Interview with Howie Hawkins, 2010 NY Green Party candidate for governor

Socialist magazine Against The Current interviews New York Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins in their March-April issue.   This is a comprehensive and highly informative interview about strategy, the campaign, and how the party is building on its success.

We tried to summarize the election as a choice between the Green prosperity plan and the Cuomo/Paladino austerity plan. The response to our program of ordinary people on the streets, in local events and in local radio and TV interviews was overwhelmingly positive.

Hawkins has run many times for local office in Syracuse.   That attention to local campaigning was the basis for the party’s success in the election:

Name recognition means a lot. I’m well known in Syracuse. I got 41% for city council in 2009. For Governor, I got 5.3% in my home county and 3-4% in adjacent counties in the same media market where people know me and my politics. Statewide I got 1.4% overall, pretty consistently across upstate except for 2.5% in the Albany area, due, I believe, to protest votes by state workers whom Cuomo targeted for layoffs and wage and benefit cuts. We did worst in the New York City area, less than one percent in its outer boroughs and suburbs.

In local races, a campaign by a small upstart party can go door-to-door to get its message to people. We have built support for particular candidates and the Green Party over a series of local races and consistent long-term campaigns for reforms in movements as well elections.

The Hawkins/Mattera ticket was the only independent minor party to pass the 50,000 vote threshold.  So the NY Green Party will have automatic ballot access for the next 4 years, while candidates with more media notoriety (Jimmy McMillan) failed the test.

We had three goals in this campaign. The first was to get enough votes to qualify the Green Party for ballot status, which will make it much easier for us to run more candidates for the next four years until the next gubernatorial race. It takes 50,000 votes for the gubernatorial ticket to qualify and we got just under 60,000, after two four-year cycles where we failed with results in the low 40,000s. So our first goal was achieved.

Our second goal was to move the debate. Here we largely failed. The media treated the Greens as marginal at best. When they did cover third party candidates, they featured on personalities over policies and focused on Kristin Davis, the former Manhattan Madam who claimed to have provided hookers for former Gov. Eliot Spitzer; Charles Barron, a Democratic member of the New York City Council who announced his Freedom line candidacy as a protest of the Democrats’ all-white statewide slate; and Jimmy McMillan, a bizarre character running on the Rent Is Too Damn High line.

[…]

Our third goal was to build the Green Party organization. Even though the corporate media characterized the only televised debate, which had all the candidates, as a “circus” and ignored me and the policies I advocated in the coverage, we got our biggest surge of volunteers and money from people who saw that debate three weeks before the election. All along the way, we picked up support as people learned of our program. We may not have moved the debate in the media and forced the major party candidates to address our policies. But we did move several thousand people to sign up with us as supporters, volunteers, and contributors.

So we did succeed in building the Green Party. We come out of the election much stronger than we went into it. Now we must organize these new people into local party organizations and campaigns for economic security, peace, freedom, and sustainability in the huge vacuum on the Left being produced by the Cuomo/Obama Democrats’ “bipartisan” program of deficit-reduction austerity, war, repression, and environmental plunder.

The entire interview is well worth reading and is available here:  Renewing New York — an interview with Howie Hawkins.

SC League Of Women Voters Issue Critical Report On Electronic Voting

Coinciding with Eugene Platt’s efforts to draw attention to the failings of SC’s electronic voting machines comes a critical report from the South Carolina League of Women Voters.

The LWV found numerous examples of unaccountable overvotes and other alarming discrepancies in the audited returns from Richland County in the November 2010 election.  Authors Duncan A. Buell, Eleanor Hare, Frank Heindel and Chip Moore have produced an indictment of the electronic voting system that must be answered by the state.

The South Carolina Green Party is formally opposed to unverifiable electronic voting. The South Carolina State Election Commission’s use of the ES&S voting machines is an expensive boondoggle.

Electronic Voting: Millions of dollars for fancy new machines that only get approved because they print a paper trail. Makes you wonder what's wrong with paper ballots to begin with.

Electronic Voting. Flickr photo by Nathan Gibbs. Reproduced under Creative Commons License.

It is astounding that the State Election Commission is perfectly aware that there have been problems with the machines.  Yet prior to the 2008 elections SCSEC spokesman Gary Baum said:

“Other states have had problems, which have led to questions about our system; but things that apply to other states don’t apply to South Carolina.”

Baum’s attitude is typical of a self-satisfied politician, and is unworthy of a public servant.  South Carolinians deserve better.  We hope that other public officials will follow Platt’s lead and other councils will condemn the electronic voting machines and recommend verifiable voting alternatives.

As William Moredock of the Columbia City Paper reported on Feb 15:

In the Bluff precinct there were 772 votes not counted.  According to the report entire precincts were missing data,  “Gadsden and Riverside precincts (numbers 327 and 362, respectively) are entirely missing from both the event log and the vote image file.”

Not only are there cases of votes not being counted, in seven precincts there are more votes certified than were in the vote image file.

The article is here:  http://www.columbiacitypaper.com/2011/02/15/voting-machine-problems/

Read the report from the League of Women Voters here: http://lwvsc.org/files/richlandauditpaper.pdf

Read Columbia journalist William Moredock’s column on the dangers of electronic voting here: http://www.columbiacitypaper.com/2010/09/29/democracy-under-assault/

Preliminary SC Green Party Candidate Results

Tom Clements, South Carolina Green Party Candidate for U.S. Senate 2010

Tom Clements, South Carolina Green Party Candidate for U.S. Senate 2010

Here are the unofficial results from the South Carolina Green Party’s 2010 candidacies. With 46 of 48 counties are reporting, these numbers are close to final.

This was a very interesting campaign season. I want to congratulate all our candidates for having the heart and the interest to get in the civic arena. We’ve shown that there is a space for independent progressive politics in the state.

Our candidates with previous local campaign or activism experience generally did well in contested races…but certainly we could have done a lot of things differently. We have to take some lessons from this campaign and learn how this political party can best serve the people of South Carolina.

The Clements for Senate campaign has run the most successful statewide progressive race in South Carolina history. With more than 120,000 votes and 9% of the overall vote, Tom Clements has far exceeded any previous statewide campaign operating without support of the two major parties.

Eugene Platt for SC House 115

Eugene Platt for SC House District 115

Other notable results include the 1,186 votes earned by Eugene Platt running in SC House District 115. Eugene’s 9.62% is the highest percentage result in a three way contest. Incumbent Anne Peterson-Hutto went down in defeat against Republican Eugene McCoy by a margin of less than 5%. In 2008, the State Election Commission threw Green Party nominee Eugene Platt off the general election ballot after he lost the Democratic Primary to Hutto. In 2006 while running as a Democrat, Eugene had come within a handful of votes of defeating the Republican in this district.

D.C. Swinton ran his first campaign for SC House District 24 as a Green/Democratic fusion candidate while a student at Winthrop University. D.C. earned 3,390 votes or 25% of the total in a two person race against an entrenched incumbent. His result is the best overall percentage result by a candidate who ran as a Green.

Dante Swinton for SC House District 24 2010

Dante Swinton for SC House District 24

Christopher Jones received 11.76% in a two-person race in SC House District 74. Leslie Minerd and Dorthea Bull each received around 2%. Gubernatorial candidate Morgan Reeves received 1.16%. Against local prosecutor Troy Gowdy and an array of right wing minor parties C. Faye Walter’s vote in the 4th Congressional District was 1.18%. Robert Dobbs similarly earned about 1.16% running in the 1st Congressional district against six other candidates. Nammu Mohammed received about 1% of the vote against Democratic Congressional Whip Jim Clyburn of the 6th District.

I want to draw your attention to the results for Amendment 2 and the SC House District 69 contest. The success of Amendment 2 puts “secret ballot” union elections into the state constitution. It passed with 86%, so card-check union elections are now forbidden by the SC constitution. Brett Bursey of the SC Progressive Network ran as the Labor Party candidate in SC House District 69, the first time this party has ever sought elective office anywhere in the country. He received 3% against a Democrat and a heavily favored Republican incumbent.

Full results follow. My thanks to all the SC Green Party candidates.

Source: http://www.enr-scvotes.org/SC/19077/39378/en/summary.html#

U.S. Senate

Tom Clements (GRN) 9.22% 120,508
Jim DeMint (REP) 61.45% 803,193
Alvin M Greene (DEM) 27.66% 361,471
WRITE-IN (NON) 1.67% 21,807
Total 1,306,979

SC Governor:

Morgan Bruce Reeves (GRN) 0.93% 12,283
Nikki R Haley (REP) 51.33% 678,937
Vincent A Sheheen (DEM) 46.94% 620,831
Morgan Bruce Reeves (UNC) 0.57% 7,579
Write-In (NON) 0.23% 2,981
Total 1,322,611

Total for Morgan Bruce Reeves (Green + United Citizens): 19,862

Attorney General:

Leslie Minerd (GRN) 2.02% 26,544
Alan Wilson (REP) 53.68% 704,227
Matthew Richardson (DEM) 44.26% 580,645
Write-In (NON) 0.03% 453
Total 1,311,869

State Superintendent of Education

Doretha A Bull (GRN) 1.57% 20,488
Mick Zais (REP) 51.20% 669,327
Tim Moultrie (LIB) 2.66% 34,769
Frank Holleman (DEM) 43.17% 564,433
Tony Fayyazi (IND) 1.36% 17,844
Write-In (NON) 0.04% 507
Total 1,307,368

US House of Representatives District 1
(Charleston, Dorchester, Georgetown, Horry):

Robert Dobbs (GRN) 1.44% 3,316
Tim Scott (REP) 65.31% 149,882
Keith Blandford (LIB) 1.17% 2,688
Ben Frasier (DEM) 28.73% 65,943
Rob Groce (WFM) 1.77% 4,054
M E Mac McCullough (UNC) 0.43% 996
Jimmy Wood (IND) 1.07% 2,455
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.07% 160
Total 229,494


US House of Representatives District 4

(Greenville, Spartanburg, Union, part of Laurens)

C Faye Walters (GRN) 1.18% 2,553
Trey Gowdy (REP) 63.48% 137,189
Rick Mahler (LIB) 1.39% 3,000
Paul Corden (DEM) 28.77% 62,175
Dave Edwards (CON) 5.09% 11,005
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.08% 180
Total 216,102

US House of Representatives District 4

Nammu Y Muhammad (GRN) 0.74% 1,286
Jim Pratt (REP) 37.01% 64,696
James E Jim Clyburn (DEM) 62.21% 108,749
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.04% 65
174,796

State House of Representatives District 24

D C Swinton (GRN) 1.75% 242
Bruce Bannister (REP) 75.35% 10,394
D C Swinton (DEM) 22.82% 3,148
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.08% 11
Total 13,795


State House of Representatives District 74

Christopher Jones (GRN) 11.74% 866
J Todd Rutherford (DEM) 87.92% 6,486
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.34% 25
Total 7,377


State House of Representatives District 115

Eugene Platt (GRN) 7.75% 955
Peter McCoy (REP) 47.01% 5,795
Eugene Platt (PET) 1.87% 231
Anne Peterson Hutto (DEM) 43.32% 5,340
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.04% 5
Total 12,326


Amendment 2

Yes (NON) 86.16% 1,072,811
No (NON) 13.84% 172,319
Total 1,245,130

SC State House of Representatives District 69

Rick Quinn (REP) 72.03% 10,360
Jan Steensen Crangle (DEM) 24.83% 3,571
Brett Bursey (LAB) 3.06% 440
WRITE-IN (NON) 0.08% 11
Total 14,382

The Rock Hill Herald, daily paper of South Carolina’s fourth largest city, endorses Tom Clements of the SC Green Party for U.S. Senate.

The Rock Hill Herald: Clements for Senate
Green Party candidate Tom Clements offers a viable alternative in this race.

URL: http://www.heraldonline.com/2010/10/30/2572265/clements-for-senate.html
Published: Saturday, Oct. 30, 2010 / Updated: Friday, Oct. 29, 2010 11:44 PM
In the race for U.S. Senate, we endorse Green Party candidate Tom Clements.

Rock Hill Herald Endorses Tom Clements for US Senate
Third-party candidates are playing a central role in a number of high-profile races this year, and in South Carolina’s Senate race, we think Clements deserves the attention of voters.
His appeal is bolstered by issues with the two other candidates running this year. Alvin Greene, as much of the nation is aware, was the surprise winner of the Democratic senatorial primary. His campaign can be dismissed as sadly inadequate.
Incumbent Sen. Jim DeMint is the prohibitive favorite in this race. But while he is popular with many voters, his extreme views go too far for a large segment of South Carolinians.
Clements has never run for office before or been involved in any party’s politics before. But he is no stranger to public service. He was approached by state Green Party members in large part because of his role as a nationally known environmental advocate and expert on nuclear power issues.
A Georgia native, Clements became the Southeastern coordinator for Friends of the Earth in Columbia in 2008. In that capacity, he focuses on issues related to nuclear power and nuclear waste, and is the public interest watchdog over the Department of Energy’s Savannah River site.
He worked for 13 years with Greenpeace International and for three years as the executive director of the Nuclear Control Institute in Washington, D.C.. He has extensive foreign policy experience as a leading nuclear antiproliferation advocate.
While the environment, and global warming in particular, is his area of expertise, he also is fluent on a number of other critical issues, including the need to support small businesses, preserving Social Security, supporting education, making health care available to all Americans and ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Clements is a thoughtful and articulate advocate for a variety of causes supported by many South Carolina voters, particularly those issues involving preservation of our precious natural resources. Clements, we think, would represent the interests of the state well in the Senate.
Sen. DeMint also boasts the support of a large segment of the state’s voters, perhaps even a majority. This time around, however, he seems to be taking that support for granted. DeMint has spent next to no time or money campaigning in the state on his own behalf, choosing instead to barnstorm the country on behalf of tea party candidates in other states.
While his goal is to elect more senators who think like he does, that effort comes at the expense of spending time in his home state, making the case to South Carolinians as to why he should represent the state for the next six years.
DeMint is entitled to feel secure that a large percentage of the state’s voters — and many other Americans — share his conservative views. But clearly, some of his views are so radical that he has estranged himself from many, even including some Republican colleagues in the Senate.
For example, many of his supporters are pro-life, as he is. But how many Republicans share his view that abortion is wrong even in the case rape or incest?
Many, like DeMint, might oppose same-sex marriage. But do they share his view that gays and unwed single mothers are unfit to teach in the classroom?
Many, like DeMint, might oppose most congressional earmarks as pork-barrel spending. But do they oppose, as he does, an earmark that would provide $400,000 to study the dredging of the Port of Charleston, which could be crucial if the port is to capitalize on traffic from a widened Panama Canal beginning in 2014?
South Carolina’s other U.S. senator, Lindsey Graham, by the way, sponsored the earmark for the study.
Some of DeMint’s stances have been an outright embarrassment to the state.
Most recently, DeMint opportunistically jumped on the firing of NPR/Fox News analyst Juan Williams to introduce a bill to cut off all federal funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service. In fact, NPR was well within its rights as an employer to fire Williams over his ill-chosen remarks regarding his fears about sharing a plane with people in Muslim garb. NPR also had warned him on a number of occasions about a possible conflict of interest in his working for the two organizations.
Those radical views will make him a major cause of gridlock regardless of which party controls Congress. DeMint’s goal is to promote an uncompromising brand of conservatism that shuns the common ground in favor of ideological purity.
Congress doesn’t need more rancor and partisan divisiveness. It needs members from both parties who are capable of working together for the common good.
In this race, Clements and DeMint are the only viable candidates. We think, however, that Clements would, ultimately, be a more effective advocate for the interests of this state.

—————

For additional information visit Tom’s website at http://clementsforsenate.com or
Facebook.

See the Clements For Senate You Tube Channel at Youtube – TomClementsSenate.

P&C Covers Eugene Platt in District 115 Debate

In this October 19 news article, Eugene Platt slams his GOP rival for a deceptive and regressive tax plan.

District 115 hopefuls differ on taxes
McCoy touts ‘Fair Tax’ while Hutto, Platt decry plan
By David Slade
dslade@postandcourier.com
Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Candidates for the state House District 115 seat found several areas of agreement, but laid out stark differences on tax policy, at a forum Monday at James Island Charter High School.

In the Nov. 2 election, Rep. Anne Peterson Hutto, D-James Island, is seeking a second term representing the James Island-Folly Beach district, challenged by Republican Peter McCoy and Green Party and petition candidate Eugene Platt.

Hutto and McCoy sparred several times over tax issues. Each said they would not support tax increases, but McCoy said he supports the “Fair Tax” plan, which would dramatically change taxation in South Carolina by scrapping income and other taxes in favor of a much higher sales tax rate.

McCoy said that plan would help small businesses create jobs and would help individuals as well. He offered the Fair Tax as his solution to helping the poor and elderly manage medical and housing costs.

“This will help our people, our elderly, by not having 7 percent of their income go to state income tax,” he said.

Hutto and Platt blasted the idea that raising the sales tax would help the elderly and the poor.

“Plain and simple, I would look out for the elderly and those on low incomes by holding the line on taxes,” Hutto said.

Platt said consumption taxes are by definition regressive, falling hardest on the poor. In contrast to his opponents, he said he would be willing to consider raising the state’s income tax.

“There are some of us … who could afford to pay a little more,” he said.

Read the rest: http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010/oct/19/district-115-hopefuls-differ-on-taxes/