include("../../art/protect.inc") ?>
|
by Steve Chapman |
|
Questions
someone really ought to ask at the next presidential debate:
For George W. Bush: You've been described as having a thinner resume than anyone elected president since Woodrow Wilson. How can someone with an undistinguished career in business and so little experience in government be adequately prepared for the most important job in the world? Would anyone consider you qualified for the presidency if your name were George Walker rather than George Walker Bush? For Al Gore: Over the years, you have changed your positions on gun control, abortion, tobacco taxes, and a comprehensive nuclear test ban. How can the American people be confident that the positions you have taken during this campaign would bear any resemblance to the ones you would implement as president? For George W. Bush: You've said that the United States should intervene with military force only when our territory is threatened, our people could be harmed, or our friends and allies are threatened. Those conditions were not present when your father sent 28,000 troops to Somalia in 1992. Was that mission a mistake? For Al Gore: You proposed tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve because the cost of gasoline has become "much more of a burden on the family's budget." What is the appropriate amount for a family to spend on gasoline, and should the federal government guarantee that no family has to exceed that amount? You've said no one should have to choose between buying food and buying prescription drugs. Should anyone be forced to choose between buying food and buying gasoline? For George W. Bush: You say the way to address high oil prices is to reduce oil imports by increasing production in the United States, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. How do you explain that between 1981 and 1999, prices fell steadily even though imports into the United States more than doubled? Since oil prices are set in a world market, won't Americans pay the same price regardless of whether we import 100 percent of our oil or zero percent? For Al Gore: You've consistently described the last recession as the worst since the Great Depression. How can that be true when the unemployment rate peaked at 7.8 percent, compared with 10.8 percent in the previous recession? You've said the current administration turned that recession into the greatest expansion in American history. How can you claim credit for the turnaround when, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the recession ended in March 1991? For George W. Bush: Both you and your running mate have business experience, as well as many campaign contributors, in the oil industry, and both of you, in the past, have suggested that low oil prices are not a good thing. Should the federal government put a floor on how low oil prices can go? Why should the American people expect two former oil executives to be ready to make decisions that would advance the public interest at the expense of the oil industry? For Al Gore and George W. Bush: You have both endorsed expanded commercial ties and a normal trade relationship with China as a way of promoting the development of free markets, democracy and human rights in a communist country. Why doesn't that formula apply to Cuba? For Al Gore: You've said this administration has turned record budget deficits into record surpluses. Why did this administration decline to offer a plan to balance the budget until after Republicans gained control of Congress and insisted on it? For George W. Bush: You have proposed $84 billion a year in new federal spending, and you are the first Republican presidential nominee in decades not to propose cutting or abolishing any major federal spending program. Is there any federal agency you would close down or any spending program you would cut by half or more? You say the vice president's spending plans would need 20,000 new bureaucrats to administer them all. How many new bureaucrats would yours require? For Al Gore: In the first debate, you said the federal government needs to provide more aid to local schools, citing a high school girl in Sarasota, Fla., who had to stand for her science class because it was so overcrowded. How do you respond to the principal of that school, who says your account was "misleading at best," since the classroom has $150,000 in new equipment and plenty of lab stools where the girl could have sat? Why is it that so many of the claims you've made during the campaign don't stand up to factual scrutiny? For the American people: Do we really want to know the answers?
Albion Monitor
October 9, 2000 (http://www.monitor.net/monitor) All Rights Reserved. Contact rights@monitor.net for permission to use in any format. |