Calvert Refuses to Debate Hedrick - Public Deserves to Hear Answers from Calvert on His Voting Record
The Hedrick Campaign was informed by the League of Women Voters of Northwest Riverside County that Congressman Ken Calvert has refused to debate his challenger, Bill Hedrick. The League of Women Voters and the Riverside Junior League had agreed to sponsor a debate.
Bill Hedrick stated, “More than ever we need to hear from those wishing to represent us in Washington and a debate sponsored by completely non-partisan, trusted groups such as the League of Women Voters and the Junior League would have allowed just that. It has been the bad judgment of many of our current political leaders that have brought our economy to this dire place. And now it’s the hardworking taxpayers of this country who are being asked to bail out Wall Street for that bad judgment. As much as any other leader, Calvert needs to explain his votes that fueled this disastrous behavior.”
Back in 1999, Calvert voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which is credited with opening the flood gates of deregulation that has led to the financial melt down.
Four years later, in 2003, Calvert authored the Access to Affordable Mortgages Act (HR 1443). At that time he stated, “In order to promote homeownership we need to give lenders and consumers incentive to enter into mortgage agreements by giving both parties
the flexibility to do so.” And five years later under Calvert’s leadership and call for ‘flexibility’ what do we have?
Bill Hedrick stated, “We face a staggering financial crisis, fostered by leaders like Calvert who zealously supported deregulation and turned a blind eye to the practices of the free wheeling, predatory lenders until the sub-prime mortgage crisis had so thoroughly poisoned our financial institutions that our children and grandchildren will be paying the $700 billion dollar tab for years to come.”
Some of the bailout money will cover colossal salaries and bonuses of CEOs which justifiably enrages Americans. True to form, Calvert voted against the Shareholder Vote on Compensation Act (H.R. 1257) in April of 2007, which would have required companies to reveal more details about executive salaries and perks and would have given shareholders the power to block pay plans, bonuses and “golden parachutes.”
It should also be considered that had Calvert further had his way, things could be even worse. Calvert supported partial privatization of social security which would have resulted in those funds being tied to the stock market. What would our seniors be facing right now had that piece of legislation actually passed?
These are the questions and actions that demand answers. But, Calvert has a double-standard. When asked by the Orange County Register if he thought Senator McCain should debate Senator Obama on September 26th, Calvert replied, ‘Yes, there should be a debate. At this time, the American people want to hear from both candidates on foreign policy and although the economy is a priority right now, there is another significant threat to our country: radical Islamic terrorists.’
Hedrick added, “It appears the Congressman does not hold himself to the same established democratic principles he asks of other candidates. And I would suggest there is another threat to our country - elected officials who refuse to listen and respond to their constituents and refuse to be forthcoming about their motives and objectives. In doing so, you can trust that Calvert will continue to offer leadership that is not just ineffective, but damaging to the well-being of his constituents.”
Congressman Calvert has also tentatively refused a debate for high school seniors at La Sierra High School, which Hedrick readily accepted. Government and history teacher, Joel Whelchel said, “Calvert’s office claims that there are legalities involved, that the debate will somehow violate the California State Education’s Curriculum Code. This makes no sense. Not only was it my intention to augment the curriculum by giving my students the opportunity to see our political system in action, it has been my experience that elected officials will speak to students whenever they are available.”
As with the League of Women Voters, Whelchel was told by Calvert’s office that he has agreed to one ‘debate’. It is sponsored by Cox Cable Service, only one question will be asked and it will be televised ‘on demand’ which will most likely guarantee a small audience.
Bill Hedrick stated, “More than ever we need to hear from those wishing to represent us in Washington and a debate sponsored by completely non-partisan, trusted groups such as the League of Women Voters and the Junior League would have allowed just that. It has been the bad judgment of many of our current political leaders that have brought our economy to this dire place. And now it’s the hardworking taxpayers of this country who are being asked to bail out Wall Street for that bad judgment. As much as any other leader, Calvert needs to explain his votes that fueled this disastrous behavior.”
Back in 1999, Calvert voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which is credited with opening the flood gates of deregulation that has led to the financial melt down.
Four years later, in 2003, Calvert authored the Access to Affordable Mortgages Act (HR 1443). At that time he stated, “In order to promote homeownership we need to give lenders and consumers incentive to enter into mortgage agreements by giving both parties
the flexibility to do so.” And five years later under Calvert’s leadership and call for ‘flexibility’ what do we have?
Bill Hedrick stated, “We face a staggering financial crisis, fostered by leaders like Calvert who zealously supported deregulation and turned a blind eye to the practices of the free wheeling, predatory lenders until the sub-prime mortgage crisis had so thoroughly poisoned our financial institutions that our children and grandchildren will be paying the $700 billion dollar tab for years to come.”
Some of the bailout money will cover colossal salaries and bonuses of CEOs which justifiably enrages Americans. True to form, Calvert voted against the Shareholder Vote on Compensation Act (H.R. 1257) in April of 2007, which would have required companies to reveal more details about executive salaries and perks and would have given shareholders the power to block pay plans, bonuses and “golden parachutes.”
It should also be considered that had Calvert further had his way, things could be even worse. Calvert supported partial privatization of social security which would have resulted in those funds being tied to the stock market. What would our seniors be facing right now had that piece of legislation actually passed?
These are the questions and actions that demand answers. But, Calvert has a double-standard. When asked by the Orange County Register if he thought Senator McCain should debate Senator Obama on September 26th, Calvert replied, ‘Yes, there should be a debate. At this time, the American people want to hear from both candidates on foreign policy and although the economy is a priority right now, there is another significant threat to our country: radical Islamic terrorists.’
Hedrick added, “It appears the Congressman does not hold himself to the same established democratic principles he asks of other candidates. And I would suggest there is another threat to our country - elected officials who refuse to listen and respond to their constituents and refuse to be forthcoming about their motives and objectives. In doing so, you can trust that Calvert will continue to offer leadership that is not just ineffective, but damaging to the well-being of his constituents.”
Congressman Calvert has also tentatively refused a debate for high school seniors at La Sierra High School, which Hedrick readily accepted. Government and history teacher, Joel Whelchel said, “Calvert’s office claims that there are legalities involved, that the debate will somehow violate the California State Education’s Curriculum Code. This makes no sense. Not only was it my intention to augment the curriculum by giving my students the opportunity to see our political system in action, it has been my experience that elected officials will speak to students whenever they are available.”
As with the League of Women Voters, Whelchel was told by Calvert’s office that he has agreed to one ‘debate’. It is sponsored by Cox Cable Service, only one question will be asked and it will be televised ‘on demand’ which will most likely guarantee a small audience.
posted by Joan Donahue at
12:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home