John Edwards for President
With the New Jersey presidential primary little more than a month away, I want to urge readers not just in Highland Park but across the state and beyond to give their support and votes to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.
Why Edwards? The answer is actually quite simple. Edwards provides the Democratic Party with an opportunity to return to its populist roots as an advocate for fighting poverty and standing up for a strong middle class.
Beginning in the 1930s, the New Deal and then the Great Society led to generations of prosperity, economic growth, and increasing opportunities for a burgeoning middle class. This was the heyday of the Democratic Party, when being a Democrat meant being an advocate for the average person as well as for our most vulnerable citizens.
But as Stephen Crockett, co-host of Democratic Talk Radio, states, when Ronald Reagan came to power, Democrats began selling out to the corporate agenda and corporate campaign dollars. Their support for initiatives such as income tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations amounted to "Republican lite" policies that reversed a long term period of prosperity and began a decades long trend of the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and the middle class being heavily weakened.
Acceptance of "supply side economics," in spite of its being proven a failure again and again, led to Democratic complicity in support of tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens and corporations, a resulting shortage of revenue to fund services, and cuts in everything from college financial aid to anti-poverty programs. "Trickle down economics," which Democrats could have stopped but instead embraced in a "lighter" form, led to excessive corporate executive pay, downsizing, outsourcing, corporate consolidation and monopolies, undermining of labor unions, and increased corporate control of the media and politics, shutting out the voices of average people.
Bill and Hillary Clinton supported the series of free trade agreements such as NAFTA, GATT, etc., all of which facilitated more downsizing and outsourcing, just as predicted by independent presidential candidate Ross Perot.
Meanwhile, no Democrat has truly made a priority out of ending poverty as we know it, something that can be done but for the lack of political will. The US is the only industrialized democracy in the world not to have national health care. Our infant mortality and average lifespan rates are an embarrassment in that they are behind those of most other industrialized countries. We spend 17 percent of our economy on health care but still have 47 million people without coverage. Other industrialized nations spend about 8 percent on health care and cover everyone.
John Edwards is running as an economic populist, wholeheartedly committed to restoring the soul of the Democratic Party. He is the only candidate talking about fighting poverty in America. Because the poor don't give big bucks to campaigns, their voices are almost always ignored. That is not the case with Edwards, who first told the truth about "a tale of two Americas," one wealthy and one increasingly struggling and who has made the commitment to restoring "one America" where "a rising tide lifts all boats."
Edwards is committed to universal health care, combatting both urban and rural poverty, strengthening the right of workers to form unions, and fighting outsourcing of jobs from our country by ending trade agreements that encourage companies to move overseas.
Even in presidential elections, this country rarely sees a turnout beyond 55 percent of those eligible. We need to ask ourselves why so many citizens opt to not participate. Maybe the answer is because no one is addressing the concerns and needs of those who struggle from paycheck to paycheck, the increasing lack of affordability of higher education, the lack of manufacturing jobs with benefits that used to secure average citizens a decent standard of living, the fear of catastrophic illness or the need for nursing home care alongside the inability to afford these.
Economic populism was the soul of the Democratic Party for decades. When the party abandoned this central tenet, it lost the allegiance of countless voters. Unfortunately, people like Bill and Hillary Clinton along with the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), who advocated the policy of "triangulation" or "Republican lite," opting, for example, to focus on ending welfare as we know it instead of ending poverty as we know it, played a central role in leading the party in this wrong direction.
Barack Obama is far more the economic populist than Hillary Clinton, but he could use additional political experience. He might find that experience as a running mate for vice president alongside John Edwards.
In 2004, I took part in a loose organization known as "the Group," which focused on raising money for Democratic candidates. At this point, with "the Group" having endorsed Hillary Clinton, I respectfully dissent with their decision. I urged its members to consider endorsing Edwards, but unfortunately, that did not happen.
It is time for the Democratic Party to reclaim its soul from those who sold out and continue to sell out to the highest bidders. Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis once said, "the more you have, the more you're responsible for giving back." If you want to see a move away from today's economic inequality, the worst since the Great Depression, if you want the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes, if you want universal health coverage for all Americans, if you want the interests of the poor and middle class to once again take front and center stage, I urge you to actively support the campaign of John Edwards and to vote for him in our primary on February 5.
To volunteer for Edwards' campaign, visit http://johnedwards.com/
Why Edwards? The answer is actually quite simple. Edwards provides the Democratic Party with an opportunity to return to its populist roots as an advocate for fighting poverty and standing up for a strong middle class.
Beginning in the 1930s, the New Deal and then the Great Society led to generations of prosperity, economic growth, and increasing opportunities for a burgeoning middle class. This was the heyday of the Democratic Party, when being a Democrat meant being an advocate for the average person as well as for our most vulnerable citizens.
But as Stephen Crockett, co-host of Democratic Talk Radio, states, when Ronald Reagan came to power, Democrats began selling out to the corporate agenda and corporate campaign dollars. Their support for initiatives such as income tax cuts for the wealthy and large corporations amounted to "Republican lite" policies that reversed a long term period of prosperity and began a decades long trend of the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer, and the middle class being heavily weakened.
Acceptance of "supply side economics," in spite of its being proven a failure again and again, led to Democratic complicity in support of tax cuts for the wealthiest citizens and corporations, a resulting shortage of revenue to fund services, and cuts in everything from college financial aid to anti-poverty programs. "Trickle down economics," which Democrats could have stopped but instead embraced in a "lighter" form, led to excessive corporate executive pay, downsizing, outsourcing, corporate consolidation and monopolies, undermining of labor unions, and increased corporate control of the media and politics, shutting out the voices of average people.
Bill and Hillary Clinton supported the series of free trade agreements such as NAFTA, GATT, etc., all of which facilitated more downsizing and outsourcing, just as predicted by independent presidential candidate Ross Perot.
Meanwhile, no Democrat has truly made a priority out of ending poverty as we know it, something that can be done but for the lack of political will. The US is the only industrialized democracy in the world not to have national health care. Our infant mortality and average lifespan rates are an embarrassment in that they are behind those of most other industrialized countries. We spend 17 percent of our economy on health care but still have 47 million people without coverage. Other industrialized nations spend about 8 percent on health care and cover everyone.
John Edwards is running as an economic populist, wholeheartedly committed to restoring the soul of the Democratic Party. He is the only candidate talking about fighting poverty in America. Because the poor don't give big bucks to campaigns, their voices are almost always ignored. That is not the case with Edwards, who first told the truth about "a tale of two Americas," one wealthy and one increasingly struggling and who has made the commitment to restoring "one America" where "a rising tide lifts all boats."
Edwards is committed to universal health care, combatting both urban and rural poverty, strengthening the right of workers to form unions, and fighting outsourcing of jobs from our country by ending trade agreements that encourage companies to move overseas.
Even in presidential elections, this country rarely sees a turnout beyond 55 percent of those eligible. We need to ask ourselves why so many citizens opt to not participate. Maybe the answer is because no one is addressing the concerns and needs of those who struggle from paycheck to paycheck, the increasing lack of affordability of higher education, the lack of manufacturing jobs with benefits that used to secure average citizens a decent standard of living, the fear of catastrophic illness or the need for nursing home care alongside the inability to afford these.
Economic populism was the soul of the Democratic Party for decades. When the party abandoned this central tenet, it lost the allegiance of countless voters. Unfortunately, people like Bill and Hillary Clinton along with the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), who advocated the policy of "triangulation" or "Republican lite," opting, for example, to focus on ending welfare as we know it instead of ending poverty as we know it, played a central role in leading the party in this wrong direction.
Barack Obama is far more the economic populist than Hillary Clinton, but he could use additional political experience. He might find that experience as a running mate for vice president alongside John Edwards.
In 2004, I took part in a loose organization known as "the Group," which focused on raising money for Democratic candidates. At this point, with "the Group" having endorsed Hillary Clinton, I respectfully dissent with their decision. I urged its members to consider endorsing Edwards, but unfortunately, that did not happen.
It is time for the Democratic Party to reclaim its soul from those who sold out and continue to sell out to the highest bidders. Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis once said, "the more you have, the more you're responsible for giving back." If you want to see a move away from today's economic inequality, the worst since the Great Depression, if you want the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes, if you want universal health coverage for all Americans, if you want the interests of the poor and middle class to once again take front and center stage, I urge you to actively support the campaign of John Edwards and to vote for him in our primary on February 5.
To volunteer for Edwards' campaign, visit http://johnedwards.com/
posted by Laurel Kornfeld | 6:01 PM
<< Home