The Booman Tribune Open Seat Initiative is designed to help progressive Democrats identify where candidates stand on critical issues. It is limited to congressional and Senate seats that are open, i.e., there is no incumbent in the race. One such race is in New Mexico’s First District, which Heather Wilson (R) is abandoning to pursue her bid for U.S. Senate.
Albuquerque City Council President Martin Heinrich is a candidate for the Democratic nomination and he was kind of enough to fill out the Booman Tribune Open Seat Initiative questionnaire.
Go below the fold to find where Heinrich stands on FISA, torture, the Bankruptcy Bill, the Military Commissions Act, and other issues where Bad Democrats have let us down.
If I can get his primary opponents to respond to my questionnaire, I will post those responses. Enjoy.
Civil Liberties
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: On October 25, 2001, Senator Russ Feingold made a statement on the Senate floor, during the debate over the Patriot Act.
Of course, there is no doubt that if we lived in a police state, it would be easier to catch terrorists. If we lived in a country that allowed the police to search your home at any time for any reason; if we lived in a country that allowed the government to open your mail, eavesdrop on your phone conversations, or intercept your email communications; if we lived in a country that allowed the government to hold people in jail indefinitely based on what they write or think, or based on mere suspicion that they are up to no good, then the government would no doubt discover and arrest more terrorists.
But that probably would not be a country in which we would want to live. And that would not be a country for which we could, in good conscience, ask our young people to fight and die. In short, that would not be America.
We have since learned that the government has used National Security Letters to invade people’s homes without a warrant, that they have violated the law to eavesdrop on our electronic communications, and they have held U.S. citizens in custody indefinitely, in violation of habeas corpus, which can only be constitutionally ignored in “cases of rebellion or invasion.”
In light of this, do you agree that Russ Feingold was correct when he was the only only senator to oppose passage of the Patriot Act?
Would you tend to agree more with candidate Jon Tester, who said “Let me be clear. I don’t want to weaken the Patriot Act. I want to get rid of it,” or with former Senate Intelligence Chairman Sen. Pat Roberts, who said, ““I am a strong supporter of the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment and civil liberties. But you have no civil liberties if you are dead”?
HEINRICH: I stand with Senators Tester and Feingold. In the 1930s, my father and grandparents left Nazi Germany because they could not and would not live in a fascist state. In Congress, I will honor my family’s legacy and of all those brave men and women who fought to defeat fascism in Europe. I pledge to stand fast and challenge those who advocate for the abridgement of our civil and constitutional rights and liberties. We are first and foremost a nation of laws. That is what makes America great. We should not turn our back on those laws, especially the first amendment to the Constitution, the moment they become inconvenient.
Since 2001, when Senator Feingold stood strong as a lone voice of reason that stood up for the Constitution in the United States Senate, a bipartisan coalition now agrees that many of the components of the original Patriot Act were indeed unnecessarily abusive. Americans should not be subject to a McCarthy-like government fishing through our library records or breaking into our homes without our knowledge.
I believe that we should scrap the Patriot Act and replace it with a new American security bill that strengthens our defenses against terrorism while protecting our civil liberties.
Instead of infringing upon our Constitutional rights, this legislation would focus on increasing security where we’re most vulnerable to a terrorist attack. Specifically, we should work to improve port, border and transportation security while ensuring that our civil liberties are protected.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Would you have voted for the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which passed the House on September 29, 2006 by 250-170 vote (with 32 Democratic supporters)? Do you disagree with then Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Pat Leahy, who said at the time:
“Authorizing indefinite detention of anybody the Government designates, without any proceeding and without any recourse — is what our worst critics claim the United States would do, not what American values, traditions and our rule of law would have us do. This is not just a bad bill, this is a dangerous bill.”
HEINRICH: There’s no question that I would have voted No and I wholeheartedly agree with Senator Leahy.
I believe in due process. I believe in the separation of powers. I believe in America’s system of jurisprudence. And, I believe in the Constitution. It’s my belief in the integrity of the Constitution that would’ve compelled me to vote No on this bill.
Just as the Nazi murderers were prosecuted at Nuremberg, we should vigorously prosecute anyone who engages in terrorism or who abets those who do. This bill, however, sets a dangerous and un-American precedent. Not only does it violate our core values, traditions and our rule of law – but, it empowers those who want to do us harm. The enemies of America exploit these undemocratic tendencies to recruit others to their cause. We must never stoop to the level of our enemies. We must undermine them by being a shining beacon for justice and fairness in the world.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: “On July 28, 2007, President Bush called on Congress to pass legislation to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) purportedly to ease restrictions on secret surveillance of alleged terrorist suspects.” This resulted in a hastily crafted revision to FISA, known as the Protect America Act of 2007. On August 4, 2007, the House passed this law by a 227-183 margin (with 41 Democratic votes). At the time:
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said lawmakers were being “stampeded by fear-mongering and deception” into voting for the bill. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) warned that the bill would lead to “potential unprecedented abuse of innocent Americans’ privacy.”
How would you have voted on this bill?
HEINRICH: I agree with Representatives Nadler and Harman. I would’ve voted No on this legislation.
We must stand up for freedom and our Constitution. The Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights reads…“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Wiretapping American citizens without a warrant violates our civil rights. I believe that the government has no right to listen in on our phone calls without first pursuing a warrant. Granting this kind of authority to government opens up a Pandora’s Box full of opportunities for abuse and would have our founding fathers rolling over in their graves.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: The Protect America Act of 2007 had a six-month sunset, and it is now being marked up in the Senate Intelligence and Judiciary committees. The Intelligence Committee recommended providing the telecommunications corporations immunity from responsibility for prior cooperation in illegal warrantless surveillance. Presidential candidate, Sen. Chris Dodd has taken a position against immunity, and has promised to place a ‘hold’ on any bill that provides for it.
“While the President may think that it’s right to offer immunity to those who break the law and violate the right to privacy of thousands of law-abiding Americans, I want to assure him it is not a value we have in common and I hope the same can be said of my fellow Democrats in the Senate.
“For too long we have failed to respect the rule of law and failed to protect our fundamental civil liberties. I will do what I can to see to it that no telecommunications giant that was complicit in this Administration’s assault on the Constitution is given a get-out-of-jail-free card.”
Do you agree with Senator Dodd’s position?
HEINRICH: Yes. I oppose amnesty for telcos who violate our civil rights and who violate the law. I believe that sets another dangerous precedent. All people must be treated equally under the law – regardless of one’s wealth or influence. I teach my children that when you do something wrong – you get punished for it. And, just as petty criminals get punished for committing crimes, so too should the Scooter Libby’s and the telcos of the world who commit crimes.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Finally, do you consider waterboarding to be a form of torture that is banned by our Constitution, specific statutes, and by signed treaty agreements? If so, what should be done to people that authorized waterboarding, and to the people that carried out those orders?
HEINRICH: Yes. By definition, drowning is torture.
People who authorize and carry out drowning should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I believe in separation of powers, so, I will leave it up to the Judicial Branch to determine individual verdicts.
Let’s remember that we are supposed to be the good guys, the one’s who don’t torture our enemies. That policy has served us well in far graver times than these.
I would suggest that Rear Admiral Donald J. Guter, United States Navy (Ret.), Rear Admiral John D. Hutson, United States Navy (Ret.), Major General John L. Fugh, United States Army (Ret.), and Brigadier General David M. Brahms, United States Marine Corps (Ret.) articulated it best when they said, “Waterboarding is inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal.”
The War in Iraq
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: The Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq passed the House on by 296-133 vote (with 81 Democratic supporters). How would you have voted on this resolution? Did you comment on the resolution at the time? With the benefit of hindsight, would you change your vote?
HEINRICH: I would’ve voted against going to war with Iraq. I’ve been a strong opponent of this war from the beginning. I first spoke out publicly against the war in Irag in 2003 when I was running for City Council in Albuquerque. I also went on record by voting for a resolution of the Albuquerque City Council which called on Congress to rescind the Iraq War resolution and begin the redeployment of American troops from Iraq. I’ve also participated in “Iraq Summer” events here in Albuquerque.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Since the invasion of Iraq, there have been periodic supplemental funding bills. Would you have put any conditions on supporting those supplemental bills? What conditions?
HEINRICH: Yes. A safe, honorable and timely redeployment of our troops.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: This year, 2007, had been the deadliest year for our troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Do you support an immediate drawdown of troops in Iraq, with the ultimate aim of complete withdrawal?
HEINRICH: I believe that we must end the war in Iraq as soon as possible. I also believe that we need to combine our withdrawal with a diplomatic surge. This diplomatic surge must include multilateral and bilateral talks that bring both domestic and international stakeholders to the table to hash out a political solution that will bring an end to the violence. Given the mess George Bush and his allies in Washington have made, we owe a strong commitment to a political settlement to the Iraqi people.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: In July 2007, Senator Webb introduced an amendment that would have ensured that troops have as much time at home as they have in combat. The Republicans filibustered the bill even though it had 56 supporters in the Senate. Would you have supported the Webb amendment?
HEINRICH: Yes. I am a strong supporter of our servicemen and women. We must not overextend our military lest we weaken our military. Our troops have given so much for our country and we must make sure that they are taken care of both while they’re on active duty and when the retire to civilian life.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: What, if any, current plans do you support for extricating ourselves from the quagmire in Iraq?
HEINRICH: As I mentioned previously, I will seek to predicate any additional Iraq funding with the safe, honorable and timely redeployment of our troops. I also believe that as we begin to bring our troops home to their families, we must simultaneously engage in a diplomatic surge that brings both international and domestic stakeholders into bilateral and multilateral discussions. It’s a complex diplomatic situation and there are a multitude of stakeholders involved at all levels. Therefore, we must be inclusive, bring everyone together and forge a landmark governing consensus that prioritizes stability and the well being of the Iraqi people.
Domestic Issues
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Are you pro-choice?
HEINRICH: Yes. I think President Clinton said it best, abortion should be safe, legal and rare.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: What’s your position on the continued funding of abstinence-only sex-education which has been proven not to work?
HEINRICH: I believe in funding comprehensive, age appropriate sex education.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Do you support added funding for family-planning programs (including subsidized birth control programs)?
HEINRICH: I support family planning programs. I believe that family planning is essential because women need to have all the resources available so that they can make the decisions that are right for them. Family planning is a critical path to reducing the number of abortions in this country and around the world, something that should be an opportunity for common ground.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Do you support federally funded stem-cell research?
HEINRICH: Yes. Stem cell research is critical to saving lives and curing disease.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: Do you have a position on gay marriage, adoption, and equal rights under the law?
HEINRICH: I oppose discrimination and I wouldn’t support an amendment that writes discrimination into our Constitution. With historically high divorce rates, marriage does need to be defended, but we shouldn’t make gay people a scapegoat for the decline of marriage in America. I respect those who believe marriage should be between a man and a woman and I leave it to each church to define religious marriage and to each state to define civil marriage. But I believe all those who engage in commitments like marriage should be afforded the same civil rights, including hospital visitation, shared property, access to adoption and end of life decisions.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: On April 14, 2005, the House passed The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 by a 302-126 margin (with 73 Democratic votes). The bill was supported by the Blue Dog coalition and now Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, who justified it:
“The argument that bankruptcies were becoming simply a way to excuse irresponsible behavior had validity to it,” he told me. “I believe that personal responsibility expectations are very important. No Child Left Behind, the accountability of students and teachers and parents and administrators to provide taxpayers their value … The core value of personal responsibility is what I felt was manifested in the bankruptcy bill.”
Yet:
Elizabeth Warren, an expert on bankruptcy at Harvard Law School, points out that 90 percent of families who file for bankruptcy do so after a job loss, a serious medical problem, a divorce, or a death. “What was the personal responsibility that they were missing?” Warren asks. “Was it that when Dad had chest pains and fell to the ground, he went to the emergency room rather than saying, ‘I don’t think I’ll be able to pay for it’? … Was it that when Mom got laid off from her job, she didn’t just hand over her keys to the landlord and move into a cardboard box on the street with her two children?”
Would you have joined the Blue Dogs in supporting this bill?
HEINRICH: I would’ve voted against the Republican bankruptcy bill. The bill didn’t do a single thing to regulate the predatory lending industry, whose practices often contribute to bankruptcy and lower rates of home ownership. Predatory lending is serious problem today and I want to make sure they are more tightly regulated. For example, people should not be charged huge fees for paying off their mortgage early, but that practice is common. Moreover, given today’s shaky sub-prime lending market, people are much more likely to lose their homes and have to subject their families to considerable hardship.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: According to the National Debt Clock the National Debt currently (as of November 13, 2007) stands at $9,118,656,201,037.12, meaning that every U.S. citizen owes $30,042.65. In 1954, the top marginal federal income tax rate was 91 percent. The current top marginal rate is 35 percent. Meanwhile:
For more than 25 years, Business Week has conducted an annual survey of the earnings of chief executive officers of the largest U.S. corporations. In 1980, those executives earned 42 times as much as the average American worker, a ratio larger than the corresponding ratios for such countries as Japan and Germany even today. By 2000, however, American CEOs were earning 531 times the average worker’s salary.
Do you think we have our tax priorities straight? How would you go about creating a fairer system and protecting future generations from being saddled with crippling debt?
HEINRICH: This is a very complex question that I could write pages on. That said it’s clear that the Democratic Party is the party of fiscal responsibility and restraint. The Republican borrow and spend fiscal policies are a recipe for disaster. We must reevaluate our priorities.
Overall, I believe that we need to pursue tax policies that reward hard work and innovation. We should make sure that our tax structure provides incentives for wage earners, those who are struggling from paycheck to paycheck, and those who actually create new, clean jobs. I support targeting tax relief toward poor and middle class working families as well as toward entrepreneurs who create new clean, green jobs that reduce our dependence on foreign oil. We can pay for tax cuts like these by closing the loop holes in our current tax structure. Loop holes that are designed to reward big oil and multi-millionaire hedge fund managers.
Fiscal responsibility includes both responsible taxation that benefits working families, but it also means that the government needs to be more efficient and effective when spending taxpayer money. As such, I support comprehensive earmark reform that brings earmarks currently shrouded in secrecy into the light of day. Increasing transparency will decrease the amount of wasteful pork that makes it into our budgets by shining a bright light on projects not deserving of federal funds.
There’s much more to America’s fiscal policy that needs to be addressed and I look forward to continuing the conversation during the campaign and when I’m in Congress.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: According to the National Coalition on Health Care:
Nearly 47 million Americans, or 16 percent of the population, were without health insurance in 2005, the latest government data available (1).
Over 8 in 10 uninsured people came from working families – almost 70 percent from families with one or more full-time workers and 11 percent from families with part-time workers (2).
Do you support a single-payer national health care program that provides universal coverage, a program that requires people to purchase private health insurance (with tax subsidies for the needy), or some other solution? What is your reasoning?
HEINRICH: 400,000 New Mexicans are without healthcare. Hundreds of thousands more are underinsured or one paycheck away from being without health care. That’s a travesty. I believe that we must find a way to provide quality, affordable health care for every American.
I’m not doctrinaire about how we get there, but I believe we must make affordable health care to every American. I think we should build on successful health care programs like Medicare and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP). It is unconscionable that the politicians in Washington get the Cadillac health care plan at taxpayer expense while denying basic coverage to so many children in New Mexico and across America. If it is good enough for the politicians in Washington, it should be good enough for all our families.
Miscellaneous
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: If elected, what committees would you like to sit on?
HEINRICH: Energy and Commerce would be my first choice.
America can do anything when we make a commitment to it. It is time to use America’s technological know-how to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and build a stronger economy by leading the world in the creation of new, clean energy technologies. We should stop giving multi-national oil companies huge tax breaks and instead invest in clean, alternative energy. Investing in new technology and clean energy like solar, wind and biofuels will reinvigorate New Mexico’s and America’s economy and create jobs for now and the future. The time has come to increase mileage standards for cars, build more and better hybrids and make them more affordable so people can save money, use less gas and cut pollution. Now is the time for America to take the lead – to own its energy future and lead the world economy.
BOOMAN TRIBUNE: If elected, would you join one of the congressional caucuses (New Democrat, Blue Dog, Progressive)? Why, or why not?
HEINRICH: I haven’t yet decided which caucuses I will join. However, I can say without a doubt that I will not join the New Democrat or Blue Dog caucuses. I believe that we need more and better Democrats in Congress. We need strong leaders who are willing to stand up, speak out and fight for our values. We don’t need more Republicans in Democratic clothing. In Congress, I’ll be a strong voice for our values – and, I’ll continue to use the internet to engage in a conversation with my constituents and the American people.
