|
9 Dec. - 11 Dec. 2003
|
|
9 Dec. - 11 Dec. 2003
| Last update 15 Dec. 2003 |
|
|
Here: Clark says environment plan would prevent 100,000 deaths Rivals rip Dean lead in debate Local concerns pop up in debate Clark makes the most of the moment Clark Nabs Big Endorsements Clark says military, foreign-policy know-how make him best man for Democratic presidential nomination |
Wesley Clark's official sites: |
| boston.com/news/politics |
By Joanna Weiss, Globe Staff, 12/9/2003
|
|
| Gen. Wesley K. Clark (ret.) |
When he presents his environmental plan today, retired Army General Wesley K. Clark will cast his goals in unusual terms for a political campaign: not emissions reduced, but lives saved.
By 2020, Clark says, his environmental plan would prevent the deaths of 100,000 people who would otherwise have died from cancer or respiratory ailments.
Clark aides say those figures are based on a study done by Save the Clean Air Act, an environmental advocacy group. The study took figures the Environmental Protection Agency uses to evaluate risks from pollutants and compared lower levels of emissions, such as those Clark advocates, to what the Bush administration allows.
Most of the other Democratic presidential candidates call for similar emissions standards -- which, Clark aides concede, would affect a similar number of lives. But they say describing environmental policies in terms of lives saved, not tons of pollutants stopped, fits into the "turnaround plan" theme Clark is using this week to present a string of domestic policies.
|
"The idea of the turnaround plan is to make people understand that General Clark believes leaders should be accountable, and part of accountability is setting easy-to-understand, easy-to-measure goals," said Clark's communications director, Matt Bennett. Changes in emissions standards, Bennett said, are "neither easy to understand nor easy to explain."
Also yesterday, Clark announced a plan to increase the median American family income by $3,000, with median income defined as $51,800.
Clark's environmental plan, which he will outline today in New Castle, N.H., calls for "strong limits" on power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, and carbon dioxide. Clark would encourage the Environmental Protection Agency to promote greater enforcement of the Clean Air Act, and seek a bill to double fines for repeat environmental offenders.
Clark would use money from the increased fines to create an "Environmental Compensation Fund" that would be distributed to local communities, for use in monitoring pollution and boosting local enforcement efforts.
He also would require expanding plants to use modern pollution-control equipment, and would work to develop new pollution-control technologies, in part by expanding the testing process, and in part by creating tax incentives to make pollution-control equipment financially feasible for companies.
And his policy papers say he would "tell the truth about air pollution," criticizing the Bush administration for allegedly withholding information about the air quality at Ground Zero after Sept. 11, 2001.
Every Democratic presidential candidate has criticized the Bush administration's environmental policies. Most oppose drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and blast Bush for proposing to limit authority of the Clean Water Act. Clark's proposed standards for air pollutants are similar to those in a bill pending in Congress known as the Clean Power Act, which has been cosponsored by Senators John F. Kerry, Joseph I. Lieberman, and John Edwards.
The League of Conservation Voters, an environmental group that has compiled data on the candidates, issued a news release yesterday giving its highest accolades to Kerry and Lieberman. The group said it endorsed any Democratic candidate over Bush, and said Clark -- who has never held public office, and has no political environmental record -- "has staked out a series of solidly progressive positions on a wide range of environmental issues."
The group said it disagrees with Clark and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean for proposing to renegotiate the Kyoto treaty on global warming to include developing nations.
Among the Democrats, Kerry -- who, in some polls, is battling Clark for a distant second place behind Dean in the New Hampshire primary -- has cast himself as an environmental champion.
Patrick Healy of the Globe staff contributed to this article.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.| top |
| boston.com/news/politics |
By Anne E. Kornblut and Joanna Weiss, Globe Staff, 12/10/2003
|
|
| Democratic presidential hopefuls Rep. Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., center, answers a question standing next to Rev. Al Sharpton, left, and retired general Wesley Clark, right, during the Democrats debate Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2003 at the University of New Hampshire in Durham, N.H. (AP Photo / Jim Cole, Pool) (AP Photo) |
DURHAM, N.H. -- Howard Dean, fresh off his surprise endorsement from former vice president Al Gore, fought off sharp attacks from his rivals last night during a presidential debate whose tenor suggested the nomination is increasingly Dean's to lose.
The eight other Democratic contenders sought to belittle Gore's role, but still sounded deeply stung by an endorsement that rocked the political landscape and gave new legitimacy to the insurgent Dean campaign. Dean downplayed the event as well, agreeing that in the end, voters, not party elders, will determine the nominee.
But his rival's attacks -- and several of the questions -- underscored Dean's front-runner status, with recent polls suggesting he leads in New Hampshire by as much as 25 percentage points. The new dynamic was reflected in the opening inquiry from ABC moderator Ted Koppel, who asked the candidates to raise their hands if they believed Dean could beat President Bush. Only Dean raised his hand.
"I think actually most voters in America make their own decision about who they believe should be the president of the United States," Senator John Edwards of North Carolina said to applause, dismissing the significance of the Gore endorsement.
|
|
"We're not going to have a coronation. The Republicans have coronations. We have campaigns, we have elections."
The Rev. Al Sharpton agreed, likening Gore's intervention in the campaign to "bossism."
"We're not going to have any big name come in now and tell us the field should be limited and we can't be heard," Sharpton said.
Several times during the event, candidates complained about the focus on Dean's endorsement or questions involving poll numbers. At one point, Koppel asked Representative Dennis J. Kucinich when he intended to pull out of the race given how low his polling numbers are -- a remark that drew a sharp response from the Ohio Democrat and set the stage for postdebate grousing that the event was superficial.
"To begin this kind of a forum with a question about an endorsement, no matter by who, I think actually trivializes the issues that are before us," Kucinich said.
Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, the onetime front-runner in New Hampshire who now lags far behind Dean in the polls, faced repeated questions about his chief rival's campaign. Unlike past events, when Kerry openly displayed his frustration with Dean, Kerry tried to approach the subject with a sense of humor -- and indignation.
After first being asked why he did not raise his hand in support of Dean, Kerry then faced a question about what -- if anything -- Dean had done right to rise so far in the polls. Kerry rubbed his eyes and his nose, looking down, during the question, then offered his biting response.
"If I were an impolite person, I'd tell you where you can take your polls," Kerry said.
To the extent that the debate focused on substantive matters, the candidates' responses were no different than on dozens of other occasions when they have convened in public. They spent a significant portion of the 90-minute event talking about Iraq, still the subject that divides the field and has put the candidates' differences most sharply into relief. Almost all the candidates condemned the handling of the war -- the sole exception being Lieberman, who referred to Saddam Hussein as a "homicidal dictator" and fully defended his decision to vote to authorize the use of force.
How to handle Iraq now -- in particular, how to begin withdrawing troops -- offered the clearest picture of how the candidates differ. Kucinich said he would pull troops out of Iraq within 90 days of UN approval of a resolution he would propose to replace US troops with UN forces. Both Dean and Clark said pulling US troops out right away would be a mistake.
Dean said the country needs an American presence, probably for several years, until the Iraqis have a sufficiently strong democracy and a constitution they respect. "The tragedy of what we did in Iraq, which I have opposed since the very beginning, is that now we are stuck there," Dean said.
Clark said the United Nations was unable and unwilling to "pick up this mission successfully," and called for US forces to remain in the region but to report to NATO. He said US forces might have to stay in the region for one to two years.
"We can put an Iraqi government in charge in the next week or two if we use indirect democracy," Clark said, "but we cannot rush the standup of an Iraqi security force if we pull out prematurely."
Lieberman and Kerry also endorsed further US involvement in the region, with the Connecticut senator calling for "an international Marshall plan for the Muslim world" and Kerry proposing a "greater Mideast initiative."
After an extended discussion about Iraq, it fell to Dean, who built much of his early support on his opposition to the war, to turn the debate to domestic subjects. "Iraq and national security are important, but they're not what this debate is about," Dean said, citing the high cost of college tuition, rising health-care expenses, and primary-school standards as "things that we ought to talk about as well."
That prompted Koppel to note that for the first 45 minutes of the debate, "we didn't even touch on Iraq."
|
Indeed, Koppel played an unusually interactive role in the debate. Toward the end of his first response, Kerry was reprimanded by Koppel for exceeding his time limit. It was one of several light exchanges between Koppel and the candidates, many of whom he has covered for decades.
"Senator Kerry, forgive me for interrupting. You may have noticed that red light," Koppel said.
"I didn't notice any red light," Kerry said, drawing laughter from the audience.
"Well, I mean, that's why I'm drawing your attention to it," Koppel replied. Kerry looked intently into the audience, toward the red light, and apologized.
Afterward, several candidates contended there was a lack of substance in the debate. "It was harder to get those ideas in tonight. You had to ram it into some question about a poll or an endorsement," Edwards said. "It was frustrating for a lot of people. It was frustrating for the people of New Hampshire, who probably switched [the channel] after 15 minutes.
"This should be a battle of ideas and vision and character and about who's ready to lead this country, not about who's where" in the polls.
| top |
| boston.com/news/politics |
With month to go, candidates still wooing N.H. voters
By Glen Johnson, Globe Staff, 12/10/2003DURHAM, N.H. -- His first semester of college is winding down, but Jefferson Phillips did not have next week's exams on his mind last night. Instead, the 19-year-old University of New Hampshire freshman planned to sit in his dorm room and watch a debate between the Democratic presidential contenders, hoping to settle on whom he will support next month in the New Hampshire primary.
In between criticisms of President Bush's foreign and domestic policies, each of the nine tried to sway New Hampshire voters, about a quarter of whom remain undecided. If Phillips listened closely between an opening discussion about Al Gore's endorsement of Howard Dean and a nearly 45-minute closing discourse about Iraq policy, Phillips had a chance to hear a lot about issues that dealt directly with his Hampton Falls hometown and the Granite State.
Warren Rudman, the former New Hampshire senator who has become an antiterrorism expert, is featured in a local television commercial, asking the nine candidates to outline how they plan to secure nuclear weapons in the former Soviet Union.
Asked to respond to that ad, Wesley K. Clark , the former Army general from Arkansas, replied: "You can get a whole lot more security for the United States of America in nonproliferation out of a billion dollars spent on this program than by putting another billion dollars into Iraq."
Scott Spradling, a Manchester political reporter who comoderated the debate, asked Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri why he had failed to use his previous position as House Democratic leader to provide ample federal money for federally mandated special education -- an financial back-breaker in the state.
"Why haven't we been able to do it? Because we've had to deal with Republicans who don't want to fund unfunded mandates," the congressman replied.
Meanwhile, Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts chastised the other moderator, ABC's Ted Koppel, for asking him to theorize why Dean, the former Vermont governor, had vaulted to the top of the polls. Instead, Kerry said a more pressing local concern was MTBE, or methyl tertiary-butyl ether, a federally mandated fuel additive that the New Hampshire government believes is worsening groundwater pollution.
Mentioning a Salem, N.H., couple who must rely on bottled water, the senator said: "MTBE is the culprit . . . This administration is trying to prevent accountability for MTBE . . . Those are the things that the American people care about."
The debate in New Hampshire between the crowded field of Democratic challengers came 49 days before the primary election and against a backdrop of polls showing Dean with a 30-point lead. Yet it also came three weeks before January, the month where history shows many New Hampshire voters decide their vote.
Phillips, a registered Democrat, said he is intrigued by the candidacies of Dean, the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, who responded to a question about job layoffs at the New Hampshire mills in Berlin and the Tyson food plant in Manchester. And like many in this state, Phillips remained undecided.
He disagreed with a point raised during the debate, that candidates such as Representative Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio, former senator Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois, and Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, among others at low standing in recent polls, should consider yielding to stronger candidates.
Events like last night's debate, with its focus on the local in addition to the national, will generate clarity soon enough.
"I think if everybody said that," Phillips said as he stood outside the Town & Campus bookstore, "we'd only have two candidates. I want to pick the person closest to my views and may the best man win. I'm not a person to settle for the lesser of two evils."
Glen Johnson can be reached at johnson@globe.com.
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.
| top |
| boston.com/news/politics |
By Scot Lehigh, 12/10/2003
YOU'RE LEFT shaking your head after a "debate" like this.
It's bad enough that the unwieldy field of nine makes any meaningful examination of the issues exceedingly difficult -- and, indeed, encourages a quick retreat to the standard tropes the candidates use every day. (Dick Gephardt does it so often he now introduces the quick link back to his stump speech by noting: "As I often say . . . ")
But throw in Ted Koppel fairly radiating self-satisfaction as he wasted precious minutes pursuing questions that might politely be called inane and the whole event became maddening indeed.
Still, frustrating as the forum was, presidential politics is about making the most of the moment. The candidate who came closest to that last night was General Wesley Clark. When he began his campaign, Clark was a decidedly uncertain trumpet, but in several answers last night he spoke with both conviction and seeming expertise about the United States and its role in the world.
Asked if foreign policy questions were truly paramount in an election when many voters say they are concerned about the economy, health care, and the like, Clark made an important (if self-serving) political point that his fellow Democrats shouldn't lose sight of: "We have to be the party that can stand toe to toe with George W. Bush on national security as well as the party of compassion."
Too often these debates devolve into a contest to see who can denounce the Republican incumbent in the strongest terms, a tedious exercise that emits a good deal more heat than light. It was refreshing to hear Clark say he wanted to put emotions aside and discuss, in a little detail, his plan to reshape the American presence in Iraq.
Clark maintained that the UN is not able to take over the Iraqi mission and that "nobody can provide security for the Iraqis as they develop their own internal defenses except for a force under US leadership." That, Clark said, means creating an international organization to administer Iraq, with the US troops reporting through NATO and working toward a clearly defined goal: a unified Iraq, with some sort of representative government, a country strong enough to repel Al Qaeda but not so strong as to threaten its neighbors.
Are those plans realistic? In a true debate, viewers might have gotten a good exchange. Last night's forum didn't offer that opportunity.
Still, at a time when the race for the number-two spot in New Hampshire is wide open, Clark made it clear he was a candidate worth listening to.
Scot Lehigh's e-mail address is lehigh@globe.com.
| top |
| CBC 2 CHICAGO |
|
|
| AFC: Wesley Clark |
Dec 11, 2003 6:11 pm US/Central
NEW YORK (AP) Retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who is running for
president, cited his record of supporting affirmative action in the
armed forces at a rally in Harlem on Thursday as evidence that he
deserves the support of black voters.
"I've fought for
it, I've fought with African-Americans, I've served under
African-Americans, I'm proud to have been there," Clark told a
group of about 200 supporters, most of them white. "But it's
not about what you sign on paper, it's about who you are as a
person. And my African-American friends know me as a person who's
fair, who's honest and who believes in human
beings."
Rep. Charles Rangel, a Korean war veteran who
for months has backed Clark in the Democratic contest, officially
endorsed Clark at the gathering.
The congressman has worked
behind the scenes in his home district of Harlem, around the state,
and in the Congressional Black Caucus on Capitol Hill to win support
for Clark, based largely on Clark's opposition to the war in Iraq
and his ability on many fronts "to beat this guy Bush,"
Rangel said Thursday.
"The biggest contribution that
this general can make for civil rights equity and justice in this
country is to get rid of George Bush," Rangel told the crowd,
which included several veterans.
The Harlem congressman also
took the opportunity to poke fun at Howard Dean, the former Vermont
governor who appeared in Harlem this week to accept former Vice
President Al Gore's endorsement, adding political heft to his
campaign.
"What I did hear was, that Dean and Gore told
the cabbie to 'take us to Harvard,' and he dropped them off in
Harlem instead," Rangel said.
Clark refused to be drawn
into discussions about Dean and his lead over the eight other
candidates, preferring to stick to "what's wrong with George
Bush and his policies."
He accused the president of
supporting a policy of "perpetual war," and proclaimed
himself "the person to face down the commander in
chief."
Rangel agreed, saying: "In times of war, we
need a warrior."
Clark told the group that Bush
"looks backwards" in his vision for America, by trying to
"emulate his father's war against Saddam Hussein," and
"Ronald Reagan's tax cut for the
wealthy."
"That's a guy who thinks America's best
days are behind us," he said. "I don't. I think our best
days are ahead."
Clark also picked up the support of
several state and local officials, including state Senate Minority
Leader David Paterson, the Legislature's highest ranking black
member.
Another prominent black leader, Andrew Young, plans
to endorse Clark at a Dec. 21 campaign event in South Carolina,
according to officials familiar with discussions about the event,
speaking on condition of anonymity.
The endorsement from
Young, a civil rights trailblazer and former United Nations
ambassador, is expected just six weeks before South Carolina's Feb.
3 primary, where blacks vote in high numbers.
(© 2003 The Associated Press. All Rights
Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten,
or redistributed. )
| top |
| Portsmouth, NH Thursday, December 11, 2003 |
By Elizabeth Kenny
ekenny@seacoastonline.com
|
|
| Retired Gen. Wesley Clark speaks to the Portsmouth Herald Editorial Board, Wednesday morning, following a debate with other candidates Tuesday evening at the University of New Hampshire in Durham. |
PORTSMOUTH - Presidential candidate Wesley Clark said another round of military base closures is necessary in 2005, but he believes the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is in the clear.
"You have to go through the BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) process. BRAC is needed to make sure we are not putting more into our military than we need," said Clark. "But the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard is a unique facility, and I’m sure it’s going to be OK."
The retired four-star general’s confidence might be reassuring to many Seacoast residents because of Clark’s extensive experience in the military and with foreign policy.
Many of Clark’s stories, metaphors and stances on a variety of issues go back to his military experience.
He describes his presidential candidacy as a plane taking off from an aircraft carrier - starting out with a bang, then dipping down toward the water before picking up again and rising steadily skyward.
"I will emerge with the nomination," Clark said in an interview on Wednesday with the Portsmouth Herald’s editorial board. "I came into the race late, and I’m not a professional politician, but I am the best leader."
His flight to the top will take some doing for the general, who ranks third among the nine Democratic presidential candidates in recent polls in New Hampshire.
As part of his campaign for the state’s primary in January, he has made many trips around the state to explore national and local issues with voters.
Clark’s relaxed manner and gentle smile contradict the stereotype of a stiff, unapproachable former military general, but on the basis of his knowledge of foreign policy, he has criticized the Bush administration, calling the war in Iraq a "strategic blunder."
"All the candidates have been coached on the Iraq issue, but I won’t be going over there to deliver a turkey at midnight, or turning to my experts to be coached," Clark said of the decisions on the war he would make as president. "For me, it will come from my own experience."
Clark said his experience and wisdom and the strategy he has in mind for the future of Iraq cannot be conveyed well during televised debates, but that his understanding of the war and his future plans for the country cannot even be compared to his fellow candidates.
"I’m the only one who’s prayed at night that when you order your soldiers into combat they do not kill innocent people," said Clark. "Bush can’t connect top to bottom of what’s going on here."
Clark added that Bush is not a visionary and reiterated some of the comments he made during Tuesday night’s nationally televised debate held on the campus of the University of New Hampshire.
"He’s repeated his father’s war, (President) Reagan’s tax cuts for the wealthy. Now he wants to repeat John Kennedy’s challenge to go to the moon," said Clark.
But Clark’s four-star general rank has made some voters wonder about his experience and expertise regarding other national issues.
In a recent poll conducted by WMUR-TV, voters cited the economy, health care and honesty as more important to them than the war in Iraq.
"I’m not just concentrating on Iraq, but that’s what people continually ask me about," Clark said.
In an attempt to address one of those issues, Clark has proposed a $100 billion, two-year program to create jobs as the first step in his plan for the economy. He has also proposed $40 billion for the states to put more money into homeland security and first-responder positions.
His stance on education attacks No Child Left Behind because "I don’t believe in standardized tests," he said. "They are not going to produce educated people."
In the end, said Clark, it comes down to teachers, average workers and voters to change society, not the people in charge.
"Only soldiers win battles; colonels can only lose
(them)," he said. "I can set the conditions for success in this
country."
| Back
to the Portsmouth Herald | Print
this Story | Email this Article
|
| top |
| HOME |
