LINK>
* ipa@accuracy.org
___________________________________________________
Monday, February 28, 2000
BRADLEY AND McCAIN: INSURGENTS?
MATTHEW ROTHSCHILD, mattr@progressive.org, LINK
Editor of The Progressive, Rothschild said: "Bradley doesn't represent a
real alternative to Gore or McCain or Bush. He supports the death penalty.
He favors tougher sanctions on Iraq. Along with Gore, he has been a leading
proponent of NAFTA and the World Trade Organization; and he, like Gore, has
carried water for the pharmaceutical companies. Bradley's health plan is a
far cry from universal care, and he leaves the insurance companies firmly in
command. He voted for aiding the contras in 1986. Bradley -- like Gore,
McCain and Bush -- is for bloated Pentagon spending and has not renounced
first use of nuclear weapons. While Bradley has been outspoken on issues of
race and poverty and welfare, he's toed the establishment line on almost
every other issue."
SHARLENE BOZACK, shar@azclean.org, LINK
Executive director of Clean Elections Institute, which was founded to
ensure that Arizona's 1998 landmark Citizens Clean Elections Act would be
implemented, Bozack said: "McCain's talk of breaking the iron triangle of
money, lobbyists and legislation is disingenuous. In 1998 he was absolutely
silent on the clean elections law here in his home state. He has since said
that he is not for public funding, which our law speaks to. The Arizona
clean elections law allows a qualified candidate to collect $5 contributions
and receive public funds once they reach a threshold, depending on the
office for which they are running -- for example, 200 contributor/supporters
for state legislature, 4,000 for the governorship. Not all candidates have
to participate in this system, but this allows people without moneyed
backers to actually run for major public office. McCain is not backing true
campaign finance reform since he just wants to limit how much lobbyists can
give to congressional candidates to $1,000. There's no cap on the amount the
candidates can raise or spend. It allows a kitchen cabinet of fundraisers to
line up countless $1,000 contributors. McCain-Feingold would have no effect
on how much McCain, Bush, Gore and Bradley have raised in 'hard money' so
far in this campaign."
JERRY STARR, jmstarr@aol.com, LINK
Executive director of Citizens for Independent Public Broadcasting, Starr
said: "The influence-peddling scandal that put McCain on the front page last
month revealed more about him than his special relationship with media mogul
Lowell Paxson. The deal McCain pushed on the FCC required the transfer of a
Pittsburgh public television license to an ultraconservative religious
ministry totally unqualified to operate an educational frequency. McCain
blamed a slow-moving bureaucracy for the two-and-a-half-year delay in
approving the transfer applications, but the real reason was enormous
community opposition to the deal, including 40,000 letters and phone calls
to the FCC. McCain has opposed federal funding for public broadcasting so
apparently was not bothered by the consequences of the Paxson deal. However,
the public has a right to know."
For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
-- Sheri (wncy2k@nccn.net), February 28, 2000