Category: All politics is local

Here is the final portion of my U.S. Senate “debate” that all started when I first sent out the “Ten Questions” back in early May. Four months later, it’s time for the voters to decide if any of the responders are worthy or if those who deigned not to respond still merit their vote. For my part, I wasn’t too impressed with any of the answers I got from the Republican side, but I would’ve liked to hear from the six who didn’t reply (Gordon, Shawver, and Vovak did; Bly, Hampton, Kimble, Madej, Steele, and Vaughn didn’t.) I also never got responses on the House side from any of the four candidates.

If you want to look back, part one is here and part two is here. Part one also introduces the speakers once again, plus I have the websites of those who have them linked to the right in the U.S. Senator (Maryland) category. I’ll have a much shorter list of links in a week.

This part begins with Question #7 and concludes with Question #10. On Question #10, George English is featured, when he answered the Ten Questions he deferred to his website with the exception of that particular question.

Tomorrow, I reveal my endorsements for the U.S. Senate seat from both parties.

Question #7:

Back to domestic issues. One pillar or goal of the Bush administration was to enact Social Security reform in the second term, but it has stalled because of claims there’s no problems with the program and privatization reforms are simply a way to enable Wall Street to profit. Do you think the Social Security program is fine as it is, or what changes would you advocate happening with the program?

Richard Shawver (R): Social Security reform? Social Security is voluntary for U.S. citizen, mandatory for legal aliens.

Lih Young (D): Clean up government; lack of accountability, unreliable records, accounting, bookkeeping, records, files; improper complaint processing. Prosecute, eliminate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” with unjust deprivation of resources (public, private) by various unlawful, unethical, immoral acts, frauds, crimes; deprived of people’s salaries, benefits (fringe benefits, insurance benefits, retirement, pension, annual/sick leaves), insurance benefits, retirement, pension, annual/sick leaves), unjust manipulation, influence: improper records, bookkeeping; improper shuffling of processing employees’ earnings, benefits, calculation of social security benefits; unjust deprivation of resources (public, private) by various unlawful, unethical, immoral acts, frauds, crimes; unjust manipulation, influence: improper records, bookkeeping; improper shuffling of processing and employees’ earnings, benefits, calculation of social security benefits; unjust denial of benefits; damage/harm supposedly workers, retirees, elderly, beneficiaries, families, socials relations, endless damages/harm (physical, mental, bodily, financial), unjust manipulation and influence: medical services, insurance plans and coverage, rehabilitation services, etc. .The problems are not just in SSA agencies, but also related agencies, e.g., Maryland State Department of Education, Barbara Smith and Susan Page, employees or phony persons, falsification, false records, refuse to provide information, files for inspection, etc.

Clean up government. Support universal national health insurance (all, Medicare, Medicaid, prescription, uninsured, catastrophic); single payer (government); simple, effective, equal, quality, meaningful, merit, accountability, preventive, affordable, low premium, cost containment (goods, services, wholesale, professional review); public funded research should benefit taxpayers not to benefit a few; public education, consumer protection. Eliminate deceit, frauds, “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation, unjust practices.

Prosecute, eliminate abuse, misuse, frauds, crimes, victimize people, deprive resources, capability (public, private), fraudulent charges; unnecessary medical services, drugs, medication, equipments, surgeries, catheters, etc.

Earl Gordon (R): (I oppose) every effort by the administration to tamper with the social security system. This system is the only federal program that guarantees citizens some form of social security from complete economic destitution. There are no valid reasons to disturb the program at this time, without replacing it with a system that offers better social security guarantees to the American people, something the President’s plan does not do. If the administration wants to tackle a big issue that is of value to the American people, it should tackle the national health care issue. Ducking this issue in the light of the frequency of international travel and the international medical situations that are presented by AIDS, SARS, the Asian Bird Flu, and international terrorists using chemical and biological weapons, is tantamount to ducking a vital national security issue.

Mike Schaefer (D): This is the 3rd rail of politics and we can expect little from leadership of either party on this issue. I favor more liberal IRA programs, but so many people do not understans self-saving programs or have the money to fund them annually, and we must help those least able to help themselves. I think the program is working well but would increase the investigation of abuse, there are many dead-recipients whose families continue to cash benefits without any criminal consequences, possibly a payback and that’s it; and I now personally of recipients who cash their check, report it stolen promptly, get a new check issued, and months-later the US cancels the first check and charges it back the innocent business entity having taken it—this is long after the crook has disappeared, thus there is no recourse for the trusting businessperson. The government knows who the crooks are but public policy makes them untouchables. That is wrong, they belong in jail.

Daniel “Wig Man” Vovak (R): I believe social security should only be for retired people, not for health care purposes. There must be firm, age-based eligibility requirements and they should be consistent. Before there is any financial change to the current social security system, the private amount that each person has invested into it over a lifetime must be easily accessed through the internet and through a local office.

David Dickerson (D): As U.S. Senator, I would propose that everyone has the right to maximize their contributions to an IRA. The present retirees or the citizens approaching retirement have no problem, but they do have the responsibility to sustain the system for their children and grandchildren. Current projections show that Social Security faces a long-term financial imbalance. The Trust Fund is projected to be exhausted in 2041 (according to the Social Security Trustees) or in 2052 (according to the Congressional Budget Office), after which Social Security will be able to pay only about 75 percent of promised benefits. Hence, reforms to restore long-term Social Security solvency are essential. If no changes are made, revenue transfers totaling $4 trillion, in today’s present-value dollars, would be needed to pay currently scheduled benefits over the next 75 years. The amount needed to assure permanent solvency over the infinite horizon is $11 trillion. Many of our government employees have better health and retirement plans than the normal Marylander worker, and I believe that there should be the same rights of Social Security Planning afforded to everyone!

Kevin Zeese (Green): The problem is bigger than Social Security, it is retirement security. As part of re-making the U.S. economy for the 21st Century we need to develop a retirement system that works. Social Security was designed as a supplement to savings and pensions — neither exist anymore. Thus, we get starvation retirement if all people have is Social Security. I have a lot of plans for remaking the economy, democratizing our economy, so that wealth is shared more equitably.

Blaine Taylor (D): I reject all President Bush’s suggestions regarding Social Security enacted by President Roosevelt in 1935 for what they really are: attempts to destroy the entire system. It only works if we’re ALL IN IT, with no one OUT OF IT. The major problem is that politicians of both parties are spending Social Security funds for programs other than Social Security—and I would stop that immediately. Reform CAN be achieved WITH the other 99 members of the US Senate, not AGAINST them. Common sense. listening, and a willing heart CAN prevail.

Dennis Rasmussen (D): Social Security is a disaster, and unless common sense returns to the Congress, instead of protecting and defining ideologies, we will have a new generation of poor and no system surviving past 2050. Social Security needs to be maintained at current levels to assure a reliable safety net for Americans approaching retirement. We must also assure all working Americans that their private sector pensions will be remain secure and available at their time of retirement. Borrowing from Social Security trust funds has weakened the financial stability of the system. Measures must be taken to assure that adequate funds will be in place to provide full benefits to retirees as originally promised by Congress.

Allan Lichtman (D): Social Security is a social insurance system – a basic income safety net for all working Americans. I will work tirelessly to strengthen Social Security and fight any attempts to privatize Social Security, which would cut guaranteed benefits and explode our national debt.

I also oppose “privatization-lite” as advocated by my opponent Ben Cardin. This misguided scheme would have the managers of Social Security, rather than individuals, invest a hefty share of your payments in the stock markets, rather than relying on bonds that bear the “full faith and credit” of our national government.
Privatization-lite would imperil the economic security of seniors and homeowners in Maryland. By, in effect, dumping government bonds to free funds for stock market investments this privatization plan would by simple supply and demand drive down the price of bonds and drive up interest rates, putting a drag on Maryland’s economy and eroding the property values of every homeowner in our state. The plan would reduce guaranteed Social Security benefits with private account benefits at the mercy of the ups and downs of the market. It would raise the administrative costs of Social Security by requiring a permanent new bureaucracy to handle private accounts and potentially subject its managers to political pressures on their investment decisions. Even worse would be “passive” investments by Social Security managers with no control over how corporations spend our money. If the market declined it would mean either a reduction in benefits or a government bailout, with money that we don’t have in times of deficit spending.

As the first steps to strengthening Social Security, I support committing Congress to stop the raid on the Trust Fund to finance other unrelated budget items, such as the mismanaged and seemingly endless Iraq War. Congress should pay back to the Social Security trust funds those money borrowed and spent for purposes other than Social Security programs.

I support rolling back the fiscally irresponsible Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans that are draining the Trust Fund.

I support a careful study of a variety of potential reforms that will address Social Security’s funding problems while ensuring that Social Security continues to meet its purpose of providing income protection and economic security to America’s working families. Possible solutions include lifting the cap on social security taxes, while exempting from taxation the first $10,000 of income to make the payroll tax both more progressive and more responsive to changes in the economy. The payroll tax falls most heavily on low and middle income workers, and today some 70 percent of workers pay more in payroll than in income taxes. That is unacceptable.

Question #8:

Some in Congress have raised the question of “pork” or excessive earmarks because our federal budget always runs in deficit and eliminating these earmarks would be a simple way to help balance the budget. But no Congressman or Senator wants to cut their district’s or state’s project. To balance the budget, would you consider sacrificing some of your district or state’s federally-funded projects or would you prefer measures to enhance federal revenues to meet the gap?

Lichtman: Although I oppose excessive earmarks or “pork,”which should be debated in the Senate, I would not sacrifice needed infrastructure projects in the state of Maryland. There are better ways to help balance the budget.

1. Develop a plan for bringing the troops home from Iraq and recouping for domestic priorities the enormous costs of the war.

2. End subsidy payments to corporations and farm price support payments to large agri-businesses. ($25 -50 billion)

3. Stop the administration from permanently abolishing the estate tax. Even keeping in place the an eased estate tax that affects only estates of $3.5 million of or more (5 out of 1,000 estates) with a 45 percent tax would save nearly $40 billion.

4. Improve tax collections and stop the administration from cementing in place tax cuts that affect only high-income filers and one-time bonus tax breaks for business, ($100-$125 billion)

5. Replace Bush’s confusing, wasteful prescription drug plan with a more efficient, user-friendly plan like the one developed by Boston University School of Public Health. ($40 billion)

6. Reform antiquated business practices at the Pentagon and eliminate needless and redundant weapons systems. ($60 billion)

7. Eliminate tax breaks to extractive industries and other unnecessary corporate tax breaks. ($20 billion)

Dickerson: I would prefer measures to enhance federal revenues to meet the gap!

Taylor: Right now, the National Debt is our biggest monetary problem bar none, and for that reason alone the current incumbent President deserves inpeachment, as well as for his Hitlerite way of lying us into the entirely bogus Iraq War, into which he allowed himself to be suckered by Tel Aviv. The basic problem is that we have been in an overheated wartime economy since our last declaration of war on Dec. 8, 1941. We need to switch to a peacetime economy for the rest of this century, and stay there. All of the Bush tax “reforms” need to be thrown out, the minimum wage raised to $ 10 in 2007, and state pork issues examined by all Senators on a case-by-case basis, weighing how the benefit to Maryland is compatible with that of the nation at large. I will not make a blanket decision on matters that haven’t even been put before me on my desk for a decision, but I would proceed as stated above, employing common sense. That’s the best answer I can give you at this time.

Shawver: There only a deficit, because Congress won’t do their job, Article 1, Section 1-10.

Zeese: No question — wasteful earmarks are one of the root causes of corruption of politics and waste of taxpayer dollars. But, we need to do much more than that to balance the budget and reduce our debt. My tax plan, attached, would help a great deal. But we also have to end corporate welfare — over $300 billion annually — as it takes money from workers and gives to the wealthy and creates an unfair playing field for small and medium sized businesses as they do not receive the welfare that big business receives. We also cannot afford to be the world’s policeman — with military bases in 120 nations, half of our discretionary spending being on the military and spending as much as the whole world combined on military. I would look to the former military leaders at the Center for Defense Information for cuts in military programs that are wasteful, duplicative and no longer needed. Tens of billions, maybe hundreds of billions could be cut with no adverse effect on our security.

Schaefer: That’s an easy one. We can find county, city, state, or joint-powers agreements, funded with very very low-cost tax free obligations, to finance anything that is a boondoggle; the President needs line-item veto so he can “kill” a number of pork items in any budget. These items are not lost, the community and political leadership then decides (a)level of necessity, and (b)alternative ways to fund it. Do not let West Virginia’s Robert Byrd have anything to do with the budget. He is the king of pork. Always has been, always will be. We need to enhance federal revenues, but do so in order to reduce our staggaring federal debt. This is called fiscal responsibliity, which is in short supply with too many Congresspersons and Senators.

Young: For issue of economy and federal deficit:

Focus on principle, merit, fairness, cost-effectiveness; not for the best interest of the people. Redirect priorities, budget, focus. Improve productivities which increase government revenue. Eliminate: waste, abuse, nonsense projects, unnecessary expenditure, abandonment of land, properties, resources, “fraud-crime- networks”; less social problems, less government expenditures; public debt/ bond (burden of taxpayers and future generations; more time, resources for people, families, less traffic congestion; unjust abandonment/ destruction/ lease-out/ sale public land, buildings, schools (free or without fair compensation, even decades long leases); purchase/ lease-in/ construct land, facilities (at outrageous costs, many times market values); improper planning, misleading, deceit; improper reserve fund (not savings for potential capital investment, but by borrowing, public debt, bond); raising taxation, fees, bond/debts mainly to benefit a few; false excuses, unjust practices, manipulation, misleading, deceit, influence; abuse of power, litigation, legal costs; especially by legal/judicial personnel; “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”; false citations (issued by city manager, police, inspection; municipal, traffic, or phoney – refused to give identities or full names), improper/unjust legislative bills, proposals, appropriation, expenditures; ineffective/nonsense projects, programs (e.g., Greater Rockville Partnership, Rockville Housing Enterprise, Annual Night-Out, Rockville University, Citizen Police Academy, CALEA police accreditation, City Attorney Paul Glasgow, related law firms, “fraud- crime- injustice networks”); Rockville City Attorney Paul Glasgow: not salaried employee, highly paid contractor; conflict of interest, ethic rules (more serious than usual employees; county, state, federal); abuse of power, litigation, complaints, files, contracting (arbitrary criteria, selection); improper complaint processing, procedures, proceedings, legal services (disservice); improper land deals, abandonment of public land, resources, properties; improper procurement, not open bid (e.g., Rockville Town Center, goods, services; all stages; design, development, construction, etc.); abuse of public land, resources for private gains; benefit a few: reimburse private expenses; improper or no records, responses, files, pleadings on complaints/cases; resolution, remedies on complaints/requests; false citation, harassment, arrest, intimidation, conspiracies, cover-up numerous serious unlawful acts, fraud- crimes, frivolous cases/litigations, unjust influences, manipulation of televised camera; without proper public hearing; as part of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation.

STOP/ELIMINATE: OFFICIAL FRAUD, SCAM, UNJUST DEVELOPMENT PLAN, e.g., Rockville Town Center Plan (misuse/abuse of power, law, litigation, public resources); public fund $99+millions (upward, city, county, state, federal) mainly to benefit a few, “fraud- crime- injustice networks”, which in turn hurt people and society further; destroy families, communities, businesses, democracy, fair election process, peace; cause serious socio-political- election- media problems; worse than Florida election 2000, World Trade Center 9-11-2001 incidences, President George Bush’s wars, President Richard Nixon’s Watergate, financial/ accounting/legal disasters (e.g., Enron/ WorldCom/ Anderson).

Reduce: the need for people to drive or get on the roads; traffic congestion, stress, accidents; the need to go to courthouses, administrative or judicial hearings/ trials; false citations (traffic, municipal infraction); abuses, unjust manipulation; taxation, fees, burden to residents; the need for more family members to work; need for multiple jobs for each person; need for cars; more trips; more stress, fatigue; abuse, waste; unjustified budget, appropriation; taxation, fees, public debt, people’s burden; improper processing of complaints, assignment of cases/hearing across all jurisdictions; unjust cancellation of hearings/ trials; unjust deprivation and rulings without affidavits, hearings, trials; need for appeals, further complaints. Provide mass transit services, bus schedules, (good, frequent, reliable); proper implementation of laws, and processing of complaints/ cases. See also other issue statements – interrelated.

Rasmussen: The system of “earmarks” has been an integral component of the U.S. budgetary process. In past years, this system, if used in a prudent and limited basis, allows the funding of priority projects when that response is appropriate. Unfortunately, in the past several years, out-of-control spending by Congress has resulted in absolute abuse of this budgetary mechanism. Earmarks have exploded from approximately 1,700 to 16,000 in the past five years. This is irresponsible and unacceptable. Earmarks should be continued as long as there is timely and full disclosure as to the sponsor of the earmark, the reasons for its request and its appropriate justification.

Vovak: Congress needs to cut spending. Period.

Gordon: This economic expansion should take the shape in many forms including the following:

(1) This country should seek an 80% improvement in the quality of life for all its citizens in the next twenty five years, because at present America is becoming one big, congested, semi-socially dysfunctional society.

(2) One of the best way (sic) to reverse this trend is by the impostition of a national economic development plan that is coordinated by a Office in the Federal Government that should be designated the National Economic Development Counsel. This counsel would be responsible for choosing at least ten different areas in this country, in ten different States where the Federal Government should then designate as national economic expansion zones and to build twelve new Philadelphia-size cities in the next twenty five years, with the surrounding industrial, living, and social infrastructure to support a population of at least sixty million Americans.

This project should be funded by private and government funds. This kind of economic activity would generate a boom in economic growth and at the same time creating a society where congestion would decrease and the quality of life would improve tremendously, not only for the present generation of Americans but for all future generations. (These cities and their surrounding areas would be built with the most advanced environmentally friendly technology and human imagination in history.)

The revenue that would be generated from all of the above economic activities would be sufficient to augment the other sources of income that would go to pay for a national health care plan as well as a more advanced and humane national education system. What the Republican Party and this nation need is not narrow minded so called sham compassionate conservatives. This nation needs constructive, visionary, and big thinking compassionate capitalists with big investment plans.

Question #9:

Now to the question of trade. When I go to a store, many’s the time that I see a product is made in China – hence we run a large trade deficit with that nation. President Bush has advocated a hemisphere-wide free trade zone that would add Central and South American countries to the umbrella originally created by the NAFTA agreement a decade ago. Given these items, and knowing also that the number of manufacturing jobs in this country remains flat to slightly lower even in this era of steadily expanding employment, where do you stand – do you see free trading eventually shifting our economy to one mostly comprised of service and technology jobs, or do you feel we should take more steps to preserve our core manufacturing positions?

Lichtman: We must take steps to preserve and strengthen our manufacturing positions. Such steps would include eliminating the current tax incentives for shipping jobs and investments abroad. We should also strengthen federal support for small businesses that are the driving engine of our economy. We should drastically reduce dependence on the fossil fuel economy and move towards the development of a robust alternative fuels industries with the promise to improve the economy and create more jobs. We should reduce the deficit to keep interest rates under control and limit the financing of our debt by foreign nations. We should support workers’ rights to organize unions which increase the number of good, stable jobs and negotiate trade agreements only with adequate safeguards for labor and the environment.

Gordon: What America needs is an economic anti-desertion law that makes it illegal for American firms to close a manufacturing plant in this country and go build the same kind of plant in a foreign country. This law should be based on the law that makes it a crime for a member of the U.S. Armed Forces to desert the Armed Forces. A clause should also be added to this law that makes it a crime for any public official or private banking entity to give support to any deserter. If we do not take these kind of legislative actions the neo cons are going to lead this nation down the path that the Romans of ancient times tread.

Rasmussen: We can no longer think in terms of the U.S. economy alone. We are truly a global economy. Free trade or limited restricted trade benefits both buyer and seller in the long run. The promotion of trade between nations also promotes peace. Nations that trade have an economic stake in each other do not make war on each other – military or economic.

Another economic truth is that production follows cheap labor and nothing will ever change that. But America can and does compete. Who does the world look to America for brain power, technology, medical breakthroughs, particularly when it comes to quality, dependable high skill-level workers? They look to the U.S.A. Where do the world’s automobile manufacturers, computer manufacturers, medical manufacturers come? They come to the U.S.A. for those skills and quality. What universities and educations are the most sought after? It is the U.S.A., again. We should welcome and embrace global trade, because in the end, the world wants and needs what we produce and consume.

The trade deficit is primarily an illusion – we are the largest market in the world today. If we buy the goods of the world in sheer volume, we buy more than the rest of the world. To believe that the rest of the world or individual nations buy an equal amount of our product is unrealistic. China may, in the future, alter that balance. We need to monitor China’s expansion plans very carefully and develop a strategy of containment.

Dickerson: Great question! Part of the reason that I decided to run for U.S. Senate is that I do not see many candidates that understand the military and global business. I’ve lived in Europe and Asia, and I can tell you, our Federal government has too many lawyers and lobbyists. We need to “make things” or we will all be working for lower wages. We need people in our U.S. Senate and Congress that understand the importance of engineering. Our wages have already been dropping over the last five years. We cannot stop outsourcing and offshoring, so we need to create new ways to gain the competitive advantage. As U.S. Senator, I will work with Maryland companies to export. I can use my international sales experience to develop business for Purdue in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and the Far East. Look at all of the business that Tyson Chicken got from Russia. Could that have something to do with the Clinton Administration? I would look to expand on attracting foreign direct investment in the shore to increase wages. Our US $ is at an all time low, so we are very attractive. The shore needs to think about how they can ship goods directly to Europe rather than sending them to Baltimore or Norfolk. Our country cannot sustain itself economically if we are a service society.

Taylor: Trade: I was the press secretary for Congresswoman Bentley on Capitol Hill during 1991-92 when the NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) was being negotiated. From that moment to this, I have failed to see how it benefitted the US one whit. We don’t need more Mexicans, and I’d have to see what we’re getting from Canada before I’d move to repeal NAFTA altogether. As for China, we are already WAY out of whack there, with billions owed to the Chinese to pay off our OWN deficits! This strikes me as not only stupid, but also criminal! We lost the battle to maintain a manufacturing base in this country a decade ago. Should we try to reinstate it? I don’t know, but I would like to sit down for a few hours with Mrs. Bentley and just listen to her views on that subject before making a decision. No one knows better than her. Naturally, the Democratic unions would be all for that. We are ALREADY there as far as being a service-and-technology economy dominated and propped up by American bayonets, just as President Eisenhower warned we would become in his last speech from the Oval Office on Jan. 19, 1961. Ending the wartime economy—and switching it to a peacetime economy for the entire 21st Century—is truly THE domestic challenge for this and future generations of Americans. If we don’t do this, I am entirely convinced, as an historian, that we shall either destroy the planet via outright world war in the short term, or strangle ourselves in envirnomental chaos in the slightly longer term. CAN we turn all this around? Yes, we CAN! We were great under FDR and Reagan, and it’s time for greatness again. War is not greatness, but mentally dull stupidity.

Zeese: These so-called “free” trade agreements are not “free” at all — what they really do is empower multi-national and national corporations. We need trade agreements that pull up labor, consumer, environmental and human rights standards, not agreements that pull them down (as these do). Under current law, a corporation can challenge a democratically passed law by going to the World Trade Organization in Europe and complaining that the law is a “restraint on trade” that allows them to overthrow the law. Democratically enacted laws should have greater power than corporations — who should be subject to the law. The U.S. is hemorrhaging jobs and is losing money on international trade. We have a record trade deficit, record federal deficit, rapidly rising federal debt limit (more than doubled in the last five years) and record high personal debt. If we continue on this course we will see a failed economy and the catastrophe’s that go with it. We must re-make our economy for the 21st Century. We need to invest heavily in education to stay competitive in the world. We need to rebuild out nation’s infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers warns that our infrastructure is failing and there is a “looming economic crisis” because of our failure to address it. We need to shift from a fossil fuel economy to an environmentally sustainable economy that relies on abundant clean energy. How do we pay for all of this — see my tax plan.

Young: Major transaction or land deal, local- global, should be rigorously reviewed objectively by academically very well trained, based on merits, priorities, cost- effectiveness, social cost-benefits, etc., through competitive processes, general soliciting, fair market mechanism; not arranged by the developer or inner circle; should be openly discussed with residents, in official meetings, Mayor/Council/ public hearings; not misleading, concealing, unjust manipulation or influence; not rushed through as the consent agenda items as mall purchases of goods and services. Eliminate, prevent: abandonment of public resources, land, properties to benefit a few or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” including developer, government attorneys, lawyers, law firms, etc.) at the expense of general public and future generations, including other jurisdictions, especially with grants and public debts from the state and federal; sold, leased out (secret hidden agenda, even huge acres, decades-long lease) with zero or no fair compensation, despite citizen’s objection; unnecessarily leased private properties for government use at very high costs even with short lease (a few years or shorter); with extra high costs to construct building, furnish expansive equipments; and when construction is done, lease expires, completed products abandoned or free to a few; often disguised by partnership, economic development, school, education, public safety, etc.; several rounds of unjust abandonment and purchase; misleading public roads, highways, when abandoned to private; unjust projects, appropriation; misuse, abuse, misappropriation; false road construction, maintenance; false records: land, roads, maps; unjust demolition of building even in good condition to initiate new construction, project, purchase, including library or school.

Schaefer: We must preserve our core manufacturing so long as it is efficient. Any country importing to the US should have equivalent exporting from the US to their country. It is disheartening to call a US firm’s help-line and be speaking to someone on the other side of the world with limited ability to speak English and not a clue as to the community or state where the caller resides. The government can do it. If I wanted to mail 100,000 political mailers from Canada or Mexico, at cheaper postage, the USPS requires payment of both the US and foreign postage for any mailings exceeding 200 items. I wish this protective attitude existed in other commerical areas of government operations.

Vovak: America should take steps to preserve our core manufacturing positions.

Shawver: NAFTA is unconstitution (sic). Article 1 Section 1-10.

Question #10:

This question should present you with the shortest answer. Given that in 2008 either you will be seeking re-election to the House and hoping for some coattails at the top of the ticket, or preparing to work with a new President (for the Senators), if you had a short list of 3 to 5 names you’d like to see seek the job, who would they be? Please note that they do not have to be candidates who are considered to be running for the post at this time.

Young: To have someone who will be willing, capable, and able to solve socio-political-election- media problems. Top 3 priorities:

(1). Society is in vicious cycles, as in need of revolution, if we don’t act. First, prosecute, eliminate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”. Oppose: unjust practices, manipulation, influence; bad legislative proposals, hidden agenda with false excuses (economic development, housing, transportation, whatever) for private gain (officials, developers, lawyers, etc.); nonsense grants, programs, projects: facilitate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”=cruel tyranny= robbery machine; continuing, on-going, expanding, penetrating, threat, coercion, victimization, deprivation, discrimination; endless immoral-unlawful acts, rob/destruct resources (public, private; business, civic, political), frivolous litigation, levies, foreclosures; improper processing of complaints, proceedings, docketing; cause vicious cycles: socio- political- election-media; civil-human rights, people-slave. E.g., Problems (A): OPM, DOJ, IRS, SSA, FBI, law enforcement, National Park Service (Prettyman?), Library of congress (Neil Gladd), financial/brokerage/ accounting/ bill-payment processing/ collection agencies, insurance, car-dealers Lakeforest Oldsmobile; phone/utilities/cable, judges, legal/court personnel, detective/ process server/ impersonators or with phony names; Leslie Gradet, Tamera Jones, William D Roessler; offices of treasury, comptroller, attorney general: Joel Jacob/Jacobson, Gail Malle-Davis, Sylvia J. Brokos, Mary Hawse, Linda Tanton, Gerald Langbaum, John Barry, Pamela Porter, Leo F. Partridge, Mark Vulcan, Jamis Riley, James Britt, Audrey Thomas, Jeanne Lippy, Jesse Rosenburger, Ralph Lepson; transcribers Margaret Bauer, Senators: Walter Baker, Barbara Hoffman, Thomas Middleton, Trooper: Marty Sealey, Vincent Mass, State Election Board Ross Goldstein; Lobbysts/municipal attorneys/lawyers/affiliates, Paul Glasgow, David Venable, Joseph Stoltz, Jr., Barry Gordon, Stephen Perouka, David Steinberg, Wolpoff & Abramson, Richard D. Mirsky, Poppleton, Garrett & Polott, P.C., Marc Sliffman, Samuel White, DOEd Susan Page, Barbara Smith?, accountant Hilda K. Matijevic..more.

(B): The problems are interrelated horizontally and vertically, among all issues, locak0 global. Montgomery County Circuit Court Loretta Knight, Bettie Skelton, District Court Clerk Jeffrey Ward, Administrstive Judge Cornelius Vaughey, Sheriff Elliot Tolbert, etc. government attorney John McCarthy, Kristen Bender are part of the “:fraud- crime- networks: with harassment, false arrest, imprisonment, false citation, false trespass, false testimony, withholding witnesses, etc.

( C). False frivolous levies, liens, garnishment, foreclosure, tenant-hold-over- eviction, etc. Thousands of cases are pending in the court systems for years or even decades; probably filed by “fraud- crime- networks” while continuing to victimize people; without proper services and proceedings; major causes of “homelessness” and poverty; not because of the problems of citizens, but because of unjust judicial/court/legal personnel, and court auditor Robert Romero as part of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”. Judges include John Debelius, Durk Thumpson, Ann Harrington, Louise Scriver, Lawrence De Beard, etc.

(D). Further example of violating Constitution or Bills of Rights (U. S. and State), police brutality or sheriff misconduct, attorneys and affiliated law firms and related “fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation are evidenced with official misconduct, e.g., District Court Judge Gary Everngam, Judge Gary Crawford, Sheriff Earnest Turner, other court personnel for improper processing of cases, including failing to docket, concealing of pleadings, falsification, denial of fair trial or jury trial demand, counter-claim, cross-claims, etc.

(E). Problems of privatization, irresponsibility, disabilities of government attorneys and judicial/legal/court personnel. Problems are very serious, expanding, local- out of state- nationwide- global; exporting injustice everywhere, including overseas. In Rockville city, in Montgomery County, in State of Maryland, in New Jersey Monmouth County, Judge Robert McLeod, Judge Patricia Bueno Cleary (?).

(2). Restore: principle, fairness, cost-effectiveness, accountability, reliability, capability; fair election, justice, peace (including civic, non-profit organizations), “check and balance”; Restore: TRUE essence of democracy, fair election process; easy access to government, files, records, transcripts; not unjustly manipulated, influenced, misled by wrong person, information, or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” = serious causes of socio- political – election –media problems, which destroy people, families, society, peace, justice, democracy. Based on merits, justification; double standards, improper processing of complaints, procedures, proceedings; falsification, false records, tampering of evidence, data; harass, intimidate complainant, witnesses; false charges, citation, bond, imprisonment, disparities, improper treatments, etc., disguised by abuse of laws, power, authorities.

(3). .Promote quality, competition, people input (policies, issues, officials, judges); televise public hearings, citizen/candidate forum/debate; maintain, disseminate meaningful accurate information, records, capability, reasoning, good sense of justice, public interest.

Zeese: I’m not impressed with any of the front runners right now. And, don’t see many on the horizon. I am most hopeful by the Unity08.org process that is seeking to build outside of the two parties or find leaders from both parties who will put the people first.

Lichtman: Russ Feingold, Wesley Clark, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mark Warner.

Schaefer: You overlook that I am not running for the House, my term will be six years and I am up for re-election in 2012, to my 2nd and last term as a US Senator.

Have no idea who will be in Maryland’s political world in 2012. If I had to name three, they would be:

(a)John Sarbanes, assuming he wins a Congressional bid now or before 2012; Democrat.

(b)Marin Alsop, new Conductor of the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra; if she finds a “home” in Maryland, and in 2012 having six years leading our state in a cultural manner—she would be a respected candidate who would perhaps bring harmony to a cacophony of political sounds in the 100 member US Senate;

(c)Marcus Allen, a doctor of chiopractic medicine, who will at that time be a leader in city, county state or federal office, an African-American success story, who would bring credit on Maryland as a Democratic Nominee and who has a great interest in political issues affecting Maryland, health care, and is not the football legend but Maryland is used to great names…

You are right, haste makes waste, thought you wanted us to pick OUR successors, you want us to pick the 2008 President.

Of those living or dead, would pick Bob Hope, Arnold Schwarzenegger, US Army Lt. General Claudia Kennedy.

Of those expected to be on the political horizon in 2008:

1. Mark Warner, former Governor of Virginia, Democrat
2. Nancy Pulosi, who will have been Speaker of the House or perhaps a US Senator by then, Democrat
3. General Colin Powell, who’ll have time to be more
active in the years proceeding 2008. The office would seek the man. Could belong to either party.
4. Joseph Liberman, if he remains in Senate leadership and/or seniority.

Gordon: (I am) John Adams/Teddy Roosevelt/Lincoln/Goldwater/Ike/William P. Rogers/and Melvin Laird oriented.

Dickerson: Well, instead of names, I think that it is more important that all of us, as Americans, work together to define the personal profile of a U.S. Senator in 2008. I counted 18 filed candidates for U.S. Senate from the Democratic ticket, so that tells us something. That tells us that many people are not satisfied with many of the candidates that were running or that they believe our country needs a change. It could also mean that they feel that the Democratic Party needs to embrace a respect for life and family values. Everyone is winning by running because they are engaging in dialogue and provoking thought amongst the Maryland voters. I, for one, think that our next U.S. Senator from Maryland needs to embody the core competencies of Jefferson and Franklin, and many of our founding fathers. He or she must understand our militia or military, and that comes from service to your country. How would the Congress vote to send our men and women in harms way if they had their children in the military? I write this to you on July 4th, and do you think that our founding fathers were even thinking of passing a law that would permit the burning of our flag? Our independence was won with the help of the French, and it was the cross-cultural leadership of our founding fathers that spearheaded our victory. We need a U.S. Senator with a global thinking, understanding of our local needs, and most importantly, a diplomat with the trans-cultural competency to secure strategic alliances that win peace and prosperity for Maryland. Tom Friedman’s book, The World is Flat, illustrates that we do live in a global world! I ran for U.S. Senate because I care about the future of my state and nation, and I hope that we all begin to think of what type of person we need in the U.S. Senate. It is not about Republican or Democrat, but more about if the person understands the world, business and our military.

Taylor: Who would I like to see President from 3-5 names? Immodestly, I would run myself in 2008 as a favorite son candidate to see enacted the program I’ve outlined above. From the current crop of would-be candidates, let’s dispose of most of them: Sen. Clinton lied about the murder of Vince Foster and helped cover it up; she goes. I would prefer GOP Sen. Libby Dole of North Carolina if have a woman we must. I would fire Secretary of State Rice for the liar that she is, period, over the bogus Iraq War; Sen. Barbara Boxer was right about her on that score. Having read all the books by and about Sen. McCain—and having heard him speak—I am not impressed. As a fellow Vietnam veteran, I have nothing but admiration and sorrow for the many long years he spent as a POW, but if it weren’t for that singular fact, we wouldn’t be having this conversation at all! While I admire former Mayor Giulani for his performance during 9/11, when actor Jimmy Woods portrays you, that’s never good! I would prefer Gov. Scwharzenneger of California, but we’d have to change the Constitution to do that to accomodate a single man, and THAT would be a dangerous precedent. I voted for GOP Sen. Bob Dole in 1996, and Ralph Nader in 2002. I discard our own Gov. Ehrlich as a crypto fascist who has surrounded himself with butt-kissing politcal gangsters of the worst sort, and Mayor O’Malley as simply incompetent. I’m not opposed to naked ambition per se, but I’m not impressed by the former—10 years my junior—or the latter, almost 20; neither are veterans, another minus in my book. If I could not be elected myself, I would want some of the latter people to be running: our very own Republicans, like Congressmen Roscoe Bartlett and Wayne Gilchrist—the fighting Marine from Vietnam!—or Democratic Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger—the trusty lifeguard!—and current Baltimore County Executive Jim Smith. These are men’s men that I would fight alongside, and women’s men who are compassionate, are smart and dedicated, and aren’t IN LOVE WITH THEMSELVES! They are, in fact, the kind of men “to go to the well with” when the Indians attack, so to speak, and it’s nice to know that there are still men left in this world whom I can admire.

Shawver: At this time I have no one in mind.

Rasmussen: As a Moderate, Common-Sense candidate for the U.S. Senate, I would favor candidates that show an ability to govern from the middle.

I am drawn to Sen. Biden’s approach to international issues. I admire John Kerry’s plan to make sure that all children have healthcare. I appreciate John Edward’s concern for the poor. I am a fan of General Wesley Clark and his strong military leadership. However, the 2008 election is, politically, a lifetime away. After evaluating all declared candidates, my support will go to the candidate whom I believe can best lead America through consensus, integrity, and an ability to develop common-sense policies.

Vovak: Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush.

Each of those candidates is a proven winner. Ford is my favorite, though.

George English (D): Regarding my choice for President, my first choice would be Representative Dennis Kucinich, whom I have seen and heard during the 2004 campaign and my second chioce would be Senator Russ Feingold. Mr. Kucinich spoke about about his first job working for a newspaper in Ohio during the Vietnam War. He had to visit the homes of the parents of sons who had been recently killed in Vietnam to borrow photos that would be used in the deceaseds’ obituaries. Many of these homes were very modest and their dead sons obviously had been the center of their parents lives. Mr. Kucinich recalled how palpably he felt their soul-wrenching grieving and how devastating their loss was when he spoke with them. That is why he was one of the few members of Congress to resist the stampede to war in iraq and made the issue the highlight of his unsuccessful campaign for President. I hope that he runs again for President and that the citizens of this country will now listen to him and recognize how courageous he was and still is by his steadfast opposition to the war. Mr. Feingold impresses me with he personal integrity, a virtue which I find seriously lacking in most members of the Congress. Their fixation with “Political Correctness” has morphed into “Political Cowardice”. The interminable morass this country now finds itself mired in the Middle East is the direct result of their moral weakness.

******************************

And so ends this “debate” of sorts. I hope it was informative and interesting, and you managed to make it through the dense morass of Lih Young’s answers. Needless to say, she’s not the person I’m endorsing on the Democrat side.

It’s amazing to me that we have over two dozen people who have decided to basically sacrifice several months of their lives and deal with a pile of paperwork as they have to file with the Board of Elections and watch every penny, even if they don’t have to file reports. Come Tuesday, all but three of those people will have their hopes dashed as just one Republican and Democrat will remain in the race. The Green Party’s Kevin Zeese is already assured a spot on the November ballot.

What I’m going to again attempt to do after the smoke clears is get the survivors on the GOP and Democrat sides to answer my Ten Questions and keep Kevin Zeese’s close at hand. Hopefully I can do a similar debate with just one post close to Election Day so people can compare and contrast. If the Republican and Democrat don’t answer the Ten Questions, by gosh I’ll make up an answer for them from things I can find out – this will work by hook or by crook!

Tonight I’m doing the second of three parts for the U.S. Senate “debate” formed from the Ten Questions. This covers Questions 4 through 6, part one is here.

Question #4:

Along that same line, many people have seen the vast sums of money that seemingly are required to run for public office and were under the impression that campaign finance reforms such as those enacted with the McCain-Feingold bill were supposed to relieve this inequity. On the whole, however, the money trail has not ceased even with these laws. How do you favor strengthening these laws to make them more effective, or do you agree with some First Amendment advocates who think these laws should be eliminated?

Blaine Taylor (D): Since my first of 15 poltical campaigns, I decided to advocate the abolition of ALL PACS: Political Action Committees. In addition, all paid advertising on television and radio should be abolished for the 2008 elections, and the necessary air time seized from the private industry networks who’ve abused the trust given them by We, the People. WE own the airwaves, they don’t, and it’s time to fire them all. Sufficient air time should be provided for all candidates free of charge. That would eliminate ALL fundraising events AND clear out Washington,DC of ALL lobbyists, just as Christ drove out the moneychangers from the temple. When I filed for the current race on July 3rd, I made the decision that I would neither solicit, nor accept. any contributions whatsoever, and have, indeed, returned all such donated funds to date. I am not playing that whore’s game! I will not be had, either by Democratic unions or GOP robber barons, and that’s that!

Allan Lichtman (D): The public financing of elections is the only way to curb the dominant influence of money on our politics. For their millions in campaign contributions wealthy corporate interests reap many billions in subsidies, tax breaks, and other forms of corporate welfare. The way to get rich in America is not to drill for oil or dig for gold, but to contribute to politicians.

Look at the campaign contributions accepted by his opponent, Congressman Ben Cardin, from the pharmaceutical and health products industry. For his 2004 re-election Cardin accepted $29,500 from the pharmaceutical and health products industry, far more than any other member of congress from Maryland, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. He accepted $8,000 from Pfizer alone. In 2003, he was the only member of Maryland’s congressional delegate to follow the lead of the pharmaceutical industry and vote against The Pharmaceutical Market Access Act, which would have authorized the importation of low-cost, safe prescription medications from Canada.

For his 2006 Senate campaign Cardin has accepted $40,000 from Constellation Energy, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. This is the company that is pushing to raise electric bills for their customers in Maryland by 72 percent. Overall he has raked in more than $63,000 from electric utilities.

You cannot serve both the common interests of the people of Maryland and the private interests of lobbyists and wealthy corporations. You cannot claim to be standing up to the pharmaceutical industry and the big energy companies when you’re raking in their cash.

I would ask: Which matters more: affordable prescription drugs, a decrease in living costs, reasonable gas and electricity prices, or swelling the already deep pockets of wealthy corporations?

As a candidate I pledge to take no PAC money from private corporations. As a Senator I pledge to take no perks, as indicated above.

Richard Shawver (R): My run for office should coat (sic) less then $5000, it’s hard to think of people or company’s from out of state giving money to candidates.

Earl Gordon (R): No answer.

Lih Young (D): The way to eliminate corporate corruption is not by rhetoric legislative bills. Most likely the legislative bills are bad, and often with serious hidden agendas and appropriation to benefit a few. A lot of legislative bills are unnecessary, except to keep legislators busy, without time to think, or to deal with more important bills or other things, e.g., resolving and provide proper remedies against “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks: operation, unjust practices; actually prosecuting and eliminating frauds, crimes or corruption (public or private, corporate or government). There are Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and other existing good laws, which need to be enforced, implemented; but are often ignored, violated intentionally, as by the rampant of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” with endless immoral, unlawful acts, frauds and crimes, which breed more corruption and violence domestically and globally. U.S. Senate, or even three branches of government, law enforcement, government attorneys, prosecutors, local- federal are not doing rights; failed to carry out their responsibilities to enforce the good laws, protecting people, their rights, resources, properties, reputation, due process, etc. Important but often ignored: Prosecute and eliminate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation, unjust practice, manipulation, influence. Stop processing bad or unnecessary legislative bills; proper processing of complaints, files, records, resolution. Based on merits, cost-effectiveness, priorities, socials cost-benefits; stop bad appropriation. Rigorous review, analysis: budget, based on merit, principle, priorities, cost-effectiveness, social cost-benefits. Promote quality, peace, justice, fair election processes; televise, disseminate, maintain meaningful information; issue, candidate, debate. Oppose: unjust practices, manipulation, influence; bad legislative proposals, hidden agenda with false excuses (economic development, housing, transportation, whatever) for private gain (officials, developers, lawyers, etc.); nonsense grants, programs, projects: facilitate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”. Major transaction or land deal should be rigorously reviewed objectively by academically very well trained, based on merits, priorities, cost- effectiveness, social cost-benefits, etc., through competitive processes, general soliciting, fair market mechanism; not arranged by the developer or inner circle; should be openly discussed with residents, in official meetings, Mayor/Council/ public hearings; not misleading, concealing, unjust manipulation or influence; not rushed through as the consent agenda items as mall purchases of goods and services. Eliminate, prevent: abandonment of public resources, land, propertes to benefit a few or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” including developer, government attorneys, lawyers, law firms, etc.) at the expense of general public and future generations, including other jurisdictions, especially with grants and public debts from the state and federal; sold, leased out (secret hidden agenda, even huge acres, decades-long lease) with zero or no fair compensation, despite citizen’s objection; unnecessarily leased private properties for government use at very high costs even with short lease (a few years or shorter); with extra high costs to construct building, furnish expansive equipments; and when construction is done, lease expires, completed products abandoned or free to a few; often disguised by partnership, economic development, school, education, public safety, etc.; several rounds of unjust abandonment and purchase; misleading public roads, highways, when in fact abandoned to private; unjust projects, appropriation; misuse, abuse, misappropriation; false road construction, maintenance; false records: land, roads, maps; unjust demolition of building even in good condition to initiate new construction, project, purchase, including library or school.

David Dickerson (D): Yes, let us strengthen these laws and establish a ceiling of the amount of money a candidate can raise for their campaign. Moreover, should it be allowed that candidates can dine in Hollywood and Las Vegas to obtain funding for their Maryland campaign? By establishing term limits, it will disallow candidates from Congress to use their influence on Federal government committees to raise money from around the country. Remember Corzonne in New Jersey using his own $60 million to win the U.S. Senate seat? Well, he did, and then he went on to become Governor of the state.

Kevin Zeese (Green): The FEC is an agency that does not work (sadly like many government bureaucracies). The Federal Election Commission should be changed so that it is not a deadlocked Commission with three Democrats and three Republicans. We should add three non-Dem/Repubs so that things can get done and people are represented. According to Gallup 38% of Americans see themselves as independent of the two old parties, 31% are Dems, 29% are Republicans. The FEC should represent that breakdown rather than be an agency that protects the two parties. I favor a voluntary check off system that is well advertised so that people can contribute to a fund for political campaigns. That is how public campaigns should be financed. Re private speech, the same limits that apply to campaigns should apply to so-called 527 organizations and the reporting of who is funding these efforts should be immediately transparent so people know who is paying for the message and what their interests are.

Campaign finance is another example of many issues — where the public wants reform and where the two parties do not provide it — because reform will threaten their hold on power and weaken the special interests that fund their campaigns. According to a brand new bipartisan poll released by the watchdog group Public Campaign, 75% of voters support a voluntary system of publicly financed election campaigns – that includes 80% of Democrats, 78% of Independents, and 65% of Republicans. The poll shows this support is being fueled by the explosive corruption scandals that have rocked Capitol Hill. And even more interestingly, the poll shows that candidates who pledge to support a public financing system get a significant political boost over candidates who do not.

Daniel “Wig Man” Vovak (R): My campaign is already implementing campaign finance reform. We have spent well less than $5000, the FEC requirement for filing paperwork.

Mike Schaefer (D): We should not eliminate these laws. I think they are enforced without common sense sometimes. I was once in a federal campaign and took $25,000 from my stock account, a margin loan against my securities, and considered it a loan to the campaign. The FED pointed out that loans can only be made by banks, not be national brokerage firms, and thus the $25,000 was a gift to my campaign by Charles Schwab & Co., which exceeded the then $1,000 limit and anyhow corporations are prohibited from making any donations. I was fined $3,500 and resented the total abuse of federal statutes to punish an innocent oversight—when the same amount of time should have gone to investigating some chicanery. (Soon after the laws were changed to permit brokerage firms and other non-bank financial sources to make loans to candidates—I warranted thanks for raising the issue). I prefer a level playing field and have considered limited expenditures in any election to a certain multiple of the salary of that office, like Congress(is it $150,000?) races might have a $300,000 limit in primary and $600,000 limit in general. Some of these guys have raised millions; would require that any banked political money exceeding the foregoing limits be returned to sender, or given to a charity, or confiscated by the US. Today incumbents bankroll millions to fighten-off any competition; that is not putlic service. America thinks that a good percent of its elected officials are political prostitutes and you don’t get any argument from me there. Las Vegas and San Diego,Cal. are sending at least two local legislators to federal prison this years, we need more of that. And perhaps we should cut 50% all legislative salaries, the taxpayers would benefit and this would encourage self-made financially independent men and women of character instead of ‘job seekers’ who file for any open elected job which inevidentable pays a lot more than they ever earned in their life. Really!

Dennis Rasmussen (D): Campaign financing is a more difficult issue. Money – and the ability to raise it – is a measure of viability of a candidate or cause. I do believe that citizens’ ability to express their desires and concerns via political involvement is a First Amendment Right.

Public financing has some merit, but how do you decide the criteria for who gets the money? If you leave that policy to elected office-holders, I can assure you they will create a system that will limit funds to challengers.

McCain-Feingold had good intentions, but produced the unintended consequences of creating independent 527 organizations. There are legitimate pros and cons to that occurrence. Reform is needed, but it needs study and honest input.

Question #5:

While the above issues have captured the headlines, our War on Terror (particularly in Iraq) is never far from our minds. It goes without saying that the vast majority of us support our troops; but the question is whether you favor our current approach or something different in terms of sending additional troops, seeking more multinational support, or a complete pullout. Maybe your thoughts are someplace in between these listed or would be considered “out of the box” thinking. What approach would you favor?

Zeese: The United States cannot bring stability to Iraq as we have made too many mistakes, e.g. invading based on inaccurate or false information, Abu Gharib, Fallujah, Haditha, killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians, searches of homes in the middle of the night, checkpoint searches and killings at checkpoints. We need to announce that we are leaving and do so promptly. Actually getting out in an orderly and safe way will take approximately six months, at the longest. During that time we should go through a reconciliation process where we recognize the damage we have done and pay for it. That is the real pottery barn rule — you break it you pay for it. If the Iraqi government wants a peace keeping force we should help to organize one through the Arab League or other regional power, if that fails then through the UN. But we need to get our toops out. They are not able to resolve this matter and are just sitting ducks. I agree with many in retired military, foreign service, intelligence and national security experts who say the Iraq war was a mistake of historic purposes and the longer we stay the bigger the mistake gets. We are making the US less secure by staying, stoking the potential of a civil war in Iraq, helping a theocratic state come into existence. As General William Odom says — all we fear is made more likely by staying in Iraq. The sooner we exit — in an orderly and responsible way — the better.

The real issue in Iraq is the desire of the leadership of both parties to control their economy and the economy of the Middle East — for as long as it has oil. It is evident that the United States is not planning on leaving. We are building the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad — ten times larger than the typical embassy, the size of 80 football fields. We are building 14 long-term military bases. We are putting down long and deep roots and plan on staying. The challenge is to change our economy so we are no longer dependent on foreign oil – indeed on fossil fuels at all. That is where we should put our resources and focus — not on militarily and economically dominating the Middle East.

Schaefer: We need to give our top military officers, generals and admirals, more influence on the conduct of the war; and Bush needs to cultivate others nations as he has done so very well as to Britain. I am shocked at Congressman Cardin’s call for a timetable for return of all troops by next year, his press release could have been written by al-Zarqawi. His view was repudiated by the Congress the next day. We need to support our President in his military posture but we have an equal obligation to question his judgment, and seek prosecution and impeachment if evidence indicates intentional misconduct. That is why it is important that the Democrats have control of either the House or the Senate so that the conduct of the Bush Administration can come under the looking-glass instead of being protected by the abusive power enjoyed by a Congress and Senate of the same party as the President. We can never know the truth when one party controls the Executive and the Legislative, and by appointments, the Judicial branch.

Shawver: Before any troops are sent to any country, it should be clerly (sic) look into, remmber (sic) Korea, Viet-Nam.

Dickerson: I served in the military as an Air Force Security Police Combat Arms Instructor, and my Chief Master Sergeant lives on the Shore, so I better be careful with this answer. We are all Americans, so arguments in the U.S. Senate do not solve problems. Our Congress decided to go to War in Iraq, and we cannot change that decision. We cannot completely pullout our troops, but we can craft an “Exit Strategy” that is endorsed by the U.N. Security Council. We need Europe, Russia and China’s financial and political support after we redeploy. A post-Iraq has to be supported by the world community. If we pullout of Iraq now, then we would be providing Iran the opportunity to invade Iraq and seek revenge for the Iraq-Iran War. We need to create a timetable for our exit, and have the Iraqi government get serious about it. When is the world going to wake up the Arab League. Do the Arabs care about the peace and stability in the region, or do they just watch us do the dirty work?

Taylor: The immediate first step is to withdraw ALL our troops from both Iraq and Afghanistan during 2007, WITH all their expensive equipment. The second step is NOT to invade Iran, Syria, and Lebanon on the behalf of the terrorist State of Israel. The third step is to abolish ALL foreign aid to Israel in 2007 and spend ALL that money to rebuild our own country in my proposed Marshall Plan for America and 2nd New Deal for American CITIZENS. The fourth step is to end our foolish and counterproductive 1948 alliance with the State of Israel in 2007, and thus end the war of terror on us. I submit to you that the interests of 295 million non-Jewish American citizens far outweigh those of 6 million Israelis and 5.2 million American Jews. The fifth step is to abolish ALL dual citizenships with other nations as inherently evil AND anti-American. The sixth step is to execute convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, not release him. The American recognition of the State of Israel in 1948 was the worst diplomatic blunder in all of our history, and should be reversed before they drag us into World War III, which in time is exactly what WILL, indeed, happen. Of that I have no doubt whatsoever. You haven’t asked, but I would bomb all North Korean missile sites tomorrow morning, and would NOT invade Cuba, which the current President is planning to do—along with Syria, Iran, and Lebanon—the week after the Republican Party wins the coming fall Congressional elections. We should also seek a peaceful solution of our current naval differences with China, not go to war with it—also as the President is planning to do before he leaves office on Jan. 20, 2009. Our esteemed President Nixon stopped the on-rushing Sino-Soviet War in 1969 in its tracks, and so can we now!

Gordon: (I believe) that it is full time for the voters and the legislative branch of our government to give an ear to Generals Scowcroft and Abizaid, and Director Goss as well as the other Americans who are expressing grave concerns about the Administration’s Iraq doctrine, and to further warn the administration of any military ventures into Syria or Iran (1) without the expressed permission of the United States Congress and (2) acting upon irrefutable evidence that those two nations were in the process of implementing a military strike against the United States mainland or on its military bases abroad. The administration has turned the Iraq war into a quagmire and possibly worse, in terms of potential for a wider war. (I) strongly support Congressman John Murtha’s call for the withdrawal of American Military Forces from Iraq. Congressman Murtha is acting in the best interest of the U.S. long term security needs. Any one who condemns Congressman Murtha’s proposal, in light of the revelations of what is taking place in Iraq, should read the history of the German sixth army in Russia during the reign of Hitler.

Rasmussen: It is too late to argue the merits of being in Iraq. The question is how do we objectively measure and achieve a winning outcome? The consequences of losing Iraq will affect the next several generations. I do not support an arbitrary time-frame for withdrawal. An exit strategy needs to be fully developed with definitive objectives that can be measured before any meaningful withdrawal of American resources. We must win with honor, secure Iraq for the Iraqi people by providing means of law and order and basic infrastructure, and return our troops as quickly as possible!

Vovak: All wars are political since politicians begin wars, not generals. Logically, politicians are responsible for ending the wars they create. The usual method of changing a policy is for people to pressure politicians to change the status quo. Hence, to oppose a war is not an act of disloyalty to our nation (or its soldiers) but an act of patriotism, because the American system is used to make a change in American policy. In Iraq, the mission has been accomplished and most troops need to return home immediately. I believe that if troops return home gradually then American soldier deaths will ultimately increase dramatically. I sense a Vietnam-type quandary rupturing in Summer 2006 with a divided nation wanting to remove all troops from Iraq or to substantially increase the number of troops. The American public will elect leaders outside of the traditional thinking of Washington, D.C. By contrast, I support The Afghanistan War, which is rooted in stopping terrorist groups. All terrorism must end.

Young: Support humanity, peace, justice. Respect other’s cultures. Cooperate with United Nation, other countries. Oppose: horrible violent force, invasion, occupation, Deprivation/destruction (countries, population, properties, soldiers; resources, reputation; public, private); unjust practices, manipulation, influence, falsification, false excuses; problems (credibility, moral, mental, financial, fiscal), official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks Government budget to carry out necessary government function; maintain truly quality, honest, integrity employees, appointees, commissioners, volunteers; etc.; eliminate “fraud- crime- injustice networks”, corporate welfare. Define and identify the “terror” or “crime” right; not opposite, falsification, misleading, deceit; false excuses to victimize people (here or overseas), as often by the “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks: Fighting the terror overseas, with UN, alliance of other countries. Pay for damages, restitution, reparation to victims; penalties against those who caused the problems or damages. Reconstruction mainly to benefit the general public of the victimized countries; not to benefit a few; with UN, alliance of countries.

Lichtman: Since announcing my candidacy for the United States Senate last September, I was the first Democratic U.S. Senate candidate to specifically propose and advocate a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, with specific goals and timetables. My original timetable, announced at my campaign kickoff on September 28, 2005, I specified that troops be withdrawn from Iraq no later than the end of 2006.
Unlike some of my opponents, I have consistently and emphatically challenged President Bush’s pretenses for the war in Iraq, and his lack of strategy for victory in the region for the last three years. I have also shown my disapproval for the war by attending anti-Iraq War rallies, meetings, forums, and protests throughout Maryland and the D.C. area.

Occupation creates insurgency; only sovereignty creates stability, which cannot be imposed externally, by force. Our continued military presence in Iraq inflames the insurgency and makes Iraq a magnet for terrorism. The president says that Iraq is the front line in the war on terrorism. It was not, however, before his misguided invasion. The CIA’s own National Intelligence Council warns that Iraq and future conflicts “could provide recruitment, training grounds, technical skills and language proficiency for a new class of terrorists who are ‘professionalized’ and for whom political violence becomes an end in itself.”

It will take years of renewed diplomatic ties and an unobtrusive positive promotion of humane, Democratic values ultimately to end tensions in the region. Therefore, I propose the following:

Ending the War

• As a United States Senator, I would not support any funding for perpetuation of the war beyond 2006, except financial and logistical resources aimed towards bringing American soldiers home from Iraq.

• I would also sponsor a Senate Resolution specifically calling for the prompt withdrawal of American troops.

• As part of my withdrawal plan, the United States would make it clear that it has no ambitions for permanent military bases in Iraq or American control over Iraqi oil.

Reprioritizing our Military Objectives

• There are too many urgent needs at home which are being neglected because our financial, logistical, and National Guard resources meant for homeland security are stretched too thin worldwide.

• We must utilize our National Guard to strengthen our Homeland Security by better securing domestic transportation hubs and American borders.

• National Guard personnel can assist in the rebuilding effort of American cities recently uprooted by natural disasters.

Finding and Eliminating the Threats from al-Qaeda

• The terrorist group responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks is still the biggest threat to American security.

• America must refocus our efforts to find and eliminate Osama Bin Laden and other al-Qaeda members worldwide.

Regaining American Credibility Throughout the World

• America must work proactively to restructure diplomatic ties with our allies and rejoin the world in multilateral initiatives to promote peace and protect our environment.

• I support the investigation into any unlawful abuse of detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison and Abu Gharab detention facilities.

• Those who break the law should be prosecuted, and conversely, any detainees found to be innocent should be freed.

• Promote positive Muslim-Judeo-Christian relationships in the entire Middle East, including in Iran and within the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. America needs to again provide real, proactive leadership to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict such as displayed under the Clinton administration.

Leading Iraq into the 21st Century

• Monitor the development of Iraqi forces with renewed support from our allies.

• Help Iraqis establish fair labor practices and vibrant local economy that will ease transition into the world economy.

• Promote strong public education and programs that emphasize democracy, international engagement, and tolerance of all cultures.

• As an expert on voting rights and democratic systems I would travel to Iraq as a Senator and offer my assistance in developing a working democracy.

• As a Senator I would introduce legislation for an investigation similar to that of the Truman Committee during World War II to assure that aid money is well-spent and wealthy, politically-connected corporations are not making illicit profits at the expense of the American taxpayers and the Iraqi people.

Question #6:

Related to the above question is the controversy over Iran’s nuclear program. The oil-rich nation claims that this program is for the peaceful use of generating electrical power for its citizens, yet on the other hand its leadership has threatened the nation of Israel with annihilation hinted as being from a nuclear bomb. While the President has the final decision, what course would you advocate he take (a pre-emptive military strike, diplomacy either through the UN or some other way, or leaving them alone as a sovereign nation) and why?

Gordon: It must be noted that during the administration of Gerald Ford, the US wanted to sell nuclear reactors to Iran, because Iran was led by the Shah, a man they saw as America’s friend. The reactors the Americans wanted to sell to Iran were the kind that could produce the materials to construct nuclear weapons. Many of the senior government officials who wanted to sell nuclear reactors to Iran are some of the same people who are now pushing the war in Iraq and for democracy throughout the Middle East.

Today Iran is ruled by a group of men who would have loved to inherit those nuclear reactors from the Shah. Had they done so, Iran would have at least five hundred to a thousand nuclear bombs today. And they would have to be thankful to the Neo Cons.

Shawver: If Iran nuclear program, is for electrical power, fine. If it’s to threatened (sic) Israel it should go befor (sic) the U.N.

Zeese: The President does not have the final decision to go to war (and a military attack on Iran would be an act of war). Under the U.S. Constitution the President cannot declare war only the Congress can. James Madison said this was the most important clause of the Constitution because they had seen Kings and Queens send countries into unnecessary and costly wars. Yet since World War II it has been the most ignored clause of the Constitution because the Congress lacks the spine to take responsibility and do its duty. If the United States bombed Iran without the Congress declaring war it would be illegal under U.S. law. Further, under international law it would be a war of aggression — the most serious offense any country can make against another. Iran is not threatening the U.S. — they are also not threatening Israel — and their religious leaders have issued an edict against nuclear weapons, indeed against weapons of mass destruction. Iran has been offering, for over a year, to negotiate with us over all issues, including Israel. We should take them up on that negotiation. Right now everything that Iran is doing is legal under the Nuclear Non-proliferation Agreement. Israel, which has 250 nuclear bombs, has not even signed the agreement. The United States is developing new nuclear weapons as well – tactical nuclear weapons — and has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Iran. This is hypocritical and undermines our moral standing to challenge Iran. Further, we are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy — President Bush lists Iran as a member of the axis of evil, then we surround them militarily with bases in Afghanistan on their eastern border, in Iraq on their western border and in the Persian Gulf to their south with our Navy. Then the Bush administration engages in the same exaggeration and manipulation that it did in the build up to Iraq. Hopefully, people will not fall for it again as Iran is a bigger challenge than Iraq. Iran is four times as large as Iraq. It we were to attack it will create further unrest in Iraq and further destabilize the region. The US will be further isolated in the world and our military force, which is already stretched to the breaking point, will be unable to handle another military quagmire. We need to change our approach. Out goal with Iran should be to make Iran our ally in the region — not our enemy. We have a lot more in common that is being discussed. If we turn them into allies we can bring stability to the region, keep our access to oil and actually resolve conflicts (including Israel-Palestine) instead of expand conflicts.

Lichtman: I strongly oppose a preemptive strike by the Bush administration. Such action would weaken the security of Israel, undermine the war against terrorism, overextend our already thinly stretched military and pose a grave threat to world peace. I have long proposed the carrot and stick approach to Iran, with negotiations that combine both real sanctions against Iran, with cooperation on meeting the nation’s alleged energy needs.

Young: Support humanity, peace, justice. Respect other’s cultures. Cooperate with United Nation, other countries. Oppose: horrible violent force, invasion, occupation, Deprivation/destruction (countries, population, properties, soldiers; resources, reputation; public, private); unjust practices, manipulation, influence, falsification, false excuses; problems (credibility, moral, mental, financial, fiscal), official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks .

Stop minorities bashing. Improve quality of officials. Support civilian review board.

Improve race relationships, by deeds, not rhetoric; diversity in good faith, not for political reasons; or to benefit/facilitate “fraud-crime- injustice networks” operations; not relaying/shuffling at the expense of justice, productivity against good workers/citizens, especially minorities. Investigate/ prosecute/ eliminate: serious problems: unjust appropriation, siphoning resources to benefit a few, “fraud-crime- networks” Investigate/ prosecute/ eliminate: minorities-bashing, hate crimes; injustice, false excuses, imprisonment, detention, torture, unfair treatment, victimization; deprivation of resources, reputation, families, social relationship; racial profiling, discrimination, victimization, retaliation, official misconduct, falsification; unlawful acts, crimes; tampering of evidence, witnesses, etc.; three branches, local- global, especially by “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice works”, including DOJ, FBI, law enforcement, judicial/ legal/ financial/ accounting personnel, their unjust practices (false excuses, manipulation, influence, destruction) destroy individuals, families, businesses, communities, peace, democracy. Their damages are more serious than 9-11-2001 World Trade Center incidence, President Bush’s wars, President Nixon’s Watergate, Florida election 2000, financial/ accounting/ legal disasters, notorieties (e.g., Enron bankruptcy, Andersen accounting). Illinois Governor issued moratorium, because of DNA tests disapproved the death sentences of some death row inmates. Maryland conducted a study about the disparities in death penalty. Examine inmate/detainee population, true causes of imprisonment, bond; disparate treatment; official misconduct, brutality, frivolous cases (civil, criminal), improper complaint processing, procedures, proceedings; administrative, judicial levels. Thorough investigation, using the complaints/cases, testimonies of this candidate before officials, legislative committees, public hearings, the Office of Court Administration; varieties of issues, including legislative proposals, budgets, etc.; accumulative, never properly resolved. Shame: judicial branch asked lawmaker (Maryland General Assembly) to abolish the record- keeping or accounting.

Vovak: America needs to continue to negotiate with Iran.

Rasmussen: I favor full international sanctions and isolating Iran if they fail to be part of the Community of Nations. If they truly want only nuclear power, we should assist and control the output of fusionable material. Iran will threaten to bargain with oil and access to oil. In the long run, it will destroy their economy, so I don’t believe they would withhold oil or access to oil as a long-term weapon. Military strikes are a last resort, and only after an attack or the threat of an eminent attack on Israel or others in the Middle East.

Taylor: I would favor diplomacy first with Iran to halt nuclear weapons production, but if our otherwise incompetent CIA can PROVE they are forging ahead, then I would opt for a surgical, missile first strike and take them out straightaway. As a former Vietnam veteran soldier and military affairs writer worldwide now, I do not believe a full-scale ground invasion is necessary. We’ve already had two Vietnams; let’s not spawn a third!

Schaefer: I am not optimistic as to the efficiency of the United Nations, these nations seeing how America has handled inspections problems re: Iraq might now be more open to a USA inspection team doing a credible audit of the capabilities of involved nuclear nations, both friends and foes. The UN cannot compel anything. Frankly if power-generation involves essentially the same nuclear capacity that an attack utilizes, there appears to be no solution, other than having a CIA operative reporting to the US Embassy in each county in confidence, with any discomforting information being shared with the President and leader of each house of the Congress. If the equipped nation is arrogant, or inflexible, then we must seek world opinion(media) incondemnation of that country and its leadership and perhaps termination of economic relationships with sabre-rattlers.

Dickerson: The President decided to go it alone the first time with Iraq, so let us not make the same mistake again. We have a U.N. Atomic Energy Commission, based in Vienna, Austria that should be in charge of the inspections and negotiations. Israel is equipped with a nuclear arsenal, so the other countries feel threatened as well. I have worked with people from Israel, at Motorola, in the Mossad, and I can assure you, that Israel is monitoring the situation quite carefully. The U.N. Security Council needs to be the global authority on this issue. The President of Iran is a mad man for directing his comments against Israel, but leave this one to Europe, Russia and China to work out. The world is tired of us acting as if we are the World Police with all of the answers. If the world is not united in boycotting Iran, then the boycott will not work. If they have an alternative supply chain from Russia or China, then there is no power in the boycott. A pre-emptive strike could ignite the Jihad even further, so let us use all of our diplomatic power backed by a strong military.

******************************

So ends part 2. On Friday I’ll do the third and final portion of this “debate”.

Today I’m going to begin the “debate” portion of my Ten Questions features. What I’ve done is taken each question and placed the answers from each of my nine responders (ten for Question #10) under each one. They are in random order so no one has an advantage by always getting the last word in, as it were.

I have done a little bit of editing this time, in that I decided not to place links or campaign website references inside the answers. (However, misspellings and poor grammar are retained.) If you’d like to see the original Ten Questions answered by each candidate I’ll link them below as I introduce each one. Unfortunately I only got about 1/3 of the candidates to return the questions and right now those who returned the surveys aren’t polling above 5% so it’s looking like the also-rans are the only ones who answered.

But I’m going to carry on anyway, because this is a public service after all and there IS usefulness to this as Green Party aspirant Kevin Zeese is assured a place on the November ballot. Thus, it’s good to compare his answers to the more mainstream parties’ folks.

First I’m going to do Questions 1 through 3 for both the Senate and the Maryland General Assembly (that post will be tomorrow.) In order of appearance on Question #1, the candidates responding are:

Mike Schaefer, Democrat – website and original Ten Questions responses.
Richard Shawver, Republican – no website, original Ten Questions responses.
Kevin Zeese, Green – website and original Ten Questions responses.
Allan Lichtman, Democrat – website and original Ten Questions responses.
Dennis Rasmussen, Democrat – website and original Ten Questions responses.
Lih Young, Democrat – no website, original Ten Questions responses.
Earl Gordon, Republican – no website, original Ten Questions responses. He did not respond to all questions either since I gleaned them from a 47 page treatise he sent to me.
Daniel “The Wig Man” Vovak, Republican – website and original Ten Questions responses.
David Dickerson, Democrat – website and original Ten Questions responses.
Blaine Taylor, Democrat – no website, original Ten Questions responses.
George English, Democrat – website and original Ten Questions response. English only answered Question #10, the rest of the time he deferred to his website.

Enjoy the debate.

Question #1:

There are several schools of thought regarding the problem of illegal immigrants, or as some would call them, “undocumented workers.” Some solutions offered range from complete amnesty to sealing the border with a wall to penalizing employers who hire these workers. Currently there are competing House and Senate measures – in particular the House bill has spawned massive protests around the country. While I have listed some of the possible solutions, it’s no exhaustive list. What solutions do you favor for the issue?

Schaefer: My campaign demands we think outside the box.

In WWII we prohibited the sending of US dollars to countries we were at war with. And I think with any country as we needed our monetary base at home to remain strong.

We need to promptly ban the sending of US dollars by wire, mail, or personal delivery, from a USA base to a recipient in Mexico. Most of these dollars are untaxed US earnings. And the act of modest-income earners fulfilling their moral equivalent of our athlete’s “Buy Momma a House” with their new-found riches, works to impoverish the Mexico illegals who are struggling to find decent housing, decent food and clothings, and assist their children with the new-found costly lifestyle. We must force those who earn bucks to spend it here, this helps our economy too, and the incentive of the Mexican poor to come to Lama-land and send hom the riches to their loved ones, will VANISH and so will the desire of many to leave their loved ones if they cannot be sending them pots of gold.

Shawver: Illegal immigrants, are illegal. Anyone hiring illegal’s are breaking the law. Send the illegal’s back, fine the employer’s.

Zeese: I favor legal borders, legal workers, legal immigration. But to achieve that we need to face up to the real underlying issue and that is economic. I find the House and Senate as posturing rather than facing up to the real economic problems — because they have both helped cause the economic problems that spur immigration. We have tripled to quadrupled the border patrol in recent years, arrest a million people trying to cross but still have a larger problem with undocumented immigrants. Why? Because enforcement cannot trump economics and our trade and other policies have made the economic problem worse. For example, NAFTA (supported by both Democrats and Republicans) has pushed one million Mexican farmers off their farms — they get pushed into the cities where there is already economic stress and as a result millions are desperate. So, desperate they risk coming across the border. We need to renegotiate NAFTA. These and other treaties like the WTO are not really free trade agreements, they are agreements that empower big business multi-national corporations and they do so at the cost of working families in the US and south of the border. In the US workers are growing more desperate — deeper into debt than ever before, more and more without health insurance, unable to afford the rising costs — especially of energy and homes, with median family income dropping and poverty rising for five years in a row. Thus, when working families see immigrants it is easy for the big business and big government interests to divide and conquer — the immigration issue is being used by those in power to keep power. This is a phony debate, nothing was ever going to be done on it, it is pure election year grandstanding not a real attempt to solve the problem. Solving the problem of illegal immigration would require facing up to the special interests — the big business interests — that control both old political parties.

Lichtman: I strongly oppose a punitive approach to immigration, including any laws like H. R. 4437 that could potentially punish teachers, clergy, social service workers and doctors who have a moral duty to serve all people in need, including the immigrant community. No American should be forced to choose between helping those people in urgent need of assistance because of excessive fear of facing penalties. I also favor a rigorous approach to citizenship for undocumented workers such as that provided in the Kennedy-McCain framework, much of which is incorporated in the current Senate bill.

Although I believe that we need to secure our borders I believe that only long-term approach to illegal immigration is a comprehensive North American solution to immigration and Homeland Security which would include the United States, Canada and Mexico working conjointly as a community on economic development, mutual security, infrastructure, education, and labor policy.

Rasmussen: First and foremost – the flow of illegal aliens must be stopped. If that means more patrols, enhanced technology, bringing in the National Guard and building barriers, then let’s do it!

Second – we need to implement formidable disincentives so that businesses do not hire illegals. That means sizable fines and other legal sanctions. We need to be able to have employers verify an immigrant’s status.

Third – we need to register all aliens. If you do not have a valid “citizen” or “visitor” I.D., then you discontinue all public assistance.

Fourth – We need to recognize that we can’t deport 12 million people. Currently, we cannot track down all the individuals for whom there are open arrest warrants, and we know their names, where they live and where they work. Identifying, much less deporting, 12 million illegal aliens with no incentive to identify themselves is unrealistic. For those who meet the requirements on a selective system, we must assimilate them into our society.

Basically, I like the concept of “Closed Borders and Open Doors” with a selective, but fair, immigration policy. Diversity has been a strength of America. However, we are a nation of laws, which must be enforced.

Young: Stop minorities bashing. Support civilian review board. Improve quality officials. race relationships, diversity in good faith, not rhetoric or abuse as often by “fraud-crime- injustice networks”. Clean-up; not relaying/shuffling at the expense of justice, productivity, good workers, minorities, immigrants. Investigate/ prosecute/ eliminate: unjust appropriation, siphoning resources to benefit a few.
All people, including minorities have a lot to contribute; should have opportunities to reach their potential. Support: good-faith diversity, not rhetoric or bad-faith (used for wrong purposes: unjust practices, unlawful acts, falsification, false/misleading testimonies, bad proposals, or for token only etc.), equality (opportunities, education, employment, business, procurement, contracting, promotion; learning, environment); fair election process; people input, open public hearings, town hall meetings (not for formality only); accurate timely information, report, statistics; assistance to needy, disability, elderly, vulnerable, but not to be diverted to benefit a few or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation. Protect people (rights, resources, reputation, liberties, constitutional, litigation, jury trials, due process, grievance, complaint, records), families, affiliations, social relationships, heritages. Improve: accountability, cost-effectiveness; benefit people, all ethnic groups, (not like current system siphoning public fund/resources (local- federal) mainly to benefit a few); quality of officials. Support affirmative action, smart growth, “proper growth”. Restore principle, function, fairness, non-discrimination. Examine/ eliminate: racial profiling, endless unjust practices, double standards; false arrest, citation, charges, detention, incarceration, bond/bail, unjust sentencing, police brutality, “official misconduct- fraud- crime- injustice networks”; improper accounting, records; abuse/diversion of social benefit programs, distortion of fund; disparity of inmate population, false excuses/disguise of abuse, detention, imprisonment. Many officials (3 branches, past, current) are problems, not solution; unjust manipulation, influence, misleading, deceit; controlled by or be part of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” = 4th branch which overlap private and public sectors. Eliminate serious problems: public agencies, private businesses (e.g., financial, legal/judicial, accounting, etc.); unjust practices, manipulation, influences; immoral, unethical, unlawful acts, fraud, crime; falsification, false excuses, false arrest, citations, liens, foreclosure, etc; deprive/ damage/ destroy people (individuals, families, business; personal, political, civic, association, social relationship); silencing people down with threats, coercion, discrimination, victimization, retaliation, civil/human rights backwards, socio-political problems, vicious cycles, people-slaves; official violation of laws, unjust schemes; bad-faith; sole sources, secret deals, abandonment of public resources especially without public knowledge; distortion of fair market mechanism in many aspects: planning, construction, land deals; disregarding important factors, justification, priorities, cost-benefits (whether education, school construction, economic development, affordable housing, medium priced dwelling units, traffic, parking…,); heavy burden with taxation, bond/debt, fees.

Issues are interrelated, horizontally, vertically, local-global; e.g., budget, education, public safety, health care, etc. See other issue statements. Problem solving approaches: proactive, diagnostic, cost-effective, preventive; not minorities-bashing. America: founded, grown, because of immigrants. Declaration of Independence, US Constitution: simple, valuable for hundreds of years, result of immigration. Republican candidate Steve Rosen seems to forget that with false excuse of illegal immigrants; disregards real problems of “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”= “EXIS OF EVILS” IN OUR HOMELAND = “super classes of crimes, welfare, parasites” = “cruel tyranny” = “robbery machine” = penetrating, expanding everywhere (inc. non-profit, civic organization) = the most terrifying terrorists on daily basis; worse then World Trade Center 9-11-2001 incidence, pre-emptive wars with Patriot Act, Florida election 2000, President Nixon’s Watergate, Financial/accounting/legal disasters (e.g., Enron bankruptcy), etc; opposite the purposes of education, government function, judicial missions; destroy our society, democracy, justice, peace; with double standards; endless unlawful, criminal acts, unjust schemes, scams, depriving of resources (public, private); fraud, theft, identity theft, hate crime, false arrests, citation, detention, imprisonment, contempt of order, bond/bail; murder, attempt of murder; harassment, victimization, discrimination, retaliation; cause homelessness, poverty, serious socio- political- election- media problems in vicious cycles; civil/human rights backward, people-slave. Scapegoat on minorities: bashing, harassing; false excuses to benefit, facilitate “official misconduct- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation. In a local candidate forum at Jewish Community Center, Steve Rosen arrogantly said that he could influence media. Candidate LIH YOUNG pointed out that Rosen should examine the violation of “rule of law” (Rosen’s own quoted words), problems about media (LIH YOUNG testified on such and other problems frequently), Rosen’s preference treatment from LWV with earlier access to Dnet, uploading more issues, lengthy statements; evidence of unfairness, unjust manipulation, as often by “official misconduct- fraud- crime- networks”. Note: Candidate LIH YOUNG’s repeated requests, including placing Young’s photo on Dnet was denied, when supposed to. LIH YOUNG SUPPORT: measures to promote democracy, productivity, heath, education, public safety; equality, employment, reaching potential to contribute most. Focus: strengthen the implementation, enforcement of Constitutional law, good existing laws; not abuse, misuse. Protect people’s rights (liberties, constitutional rights, litigation, jury trials, due process, resources, properties, reputation, association); not deprived, damaged, destroyed; not secret detention, deprivation, disparity treatment, sentencing. Investigate/ prosecute/ eliminate the false arrests, detention, falsification, false excuses, unjust practices, manipulation, influences, as often by “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”. OPPOSE: anti-immigrants approaches, hate-crime; obstruct, destruct, hinder productivity, employment, job search, purchasing power, family life; deprive, damage liberties, rights, resources; bad legislative bills with hidden agenda (regarding unjust heavy penalties, driving, license, vehicles, etc.) to benefit/ facilitate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” operation at the expense of the people, especially minorities.

Gordon: The United States does not face an immigration crisis. The United States is just lacking an appropriate refuges policy to deal with people who were displaced by the socioeconomic disaster that was created by the pro American Neo Cons brutal military-political dictatorships in Central and South America over the past years. The United States should treat these refugees with respect and human dignity, mindful of the contribution many are making to the economic stability of the food supply (farm workers) and housing market (construction workers.) Whatever financial cost is incurred by the United States in its treatment of some of these refugees should be charged to the nation from which they came, by subtracting the cost from the foreign aid that is given to these nations by the U.S. (All foreigners should be fully aware that English is the official language of the United States, there is no need for an amendment to the constitution on this issue).

Vovak: Our borders are out of control to the point where private individuals are exceedingly more effective than the government at protecting America against terrorism. The federal government has a department that controls immigration, called the Immigration and Naturalization Service. That department needs to be eliminated or its laws enforced beginning immediately.

Dickerson: We are Americans first, so we all have to stand united and protect the constitution. We cannot offer Amnesty to any illegal immigrants, but we can be humane and offer processes for everyone to work towards becoming American citizens. We need to secure the border, and we can start by requesting the Mexican and Canadian governments to work with us. The Great Wall of China and the Berlin Wall did not work in the long term, but we can start ‘cracking down’ on the businesses that hire illegal immigrants. Every human being is looking to make a better life for themselves and their family, so there is no need for us to act against many of the illegal immigrants. If companies cannot find the employees, then the U.S. government needs to do a better job of issuing ‘Temporary Working Visas’ as a rapid response to small business needs, in the event an American cannot fill the job.

Taylor: No amnesty. English is and remains the official language of the land. Deport all Mexican flag wavers back to Mexico where they belong. Deport all 11 million illegal aliens before they become 30 million. Secure all frontiers: Mexico, Canada, seacoasts. Shoot invaders. Halt ALL immigration for the six-month period of January-July 2007 so that the new Democratic Senate and House of Representatives in Congress Assembled can get us OUT of the mess we’re now in, rather than getting in deeper. Simultaneously, open a national debate about the merits and demerits of halting ALL immigration for good. We’re going to have to do it in the end or risk being infiltrated by foreign elements who will, in fact, take over the United States and end our civilization as we know it. Of that I am absolutely convinced—and history is on my side, too. Europe is experiencing huge problems. The will expel all aliens first, and we will be forced to follow suit. If they don’t, won’t, or can’t learn and speak English, they should ALL go.

Question #2:

Another top-burner concern is the current spike in the price of gasoline. Again, this is a broad issue with many scenarios that can be played out. Possible solutions that have been bandied about in recent days are a temporary suspension of the federal 18.4 cent a gallon tax on gasoline and easing environmental restrictions on gasoline blends (as happened after Hurricane Katrina). Further down the road but possibly affecting prices on the futures market would be the approval of additional oil drilling in ANWR and the Gulf of Mexico. If you were elected, what solutions to this issue would you pursue and why?

Gordon: The energy policy of the Neo Cons presents another act of deception. The American people are told that, due to the demands for oil by nation such as China and India, the availability of oil on the world market is very limited. So based on the gospel of supply and demand, the prices are high at the gas pump.

The claim by the administration is as deceptive as Iran/Contra and Iraq WMD claims. There are absolutely no shortage of oil on the world market. The former Soviet Republics have so much oil that they can sell America that, even if the Middle East was up in flames, gas prices should not have been where they are. Moreover, whether one believes it or not, there is enough oil and gas in Central and South America that could serve this nation’s needs for the next one million years at the rate of the present consumption level. This oil could be made available to the American people in a flash, if America’s politics were free of corrupt Neo Cons influences.

Vovak: If Americans want to pay less in gasoline costs, America should use Iraq’s oil. It is a small price for that country to pay for giving them democracy.

Rasmussen: The energy issue is solvable, but it may require the American people and American businesses to compromise to achieve a strategy of conservation and energy independence.

First – The mileage standard for auto and truck performance must be increased at least an additional 4-5 miles/gallon, including SUV’s.

Second – We must provide incentives and approve exploration of the liquefied natural gas resources located on the northern slope of Alaska.

Third – We have limited refining capacity. We must build more. In addition, we need the ability to produce and blend bio-fuels, particularly ethanol.

Fourth – Mobilize the scientific community and provide researchers the funds, facilities and mandate to develop alternative, commercially viable fuels and sources of energy.

Fifth – We need to re-allocate subsidies to the large oil companies and utilize those funds to encourage the development of new power plants and install environmental technology to existing fossil burning power plants to eliminate dangerous mercury emissions.

Shawver: I see no reason why companys can’t drill for oil, as long as they are responsible for any spills.

If we are in Iraq, they should be paying for the war. And we should have all the oil we need.

Zeese: We need to recognize that the 21st Century economy will have to no longer be based on fossil fuels. We have the technology to break our addiction to fossil fuels, including oil and gas but it is not being applied. Once again this is about big business and big government working together for their interests. Every penny increase in the price of oil is $1.5 billion annually for the oil companies. The most recent energy bill had $7 to $12 billion in corporate welfare for the richest companies in the world — big oil. The government is taking money from working Americans and giving it to the wealthiest Americans. We need to restructure our economy for the 21st Century, part of that is shifting from a fossil fuel economy — that is causing terrible environmental damage to our water (including the Chesapeake) and air, but most significantly to the climate change that will cause chaotic weather. We need to move quickly on a variety of fronts to increase efficiency and use technology that minimizes fossil fuels. This includes transportation, home, business and government buildings. For all of these areas we have solutions and applying them will actually grow the economy and create new businesses. If we do not act to manage this transition it will be forced upon us by crisis. We need urgent action in this area.

Taylor: The immediate solution is for the Federal government to take over—nationalize/socialize—ALL gas and oil production faciltiies in this nation, and I make no bones about it, either! The REAL solution, however, is to turn completely AWAY from gas, oil, ethanol and all other fossil-based fuels and TOWARD wind, solar, water, and controlled nuclear power to meet our country’s energy needs for the rest of the 21st Century. In the end, we will, indeed, do exactly this: the only remaining question is: How soon? My answer is to START in 2007, and forge ruthlessly ahead.

Schaefer: Additional oil drilling is a positive, we need to be less energy dependent. Tax credits for purchase of hybrid or electric vehicles need to be increased and promoted. A luxery tax on inefficient new cars is needed, let people buy Hummers but pay a 20% federal luxery tax for any vehicle that does not meet certain standards of efficiency to be set by the states or the feds.

And we need a cap of $2 million on CEO pay, it would be five times the pay of the US President, now 400K. They can have stock options but the $60 million pay taken last year by at least l0 CEO’s earns them prosecution for misapproriaton of shareholder equities. This would not mean much at the pump but the oil companies are prominent among the violators.

Young: Major transaction or land deal should be rigorously reviewed objectively by academically very well trained, based on merits, priorities, cost- effectiveness, social cost-benefits, etc., through competitive processes, general soliciting, fair market mechanism; not arranged by the developer or inner circle; should be openly discussed with residents, in official meetings, Mayor/Council/ public hearings; not misleading, concealing, unjust manipulation or influence; not rushed through as the consent agenda items as mall purchases of goods and services. Eliminate, prevent: abandonment of public resources, land, properties to benefit a few or “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks” including developer, government attorneys, lawyers, law firms, etc.) at the expense of general public and future generations, including other jurisdictions, especially with grants and public debts from the state and federal; sold, leased out (secret hidden agenda, even huge acres, decades-long lease) with zero or no fair compensation, despite citizen’s objection; unnecessarily leased private properties for government use at very high costs even with short lease (a few years or shorter); with extra high costs to construct building, furnish expansive equipments; and when construction is done, lease expires, completed products abandoned or free to a few; often disguised by partnership, economic development, school, education, public safety, etc.; several rounds of unjust abandonment and purchase; misleading public roads, highways, when abandoned to private; unjust projects, appropriation; misuse, abuse, misappropriation; false road construction, maintenance; false records: land, roads, maps; unjust demolition of building even in good condition to initiate new construction, project, purchase, including library or school.

Lichtman: With gas prices soaring above $3 a gallon it is time to stop talking about cutting prices and start taking action. The following is my plan for cutting prices at the pump for the people of Maryland and the nation, both now and in the long term. This is a real plan for change, not the purely rhetorical gesture made by George W. Bush:

1. Provide new powers for the Federal Trade Commission to investigate and crack down on price gouging by the big oil companies. Exxon made a record $36 billion in profit last year and recently paid out some $400 million to its retiring CEO, exploding the excuse that soaring pump prices are solely the product of rising costs.

2. Impose an excess profits tax on the big energy companies with an exception for profits devoted to research into and production of clean, renewable sources of energy.

3. Eliminate state anti-competitive laws, including the Maryland law, which prevents retailers from reducing prices below a specified minimum.

4. Enforce the anti-trust laws to increase competition in the heavily concentrated energy industry.

5. Adopt a plan now for converting a substantial component of the fossil fuel economy to clean, renewable sources of energy. Components of the plan would include:

o Adopt Fuel Economy Standards: We need to adopt real, loophole-free, fuel economy standards for motor vehicles, not the shell game that President Bush has proposed. Even a modest average 5 miles per gallon increase in real fuel economy could save more than 20 billion gallons per year by 2020, according to the Alliance to Save Energy.

o Flip the Subsidies: The government must flip subsidies, tax breaks, and research and development programs from fossil fuels to clean, renewable sources of energy. This would include repealing the $12 billion in subsidies to big oil and gas companies in Bush’s energy bill and devoting the proceeds to developing and producing alternative energy sources.

o Convert Government Fleets: We can begin to convert all government vehicular fleets to low emission, fuel efficient vehicles, including the latest in plug-in hybrid technology and bio-mass fuels.

o Upgrade Efficiency Standards: We need to upgrade energy efficiency standards for appliances and buildings and create incentives for conservation and the cogeneration of energy.

o Make a Commitment to Conservation: The U. S. spend less than $1billion a year on conservation measures, a substantial reduction since the Clinton years. We need a real federal commitment to conservation as well as leaders who will work with the American people to promote a new conservation ethic.

o Advance Research: The government must establish a first-class federal research program devoted to the development of alternative fuels and conservation initiatives.

We can reduce prices at the gas pump, put consumers ahead of excess profits for energy companies, and convert to clean, renewable sources of energy. It is a matter of will, not technology. As President Kennedy said, “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone…”

Dickerson: As U.S. Senator, I would immediately recommend that our country has a meeting with the OPEC members to forge an agreement that prevents another Energy Crisis that we experienced in this country. I remember the day sitting in the car with my father at 3:00a.m. because we had to stand in line at the pump to get gas. China and India’s development has placed more demands for fuel, thus we are seeing a rise in the prices. When the Premier of China visited the United States, he had stopped off in Nigeria to forge relationships and agreed to invest in their infrastructure development. We should reconsider our policy of nation-building in Iraq, and look to secure our relationships with oil producing countries around the world. Does oil drilling in ANWR and the Gulf of Mexico solve the long term strategic problem? No! We also need to immediately be concerned with our National Security and begin developing an Alternative Energy source. Exxon did purchase Reliance Electric years ago, and then they put them out of business when they had invented an Electric Car. I would recommend that we work with Germany and Japan to develop our Alternative Fuel research and development in Maryland. My experience in working in Germany and Japan could support that idea.

Question #3:

Recently the news has featured ethics scandals involving GOP donor Jack Abramoff and former House member Duke Cunningham of California as well as Democrat House members William Jefferson of Louisiana and Allan Mollohan of West Virginia. If elected, what steps would you take to help eliminate ethical improprieties among our elected representatives?

Young: Rigorous review, analysis: budget, based on merit, principle, priorities, cost-effectiveness, social cost-benefits. Promote quality, peace, justice, fair election processes; televise, disseminate, maintain meaningful information; issue, candidate, debate. Oppose: unjust practices, manipulation, influence; bad legislative proposals, hidden agenda with false excuses (economic development, housing, transportation…whatever) for private gain (officials, developers, lawyers, etc.); nonsense grants, programs, projects: facilitate “official misconduct- government gang- fraud- crime- injustice networks”=cruel tyranny= robbery machine; continuing, on-going, expanding, penetrating, threat, coercion, victimization, deprivation, discrimination; endless immoral-unlawful acts, rob/destruct resources (public, private; business, civic, political), frivolous litigation, levies, foreclosures; improper processing of complaints, proceedings, docketing; cause vicious cycles: socio- political- election-media; civil-human rights, people-slave.

Vovak: The American system seems to be working, as unethical officials are being caught. In time, more will be caught.

Rasmussen: This one is really simple. No ability for lobbyist organizations, including trade associations to give, raise or steer campaign contributions to anyone in office or running for office. Take that ability away, and you have instant reform. The role of the lobbyist is to educate and inform, not control the power to vote.

Dickerson: Term limits, campaign finance and lobbying reform. If all men are created equal, then it should not be that the major press only favors the candidates with the money. Our founding fathers never established term limits, but did they expect Edward Kennedy to be in the U.S. Senate since I was born in 1962? I propose no more than two terms of office for the U.S. Senate. However, I still think that it serves our democracy for the better by allowing candidates at the last minute to file in this state without requiring them to have petitions signed. The winds of change need to allow for someone to step forward without any barriers.

Shawver: To eliminate ethical improprieties Article 1, Section 5.

Lichtman: Maryland needs a Senator who understands how corruption eroded our government and is ready to stand as a watchdog against practices that sell out the people’s interests to the wealthy corporations. As a Senator I pledge to fulfill that role and to accept no perks or benefits from special interest groups – no junkets to foreign lands, no weekends at lush resorts, no fact-finding trips that become golf holidays. As an educator I understand the importance of setting a role model for students. As a Senator I would do no less for the people of Maryland.

I would also propose much stricter regulation of lobbying than in the sham Republican proposal. Real reforms would ban privately-funded travel and all forms of gifts to lawmakers, restrict former members of Congress from lobbying for two years, and establish an independent ethics-oversight committee. The people’s interests should never be sold out for the wealthy corporate interests.

Taylor: The Senate and House should expel all such members who are crooks, and press the judiciary for the full serving of all sentences, with NO parole.

Zeese: Money in politics is at the root cause of most of the problems we face. I don’t agree with Sen. John McCain on everything but he is right when he says that our “electoral system is nothing less than a massive influence peddling scheme where both parties conspire to sell the country to the highest bidder.” If you doubt the accuracy of the statement visit opensecrets.org and see who is funding the two old parties. If you know it is true, as most Americans know, then you have to decide whether you are going to be part of this corrupt system or challenge it. I’ve decided to challenge it and that is why I am running outside of the two old parties. I’ve created a UNITY CAMPAIGN. For the first time in history three parties have nominated the same candidate — the Libertarian, Green and Populist Parties – also I have members of the Democratic and Republican Parties as well as Independents on my campaign committee. We are joining together because government no longer works for most Americans. We need a paradigm shift in the way we approach issues and need to make this a country that is truly of, by and for the people. That cannot be done by either of the old parties because they are in too deep with the wealth special interests that fund their campaigns.

I oppose earmarks, oppose travel paid for by lobbyists, oppose sweetheart book deals and want to see money having less influence on politics. I favor televsion and radio stations — who are licensed to use the public airwaves — to be required to provide enough time for candidates to let voters know what they stand for. I also support inclusion of all ballot approved candidates in all debates and candidate forums. And, we need to end partisan administration of elections — elections should be administered in a non-partisan way by civil servants rather than political appointees. Our democracy is in serious trouble and major changes are needed.

Schaefer: I have known Cummingham for over ten years. He has serious mental blocks and deserves what he got, guess being treated like a hero for all those years before running for Congress made him think he was invincable. Am happy to see this issue be on the front burner. I would double the budget for the Department of Justice’s public integrity unit and have monitoring of all local, county, state and federal officials by random surprise checks and US Attorneys ordered to bring all published or unpublished criticism of official ethnics to the attention of the DOJ public integrity unit for evaluation.

I applaud Nancy Pelosi for pushing the removal of Jefferson from his Committee.

I think pension benefits ought be reduced 50% or eliminated upon conviction, or the actual funds paid in refunded, without intereset, so that the Congress can terminate its relationship with those who dishonor it.

******************************

That’s all for tonight. I’ll do Questions 4 through 6 next Wednesday and Questions 7 through 10 next Friday. Meanwhile, look for the Maryland General Assembly post tomorrow, I wasn’t on the computer much this evening as the lights flickered menacingly on several occasions with the gusty winds.