During the past five years, average Americans have suffered the consequences of the incompetent, corrupt, immoral, radical right, regressive Republican administration of George W. Bush. Every step of the way he has been aided and abetted by Republican rubber stamp cohorts in Congress like Jo Ann Davis (R-VA-01). The results have been a devastating disaster for our country.
Now, we have an exlusive, in-depth interview with the man who's going to replace that "Republican rubber stamp" in just 11 months - Shawn O'Donnell. It's long (but highly informative and interesting!), so we've divided into three parts - the first four questions yesterday, the second set today, the last four questions tomorrow. Enjoy...and PLEASE support Shawn O'Donnell, because with all our help, we can take back that Congressional seat and start taking back America from the right-wing extremists!
5) What is your view of Social Security - a middle class entitlement or more of a safety net for the poor? Do you believe that Social Security should be reformed, possibly including means tests for income or raising the retirement age?
Social Security is a government guaranteed and administered insurance plan with required employee contributions and employer matches. Republicans hate government programs that work for the common good, work well, are solvent in both the short term and long term, and can be easily tweaked whenever necessary.
Radical regressive Republicans like Bush, DeLay and Davis continue to pursue congressional actions that seek to privatize Social Security. These actions come from an administration that practices Enron style accounting, awards Halliburton ?no-bid? contracts, and borrows trillions of dollars to give away to millionaires and corporate cronies. One of my great fears is that, if Democrats do not take back the House in 2006, Republicans will try once again to take a wrecking ball to Social Security, the foundation of true economic security for millions of our fellow Americans.
6) Recently, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation?s annual State of the Bay report gave the Bay an overall health rating of "D." The Foundation's President, William C. Baker, was quoted as saying, ?Today, more than halfway to the 2010 target date, instead of seeing significantly improved water quality, we have a bay that is dangerously out of balance and in critical condition.? Obviously, that's not acceptable. If elected to Congress, what would you do to restore this invaluable and amazing ecosystem? In general, do you consider yourself a strong environmentalist?
I?m a believer in measurements and accountability and unfortunately the ?D? grade on the State of the Chesapeake Bay appears to be accurate. Much more needs to be done and it will be necessary to step up the work to meet even a majority of the targets established for 2010. One critical goal that has been clearly defined and is measurable is the restoration of 25,000 acres of wetlands. We need to reach and exceed that goal as soon as possible.
I consider myself a strong supporter of our personal and societal responsibility to our environment. The way we treat the air we breathe, the water we drink, the way we use the land, and our entire ecosystem tests our ability to use our resources in a manner that is responsible to each other and to future generations.
7) What is your opinion of President Bush's current nominee to the Supreme Court, Samuel Alito? In general, what is your philosophy regarding the role of the Federal courts - do you believe they should be "strict constructionists," "neutral referees," "judicial activists," or none of the above? Also, should nominees to Federal courts face a "litmus test" on abortion or any other issue?
As you know, members of the House of Representatives do not vote on the confirmation of presidential appointments to the Supreme Court, but in my opinion, Samuel Alito?s nomination represents another effort by the Bush administration to put a radical right wing judicial activist on the court. While plenty of reasons exist to vote against Alito, I believe that any judge who saw no problem with a police officer shooting and killing an unarmed teenager who was fleeing after a $10 home burglary, or strip searching a ten year old child without a warrant, should not sit on our Supreme Court.
Supreme Court decisions have played too crucial a role in the advancement of our society to allow anyone with a predetermined agenda and inability to judge cases on the individual merits to advance to the highest court in the land.
8) Are you more of a "free trader" or "fair trader" in terms of international economic policy? Do you believe that labor, environmental and human rights guarantees should be part of trade agreements? What do you think about NAFTA, CAFTA, and Most Favored Nation status for China, for instance?
Multinational economic agreements like NAFTA, CAFTA, and MFN for China should all have been based upon strict rules and regulations that would have worked to move our trading partners to a more level playing field. For example, workers should be allowed to unionize, minimum wage and benefit levels should have been set, and industry specific environmental policies and enforcement put in place.
Let?s face facts. NAFTA created ?a giant sucking sound? moving good paying jobs of U.S. citizens to low paid workers in other countries without stemming the tide of illegals willing to break our laws to enter the U.S. NAFTA supporters promised its passage would lift millions out of poverty but instead it brought lower wage rates to U.S. workers and caused even more illegals to enter the U.S. looking for work.