Arizona Has No Clear Democratic Presidential Frontrunner

On Monday, eight vying for the Democrat nomination for the 2008 presidential election debated the issues, as they do every year. This year, however, the debate was a bit different. This year, the questions came from we, the people, more directly to the candidates, by way of YouTube. This change certainly makes for a more interesting debate, but will it lead to discussion that's more relevant to the lives of the constituents? How do the candidates' goals and positions stack up against Arizona's opinions and needs?

The eight candidates are Senator Joseph Biden, Jr. of Delaware; Senator Hillary Clinton from New York; Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut; Former Senator John Edwards of South Carolina; Former Senator Mike Gravel of Arkansas; Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio; Senator Barack Obama of Illinois; and Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico. Currently, the two candidates leading in the polls in Arizona are Senators Clinton and Obama. According to polling data by several outlets, listed by USA Election Polls, Obama is gaining ground, picking up around four points in as many months, while Clinton's polling figures have stagnated or dropped, depending on which polls are taken into account. Because the number and names of candidates included in polling changes quickly in the primaries, there is no clear frontrunner in Arizona, as of yet. Clinton certainly holds first place right now, but with only around 25% of respondents supporting her, that first-place spot doesn't yet hold much meaning.

The candidates spent some time discussing disaster response, in light of the problems evident in the government response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Governor Richardson in particular spoke of the need to eliminate red tape, get assistance to displaced families faster, and protect people in need from predatory companies seeking to make a fast buck at the expense of those vulnerable to being ripped off in their time of need. While Arizona does not have hurricanes, we battle wildfires and summer flooding almost every year. Parts of the Phoenix area suffered severe flooding not long before the debate aired, in fact. The need for quick government response to disaster, at all levels of government, is a very real issue to all Arizonans. We need a president to lead by example, to set a precedent of real response to local or regional disaster. Richardson clearly understands this need.

We struggle with education in Arizona, in a place where according to a Northern Arizona University report (PDF), we have the second-least funding per student, nearly the worst test scores in the nation. Our students need real help, they need a strong education, in order to have a strong, growing economy in our state. Most of the candidates sent their own children to public schools, and have seen wonderful results, but Senator Obama puts words to the very real problem that many Arizona parents have today, when he said, among other things, that the question is not about where our politicians send their children, but whether or not ordinary citizens, who can't work the system, can get their children into a decent school. America is about being able to earn anything you want, and this is what we have failed on. Obama talks of the need to help all parents negotiate the educational system on their children's behalf, so that those children have the education needed to earn whatever it is they will grow to desire in life.

Here in the desert southwest, we have a great and unique ability to invest in renewable, clean energy sources, rather than depending on oil, coal, or even cleaner nuclear power. We have the option to invest in a combination of solar and wind power, in particular, but this has been, so far, completely ignored as a viable alternative to an old an increasingly unreliable nuclear power plant. Senator Gravel advocates a change to our tax system, taxing based on spending rather than income, to initiate fundamental change in the way Americans perceive spending and consumerism. Senator Dodd supports a standard of 50 miles per gallon, for our nation's cars. He also supports more taxation on polluters, to reduce the cost savings of higher-polluting options. Clinton champions good old-fashioned American innovation, and the need to develop existing solar and wind energy options. The only thing that's going to hold these plans back, in the minds of Arizonans, is what will happen to low-income families who would be least able to make the switch to alternative fuels, as fossil fuels become subject to higher taxation and fewer tax breaks. Arizonans need a plan to help each family exchange old energy technology for new, without forcing them to give up their budgets for retirement savings, college savings, or even food and health care.

The candidates also addressed the issue of minimum wage. With one in five of our residents living without health insurance according to the Arizona Daily Star, and nearly that many living below the poverty line according to census reports, getting people out of poverty is a very real issue. Each of the candidates supports raising the minimum wage as soon as possible, to nearly double what it was before the last increase. But here in Arizona, most minimum wage jobs are held by adults lacking in education and vocational training to get a better job, and teens are having difficulty finding employment at all. What Arizona really needs is education, rather than a mandate that our employers pay more to those who earn the least. None of the candidates has a plan to help adults get the training they need, to become self-supporting, so that our teens can have those minimum wage jobs and the related early experience in work ethic and handling their own income.

Iraq has been a divisive issue in Arizona since 2002. Presently, 51% of Arizonans support withdrawal from Iraq. Presently, all of the Democratic candidates for president support withdrawal from Iraq. But, at the same time, on the issue of Darfur and bringing safety and stability to the residents there, Biden and Clinton support military action in Darfur, though Clinton does not support military action that includes American ground troops. Senator Gravel speaks of America's failure to responsibly govern on a global scale. Governor Richardson speaks of the need for increased involvement through peacekeeping troops and diplomatic channels. Arizona has three major military bases, and a great deal of our economy is based on the military, and even still, a slim majority of Arizonans want out of Iraq. How are these same Arizonans going to respond, then, to an eerily similar situation of genocide, oppression and violence going on in Darfur? The candidates don't address the question of how America can intervene in Darfur without it becoming too quickly mired in the same opposition that Iraq has received from American citizens.

As far as Iraq itself is concerned, a poll conducted by Arizona State University shows that Arizonans recognize that Iraqi powers do not appear to be interested in negotiating for peace or stability within government. There is not much that an outside force can do to help if nobody is willing to come to a table and talk. It may keep us safer, or make us feel safer, to have a military presence, but we cannot make peace in a place where it is not wanted, not by military might, not by creating a federal government, not by decentralizing government and setting up regions of sectarian-based power Dark Ages-style. Arizona residents, at this point, recognize that America can do nothing but wait for Iraqi powers to be ready to work together in some fashion. Giving up now may be a poor choice or it may be a great one; we cannot judge that until several decades down the road. But America has spoken, Arizona has spoken, and all of the candidates positions on Iraq reflect the will of our community's majority.

Obama made an excellent point, that the time to ask about exit strategies, to ask for a clear definition of what America's job is and criteria by which we can judge progress, was before we went in. This belated understanding of how to approach foreign involvement resonates with what we, the people, want in terms of approaching the inevitable next time our country finds itself duty-bound to try to help others, on the international scene.

The debate closed with a simple question in which the questioner requested that each participant say something kind about the person to his or her left. Through this, the candidates had the opportunity to have some fun and provoke a few laughs -- something we all desperately need, these days.