Q&A with Lesch
1. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?
I am running for Congress because of a deep concern that if "we the people" do not wrestle control of our government back from the corporate and big money interests, our children's generation will not be able to enjoy the same or better opportunities that our generation has enjoyed. Many of us are already seeing signs of this. U.S. workers today, in 2008, make less, when adjusted for inflation, then they made when George W. Bush entered office in 2000, which is unprecedented since the great depression. U.S. corporate profits are at an all-time high, but U.S. workers have been left behind. 6% more U.S. citizens are in poverty since George W. Bush entered office. My opponent, Judy Biggert, the incumbent congressperson (R-13), has been a rubber stamp for these disastrous Bush Administration policies. I have been a software engineer for 29 years in the IL 13th Congressional District. As an engineer I am trained to identify the root causes of problems after careful analysis. These analytical skills are sorely lacking in our current Congress. I'm a Green Party candidate because I recognize that one of the primary root causes of problems in our government is the two party system dominated by the Republican and Democratic Parties driven by a thirst for massive corporate campaign contributions. I will not accept any corporate contributions, so that I can represent "we the people", not just a few wealthy corporations and individuals. My Republican and Democratic opponents have accepted over one million dollars from corporate PACs, which completely disqualifies them from evenhandedly representing "we the people".
2. For incumbents and non-incumbents. If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.
If elected, I will be a strong advocate to reform health care by moving toward a universal, single-payer system. The current health insurance industry's top priority is profit. This undermines the role health insurance ought to play in our society, which is to keep costs down so everyone has access to high quality health care. Medicare, for instance, is a much more efficient and cost-effective health insurance system, and it needs to be expanded to all Americans so an illness does not have to go through additional economic hardships. My late fiancée Kathleen, for instance, who was diagnosed with late stage melanoma in December and died of cancer just a few months ago, had to fight with her employer to keep the health insurance she needed to fight the cancer. We can do better in this country, but doing better requires political will and courage. I would also sponsor and support legislation to end the illegal occupation of Iraq within a 3 month period, a marshall plan to effectively solve the looming, catastrophic crisis of global climate change, end our dependence on foreign energy sources, restore US government fiscal responsibility, restore tariffs and repeal so-called free trade agreements that have resulted in the loss of millions of US jobs, end torture by US government agencies, and restore our constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties.
3. In which ways, if at all, would you alter U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan? How would you characterize the effect of the U.S. "surge" in Iraq? What objectives, if any, must the U.S. still meet before it begins to withdraw troops?
The women and men of the Armed Forces have been sent into combat zones created, not to protect our national security, but to satisfy President Bush and Dick Cheney's lust for the profits of war. The war in Afghanistan was completely avoidable. When the Taliban offered to hand over bin Laden following Sept. 11, Bush declined the offer and instead invaded the country and allowed bin Laden to escape. Regarding Iraq the evidence is clear that none of the reasons Bush gave for invading have turned out to be valid, and in fact, there is a significant amount of evidence that the Bush Administration has lied and fabricated its way through this war and occupation. The fact of the matter is, none of the information this administration has produced can be trusted. The only solution is begin a swift pull-out immediately of all US troops, mercenaries, and contractors.
4. What short-term steps, if any, would you advocate to keep gasoline prices in check?
The current crisis with gas prices is not caused by an increase in overhead, or a decrease in supply. This is caused directly by continual US threats to the stability of the Middle Eastern region by illegally invading and occupying Iraq and threatening to invade Iran, a country that has not started a war with another country for over 100 years and is not a threat to the US. Another major cause of the current energy crisis is Enron-like market manipulation by the major oil companies and speculators. Currently speculators can buy massive amounts of oil for very little up-front money, then turn around and sell it for a quick profit, thus driving up the price of oil. The only solution is to tighten regulations on the market to minimize or end this kind of speculation. I would couple this with longer term solutions that would decrease our need overall for fossil fuels. This can be done through a more robust rebate program for hybrid cars and solar panels, for instance.
5. Please list the key elements of your preferred long-term energy policy. Rank or rate the relative importance of domestic oil exploration, conservation and alternative-energy development. What part, if any, should ethanol play in U.S. energy policy?
Whether a gallon of oil is drilled in a foreign country or it is drilled here at home, either way, it gets sold on the same market that is dominated by speculators. So while drilling American oil sure sounds patriotic, it is, in fact, not going to help us. The only thing domestic drilling will do, however, is sap our country's oil reserves that we may need for a major crisis in the future. We need that domestic oil to stay in the ground for our health now and our ongoing security. Also, any solution that increases the amount of oil drilled in the world, propels us faster towards the catastrophic effects of global climate change. We currently have a growing array of technology that can solve this crisis, but very little political will to institute this technology. I would expand the rebates on hybrids and electric cars. I would expand rebates on solar panels, and other smart energy upgrades to people's homes. I would be in favor of legislation that encourages more wind, cellulose based biomass, geothermal energy, and other types of energy as well. Please see my May, 8, 2008 press release concerning a marshall plan approach supported by me and many other Green Party Congressional candidates and by Green Party presidential nominee Cynthia McKinney. http://www.votesteve.org/media/20080508.shtml
6. What steps, if any, should Congress take to promote economic recovery? What steps by the federal government might make the nation's economy worse?
Bush has created a major imbalance in America. The government is spending more than it has, so it has to borrow from emerging powers like China to make up the difference. The tax burden has gotten lighter on the wealthiest people and heavier on the middle class. This is why we're seeing home foreclosures when CEOs -- even those in failing and underperforming companies -- are getting millions of dollars in pay raises and stock options every year. Congress can and should fix this imbalance. Congress can encourage economic recovery by balancing the budget without borrowing from foreign nations, begin to pay down the national debt, roll back the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans and provide tax relief to the middle class. By ending the costly occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan, we can begin to rebuild our infrastructure here at home. By making Medicare available to all U.S. citizens, we can substantially reduce the costs of health care for everyone. By pushing an aggressive renewable energy plan, we can stimulate a new market for efficient technologies. By repealing so-called free trade agreements that only benefit the owners of corporations and oppress foreign workers and lead to unchecked pollution of their environment, supporting the right for workers to organize, and restoring tariffs, we can start rebuilding our middle class and allow workers to retire and fight illness with dignity. All of this will create massive economic growth for this country. However, I should note that I would be opposed to any stimulus plan that is paid for by money borrowed from foreign countries, such as the Bush Administration's borrowing money from China to fund tax rebate checks.
7. Do you favor or oppose a larger federal role in health-care? Either way, why and what should the federal role be? What, if anything, should be done about rising health care costs and Americans who do not have health coverage?
Health insurance works by spreading costs and risk over the largest group of people over the greatest amount of time. Thus, the most efficient health care insurance this country can have is one in which all citizens are a member, called universal, single-payer health care. This is the only way to ensure that you will have health care when you need it, that all of your illnesses will be covered, and that you will not lose your job or your home because of an illness. To that end, single-payer universal health care will be a major stabilizing force in American life. For that reason, Congress must make it its business to bring about single-payer universal health care.
8. Would you maintain or scale back federal tax cuts made during the past eight years? Either way, why? How, as specifically as possible, would you try to reduce federal budget deficits and the national debt?
Bush's so-called tax cuts really are little more than a cruel illusion. Imagine someone going to the ATM, taking out $600 on their credit card every year, and believing it to be a pay increase. Voters need to understand that the so-called tax cuts gimmicks were funded for by borrowed money -- money we now owe to China and others. Under all other presidents prior to George W. Bush, the US amassed a national debt of about 5 trillion dollars. In less than 8 years, as a result of the current presidential administration and Congress's actions, the national debt has almost doubled and is projected to exceed 10 trillion dollars before this President leaves office. But I'm not calling for a tax increase on the middle class, because the middle class actually does deserve the tax relief it was promised but never actually received. Meanwhile the wealthiest Americans saw their tax burdens decrease, so that the middle class was paying a greater burden of the cost of this current Congress's and President's largesse. I would restore a more progressive tax system, where the wealthy once again pay their fair share. But in doing so, they too will see the advantages in a better, more stable economy with more opportunities for innovation and growth.
9. The current Congress could not agree on immigration reform. What would you do to advance reform in a divided Congress, and, briefly, what should the key policy elements be?
There is no magic bullet for immigration reform. It's not a mass deportation or higher fences. As long as the United States offers a higher quality of life and more economic opportunity than Mexico, workers will want to come here. It's that simple. One thing we can do is increase opportunities for workers to come here legally, so they can be treated fairly and so they do not undermine the American workforce. The other component to that is working with Mexico and other countries to improve economic conditions in their country, by ending the abusive free trade agreements, re-instating tariffs and holding countries we trade with to the same human rights and workplace protections that we have here.
10. In what ways is the U.S. government successfully defending citizens against terrorism, and in what ways is the U.S. failing in that regard?
The U.S. government is not successful in defending against terrorism. First of all, September 11 was a failure by the Bush administration to recognize the glaring warning signs of an imminent terrorist attack that ended up with thousands losing their lives and more becoming sick with respiratory problems, not to mention post-traumatic stress. Following September 11, the Bush White House launched the so-called War on Terror, which has succeeded in destroying civil liberties, creating a climate of fear, and rewarding big Republican donors, but failing to make us even marginally safer than we were before Sept. 11. In fact, the invasion of Iraq, along with anti-Islamic rhetoric from conservatives heard as recent as the Republican National Convention, has only turned the average Muslim against us, and has served as a great recruiting tool for our enemies. We must rise above the tactics of the terrorists. We must recognize the so-called War on Terror for what it is: a vague doctrine and convenient excuse for a hidden political agenda. The U.S. can once again restore its standing in the world by withdrawing troops from Iraq and beginning to restore the trust of our allies. We must end the hate speech against Muslims. We must draw down the police state that has emerged in this country by ending domestic spying, ending needless police action against free speech, like what we saw in St. Paul during the convention, and even here in DuPage County with the prosecution of two people who dared to hold a sign calling for Bush's impeachment. We must end torture US government torture, kidnapping, secret prisons across the world, etc. The so-called War on Terror has cost us not only our freedom, but our dignity, and we need to take them both back.