Q and A with congressional hopeful Howard Shanker
Alex T. Mudd - March 6th, 2008Congressional hopeful Howard Shanker visited NAU on Feb. 26 to appear on KJACK’s Big Mouth Talking and to answer some questions from The Lumberjack. The local Democrat is one of the numerous candidates running for Arizona Congressional District 1.
Q: How effective are Coconino County’s renewable energy programs and what potential do they have in the future?
A: We’re about 10 years behind where we should be. We have not provided the correct incentives, and we have not promoted research and development. In just a few years I think we can be well on our way to being a net exporter of energy. I represent a potential wind farm that would go in on the Cameron reservation. The potential is unlimited. It is nice that we have these individual homes putting up solar panels, which is good, but the way to go are these large-scale solar and wind projects.
Q: Do you have ideas for legislation that would contribute to Arizona’s sustainability?
A: Yeah, absolutely. I can tell you of all the candidates who [are] running for Congress, and there is going to be a primary Sept. 2, I’m the only one who has sued the federal government on a regular basis. What we need now are not people who are going to pander to the party-line whether it is Democratic or Republican. We need smart people who are willing to stand up for what is right. I have a track-record, I like to think, of standing up for what is right even if it’s unpopular. We’re at a crossroads. From my perspective, the way the government is going, if we have four more years the dollar is going to be worthless. We are going to become a second-rate society with a handful of haves and a whole lot of have-nots.
Q: What are some of your ideas on shrinking the national debt?
A: The fastest way to shrink the debt is to end the war in Iraq and stop borrowing money from foreign countries to service that debt. We’ve just been completely irresponsible fiscally. We have been spending like drunken sailors and at the same time cutting services. During a time of war when the country is spending billions of dollars, the economy should be booming. It would be a false or artificial stimulus, but when the government spends money like this it is supposed to stimulate the economy. What is happening here is the money is disappearing; it’s going into a handful of corporations that are helping to manage the war effort and its not trickling back into the U.S. economy.
Q: Do you think veteran healthcare in Coconino County is adequate?
A: No, I don’t think so. There are a lot of vets who get really good care in Prescott and Phoenix, but we’re going to have a lot of people coming into the system in a very short time, and I don’t think we’re sufficiently equipped to do that. Also, keep in mind if you’re out in the Navajo reservation, you have no veterans hospital or anything. A lot of these people don’t even have transportation to get to the veterans hospital. We need to improve access throughout the district, as well as the quantity and quality of care available.
Q: Why do you think the recent economic stimulus package, a bi-partisan effort, was a mistake, and what changes would you make to fix it?
A: The cornerstone of the stimulus package was sending everybody $600. There is nothing I have ever seen to suggest that would actually work to stimulate the economy. What we need to do is think longer term. In the short term we’ve reduced the interest rates, and that can stimulate the economy. In the short term, we should have extended food stamps and unemployment benefits, because that would have a direct impact on spending in the economy. For the midterm, we should have taken the money that we gave to all these people and invested it in our infrastructure. That would create jobs and fix our infrastructure, which is aging and needs repair. We also could have released some oil from our reserves, which would have reduced the prices of gasoline and heating oil in our houses.
Q: Do you still believe the U.S. should leave Iraq as soon as possible, given recent reductions in civilian casualties and other indicators of potential progress?
A: I came into this race about a year ago. A year ago, I was not sure what the right thing to do was, largely because we made the mess and we should try to clean it up. But what has become evident to me over the (past) year is I don’t think we can clean it up. With the surge sure, maybe civilian deaths have been reduced, but there really hasn’t been any meaningful diplomatic progress. So if you put a million soldiers in a limited spot, sure there is going to be a reduction of violence, but how long can you leave them there? At some point you have to get them out and if there is no progress on the diplomatic front, then this is really just meaningless. I think it was irresponsible to go in there in the first place; there clearly were no weapons of mass destruction. Unfortunately we’ve had a lot of experience at trying to export American democracy, which gets us into a lot of trouble. But right now we’re just maintaining a level of deployment that we can’t maintain as a country and that I don’t know if we should be maintaining anyways as an ethical or moral proposition.
A podcast of Shanker’s appearance on Big Mouth Talking can be found at www.kjack.org.
More information on Shanker’s campaign is also available at www.shanker2008.com.