I am accepting a blogger's proposal to participate in what may be the first on-line congressional candidate debate. I look forward to increasing the rigor of this dialogue and holding my opponent accountable for her support of the Iraq war, the Patriot Act, and massive illegal wiretaps. As you know I face incumbent Jane Harman in the California Democratic Party Primary election next Tuesday, June 6th.
In response to blogger Thomas Davis's proposal, I have submitted four questions for Harman. Although I previously challenged Harman to debate any time anywhere, Harman refused -- most recently before the West LA Democratic Club, which overwhelmingly endorsed me May 30 after the two, at Harman's insistence -- did not debate, but made separate presentations without opportunities for rebuttal.
Following separate on-line diary postings by Jane Harman and by me that drew hundreds of comments, a blogger --Thomas Davis (tomtech -AT-sbcglobal.net) - proposed that Harman and I submit four questions each for an on-line debate, with answers and rebuttals posted on late Sunday or early Monday on DailyKos, My Left Wing, and MyDD,com.
The debate format is outlined below:
4 Questions from moderator for Ms. Winograd
Replies From Ms. Winograd
Rebuttals from Ms. Harman
Rebuttal from Ms.Winograd
4 Questions from moderator for Ms. Harman
Replies From Ms. Harman
Rebuttals from Ms. Winograd
Rebuttal from Ms. Harman
4 Questions from Ms. Winograd for Ms. Harman
Replies From Ms. Harman
Rebuttals from Ms. Winograd
4 Questions from Ms. Harman for Ms. Winograd
Replies From Ms. Winograd
Rebuttals from Ms. Harman
Final Statement from each candidates.
I am pleased at the possibility of a debate, and submit the following questions:
1. Why do you think Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi reportedly (LA Times/May, 2006) wants to replace you on the House Intelligence Committee?
2. You voted for the Patriot Act three times, most recently on May 7, and yet now you say you want to protect our civil liberties. How can you protect our civil liberties when you vote to suspend 4th amendment rights with the Patriot Act's sneak and peek searches, whereby law enforcement, without a warrant, can search our homes and never tell us?
3. In your campaign mailer you describe yourself as a "leading critic of the Iraq war." You sat on the House Intelligence Committee during the build-up to the war and ignored State Department analysts' strong objections, issued in the National Intelligence Estimate, Oct. 2002 (posted under Harman's record on Winogradforcongress.com.) Ignoring their warnings that WMD's in Iraq were "highly dubious", you took to the floor of Congress to urge America to invade and bomb Iraq. You refused to join 133 other members of Congress who said NO to giving Bush a blank check to go to war. You have repeatedly voted to fund this war, have opposed Congressman Henry Waxman's efforts to investigate the military's use of torture in Iraq, and refused to co-sponsor an investigation into the Downing Street Memo. How then can you say you are a leading critic of the Iraq War?
4. During your Feb. 12, 2006 interview on Meet the Press, you defended your year-long silence during the briefings on the NSA spying, saying you would have been breaking three federal laws had you blown the whistle on Bush and Cheney. Yet, you would have been protected under the US Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause, Article 1, Section 6. Given that the Constitution affords congress members immunity to discuss executive-branch law breaking on the floor of Congress, are you now sorry you did not reveal the truth in the face of flagrant Bush law-breaking?
I look forward to participating in what may be the first on-line debate between congressional candidates. I am hopeful my opponent will step up to the challenge and answer questions about her record. I welcome transparency and accountability on the campaign trail.
To learn more about my candidacy, please visit: winogradforcongress.com