BECK index


The Campaign of

Sanderson Beck

as a Democrat

For President
of the United States

Why I Am Running for President
What I oppose:
What I support:
Political Principles and Vision
Transforming U.S. Military Policy to World Peace
Social Responsibility
State of US 2003: An Alternative Address by Presidential Candidate Sanderson Beck

This has been published in the book PEACE OR BUST. For ordering information, please click here.

Why I Am Running for President

I am deeply concerned that the United States is being led in the wrong direction by George W. Bush and reactionary Democrats. I intend to educate people by explaining how we can lead the world into a golden age of peace, justice, and prosperity, not just for US but for everyone in the world. I aim to apply the wise teachings of the Christ, Buddha, Socrates, Lao-zi, Confucius, and other sages to politics to make the world a better place. I hope to awaken "Christians" who have been led astray by hypocrites supporting wars and the uncharitable policies of right-wing politicians that are contrary to what Jesus taught.

I was born on March 5, 1947 in Los Angeles, and I was a Conscientious Objector during the Vietnam War. I have taught more than forty different college courses, written many books, and dedicated my life to working for world peace. I will be honest, and I admit that my policies are closer to Greens than Democrats. I am offering the Democratic Party progressive policies, and I hope to be included in the Democratic debates during the primaries. Also, by running as a Democrat I will not hurt the Democratic nominee who goes against the Republican in the final 2004 election.

Our great country has become an oppressive empire to serve the greed of those with power. Now that the Cold War is over, we can eliminate all weapons of mass destruction and reduce all military forces in the world. Nonviolent methods and international law can resolve conflicts and protect human rights. We can reduce terrorism by not terrorizing the world with a bullying foreign policy. I believe the United States of America can lead the way to a world that is more democratic, free, fair, peaceful, prosperous, and sustainable if we act intelligently and responsibly with our great power and wealth. I appeal to the best in people so that we may treat others as we would be wish to be treated. I hope you will join me in this effort to reform our government.

How You Can Help

I am asking you to support my educational candidacy so that together we can raise awareness on issues of peace and justice. By supporting a "protest" candidate we can show that we want leaders who will serve the common good of all rather than wealthy contributors. Protest led to the Protestant Reformation and the founding of the United States as a republic. Buddha and Jesus began with a small group of followers; but their ideas spread and have inspired millions. By working together I believe that we can transform our militaristic and violent society into a peaceful and just world community.

Current federal election law requires a candidate to raise $5,000 in each of twenty different states from contributions up to $250 per person in order to qualify for a matching amount of money from the U. S. Government. If people I meet on my nation-wide tour from March to October 2003 help me, I believe we could reach this goal, which would enable me to get on the ballot in all states and be included in the primary debates. If we find someone better to run with policies as good as mine, I will support that candidate.

To find out how you can send us an e-mail please click on

I oppose:

wars and arming for wars
- U.S. bombing of other countries
- all weapons of mass destruction
- huge expenditures wasted on the military
- military aid and arms sales
- American neo-imperialism and NATO expansion
- paranoid curtailing of civil liberties
- recent tax cuts for rich persons and corporations
- recent bellicose American arrogance
- the current push for U.S. world domination
- an endless war on "terrorists"
- government secrecy, spying, and covert violence
- unfair trade treaties that hurt other countries
- exploiting "sweatshop" labor
- the corruption that bribes elected officials
- government "welfare" for corporations
- excessive bureaucracy and government red-tape
- capital punishment
- long prison sentences for nonviolent crimes
- the war on drugs
- leniency for corporate criminals
- restricting a woman's right to choose abortion
- sexism, racism, and other prejudices
- government censorship
- ravaging the natural environment
- polluting air, water, and natural resources
- weakening environmental protections
- genetically modified foods
- subsidizing the meat industry
- pork-barrel spending
- gerrymandering election districts
- electronic surveillance without a court order
- punishing whistle-blowers and valid critics
- forcing mothers of young children to take jobs
- privatizing Social Security
- mandatory drug testing
- discriminatory racial and ethnic profiling

To find out how you can send us an e-mail please click on

I am for:

universal peace, justice, and love
+ social and political responsibility
+ personal freedom and limited government
+ communicating openly and honestly
+ the principles of the Earth Charter
+ the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ international law and the United Nations
+ the International Criminal Court
+ the Global Warming Treaty
+ the treaty that bans landmines
+ abolishing all weapons of mass destruction
+ thorough weapons inspection in all countries
+ ending all military aid and arms sales
+ closing U.S. military bases in other countries,
converting them to universities and hospitals
+ large reductions in military spending
+ reforming the Homeland Security Department
+ phasing out the Defense Department
+ increasing economic aid to poor countries
+ democratic self-determination for all nations
+ universal health care paid by the government
+ including all prescription drugs
+ publicly funded medical research
+ public education
+ increasing funding for education on all levels
+ interest-free loans to college students
+ affirmative action to overcome discrimination
+ merit scholarships to encourage excellence
+ tuition-free public universities and colleges
+ increasing the minimum wage
+ decreasing the work week to 35 hours
+ increasing taxes on corporations
+ progressive income tax
+ increasing deductions for dependents
+ paying off the national debt by taxing assets
+ sustainable living
+ corporate accountability
+ expanding the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps
+ improving public transportation
+ improving national parks and protecting wildlife
+ providing time on TV for candidates' debates
+ public funding for political campaigns
+ increasing funding of public broadcasting
+ reforming Social Security by removing the cap
on the tax for higher incomes
+ replacing the war on drugs with treatment
+ registering guns and banning assault weapons
+ encouraging organic farming
+ green taxes to pay for environmental damage
caused by industry and products
+ increasing tax on tobacco, alcohol, and other
drugs to pay for the health costs they cause
+ holding weekly Presidential news conferences
+ videorecording Presidential policy discussions
+ allowing voters to register on election day
+ making election day a public holiday
+ instant run-off voting
+ enfranchising Washington DC voters
+ a Constitutional amendment to make the U.S.
Senate more representative of the people
+ cultural diversity and exchanges
+ encouraging the arts
+ beneficial non-profit organizations
+ forgiving all interest on third-world debt
+ making the Internet more available to all
+ public assistance for the destitute
+ protecting the rights of labor unions
+ better rehabilitation and classes for prisoners
+ ratifying the equal rights amendment
+ consumer protection laws and advocacy
+ public access to government information
+ protecting the rights of native Americans
+ subsidizing low-cost housing
+ subsidizing renewable energy technology
+ phasing out nuclear power
+ subsidizing recycling
+ free trade that is fair and responsible
= a peaceful world community.

To find out how you can send us an e-mail please click on

Political Principles and Vision

I always ask God for guidance in my life and pray for the highest good of all, even though that may be difficult for me personally. This is my philosophy, and I put it into practice as best I can. Obviously it would be easier for me not to run for President of the United States. This is a very serious aspiration, and I feel a great responsibility to be honest and sincere in this endeavor. I believe that we are all spiritual beings and part of God, and as souls when we discover the reality we are, then we realize that this universe has a spiritual basis of reality that is much deeper than physical scientists usually admit. In my book LIFE AS A WHOLE: Principles of Education Based on a Spiritual Philosophy of Love I describe 27 Divine Principles that I believe are the spiritual foundation of reality and which are also guides for us to live well. These 27 principles are goodness, truth, beauty, reality, awareness, joy, love, wisdom, power, life, growth, fruition, will, freedom, responsibility, creativity, balance, harmony, courage, faith, patience, law, justice, peace, wholeness, health, and perfection. These are the guiding principles of my life and are what shape my political policies.

Although I may have little political experience, I have been studying and preparing myself throughout my life to develop wisdom that would make me capable of offering the best contribution I can for the welfare of all humanity. Certainly a philosopher running for President is unusual if not unique. I have spent much time studying history, and I have read several multi-volume biographies of the greatest U.S. Presidents - Washington, John Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt. I have written a comprehensive history of the world up to 1300, emphasizing ethics. Yet I am also interested in current politics and have made personal sacrifices in order to help our society move from war to peace. Recent trends have convinced me that we are now facing our greatest crisis - even greater than the military buildup under Ronald Reagan during the Cold War. I have responded to this emergency first by revising and greatly extending my book THE WAY TO PEACE, which is on my website as Guides to Peace and Justice. I began to plan a tour of the United States to college campuses in order to work for peace and sell my recently published books. In 1987 I went on a peace tour to 47 states and met with about 600 peace groups, encouraging them to influence the Democratic candidates running for President to have peace policies.

I have often thought of going into politics and figured that I could run for Congress and then later perhaps run for the Senate or the Presidency; but to my surprise on November 12, 2002 spiritual guidance presented me with a different plan as I began to consider running for President. My main goal is not to get elected to office, but rather to help our country find better policies. I began to realize that in this era of money politics my running for Congress would reach few people, because debates would probably not even be held by an entrenched incumbent, and I would be reduced to raising money to pay for TV ads. Besides, people would say, "What good are your ideas for such radical changes since you would never be able to implement them even if you were elected to Congress?" However, by running for President as a Democrat I might be able to gain enough support for my visionary policies to get myself included in the televised primary debates. Thus I could run as an educational candidate in order to raise awareness on peace and justice issues, offering voters a protest candidate in the primaries that would likely be dominated by Al Gore, whose foreign policy is almost as bad as that of George W. Bush. Now that Gore has decided not to run, the field is even more open for a candidacy such as mine. If there are many candidates running as Democrats, I believe that this will help me, because the other candidates are quite similar and will divide up that portion of the vote.

In my study of history and observation of current events I have noticed a great disparity between the ethical theories of the wise and the political actions of those in powerful positions. Yet in people there is a deep and persistent longing for a better world that has been taught by the sages - a world of peace and justice based on love for all humanity rather than the aggressive policies of power-hungry politicians, who work only for selfish national and party interests.

I believe in the vision of a better world as taught by Jesus the Christ and others, that the Christ consciousness is in every person, and that the second coming of Christ is when each person realizes it within. When enough people act on this realization to implement the policies of love for all, then the sovereignty of God may become a reality in this world. My life is dedicated to working for this. I have also studied the other great religions and do not mean to imply that Christianity is the only way. Recently I published the WISDOM BIBLE, which includes the greatest scriptures and philosophical classics of all the major religions and ancient philosophies. A person of authentic spiritual awareness does not discriminate against people of other religions or of no religion. Rather we should respect all people and evaluate the fruits of their actions. I have no intention to impose one religion on other people. Rather I believe that by becoming universal in our consciousness and tolerant of diverse beliefs and cultures we can achieve a brotherhood and sisterhood of all humanity. To do this we must learn to apply the golden rule that is found in all religions, to love others as ourselves.

The United States has become the most powerful nation in the history of the world, and we have a great responsibility not to abuse this power. The arrogant policies of George W. Bush display such a grotesque double standard and blatant hypocrisy that the Government of the United States is becoming not only feared but also hated around the world; war is not the way to peace. I believe that I can help lead the world to peace. I realize that my chances of being elected President in the year 2004 are very small; but I would not be running for President if I did not sincerely believe that I would be a very good President if I were by some miracle elected.

What are my political principles? First, I believe in honesty and openness in democratic government. I will not lie nor deceive, and I will communicate as much as I can. For example, I would hold a public press conference to answer questions every Wednesday at noon, and if needed sometimes on a Monday or Friday too. I believe in learning as much as I can, and I would encouarge all relevant views be expressed on each issue. I would like to see conferences held on various specific issues. Then on a weekend the spokespersons selected by those conferences would meet with myself and pertinent department heads and advisors and Congressional leaders to discuss what policies would be best. Each weekend could take up a different issue, and these sessions could be video-recorded so that others could learn about the policy discussions.

Most of all, I believe in love applied to all. Thus I am opposed to violence and killing. This would mean a radical change in what is called "foreign policy." I believe that if the United States adopted peaceful policies and accepted effective international law with collective security through the United Nations, we could lead the world in the disarmament process that would involve every country on Earth. Since the end of the Cold War, the United States no longer has a rival enemy.

The current Bush administration has used the panic resulting from the terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 to exaggerate this new enemy to justify increasing his power and expanding the military complex. Tragically his policy of going to war against a handful of terrorists actually becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, because it creates more terrorists reacting to the oppressive war policy. Because I am opposed to violence, I believe in being very tough on those who use violence; but they should be treated as individual criminals. It is a fundamental error in logic and ethics to punish groups of people for the crimes of individuals, whether it is by punishing or going to war against whole nations for the crimes of their leaders or targetting ethnic or national groups out of fear they will be terrorists. This is why we need to ratify the International Criminal Court (ICC) so that criminals like Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, and others can be brought to justice without anymore violence than necessary. It is rather obvious to me that Bush does not want to recognize the ICC, because he is afraid that his policies could bring himself, his allies, and others in his government before that court for their crimes against international law.

I believe in maximizing freedom as much as possible. I oppose the use of force, because it is the opposite of freedom. Why is it that so many conservatives who say they believe in freedom and limited government favor a huge military establishment? Is it because they believe in their own freedom but not in that of others? Yet to make sure that one's freedom does not take away the freedom of another (whether individuals or groups), we must apply the principle of justice. History shows that this is usually best accomplished by using laws that are equal for all and democratic processes in order to prevent tyranny and oligarchies. I personally do not like bureaucratic hassles, and I would like to see laws and governmental regulations simplified. The public does need to be protected by laws. I favor trusting people to do the right thing without having to answer to government for every little thing; but those violating the laws and harming others must be held strictly to account.

In most areas of life I think the government should let people be as free as possible and not interfere. I think the government should stay out of religion and should avoid getting involved in censorship. I believe very strongly in the free expression of ideas so that people can be aware of many options in life and make their own choices. I believe in free markets for commercial goods so that consumers have choices and can find efficient products at competitive prices.

Nonetheless in some areas of providing services to the public I believe that government can most fairly and efficiently organize the process, and in those areas I do not support privatization. The most obvious examples are the judicial process of laws and courts, highways and roads, bridges, and public utilities. Which public utilities such as water lines, electricity, gas, telephone, cable, and so on should be publicly operated and which might be privatized are debatable issues, and I have no fixed views. Generally I think that when the service is a single universal system, I think it often is in the public interest to have this accomplished by a government agency; but when a diversity will serve the public better or when it is not a universal necessity but an elective option, then private competition may give us more efficiency at better prices.

In education a combination of public and private institutions can provide a variety that serves the public well. Because I believe that universal education is a necessity and should be provided for all, I do not favor the complete privatization of schools. I think the entire society benefits by having a free and public educational system so that everyone in the society can get a good education, while some can still pay for private education to suit their special interests.

Another analogous social need is health care. With more than forty million Americans lacking health insurance and many others struggling with inadequate care, I believe this is a dismal failure in the richest nation on Earth. I believe that any decent society will make sure that all of its people have good health care. The Canadian and European systems of national health care for many years have proven that this can be accomplished efficiently and reduce costs by eliminating the private insurance bureaucracy and sales agents by simply providing free health care for everyone. Individuals can still hire private doctors if they want, and of course such things as cosmetic surgery would not be covered by the public health system.

Thus I think it is clear at this point that I am not for either extreme of unfettered private capitalism or totalitarian governmental socialism; but rather I support a mixed economy that socializes public needs such as education and health care but allows a free market in areas of discretionary spending.

My vision is to end all wars and to disarm all national armies, navies, and air forces, allowing local law enforcement officers to remain. All disputes not settled locally or by national governments would be resolved by the International Court. The United Nations needs to be reformed in order to make it more democratic and effective at keeping the peace, or a world constitutional convention needs to plan a democratic federal world government that would be ratified and joined by all nations on Earth for the good of all. This world government would have limited powers and checks and balances to make sure that everyone's rights are protected. Nations would continue to have sovereignty within their borders as long as they do not violate human rights or interfere with other nations. The peacekeeping forces of the world government would be drawn from many nations and would only use the force necessary to bring suspected criminals to the International Court. People would be educated and trained to use nonviolent methods for resolving all conflicts.

I see the United States changing from an oppressive military superpower and selfish exploiter to a generous leader that sets an example of how good life can be when we all cooperate for the benefit of all. I admit that the wealthy in our society will be contributing more to the general good than they have in the past; but I believe that they will be better off for this also as they realize greater inner happiness from the good they do. The opportunity to earn and possess wealth in this society is a blessing, and I believe that those people have an obligation to give back to the society in which they prosper so richly. Someone may ask, "What if the rich leave the United States?" Of course they would be free to go; I would hope that other countries taking them in would also expect them to contribute. I suppose they might try to change some other country into a refuge for greedy and selfish people; but others in the world may not want to buy the products controlled by such people, and at least they would be isolated and not fomenting wars in order to increase their wealth.

Essentially, I believe in a balance of freedom with justice that promotes the general welfare of all by making sure everyone has what they need while allowing every individual free expression and opportunity to achieve their dreams.

To find out how you can send us an e-mail please click on

Transforming U.S. Military Policy to World Peace

The United States has become by far the greatest military power in the history of the world. Now the Bush administration is intent on increasing this power to achieve world domination. Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Richard Perle have made it clear that they are seeking not just military superiority but military supremacy so that no other country, not even our allies, could challenge the United States. The Cold War balance of power was based on the deterrence theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), which crazily threatened to destroy the world if things went wrong. Fortunately thus far nuclear disaster has not struck, though many believe that it is a mathematical probability over time. MAD was based on the understanding that neither side could expect to defend themselves against the other superpower in an all-out war because of the overwhelming destructive power of thermonuclear weapons deliverable within minutes by missiles. The reason why the superpowers agreed on an Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty in 1972 was because the development of a defense would destroy deterrence. This destablilization might cause one side to strike first before the other side fully developed their defense, or they would face the possibility of being blackmailed by the threat of losing a nuclear war.

President Ronald Reagan and now George W. Bush have presented this missile defense program to an unsophisticated public as a reasonable defense against an attack; but it would make the world much more dangerous, because other countries would believe that the United States would no longer be deterred from exercising its power however it wanted. Because this technology is extremely difficult to perfect, if not nearly impossible, it is unlikely that a nation could ever be able to withstand an all-out attack by many missiles. Its most feasible use would be for blackmailing other countries, or in connection with a massive first strike it might be able to shoot down a few missiles that have been missed in the surprise attack. Because of the extreme difficulty that any modern defense has against the increasing advances of offensive technology, this endeavor would be enormously expensive and would have little chance of success. Yet this has been the pet project of War Secretary Rumsfeld for years. Rumsfeld has also redesigned the American military and now NATO too to develop the capability of sudden attacks that the Nazis called blitzkrieg.

President George W. Bush has essentially declared war on everyone in the world who does not go along with his endless war on terrorism, which is really a war to make sure that the United States controls the oil in the Middle East and all other resources it feels it needs or wants. If the Vietnam War taught us anything, it is that even overwhelming military supremacy cannot win a war if the people are fighting for their own freedom and independence. War is not the way to achieve security; war brings death, destruction, poverty, hatred, and misery. I believe that security is fundamentally important; but the best way to protect the security of the American people is to make sure that no one in the world can make war. To believe that one can protect the security of a country by having that country go to war against other countries is a dreadful illusion, because as long as others lack security, they will react to endanger the security of their oppressors. Thus Israel will never gain the security it wants and needs as long as it continues to oppress the Palestinians. The only conceivable way this could be accomplished would be by exterminating all of one's enemies. Yet this is not likely even possible, since any surviving human beings would naturally consider such an exterminating country an enemy, as would any humane people within such a country.

No, my friends, war is not the answer. The United States, having appointed itself policeman of the world, is currently spending on the military about as much as all the rest of the world combined together. This colossal waste of financial, scientific, technical, and human resources greatly damages the American quality of life compared to what it could be if we went on a peace economy. Very little of this spendng has any productive value or beneficial use. Because of the extensive environmental damage that will cost more to clean up, we would even be better off paying the people in the military and manufacturing the weapons to do nothing. I am not suggesting that; but I do believe that all unemployed workers, who may not be able to find a job, should be given the support they need. Thus I do favor veterans benefits and generous retirement programs. I think that serving your country is a very noble thing; but I would like to see people serving their country in constructive ways instead of destructively. Environmental cleanup and conversion of military bases and weapons factories would be some of the new opportunities that would be created by reducing our military spending.

Since the United States is spending so much more on the military and is so powerful, I believe that we can safely begin the process of disarmament before the others. Then our good example would encourage other countries to disarm as well. Along the way the process would need to become multi-lateral or actually omni-lateral. In other words, we would not disarm completely until all other nations agreed to do the same. International inspection teams would make sure that everyone was complying, and international authorities would arrest anyone who violates the disarmament laws. We could begin by disarming the most useless weapons - the nuclear arsenals. Russia could be assisted in this process, as we are already doing, and I believe that Britain, France, and China would be persuaded to cooperate also. Then other weapons of mass destruction could be eliminated. Disarmament of conventional forces would be in stages, and they would have to be replaced by a trustworthy world government under democratic control.

The United States has been the great pioneer of republican government in the modern era. I believe that if we sincerely believe in democracy, we will lead the way toward global democracy. As long as the United States claims to be a great democracy but in the world acts like a bullying tyrant, others will see that we are hypocrites with one standard within our nation but another for those outside our borders. Also while we are withdrawing our troops from abroad and dismantling U.S. bases in other countries, we could convert them into university campuses and hospitals. I think we could greatly expand the Peace Corps so that dedicated Americans could be sent out to other countries with minimal cost, since little technology is required, to help other peoples with our skills - teachers, doctors, nurses, scientists, technicians, business administrators, and so on. Such people would also be learning about other countries so that the United States would become less isolated from the rest of the world.

When the disarmament process has been completed by all countries, I think the Department of Defense could be phased out as its legitimate functions for self-defense are absorbed into the new Homeland Security Department. The Coast Guard, for example, would still be protecting the borders. However, much of the spying and surveillance will need to be removed from the Homeland Security Department as unnecessary and as unwanted infringements on our privacy. This country has two centuries of experience in using judges and courts to protect civil liberties. This is no time to be giving up those liberties out of paranoia, because some of the evils from our past foreign policy came back to haunt us.

We need more education in the ways of nonviolence with training for professionals to develop their skills in peaceful conflict resolution. A nation that believes in freedom will never give it up; but instead of fighting and killing for freedom, which is a contradiction since it takes away the freedom of others, courageous people will be willing to die if necessary to stand up for their rights and freedom but will be compassionate enough never to kill. When large numbers of people are united in these beliefs and skills of peacemaking, no power could ever overcome them. I think that Europeans are already starting to realize this. When they are able to communicate this to their political leaders or choose leaders who believe in this, then Europe will be eager to disarm and purify their economies from the military also. In fact I predict that if the United States does not lead the world toward peace, that Europeans and others will make the United States follow them toward peace. I have explained about making individual leaders responsible for their crimes without punishing whole countries; but if whole countries try to resist peace and justice, then it may be necessary for the rest of the world to impose boycotts and sanctions to get them to change their minds. I hope that Americans will want to lead the way toward a paradise on Earth rather than be made to follow this enlightened path by economic pressures.

We need to begin this process of disarmament by supporting the International Criminal Court (ICC) so that war criminals like Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and others can be brought to justice by peaaceful means. The United States can stop its violation of Article 6 of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty by working for an international agreement to eliminate all nuclear weapons in the world. The United States needs to begin cooperating more fully with the international inspectors of the Chemical and Biological Weapons treaties so that these weapons of mass destruction can be eradicated as well. The United States needs to sign and ratify the treaty that bans landmines so that these terrible scourges can be removed from the Earth.

To find out how you can send us an e-mail please click on

Social Responsibility

As stated in my political principles, I believe in balancing government's limited role in serving the public interest and protecting social justice while allowing as much personal freedom as possible in the marketplace of ideas and enterprise. I believe that western Europe has demonstrated the success of a mixed economy that socializes basic human needs such as education and health care without limiting business opportunities and competitive commerce. The United States has lagged behind progress in public health care for about twenty years while taxing its people very heavily to pay for huge military expenditures. I believe that greatly reducing the military budget while providing a more efficient universal health care system will both greatly add to the prosperity of the American economy and improve the quality of life for all. I believe that the entire world is gradually progressing toward this balance as the Soviet Union and China have been experimenting with freer markets while the western capitalist nations have been increasing their socialized welfare systems in order to alleviate the poverty and unemployment that can accompany unfettered capitalist exploitation.

Because it is long overdue, I believe that providing universal medical care for all in the United States should be a high priority. This was first proposed by President Truman more than fifty years ago. Under a good health care system neither senior citizens nor anyone else would have to worry about how they are going to pay for needed medical treatments and prescription drugs. Dental care and treatment for mental illness would also be covered. The government would have to regulate how much the health care providers are paid, because otherwise the taxpayers could never afford to pay prices without any natural limit. People would be able to choose their doctors and health services, and the government would simply pay the providers a democratically determined fair price without any complicated insurance plans and excessive bureacratic confusion or exploitative profits in the private sector. Essentially the people of the United States would be the employers of all health care workers. Optional services beyond what is considered basic health care needs such as cosmetic surgery and elective treatments such as counseling, massage, etc. would still be available in the private sector. Also such services, which are considered preventive or enhance staying healthy, may be partially covered by government subsidy with the person seeking the service paying the balance.

I believe in controlling dangerous drugs by high taxation instead of by criminalization. This could end the large social costs of the failed war on drugs that has punished so many people who need help and resulted in the violent gangsterism similar to Prohibition in the 1920s that was finally repealed in 1933. Studies indicate that the health care costs resulting from cigarette smoking amount to at least $2 per pack; I believe this or even more should be the tax on cigarettes. The large number of people killed every year by drunk drivers should make us realize that alcohol also needs to have a higher tax. As to the currently illegal drugs, I believe that they still should be prohibited from minors. Such drugs can be regulated by the government so that at least quality control can make them somewhat less dangerous, and they should be taxed very highly according to the extent of their danger so that this money can be used to provide treatment programs for those who want to free themselves from these addictions. Also educational campaigns can warn people about the specific dangers of various drugs. Crimes committed by drug users, especially violent crimes, should be strictly prosecuted. Otherwise I believe that individuals should have as much freedom of choice as possible as long as they are not hurting others. I believe that individuals who wish to end their life in this physical body should be allowed to do so with the assistance of a physician after a counseling process.

When I decided to run for President in November 2002 as a peace candidate, people supported Kucinich instead because they thought he had a better chance of winning. Dean supporters thought he was an anti-war candidate who had a better chance of winning than Kucinich. Kerry then defeated Dean because Democrats thought he had a better chance of beating Bush. Finally the American people voted for Bush because they thought he would be better at "winning the war against terrorism." So it goes, instead of applying the teachings of Christ and Buddha, people succumb to the hypocrisy that betrays the integrity and principles of love. As a result voters in the United States have affirmed a war criminal in the highest office.

I was an official candidate (registered with the Federal Elections Commission in 2002) for the nomination by the Democratic Party for President of the United States from December 2002 until I endorsed Dennis Kucinich in May 2003.

Copyright © 2003, 2009 by Sanderson Beck

This has been published in the book PEACE OR BUST. For ordering information, please click here.

State of US 2003: An Alternative Address by Presidential Candidate Sanderson Beck

BEST FOR ALL: How We Can Save the World

BECK index