Ms. Wells laid out all of her ideas clearly, and she revealed her strength as a candidate as she spoke. For example, she demonstrated a tight fiscal policy by showing that she refuses to use money from corporations in her campaign. Thus, she knows how to hold a campaign without excessive spending, so she will most likely be efficient in office with monetary policy. Also, her care for the environment in the green platform, and her acknowledgment that the green sector of jobs is the best area for economic expansion seems to be the most rational solution. The only complaint that other parties could give against this expansion is that it currently only holds 3% of jobs. However, this is one of the most ridiculous arguments of all because if we expand the green sector, then it will become more than 3%. I know, it's crazy. Also, starting with such a small portion of the job market allows for greater expansion than trying to expand a bloating manufacturing sector. Sorry, Ms. Whitman.
Jerry Brown was also commendable in his discussion, but his disagreement of prop 19 is questionable because it would be a quick access to tax revenue while the green sector jobs can be opened for long term improvements, both in the economy, energy dependence, and mother Earth. Even if the bill is written imperfectly, it is a good stepping stone that can be updated to improve its flaws.
Mr. Ogden was mostly agreeable, but his lack of concern for the environment and its affairs concerns me. The environment is much like the economy, it heals very slowly, but it can be destroyed in an instant. California has such a wonderful ecology, and ignoring this seems to make Jerry Brown's analogy far too true. Also, why can't small business regulations be diminished while maintaining an appreciation for the environment? The candidates seem to be making this argument limited to only one or the other, but they should be able to be separate issues.
Mr. Devore lived up to the tea party's frightening out-dated policies. On almost all social issues, he seemed to try to transport the United States back to the 1950's, except for the extraordinarily surprising (and rational) support for gay marriage. This is even more surprising considering his fellow party member Carl Paladino's words on the subject: "I don't want (children) to be brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid or successful option." Furthermore, his fiscal promise of slashing taxes and all government involvement in business is a terrible idea because irresponsible businessmen and their speculation are what put this nation into much of the financial trouble it is in today. Also, saying that prop 19 will increase traffic accidents is just fear for a needed social change, and absolutely nothing more.
Ms. Whitman echoed many similar policies as the Mr. Devore, but thankfully was not quite as extreme. I can actually agree with the fiscal policy of reducing the "red tape" needed to start a small business, but there must be a small bit of red tape to protect the environment from these businesses. Thus, regulation is needed, and a moderate approach could definitely be the answer, and it should satisfy all parties enough.
Overall, all I can hope for is that not only can change and improvements be said, but that they actually happen, and even more importantly, actually work. Also, voters need to stop ignoring the grassroots parties because the green party has been calling for environmental reform for a very long time, and ever since there has only been more and more need and concern for environmental reform. Now that concern is increasing, voters should try something new and vote for the candidate that will help the green we live on and the green in our pockets.