California Primary Election Special Issue: Ron Paul and John McCain
These short informational columns were part of an “election issue” published during the California Presidential Primaries on February 4, 2007. Other major candidates were also featured, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and Mike Huckabee. The candidates I was assigned to research and evaluate were John McCain and Ron Paul.
Photo credit: T. Rob Brown
JOHN McCAIN
Why you should vote for him: As a veteran and victim of torture, Sen. John McCain has the most significant experience of the after-effects of war as a soldier on the ground. He firmly opposes the use of torture as an interrogation technique and specifically denounced waterboarding as a torture method when the Bush Administration attempted to claim otherwise. He has a strong record for environmental issues, advocating “stewardship” and responsible management of the earth. He would allow parents to choose whichever school they want to send their child to, which would allow greater options and flexibility for parents.
McCain is an Independent vote favorite, because he isn’t as conservative as President George W. Bush or fellow candidate Gov. Mike Huckabee. A senator from Arizona, he recognizes that immigration is a serious issue and understands that more will have to be done than just building a fence. Although he has allowed some illegal immigrants to become U.S. citizens under certain circumstances, he won’t allow complete amnesty. He also accepts that global climate change is occurring and knows something must be done to deal with it.
Why you shouldn’t vote for him: In terms of change, McCain fails miserably. On foreign policy issues, he is the candidate who resembles President Bush’s policies the most and whose voting record regularly endorses Bush’s policies, with the notable exception of torture. He would not withdraw our troops from Iraq, but actually increase the numbers of soldiers on the ground. While he sympathizes with war veterans, his plan of action would make more of them.
His economic policies and tax cuts stand to benefit corporations and big business the most, increasing their profitability but not impacting the American worker as significantly. His opposition to abortion with exceptions for rape, incest or life threatening of the mother essentially punishes women for having sex. He opposes universal health care but intends to reduce spending, and the only benefit he proposes would be a tax credit for those who have insurance, one that comes down to less than $250 a month. McCain’s greatest strength is his familiarity, but because the vast majority of us are dissatisfied with the way things are, this is why he won’t — and shouldn’t - be elected.
Photo credit: Ron Paul
RON PAUL:
Why you should vote for him: He’s not the typical Texan. If the most important issue to you is ending the war in Iraq, Ron Paul is the candidate whose plan is the quickest and most straightforward. Rep. Ron Paul opposes the war in Iraq and has been the only Republican candidate to consistently do so from the beginning. He supports the most immediate withdrawal of troops from the Middle East. His radical plans for economic reform draw attention to the way the government spends our money, and compels us to search for better solutions to our economic problems.
Why you shouldn’t vote for him: While his “no income-tax” plan appeals to people as individuals, it becomes more disturbing when you look at the big picture and all the programs and benefits that our pooled money provides us as a society - benefits which pale in comparison to the amount we would keep as individuals. Paul’s strong dislike for Federal level government leads him to disband as many Federal departments, budgets and programs as possible and return these to state-level control. Because individual states do not have the same resources or budget as Federal programs, this serves to eliminate possibilities, particularly for those who cannot afford to relocate to another state in order to suit their needs. For example, in Paul’s world abortion could either be ensured or outlawed in individual states, and your right to control your body and your future would depend entirely on where you were lucky enough to live or wealthy enough to move.
In economic scenarios, such as energy and health care, his solution is almost always to remove regulations and return control to free market forces, which does not ensure quality or safety, especially in light of his intent to reduce federal power. If corporations have no legal requirement to make their products safe and good quality and no agency to enforce any regulations that do exist, they won’t bother to produce high-quality, safe products. We will have unregulated nuclear development and health insurance companies can deny even more people while taking their money. Paul’s solutions will not help our problems; they’ll just make them worse.
Read the original columns online: John McCain, Ron Paul.
