Windy City Times: You lived in San Francisco in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when AIDS first struck. How did this affect your sensitivity to the LGBT community?
Rich Whitney: I lived in San Francisco from 1979 to 1981 but also in San Jose, which is about 45 miles away, for a while. I was of course tuned into the gay and lesbian community as a political progressive at that time and there were already issues affecting that community. Prior to the AIDS epidemic, there was that whole thing with Anita Bryant. It wasn't a major focus of my political work but it was certainly part of it. When the beginnings of the epidemic started to hit there was a right wing backlash blaming the gay lifestyle so it was important to respond to that and to get people to look at the disease as a serious public health issue and not just as a gay issue.
WCT: As governor, what kind of actions would you take to ensure that HIV/AIDS education is properly addressed?
RW: There are so many areas where the education system needs to be improved. That's certainly one of them. AIDS education has to be a part of it. We need age-appropriate sex education and we need clean needle exchanges. That's been a little battleground that hasn't gotten a lot of attention but we need to be supportive of that program and allow it to happen as a public health measure. Improving public health education in schools could helps with combating HIV, but also unwanted pregnancies. There's a lot that needs to be done to improve our investment in public health.
I support single-payer healthcare. That would go a long way toward addressing health problems in Illinois. I'm also an advocate for free or drastically reduced higher education and improving the caliber of Pre-K to 12th grade education. This fits into the idea of investing in people, which is a focus of the Green Party. So I would renew emphasis on public health.
WCT: As an attorney who practices civil rights and employment law, have you encountered issues with the LGBT in your work?
One of my areas of focus is employment law including discrimination. I was heartened when the Human Rights Act included discrimination based on sexual orientation. I have helped some people in that area in dealing with the problem of sexual harassment. I've had some cases with varying degrees of success. Employment law is always an uphill battle in any discrimination case. I am all in favor for equal treatment under the law.
In 2006 you said that you'd like to get government out of the "marriage" business altogether and that the government should only recognize "civil unions" for everyonegay and straight. Have your thoughts changed since then? Are you in favor of gay marriage or civil unions?
I believe in equality of the law and since Illinois state law uses the term "marriage" to describe the contractual relationship between partners, of course I support the rights of gay and lesbians to marry. In an ideal world what I would rather see is the state not even use the word "marriage." What the state does is better described by the words "civil unions." It's a contract that the state recognizes. In an ideal world marriage is something that is left to religions. I realize that in the here and now, in the immediate struggles that confront us for equality, it's a lot shorter to say I support the right to marry.
WCT: What are your thoughts on the military's policy of "Don't Ask Don't Tell"?
I think there's a general consensus that it hasn't worked really well and that there are still problems with discrimination in the military. I think the time has come to just allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military openly. That is, if they want to serve in the military. The peace activist in me has mixed feelings about that. I think our military-industrial complex in this country is too large. We need to dial it down and focus on defense. For people who do want to serve it should be on an equal basis. Let's address the question of discrimination in the military as we do in other areas.
WCT: You received more than 10 percent of the vote in the 2006 gubernatorial election. Who do you see as your party's base of support? How do you expect to build on that momentum in this election? Is there any particular group or place where have you been most surprised to receive support?
RW: The real core base of support is what might be called the progressive movements in Illinoisthe peace movement, the school reform movement, the movement towards budgetary reform, and certainly single payer healthcare. There was also a lot of people that felt disaffected, people whoif you broke down my numbersmight otherwise have voted Republican. The stereotype is that Green Party candidates just take way votes from Democrats. The reality is more complex.
Some of those who came out to support me were people who more typically would not vote had we not had a Green Party candidate in the race. My focus in 2010 is to build primarily on the progressive base. There's a lot of potential for people who reflexively vote for Democrats. If they're not put of f by the performance of that party at this juncture I don't know what will do it. The Democratic Party has had complete control since 2003 and yet what do progressives have to show for it?
WCT: As the third party candidate, do you feel like you can take more risks? What are the additional pressures of being the third party candidate?
RW: I do think that I can take more "risks" as far as speaking what I really believe. That's kind of what the Green Party is about. There are other third parties that are very dogmatic. The fact that we don't take corporate campaign money as a matter of policy means we're serious about representing the people and not these artificial constructs. These are the reasons I say things that are truthful. Take the legalization of marijuana. Does it make any sense for alcohol to be legal and for marijuana to be illegal? Alcohol tends to be associated more with violent conduct. It doesn't make sense to incarcerate people for crimes of this nature. It's an idiotic strain on our system so why isn't it legal? For whatever reason politicians of the other parties think, "Oh, you can't touch that." It's common sense public policy. I feel free to speak the truth.
The flip side of not taking corporate money is: how do you fund your campaign? Concomitant of thatso many of the media think that if you don't raise a million dollars you're not a serious candidate. One of the things I'm challenging is the notion that you can't be serious if you're not raising that kind of money. In 2006 I spent $45,000 to get 10.5 percent of the vote. Blagojevich spent $11 million or $12 million and [ Judy Baar ] Topinka spent $8 million or $9 million or something like that. We certainly get more bang for our buck. If I can raise enough money to be competitive and get my name out there, we have a shot.
WCT: The budget and clean up government would seem to be priorities this year. Where on the radar do LGBT issues actually fall?
RW: The Green Party internationally is based on the four pillars of grassroots democracy, social justice, nonviolence and the environment. These issues are about equal treatment under the law. We need to get to a society in which every child born has an equal chance to thrive: That's the operating principle. That's how I defined social justice. From that premise your public policy has to reflect that, has to oppose discrimination in all its form. We have to oppose hatred. We have to make sure everyone has economic opportunity. From that premise the issues of concern to the GLBT community are always high priorities among my concerns.
WCT: What issue do you think most separates you from the other candidates in this race?
At this point there are so many candidates in the race. I'm not sure where they stand on issues of LGBT rights and opportunities. I'm supposing Pat Quinn and Dan Hynes are pretty good on that. I don't know that there's anything that would distinguish me from them with regard to GLBT rights. People in the GLBT community have to know that I will hold firm and not put things on the back burner due to horse trading or political partisanship. Your readers can look at what the Green party has done nationally. One of the first gay marriages done nationally involved Green Party members. In many places we've been leading the charge because we're a party based on principle and not politics to the highest bidder.
WCT: What would you tell people who think that voting for the Green Party would be like throwing away a vote?
RW: We've had Democratic Party control since 2003 in Illinois and what do we have to show for it? I'm in favor of giving credit where credit is due. And as far as the GLBT community is concerned, there's been the change in the Human Rights Act. We'll give them major points on that one. But after that the list starts to drop off pretty quickly as far as social progress in Illinois. I would ask voters: What are you actually going to get by voting for the Democrats? The question has changed in Illinois. I don't think in 2010 this is going to be the third party protest vote. We're in it to win it. We have a more-than-plausible chance for victory come November 2010. Discontent is at an all-time high for the two corporate-sponsored partiesthe Republicans and the Democrats. I think we're well-poised to gather support from the disaffected voters of this state. If we can pull it together I think this is doable. We're looking at this to win.
See www.whitneyforgov.org .