Though seat belt use actually is rising slightly nationwide, fatality figures published Monday offered a somber contrast as law enforcement launched its annual pre-Memorial Day drive to persuade Americans to buckle up.

Total belt use rose to 82 percent last year — from 81 percent in 2006 — the government said. Twelve states had rates of 90 percent or better, led by Hawaii and Washington. Only three were below 70 percent: Arkansas, Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

But the news was hardly all encouraging.

Sixty-eight percent of drivers and passengers between the ages of 16 and 20 who were killed in car crashes at night in 2006 were unbuckled, said the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. During daytime, 57 percent of the young motorists and passengers who were killed were not wearing seat belts.

That portion of the study focused on 2006 data and did not evaluate other years.

The problem isn’t just with teens. The percentage of unbuckled drivers and passengers who died at night is well up in the 60s through the age of 44. It declines to 52 percent for people 55-64 and 41 percent for those older than that.

Safety officials say they are emphasizing seat belt use by young people between 16 and 20 during this year’s “Click It or Ticket” publicity campaign through June 1. Police say they will be issuing tickets to motorists who fail to wear their seat belts, a message that will be supported by a $7.5 million advertising campaign.

Gabriela Sazon, a senior at Calvin Coolidge High School in Washington, is a believer from personal experience. But she also understands the problem among teenagers in general.

She and her mother avoided injuries two years ago when their car flipped on its side on a rain-slicked road. Both were wearing their seat belts.

Sazon said peer pressure can sometimes play a role in teens not buckling up. “They don’t want to seem like a nerd around their friends,” she said.

Said NHTSA administrator Nicole Nason: Teenagers frequently bring a “combination of inexperience and fearlessness” when they fail to buckle up in their cars. “It’s a deadly combination.”

Nason said the agency is urging states to adopt licensing programs for new drivers that prevent them from driving with other teenagers in the car. She said carloads of teens traveling together can create distractions for the driver and increase the safety risks.

Anne McCartt, a researcher with the Virginia-based Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, noted that seat belt use at night tends to be much lower across all age groups.

Fatal crashes involving teenagers at night are more likely to involve risk factors such as alcohol, she said, so the failure to wear a seat belt “may be part of a more general atmosphere of risk-taking.”

Obama will still be short of the overall number of delegates needed to clinch the nomination, unless he were to suddenly receive an avalanche of endorsements from the party and elected officials known as superdelegates. But the Illinois senator’s campaign is touting the delegate milestone as a big step in defeating his rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

“A clear majority of elected delegates will send an unmistakable message — the people have spoken, and they are ready for change,” Obama campaign manager David Plouffe wrote in a memo to supporters Monday.

“As we near victory in one contest, the next challenge is already heating up,” Plouffe wrote. “President Bush and Senator McCain have begun coordinating their attacks on Barack Obama in an effort to extend their failed policies for a third term.”

Obama picked up the endorsement of Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia Monday, less than a week after Clinton overwhelmingly won the state’s primary. Byrd is the longest serving member of the U.S. Senate.

Obama has led in pledged delegates since he won the first caucuses in Iowa on Jan. 3. The two candidates stayed close through Super Tuesday, when Democrats voted in 22 states and American Samoa. Obama won 13 more delegates than Clinton that day — out of nearly 1,700 at stake.

Obama built an imposing lead the following two weeks, winning 11 straight contests in states such as Louisiana, Maryland, Washington and Virginia. He led by 161 pledged delegates on Feb. 19, after victories in Wisconsin and Hawaii. The lead has been relatively unchanged ever since as the candidates spent the past three months trading victories.

Obama goes into Tuesday’s contests with 1,610.5 pledged delegates won in primaries and caucuses. He needs 17 more to reach a majority of the 3,253 pledged delegates available. Clinton has 1,443.5 pledged delegates, according to the latest tally by The Associated Press.

Clinton’s campaign played down the significance of the milestone, accusing Obama of declaring victory without reaching the required number of overall delegates.

“Premature victory laps and false declarations of victory are unwarranted. Declaring ‘mission accomplished’ does not make it so,” Howard Wolfson, Clinton’s communications director, said in a memo to supporters.

Obama has a total of 1,915 delegates overall, including endorsements from superdelegates. Clinton has 1,721, according to the latest AP count.

Obama is a little more than 100 delegates short of the 2,026 needed to clinch the nomination. He cannot make up that ground in the Kentucky and Oregon primaries because of the proportional way in which Democrats award delegates. The two states have a total of 103 delegates at stake Tuesday.

But winning a majority of pledged delegates could help his case with undecided superdelegates, who are free to support whomever they choose at the party’s national convention in August. Obama argues that superdelegates should support the candidate who wins the most delegates in the primaries and caucuses. Otherwise, he says, they would be overturning the will of the voters.

Obama, who overtook Clinton in superdelegate endorsements a little more than a week ago, picked up six more Monday. Clinton added none.

Clinton argues that superdelegates should exercise independent judgment.

Her campaign is also trying to change the math by getting the delegates seated from the Michigan and Florida primaries. Clinton won both primaries, but the states had been stripped of their delegates for violating party rules by holding their primaries before Feb. 5.

The Democratic National Committee‘s rules panel is scheduled to address the issue May 31. If any of the delegates are reinstated, it would increase the number needed to clinch the nomination.

“There is a risk of a downturn,” the president said in his remarks at the White House.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, speaking after Bush’s remarks, said 1 percent of GDP would equate to $140 billion to $150 billion, which is along the lines of what private economists say should be sufficient to help give the economy a short-term boost.

Paulson said the largest part of the stimulus package would be targeted to individual taxpayers. One Republican official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Bush was hoping to target about $100 billion toward individuals and about $50 billion toward businesses.

The president and Congress are scrambling to take action as fears mount that a severe housing slump and painful credit crisis could cause people to close their wallets and businesses to put a lid on hiring, throwing the nation into its first recession since 2001.

Bush said that Congress and the administration need to settle on a temporary economic package that could be implemented quickly to “keep our economy growing and create jobs.”

“Letting Americans keep more of their money should increase consumer spending,” he said.

Bush outlined several criteria for the package to meet: It must be “big enough to make a difference in an economy as large and dynamic as ours,” it must be built on “broad-based tax relief,” it must take effect right away but be temporary, and it must not include any tax increases.

Specifically, he called for tax incentives for businesses, including small companies, to make new and major investments this year. “Giving them an incentive to invest now will encourage business owners to expand their operations, create new jobs and inject new energy into our economy in the process,” Bush said.

He also called for tax relief for individuals — probably to come in the form of one-time rebates. But he did not say how much money Americans would get to keep or the amount of other tax incentives that could be in the package. Nor did Bush detail how the nation would pay for such a plan.

“Americans can spend this money as they see fit: to help meet their monthly bills, cover higher costs at the gas pump, pay for other basic necessities,” he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has talked of a package totaling $100 billion or more. House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio spoke of a bill in the range of $100 billion to $150 billion. Aides have said Bush does not believe the stimulus spending should be offset — or paid for — by any tax or spending changes elsewhere. Some deficit hawks want this but isn’t expected to be part of any package.

Speaking for about seven minutes, Bush called passing a growth package “our most pressing economic priority.” But he also used his announcement to defend his tax cuts, which are set to expire unless the Democratic-led Congress opts to extend them.

He acknowledged Americans’ fears of an economic downturn.

“The economy’s still creating jobs, though at a reduced pace,” he said. “Consumer spending is still growing, but the housing market is declining. Business investment and exports are still rising, but the cost of imported oil has increased.”

He said his advisers and many outside experts expect that the U.S. economy will continue to grow over the coming year, but at a slower rate than the past few years.

“Continued instability in the housing and financial markets could cause additional harm to our overall economy and put our growth and job creation in jeopardy,” he said.

Bush said markets rise and fall, and there are times when swift, temporary action by the government can help ensure that market fluctuations do not undermine the economy. “This is such a moment,” he said.

“We’re in the midst of a challenging period,” Bush said. “And I know that Americans are concerned … But our economy has seen challenging times before. It is resilient.”

Bush has gone down the tax rebate road before. Back in 2001, he added refunds of up to $300 per individual and $600 per household as a recession-fighting element of the tax cut plan that had been the centerpiece of his 2000 campaign.

Economists said a reasonable range for tax cuts in the new package might be $500 to $1,000. A White House plan is looking at rebates of up to $800 for individuals and $1,600 for married couples.

Bush first signaled his support for the approach of income tax rebates for people and tax breaks for business investment in a conference call Thursday with bipartisan congressional leaders.

Democratic congressional leaders agree that tax relief should be in the package, but are working on a broader measure that would also include aid targeted to the poor and unemployed.

White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said there are many ways to get quick agreement. Bush chose to lay out “principles” with few specifics to the American people now, while bipartisan negotiations with Capitol Hill are taking place privately. The White House feels Bush was out of the mix for too long, because he was away for eight days in the Mideast while Democratic leaders talked almost daily about the need to stimulate the economy — and how.

The White House scheduled Bush to talk about a stimulus package twice on Friday. After the Roosevelt Room appearance, he left for a visit at a Frederick, Md., manufacturing plant.

Bush’s talks with Saudi King Abdullah, which began over dinner and were continuing with late-night meetings, also were expected to cover peace between Israelis and Palestinians and democracy in the Middle East.

Coinciding with Bush’s trip, the Bush administration in Washington notified Congress on Monday that it will offer Saudi Arabia the chance to buy sophisticated Joint Direct Attack Munitions — or “smart bomb” — technology and related equipment, the State Department said. The administration envisions the transfer of 900 of the precision-guided bomb kits, worth $123 million, that would give the kingdom’s armed forces highly accurate targeting abilities.

The sale is part of an overall $20 billion weapons package for Saudi Arabia, administration officials say.

The arms packages are an important part of the U.S. strategy to bolster the defenses of oil-producing Gulf nations, such as Saudi Arabia, against threats from Iran. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, which have majority Sunni Muslim populations, harbor deep suspicions about Shiite Iran’s apparent designs to establish itself as a major power. They have reacted skeptically to the conclusions of a new U.S. intelligence estimate about Iran.

Congress already has been briefed on the entire arms package, which also includes the sale of the Navy’s Littoral Combat system. Lawmakers mostly see the deal as critical to maintaining relations with a war-on-terror ally. Some are opposed to the JDAMs portion out of concern that it gives Saudi Arabia a technical edge over Israel and the ability to attack it, but are unlikely to muster the two-thirds majority needed to block the sales.

The administration has assured lawmakers in closed briefings in recent months that there would be proper restrictions on the JDAMs sales to ensure they would not threaten to Israel. Israel also has said it does not oppose the deal.

As for the topic of rising oil prices, Bush national security adviser Stephen Hadley would only say “we’ll have to see” when asked whether Bush would raise the issue with the king. The Saudis are responsible for almost one-third of OPEC‘s total output.

Another item for discussion could be the democratic principles Bush has promoted during his trip. While Abdullah has tried to push some reforms on education and women’s rights and there have been limited municipal council elections, the king has been cautious and limited in his efforts. He apparently has been hampered by others in the royal family worried that fast changes could upset the country’s conservative clerics and citizens.

After arriving Monday afternoon in Riyadh from Dubai, Bush expected to hear Abdullah urge him to keep up the pressure on Israel to halt settlements in Palestinian territories. The administration was able to persuade the Saudis to participate in the U.S.-sponsored Mideast peace conference in Annapolis, Md., in November.

Bush enjoyed a warm embrace from Abdullah. He was staying a night at the monarch’s ranch — a rare show of hospitality to a visiting dignitary that reflects Bush’s hosting of Abdullah twice at his own ranch in Crawford, Texas.

And the king greeted Bush at the base of the steps of Air Force One — a gesture the president never affords foreign leaders visiting the U.S. A band played each country’s national anthem as the leaders walked on a red carpet behind a high-stepping uniformed officer carrying a gold sword.

The hospitality masked Bush’s deep unpopularity among ordinary Saudis.

A recent poll conducted for Terror Free Tomorrow, a bipartisan group whose goal is undermining world support for terrorism, found only 12 percent here view Bush positively — lower than Iran’s president or even al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden — and more think warmly toward Iran than America. Top among the reasons are the chaos in Iraq that followed the 2003 U.S.-led invasion and the widespread Arab feeling that the United States is biased toward Israel and not serious in seeking Mideast peace.

A rare cold front brought clouds and rain to Riyadh for the visit. Tight security was evident: Hundreds of police cars have deployed along major roads and sharpshooters are on some rooftops. In one neighborhood, police using loudspeakers demanded that cars be removed from some streets as two helicopters hovered overhead.

Earlier in Dubai, Bush got a flavor of the cosmopolitan banking and business hub, whose glass skyscrapers and booming construction have turned it into the capital of Middle East hustle. The soaring Persian Gulf city-state was Bush’s second stop in the seven-state United Arab Emirates federation. On the first, in Abu Dhabi on Sunday, he delivered a gentle lecture on democracy to authoritarian Arab allies and attended an opulent picnic at a desert horse camp.

Bush engaged in a day of cultural diplomacy in Dubai. He stopped at the historic home of the city-state’s former ruler, now a museum, where a group of girls performed to Arabic music.He had lunch on cushions set in a circle with students of the Dubai School of Government. And he attended a gathering of a young leaders’ group, in a conference room atop one of Dubai’s signature buildings, the luxury hotel Burj Al Arab that is shaped like a tall ship sail.

Dubai is caught in the middle of the West’s efforts to crack down on business in and out of Iran to protest its nuclear ambitions. Dubai, with a powerful Iranian business community, is eager to maintain its lucrative financial ties with Tehran, but wary of angering the United States and the United Nations.

___

The vote followed a Kremlin campaign that relied on a combination of persuasion and intimidation to ensure victory for Putin’s United Russia party.

With ballots from about 30 percent of precincts counted, United Russia was leading with 63.6 percent, while the Communists — the only opposition party expected to get seats — were in a distant second with 11.3 percent, said Central Election Commission Vladimir Churov.

Two other pro-Kremlin parties — the Liberal Democratic Party and Just Russia were following with 10.6 percent and 7.1 percent, respectively, he said.

The Kremlin has portrayed the election as a plebiscite on Putin’s nearly eight years as president — with the promise that a major victory would allow him somehow to remain as leader after his second term ends next year.

Putin is constitutionally prohibited from running for a third consecutive term, but he clearly wants to stay in power. Many supporters have suggested his becoming a “national leader,” though what duties and powers that would entail are unclear.

“The vote affirmed the main idea: that Vladimir Putin is the national leader, that the people support his course, and this course will continue,” said party leader and parliament speaker Boris Gryzlov said after the exit polls were announced.

Pollsters said United Russia’s performance would give it a crushing majority of 306 seats in the 450-seat State Duma, or lower house. The Communists would have 57 seats.

The opposition accused the Kremlin of rigging the vote, with Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov calling the election “the most irresponsible and dirty” in the post-Soviet era.

For Russia’s increasingly isolated opposition movement, the election was more evidence of Russia’s drift away from political pluralism and democracy.

“The fact is, they’re not just rigging the vote. They’re raping the democratic system,” said former chess champion and opposition leader Garry Kasparov.

Kasparov, who was jailed for five days after a protest last weekend, spoiled his ballot by writing on it “Other Russia,” the name of his opposition umbrella group.

All seats will be awarded according to the percentage of the vote each party receives; in previous elections, half the seats were chosen among candidates contesting a specific district, allowing a few mavericks to get in. About 109 million people are eligible to vote.

Putin has presided over Russia’s transformation from a poor, chaotic country to a relatively prosperous, stable nation earning $800 million a day in oil and gas revenues.

He has cast the election as a contest between Russian patriots and “foreign-fed jackals” who he claimed would, at the behest of the West, return Russia to the poverty and instability of the 1990s.

He has lashed out at the U.S. and its allies over the past year, accusing the West of seeking to weaken Russia. And he has challenged Washington’s plans to build a missile defense system in Europe.

The Kremlin‘s opposition to the West appeals to many Russians, who suffered economically, physically and emotionally after the Soviet Union‘s collapse.

“Today everything is clear and stable in life. The president’s words always coincide with what he does. As for the other candidates we don’t know yet where they would take us to,” said Raisa Tretyakova, a 61-year-old pensioner in St. Petersburg.

Putin has said an election triumph would give him the “moral authority” to hold the government and legislature responsible for implementing his policies after he leaves office. Some analysts say he may seek re-election despite the constitutional ban.

Officials throughout Russia appeared determined to ensure a huge turnout, through pressure, persuasion and even presents. In Chukotka, voters had a chance to win cellular phones. Another Siberian region promised new housing for whichever village shows the most “mature” turnout.

Teachers, doctors and other workers across the country have said they were ordered by their bosses to vote or risked losing their jobs.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, regarded in the West as the most authoritative election monitor, canceled plans to send observers.

Putin claimed the pullout was instigated by the United States to discredit the elections. But the OSCE said Russia delayed granting visas for so long that the organization would have been unable to meaningfully assess election preparations.

The figures come as the military says violence has fallen to levels not seen in nearly two years, while acknowledging that Iraqis are still dying in unacceptable numbers.

An expert on the effect of conflicts on civilians agreed, saying that while the downward trend was positive, it needed to be kept in perspective.

“We’ve gone from horrific levels of murder to very bad, which is an improvement but not a reason to celebrate,” said Richard Garfield, a professor at New York’s Columbia University and a manager of health and nutrition for the World Health Organization.

“At these so-called low levels, there’s a massive number of excess deaths still likely to occur.”

It was the third consecutive monthly decline in the death toll of Iraqi civilians and security forces since August, when a massive suicide bombing targeting minority Yazidis in northern Iraq helped push the figure to at least 1,956.

Some 500 are thought to have perished in the bombing of the Yazidis.

At least 1,023 Iraqis were killed in September, 911 in October and 718 in November, the lowest since January 2006, when 615 Iraqis were killed, according to figures compiled by the AP from hospital, police and military officials, as well as accounts from reporters and photographers. Insurgent deaths were not included. Other counts differ and some have given higher civilian death tolls.

The number of U.S. troop deaths also declined for the sixth consecutive month, with at least 37 recorded in November, according to an AP tally based on military figures. That was the lowest number since March 2006, when 31 American service members died.

The U.S. military has said the decline in the number of deadly attacks is largely due to a troop buildup this summer of some 30,000 additional troops that enabled them to get closer to the population, as well as a sharp turn of public opinion against al-Qaida in Iraq and other extremist groups.

But American commanders and other officials have gone to great lengths to warn that militants on both sides of the Sunni-Shiite divide still pose a major threat, and violence continues.

“We’re always encouraged by any downward trend in violence, but we can’t get complacent,” said Navy Lt. Patrick Evans, a military spokesman.

“There have been improvements in security, however, militants, insurgents, extremists and criminals out there will continue to keep looking for opportunities, so we have to remain vigilant and on alert,” he added. “There’s still a lot of work that needs to be done.”

The numbers were high even before the Feb. 22, 2006 bombing in the city of Samarra north of Baghdad, which devastated the golden dome of a revered Shiite shrine. But the attack caused longstanding tensions to boil over and assassinations, bombings and execution-style killings were rampant.

November of that year was one of the deadliest of the war, with at least 2,250 Iraqis killed, dwarfing recent figures.

Garfield, the Columbia University expert, expressed concern that the recent reports of the decline in violence could tempt people to ignore the fact that the numbers are still high amid rising public criticism of the war.

“I think there is a great potential to close the door on Iraq, bring the troops home, wash our hands of it,” he said in a telephone interview from Geneva. “But the improving trend suggests that the right kind of presence of the international force can make a tremendous difference in how the Iraqis are doing and they will need that presence for a long time.”

He also estimated the count was only one-third of the actual total, underlining the difficulties in keeping track of the number of Iraqi civilians who have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. Wide-ranging estimates cannot be confirmed due to the tenuous security situation.

Iraq Body Count, an independent organization that tracks media reports as well as official figures, estimates that 77,573 to 84,502 civilians have been killed.

In a bid to better detect trends in the violence, the U.S. military is planning to increasingly use Iraqi data while warning that both sets of information are flawed.

“We recognize that when we only use coalition reports we underreport,” said Col. Bill Rapp, a senior aide to the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus.

Rapp, speaking to reporters at a recent briefing on measuring trends, said the increasing use of Iraqi data became a priority as Petraeus shifted the U.S. command’s focus to protecting the Iraqi people. It also will help the military fill in the gaps as it draws down forces and transfers more security responsibilities to the Iraqi government in coming months.

U.S. officials acknowledge that Iraqi government data is often incomplete and imprecise as well as tainted by potential sectarian bias.

But the military is working with the Iraqis to develop an automated database of their own that would help eliminate duplicate reports, among other attributes.

Fleming met that goal within six months of starting the project, through fairs, air shows and NASCAR races. Four million letters later, the Pentagon took notice.

Now Fleming is a college freshman whom the Department of Defense has drafted to move her gratitude-gathering efforts into the digital age by using her organization to support the effort to text troops over the holiday.

“When they came to me and had this new novel idea … to send text messages,” Fleming said, “I thought it was great because it’s something that’s immediate.”

Click here to learn more about the program “America Supports You.”

Major cell phone carriers have agreed to send the messages for free. People can send a text message of thanks to 8-9-2-7-9, until midnight, PT, on Thanksgiving Day. The messages end up on a Web site, where troops with Web access around the world can log on to read the sentiments and respond.

“Thank you for keeping us safe,” one text message from Maryland reads.

At just more than 62,000 text messages sent so far, the program has a way to go to reach that million-message goal. But it’s doable, considering that quick texting is this generation’s communiqué of choice.

“I thought it was a really easy way just to be able to … send a text message of thanks,” said student Maria Sanchez. “I mean, as college students, we don’t exactly have all the time in the world to sit and write a card.”

And it is Fleming’s mission to engage her peers in a war that is out of sight … and often out of mind.

“A lot of them may not get support from their friends and family. They may not get care packages, and so, you have some soldiers … who are sitting there who get absolutely nothing,” Fleming said. “This is something that will connect them with home … where complete strangers will say ‘Happy Thanksgiving, Happy holidays. We’re thinking about you.’”

This is the fifth Thanksgiving since the invasion of Iraq. Fleming believes a million thanks is the least we can do.

“My husband and I are happy,” said Murray, 46, a homemaker from Montpelier, Miss. “We just wish we could buy more into the American dream.”

Like Murray, most in the U.S. say they are personally happy and feel in control of their lives and finances, according to an extensive Associated Press-Yahoo! News survey on the mood of voters. Beneath the surface, though, personal and political discontent is bubbling.

There is a widespread unease—shared by 77 percent—that the country has meandered off in the wrong direction. Nearly all Democrats and more than six in 10 Republicans think the country has taken the wrong course. And although almost half express interest and hope in the upcoming elections, a third voice frustration—particularly Republicans.

The AP-Yahoo! News survey will track voters’ perspectives during the run-up to next year’s election, interviewing more than 2,000 people repeatedly about their lives and views about the country, candidates and issues. The polling, conducted by Knowledge Networks, will let the AP and Yahoo! track how and why opinions form and change during the campaign.

People are paying attention to the 2008 presidential campaign. Solid majorities think their vote matters and say this wide-open presidential contest is more important than usual.

Stirred in are warning signs for Republican candidates: Democrats seething after nearly seven years under President Bush are happier and more psyched up about this election than Republicans.

More Democrats than Republicans say they are hopeful about the voting, 54 percent to 39 percent, and more of them are interested in it. Republicans are more likely to say the election leaves them frustrated and bored.

“There’s no one out there to vote for,” Rocky Belcher, 43, a Republican and college professor from Vandalia, Ohio, said about the GOP field. “That means a lot of Republicans may not get out there to vote.”

Happy and unhappy people alike say they are likelier to vote for the Democratic nominee, with the unhappy—who are likelier to be lower-income and less educated—giving Democrats a bigger, 2-to-1 margin. When it comes to the candidates battling for those nominations, the two front-runners—Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., and former GOP New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani—are faring about equally among the happy and unhappy.

More Democrats than Republicans say the 2008 contest is unusually important, and they are likelier to describe themselves as excited, interested and hopeful. By wider margins than Democrats, Republicans say the election makes them feel frustrated and bored.

Democrats and Republicans differ when defining the key issues. Democrats list the economy and health care followed by Iraq, while Republicans name three equally—terrorism, the economy and Iraq.

Joseph Lyon, a 22-year-old Republican from Houston, is most troubled by a fear the U.S. will leave Iraq too soon and by immigrants who stream into the U.S. but do not learn English.

“That’s ridiculous,” said Lyon, who begins serving with the Marines early next year. “They come here to live and expect us to assimilate to them. It’s our country.”

In Oshkosh, Wis., Jenny Walsh is most concerned about the failure to end the war and what she sees as a growing gap between rich and poor.

“We need change, just something that’s completely different,” said Walsh, 28, a Democrat and convenience store manager. “It’s just slowly going downhill.”

With the limp housing and credit markets dominating recent headlines, financial problems are at the heart of many people’s worries. Though three-quarters say they control their financial situation, most say they are having trouble getting ahead, including a third who say that has become very difficult.

“Something’s gotten out of synch between what we make and what things cost,” said Sandra Dempsey, 47, a child-care provider in Jonesboro, Ga. “Slowly but surely the middle class is becoming the lower class.”

In a measure of the two parties’ traditional strengths with income classes, people saying they are enjoying good financial times said they are slightly likelier to support next year’s Republican presidential candidate over the Democrat. Those saying times are tough are less likely to vote, but back the Democrat by nearly a 2-to-1 margin, though they don’t necessarily blame Republicans for their problems.

“We have illegal immigrants coming in, they work for cheaper and that keeps black folks out of jobs,” said Charlie Burnette, 56, a mechanic from Durham, N.C.

When it comes to the stressed out, they are as likely to vote Democratic or Republican as are those without such tension in their lives. The same is true for people who generally trust others and those who do not.

While two-thirds said they approve of gambling, overwhelming majorities disapproved of heavy drinking, smoking marijuana, and using cable TV or a neighbor’s Internet connection or sharing music or video files without paying. There are scant party differences in most, though Democrats were twice as likely as Republicans to approve of marijuana smoking, and young people are far likelier than their elders to assent to each one.

The online survey of 2,230 adults was conducted Nov. 2-12 and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points. The survey included 1,049 Democrats, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points, and 827 Republicans, for whom the margin of sampling error was plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

This Internet survey uses Knowledge Networks’ online panel, which is nationally representative because people are first contacted using traditional telephone polling methods, and then followed with online interviews. People selected for the study who do not already have Internet access are provided with it for

In a joint statement, the Writers Guild of America and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers said both sides had agreed to return to formal negotiations.

The statement said no other details would be released.

“That’s fabulous, that’s great,” said Sean Jablonski, a writer for the FX drama “Nip/Tuck.” “You can’t get a deal until two sides sit down and talk about it,” Jablonski said.

“It’s a good message to hear around the holidays,” he said.

John Aboud, a TV writer and a strike captain, said he hoped a return to talks would quickly lead to a contract.

“I’m delighted to see they’re starting to move forward and I hope we can wrap this thing up soon,” Aboud said.

It’s unclear what pushed both sides back to the table. The strike has been bruising and very public, with writers being joined by actors on picket lines and producers taking out full-page newspaper ads to tell their side of the story.

Since the strike began Nov. 5, late night talk shows and several sitcoms have gone to reruns. Other shows are counting down the number of episodes they have left before running out of scripts.

Industry analysts had thought there would be enough scripts to produce shows well into January. But many shows have gone off the air at a faster pace than expected, as cast members and show runners have refused to cross picket lines.

Compensation for shows offered on the Internet is at the heart of the dispute.

The producers have said it’s offering writers a share of licensing fees paid by Web sites to stream shows. The union has rejected the offer, saying the payments wouldn’t begin until six weeks after a show goes online and viewer interest is nearly exhausted.

Writers also want a cut of revenue from non-skippable ads contained in many shows streamed free online. The alliance slammed the door on that demand.

The last writers walkout in 1988 lasted 22 weeks and cost the industry $500 million. The entertainment industry contributes an estimated $30 billion a year to the Los Angeles economy, or about $80 million a day.

Meanwhile, the writers, who went on strike Nov. 5, would continue on the picket line, said Gregg Mitchell, a spokesman for the guild.

Some writers applauded the return to talks.

“This is nothing new,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammed Sadiq told The Associated Press. “The U.S. has been saying this for many days. He has said that same thing. He has reiterated it.”

Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte delivered the message that Musharraf must end emergency rule as soon as possible during a two-hour meeting Saturday with Musharraf and Pakistan’s deputy army commander, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani. The envoy’s visit was seen as a last best chance to ease the latest political turmoil in Pakistan.

Sadiq said the government was taking steps to hold free and fair elections, and any decision on lifting the emergency would “be taken according to the ground situation.”

Speaking during a news conference at the U.S. embassy earlier Sunday, Negroponte said he “urged the government to stop such actions, lift the state of emergency and release all political detainees” and that “Emergency rule is not compatible with free, fair and credible elections.”

It’s a view shared by opposition leaders, who insist that any vote held while thousands of opponents are in jail cannot be considered credible. They say most of those targeted in the emergency are pro-Western moderates, not the Islamic extremists Musharraf said he needed to combat.

The state of emergency came into effect Nov. 3, and since then, thousands of opponents have been jailed, Supreme Court judges purged and independent TV stations muffled.

Just ahead of Negroponte’s visit, Musharraf made some concessions — freeing opposition leader Benazir Bhutto and a leading human rights activist, and loosening his restrictions on several independent television news outlets.

Though measured in his comments, Negroponte expressed some impatience with Musharraf, saying he hoped to see more steps toward democracy soon. “There remain some other issues that are yet to be considered, or yet to be undertaken,” he said, without going into detail.

But despite Musharraf’s apparent intransigence, Negroponte would not characterize his trip as a failure. “In diplomacy, as you know, we don’t get instant replies when we have these kinds of dialogue,” he said. “I’m sure the president is seriously considering the exchange we had.”

Negroponte also praised Musharraf’s efforts in the war on terror, and said he was heartened by the announcement that elections would be held by Jan. 9.

“President Musharraf has been and continues to be a strong voice against extremism,” he said. “We value our partnership with the government of Pakistan under the leadership of President Musharraf.”

Going into Saturday’s meeting, senior Bush administration officials were clear on what they wanted: an end to the emergency, a date set for legislative elections in January, the release of opposition leaders and that Musharraf step down as army chief.

Kayani is widely expected to take over the powerful role of military chief when Musharraf sheds his uniform and starts his second term as president in the coming weeks.

Shortly after arriving in Pakistan, Negroponte phoned Bhutto, the highest-level U.S. contact with the Pakistani opposition leader since the emergency rule began.

In their discussion, Negroponte underscored Washington’s opposition to the emergency and its desire to see her and other opposition figures free to peacefully take part in Pakistani politics, said State Department spokesman Sean McCormack. The conversation came just hours after Bhutto was released from house arrest.

Bhutto and Musharraf had been negotiating a power-sharing arrangement, but talks apparently collapsed as the general moved against the opposition following his decision to suspend the constitution.

On Sunday, Negroponte urged the two to restart talks and ease “the atmosphere of brinkmanship and political confrontation.”

“If steps were taken by both sides to move back toward the kind of reconciliation discussions they were having recently, we think that would be very positive and could help improve the political environment,” he said.

Bhutto has in recent days made increasingly strident demands for Musharraf to resign, and has proposed the opposition form a unity front to serve as a transition government ahead of elections.

Musharraf has steadfastly refused. Instead, he’s expressed exasperation with the mounting Western pressure and has pressed ahead with plans for elections, swearing in an interim government Friday charged with preparing for the vote.

___