Republican Candidates for US House Responses to WYRLC Questions

Candidates for the Republican nomination to the Wyoming seat in the U.S. House of Representatives were sent a questionnaire by the Wyoming Republican Liberty Caucus. The following table is the complete response of Ms. Lummis and Mr. Gordon. Some of the questions in the questionnaire were given some explanatory text. Click here for the full text of the questionnaire.

Questions	Ms. Lummis' response	Mr. Gordon's response
1. Do you support allowing drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)?	I support drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.	As to developing sensitive places like ANWR, I believe energy development done in these special areas must be done with the greatest care and respect for all the resources involved.  I believe in responsibility and I also know we have technology appropriate and readily available to these tasks.  As Teddy Roosevelt said, “I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land; but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us.” Furthermore, I believe the reserves in ANWR should benefit the United States directly and cannot be exported if they are developed.
2. Do you support balancing the US budget? If so, how would you do that (what programs would you cut or would you increase taxes)?	I support balancing the U.S. budget. All non-defense discretionary spending should be cut. Only those functions specifically enumerated as Federal responsibilities in the U.S. Constitution shall remain fully funded.	I think a balanced budget is vital for the future of this country. However, raising taxes is not the way to achieve that end, right now the country needs to keep taxes low or all efforts to stimulate the economy will be void. I would balance the budget with a strict adherence to the Pay-As-You-Go rules; eliminate frivolous earmarks; and aggressively review the spending practices of all governmental agencies to ferret out waste, fraud and abuse.
3. Do you support the continuation of a lower tax rates for capital gains income (10% or 15%) as compared with the tax rates for regular earned income (as high as 39%)?	I support the continuation of a lower tax rate for capital gains income.	I fully support making President Bush’s tax cuts permanent. I don’t support any tax increases so I would keep tax rates on capital gains low and I would work to decrease the tax on earned income. This is the approach to get the economy back on track not “stimulus packages.”
4. Do you favor elimination of the federal estate tax (the "death tax")?	I favor elimination of the federal estate tax.	Absolutely, I favor eliminating the death tax.
5. Are you in favor of replacing the income tax with a national sales tax? If so, will you become a co-sponsor of the FairTax bill in the House?	I have not developed a position regarding replacement of the income tax with a national sales tax.	The FairTax is an interesting idea because it is a true consumption tax. It is also nice to consider doing away with the IRS. One concern I have right now with what I have seen is that it might make small business owners effectively tax collectors for the state. I am studying the proposal and if Congress can find a way to prevent an unnecessary burden on these small business owners I would consider co-sponsoring the legislation. In any event, I want to work towards reducing the tax burden on hard working Wyoming families.
6. Do you support the Real ID law, or do you support the repeal of all or parts of it?	I support the repeal of parts of the Real ID law.	First of all I have a real problem with the way Congress uses riders and earmarks to pass proposals that would not stand up to an open debate and vote. Real ID was a classic example of the federal government overreacting to a problem with an unfunded mandate. In principle, I support efforts to prevent terrorists and illegal immigrants from obtaining identification cards, but I do not support efforts by the federal government to usurp state’s rights which include issuing identification cards. The stated goal of improving national security is fine, but Real ID encourages the federal government down a slippery slope. I have some real privacy concerns with the proposal.
7. Do you support any new federal law that would control or limit the purchase, ownership, sales or transportation of any type of gun that is now legal?	I do not support any new federal law that would control or limit the purchase ownership, sales, or transportation of any type of gun that is now legal.	My wife has her concealed carry permit and I know that she would not be alive today if she did not own a firearm and know how to utilize it. I am against any proposal to take away the rights of an individual to own and posses a firearm.
8. Do you support an increase in the number of H1A, H2A and H2B visas granted annually? If so, how much of an increase (50%, double, triple, or more)?	I do support an increase in the number of H1A, H2A and H2B visas. I must further evaluate the needs of Wyoming employers for workers to fill vacant positions that cannot be filled by U.S. citizens before specifying the amount of the increase.	As a rancher who has had to count on sheep shearers each spring, I can see a real need for these programs. These individuals from Australia and New Zealand come every year to do a job that too few Americans are willing to do. They do a necessary job helping ranchers keep their business going and then they go home. The tourism and service industries in Wyoming are dependent on the H2B to meet the seasonal trends of their industry. Legal jobs under these visa programs are helpful for a state which is experiencing serious labor shortages. Moreover, owing to the fact that there are requirements to advertize the potential job to Americans first, I am satisfied no Americans are being put out of work. Perhaps it is a sad day in America when there are jobs available that no American is willing to do. Nevertheless, these visa programs are for temporary workers who come to America to do a job at a published wage and then head home. For the last few years Congress has passed an exemption allowing over 100,000 extra H2B visas to go out. That’s about a 200% increase from the standard number of visas. Congress needs to reform the system rather than passing stop-gap measures like these. If the federal government improves the visas for temporary workers so they use biometrics and all available technology to prove the holder of the visa is the person who applied for it and that person went through a rigorous background check I could support an increase in the number of temporary visas. I do think this needs to happen simultaneously with an effort to offer unemployed Americans jobs where there is a shortage of workers. That could keep the overall number of visas down, but again we have jobs that American appear unwilling to do. Tax consideration for people willing to move to areas in need of workers might be helpful.
9. Do you support NAFTA as it exists? If not, do you favor renegotiation and reauthorization by the Senate, or outright repeal?	I favor renegotiation and reauthorization of NAFTA by the Senate.	I am in generally in favor of free trade especially now that exports of American goods are picking up, but trade must be fair to American workers and goods and take place on a level playing field. While NAFTA has increased our country’s exports to Mexico and Canada, it has pushed some manufacturing and agriculture production out of the United States. My priority as Congressman would be to continue presidential fast-track authority on trade agreements and insist that the trade negotiations be conducted in a way that we do not give away more than we are going to receive from the trade agreement. I do not support efforts to renege on our current agreements especially at a time when exports will play an important part in our economic recovery.
10. Do you support the expansion of the Federal Reserve lending to and regulation of nonbank businesses like brokerage firms and investment companies?	I do not support the expansion of the Federal Reserve lending to and regulation of non-bank businesses. However, since the Federal Reserve has already expanded its scope to investment banks, regulation may be appropriate.	I believe the Federal Reserve is taking too active a role in the economy right now and am concerned with the Fed lending to nonbank businesses. As for regulation of the Fed to correct these actions, I think the bailouts and lending are creating an artificial market and easing the negative consequences of the risks many of these companies took. I would like the market to function freely with risk shaping the market when it is either rewarded or punished. I am especially concerned that the tax payer without real opportunity to dissent is expected to backstop risky behaviors – to be the “lender of last resort.”
11. Do you support an increase, no change, or a decrease in funding for the federal Department of Education?	I support a decrease in funding for the federal Department of Education. In fact, because education is a state responsibility, the federal Department of Education is overreaching into an area which is exclusively the province of the states.	My feeling is that the education of our children starts at home and is based on local control by our school boards. I also believe there are few more important obligations that we have as a society than education. I do not support additional funding for the Department of Education that will fund bureaucrats in Washington. Any change in funding must be done so it ends up in the classroom educating our kids. I believe the Department of Education has taken more authority than it should to Washington and is eroding the ability of local school districts to control what happens inside their classrooms. To be sure, a national standard is of value, but education should rest at the local level. The No Child Left Behind Act is well intentioned by raising the floor nationwide for education, but concentrates too much authority centrally. I also believe the act does much to ensure that our most motivated students have the opportunities or are challenged adequately with the new emphasis on teaching to the test.
12. What is your position on the NAIS?	I oppose mandatory National Animal Identification System.	I have voluntarily participated in the facility identification program at my ranch in an effort to have value added products. I have yet to see any return to the ranch on the investment of time and money from these efforts. The NAIS does not appear to be focused on identifying sick animals and quickly tracking them back to their origins. Rather it seems like another attempt by the federal government to intrude into state’s rights, in this case the USDA overstepping the Wyoming Department of Agriculture. I cannot support it as a mandatory program as the notion now seems unlikely to address any of the concerns it purports to. Practically, I also worry about how far down hill the ball will roll or whether it will stop in the right hole.
13. Do you support requiring all illegal aliens to leave the US and remain out of the US until they can obtain a visa through normal procedures with no special treatment (that is, requiring them to get in the back of the line for re-entry into the US)?	I support requiring all illegal aliens to leave the U.S. and remain out of the U.S. until they can obtain a visa through normal procedures with no special treatment.	I do not support amnesty for those who have broken the laws of our country.
14. Do you support the McCain-Feingold Act as it exists? If not, how would you modify it, or would you support outright repeal?	I do not support the McCain-Feingold Act. Rather, I support repeal of the Act.	I believe very strongly that our government should be made up of citizens and that qualified citizens should have every opportunity to seek election, not just those who are well healed, or who have good friends in high places. McCain-Feingold sought to get special interest money out of politics and clean-up elections. It has done nothing it intended to do and has had some very disturbing consequences, specifically the creation of 527 groups. The act needs to be modified. We should build upon the recommendations of the Commission on Federal Election Reform chaired by former Secretary of State James Baker and former President Jimmy Carter so we look beyond the act of voting and focus on how federal campaigns operate.
15. Do you support the continuation of the current policy for farm subsidies? Do you support the continuation of protective tariffs on imported agricultural products?	I do not support the continuation of the current policy for (i) farm subsidies and (ii) protective tariffs on imported agricultural products.	I am also generally opposed to market manipulating farm subsidies or tariffs. Farm subsidies should specifically be brought into play as a safety net for farmers and ranchers not as a form of welfare. Subsidies that drift towards entitlements or are not inversely responsive to good times are just plain wrong. Spending billions to subsidize corn ethanol is shortsighted and obviously unsustainable. The CRP program can be beneficial in encouraging landowners to maintain wildlife habitat and stop plowing highly erodible lands. I do think the Farm Bill needs to be reformed towards the marketplace and away from subsidies.
16. Do you support an increase, no change or a decrease in funding for foreign aid?	I support a decrease in funding for foreign aid. The growth in sovereign wealth worldwide exceeds $1 trillion per year. At the same time, the United States is the largest debtor nation in the world. Foreign governments have the financial wherewithal to aid countries in need. It is time for the rest of the world to step up to the plate.	I support continued foreign assistance in the context of a balanced budget and national self-interest so, given the current budget deficit we cannot continue this level of spending. The counties mentioned here are all strategic allies in the Middle East and the aid and technical assistance encourages stability in the region. We cannot walk away from Iraq and leave an unstable country where anti-Americanism will be allowed to flourish at even greater rates then it is today but neither can we continue to pour money down a drain if we cannot see progress. That said, it is important for the region to take more of an interest in its own stability and that means that the United States must encourage other countries to shoulder their fair share. Iraq itself must be encouraged to pay more of the cost of providing security inside its borders. Iraq must step up and do more for its future.
17. Do you support the continued sale of billions of dollars worth of high tech military equipment to Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt?	I do support the continued sale of high tech military equipment to Israel. However, I am undecided regarding such sales to Saudi Arabia and Egypt.	Not especially and only as long as these nations continue to works towards stability and peace in the Middle East and continue efforts to confront terrorism.
18. Do you support a return of the dollar to the gold standard? If not, how would you propose to protect the value of the dollar so that retirees can be assured that the value of their savings won't be destroyed by inflation?	I do not support a return of the dollar to the gold standard. We must reduce the national debt, balance the federal budget, and reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy to restore the value of the dollar.	With gold trading at just under $1000 an ounce it would be impractical and financially impossible for the Treasury to return to the gold standard. To protect the value of the dollar, we must balance our budget, reduce the deficit and continue to grow the economy. A devalued dollar helps American businesses reinvigorate their export business but I am very concerned with the financial mess our country seems to be in and believe we have a lot of hard work to do to remedy years of profligacy. I am deeply worried about the prospects of inflation and its negative impact on the economy and working families. Fiscal responsibility is paramount.