Q&A with Foster
1. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?
The American people deserve a responsive, bipartisan government committed to serving the public interest and finding solutions that will work for us all. As a scientist and a businessman, I believe that facts, not ideologies, should be the basis for that problem solving, and that our government works best when members of both parties come together to reach a reasonable compromise. For example, I have cosponsored the bipartisan compromise on offshore drilling and renewable energy, joined with bipartisan majorities to pass a GI Bill for the 21st century, and supported a Farm bill that will both help our farmers and strengthen our nation's nutrition programs. In addition, I worked with Rep. Judy Biggert and members from both sides of the aisle to restore funding to science, saving jobs at Fermilab. I also believe that listening to my constituents is at least half the job, and I am proud of coming back to the district every single weekend, holding 25 sessions of "Congress on Your Corner", answering thousands of constituent letters, and personally meeting and talking to thousands of people on a one-to-one basis. At a fundamental level, I feel that you cannot represent people unless you listen to them.
2. 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.
One of my proudest accomplishments has been working with Democrats and Republicans alike, successfully convincing members of House and Senate leadership to recognize the importance of restoring science funding. Our efforts were successful, as the Supplemental Appropriations bill, which was signed into law, contained $400 million in funding for science, saving high wage jobs at Department of Energy laboratories including Fermilab. This funding enabled our talented scientists to continue their vital research, allowing our country to remain competitive in a global marketplace. I am equally committed to our veterans, both at home and abroad. Among other initiatives, I supported a historic GI bill for the 21st century, because our brave Americans serving in Iraq and Afghanistan deserve a future worth fighting for. As a result of the GI bill, veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan will be able to obtain full scholarships to 4-year public universities. My first floor amendment (see #10 below) strengthened deterrence against nuclear terrorism. Furthermore, I proudly lifted the veil behind the appropriations process on my 100th day in office when I disclosed from top to bottom my entire list of Appropriations requests to let people know my priorities as well as my strong belief in transparency.
3. In which ways, if at all, would you alter U.S. policy in Iraq and Afghanistan? How would you characterize the effect of the U.S. "surge" in Iraq? What objectives, if any, must the U.S. still meet before it begins to withdraw troops?
Different regions of Iraq have been stabilized at different times. Kurdish Iraq has remained relatively stable throughout the war by granting it de-facto autonomy. In Anbar province, the key development was the "Awakening" of the Sunni tribes against Al Qaeda, which occurred months before the surge started. In Basra, the British established a timeline and pulled the troops out, and although there were difficulties, it has been possible to maintain order without troops patrolling the streets and with only limited air support. The surge had the greatest effect in the Baghdad region, which has also been stabilized by physical walls between ethnic neighborhoods as well as the exhaustion of ethnic violence. At this point, we should follow the consensus of the Iraqi government, the Iraqi people, and most Americans to establish a firm timeline for responsible withdrawal of U.S. ground troops. It is time to stop arguing about mistakes of the past and begin redeploying our troops out of Iraq and into the real war on terror in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Finally, it is inexcusable that we are spending $10B each month on this war when the Iraqi government is sitting on $80B in oil revenue.
4. What short-term steps, if any, would you advocate to keep gasoline prices in check?
Most of the recent oil price increases are the result of long-term increases in demand from developing countries (India and China), with the price increase sharpened by a speculative bubble that appears to have at least partially deflated. The short term supply and demand curves for petroleum are extremely inelastic, with a 1% change in supply or consumption resulting a 10-15% change in price. Thus, the ~3% drop in worldwide consumption in response to rising prices may already have had a significant effect. Speculative prices respond mainly to changes in commercial inventory levels, so that one action that may impact (or has already impacted) prices is the rate of oil filled or released from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). There is good evidence that inventory releases from the SPR has lowered prices in the past. The SPR is currently over 97% full, and temporarily releasing a small portion of this oil may have an additional effect. There have also been reports of market manipulation via deliberate mis-reporting of oil inventory levels by oil speculators (already a federal crime), and Congress is acting to strengthen investigation and enforcement in these matters.
5. Please list the key elements of your preferred long-term energy policy. Rank or rate the relative importance of domestic oil exploration, conservation and alternative-energy development. What part, if any, should ethanol play in U.S. energy policy?
We need to find a solution that makes good business and scientific sense. In the medium term (5-15 years), exploitation of domestic oil shale, offshore drilling, and other sources of fossil fuels will be important in reducing our trade deficit in the energy sector. These are unlikely to result in a large drop in the price of oil and gas since they represent a small fraction of worldwide oil supplies, and the extraction costs will be significantly higher than traditional sources of oil. Efficiency improvements will be important in the medium term. The technology for these exists, and a combination of mandates and market incentives is appropriate. In the long term, we need to invest in new clean energy like solar power, deep drilled geothermal power, wind energy, fusion, and sensible development of nuclear power and biofuels. Prioritizing the R&D among these areas will require congressional guidance with scientific and business sense - an area where I am beginning to play a significant role. Corn-based ethanol is only marginally viable as an energy crop. However, I support ethanol in the short term, as it is an important bridge to the development of advanced biofuels, like cellulosic ethanol from switch grass.
6. What steps, if any, should Congress take to promote economic recovery? What steps by the federal government might make the nation's economy worse?
As a member of the Financial Services Committee, I was involved in the markup and passage of comprehensive bills to address the mortgage crisis, as well as the enabling legislation to allow the (regrettably necessary) bail out of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. To create good paying American jobs, our tax code must provide incentives for companies to do business here instead of elsewhere. This is now more than just a manufacturing issue: for example many of the high-tech Telcom jobs in the "I-88 Technology Corridor" are being off-shored to India and China. One useful step might be for the R&D tax credit to be preferentially allocated to companies that manufacture in the U.S. rather than offshore. One of the fundamental lessons of the last 16 years is that the economy performs best when policies are adopted that strengthen small businesses and the middle class, and performs poorly with policies that reward only large corporations and those already wealthy. Instead of "trickling down," wealth at the top now largely flows overseas rather than being reinvested at home. Finally, we must adopt a realistic plan to begin paying down the debt that has piled up under the Bush administration.
7. Do you favor or oppose a larger federal role in health-care? Either way, why and what should the federal role be? What, if anything, should be done about rising health care costs and Americans who do not have health coverage?
I believe that every man, woman, and child in the United States deserves access to a basic level of healthcare. While I believe in the importance of covering each individual, I am open to ideas and experimentation to determine the most efficient form of public-private partnership to provide this basic level of health care. Controlling costs will require a serious and ongoing discussion in our country about what is meant by the "basic level of health care." I also believe in ensuring the right of a patient who can afford it to purchase additional coverage beyond the minimum level provided. When determining how best to deliver such a system, our priorities should be reducing the high administrative overheard that inflates the costs of delivering healthcare without bringing any actual improvement to the quality of the healthcare received by the patient, cost-saving technologies such as electronic medical records, and improving the transparency for choices and costs within the system. As first step, I strongly support the SCHIP bill that helps ensure adequate access to health insurance for our children.
8. Would you maintain or scale back federal tax cuts made during the past eight years? Either way, why? How, as specifically as possible, would you try to reduce federal budget deficits and the national debt?
I have consistently supported tax cuts for the middle class, while returning to the tax rates of the 1990s for the wealthiest 1-2% in our country. I voted against the Democratic Party's Budget because it failed to do enough to lock down the middle class tax cuts that I had campaigned on. The first bill I introduced in Congress - The "Universal Homeowner Tax Cut of 2008" - provided a property tax deduction for middle-class homeowners who did not itemize, and paid for this tax cut by closing a loophole that encouraged wealthy people to escape taxation by moving their money overseas. Cutting taxes without cutting spending cuts is indefensible, since it only increases taxes for our children. According to the CATO Institute, the government provided $92 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to business and private-sector entities in fiscal year 2006. Continued subsidies to some of our largest and most successful companies is unacceptable, and I plan on working to curb this wasteful spending. Other specific spending cuts I support include ending the war in Iraq, ending over-use of contractors and consultants for government functions, and terminating spending on technically questionable military systems.
9. The current Congress could not agree on immigration reform. What would you do to advance reform in a divided Congress, and, briefly, what should the key policy elements be?
The Bush administration's effort at immigration reform was a useful first attempt to reach a compromise, but it was ultimately derailed by extreme ideologues on both sides of the debate. In my mind, some missing elements including increased border security including more boots on the ground, rapid and reliable employment verification, realistic immigration and worker visa quotas, comprehensive criminal background checks for those entering worker visa programs, and measures to ensure that legal immigrant worker visa programs pay for their impact on our schools, health care and police. What we need in Congress are more reasonable voices for a workable compromise rather than more inflammatory proclamations by ideologues. I intend to be one of those voices in the middle, hammering out a workable compromise that meets the needs of current U.S. citizens, businesses, and legal immigrants. And when a compromise is reached, Congress must return and "fine tune" our immigration policy each session of Congress, rather than let the system rot and degenerate into a system of illegal conduct as has happened since the previous immigration reform in the 1980's. Border security has many unique issues, which I recently reported on following an official visit to the U.S./Mexico border.
10. In what ways is the U.S. government successfully defending citizens against terrorism, and in what ways is the U.S. failing in that regard?
Terrorism is a real threat to our nation's security and we must be diligent in our efforts to pursue those trying to harm us. However, we should not confuse activity and posturing for progress. The Bush Administration's poor execution of the war in Afghanistan and misguided efforts in Iraq has failed to increase America's safety. Meanwhile, significant holes remain in our defenses against nuclear terrorism, bioterrorism, and chemical weapons. Each day the Illinois 14th district is crisscrossed with trainloads of container freight that has traveled uninspected from its loading points in South or East Asia. The fact that this fundamental recommendation of the 9/11 commission - incoming inspection of containerized cargo - has been passed by the House but blocked in the Senate by a coalition of lobbyists for multinational businesses is a disgrace, and leaves our nation open to chemical or biological attacks. Deterrence must also remain a crucial part of our antiterrorism strategy. In my first floor amendment, I introduced and passed an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill that advanced our nation's nuclear forensics capabilities, to ensure we could identify the source of nuclear material used in an attack on our country - and respond appropriately.