The grass is not always GREENer on the other side. As the election nears, the campus crusade for Nader has upped its prominence. Not a day goes by that I am not bombarded by “non-partisan” information concerning campaign contributions, every sidewalk on campus is caked with pro-Nader slogans, and we even have two Nader supporters in full costume, the one representing corporations looking eerily similar to Nader himself. The Nader people really got me thinking about the political process.

The Nader supporters would have you believe that a two-party system is ruining the country and drastic changes must be made.

I agree the two major parties are very centrist, but so is the voting public. It is foolish to think adding yet another party to the mix will solve anything.

One only has to look at the muddled messes in Europe to see that very little gets done in multi-party systems. The Nader camp also complains that not everyone is represented in the two-party system, yet people are less represented in a multi-party system.

Consider when you have five parties running and the winning candidate receives 10 percent of the vote. I don’t think anyone would say that he represents the views of most of the people.

The fact is the two-party system has existed, with a few exceptions, for the entire span of American history. If the system is so wrong, why then is the United States the most powerful and influential country in the world?

The Constitution and two-party system have been in place for over 200 years, hardly an institution about to collapse upon itself.

After reading Tim Paluch’s “Two-Party Votes are Wasted Votes” column in Wednesday’s paper, I couldn’t help but laugh at his idealism.

The idea that Nader doesn’t accept money from big business is not because of some lofty purpose, but that no one is willing to give money to a sure loser.

Paluch foolishly advises that in order to free up money for Nader’s costly and ineffective programs, we should cut the defense budget by 50 percent freeing up $150 billion.

Apparently he does not realize just how many people gain their livelihood from the U.S. military. Does he honestly believe they are just going to sit back and let some new guy who just rolled in to the Oval Office destroy that?

They have already killed one president to preserve themselves, why wouldn’t they do it again? Nader’s programs cost too much to implement and help too few. While the Green Party may not want to admit it by using the “S” word, they are socialists.

Nader has made great contributions to the country in consumer advocacy, but that does not make him qualified to run the country. The two-party system is the best system for the country and always has been.

Jon Barnhill

Sophomore

Zoology