Mike Gravel in The Contenders
On Budget & Economy:
Considered his bankruptcy as creditors donating to his cause
In 2004, Gravel had run up $85,000 in credit card debt due to a health crisis requiring multiple surgeries, and the money he’d spent pursuing his National Initiative. Urged to declare personal bankruptcy, Gravel at first hesitated. “And then I thought
about it: ‘My God, isn’t this interesting? I’m going to get these 6 credit card companies who have been predators on normal people. I’m going to get them to contribute to the National Initiative.’ And I filed bankruptcy just in a heartbeat & that was it.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.200
Nov 11, 2007
On Drugs:
War on drugs is a total failure
On certain facets of social policy, Gravel happily goes out on a limb that the mainstream candidates, whatever their personal views, would never dare test. On the war on drugs: “I think the
American people realize the war on drugs is a total failure--waste of time, waste of money. What’s wrong with marijuana? You can go out to buy a fifth of gin and do more damage to yourself.”
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.197-198
Nov 11, 2007
On Government Reform:
Public empowerment appeals to progressives & libertarians
His “National Initiative for Democracy” forms the core of Gravel’s politics. Gravel declares, in language to set many a progressive heart beating: “The central power of government in a democracy is lawmaking--not voting. Governments throughout history
have been tools of oppression; they need not be.” He then, however, adds this caveat: “American citizens can gain control of their government by becoming lawmakers and turning its purpose to public benefit, and stemming government growth.”It’s this
kind of rhetoric that is winning Gravel fans among libertarians. The idea of direct democracy might have broad appeal to an electorate sick of a political system mired in soft money, corporate cronyism, and partisan gridlock. Nearly half the states
already have procedures for initiative, referendum, and recall, and California citizens are fiercely attached to their ballot box veto power. In one sense, then, Gravel is just trying to spread this already popular concept to the federal level.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.195-196
Nov 11, 2007
On Government Reform:
National Initiative criticized as public opinion bureaucracy
The system Gravel proposes to create as a result of the Constitutional amendment suggests its own bureaucratic quagmire. For example, Gravel would have people propose a law through petition, or have it brought forward by a state legislature. However,
he also added the idea of considering laws backed by a public opinion poll. But opinion polls can easily be manipulated by the people who pay for them.
Gravel insists the initiative process is “not intended to replace existing government, but to
supplement it.“ Gravel’s National Initiative would be carried out by an Electoral Trust, with one member elected at large from each state and a director appointed by the board of trustees. This Electoral Trust in effect creates a new political bureaucrac
of people who can draft laws, operate a communications system, set up committees and run hearings. Like the Federal Reserve System, it lies outside the federal government structure, and is not appointed by or beholden to the president.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.196
Nov 11, 2007
On Homeland Security:
1960s: Wept openly in Senate because US is dragged in mud
It could be argued that Gravel’s so-called tirades, especially on the Iraq War, result not from naivete, but from a kind of experience that none of the other candidates share.Until the debates, Gravel’s low-budget campaign may have been nearly
invisible. Yet to older progressives, Gravel is hardly an unknown. During the 1960s, he was often in the news as one of Congress’s fiercest opponents of the Vietnam War. In his most famous act, Gravel helped make public the Pentagon Papers by carrying
them into the Senate in two suitcases and reading them into the record--for a time, with tears streaming down his face.
In a television interview he said, “I wept because it hurts to see our nation dragged in the mud... to be part of a nation that is
killing innocent human beings.” Gravel is also credited with mounting filibusters and cutting legislative deals that helped stop the draft, and later with fighting nuclear testing and nuclear power.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.194
Nov 11, 2007
On Principles & Values:
Gadfly who’s mad as hell at Democratic Establishment
From the moment he bulldozed his way into public consciousness, maverick candidate Mike Gravel has been a pain in the ass of the Democratic establishment--exactly what he wants to be. For a year, the party mainstream had simply ignored Gravel, who
declared his candidacy back in April 2006. Such a small and insignificant gadfly, it seemed, wasn’t even worth the effort of swatting. That attitude ended with Gravel’s appearance at a sleepy Democratic presidential debate in S.C. After challenging his
rivals to end the war by legislative fiat--and make it a felony for the president to keep troops in Iraq--Gravel saw visits to his website zoom up, and YouTube clips begin drawing tens of thousands of views.Gravel is less polite than Dennis Kucinich,
whom he joins in challenging the other candidates on their timid and pathological centrist positions. One-on-one, Mike Gravel is jovial and mild-mannered; on stage with his rivals, he’s mad as hell, and he’s not going to take it any more.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.193
Nov 11, 2007
On Principles & Values:
Lost re-election after alienating every AK constituency
Born into a working-class French Canadian family in central Massachusetts and educated in Catholic schools, Gravel moved to Alaska after serving a stint in the Army Counter Intelligence Corps in the 1950s.
He worked as a brakeman on the Alaska Railroad and made some money as a property developer on the Kenai Peninsula before winning a seat in the legislature and then the US Senate.
He lost that seat in 1980, in the election that would send Republican Frank Murkowski to Washington. After twelve years in Congress,
Gravel told Salon.com he had alienated “almost every constituency in Alaska,” and he was disgusted “with public service, with the way government operated.”
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.194-195
Nov 11, 2007
On Principles & Values:
Blogosphere hails Gravel/Paul ticket with cross-party appeal
Mike Gravel declares, in his “National Initiative for Democracy”, in language to set many a progressive heart beating: “The central power of government in a democracy is lawmaking--not voting. Governments throughout history have been tools of oppression;
they need not be.” He then, however, adds this caveat: “American citizens can gain control of their government by becoming lawmakers and turning its purpose to public benefit, and stemming government growth--the people are the more conservative than
their elected officials regardless of political party.“ It’s this kind of rhetoric that is winning Gravel fans among libertarians, who have helped make him an unlikely favorite on user-generated news sites like Digg.com (where some are hailing a ticket
of ”Mike Gravel/Ron Paul“ --or vice versa).The idea of direct democracy might have broad appeal to an electorate sick of a political system mired in soft money, corporate cronyism, and partisan gridlock.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.196
Nov 11, 2007
On Principles & Values:
No-nonsense challenge to mainstream Democratic shuffling
Thousands of Americans who may have no intention to vote for gravel seem nonetheless delighted to hear such no-nonsense challenges to mainstream Democratic shuffling around the issue of war. They also, apparently, are entertained not only by his debate
antics, but by his campaign ads, which became a sensation on YouTube.In one, Gravel stares straight into the camera, his gaze steady, then finally he turns around and walks away along a shoreline. He pauses, stoops to pick up a rock, throws it in the
water, and continues to walk into the distance. He speaks not a word.
The symbolism is explained by one pundit, “It would be the rock in the water and the ripple effect of the senator and his message and who he is, a man with an idea, who is little
by little, day by day communicating that message.” Gravel himself was uncharacteristically blunt in response to ridiculing of the spots on Tucker Carlson’s show: “It’s a metaphor,” he said. “Why can’t people like you understand that?”
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.199-200
Nov 11, 2007
On Principles & Values:
Wildcard independent run raises specter of Nader
The Democratic leadership is haunted by the specter of Ralph Nader. While Dennis Kucinich--all in all a more reliable and effective advocate for left-leaning positions--can be counted on to drop out after the primaries and support the Democrat,
Gravel is a true wild card. What would happen if old man Gravel bolted to run as an independent in the general election, and stated pulling one or two or three points?To make matters worse, Nader himself has praised Gravel.
After hearing Gravel speak before the Democratic National Committee, Nader called him “a fresh wind coming down from Alaska,” complimented his National Initiative, and compared him to the
Roman statesman and orator Cicero, who “defined freedom with these enduring words: ‘Freedom is participation in power.’”
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.201-202
Nov 11, 2007
On Tax Reform:
Eliminate income tax so the wealthy can’t “game” the system
Gravel has another controversial proposal: to eliminate the income tax and fund the government solely through sales taxes. While appealing, again, to libertarians, the proposal is bound to alienate liberals who might otherwise sympathize with the
ex-senator: Sales taxes are considered “regressive,” meaning they take proportionately more from those with lower incomes than from the better-off.
But Gravel maintains that since the present tax system has become corrupted by “wealthy people gaming the system,” his fix would provide a solution; to help the poor, he’d provide a guaranteed
minimum income, distributed through Social Security. Getting rid of the income tax was until fairly recently a topic relegated to the far right wing.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.197
Nov 11, 2007