|
Full
Transcript of Interview with Representative Dennis Kucinich by Link TV
Political Correspondent Mark Hertsgaard technologies so
that they can...
anything about the fact that there were people trying to come into this country or planning to attack this country. That’s why we need this report released. You know, and so... Mark Hertsgaard: Which report?Rep. Kucinich: The 9-11 report. We need to know that, because then we can, we can make a determination as to whether or not the concerns that we have are well-founded or if there’s a concern we should have about the way that the information was used, if information in fact was supplied. I think that we need to certainly have proper police and intelligence work available. But we also need to make sure that we’re not misdirecting out angst. If our fear is of the immigrant, then we are directing this nation into a, into a place which, which may be contrary to where, what we stand for as a nation. We cannot wall off our nation. We cannot separate ourselves from the world. We have to ever be open to people coming to this country. At the same time, you know, we have a responsibility to make sure that there’s not a criminal element coming in here. And that’s always been true. That’s always been true. But we can’t use that concern to, to dwarf the ambitions of, of freedom seeking people to come to America. Otherwise we’ll lose what this nation’s about. So the balance that has to be achieved has to be done with integrity and, and with veracity in order to have an authentic policy of, of immigration which is neither punitive nor lax. Mark Hertsgaard: Do you believe President Bush has told the truth about September 11th? Rep. Kucinich: I think that President Bush is getting all kinds of information and I think we have to, what we, what President Bush needs to do is to provide all the information for the American people. You know, it’s, it’s... I think it’s a mistake to assert that the President knew 9- 11 was going to happen and did nothing, because that’s a stretch, but I think it’s important for the information to be brought forward to the public, for a number of reasons. Mark Hertsgaard: The information about?Rep. Kucinich: About 9-11. How 9-11 happened. What were the events that led to 9-11. What’s all the findings in this investigation that this task force has done. Mark Hertsgaard: The White House has admitted that it was warned that such attacks might happened although just the other day President Bush denied that he had been told that al-Quaeda might hijack planes. So the average American who’s reading the paper, how do they know? Rep. Kucinich: Well, that’s exactly the point. That’s why we need an open discussion about it [in the next president.] I would bring about such an open discussion, just so American can, we can put this behind us. Because all the questions that, that loom about 9-11 in away divert us from being able to heal our nation. We had a great tragedy in our national family. The loss of lives and the families who were effected and the heart of this country was, was wounded. When you have a death in the family you, you bring the family together to talk about it. You try to see if there’s any reason or rhyme to it, and then you try to find a way to have some closure. But you can only do that by getting to the truth of the matter. This isn’t about blame. This is about reconnecting with the purpose of our nation, not, not for the purpose recrimination but for the purpose of continuing to unfold as to who we are and not be stuck, not be so traumatized by 9-11 that we can’t get off of it and we’re forced to start attacking other nations and thinking that somehow that’s going to be the solution. We need to get to the deeper truths of 9-11 and as president I’ll help lead this country to the kind of healing that will enable us to get to the truth, have some closure and move on to do the great things this nation is capable of in the world. Mark Hertsgaard: Let’s take another question. This from a member of the U.S. Student’s Association, Steven Alvarez in Santa Cruz, CA.Q: Hi, my name is Steven Alvarez and I’m with the undergraduate student government at the University of California, Santa Cruz. Based on the recent ruling about gay marriage in Massachusetts, I wanted to ask you would you support legislation for domestic partnership and would you include the same benefits that heterosexual spouses are guaranteed? Rep. Kucinich: Yes. And I already support such an effort. Furthermore, as President of the United States, the matter of, of gay marriage needs to be addressed in a forthright way. I think, that the protections of civil law ought to be made to everyone regardless of race, color, creed or sexual orientation. We should not ask that, that this nation turn its back on those who, people who love each other very much but happen to be of the same sex and that they somehow should be denied the protections of over 1049 different civil laws that married couples are able to achieve. I think that this is neither a liberal nor conservative issue. Because the conservative approach would say that people who, who love each other ought to be together and ought to stay together and that adds to a stable society. I think what we need to do is be openhearted as a nation and as president, I will lead the nation in that direction. And furthermore as a candidate I’m fully prepared to challenge the President if he feels that he can use this as some kind of a wedge issue to divide the American people. I think only an American, only a Democratic candidate who is courageous and forthright in bringing this issue to the American people can touch the hearts of the American people and, and turn this in a new direction, away from polarization, away from condemnation and towards tolerance and acceptance. Mark Hertsgaard: Let me ask you a question off of issues for a second, because certainly part of what makes Americans vote for president is where they stand on the issues, but part of it also their sense of the person. I’m always struck as a reporter, those of you who run for president, run for public office, it is an exhausting, exhausting process, I salute all of you about that. My question is when is the last time that you had a genuine day off? I mean a day off. No work. And
what did you do that day, how did you spend it? Rep.
Kucinich: Thanksgiving. Mark
Hertsgaard: Thanksgiving? Rep.
Kucinich: Yeah. Mark
Hertsgaard: And how did you spend it? Rep. Kucinich: Thanksgiving. I spent it with friends, at Thanksgiving dinner, just you know, spent some time walking on a beach and had a great Thanksgiving dinner and it was just fantastic.
I enjoyed it immensely. Mark
Hertsgaard: No campaign calls. Rep.
Kucinich: Oh, no, no, no. Mark
Hertsgaard: Nothing. Rep.
Kucinich: No. Mark
Hertsgaard: Just friends and family or... Rep.
Kucinich: Friends. Mark Hertsgaard: And I have to ask you, how’s the search for the future first lady coming? Rep. Kucinich: Well, you have to remember the context of this, Mark. The context is I was asked a question as were all the candidates what would be the role of, of a first lady in, or first mate, in your administration? And by the time the question got around to me I said, look, I’m not married, I can only fantasize about this but I’d want a woman who is passionate about health care and working for peace and, and a full employment economy, and then I said so, if you’re out there, call me. And I heard from a lot of women. Mark Hertsgaard: The phone rang and rang.Rep. Kucinich: Well, you know what it shows, though, it shows that American women are, want to be taken seriously about the role a first lady could have in an administration. That it’s not just going to be as some kind of a prop. But that women are playing a vital role in our society and expect to be taken seriously and, you know... Mark Hertsgaard: So how would the first lady function in a Kucinich administration? Rep.
Kucinich: Would be a partner. Mark
Hertsgaard: Um-huh. Rep.
Kucinich: Someone who is an advisor. Mark Hertsgaard: In a way that, for example, Hillary Clinton was during the Clinton years, that kind of a partner? Rep. Kucinich: I think that Hillary Clinton and you know, there have been other first ladies that have I think been very close to their husbands. You can go back through most of the first ladies in one way or other have played a role in providing advice. They may not have been as high profiled about it, but I think it’s important for a would be president to acknowledge that whoever the first lady would be, or if we’re talking about in a case of a woman candidate, the first mate, would be in a position to have some influence. You can’t ignore that, I mean, we’re all, the people who are closed to us have some influence in our lives and I think it’s important to acknowledge that our significant other or our spouse would have some impact on what’s going on in the country. It’s inevitable. The question is, there are certain areas that I think women in particular have a strong interest in and we want to make sure that, that, that is acknowledge. And the young lady who actually won a contest that politics New Hampshire put up. I had a chance to say hello to her and we got together for breakfast the other day and she really, I think, her name’s [Ginny Santore], and she in a sense is [emblemative] of women all over this country who, who are serious about public policy and want a president to take their interest in these issues in a serious way, and I, I do. Mark Hertsgaard: One question about that, abortion. A number of women that I talked to preparing this broadcast were concerned about you because of your position on abortion. In the past you were pro-life, quite outspokenly so in your early career. Since then you’ve come around to being pro-choice. Can you explain a little bit about that. Rep. Kucinich: Well, when you say outspokenly so, I actually [never] gave a speech on the floor of the House about it except recently in defense of a women’s right to choose. I’ve had a journey on this issue and it’s not the kind of issue that you can just [snap] flip like that. This has been a product of, of many years of discussion with women in my life and with members of Congress, women in Congress and the Supreme Court made a ruling in a Nebraska case, Sternberg v. Carhardt, which said that the, the legislative body in Nebraska had to take into account or failed to take into account a women’s health, her, the definition of the procedure and it, that it did not meet their test of Roe v. Wade and that it imposed an undue burden on a woman. That was with respect to a late term abortion bill. The Congress of the United States brought that identical bill back and that was a moment for me to, to look at where the issue was going because... Mark Hertsgaard: [That’s it.]Rep. Kucinich: That was the moment, it looked, yeah, I looked at it and I said, you know, they’re not even concerned about a woman’s health? I mean, you know, we, we need to, after the Supreme Court has stated that, that this is something that you must consider, it was just like swept aside. And so when Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin offered an amendment to meet the Constitutional test, to say that it has to take into account a mother’s health, that there has to be a definition of procedure and that it cannot constitute an undue burden, Congress rejected that. So, then for the first time in my career I voted present on an issue that I had consistently voted in, in favor of and that signaled a shift and then the women in the Congress and in my life started to talk to me some more and say, this is not simply a matter of privacy, which it is, it’s not simply a matter of choice, which it is, it’s a matter of whether a woman is going to have true equality in society. So I can sit here and say that since that moment that I have consistently supported a women’s right to choose. This is before I became a candidate for president. Mark Hertsgaard: What year?Rep. Kucinich: Well, this happened last year, but it was long, it was long before I became a candidate for president. And that I, that I’ve supported a woman’s right to choose, and in the last bill that came up I not only voted to, to defend a woman’s right to choose, I spoke on the floor of the House, and for the fir, and actually for, you know, one of the first times I’ve ever spoken on the issue because I felt that it’s important, you know, while we, while we want to make abortions less necessary through sex education and birth control, we can only do that in the context of protecting Roe v. Wade and a woman’s essential equality in society. For those who are interested in trying to make abortions less necessary will also need to support pre-natal care, post-natal care, childcare, a living wage, universal health care, and that way we can, we can help improve the quality of life in our society. And Mark, because of my journey on this, I may be the only presidential candidate who’s in a position to understand people’s hearts, who’s in a position to try to balance what is really a, a very difficult issue for, for our American community. And to try to reconcile people to get away from the judgement and the condemnation that is so afflicted this consideration of this issue. And to try to create circumstances where abortions are less necessary but only to affirming that a woman’s essential equality by protecting Roe v. Wade. And finally, as President, I will ask anyone who wants to be appointed to the Supreme Court to, to commit to protecting Roe v. Wade so that we don’t go back into this very difficult national debate which could serve to undermine not only a woman’s right to choose but her equality. Mark Hertsgaard: You mentioned health care. Let’s take another question from one of our viewers. This is a LinkTV viewer. [Audio tape side A ends/Side B begins] Q: ...and it’s even more important to put that idea into effect. Are you in favor of national health insurance or a single payer plan, similar to that in Canada and if so, how would you implement such a plan in view of the hostility of the health care industry and the high probability of a Republican Congress? Rep. Kucinich: Well, first of all, thank you for the compliment. It is laudable to be for universal, single payer. And as a matter of fact, I have such a plan. I’ve introduced legislature with John [Connors] of Michigan, HR 676, to create a universal, single payer health care system, a national health plan, extended Medicare for all. Now the way that we would accomplish it is this. Currently the United States pay $1.4 trillion for health care, that’s from private resources and from the government. And all that money goes into, into paying for the health care services for this country, except for one thing. Hundreds of billions of dollars of that $1.4 trillion go for things like corporate profits, stock options, executive salaries, advertising, lobbying, marketing, cost of paperwork in the private sector is 15-30%. We’re already paying for a universal standard of health care but we’re not getting it because of the allocation of dollars. My plan is to take America away from a for-profit system where health care is rationed by according to ability to pay and create a not-for-profit system where all the resources go into providing Americans with medical care for all medically necessary procedures, with dental care, vision care, mental health care, long term health care, a prescription drug benefit, alternative and complementary medicine. All that would be covered. And we have the money to do it now. The question is do we have the political will and leadership? And that’s where I come in. I intend to make this the defining domestic issue in this election and by doing that I will demonstrate to the American people that if they will follow the same lead that the people in 1932 gave this country when it gave FDR a mandate for sweeping economic change by electing 88 new members of the House and 13 new members of the Senate to create the context of the New Deal, I will ask the American people give me a Congress that will give you health care. That’s the way that we challenge the insurance industries who have a, a stranglehold on our political process. We can make this an issue in every congressional district. And I’m ready, I’m prepared to do that. Now there are some candidates for president, Mark, who have said, you know, if you want fundamental change in the system I’m not your man. And one of those candidates is a doctor... Mark Hertsgaard: Howard Dean is the man you’re referring to.Rep. Kucinich: Frankly. And you know what, I think that it’s time to get a second opinion and a second opinion would give the American people the understanding that you can have a not-for-profit system. Now Governor Dean has said that you know, well, he wants everyone to have health insurance, even though ten million people would be left out of his plan, he wants everyone to have health insurance. We must look at that description. Health Insurance. That means you can have health insurance but you’re still going to be stuck with an insurance company that’s going to raise your premiums, increase your co-pays, increase your deductibles and shrink you area of coverage because insurance companies make money not providing health care. So, my plan is to take it out of the hands of the private insurers and out of the hands of the pharmaceutical companies, and create a not-for-profit public health care system where everyone is cared for. And that’s a major difference between Governor Dean and I and I think it’s going to be
one of those defining issues in this election. Mark
Hertsgaard: You’ve called it “Medicare for All.” Rep.
Kucinich: Right. Mark Hertsgaard: And you’ve pointed out that the United States almost alone of advanced industrial countries, we’re the only country that does not have universal health care. Rep. Kucinich: Yes.Mark Hertsgaard: But I have to ask you, having spent time in Europe and other places, what do you say about the people who say yes, they have universal care but they wait forever to get to a doctor, they wait in long lines to get non-emergency procedures. Does that concern you at all about a public health care program? Rep. Kucinich: Well, there’s two answers to that. First of all, today many people can’t get any health care at all. We have 43-45 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, cause they can’t afford it. This market-based approach towards health care inevitably is going to exclude more and more people, and inevitably it’s creating a kind of poverty in this country where you either have the ability to pay or you don’t. And if you don’t have the ability to pay you’re out of luck. There’s a lot of people experiencing bankruptcy because they can’t afford their doctor bills. Now that’s a fact. This system is, is a system that is, is becoming increasingly corrupt because it’s ignoring a basic concern of the American people for health care because it’s held by certain financial interests. So, I’m going to break that hold. Now, the question is will you be able to provide health care for all the people under this system and will they have access to it. The answer is absolutely. We built in to the financial projections the, the, the inevitability of increased utilization. Mark Hertsgaard: What does that mean? More and more people will use it.Rep. Kucinich: More and more people are going to use it, absolutely. And that what does it mean is that also we have to build out our health care infrastructure. We have to create more medical education opportunities so more people will be able to go to medical school and I’m working with someone, someone who’s, who’s an expert in this field, we’ll have to be able to have more individuals going into nursing and other medical technologies so we can create the context for people to be able to provide the support as the system grows. And we also will have an emphasis on prevention. You know, so much of our health care costs today get driven up because the emergency rooms end up being the health care of last resort when people are in serious condition they end up going to emergency rooms when the ounce of prevention would be worth a pound of cure. So the emphasis will be on preventative medicine and there will also be an emphasis on maintenance of health care where people can get taken care of and they don’t get into the kind of extreme expenses that come from not having your health taken care. It will mean a healthier nation, a more productive nation, a nation which care feel a little bit more freedom [being that] it’s not constrained by private health care companies. So, you know, this is really a, an all encompassing issue in this country and I intend to, as I said, make it a defining issue in, in this race for president. Mark Hertsgaard: I want to turn to foreign affairs in a second but first one more question on the domestic side. Education is obviously another big issue. You’ve talked about giving, and I’m sure many parents around the country will love to hear this, free college tuition. How will you provide free college tuition to, and how many American would be available, eligible for free college tuition? Rep. Kucinich: Well, right now, based on the fact that there are about 12 million people going to public colleges and universities in this country and figuring that perhaps the average cost of it could be between $5000-6000 a year. You know, you extrapolate that, you have between $60 and 72 billion a year that would have to be set aside for tuition free education at public colleges and universities. So the question would be where, where could that money come from. Mark Hertsgaard: $72 billion.Rep. Kucinich: Right. Well, anywhere from 60-72. You know, the numbers keep getting recalculated because what’s happening is states are experiencing budget cuts and are now passing along the costs to the students in terms of higher tuition. If we change our budgetary practices and take some of the pressures off the states and, and you then have a little bit more play where there’s some more resources. Well, we don’t have that right now. So let’s talk about where our government’s resources are going right now. We have seen an administration that provide tax breaks to people in the top bracket, people who weren’t asking for such breaks I might add. There’s been a redistribution of the wealth upwards. It’s not healthy for this country. I want to see the tax breaks that went to people in the top bracket canceled and put that money right into a fund for universal college education, tuition free. Mark Hertsgaard: Could anyone then who wanted to go to college, who obviously passed the scholastic part of it, could they then be assured under a Kucinich administration money will not be an obstacle, you will be able to go to college? Rep. Kucinich: That’s the direction we want to take the country, absolutely. Now keep in mind, this administration has created a, a budget deficient from $276 billion surplus in the year 2000 to an over $500 billion deficient in this coming year. We have to be aware that they’ve created some serious financial problems. But we can remedy some of those problems. We can remedy them by getting the United States out of Iraq. We’re already into the war there for $155 billion. The continued occupation of Iraq will cost this country dearly, not only in terms of our national reputation, and not only in terms of loss of lives of the men and women who serve this country, but it will be a drain on America’s ability to be able to meet a domestic agenda for education, for health care, for housing and all of, and a whole range of social programs. So as President of United States, I would put a priority on education. There’s another area here, too, that speaks to the use of our national resources. The Pentagon budget has been expanding very rapidly. I would contend that it’s being driven by fear. One doesn’t look too much at the spending policies inside the Pentagon, but actually that’s my job. I’m the ranking member on a sub-committee that has jurisdiction over national security and we’ve held hearings on spending practices in the Pentagon. We know, for example, that the Pentagon has over a trillion dollars in accounts it cannot reconcile. We know about... Mark Hertsgaard: Because they’ve lost a trillion dollars through bookkeeping errors. Rep. Kucinich: Means they can’t, means they can’t track it down. You know, they have over a thousand accounting systems. They can’t track it down and so we don’t know. We also, we also, what we do know though is that for example, this missile system that they want to put up,
we know that that system... Mark
Hertsgaard: The space weapons system? Yeah. Rep.
Kucinich: The missile shield. Mark
Hertsgaard: Oh. Rep. Kucinich: We know that that system, right from the beginning, as been fraught with fraud. And that we shouldn’t be spending money on it. So I’ll set that system aside. I’ll set aside the building of new nuclear weapon. I’ll set aside the building of, putting weapons in space, creating a weapons platform in space. We have so many weapon systems right now that are being developed when we haven’t even used the previous generation. There’s a tremendous amount of waste that’s going on. I believe a 15% reduction in the Pentagon budget can be achieved without any adverse impact on our national security whatsoever. As a matter of fact, we’ll have a better enhanced national security because we won’t be wasting the tax payers money. Mark Hertsgaard: Will they find the trillion dollars then?Rep. Kucinich: Well, you know what, we’ll find a way to straighten out the books. I mean this
is a nightmare for the taxpayers as well as for fiscal management. Mark
Hertsgaard: A trillion dollars. Rep.
Kucinich: That’s right. Mark
Hertsgaard: That is a thousand billion, is that what that is? Rep.
Kucinich: Well, yes. Mark Hertsgaard: As they say, that’s more money [TALKING OVER EACH OTHER] Rep. Kucinich: Well, right a billion here, a billion there, it starts to add up, that’s what they say. Mark Hertsgaard: Yeah.Rep. Kucinich: And see, this, and I would further contend that our entire defense strategy is outmoded. That we’re fighting the last wars, that we need to encompass a view of the world as interconnected and interdependent. That the challenges in the future are not nation states against nation states. The challenge of the future are these non-state actors. And the only way you meet that challenge is to organize with the world community. So, I’ll have a, a strong defense but it will be lean. It’s not going to be wasting the tax payers dollars. And that means that we’ll have more money for a domestic agenda. So, isn’t it, you know, what’s interesting? It always just [___] me when people tell me well, you know we have money for education, you know, we don’t have money for health care, but we have money for tax cuts for people in the top brackets, we have money for war, we have money for an expanded Pentagon budget. We have money for those things but we don’t have money for the basic needs of the country. Wrong! As president, I will direct a shift in priorities in America where we start taking care of the basic needs of our people here at home, and that’s what government ought to be about. It ought to be about meeting people’s practical aspirations. And we’re not doing that right now because I’ll tell you, people don’t aspire to war. You know, this is like a riff on, on Marie Antoinette who said, you know, years ago, the French, let them eat cake. Well, now we’re being told by administration, let them eat war. Mark Hertsgaard: Well, that is a perfect introduction to our next question. Here again from our young friends at Wiretap, Eleanor [Polly] from Colorado. Q: Hi. My name is Eleanor. I’m calling from Colorado. I’m a Wiretap reader and a member of [Peace Jam]. I’m asking this question because I would like to see peace achieved in my lifetime but I am confused by the irony of the practice around, trying to achieve peace through war. My question is, do you have any new ideas for achieving peace? Rep. Kucinich: Yes, I do and you have a right to ask that because the future always knows when the place that’s being prepared for it is threatened and the young people of America today are very aware that our government is moving in a direction which threatens their future. On July the 11th, 2001, I introduced legislation now supported by 50 members of Congress to create a cabinet level Department of Peace. That new idea will take America in a new direction, which connects us to the work of Dr. Martin Luther King, to the vision of Mahatma Gandhi and others who’ve worked for peace, so we can look at our own nation and the challenges we have in our own society, challenges like domestic violence, spousal abuse, child abuse, and through education, through working with community groups and non-governmental organizations, we create a whole new context in our society to address those issues that have vexed our homes and our communities, issues including gang violence, violence in the schools, racial violence, violence against, violence gays, police/community relations challenges that keep percolating. These are things we need direct programs to deal with, and we need an awareness in our society. We need it to become the work of our society in addressing this, to teach children at the earliest age peace giving, peace sharing, mutuality, reciprocity, looking at the other person as an aspect of oneself. We can actually teach this. We can become a more peaceful society through, through dedicating our society to do that. And, Mark, on an international level, the Department of Peace, will work with the other nations of the world to make war itself archaic. We must believe in our capacity to evolve. War is not inevitable unless we act on the belief that it is. If you believe war is inevitable, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. So my work as PREsident of the United States will be to work with nations of the world to create a new structure for peace so we can make the work of peace, that work in the everyday lives of nations around the world. And you know what’s really interesting is that, and now a member of Parliament, John McDonald, has taken up this bill that I’ve introduced in the House of Representatives and has introduced it into Parliament. Mark Hertsgaard: In Great Britain. Rep. Kucinich: To create the discussion in Great Britain. And I’m in touch with other legislators from around the world. And I think this idea is going to start catching on. So we can create peace and I want, I want our young caller to know that you have a right to expect that. You have a right to expect your leaders will take us away from war. War is not inevitable. And war is proving increasingly, as we go into a complex society, to be a way that is wasteful, counterproductive and we must proceed with what President Franklin Roosevelt called the science of human relations in finding a way to work together. As President Kennedy said, you know, we must learn to live together as brothers and sisters or we’ll perish together as fools. Mark Hertsgaard: Franklin Roosevelt though, of course, also fought and led American forces in World War II, and I wonder if there aren’t sometimes when violence as unwanted as it may be is necessary. I want to ask you about something quite specific here. In 1999, the War in Kosovo, Clinton administration intervened there to stop the ethnic cleansing of Albanians. And at the time you opposed the U.S. intervention and at the time you told, or at least were quoted in the Cleveland Plain Dealer as saying that people should instead pin their hopes for peace “on whatever source of humanity remains” in [Slovidon Molosovich]. He, of course, was the Yugoslav dictator, who had spent the last eight years ethnically cleansing people throughout the Balkans. So, some people might ask how can you in a situation like that, a man who has shown, Molosovich in this case, who has shown an eagerness to direct the murder of thousands of people. Isn’t it necessary for the U.S. or some force to intervene to stop that evil? Rep. Kucinich: Well, it’s necessary for the world community to cooperate in a manner that can meet that kind of challenge. Absolutely. However, let’s look at what happened. What happened is that the Dayton accords which were designed to create a workable framework for the settlement of all of these issues in the Balkans actually ended up being nothing more than a papering over of the differences that occurred. So that you had Molosovich, [Turdjesman and Isobegavich] walk out of Dayton without a real hard and fast agreement about the direction they would go... Mark Hertsgaard: These are the Balkan leaders.Rep. Kucinich: That’s right. We just, what we did was basically shove this under the carpet and call it an agreement. The fact of the matter is that the violence continued to percolate and was not addressed throughout the region. What happened with the Clinton administration is that there was a meeting with, with the Serbian government at [Ramboiere] in which Secretary Albright gave them a non-negotiable demand that basically said turn over your country and that set the stage for the intransigence. Look, we, and then the bombing of Belgrade, which I opposed. Look, we can’t make any mistake about the fact that there are people in the world who want to engage in a path of violence without restraint. That’s why it’s so important to have a strong United Nations. That’s where the strength of the U.N. comes into play. You have to remember that with this action against Serbia, what happened is that the North Ame, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization took a new stance where they became an offensive organization instead of a defensive organization. We really went around the process that could have been, I believe, effective over a long period of time at the U.N. I have a strong belief that the U.N. process can work if it’s funded. I met with [Koffi Anan] who told me the greatest problem that he had is he didn’t have the funds to do the job. If the U.N. is funded we can work through the world community. But what we need to do, Mark, we need to be wary of an administration that wants to proceed on a [doctorate] of unilateralism and pre-emption to try to justify wars anywhere. This administration in Iraq attacked a country that did not attack us and that we, we could have worked the U.N. procedures of weapons inspections to prove that there were no weapons of mass destruction. So it isn’t as though we’re fated to, to attack nations whose leaders get out of control. The idea of a Department of Peace is you’re, you’re on the ground early on and you’re seeing where the violence is percolating. That, that what we often find is the intervention comes in long after just, you know, reams of data have appeared that indicate you’ve got a problem. It’s like you have a small fire and you wait until it engulfs a forest. Well, the Department of Peace would be there early on in finding ways of meeting those difficulties that are occurring. And if nothing can be done, that’s what the United Nations ought to be about. No nation should take it upon itself to become the enforcement mechanism for international principles. That’s what the U.N.’s about. That’s the only way we’re going to have peace in this world. Mark Hertsgaard: Let’s take a question that relates to this from one of our viewers. This is a member of the World Affairs Council Betty Overhoff from Danville, CA. Q: Hello. My name is Betty Overhoff and I’m Contra Costs Chair of the World Affairs Council. My question is about North Korea. Do you view them as a possible threat to the United States, and if you do, how will you handle this problem?Rep. Kucinich: When President Bush declared North Korea part of the Axis of Evil and then he proceeded to attack Iraq without any justification he created a North Korea a problem for the United States. As President of the United States, I would meet with the North Korean leaders and assure them that we have no intention of attacking their county. I would ask them to give up any of their ambitions for any kind of nuclear power. I would ask them to understand that as president I intend to lead the way, to live by the tenets of the Non-Proliferation Treaty which called for all the nuclear nations to get rid of their weapons and for the non-nuclear nations not to develop weapons. The United States’ credibility is on the line through the presidency and as president I would set aside the ambitions outlined in [the nuclear posture] review, for a nuclear first strike and the development of new nuclear weapons. I’d lead the world in an effort to abolish nuclear weapons. I’d provide comfort not only to the North Koreans on the security issues, but I’d also provide comfort on the economic issues. North Korea right now is having difficulty feeding its people. We need to make sure that they have the resources so that their people will be fed. We also need to make sure that the ambitions of North Koreans and South Koreans to reunify are not in anyway defeated because of the [re___ politic] of American foreign policy. And so, I think that we can achieve a [reproach ________] with the, with the North Koreans and I think that we can move in the direction which will lessen the kind of, of tensions which now exist. Mark Hertsgaard: Can you talk quickly about the role of China, here, not only in relation to North Korea, but Nick Christophe said in the New York Times the other day that the rise of China is the most important fact in the world today, not just because China’s economy is, is taking away jobs from, from others, but also their industrialization is creating enormous environmental difficulties. As president, what would you do about China? Rep. Kucinich: I remember meeting with a Chinese energy minister in Buenos Aires a few years ago at the Conference of Parties, the Global Climate Change talks and was talking to him about this new development that’s going on in China and the damage to the environment and one of the things he said, he said, well, you know, you’re not one to talk. We’re still, our people are still riding around on bicycles. And I said, great idea. We, we need to recognize that China has been for quite a while an emerging economic power and the United States needs to be in a constant dialogue with China. We also have to look at what our trade relations are in, in effect enabling China to gain an enormous amount of strength through, you know, we have a $130 billion trade deficient with China alone right now. And I think the, the lack of a dialogue has been created by global corporations essentially setting the tone for what the, for the exodus of jobs out of this country and for the growth of China. One of the first companies I had in my office after I got elected to the Congress was Boeing who explained to me, they were promoting, they were asking me to support most favored nation status for China and I, and in the course of the conversation it was very clear that they were ready to provide prototypes to the Chinese government so they could develop aircraft and that, you know, set the stage for, you know, I think a threat to our ability to make what is really one of the biggest products that we make in this country: airplanes. We need to be aware of what our economic needs are first in this county. I do not want to see America go out of manufacturing. I think the maintenance of steel, automotive, aerospace, shipping, textiles, and agriculture are vital to our national security. We need a cooperative relationship with China. But my administration will be about reviewing the most favored nation status. We want trade with China but you know what everyone wants access to our market as well. And we have, as Lester Theroux has written, there has to be some correspondence between what a nation sells from us and what they buy from us. So we need a more even relationship with China. And also, on the issues of peace, I think the Chinese will find that I’ll be the kind of president who will give them a sigh of relief, they won’t have to go into a huge arms race, having to worry about an aggressive United States intent on expansion. Mark Hertsgaard: We’re about to run out of time. Let me ask you one last question. As a reporter overseas, foreigners often tell me, you Americans, when you elect your president, you’re not just electing the President of the United States. You’re so powerful you’re in effect electing the President of the World. How would you as president live up to that responsibility? Rep. Kucinich: I bring, and I will bring to the presidency, an holistic world view, a view of a world as one. A world that is interconnected and interdependent. A world that is linked not only nation to nation but heart to heart. And my presidency will be one which will reach out to embrace the fullness and the diversity of the world, to let people know that America is ready to participate as a nation among nations, not a nation above nations. The highest principles and aspirations that our founders set forth for this nation are principles that we can share with the world to the extent that countries are ready to embrace them. But for those who are not, we need to find a way to have peaceful co-existence. And as the President of the United States, I will create an affirmative culture of, of international law, by supporting not only nuclear abolition but by having the United States sign the biological weapons convention, the chemical weapons convention, the small arms treaty, the land mine treaty. America will join the international criminal court. We will sign the Kyoto Climate Change treaty. We will participate in a global effort to meet the problems of AIDS. We’ll work to achieve the treaty with, the [SEDAR] treaty, affirming the rights of women and children. It’s through an American leader who’s ready to recognize the importance of an affirmative structure of international law and cooperation, that I think we can be about the beginning of a new era of peace in the world. And I’m ready and I’m up to that challenge. Mark Hertsgaard: Congressman Dennis Kucinich, thank you very much for joining us. Rep. Kucinich: Thank you.Mark Hertsgaard: You know, during this campaign just about every candidate has said that this election is really about listening to the American people, hearing their ideas and answering their concerns. In the end, that’s what should decide who ends up in the White House. That’s all we have time for. I’d like to thank Representative Kucinich for joining us. I’d also like to thank the citizens groups who participated with us. You can learn more about all of these groups at our Web site, www.LinkTV.org. And you can read about this program in full transcripts online at Salon.com. I’m Mark Hertsgaard in San Francisco, for the People’s Voice, thanks for joining us. BackgroundWhat if you could sit down with each of the presidential candidates for an hour to ask them hardhitting questions about issues that real people care about? Link TV is doing just that with its new series, THE PEOPLE’S VOICE — one hour, in-depth, interviews with presidential candidates. From Iowa farmers to environmentalists to the nation’s newest voters, Link TV is putting the people back in the electoral process by linking the candidates with the nation’s leading citizen activist groups and membership organizations. The first edition of THE PEOPLE’S VOICE features Rep. Dennis Kucinich.An election series unlike any other on national television, THE PEOPLE’S VOICE promises to mobilize the mobilizers and activate the activists by enlisting the people most involved in making this country a better place. Journalist Mark Hertsgaard, the host of THE PEOPLE’S VOICE and Link TV’s political correspondent, has a national reputation for probing deeper. His hard-hitting journalism has appeared in The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Time, The Washington Post, and many other publications around the world. He is the author of five books, including most recently “The Eagle’s Shadow: Why America Fascinates and Infuriates the World” (Picador).Partnering citizen groups are being encouraged to organize “house parties” across the country, where viewers watch and participate in the interviews. Throughout each program, banners appear on the bottom of the screen giving viewers many other ways to get involved in the electoral process, from registering to vote to volunteering for a candidate’s campaign to joining one of the collaborating citizen groups. Funding for the THE PEOPLE’S VOICE is provided by The Shei’rah Foundation and Link TV viewers. About Link TV:Founded in 1999, Link TV is the first U.S. network offering a global perspective on news, current events and culture, presenting viewpoints seldom covered in the U.S. media. In fact, 95% of the station’s first-run documentaries on global issues have never before been shown in the U.S.Link TV is seen nationwide via satellite broadcast on DIRECTV Channel 375 and on DISH Network channel 9410 and is accessible to more than 21 million households, one out of every five, in the U.S. Link’s programming, combined with its innovative use of two-way digital link- ups and a participatory web site, deepens audience engagement and encourages active participation. Link TV is a national non-commercial channel funded by viewer contributions and grants from major foundations. For complete program scheduling and Internet streaming, go to About Salon.com:Founded in November 1995 by David Talbot, Salon.com (NASDAQ:SALN) is an Internet company that produces 8 original content sites as well as two online communities—Table Talk and The WELL. The content sites, updated daily or more frequently, include News and Politics, Opinion, Technology & Business, Arts & Entertainment, Books, Sex, Life and Comics. About Participating Citizen Activist Organizations:The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights is the oldest and broadest-based civil rights coalition in the United States. Founded in 1950, LCCR is currently comprised of more than 180 organizations representing persons of color, women, children, labor unions, individuals with disabilities, older Americans, major religious groups, gays and lesbians, and civil liberties and human rights groups. LCCR works to effect meaningful legislation, policies, and judicial appointments, and to ensure the proper enforcement of civil rights laws to unite us as a nation true to its promise of equal justice, equal opportunity, and mutual respect. The National Family Farm Coalition (NFFC) represents 34 grassroots farm, resource conservation, and rural advocacy groups from 32 states, and works with farmers and others to preserve and strengthen family farms. The
United States Student Association (USSA) is the country’s
oldest and largest national student
organization, representing millions of students. Founded in 1947, USSA
is the recognized voice for
students on Capitol Hill, in the White House, and in the Department of
Education. USSA believes that education is a right and works on
building grassroots power among students to win concrete victories that
expand access to education at the federal, state, and campus levels. WireTap
is the independent information source by and for socially
conscious youth that showcases
investigative news articles, personal essays and opinions, artwork and
activism resources that
challenge stereotypes, inspire creativity, foster dialogue and give
young people a voice in the
media. |