Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers' (WA-05) Primary Election Statement

The following statement is from Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers:

"I want to thank the people of Eastern Washington for their continued support and their vote. I feel good about tonight's numbers – although tonight is only the first snapshot and our final vote totals won't be known for at least another week. I am confident our margin of victory will only increase as more ballots are counted.

"Since being elected to serve Eastern Washington in Congress, I have worked hard on the issues we all care about including growing the economy, reducing taxes on families and small businesses, helping our farmers, improving access to health care and meeting America's energy needs with innovation, investment, and more domestic oil production.

"I want to congratulate Mark Mays on his victory tonight and look forward to a campaign that is focused on the issues and our different ideas on how to address the challenges facing our region and our country. With this election, the voters of Eastern Washington have a very clear choice.

My campaign will be focused on my record and the work I have done on behalf of Eastern Washington including:

- Serving as a member on the Farm Bill Conference Committee which passed legislation important to Eastern Washington farmers;
- Serving as Ranking Republican on the Water and Power Subcommittee where I am working to promote hydropower as a renewable resource;
- Serving as a member of the Higher Education Opportunity Act Conference Committee which included my proposals to increase our nation's competitiveness, make college more affordable and crack down on diploma mills;
- Sponsoring legislation to ensure Eastern Washington veterans have access to the benefits they've earned;
- Advocating for Fairchild Air Force Base receive the next generation of air refueling tankers;
- Protecting the helicopters based at Fairchild AFB that are used for survival school training and search and rescue missions."

A reminder: Tonight's numbers only reflect the ballots that were received prior to Election Day. Counties will continue to count ballots well into next week and the primary election will be certified on September 9, 2008.

"Big biz rolls out campaign dough despite weak ballot"

The August 14 edition of the Whitman County Gazette reported that figures from the Washington Public Disclosure Commission show that nearly $200,000 has been contributed to Washington 9th Legislative District political candidates thus far. Approximately $180,000 has been raised by Republicans, and around $5,000 by the Democrats and Green Party. That's quite a disparity. Depending on how things go in today's primary, much of that Republican surplus will likely be used in other districts statewide to help elect other Republicans.

That contribution disparity has been replayed in the Washington 5th Congressional District, prompting Gazette editor Jerry Jones to come to a conclusion similar to the one that I made recently about this year's race:

Motorists in Whitman County during the days before the state’s Aug. 19 mail-in primary deadline can’t help but notice the attractive campaign signs posted for Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers. She is seeking a third term as 5th district representative. The incumbent’s campaign seems to be picking up a full head of steam, and she’s predicted to nail down another term.

The Federal Elections Commission report as of July 31 puts the McMorris Rodgers campaign contributions at $1,083,675 with spending at $651,112.

A report in Sunday’s Lewiston Morning Tribune notes Microsoft’s Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer are among top level corporate executives who have sent in money. General Dynamics and R.J. Reynolds execs also have sent contributions.

McMorris Rodgers in previous races has been a tough campaigner who covers the miles in her district. With her experience and staff, she appears to be a strong favorite to win another term, despite running in a year when the Republicans are predicted to sustain a setback.

However, this time around the campaign is different. The 5th district incumbent is in a race which really isn’t a race when compared to the last two rounds. Although other names are on the ballot, McMorris Rodgers doesn’t have a strong opponent.

The last time around she was challenged by Peter Goldmark of Okanogan. Goldmark, a member of a family with a hallowed link to the state’s Democratic party, cranked up a strong campaign with TV ads featuring his ranching family mixed with the normal Democratic themes.

Goldmark is now challenging incumbent Doug Sutherland for commissioner of public lands. As a Democrat, he figures to get strong party support on the west side of the state. That outlook contrasts with the 5th district which now has a distinct GOP-leaning electorate.

Two years prior to the Goldmark challenge, McMorris faced Don Barbieri, Spokane hotel executive who plowed a lot of his own money into the campaign.

This time around, McMorris Rodgers faces a lineup of political lightweights. While the Goldmark and Barbieri campaigns enrolled strong backing from the Democrats, the foes this time around don’t have the same credentials, or the same kind of money.

According to the Spokesman Review, Mark Mays, a Spokane psychologist and attorney, is seen as the top opposition candidate for the Democrats. Mays, as of July 31 has raised $43,939 and spent $33,464. Those kind of numbers mean not a lot of campaign signs along Whitman County highways and byways.

Of course, veteran 5th district voters have seen past campaigns when the incumbent pulled out all the stops with strong financial backing while facing lightweight opposition. Democrat Tom Foley waged power campaigns against Republican challengers who lacked name recognition, money and support for their own party. Foley, who advanced up the power ladder to be speaker of the house, could expect a stack of corporate contributions and those were used.

A money flow to incumbents is one of the hard facts in today’s politics. Those corporate contributions on the McMorris Rodgers donor list shouldn’t be considered as special for the 5th district. The donations are also on the lists of candidates around the country. The money flow has been criticized, but it’s the way of doing business in a world where decisions in congress can impact corporations and where candidates now need a lot of money to campaign, even when they don’t have to campaign.

WA 5th Congressional District: Republican Candidate Cathy McMorris Rodgers Answers Your Questions

1. Steve from Pullman asks: What is your stance on nuclear energy? Europe and the rest of the world have left us behind in nuclear technology. Nuclear energy is much more safe now than thirty years ago at the time of Three Mile island. Plus, increased funding on nuclear research and development could be a boon to businesses and universities like SEL and WSU here in Pullman.

I support an “all of the above” plan to meet our nation’s energy needs, including expanding nuclear power. The plan also includes increased conservation, investment in renewable energy like solar, wind and hydropower, and increased exploration for oil in places like ANWR and on the Outer Continental Shelf.

2. Jay from Colfax asks: Would you support a balanced budget amendment?

I support a balanced budget amendment. In fact, I am a cosponsor of one, H.J. Res. 1.

My second question is: No one ever addresses the 800 pound gorilla called the national debt. Do you have any plans on paying off or paying down the nine-trillion-plus dollar debt?

That is a complicated question. Yes, we must work to eliminate our national debt. This can be accomplished by controlling spending. I believe our government doesn’t have a revenue problem—we have a spending problem.

Our entitlement programs are also contributing to the national debt. Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid current consume 62% of the federal budget, leaving 38% for everything else like the military, defense, the current War on Terrorism, transportation education and other programs. Therefore, I believe we need to start looking at Medicare reform in such a way that does not cut reimbursement rates to doctors.

3. Matt from Colton asks: As an "almost" US citizen, even though I cannot vote yet, I have a question regarding Immigration. Recently I found out that my local Immigration office is about 1 year behind on Naturalization, if I remember correctly, they are just starting to work on application to become a US citizen from about August 2007. So all in all, even though I can become a US citizen around June 2010, I will still may have to wait until June 2011 or out to December 2011. That means I will have been unable to become a naturalized citizen for more than the required 5 years, on top of that my status was adjusted in Nov/Dec of 2004, yet I had to wait until June 2005 to get my green card and start the "5 years of residence"...The Question is: Do you support the streamlining of the process of becoming a naturalized US citizen?

Matt, congratulations on “almost” becoming a U.S. citizen. Yes, I believe the process of becoming a naturalized U.S. citizen is too complicated, too bureaucratic and too time-consuming. Helping resolve citizenship issues is one of the top issues my office deals with. We’ve found it can take 5-6 years to become a U.S. citizen. In addition, it’s important we streamline the process because so many companies are having trouble attracting specialized employees from overseas.

4. Jan from Pullman asks: What is your position on stem cell research? Specifically, I would like to know why Rep. McMorris Rodgers voted against H.R. 810 (The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act) and how Mr. Mays would have voted on H.R. 810.

I am against embryonic stem cell research, which would involve the destruction of human embryos. I support research based on adult stem cells.

5. Scott from Garfield asks:. How do you feel about allowing grazing on CRP land?

I support grazing on CRP land.

WA 5th Congressional District: Democratic Candidate Mark Mays Answers Your Questions

First of all, I want to thank Tom for including us in this process. I also want to thank you, the readers for asking questions that are important to you. It is important to understand that we all want a better America, and we all have different means to get to that goal. We need to understand that as Americans, a healthy debate about the issues is the most important part of exercising our right to vote. I thank you all for participating in that process.

Secondly, I would ask that you check out our Website, www.votemarkmays.com. We are soon to upload substantive issues pages that will answer more of your questions on a broader number of topics. Once again, I thank you for this opportunity, and hope that you will stay in touch.

Mark Mays, Ph.D., J.D.
Democratic Nominee for 5th Congressional District WA state

1. Steve from Pullman asks: What is your stance on nuclear energy? Europe and the rest of the world have left us behind in nuclear technology. Nuclear energy is much more safe now than thirty years ago at the time of Three Mile island. Plus, increased funding on nuclear research and development could be a boon to businesses and universities like SEL and WSU here in Pullman.

Looking at different models, such as that used in Canada with much smaller and safer nuclear reactors, will allow us to fully evaluate the safe use of nuclear energy. I am not opposed to the use of nuclear power, but we also must be mindful of the waste that is associated with those types of generating facilities.

Thinking more globally about the problem would assist even more. In combination with Hydro, solar, wind, and tide power, safe nuclear power could be an asset to our way of life. America’s addiction to fossil fuels needs to be transformed into an addiction to alternative means of energy generation if we are to keep our world a sustainable place to live.

2. Jay from Colfax asks: Would you support a balanced budget amendment?

While I support greater financial restraint and responsibility, a trait that has clearly been lacking in the Bush Administration, I do not support a balanced budget amendment, but please also let me tell you why.

I do not support such an amendment because there have been times in our Nation’s history that we have had to borrow money to maintain important governmental services. For example, during the Great Depression, the United States went into debt to make sure that we invested in America. Many roads, bridges, and national parks came to be because of that effort. One such project, very close to us here in the State of Washington is the Grand Coulee Dam. It was precisely this investment that gave jobs to our jobless, and stimulated the economy to a point where we pulled ourselves out of the financial mess that we were in.

While I do not condone the following examples , I will state them here for debate. More recently, President Reagan used deficit spending to outspend the Russians, therefore causing the economic collapse of the Communist system there. In addition, the Bush Administration is using borrowed money to pay for the war in Iraq. While the richest one percent of our nation benefits from the tax cuts given to them by George Bush and the Republicans, our dollar has lost more and more value. Right now, the American dollar is worth less than the Canadian dollar. We need to balance the budget and be more responsible with our Federal Budget, but forbidding the Federal Government from deficit spending in the form of a Constitutional Amendment is going a bit too far.

My second question is: No one ever addresses the 800 pound gorilla called the national debt. Do you have any plans on paying off or paying down the nine-trillion-plus dollar debt?

Our National Debt is an embarrassment to our country. We need to work together to make sure that our children and their grand children do not have to pay for our foolish economic policy. The Bush Administration and the National Republican party have devised a national economic policy that has devalued the Dollar, deregulated financial markets that have caused a near collapse of our banking system, and run up a total of nine trillion dollars in debt.

A trillion is a very large number. If one counted backwards by seconds, a million seconds ago, was sometime last week. A billion seconds ago was just about the time that Richard Nixon boarded the plane to leave the White House. But a Trillion seconds ago was 30,000 BC!

It would be necessary to roll back the Bush tax cut, and put some of the focus on again paying down the national debt so that we get back to where we started when George W. Bush first came to power. It will not be an easy task, but I would support greater financial responsibility by our Federal Government.

3. Matt from Colton asks: As an "almost" US citizen, even though I cannot vote yet, I have a question regarding Immigration. Recently I found out that my local Immigration office is about 1 year behind on Naturalization, if I remember correctly, they are just starting to work on application to become a US citizen from about August 2007. So all in all, even though I can become a US citizen around June 2010, I will still may have to wait until June 2011 or out to December 2011. That means I will have been unable to become a naturalized citizen for more than the required 5 years, on top of that my status was adjusted in Nov/Dec of 2004, yet I had to wait until June 2005 to get my green card and start the "5 years of residence"...The Question is: Do you support the streamlining of the process of becoming a naturalized US citizen?

I would support streamlining the immigration process. It is very hard for one to become a naturalized citizen of the US, and we need to work harder to make that process more cooperative.

4. Jan from Pullman asks: What is your position on stem cell research? Specifically, I would like to know why Rep. McMorris Rodgers voted against H.R. 810 (The Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act) and how Mr. Mays would have voted on H.R. 810.

Stem cell research is an area in which scientific research could have kept America at the vanguard of health research. Instead, we have allowed other nations to take the lead.

I support research on stem cells. The potential for treatments for many degenerative and terrible diseases is too vast to allow the opportunity to pass. I would have voted for H.R. 810. I think that it is time for the United States to take the lead not only in stem cells, but expand the amount of scientific research funded by the Federal Government. It is through scientific research that we have improved the quality of life for our citizens throughout the years.

5. Scott from Garfield asks:. How do you feel about allowing grazing on CRP land?

Many of these lands were put into this designation for different reasons. Dependent upon what types of vegetation and wildlife is present, and how grazing would affect that habitat would affect my decision. For example, some CRP land is grassland, and some is shrub-based. The grazing on the grassland would, in the later summer months would be allowable in most cases, but it should be handled on a case-by-case basis. These rules were put in place to conserve our landscape and to prevent damage to the ecosystem, and if grazing does not run contrary to those rules, then I see no reason why grazing should not be allowed.