Writing between the two Democratic presidential debates last
week, Emily Atkins of The New Republic understandably complained
Share |
The entire first half of the debate passed without a single
climate-related question. Some candidates did address it: In response to a
question about the economy, Elizabeth Warren referred to a “worldwide need for
green technology.” Washington Governor Jay Inslee mentioned the issue,
too—understandable, given his campaign’s undivided focus on global warming.
But those candidates took it upon themselves to address
climate change, pivoting away from other subjects brought up by the moderators.
This, naturally, caught the eye of environmental reporters—and royally pissed
off activists who have been pushing for a climate-focused debate.
It's possible the candidates, maybe even the hosts, learned what
Atkins had written because there was much more discussion of climate in
Thursday's debate, including five candidates who suggested "climate"
when asked by Chuck Todd what issue would be the first they'd "push"
if elected. (Some cited more than one issue.)
On a positive (or negative) note, that at least
beat attention to workers' rights. Responding to Todd's question, Senator
Bennet stated "the lack of economic mobility Bernie talks about."
Sanders' response, ironically, did not refer to workers, workers
rights, or unions. Earlier, however, he did refer in passing to "the labor
movement." That was the only time in that second debate any candidate in
the party which once prided itself on being the party of "working
people" uttered the word "labor." And "union" got no
mention.
In the earlier debate, on Wednesday, Governor Inslee was
asked how he'd address income inequality and replied in part
Well, I’m a little bit surprised. I think plans are great,
but I’m a governor. And we’ve got to realize the people who brought us the
weekend, unions, need — are going to bring us a long overdue raise in America.
And I’m proud of standing up for unions. I’ve got a plan to
reinvigorate collective bargaining so we can increase wages finally. I marched
with the SEIU folks. It is not right that the CEO of McDonald’s makes 2,100
times more than the people slinging cash at McDonald’s.
"Proud of standing up for unions" with "a
plan to reinvigorate collective bargaining?" Judging by the avoidance of the very subject
by nineteen other candidates over two nights, it's clear that the Democratic
Party believes there is no electoral advantage in even mentioning the dreaded
union.
Certainly, there should be no studio audience, whatever
instructions it is given, in a presidential debate because it can
skew candidate responses, bias the television (and later, video) audience in
favor or against a candidate, and wastes valuable time which should be devoted
to follow-up questions. Nonetheless, when 95% of the candidates of the party with a spark of interest in economic inequality completely ignores the
contributions of unions and their role in uplifting workers and the entire
economy, dedication to alleviating that "lack of economic mobility Bernie
talks about" appears woefully limited.
Share |
No comments:
Post a Comment