Pro: "Real choice must include more than the choice of whether or not to have an abortion, and must begin with an informed choice about preventing unintended pregnancy. By providing all women with reproductive health care and family planning, as part of a program of health care as a human right, we can greatly reduce the need for abortion. Giving women real choices for education opportunities and good paying jobs will also reduce unintended pregnancies. Abortion is a necessary health care option, but will decline as women's choices expand upstream of unwanted pregnancy."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "The fundamental flaws of an economic policy dictated by Wall Street are apparent, even if they have sometimes been masked by periods of apparent growth that were actually financed by unsustainable credit card and housing debt. Wealth that should be invested in our local economy to create jobs is being put in the hands of the super rich who build factories abroad instead. Families disintegrate while the income of the richest few surges upward. This is changing America in a way that we must not accept."
Con: "It is terrible that some individuals now believe they can shoot Black people on our streets and get away with it, but it is not surprising given that they have seen that police forces across the country make use of racial profiling and that our prison and criminal justice systems reinforce racial disparities in every imaginable way."
"Stein Calls for Elimination of Racist Violence," www.jillstein.org, Apr. 9, 2012
Con: "America's experience shows that capital punishment does not effectively stop crimes from being committed. And our judicial system makes mistakes, killing people who are innocent. It's time to move beyond capital punishment, to abolish it, and to instead use life imprisonment as the most severe form of sentencing for those who cannot be trusted to live in common society."
Con: "We've all heard about the bailouts, the big bailouts of Wall Street, and you may have heard it was about 800 billion dollars that we paid out as part of this TARP [troubled assets relief] program. Well it's a well kept secret - it wasn't just 800 billion dollars, it turns out there were many many trillions more, in fact 16 trillion dollars, if you can wrap your head around it, that was basically given away as low interest and zero interest loans that was given to the biggest banks and financial institutions...
That's who the Fed, behind closed doors, gave 16 trillion dollars to, when we could have been using that money here instead of loaning it to the big banks to get them out of the hole that they created. We could put that money into our small businesses and to our municipalities and our state governments and start creating jobs right here."
Speech at Occupy Boston rally, YouTube.com, Oct. 9, 2011
[Editor's Note: In addition to the above Con statement from Oct. 9, 2011, Jill Stein also made the following statement during her Jan. 2012 speech "A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal For America," available at www.jillstein.org:
“We will end taxpayer-funded bailouts for banks, insurers, and other financial companies. We’ll use the FDIC resolution process for failed banks to reopen them as public banks where possible after failed loans and underlying assets are auctioned off.”]
Pro: "Jill Stein: What Obama's pointing to, General Motors, you know, as the example of the shining star of our success, is basically more of the same. Corporate profits are off the chart, they have recovered, CEO salaries are doing great, but workers have had their wages slashed.
Jim Braude: Was he [President Obama] wrong to bailout those companies - the auto companies?
Jill Stein: ...[N]o he was not wrong, but we should have asked for some, you know, justice for workers... The jobs that are coming back do not sustain a family, they are not a living wage."
"Jill Stein: Obama, Romney, Harmful to US," www.nenc.com, July 19, 2012
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "The developers and financiers made trillions of dollars through the housing bubble and the imposition of crushing debt on homeowners. And when homeowners could no longer pay them what they demanded, they went to government and got trillions of dollars of bailouts. Every effort of the Obama Administration has been to prop this system up and keep it going at taxpayer expense. It's time for this game to end. It's time for the laws be written to protect the victims and not the perpetrators. It's time for a new deal for America, and a Green New Deal is what we will deliver on taking office."
"Stein and Honkala Arrested in Protest of Foreclosure Giant Fannie Mae," www.jillstein.org, Aug. 1, 2012
Con: "Our real solution to the deficit is to end the Bush-Obama recession. Reductions in spending provide enormous savings, which may very well overwhelm the need for adjustments in the tax code. Those adjustments do need to be made, including asking the wealthiest to contribute their share, and giving breaks to the middle class and the poor, who are paying way too much...
But the reductions in spending should be focused properly - not on cutting social programs - but instead on downsizing the military, bringing the troops home, and moving to a prevention-based health care system. Those provide enormous savings and reductions, which may very well overwhelm the need for adjustments in the tax code."
"Jill Stein in AmericansElect Email Questionnaire," www.ontheissues.org, Dec. 21, 2011
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "The Green New Deal begins with an Economic Bill of Rights that recognizes our rights to an economy that serves people. This means that everyone willing and able to work has the right to a job at a living wage. All of us have the right to quality education, health care, utilities, and housing. Each of us has the right to unionize, to fair taxation, and to fair trade...
We will honor workers rights, including the right to a living wage, a safe workplace, to fair trade, and to organize a union at work without fear of firing or reprisal. The idea that the Bill of Rights does not apply to you when you enter your workplace is an idea that says that you are only free when you are not working. That’s not acceptable in America."
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal For America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Con: "The wave of undocumented immigrants [in the US] resulted from the passage of NAFTA, which was as harmful to economies south of our border as it is to our own economy. People have come here who have lost their jobs, who can no longer support their families, particularly as we have destroyed the economy in South America by dumping agricultural products, as developed by NAFTA. That's where the real solution lies - renegotiating these treaties which have been harmful to American workers as much as they've been harmful to workers in other countries."
Con: "A Green president would invest in wind, solar and geothermal, emphasize efficiency and conservation, phase out nuclear power plants, and move to a carbon-free economy to deal with climate change. We would immediately end Obama’s expensive subsidies for nuclear power as well as fossil fuels, and use those funds instead to kick off a job- producing energy program based on clean, safe and renewable energy."
"After Fukushima, Stein Calls for 100% Renewable Energy Economy," www.jillstein.org, Mar. 12, 2012
Con: "The Occupy movement is a cry for change from workers whose jobs have been shipped overseas and young people whose future is being stolen from them by politicians intent on serving Wall Street rather than the people...
The Occupy Wall Street movement is addressing the root of these problems, and the 99% must be heard. Both the Democrat and Republican parties have broken America’s social contract by refusing to remedy — in fact, deliberately aggravating - our economic inequities."
"Green-Rainbow Party Says: Keep Hands off Protesters," www.independentpoliticalreport.com, Oct. 13, 2011
Pro: "I think it is time to make public higher education free as it should be. We've done this before when our troops came home from the second world war we provided free higher education through the GI Bill and we know that it pays for itself. For every dollar that we invested as tax payers, seven dollars was returned as benefits to the economy including more than enough revenue to cover the full cost of those tuition payments...
We owe it to our younger generation to give them a secure start into their economic lives... You need a college degree in order to have economic security so it's only right that we should now be providing that for free.
...[A]nd while we're at it, it's time to instead of bail out wall street for the fourth time... instead lets bail out the students and do something really useful with that bailout...
...We cannot afford not to educate our students. Our younger generation is the greatest resource we have... Every generation the economy needs to be re-booted by fresh imagination, and by the fresh genius of the new generation. That doesn't happen when a generation is locked into being indentured servants, that's what our students are now, we need to bail them out and create free public higher education."
"Third Party Presidential Debate," in Chicago, IL, hosted by the Free and Equal Elections Foundation, www.c-span.org, Oct. 23, 2012
Con: "[W]e need to reject this facade of No Child Left Behind... which basically commodifies education, commodifies our children, and we need to return to a broad concept of educating for lifelong learning and teaching the whole student."
Debate with Kent Mesplay at the Glendale Public Library, Glendale, AZ, hosted by the Maricopa County Green Party, YouTube.com, Feb. 25, 2012
Con: "In Massachusetts, our public schools and colleges are the cornerstone of our democracy and provide the foundation for our citizens' economic success. But now this vital system is under sustained attack from privatization interests who undermine public schools as part of an effort to advance charter school interests.
The funding of education is clearly at a crisis point. Years of neglect, fiscal mismanagement, and promotion of privatization have combined with a budget shortfall to seriously threaten the viability of our public education system. If we tilt toward privatization, it will produce a stratified collection of schools that will make education more expensive, separate schools from their communities, and lead inevitably to the abandonment of the concept of equal access to education. Party leaders are now actively promoting charter school encroachment."
Con: "Standardized tests do not measure some of the most important goals of an educational system. And careful studies have shown that passing standardized tests does not translate into later academic success, much less success in life...
The goal of education should be to educate the whole student for lifelong learning and success. Educational programs need to be highly flexible in recognition that student skills, needs, and modes of learning vary widely. Forcing all students into a standardized track is harmful to many students. Challenged learners in particular are poorly served by a system that requires extensive drilling and rote memorization.
The current obsession with high stakes testing distracts from addressing the profound barriers to learning that arise long before the child has walked through the classroom door, including poverty and unemployment, poor health, poor nutrition and community violence."
"Was the US Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, which allows for unlimited political contributions on the grounds of free speech, good for America?"
Con: "Reverse the Citizens United ruling to revoke corporate personhood, and amend our Constitution to make clear that corporations are not persons and money is not speech."
"Where We Stand on the Issues," www.jillstein.org (accessed Oct. 9, 2012)
Con: "We call for, for example, a constitutional right to vote, which would make these voter ID laws obsolete and impossible. We would ensure that every voter has the right to vote...
...[W]hich would put voter ID laws basically into court, and would render them unconstitutional, essentially. It would make very clear that anyone who tries to restrict the right to vote will be taken into court, where they will have to prove before a court of law and a jury that they are not violating that right. And right now that decision, you know, is left up to secretaries of state, and to legislatures and so on. So there would be constitutional protection.."
"How Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein Differs from the Two Major Parties," www.uprisingradio.org, Sep. 27, 2012
Pro: "Stein's Green New Deal, the cornerstone of her campaign, is a blueprint for action to stop climate change. The massive investment needed to transition to a carbon neutral economy by 2025 will provide the foundation for a revival of the American economy, putting tens of millions of Americans back to work while providing reliable, safe and affordable energy for our future.
Jill Stein supports an annual fund of several hundred billion dollars to invest in clean renewable energy (wind, solar, geothermal, tidal), public transportation and organic agriculture. It will be funded via taxes on the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies, major cuts in the military budget, a rising fee on carbon emissions, and an end to subsidies on fossil fuels and nuclear power plants.
Stein and the Green Party will shut all oil, coal and nuclear plants by 2025. Dr. Stein will ban mountaintop removal coal mining, the hydrofracking of natural gas and the development of the tar sands oil and Keystone XL. Jill Stein will stop oil drilling off shore, on public lands, under the Great Lakes and in the Arctic."
"Sign On Statement: The Urgency of Climate Change in the 2012 Election," www.jillstein.org (accessed Oct. 26, 2012)
Con: "[T]he State Department makes it clear that the sticking point in their minds is the route of the pipeline. This fails utterly to address the critical issue - which is the amount of carbon that will be exhausted into the atmosphere from the Canadian tar sands. No matter which route is taken, this pipeline is a disaster for the planet. No further study is needed to come to this conclusion. As president, I would terminate this project so that we can move forward to a green energy future."
"Climate Victory on Keystone Pipeline Requires Continued Green Pressure Through 2012 and Beyond," www.jillstein.org, Nov. 13, 2011
Con: “A new world really is possible. We can, and must, shift to an economy in which 100% of our electricity is generated renewably. We can and must leave the old economy behind – which was based on mining, extraction, and dirty dangerous expensive nuclear power. We can and must stop poisoning ourselves, our children, and other living beings.”
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "America needs to go in a new direction. We are calling for a Green New Deal that would decisively end high unemployment and make a massive investment in solar, wind, energy efficiency and mass transit. We reject the President's assertion that 'all of the above' is the right answer when it comes to energy. We need to wean ourselves from the fossil fuels that pollute our land and water, motivate wars for oil, and which are pushing us to a climate catastrophe."
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Pro: "Current levels of fossil fuel use are already heading us toward indisputably catastrophic levels of global warming. Yet with emissions rising faster and faster every year, the Obama Administration has shockingly pushed an agreement to do nothing before 2020, ensuring that the critical time window for saving the climate will be missed. That the White House is responsible for this is unforgivable.
People are already dying from climate change. Extreme weather changes have already inflicted tens of billions in damage. This is a mere hint of the far greater impacts we are already on track for. The clear solution to the growing worldwide economic crisis is to invest in a sustainable fossil fuel-free economy."
"White House Role in Blocking Climate Progress 'Unforgivable'," www.jillstein.org, Dec. 12, 2011
Pro: "We can provide adequate warning labels for toxic contaminants in food and for genetically-modified ingredients. Consumers have a right to know what is in the food they are purchasing."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "It is more dangerous to the occupants of a home to have a gun than not. It's more likely that you'll be injured by your own gun than that you'll be defended against some intruder with that gun. It's an enormous public health problem in our cities-- there are tragedies every day where young people are being shot, as victims of gun crimes. It's tragic. We're not arguing that nobody should have a gun--but public safety should factor into constraints."
"OnTheIssues Interview with Jill Stein," www.ontheissues.org, Dec. 21, 2011
Con: "I will replace ACA with improved Medicare for All, which provides quality care while saving money... ACA makes a profit-driven system even more expensive by adding complexity ('exchanges') to an already massive bureaucracy. Crafted by insurers, it provides $400 billion in taxpayer subsidies for stripped-down policies that enrich insurers while forcing consumers to buy the inadequate plans through a mandate. Costs continue to skyrocket, as seen with the Massachusetts plan (on which ACA is based), impoverishing consumers, businesses and government while draining resources from safety-net hospitals and threatening care for tens of millions who'll remain uninsured."
Con: "The mandate that every American buy expensive, inadequate health insurance is a scheme developed by Republicans and foisted on the nation by Democrats. The winners are the health insurance companies...
Americans spend far more money on health care than other industrial democracies but have a poorly performing health care system, ranked only 37th in the world, due to the cancerous burden of private health insurance. Obama and the Democrats turned their backs on Medicare—a proven solution. Instead they enacted a health insurance mandate whose prime goal will be to increase insurance company profits."
"Forget Obamacare: Steincare Would Cover All," www.jillstein.org, Apr. 4, 2012
Con: "[It is] time for all Americans to reject the failed Obama and Romney approach to the health crisis, and demand an improved Medicare for All system that provides health care to all at an affordable price...
We must implement a publicly administered non-profit system with no premiums, no deductibles, no co-pays and no co-insurance. This kind of system is proven. It is providing affordable health care all across the developed world, and providing better health outcomes. It's the only fiscally sound approach to health care costs because it eliminates the inefficiencies of private insurance corporations, and provides effective cost controls."
"Romneycare and Obamacare Are Class Warfare and Failures, Says Stein," www.jillstein.org, June 28, 2012
Pro: "[I]t’s time for the United States, the richest country in the world, to catch up with the rest of the developed nations and provide health care for everyone as a human right. We can do this through a Medicare for all system that will not only provide quality health care - it will save trillions by streamlining the massive health insurance bureaucracy and ending runaway medical inflation."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Grant undocumented immigrants who are already residing and working in the United States a legal status which includes the chance to become U.S. citizens."
"Where We Stand on the Issues," www.jillstein.org (accessed Sep. 13, 2012)
Con: "The human cost of this escalating war on immigrants includes families torn apart and children emotionally traumatized, the expansion of racial profiling in policing, and the reinforcement of a caste system in which undocumented workers form the most vulnerable and exploitable level in the labor force.
We must end the systemic practice of detention and deportation of immigrant women, men, and children. We must reverse the militarization of our borders and the federalization of our local police."
"Statement on International Migrants Day," www.jillstein.org, Dec. 19, 2011
[Editor's Note: In addition to the Dec. 19, 2011 statement above, Jill Stein also made the following Con statement in a Project Vote Smart "Political Courage Test," available at www.votesmart.org (accessed July 13, 2012). When asked, "Do you support the enforcement of federal immigration law by state and local police?," Jill Stein responded "No."]
Con: "We must end the systemic practice of detention and deportation of immigrant women, men, and children. We must reverse the militarization of our borders and the federalization of our local police. Undocumented immigrants who are already residing and working in the United States, and their families, should be granted a legal status which includes the chance to become U.S. citizens. Our priorities for immigration reform must include family reunification, asylum for political, racial, gender, and religious refugees, and the normalization of border crossings throughout North America."
"Statement on International Migrants Day," www.jillstein.org, Dec. 18, 2011
Pro: "We are a nation of immigrants - and immigrants are a critical component of our economy. In Alabama, their tomato industry collapsed to the tune of billions of dollars when they passed very harsh anti-immigrant laws and the immigrants left town. That state learned the hard way how valuable the immigrant sector was to their economy. And that's true nationally. The real solution is:
A) Fix the economic problems that are driving waves of immigrants into this country, initiated by our own trade policies.
B) Then, yes, providing a legal pathway to citizenship to the immigrants who are an integral part of our economy and our culture."
Con: "A hallmark of a Stein administration will be respect for international law and a rejection of the Bush doctrine of preemptive war that Obama and his party have come to embrace. The interests of the American people are not served by illegal attacks on other nations based on hypothetical future transgressions. Yet President Obama is threatening Iran with attack by saying that 'all options are on the table'. It’s a terrible replay of Bush's run-up to the invasion of Iraq over the mythical weapons of mass destruction...
A US or Israeli airstrike on Iran would have severe repercussions for the American people. It would produce a global oil supply crisis that would send our entire economy into a tailspin. And it could lead to retaliatory attacks on Israeli and American citizens. We need to take a clear stand against nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, but preemptive attacks, especially for a problem that is not even in evidence, are counterproductive and must not be on the table. The mindset that every problem requires a military response has gotten us into trouble again and again, and its disappointing to see the Obama Administration going down that road yet again."
"Obama's Own Iran Statements Are 'Loose Talk of War,' Says Stein," www.jillstein.org, Mar. 5, 2012
Con: "As we found on issue after issue — the war, reappointing George Bush’s secretary of defense, sticking to George Bush’s timeline on Iraq, expanding the war, expanding the drone wars all over the place... We’re certainly not more secure, more equitable, more healthy or safer internationally, with what Obama has brought."
"Five Questions for Jill Stein of the Green Party," www.thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com, Feb. 14, 2012
Con: "We are not out of Iraq - we should be out of Iraq and we are not. We never should have been in Iraq. We have spent perhaps $1 trillion, lost nearly 5,000 American lives, and probably 100,000 or perhaps one million Iraqi lives. It's an unspeakable shame that this war occurred at all. A war caused by lies and military opportunism. A war that has conveniently secured some oil supplies for the US and the West but what a horrible price that has been paid for that illegitimate bounty."
"OnTheIssues Interview with Jill Stein," www.ontheissues.com, Dec. 21, 2011
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "[T]he United States has encouraged the worst tendencies of the Israeli government as it pursues policies of occupation, apartheid, assassination, illegal settlements, blockades, building of nuclear bombs, indefinite detention, collective punishment, and defiance of international law. Instead of allying with the courageous proponents of peace within Israel and Palestine, our government has rewarded consistent abusers of human rights. There is no peace or justice or democracy at the end of such a path. We must reset US policy regarding Israel and Palestine, as part of a broader revision of US policy towards the Middle East...
...[A] dedicated commitment to justice will further American interests in the region much better than the current policies of supporting abuses and violence by one side against the other. And I believe that this is in the best interests of all people living in Israel and Palestine."
"US Policy to Israel, Palestine Must Change, Says Stein," www.jillstein.org, May 15, 2012
Pro: "I’m proud that I don’t have to change my position to match the polls. I have supported marriage equality since at least 2002, when I ran for governor. And I’m going to continue to work to eliminate this insidious form of discrimination. President Obama is still enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act - and that has to stop. And the President is saying that its acceptable for individual states to discriminate. I believe that when it comes to basic rights, it’s improper for a President to treat them as local options. The federal government is charged with defending the human rights of all people, no matter which state they live in."
"Stein Welcomes Obama's New Position on Marriage Equality," www.jillstein.org, May 11, 2012
Con: "[I would] order the DEA and the Justice Department to cease and desist all attempts to harass or prosecute medical marijuana clinics or other legitimate marijuana-related businesses that are operating under state laws...
President Obama promised to use a science-based approach to public policy. But when it comes to marijuana, he has continued the unscientific policies of George Bush, and has even gone far beyond Bush in his attacks upon medical marijuana clinics. He supports the irrational classification of marijuana in the most dangerous drug category, and he supports the ban on commercial hemp growing. This is mania-based policy, not science-based policy."
"Stein Challenges Obama on Marijuana Policy," www.jillstein.org, Apr. 22, 2012
Pro: "Our current approach to the regulation of marijuana is a failure. It has resulted in a massive black market that is creating violence in our communities and pouring hundreds of millions of dollars each year into the pockets of criminal supply networks. Taxpayers are footing the bill for ineffective law enforcement efforts and unnecessary judicial expenses. And the most that can be achieved is to keep a few people from purchasing an herb that appears to be much less harmful than alcohol or tobacco.
It’s time to get rid of the black market and bring marijuana sales under a legal regulatory framework...
One option to be examined would permit limited marijuana sales through existing liquor stores. The use of marijuana for medical purposes would be expedited under separate provisions in which a doctor’s prescription would be required.
As a physician, I believe in caution and moderation with regard to any substance we take into our bodies. And I would apply that same caution to marijuana. But evidence suggests that the effects of marijuana on health are far less harmful than those of tobacco and alcohol."
Con: "No matter who is in the oval office, if it’s not one of us, we need to be out on the street, even if there is someone with a D on his shirt who is continuing these wars, who is continuing the drone wars which we have just been told are about to expand into North Africa now as well under the auspices of the CIA that has requested a major expansion in drone capacity...
We need to be standing up and demanding the kind of foreign policy we deserve that is a foreign policy based on international law and human rights. The drone wars are dreadful, it’s said that they are actually hitting about 2% of their victims in fact are thought to be key operatives within al-Qaeda or associated groups, so the vast majority of the people being killed are not significant operatives. So when Barack Obama talks about creating coalitions with Yemen and Somalia, whatever his coalitions are doing, unfortunately they are vastly overwhelmed by what his drones are doing because we are seeing, in fact, people being driven into the camp of the avowed enemies of the United States because of the impact of these drone wars. So, they need to be put to an end."
"Expanding the Presidential Debate on Foreign Policy," YouTube.com, Oct. 22, 2012
Con: "The numbers just don't add up. We can not continue spending a trillion dollars a year on this bloated military industrial security complex without really having to pay the price here at home...
We hear them both talking about maintaining our strong military or growing that military. This is a military that is now six times the size of the next biggest spender... this is a military budget that has doubled in size since the year 2000. But it's clear we are not twice as secure for having doubled the military budget. If anything we are less secure for draining a trillion dollars a year from our budget here at home...
...[W]e absolutely must strengthen our economy here at home this is where our true national security lies... That's why my campaign and the Green Party are calling for a Green New Deal now, an emergency program that actually puts our dollars, including hundreds of billions of our war dollars, into actually creating true security here at home."
"Expanding the Presidential Debate on Foreign Policy," YouTube.com, Oct. 22, 2012
"Is the 2012 NDAA, which authorized arresting and indefinitely detaining suspected terrorists (including US citizens) without charge, good for America?"
Con: "It is an outrage that 1021 NDAA was ever passed to start with. It's an incredible betrayal of our civil liberties that the President has assumed dictatorial rights to put us in prison at his pleasure without charge or without trial.
This is unallowable and is a basic offense against the very foundation of American liberty and it should be repealed."
"Third Party Presidential Debate," Chicago, IL, hosted by the Free and Equal Elections Foundation, www.c-span.org, Oct. 23, 2012
Pro: "I stand firmly with those brave Americans in the Occupy Wall Street Movement in hundreds of communities across our country who have been willing to put their bodies on the line for democracy. The demand to end the rule of the 1% is the civil rights movement of our time. People are rising up to demand a more just nation, and police brutality and state violence are being unleashed to suppress democracy for the 99%...
Occupying public spaces as protest is a constitutionally protected form of free speech. I call upon local, state and federal officials to stop attacking the Occupy Wall Street movement. I also call upon our courts to enforce the constitution and protect the first amendment rights of the occupiers."
Pro: "The Green New Deal creates a Corporation for Economic Democracy, a new federal corporation (like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting) to provide publicity, training, education, and direct financing for cooperative development and for democratic reforms to make government agencies, private associations, and business enterprises more participatory.
And speaking of the public broadcasting, the Green New Deal strengthens media democracy by expanding federal support for locally-owned broadcast media and local print media."
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Peter J. Reilly: ...Someone who is designated a minister of the gospel is entitled to exclude from income the amount their congregation pays them for housing [known as the parsonage exclusion] regardless of the size, there is no dollar limit on this... If you were president would you consider not defending the constitutionality of the parsonage exclusion?...
Jill Stein: ...I try not to shoot from the hip, and actually consider these things before taking a position on them, and I would have to say that I would do that. But at first blush I would agree with the principal here of separation of church and state, which would seem to say we should not give special favors to employees of religious institutions that certainly sounds true."
"Jill Stein Lining Up with Freedom From Religion Foundation on Parsonage Exclusion," www.forbes.com, Oct. 9, 2012
Con: "This proposal to turn our Social Security system over to private corporations would lead to huge losses for retirees who depend on Social Security. And it would create investment risks that cannot be tolerated in our Social Security program."
Con: "Demilitarize US foreign policy to emphasize human rights, international law, multinational diplomatic initiatives and support for democratic movements across the world."
"Where We Stand on the Issues," www.jillstein.org (accessed Sep. 27, 2012)
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "The Green New Deal is an emergency jobs creation plan that really addresses the crisis in our economy, in unemployment, and likewise, in the climate...
...[T]he costs of creating these jobs would be less than what was spent in the Obama stimulus package, which essentially created two million jobs, which were good and probably blunted a worse catastrophe and did add some jobs in the area of the green economy, but ultimately wasn't of sufficient magnitude to really fix the problem. So, this will do a whole lot more. The cost for the stimulus package worked out to be about $220,000 per job created, because the mechanisms were indirect and relied a lot on tax incentives, which don't always get used to create jobs. This, instead, would be money used directly to create jobs and would be more like $20,000 per job created."
Truthout interview with Steve Horn, "The Party of Our Discontent? An Interview with Green Party Candidate Jill Stein," www.truth-out.org, Jan. 29, 2012
Pro: "...[W]e're calling for a fair tax system. So we have, for example, a financial transaction tax, which would bring hundreds of billions of dollars into the economy; an offshore tax haven tax; and a progressive tax on millionaires and billionaires."
Interview with Paul Jay of The Real News Network, "Why Is the Green Party's Jill Stein Running to Be President?," therealnews.com (accessed July 17, 2012)
Pro: "The gap between the very rich and the many poor has never been so great. The wealthiest 1% in America now own as much wealth as 90% of all Americans...
Though the corporate elite are richer than ever, they are contributing less than ever to the tax base that keeps the infrastructure going that their profits rely on – schools, transportation, clean air and water, safe food, the legal system, the police, and the military...
When they say there’s not enough money, they mean there’s not enough money for YOU. Instead of austerity, we can end the Wall Street bailouts, cut the bloated military and tax the bloated rich."
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Pro: "When corporations and big money dominate our elections, government of, for, and by the people cannot take root. For this reason, we urgently need to amend our Constitution to make clear that corporations are not persons and money is not speech. Those rights belong to living, breathing human beings like you and me - not to business entities controlled by the wealthy."
"A People's State of the Union: A Green New Deal for America," www.jillstein.org, Jan. 2012
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Demilitarize U.S. foreign policy to emphasize human rights, international law, multinational diplomatic initiatives and support for democratic movements across the world... Make human rights and international law the basis of our policy in the Middle East."
"Where We Stand on the Issues," www.jillstein.org (accessed Sep. 13, 2012)