Independents In The Post-World War

With a minimal initial investment of $100,000 and a single acre of level ground, a self-sustaining aquaponics based growing operation can be established and become profitably within 6 months. Through continuous year round vegetable and fish production, this operation can conservatively generate $250,000 in annual revenue starting in the very first year. While the initial investment in materials and equipment is steep, the output of this system rapidly accelerates to full potential and costs very little to maintain on an annual basis. The versatility of this system allows for the

Congressional polarization can easily be tracked unlike the polarization trends in the public which causes the moderates to become ignored. According to scholars, many moderates in the public ‘lean’ toward either the Democratic or Republican camp which complicates the polarization trends (a); they often outnumber partisans of the party towards which they ‘lean’ (Smith). While the public remains consistently moderate, Congress consistently loses its moderates as they retire, and more radical congressmen and women secure their places (Fiorina 5). Fiorina hardly considers independents or moderates in this essay; this mistake overlooks their ‘swing vote’ in many major elections for both Congress and the executive branch (Enns and Schmidt). But,

The book “The Persuadable Voter” by Sunshine Hillygus and Todd Shields examines voters decisions and actions with a focus on persuadable voters. Hillygus and Shields define the persuadable voter as a reasoned voter who vote might change, is undetermined or may not agree with their party. Persuadable voters are often used synonymously with independents and those without a strong partisanship towards one party or the other. Persuadable voters have been often simplified without much examination that goes into what causes these voters to be persuadable or influenceable. Hillygus and Shields question modern myths about persuadable voters and offer their own thoughts on the topic. The authors found that the persuadable voters

Partisanship is defined in The American Voter “as both a set of beliefs and feelings that culminate in a sense of “psychological attachment” to a political party. It is one of the most important factors affecting the American political system. It explains, to some extent, vote choice, political engagement, partisan reasoning, and the influence of partisan elites. This definition generates two competing views of partisanship, the instrumental and expressive perspectives. This debate is what

The Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan noted self-proclaimed independents made up 19% of voters in 1958, to just below 40% for the past decade. Dealignment also results from divisive, sometimes nonpartisan societal issues. After the election of 1968, there was widespread debate over race relations and the Vietnam War that eventually lessened democratic control; yet, the number of independents grew more than the number of republicans in the 1970s and 80s. Population growth is also an explanation for this trend; when communities were tight-knit, it was important to have a partisan affiliation in order to be accepted and contributing in the community. With a larger and more distant population, people consider partisan affiliation a threat to individuality, and choose to vote for the best politician, not the party. Another reason for the dealignment of political parties is the rise of interest groups that are better equipped to take positions on specific and divisive policy issues than are political

From 1972 to 2004, Abramowitz points out that the correlation between ideology and party identification rose from .32 to .63 showing an increase over time from a more moderate stance to a more polarized one in the engaged electorate. In the 1984 to 2004 ANES, the least interested and least informed Americans were shown to be in the middle of the liberal-conservative spectrum, while the more informed and active constituents were more likely to be more polarized. From the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) data, Abramowitz states that even Independents leaned more liberal or conservative than weak Democrats or weak Republicans respectively. Again, nonvoters made up forty-one percent of the center of the distribution affirming that only the nonvoters are non-ideological and non-polarized. In regards to social groups, Abramowitz concluded that religious commitment mattered more than social status, but overall, voter’s ideological beliefs made a greater impact on party loyalty than being part of any social

As an alternative to the industrial food chain which is now prevail in the US, the organic food chain emphasis that “nature rather than the machine should supply the proper model for agriculture” (Pollan 131). The idea of “organic” is best demonstrated by farms that raise diversified species in a traditional way and target at the local market. However, most of the “organic food” people consume today is produced from the “industrial organic” farms which belong to the industrial food chain instead of the ideal organic food

The United States has maintained its two party system for some time, but the major parties have not always been so clearly separated. In the early and mid-twentieth century, polarization was actually declining, as there was much ideological overlap between the members of the two parties (Kuo). Many people, such as conservative Democrats and liberal Republicans, rested in the ideological middle. Additionally, each party represented a coalition of diverse interests. At

A major criticism of organic foods is the obvious price increase included with purchasing organic products. While there are numerous reasons for the price premium associated with organic foods, the most obvious reasons are the cost of organic supplies such as feed and fertilizer to make a profit. George Siemon, CEO of the Organic Valley co-op, states that “A ton of organic cattle feed can cost from $350 to $400 a ton versus $220 or less for a ton of conventional feed,” illustrating a major price difference for simply fertilizing a crop (Simon). With access to more resources than organic farmers, conventional farmers will often spend less in the overall farming of a crop than organic farmers, increasing their profits. Conventional farmers often use materials such as “sewage sludge, which is cheap to buy, and chemical fertilizers, which are both cheap to buy and cheap to transport” (Simon). Using these potentially hazardous chemicals for crop production runs the major risk of chemical runoff and contamination of local water supplies or reservoirs, which will directly affect

We need to save water because we need to save plants. Earth’s oxygen and most of the food comes from plants. Not just us but plants also need water for survival too."Midwest Plan Service guidelines suggest that farms using 2,000 gallons per day" (Consumptive Water Use Restrictions in the Delaware River Basin. 2002. Agricultural and Biological Engineering Fact Sheet F-199, Penn State Extension). This shows that farmers around the world need lots of water to harvest healthy crops which demand a huge amount of water. Farmers may uses a lot of water for plants and animals but they also know techniques to save water. "Good grazing management increases the fields’ water absorption and decreases water runoff, making pastures more drought-resistant." (CUESA intern Janelle Shiozaki ). Rotational grazing is a process in which livestock are moved between fields to help promote pasture regrowth. Other ways farmers can save water is to decomposed organic matter to improve soil structure to help the environment breath better and animals habitat.

Over the last few years, awareness of organic food has risen. Due to this, the demand for organic food is a factor which is influencing the farmers to switch to use this technique, and it is being sold in specialty stores and conventional supermarkets. Organic products contain numerous marketing claims that it is healthier, it offers more value, and the farming is more environmentally friendly than traditional foods, so, how does one determine if organic is the way to go? Some argue that there is evidence that supports and demonstrates why organic foods and farming are better overall, while others insist that conventional foods and agriculture can offer the same benefits as going organic. There is no right or wrong answer. Within this

There are various factors that influence how a voter will cast their choice in the U.S. elections. Party identification is the most top factor in a person's voting choice. Some voters are members of either the two majors political parties; the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. These party affiliations are usually determined by a person's influences from family, peers, media and the assessment of the candidates and the issues. Independents who are not affiliated with either party does not have a particular loyalty to any party. They vote mainly on the issues (Schmidt, Shelley, Bardes, 2011, p.193).

Organic farming is becoming an increasingly popular market throughout the world. (Adam, 2004, p. 666). The aims of organic farming are, to decrease pollution, maintain soil fertility and biodiversity, be more sustainable, and have increased nutritional benefits than conventionally grown foods (Yaping et. al., 2003, p. 298). While the aim of conventional farming is to provide safe, proficient supplies of food, in abundance and at low prices (Trewavas, 2001, p.409). Since 1996, the amount of land in the UK dedicated to organic farming has risen tenfold (Adam, 2004, p. 666). As well, from 1992 to 1997, the amount of certified organic cropland in the US more than doubled (Tafel et al, 2007, p.182 ). The main difference between organic and

The National Organic Standards Boards defines organic agriculture is ìan ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony. The primary goal of organic

Agriculture in the United States has changed dramatically over the centuries. Since the 1960’s large commercial farms have been leading in sales. As a direct result of their success we, as a society, have access to affordable food. However, the success of large farms has lead to many negative impacts such as increased usage of resources and decreased diversity in crop fields. This begs the question, what can be done to reduce the negative impacts of large farms. One solution growing in popularity is sustainable agriculture. The idea of sustainable agriculture is to create farms that need little to no outside help from irrigation, pesticides, or fertilizers. Sustainability can be achieved in many way through