Q&A with Morgenthaler

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 is that? What will be your main priority in office?

I'm running for Congress because I believe in my neighbors, the people I raised my family with, see at church and at the grocery store. I believe in their hard work and common sense, in their dreams for their kids and their hopes for the future. I don't think they're being served very well by Washington these days. Our current representative doesn't seem to understand the challenges everyday families face. He spends too much time playing the Washington game of voting to benefit the special interests and taking their money to fund his political campaigns. My husband and I came to Des Plaines 17 years ago for the same reason so many people do: to make a home, get a good job, raise a family, live in a strong community. Washington should be finding ways to help us fulfill our dreams, but most of the time they're either trying to one up each other and getting nothing done, or standing in our way. One thing I learned in the Army is that if you are willing to set aside your personal ambitions and work together, you can get things. I believe we can develop renewable fuels to lower energy costs and brighten our children's future. I believe we can reign in government spending to lower taxes. I believe we can have more secure borders. I believe America can restore its position in the world and can have a foreign policy that's smart and tough. A lot of people in Washington seem intent on telling us what we can't do. I believe we can-but only if we work together. I think that's gotten lost in Washington. They're so busy trying to score political points as Republicans or Democrats that they've forgotten that we're all Americans, and that we've got some real problems that make it tough for ordinary people. It's time for America to be America again - the country that tackles its problems.

2. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.

With all the special interest money and media attention and seemingly endless negative attacks that go back and forth in politics these days, I think people running for office sometimes lose sight of the fact that if they are elected, they have a job to do. "Congresswoman" is a job title not an entitlement. I will do the job by representing the values and views of the constituents of the district. Congressman Roskam and his friends in Congress seem to have forgotten about us. 350,000 Illinois children could go without healthcare because they played politics with the SCHIP bill. They've gone on a spending spree with taxpayer dollars, and it's our children who are going to end up paying the bill. They criticize our teachers but haven't done one thing to fix our schools. They let oil companies take record profits straight out of our pockets but have done nothing to make us energy independent. They talk tough about security and have done nothing to secure our borders. Instead of coming together to find the responsible way to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and bring our troops home, they spend time scoring partisan political points. As someone who has proudly worn our country's uniform, I think it's nothing less than immoral for Congress to spend time fighting phony political battles while our sons and daughters are in harm's way overseas. I've lived here for 17 years. My neighbors work hard. When they sit down to balance their check books every month, they pay their bills and try to save a little something for the future. When they think about what lies ahead, most of all they want what's best for their children. We could use a little more of their work ethic and common sense in Congress. That's what I'll bring with me to Washington. I'll work hard every day, just like they do, to make it a little easier to raise a family in Illinois. I will immediately tackle these tough problems, always keeping in mind that I represent the people, not the corporate special interests.

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 US still meet before it begins to withdraw troops?

I served in Iraq along side some of the bravest men and women this country has to offer. What's missing in most of the news accounts about Iraq is how hard they are working, how much they believe in the good our country can do, and how much they want to succeed. They deserve a game plan that sets aside politics in favor of a clear eyed analysis of conditions on the ground. The surge has been effective in tamping down violence and reducing the number of American military killed, and for that we should all be thankful but not surprised. When you send in America's best, you can expect for them to do everything they can to get the job done. Unfortunately, even with American servicemen and women working hard to help establish security on the ground, we still have not seen considerable progress on the political front. I believe that it is time to find a responsible way to turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and bring our troops home. We need to set clear bench marks so we can all proceed with a common understanding of our goal. The warring factions in Iraq need to summon the political will to forge a settlement. That's not something we can do. It's time for the Administration and Congress to come together, not as Democrats, not as Republicans, but as Americans, to set a responsible path to bring our troops home, turn Iraq over to the Iraqis and stabilize the region. At the same time, we need to strengthen our presence in Afghanistan. We do not have the number of troops needed to successfully hunt down our enemies while protecting the Afghanis who have stood up against these terrorists.

4. What short-term steps, if any, would you advocate to keep gasoline prices in check.

The price of gas has an effect on nearly every sector of the U.S. economy. From tourism to the price of food, energy costs are driving up prices and slowing economic growth. While the ultimate solution must center on a long-term strategy to develop alternative and renewable energy sources, we cannot ignore the present burden that record-high gas prices places on American families. Where we can safely drill domestically, we should. Much has been made of opening up the rights to off-shore drilling, which, once you go through all of the regulatory and licensing processes and mechanics of setting up new operations, would begin to produce oil in the next decade. Well, the oil companies already lease 68 million acres on public lands and off our shores that they are not using. They should begin to extract oil in those acres immediately, or we should give those licenses to companies that will. That's the quickest way to produce more U.S. oil. If the rising costs of energy continue to drive down the economy, we should also consider releasing some oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. There are currently in excess of 700 million barrels of oil in reserve. A modest swap from the SPR would give immediate price relief while we wait for the effects of other avenues like domestic drilling and development of alternatives to have an impact. We must also monitor the big oil companies who have been making record breaking profits. While my neighbors and I have nothing against an industrious company making a profit, if they are engaging in price-gouging and other unfair practices at our expense, they should be stopped.

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 US energy policy?

We should not repeat the mistake of the past by over-dependence on one or two sources of energy. The new energy economy must consist of many different types of energy sources. Having a diverse, decentralized and independent energy market will be a great strength for America. So we need to invest in many promising approaches - including solar, wind, ocean currents, geothermal, and biofuels. Ethanol should absolutely be part of our energy future, and scientists are discovering exciting ways to produce more of it from non-food sources such as algae, which will alleviate the food vs. fuel debate. Since my days at Argonne National Laboratory, I've been a big believer in investment in research and development, especially as it relates to developing renewable and alternative energy sources. It's important for our long term economic stability and for our environment. There are a lot of good ideas out there, and I believe there is still a lot just waiting to be discovered. We should have an Apollo like program to invest in, research and develop alternative energy sources. It's that important. If we do it, and I believe it should be one of our nation's top priorities, there is no question that it will yield results. This is America, and in America we set those kinds of goals and we meet them head on.

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?

The strength of our economy should be measured in part by whether average American's believe that the American Dream is within their reach: can they support their family, afford a nice home, have good health care, send their children to college and save for retirement. Unfortunately, many feel that dream slipping away. Middle class American families are really feeling squeezed. We are facing rising costs at the pump and in the grocery store. The values of our homes are dropping and our property taxes are rising. Unfortunately, wages have not kept pace with these rising costs. Congress must help ease the burden of middle and working class families by lowering taxes and giving higher tax breaks for expenses like college tuition - expenses that are an investment in our nation's future. We are facing an energy crisis, but from that crisis can come opportunity. The government should give tax breaks to companies developing alternative energy sources and to small businesses investing in the high-tech industry. Moreover, investment into our national laboratories will create jobs and strengthen our position in the global economy.

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 am going to spend some time on the larger question of health care because this issue is so important to our families and our long-term economic competitiveness. Our health care system is disintegrating before our eyes. We need to approach reform in a new, fresh and comprehensive way in the next Congress, putting a lot of ideas on the table. The problem with Washington is special interest groups get focused on their little piece of the puzzle and try to force candidates into lock-step formation, and then nothing gets done. The federal government has and will continue to have a significant role in health coverage. Through Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, the Veteran's Administration, the Federal Employee Health Benefits program and other programs, the federal government delivers health coverage to millions of Americans. As the population ages and war heroes come home, veteran's health programs will need to grow to deliver on the promises we've made. The problem is in the private sector, where skyrocketing costs have made it tough for many to afford decent coverage. My Republican opponent supports a radical plan that would destroy the employer-based health care system that we have relied on for generations. His plan would tax employee health benefits, raising taxes on everyday workers and small businesses. Well, the problem with health care is not that we're not paying enough. When working people lose their health coverage and are forced to fend for themselves under his plan, he would offer a tax credit that would cover about one-third of the cost of an average family's insurance premium. I have a different approach and it's based on this premise - we need to strengthen the U.S. health care system, not abandon it. Americans deserve higher quality care at a reasonable price, not substandard care they can't afford. We need to build on the current employer-based system, not destroy it, and we need to offer different solutions that work for different populations. We have to get every American covered with affordable coverage. I am firmly committed to that. We need to get a handle on skyrocketing premiums so small businesses can cover their employees. We must protect consumers' rights, safeguard privacy and improve quality while getting costs under control. We need to emphasize primary and preventive care, to catch and treat problems early before they become more costly. We need to bring medicine into the 21st century, with IT systems and quality standards. Five years ago, my husband was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. It was a shock to him and scary for me and our kids.  We really didn't know what the future would hold for us as a family. We surely couldn't afford the medication he needs to take every day. Fortunately, we had health insurance. 1.7 million Illinoisans aren't so lucky. And millions more people and businesses are having a tough time paying for skyrocketing premiums. It's outrageous that this Congress has done nothing to help solve this problem. We have an enormous opportunity in the next Congress -- if we elect people who are willing to break free of the special interests, set aside the partisan bickering, roll up our sleeves and do the hard work of fixing the broken health care system in a smart, step-by-step way.

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?

The federal budget is a mess and our economy is contracting, and we're not going to solve these problems by raising taxes. The problem isn't that government needs more money to spend. The problem is that government spends too much on the wrong priorities. We've got to go the other way: re-prioritize federal spending so we can avoid raising taxes. It's really that simple. The government should do what every family and every business does--plan for the future, save a little when you can, cut spending when times are tight. Folks in Washington spend a lot of time trying to convince you that it's more complicated than that. It's not. Reigning in government spending so that we can cut taxes is one of the main reasons I am running for Congress. One place to start would be to hold members of Congress accountable for the spending projects they request. We all know earmarks are out of control. I would rather have legislators decide where money is most needed in their own districts than bureaucrats in Washington, but all requests should be disclosed and get an up or down vote. They should not be hidden or buried in bills that they have nothing to do with.

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 failure of the current Congress to pass immigration reform threatens our national security. Our congressman promised he'd secure our borders but over 1.5 million more undocumented immigrants have crossed our borders under his watch. The fact that Congress is closely divided between the two parties is not an excuse for inaction. We need to send people to Congress who will set aside the petty partisan bickering and get the job done. I was Illinois' homeland security chief for two years. I know our borders are porous - both north and south - and that means there are real threats to our safety. We don't know who's coming in or where they are going. That's got to stop. We must come up with a comprehensive plan to address what is a very complicated issue. The first step is simple - enforce our existing laws. Employers who knowingly hire illegal labor or engage in employment fraud should be held to account. From my years as homeland security chief, I know that the federal government is not providing the resources necessary to combat this problem. We need to hire more border patrol agents and give them the tools they need like high tech surveillance equipment and electronic fencing.

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?

I've spent more than 30 years working to keep America safe, first in the military and then as Illinois' homeland security chief.  There's no doubt that America faces complex threats that can evolve rapidly and that require our constant attention, but we do have allies, and we need to work with them. This Administration took us off-course when it rebuked our allies in the war on terror and took us singlehandedly into Iraq. Now Al-Qaeda is resurgent in Afghanistan and Pakistan. We need to re-establish our leadership role and alliances in the world, chart a responsible way forward in Iraq, finish the job in Afghanistan, address the diverse challenges presented by countries like Pakistan, Iran, and Russia, and track down and take out the terrorists wherever they are -- with our friends at our side bearing a share of the burden.  We need to do a better job working with our allies, sharing resources and information, and collaborating on an international scale.  We'll also be better positioned to stop terrorists before they have a chance to threaten the U.S. once we've redeployed our troops out of Iraq, something that I believe has to happen soon. At home, it really starts with common sense measures, and the commitment to see them through.  We've got to get a better handle on who and what is coming into our country, and where they are going once they get here. That requires better security at our ports and borders, both in terms of manpower and the technology to track what's coming in and where it's going.  We've got to have seamless cooperation among local, state and federal authorities, with shared intelligence and top-notch equipment.  In Illinois, we established communication interoperability and pre-staged communication vans all across the state so that we could respond to any disaster anywhere in the state within 90 minutes. We've conducted robust and realistic antiterrorist exercises to include a scenario in which terrorists used a bioweapon against our citizens. We enhanced security to protect our bridges and critical infrastructure and we worked closely with the city of Chicago to ensure they had the necessary equipment to protect its citizens. One thing I know is that when politics and political aims substitute for informed judgment, we put ourselves at unnecessary risk.  I'm afraid that's happened more often than it should under the current Administration.  We have a tough road forward. But it's one we can manage if we are smart, tough, keep our eyes on the ball, and make decisions for the right reasons.