Candidate selector: 2008 Caucus Republican Candidates

Welcome to our candidate selector for 2008 Caucus Republican Candidates. It's a fun and educational tool that can help you decide which candidate(s) you agree with the most.

Here's how it works. Below, we've listed a set of issues and the candidates' positions on these issues. Check the box next to a candidate's response if you agree with it. After you're done, we'll tell you which candidate(s) you agreed with the most.

Please note that this is meant to be fun and educational - but shouldn't necessarily be used as the de facto way of making such an important decision. We encourage you to learn as much as you can about each candidate.

What are your views about abortion?
- The candidate is pro-life and says Roe v. Wade was "bad law and bad medical science." Strict constructionist judges, such as Chief Justice John Roberts, should be appointed to the Supreme Court.
- The candidate was personally opposed to abortion, but ran in 1994 U.S. Senate and 2002 gubernatorial campaigns supporting the pro-choice position. The candidate has said that in studying whether human stem cells should be used in research, he decided he didn't like the idea of creating new life for experimentation in embryo farming nor did he like that the embryos were destroyed after 14 days. Both of these concepts led him to change his stance to pro-life.
- The candidate is pro-life and "an unshakable foe of abortion." In Congress, the candidate has authored legislation that would define life as beginning at conception. The candidate is also the prime sponsor of a resolution that would negate the effect of Roe v. Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life.
- Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned. Any new judicial appointment candidates should understand that courts should not be in the business of legislating from the bench. Constitutional balance would be restored by the reversal of Roe v. Wade, returning the abortion question to the individual states. The difficult issue of abortion should not be decided by judicial fiat.
- Abortion is not only wrong, but incompatible with America's foundation. The Declaration of Independence gives every human unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness but the Declaration gives no such power to humans to decide who is human and who is not human. Roe v. Wade should be overturned. A human life constitutional amendment would return America's view of life back to the intended view as stated in the Declaration of Independence.
- The candidate is pro-life and would amend the U.S. constitution "to protect all unborn children from the moment of conception by prohibiting any state or federal law that denies the personhood of the unborn." The candidate would support strict constructionist judges and would not appoint judges "who do not believe that the unborn are precious and should be protected." The candidate has voted no on human embryonic stem cell research.
- The candidate supports and has always supported passage of a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life. "My convictions regarding the sanctity of life have always been clear and consistent, without equivocation or wavering. I believe that Roe v. Wade should be over-turned." The candidate also believes in using existing stem cell lines for research, but does not believe in creating life for the sole purpose of destroying it.
- The candidate is personally opposed to abortion and favors adoption over abortion. However, ultimately, a woman should make that decision based on her own conscience in consultation with her physician. There should be reasonable restrictions on abortion such as parental notification with a judicial bypass and a ban on partial birth abortion—except when the life of the mother is at stake. As president, the candidate would appoint strict constructionist judges, who, like Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, would take a conservative and more limited view of abortion.
What are your views on environment and energy?
- Increasing U.S. energy independence and investing in alternative energy sources will produce a healthier environment. While we don’t know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce carbon dioxide emissions without harming our economy. We need an energy policy that invests in advanced technologies and places more emphasis on conservation and energy efficiency. We should conduct research and development into technologies that improve the environment, especially the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions. Climate change is real and will stay with the country. However, the U.S. alone can't solve the problem. India and China must also do their part.
- Through the development of additional forms of renewable energy sources coupled with the increase in our energy efficiency, America can end its dependency on foreign oil and clean up the environment. The country should spend more in research in the renewable energy market. America should be aligned with China and other countries to create a global movement toward energy efficiency and environmental protection.
- The candidate voted to bar federal funding for the Energy Department's "Yucca Mountain Youth Zone" Web site, which neglected to tell children about safety issues involved in burying the country's nuclear waste 90 miles from Las Vegas. In terms of energy, the government should get out of protecting oil prices and allow the free market to set prices. If oil prices become too high, then the free market will develop alternative fuels. Protecting individual private property rights is the best way to protect the environment - you have no right to pollute your neighbor's property, including your neighbor's air or water. No one has the answer on what is causing an increase in carbon dioxide levels and global warming.
- The candidate is committed to clean air and clean water and to conserving open space and says global warming can no longer be ignored. Reducing the U.S. dependence on oil is not only a greenhouse gas issue, but a national security issue. Americans needs to limit carbon emission by harnessing market forces that will bring advanced technologies, such as nuclear energy, to the market faster, which would reduce our dependence on foreign supplies of energy. The candidate favors building the proposed national repository for nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, which is 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.
- Americans should be wary of giving the government total and complete control about dealing with to global warming. There is much scientific evidence contrary to the belief that global warming is a serious, human-induced threat. Economic growth will be subsequently stunted if the solutions to decrease carbon dioxide emissions outlined in the Kyoto Protocol are implemented.
- It is important that Congress protect the property rights of private landowners and curb the government from excessive regulatory takings. The candidate voted against barring the use of federal dollars for the Energy Department's Web site to promote the use of Yucca Mountain as a federal nuclear waste dump. In terms of alternative energy, the country's colleges, the private sector and government laboratories should work toward developing alternative fuels to end reliance on the Middle East oil and also help the climate. Taxes should be cut to zero for alternative energy sources.
- We should ensure energy independence by exploring all avenues of alternative energy, such as nuclear, wind, solar, hydrogen, clean coal, biodiesel and biomass. Greenhouse gas emission should be curtailed. The candidate supports drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and increasing offshore drilling, but insists that the country should stop relying on oil. In terms of storing nuclear waste: "Everybody wants the benefits of nuclear energy, but nobody wants the storage of the nuclear material in their own backyard. Part of it is you have to make it economically viable for somebody to actually receive it. But a lot of it is changing attitudes, educating the public that nuclear byproducts can be disposed of safely, because the first reaction people have is, 'Our kids are going to glow in the dark if we put that stuff in our state.' That's not the case."
- Global warming is real and humans contribute to it. There is a way to deal with it and also to accomplish energy independence, which we need as a matter of national security. "I think we have to accept the view that scientists have that there is global warming and that humans contribute to that. And the fact is that there is a way to deal with it and to address it in a way that we can also accomplish energy independence, which we need as a matter of national security. It's frustrating and really dangerous for us to see money going to our enemies because we have to buy oil from certain countries. We should be supporting all the alternatives. We need a project similar to putting a man on the moon."
What are your views on the home mortgage crisis?
- Hispanics who don't speak English very well — and don't understand the mortgages they're getting into — are partly to blame for the growing numbers of foreclosures around the country.
- President Bush is correct in providing the Federal Housing Administration the power to help some homeowners get their mortgages refinanced at level rates. The Federal Reserve's actions will allow continued activity in the credit markets and keep the subprime mortgage problems from expanding to hurt more of the economy.
- Concern over the impending foreclosures on homes is part of a larger issue of the United States' monetary policy. Foreclosures are caused by the excesses made by the Federal Reserve, which has attempted to find solutions that would only delay recovery by continuing a cycle of inflation and devaluing of the currency.
- The candidate has been silent about the subprime mortgage crisis or any need for government involvement. However, in mid December 2007, the candidate did mention that increasing numbers of voters are talking about home foreclosures.
- The candidate hasn't commented on subprime mortgages, but has said the country's economic policy should be similar in style to a family's household management.
- The candidate has not spoken extensively on the mortgage crisis and his campaign Web site does not specifically mention what he might do to curtail the problems of people who face impending foreclosures. However, the candidate has voted against a congressional resolution to regulate the subprime mortgage industry.
- The Bush administration's plan to help families in jeopardy of losing their homes in foreclosures by freezing interest rates for some sub-prime borrowers, could create a "chilling effect" on lending. Bush's plan would make those in the lending industry weary of loaning money because they may not get their money back. The candidate opposes any further action by the president and Congress in combating the issue of mortgages, saying the issue is a market-based one better left without government intervention. Bailing out individuals who at risk of being unable to pay for their homes once their mortgage loan rates change to a higher rate is not in the best interest of the people. The blame for the problem should be placed on overambitious borrowers and greedy lenders.
- The candidate opposes the government bailing out homeowners hit by the mortgage crisis because there would be nothing stopping those homeowners from making another mistake. However, those who were cheated by unethical mortgage lenders could be helped by the government. The overally solution is to concentrate most heavily on strengthening the economy and making the (Bush) 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent. The "FairTax" proposal would add to the problem because it would eliminate the home mortgage income tax deduction, which has created an incentive for single-family home ownership for decades.
What should be done about health care?
- Americans have the best health care in the world. Some, however, choose not be insured; others cannot afford it. Every American should be able to get health insurance coverage that is affordable, fully accessible and portable. Coverage should meet each person's individual needs and put them in control. Those who propose a one-size-fits-all ,Washington-controlled program ignore the cost, inefficiency and inadequate care that such a system offers. Access to affordable, portable health care can be made available for all Americans without imposing new mandates or raising taxes. Current government programs must also be streamlined and improved so that those who truly need help can get the health care they need.
- States should implement programs for health care as opposed to a federally mandated health care system or raising taxes. By providing primary care to people, larger, more expensive health care problems can be avoided. Market reforms should be implemented to drive down health care costs. The costs would fluctuate depending upon each state's planned proposal. Those that purchase their own health insurance would be able to deduct premiums, deductibles and co-payments form their income. Health care insurance should not be made mandatory on a national level.
- A mixture of government involvement with a corporate-run system introduced in the 1970s pushed the price of health care higher. Over the years it has also diminished the doctor-patient relationship. But giving the government even more control through socialized medicine, is not the answer. Instead, we should move toward a free market system through the implementation of health savings accounts, which would let people put money aside for their medical needs and get a tax credit for doing so. Health savings accounts would then give the patient more control to pick their own doctors and decide what type of medicine they want attending to their health. This program could be transitioned so not to disenfranchise the people on federal programs such as Medicaid, Medicare and S-Chip. Young people should opt out of the current system and start taking responsibility for their own health care.
- Insurance reforms should increase the variety and affordability of insurance coverage available to American families by fostering competition and innovation. The tax code should be reformed to end bias toward employer-sponsored health insurance, provide all individuals with a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) to increase incentives to get insurance. We should be able to buy health insurance across state lines. Insurance plans should be portable from job to job. You should be able to get insurance not only through employers, but through any organization or association you choose. But such plans would have to meet rigorous standards and certification.
- Government control is not the solution. People should be allowed to set up tax-deductible medical savings accounts and combine them with catastrophic insurance. Such a plan would give consumers greater freedom, control and rewards by empowering them to be effective policemen of the relationships between price and quality in the health care marketplace. Malpractice lawsuit awards should have a sensible cap as a way to stop doctor shortages in many states. The country needs to use free market principles and support the importing of cheaper prescription drugs from places like Canada and Europe.
- Health care should be reformed so that consumers are in control. They should have the freedom to buy health care across state lines, have the freedom to make their own informed health care choices and have the freedom to innovate to save money and improve medical outcomes.
- The system is broken because it emphasizes health care over health. The U.S. doesn't needed federally mandated universal health care, but the country does need to get serious about preventive health care. Policies should encourage the private sector to bring down costs, with the states serving as test sites to develop market-based approaches. We should move from employer-based health care to consumer-based health care. Health care coverage should be portable, moving with the person from job to job.
- The problem with current health care insurance is it's dominated by government and employers. If 100 million people were seeking out their own private health insurance plans, it would be affordable because free market principles would be at work. A major tax deduction of $15,000 to set up a health savings account would give people an incentive to own their own private health insurance.
What do you think about immigration?
- The candidate is opposed to any form of amnesty for illegal immigrants. Arrest and deportation is not a reasonable solution either. Self-deportation can be achieved by enforcing the laws against unauthorized alien workers and their employers. Without illegal job opportunities, fewer aliens will try to enter and those here illegally now will likely return home. The borders can be made more secure by doubling the immigration agents, by increasing the border patrol to at least 25,000 agents and by increasing the number of detention facilities to hold illegal aliens that have been arrested. We should also increase funding to prosecute alien smugglers, to prosecute illegal alien gangs and bolster border security.
- In order to end the continuing flow of illegal immigration, our borders must be strengthened and the allure of accessible employment must be stopped. A fence should be built along the Mexico-U.S. border in addition to placing troops along the border for extra enforcement. An employment verification system is needed for all immigrants without a valid Social Security number. The card would allow employers to identify whether or not they are legal to hire. The card system would put some of the responsibility on employers to end illegal immigration. Neither amnesty nor any permanent residency should be granted for those already in the country illegally.
- We should physically secure our borders and coastlines. We should enforce visa rules and have immigration officials track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. There should be no amnesty and no welfare for illegal aliens. We should end birthright citizenship because as long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. will remain strong. The U.S. should pass true immigration reform. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.
- To deal with illegal immigration, we should first secure the borders, then set up a temporary worker program that could only be valid through a tamper-proof biometric document, then finally begin to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants already in the U.S.
- In order to maintain and encourage legal immigration, but stop illegal immigration, America's borders must first be secured. Illegal immigrants should not be given the same rights as legal immigrants. Enforcing already existing laws is fundamental in ending illegal immigration.
- The U.S. should build 854 miles of double-border fence across the Mexican border with California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. There should be no amnesty for illegal immigrants who are here. Amnesty "encourages a whole new wave of illegal immigrants who seek to catch the next amnesty." Illegal immigrants who are here need to leave because they are causing higher levels of unemployment, especially in the construction trades, by working for less than the going construction wages. The law should be changed so children of illegal immigrants who are born here do not automatically become citizens. We should create a nationwide employment verification system, with consequences placed on employers who hire illegal immigrants.
- The U.S. needs to secure its borders. We need a fence along the border with Mexico, electronic in some places, and more highly trained border agents. The amnesty bill that was defeated by the Senate in June was not the answer. But the laws need to be revised to allow the 12 million illegal immigrants here a process where they can pay a reasonable fine in admission of their guilt for violating the border laws and agree to start getting legal status and citizenship. The U.S. needs to crack down on employers who are hiring illegal immigrants at lower wages by putting penalties on those employers.
- The candidate would end illegal immigration in as few as three years by boosting the number of border security agents to 18,000 from the current 12,000, building a fence along the U.S.-Mexico border that would employ monitoring devices and deploy federal agents at the border at 50 mile intervals, using high-tech monitors to detect people trying to enter illegally. U.S. immigration laws should allow us to identify everyone who is in the U.S. from a foreign country. They should have a tamper-proof ID card. It should be in a database that allows you to figure out who they are, why they're here, make sure they're not illegal immigrants coming here for a bad purpose, and then to be able to throw out the ones who are not in that database.
What should be done about Iraq?
- We should continue President Bush's policy to keep troops in Iraq to stabilize the country. However, the U.S. didn't go into Iraq with enough troops and didn't know what to expect when they arrived. If U.S. troops were to leave, the American people would face more of a danger at home. The U.S. should recognize that Islamic facism is fighting a global war.
- The U.S. invasion of Iraq has not gone as smoothly as the government had hoped for, but that progress is happening. Before the U.S. can withdraw any troops, Iraq must be stabilized to the point that outside influences cannot invade the country and cause civil unrest. It is in America's national security interests to create a strong central Iraq government and military rather than divide the country up into smaller sub-states. There should be standby troop support in and around Iraq for some time.
- The candidate is the only Republican who voted against the war in Iraq. The U.S. should immediately withdraw.
- We should keep troops in Iraq until the war is won. The war had been mismanaged, but the surge is working. More troops should be deployed to Iraq to stabilize the country. Pulling out the troops from Iraq will lead to the terrorists bringing the fight to America. The U.S. must accelerate the training and equipping of Iraqi armed forces and police.
- The candidate has never supported the Iraq war, but has supported the larger war on terror. The Iraq war could have been handled better. After the initial overthrow of Saddam, the U.S. should have transfered the political control of the country over to the United Nations. Nation building and encouraging self governance is one of the key roles of the United Nations, so the United Nations needs to be part of the overall strategy.
- The U.S. should give the second phase of the military operation in Iraq - the troop surge - a chance to work. The key to winning in Iraq is to get all 129 Iraqi military battalions operational so they can eventually move into the combat field. When that is done, they can begin replacing American heavy combat troops and those U.S. troops can rotate out.
- Setting a timetable for withdrawal is a mistake. "This country has never declared war until 'a week from Wednesday,' we have always declared war until victory. I am focused on winning. Withdrawal would have serious strategic consequences for us and horrific humanitarian consequences for the Iraqis. I support a regional summit so that Iraq's neighbors become militarily and financially committed to stabilizing Iraq."
- Setting an artificial timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq now would be a terrible mistake, because it would only embolden our enemies. Iraq is only one front in the larger war on terror, and failure there would lead to a broader and bloodier regional conflict in the near future. Building an accountable Iraq will assist in reducing the threat of terrorism.
What is your stand on taxes?
- The U.S. tax code should be reformed so it is based on simplicity, fairness and growth. The IRS should be dissolved and a new U.S. tax code should be written that gets the government out of the pocketbooks of the citizens, while enhancing U.S. competitiveness. We should permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which are subject to expire in 2010. We should reduce individual income tax rates to save every tax-paying family at least $500. The the $1,000 child tax credit needs to be preserved. The death (estate) tax, and the alternative minimum tax should be repealed. The corporate tax rate should be reduced. We should permanently extend small business expensing and simplify the depreciation tables. Each taxpayer should be given the choice of paying a simple flat tax or paying income taxes under the current tax code.
- The current tax structure may not be perfect, but it shouldn't be thrown out in exchange for the Fair Tax system. Instead, the key to tax reform lies in reducing government spending, which can be accomplished better by giving the president the line-item veto. Taxes on personal savings should be eliminated in order to encourage more Americans to open savings accounts. The estate tax should be eliminated and the Bush tax cuts should be made permanent. "Keep our taxes down and our spending down...Deregulate, deregulate, deregulate."
- We should eliminate the IRS and the income tax. Although the candidate has not endorsed the Fair Tax commonly known as the consumption tax, he notes that it would simplify the tax system. The IRS is unconstitutional. All of America's problems can be solved by looking into the constitution. If the reform does not either eliminate or reduce a tax, the reform is not sufficient. The IRS aides the government in overspending and the more the government spends, the less freedoms Americans' have. The candidate is focused on cutting federal spending. The candidate looks to cut some of the federal departments, agencies and programs that are drains on federal spending. "Real conservatives have always supported low taxing and low spending."
- The tax system is fair and stimulates wealth and a vibrant economy. The candidate has never voted for, nor supported, a tax increase, but he has not signed the no-tax-increase pledge that has been circulating the Republican field and has served for the litmus test on taxes for Republican candidates. The 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts should become permanent. The main way to reduce taxes is to cut federal spending.
- Taxing incomes is contrary to America's freedoms. The income tax funds a "spendthrift" government and takes control away from the American people. The income tax should end and be replaced by a national sales tax that would redirect fiscal responsibility into the hands of the people. This would be the first step toward ending government spending because, "They [government] can't spend what they don't get." The national sales tax is more progressive than the system in place today because those who spend more would get taxed more. The candidate has touted a plan that would exempt African-American descendants of slaves from income taxes for at least a generation for all of the years in which their work was being exploited.
- Increasing taxes only leads to an an increase in poverty. To combat taxes should be cut for all Americans and not just those sectioned off based on their income and deemed worthy. The candidate has refused to sign the "no new tax" pledge on the grounds that there could be an emergency that would warrant tax increases. The candidate is in favor of simplifying the tax system with either a fair tax or a flatter, simpler tax system. The candidate has publicly sponsored the FairTax. The worst kind of tax-related spending is one that touches all Americans regardless of their income bracket — money spent toward tax preparation — and we should rid the country of this financial burden.
- Americans should be taxed on what they buy, not what they earn. The candidate endorses the "FairTax," calling it the productivity tax. It will eliminate all income and payroll taxes, essentially taking away the need for the IRS. Under the FairTax, Americans will be taxed only on what they buy and will receive monthly reimbursements on necessity purchases. What the Fair Tax does not do is put money in the government's pocket, it is what Huckabee calls "revenue neutral." Some taxes are necessary to ensure services such as firefighters and drivable roads are available to the public.
- The Bush tax cuts should be permanent. The estate tax should be killed. The candidate said cutting taxes worked in his previous office and said doing so resulted cutting unemployment by 50 percent and increasing revenue by 40 percent.
Should Yucca Mountain be used as the national repository for nuclear waste?
- In 1997, the candidate voted yes to approve a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. A "yes" vote authorized the president to use his sole and unreviewable discretion to determine the suitability of the site. Since then, the candidate has not commented on his support of the Yucca Mountain project. The candidate has said that he has always been an advocate of nuclear power.
- The candidate has not taken a firm stance on Yucca Mountain, but has said he understands that Nevadans have a lot to say on the issue and would never do anything to put them in harm's way. He would have to look at all available data regarding the plan to store nuclear waste in the mountain before making a decision.
- The candidates is the only Republican in the race to take a firm stance against using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste repository. The issue is about states' rights and the federal government should not be involved. In May 2006, the candidate voted to prohibit funding toward a "Yucca Mountain Youth Zone" Web site. The site featured games and activities promoting Yucca Mountain as a safe repository for nuclear waste. At a speech given at UNLV, the candidate said he was once one of three members of Congress who voted against Yucca Mountain.
- Tough decisions regarding nuclear waste have to be made. Storing nuclear waste over many different states is a larger national threat than storing all the waste at Yucca Mountain. We should move forward with building more nuclear power plants. Storing waste inside Yucca Mountain will streamline that cause.
- A high-level nuclear waste facility should be built at Yucca Mountain. New nuclear plants should be constructed and existing plants should be relicensed, but "not as a mandatory requirement [and] provided the nuclear plants are not built with tax dollars." Radioactive waste from nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants should be recycled into consumer products. "These metals have no more radioactivity than the background environment, and hence pose no human health risk. Allowing private companies to acquire these materials would save the U.S. Treasury and the American taxpayer half a billion dollars in avoided disposal costs."
- The candidate has not gone on record about using Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste facility. But the candidate has voted against the wishes of those opposed to the facility. In May 2006, the candidate supporting the funding of the "Yucca Mountain Youth Zone," a Web site opponents of the nuclear dump claimed was Bush administration propaganda that attempted to make high level nuclear waste fun with games and activities that ignored potential accidents.
- The country has an unfounded bias against nuclear energy. France is a country not known for risky behavior, yet France is friendly enough toward nuclear power to become an almost completely nuclear country. Nuclear waste storage is "the sticky part" of the issue. The American public should be educated that nuclear byproducts can be safely disposed of.
- Safety issues surrounding Yucca Mountain are a matter of "grave concern," but the candidate has not ruled out the possibility of supporting the project.