Conservative and Respectful

I came of age during our nation's bicentennial celebration, when, as a society, we were focused on the great achievements, physical and philosphical, that led to founding of our country. I understand that the promise of freedom was incomplete in 1776, as it was in 1976 and as it is today. The incompleteness is not due to any weakness in the principles of our founding, but in our weakness to follow those principles and the implicit contract to treat our fellow citizens respectfully and equally. Out of my acceptance of our founding principles, my respect for the sacrifices made to establish and continually defend them, and belief that we are stewards of a great nation, I am a conservative.

I believe the social and economic institutions that have served to build this nation will continue to make us a better society. Government should not replace what has traditionally been done in the private sector (health care), government should not supplant private philanthropic groups, government should not limit or replace our free political speech in the name of reform, and government should not use a citizen's improper thoughts as an aggravating factor in a crime (the concept of hate crime).

I respect the goals of those seeking to improve access to health care, providing relief to those in need, fighting corruption in government, and seeking social justice; but, there are traditional, American ways to achieve these goals. Repressive legislation is not American, and is rarely successful.

Pro-Life

I believe humanity starts at conception. Legally we can't legislate to this level of morality. I believe a human life amendment is necessary to provide legal status as human to a person from the time of the first missed menses after conception.

The federal death penalty is an appropriate punishment and deterrent for certain heinous crimes. While I agree with death penalty opponents that as a punishment to protect society other options exist, I believe the federal death penalty acts as an effective deterrent to violence against peace officers and their families. How could any legislator justify not applying the ultimate punishment to those who attempt to kill peace officers and their families to improperly influence the application of justice? Since this is the ultimate punishment, both the legislature and executive should be involved in actively reviewing and affirming death sentences. The federal capital structure should be revised, eliminating some offenses and focusing on national protection and integrity of the justice system.

As a Roman Catholic I don't think the bishops have fully considered the application of the death penalty as a deterrent to organized efforts to disrupt the justice system; nor have they fully addressed the death penalty as a punishment for treason and espionage. I am willing to engage in a thoughtful dialog on these aspects of capital punishment and the responsibility of the legislature and executive to law enforcement officers and their families.

Religion

The founders of our nation recognized in the Declaration of Independence that spirituality is inherent in human nature. I agree. I believe in protecting the freedom of religious expression, even if that expression offends others. The limit on free expression of religion is well established in law and court decisions and bureaucrats should not try to go beyond these limits. All sects of Christianity, Judaism and Islam can coexist in our nation peacefully. Wiccans, Buddhists, Shintoists, etc. are also welcomed here.

Freedom of religion should not be confused with freedom from religion. As an American you will be exposed to religious practices of other people and our society will allow expression in public places. As an American you will find that certain practices which your religion might find immoral (gambling, drinking, artificial contraception) will be allowed under the law. This is a pluralistic society which respects individual human rights and the exercise of free will.

Economy

I am a free market supporter. If it sounds like capitalism, I will generally support it. If it smells like Reaganomics, I like it. Taxes should be simple, low, and obvious. Taxes should generally not incentivize business decisions, that's what the market does. Tax policy should encourage businesses to locate in the U.S., not off shore.

Judicial Activism

The legislature should have the fortitude to pass laws that are clearly interpreted by the judiciary. If a court exceeds legislative intent, the legislature should explicitly act to legally limit the impact of the court decision.

International Role of the U.S.

I am very old school here. Look up the Truman Doctrine and you will get a good idea about my views. The United States is never really safe while expansionist, repressive regimes exist. The current adversary fights to implement a totalitarian, Islamic caliphate world wide. This is not a spiritual caliphate; it is a repressive government system based on a very narrow interpretation of Islamic edicts. This caliphate will bear no resemblance to those of the golden age of Islamic achievement.

I also believe the U.S. should actively intervene in instances of genocide. We signed a treaty promising that. Some say the conservative position is to only act internationally in the narrow self interest of the U.S.; I believe there are certain crimes against humanity which always warrant U.S. action.

Immigration

This nation has laws governing immigration. The laws are fair and should be followed. Our immigration policies should give priority to those seeking liberty by escaping repression, tyranny and terror. Economic immigration is secondary to this.

H1B visas for science and engineering professions serve short-term needs to the detriment of long-term education of citizens. There should be a corresponding academic scholarship program to fill the need identified in the H1B application. We need to provide scientific and engineering opportunities to our children, not out source our intellectual future. I can't help but view every scientist and engineer who is admitted to this nation to fill an unmet need as a mark against the public education system serving our urban youth. Just by the raw number of students and our advanced technologies, American cities should be providing us a depth and breadth of intellectual talent unrivalled in history--but they are not, so we turn to foreign sources of talent.

Catholic Bishops' Policy Goals

The following extract is from A Call to Political Responsibility from the Catholic Bishops of the United States. Any time such a group takes a strong stand in the public arena, it deserves to be addressed in a straight forward manner. I have attempted to address each point with my policy position (in blue) and justification for my position. I never intend disrespect in any answer, and I am willing to participate in any forum or dialog on all these issues.

Catholic teaching challenges voters and candidates, citizens and elected officials, to consider the moral and ethical dimensions of public policy issues. In light of ethical principles, we bishops offer the following policy goals that we hope will guide Catholics as they form their consciences and reflect on the moral dimensions of their public choices. Not all issues are equal; these ten goals address matters of different moral weight and urgency. Some involve matters of intrinsic evil that can never be supported. Others involve affirmative obligations to seek the common good. These and similar goals can help voters and candidates act on ethical principles rather than particular interests and partisan allegiances. We hope Catholics will ask candidates how they intend to help our nation pursue these important goals:

Generally, the bishops emphasize the common good and don't seem to provide a good relationship between individual liberty and the common good. I believe the protection of individual liberty is essential before legislating the common good. When there is a conflict between individual liberty and the common good, our national tradition drives me to protect the individual liberty.

Address the preeminent requirement to protect the weakest in our midst�innocent unborn children�by restricting and bringing to an end the destruction of unborn children through abortion.

I support practical legal limits to abortion (under a human life/human rights amendment) driven by the basic American understanding that the right to life is inherent in our humanity and my contention that respect for human life begins at conception.
Keep our nation from turning to violence to address fundamental problems�a million abortions each year to deal with unwanted pregnancies, euthanasia and assisted suicide to deal with the burdens of illness and disability, the destruction of human embryos in the name of research, the use of the death penalty to combat crime, and imprudent resort to war to address international disputes.

Euthanasia and assisted suicide are significantly different than avoiding extraordinary means to extend life. As an individual we must have the legal right to refuse therapies for ourselves or those in our care, but we don't have the right to actively end the life of another or ourselves. Medical research should be life affirming, not controversial; the fact that we must discuss destruction of human embryos is an indication that something is wrong. I believe the death penalty can be applied appropriately as a deterrent to some crimes; blanket statements that it is always an effective deterrent and never a deterrent are both wrong. The use of war (or violence) to settle international disputes must be considered with the threat a continuing situation poses to the citizens of our nation. The bishops don't provide enough discussion about the responsibility of leaders to protect citizens from foreign threats, nor specifically, the numerous acts of war committed by the government of Saddam Hussein against the forces of the United States operating under U.N. mandate. The continuing military action in Iraq is not against a national entity, it is against extra-national criminals acting as puppets for Iran. During my campaign I will gladly discuss the details, motivations, and threats involved in the "imprudent resort to war" in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Define the central institution of marriage as a union between one man and one woman, and provide better support for family life morally, socially, and economically, so that our nation helps parents raise their children with respect for life, sound moral values, and an ethic of stewardship and responsibility.

I agree that marriage is a union between one man and one woman. The bishops imply here and state elsewhere, that recognition of same-sex civil unions goes against supporting family life morality and is not in the common good. As I have documented elsewhere in my campaign material, if it is proven that homosexuality is an inherent characteristic in some people, I believe American tradition compels me to support same-sex civil unions to provide legal protection to one-to-one relationships. This is an example of individual rights versus common good. Supporting families economically is such a nebulous statement that I will strongly defend that the traditional low-tax, market economy has proven it promotes stable families more than the social welfare state. When parents have earned the economic means to make decisions for their families, families thrive.
Achieve comprehensive immigration reform that secures our borders, treats immigrant workers fairly, offer an earned path to citizenship, respects the rule of law, and addresses the factors that compel people to leave their own countries.

This is such a weak statement of principle, it does not deserve to be in this document. I stand for supporting our current laws and allowing those who have entered the United States legally to earn citizenship. People leave their home countries for many reasons, but if one is that they can easily infiltrate the U.S., work illegally, and seek refuge in our social institutions--I will address this factor. At no time should enforcement of immigration law preclude or criminalize any act of kindness or compassion to another person. I go into more detail about the nuances of my illegal immigration/legal immigration stances in my campaign material.
Help families and children overcome poverty: ensuring access to and choice in education, as well as decent work at fair, living wages and adequate assistance for the vulnerable in our nation, while also helping to overcome widespread hunger and poverty around the world, especially in the areas of development assistance, debt relief, and international trade.

As a conservative I strongly believe that the best benefit to any family is a strong, healthy market economy. I make no apology for this belief, because I agree with Pope John Paul II that economic freedom is an inherent aspect of human freedom like freedom to worship, freedom of speech, and property rights. Personal liberties, free republics and free markets will do more to overcome hunger and poverty throughout the world than any donation of money or relief of debt.
Provide health care for the growing number of people without it, while respecting human life, human dignity, and religious freedom in our health care system.

A government administered health care system will eventually trade human life for economy of service, abuse human dignity, and trample on the religious freedom of providers and institutions. There are many examples throughout the world that prove my point. People need good jobs in a growing economy to afford health care and expand our charitable safety nets. Health care must be paid for by one payer or another, but all the funds eventually come from an employed person. Each time money changes hands, value is lost; families should pay for their own health care and make their own health care choices.
Continue to oppose policies that reflect prejudice, hostility toward immigrants, religious bigotry, and other forms of discrimination.

I wore the uniform of the U.S. Air Force to protect our Constitution, government, and society from those who oppose these values. I hope a continuing dialog about "other forms of discrimination" helps us to understand each other and grow the humanity of our society.
Encourage families, community groups, economic structures, and government to work together to overcome poverty, pursue the common good, and care for creation, with full respect for religious groups and their right to address social needs in accord with their basic moral convictions.

I agree with the sentiment of this goal. I understand the desire of religious groups to work in partnership with the government without sacrificing the inherent moral conviction of underlying faith. Government should never force religious institutions to compromise morality for secular goals.
Establish and comply with moral limits on the use of military force�examining for what purposes it may be used, under what authority, and at what human cost�and work for a �responsible transition� to end the war in Iraq.

Saddam Hussein was a dictator in the tradition of Hitler and Stalin. To accept this as objective truth and recognize the evil committed by him and his regime is to understand the moral use of military force. To understand how easily Saddam Hussein could destroy a Kurdish village, pay a Palestinian to kill an Israeli, provide aid to Al Qaeda, and train terrorists is to understand what a clear and present danger really is. The question of leadership in the modern world is not the human cost of taking action, but the human cost of not acting.

What is meant by "responsible transition" to end the war in Iraq? Is the intent to end the conflict and then withdraw U.S. forces? Is the intent to push off the fighting (not end the war) to the Iraqi government, and withdraw U.S. forces? To fully address this point I must ask the bishops with whom do they think we are at war? Without really understanding the conflict, the enemy, and the cost of not winning (which is different than losing) one cannot determine the morality of any choice.

I respectfully submit for consideration of the bishops: Leadership demands one to act when others won't. An oath to the Constitution compels a U.S. leader to act in the interest of the United States of America, not under authority of the United Nations. Securing the blessings of liberty for our posterity requires a U.S. president to defeat an avowed enemy, not defer a conflict.
Join with others around the world to pursue peace, protect human rights and religious liberty, and advance economic justice and care for creation.

Peace as an objective is always a worthy goal, but peace is not the absence of war; peace includes the absence of fear and terror. I agree the foreign policy of the United States should focus on protection of human rights, religious freedom, and economic freedom. In researching the meaning of "care for creation", it appears to me that the bishops have accepted the premise of human-caused global warming. I would think the Catholic Church's historical record on backing scientific theories would contraindicate any position on controversial scientific theories. I do stand for stewardship of the environment and truly understanding our role in nature and its changes.

Paid for by Paul Spause for Congress, Michelle Bennett, Treasurer.