Place of residence: Frederick Date of birth: June 3, 1926 Place of birth: Moreland, Ky. Occupation: Representative, Maryland’s 6th District, U.S. House of Representatives Education: B.S., theology and biology, Columbia Union College; M.A., human physiology, University of Maryland; PhD, human physiology, University of Maryland Community Associations, involvement: Member, Maryland Sheep Breeder’s Association; life member, Frederick Arts Council; honorary life member, National Rifle Association; member, Maryland Farm Bureau. Family: Married more than 40 years to Ellen Bartlett, 10 children, 16 grandchildren, 2 great-grandchildren. Campaign office address and telephone: P.O. Box 245, Middletown, MD 21769; 240-446-0077 Campaign Web site: www.bartlettforcongress.org Link to federal campaign finance database

Congress, Dist. 6

Roscoe G. Bartlett (R)

I voted "no" on the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. It was unwise for some leaders to rush to label this an urgent crisis that then became a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's wrong to privatize profits while socializing losses. It's wrong to make taxpayers liable for the consequences of decisions by irresponsible borrowers, lenders and investors. It is a very poor deal for taxpayers and future generations for the federal government to be the buyer of last resort of troubled assets for above market prices in the hopes they will be sold later for a profit. I also opposed it because its supporters admitted it is only a short term solution for long term problems. I supported better alternatives that would restore confidence in our Main Street savings institutions; directly address factors causing the credit freeze and reform government policies that fueled the housing bubble which burst and contributed to the economic downturn. Unfortunately, these alternatives were not debated nor allowed a vote.

Q. Is the bailout package a slippery slope? Can we expect other industries to need/expect similar massive help and, if that's the case, how should the government respond?

This law puts us on a dangerous course. It sets a precedent for more failed businesses and industries to demand subsidies from the federal government at taxpayers' expense. It invites further intrusive meddling, mandates and red tape by the federal government. Government intervention and interference with decisions by businesses and individuals causes uncertainty for the private sector and stifles entrepreneurship and innovation. The leaders of Congress promised to come back to review the outcome of this new law and to oversee it in the hopes this bill won't cost taxpayers' $700 billion. I will hold them to these promises. We can and should address this crisis in a more responsible manner which would have longer lasting effects. This new law should have been the bill of last resort. Instead, it was the first and only option presented to me on behalf of the residents of the Sixth District.

Q. Some, like Sen. Cardin, have called for a Manhattan Project-type effort to address the nation's energy needs and to get the U.S. off foreign oil? What do you believe should be done?

High energy costs are the biggest long-term challenge facing Americans and the world in the 21st Century. I've been recognized by Slate magazine as one of the 80 most powerful American leaders over age 80 for my advocacy to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. There isn't one silver bullet solution. I have long called for an energy program that would combine the total commitment of World War II, the technology focus of the Apollo missions to land a man on the moon, and the urgency of the Manhattan Project that developed the atom bomb during World War II.

In the short term, conservation, such as car pooling and eliminating trips to use less oil is the only thing that can reduce oil prices. Investments in efficiency, such as hybrid vehicles that use less energy produce benefits that increase over time. In the longer run – over the next years and decades – investments in research and development of cleaner domestic, alternative and renewable sources of energy are needed. Our country needs to support the development and implementation of sustainable energy alternatives or they won't be there when we need them.

I am sure that Americans are up to this challenge. We are blessed with a Constitution that secures Americans' rights to their inventions and protects our civil liberties. We are the most innovative people in the world. I think we can lead the world in developing the technology to take us away from fossil fuels and imported oil to other domestic, cleaner and renewable sources of energy.

I work with colleagues in the House and the Senate for changes in energy policies to support conservation, efficiency, and research, development and usage of domestic, cleaner, alternative and renewable sources of energy. I co-founded and co-chair both the Defense Energy Working Group and Congressional Peak Oil Caucus to develop bipartisan energy solutions to our energy challenges.

What are your top three priorities for the next two years, if elected?

The No. 1 priority — because if we fail at this nothing else will matter — is to fulfill the federal government’s responsibility under our Constitution to win the war against us by radical Islamic terrorists without undermining our Constitution.

I will continue to support lower taxes, a balanced budget, and regulatory policies to strengthen the economy and encourage the creation of jobs. I will continue leading efforts in the Congress to change federal government policies to reduce our dangerous dependence upon imported oil and to encourage a transition to domestic, alternative, renewable sources of energy.

How would you rate the performance of the House of Representatives: excellent, good, fair or poor? Why?

Fair. At a time when our personal economic security is challenged by prospects of a weakening economy, the commitment of the Congressional Democratic majority to repeal the 2003 tax cuts, which would impose the biggest tax increases in history on Americans, is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

I will continue to vote to cut wasteful spending as my highest priority to balance the budget. Americans work hard and deserve to keep more of the money they earn. Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs and strengthen our economy. Taxpayers know better than bureaucrats how best to spend their money.

Over the course of 2007, the security in Iraq has been steadily improving under new American military leadership and a new strategy. However, the congressional Democratic majority ignored this progress and many other priorities of voters and instead insisted upon repeated attempts to force arbitrary withdrawals of American troops from Iraq.

Radical Islamic terrorists remain committed to targeting and killing innocent civilians and destroying the U.S. and our allies to advance their brutal, tyrannical and totalitarian perversion of Islam.

Most thoughtful observers agree with me that arbitrary withdrawal would do more harm than good for Americans and Iraqis and people in the region. Anti-American terrorists would be emboldened. American troops in harm’s way would be in more danger.

The men and women in our military are heroically fulfilling America’s obligation to assist fledgling democratically elected sovereign governments of Iraq and Afghanistan. We should not abandon the Iraqis and Afghans if they request our help to fight and defeat terrorists who target innocent civilians.

Do you have a timeline on when the U.S. should pull out of Iraq?

I have consistently called for a commitment to an events-driven withdrawal based upon achievement of a check list of benchmark accomplishments mutually agreed upon by Americans and Iraqis.

I believe those key missions are: establish an adequate military and police force to ensure personal and national security for Afghanis and Iraqis; establish a stable national government; and create a functioning judicial system.

A checklist of milestones would establish clear goals and reassure Americans, Iraqis that we will not abandon the citizens in those countries to become victims of terrorism and create vacuums in those territories to become havens and sanctuaries for terrorists.

Would you make any changes to the way the Department of Homeland Security is run?

I do not serve on the committees that most closely monitor the Department of Homeland Security. However, as an engineer and a small business owner, I learned that every organization benefits by reexamination of its performance and consideration and implementation of innovative alternatives.

The Department of Homeland Security was created by combining 22 existing federal agencies. No reorganization that large and complex can occur smoothly and perfectly according to plan. Continuing oversight can provide recommendations to improve this new department.

Should more be done to shore up Social Security? Why?

Yes, more should be done to shore up Social Security because it is in trouble. It will be fine during the presidency of George W. Bush, but the Social Security Trustees project that the Social Security Trust Fund won’t have enough money in it to provide promised benefits to baby boomers, let alone younger generations.

President Bush proposed reforms that would have used the power of compound interest to preserve and strengthen Social Security. Unfortunately, congressional Democrats blocked any changes at all when they were in the minority and refused to consider any changes after becoming the majority. The oldest baby boomers are 65 already.

The Democrats’ refusal to tackle Social Security’s problems will cause larger tax increases and benefit cuts or reductions in other government programs in the future in order to save Social Security.

I support allowing younger people the option of investing some of their Social Security taxes into new personal retirement nest egg accounts similar to the Thrift Savings Program for federal employees and 401k pension plans.

Should more be done to shore up Medicare? Why?

All seniors now have the option of benefiting from group purchasing power and competition to buy the prescription drugs they need under Medicare. Low-income seniors now have government support so they can afford to buy the drugs they need. If they enrolled in one of the new Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage programs, they are getting large discounts on their prescriptions. Introducing more choices for seniors and increasing competition among health care providers would strengthen Medicare.

What is your position on the death penalty?

I oppose the death penalty. The death penalty is ineffective as a deterrent. The death penalty also costs taxpayers more than lifetime incarceration of people who commit heinous crimes.

What is your position on abortion?

I have a 100 percent pro-life voting record. I oppose abortion as an unjustified killing of an unborn child with the exception of extremely rare cases involving the life of the mother, rape and incest.

What is your position on same-sex marriages?

I oppose same-sex marriages. In 5,000 years of recorded human history, families consisting of a mother and a father committed to each other in marriage; marriages supported and respected by society; and marriages protected under law by governments have been the strong foundation for raising healthy children and perpetuating civilizations. This is not a coincidence.

Do you support the federal No Child Left Behind law? Why or Why not?

I voted against the No Child Left Behind law. Instead, I support increasing local control of education by parents, teachers and administrators because it is paramount to maintaining the excellent quality of schools in central and western Maryland. Sixth District residents know better than any bureaucrats in Annapolis or Washington, D.C. what is needed to give their children and our students the skills they need to compete globally.

What state transportation projects are a priority for you? How should we pay for them?

I am proud that I have sought and secured more than $20 million in federal gasoline taxes for my highest priority — completion of the project to build the missing exchanges between I-270, Route 85, Route 355 and I-70 in Frederick.

Fuel taxes provide a dedicated revenue stream for maintaining and improving our transportation infrastructure. These taxes average 62 cents per gallon and are the second largest contributor to the price of gasoline and diesel at the pump. The largest contributor is the price of crude oil. Federal taxes are 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline and diesel. Additional Maryland state taxes are 23.5 cents per gallon for gasoline and 24.3 cents per gallon for diesel.

Should America have a self-sufficient energy policy? How would create one?

Self-sufficiency is not nearly as high a priority as making changes so that our energy policies will promote national and economic security for Americans. With oil nearing $100 per barrel when it was $40 per barrel two years ago, many recognize the threat that our addiction to oil poses to our national and economic security.

America is strengthening adversaries, like Venezuela, while losing clout diplomatically and economically. To reverse these unacceptable trends, we need dramatic changes in our energy policies. The Chinese are planning for a ‘‘post-oil” world with a five-point plan. It is a sensible model.

Most important and crucial, it starts with conservation to save energy and money to invest in alternatives. Second, we need to increase the proportion of domestic sources of energy. Third, we need to diversify our energy sources. Fourth, we should improve the environment. Fifth, we should seek international cooperation, though the Chinese are also planning for international confrontation.

The new energy law takes baby steps along these lines. It also includes provisions I authored to promote solar-powered lighting and air conditioning and sustainable development of biomass.

Is the federal government doing enough to help communities deal with the effects of the Base Realignment and Closure plan? Why?

Maryland is in the enviable position of the largest gain in jobs under the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) plan. 10,000 jobs will move to Aberdeen Proving Ground to strengthen it as a center of excellence in C4-ISR - Command and Control, Communications, Computers; and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance.

The Army just briefed me and other members of the Maryland delegation and reaffirmed its commitment to make the transition as smooth as possible. The Maryland delegation is united in its dedication to secure any additional resources needed to assist communities settling these new workers and their families.

Is the federal government doing enough to protect the border? Why?

No. That is why I have supported bills to increase and improve border security, including building more and better fences along part of our southern border crossed by most illegal immigrants. The congressional Democratic leadership refused to provide the funds to build most of the approved new fence.

What should the federal government do about the illegal immigrants already in the United States?

Our immigration system is broken. Illegal immigrants are a drain on taxpayers and undermine our national security. I have voted against and oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. Amnesty would undermine America’s strength as a country based upon the rule of law and encourage more illegal immigration.

I support legislation to improve enforcement of existing laws against illegal immigration and to punish companies who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. I have initiated innovative collaborative enforcement efforts with state and local governments to identify and deport the violent illegal immigrants who have been arrested and pose the greatest threat to citizens and law-abiding residents in our communities.

What is your opinion of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America?

With no additional taxpayer funding, the Security and Prosperity Partnership or SPP is a dialogue that was initiated in 2005 by President Bush among the United States, Canada and Mexico.

Its admirable goal is to increase security and to enhance prosperity among the three countries through greater cooperation. It is too early and difficult to tell if benefits cited by the administration as a result of the SPP to date would have occurred without it.

The United States and Canada signed an agreement to enable simultaneous exchange of information between virtual national laboratory networks to speed up response times when managing infectious disease outbreaks. All three countries are developing uniform in-advance electronic exchange of cargo manifest data for maritime, railroad and motor carriers to speed up and hopefully ensure security of cargo shipping.