By Reginald Johnson
Three
huge issues have received almost no attention so far in this year's presidential
election campaign: global warming, the corporate takeover of election
financing and the future of Social Security.
I’m hoping the silence around these
issues will change in this month’s debates, which begin Wednesday night in Denver.
The
format for the first debate is that Jim Lehrer, of PBS, will ask questions of
his choosing about domestic policy. It would be better if there were a team of
journalists asking questions, but this is the format. All the other debates
will have a similar format, except one which will see citizens ask questions in
a town hall setting.
At tomorrow’s
debate it will be up to Lehrer to ask questions of the greatest relevance.
Let’s hope he does his job.
Despite
what is being called a “planetary emergency” relating to global warming,
President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney haven’t touched
the issue of climate change during the campaign. And apparently the elite Washington
press corps hasn’t bothered to ask them what their approaches are to dealing with
his massive problem, since we haven’t heard anything about it.
Lehrer needs to
ask President Obama why he hasn’t shown more leadership in dealing with climate
change during his first term. While Obama
has done a few positive things, such as issuing improved fuel economy standards
for cars and setting CO2 standards for cars and new power plants, he has not
advocated the kind of sweeping program that’s really needed to slow global
warming. He needs to go before the American people and lay out how serious this
problem is, and propose a comprehensive plan to turn the nation to a green
economy and turn away from fossil fuels. It’s also imperative that he show real
leadership on the global level, something he hasn’t done so far.
Romney needs to be
asked how he can be taken seriously as a presidential candidate when he has the
audacity to question the reality of global warming. The GOP candidate claims that
climate science is “unsettled,” despite the mountain of studies indicating otherwise.
He’s come out against a carbon tax and would continue the Republican attack on
the EPA for trying to regulate carbon emissions. Lehrer needs to question him
on these wholly irresponsible positions.
Then there’s Social
Security. The two main presidential
candidates need to come clean about how they view this long-standing old-age
benefit program, which sustains hundreds of millions of people. Up to this
point, Obama has played his usual evasive game of ‘I support it, but….’ He set
up the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction commission a couple of years ago that
recommended a cut in Social Security cost of living adjustments. Obama said he
agreed with the plan. But lately, during the election campaign, Vice President
Joe Biden has gone around and stated emphatically that no cuts are planned for
Social Security.
So what are we to think here? If re-elected, will Obama seek cuts in Social Security or
not? The economist Dean Baker recently
wrote a good piece on the conflicting signals coming from the administration on
Social Security at www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/18-2.
Romney, while he
hasn’t said so explicitly, would likely back cuts to Social Security. He and
his running mate, Congressman Paul Ryan, support the elimination of Medicare as
we know it, turning it into a weakling “voucher” program, in order to reduce
costs. If they think this way about Medicare, then you better believe Social Security
is in their gunsights as well. Lehrer needs to probe Romney on this issue,
especially in the wake of his notorious remark that he didn’t care about the 47
per cent of all Americans who collect some kind of government benefits.
Finally, there’s
the issue of corporate influence in elections and the astronomical cost of
running for office. Since the passage of the Citizens United ruling by the
Supreme Court, which opened the door to virtually unlimited corporate spending
in election campaigns, there’s been an avalanche of business sector money being
dumped into Super PACs and independent outside groups to attack or support
different candidates. The ruling is giving corporations an inordinate amount of
power in determining who will win elections.
There’s a drive on
to pass a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and reverse the
legal position that corporations have the same free speech rights as people, or
simply put, that corporations are people.
Romney already is
on record as supporting Citizens United, saying “corporations are people.” Lehrer or someone at a later debate should
ask him how a democracy can last when corporations take over the election
process.
Obama, who has
criticized the Citizens United ruling, should be asked whether he backs the
proposed constitutional amendment, and if not, what he thinks should be done
about the astronomical cost of elections and in particular the massive spending
by corporations in elections.
I don’t know
whether any of these questions will be asked, or to what extent. If no
questions are asked about these three vital subjects, the whole debate process
is a sham.
If you want to be
sure you’ll hear debate on the issues discussed above and more, tune in
Wednesday from 8:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. to the show Democracy Now (www.democracynow.org) which is hosting a special debate for two
third party candidates, Jill Stein of the Green Party and Rocky Anderson of the
Justice Party. The two candidates have been shut out of the main debate by the
Commission on Presidential Debates.
Stein’s campaign
also said an “Occupy the CPD” has sprung up and Stein, her running mate Cheri
Honkala, supporters and activists will march on the CPD event at the University
of Denver, prior to the DN
broadcast.
The media have
largely ignored Stein and Anderson’s
campaigns. One exception has been the interview of Stein by Scott Harris of the
Between the Lines radio show on Aug. 17. To hear the broadcast go to www.btlonline.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment