Dennis Kucinich:
But I'm, in my own way, given the opportunity to reach out and to talk
about the importance of a new direction for America in the world, away from
war, away from these drone attacks; of a new direction for America at home,
rebuilding America, and protecting the benefits of people who've worked for it
for a lifetime -- Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Also, I'm protecting our civil
liberties. I'm in a position where - all
of the years of work that have permitted me to be a spokesperson and an
activist - I can continue to do that.
So, I'm grateful for that opportunity, but I'm involved in many
different things, and I'm, at this point, continuing to consider other offers
for involvement that are coming around, and I'm also on a speaking tour. Next week, on February 7th I'll be
giving the Kelly Lecture in Santa Barbara. A few days later I'll be the speaker
at the Western States Legal Foundation's 30th Anniversary in
Oakland. A few days later I'll be
speaking at a major labor rally in Wisconsin.
So I'm continuing to stay active, and to advance those things that I've
been talking about for my entire life, and in particular, the last sixteen [16]
years in the United States Congress.
Rob Kall:
Now, one of the reasons you're not in Congress is gerrymandering. We now have a Congress that the minority of
Americans voted for, but it is solidly controlled because of
gerrymandering. Is there any hope that
we can do anything about this?
Dennis Kucinich:
First of all, let's look at it at a couple different levels, and it's an
important question that you're raising. I was doing some research on this, this
morning as a matter of fact. The New
York times says that there's one hundred and ninety-nine [199] solid Republican
districts. That has a lot to do with
gerrymandering. One hundred and fifty two [152] solid Democratic
districts. It's important to know that
gerrymandering was done at a state level, and can have a tremendous impact in
describing the contours of a district, and in determining if there's going to
be a lot of Democrats or a lot of Republicans in it. And wherever there is a Republican
legislature, they did their best to try to make sure that there were solid
Republican districts.
But there is
something that you need to keep in mind.
There's a website, I think it's called "Ballotpedia," or something like
that, where they analyze races. I want
to share some numbers with you and your listeners, because this shows you that
this deck isn't irretrievably stacked, by any means. They point out that there were thirty [30]
races in 2012 that had a margin of victory of less than five [5%], and in those
races eighteen [18] winners were Democrats, twelve [12] were Republicans. There were thirty-three races [33] where the
margin of victory was between five and ten percent [5-10%], and fifteen [15] of
those winners were Democrats, eighteen [18] Republicans. Here's something that's worth thinking
about: eighty-seven [87] races had a
margin of victory between ten and twenty percent [10-20%], and of those
eighty-seven races, twenty-three [23] were Democrats and sixty-four [64] were
Republicans. It's in those districts
that if you have Republicans who are not responding to the practical
aspirations of people, districts like that can flip.
Look, I took a
district, years ago, from a Republican member of Newt Gingrich's leadership
team, and I did it running on a Progressive program of jobs for all, Healthcare
for all, Education for all, and peace.
So even though it is true that gerrymandering has produced a solid bloc
of Republicans towards a Republican majority, it is not true that it's always
going to stay that way. And Republicans
are aware of that; because of the changes that happened to the party at the
primary level with the Tea Party, and also because of the changes that are happening
in national politics. You look at issues
that deal with the debt, spending; there is some apprehension out there among
Republicans about whether or not they're meeting the needs of their
constituents, and I think that you're going to see, that notwithstanding the
obvious advantage that Republicans have at the Congressional district level,
that the electorate in many cases still remains up for grab in those areas
where there still can be challengers within striking distance. Again, I will point to those eighty-seven
[87] districts in 2012 where the margin of victory was between 10 and twenty
percent [10-20%], and the Republicans had a very strong advantage - but
frankly, you know what? Nothing is
guaranteed. We have a volatile electorate, volatile politics, and with the
right issues expressed (and I think they're economic, primarily), things can
change.
Rob Kall:
It looks like there's this immigration reform in the Senate
happening. Is that legit, or are they
just trying to put the Republicans in a position where they're forced to show
their true colors?
Dennis Kucinich:
Well there has to be a path towards legalization. I don't think it's about true colors as much
as it's about the reality of where we are in America today. About how people who have come from other
countries - in many cases we're talking about people who've come over the
border from Mexico or Central America -- they're part of the economy, and their
children are here. This is why the DREAM
Act was important. But what we need to do
is look at a broad area of immigration, and understand that we should not have
policies that split families, we should have policies that get people back to
legalization. This has been true for many years. Republicans are very aware that there is a
massive constituency of immigrants, notably Spanish-speaking people, who are
not going to be denied, and who do not want to be discriminated against, or
their family members discriminated against.
So, I think we're actually going to see some changes in immigration
policy. How that's going to work out of
the Senate, I can't predict, but I think we are headed in that direction. There are demographic realities there,
political realities, economic realities, and I think the politics and the legal
framework is going to have to catch up with those realities.
Rob Kall:
You know, it's not just the Latino community that voted Democratic in
the last election, it was Asians, and Islamists; it was amazing how many
different demographic groups went seventy percent [70%] or more for Obama. Where do the Progressives fit into that
equation? Is this about Obama, who is
certainly not Progressive? How do you see
the future of Progressives, to the left of the Democrats frankly, I think --
where do you stand?
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
