THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, October 30, 1994 TAG: 9410270586
SECTION: COMMENTARY PAGE: J4 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Interview
LENGTH: Long : 253 lines
This is to run inside the commentary on 10/30. It might start on J1./Luisa
Q. Should term limits should be imposed on members of Congress? If so, how many years should members be allowed to serve?
PICKETT: Restrictions on the length of a member's service in Congress will not provide a near-term solution to current public dissatisfaction with Congress. Some members do serve too long. I favor limiting the time that a person may serve and would set this limit at 18 years for members of the House and the Senate.
CHAPMAN: I support term limits because we must end the concentration of too much power in the hands of professional politicians. . . I support legislation to limit House members to eight years and senators to 12 years.
Q. Do you favor/oppose a federal universal health care plan?
PICKETT: Oppose
CHAPMAN: I support insurance reforms, but I oppose Clinton's proposed federal takeover of health care. All the plans being discussed would break the back of the budget and require massive tax increases. America has the best quality health care in the world. We should build on its strengths, not have it taken over by the government.
Q. What are the most important components any universal health care coverage plan should include?
PICKETT: (No response)
CHAPMAN: 1. Standardize paperwork and make insurance forms as easy to use as possible. 2. Prohibit insurers from denying insurance because of pre-existing conditions. 3. Prohibit insurers from dropping clients if they get sick. 4. Allow people to take their insurance from one job to another.
Q. What would be the most effective means of financing a universal health care plan?
PICKETT: (No response)
CHAPMAN: There is no good way to pay for universal health care. No one even knows how much universal health care would cost, but we know it will be a lot. The Ways and Means Committee bill would have cost $1.26 trillion in subsidies alone. The American taxpayer should not have to shell out more taxes to pay for it.
Q. Would you favor/oppose replacing the current income tax system with the so-called ``flat tax,'' by which every person would pay a set percentage of their income? (Proponents of such a plan estimate that percentage at 17%)
PICKETT: Oppose
CHAPMAN: We don't have a deficit because the American people don't pay enough in taxes. We have red ink because Congress spends too much. I favor the flat tax in theory if it protects the home ownership exemption and exemptions such as charitable, investment and savings credits.
Q. Do you favor/oppose any reduction in the capital gains tax (currently 29%)? Why/why not?
PICKETT: Lowering the capital gains tax rate will improve the mobility of capital, lower the cost of capital, recognize the impact of inflation on long-term investments, and help compensate for the added risk associated with long-term investments.
CHAPMAN: I favor reducing the capital gains tax. Every time the capital gains tax has been reduced in the last 30 years the economy has grown, more jobs were created and incomes rose.
Q. Do you favor/oppose a tax credit or federally-funded voucher system for parents who send children to private or church-sponsored schools or educate children in the home? Why/why not?
PICKETT: Public monies should not be used to pay private expenses of individuals, and the separation between church and state implicit in our Constitution should be strictly observed.
CHAPMAN: I support programs that give parents the right to choose the schools their children attend. I support tax credits and voucher systems that would allow children the opportunity to attend either a public or private high school.
Q. Do you favor/oppose a balanced budget amendment? If not, why not?
PICKETT: I favor a balanced budget. I oppose tinkering with the Constitution unless the proposed change will require a balanced budget. This precludes shams and window dressing masquerading as constitutional amendments that require a balanced budget when in fact they do not.
CHAPMAN: I support the enactment of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. We need to get federal spending under control, and the balanced budget amendment works for those states, like Virginia, that have it.
Q. Do you favor/oppose allowing the president to eliminate individual spending efforts from the budget through the use of a line-item veto? Why/why not?
PICKETT: Oppose. It will open the door for enormous partisan mischief and increase friction between the executive and legislative branches of government that will thwart sound policy development.
CHAPMAN: Congress seems to be unable to stop itself from loading up every appropriations bill with tons of wasteful spending. I favor legislation to give the president what most state governors have - the ability to cut wasteful spending from massive appropriations bills.
Q. As a cost-cutting measure, do you favor/oppose ``means-testing'' - basing federal benefits on financial need rather than entitlement - for such programs as Medicare and Social Security retirement plans?
PICKETT: Oppose.
CHAPMAN: I divide ``entitlements'' into two categories. One category I would call contracts between the people and their government. These are programs, like Social Security and Medicare, to which people contributed in reliance on their government's promises. They are not currently means-tested.
Some other entitlements are not contracts. Most, like Medicaid and food stamps, are means-tested. I see nothing wrong with assuring that the tests are appropriate, or means-testing entitlements that are not now means-tested.
Q. What initiatives do you favor, if any, to reform fund-raising and spending in election campaigns for federal offices?
PICKETT: Shorten campaign period. Improve disclosure process. Require disclosure of source and identity of contributors for campaign money from political parties. Restrict the amount of campaign contributions from contributors outside election district. Limit political action committee contributions.
CHAPMAN: Ban contributions by PACS, or reduce the maximum of PAC contributions from the current $5,000 per election to $1,000. Require candidates to raise at least 75 percent of their funds within their districts. Prohibit incumbents from sending unsolicited franked mail in an election year. Forbid congressional staff from working in campaigns.
Q. Do you believe that reductions in defense spending have been too deep, not deep enough, or just about right?
PICKETT: The military has not been funded at adequate levels to perform unprogrammed missions such as Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti and Iraq. Additional money is now needed by the military to compensate for the money diverted temporarily from essential training and maintenance activities to perform these missions.
CHAPMAN: I am convinced that the recent reductions in defense spending have been far too deep.
Q. If Naval Air Station Oceana were targeted for closure by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission, what action would you take as representative of the 2nd Congressional District?
PICKETT: My objective is to keep Oceana Naval Air Station and other military facilities in the Second District off the base closure list. I have organized committees for this purpose in Virginia Beach and Norfolk which are working diligently with local elected and community leaders to bring every possible resource to bear in favor of maintaining existing military bases in the district.
CHAPMAN: We can't wait to see what the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission says about Oceana. Once the commission has ruled, there is almost nothing anyone can do to overturn its ruling. The task is to keep Oceana off the hit list. The way to do that is to ensure that Oceana is far and away the most state-of-the-art of the facilities with which it competes.
Q. Should the U.S. continue to provide funds to assist former Soviet-bloc states in their transition to free-market economies?
PICKETT: The U.S. cannot underwrite the transition of Soviet-block states to free- market economies. But money provided by the U.S. to eliminate weapons of mass destruction is well spent.
CHAPMAN: The proper form of assistance to the former Soviet-bloc states is to aid in their transition from superpower to peaceable nations. I would support financially assisting those republics that have nuclear and/or chemical weapons in dismantling and disposing of those weapons.
Q. Did you favor/oppose the U.S. Armed Services' role in the return of Jean Bertrand Aristide to power in Haiti? Why?
PICKETT: I oppose the use of U.S. military forces in Haiti. The conditions in Haiti do not warrant unilateral intervention by the United States.
CHAPMAN: As a veteran, I will support our troops regardless of where they are deployed. However, I opposed using our troops to install Aristide as president of Haiti because: 1.) We have no national security interest; 2.) Our involvement will not avert violence in Haiti; 3.) We are engaged in missions, such as stopping looters, that are inappropriate for U.S. military personnel.
Q. Should the United States have taken a more active military role in attempting to stop the warfare that erupted in the former nation of Yugoslavia?
PICKETT: No
CHAPMAN: The fighting in the former Yugoslavia is the result of ethnic conflicts that have existed for centuries. I doubt that we could have stopped it, nor do I think we should have made the massive commitment necessary to try.
Q. Should Congress approve the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT)? Why/why not?
PICKETT: Yes. To pave the way for U.S. economic leadership in the world community, and expand and improve world markets for U.S. industry and products.
CHAPMAN: I support the GATT because, despite its flaws, it represents a progress toward trade that is both free and fair. I have a number of questions regarding the implementing legislation. I also question whether the World Trade Organization, the organization that will enforce compliance, might unduly infringe on our national sovereignty.
Q. Should women have the legal right to seek an abortion for any reason through the second trimester of gestation?
b. Do you agree/disagree that women should have the right to seek an abortion in a case of pregnancy that involves 1.) rape? 2.) incest? 3.) risk of life of the mother?
c. Should the federal government assist in funding abortions as part of health benefits commonly available to economically disadvantaged women?
d. Do you favor/oppose a parental-notification requirement for a minor seeking an abortion, if reasonable standards were in place to protect the child from physical abuse from the parent(s)/guardian(s)?
PICKETT: (to all parts) The decision of the United States Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade strikes a reasonable balance between the interests of the community and the rights of the individual concerning the issue of abortion. I support this decision and believe that it provides the necessary fundamentals on this issue to resolve the contentious debates associated with the subject of abortion.
CHAPMAN:
a. I disagree that a woman should have the right to seek an abortion ``for any reason'' through the second trimester.
b. I agree that when a pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or when carrying the fetus to term jeopardizes the mother's life, women should have the right to seek an abortion.
c. I oppose using taxpayers' dollars to fund abortions.
d. I support parental-notification requirements where the minor can be protected from abuse by a parent or guardian.
Q. Please offer your brief appraisal of the following initiatives enacted during the first 20 months of the the Clinton administration:
The federal budget and its tax increase on upper-income earners:
PICKETT: I opposed the reconciliation bill which increased income taxes for certain taxpayers.
CHAPMAN: I oppose the Clinton economic plan. Clinton's original plan was so tax-heavy that it could have plunged the country back into recession. Congress discarded much of the plan and watered down the rest so that it has not caused the economic disaster it might have. Its tax increases on ``upper-income earners'' hurt the kind of small business that create new jobs, and too much was cut from defense spending.
The crime bill:
PICKETT: I voted against the crime bill because it failed to adequately respond to the needs of local law enforcement, included excessive and unnecessary spending unrelated to community safety, included unfair formulas for allocating funds, and will create new federal bureaucracy.
CHAPMAN: The Clinton crime bill was a spending bill that did not contain the real solutions to America's crime problem.
The ban on certain semi-automatic weapons commonly referred to as assault weapons.
PICKETT: The banned semi-automatic weapons are no different from numerous other weapons that are not banned. As a meaningful public safety issue, very little was accomplished.
CHAPMAN: I oppose the crime bill's ban on so-called ``assault'' weapons because it violates our Second Amendment rights and will not appreciably reduce crime. New laws to stop gun violence are merely surplus when we do not enforce the existing laws on the books.
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA):
PICKETT: I voted in favor of the North American Free Trade Agreement because of its potential to improve economic conditions and trade among Canada, Mexico and the U.S. Subsequent events and economic reports have confirmed this to be true.
CHAPMAN: I support NAFTA because it will create new jobs for Americans and lets American consumers choose the best that the U.S., Canada and Mexico have to offer. NAFTA's impact will vary from product to product but, overall, NAFTA promotes free and fair trade among the countries involved.
``Don't ask, don't tell'' policy for gays in the military:
PICKETT: I support the position of the military concerning the need to exclude homosexuals from service.
CHAPMAN: As a former military officer I oppose the Clinton ``don't ask, don't tell'' policy.
Q. On issues of great national importance, are you more likely to vote your conscience or to vote according to the beliefs of the majority of the residents of the district who express their opinions on that issue?
PICKETT: Neither. I vote on issues to reflect the views, values and interests of what I believe to be the majority of the citizens in my district.
CHAPMAN: I am more likely to vote according to my perception of our national interest. I am very conscious, though, that the people of the Second District are very well educated and very well informed, and I will give great weight to their views. On local issues I will strive to vote in the best interest of our district.
KEYWORDS: HOUSE OF DELEGATES RACE 2ND DISTRICT CANDIDATES
INTERVIEW by CNB