I support Congressman David Price for the 4th District Seat - NOT BJ Lawson
I am very disappointed that MAPAC NC endorsed BJ Lawson over the incumbent, Congressman David Price. This was a very hasty decision based on Dr. Lawson’s well-spoken presentation at the MAPAC candidates forum – but we cannot overlook Dr. Lawson’s inexperience and impracticable views. Because he has so little experience and would be a junior member of the Republican party, forced to vote party line, I doubt that he can exact any of the changes he promises. Please see below my detailed explanation for why I support Congressman David Price.
Also, Congressman Keith Ellison, the first Muslim Congressman, also called MAPAC earlier this week to encourage us to endorse Congressman David Price. He gave us these reasons:
1. David Price is a strong leader in Congress
2. He is respected by members of both parties
3. David Price has always stood with Keith Ellison when issues of hate/bias/discrimination have come up in the Congress
4. Keith Ellison can always turn to David Price when he needs support in Congress
5. Keith wants to build the Muslims momentum in the US political system through rational/practical choices and decisions
6. Ron Paul and his followers have extreme views which will not be successful in the US Congress. Dr. Lawson’s views are very heavily influenced by Ron Paul.
Politics rewards experience.
Firstly, we must realize that the power structure of politics rewards experience. Congressman Price has 20 years of experience in the House of Representatives. I worked in his office for a summer and I saw firsthand the respect he has from both Republicans and Democrats because of his seniority. Dr. Lawson has no state government experience and it would be imprudent to send a novice to Congress at this critical stage of American healthcare, economy, national security, and international affairs. As a junior member of Congress and a junior member of the party, Dr. Lawson will probably have to vote with his Republican party on most issues and be restricted by that party’s conservative views.
Politicians reward loyalty.
Secondly, elected officials reward those who are loyal to them. It would be a mistake for us to endorse Dr. Lawson instead of Congressman Price. Change is good, but if we change something that has been working well for us for the past two decades, we would be shooting ourselves in the foot. Muslims have to think strategically about who we want to represent us in Congress.
A Congressman remembers who supports him and rewards that loyalty by protecting that community’s interests and by responding to its constituent needs. We should continue to build our relationship with him – and now we have the grounds to do so, to ask more of him, since we have supported him for so long. It would take another long term to build a relationship with a new candidate.
We have to think big.
Thirdly, our community has to think big – we want Senator Barack Obama to be president, but the more Republicans that are in Congress, the less likely it is that Senator Obama will be able to effect any meaningful change. I’ve already mentioned that Dr. Lawson would probably be restricted by his party in his freedom to vote. Mr. Price has more leeway in voting for something right because of his twenty years of experience and as a Democrat, would support Obama’s positions.Congressman Price has been loyal to our community on a personal, national and international level.
Fourthly, Congressman Price not only shows interest in our community here in NC, but is one of the few members of Congress who visits Muslim countries to constructively interact with those governments. He’s been to Lebanon, Afghanistan, Indonesia and many other countries and worked with their governments as a chair of the House Democracy Assistance Commission. I’ve even heard him say in a speech, when he was invited by a Jewish student group, that even though the United States is a friend of Israel, we do not have to agree with everything Israel does.
Congressman Price voted against the Iraq war from the beginning, when it was unpopular to do so and has continually introduced bills to revoke the war’s authorization. Since he has become chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee that funds the Department of Homeland Security, Congressman Price has worked to shift DHS’s attitude to focus on privacy and civil liberties. Also, Senator Obama has introduced the Senate version of Congressman Price’s bill on reforming regulations on private contractors following the Blackwater debacle.
Congressman Price has consistently supported the Muslim community. He always attends the MAPAC events and has year after year come to smaller meetings when invited by Muslims to their homes. He listens to our issues and gives us solid answers, not empty policy promises.
One personal thing I’d like to share that I haven’t shared with this community before shows how far Congressman Price will go to support our community and to do the right thing. When Professor Nasser Isleem’s wife and children were stuck in Gaza during the Lebanon war, I called Congressman Price’s office after every other avenue to get them out had failed. Not only did Congressman Price get Mrs. Isleem and her children out of Gaza, he chartered a plane and got 50 other Arab Americans, mostly women and children, out of Gaza when every border had been closed off. Any other Congressman would’ve said “Sorry, I can’t help you.” But Mr. Price went the extra 10 miles for people who weren’t even voting for him because we asked him for help.
Dr. Lawson is not ready to represent our community in Congress.
Lastly, Dr. Lawson is not ready for Congress and our community would be harmed by supporting him instead of Congressman Price. He is young and charismatic, but he does not have the experience in any level of government to make him a strong advocate for our issues. We need a powerful force like Mr. Price.
Dr. Lawson handed out copies of the Constitution as support for his campaign. But his extreme and conservative interpretation of the Constitution leads him to believe that many functions of government are illegal because they are not literally proscribed in the Constitution. He thinks Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional. This is an unworkable from a legal point of view. If we based our laws only on what was literally in the Constitution, we would still be living with restrictive 18th century laws and social systems.
Dr. Lawson seems to believe that the Department of Education, research entities like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, and safety net programs like Social Security and Medicare are unconstitutional and therefore should be abolished. Because he subscribes to a libertarian view that there has been too much financial regulation, he has advocated unworkable ideas on his website’s blog like abolishing the Federal Reserve and reverting to regional currencies or bartering. As a freshman member of Congress, Dr. Lawson would realistically be forced to vote with his Republican party and endorse all of its restrictive policies – or, even worse, he would follow the lead of his mentor Ron Paul in voting far out of the mainstream of both parties on many issues and accomplishing nothing.
Dr. Lawson is not unskilled or immature. He is charismatic and new. But he is not ready to lead us in Congress as Muslims or as North Carolinians. At most, let him prove himself and his ideas in state government first. Changing focus now and supporting him instead of Congressman Price would seriously dampen our voice and representation in Congress.
Mr. Price has the experience and initiative to support us as Muslims and North Carolinians. He has a history of speaking strongly for us and going out of the way to help us in times of need. We should continue to support him as we have in the past, and we can continue to expect him to be an advocate for us.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
You have misrepresented, and in one case flat out lied about, Dr. Lawson’s views on a particular subject, financial regulation. While he is a proponent of free market economics, he recognizes that our monetary system, being controlled by the Federal Reserve with delegated power to private banks to create money through fractional reserve banking, is not a free market system and thus MUST be regulated. He would never have voted for the repeal of Glass-Steagall- which prohibited institutions from performing both commercial and investment banking services- in 1999, for which David Price DID vote (http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=1999&rollnumber=570). This is a fact regarding this subject in which your readers would be interested that you conveniently left out.
But while the maintenance of Glass-Steagall could have prevented the massive leveraging that led to banks being too big to fail, it also would not have prevented a major financial crisis which is inevitable in a debt-based monetary system in which a central bank creates credit out of thin air and sets market interest rates. This leads to the accumulation of credit and asset bubbles, which, in tandem with fractional reserve banking, lead to financial instability and recessions. It is absolutely vital that our economic policymakers understand this, and Dr. Lawson demonstrates a very good understanding of this.
Furthermore, if you are appealing to the Islamic community, it would do your readers well to note that Sharia prohibits usury, which is a prominent feature of our financial system enabled by central banking and fractional reserve banking. The practice of Islamic Banking is that of sound, full reserve banking, which Dr. Lawson advocates. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_banking)
You have also misrepresented his foreign policy views as “isolationist” and “antagonistic.” For one, he does not believe in isolationism; quite to the contrary, he believes in open and active engagement of the world through commerce and diplomacy. What he does not favor is a “police the world” foreign policy in which the United States intervenes belligerently, often unilaterally. Not only is this a fundamentally arrogant foreign policy, but it is also truly “isolationist” and “antagonistic,” as it projects the image that America does what it wants with no concern for what other nations think. David Price has a long record of advocating for this form of foreign policy with his support for interventions in the Balkans, Somalia, Haiti, economic sanctions on Iraq leading to the deaths of 500,000 people, and his support for a poorly and broadly worded use of force resolution against terrorists in 2001 along with the current occupation of Afghanistan. This, despite the fact that experts such as former CIA Bin Laden Unit chief Michael Scheuer and national security analyst Chalmers Johnson all agree that interventionism destabilizes regions and incites organizations like al-Qaeda to grow in membership and to attack the United States. This is the wrong-headed foreign policy of the United States in the post-WWII era, and Congressman Price demonstrably supports it. Dr. Lawson does not, and he will advocate for the foreign policy of our founders, which is one of commerce and friendship with ALL nations and entangling alliances with none.
Your assertion that Dr. Lawson will “follow the Republican party line” in Congress is simply foolish. He did NOT follow the party line during the Republican primary, and instead advocated precisely the views he voiced at MAPAC’s candidates forum. This is despite the fact that it was not the politically correct thing to do, and in fact the local GOP establishment drafted their own candidate to run against him and worked very hard through a nasty and shadowy smear campaign to defeat him. Dr. Lawson has already demonstrated quite well he is unwilling to toe the party line for favors or political advancement. To suggest otherwise is either ignorant of history or flatly dishonest.
What your piece amounts to is nothing more than a pathetic amalgam of fear tactics founded mainly on baseless assertions. It is fine to advocate for Congressman Price if you so choose, but it is not fine to do so while employing a shameful assault of smears on Dr. Lawson.
October 19th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Dear Paige:
Thank you for sharing your views. I appreciate the cross-dialogue so that people can make the best decision possible. I especially do not want to disseminate incorrect information but only wish to offer another perspective, so I encourage people to try to find the truth of the matter in addition to reading all of our comments.
Taiyyaba
October 19th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
Assalaam Aleikum Sr Taiyyaba,
I just wanted to correct your assertion that MAPAC’s endorsement of BJ Lawson was a hasty decision. In fact BJ Lawson spoke at the 2008 MAPAC Dinner in March and has attended every MAPAC event since. He also has been actively involved in speaking out against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, any intervention that harms the sovereignty of Pakistan and has spoke out against the occupation of Palestine. Rather than being a stranger his actions, deeds and words speaking out against oppression have made him more of a brother. His opinions on civil liberties stand in stark contrast to David Price’s voting record.
MAPAC is not the only group who is leaving Congressman Prices camp and crossing over to support BJ Lawson. Many Progressive Democrats are doing the same and i am astounded by the people who are telling me that they have had enough of Congressman Price. The bailouts was the last straw for many. They have never had a viable candidate to vote for and many are taking this opportunity. Congressman Price has tried to paint BJ Lawson as a Republican which to be honest really shows how out of touch he is with his constituents. Most Democrats know that BJ Lawson has been opposed from day one from the Republican establishment in the 4th District. They know because he has been campaigning religiously full time day and night to the Democrats in the 4th district in downtown Durham, Carrboro and Chapel Hill. He has consistently stood up to his own party and argued against the war, restoring our civil liberties and defending the rights of Muslims at home and abroad at the cost of votes and donations to his campaign. If Congressman Price had shown the same backbone in regards to the PATRIOT Act, the funding of the war and to oppressed Muslims around the world he might not have lost MAPAC’s endorsement.
wasalaam
Br Marc
October 19th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Thank you for your comment, Br. Marc.
October 20th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Taiyyaba — I appreciate your defense of Rep. Price and your desire to continue a long-standing 4th District tradition. I strongly believe, however, that we must question tradition by objectively assessing its results, and in the face of overwhelming agreement that our country’s current direction is unsustainable.
My goal is to advance a principled government that serves all of us equally, and begins to question the destructive combination of government interests and corporate interests that lead us down dangerous paths in both foreign and domestic policy.
I invite you to review my Web site (www.lawsonforcongress.com) and campaign blog (blog.lawsonforcongress.com) and identify any areas of disagreement. I look forward to continuing the conversation.
BJ