Where the candidates stand on issues

[Shelly]

It's obvious that some know who they are voting for, but for the undecided or just a simple refresher, here's where the nominees stand on the issues (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/)

OBAMA

DO YOU HAVE A PLAN TO MAKE HEALTH CARE MORE ACCESSIBLE TO AMERICANS? IF SO, HOW WOULD YOU DO IT?
Every American has the right to affordable, comprehensive and portable health coverage. My plan will ensure that all Americans have health care coverage through their employers, private health plans, the federal government, or the states. My plan builds on and improves our current insurance system, which most Americans continue to rely upon, and creates a new public health plan for those currently without coverage. Under my plan, Americans will be able to choose to maintain their current coverage if they choose to. For those without health insurance I will establish a new public insurance program, and provide subsides to afford care for those who need them. My plan includes a mandate that all children have health care coverage and I will expand eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs to help ensure we cover all kids. My plan requires all employers to contribute towards health coverage for their employees or towards the cost of the public plan. Under my plan a typical family will save $2,500 each year. We will realize tremendous savings within the health care system from improving efficiency and quality and reducing wasted expenditures system-wide. Specifically, these savings will result from investments in health information technology, improvements in prevention and management of chronic conditions, increased insurance industry competition and reduced industry overhead, the provision of federal reinsurance for catastrophic coverage, and reduced spending on uncompensated care.

DO YOU SUPPORT ALLOWING A PORTION OF THE MONEY CURRENTLY WITHHELD FOR SOCIAL SECURITY TO BE PUT INTO PRIVATE ACCOUNTS? WHY OR WHY NOT?
No, I do not support the privatization of Social Security. I opposed President Bush s privatization scheme because it would have undermined -- not strengthened - Social Security. We should not add greater risk or debt to the system. Otherwise, workers who contribute to the Social Security System may face the prospect of inadequate benefits when they retire or if they become disabled if their investments go sour. Workers have lived up to their end of the bargain. Surely, the federal government can do the same. Social Security is one of the most important government programs ever created; it provides a vital safety net to millions of seniors and Americans with disabilities. The long-term problem with this program is real but manageable. With a little genuine bipartisan leadership, we can make the necessary adjustments without gutting the system with privatization, as President Bush has proposed.

WHAT SPECIFIC CHANGES WOULD YOU MAKE TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAM?
Social Security is indispensable to our workers and seniors. It is a great reflection of our values and commitments, and I want to make sure it is solvent and viable for the American people, now and in the future. The focus of reform options should be on protecting the basic integrity and fairness of Social Security. I will work in a bipartisan way to maintain Social Security's solvency for future generations. I believe everything has to be on the table that is genuinely intended to strengthen the program. We can close the gap with an equitable mix of benefit and tax changes similar to those recommended by the bipartisan Greenspan Commission in 1983.

DO YOU SUPPORT SETTING A DEADLINE FOR EITHER A WITHDRAWAL OR A PARTIAL PULLBACK OF TROOPS FROM IRAQ? IF SO, WHAT WOULD BE THE DATE OF THAT DEADLINE?
I opposed this war from the beginning, when it was unpopular to do so, in part because I believed it was a diversion from the real threat of al Qaeda and that giving this President the authority would lead to the open-ended occupation we find ourselves in today. Now our soldiers find themselves in the crossfire of a civil war and our military is stretched thin. I support beginning the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq immediately, and under the plan I introduced in January 2007, we would have begun withdrawing forces engaged in combat operations on May 1, 2007. A withdrawal of our troops is the best leverage we have to press the Iraqi political leaders to make the political compromises necessary to end their civil war.

WHAT DISTINGUISHES YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ FROM THOSE OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES?
What distinguishes my plan from nearly all the other candidates is that I was among the few with the good judgment to have opposed the war from the beginning. Now that we must correct the mistake of authorizing and waging this war, there are only bad options and worse options. Under my plan, we would begin withdrawing troops immediately. I would maintain a follow on force in and around Iraq to protect ongoing U.S. interests there, including counter-terrorism operations, training and force protection. Since success in stopping this civil war requires a political solution among Iraq's leaders, I have proposed a diplomatic surge in Iraq and in the neighboring countries. My plan to end the war also seeks to use policy measures now to ensure that our troops are not confronted with destabilizing ethnic strife that undercuts regional stability later. To that end, I have proposed that we condition any future assistance to Iraq on human rights performance, that we aggressively seek to assist Iraq's internally displaced now, that we increase funding for refugees in neighboring countries, and that we declare the international community's intention to hold the perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide accountable for their crimes.

WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TOP THREE NATIONAL SECURITY PRIORITIES IF YOU WERE ELECTED?
My first priority would be to end the war in Iraq. It has cost America dearly in terms of blood and treasure, been a diversion from the fight against al Qaeda, stretched our military, and undermined the view of the United States the world wide. Ending the war in Iraq will permit us to develop a comprehensive strategy against terrorism, which will be another chief national security priority of my administration. I will ensure that we are taking sufficient action against the terrorists on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; that we develop the capabilities and partnerships we need to counter the terrorist threat in other parts of the world; that we engage the world to dry up support for terrorism and extremism; that we restore for the rule of law and our values; and that we secure a resilient homeland. My administration will also make it a priority to marshal a global effort to meet a threat that rises above all others in urgency -- securing, destroying, and stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction. As president, I will lead a global effort to secure all nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites within four years -- the most effective way to prevent terrorists from acquiring a bomb. We should fully implement the law I passed with Senator Dick Lugar that would help the United States and our allies detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass destruction throughout the world. While we work to secure existing stockpiles of nuclear material, we should also negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of new nuclear weapons material. As starting points, the world must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and work to eliminate North Korea's nuclear weapons program. We must also dissuade other countries from joining the nuclear club. Countries should not be able to build a weapons program under the auspices of developing peaceful nuclear power. That's why we should create an international fuel bank to back up commercial fuel supplies so there's an assured supply and no more excuses for nations like Iran to build their own enrichment plants. And if we want the world to deemphasize the role of nuclear weapons, the United States and Russia must lead by example. President Bush once said, 'The United States should remove as many weapons as possible from high-alert, hair-trigger status -- another unnecessary vestige of Cold War confrontation.' Six years later, President Bush has not acted on this promise. I will. We cannot and should not accept the threat of accidental or unauthorized nuclear launch. We can maintain a strong nuclear deterrent to protect our security without rushing to produce a new generation of warheads.

WHAT TYPES OF REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES DO YOU PLAN ON IMPLEMENTING OR PROMOTING IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH CLIMATE CHANGE AND TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY LESS OIL DEPENDENT?
Global warming is not just the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet -- it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind. Combating global warming will be a top priority of my presidency, and I will attend to it personally. Putting a price on carbon is the most important step we can take to reduce emissions. I will enact an economy-wide market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050. I will devote significant resources from a permit auction toward accelerating the development and deployment of low carbon technologies and addressing the economic challenges imposed on key industrial sectors. Another top priority for my energy and global warming agenda will be changing the cars we drive and the fossil fuels we burn. I will increase fuel efficiency standards by 4% per year, lift the 60,000-per-manufacturer cap on buyer tax credits to encourage more Americans to buy ultra-efficient vehicles, and encourage automakers to make fuel efficient hybrid vehicles. Domestic automakers will get either assistance shouldering their health care legacy costs in exchange for investing 50 percent of the savings into technology to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles or generous tax incentives for retooling assembly plants. I proposed a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to reduce the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of passenger vehicle fuels sold in the U.S. by 10 percent in 2020 and require additional reductions of 1% annually thereafter.

SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT HAVE A ROLE IN ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY RESOURCES? IF YES, HOW WOULD YOU DO IT?
Yes, I will dramatically increase federal investment in advanced clean-energy technologies and energy efficiency. I believe that the U.S. can and should be a global leader in the development of alternative energy sources, such as ethanol and other biofuels, as well as wind and solar. We should set benchmarks for production so that more companies will invest in production and create distribution facilities where the average consumer can access biofuels for cars designed to run on them. And I believe nationally we must get more energy from renewable sources and support a goal of 20% renewable energy by 2020. We have vast potential in this country to produce clean renewable energy and reduce our reliance on dwindling domestic natural gas reserves. The investment certainty provided by a significant RPS will encourage innovation, bring down the costs of renewable power, encourage necessary investment in new transmission, inspire new domestic industries, and strengthen rural economies. I will also create the 5-E (Energy Efficiency, Environmental Education and Employment) Disconnected Youth Service Corps. This program will directly engage disconnected and disadvantaged youth in energy efficiency and environmental service opportunities to strengthen their communities while also providing them with practical skills and experience in important career fields of expected high-growth employment. The program will engage private sector employers and unions to provide apprenticeship opportunities.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HANDLE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS? DO YOU SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH'S IMMIGRATION PLAN?
I was very disappointed by the Congress's failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform. This crisis demands that we take action. Holes remain in our borders. Millions of undocumented immigrants persist in the shadows. I will work to pass comprehensive reform that protects our security, bolsters our economy, and preserves America's tradition as a nation of immigrants who are welcomed as long as they work hard and play by the rules.

WHAT ARE YOUR TOP THREE PRIORITIES WITH REGARD TO IMMIGRATION?
We need to work in a bipartisan way to achieve comprehensive immigration reform. First, on security, comprehensive reform has to mean gaining operational control of our borders by using better technology, improving infrastructure, and making smart choices about where we deploy resources on the Southern and Northern borders. These actions can strengthen our security while discouraging people from taking the risk of crossing the border illegally. Second, at the workplace, we need a simple, but mandatory electronic system that enables employers to verify the legal status of the people they hire. Third, we need to bring the 12 million undocumented people out of the shadows. We need to be realistic about the fact that they are here, we can't deport them, and they have become an integral part of our society. We need to give this population a chance to pay a fine, to have provisional status in the country, and to get into the back of the line for citizenship.

DO YOU SUPPORT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION? IF YOU DO, WHY DO YOU THINK IT IS A BENEFIT TO OUR COUNTRY? IF NOT, WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD BE GAINED BY CHANGING OR ELIMINATING IT?
I support affirmative action. When there is strong evidence of prolonged and systemic discrimination by organizations, affirmative action may be the only meaningful remedy available. Affirmative action programs, when properly structured, can open up opportunities otherwise closed to qualified minorities without having an adverse impact on the opportunities for whites. And while I support affirmative action for minorities, I also support efforts to increase opportunities for qualified students from low-income college to attend colleges and universities -- regardless of their race.

DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE ARGUMENT THAT ONLY THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS ARE BENEFITING FROM THE CURRENT ECONOMIC GROWTH? WHY OR WHY NOT?
Today's economic growth and federal economic policies disproportionately benefit the wealthiest of Americans, many of whom have armies of lobbyists and political fundraisers at their disposal. Special interests that have spent billions of dollars lobbying Washington have received preferential tax treatment, scores of congressional earmarks and favorable regulatory decisions at the expense of low and middle-income Americans. My top priority in Washington is to put America's interests before the special interests and ensure that the benefits of globalization and economic growth are distributed more fairly in our society.

WHAT ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS YOU WOULD DO TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY?
First, I will make strategic, long-term investments into American infrastructure to create more high-wage jobs. I will expand federal funding for basic research, make the tax credit for research and development permanent, and expand the deployment of broadband technology, so that businesses can invest in innovation and create high-paying, secure jobs. And I will make investments in education, training, and workforce development so that Americans can leverage our strengths -- our ingenuity and entrepreneurialism -- to create new high-wage jobs and prosper in a world economy. Second, I will fight against trade agreements that undermine American competitiveness and use trade as a tool to grow American jobs. I will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) that fail to live up to those important benchmarks. Third, I will promote digital inclusion. Getting broadband Internet access into every home and business in urban America at an affordable rate could give low-income people increased opportunities to start businesses and engage actively in our communities.

IF ELECTED, WOULD YOU BALANCE THE BUDGET? IF YOU ANSWERED YES, HOW SOON WOULD YOU DO IT?
I am committed to restoring fiscal discipline and reforming our current budget and tax system. The most important first step we can take on that path is to restore pay-as-you-go spending rules so that we do not dig ourselves into deeper debt. My priorities will not increase the deficit. I will pay for each of the investments I call for by either cutting other spending or finding new revenue sources. If in the end I can't find enough offsets to fund all of my priorities, I will prioritize them. I will protect the tax cuts for the middle class, but I will repeal the unnecessary tax cuts for oil and gas companies and for the wealthiest Americans.

WOULD YOU ROLL BACK TAX CUTS THAT WERE SUPPORTED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION?
Yes. I support the tax cuts for low and middle income families and will work to make them permanent in a fiscally responsible way. These are the families facing the greatest economic challenges and anxiety, and they are the ones who should benefit first. I do not support making permanent Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. Rather than providing expensive, deficit-financed tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest Americans, we should be working to fix our tax system to help the middle-class. Extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy simply does not do that.

DO YOU SUPPORT THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND PROGRAM? WHY OR WHY NOT?
The goal of the No Child Left Behind Act is the right one -- ensuring that all children can meet high standards -- but the law has significant flaws that need to be addressed. However, unfulfilled funding promises, inadequate implementation by the Department of Education, and shortcomings in the design of the law itself have limited its effectiveness and undercut its support among many people who care deeply about our schools and our students. The shortcomings of NCLB, however, shouldn't end the conversation. They should be the start of a conversation about how we can do better. One of the greatest troubles of No Child Left Behind is that we have spent too much time preparing students for tests that do not provide any valuable, timely feedback on how to improve a student's learning. We need tests and measurements, but we should ensure that they are useful to improve student learning. As president, I will support the creation of testing models that will: provide educators and students with timely feedback about how to improve student performance instead of arriving with too little too late; measure readiness for college and success in an information-age workplace by testing reading comprehension, writing skills, and other critical thinking skills; and indicate whether individual students are actually making progress toward reaching high standards. Good teachers with the tools to do their jobs should not have to teach to the test. They should be able to teach a rich curriculum.

WHAT CHANGES, IF ANY, WOULD YOU ATTEMPT TO IMPLEMENT IN NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY?
As President, I'd launch a campaign to recruit and support hundreds of thousands of newteachers across the country, because the single most important factor inside the school building for a student's achievement is the person standing in front of the classroom. I will treat teachers like the professionals they are, making sure they get the pay they deserve, while working with them to develop the high standards we need. We need to create real career opportunities that reward successful teachers, motivate them to stay in the profession, and take advantage of their skills to help mentor new teachers. Teachers and educators need time to plan lessons and learn. That time should be made available each week and in the summer time. And teachers and principals should be paid for this additional work. We can't ignore that the achievement gap is a problem across the country. To tackle this problem, the first thing we have to do is close the gap that exists between children before they enter kindergarten by providing high-quality preschool opportunities to all children. Far too few Latino and African-American children are enrolled in early childhood education programs, despite the proven successes of such programs. As president, I will increase funding for Head Start and expand access to Pre-K. My plan to attract and retain high-quality teachers in high-needs districts will also go a long way toward closing this achievement gap. I have proposed grant funding for prospective teachers to serve residencies with school districts similar to training in other professional fields like medicine. Prospective teachers will learn from mentor teachers, with stipends provided to teachers-in-training in exchange for a commitment to teach in that district once they complete the program. This will provide effective training of new teachers in high-needs districts.

WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT DEFINES MARRIAGE AS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN?
I oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment.

WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON CIVIL UNIONS BETWEEN SAME SEX PARTNERS?
I support civil unions.

DO YOU SUPPORT THE ROE V. WADE DECISION OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THIS DECISION OVERTURNED? WHY OR WHY NOT?
I have been a consistent champion of reproductive choice and will make preserving women's rights under Roe v. Wade a priority as president. I oppose any constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in that case.

SHOULD THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE A ROLE IN SEEKING AN END TO POVERTY? WHAT WOULD YOU DO, SPECIFICALLY, TO DEAL WITH POVERTY?
The federal government has a critical role to play in eradicating poverty. It's a moral outrage that in the richest nation on earth, 37 million Americans are living in poverty. I will increase federal funding for anti-poverty programs. In addition to passing my universal health care plan, I will fully fund the Community Development Block Grant program and create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund. I will increase funding for transitional jobs and career pathways programs and I'll provide greater supports for exoffenders and their families. I will ensure that minimum wage is indexed for inflation. And I will expand eligibility and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to benefit 12 million Americans. Additionally, I have called for the creation of a new program that replicates the success of the Harlem Children's Zone -- an all-encompassing, all-hands-on-deck anti-poverty effort that is literally saving a generation of children in a neighborhood where they were never supposed to have a chance. As president, an important part of my plan to combat poverty will be to replicate the Harlem Children's Zone in twenty cities across the country. These 'Promise Neighborhoods' will focus on addressing concentrated, intergenerational poverty in our cities. We'll train staff, we'll have them draw up detailed plans with attainable goals, and the federal government will provide half of the funding for each city, with the rest coming from philanthropies and businesses. I will also create a White House Office of Urban Policy and have the Director of that Office report directly to me. Finally, I will provide families the support they need to raise their children. I will provide more financial support to fathers who make the responsible choice to help raise their children and crack down on the fathers who don't. And I'll help new mothers with their new responsibilities by expanding a pioneering program known as the Nurse-Family Partnership that offers home visits by trained registered nurses to low-income mothers and mothers-to-be. My plan will assist approximately 570,000 first-time mothers each year.

DO YOU THINK GUN CONTROL HAS AN IMPACT ON CRIME RATES IN THE UNITED STATES?
Yes, I do think that reasonable gun control measures reduces violent crime and saves lives. I respect the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. But we can't deny that gun violence has taken the lives of too many Americans. I believe that through common-sense measures, we can keep guns from those who may pose a threat, while also protecting the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen.

DO YOU THINK TIGHTER RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE IN PLACE FOR THOSE BUYING A FIREARM?
I support reasonable, common-sense measures to limit such occurrences. I would close the gun-show loophole and require mandatory background checks on purchasers at gun shows. That loophole has been exploited by everyone from foreign terrorists to the Columbine High School shooters. Closing it would not impair the rights of hunters and other lawful gun owners. I also believe that we should make the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban permanent. Those weapons belong on a foreign battlefield, not on our streets. Finally, I support making guns in this country child proof. This is, again, a common-sense solution: guns and kids don't mix.

IF ELECTED, WOULD YOU KEEP THE CURRENT BAN ON FUNDING FOR EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH IN PLACE? WHY OR WHY NOT?
No. Each year, 100,000 Americans will develop Alzheimer's disease, with impaired memory, ability to understand, and judgment. Over 1 million adults will be diagnosed with diabetes this year, and risk complications that include blindness, damaged nerves and loss of kidney function. We all know or have met individuals with spinal cord injuries, including national celebrities, local war heroes and loved ones from our own families and circles of friends, who are struggling to maintain mobility and independence. For most of our history, medicine has offered little hope of recovery to the 100 million individuals affected by these and other devastating illnesses and injuries. Until now. Recent developments in stem cell research may hold the key to improved treatments, if not cures, for those affected by Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, spinal cord injury and countless other conditions. For this reason, I am a proud supporter of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act. The president was wrong to veto it, and I will make sure that it is finally signed into law when I'm president.

WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TOP THREE OVERALL PRIORITIES IF ELECTED?
My top priority as president will be ending this war in Iraq, a war that should have never been authorized and never been waged. In doing so, I will work to keep our country safe from terrorists and to restore American credibility around the world. Providing universal health care to the 47 million Americans who currently do not have it will be another top priority of my administration, as will combating global warming and putting our country on the path toward energy independence. But all of the issues that I have focused on in this campaign -- whether it's creating a 21st century education system and fighting poverty or achieving comprehensive immigration reform and strengthening our economy -- are vitally important and must be prioritized by the next president. And all of these issues share one thing in common: in order to fully address them, we have to do more than change political parties. We have to fundamentally change our politics and transform the way business is done in Washington.

© 2008 The Washington Post Company

[Shelly]

McCAIN

SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT HAVE A ROLE IN EXPANDING ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE? WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WOULD YOU DO TO RESTRUCTURE THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM?
I believe real health care reform must put individuals and families, not bureaucrats, at the center of our health care system. Americans deserve leadership for real reform that provides greater access to high-quality health care and ends spiraling costs. But the road to reform does not lead through Washington and a hugely expensive, bureaucratic, government-controlled system. We have all tangled enough with the existing bureaucracy to know that even more will diminish, not improve, quality. I believe the best way expand access and controls costs, without hurting the quality of our health care, is to harness competition to offer more affordable insurance options for as many Americans as possible, and to leverage innovation -- such as low-cost health clinics in retail stores for example -- and cost-effectiveness of our nation's firms to put an end to existing rigid, unfriendly bureaucracies. I support the development of a secure national medical records and placing greater emphasis on preventative care so fewer people have to spend time in hospital and emergency care. We must build a national market where insurance is more available, portable, and accessible across state lines; in which patients' rights are respected and their information under their control; and one in which people may save more in tax-exempt Health Savings Accounts. I believe we must also assist those who need help in getting health coverage by offering a tax credit, for example, to help people pay for insurance. We also need more transparency of prices and quality measures so patients can make informed choices. This is why real reform must provide incentives for a national market - including the reimportation of pharmaceuticals - that offer greater transparency about effective patient care, options for preventative care and therapies, and prices so that competition in the health care market makes it easier for individuals and families to navigate toward better quality and lower cost. I will demand reform to medical malpractice laws to curb abusive lawsuits that squeeze doctors, prevent innovation, and drive up the cost of health care. Finally, I encourage our states to continue exploring with their own health care reforms to see what works and what doesn't. American health care is the best in the world, but I believe we can do much better with this kind of reform.

DO YOU SUPPORT ALLOWING A PORTION OF THE MONEY CURRENTLY WITHHELD FOR SOCIAL SECURITY TO BE PUT INTO PRIVATE ACCOUNTS? WHY OR WHY NOT?
I believe that we may meet our obligations to the retirees of today and the future without raising taxes, and I support supplementing the current Social Security system with personal accounts - but not as a substitute for addressing benefit promises that cannot be kept. People in both parties agree that we must make the hard decisions to restore solvency to these programs.

WHAT SPECIFIC CHANGES WOULD YOU MAKE TO THE SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAM?
No government program is the object of more political posturing and spin than Social Security. Americans have the right to know the truth, no matter how bad it is. The current Social Security system is unsustainable. A half century ago, sixteen American workers supported every retiree. Today, it's just three. Soon, it will be only two. If we don't make some tough choices, Social Security either won't be there for our children and grandchildren or we will have had to raise taxes so dramatically to support them that we will have crushed the prosperity of average Americans. I believe that we may meet our obligations to the retirees of today and the future without raising taxes, and I support supplementing the current Social Security system with personal accounts - but not as a substitute for addressing benefit promises that cannot be kept. People in both parties agree that we must make the hard decisions to restore solvency to these programs. As President, I'll submit a plan to save Social Security, and I'll ask Congress to do the same. I'll work on a bipartisan basis to make the hard choices; to protect the retirement security of the American worker, and the growth of the American economy. And if Congress is afraid to make those choices, then they can just let me do it. I'll take the heat. I'll ask Congress to let me submit a comprehensive proposal. I'll prepare it carefully, fairly and honestly. And they can vote yes or no: no amendments; no filibuster; no tricks: no band-aid solutions; no more kicking the can down the road as the problem becomes harder and more expensive to solve; no more hoping that a future generation of leaders will have the courage we lack. If some of their constituents complain, and they will, they can put the blame on me.

DO YOU SUPPORT SETTING A DEADLINE FOR EITHER A WITHDRAWAL OR A PARTIAL PULLBACK OF TROOPS FROM IRAQ? IF SO, WHAT WOULD BE THE DATE OF THAT DEADLINE?
Today, Americans are fighting bravely in battles that are as dangerous, difficult and consequential as the great battles of our armed forces' storied past. In Iraq, I know the war has not gone well, and the American people have grown tired of it. I, too, have been made sick at heart by the many mistakes made by civilian and military commanders and the terrible price we have paid for them. I want our troops home too, but I want our troops to return home with honor and in victory. We cannot react to past mistakes by embracing calls to begin troop withdrawals or to revive our previous failed strategy of a partial troop pullback that will be an even greater mistake, a mistake of colossal historical proportions, which will seriously weaken American security.

WHAT DISTINGUISHES YOUR PLAN FOR IRAQ FROM THOSE OF THE OTHER CANDIDATES?
Presidential candidates argue for the course of cutting our losses and withdrawing in the vain hope it will improve American security. I cannot join them in such wishful and dangerous thinking. I believe that their approach would make the world a more dangerous place and weaken American security. For many years I warned about the erosion of security in Iraq and called for a different strategy that would give us the best chance to succeed. Because our troops were spread too thin, I urged a larger ground force in Iraq to implement a new counterinsurgency campaign like the one now underway in Iraq. Today, we have new commanders in Iraq, and they are following a new course we should have been following from the beginning, which makes the most effective use of our strength and doesn't strengthen the tactics of our enemy. This new battle plan is succeeding in places where our previous tactics failed. Although the outcome remains uncertain, General Petraeus deserves adequate time to salvage from the wreckage of our past mistakes a measure of stability for Iraq and the Middle East, and a more secure future for the American people. Premature troop withdrawals or redeployment would not advance peace. It would strengthen al Qaeda and boost recruitment in their ranks, empower Iran and other hostile powers, unleash a full-scale civil war in Iraq that could quite possibly provoke genocide there, and destabilize the entire region as neighboring powers aid of their favored factions. The consequences would threaten us for years, and I am certain would eventually draw us into a wider and more difficult conflict. Our defeat in Iraq would be catastrophic, not just for Iraq, but for us. I believe that as long as we have a chance to succeed we must try to succeed.

WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TOP THREE NATIONAL SECURITY PRIORITIES IF YOU WERE ELECTED?
Defeating radical Islamist extremists is the national security challenge of our time. At home, my administration will be fully prepared to deter, detect, and respond to any attack. But we must stay on offense. The 9/11 attack highlighted a failure to adequately respond to a hostile global terror network. Before 9/11, al Qaeda was basically free to plan, train, and conduct attacks from Afghanistan-despite bombing US embassies and attacking the USS Cole. As president, I will not allow such terrorist sanctuary. We must never again assume that the activities of extremists overseas do not impact our own security, which is why we must succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan. But prevailing in this struggle will require more than military power. I would employ every tool possible to help moderate Muslims resist the well-financed campaign of extremism that is tearing their societies apart. I would also seek a Free Trade Area from Morocco to Afghanistan, open to all who do not sponsor terrorism. Secondly, I will act to break our dependency on foreign oil. Al Qaeda continues to plan attacks on oil facilities hoping to skyrocket oil prices and nosedive the American economy. We cannot continue to enrich the foreign oil cartel and petro-dictators. In fact, some of our gas dollars flow to the very fanatics we are fighting. As President, I'll implement an energy strategy of diversification and conservation to break the dominance of oil in our transportation sector. For example, my agenda will include deploying more technologies to improve energy efficiency, developing alternative fuels, increasing electrical power generation from nuclear power and other sources and increasing domestic oil production in environmentally friendly ways. I will also push for a worldwide League of Democracies. It could act where the UN fails, principally because of the vetoes of autocratic states. The UN has proven to be ineffective in meeting the great challenges of our time. The League would not supplant the UN but would harness the political and moral advantages offered by united democratic action. Whether pressuring tyrants in Burma or Zimbabwe or Sudan or Syria, uniting to impose sanctions on Iran and North Korea to stem nuclear proliferation, or supporting struggling democracies in Ukraine and Serbia, the League would advance freedom and opportunity. As president, I would call a summit of the world's democracies in my first year--just as America led sixty years ago in creating the NATO alliance.

DO YOU THINK CLIMATE CHANGE IS CAUSED BY HUMAN ACTIVITY? IF NOT, WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THE ISSUE? WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WOULD YOU DO TO DEAL WITH CLIMATE CHANGE?
Based on consensus among the world's scientists, I believe that global climate change is real, consequential, and related to human activities. Noticeable effects from the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are already being felt on earth, and scientists are convinced that the effects will grow more significant and costly. Experts believe that the effects of these changes - including increased ground temperatures, reduced water supply, rising sea levels, and changing agricultural patterns - can result in social, economic, and political upheaval that impact U.S. national security. Furthermore, market forces, political instability, terrorism and environmental pressures make our dependence on foreign oil a strategic vulnerability. We must act now to strengthen American security. As president, I will pursue a market-based, cap and trade system to achieve appropriate limits on greenhouse gas emissions as efficiently and effectively as possible. I will ensure that such a system is harnessed as a means of diversifying the nation's energy mix to make us less dependent on foreign oil and to place America at the forefront in the development of the energy and environmental protection technologies the world will demand for many years to come. I will also ensure that these efforts meet several key tests, including proper protection of consumers and the economy, preventing other countries from dodging their responsibilities, promoting the development and deployment of advanced technology, and prioritizing the best interests of America's economic, environmental, and national security. I will not support schemes advanced by other policymakers and candidates that would use this problem to levy new taxes that will be more successful at filling government coffers and empowering bureaucrats than achieving necessary environmental objectives as flexibly and efficiently as possible.

SHOULD THE GOVERNMENT HAVE A ROLE IN ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY-EFFICIENT TECHNOLOGIES AND SUSTAINABLE ENERGY RESOURCES? IF YES, HOW WOULD YOU DO IT?
I believe we must act now to increase our energy security, but the strategy I propose won't be another grab bag of handouts to this or that industry and a full employment act for lobbyists. Energy efficiency by using improved technology and practicing sensible habits in our homes, businesses and automobiles is a big part of the answer, and is something we can achieve right now. And new advances will make conservation an ever more important part of the solution. Improved light bulbs can use much less energy; smart grid technology can help homeowners and businesses lower their energy use, and breakthroughs in high tech materials can greatly improve fuel efficiency in our oil-dependent transportation sector. We can easily deploy such technology today for less than $100 per flexible-fuel vehicle. We can also provide fuel options and improve the fuel efficiency of our vehicle fleet by making them out of high tech materials that improve their strength and safety. We are doing that very thing right now to beat our foreign competitors in the aerospace industry. Alcohol fuels made from corn, sugar, switch grass and many other sources, fuel cells, biodiesel derived from waste products, natural gas, and other technologies are all promising and available alternatives to oil. America's electricity production is for the most part petroleum free, and the existing electric power grid has the capacity to handle the added demand imposed by plug-in hybrid vehicles. We can add more capacity and improve its reliability in the years ahead. With some of the savings from cutting subsidies for industries that can stand on their own, we can establish a national challenge to improve the cost, range, size, and weight of electric batteries for automobiles. Fifty percent of cars on the road are driven 25 miles a day or less. Affordable battery-powered vehicles that can meet average commuter needs could help us cut oil imports in half. The reward will be earned through merit by whoever accomplishes the task. I want to improve and make permanent the research and development tax credit. I want to spend less money on government bureaucracies, and, where the private sector isn't moving out of regulatory fear, to form the partnerships necessary to build demonstration models of promising new technologies such as advanced nuclear power plants, coal gasification, carbon capture and storage, and renewable power so we can efficiently use our most abundant resources.

HOW DO YOU THINK THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HANDLE ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS? DO YOU SUPPORT PRESIDENT BUSH'S IMMIGRATION PLAN?
Immigration is one of those challenging issues that touch on many aspects of American life. I have always believed that our border must be secure and that the federal government has utterly failed in its responsibility to ensure that it is secure. If we have learned anything from the recent immigration debate, it is that Americans have little trust that their government will honor a pledge to do the things necessary to make the border secure.

WHAT ARE YOUR TOP THREE PRIORITIES WITH REGARD TO IMMIGRATION?
As president, I will secure the border. I will restore the trust Americans should have in the basic competency of their government. A secure border is an essential element of our national security. Tight border security includes not just the entry and exit of people, but also the effective screening of cargo at our ports and other points of entry. We can further strengthen our border security if we pursue policies that recognize the importance of building strong allies in Mexico and Latin America who reject the siren call of authoritarians like Hugo Chavez, support freedom and democracy, and seek strong domestic economies with abundant economic opportunities for their citizens. Furthermore, our policies must promote robust economic growth - by keeping government spending in check, holding down taxes, and cutting unnecessary regulatory burdens -- so American businesses can hire and pay the best. They must recognize the importance of a flexible labor market to keep employers in business and our economy on top. It should provide skilled Americans and immigrants with opportunity. Our education system should ensure skills for our younger workers, and our retraining and assistance programs for displaced workers must be modernized so they can pursue those opportunities. Our policies must also recognize the importance of assimilation of our immigrant population, which includes learning English, American history and civics, and respecting the values of a democratic society -- and that America will always be that 'shining city upon a hill,' a beacon of hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life built on hard work and optimism. Border security and our failed immigration system are more examples of an ailing Washington culture in need of reform to regain the trust of Americans. In too many areas -- from immigration and pork barrel spending to Social Security, health care, energy security and tax relief -- business-as-usual politics prevents addressing the important challenges facing our nation.

DO YOU SUPPORT AFFIRMATIVE ACTION? IF YOU DO, WHY DO YOU THINK IT IS A BENEFIT TO OUR COUNTRY? IF NOT, WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD BE GAINED BY CHANGING OR ELIMINATING IT?
I believe in the protection of civil rights and equal opportunity for all Americans. America must never relent in its pursuit of equality under the law. Regardless of race, ethnicity or gender the law should be equally applied. We must recommit ourselves to the ideal that every individual is created equal in the eyes of God and every individual must therefore be treated equally under the law. Fully embracing this ideal means providing every American the ability to compete on a level playing field where individual creativity, hard work and initiative are rewarded. It means aggressively enforcing our nation's anti-discrimination laws. It means taking seriously our commitment to educate all of America's children so they have the necessary tools to compete and succeed in life. It means building a strong, vibrant economy where opportunity is always abundant for all who seek it. It also means rejecting affirmative action plans and quotas that give weight to one group of Americans at the expense of another. Plans that result in quotas, where such plans have not been judicially created to remedy a specific, proven act of discrimination, only result in more discrimination and violate the concept of equality of opportunity. As President, I will use to power of my office to promote economic opportunity and to strengthen the fabric of our nation. I also believe that rather than engaging in unnecessary, divisive political debates, it is far more constructive to engage in dialogue and cooperation, focusing our mutual efforts on providing all Americans the chance to fulfill their expectations.

DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THE ARGUMENT THAT ONLY THE WEALTHIEST AMERICANS ARE BENEFITING FROM THE CURRENT ECONOMIC GROWTH? WHY OR WHY NOT?
I believe that we should relentlessly pursue a growth-oriented economic policy, because I believe all Americans share in the benefits of an expanding economy. Over the past year, Americans in the bottom income quartile experienced higher wage growth than those in the top income range, with gains nearly double the rate of inflation. I do however understand that this is not always the case. I understand that our increasingly globalized economy doesn't always or automatically translate into higher quality of life for every American. It is government's job to help displaced workers get education and training. And, most important, we must dramatically improve the quality of primary and secondary education to empower future workers to compete in the world market. Education must be a lifelong process. An educated worker is a worker who can adapt and can change. Instead we have an outmoded training system for displaced workers and an education system that fails to ensure our children can compete in an ever-changing economy. This is unacceptable. We have an obligation to current and future generations to provide the opportunity for every American to prosper. I remain committed to pursuing the economic growth that we have enjoyed in the past. Fulfilling the promise of American prosperity in a global economy rests on our ability to provide a pro-growth, job-creating environment for working men and women, for innovators and entrepreneurs, and for our children on whom the world will soon depend.

WHAT ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS YOU WOULD DO TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROSPERITY?
I am committed to pursuing a pro-growth economic agenda. First, we must minimize the burden of the federal government on entrepreneurs and the private sector by keeping spending under control and taxes low. We should keep income taxes low by making the tax cuts permanent, thus eliminating the threat of a crippling tax increase in 2011, by repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax, and also by making it more difficult for Congress to raise taxes by requiring a three-fifths, super-majority vote in order to pass a tax increase. But low taxes work best when accompanied by low spending. To limit spending, we must eliminate pork-barrel spending and reform entitlement programs. Opening markets for American goods and services is indispensable to our future prosperity. We can compete with anyone. American leadership on trade is critical to a vibrant world economy and to ensure access to new markets which will benefit our businesses, workers, farmers, and ranchers. Ninety-five percent of the world's customers are outside our borders, so it makes sense to try to reach more of them with our products and services by concluding more trade agreements tied to vigorous enforcement. Over the past fifty years, efforts to reduce global barriers to trade have raised U.S. incomes by $1 trillion every year - a $3,500 'trade refund' for every man, woman, and child in the United States. We also benefit from direct investment in our nation. Americans do not shy away from the challenge of competition: they welcome it. Because of that, we attract foreign investment from across the world. Trade has also contributed to our low unemployment and inflation rates. But the benefits we enjoy today can easily be gone tomorrow if governments travel the road of protectionism to failure. We must stand firmly against such economic isolationism today to ensure America's prosperity tomorrow. America has succeeded because we've more willing to embrace and encourage economic change more than most of our competitors. *break* Additionally, a strong tech industry is critical to our continued prosperity. Maintaining our tech edge requires robust basic research, a highly skilled workforce, and a healthy investment climate. We must support our tech industry with smart policies that make basic research a priority, improve our schools to produce graduates with strong math and science skills, make our immigration system friendlier to the world's tech innovators, and make our tax system and patent laws innovation friendly.

IF ELECTED, WOULD YOU BALANCE THE BUDGET? IF YOU ANSWERED YES, HOW SOON WOULD YOU DO IT?
If I'm elected President, I won't leave office without balancing the federal budget. And I won't do it with smoke and mirrors. When I leave office, I want to leave a budget that stays balanced after I'm gone, and can weather the occasional downturn and unexpected contingency. I'll do it by spending less and encouraging economic growth. If the federal government can't be funded with current revenues, which are growing at historic rates, then the government is too big and is growing too fast. I won't balance the budget by allowing the President's income and investment tax cuts to expire. For example, I'll hold government agencies accountable for the money they spend and make every aspect of government purchases and performance transparent. Every federal agency is going to have goals set at the beginning of the fiscal year, and they'll have to issue public progress reports at the end of the year on how well or poorly they met them. We'll find some good performers, and I'll be proud to recognize them. But when we do not, performance will determine whether they are funded the next year. Government programs will be judged for the success they've had in meeting a need that people can't be expected to meet for themselves. If a program has a good record, and serves a purpose that the private sector can't they'll receive continued funding. But we're not going to spend more money on them just because they have been around for a long time. If they're not giving Americans good value for their tax dollars, they're going to have to change or they're going out of business. Wasteful spending has gone from irresponsible to indefensible. I promise, if I'm elected President I won't let Congress waste any more money on programs that aren't reviewed or that need to be reformed or abolished or on projects that serve no greater purpose than to deceive voters into re-electing their local Congressman. I also believe the President should have the line item veto as 43 governors have, and I'll fight to get it. I will veto every pork-barrel bill Congress sends me, and if they keep sending them to me, I'll use the bully pulpit to make the people who are wasting your money famous.

WOULD YOU ROLL BACK TAX CUTS THAT WERE SUPPORTED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION?
We should keep income taxes low by making the President's tax cuts permanent and eliminating the threat of a crippling tax increase in 2011. Raising taxes is wrong headed. In fact, we should make it more difficult for Congress to raise taxes on Americans by requiring a three-fifths, super-majority vote in order to pass a tax increase. This will ensure that if Democrats want to raise America's taxes, they will have to get a lot more than 51 votes to do it. Additionally, we certainly do not need two separate tax systems, a regular tax and an Alternative Minimum Tax. I am committed to repealing the AMT before millions of American families are forced to devote even more of their hard work to paying for Washington's spending sprees. I am committed to ending the spending sprees. One reason to undertake tax reform is to keep taxes low, simple and fair before the AMT hits as many as 30 million people by 2010. I also believe an important element of the American dream is to have the opportunity to pass along to your children what you have worked hard to build. The tax code should respect and reflect that value. I believe we need to set a responsible policy and maintain it so that families and business owners can plan accordingly without being whipsawed by Washington. Consistent with these principles, I seek permanent reform of the estate tax, and I support raising the exemption from taxation on estates up to $10 million while cutting the tax rate to 15 percent.

DO YOU SUPPORT THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND PROGRAM? WHY OR WHY NOT?
The principles underneath No Child Left Behind -- standards, accountability, transparency, and choice-- are a major step in the right direction; taking away power from education bureaucrats and returning it to those on the front lines of education -- the local schools, the local teachers and the local parents. It has provided support and guidance to our state and local communities to strengthen our schools, while also giving much needed flexibility for every state in the use of federal education dollars. It also contains many initiatives that have helped ensure that more federal education dollars reach our classrooms rather than being lost in bureaucratic black hole. But education reform must go beyond No Child Left Behind by addressing the underlying cultural problems in our education system - a system that still seeks to avoid genuine accountability and responsibility for producing well-educated children.

WHAT CHANGES, IF ANY, WOULD YOU ATTEMPT TO IMPLEMENT IN NATIONAL EDUCATION POLICY?
American Education must be worthy of the promise we make to our children and ourselves: the freedom and opportunity to chase our dreams. Yet nearly half our children languish in schools unworthy of their potential. It is a betrayal of our promise and a threat to our global competitiveness. We must continue our efforts to set standards and hold schools accountable for their performance. Our schools can and should compete to be the most innovative, flexible and student-centered - not safe havens for the uninspired and unaccountable. Let them compete for the most effective, character-building teachers, hire them, and reward them. If a school won't change, the students should change schools. I believe parents should be empowered with school choice to send their children to the school that can best educate them just as many members of Congress do with their own children. I find it beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to chose their child's school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe. They make another choice. That is a right we should honor for all parents. It is fundamental, and essential. Accountability, choice, effective teachers -- it's a simple recipe to restore greatness to our schools and meet our promises to parents and their children.

WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT THAT DEFINES MARRIAGE AS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN?
I believe the institution of marriage should be protected and defined as a union between one man and one woman. This definition recognizes the fundamental role of the traditional family in shaping, stabilizing and strengthening our communities and our nation. I agree with the Founding Fathers that, as with most issues critical to the preservation and health of our civil society, the basic responsibility for preserving and strengthening the traditional family should reside at the level of government closest to the people. Where State and local governments act to preserve the traditional family the Courts should not overstep their authority and thwart the Constitutional right of the people to protect the traditional family. If the Supreme Court should ever exceed its Constitutional authority and strike down state or local laws designed to protect the traditional family, I would support a Constitutional amendment to define the family as a union between one man and one woman.

WHAT IS YOUR POSITION ON CIVIL UNIONS BETWEEN SAME SEX PARTNERS?
While, as a federalist, I recognize the right of the states to regulate the institution of marriage and to pass civil union laws, I strongly believe in the current law that declares that no other state should be legally bound to recognize same sex marriages or unions that might be legal in other places. But while the citizens of each state should decide this question, I personally oppose civil unions that for all intents and purposes confer the same status as traditional marriage. I am not against people entering into contracts or exchanging powers of attorney, a right that most states already afford to all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation. While, as a federalist, I recognize the right of the states to regulate the institution of marriage and to pass civil union laws, I strongly believe in the current law that declares that no other state should be legally bound to recognize same sex marriages or unions that might be legal in other places. But while the citizens of each state should decide this question, I personally oppose civil unions that for all intents and purposes confer the same status as traditional marriage. I am not against people entering into contracts or exchanging powers of attorney, a right that most states already afford to all citizens, regardless of sexual orientation.

DO YOU SUPPORT THE ROE V. WADE DECISION OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THIS DECISION OVERTURNED? WHY OR WHY NOT?
As someone who has consistently and strongly been pro-life, I fully believe that Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that should be overturned. Roe v. Wade is the most egregious example of judges who impose their own views by legislating from the bench rather than strictly rule what the Constitution says. The Supreme Court ruling on the horrific practice of partial-birth abortion in April was a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary. The ruling ensures that an unacceptable and unjustifiable practice will not be carried out on our innocent children. It also clearly speaks to the importance of nominating and confirming strict constructionist judges who interpret the law as it is written, and do not usurp the authority of Congress and state legislatures. Although critical, I also believe that the reversal of Roe v. Wade would represent only one step in the long path toward ending abortion. The Hyde Amendment, which prohibits your federal tax dollars from paying for abortions, has done more to reduce abortion that any other action taken by the federal government. I oppose the use of tax dollars to fund abortion and, if elected, I would veto any congressional attempt to provide federal funding of abortion. Furthermore, once the abortion issue is returned to the states, the fight for life will be one of courage and compassion - the courage of a pregnant mother to bring her child into the world and the compassion of civil society to meet her needs and those of her newborn baby. The pro-life movement has done tremendous work in promoting adoption, and in building and reinforcing the infrastructure of civil society by strengthening faith-based, community, and neighborhood organizations that can provide critical services to pregnant mothers in need. I believe this work must continue and government must find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion. If elected, I will work to find new ways to empower and strengthen these armies of compassion and to build the consensus necessary to end the human tragedy of abortion.

SHOULD THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAVE A ROLE IN SEEKING AN END TO POVERTY? WHAT WOULD YOU DO, SPECIFICALLY, TO DEAL WITH POVERTY?
I believe the government plays an essential role in addressing poverty. We must ensure that government policies promote freedom, opportunity and prosperity for all Americans. For example, among the most important determinants of economic well-being is educational attainment. The statistics are undeniable; if you can get a decent education, you can free yourself from the threat of poverty. This is why we all should agree that a quality education is the right of every child and the responsibility of every parent, teacher and school. Furthermore, I believe that government can improve the education system by establishing standards for accountability and performance in schools, fostering competition in the current education monopoly by allowing parents to choose the school that can best educate their child, and fighting the rising tide of high school dropouts. Fulfilling the promise of American prosperity in a global economy also rests on our ability to provide a pro-growth, job-creating environment for working men and women, for innovators and entrepreneurs, and for our children on whom the world will soon depend. A pro-growth economic policy that benefits all Americans must recognize that it is the private sector -- the entrepreneurs, the innovators, and all the other hard-working Americans -- which creates jobs and grows the economy. I believe Washington can best assist America's businesses by keeping taxes low and expanding global trade for American products to ensure continued economic growth so all Americans have the opportunity to share in our nation's prosperity. But we should also remember that the dynamic growth and sweeping changes in our economy bring opportunities but also challenges. Suddenly, the world changes, and through no fault of their own, some Americans find themselves unable to compete after having lost their job. Unfortunately, we have not been as good enough at helping them deal with these changes. We have enacted nearly a half-dozen government programs to assist displaced workers. But these programs have not provided the assistance these workers need to make it through the transition. We should replace our outmoded programs with a single, effective system for retraining, relocating and assisting workers who have lost a job. We can help people get back on their feet more quickly with jobs in the private sector, which offer the best training for a changing marketplace. We can strengthen community colleges and technical training, and give displaced workers more choices to find their way back to prosperous lives.

DO YOU THINK GUN CONTROL HAS AN IMPACT ON CRIME RATES IN THE UNITED STATES?
I do not believe we should tamper with the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, and I believe law-abiding citizens have the right to own guns. The right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is a fundamental, individual Constitutional right that we have a sacred duty to protect. We have a responsibility to ensure that criminals who violate the law are prosecuted to the fullest, rather than restricting the rights of law abiding citizens. Gun control is a proven failure in fighting crime. Law-abiding citizens should not be asked to give up their rights because of criminals - criminals who ignore gun control laws anyway. Neither justice nor domestic peace is served by holding the innocent responsible for the acts of the criminal.

DO YOU THINK TIGHTER RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE IN PLACE FOR THOSE BUYING A FIREARM?
I support instant criminal background checks to help prohibit criminals from buying firearms and have fought to ensure they are conducted thoroughly, efficiently, and without infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens. Federal law requires licensed firearm sellers at gun shows to do an instant criminal background check on purchasers while private firearm sellers at gun shows do not have to conduct such a check. I support such checks and believe that they must be conducted quickly to ensure that unnecessary delays do not effectively block transactions. I also oppose 'waiting periods' for law-abiding citizen's purchase of firearms. I do not support backdoor attempts to restrict Second Amendment rights by holding gun manufacturers liable for crimes committed by third parties using a firearm, and have worked to protect gun manufacturers from such inappropriate liability, nor do I support restrictions on so-called 'assault rifles.' I believe that banning ammunition is just another way to undermine Second Amendment rights. I also support the right of law-abiding citizens of the District of Columbia to bear arms, and oppose the confiscation of firearms from private citizens, particularly during times of crisis or emergency. Finally, I do believe in strict, mandatory penalties for criminals who use a firearm in the commission of a crime or illegally possess a firearm, and in requiring gun manufacturers to include gun safety devices such as trigger locks in product packaging.

IF ELECTED, WOULD YOU KEEP THE CURRENT BAN ON FUNDING FOR EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH IN PLACE? WHY OR WHY NOT?
I oppose the intentional creation of human embryos for research purposes, and I support legislation that Congress has passed making it a federal crime for researchers to use cells or fetal tissue from an embryo created for research purposes. I also support banning attempts to use or obtain cells from a human fetus gestated in the uterus of a nonhuman animal. I strongly oppose human cloning. I support a public policy that balances the moral concerns of those opposed to federal funding of embryonic stem cell research with the sense of moral imperative of taxpayers who support such research. I support the increase of funding for promising research programs, including amniotic fluid and adult stem cell research and other types of scientific study that do not involve the use of human embryos. While I support expanded federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, I believe clear lines should be drawn that reflect a refusal to sacrifice moral values and ethical principles for the sake of scientific progress, and that any such research should be subject to strict federal guidelines. Stem cell research holds the potential to unlock cures that could defeat deadly diseases and relieve tremendous human suffering. At the same time, one type of stem cell research, involving embryonic stem cells, has also raised serious ethical and moral concerns, both inside and outside the medical community. The compassion and drive to relieve suffering and to cure deadly diseases cannot be permitted to erode crucial moral and ethical principles.

WHAT WOULD BE YOUR TOP THREE OVERALL PRIORITIES IF ELECTED?
Winning the War Against Islamic Extremists: As president, I would take all my responsibilities to the American people seriously. But I would have one responsibility that would outweigh all the others and that is to protect the security of this great nation from all enemies. In particular, we must understand that we confront a lengthy struggle against Islamic extremism that will not be won quickly or easily. But we will win it. While our ultimate victory is not in doubt, the length and intensity of this struggle remain to be determined. It's up to us. We must recognize that our enemies are in this fight to win, and I assure you that I would employ all instruments of national power - military, intelligence, law enforcement, economic and political -- to defend our nation and defeat them. Reforming Government: Americans have lost trust that their government and its elected officials will serve America's interest, not their own. I would use my presidency to restore that trust. I would fight to ensure a political process worthy of the sacrifices that have been made by so many to keep us free and proud. I would see to it that the institutions of self-government are respected pillars of democracy, not commodities to be bought, bartered, or abused. Special interests have too much influence in Washington. That will end. I will secure the border, bring spending under control, veto pork-barrel spending bills, and keep taxes low. I would reform a tax code that is too complex and too burdensome. I will work to modernize Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and bring accountability, choice and competition to underperforming schools, so our children are equipped for the best jobs of the 21st century. Reforming Health Care for all Americans: I would address health care in America, an issue that touches every family in this nation and impacts our economy and fiscal outlook. I believe we can fix our health care system and lower costs without sacrificing quality. But I know the answer is not to increase the amount of bureaucracy through a government-controlled health care or single-payer system. The answer is to, for example, enhance the ability of the market participants to offer affordable and portable insurance options for as many Americans as possible and to help those without insurance to access the health care system with the dignity and quality care that all Americans expect and deserve.

© 2008 The Washington Post Company

[JoeChalupa]

I've read those Shelly. Thanks for posting. :tu

[Shelly]

:) Yeah, I was trying to find something the was formated like this and that was easy to read, and viola!

Is there something like this for the VPs?

[byrontx]

Great read. Thanks for the posting.