Lt. Governor - Dr. Marvin Malek
Questions and Answers with Dr. Marvin Malek (P) on Candidacy for Lieutenant Governor
Barre-based physician Marvin Malek was a late entry into the race for Lieutenant Governor on the Progressive Party ticket after Vermont Woman had completed our initial interviews with the candidates. Instead, we followed up with Malek via email only, and have included the full text of his remarks below.
VW: Why enter this race now?
MM: I entered the race for Lieutenant Governor when the events of last May signaled the end of health reform in Vermont. After passing a bill that leaves the many unique and dysfunctional features of the US health care system intact, both Democrats and Republicans hailed it as an “historic”, “landmark” piece of legislation. It seemed clear that a new voice from a different political party was needed in Vermont to provide a less politically driven discussion of what meaningful health reform would entail – and what could realistically be expected from the new legislation. My vantage point as a physician with an active hospital practice and a busy office practice in internal medicine – as well as advanced training in health policy and economics – gives me a perspective that the other candidates can’t bring to this discussion.
VW: What is your response to the “spoiler” argument, that you are guaranteeing a Republican victory by splitting votes on the left?
MM: In repeated statewide polls, and in several ballot questions on town meeting day, the citizens of Vermont have expressed a strong and consistent desire for a ballot run-off process to settle any election in which no candidate has garnered 50 percent of the vote. And I am in agreement with Vermonters in this desire. The ballot runoff – whether instant runoff or a traditional delayed runoff – allows new voices into the electoral process without concern that a new candidate may “spoil” the outcome. This process allows voters to express their first choice in every election when they vote, rather than having to consider instead casting their votes strategically based on pre-election poll results. The two major political parties are equally responsible for preventing the process of amending our constitution to allow ballot runoffs. Governor Douglas has expressed his satisfaction with the status quo. And during their years in control, the Democrats in the Legislature have not permitted a runoff bill out of committee to come to the floor for a vote.
VW: Do you support a woman’s right to choose? Please explain, specifically, why or why not, including any restrictions you support or oppose.
MM: As a physician in active practice, I am a firm believer that every patient should have autonomy and control over their medical care. This includes all decisions related to reproductive choice, including access to contraception as well as termination of pregnancy. In my experience, women grappling with an unwanted pregnancy do not take the decision-making process lightly; often find it to be emotionally wrenching. It is inappropriate and cruel for the government to enact laws that harass women who have made the decision to abort a pregnancy. Such efforts range from showing pictures of the developing fetus to mandating a 24 to 48 hour delay, to detailing who is or is not allowed to transport a minor crossing state lines to access abortion services. I oppose all such laws as intrusive and disrespectful of these women.
VW: Do you support over the counter access to Plan B for women?
MM: Despite recent decline, the abortion rate in the United States is still far higher than most every developed country. Much of this is due to inadequate health education in our schools and poorer access to contraception (in part due to the fact that one third of 18-30 year old adults lack health insurance coverage). Use of high dose oral contraceptives during the first 72 hours after unprotected intercourse is about 88 percent effective in preventing pregnancy, and experts estimate that in real world conditions has the ability to prevent about half the abortions in the United States. These post-coital contraceptives have been available for years in other developed countries and have repeatedly been demonstrated to be safe and effective. It is inexcusable that the FDA has allowed such a long delay in allowing these post-coital contraceptives from being available over-the-counter for women of all ages.
VW: The number of women incarcerated in Vermont has increased fivefold in the last ten years. Would you support sending women out of state to serve their time if the numbers get too high? Would you support funding alternatives to incarceration for women? If so, please give some examples of programming and levels you would support.
MM: I do not support sending Vermont women to prisons in other states.
Every woman serving a prison sentence already faces many challenges. She should not have the added difficulty of serving time far from her family and friends – or her children. These are the individuals who will serve as the prisoner’s support network after her prison sentence is completed. Many of these individuals do not have the time or resources to visit other states. This separation therefore adds to an unhealthy degree of depersonalization, and adds to the risk of poor outcomes after the woman is released from prison.
VW: Recipients of welfare are required to work or engage in work preparation activities as a condition of receiving welfare benefits. Do you support maintaining the hourly work requirements of 30 hours per week? Would you support education and skill building programs that address barriers to employment to be included as part of the 30 hours work requirement?
MM: Welfare benefits go only to parents with children. The controversial work provision is for single parents, not two-parent households who have always had to have one parent working to qualify for benefits. Raising children is work, especially when you're doing it alone. It is not good policy to look down on the work of raising children and force single parents to take low wage jobs outside the home, often paying most of their wages for childcare! I support women who want to get a degree or quality job training. If low-income single parents choose to go to school, the state should provide substantial financial support to that educational process. It's not only the right thing to do, but it is extremely cost-effective, and it certainly should “count” toward the 30-hour work requirement.
VW: In a study published in 2003, 92 percent of women nationwide identified ending domestic violence and sexual assault as the highest priority for the women’s movement. In 2002, rates of domestic violence and sexual assault in Vermont skyrocketed by 10 percent and 19 percent, respectively. Given these numbers, what would your administration do to support survivors of these crimes?
MM: We need to add funding in support of the victims' networks, and to fund programs to teach police officers to respond to these crimes with effectiveness and sensitivity. In the case of domestic violence, better responses from the police and court systems can help to prevent these assaults from becoming a recurrent horror in these women’s lives.
VW: Do you support the Circumferential Highway? Why or why not?
MM: I do not support the Circ. Studies show that it is bad for the environment and it doesn't help the transportation problems in Chittenden County. It's a boondoggle promoted by land speculators. I'd suggest a moratorium on all new highway construction, instead spending the precious transportation dollars on fixing roads and bridges we already have.
We must shift our transportation priorities to multi-person and alternative transportation. A reliable network of mass transportation along our major commuter routes would be a great step forward.
VW: What is your reaction to Governor Douglas’ veto of the Farmer Protection Act? Please explain.
MM: This veto primarily helped the seed and chemical companies, not Vermont’s farmers. Corporate control of agriculture has led farmers to become dependent on expensive and unproven technological inputs. None have been shown to be beneficial to the farmer or safe for the environment in the long term. The FPA was created to reduce the likelihood of farmers suing each other when inevitable cross-pollination occurs. The act was carefully crafted, good for our farmers, and should not have been vetoed.
VW: What is your reaction to Governor Douglas’ veto of the Gender Identity Bill? Please explain.
MM: The Governor had a chance to expand Civil Rights protections and he chose not to. This move is unprecedented in Vermont. In addition, the governor is making a mockery of the Human Rights Commission by effectively stacking it with people who don't support Civil Rights.
VW: How can we maintain our small farms in the face of higher energy costs and competitive prices from corporate agriculture?
MM: We need to work with the individual situations farmers face. Some can convert to organic, others can start artisan cheese operations, but most will continue to produce conventional milk. For farmers, of all sizes, we must create a Vermont Brand of milk. 15 percent of the Southern New England and New York consumers indicated they would prefer to purchase a branded Vermont product. Since Vermont only produces 1.5 percent of the country's milk, that consumer market could consume all of our milk. With a small state investment, a plant could be operating within a year. With a state commitment of matching advertising dollars (as we do for the ski industry) the markets could be opened. Also, enactment of an affordable universal health care system would be of enormous benefit to farmers, as it would be to owners and employees of all small businesses.
VW: Do you support the Premises ID program here in Vermont? Why or why not? Would you support expanding this program to include other elements from the proposed National Animal Identification System?
MM: No. The most effective way to reduce the risks of animal diseases and their ability to spread is by helping familiarize farmers with warning signs of these diseases. Cataloging the 7,000 farms and homestead operations is not the best way to spend state tax dollars. We need to develop education materials to distribute through feed dealers/stores, and other suppliers.
VW: What is your position on locally generated wind power in Vermont?
MM: We must take responsibility for our own energy consumption by producing it here. It will mean some people will have to look at wind turbines, but it's better than making someone in Nevada live with radioactive waste. We missed an excellent opportunity when Jim Douglas decided not to buy the hydropower dams on the Connecticut River.
VW: What is your position on the potential re-licensing of VT Yankee?
MM: A responsible energy future does not include nuclear power. It is irresponsible to burden our descendents with dangerous radioactive waste for centuries to come. Also, nuclear power plants serve as a near ideal target for a terrorist attack. We need to develop renewable energy sources and fully fund Efficiency Vermont to reduce our demand for energy. We need wind, solar, biomass, and improved conservation and efficiency to reduce our dependency on unsafe energy sources.
VW: What is your opinion on the recently passed Health Care Affordability Act/Catamount Health?
MM: The new legislation will not lead to universal health coverage, and will not reduce health care costs. With the implementation of the Catamount program, we are adding yet another set of rules to the huge administrative burden doctors and hospitals are already facing.
The first principle in meaningful health reform is for the state to self-insure – just as most large businesses do. We should create a state insurance program, which will provide comprehensive health insurance coverage to every Vermonter from cradle to grave. The average American might view this as expensive and utopian. But by including everyone in a single program, we will be eliminating the massive administrative costs built into the current system, we will have the clout to significantly lower pharmaceutical and other equipment costs, we can greatly reduce malpractice liability costs, and we can methodically identify and minimize much of the remainder of the unneeded spending in the current system – ranging from money diverted to advertising, to lobbying, to investor dividends, to fighting over any and every insurance claim.
VW: Do you support Instant Run-off Voting? Why or why not?
MM: I strongly support Instant Run-off Voting. It has proven itself in Burlington and numerous other countries all over the world. It allows people to vote their preference, while guaranteeing that the winning candidate will be the person most voters prefer. What could be simpler or more democratic?
VW: Do you support Election Day Registration? Why or why not?
MM: Our democracy is only safeguarded if people can – and do – participate. We should do everything possible to remove obstacles to voting. Many people may not pay attention to advance deadlines for registration, but will show up on Election Day and want to cast a ballot. They should be welcomed into the electoral process.
