Nader Raises Issues, but Is He Qualified?

* Phil Donahue (Commentary, Sept. 24) gets it exactly right when he argues that Ralph Nader should be allowed into the televised presidential debates because he raises issues that Al Gore and George W. Bush do not: the “war on drugs,” the full effects of globalization, single-payer health care, the corporate influence on government, etc.

Elections are not just to elect someone but to raise issues important to the country. That 61% of the people want to see Nader in the debates and that crowds larger than for any other candidate have been turning out for him show that America wants to hear these issues discussed. Of course most voters are not going to list him as their voting choice, given the stranglehold that the two parties have in the absence of proportional representation. Voting preference should not be the criterion of admission to the debates but the seriousness of the issues that a candidate brings to the debate. Nader passes this standard gloriously, and it is a disservice to our democratic processes to exclude him.

CHARLES CRITTENDEN

Lake View Terrace

*

Donahue does a nice job of outlining the candidate’s positions (which I mostly agree with). While it would be nice to have all candidates for president participate in the debates, Nader (and Pat Buchanan) are fringe candidates. Does Donahue feel that every fringe candidate deserves to be included in the debates? The commission’s 15% polling threshold is reasonable.

Nader’s positions are personally very appealing, but my overwhelming concern about his candidacy is his viability as a pol and president. It seems that he thinks that good ideas are enough of a reason to vote for him. Nader, like Buchanan, Jesse Jackson and Ross Perot, seems to believe that he can jump directly to the most powerful position in the country without having proven that he can actually govern and build consensus. Let these and all future candidates first run for an office they can actually win--certainly Buchanan and Jackson could have won House seats--to prove their leadership and government skills before voters go out on limb. Now, if Paul Wellstone was running, I would take a very close look.

THOMAS McGOVERN

San Bernardino