The Danger of Third Parties

Ralph Nader’s self-centered article on third parties and his presidential ambitions failed to note the harm third parties do in a country like ours that does not follow the European tradition of proportional representation and has no mechanism for a coalition presidency. Even European countries with multiple parties and parliamentary systems have difficulty ensuring democracy when there are no clear governing mechanisms.

In the past, Germany gave major portfolios to a minor party in order to permit the two dominant parties to form coalitions. Other European countries, including Spain today, have struggled for months after elections to form governing coalitions. In this country, Bill Clinton won his first election in part because of Ross Perot’s third-party challenge. The Republicans have long resented Clinton’s victory and have become a party that avoids compromise and seeks to obstruct rather than govern. We should not forget the disastrous effect of Nader’s candidacy.

Sanders was right to run as a Democrat, and hopefully he will support the Democratic Party’s nominee and resist the temptation to run as a third-party candidate should he lose the nomination.

Instead of looking for solutions in a third party, voters should focus on the issues that need to be addressed and decide whether candidates correctly identify those issues; know the remedies; and know how to implement remedies. It is not enough to identify problems. Solutions and procedures do not fit on bumper stickers or 30-second spots.

Evangeline Monroe

Quechee

Sen. Ayotte and Women’s Health

To the Editor:

It’s clear that when Sen. Kelly Ayotte talks about making “women’s health a priority,” she doesn’t mean all women. She doesn’t mean women who get their insurance through the Affordable Care Act. She doesn’t mean low-income women who can’t afford to get an exam at a high-cost hospital. And she certainly doesn’t mean the women in my community who depend on Planned Parenthood for their health care.

As she faces off with Maggie Hassan, Ayotte’s campaign has ramped up its efforts to pink-wash her record, touting her support for mammograms. But access to mammograms goes hand-in-hand with access to health insurance and affordable care, and if Ayotte had it her way, thousands of New Hampshire women would lose access to both. Breast cancer is a challenge too many women face and we must do more to raise awareness and provide the tools necessary for early detection and effective treatment. But Sen. Ayotte’s short lineup of bills do nothing to address the issues of prevention or access to quality, affordable care.

If Sen. Ayotte truly wanted to ensure all women had access to the care they need, she would end her crusade against the Affordable Care Act, which has allowed thousands of New Hampshire women the ability to afford health care for the first time — and so gain access to breast cancer screenings and mammograms. If Sen. Ayotte truly wanted to eliminate barriers to breast cancer screenings, she would advocate for increased funding for Planned Parenthood, which provides thousands of breast exams in our state — not vote multiple times to defund the organization based on fraudulent claims that have long since been repudiated.

Liza Draper

Claremont