Dean Criticizes Privatizing Services, but His History Is Mixed

[in_cog_ni_to]

An article from The New York Times on Dean's record on "privitization in Vermont" and his seemingly different views now. Which is it? Is he for Privitization of Medicare, SS, our schools and social programs or not? :shrug:

<snip>
By JODI WILGOREN

Published: December 21, 2003


DUBUQUE, Iowa, Dec. 20 — Howard Dean has repeatedly declared his blanket opposition to privatization of public services during his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, though as governor of Vermont he at times went on record supporting privatization.<snip>

<snip>
Then he added, "The answer to your direct question is: I oppose privatization of public services."

But in a 1998 letter to a constituent concerned about the privatization of a government-run day care center, Dr. Dean wrote, "Over all, I have found that private contractors can perform the same service for less money while maintaining a high level of quality."

He wrote that he could not intervene in the case but added that Vermont "relies on the outsourcing of certain state functions in order to save taxpayers money."<snip>

There more to this article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/politics/campaigns/21DEAN.html

[Melodybe]

1. This is so lame! They are talking about daycare here!

At least the NYT is not using the article to trash Dean, this is such a stupid non-issue. Gepthart needs to drop out now, his campaign has been dead for a while.

[markus]

2. Why do Dems attack Dean for "moving to the Left"

when we should be striving to move the entire country to the Left, just as the NeoCon have spent the last generation and tens if not hundreds of millions of wealthy NeoCon dollars to move the country to the right.

The question should be: why are Edwards and Lieberman and the rest of the Polly Pure DLCers stuck in the center-right?

I applaud Dean's bold move to the left, and its why I support him. Hell, I'd support his as an anti-Bush, anti-Iraq-war centrist. Any move to the left is just icing on the cake.

[KittyWampus]

4. Because Dean Moved On So Many Issues His Commitment Is Suspect

Especially since Dean bad mouthed "Real" Liberals while he was presiding as a Right Of Center Governor.

Why doesn't Dean run on his ACTUAL RECORD?

Frankly, it's pretty clear he's an opportunist with no real core and will say anything to get elected...

Further, he's been running for President since he became Governor.

The NYTimes also reported last week that Dean looked into running in 2000.

[Melodybe]

5. Please quit bashing my candidate, this is yer another non-issue getting

too much press. Dean's record as Governor is a good one, far better than any other Governor's I've heard of. I personally think that all of the things he did as Governor make a lot of sense. Things like funding to help addicts are nice, but honestly if I was a tax payer I would rather my money go to schools or Dean's Sucess by 6 program, than to help people kick heroin. People bash Dean for not being liberal enough, but get real, he has common sense, he did the best for his state that he could. Why don't you ask those Vermonters that elected him so many times, they seem pretty happy. Dean never said the he was liberal anyway, the media whores dubbed him that in the hopes of turning people off. Unfortunately, it back fired on them.

I don't bash other candidates here, why are you bashing mine?

[maddezmom]

3. thanks for the article

I actually read it and can see why there may be some questions. :)

[killbotfactory]

6. Eh..?

There's a bit of a difference between using private contractors for gov't related projects, or privatising a day care center, and privatising schools, medicare, or social security.

These aren't even in the same league.