2008 Presidential Candidates on: Homeland Security

[EMUJeff]

In an attempt to help us all become more informed citizens in regards to the upcoming November 4th, 2008 Presidential election and with the start of the general campaign upon us I will present some threads on specific topics. They will include some quotations with sources. These are chosen from the non-partisan group ontheissues.org. In each of the 24 threads one issue will be highlighted with a rotating order of candidate presentation for the major candidates nominated by parties or expected to have impact on the election. Wherever possible, we will quote the candidate over time so any changes in opinion are notable.
At this time they include Senator John McCain (Republican), Senator Barack Obama (Democrat), Representative Bob Barr (Libertarian), Cynthia McKinney (Green), Ralph Nader (Independent), and any other candidate who is registered in enough states to carry a majority of the Electoral college (Alan Keyes on the Constitution Party ticket may be eligible later as the party is in 14 states and counting).
This thread's topic: Homeland Security
EMUJeff

[EMUJeff]

Congressperson Bob Barr-

Restore habeas corpus and protect citizens from government

The nation's founders drafted the Constitution to sharply limit the federal government's powers. Unfortunately, in recent years government at all levels has shown growing disrespect for the Constitution, particularly the Fourth Amendment that protects citizens from unlawful searches and seizures. The sustained government attack on the sanctity of the rights of the individual, including their right to be secure in their privacy and property, has created a moral and Constitutional crisis. America's elected officials at all levels must renew their respect for the law and work to protect the rights of individuals.

The place to start is restoring the writ of Habeas Corpus, which protects against unlawful detention, and thus stands at the core of individual liberty. Article 1 of the Constitution provides that this right shall not be suspended without clear and necessary cause, such as during an invasion. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 effectively ended this protection within America Source: Campaign website, www.bobbarr2008.com, "Issues" Apr 22, 2008
Restore military to defense; commit to non-intervention

For far too long and at the cost of American blood and treasure, our great military has been too willingly and quickly used for purposes other than national defense. Our fighting men and women deserve better and the integrity of our nation must be restored.

Our National Defense policy must renew a commitment to non-intervention. We are not the world's police force and our long, yet recently tarnished, tradition of respecting the sovereignty of other nations is necessary, not from only a moral standpoint, but to regain the respect of the world as a principled and peaceful nation.
The proper use of force is clear. If attacked, the aggressor will experience firsthand the skillful wrath of the American fighting man. However, invading or initiating force against another nation based upon perceived threats and speculative intelligence is simply un-American. We are better than the policy of pre-emptive warfare. Source: Campaign website, www.bobbarr2008.com, "Issues" Apr 22, 2008 Here are some of the candidate’s voting records where the main topic of the legislation was foreign policy...

Voted YES on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Vote to pass a bill appropriating $266 billion in defense spending for FY 2000. Among other provisions the bill would allot $1.2 billion for research and development for next-generation tactical aircraft, yet would not include $1.8 billion in procurement funds for the new F-22 Raptor combat aircraft. The bill would also fund a 4.8 percent pay increase for military personnel. The bill would also allot $93.7 billion for operations and maintenance to be used to maintain military properties and spare parts that have been reduced due to overseas military combat missions.
Reference: Bill introduced by Lewis, R-CA; Bill HR 2561 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.2561:) ; vote number 1999-334 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_1999-334.htm) on Jul 22, 1999
Voted YES on deploying SDI.

Vote to declare it to be the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense.
Reference: Bill introduced by Weldon, R-PA; Bill HR 4 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.4:) ; vote number 1999-4 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_1999-4.htm) on Mar 18, 1999
Sponsored bill allowing assassination of terrorist leaders.

Barr sponsored allowing assassination of terrorist leaders

OnTheIssues.org explanation: The US Army and the CIA are currently prohibited by law from assassinating enemies, including terrorist leaders. These prohibitions were put into place after the Kennedy assassination, and after the CIA attempted to assassinate Fidel Castro, so that enemy countries would have no incentive to assassinate American leaders. This bill undoes those prohibitions. Pres. Bill Clinton claimed during his presidency, he interpreted this law to NOT apply to terrorist leaders, since "assassination" only applies to government officials. Hence Pres. Clinton DID attempt to assassinate Osama bin Laden, by cruise missile attack. Under that interpretation (which is not universally accepted) this bill would clarify that Pres. Clinton's actions were and are legal, and hence Pres. Bush may take the same action.
EXCERPTS FROM BILL and from ORIGINAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS:
Congress finds that--
past Presidents have issued Executive orders which severely limit the use of the military when dealing with potential threats
these Executive orders limit the swift, sure, and precise action needed to protect our national security;
present strategy allows the military forces to bomb large targets hoping to eliminate a terrorist leader, but prevents our country from designing a limited action which would specifically accomplish that purpose.The following provisions of Executive orders shall have no further force or effect:
Section 5(g) of Executive Order 11905: "5(g) No employee of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination."
Section 2-305 of Executive Order 12036: "2-305. No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.
Section 2.11 of Executive Order 12333: "2.11: No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination."


Source: Terrorist Elimination Act (H.R.19) 01-HR0019 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_01-HR0019.htm) on Jan 3, 2001
No US troops under UN command; more defense spending.

Barr signed the Contract with America:

[As part of the Contract with America, within 100 days we pledge to bring to the House Floor the following bill]: The National Security Restoration Act:
No US troops under UN command, and restoration of the essential parts of our national security funding to strengthen our national defense and maintain our credibility around the world. Source: Contract with America 93-CWA8 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_93-CWA8.htm) on Sep 27, 1994

[EMUJeff]

Ralph Nader-

A wasteful defense is a weak defense

People don't like Pentagon waste, a bloated military budget, all the reports in the press and in the GAO reports. A wasteful defense is a weak defense. It takes away taxpayer money that can go to the necessities of the American people. That's off the table to Obama and Clinton and McCain.

An independent military analyst wrote an article the other day saying there's no debate on the bloated military budget, on how best to defend this country without breaking the federal budget and putting huge deficits on the backs of our children and their grandchildren. We need to shift the power from the few to the many. And always in American history, every social justice movement was a shift of power from the few to the many. Maybe the slogan should be "Power to the babies." Source: Meet the Press: 2008 "Meet the Candidates" series (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Meet_the_Press.htm) Feb 24, 2008
Hold Bush accountable for torture & illegal war

offers nothing to hold this outlaw presidency accountable. He's backing away from any kind of accountability for a presidency that has made a mockery of the constitution, made a mockery of federal law and international treaties, whether it's systemic torture and illegal war in Iraq, spying on Americans without judicial approval or undermining the authority of Congress, which he's a part of.
Source: CNN Late Edition: 2008 presidential series with Wolf Blitzer Feb 3, 2008
[B]Solving Palestinian-Israeli conflict would reduce terrorism

Q: Briefly describe Nader's position on Middle East Policy, including Israel.

A: Ralph Nader spoke out vigorously against Israel's 2006 invasion of Lebanon and US support for it. Nader said, "The greatest move toward national security in our country and in the so-called effort against terrorism would be to solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The majority of both people would like a two-state solution. This is an eminently resolvable conflict. But as long as the US basically says to whoever is in charge, 'You can do whatever you want over there, and we'll still pump $3 - $4 billion and cluster bomb weapons, etc.,' there's not going to be a resolution. As long as there's no resolution, there's going to be an inflammation increasing all over the Islamic world, and our national security will be compromised." Source: Green Party 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Green_Questionnaire.htm) Feb 3, 2008
End secret detentions & restore civil liberties

Q: Briefly describe Nader's position on Civil Rights.

A: Ralph Nader "supports the restoration of civil liberties, repeal of the Patriot Act, and an end to secret detentions, arrests without charges, no access to attorneys and the use of secret 'evidence,' military tribunals for civilians, non-combatant status and the shredding of 'probable cause' determinations." 14 Source: Green Party 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire Feb 3, 2008
Bush should apologize for failing our troops

On Nov. 1, 2006, Sen. Kerry apologized for a "botched joke" but noted that he meant no disrespect to members of the armed forces. The people who owe our troops an apology are George W. Bush and Dick Cheney who misled America into war, and for a bushel basket full of reasons.

Failure to provide adequate body armor and truck armor in a timely fashion.
Failure to accurately report casualties.
Failure to provide sufficient troop strength in Iraq
Failure to provide troops in Iraq with safe drinking water.
Failing to care for returning troops.
Failure to help veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Failure to protect soldiers and veterans from off-base scams.
Failure to adequately pay troops when abroad and when injured.
These inexcusable, contemptuous indifferences to the well-being of the soldiers, combined with the rush to wage an unnecessary, immoral and illegal war, should compel George W. Bush and Dick Cheney not only to apologize, but to resign.
Source: Open letter by Ralph Nader and Kevin Zeese Nov 2, 2006
Repeal the Patriot Act; end secret detentions

Civil liberties and due process of law are eroding due to the "war on terrorism" and new technology that allows easy invasion of privacy. Americans of Arab descent and Muslim-Americans are feeling the brunt of these dragnet, arbitrary practices. Nader supports the restoration of civil liberties, repeal of the Patriot Act, and an end to secret detentions, arrests without charges, no access to attorneys and the use of secret "evidence," military tribunals for civilians, non-combatant status and the shredding of "probable cause" determinations. They represent a perilous diminishment of judicial authority in favor of concentrated power in the executive branch. Sloppy law enforcement, dragnet practices are wasteful and reduce the likelihood of apprehending violent criminals. Nader seeks to expand civil liberties to include basic human rights in employment and truly equal rights regardless of gender, sexual orientation, race or religion.
Source: Campaign website, VoteNader.org Nov 11, 2004
Weapons corporations indirectly control tax dollars

The states and cities are reporting deeper deficits. This year, the states will be over $60 billion in the red. Taxes & tolls are going up. Necessities are being cut-outlays for schools, libraries, fire and police departments, sanitation department, child welfare, health care & services for elderly people. But there are hundreds of billions for Soviet-era type weapons driven by the weapons corporations & their campaign cash for key members of Congress who decide the distortions of your tax dollars.
Source: In the Public Interest, "Overspending on the Military" Jan 17, 2003
Bush attacks civil liberties while saying he defends them

[After 9/11], the Bush Administration confronted the age-old balance between national security and civil liberties by coming down hard on the latter. But by deed, not by rhetoric. In their statements, President Bush and his Cabinet spoke the language of freedom and liberty, which they said the terrorists and their backers attacked on September 11. They are attacking, the President declared again and again, our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, and our freedom to disagree. But in a remarkable In the weeks after 9/11, expressions of political dissent or the need for tolerance were frowned upon, condemned, or excluded from radio and television. People were shouted down at public gatherings, summarily cut off on TV shows, fired from their jobs. contrast between words and deeds, even for Bush, the government responded with both the most restrictive single law on our civil liberties since the Alien and Sedition Acts of 798 and, by creating a climate of repression, chilling dissent.

Source: Crashing the Party, by Ralph Nader, p. xi-xiv (http://www.ontheissues.org/Crashing_the_Party.htm) Oct 9, 2002
Cut defense budget by $62B by reducing waste & fraud

Nader suggested that the US military could be cut by $62 billion without unduly harming national security. The $62 billion figure was based on an estimate by a Reagan administration assistant defense secretary. "An effort to cut waste, fraud and redundancy from the military budget is long overdue," said Nader. "Instead Al Gore and George W. Bush are competing to curry favor of the defense contractors, each arguing that they will commit more dollars to the military than the other."
Source: Nader: Crusader, Spoiler, Icon, by Justin Martin, p.252-3 Sep 1, 2002
Corporate welfare: taxpayers fund defense industry mergers

No government agency is cozier with industry than the Department of Defense, and corporate welfare is pervasive at the agency famous for cost overruns, waste, fraud, and abuse. Among the most galling of Defense Department corporate welfare handouts is the Pentagon’s merger subsidy program, which pays defense contractors to merge, lessening competition for government bids and increasing the lobbying power of newly combined defense megafirms.

The Pentagon subsidy plan began in the 1990s, when it decided to encourage consolidation in the defense sector. The industry asked for and won encouragement in the form of payments to cover the costs of consolidation-including extravagant “golden parachute” bonuses to executives.
Levels of industry concentration in the defense sector are now so high that the antitrust authorities are beginning to intervene to block some new mergers among primary contractors. But other defense mergers continue to proceed-with the help of the US taxpayer. Source: Cutting Corporate Welfare, p. 21-22 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Corporate_Welfare.htm) Oct 9, 2000
Deter wars by being attuned abroad

Q: When would you send our young people into harm’s way?

NADER: When our essential security interests and the safety of the American people is at stake.
Q: Does that mean we would have to be on the verge of an invasion of an outside force?
NADER: No. For example, looking backward, there were ways to have deterred the Japanese; there are ways to signal to the Germans. Historians have shown that. We have just got to be more rigorously attuned to that. Source: Scot Lehigh, Boston Globe, page D1 Oct 8, 2000
Kill F-22, Seawolf, Osprey, & other gold-plated weapons

Q: The Green Party proposes cutting the defense budget in half. What programs would you cut to reduce spending by $150 billion?

A: One, bring back the troops from Western Europe and East Asia, 55 years after World War II, who are defending prosperous allies who can defend themselves against non-existent enemies. That’s $70 billion right there. Take out of the pipeline those gold-plated weapons systems that ex-admirals and generals have opposed, including some Pentagon analysts who’ve told me that they’re not strategically needed, the F-22, the Joint Strike Fighter, another bunch of Seawolf submarines, the Osprey fighter, which has killed 34 Marines. So you streamline the procurement budget. You know, there are a lot of former Pentagon officials who are not working in the defense industry who really know what needs to be done for a lean, effective military defense driven by defense considerations, not by the profit procurement demands of Lockheed Martin & General Dynamics and other corporations. Source: Nader-Buchanan debate on ‘Meet the Press’ (http://www.ontheissues.org/Nader-Buchanan.htm) Oct 1, 2000
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is discriminatory against gays

Q: Do you support the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military?

A: No I do not. The current system is discriminatory against homosexuals who wish to serve their country. All members of our society should have equal rights and responsibilities. Gays have served in all military branches in numerous foreign countries and, truth be told, have given their lives serving in the U.S. armed services throughout American history.“ Source: Associated Press Sep 6, 2000
SDI doesn’t work; money better spent elsewhere

Q: I assume you’re against SDI?

A: Well, it doesn’t work, even according to the physics community. Gen. MacArthur warned against looking for enemies. [An enemy] could bring a nuclear bomb in a suitcase -- so what are we gonna do, have a $500 billion suitcase defense system? We have far more serious needs -- with billions spent on arms instead of spending pennies to protect children’s health. Source: National Public Radio, “The Connection” Jul 11, 2000
Stop using weapons sales to determine foreign policy

Much of our foreign policy is driven by insatiable corporate pressures to sell military hardware to both the Defense Department and directly to foreign dictators. This happens even if it goes against the interests of our country, taxpayers and the principle of prudently allocated public budgets.
Source: Nomination Acceptance Speech Jun 25, 2000
Stop spending on unneeded weapons & non-existent enemies

Fifty years after World War II, tens of thousands of our troops are still in Europe and East Asia, defending prosperous nation allies who are fully capable of defending themselves against non-existent enemies. Yet, useless massive weapons systems remain on the drawing boards to further mortgage our fiscal future and drain money and talent from long overdue civilian projects.
Source: Nomination Acceptance Speech Jun 25, 2000
Cut defense budget by $100B; time to demobilize

Q: The Green Party platform says about defense spending: “We strive to cut the defense budget by 50% by the year 2000, from approximately $300 billion -- aggregate spending -- in 1996.” Is this your position?
A: Not that much. But [even former Reagan officials say the] defense budget can be cut by $100 billion. Look, our traditional adversaries are no more. Soviet Union is gone. Historically, we demobilized after our enemies have disappeared or have been conquered. We’re not doing that now. We have F-22s, tens of billions of dollars. Analysts in the Pentagon are opposed to it. B-2 bombers forced down the Pentagon’s throat while the global infectious disease efforts of the Pentagon, a great story, is starved for its budget.
Source: Interview on ‘Meet the Press’ May 7, 2000
Stop unneeded defense of prosperous countries

Q: How would you cut the Defense budget by a third?
A: First, bring back some of the troops from Western Europe & East Asia who are defending prosperous countries who can defend themselves against non-existent enemies. There’s about $70 billion being spent in that area a year in up-front and back-up costs. And then these massive weapons systems that have no strategic value whatsoever. How about the Osprey aircraft? That’s crashed and killed a lot of Marines. A wasteful defense is a weak defense.
Source: Interview on ‘Meet the Press’ May 7, 2000
Defense frameworks: how to wage peace while building weapons

Q: People will want to know your views on sanctions on Iraq, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, Chechnya and Kosovo. You’ve got to be prepared to answer those questions.

A: They’ll be answered in terms of frameworks. Once you get into more and more detail, the focus is completely defused. The press will focus on the questions that are in the news. If Chechnya is in the news, they’ll want to focus on that. We should ask ourselves, What kind of popular participation is there in foreign and military policy in this country? Very little indeed. We want to develop the frameworks. For example, do we want to pursue a vigorous policy of waging peace and put the resources into it from our national budget as we pursue the policy of building up ever-new weapons systems? Source: Alternative Radio interview with David Barsamian Feb 23, 2000
Popular participation instead of corporate involvement

What kind of popular participation is there in foreign and military policy in this country? Very little indeed. Corporations are very much involved in a lot of these foreign policy and military policy issues. In fact, one might say they are most involved compared to anyone else in military policy budget through the Pentagon, with huge amounts of money going to unnecessary weapons systems, even by conventional military analysts’ opinions.
Source: Alternative Radio interview with David Barsamian Feb 23, 2000
Supports Test Ban Treaty & arms control

Q: What are your views on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
A: Of course I’m for it.
Q: People need to know that, right?
A: Certainly. Arms control is extremely important.
Source: Alternative Radio interview with David Barsamian Feb 23, 2000
Arms race is driven by corporate demand

The arms race is driven by corporate demands for contracts, whether it’s General Dynamics or Lockheed Martin. They drive it through Congress. They drive it by hiring Pentagon officials in the Washington military industrial complex.
Source: Alternative Radio interview with David Barsamian Feb 23, 2000
F-22 aircraft is unneeded; and dangerous to fly

The F-22 fighter aircraft is an inadvisable project that is strategically not needed and pushes the frontiers even of manned pilot stamina in terms of g-levels, in other words, increases the risk of pilots blacking out. G-levels“ are the gravity levels that they pull down in these extremely high speed military aircraft. It’s beginning to affect the pilots. They tend to for short periods of time pass out and recover while they’re still in flight.
Source: Alternative Radio interview with David Barsamian Feb 23, 2000

[EMUJeff]

Congressperson Cynthia McKinney-

End the rollback of our civil liberties

Politics in the US is at a crisis level. Disillusionment, lack of participation, and establishment of false choice--what is one to do? For me, I can't give up hope.

There are important issues, national in scope, that need to be addressed. Unfortunately, they're not being addressed now. These issues include a livable wage, single payer health care, and of course the wars. And the rollback of our civil liberties and the infrastructure needs of our country. Source: IPS News interview by Matthew Cardinale Mar 22, 2008
Questions Bush administration involvement in 9/11

She lost her seat in 2003, after commenting on KPFA radio: "We know there were numerous warnings of the events to come on Sep. 11. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sep. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firms' stocks. What did the Bush administration know, and when did it know it about the events of Sep. 11?" Media outlets only played the last part of her lengthy quote & called her a conspiracy theorist
Source: IPS News interview by Matthew Cardinale Mar 22, 2008
PhD thesis: role of assassination as a state political tool

Today, in addition to campaigning for president in more than 20 states, McKinney is completing a PhD in African American Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. Her dissertation topic is on the role of assassination as a political tool of the state.
Source: IPS News interview by Matthew Cardinale Mar 22, 2008
Maintain habeas corpus; oppose Patriot Act

Q: Briefly state your position on the following issue: Death Penalty, and also Civil Rights.

A: In 1996, I voted to maintain the right of habeas corpus in Death Penalty Appeals. I opposed the Patriot Act and its re-authorization. Source: Green Party 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire Feb 3, 2008
Bring home all troops stationed abroad

Reconstruction Party Manifesto point #9. We Want an End to Militarism Now!
We want all U.S. troops stationed in other countries around the world to come home. We call for an end to funding for war, products for war, preparation for war, intelligence for war or funds used to destabilize other countries, or to maintain or expand U.S. military presence at home or abroad. We call for an end to the expanding police state at home.
Source: Manifesto for a Reconstruction Party Jan 26, 2008
we have not had truth about September 11

Q: How can the Bill of Rights be protected after the next terrorist attack?

A: Well, first of all, we ought to try as best we can to PREVENT the next terrorist attack. We can do that by understanding the last one. We don't understanding the last one because we have not had truth about September 11. Source: 2008 Green Presidential Debate moderated by Cindy Sheehan Jan 13, 2008
Don't give up liberty in exchange for security

Q: How can the Bill of Rights be protected after the next terrorist attack?

A: I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said that a population who gives up its liberties in exchange for security deserves neither. We do have an infrastructure -- military and intelligence -- that can perform for our country if we have leadership that demands it perform. Source: 2008 Green Presidential Debate moderated by Cindy Sheehan Jan 13, 2008
Criticized excessive secrecy in 9/11 investigation

On July 22, 2005, the first anniversary of the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, McKinney held a well-attended Congressional briefing to address outstanding issues regarding the 9/11 attacks. The day-long briefing featured speakers who critiqued the 9/11 Commission account of 9/11, addressing omissions & a lack of historical & political analysis. An Atlanta Journal-Constitution editorial maintained that the purpose of the event was to discuss whether or not the Bush administration was involved in th 9/11 attacks, expressing surprise that McKinney was once again taking on the issue that was widely believed to have been the one that cost her her House seat. The 9/11 Commission has sealed all the transcripts of some 2,000 interviews, all the forensic evidence, and all documents used in compiling its final report until January 2, 2009. McKinney's interest in 9/11 relates specifically to her opposition to excessive government secrecy, which she has challenged with numerous pieces of legislation.
Source: Wikipedia article, "Cynthia McKinney" Dec 21, 2007
Speak out against Pentagon waste, fraud, and abuse

McKinney believes that the most important bill in the US Congress is the federal budget, which is a blueprint of where our country is headed. At almost $3 trillion , the federal budget properly directed can provide for the health & security of our nation McKinney believes that the 4th District must get its fair share and that taxpayers should get maximum value for their contribution to our country's overall security. That's why she has repeatedly spoken out against Pentagon waste, fraud, and abuse.
Source: Campaign website, www.cynthiaforcongress.com, "Issues" Dec 20, 2007
Allow concurrent veterans' disability & retired pay

There is no reason why someone who is retired from the military should have to choose their pension over any veterans' disability benefits. While in Congress, I helped end this inequity & permit concurrent receipt of both retired pay & veterans' disability benefits.

I introduced legislation which is now law, that corrects an unjust provision of Agent Orange compensation. People who had respiratory cancers from their exposure were getting denied their benefits, and that will no longer happen. Source: Campaign website, www.cynthiaforcongress.com, "Issues" Dec 20, 2007
Suspend use of depleted uranium munitions

McKinney introduced the following bill in the 2005-2006 Congress: H.R.5303: Depleted Uranium Munitions Suspension and Study Act: To require the suspension of the use, sale, development, production, testing, and export of depleted uranium munitions pending the outcome of certain studies of the health effects of such munitions, and for other purposes
Source: Campaign website, www.cynthiaforcongress.com, "Legislation" Nov 1, 2006 Here are some of the candidate’s voting records where the main topic of the legislation was foreign policy...


Voted NO on allowing electronic surveillance without a warrant.

Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to allow the President & Attorney General to authorize electronic surveillance without a court order to acquire foreign intelligence information, after certifying that the surveillance is directed at the acquisition of communications of foreign agents.

Proponents support voting YES because:
Intelligence is the first line of defense in the war on terrorism. That means we have to have intelligence agencies and capabilities that are agile, that are responsive to changes in technology, and that also protect the civil liberties of Americans. Let me make an analogy. With modernization, we replaced Route 66 with Interstate 40. We no longer have the stoplights and the intersections. We created on ramps and off ramps and concrete barriers to protect the citizens where traffic was moving very quickly. That is like what we are trying to do here--FISA needs modernization.
Opponents support voting NO because:
We are legislating in the dark. We do not even know what the President is doing now because he will not tell us. The New York Times exposed that the administration had authorized secret surveillance of domestic conversations. When exposed, the President claimed he was operating under inherent powers, but court decisions have found that the President cannot simply declare administration actions constitutional and lawful, whether or not they are.
Yet rather than finding out what is going on, this legislation retroactively legalizes whatever has been going on. The President already has broad latitude to conduct domestic surveillance, including surveillance of American citizens, so long as it is overseen by the FISA court.
This bill does not enhance security, but it does allow surveillance without the traditional checks and balances that have served our Nation well. Reference: Update the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978; Bill H.R.5825 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.05825:) ; vote number 2006-502 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2006-502.htm) on Sep 28, 2006
Voted NO on continuing intelligence gathering without civil oversight.

A resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 5020) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2007 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities. Voting YES indicates support of the current methods for intelligence-gathering used by the CIA and other agencies. The resolution's opponents say:

This bill could have and should have required a dedicated funding line for the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The 9/11 Commission recommended this board to serve as a civil liberties watchdog on the potential erosion of the basic constitutional rights. Now, 15 months later, we find our concerns about basic civil rights to have been well founded, but the oversight board is barely up and running [and is not funded].
Many of us believe that when the President authorized the NSA surveillance of Americans, he broke the law, plain and simple.
We are talking about the most basic fundamental civil liberties that protect the American people, and the Republican leadership will not even let us debate it. What are they afraid of?
If you believe that this President should have the ability to spy on Americans without a warrant and without going to the FISA court, then they should write that bill and bring it to the floor, then have a debate and a vote.

The resolution's proponents say:
We have had the good fortune in this country for the last 4 1/2 years to have not had another terrorist attack on our soil, and it is not because they haven't tried. The reason for that success boils down to two things: the courage of our soldiers and the quality of our intelligence. Exceptional intelligence is the first line of defense for America in the long war on terrorism.
I think as a responsible body we have to start out by getting the facts. That means hard work that is done largely in secret. Oversight is under way, and, for the most part, the National Security Agency has been very forthcoming.
Reference: Intelligence Authorization Act; Bill HR 5020 resolution H RES 774 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.res.00774:) ; vote number 2006-108 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2006-108.htm) on Apr 26, 2006
Voted NO on federalizing rules for driver licenses to hinder terrorists.

REAL ID Act of 2005: To establish and rapidly implement regulations for State driver's license and identification document security standards, to prevent terrorists from abusing the asylum laws of the United States, to unify terrorism-related grounds for inadmissibility and removal, and to ensure expeditious construction of the San Diego border fence.

Title I: Amendments to Federal Laws to Protect Against Terrorist Entry - defining more factors relevant to credibility determinations in asylum cases.
Title II: Improved Security for Driver's Licenses and Personal Identification Cards - setting minimum security requirements, including the incorporation of specified data, a common machine-readable technology, and certain anti-fraud security features. Title III: Border Infrastructure and Technology Integration - studying ground surveillance technologies.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R, WI-5]; Bill H.R.418 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.r.00418:) ; vote number 2005-031 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2005-031.htm) on Feb 10, 2005
Voted NO on continuing military recruitment on college campuses.

Expresses the continued support of Congress for, and encourages the executive branch to continue challenging any judicial decision against, specified provisions of Federal law prohibiting making certain Federal contracts with or grants to institutions of higher education that prevent military recruiters from having access to their campuses and to certain information about their students.
Reference: Resolution sponsored by Rep Mike Rogers [R, AL-3]; Bill H.CON.RES.36 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:h.con.res.00036:) ; vote number 2005-016 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_2005-016.htm) on Feb 2, 2005
Voted NO on $266 billion Defense Appropriations bill.

Vote to pass a bill appropriating $266 billion in defense spending for FY 2000. Among other provisions the bill would allot $1.2 billion for research and development for next-generation tactical aircraft, yet would not include $1.8 billion in procurement funds for the new F-22 Raptor combat aircraft. The bill would also fund a 4.8 percent pay increase for military personnel. The bill would also allot $93.7 billion for operations and maintenance to be used to maintain military properties and spare parts that have been reduced due to overseas military combat missions.
Reference: Bill introduced by Lewis, R-CA; Bill HR 2561 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.2561:) ; vote number 1999-334 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_1999-334.htm) on Jul 22, 1999
Voted NO on deploying SDI.

Vote to declare it to be the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense.
Reference: Bill introduced by Weldon, R-PA; Bill HR 4 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:H.R.4:) ; vote number 1999-4 (http://www.ontheissues.org/HouseVote/Party_1999-4.htm) on Mar 18, 1999
End the use of anti-personnel mines.

McKinney co-sponsored the Landmine Elimination and Victim Assistance Act:

Expresses the sense of Congress that:
the Department of Defense should field currently available weapons and other technologies, and use tactics and operational concepts, that provide suitable alternatives to anti-personnel mines and mixed anti-tank mine systems; and
the United States should end its use of such mines and join the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction.
Amends the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993 to make permanent (currently terminates on October 23, 2003) the prohibition on the transfer of anti-personnel landmines.
Directs the President to establish an interagency working group to develop a comprehensive plan for expanded mine action programs, including victim rehabilitation, social support, and economic reintegration.
Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR948 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_01-HR948.htm) on Mar 8, 2001
Recognize women veterans; assist military families.

McKinney adopted the Women's Caucus policy agenda:

The teams of the Women’s Caucus are charged with advancing action on their designated issues in a bipartisan manner. Legislation from Team 8: WOMEN IN THE MILITARY/WOMEN VETERANS:
HR1847—Military Dependents Communications Confidentiality Act—prescribe regulations to protect the confidentiality of communications between dependents of members of the Armed Forces and professionals providing therapeutic or related services regarding sexual or domestic abuse. (Maloney/Kelly) [STATUS: enacted as part of the FY2000 Defense Authorization bill]
H.Res. 41—Honoring American Military Women For Their Service in World War II—A resolution to honor the women who served the United States in military capacities during World War II and recognizing that these women contributed vitally to the victory of the United States and the Allies in the war. (Myrick)
Source: Women's Caucus Agenda-106th Congress 99-WC11 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_99-WC11.htm) on Jul 15, 1999

[EMUJeff]

Senator Barack Obama- part 1 of 2

No torture; no renditions; no operating out of fear

Q: A disturbing Justice Department memo emerged saying that not even interrogation methods that "shock the conscience" would be considered torture nor would they be considered illegal if they had been authorized by the president. Comments?

A: We have to be clear and unequivocal. We do not torture, period. Our government does not torture. That should be our position. That will be my position as president. That includes renditions. We don't farm out torture. We don't subcontract torture. Torture does not end up yielding good information--most intelligence officers agree with that--but it is also important for our long-term security to send a message to the world that we will lead not just with our military might but we are going to lead with our values and our ideals. That we are not a nation that gives away our civil liberties simply because we're scared. We're always at our worst when we're fearful. Fear is a bad counsel and I want to operate out of hope and out of faith. Source: 2008 Democratic Compassion Forum at Messiah College (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Dems_Compassion_Forum.htm) Apr 13, 2008
Unacceptable to have veterans drive 250 miles to a hospital

The incredible burden that has been placed on the American people, starting with military families, and the fact that we still are not doing right by our veterans, that we still don't honor their service, that there are still homeless veterans, that we still don't screen properly for post-traumatic stress disorder and make sure that they're getting mental services that they need, that we are still having veterans in south Texas have to drive 250 miles to access a veterans hospital. That's unacceptable.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate at University of Texas in Austin Feb 21, 2008
Pursue goal of a world without nuclear weapons

Obama will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons, and pursue it. Obama will always maintain a strong deterrent as long as nuclear weapons exist. But he will take several steps down the long road toward eliminating nuclear weapons. He will stop th development of new nuclear weapons; work with Russia to take ballistic missiles off hair trigger alert; seek dramatic reductions in stockpiles of nuclear weapons and material; and expand globally the US-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles.
Source: Campaign booklet, "Blueprint for Change", p. 50-55 Feb 2, 2008
Al Qaida is stronger now than in 2001 as Iraq distracted us

We are seeing Al Qaida stronger now than at any time since 2001. That is a significant threat that has to be dealt with. Because we have been distracted, we have ended up seeing a more dangerous situation, and so we are not--this is not just a matter of who is right and who is wrong about having gone to war or the surge. It's also, how do we deal with the future threats? And as long as we're bogged down in Iraq, we are not going to be able to deal with those future threats.
Source: 2008 Congressional Black Caucus Democratic debate Jan 21, 2008
Colleges must allow military recruiters for ROTC on campus

Q: Will you vigorously enforce a statute which says colleges must allow military recruiters on campus and provide ROTC programs? A: Yes.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008
Rebuild a nuclear nonproliferation strategy

I've worked on nuclear proliferation in the Senate, to improve interdiction of potentially nuclear materials. It is important for us to rebuild a nuclear nonproliferation strategy, something that this administration has ignored, and has made us less safe as a consequence. It would not cost us that much, for example, and would take about four years for us to lock down the loose nuclear weapons that are still floating out there, and we have not done the job.
Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Democratic primary debate Jan 6, 2008
FactCheck: Promised to repeal Patriot Act, then voted for it

Clinton took direct aim at Obama and connects fairly solidly: "You said you would vote against the Patriot Act; you came to the Senate, you voted for it." Clinton is correct to say that Obama opposed the Patriot Act during his run for the Senate. She's relying on a 2003 Illinois National Organization for Women questionnaire in which Obama wrote that he would vote to "repeal the Patriot Act" or replace it with a "new, carefully crafted proposal." When it came time to reauthorize the law in 2005, though, Obama voted in favor of it. He started out opposing it: In Dec. 2005, Obama voted against ending debate--a position equivalent to declaring a lack of support for the measure. Then in February of that year, Obama said on the floor that he would support th Patriot Act's reauthorization. In March 2006, Obama both voted for cloture and for the Patriot Act reauthorization conference report.

Clinton, by the way, followed exactly the same path on the 2005 bill, from speaking in opposition to voting for it. Source: FactCheck.org on 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Democratic debate (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Dems_Facebook.htm) Jan 5, 2008
No presidential power for secret surveillance

Q: Does the president have inherent powers under the Constitution to conduct surveillance for national security purposes without judicial warrants, regardless of federal statutes?

A: The Supreme Court has never held that the president has such powers. As president, I will follow existing law, and when it comes to U.S. citizens and residents, I will only authorize surveillance for national security purposes consistent with FISA and other federal statutes. Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007
No holding US citizens as unlawful enemy combatants

Q: Does the Constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants?

A: No. I reject the Bush Administration's claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain U.S. citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants. Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007
Congress decides what constitutes torture, not president

Q: If Congress prohibits a specific interrogation technique, can the president instruct his subordinates to employ that technique despite the statute?

A: No. The President is not above the law, and not entitled to use techniques that Congress has specifically banned as torture. We must send a message to the world that America is a nation of laws, and a nation that stands against torture. As President I will abide by statutory prohibitions for all US Government personnel and contractors. Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007
No torture; defiance of FISA; no military commissions

Q: Is there any executive power the Bush administration has claimed or exercised that you think is unconstitutional?

A: I reject the view that the President may do whatever he deems necessary to protect national security, and that he may torture people in defiance of congressional enactments. I reject the use of signing statements to make extreme and implausible claims of presidential authority. Some further points:

The detention of American citizens, without access to counsel, fair procedure, or pursuant to judicial authorization, as enemy combatants is unconstitutional.
Warrantless surveillance of American citizens, in defiance of FISA, is unlawful and unconstitutional.
The violation of international treaties that have been ratified by the Senate, specifically the Geneva Conventions, was illegal (as the Supreme Court held) and a bad idea.
The creation of military commissions, without congressional authorization, was unlawful (as the Supreme Court held) and a bad idea.
Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_Exec_Power.htm) Dec 20, 2007
Restore habeas corpus to reach Muslims abroad

If you were a Muslim overseas listening to Rudy Giuliani say "they are coming here to try to kill you," which is the tenor of many of the speeches that are delivered by Republicans, you would get an impression that they are not interested in talking and resolving issues peacefully. Now, what we need to do [to reach Muslims] is we need to close Guantanamo. We need to restore habeas corpus. We need to send a strong signal that we are going to talk directly to not just our friends but also to our enemies.
Source: 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic debate Dec 13, 2007
Human rights and national security are complementary

Q: Is human rights more important than American national security?

A: The concepts are not contradictory, but complementary. Pakistan is a great example. We paid $10 billion over the last seven years & we had two goals: deal with terrorism and restore democracy. We've gotten neither. Pakistan's democracy would strengthen our battle against extremists. The more we see repression, the more there are no outlets for how people can express themselves and their aspirations, the worse off we're going to be, and the more anti-American sentiment there's going to be in the Middle East. We keep on making this mistake. As president, I will make sure that nuclear weapons don't fall into the hands of extremists, especially Al Qaida. If we simply prop up anti-democratic practices that feeds the sense that the US is only concerned about us and that our fates are not tied to these other folks. That's going to make us less safe. That's something I intend to change. Source: 2007 Democratic debate in Las Vegas, Nevada (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_Dems_Las_Vegas.htm) Nov 15, 2007
Don't allow our politics to be driven by fear of terrorism

A statement most Democrats will make only in progressive precincts, the one he couldn't quite get out when asked what he would do if American cities were attacked: "The threat that we face now is nowhere near as dire as it was in the Cold War. We shouldn't allow our politics to be driven by the fear of terrorism."
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p. 82 Nov 11, 2007
2006: Obama-Lugar bill restricted conventional weapons

Obama worked with Richard Lugar (R-IN) to pass legislation to help secure dangerous conventional weapons, especially from the former Soviet Union. In Dec. 2006, the Senate passed the Lugar-Obama bill to restrict the global spread of conventional weapons. Obama noted, "The Lugar-Obama initiative will help other nations find and eliminate the type of conventional weapons that have been used against our own soldiers in Iraq and sought by terrorists all over the world."
Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p.160 Oct 30, 2007
Judgment is as important as experience

The conservative magazine the Economist said, "Mr. Obama has already shown that he possesses something more important than expertise--judgment. His prediction about the Iraq war back in 2002 has proved strikingly prescient." In 2002, Obama said: "I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East and encourage the worst, rather than the best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda." Everything Obama said five years ago has come true. As columnist Margaret Carlson noted, Obama "was dead-on correct about the seminal issue of our time."
Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p. 39 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Improbable_Quest.htm) Oct 30, 2007
If attacked, first help victims then prevent further attacks

At the First Democratic debate on April 26, 2007, the moderator asked how would you change the US military stance overseas if we learned that two US cities were hit by al-Qaeda terrorists.

Obama responded, "Well, first thing we'd have to do is make sure that we've got an effective emergency response. The second thing is to make sure we've got good intelligence, A, to find out that we don't have other threats and attacks potentially out there, and B, to find out do we have any intelligence on who might have carried it out so that we can take potentially some action to dismantle that network."
Later in the debate, Obama added, "We have genuine enemies out there that have to be hunted down; networks have to be dismantled. There is no contradiction between us intelligently using our military and, in some cases, lethal force to take out terrorists and, at the same time, building the sort of alliances and trust around the world that has been lacking over the last six years." Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p. 40-41 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Improbable_Quest.htm) Oct 30, 2007
America cannot sanction torture; no loopholes or exceptions

America cannot sanction torture. It's a very straightforward principle, and one that we should abide by. Now, I will do whatever it takes to keep America safe. And there are going to be all sorts of hypotheticals & emergency situations & I will make that judgment at that time. But what we cannot do is have the president state, as a matter of policy, that there is a loophole or an exception where we would sanction torture. I think that diminishes us and it sends the wrong message to the world.
Source: 2007 Democratic primary debate at Dartmouth College Sep 6, 2007
Repeal Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell

Obama believes we need to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in consultation with military commanders. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Obama will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure we accomplish our national defense goals.
Source: Campaign website, BarackObama.com, "Resource Flyers" Aug 26, 2007
2005: Passed bill to reduce conventional weapon stockpiles

Obama's greatest legislative success was teaming with Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana on a bill that expanded US cooperation to reduce stockpiles of conventional weapons and expanded the State Department's ability to interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction. In the spring of 2005, Obama had traveled to Russia with Lugar to inspect nuclear weapons stockpiles.
Source: From Promise to Power, by David Mendell, p.313 Aug 14, 2007
We are no safer now than we were after 9/11

Q: What do you think we're not prepared for?

A: I don't believe that we are safer now than we were after 9/11 because we have made a series of terrible decisions in our foreign policy. We went into Iraq, a war that we should have never authorized and should not have been waged. It has fanned the flames of anti-American sentiment. It has, more importantly, allowed us to neglect the situation in Afghanistan. We know right now that al Qaeda is hiding in the hills between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Source: 2007 AFL-CIO Democratic primary forum Aug 8, 2007
Close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeas corpus

Why don't we close Guantanamo and restore the right of habeas corpus, because that's how we lead, not with the might of our military, but the power of our ideals and the power of our values. It's time to show the world we're not a country that ships prisoners in the dead of night to be tortured in far off countries. We're not a country that runs prisons which locks people away without ever telling them why they're there or what they're charged with. We're not a country which preaches compassion to others while we allow bodies to float down the streets of major American cities. That's not who we are.

We're America. We're a nation that liberated a continent from a mad man, that lifted ourselves from the depths of depression, that won civil rights and women's rights and voting rights for all our people. We're the beacon that has led generations of weary travelers to find opportunity and liberty and hope on our doorstep. That's who we are. Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference (http://www.ontheissues.org/TBA_2007.htm) Jun 19, 2007
Get first responders the healthcare and equipment they need

It is a noble calling what you do [as firefighters]. You know that. I know that. This country knows that. But sometimes Washington forgets. They praise your work. But when it's time for you to get health care or buy the radios and equipment you need, those supporters disappear like a puff of smoke.

Instead of making your job easier, they tried to cut funding so that you couldn't buy the masks and suits you need. They wanted to stop the hiring of 75,000 new firefighters. They wanted to hide the US Fire Administration under layers of bureaucracy at Homeland Security. And 5 years after September 11th, they still won't give our first responders the health care they earned that day.
What keeps Washington from doing all that it needs to do to better protect our firefighters, police officers, and EMT's--it's not a lack of ideas and solutions that's holding us back. It is the smallness of our politics. Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_IAFF.htm) Mar 14, 2007
Need to be both strong and smart on national defense

Obama takes an unexceptional position on defense spending, i.e., we need to be strong but we need to be smart about it. However, some papers reported the story as "Obama chides other Democrats on defense." Of course, it is not true. The rumor got started that way, in the lead of an AP article on Obama's Sept. 18 speech to Iowa Democrats. Six other articles reporting on the same event failed to mention the mythical attack on other Democrats.
Source: Should Barack Obama be President, by F. Zimmerman, p. 50 Oct 17, 2006
Grow size of military to maintain rotation schedules

Our most complex military challenge will involve putting boots on the ground in the ungoverned or hostile regions where terrorists thrive. That requires a smarter balance between what we spend on fancy hardware and what we spend on our men and women in uniform. That should mean growing the size of our armed forces to maintain reasonable rotation schedules, keeping our troops properly equipped, and training them in the skills they'll need to succeed in increasingly complex and difficult missions.
Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p.307 Oct 1, 2006
Battling terrorism must go beyond belligerence vs. isolation

We know that the battle against terrorism is at once an armed struggle and a contest of ideas, that our long-term security depends on a judicious projection of military power and increased cooperation with other nations, and that addressing the problems of global poverty and failed states is vital to our nation's interests rather than just a matter of charity. But follow most of our foreign policy debates, and you might believe that we have only two choices--belligerence or isolationism.
Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 23 Oct 1, 2006
Going after Al Qaeda in Pakistan is not Bush-style invasion

Q: You stand by your statement that you would go into western Pakistan if you had actionable intelligence to go after al Qaeda, whether or not the Pakistani government agreed. Isn't that essentially the Bush doctrine? We can attack if we want to, no matter the sovereignty of the Pakistanis?

A: No, that is not the same thing, because here we have a situation where Al Qaida, a sworn enemy of the United States, that killed 3,000 Americans and is currently plotting to do the same, is in the territory of Pakistan. We know that. And this is not speculation. This is not a situation where we anticipate a possible threat in the future. And my job as commander in chief will be to make sure that we strike anybody who would do America harm when we have actionable intelligence do to that. Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Democratic primary debate (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Dems_Facebook.htm) Jan 6, 2006
Rebuild the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

We would obviously have to retaliate against anybody who struck American soil, whether it was nuclear or not. It would be a much more profound issue if it were nuclear weapons. That's why it's so important for us to rebuild the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that has fallen apart under this administration. We have not made a commitment to work with the Russians to reduce our own nuclear stockpiles. That has weakened our capacity to pressure other countries to give up nuclear technology. We have not locked down the loose nuclear weapons that are out there right now. These are all things that we should be taking leadership on. Part of what we need to do in changing our foreign policy is not just end the war in Iraq; we have to change the mindset that ignores long-term threats and engages in the sorts of actions that are not making us safe over the long term.
Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Democratic primary debate (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Dems_Facebook.htm) Jan 6, 2006
We are currently inspecting 3% of all incoming cargo

Q: Name a key vulnerability or weakness that you see in homeland security.

A: Our inspections of ports. We are currently inspecting 3% of all incoming cargo. Terrorists could load up a cargo container and drive it straight into the middle of the Loop without significant risk of them being inspected. Our chemical and nuclear plants are still unsecured, despite how vulnerable they are. There are a whole host of domestic priorities that have been neglected by the Bush administration. Source: IL Senate Debate Oct 26, 2004
Increase funding to decommission Russian nukes

More than a decade after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Russia still has more nearly 20,000 nuclear weapons and enough nuclear material to produce 50,000 more. At the current rate of spending, it will take 13 years to secure all the potential bomb material from the old Soviet Republic. We should increase funding to do it in four years. We must also strengthen the existing Non-Proliferation Treaty, and lead in the efforts to prevent countries with the proven capability to build WMDs from doing so.
Source: Press Release, "Renewal of American Leadership " Jul 12, 2004
Give our soldiers the best equipment and training available

[The US should] prepare our military to meet the new threats of the 21st century. We must prepare our military to meet the new threats of the 21st century by making sure that we have sufficient forces and by giving our soldiers the best equipment and training available. We must also ensure that members of our National Guard and reservists have access to affordable, quality health care.
Source: Press Release, "Renewal of American Leadership " Jul 12, 2004
Balance domestic intelligence reform with civil liberty risk

[The US should] strengthen and improve intelligence capabilities. We must reform our domestic intelligence capabilities in a manner that balances the risks of impeding on the civil liberties of our citizens and increase international cooperation on all fronts. We should also give the Director of Intelligence the authority he or she needs over budget and personnel to be effective and accountable.
Source: Press Release, "Renewal of American Leadership " Jul 12, 2004
Barack Obama on National Service

Expand Peace Corps and AmeriCorps to 266,000 slots

THE PROBLEM

Americans Not Asked to Serve After 9/11: President Bush squandered an opportunity to mobilize the American people following 9/11 when asked Americans only to go shopping.
Insufficient Federal Support for Service : While more than 500,000 people have served in AmeriCorps, the program turns away applicants a year because of limited funding.
OBAMA'S PLAN

Expand National Service: Obama will expand AmeriCorps from 75,000 slots today to 250,000 and he will focus this expansion on addressing the great challenges facing the nation. He will establish a Classroom Corps; a Health Corps; a Clean Energy Corps; a Veterans Corps; and a Homeland Security Corpss.
Expand the Peace Corps: Obama will double the Peace Corps to 16,000 by 2011. He will work with the leaders of other countries to build an international network of overseas volunteers so that Americans work side-by-side with volunteers from other countries.
Source: Campaign booklet, "Blueprint for Change", p. 45-46 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Blueprint_Obama.htm) Feb 2, 2008
Put forward a national service program

The volunteer Army is a way for us to maintain excellence. If we are deploying our military wisely, then a voluntary army is sufficient, although I would call for an increase in our force structure, particularly around the Army and the Marines, because we've got to put an end to people going on three, four, five tours of duty and the strain on families is enormous. The obligation to serve exists for everybody. That's why I've put forward a national service program that is tied to my tuition credit for students who want to go to college. You get $4000 every year to help you go to college. In return, you have to engage in some form of national service. Military service has to be an option. We have to have civilian options as well. Not just the Peace Corps, but one of the things that we need desperately are people in our foreign service speaking foreign languages in a lot of work that may not be hand-to-hand combat but just as critical in ensuring our long-term safety & security.
Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_Dems_Las_Vegas.htm) Jan 15, 2008
Give 18-year-old women opportunity to serve

Q: Teenage boys must register for selective service at age 18, but not girls. I'm wondering whether this sends the right message about national service?

DODD: I don't see a need for the draft. I don't believe that is necessary. But if you are going to have one I think it ought to be gender neutral.
Q: If it did not necessarily mean military service, should the country examine registering women at 18?
CLINTON: Yes.
EDWARDS: Yes. But it's absolutely crucial that we ask Americans to be patriotic about something other than war. As with John Kennedy's call to action, I think we need a president who asks Americans to sacrifice.
KUCINICH: We have to say no to a draft.
BIDEN: Yes ,and there should be universal service.
OBAMA: Yes. Every young person should have that opportunity to serve and do something that is bigger than themselves.
RICHARDSON: Yes. And I outlined a plan two years of college tuition paid off by the government, one year of national service Source: 2007 Iowa Brown & Black Presidential Forum (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_Dems_Brown_Black.htm) Dec 1, 2007
Register women for draft, but not for combat

Q: Do you think women should register for selective service when they turn 18 like men do currently?

A: You know, a while back we had a celebration in the Capitol for the Tuskegee Airmen, and it was extraordinarily powerful because it reminded us, there was a time when African-Americans weren't allowed to serve in combat. And yet, when they did, not only did they perform brilliantly, but what also happened is they helped to change America, and they helped to underscore that we're equal. And I think that if women are registered for service--not necessarily in combat roles, and I don't agree with the draft-- I think it will help to send a message to my two daughters that they've got obligations to this great country as well as boys do. Source: 2007 YouTube Democratic Primary debate, Charleston SC (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_YouTube_Dems.htm) Jul 23, 2007
Barack Obama on Veterans

Improve veterans' mental health treatment & PTSD benefits

AT A GLANCE

Improved Mental Health Treatment: Obama will improve mental health treatment for troops and veterans suffering from combat-related psychological injuries.
THE PROBLEM

There is a Shortage of Care for PTSD: Veterans are coming home with record levels of combat stress, but we are not adequately providing for them.
OBAMA'S PLAN

Improve Mental Health Treatment: Obama will improve mental health care at every stage of military service. He will recruit more health professionals, improve screening, offer more support to families and make PTSD benefits claims fairer.
OBAMA RECORD

Obama led a bipartisan effort in the Senate to try to halt the military's unfair practice of discharging service members for having a service-connected psychological injury.
Obama passed legislation to stop a VA review of closed PTSD cases that could have led to a reduction in veterans' benefits.
Source: Campaign booklet, "Blueprint for Change", p. 56-57 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Blueprint_Obama.htm) Feb 2, 2008
Address the deficiencies in the VA system

We don't have a full-service VA system, so a lot of troops that have been injured are having to travel elsewhere, and that's something that we have to address. There are important efficiencies that we can obtain by having a VA hospital system; for example, prescription drugs. But we have to have a VA that serves everybody. In some rural communities that the veterans don't have access to the services needed, we've got to make sure that they do have the option for a private hospital that is close by
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007
The cost of the Iraq war should not shortchange VA benefits

We tried to tell the Bush administration you need an additional $2 billion to provide services to troops who are coming home. They said no. Everything's covered. Six months through, they had to come back and say, it turns out we did need it after all. Part of the reason is because they have been trying to keep the costs down of this war and have not fully factored in the sacred obligation that we have to make sure that every single veteran has the services that they need.
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007
Make sure the outpatient facilities work for veterans

I visited Walter Reed repeatedly. Typically what would happen is we would go to visit troops in the medical facility, and people will acknowledge that the medical facility at Walter Reed does great work. Unfortunately, it turned out that the outpatient facilities were disastrous. That's why we now have legislation to make sure not only that we're just painting over some of the mold in there, but also making it easier for families & veterans to negotiate the system once they're outpatients.
Source: 2007 Dem. debate at Saint Anselm College Jun 3, 2007
Comprehensive plan for our veterans healthcare

Washington says that they support the troops. They give long speeches about valor and sacrifice. But when it comes time to sending our troops into battle with the proper equipment and ensure that veterans have what they need when they get home, they don't do anything except slap a yellow ribbon on the back of their SUV. That's how come our men and women have to use scrap metal to protect their Humvees.

Our veterans end up living among mice and mold. They stare at stacks of paperwork. They thought they left the frontline in Iraq but they came home to a new frontline of red tape and bureaucracy.
This is unacceptable. When our veterans come home, I don't want them crawling around a dumpster for a meal or a box for shelter. I don't want them drowning in whiskey to silence the PTSD. I don't want that for our veterans. We know they deserve more.
So let's make a promise today--and say that, right here and right now, is when we begin to put together a comprehensive plan for our veterans. Source: 2007 IAFF Presidential Forum in Washington DC (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_IAFF.htm) Mar 14, 2007

[EMUJeff]

Senator Barack Obama- part 2 0f 2

Barack Obama on Voting Record

Support veterans via the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act

Following reports of neglect at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Obama introduced the Dignity for Wounded Warriors Act. The bill improves the condition of troop housing, streamlines the process for seeking care, provides greater information to recovering servicemembers, requires the hiring of more caseworkers, and provides more support to family members who care for injured troops:

Sheltering and Rehabilitating Homeless Veterans
One in three homeless males is a veteran.
Fighting for Disability Benefits
Obama forced the VA to notify veterans about their right to review past claims.
Treating Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) & Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
Easing the Transition of Veterans into Civilian Life
Obama's legislation would require that the military provide new veterans with electronic medical and service records & monitor health trends.
Source: Campaign website, BarackObama.com, "Resource Flyers" Aug 26, 2007 Here are some of the candidate’s voting records where the main topic of the legislation was foreign policy...


Voted NO on removing need for FISA warrant for wiretapping abroad.

Vote on passage of S.1927, the Protect America Act: Amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to state that nothing under its definition of "electronic surveillance" should encompass surveillance directed at any person reasonably believed to be located outside the US.

A modified version, S.2011, failed; it called for amending FISA to provide that a court order is not required for the electronic surveillance of communication between foreign persons who are not located within the US for collecting foreign intelligence information, without respect to whether the communication passes through the US or the surveillance device is located within the US.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
Sen. LEVIN: Both bills cure the problem that exists: Our intelligence agencies must obtain a court order to monitor the communications of foreigners suspected of terrorist activities who are physically located in foreign countries. Now, what are the major differences? Our bill (S2011) is limited to foreign targets limited overseas, unlike the Bond bill (S1927), which does not have that key limitation and which very clearly applies to US citizens overseas. Our bill does not. Now, if there is an incidental access to US citizens, we obviously will permit that. But the Bond bill goes beyond that, citing "any person." It does not say a "foreign person." We avoid getting to the communications of Americans. There you have to go for a warrant.
Proponents support voting YES because:
Sen. LIEBERMAN: I will vote for the Bond proposal (S1927) because we are at war, & there is increased terrorist activity. We have a crisis. This proposal will allow us to gather intelligence information on that enemy we otherwise would not gather. This is not the time for striving for legislative perfection. Let us not strive for perfection. Let us put national security first. We are going to have 6 months to reason together to find something better. Reference: Protect America Act; Bill S.1927 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SN01927:) ; vote number 2007-309 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2007-309.htm) on Aug 3, 2007
Voted YES on limiting soldiers' deployment to 12 months.

Vote on an amendment, SA2032, which amends HR1585, the Defense Authorization bill: To limit the deployment of a unit or individual of the Armed Forces for Operation Iraqi Freedom to no more than 12 consecutive months; and to limit Marine Corps deployment to no more than 7 consecutive months; except in time of national emergency.

Proponents support voting YES because:
Sen. HAGEL: The war in Iraq has pushed the US Army to the breaking point. When we deploy our military, we have an obligation to ensure that our troops are rested, ready, prepared, fully trained, and fully equipped. Today's Armed Forces are being deployed repeatedly for increasing periods of time. This is quickly wearing down the troops and their families, impacting the mental and physical health of our troops. Further, these deployments are affecting the recruiting and retention rates of the military. For example, the Army reached only a little over 80% of its recruiting goal for June. This is the second month in a row that the Army has failed to recruit the number of new soldiers needed to fill the ranks. And this is with $1 billion in large cash bonus incentives.
Opponents recommend voting NO because:
Sen. KYL: Time in theater and dwell times should be a goal, rather than an absolute fixed requirement that becomes the policy of the US military determined by congressional action. By mandating a certain policy for deployment time or dwell time, the Congress is engaged in the most explicit micromanaging of what is obviously a function for the Commander in Chief and military commanders to perform. This is not something Members of Congress are knowledgeable about or would have the ability to dictate in any responsible fashion. It also would be unconstitutional. Clearly, the dwell times of troops or the amount of time in theater is an obligation of the Commander in Chief, not something for the Congress to determine. Reference: Hagel Amendment to Defense Authorization Bill; Bill SA2032 to HR1585 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SP2032:) ; vote number 2007-243 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2007-243.htm) on Jul 11, 2007
Voted YES on implementing the 9/11 Commission report.

Vote on passage of a bill to implement unfinished recommendations of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission) to fight the war on terror more effectively:

I: Improving Intelligence and Information Sharing within the Federal Government and with State, Local, and Tribal Governments
II: Homeland Security Grants
III: Communications Operability and Interoperability
IV: Emergency Management Performance Grants Program
V: Enhancing Security of International Travel
VI: Privacy and Civil Liberties Matters
VII: Enhanced Defenses Against Weapons of Mass Destruction
VIII: Private Sector Preparedness
IX: Transportation Security Planning and Information Sharing
X: Incident Command System
XI: Critical Infrastructure Protection
XII: Congressional Oversight of Intelligence
XIII: International Cooperation on Antiterrorism Technologies
XIV: Transportation and Interoperable Communication
XV: Public Transportation Terrorism Prevention
XVII: 911 Modernization
XIX: Advancement of Democratic Values

Opponents recommend voting NO because:
One of the authors of the 9/11 Commission report said, the President's announced strategy should be given a chance to succeed. That is what I think we should do, give this plan a chance to succeed. Our troops in theater, our commanders, and the Iraqi leaders all believe they can see early signs of success in this program, even though it has just begun, and they are cautiously optimistic that it can succeed. I think it would be unconscionable for the Congress, seeing the beginnings of success here, to then act in any way that would pull the rug out from under our troops and make it impossible for them to achieve their mission. Reference: Improving America's Security Act; Bill S. 4 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SN4:) ; vote number 2007-073 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2007-073.htm) on Mar 13, 2007
Voted YES on preserving habeas corpus for Guantanamo detainees.

Sen. Specter's amendment would strike the provision regarding habeas review. The underlying bill authorizes trial by military commission for violations of the law of war. Excerpts from the Senate floor debate:

Sen. GRAHAM [recommending NO]: The fundamental question for the Senate to answer when it comes to determining enemy combatant status is, Who should make that determination? Should that be a military decision or should it be a judicial decision? That is something our military should do.
Sen. SPECTER [recommending YES]: My amendment would retain the constitutional right of habeas corpus for people detained at Guantanamo. The right of habeas corpus was established in the Magna Carta in 1215 when, in England, there was action taken against King John to establish a procedure to prevent illegal detention. What the bill seeks to do is to set back basic rights by some 900 years. This amendment would strike that provision and make certain that the constitutional right of habeas corpus is maintained.
GRAHAM: Do we really want enemy prisoners to bring every lawsuit known to man against the people fighting the war and protecting us? No enemy prisoner should have access to Federal courts--a noncitizen, enemy combatant terrorist--to bring a lawsuit against those fighting on our behalf. No judge should have the ability to make a decision that has been historically reserved to the military. That does not make us safer.
SPECTER: The US Constitution states that "Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." We do not have either rebellion or invasion, so it is a little hard for me to see, as a basic principle of constitutional law, how the Congress can suspend the writ of habeas corpus.
GRAHAM: If the Supreme Court does say in the next round of legal appeals there is a constitutional right to habeas corpus by those detained at Guantanamo Bay, then Sen. Specter is absolutely right. Reference: Specter Amendment (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN03930:); Bill S.AMDT.5087 to S.3930 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP05087:) ; vote number 2006-255 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-255.htm) on Sep 28, 2006
Voted YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods.

Amendment to provide for congressional oversight of certain Central Intelligence Agency programs. The underlying bill S. 3930 authorizes trial by military commission for violations of the law of war. The amendment requires quarterly reports describing all CIA detention facilities; the name of each detainee; their suspected activities; & each interrogation technique authorized for use and guidelines on the use of each such technique.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:
I question the need for a very lengthy, detailed report every 3 months. We will probably see those reports leaked to the press.
This amendment would spread out for the world--and especially for al-Qaida and its related organizations--precisely what interrogation techniques are going to be used.
If we lay out, in an unclassified version, a description of the techniques by the Attorney General, that description will be in al-Qaida and Hezbollah and all of the other terrorist organizations' playbook. They will train their assets that: This is what you must be expected to do, and Allah wants you to resist these techniques.
We are passing this bill so that we can detain people. If we catch someone like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, we have no way to hold him, no way to ask him the questions and get the information we need, because the uncertainty has brought the program to a close. It is vitally important to our security, and unfortunately this amendment would imperil it. Reference: Rockefeller Amendment (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN03930:); Bill S.AMDT.5095 to S.3930 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP5095:) ; vote number 2006-256 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-256.htm) on Sep 28, 2006
Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act.

This vote reauthorizes the PATRIOT Act with some modifications (amendments). Voting YEA extends the PATRIOT Act, and voting NAY would phase it out. The official summary of the bill is:
A bill to clarify that individuals who receive FISA orders can challenge nondisclosure requirements, that individuals who receive national security letters are not required to disclose the name of their attorney, that libraries are not wire or electronic communication service providers unless they provide specific services, and for other purposes.
Opponents of the bill say to vote NAY because:
Some may see the vote we are about to have as relatively trivial. They are mistaken. While the bill we are voting on makes only minor cosmetic changes to the PATRIOT Act, it will allow supporting the PATRIOT Act conference report that was blocked in December. Cosmetic changes simply don't cut it when we are talking about protecting the rights and freedoms of Americans from unnecessarily intrusive Government powers.
The White House has tried to make life uncomfortable for Senators. It has suggested they are soft on terrorism, that they don't understand the pressing threat facing this country, that they are stuck in a pre-9/11 mindset. Those attacks should be rejected.
We can fight terrorism aggressively without compromising our most fundamental freedoms against Government intrusion. The Government grabbed powers it should not have when it passed the original PATRIOT Act and we should not be ratifying that power grab today. The PATRIOT Act reauthorization conference report is flawed. S. 2271 pretends to fix it but I don't think anyone is fooled, least of all our constituents.
Because the Republican leadership obstructed efforts to improve the bill, the "police state" provisions regarding gag orders remain uncorrected. The Senate should get down to the serious business of legislating real fixes to the PATRIOT Act. Reference: USA PATRIOT Act Additional Reauthorizing Amendments (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r109:FLD001:S51558); Bill S. 2271 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN2271:) ; vote number 2006-025 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2006-025.htm) on Mar 1, 2006
Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision.

Vote to invoke cloture on a conference report that extends the authority of the FBI to conduct "roving wiretaps" and access business records. Voting YES would recommend, in effect, that the PATRIOT Act be extended through December 31, 2009, and would makes the provisions of the PATRIOT Act permanent. Voting NO would extend debate further, which would have the effect of NOT extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. Reference: Motion for Cloture of PATRIOT Act; Bill HR 3199 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR3199:) ; vote number 2005-358 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2005-358.htm) on Dec 16, 2005
Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism.

Vote to adopt an amendment that makes US businesses and their subsidiaries liable to prosecution for dealing with foreign businesses which have links to terrorism or whose parent country supports terrorism. Voting YES would:

Empower the President under the Trading with the Enemy Act to prohibit US businesses and their subsidiaries from transacting with foreign businesses identified as having links to terrorism.
Forbid US businesses and their subsidiaries from engaging in transactions with any foreign business whose parent country has been identified as a supporter of international terrorism.
Require the President to publish a list of foreign businesses identified as having links to terrorism, and bans US ownership or control of foreign businesses engaged in transactions with such businesses.
Call for US businesses to disclose in their annual reports any ownership stake of at least 10% in a foreign business that is itself engaging in transactions with a proscribed foreign business.
Reference: Stop Business with Terrorists Act of 2005; Bill S AMDT 1351 to S 1042 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP1351:) ; vote number 2005-203 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2005-203.htm) on Jul 26, 2005
Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders.

Amendment intended to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by restoring $565 million in cuts to vital first-responder programs in the Department of Homeland Security, including the State Homeland Security Grant program, by providing $150 million for port security grants and by providing $140 million for 1,000 new border patrol agents. Reference: State Homeland Security Grant Program Amendment; Bill S AMDT 220 to S Con Res 18 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SP220:) ; vote number 2005-64 (http://www.ontheissues.org/SenateVote/Party_2005-64.htm) on Mar 17, 2005
Sponsored bill for Iraq budget to be part of defense budget.

Obama introduced requiring Iraq War budget be part of regular defense budget
OnTheIssues.org Explanation: Since the start of both the Afghanistan war and the Iraq war, expenditures for those war have been voted for in "emergency supplemental spending bills," instead of in the normal defense spending bill. That implies that the expenditures are unexpectedly high, which may have been true in the early years of the war. This amendment requires regular budgeting for the Afghanistan & Iraq wars.
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: To require regular budgeting for ongoing military operations.
EXCERPTS OF BILL:

The President's budget for each fiscal year after 2007 shall include--
a request for funds for such fiscal year for ongoing military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq;
an estimate of all funds expected to be required in that fiscal year for such operations; and
a detailed justification of the funds requested.

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote, 98-0, Vote Number: 170. Source: Defense Authorization Bill (S.AMDT.4242 to S.2766) 06-SP4242 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_06-SP4242.htm) on Jun 14, 2006
Restore habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror.

Obama co-sponsored restoring habeas corpus for detainees in the War on Terror
A bill to restore habeas corpus for those detained by the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Sen. SPECTER. "I introduce this legislation, denominated the Habeas Corpus Restoration Act. Last year, in the Military Commissions Act, the constitutional right of habeas corpus was attempted to be abrogated. I say "attempted to be abrogated" because, in my legal judgment, that provision in the Act is unconstitutional.
"It is hard to see how there can be legislation to eliminate the constitutional right to habeas corpus when the Constitution is explicit that habeas corpus may not be suspended except in time of invasion or rebellion, and we do not have either of those circumstances present, as was conceded by the advocates of the legislation last year to take away the right of habeas corpus.
"We have had Supreme Court decisions which have made it plain that habeas corpus is available to non-citizens and that habeas corpus applies to territory controlled by the US, specifically, including Guantanamo. More recently, however, we had a decision in the US District Court applying the habeas corpus jurisdiction stripping provision of the Military Commissions Act, but I believe we will see the appellate courts strike down this legislative provision.
"The New York Times had an extensive article on this subject, starting on the front page, last Sunday, and continuing on a full page on the back page about what is happening at Guantanamo. It is hard to see how in America, or in a jurisdiction controlled by the United States, these proceedings could substitute for even rudimentary due process of law." Source: Habeas Corpus Restoration Act (S.185/H.R.2826) 2007-S185 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_2007-S185.htm) on Jun 22, 2007

[EMUJeff]

Senator John McCain- Part 1 of 2

Improve human intelligence to get Osama bin Laden

Q: What will you do differently to get Osama bin Laden?

A: Most importantly, I'll improve our human intelligence.
Q: How?
A: Well, we're going to recruit, and send people in who can blend into the culture, into the tribal communities. I didn't say it was going to be easy. But I will get him. And why is it so important? One, he killed 3,000 Americans. But two, he is recruiting & instructing radical Islamic extremists who want to destroy everything we stand for. This guy is a continuing threat. Source: Meet the Press: 2008 "Meet the Candidates" series Jan 6, 2008
Surveillance of overseas communications is ok

Q: Does the president have inherent powers to conduct surveillance for national security purposes without judicial warrants?

A: There are some areas where the statutes don't apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress, no matter what the situation is.
Q: So is that a no?
A: I don't think the president has the right to disobey any law. Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007
Ok to hold even US citizens as enemy combatants

Q: Does the Constitution permit a president to detain US citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants?

A: The Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that, under the Congressional authorization of the use of force, the US can hold even American citizens under the law of war if they are enemy combatants. But the Court also said that US citizens must have due process to challenge their detention. And I think that is very important when it comes to American citizens. Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007
Consult lawyers on war decisions; no half-cocked war basis

Q: [to McCain]:You didn't think much of the answer of Gov. Romney in the last debate, when he said that he would ask his lawyers whether he needed congressional authorization to use military force against Iran. Why not?

MCCAIN: Because I don't think that's the time to call in the lawyers, when we're in a national security crisis. Those are the last people I'd call in. I'd call in my wisdom, my knowledge, my background, my experience, and my ability to lead this nation.
ROMNEY: I want to make one thing very, very clear, and that is if there were ever a question of a security threat to this country, I would act immediately to protect the interests of America and our citizens. No question about that. But every president has of course met with White House counsel and they have written opinions about the involvement of Congress. The decision to take our men and women to war is the most grave decision and I would do that on a very deliberate and careful basis, not a half-cocked basis. Source: 2007 GOP primary debate in Orlando, Florida (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_GOP_Florida.htm) Oct 21, 2007
Ran the largest squadron in the US Navy

Q: This country hasn't elected a senator to be president since jack Kennedy in 1960. And generally, voters go for governors who have run something. What have you ever run in your career?

A: I've run the largest squadron in the US Navy, and I didn't run it, I led it. It was tens of millions of dollars of assets, training brave young Americans to go fight and defend the country. I'll defend my leadership of 1,000-men and -women organization with the management of anything that anybody else has done. Source: FOX News Sunday, 2007 presidential interviews Oct 21, 2007
After 9/11, ask Americans to join military or AmeriCorps

Q: You were critical of Pres. Bush for the lack of asking for sacrifice after September 11th, adding that "Just go shopping" wasn't enough. What would you have asked?

A: I would have asked Americans, when Americans were ready to serve a cause greater than themselves, I would have told them, first of all, consider the military; also the Peace Corps, also AmeriCorps, also neighborhood watches, also volunteer organizations that we would form up all over America. That way we would all serve this nation. Source: 2007 Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan Oct 9, 2007
Let loose smart, tough spies to catch Bin Laden

Q: How would you catch bin Laden?

A: I would establish an organization not unlike the OSS in World War II. People who are smart, people who are tough; people who are used to operating independently, and the smartest and most talented people I know. And I would let them loose, and I'd say find this guy and do whatever is necessary to get him. Source: 2007 Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan Oct 9, 2007
His Military Commissions Act ended up denying habeas corpus

As a direct result [of the media's lack of analysis of McCain's epic bio], much of what we think we know about John McCain is wrong. He does not, for instance, talk particularly straight. Nor is McCain much of a reformer, hard as that might be to accept.

His two most significant reform laws--the line-item veto and McCain-Feingold--were both judged to be largely unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. (Indeed, most of McCain's ideas for reform involve increasing federal power at the expense of civil liberties.) A third law, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, will be adjudicated by the high court in the fall of 2007, and is a classic example of a legislative cure be Source: The Myth of a Maverick, by Matt Welch, p. xix (http://www.ontheissues.org/Myth_of_Maverick.htm) Oct 9, 2007
1973: Spokesperson for Operation Homecoming

[While a POW, McCain] did receive special treatment because of his father, especially (ironically enough) in Hanoi, where he likely would have been left for dead had his captors not learned of his identity. Of the 591 POWs who came back to the US in the first months of 1973 as part of Operation Homecoming, only one was offered an extraordinary 13-page spread in US News & World Report in which to write about his experience, thereby launching a national profile. This certainly wasn't because of McCain's own rank, flight record, or length of imprisonment.

McCain became a trusted Congressional advisor on POW issues, a status most of the other 590 men likely did not enjoy. Although McCain had help getting his foot in the door, he made the most of his opportunities. The remarkable, gracious, and nearly bitterness-free bit of writing [in US News & World Report] foreshadowed the literary success he would have with Faith of My Fathers. Source: The Myth of a Maverick, by Matt Welch, p. 47 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Myth_of_Maverick.htm) Oct 9, 2007
1977:Appointed as Navy liaison to Congress

McCain was appointed to his father's old post as Navy liaison to congress in 1977. Long accustomed to Washington socializing and the Navy's organizational concerns, he was ideally suited for a job that largely involved accompanying senators on long-distance trips and making sure the Navy's interests were being represented on Capitol Hill.

Unsurprisingly, he proved to be one of the most popular Navy liaisons in history. John McCain, as a Navy captain, "knew on a personal basis more senators and was more warmly received than virtually any lobbyist I have ever known in this town; they loved to see him," McCain's liaison office colleague said. Source: The Myth of a Maverick, by Matt Welch, p. 48-49 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Myth_of_Maverick.htm) Oct 9, 2007
Cited 245 pork projects, or $3.5M waste in defense bill

McCain for years has made exhaustive lists of Senators' pet projects, many of them not remotely military-related, slipped into massive defense bills. He's gone after weapons systems the military branches don't need, and sweetheart financing arrangements, all while steering clear of writing his own pork into legislation. Rhetorically, on both defense pork and run-of-the-mill earmarks, John McCain has been one of the best public servants in Washington

[When discussing] the 2002 defense bill, McCain liste 245 gratuitous pork projects totaling more than $3.5 million in wasteful spending. "This bill chooses to fund pork-barrel projects with little relationship to national defense at a time of scarce resources & under-funded urgent defense priorities," McCain rightly noted.
[One observer said], "I gave this body motion like, 'Ok, what are you going to do now?' And McCain's body motion response was, 'That's it. The speech.' " The bill passed 94-2, with only McCain and Sen. Phil Gramm voting no. Source: The Myth of a Maverick, by Matt Welch, p.110-111 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Myth_of_Maverick.htm) Oct 9, 2007
I've spent my life leading on national security issues

A: [to McCain]: Mayor Giuliani says his leadership after the 9/11 attacks shows he is the best candidate for national security, and you say nothing he has done shows any real experience in foreign policy or national security affairs. Tell me why?

A: I've spent my life in national security issues. I've taken unpopular stance because I knew what was right. Back in 2003, amid criticism from my fellow Republicans, I spoke strongly against the Rumsfeld strategy, which I knew was doomed to failure and cause so much needless sacrifice. I advocated very strongly the new strategy that some Democrats have called the McCain strategy--which it is not. And I believe that this strategy is winning. I know the conflict. I know war. I have seen war. I know how the military works. I know how the government works. I understand national security. I was once the commanding officer of the largest squadron in the US Navy. I didn't manage it. I led it. Source: 2007 GOP debate at UNH, sponsored by Fox News (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_GOP_UNH.htm) Sep 5, 2007
Radical Islamic extremism is a hydra-headed challenge

I firmly believe that the challenge of the 21st century is the struggle against radical Islamic extremism. It is a transcendent issue. It is hydra-headed. It will be with us for the rest of the century. I have served my nation and my country and the people of this country for all of my adult life. I am the most prepared. I have been involved in these issues. I have served this nation in the military and in the Congress, and I'm the best prepared and need no on-the-job training to meet that challenge
Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007
I support the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive war

Q: Do you believe in the Bush doctrine? In 2002, the president said we have a right to a pre-emptive attack, that we can attack if this country feels threatened. And on that basis we went into Iraq. Do you agree with the doctrine, or would you change it?

A: I agree with the doctrine. And I'd also like to give President Bush a little credit. Right after 9/11, every expert in the world said there would be another attack on the US. There hasn't been. Now, maybe that's all by accident. But if there had been, I think it's very clear where the responsibility would have been placed. We created the Department of Homeland Security, and America is safer. I'd like to give the president some credit for that. Now, I strongly disagreed with the strategy employed by Secretary Rumsfeld. And I'm the only one at the time that said we've got to employ a new strategy and outlined what it was, which is the Petraeus strategy. But we are succeeding now in Iraq. Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Republican primary debate (http://www.ontheissues.org/2008_GOP_Facebook.htm) Jan 5, 2006
We must provide our children a strong, better country

The sacrifices borne in our defense are not shared equally by all Americans. But all Americans must share a resolve to see this war through to a just end. We must not be complacent at successes, AND we must not despair over setbacks. We must learn from our mistakes, improve on our successes, and vanquish this unpardonable enemy. If we do less, we will fail the one mission no American generation has ever failed-to provide to our children a stronger, better country than the one we were blessed to inherit
Source: 2004 Republican Convention Speech Aug 30, 2004
A lack of complacency shouldn't provoke a lack of confidence

No American will ever forget what happened on the morning of 9/11, the moment when the pendulum of history swung toward a new era. It shook us from our complacency in the belief that the Cold War's end had ushered in a time of global tranquility. The opening chapter was tinged with great sadness and uncertainty. But an absence of complacency should not provoke an absence of confidence. What our enemies have sought to destroy is beyond their reach. It cannot be taken from us, but only be surrendered.
Source: 2004 Republican Convention Speech Aug 30, 2004
We don't have as much to fear as we had in the past

Crime rates rise and fall and rise again, and claim victims and leave tragedies behind, but lawlessness is still much less prevalent today than it was a century ago. We are the world's only superpower, with armed forces so powerful that they deter all but the most irrational of adversaries from significantly challenging our security. We don't have as much to fear as we had in the past. Courage may be in scarce supply, but the demand appears down as well. And we have come to grade courage on the curve.
Source: Why Courage Matters, p. 21 Apr 1, 2004
Those who gave their lives deserve to be remembered

Those who gave their lives in service to their country deserve to be remembered. Should, as we hope & intend, another people in a country far from ours gain & keep their own right to self-determination, that would be an accomplishment worth remembering. But will it? The thrill of it will fade away. We constantly seek new ones and the shelf life of their effect contracts correspondingly. Will we attempt to inspire our own courage some distant day by recalling the heroics of our compatriots in Iraq?
Source: Why Courage Matters, p. 24 Apr 1, 2004
First reaction to Sept 11: "This is war"

On Sept. 11, McCain drove to his office (Unlike many senators, McCain refuses to be chauffeured). Shortly after his car crossed the 14th Street bridge into Washington, he heard the news on the radio that a plane had slammed into the World Trade Center.

Staff members in the cramped office, watching TV, saw a second plane hit the other tower. "This is war," McCain said quietly.
issued the statement they'd decided on: "There are no words to describe adequately the enormity of these attacks on the US or the depravity of those who are responsible for them. These were not just crimes against the US, they are acts of war. We will prevail in this war, as we have prevailed in the past."
[Over the next few days, McCain] offered more leadership then than did the President. "The best thing that we can do as Americans is to remain calm," McCain told ABC. "Obviously, this is an act of war that has been committed against the US," he told another interviewer. Source: Citizen McCain, by Elizabeth Drew, p.131-132 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Ciitzen_McCain.htm) May 7, 2002
[B]Argued for base closings even in the wake of 9/11

McCain took on a contentious issue: closing of unneeded military bases. Senators with bases in their states objected, as usual, and in the last few years they had prevailed.

But this was an issue that went to McCain's disdain for pork, particularly when military funds would be wasted, particularly now. He was disturbed that even in a national crisis parochial interests might prevail. Speaking with some agitation on the Senate floor, McCain said, "The fact is, at a time when we rally around the president and our military and civilian leadership. It is that clear." He became a bit testy with his friend and usual ally, Susan Collins, who had just argued against more base closings. "I would like for the Senator from Maine to talk to General Schwarzkopf & the Joint Chiefs of Staff," he said. "It's business as usual in the US Congress. We're not prepared to give up anything to fight this war on terrorism." McCain's position on the base-closings prevailed, on a close vote. Source: Citizen McCain, by Elizabeth Drew, p.151 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Ciitzen_McCain.htm) May 7, 2002
[B]Channel fear into productive missions and activities

McCain gave an interview on the subject of fear, in the wake of 9/11. McCain, earlier in his life, in the North Vietnamese prison camps, had confronted fear. McCain said, "The way you live with fear is that you suppress it." He said, "Anyone who is faced with a life-threatening situation will have fear. Anyone who says they don't is either crazy or a liar. The trick is to channel it into productive missions and activities. That's the way I've handled it in the past."

[On another show], McCain said, "I think you have to recognize that there is a reason for fear...but you have to suppress it. You have to channel it, and it can be beneficial in a way because it will make you more alert. It'll make you more efficient. And it will make you more aware of everything that's going on around you. You know, Ernest Hemingway's famous definition on courage was 'grace under pressure.' You've got to show grace under pressure and that grace is to go on with your life, not let it rule you, not let it overcome you." Source: Citizen McCain, by Elizabeth Drew, p.157-158 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Ciitzen_McCain.htm) May 7, 2002
“Rogue state rollback” avoids use of US troops

Q: You’ve talked about something that you have called “rogue state rollback,” which means, as I understand it, arming and paying for rebel armies in countries like Iraq to overthrow governments that we don’t like. Will we have a moral obligation under your policy to send American armed forces to help those folks out? A: No, that’s a very narrow interpretation of “rogue state rollback.” That means that you do whatever you can, whether it be the use of propaganda, whether it be used to organize groups outside the country, whether it be arming and training and equipping, depending on what the possibilities are. No, this is an attempt to [I]avoid US military involvement. We do what we can to overthrow these countries which pose a clear and present danger to the security of the US. So you really kind of have two choices: you react militarily, risking American lives, or you try to overthrow that government.
Source: GOP debate in Los Angeles (http://www.ontheissues.org/GOP_LA.htm) Mar 2, 2000
Disagrees with Perot: No more POWs in Vietnam

Like a lot of POWs in Vietnam, McCain came to know Ross Perot after the POWs were released in 1973. By then, Perot had become well-known for his efforts to help POWs and their families.

Both McCain and Perot remained active in POW matters after the war. But over time they found themselves at opposite ends of the most important issue: Whether American servicemen were still being held in Southeast Asia. Through the early 1990s, Perot insisted that government officials had ignored evidence of servicemen still in captivity, while McCain doubted a conspiracy occurred and believed much evidence of prisoner sightings was discredited. Perot [was accused of] the rash pursuit of conspiracy theories, while McCain became angered by people he thought were creating false hopes that missing servicemen were still alive. Their disagreement led to sharp words at a Senate committee hearing in 1992. Source: New York Times, p. A10 Feb 26, 2000
Accepts gays in military under current policy

KEYES [to McCain]: I have signed the following pledge: In the interest of national security and the morale of our armed forces, if elected president of the US I pledge to reinstitute the ban on homosexuals serving in our nation’s military. Would you join me, sir, in signing that pledge?

McCAIN: No, I will not. military leaders that you and I respect say that this policy is a good one. I will support the present policy. Source: Republican Debate in West Columbia, SC Jan 7, 2000
Military’s political leaders need military backgrounds

I think the state of our military is still important. I think the fact that we have a president of the United States, National Security Adviser, a Secretary of State and a Secretary of Defense, none of whom have ever spent one minute wearing the uniform of the United States of America’s military is a disgrace, and we’re going to change that.
Source: Republican Debate in West Columbia, SC Jan 7, 2000
Women have proven themselves in combat-no restrictions

Q: Do you think it’s a good idea to prohibit women from combat? A: No, I don’t and it’s already been proven in the Persian Gulf War that women performed extraordinarily with heroism and skill and courage including in a POW experience.
Source: Des Moines Iowa GOP Debate Dec 13, 1999
Bombing useless targets in Vietnam destroyed US morale

When I was first on the [I]Forrestal, every man in my squadron had thought Washington’s air war plans were senseless. The target list was so restricted that we had to go back and hit the same targets over and over again. It’s hard to get a sense that you are advancing the war effort when you are prevented from doing anything more than bouncing the rubble of an utterly insignificant target. When President Johnson ordered an end to Operation Rolling Thunder in 1968, the campaign was judged to have had no measurable impact on the enemy. Most of our pilots flying the missions believed that our targets were virtually worthless. In all candor, we thought our civilian commanders were complete idiots who didn’t have the least notion of what it took to win the war. I found no evidence in postwar studies of the Johnson administration’s political and military decision-making during the war that caused me to revise that harsh judgement.
Source: “Faith of My Fathers”, p. 185-6 (http://www.ontheissues.org/Faith_of_My_Fathers.htm) Nov 9, 1999
Vietnam was a worthy cause despite losing

My country had failed in Vietnam. There is much to regret about America’s failure. The reasons are etched in black marble on the Washington Mall. But we had believed the cause that America had asked us to serve in Vietnam was a worthy one, and millions who defended it had done so honorably.
Source: “Faith of My Fathers”, p. 348 Nov 9, 1999
Pres. needs experience more than briefing books

McCain said there are times when the commander-in-chief “can no longer rely on briefing books & talking points. When a President makes life & death decisions he should draw wisdom from the deep experience with the reasons for and the risks of committing our children to our defense. No matter how many others are involved in the decision, the President is a lonely man in a dark room when the casualty reports come in. I am not afraid of that burden. I know both the blessing and the price of freedom.”
Source: Alison Mitchell, New York Times, p. A20 Sep 28, 1999
Discard ABM Treaty and develop a missile defense

A massive nuclear exchange between the US and the Soviet Union is no longer our central preoccupation. The threat is much more diverse, and more difficult to deter. We urgently need a practical ballistic missile defense, and the ABM Treaty is for the moment blocking us from obtaining it. [We should develop] a defense against terrorists and rogue states that will benefit all nations. Let us praise the good intentions that created the ABM Treaty, then consign it to the history pages where it belongs.
Source: www.mccain2000.com/ “Position Papers” 4/30/99 Apr 30, 1999
Use force, with US control, only for vital interests

Force has a role in but is not a substitute for diplomacy. All means short of force should be employed first. [We should not risk] American lives in quarrels that are entirely someone else’s affair, where no faction is committed to our values, and no vital interest is at stake. When force must be used, have clear rules of engagement, define an achievable mission, and bring [US troops] home as soon as possible. And never accept foreign or “dual key” authority for the command of US military operations.
Source: www.mccain2000.com/ “Position Papers” 4/30/99 Apr 30, 1999
John McCain on Defense Spending

Clean up waste in defense acquisition

Q: What specific programs would you cut if you were president?

A: Line-item veto is the best tool. We need it very badly. There are a whole variety of programs that need to be cut, & I would start in cleaning up defense acquisition. The cost overruns associated with the purchase of our weapons systems is completely out of control. There's a $160 million combat ship that is now $400 million. We've got to get that under control first. Let's stop the pork- barrel spending; then we'll go at programs. Source: 2007 GOP primary debate, at Reagan library, hosted by MSNBC May 3, 2007
Eliminate defense pork, but increase most other defense


Indicate your priorities for defense spending:
Greatly Increase: Intelligence operations; Pay for active duty personnel; Programs to improve troop retention rates; Troop and equipment readiness
Slightly Increase: Armed Forces personnel training; Military hardware; Modernization of weaponry and equipment; National missile defense; Research and development of new weapons
Eliminate: Defense pork barrel projects
Source: Congressional 2004 National Political Awareness Test Nov 1, 2004
Terminate C-130, B-2, and Seawolf; use funds to modernize

McCain asserted that US military preparedness is dangerously inadequate, and names specific weapons systems he considered unnecessary, elimination of which would provide some of the funds needed to modernize the military and increase preparedness. He said that the C-130 military transport aircraft, the B-2 stealth bomber, and the Seawolf submarine should all be taken out of production. He noted that for years Congress has forced the Air Force to buy more C-130s than its leaders wanted.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A19 Dec 8, 1999
Politicians keep unneeded bases open for political purposes

McCain said numerous unneeded military bases, which have been kept open by congressmen eager to avoid unemployment & dislocation in their districts, should be closed. That, along with eliminating unnecessary weapons systems, would save up to $20 billion that could modernize forces to face current threats, he said. McCain took pains to absolve military leaders of blame for the lack of preparedness, faulting instead what he called gross neglect of real military needs by politicians from both parties.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A19 Dec 8, 1999
Keep health care promises to aging veterans

McCain fears the dying generation of WWII veterans is being shortchanged in health care at an age when the old soldiers’ medical needs are more expensive than ever. “Our WWII veterans, the greatest generation, they’re dying at 30,000 a month, & they’re not getting the care they’ve been promised,” McCain said. “If you’ve got a flat budget, and millions of Americans who need expensive long-term and geriatric care, it doesn’t match up.” McCain said he plans to announce soon a “Contract with Veterans.”
Source: The Sunday Enterprise (Brockton, MA), p. A7 Nov 21, 1999
$6.4B of military spending waste is a disgrace

The President and the Congress have allowed the military to deteriorate. I identified $6.4 billion worth of waste, worth of projects we don’t need or want. It is enraging. I get angry when we spend $350 million on a carrier the Navy doesn’t want or need; 500 and some-million dollars on an airplane, a C-130, that the Air Force has said for years they don’t need. And meanwhile, we have 12,000 enlisted families on food stamps. That’s a disgrace! I am going to fix it as president.
Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College Oct 29, 1999
Raise military pay to avoid military draft

McCain opposes reviving a military draft even though enlistments are down and the services could be forced to return to selective conscription if they can’t fill the ranks with higher pay and improved benefits. The modern military requires technical skills to operate today’s sophisticated weapons, and it takes a long time to acquire those skills, McCain said. McCain blamed Congress for the shortage, saying it has failed to provide the necessary funding to raise military pay & benefits.
Source: Associated Press Aug 3, 1999
Military personnel on food stamps is a national disgrace

The military is not seen as an attractive option, McCain said. McCain told the local Rotary Club that there are 11,000 military personnel on food stamps. “That’s a national disgrace,” he said.
Source: Associated Press Aug 3, 1999
Europeans should spend more on defense, within NATO

As we approach the 50th anniversary of NATO, the Atlantic Alliance is in pretty bad shape. Our allies are spending far too little on their own defense to maintain the alliance as an effective military force. [And Europeans have a] growing determination to develop a defense identity separate from NATO. We [should encourage defense growth] only within the institutions of NATO. Defense structures accountable to the WEU or any other organization other than the alliance will ultimately kill the alliance.
Source: www.mccain2000.com/ “Position Papers” 4/30/99 Apr 30, 1999

[EMUJeff]

Senator John McCain- part 2 of 2

John McCain on Torture

Hiding torture is wrong, and harms US credibility abroad

Q: This report that the CIA destroyed tapes of its interrogation of two terror detainees--do you believe that the agency was trying to hide something?

A: I do not know. But the actions were absolutely wrong. I'm glad that the attorney general is going to investigate it. This harms the credibility and the moral standing of America in the world, again. There will be skepticism and cynicism all over the world about how we treat prisoners and whether we practice torture or not.
Q: The CIA director says the tapes were destroyed to protect the identity of the officers involved in the interrogation. Do you buy that?
A: We certainly want to do everything we can to protect the identities of those in the CIA. But he was advised not to [destroy the tapes] b several people, including high-ranking members of the administration. We're also setting up a false argument here between torture & moral high ground. That doesn't have to be. We have to keep the moral high ground. We can do it without torturing people. Source: Fox News Sunday: 2007 "Choosing the President" interviews (http://www.ontheissues.org/2007_Fox_News_Sunday.htm) Dec 9, 2007
Waterboarding is torture; we're not going to torture people

Q: [to Romney]: Considering that Mr. McCain is the