Q&A with U.S. House Dist. 14 Democratic hopefuls

Four candidates are vying for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. 14th Congressional District in the Feb. 5 primary -- businessman and former physicist Bill Foster, 52, of Geneva; carpenter John D. Laesch, who turns 34 Tuesday, of Yorkville; site development officer Joe Serra, 46, of Geneva; and attorney Jotham S. Stein, who turns 46 Thursday, of St. Charles

The primary candidates filled out a Q&A; here is a sampling of their answers.

Q. For incumbents and non-incumbents: If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make

Foster. I believe I can have an immediate, positive impact on the investment of taxpayer dollars. Research and development has two components which are often not considered in the proper context: the science and the business. I am someone who can not only tell you if it works in the lab, but if it will work in the business model. We need more technical and engineering sense in Congress. And we can obviously see by the mountains of debt racked up by Congress and this administration that we need more business sense. I've started my own business and managed multi-million dollar construction projects at Fermilab, and I'm ready to get to work on tackling the federal budget.

Laesch. Initiating a new energy policy that invests heavily into renewable energy sources would create jobs, curb global warming and reduce the perceived need to maintain a military presence in the Middle East. The current price tag for the Iraq war, $1.5 trillion, could have covered the cost of a $20,000 investment for every American family to buy solar panels, wind generators or better insulate their homes. I believe that the program would encourage more people to invest in alternative energy solutions if we offered subsidies to individuals who want to make their homes more energy-efficient. If a home or business owner wants to re-insulate their homes, install solar panels or invest in wind energy, they would receive a sizeable rebate from the U.S. government. We could stimulate the automotive industry and create even more American jobs by offering better financial incentives for people who buy a hybrid or hybrid-electric vehicle. Financial incentives for automobiles or home remodeling could allow low- and middle-income families to buy an energy-efficient vehicle or make their home more energy-efficient. Ultimately, we all benefit.

Serra. The greatest contribution that I can make to the U.S. Congress is my ability to seek conciliation between opposing views. My contribution will help end stalemates and indecisiveness in Congress and ensure the people's business will be done.

Stein. I have real solutions to many of the problems we face. I support withdrawing the troops from Iraq as quickly and safely as possible and I will fight for universal health care for all Illinoisans. I have a 10-point plan to fix global warming, will fight to get money out of politics, will use my experience to bring excellent jobs to our district, and I believe every child in America should have an absolute guarantee of food and health care. See www.VoteStein.com for complete details. I will use my skills as a compromiser and negotiator to bargain for the things you and I believe in, but negotiate and compromise for the greater good of all of us so we can get something done and start fixing the real problems we face.

Q. In which ways, if at all, would you alter the U.S. course in Iraq? What objectives, if any, must the U.S. still meet before it begins to withdraw troops?

Foster. First, let's state the obvious. Our presence in Iraq is not leading toward political stability, and our continued presence is exacerbating the problem. We must bring this war to an end right away, and we must responsibly withdraw our troops. The first step we must take are to get out troops out of combat operations and to withdraw to safe positions. We should begin withdrawing troops at the safest logistical level possible until we've achieved strategic redeployment. This would leave a residual force in either neighboring countries or in the Gulf to maintain overall peace, so that full-scale civil war does not break out. During this draw-down, the appropriate level of pressure will force the negotiations that would hopefully spur a peace process.

Laesch. The job for our military in Iraq has been accomplished. The solution to this crisis is political and diplomatic, and unfortunately, this administration has shown no competence in either area. There are no more military objectives that can be accomplished by a unilateral military force. The United States needs to hand peacekeeping operations over to the United Nations and bring the Arab League into the discussion regarding Iraq's future. The president of the United States and the Secretary of State need to engage regional players. There will be no peace in Iraq until that peace allows the Iraqi people to share in the oil wealth and determine the course of their own government. It is the responsibility of the executive branch to conduct foreign policy, but I hold little hope that the Bush administration will ever rise to the task. It is now the responsibility of Congress to utilize the power of the purse and cut funding for Bush's reckless war. The U.S. Congress, a separate and equal branch of government, and I take that responsibility seriously. I will strongly oppose any future war funding bills until the president actively engages the Arab League and United Nations in the peacekeeping process.

Serra. I am running for our military. I have spoken to many, many Iraq veterans and soldiers currently in Iraq and all have told me that we should remain in Iraq. I want the soldiers home now, but I am willing to listen to our military who say they want more time. I am in favor if addressing a pullout, but only after specific benchmarks have been met by to be agreed-upon dates. Those benchmarks are: training enough Iraqi security forces to replace our American soldiers, and the Iraqi Parliament is willing and able to govern their country and control their military.

Stein. We should withdraw our troops from Iraq as quickly and as safely as possible starting now. We should bring most of the troops home, leaving some forces at bases in the friendly countries of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, so that we are ready should whatever government emerges in Iraq threaten us with biological or nuclear warfare. But if we ever attack again, our one goal must be to take out the weapons of mass destruction and then withdraw. There is no vital U.S. interest that justifies the U.S. acting as policeman in Iraq. Our presence in Iraq is making our nation and military weaker, not stronger. Our presence there is fueling the Iraqi people's hatred for America and increasing the numbers of terrorists that al-Qaeda and others who want to attack America are recruiting. Furthermore, the United States will not be able to impose democracy on Iraq through military force. Iraq has no democratic institutions and no democratic history, and is not a natural country. It was created by the British and French when they divided up the region. It is time for the Iraqis to take responsibility for governing and policing their own country.

Q. Do you favor or oppose a larger federal role in health-care coverage? Either way, why? And either way, what, if anything, should be done about rising health-care costs and Americans who do not have health coverage?

Foster. I believe we need to move to a universal health care system right away as costs are spiraling out of control for both individuals and small businesses. As a scientist, I will take a data-driven approach to this problem to decide whether we should implement a single-payer style system, or whether there is a role for private enterprise that saves taxpayer dollars. Here is what I know right now. Insurance companies at present chew up about 30 percent of our health-care dollars whereas single-payer systems in other countries seem to chew up about 10-15 percent of health-care dollars in bureaucratic overhead. If this system is prototyped in the states and the data remains, then we have our answer about the most efficient use of our health-care dollars.

Laesch. When the CEO of United Healthcare, William McGuire, earns $37 million a year while more than 47 million Americans are going without health care, we have a problem. We know that private solutions like Health Savings Accounts are not working for most Americans, and businesses, small and large, are forced to cut or eliminate benefits because of skyrocketing premiums. This leaves nearly 87 million without adequate coverage. Fortunately, we can solve the problem without creating a new program. Medicare is a successful program that can be expanded to serve as a single-payer health-care program that covers all Americans. We have the best doctors, nurses and medical technology in the world, but we have the most inefficient health-care financing system imaginable. We need a health-care system that seeks to make people well instead of a health care system that seeks to make people like William McGuire wealthy. I will take on big insurance companies and work to pass a fair health care system that covers all Americans. A single-payer system allows doctors and patients to make health-care decisions without the intrusion of an insurance middleman. The program would cover every medically necessary procedure, including preventive care.

Serra. I am in favor of an increased federal involvement of the American health-care crisis. America spends more on health insurance per person than any industrialized nation in the world, and yet 47 million Americans lack health insurance. Of those, more than 9 million are children. Those with health insurance feel the cost of the uninsured, paying an average of $922 more per year in premiums due to the unpaid health care costs of the uninsured. By this statistic alone, if the federal government agrees to enact the SCHIP, the overall cost for health care will be lowered for all citizens.

Stein. Over 43 million Americans don't have health care; 8.3 million children don't have health care. That's more children without health care in America than 11 times the population of our 14th Congressional District. I strongly support universal health care for all Americans. Our health-care system is broken and we need to fix it. We are the only industrialized country in the world that fails to guarantee health care to all its citizens. In the United States, health care costs an average of more than $6,000 per person a year, but the U.S. ranks right at the bottom of the list of industrialized countries in many health-care statistics. I am not wedded to a specific way or plan to deliver the universal health care. As your congressman, I will work across and within party lines to try and bridge the great differences we have in our country regarding delivering health care to all. We can start controlling health care costs by allowing the government to use its bargaining power to negotiate discounts for prescription drugs, allowing re-importation of affordable drugs from Canada and other safe foreign countries, and banning direct and indirect drug company incentives to doctors for writing prescriptions for drugs from the drug company. See "Food and Health Care for Every Child" and "Universal Health Care for Every Adult" at www.VoteStein.com for further details on my health-care plans.

Q. Do you favor maintaining or scaling back federal tax cuts made during the past eight years? Either way, why? What specific strategy, if any, would you apply toward reducing federal budget deficits and the national debt?

Foster. I believe the top rates need to return to where they were in the 1990s when we enjoyed an unprecedented economic expansion. The piling up of wealth with the top 1 percent of this country is getting out of hand. We need to shift our priorities to expanding the middle class instead of giving tax breaks for people that don't need it. Reducing the deficit is one of my top goals in Congress and that starts by ending the war in Iraq. We are spending an incredible amount of money that is not producing demonstrable gains. The next step I will take is going over the federal budget line by line. I have years of project management at Fermilab and business experience, and I am ready to take up this challenge.

Laesch. I support repealing Bush's tax cuts that only benefit millionaires. While I do not support a presidential line-item veto, I would like to see the Congressional Committee on Oversight and Government Reform do more work to investigate government contracting abuses.

I doubt that I will sit on the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, but I am confident that Rep. Henry Waxman (D), who chairs the committee, will do a much better job at stopping such gross examples of waste, fraud and misuse of the taxpayer money. Instead of overpaying government contractors, we need to spend that money on education and invest more money into renewable energy initiatives.

Serra. Since 2001, President Bush's tax cuts have shifted federal tax payments from the richest Americans to a wide swath of middle-class families. These tax cuts for the wealthy have failed to boost economic performance and they have reduced revenues substantially during a time of war. I am in favor of repealing all of the tax cuts initiated by President Bush in 2001.

Stein. I support rolling back the unfair tax cuts President Bush gave to the wealthiest Americans. The tax cuts given to the richest Americans were unfair because President Bush paid for the tax cuts on the backs of America's middle class. The middle class pay for the tax cuts because the tax breaks for the rich are financed by increasing the federal deficit, increasing federal borrowing, and raiding the taxes hard working Americans pay into Social Security. I support reducing the size of America's budget deficit. We can do that by: rolling back the unfair tax cuts President Bush gave to the wealthiest Americans; closing the $290-$350 billion a year "tax gap" by ensuring the IRS does a better job collecting the billions in legitimate taxes that aren't being collected; cutting billions in wasteful federal spending by reducing inefficiency and corruption in government; passing a Constitutional amendment to give future presidents a line item veto.

Q. The current Congress could not agree on immigration reform. What would you do to advance reform in a divided Congress, and, briefly, what would the key elements be in your own immigration policy?

Foster. This is the perfect example of Congress doing nothing for 20 years, and then trying to throw everything into one bill to fix the problem. That's a recipe for gridlock. The truth is, Congress should have been dealing with this every year, generating and maintaining workable solutions to our immigration problems. And there are things that we agree on right now that can be done.

First, we need better border security. Everyone agrees on this. And I'm open to whether that's a wall, or some sort of wall/electronic wall combination. Secondly, we have to have a better way of enforcing our laws, and I think we need a way for employers to be certain about the immigration status of workers. The system we have now is broken and too easy to cheat. I envision a card with biometric data or a cell phone with encryption that can be given to an employer and then checked quickly against a national database. By putting into place a system where employers have an easy way to verify citizenship and employment status, we will shift the responsibility onto employers, who will have the means to enforce the law.

Laesch. Fair-trade agreements are an integral part of a comprehensive immigration plan. This is the only way to truly address the global trade inequity, the root cause of increased immigration. Politically, this is probably the best way to pass a comprehensive immigration bill. I oppose Bush's two-tier guest worker program and I oppose the Oberweis/Foster efforts to move toward a biometric national ID card. A biometric ID is the first step on a slippery slope toward further attempts to restrict of our civil liberties. Benjamin Franklin said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Another key component is making the legal path toward citizenship more efficient. Those who emigrate to the United States and play by the rules should not have to face a stifling bureaucracy. This is in no way amnesty. By definition, amnesty is the act of pardoning without consequences. We are talking about financial consequences; including the costs of English language classes, the payment of back taxes, and an earned path toward citizenship. These are the steps toward citizenship that my ancestors, and others took when they came to America via Ellis Island.

Serra. U.S. immigration policy is long overdue for reform. The current discussion around immigration reform comes at a time when the United States has more foreign-born residents than ever before. The nearly 36 million immigrants in the United States make up 12 percent of the U.S. population. Estimates show that roughly one-third of the immigrant population resides here with legal permanent residency, one-third is naturalized U.S. citizens and one-third are estimated to be here without legal status. This is probably one of America's most difficult issues to address. No matter what is done, there will be a lot of disharmony associated with the action or inaction of our government. I support the following: recognize the economic role and contribution of undocumented workers by implementing an earned legalization program (Senator McCain's bill, S. 1461); creating an Impact Aid Program that would offset state and local expenditures related to the program; creating a New Americans Initiative -- a program to support state-level public-private partnership that would help all immigrants integrate into American society in a systematic, coordinated, and effective way, through local government and nonprofit programs; allowing in professionals as legal immigrants, but sealing border; allowing path to citizenship if illegal immigrant admit guilt and pay fine; and doing a better job patrolling the Canadian and Mexican borders.

Stein. I will use my skills as a compromiser and negotiator to bargain very hard for comprehensive immigration reform. I will work hard with Representatives in both parties keeping my eye on the goal of comprehensive immigration reform and I will compromise for the greater good of all as necessary so we can get something done and start fixing our immigration laws so we all benefit. One focus of our immigration policy must be to secure our borders. We must secure both our southern and northern borders with Mexico and Canada and we must increase Coast Guard funding to ensure that our eastern and western coasts are protected. We must do this to protect our country from terrorists and drug dealers as well as illegal immigrants. Another focus of our immigration policy should be to modernize our visa system so that it meets the needs of America's businesses and universities and allows for unification of close family members. We should give a path to citizenship for the 12 million illegal immigrants currently here. Once we have secure borders, we should also grant temporary worker visas providing the temporary workers have the same rights as other American workers while they are here.

Q. Given rising oil prices and Middle East turmoil, what specific steps, if any, do you favor to accelerate research into and application of alternative energy sources? Which alternative sources do you think hold the most potential for producing large amounts of affordable energy?

Foster. I have laid out an extensive vision for how I view our government's role in promoting renewable resources and ending our dependence on foreign oil. The main thing that distinguishes me from any other candidate in this race is my scientific and business credentials on this issue. This is a multi-faceted issue that I will be happy to discuss more in detail during our interview, but to keep under 200 words, let's just discuss R&D. We must choose the right technologies. If we are to invest in carbon capturing and sequestration, then the science and the business must be sound. Geothermal drilling is a promising new technology that was born out of deep-oil drilling, but capturing the heat will require the right investments by Congress and the private sector. We should encourage government funded "innovation awards" to promote these promising technologies. In energy policy and many other issues, there is no substitute for sound scientific and business sense in Congress.

Laesch. The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research released a report this August that laid out a carbon-free and nuclear-free roadmap for the United States. The plan creates energy grids that receive power from multiple sources like solar (35 percent) and large-scale wind farms (10-15 percent). Biomass, geothermal, wave energy and other base loads (25 percent) complete the list of primary contributors. The main problem with wind and solar energy is intermittency. The use of a public power grid that integrates, stores and distributes multiple sources of energy could adequately produce energy for our country and reduce CO2 emissions by 80 percent by the year 2050. Over the short-term, nuclear energy provides an affordable solution, but not before a Democratic administration and Congress ensures the integrity of Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This is stopgap, but may be necessary to transition from foreign oil to an infrastructure for clean, renewable energy, like wind and solar. Rural parts of the 14th District could be a prime energy producer for the state of Illinois. I would also work with the Fox Valley Electric Car Association to explore the viability of electric car charging stations within the 14th District.

Serra. Meeting the challenge of the new clean energy economy requires rethinking present policies, redirecting resources, breaking old boundaries and forging new alliances. It means abandoning old approaches that traded-off the health of the economy for the health of the environment and sacrificed good jobs and technology innovation. Promote advanced technology and hybrid cars. Invest in more efficient factories. Encourage high performance building. Increase use of energy-efficient appliances. Modernize electrical infrastructure. Expand renewable energy development. Improve transportation options, such as increase mobility, job access, and transportation choice by investing in effective multimodal networks including bicycle, local bus and rail transit. Reinvest in smart urban growth. Increase the use of hydrogen fuel cell technology and preserve regulatory protections.

Stein. We must reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Because of global warming, we must reduce our dependence on oil, period. Energy independence goes hand in hand with combating global warming. My plan to fix global warming makes us energy independent and combats global warming at the same time. Specific steps I favor to accelerate research into alternative energy sources include: tax credits for using alternative energy sources or products; tax credits for producing alternative energy; increase and fully fund alternate energy programs in the farm bill; tax credits for venture capital for alternative energy sources; and increasing basic research funding for our nation's universities. Wind energy could be a big part of our energy independence and reducing greenhouse gas emissions if we offer appropriate incentives. For example, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), Illinois has the potential to produce nearly 85 percent of its electricity needs from wind. According to the UCS, wind energy by itself could provide $1.2 billion in new income for farmers and rural landowners by 2020, as well as 80,000 new jobs.

Q. Are you concerned, or not, about the number of former U.S. jobs being outsourced? Either way, what policy changes, if any, would you favor in that regard?

Foster. Absolutely. As a small businessman, I've seen first-hand the concerns that people commonly only associate with outsourcing.

When health-care costs explode, it's easy to see why people look for opportunities to do business elsewhere. When trade agreements are not being enforced and your competitors are able to sell products at half the cost you are because there are no labor, environmental or human rights standards in foreign countries, it's not surprising to see the angst in people. We need a president and a Congress that will stand up to currency manipulation by other countries. Some outsourcing is inevitable, but when jobs like that are lost, we do not see the retraining programs or the focus on workers from this administration. Couple all this angst with the recent mortgage crisis and the worry voters have for this economy is palpable. It's the main reason besides Iraq why the public views Congress in such a poor light.

Laesch. Every working American family is concerned about the off-shoring and outsourcing of good-paying jobs and it will be one of my highest concerns when I am elected. We have to bring good-paying jobs back to America and stabilize our economy. The $763 billion trade deficit is a clear signal we need to go back to fair trade instead of free trade. Free trade policies take America down an immoral road by encouraging the use of sweatshop and child labor. Here at home, workers on the line at Caterpillar are trying to compete with workers who earn less than $5 a day to complete the same job. Fair trade agreements would create a sustainable global economy and equalize the discrepancies in wages worldwide, preventing the exodus of more American jobs to nations where workers may more easily be exploited. Additionally, we need an enforcement body that protects workers' rights, uphold labor and environmental standards, and narrow the wage gap that induces employers to send American jobs overseas.

Serra. No response given.

Stein. Yes, I am concerned about outsourcing. We can combat outsourcing and ensure excellent jobs are created right here in our congressional district by: electing me because with my years of experience with venture capitalists and entrepreneurs -- people who start companies, invest in companies and grow companies -- I can bring excellent jobs to our district; pursuing policies across the board that ensure our economy can innovate and grow, creating excellent jobs and a strong economic engine in the district; pursuing fair trade policies; and ending currency manipulation by foreign countries. American workers still have the highest productivity and can compete effectively if there is a level playing field. As your congressman, I will work to provide a level playing field by ensuring that we have fair trade with other countries. We can't let in dangerous goods just because they are cheaper and we don't want to allow goods sold in our country to be produced by workers who are denied the basic right to freely associate. It isn't fair when our workers are called upon to compete with a system that is clearly unethical, with standards that fall below the basic rights that the United Nations signatory countries are supposed to uphold. We can compete, and with my plans for encouraging business growth through entrepreneurship we will compete, as long as we have fair trade.