............................................................................
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996
Subject: Re: Questions for Senate Candidates
I have a 2 questions for the Senate debetes online.
1. For both candidates, especially Senator Wellstone
"Both of you are well aware of the average citizen's disgust for
the corrupting influence of special interest money on elections and
politics, yet neither of you have signed the Americans Against Political
Corruption Pledge calling for real campaign finance reform in the first one
hundred days of the 105th Congress. You both have recieved the pledge
several times. Why have you you not signed the pledge and committed
yourself to real reform?
(if details are needed the pledge calls for:
1. Limit contributions from outside the district to 25%
2. Constitutional amendmet to limit campaign spending
3. $100 contribution limits
4. substantial free and reduced cost mailings and tv and radio ads
(the public owns the airwaves and the post office)
5. national initiative and referendum, and the removal of barriers to
participation more candidates and political parties)
The pledge is a la carte. Candidates can sign on to parts or all
of the
pledge. It is not all or nothing.
2. In this time of budget cutting frenzy would you committ yourselves to
cutting polluter pork from the budget by cutting the massive corporat
welfare programs such as below cost timber sales, range reform, and the
reform of the 1872 mining law?
Any feedback on these questions would be appreciated.
In regards to the campaign pledge i have faxed and hand delivered the
pledges to both candidates campaign offices several times, and delivered
2800+ postcards on the issue to Wellstone's communications director, Linda
Marson. Wellstone replied with a letter stating his support for all of the
points (but was kinda fuzzy about the constitutional amendment) but has not
returned the pledge. Boschwitz's campaign will not even return my calls.
More than 275 candidates across the country, including more than 40
incumbents have signed the pledge. In Minnesota the signers include Bill
Luther, Tad Jude, and Jack Uldrich. Gil Gutknecht wrote a letter saying he
does not sign pledges, yet he signed the contract with america, and the
minnesota compact.
............................................................................
Subject: Why makes laws that are not liked to morals better?
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996
Why are ethical and moral principles no longer the basis for our laws? For
thousands of years, morals have shaped social behavior, guided laws and
punishment. Now laws are merely based on public opinion, convenience and
ability to enforce. It's now OK to kill someone if you have a good reason.
It's OK to cheat on your wife if she doesn't find out. It's OK to not wear
a helmet if I don't want to. How do you defend this new age way of
justifying ourselves. I sure don't see it working. Do you? Everything is
really getting worse. Crime is increasing, prisons are overflowing,
disease is spreading, more and more people are poor and no one seems to
care. In light of the changes in morals in the last 30+ years, do you
really think we are better off with this opinion-based law?
............................................................................
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996
Subject: Re: Questions for Senate Candidates
I'd like to hear the candidates discuss school choice.
I'm a Wellstone backer, but it bugs me that he's been silent for years on
public school choice, eg, public charter schools, open enrollment, and
post-secondary enrollment options.
I'd like to know specifically why he's steered clear of saying anything
about these programs all this time, and why now he's backing (quietly, it
seems) charter schools.
I'm not convinced he sees the real system-changing potential of charter
schools or that it's just a convenient way to be in favor of choice while
still be strongly against private school vouchers.
As for Rudy, the question I'd like to see asked him is, "Why not put more
emphasis (federal dollars) towards public charter schools instead of the
divisive voucher programs?"
............................................................................
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996
Subject: Questions for Senate Candidates
I would like the candidates to discuss what they think would happen to
the US economy if the deficit and total debt is not reduced at some
point. How high can it go, how long can it stay there, is it a factor at
all. If it is, then why are we delaying the inevitable? If it is not a
factor, why not? I don't want to hear about how much the deficit has
been reduced, tell me if anyone has the courage to eliminate it.