Replies

FYI - You might find some of the following article quite interesting, in terms of just how devastating the rift was that existed by Election 2000 between FL environmental acitvists and Dem leaders, especially Al Gore, but also including other Dems such as FL's current US Senator Bob Graham.

Interestingly, the FL environmentalists found support from certain Republican leaders, who likewise opposed the proposed airport.

In light of Al Gore's much touted environmental background, I almost had to laugh when reading how Al Gore couldn't even host a ralley for his campaign in SW FL during Election 2000. He was advised that protesters would definitely be there, angered by his refusal to support the FL environmentalists. In addition, he was repeatedly warned by some local leaders that he could lose FL in Election 2000, if he didn't state a position on the Homestead airport issue.

The article is the 2nd one listed on the FL environmental activist website I mentioned in my editorial, "no airport". Below is a link to this article - "Collison Course" -- detailing Al Gore's environmental woes in FL:

Feature Story published November 23, 2000 in the Miami New Times:

"Collision Course"

by Jim DeFede

Award-winning columnist Jim DeFede chronicles how the Gore campaign tried and failed to muster support from South Florida environmentalists prior to election day due to Gore's political pandering to developers and power-hungry Democrats.

Here's an interesting excerpt about why people predicted Gore would lose Florida, from the article I linked to above in my post #71:

McGinty revealed that Gore was contemplating a campaign rally in South Florida that would emphasize his lifelong defense of the environment and the Clinton administration's efforts to restore the Everglades. If the vice president were to hold such a rally in South Florida, McGinty wondered, would there be protesters?

The answer she received was unambiguous: You can count on it.

According to those present, McGinty replied, "It breaks the vice president's heart" that he can't schedule an environmental event in South Florida for fear of being embarrassed by protesters over the Homestead issue.

"There were a lot of questions about whether he could risk showing up down here," recalls Chinquina. "And our answer was no. Unless he is coming to announce his position on the air base, don't come."

As the meeting drew to a close, after more than two hours of debate, McGinty tried to end on a positive note. "Win or lose, the vice president wants you to know that he cares about you," she reportedly said.

"Well, take our friendship back to the vice president," Chinquina replied, "and tell him that only a true friend will tell you what you don't want to hear. And what you don't want to hear is that you are going to lose this election because of Homestead. Because no matter what we say, a lot of our folks are going to vote for Nader.

Chinquina was right. Forget about hanging chads and butterfly ballots. Forget about confused voters and missing ballot boxes. Forget about recounts and lawsuits. If Al Gore loses Florida's 25 electoral votes, and with them the presidency, he can blame himself for refusing to stand in opposition to an airport at Homestead Air Force Base.

Ralph Nader received more than 96,000 votes in Florida. In the final week of the campaign, he visited Miami and hammered away at the vice president's silence regarding Homestead. "Al Gore is waffling as usual," Nader exclaimed. "He refuses to take a position as usual."

On the eve of the election, Nader sent out a letter to environmentalists across the state, attacking both Gore and Bush but singling out Gore for particular scorn. "On the Everglades, currently a key issue in a hotly contested state...."Gore has not opposed a proposed commercial airport on the site of the former Homestead Air Force Base, despite the protest of local people working for conservation and his own EPA. There are no airports situated on the border of national parks in America; the Everglades is the last place to consider changing that fact. In general, work to restore the Everglades should be done for the public, and for future generations, not on the basis of debts called in by the sugar industry and local power brokers."