The Gore View

After reading your recent article on Al Gore, "How Bad is He?", I felt uneasy. I am planning on voting for Gore, unless it is clear that either he or Bush has a clear lead (in which case, I'll cast my vote for the Green Party--NOT Nader, who I don't feel would be an effective president). Contrary to what many Naderites believe, I am not voting simply out of "fear," and ignoring my "conscience." My conscience has wrestled more with this election than any previous election since I had the right to vote, and it is my conscience that, in the end, is compelling me to cast a vote for Gore. This is largely due to the upcoming Supreme Court appointments which could have lasting consequences for all of us), and my concern for the environment (Gore at least has somewhat of a record of working for environmental protections).

The facts you state about Gore in your article definitely paint him in a poor light. Because you did not state your sources, I went ahead and did some of my own fact-checking (from NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and the Gore campaign itself). I know that Eat the State! is a lefty paper, but I also feel that your article deliberately left out information about Gore that might have shed a more positive, or at least balanced, light on his record and his principles. I'm not a huge Gore fan, but it's amazing to me how easy it is for a paper to present him in a negative light, utilizing some choice facts and some voting records that are now 20 years old (people are capable of changing/modifying their opinions, aren't they?). The following is what I found:

Here's what ETS! said: > Gore opposed abortion rights for most of his > congressional career, speaking of "a fetus' right to life." He supported > the Hyde Amendment banning federal funding for abortions for poor women, > and even at one point opposed a provision allowing exceptions in the case of rape. He voted for an unsuccessful House measure that defined a fetusas a> person from the moment of conception, and denied federal funding to any > hospital or clinic that provided an abortion.

Here's what I found: "Vice President Gore and the Clinton Administration have always been dedicated to the principles embodied in Roe v. Wade." - Kate Michelman, President of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. [NARAL Release, 1/22/98]

As a Member of Congress, Al Gore cosponsored the Freedom of Choice Act, which sought to codify the Roe v. Wade decision into federal law so that states could not limit or chip away rights provided by the decision. [The Washington Post, 7/6/92, The Chicago Tribune, 11/14/91]

Increasing Family Planning. The Administration's FY 2000 budget includes $240 million for family planning through Title X, a $25 million increase, and the largest increase in 15 years. These funds will be used to prevent over a million unintended pregnancies a year by improving the delivery of comprehensive reproductive health services as well as to increase the accessibility of contraceptive counseling and services. [Clinton-Gore Administration FY 2000 Budget Summary]

Fighting to prevent Violence at Women's Health Clinics. Vice President Gore

is fighting for $4.5 million to fund additional security enhancements for clinics deemed at risk of violence. The initiative will help respond to the

growing violence against women's health clinics and providers by helping to

pay for improvements like closed-circuit camera systems, improved lighting,

motion detectors, alarm systems or bullet-resistant windows. [The Washington Post, 1/22/99]

Here's What ETS! said: > Gay Rights: Gore also voted in 1980 for an amendment prohibiting > the Legal Services Corporation from assisting people discriminated against > because of their (real or perceived) sexual orientation. In August 1986 he > voted for a Jesse Helms amendment forcing the District of Columbia to > overturn a law prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating against > HIV+ applicants. >> A year later, he voted to prohibit HIV+ immigrants from settling > in the U.S. At the behest of pharmaceutical corporations, he has led > efforts to prevent South Africa from introducing affordable generic HIV > drugs.

Here's what I found:

In the early days of the Clinton-Gore Administration, Vice President Al Gore was a forceful voice in support of lifting the ban on gays in the military.

Elizabeth Drew wrote that, "At a meeting on Wednesday night, July 14, in the President's study in the residence, the issue was argued bitterly. Gore insisted that the President shouldn't compromise, that it was a matter of principle. The President should just lift the ban, Gore argued, even though

he was sure to be overridden by the Congress." Gore has stated that the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy has not worked, and as president, he would eliminate it.

In 1998, the Administration signed an Executive Order to update equal employment rules within the federal government, by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. The order provides a uniform policy for the Federal government to prohibit employment discrimination based on sexual orientation in the federal civilian workforce. As a result of this executive order the U.S. government is now the largest employer--with more than 1.8 million employees--to have a non-discrimination policy based on sexual orientation in the workplace.

Vice President Gore, along with the Administration, has called upon Congress to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act to extend employment protection to gays and lesbians throughout the American workforce. Gore understands that in 39 states today, it is entirely legal to fire an individual simply because they are lesbian or gay. Although the bill eventually died in Congress in 1997, it was reintroduced in 1999 and Vice President Gore has been a vocal supporter for the final passage of the legislation.

The Administration has become a leading example of inclusiveness and diversity by appointing more than 150 well-qualified openly gay men and lesbians to the Judicial and Executive branch. Elizabeth Birch, of the Human Rights Campaign, has praised the Administration for their efforts, including the implementation of non-discrimination policies, and the elimination of criteria based on sexual orientation in determining security risks for employment or employees in the federal government.

As a U.S. Senator, Al Gore was an original cosponsor of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act of 1990. This Act provided grants to improve the quality and availability of AIDS treatment.

I'm not disputing your facts. And some of mine are likely tainted with the fine sheen of campaign propaganda. What I have been learning most during this campaign season is that it's extremely difficult to truly know WHAT the candidates really think, because there is so much conflicting information, and even the facts can be edited and utilized for partisan purposes.

Who is the real Gore? I'm not entirely sure. For some of my friends, their choice for President is very black and white (Gore is Bad, Nader is Good).

For me, this entire campaign season has been awash in gray, gray, and more gray. I am having to rely on many conflicting sources to make my final decision. And even that decision will, in the end, be a conflicted one.

Sincerely,

--Kathryn Mostow, via e-mail

G.P. replies: First, Kathryn, thank you for doing your own research. Every voter should. However, bear in mind that getting research facts from a campaign is akin to watching a commercial for product information. It's likely to be extremely selective at best.

Most of the material in the article you cite, and hundreds of pages more, is contained in the excellent "Al Gore: A Users' Manual," by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, just out on Verso Press.

It fascinates me that of the dozen or so different issue areas in which I criticized Gore's record--many dating to his days as VP--the only issue areas you could find to contest date from his Congressional career 10-25 years ago.

ETS! is primarily a print publication, and stuff gets edited and/or written tersely to save space. I should have made the additional point that for the items dating to Gore's congressional career (the abortion and gay rights items you cite), he was representing a conservative southern state and his record with a national constituency as VP was better. However, what's relevant is that his record as a Rep and Senator from Tennessee is in many respects worse than that of George W. Bush in answering to the conservative southern views of Texans--begging the question of why Gore backers are painting a Bush victory in such apocalyptic terms.

One more advantage to a Gore presidency: maybe he'll appoint Robert Redford Ambassador to Tibet.

Vote for Cantwell

I watched with interest the KING-5 debate last night between Maria Cantwell and Slade Gorton. What interested me most was Gorton's claim over and over again that local people should be making the decisions for the things that affect them directly. The example in the Okanogan of the proposed Battle Mountain gold mine was used. The longer I live the more I see the interconnectedness of all beings and how interrelated our activities are. Mining tailings from one mine tend to end up affecting aquifers and salmon Locally, as well as hundreds of miles away. Dams in one area end up affecting the salmon in another county.

This is when good leadership on a regional and national level is needed. We need representatives in Washington, D.C. who will look out for our local interests at the same time as they take a regional view of our issues. We need someone who will tell a community that their local choice may have negative consequences elsewhere in the state or even in the future locally, when the resource is gone and all that's left is the clean-up effort (or superfund site declaration--see Idaho's recent problems in that area).

It's time that this state got some relief from the parochial and patriarchal views of our senior senator. It's time to remove someone who votes time and time again against reproductive freedom for women and international family planning funding. It's time for a relief pitcher to step in, and that person is Maria Cantwell. As I hiked out by Quilicine this past weekend I couldn't help but think of the clearcuts surrounding that area and how Gorton's close connection with the timber industry has caused a major slashing of our forests for a quick buck.

Let's win one for the home team! For these reasons and for our Native American friends, it's past time to go to the bullpen for Washington State.

It's time for Maria Cantwell on November 7th!

For a better world,

--Albert Kaufman, Beacon Hill

Zero Population Growth for the Rich!

During this election season, it burns me up that Republicans and Democrats can't talk about poverty here in the U.S. and shrinking government services to the poor. I hate it that both parties call poor people freeloaders and use that as an excuse to cut services. I'll tell you who the freeloaders are.

Today a rich old lady client came into the office where I work to meet with one of my bosses. She was scheduled to arrive at 11:00, but came in at 10:20. She's a little slow moving, but can walk just fine. When my boss pushed aside a project and came out to meet with her a half-hour earlier than planned, this is what she said: "Oh, I'm sorry I'm early, but I came by Access."

"What?" my boss said.

"Access," she replied, her face lighting up. "It's a shuttle service provided by the federal government so everybody can get out and around."

I nearly vomited on the spot. This lady, who's worth several million bucks, couldn't call a cab. I know disabled people who can't get Metro's shuttle service to pick them up on First Hill--much less Mercer Island, where this bitch lives. And the shuttle service is funded mostly by state money: sales taxes paid by you and me.

The problem isn't that poor people take advantage of the government and its services (what the hell else are these services for?). The problem is that the government can't keep stingy rich people from using services that weren't meant for them. (And that goes for big businesses, too!)

Yours in disgust,

--Cranky Prole Bitch

Flunking the Electoral College

I continue to love your alternative points of view, particularly about the presidential elections right now. But how about devoting some pages to the real story about the electoral college?

We're all familiar with the phrase as a buzzword in presidential elections, but how many realize that there are actually only 538 of these flesh-and-blood folks in the entire country who actually decide who becomes President and Vice President?

They're not members of Congress or employees of the federal government but usually chosen by the state's political parties at their conventions. And this year, they choose who leads this country, not on November 7 when all us poor lackeys are down at the election booths, but on December 18th!

All this information is available at websites like: http://www.fec.gov/pages/ecworks.htm

...and although it's not exactly a secret, the details of the electoral college get much more interesting:

You probably know that whichever candidate wins the slightest popular majority in each state gets all the electoral votes for that state. So, in other words, if Gore gets just one more popular vote in Washington state than Bush, all of our 11 electors become the ones chosen by the Democratic Party.

Although these electors usually vote for the candidates who won the popular vote in their state, it's not illegal for them to vote for anyone they want to! ("No elector has ever been prosecuted for failing to vote as pledged." (http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/elctcoll/faq.html)

In the 1976 election between Carter and Ford, one Washington state elector cast his ballot for Reagan! In 1960, Strom Thurmond got 14 votes and Barry Goldwater got one for VP! And in 1988 (ostensibly between the senior Bush and Dukakis), one West Virginia elector chose the Democratic VP candidate Lloyd Bentsen for President, and Dukakis for Vice Prez!!

So, why are these candidates pouring all their time and energy in trying to sway the popular vote?! They only need to convince these 538 individuals to cast the ballot in their favor! And they still have almost six weeks after the general election to do so!

And, so: who are these mysterious electors? Probably the best way to find out is to contact the Secretary of State for your state (get contact information at www.nass.org). I got in touch with the right people in Washington State and one sent me the list of names with addresses, and in some cases, phone numbers.

So, in Washington state at least, these fine men and women will be getting phone calls and letters from me urging them to, yes, VOTE NADER!!!!! [I'll be happy to give you the list of these folks after the election, if you like!]

keep up the great works!,

--Bruce Greeley, via e-mail

Eat the Airwaves

Hear Eat the State! political commentary on Mind Over Matters every Saturday morning from 8:30 to 9:00 on KCMU 90.3 FM. If we can get up that early, the least you can do is turn on your radio and listen!