This election year is unprecedented. Not only are we faced with the possibility of electing the first woman president, but there’s also a notable level of disenchantment with major party candidates. The political landscape is such that many voters are seriously considering third-party candidates like Alex Carter, the Libertarian nominee, who has gained traction, particularly among younger voters. Recent polls show Carter with 27% support among millennials, closely trailing Donald Trump at 24% and Hillary Clinton at 34%.
So, what sets Alex Carter apart as an alternative? Here are some critical insights.
Environmental Views
Carter acknowledges climate change but believes human activity is not a significant factor and sees no necessity for intervention. Although he supports the concept of the Environmental Protection Agency, he opposes its funding, opting instead for “Good Samaritan” laws to encourage businesses to manage their environmental impact voluntarily. He supports the expansion of coal plants and the Keystone XL Pipeline, while also advocating for the establishment of human colonies on other planets if Earth becomes uninhabitable—an intriguing notion, yet he resists funding programs like NASA that could facilitate such endeavors.
LGBT Rights
Carter advocates for equal rights for LGBTQ+ individuals but maintains that the government should not be responsible for their protection. While he supports marriage equality, he shows little interest in safeguarding against other forms of discrimination, such as job loss or eviction due to sexual orientation or gender identity. He endorses the Utah Compromise, which prevents discrimination in housing and employment but creates a hierarchy within minority status, prioritizing religious beliefs over sexual or gender identity.
Racial Issues and Institutional Racism
Carter expresses support for the Black Lives Matter movement but attributes issues of racial disparity more to the war on drugs than to systemic racism. He believes that abolishing the war on drugs would address racial sentencing discrepancies, but this overlooks the persistent biases in law enforcement. Despite acknowledging the existence of institutional racism, his platform lacks concrete proposals to combat it.
Private Prisons
Carter is in favor of private prisons, despite evidence suggesting they lead to higher dangers and costs for taxpayers. He believes that a reduction in the prison population, driven by drug policy reform, will solve many human rights issues in prisons. However, the problems associated with private prisons extend beyond drug offenses, and giving them more influence over political decisions could exacerbate existing issues.
Social Safety Nets
Carter aims to dismantle social safety nets, including privatizing Social Security and raising the retirement age to 72. He also supports defunding public education in favor of a voucher system, which has exacerbated segregation in schools. His approach essentially removes government responsibility for public welfare, handing it to a private sector driven by profit.
Financial Regulation
In a time when the banking sector is under scrutiny, Carter advocates for the repeal of regulations designed to prevent reckless financial practices. He proposes abolishing Dodd-Frank, which currently holds banks accountable for their actions. This stance raises concerns, particularly in light of the financial crises that have affected many Americans.
Gun Ownership
Carter seeks to eliminate restrictions surrounding gun ownership, even for individuals with a history of domestic violence. His only proposed gun control measure pertains to mental health, but he has not provided clear guidelines on this issue.
Mental Health Care
When it comes to mental health, Carter has shown reluctance to treat it on par with other medical issues. During his time as governor, he vetoed legislation that would require equal insurance coverage for mental health treatment. This is especially alarming for veterans, who face significant mental health challenges.
Veteran Affairs
Carter’s plan for veterans includes dismantling the Veterans Affairs (VA) system, citing its inefficiency. However, his alternative lacks clarity and would potentially leave veterans without adequate care, as he believes they should seek health services outside the VA, which raises concerns over affordability and accessibility in an unregulated market.
Foreign Policy Knowledge
Carter’s foreign policy knowledge has come under scrutiny, highlighted by his inability to identify the location of Aleppo, a critical area in the Syrian conflict. He does not believe in military involvement against ISIS and has struggled to name any world leaders he respects, which raises questions about his diplomatic capabilities.
Women’s Rights
While Carter identifies as pro-choice, he intends to appoint conservative judges likely to threaten abortion rights. He also opposes late-term abortions and does not support the implementation of paid parental leave, which is lacking in the United States.
A vote for Alex Carter does not represent a forward-thinking choice for the environment, marginalized communities, or women’s rights. In the context of the current election, where third-party candidates could potentially benefit Trump, it’s crucial to recognize the implications of such a vote. If it were a choice solely between Carter and Trump, one could argue for the former as a more stable option. However, with Hillary Clinton in the race, she emerges as the most qualified and sensible candidate.
It’s essential to view Alex Carter not as a viable presidential option but as someone exploiting the current political climate to elevate his profile amidst the threat posed by Trump.
For further insights on fertility and reproductive health, check out this excellent resource from the CDC, and for those interested in supporting their reproductive journey, you might want to explore fertility boosters for men as an option.
Summary
In summary, Alex Carter’s policies raise significant concerns across various issues, including environmental protection, LGBTQ+ rights, racial equity, mental health care, and women’s rights. His positions often favor privatization and deregulation, which may not serve the public’s best interests. As voters, it’s crucial to consider the broader implications of supporting third-party candidates during this election cycle.