Fred Thompson Return to Candidate Profile Page »

Should the government have a role in expanding access to health care? What, if anything, would you do to restructure the health care system?

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. I am committed to a healthcare system that: -Realigns programs and creates a system around individual consumers and patients by providing more information and more opportunities to choose affordable health care options that best meet their needs and those of their families. -Improves the individual health of all Americans by shifting to a system that promotes cost-effective prevention, chronic-care management, and personal responsibility -Modernizes delivery and administration of care by encouraging the widespread use of clinical best practices, medical information technology, and other innovations. -Increases competition and consumer choice while streamlining regulations through free-market solutions that benefit individuals and reduce costs for employers. Promotes and speeds medical research and life-sciences innovation.

Do you support allowing a portion of the money currently withheld for Social Security to be put into private accounts? Why or why not?

I believe that workers should have the option of making contributions to voluntary Personal Retirement Accounts, which will work like a 401(k) plan, and thereby permit all American workers to participate in the expansion of wealth in America. Specifically, I propose that Social Security establish voluntary Personal Retirement Accounts (PRAs) for which: - Each worker would automatically contribute 2% of his/her wages into a voluntary Personal Retirement Account. - This employee contribution would be matched by 2.5 for 1 ($2.50 for every $1 dollar contributed) on the contributions from the first $1000 of wages earned each month. The match would be made from existing contributions. - All additional contributions would be matched fifty cents on the dollar. - If a worker does not want to participate in the voluntary PRA, he/she could opt out of the program at the beginning of each year.

What specific changes would you make to the Social Security program?

Provide voluntary personal retirement 'add on' accounts to supplement benefits. Index the Social Security benefit formula for prices, not wages. I believe that workers should have the option of making contributions to voluntary Personal Retirement Accounts, which will work like a 401(k) plan, and thereby permit all American workers to participate in the expansion of wealth in America. Specifically, he proposes that Social Security establish voluntary Personal Retirement Accounts. We must protect current and near retirees' benefits and preserve the Social Security program for future generations. Current law promises future retirees more benefits than current retirees with the same real income even though they paid the same real amount in taxes. That promise is one the current system cannot keep. Instead, current law effectively requires a 23% across the board reduction in benefits when the Trust Fund runs out of money, an event currently projected to occur in 2041. We can afford to guarantee all workers the current benefit formula, fully indexed for inflation. But, with a system that is running out of money, we cannot and should not promise to increase benefits that we cannot pay for.

Do you support setting a deadline for either a withdrawal or a partial pullback of troops from Iraq? If so, what would be the date of that deadline?

I believe that the troop withdrawal plan that General Petraeus has proposed is the right course. This recommendation is a result of the success being seen on the ground in Iraq. With the momentum of an effective military strategy now on our side, we must press forward, never wavering, and unite in our determination to defeat al Qaeda and other extremists who remain committed to forcing our surrender. This is central not only to success in Iraq, but also to our long-term plan to bring our troops home. A wholesale withdrawal of American troops from Iraq--as many Democrats propose -- would embolden al Qaeda, strengthen Iran, betray our allies, and dishonor the memories of the men and women who have sacrificed so much to keep us safe.

What distinguishes your plan for Iraq from those of the other candidates?

A wholesale withdrawal of American troops from Iraq--as many Democrats propose -- would embolden al Qaeda, strengthen Iran, betray our allies, and dishonor the memories of the men and women who have sacrificed so much to keep us safe. Every day, our troops in Iraq demonstrate a heroic resolve to win. I wish Democrats in Washington would dedicate as much time and energy to winning as they do on how to surrender the fight. The average 20 year-old serving in Iraq apparently knows more about national security than many of the 20 year-political veterans serving in Congress.

What would be your top three national security priorities if you were elected?

The first responsibility of government is to protect the American people, the homeland, and our way of life. Today we face the urgent threat of radical Islamic terrorists. Al Qaeda is committed to attacking us here at home, and wants to use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to kill millions. We must never give them that opportunity. We must defeat the terrorists abroad, and that begins in Iraq and Afghanistan -- the central fronts in this global war. We must show the world we have the will to fight and win. A weakened America -- or an America that appears weaker -- will only encourage further attacks. We must persevere. As Commander-in-Chief, the president must ensure the United States has the means to achieve victory. Presidential leadership requires talking to the American people about these stakes, mapping out a clear vision for success, and devising a comprehensive strategy for achieving it. I am committed to: -A larger, more capable, and more modern military that can defeat terrorists, deter adversaries, and defend the U.S. and our interests. -A missile defense system that can protect the U.S. and our allies from long-range ballistic missiles. -An enhanced intelligence community, with robust human-intelligence capabilities, focused on terrorism and proliferation. -A robust approach to homeland security that will protect our nation from terrorists and WMD, regardless of where they come from. -A strengthened system of global alliances to better combat terrorists, proliferators, and traditional threats to our interests. -A judicial system that deals with the realities of terrorists and unlawful enemy combatants.

Do you think climate change is caused by human activity? If not, what is your view on the issue? What, if anything, would you do to deal with climate change?

While we dont know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce CO2 emissions without harming our economy.

Should the government have a role in encouraging development of energy-efficient technologies and sustainable energy resources? If yes, how would you do it?

The energy challenges our nation faces today are real and significant. Our dependence on foreign sources of oil threatens our national security and puts our economic prosperity at risk. America must rise to the challenge and take the steps necessary to become more energy independent before this becomes a crisis. No one solution will solve the energy challenges we face; all ideas must be on the table. Greater energy security will enhance our ability to pursue our foreign policy and national security objectives. Increasing our energy independence and investing in alternative energy sources will also produce a healthier environment. And while we don't know for certain how or why climate change is occurring, it makes sense to take reasonable steps to reduce CO2 emissions without harming our economy. Overall, I am committed to: -A balanced approach to energy security that increases domestic supplies, reduces demand for oil and gas, and promotes alternative fuels and other diverse energy sources. Investing in renewable and alternative fuels to promote greater energy independence and a cleaner environment. -An energy policy that invests in the advanced technologies of tomorrow and places more emphasis on conservation and energy efficiency. -Conducting research and development into technologies that improve the environment, especially the reduction of CO2 emissions.

How do you think the United States should handle illegal immigrants? Do you support President Bush's immigration plan?

We have thousands of people standing in line at embassies around the world to become United States American citizens, to come here to get a green card, to come here and to assimilate and be a part of our culture. They are part of what has made our country great. Some of our better citizens. We all know them and love them. Now, it's our country together -- their's and ours... It's our home. And we now get to decide who comes into our home. And to place somebody above them or in front of them in line is the wrong thing to do. We've got to strengthen the border. We've got to enforce the border. We've got to punish employers who will not obey the law. And we've got to eliminate sanctuary cities and say to sanctuary cities, if you continue this, we're going to cut off federal funding for you, you're not going to do it with federal money.

What are your top three priorities with regard to immigration?

In the post-9/11 world, immigration is much more of a national security issue. A government that cannot secure its borders and determine who may enter and who may not, fails in a fundamental responsibility. As we take steps to secure our borders and enforce our laws, we must also ensure that our immigration laws and policies advance our national interests in a variety of areas, and that the immigration process itself is as fair, efficient, and effective as possible.

Do you support affirmative action? If you do, why do you think it is a benefit to our country? If not, what do you think would be gained by changing or eliminating it?

No comment.

Do you agree or disagree with the argument that only the wealthiest Americans are benefiting from the current economic growth? Why or why not?

The Democrats, of course, want to raise taxes. They only want to target the rich, they say. A word of advice to anyone in the middle class -- don't stand anywhere near that target. Wouldn't it be great if, instead of worrying so much about how to divide the pie, we could work together on how to make the pie bigger? On globalization -- we're not afraid of it. It works to our benefit. We innovate more and invest in that innovation better than anywhere else in the world. Same thing goes for services, which are increasingly driving our economy. Free trade and market economies have done more for freedom and prosperity than a central planner could ever dream and we're the world's best example of that. So, why do we want to take investment dollars out of growth, and invest it in government?

What are the three most important things you would do to promote economic growth and prosperity?

Free people are best equipped to order their own affairs, and the common interest benefits from and is improved by the aggregate success of all. We must reform our tax system, encourage investment, support entrepreneurial spirit, open markets abroad to American goods, and minimize burdensome government regulations to continue to expand the economy and bring increased wealth to all Americans.

Would you roll back tax cuts that were supported by the Bush administration?

I will permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Tax relief enacted in 2001 and 2003 has proved critical to generating a strong economy that has experienced growth despite the war on terror, the collapse in the housing market, and other economic challenges over the last six years. Unless action is taken, every American taxpayer will see a massive tax increase after December 31, 2010. Allowing this tax hike will impose an enormous financial burden on American families, slow economic growth, cost America jobs, and make it more difficult to address the country's long-term budget, economic, and security challenges.

Do you support the No Child Left Behind program? Why or why not?

At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. No Child Left Behind was a good start -- the testing component, in particular, was a necessary measure. The associated federal mandates, however, have put significant administrative burdens on teachers and caused many States to lower testing standards.

What changes, if any, would you attempt to implement in national education policy?

Despite the tens of billions of dollars spent on education by Washington each year, and the hundreds of federal education programs now in place, our children are still falling behind, particularly in subjects crucial to success in the global economy in which we live. Given the importance of education to our nation's security, prosperity, and unity, we should all be alarmed and committed to solving this problem. At a time when America is behind other developed countries in education excellence, the federal role in education is too intrusive and too bureaucratic, and has become part of the problem. No Child Left Behind was a good start -- the testing component, in particular, was a necessary measure. The associated federal mandates, however, have put significant administrative burdens on teachers and caused many States to lower testing standards. State and local governments are closest to the parents, the kids, and the schools. They are best situated to implement changes and innovations that result in better educated children. A new, simplified, federal education block grant program with objective testing standards would bring us closer to reaching the shared goal of improving our schools, while preserving local control. We must begin by returning to our core principles of more parental control and choice, higher standards, and greater accountability.

What is your position on the proposed constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between a man and a woman?

I believe marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and that this institution is the foundation of society. As such, he supported the Defense of Marriage Act when he served in the Senate. I support a constitutional amendment to prevent activist judges from misreading the Constitution to force same-sex marriage on any state and on our society.

What is your position on civil unions between same sex partners?

I am committed to returning authority to the levels of government closest to families and communities -- the states -- and then protecting states from further intrusion by the federal government, the judiciary, and other states.

Do you support the Roe v. Wade decision or would you like to see this decision overturned? Why or why not?

I believe Roe v. Wade was a bad decision that ought to be overturned."

Should the federal government have a role in seeking an end to poverty? What would you do, specifically, to deal with poverty?

My plan for tax relief and economic growth provides commonsense solutions to increase American competitiveness in the 21st century. These solutions will allow Americans to keep more of their money and encourage companies and entrepreneurs to invest and create jobs in the United States. Enhancing the choices of taxpayers, permanently reducing taxes, encouraging investment in America's corporations and small businesses, and restraining government spending are all steps in the right direction. America's economy has endured several challenges over the last several years -- it is time to move forward and enter a new era of economic security and prosperity.

Do you think gun control has an impact on crime rates in the United States?

Gun control is touted as a major crime-control measure. But some of the places with the strictest gun-control laws also have high violent-crime rates.

Do you think tighter restrictions should be in place for those buying a firearm?

I strongly support the Second Amendment of the Constitution, which protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms. Gun control is touted as a major crime-control measure. But some of the places with the strictest gun-control laws also have high violent-crime rates. Disarming law-abiding citizens does not prevent crime. The answer to violent crime is smart, effective, and aggressive law enforcement. The real effect of these gun-control measures is to place onerous restrictions on law-abiding citizens who use firearms for such legal activities as self-defense, sport-shooting, hunting, and collecting. I am committed to - Strictly enforcing existing laws and severely punishing violent criminals. - Protecting the rights individual Americans enjoy under the Second Amendment.

If elected, would you keep the current ban on funding for embryonic stem cell research in place? Why or why not?

I support adult stem cell research. I oppose embryonic stem cell research and human cloning.

What would be your top three overall priorities if elected?

Make our country safer and more secure, put the federal government on a sustainable and sound fiscal basis, and strengthen the rule of law by stopping illegal immigration.