US Senate candidates answer questions – NECN

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Democrat Tammy Baldwin and Republican Tommy Thompson supplied the following answers to questions related to their campaigns and issues in the race for Wisconsin’s open U.S. Senate seat.

Question: The Thompson campaign portrays Baldwin as too extreme for Wisconsin, intent on increasing taxes and spending. The Baldwin campaign portrays Thompson as not looking out for Wisconsin voters any more, more beholden to special interests than average voters. Can each of you directly address these claims and explain why you would disagree?

Baldwin: The Wisconsin I know has a tradition of taking on the special interests that have too much power and influence and while I have taken them on, Tommy Thompson has taken them on as clients at his lobbying firm in Washington. I believe that if we’re going to prosper everyone deserves a fair shot. I will cut taxes for middle class families and small businesses, and force millionaires to pay their fair share. Tommy’s plan would give millionaires like himself new, budget busting tax cuts while actually raising taxes on the middle class. This election is about whether Wisconsin will have a senator who will be a voice for a strong middle class, or someone who will continue being a voice for the very powerful. I will work across party lines to move our economy and Wisconsin forward.

Thompson: When you don’t have a record to run on, you resort to demagoguery and lies. Wisconsin families have seen nothing but a barrage of negative attacks from my opponent because during her 14 years in Congress she has only delivered higher taxes and increased debt to the constituents she represents. Baldwin has been consistently ranked by non-partisan sources as one of the most liberal members of Congress. Tammy Baldwin can’t attack my record because it’s proven. I have dedicated my life to bettering the great state of Wisconsin. As governor, I worked with the private sector to create jobs; I cut taxes 91 times and my welfare reform was adopted nationally. There is nobody who loves Wisconsin more than me, which is why I am running for the United States Senate.

Question: What is your plan for creating jobs and why is better than your opponent’s?

Baldwin: I believe that if we’re going to prosper, everyone has to have a fair shot. That is why I have supported tax cuts for middle class families and small businesses and fought to protect and create Wisconsin jobs. Small businesses will continue to be the engine that moves our economic recovery forward. I am also a co-sponsor of the “Bring Jobs Home Act,” which would eliminate tax breaks for companies that outsource our jobs to other countries, and would reward companies overseas with tax cuts to relocate to the United States and create jobs here at home. I have focused my campaign squarely on strengthening Wisconsin’s manufacturing base and building a “Made in Wisconsin” economy to move our economy forward.

Thompson: With over 23 million Americans either unemployed or underemployed and a $16 trillion debt, it’s clear that the policies of Baldwin and President Obama are not working. In fact, Baldwin’s plan to improve the economy is more taxes, which will fall on small business. I have a proven record as a job creator. As governor, I worked hand-in-hand with the private sector to create over 740,000 jobs, cut taxes and reform welfare. My number one priority is the economy. That is why I have a detailed plan to RESTORE America, which emphasizes the importance of manufacturing in Wisconsin to the American economy. My plan would create a more competitive corporate tax rate, repatriate foreign profits for investment at home and expand America’s domestic energy production.

Question: Do you support changing Medicare into a voucher system, similar to what Rep. Paul Ryan has proposed? If not, what changes, if any, do you believe should be made to Medicare to make it sufficient for future generations?

Baldwin: For over a year Tommy Thompson has supported Paul Ryan’s plan. I oppose it because instead of the guarantee of Medicare, it will give insurance companies huge profits and provide a voucher to seniors that sticks them with higher out of pockets costs for seniors by $6,000 a year. Medicare is a promise we make to our seniors and we need to honor that promise. I fully support strengthening Medicare now and into the future. I supported the new health care law which extends the solvency of Medicare by eight years. I support commonsense reforms to lower costs by rewarding quality of care, not quantity of services. We also need to allow Medicare to negotiate better prescription drug prices and continue promoting prevention and innovation in caring for seniors who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid.

Thompson: Medicare is rapidly approaching insolvency. I have the knowledge and experience needed to reform it so that seniors have access to reliable and affordable coverage. Tammy Baldwin’s plan for Medicare is to gut $716 billion from it, put a board of 15 unelected bureaucrats in charge of rationing care, and then sit back and watch as it goes insolvent. I want to save Medicare, which is why my plan preserves it for current seniors and protects it for future generations. I will provide seniors with the option to either stay on Medicare or to select their own coverage from the private sector. I am the proud architect of Medicare Part D, which came in 43 percent under-budget, saved taxpayers $435 billion and earned the support of 90 percent of seniors.

Question: What should the government’s role be in controlling health care costs?

Baldwin: The Affordable Care Act will now reward states like Wisconsin that keep costs down by focusing on prevention and quality, instead of quantity. Wisconsin hospitals are national leaders in providing high-quality, low-cost care, and this law will finally reward them for their innovation, so as to ensure our physicians and hospitals are rewarded for the high quality of care they provide. My opponent favors repealing the new health care law completely, but has not put forth a plan to slow the rise of health care costs. Currently, Medicare can’t negotiate for lower drug prices because my opponent made it illegal. This increases costs for taxpayers and increases the deficit. I would end Tommy Thompson’s sweetheart deal with drug companies and allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper prescription drugs, saving $156 billion.

Thompson: Not only did Tammy Baldwin support the health care law, but she advocated for a complete government takeover of the system. Because of her, families across the country are facing one of the largest tax increases in history and businesses are being forced to pay higher fees to the government. I will repeal and replace the current health care law with a commonsense, market-based plan. Unlike Baldwin’s health care law, which was pushed through a Democrat-controlled Congress with a Democrat in the White House, I will work in a bipartisan manner to provide the quality and cost-effective care that every American deserves.

Question: Both of you have said you support cutting taxes. What taxes would you prioritize cutting and which ones do you believe your opponent would prioritize? Additionally, how would you pay for those cuts?

Baldwin: I support extending tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses because they can’t afford to have their taxes raised. As we continue to work on moving our economic recovery forward, everyone needs to do their fair share. We also can’t afford to extend tax cuts for those at the top and I believe that millionaires and billionaires need to pay their fair share so we can invest in growing our economy. I am the lead sponsor of the Buffett Rule, to ensure that people with over a million dollars a year in income pay at least as high a tax rate as the middle class. My opponent supports extending budget busting tax cuts for the top 2 percent and additional tax cuts for millionaires like himself while raising taxes on the middle class.

Thompson: Tammy Baldwin does not support cutting taxes. She has voted in favor of raising taxes 159 times and she most recently supported one of the largest tax increases in history. My opponent also bucked her own party and turned her back on the middle class by voting to raise taxes on them by $3,000. Unlike my opponent who wants to raise taxes, I cut taxes 91 times as governor of Wisconsin. I do not believe that raising taxes and putting the burden on the backs of hard-working families and job creators is the right way to balance the budget. First and foremost, I would cut wasteful spending, reform the broken tax system, and maintain the current tax rates so families across the country don’t get hit with higher taxes.

Question: What is your plan for balancing the federal budget?

Baldwin: We need to put politics aside and get serious about confronting the federal deficit by working together across party lines. First, we need to bring our troops home from Afghanistan and reinvest those tax dollars here at home to create jobs and reduce our deficit. We should work together to find savings in our defense budget by cutting spending on acquisition programs the Pentagon doesn’t want or need to keep our country safe. Next, I would end the sweetheart deal given to drug companies that forces Medicare to pay higher costs for prescription drugs. Finally, we need to close tax loopholes and ending perverse incentives that reward companies for shipping American jobs overseas. I also support ending corporate welfare to big oil; ending subsidies to millionaire, corporate farmers; and ending the special tax break of carried interest for hedge fund managers.

Thompson: Our nation’s debt is the biggest threat to America’s national security and must be addressed immediately. The Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate has failed to pass a budget for three and a half years. That’s more than 1,200 days that they put their own interests above the wellbeing of our nation’s economy. Even worse, there are no repercussions. My budget reform plan would: Pass Congressman Ryan’s Path to Prosperity; Reform the Senate budget process; Require all federal agencies to cut their discretionary budgets by 5 percent; Establish new, meaningful consequences for any budget committee and/or majority leader who fails to send a budget resolution to the floor of the U.S. Senate; Repeal and replace ObamaCare; Enact federal spending cuts.

Question: What would you do to improve the state’s dairy industry?

Baldwin: No agricultural industry is more important to Wisconsin than our dairy farmers. Right now, Wisconsin dairies are hurting and the current dairy safety net program, the Milk Income Loss Contract (MILC) Program needs significant reform. The proposed Farm Bill contains serious dairy reforms that need a full and thoughtful debate to ensure we move in the right direction for Wisconsin dairy farmers. If dairy farmers continue to experience the deep losses they incurred in 2009 and now in 2012, our family dairies will be few and far between. Worse yet, Congress recessed for the election without extending the MILC program, leaving dairy farmers without a safety net. It’s time for Congress to put aside partisan politics and do what’s right for Wisconsin dairy farmers and pass a five-year Farm Bill.

Thompson: I grew up on my family’s farm in Elroy, so I know firsthand how important family owned farms are to the economy. That is why I strongly oppose the death tax. Unfortunately, my opponent has repeatedly voted for the death tax. The burden of the death tax will be borne primarily by families, since 98 percent of farms are owned by families or individuals. With up to 85 percent of the typical farm’s value tied up in illiquid assets, we must work to protect family farms. I also support using free trade agreements to open markets for Wisconsin farmers. Free trade is an important tool in keeping American jobs at home and the U.S. competitive in the global economy. Agreements like these promote American agriculture in the global marketplace.

Question: What is your plan for ending the war in Afghanistan?

Baldwin: In 2001, I supported the use of military force in Afghanistan against the perpetrators of the September 11th terrorist attacks on America. The mission authorized by that vote has been accomplished by the courageous men and women of our armed forces who paid a heavy price for a war that has continued far too long. I do not support extending our military presence in Afghanistan and oppose a continued American military presence in Afghanistan. Our nation continues to face great economic challenges. It is time to bring our troops home safely as soon as possible and redirect the roughly $2 billion we spend in Afghanistan each week to balance our budget and strengthen our own economy.

Thompson: I believe we must take deliberate and thoughtful steps to ensure that our troops have the tools they need for a safe and timely withdrawal from Afghanistan. As the United States continues to work with coalition forces to combat global terrorism, I believe we must remain committed to the safety of the men and women of our Armed Forces at all times.

Question: What is your position on abortion?

Baldwin: I support the Roe v. Wade decision and believe abortion should be safe, legal, and up to the woman, not the government. My opponent wants to overturn Roe v Wade and make abortion against the law even early in pregnancy. He also supports increasing the role of government, insurances companies, and bosses in telling women and their doctors what to do and would make it make it harder for women to access preventative health care services like birth control. I have supported measures to improve women’s access to birth control while my opponent would repeal those measures. I have also fought efforts by Congressional Republicans to “get rid of” federal funding for Planned Parenthood, preventing millions of women from accessing breast and cervical cancer screenings, annual exams and other care they need to stay healthy.

Thompson: My beliefs are reflective of the traditional values of Wisconsin families. I have always been a protector of life; I banned partial birth abortions, passed the Fetal Homicide and Bodily Injury Act and the Woman’s Right to Know Act. However, I also believe that there should be exceptions in the instance of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is in jeopardy.

Question: Do you believe the right to bear arms, as provided under the Second Amendment, should be limited in any way? If so, how?

Baldwin: As a gun owner, I firmly believe in the Second Amendment and the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms. I also believe rights don’t extend to terrorists or criminals and that’s why I support making improvements to the current background check system and closing loopholes that allow certain gun purchasers to avoid a background check altogether. This is a position supported by Wisconsin police chiefs, sheriffs, and mayors to make our communities safer. Our right to keep and bear arms can be reconciled with reasonable and limited safety measures like child safety locks that do not infringe on Americans’ constitutional rights.

Thompson: Unlike my opponent who has a long history of opposition to our Second Amendment rights, I have been given “A” ratings from groups like the NRA. My strong support has also earned me the organization’s endorsement. It is unfortunate but there are evil people in the world who will use whatever means they have to cause harm to others. Restricting access to legal firearms for law-abiding citizens does not deter sociopaths from their destructive tendencies. As an avid sportsman and hunter I believe in protecting the Second Amendment rights of law abiding Americans and preserving that important part of Wisconsin’s heritage.