Hi Rodger,
I saw your letter in the Belleville News Democrat today, and would like to pass on a couple of thoughts. First of all, I admire the goals of the Green Party, as do most progressive Democrats. There are many of us that feel that the two party system leaves us with too little diversity in our political system. However, I would, point out that in the absence of instant run off voting, it is impossible to get third parties on the ballot with out completely throwing elections to a minority party. Republicans use third parties, such as the Green Party, as a means for dividing the progressive votes to get their candidates elected. In some cases they even provide funding for Green Party candidates to win elections with out the support of the majority of voters.
Jerry Costello has an incredibly progressive voting record. He consistently votes in the best interest of the working people of Southern Illinois and the environment. Clearly the progressive agenda would be much better served by focusing collective energy on elections such as IL-19, where John Shimkus is currently serving serving as the congressional representative. He has been a rubber stamp for the worst president we have had in the history of our nation. (Coincidently, Bush was able to challenge the elections in Florida and eventually get appointed President precisely because the Green Party was able to divide the vote in the 2000 presidential elections) There are many other issues that should be considered much higher priority when compared to trying to unseat Rep. Costello. For Example:
- Getting corporate money out of elections with public funding
- Incorporate instant run off voting into elections
- Better regulate the media so it is not so completely unbalanced
- Start a third party for the evangelical Christians
- Start a third party that runs on an anti-immigrant, anti-homosexual, anti-corporation platform
- Get rid of electronic voting machines
- Raise awareness of the Republican practice of voter caging
- Focus on preventing right wing zealots from getting elected rather then running against progressive Democrats
I wish you luck in your campaign for 2008, and should you choose to join the Democrats in the struggle to get our country back, I am sure that you would be welcome to join us!
Best Regards,
Chuck
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Open Letter to the Green Party Candidate for IL-12
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
You wrote:
"There are many of us that feel that the two party system leaves us with too little diversity in our political system."
What you are advocating for IS THE EXACT two party system you say is broken. Furthermore, you argue that the creation of more right wing third parties would somehow advance the progressive agenda...that is backward thinking.
If you want more progressives in office, you need more progressive candidates to run for office. Period. The Green Party is the only party that runs on a progressive agenda. Take a close look at Democratic candidates for president, for instance. How many of them are out there advocating for equal marriage? end of death penalty? universal single-payer health care? public financing of elections? instant run-off voting?
When you go down ticket to congressional and local Democrats, you're going to find an even more centrist ideology. For congressional and senate candidates, you're going to find people who authorized and regularly vote to fund the war, people who authorize erosions of our civil liberties, etc. etc. etc.
So what it comes down to is, if you want things to get worse, vote Republican. If you want more of the same, vote Democratic. If you want to start reversing the damage done in the past several years to our economy, our health care system, our environment, our education system, and to our middle class in general, vote Green.
Fair enough comment, however I would say this in response to your assertion:
"If you want to start reversing the damage done in the past several years to our economy, our health care system, our environment, our education system, and to our middle class in general, vote Green."
If you want reverse the damage, get involved. If progressive voters participate, we can change the parties agenda.
Mr. Boeckman,
I want to thank you for your response to my letter to the editor in the Belleville News-Democrat. I have great respect for everyone’s opinions, but it is obvious we do disagree on some points; however, this does not stop us from having a reasonable and civil discussion over the issues.
You indicated it is impossible to get third parties on the ballot without completely throwing the elections to a minority party. I do not understand your theory on this topic. The Green Party is already on the ballot. We have ballot status in 23 states in the United States presently. The Green Party may presently be the minority party of the three, but we hope to change that, as we advocate policies that address the needs of the unrepresented majority.
Your statement that the Republicans use the Green Party as a means for dividing progressive votes is based on claims that have been wildly exaggerated. They arise from allegations made about Ralph Nader in 2004 who was running as an Independent, not a Green. There have also been allegations made against Green candidate Carl Romanelli when he was struggling to get on the ballot in 2006. I don't necessarily agree with all of his actions but the primary blame lies with the Democrats and Republicans who collaborated to rig the laws against third party challengers." In any event, one example of significant donations from traditionally GOP sources hardly supports your broad conclusion. The Green Party is made up of Greens, not Republicans. Since the 1980s the Green Party has struggled to build this organization based on their values in an effort to provide a genuine people’s alternative to the two corporate-sponsored parties. You might do well to be less concerned with a few misguided Republicans who mistakenly believe that donating to the Green Party will be helpful to them (it certainly did not work in Pennsylvania, where Santorum was defeated) and a lot more concerned with how the same multinational corporations fund the major candidates of Democrats and Republicans alike—and they do so because they know they can buy essentially the same results from either party.
It may interest you to know that in the 2006 gubernatorial race in Illinois, candidate Rich Whitney did as well in traditionally Republican precincts as in traditionally Democratic precincts. The idea that the Green Party is “stealing” Democratic votes is wrong as a matter of principle; votes do not “belong” to any party, they have to be earned. Many people who vote Green who otherwise tend not to vote at all are the great majority who are not represented by either of the corporate-sponsored parties.
Incidentally, two of Jerry Costello’s top contributors are AMR Corporation and FedEx Corporation, both of which traditionally give more money to Republican candidates than Democrats. By your reasoning, and with greater justification, one would have to conclude that these major Republican donors are “using” Jerry Costello.
The quote from your email said, “Jerry Costello has an incredibly progressive voting record. He consistently votes in the best interest of the working people of Southern Illinois and the environment.” This statement reflects your partisanship more than reality. We could do worse than Jerry Costello; however, we can do a lot better as well. He does have a good track record for labor issues; however, he does not consistently vote in the best interest of the environment. Environment Illinois rates him at a 69% on key votes in 2007, which is a “D”. Included in Costello’s votes: he favored relaxing public health and environment laws for the siting of oil refineries and in favor of weakening the Endangered Species Act. He has the same mediocre record with the League of Conservation Voters. It is good that he voted in favor of the Energy Independence and Security Act on December 6, but it is too bad he voted against the CAFÉ standards in 2001 when it could have made a real impact on our current energy and environment crisis. But this was expected, as Costello has frequently voted to support the interests of Big Oil, in favor of offshore oil drilling, and supported the Bush-Chaney energy plans from 2003 -2005. On August 4, Costello voted against the Udall Amendment that would require electric suppliers to provide 15% of their electricity using renewable energy resources by the year 2020.
I do commend Jerry Costello for opposing the War on Iraq and his vote this week against additional funding; however, he has on many other occasions voted to fund the war and voted against a timetable for withdrawal of our troops. He has been consistent in voting in favor of massive military spending, most recently a $506.94 billion bill for the 2008 fiscal year for Defense. This continues fueling the military-industrial complex and all the corporate welfare, waste and wanton contractor profiteering that goes with it, and subsidizing the very forces that favor periodic military intervention and war.
The American Civil Liberties Union has scored Jerry Costello at 59%, which is a Failing grade. He voted in favor of an amendment to the 9/11 Commission Recommendation Act that would allow courts to deny bail for any person charged with a terrorist offense without having to prove the person is dangerous or a flight risk. He voted in favor of the REAL ID Act. Please refer to www.realnightmare.org for more information on this topic. He initially voted for the USA Patriot ACT; however I will admit he has recently opposed reauthorization of this bill.
There have been many other instances where Jerry Costello has failed to act in behalf of the people of District 12, such as supporting single-payer health care (HR676). He has recently jumped on the bandwagon, but his history shows no leadership in the fight against global warming. He has failed the District in addressing its need for a district-wide solution for mass transportation. In fact we need to be looking at state and national mass transportation as a long-term effort for 20 years from now. So if you still believe he is “Incredibly progressive” I would take a closer look at his track record.
Your email mentioned that we should be focusing our energy on District 19, where John Shimkus is currently serving and has been a rubber stamp for the worst president in our history. We do indeed have a candidate running in the district, Vic Roberts. In fact we have 32 candidates running for various positions in the state of Illinois.
Your comment that “Bush was able to challenge the [2000] elections in Florida and eventually get appointed President precisely because the Green Party was able to divide the vote” is based on erroneous information. Al Gore did not demand a full recount, which allowed the Supreme Court coup. Al Gore ran a very bad campaign that barely distinguished him from Bush, and not one Democrat in the Senate challenged the results from the election. Only a handful, including Cynthia McKinney, who is now Green, raised the issue of massive voter disenfranchisement—and do you remember, over 200,000 Democrats voted for Bush, but yet people persist in saying that Ralph Nader was to blame for Bush’s victory because some unknown percentage of his 97,000 voters might have voted for Gore? This myth is dying hard, but it will not deter Greens who are standing up for the public interest, rather than calculating how to maintain a system that perpetuates “lesser evil” voting and delivers greater-evil results.
You said “There are many other issues that should be considered much higher priority when compared to trying to unseat Rep. Costello.” I am not trying to “unseat” Rep. Costello. To say that I am trying to “unseat” Costello is to wrongfully presume that Costello owns the seat; it does not belong to him. The seat belongs to the voters of the 12th District in Illinois. He earned the right to sit as their representative by winning the vote. To sit as their representative in 2009, he will have to earn it again in 2008, as well as I am trying to earn it based on my own campaign, based on my own (and Green) values and priorities with my own message. That is what is supposed to happen in a democratic republic.
I thank you for your letter and your good wishes, but please do not hold up the party for me to join the Democrats. I might add too, that if Jerry Costello has the courage for a series of debates I am ready for the challenge, and we should include the Republican candidate, Tim Richardson.
Rodger Jennings
Green Party Candidate District 12
Chairman of Metro East Green Party
Post a Comment