth that teens who learn about birth control are more likely to have sex.” Source: Comprehensive sex ed may cut teen pregnancies

Currently, the federal government champions the abstinence-only approach, giving around $170 million each year to states and community groups to teach kids to say no to sex. This funding precludes mention of birth control and condoms, unless it is to emphasize their failure rates.

As Arthur Caplan, Ph.D.—director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania—said in his article, “Blind faith on sex-ed approach puts kids at risk” – “Actually, you cannot expect abstinence-only sex ed to be protective, effective or in any way useful at all. Ever. Period. Enough already. It’s time to pull the plug on abstinence-only sex education. There are too many lives at stake to put up with a reproductive-health policy that is willing to kill and disable our kids out of an allegiance to a blind faith in something that does not work.”

Abstinence students still having sex – Study tracked 2,057 young people in government-funded programs -  April. 16, 2007 – Students who participated in sexual abstinence programs were just as likely to have sex a few years later as those who did not, according to a long-awaited study mandated by Congress.

Also, those who attended one of the four abstinence classes reviewed reported having similar numbers of sexual partners as those who did not attend the classes, and they first had sex at about the same age as their control group counterparts — 14.9 years, according to Mathematica Policy Research Inc.

Sources:
1. Ventura SJ, Mosher WD, Curtin SC, Abma JC, Henshaw S. Trends in pregnancies and pregnancy rates by outcome: estimates for the United States, 1976-96. Vital Health Stat 2000;21(56):1-49.
2. The Public Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. (P.L. 104-193, August 22, 1996.)
3. Abstinence only sex education is risky and ineffective Mike Stobbe, AP Medical Writer, wrote an article that reported a 3% increase in the teen birth rate—the first increase in 14 years.
4. Study: Birth control education helps reduce pregnancies in high school kids (March. 24, 2008)

Facts on Sex Education in the United States 12/2006

Sex Education Policy
(1) Currently, 35 states mandate either sex education or education about HIV/AIDS and other STIs, but their laws tend to be very general. Policies specifying the content of sex education are typically set at the local level.

Source: Guttmacher Institute, Sex and STD/HIV education, State Policies in Brief, November 2006, , accessed Nov. 28, 2006.

(2) More than two out of three public school districts have a policy to teach sex education. The remaining one-third of districts leave policy decisions up to individual schools or teachers.

Source: Landry DJ et al, Abstinence promotion and the provision of information about contraception in public school district sexuality education policies, Family Planning Perspectives, 1999, 31(6):280–286.

(3) Eighty-six percent of the public school districts that have a policy to teach sex education require that abstinence be promoted. Some 35% require abstinence to be taught as the only option for unmarried people and either prohibit the discussion of contraception altogether or limit discussion to its ineffectiveness. The other 51% have a policy to teach abstinence as the preferred option for teens and permit discussion of contraception as an effective means of preventing pregnancy and STIs. ibid

(4) More than half of the districts in the South with a policy to teach sex education have an abstinence-only policy, compared with one in five of such districts in the Northeast. ibid

Government Support of Abstinence-Only Education
(1) There are three federal programs dedicated to funding restrictive abstinence-only education: Section 510 of the Social Security Act, the Adolescent Family Life Act’s teen pregnancy prevention component and Community-Based Abstinence Education (CBAE). The total funding for these programs is $176 million for FY 2006.
Source:(Unpublished tabulations based on annual federal government appropriations for abstinence-only sex education.)

teen mom(2) Federal law establishes a stringent eight-point definition of “abstinence-only education” that requires programs to teach that sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong and harmful—for people of any age. The law also prohibits programs from advocating contraceptive use or discussing contraceptive methods except to emphasize their failure rates.

Source: Dailard C, Abstinence promotion and teen family planning: the misguided drive for equal funding, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2002, 5(1):1–3; and Dailard C, Fueled by campaign promises, drive intensifies to boost abstinence-only education funds, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2000, 3(2):1–2 & 12.

(3) Federal guidelines now define sexual activity to include any behavior between two people that may be sexually stimulating, which could be interpreted as including even kissing or hand-holding.

Source: Dailard C, Legislating against arousal: the growing divide between federal policy and teenage sexual behavior, Guttmacher Policy Review, 2006, 9(3):12–16.

(4) New federal restrictions have been expanded to target adolescents and young adults between the ages of 12 and 29.

Source: Dailard C, New Bush Administration policy promotes abstinence until marriage among people in their 20s, Guttmacher Policy Review, 2006, 9(4):23.

(5) There is currently no federal program dedicated to supporting comprehensive sex education that teaches young people about both abstinence and contraception.
Source: Dailard C, 2002, op. cit. (see reference 26); and Dailard C, Sex education: politicians, parents, teachers and teens, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2001, 4(1):9–12.

(6) Despite years of evaluation in this area, there is no evidence to date that abstinence-only education delays teen sexual activity. Moreover, recent research shows that abstinence-only strategies may deter contraceptive use among sexually active teens, increasing their risk of unintended pregnancy and STIs.

Source: Kirby D, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001; Bearman PS and Bruckner H, Promising the future: virginity pledges and first intercourse, American Journal of Sociology, 2001, 106(4):859–912; Bruckner H and Bearman PS, After the promise: the STI consequences of adolescent virginity pledges, Journal of Adolescent Health, 2005, 36(4):271–278.

(6) Evidence shows that comprehensive sex education programs that provide information about both abstinence and contraception can help delay the onset of sexual activity among teens, reduce their number of sexual partners and increase contraceptive use when they become sexually active. These findings were underscored in “Call to Action to Promote Sexual Health and Responsible Sexual Behavior,” issued by former Surgeon General David Satcher in June 2001.

Source: Dailard C, Abstinence promotion and teen family planning: the misguided drive for equal funding, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2002, 5(1):1–3; and Dailard C, Fueled by campaign promises, drive intensifies to boost abstinence-only education funds, The Guttmacher Report on Public Policy, 2000, 3(2):1–2 & 12.

Source: Kirby D, Emerging Answers: Research Findings on Programs to Reduce Teen Pregnancy, Washington, DC: National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 2001; Bearman PS and Bruckner H, Promising the future: virginity pledges and first intercourse, American Journal of Sociology, 2001, 106(4):859–912; Bruckner H and Bearman PS, After the promise: the STI consequences of adolescent virginity pledges, Journal of Adolescent Health, 2005, 36(4):271–278.

More than nine in 10 teachers believe that students should be taught about contraception, but one in four are prohibited from doing so.

One in five teachers believe that restrictions on sex education are preventing them from meeting their students’ needs.

Eighty-two percent of adults support comprehensive sex education that teaches students about both abstinence and other methods of preventing pregnancy and STIs.

Only one-third of adults surveyed support abstinence only education, while half oppose the abstinence-only approach.

Reference: PDF file Facts on Sex Education In the United States

pregnant teenPalin backed abstinence only programs in her 2006 gubernatorial race. And today, McCain and Palin’s stands on support for government funded abstinence only until marriage programing have not changed, even though these programs have proven to be ineffectual.  Before entering the voting booth please remember that McCain and Palin are prepared to continue to deny American teens the comprehensive sex education that they so obviously need, and vote Obama – vote for change.

America change is going to do you good

Given the conduct of Bush and his Administration these past 8 years in office, I wonder how clear thinking, intelligent and rational it would be not to stand for change and to vote accordingly? It doesn’t seem to me that voting for more of the same Republican antics would be a wise thing to do.

Economic mismanagement
(1) Bush’s tax cuts for the rich have reduced annual tax revenue available for public needs hundreds of billions each year. McCain and Palin’s plan is more of the same.

(2) Bush/Cheney’s occupation of Afghanistan and invasion of Iraq plan has cost citizens trillions of dollars of debt and interest. This is not to mention the human loss of men and women being sent home in body bags who would have otherwise lived, worked and paid taxes. The tab is estimated to be well into the trillions when you add rehabilitation for injured vets, replacement of military hardware, and the value of things Americans could have produced but didn’t. The vets returning home are not getting the medical help they need. McCain and Palin’s plan is more of the same.

(3) Bush and his buddies finished off the deregulation of banking that began in earnest during Clinton’s presidency. This ideological madness has caused the collapse of investment funds, banks, and the stock value of corporations that depend on them (which is to say most of Wall Street and much of the financial world), as well as a steep decline in the value of most homes in America and a sharp rise in the cost of living in them, foreclosures, and bankruptcies. Now the Bush administration has bailed the big guys out, while McCain claimed the economy is fundamentally sound, and postured that he had to suspend his campaign, when in fact, this was nonsense.

Energy
(4) President Bush lied in his September 6th radio address when he said that the oil in the offshore protected areas is equal to 10 years of current production. It’s not true. The Energy Information Agency, which is the government agency responsible for making estimates of oil reserves, says there are approximately 8 billion of barrels of oil in the protected areas. Current production is approximately 3 billion barrels a year and that means the oil in the offshore protected areas is equal to less than 3 years of annual production, not ten years. Is It News When the President Makes Untrue Statements (i.e. lies)?
America’s Oil and Gas Supply: “American Innovation Creating American Energy, American Jobs, and American Wealth” PDF

Republicans like McCain and Palin are pushing offshore drilling in environmentally sensitive areas as part “an ‘all of the above’ strategy to lower gasoline prices and decrease dependence on imported oil. It can’t be true, because there is not enough oil in these areas to have more than a minimal impact on gas prices (e.g. 3-4 cents per gallon) and even this benefit will not be realized for close to two decades.

When Wall Street Needs Money, Rules of Journalism No Longer Apply

Abortion, Contraception and Dirty Politics
(5) Bush is attempting to redefine contraception as abortion. Can you imagine living in a place where birth control is considered an “abortion” and health insurers won’t cover it? Where even rape victims are denied emergency contraception?

It seems unbelievable, but the Bush Administration is quietly trying to redefine “abortion” to include birth control. The Houston Chronicle says this could wipe out dozens of state laws that protect reproductive freedom for women and also protect rape victims. Access to basic health care for millions of women would be jeopardized. And it’s being pushed as a “rule change”—meaning, it doesn’t need congressional approval. The Bush administration’s draft regulations on abortion and contraception can be read at rhrealitycheck.

It would seem that McCain and Palin’s religious choices and their positions on these issues propose more of the same dirty politics when it comes to eliminating reproductive freedom for women.

War
(6) Bush and his Administration sacrificed America’s finest young men and women on the altar of oil while lying and saying that there were WMD when there weren’t. (Note these statistics are in a state of flux.)

U.S. Confirmed Deaths

Reported Deaths: 4168

Confirmed Deaths: 4161

Pending Confirmation: 7

DoD Confirmation List

(7) Bush and his administration are responsible for American 30,324 casualties re: the war on Iraq. (Note these statistics are in a state of flux.)

(8) Civilian death toll – Bush and his administration are responsible for the slaying of between 87,558 and 95,557 Iraqi’s to attempt to build American oil hegemony in the middle east and to secure a strategic position from which an attack Iran could be launched (primarily women and children ). (Note these statistics are in a state of flux.)


www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

McCain’s position and voting record on the war Iraq are found here at on the issues.

McCain strongly disagrees with those who advocate withdrawing American troops at this time. His strategy for victory (cough) in Iraq is more of the same of what the Bush administration has produced and Palin is in agreement with him.

Abuse of power
(9) For the past eight years, Americans have witnessed the dangerous consequences of an overreaching vice president who has sought at every turn to enhance executive power at the expense of constitutional, legal and ethical safeguards.

Palin has a record of abuse of power as the Governor of Alaska. The “Troopergate” (video analysis link)  Troopergate report PDF, investigation report conducted by an independent investigator and released Friday by a bipartisan legislative committee, tells the tale. It documents the campaign that Palin and her husband Todd waged to get her former brother-in-law fired from the Alaska state troopers. voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/10/palin_too_close_for_comfort….

ObamaIMO Americans deserve much better representation in the Oval Office than the same kind of behavior that they received under Bush, so I do hope they do vote for Obama and his Blueprint for Change because all McCain and Palin propose is more of the same.

Related posts found in this blog: Gay Rights: Equality or Hypocrisy?

Palin Makes Me Puke

Hat tip to Grizzly Bay. Here are some facts about John McCain’s choice for Vice President, Sarah Palin:

(1) She is presently under investigation in Alaska for abuse of power

Sarah Palin is being investigated for abuse of power (7/08) after she fired the Dept. of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Palin pressured Monegan to fire her sister’s ex husband who is a state trooper. When Commissioner Monegan refused, Palin fired him. Audiotapes released last month reveal that aides to the 44-year-old governor pressured Safety Director Walter Monegan to dismiss Trooper Mike Wooten, after Wooten allegedly threatened Palin’s father during a messy child custody fight with the governor’s sister Molly. Monegan refused to do so and was fired on July 11 and replaced by an official who had previously been suspended for sexual harassment.

Palin said Monegan was let go for failing to fill trooper vacancies and invited a close examination of her role in the matter. The Alaska state legislature obliged, allocating $100,000 to investigate. The results of the probe are expected on Oct. 31, less than a week before the general election.

… We’ve had eight years of a president and vice president who have abused their executive power, using the awesome capabilities of the state to spy on Americans, inserting fake news in the media, pressuring news organizations not to run important stories, silencing protests by penning in all critics in remote “free speech” zones, attacking individual critics with White House-directed campaigns that border on treason, as in the case of the outing of CIA undercover operative Valerie Plume, whose husband had criticized a Bush argument for invading Iraq, and threatening government scientists who wanted to report their legitimate findings on climate change.

We have seen over these past eight years just what abuse of power can do to destroy democratic government and a free society.

So now we have Gov. Palin, whom evidence suggests may have abused her power as governor of Alaska to fire the state’s public security director after he blocked her efforts to destroy the career of a low-level state trooper who happened to be her former brother-in-law, because she wanted to avenge a sister engaged in an ugly post-divorce custody dispute. …

Of All the Reasons McCain’s Palin Pick is Awful, Evidence of Her Abuse of Power is the Worst

… We rely on elected officials not to use the power of their office to pursue personal agendas or vendettas. It’s called an abuse of power. There is ample evidence that Palin used her power as governor to get her ex-brother-in-law fired. When his boss refused to fire him, she fired his boss. She first denied Monegan’s claims of pressure to fire Wooten and then had to amend her story when evidence proved otherwise. The available evidence now suggests that she 1) tried to have an ex-relative fired from his job for personal reasons, something that was clearly inappropriate, and perhaps illegal, though possibly understandable in human terms, 2) fired a state official for not himself acting inappropriately by firing the relative, 3) lied to the public about what happened and 4) continues to lie about what happened.

These are, to put it mildly, not the traits or temperament you want in someone who could hold the executive power of the federal government.  Getting Real About Palin

(2) She strongly supports big oil

Palin is aligned with the oil industry on two key issues. She favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and many offshore areas. Palin represents one of the few real petro-states within the United States. Big Oil is big business in Alaska, and the state relies on oil and gas tax and royalty revenues for more than 80 percent of its budget. The state’s coffers runneth over; every resident of Alaska gets a check from the state, a dividend for his or her share of the oil and gas extracted from the ground. Oh, and Palin’s husband works as a field operator for BP, one of the main operators on the North Slope. Oil interests are largely Alaska’s interests.

(3) She is adamantly opposed to reproductive rights for women
Palin Pro-Life Reference Links
Christian Coalition: We love Palin and the GOP’s most pro-life platform yet
Christian Coalition of America Applauds John McCain’s Choice of Pro-Life Governor Sarah Palin www.cc.org/pressrelease/christian_coalition_america_applauds_john_mccain039…
McCain Turns Hard Right, Goes All-In With “Pro-Life” Sarah Palin as Veep
McCain’s Surprising Sarah Palin Selection

(4) She has no federal or international experience. Prior to being governor (for less than two years) she was only the mayor of a small town and a beauty queen!

(5) She believes global warming is not human caused and is opposed to listing the polar bear as an endangered species.  Palin denies climate change realities on first day as McCain’s running mate – 29 Aug 08 – What are the ramifications of a US Vice President that is willing to shrug off the scientific realities of global warming?
Guess we’ll find out if John McCain takes the White House. In an interview with Newsmax today, McCain’s vice-presidential running mate Sarah Palin stated that:
“A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made. “

Palin Buys Climate Denial PR Spin – Ignores Science

Greenpeace sent out a comprehensive look at Palin’s history on environmental issues
Palin environmental backgrounder PDF

(6) She’s a creationist who believes intelligent design should be taught along side evolution in public schools. McCain’s VP Wants Creationism Taught in School

The legal record suggests that Palin’s approach is not just ignorant of the facts, but a plain violation of the Constitutional boundary between church and state. Recall, for example, the December 2005 United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania decision in Kitzmiller vs. the Dover Area School District.

As reported in the Anchorage Daily News during her race for the governorship of Alaska, Sarah Palin offered up a classic anti-evolution answer when asked during a televised debate whether creationism should be taught with evolution in the public schools:
“Teach both,” Palin said. “You know, don’t be afraid of information… I am a proponent of teaching both.”

Is Sarah Palin A Creationist?

John McCain, as you may remember, signed on as the keynote speaker at a Feb. 2007 event at the Discovery Institute, the major lobbying group for Intelligent Design.

Focus on the Family’s James Dobson says he’ll vote for McCain now

(7) She supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and anywhere else big oil wants

(8) She supports Pebble Mine which will destroy the richest salmon run in the world

(9) She supports aerial shooting of bears and wolves in Alaska

(10) She is pro-war
Palin is seemingly unaware of McCain’s Iraq plan
Palin On Iraq
The Thinnest Of Wisps Of Sarah Palin’s Foreign Policy Views Emerge

It appears that McCain has chosen a female Vice President, who is farther to the right than he is. She’s the anti-thesis of Hillary Clinton. To me this looks like a desperate attempt to win the support of women voters and the support of the right wing religious fundamentalist voters.   What do you make of his choice?

Update: Here’s more about Palin to consider

Palin didn’t back McCain in the primary. She stayed neutral in Alaska’s January primary — perhaps on account of McCain’s opposition to drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. “A lot of us are sitting back and waiting to see if there will be new players in there,” she said in 2007. “That’s probably why that box that says ‘none of the above’ is so popular right now.”

Oil scandals – In a state whose politics have been defined of late by oil scandals Palin is linked to scandals involving indicted Sen. Ted Stevens (who offered an endorsement of her Friday) and Rep. Don Young. She’s also clashed with McCain over Arctic drilling — she wants drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which he has continued to oppose.

According to an Anchorage Daily News clip e-mailed to reporters, Palin accepted $5,000 in contributions from company executives and their wives during her failed 2002 lieutenant governor’s bid — which represented about 10 percent of her minuscule war chest that year.

Bridge to Nowhere – When she became governor Palin sold Gov. Frank Murkowski’s state-owned jet and canceled Stevens’ much-maligned “bridge to nowhere,” was also a vocal critic of oil field services giant Veco, a major player in Alaska politics that’s now accused of improper relationships with Stevens and Young.

There was also some pandering right from the start. “I told Congress `Thanks but no thanks on that bridge to nowhere,’ ” Palin reported to the crowd in Dayton, Ohio. “If our state wanted a bridge, I said, we’d build it ourselves.”

But the state kept the bridge money.

Sarah Palin supported Ketchikan ‘bridge to nowhere’ during 2006 race for Alaska governor

Palin accused of using ‘Bridge to Nowhere’ issue to gain stature

Palin has much to prove

Bridge to Nowhere abandoned

Stevens and Young, redux. Palin has distanced herself from the state’s two most popular politicians, but both appeared at Palin fundraisers during her 2006 gubernatorial bid.

Palin unqualified to serve as vice president

Palin

The environment. As governor, Palin vetoed wind power and clean coal projects, including a 50-megawatt wind farm on Fire Island and a clean coal facility in Healy that had been mired in a dispute between local and state governments.

Palin’s $268 million in vetoes hit dozens of projects across the state. She reduced funding for things like artificial turf at Service and Palmer high schools, expansion of Covenant House for homeless and runaway youths in Anchorage and support of the group Arctic Power’s lobbying in Washington, D.C., to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil development.

Palin eliminated other projects entirely. That includes study of a second bridge between Juneau and Douglas Island, a Cook Inlet Housing Authority community center for seniors, Ketchikan Little League batting cages and big utility projects through the Railbelt Energy Funds.

Hundreds of other projects remain in the budget, including $25 million for the Fire Island Wind Farm that she vetoed last year. Palin also left in $15 million each for a UAA sports arena and port of Anchorage expansion.

She also didn’t veto a controversial $2 million for an “academic based” conference meant to highlight arguments that global warming isn’t threatening the survival of polar bears

Palin’s veto ax lops $268 million from budget

She supports Pebble Mine which will destroy the richest salmon run in the world. She supports aerial shooting of bears and wolves in Alaska. She believes global warming is not human caused.

Sarah Palin On The Environment

Mayoral performance. Palin has cited her mayoral work as a central part of her qualification to serve as governor. But at the beginning of her term, asked by the local newspaper how she would run the city without six experienced department heads that she fired, she made the job sound like no big deal: “It’s not rocket science. It’s $6 million and 53 employees.”

Palin, who portrays herself as a fiscal conservative, racked up nearly $20 million in long-term debt as mayor of the tiny town of Wasilla — that amounts to $3,000 per resident. She argues that the debt was needed to fund improvements.

And, maybe, censorship. As noted before Palin she is adamantly opposed to reproductive rights for women. She supports teaching creationism, intelligent design alongside evolution in public schools. According to the Frontiersman newspaper, Wasilla’s library director, Mary Ellen Emmons, said that Palin asked her outright if she “could live with censorship of library books.” Palin later dismissed the conversation as a “rhetorical” exercise.