What Not To Do: Vote Whitman

I am going to take this opportunity and try to convince you to not vote for Meg Whitman.

After speaking with many Republicans and trying to understand why Whitman is an adequate gubernatorial candidate, the most common answer I get is “She ran eBay!” I had no idea that a person who ran some sort of company was automatically equipped to run a state. Apparently, I am wrong, because a cheesy Hollywood actor seemed eligible, and, according to you voters, “fit.” Let’s not make the same mistake twice. Here are, briefly, reasons why Meg Whitman is not fit to run this state.

Let’s begin with her immigration policies. Whitman visited the state of Arizona and voiced her opposition to SB1070, deeming it unjust. However, her previous housekeeper Nicandra Diaz-Santillan has testified being underpaid, exploited and mistreated, and quotes Whitman stating “I don’t know you, and you don’t know me,” after Whitman found out Diaz-Santillan was an undocumented worker.

Let’s move on to her social policies. Whitman has stated her opposition to gay marriage, emphasizing her support for civil unions for gay couples. Such a viewpoint reminds me of those held in the 1960s. Black people could drink water – just not from the same fountains as white people – but they STILL HAD THEIR WATER! That’s absurd. I find it comical that Republicans are so concerned with “SMALLER GOVERNMENT INVOLVED IN PEOPLE’S LIVES” but find it necessary to dictate laws regarding relationships between two people desiring to get married.

Whitman also clearly emphasized her opposition to abortion, disempowering a woman’s right to choose within this country. So far, so bad, Meg. If you want the women’s vote like you have previously stated, you should consider allowing lesbians to marry if desired. Pro-choice policies resonate within the state. If you want the women’s vote, I recommend you start fighting for women.
Moving onto her plan for you. Those who are concerned with the budget cuts and are wondering what this next governor has planned for you, I’d like to take this time to share what Ms. Meg has planned: “Let’s require work for welfare and a two-year time limit on welfare benefits. Real welfare reform has worked in other states. It’s time to do it here … We’ll use some of the money we save to invest in our state colleges.” According to http://www.nomeg2010.com, an analysis explained the discrepancies within this plan.

“The state receives about $3.7 billion a year in federal welfare money if it spends a minimum of about $2.9 billion a year on programs aiding needy families with children, providing job training, discouraging out-of-wedlock births or strengthening two-parent families.

Under federal rules, spending less than the minimum would reduce federal aid over the next year by the amount of the shortfall. Federal laws also require the state to fill in that shortfall the next year.

That means the state could cut only $1 billion in welfare spending – without jeopardizing federal aid – if it used that money for other specified purposes, such as preventing out-of-wedlock births.”

As my friend Matan says, “Taking money from one failed institution and pouring it into another is not going to make the situation any better.”

Moving on to a funny statement Whitman made at a conference in central Fresno, California: “I didn’t know that California had such a large agricultural industry!” Yes Meg! California is only ranked one of the highest in agricultural production in the world! No big deal though, I’ll let that one slide. Meg Whitman has not voted in 28 years and now she wants your vote. No, this is not a fact that I am making up. Whitman has admitted to it, and is now asking for your vote! How does that make any sense? She is like the third grader in elementary school that is so anxious to share her toy during show and tell, but she is not listening or paying attention when it’s another kid’s turn. If voting is going to make Whitman governor, and achieve her beyond-eBay dreams, why didn’t she vote for 28 years?

I believe Irvine should join San Jose (Whitman’s hometown), in supporting Jerry Brown instead of her. But asking for that would be like asking Sarah Palin to say something profound for once.

There are more reasons, and I encourage you to go to http://www.nomeg2010.com. Read the analysis. It is far more serious than mine, of course.

Do yourself a favor this November, and don’t vote Meg Whitman. Let her worry about eBay, and leave the big stuff – like running a state – for the bigger kids to worry about.

Nuha Abusamra is a second-year political science major. She can be reached at nabusamr@uci.edu.