Thanks to Phil Forgit for doing this, especially given how busy he's been the past few days! I like Phil's answers very much, although I strongly disagree with him on embryonic stem cell research. Overall, though, this is excellent -- on the environment, FISA, torture, civil liberties, Iraq, etc. You can check out Phil's website here.
1. Why, in your own words, have you decided to run for the US House of Representatives this year? What convinced you to get involved in politics at this level?
I served my country in Iraq, in support of a fledgling democracy, one in which the people have choices in their elections. In my own congressional district, I came home to find that my next Congressman would be selected by a few hundred Republican activists in a convention and the election would go uncontested by the Democrats. I am running because I wanted to ensure that there was a contested election and only entered when I felt assured that my candidacy would marshal the kinds of resources and people needed to win. My past experience running for office in a tough Republican House of Delegates district and my background as a teacher, naval reservist and small businessman gave me confidence that we could not only win a convention but have a unique opportunity to mount a credible and winning campaign in the 1st CD.
2. Please tell us a little bit about yourself, particularly what you see as your major strengths? What are you most passionate about? What is your favorite book and why?
Experience in the military and public education has given me many strengths- discipline, attention to detail, and concise planning. I am a hard worker who attracts other hard workers; my campaign staff and I are in this race to win. I am passionate about democracy and the democratic process. I am passionate about engaging voters in that process by giving them a real choice. This campaign is emanating from Jamestown, the birthplace of American representative democracy and Williamsburg, the birthplace of the Revolution and I am proud to be leading that charge. I generally read political and military histories and biographies.
3. In your opinion, was the Iraq war fundamentally flawed or simply mismanaged? At this point, would you favor an immediate withdrawal, an exit strategy, or what?
Both. We should redeploy and reduce our presence to that of an external referee. We currently have no plan for withdrawal and that is not acceptable.
4. Is it acceptable for Iran to have nuclear weapons, and if not, what would you advocate doing about it?
We need to engage Iran, their allies, their neighbors, and our allies with all that we have in our diplomatic/political/economic arsenal to make any progress towards ending their quest for a nuclear weapon.
5. What is your opinion of the FISA law passed by Congress this past summer? Should telecoms be granted retroactive immunity? What other changes, if any, should be made to the law?
We must balance our civil liberties against our security, without sacrificing those liberties. The telecoms cannot be allowed retroactive immunity. If they will not voluntarily cooperate with congressional committees investigating abuses, testimony given in lawsuits and/or threats of litigation may be our only way to reveal exactly how extensively the government has infringed on our civil liberties. With regards to the FISA law, I would push to update the 1978 legislation by establishing provisions to expedite the process of procuring a court order, but I support the requirements for a court order and do not support a revamped FISA that discards judicial oversight.
6. Do you believe that "waterboarding" is torture? More generally, are "enhanced interrogation techniques" acceptable under any circumstances?
Waterboarding is torture. I am amazed at the Orwellian "Bushspeak" by which our administration concocts new words and phrases to mask the indecent nature of their actions.
7. Do you support cutting greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050? How would you go about doing that, and specifically would you support a revenue-neutral carbon tax on polluting industries?
First, we should encourage emissions/carbon credit trading. Programs such as emissions trading have proven impacts on corporations' carbon footprints. Incentive based programs for cleaner industries will also lower emissions.
Second, developing nations play a role in this problem. They need economic opportunities, but we can't allow them to repeat the industrial revolution of our own past, where the environment was sacrificed for economic growth. We need to provide the assistance they need to learn from our mistakes.
Third, we have to start investing in green technologies which are proven to have strong returns. We must consider environmentally friendly infrastructure like "green" building codes and public transportation as well as renewable energy sources, like solar power and wind.
Environmental and energy concerns extend beyond the well-being of our planet, but also point to issues of dependence on foreign oil and excessive domestic energy consumption. Let's look at what an 80% reduction by 2050 really means-- less than 2% per year! That may be difficult but it is not unattainable if we combine market driven forces, consumer awareness programs, good public planning and policy choices, and we work to keep moving forward with green technology innovations that might be developed over this time.
8. What is your position on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research?
I am supportive of stem cell research, but not embryonic stem cell research.
9. Do you agree with Al Gore that our nation is now facing a "constitutional crisis? If so, what would you advocate doing about it?
In any war or crisis or perceived threat, the Executive Branch has a propensity to exert more power than is afforded by our constitution. For example, Lincoln's suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1861 was technically exerting more power than the Constitution actually gave the President. The current situation seems different to me, however. We have entered an era in which the Executive Branch is extending authority to the point of abuse. Our Legislative Branch needs to swiftly and strongly stop this from happening.
10. What is your position on trade issues? Do you believe that labor, environmental and human rights guarantees should be part of trade agreements? In general, would you describe yourself as more of a "fair trade" or "free trade" person?
Trade Agreements need to be anchored by fair trade and reciprocity, with the exact same rules for laborers and manufacturers on both sides of the border. Over the thirteen years of its existence, NAFTA has emerged as flawed because of the inequities between parties. Trade contracts with inequitable stipulations have negative consequences for American industry, American workers, and our economic growth and security.
11. Would you favor comprehensive immigration reform that provides a path to EARNED citizenship for people who pay a fine, learn English, and play by the rules? In general, what is your position on immigration into this country?
1) America must first shut down our borders to illegal immigration, beefing up border police and the INS. 2) We must penalize businesses that knowingly hire illegal immigrants, thus removing incentives to illegally enter the country. Only then will Americans even consider supporting a path to earned citizenship. Our current policies are allowing the creation of a new underclass in the U.S., something we as Democrats can not morally, socially or economically tolerate.
12. How would you describe your political philosophy: liberal, Teddy Roosevelt Progressive, Mark Warner centrist, or something else?
I look at all sides of an issue and simply try to find the best solution, devoid of all the ideological baggage that tends to stifle our efforts. If it makes sense and solves a problem, it doesn't matter whether it is progressive or conservative, left or right or from the center. That puts me in the Mark Warner, John Miller, Jim Webb centrist camp. In other words, I am a Virginia Democrat.
Phil, your biggest problem is going to be explaining your "Pro-choice, but anti-abortion" position. The Republicans are going to hammer you ceaselessly on that. I know there are those who won't like your answer on embryonic stem-cell research, but at least you've staked out a position, now please stick to it!
I am one person who won't disqualify a Democrat if they identify themselves as Pro-Life, and I understand the nuance of your position, but the GOP and local rags like the Free-Lance Star will have a field day slamming you on this. If you're Pro-Life, identify yourself as such. You can do that without promoting bad legislation and the RTL social agenda.
I know you will be more politic when you come here, and I'm sure Ted Hontz and all us Rappahannock Democrats will give you plenty of support.