The Reform Party
By unkown

The race is on.  Less than two months remain until the 2000 presidential election, and all the candidates are pushing through the last mile of press conferences, interviews, and public appearances.  Amidst the last-minute chaos, some of the main issues are taking the back seat to political warfare between Gore and Bush.  Although most of the media attention has centered on these two, many other candidates exist, and all have something important to contribute.

The Reform Party is blessed, or possibly cursed, with possessing two strong presidential candidates this year.  The Reform party has split into two "wings," one supporting Pat Buchanan, and the other backing Dr. John Hagelin.  Unfortunately, the party has less influence over the country as a whole when they can't even decide which person they want for president. The controversy between the two running candidates has weakened the party, in that its interests are divided instead of united.  But enough about the controversy.  Who would be a better President?  Let's look at them beyond the limelight, and get down to the real issues at hand.

Pat Buchanan is no stranger to the political arena.  He has experience running for the presidency, and his solid platform reflects his experience.  His first order of business involves cleaning up corruption in government through a series of strict reforms in Congress, campaign finance, politics, and lobbyist groups.  A staunch Pro-Life supporter, Buchanan also wants a Human Rights Amendment and swears that he will not nominate anyone into the supreme court that doesn't share his "right to life" view of abortion.   While both of these platforms are rather bold, they prove he is resolute, and fights for his beliefs.

Buchanan's other views present some problems.  He nobly wants to protect American jobs and keep civilians out of war, but he goes about it in the wrong way.  Buchanan is angry that working Americans are sacrificing their industry for the global economy, and wants to enforce trade laws and reciprocal trade policies.  He also proposes that America withdraw from any international organization that doesn't protect U.S. "sovereignty."  As for keeping peace, he won't sacrifice any American soldiers to follow the regimes of international organizations.

There is one main problem with Buchanan's platform.  In his selfishness, he fails to realize that the world is becoming inevitably interconnected.  The environment, the Worldwide Web, global commerce, technology; all are pulling our world together, and we need to create ways to work together, not build barriers between us.  As a leading nation, we hold a responsibility to take an active part in the welfare of less stable nations of the world.  We are all bound together, whether Mr. Buchanan likes it or not, and we won't be "sovereign" if there the world around us deteriorates.

His view on immigration is likely blinded. He plans to "mend" the melting pot of America by reducing both legal and illegal immigration, and pushing schools to "educate" students in the way of the "American" culture and language.  But America is unique and diverse because we allow people to keep their own customs, language, and religions.  We won't be a melting pot if he stops immigration of all kinds.

In the other corner, we have Dr. John Hagelin, a quantum physicist with much less political experience.  Hagelin has yet to prove his political influence, but takes a "do it all" perspective.  While not always realistic, his proposals would do a great deal of good for our country.

His top priorities include prevention-oriented healthcare, reducing crime, and renewable energy products.  Obviously knowledgeable in science, he also strongly supports sustainable agriculture without using genetically engineered foods.  Hagelin believes we can cut taxes deeply while still saving social security and Medicare, and wants more focus on educating the leaders of tomorrow through better education programs.  Hagelin takes much the same viewpoint on trade as Buchanan, that American interests need to be put first. 

Most of Hagelin's platforms carry promising ideas, but they lack the polish of fine-tuned plans.  He focuses less on the exact problems at hand and instead offers broad solutions that don't all seem feasible.  His platforms just aren't as refined and solid as Buchanan's, but he takes a much more sustainable approach to America's future.    

Both Reform candidates differ a great deal, but each offer something important.  Buchanan's strong, unwavering ideals show the kind of gutsy politics our government needs to be spurred into action.  At the same time, Hagelin's solutions shed light on sustainable ways for Americans to ensure their future and better their lives.  Neither of them may gain enough votes to win this election, but their platforms will surely influence future politics, and who knows what political influence they will hold in four years time.  If only the Reform party could decide on one candidate next time around, they might have enough influence to elect a President.