Let’s say the public is polled, and they say they oppose something; perhaps something like drilling for oil in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge:

Question: Should oil drilling be allowed in America’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?

— 53 percent — Do Not Allow Oil Drilling

— 38 percent — Allow Oil Drilling

The poll found a remarkable gap in intensity of feeling about drilling: 44 percent of respondents strongly oppose drilling, while just 25 percent strongly support it. Only about 10 percent were undecided on this issue.

What then could be driving some representatives in government to press ahead with plans to drill for oil in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge? Hard to say what motives are, but that is exactly what a website is trying to figure out. Granted they have a rather heavy-handed approach, and their data is not exactly transparent, but it does show some pretty nice capabilities for collecting and presenting data.

I guess the real question is can this site demonstrate a that contributions have led to pro-drilling votes. It is odd to me that they do not have that figured out, yet they suggest you tell everyone to stop taking money. And even if they did show a trend of payments and pro-drilling votes they would still have to account for the usual correllation/causation issues…