|
Back
|
Hawkins Challenges Clinton to Agree to Multi-Party Debates
Urges Progressive Democrats to Go Green vs. Clinton |
For more information:
Howie Hawkins, (315) 425-1019
Sally Kim, (518) 364-2968
Howie Hawkins, the Green Party candidate for US Senate, joined today with consumer advocate Ralph Nader in challenging Hillary Clinton to agree to participate in a series of debates before the November 7 election.
Hawkins said he wanted to debate Republican nominee John Spencer as well as Clinton and called for the inclusion of all of the ballot-qualified candidates. He said he would welcome debates with the Socialist Equality, Socialist Workers, and Libertarian candidates even if Clinton and Spencer refused, although he said they should be in addition to, not instead of, all-party debates.
"Debate access should be a right for every candidate who earns a place on the ballot. Fair elections not only require fair ballot access, but fair debate access. We don't have democracy if the public does not know about all of their options and only hears about the two corporate-sponsored candidates with big money from big business," stated Hawkins.
Hawkins called for legislation to require broadcast media to sponsor and broadcast all-candidate debates as a condition of their broadcasting licenses and to make participation in these debates a condition of ballot qualification for candidates.
Hawkins noted that Jodi Rell, the Republican Governor of Connecticut running for re-election, has insisted on the inclusion of Green Party gubernatorial candidate, Clifford Thornton, in their debates. "Does Hillary Clinton have less of a democratic spirit than a Republican with a similar commanding lead in the opinion polls?" Hawkins asked rhetorically.
Hawkins also called upon the leadership and activists of the peace movement and progressive Democratic clubs and organizations to vigorously join in the campaign debate by publicly supporting his candidacy.
"Leaders of the corporate wing of the Democratic party like Clinton are caught in a contradiction between their base of Democratic voters, the majority of which are anti-war and progressive, and their base of corporate funders, which is pro-war and conservative. I personally believe the majority of voters are already closer to the Greens than the corporate Democrats on most issues and that we will be more effective by mobilizing that progressive majority independently of the corporate-funded Democrats than by getting mired internal Democratic Party fights with its corporate wing. However, I respect the sincerity and effort progressive Democrats who are trying to reform their party. I greatly appreciate that many supporters of the progressive, antiwar Democratic challenger to Clinton, Jonathan Tasini, have said since the September 12 primary that they will privately urge their people to vote for me in November. Now I urge them to take next step, to take stronger action, and to publicly endorse my campaign. That is the most powerful way they can make their voices heard in this election and give leadership to the progressive, pro-peace majority of Democratic voters," Hawkins said.
"The shameful exclusion of Tasini from a real debate on the war at the state Democratic convention and in the campaign debates by Clinton and the corporate wing of the Democratic Party should not go publicly unchallenged from Democrats who are leaders and activists in the peace and progressive movements. They should make this a public issue. If they don't make the corporate Democrats pay a price for their exclusion of antiwar and progressive voices, they are effectively telling Clinton and the corporate Democrats to take their support for granted in the future. If they want leverage inside the Democratic Party in the future against the corporate Democrats, they need take the outside option and go Green in this election and cost the Democrats a big block of votes for backing a corporate militarist like Hillary Clinton," Hawkins said.
Hawkins noted that after recent Ned Lamont's stunning antiwar upset of Joe Lieberman in Connecticut, the outcome of the many September 12 primaries around the county did not a clear antiwar message from the Democrats. Hawkins pointed to the losses of antiwar challengers Tasini and Kwesi Mfume of Maryland, on the one hand, and the victories of half a dozen antiwar Democrats, on the other.
"Progressive, antiwar Democrats are fighting with the corporate wing of the Democrats for the heart and soul of their party. Especially with Clinton as the leading Democratic candidate for president in 2008, this is a make or break moment in our effort to bring our troops home. It is a time for strong public action and leadership, not furtive politics behind the scenes," said Hawkins.
Hawkins said he looked forward to taking apart both Clinton and Spencer on the Iraq war. "Their mutual sniping is a debate over the tactics of the war, not over its mission, which was wrong in first place. The mission was always to secure permanent US military bases and oil reserves in the Persian Gulf, and not about the public rationales of weapons of mass destruction, democracy, or terrorism. This issue is not about being hard or soft on defense, but about being smart or stupid. The pro-war Clinton/Spencer policies are stupid. They are creating more terrorists, isolating the US in world opinion, and draining our public treasury," said Hawkins.
"Being smart on defense means foreign and military policies that increase the security of all nations and increase economic prosperity of both American and foreign workers. Rather than wars for oil, I would cut our bloated military budget by $300 billion a year to fund a global public works program to rebuild the world's energy infrastructure around renewable energy. That would create a global engine of job creation and sustainable development. It would address the crises of global warming and peaking oil production. It would spread goodwill around the world instead of resentment at the US global military occupation. It would do more to promote our national security and world peace than all the arms in the world. Smart defense means being the world's humanitarian superpower instead of the world's militaristic bully," said Hawkins.
Besides debating the war on Iraq with Clinton and Spencer, Hawkins said he also wanted to debate health care. "We have the most inefficient and irrational system of health care financing gin the world. We spend twice as much per capita on health care as any other country, yet 47 million have no health insurance and another 50 million under-insured are one serious illness away from bankruptcy. As a result, the US ranks 37th in the world in health care outcomes, according to the World Health Organization," Hawkins said.
"Hillary Clinton is more responsible than anyone else in America for killing national health insurance. In 1993, she vetoed consideration of national health insurance by the White House Health Care Task Force she headed up and rammed through a complicated scheme of compulsory private health insurance enforced by government mandates and subsidies. At that time, national health insurance had been in the Democratic platform since Truman, had 100 co-sponsors in Congress, and 70 percent support in the public opinion polls. What we got instead, thanks to Clinton, was skyrocketing insurance costs, skyrocketing numbers of un- and under-insured, and skyrocketing campaign contributions to Clinton from the health insurance industry," Hawkins said.
Hawkins said the debates should also cover energy policy, given its central role in worsening national security, environmental, and economic problems. Hawkins noted that Clinton's refusal to sign a letter from Senators encouraging the federal government to allow states to set higher than federal fuel efficiency standards earned her the label of "climate change no-show" from an April 17 Boston Globe editorial. Hawkins said that Clinton's energy policy enunciated last May in a National Press Club speech was "too little, too late, and too weak."
"Corporate welfare for Big Oil and negotiations with the auto giants over fuel efficiency is more of the same ineffectual policy of the Clinton and Bush presidencies. Instead of corporate welfare giveaways, we need direct public investment in public works to build a renewable energy infrastructure. Instead of the disastrous so-called voluntary compliance of the Clinton/Bush era, we need to return to performance standards, which worked well to reduce pollution in the 1970s and 1980s," Hawkins said.
The Green Party is seeking to regain official party status in New York. It needs 50,000 votes for Governor for Irish author, actor, and activist, Malachy McCourt.
|
| |
 *Website by David Doonan, Labor Donated to Hawkins for Senate Campaign* |
|
|
