For a Real Debate Americans Need Real Questions
By Erik Leaver
Despite a robust stock market and a lack of threatening international conflicts, Americans are still deeply concerned about issues of basic equality and social justice, here and abroad. And, overwhelmingly, they want the presidential candidates to debate a range of issues that, so far, both Bush and Gore have been ignoring.
Unfortunately, the first presidential debate only highlighted the divide between public concerns and political rhetoric. For 90 minutes, Bush and Gore dished out prepackaged, carefully scripted answers designed to shed little light on their real views and policies. It's no wonder that people's opinions were not swayed.
A new public opinion poll, commissioned by The Nation magazine and the Institute for Policy Studies released just before the debate, found a large majority of the public wants the candidates to debate U.S. involvement in peacekeeping missions, how to close the gap between rich and poor school districts, and the nuclear test ban treaty among a host of other issues. None of these topics was discussed by the candidates in Tuesday's debate. And on two key issues where Bush and Gore basically agree - the benefits of international trade and increased military spending relative to other priorities, for instance - the public does not.
The findings of the poll include:
- Despite the booming economy, many Americans worry about the disenfranchised: they show concern for the many Americans without health insurance (91%) and the gaps between rich and poor (74%). An overwhelming majority (81%) supports an increase in the minimum wage.
- While both candidates express enthusiasm for the growth of international trade, a huge majority of voters (83%) wants to see this expansion moderated by other goals - protecting workers, the environment and human rights - even if this means slowing the growth of the economy.
- While both candidates are speaking in favor of increases in defense spending, a strong majority (63%) of Americans are interested in redirecting defense funds to education and other priorities.
- A clear majority considers it "very important" or "somewhat important" for the candidates to debate some of the foreign policy issues that rarely see the light of day on the campaign trail, such as the comprehensive test ban treaty (80%) and contributing to international peacekeeping operations (86%). An equally strong majority (81%) wants the United States to cooperate with other countries through the United Nations.
The poll asked questions that had been used in previous polls over the last several years. These questions were asked again to see if the current political campaign has made much difference in public attitudes. Surprisingly, The Nation/IPS poll found that voter views and levels of interest on these issues are generally about as strong as they were in mid-1999 - even though many of the issues tested received scant attention during the last 12 months of intensive campaigning.
These questions were neither posed nor answered in Boston. Mr. Lehrer openly stated at the beginning of the debate, "The questions and the subjects were chosen by me alone." The lack of democracy at the debates - the very place where voters are gaining information to elect their leader - severely undermines the credibility of our electoral system. Protesters in Boston tried to elevate this basic issue but neither the media nor the candidates paid them any attention.
By shutting out the critical issues it is no wonder why voters are not tuning into the debates - nor should it be a surprise that some major television networks are not even broadcasting the live debates. More importantly, if citizens don't hear the candidates speak to the issues affecting their lives, the voter turnout on Election Day is bound to be slim.
One way to break out of this tightly controlled format would be to allow all of the official presidential candidates to take part in the debates. Instead, the Commission on Presidential Debates, the organization, which has organized the presidential debates since 1988, banned the two minority candidate s- Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan - even though Buchanan has qualified for federal funding. Nader's public support is greater than 5%, and a majority of the public wants to see them in the debates. The Commission, which receives sizeable corporate funding, even had the audacity to bar Nader, who had a ticket to enter, from sitting in the audience. Such manipulation of our electoral process undermines our democratic institutions.
Voters are out ahead of one or both of candidates Bush and Gore in believing fair trade is more important than free trade, supporting shifting military spending to other priorities, wanting the U.S. to act as a global partner with the United Nations, and in democratizing the debate process. When are the two main presidential candidates and the Commission on Public Debates going to catch up?
Erik Leaver is a project associate for Foreign Policy In Focus, a joint project of the Institute for Policy Studies and the Interhemispheric Resource Center.
The full text of the public opinion poll, and further material on Campaign 2000, is available on the In Focus website, www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org
