U.S. SENATE: ASHCROFT BRINGS EXPERIENCE AS GOVERNOR TO RACE

Why are you running for U.S. Senate this year?

I am running because decisions are being made on a daily basis that will have a profound effect on the ability of this nation to succeed and survive and have the same standing in the future as it has had in the past. Those decisions are made every day in Washington. We need to make sure the people of Missouri are represented and the philosophy and values of this state are represented in those decisions.

What effect does party affiliation have on your campaign?

I believe in this year there is a substantial welcome in the electorate for the Republicans, in part because there is a major disenchantment with the Clinton agenda in Washington. This may be one of the more favorable years for Republicans in quite some time. I think the principals of the Republican Party provide a framework in which we are more likely to succeed in the next century, survive in the next century.

What do you feel that you have to offer citizens of Missouri?

I offer them hard work. I offer them commitment to values of freedom from intrusive government, of integrity in fiscal affairs, balanced budgets, commitment to term limits, commitment to not pass laws that only apply to the people and not to the Congress. I have a commitment to the line-item veto, which would allow the president of the United States to exercise the authority that would provide for fiscal integrity at the federal level. I offer to the people a program that will provide freedom from the barbaric impact of crime in society, a commitment to make a strong statement against crime including support for capital punishment. I offer to the people a program of relief from the weight of welfare.

Discuss briefly your background and experience that has prepared you to serve in the Senate.

My parents raised me with a deep respect for this country and a high respect for truth and integrity, with a set of values that emphasize personal responsibility, a respect for others for their persons and their property. Those basic values including that it is better to build something than it is better to break it. It is better to earn something than to steal it. It is better to purify than it is to pollute.

I went to school in public schools in Missouri. I went away to college and law school but came back and taught for 5 1/2 years as a teacher at Southwest Missouri State University. Then I ran for the U.S. Congress and served in the state auditor's office. I served eight years as the state attorney general and served eight years as governor. In those eight years as governor, I had to deal with challenges that relate to the federal government, particularly with its mandates.

I have been in every county of this state in the primary and will be back in every county of this state in the general election. I have worked side-by-side with Missouri voters on their jobs in many settings. These learning experiences will be very helpful to me in developing public policy that will have an impact on the level of productivity and opportunity in this state.

What distinguishes you from the other candidates running this year for the Senate?

I can run down a list of issues that will distinguish me clearly from my opponent, and I will do it. I am for a balanced budget amendment enforceable by a line-item veto. He is not. I am for term limits in the U.S. Congress. He is not.

I am for limiting the ability to enact laws that apply to the public but not to the Congress. He has voted for those kinds of things. I am for the death penalty. He is not. I am for limiting these frivolous appeals that hamstring our prison system and its capacity to handle criminals. He is not. I am for stronger sentences for people who illegally sell guns. He is not.

I am for stronger sentences for those who use guns in the commission of crimes. He has voted against those things. I am for work as part of the welfare system. He has voted against that as a member of the Missouri legislature. He has voted against that as a member of the Congress. His welfare reform program would provide for an increase of $20 billion and the commitment to welfare that is more than twice the president's projected increase of $9 billion. I am in favor for capping welfare then providing the flexibility to the states to revamp welfare and reduce the impact of welfare financially in the society and hopefully reduce it in terms of the human toll.

When I started as governor of this state and the day I finished as governor of this state, the corporate and individual tax rates stayed the same. My opponent has voted to raise taxes in every single year he has been in Congress.

There are many problems facing the country, but what do you feel is the ONE biggest problem facing the United States today?

The single biggest need that government can address is responsible operation of the Congress. We need to reform the way Congress does business. Congress, as usual, has failed the American people. It has lacked the discipline to set priorities and to live within its means. The people have lost confidence because they feel that Congress lives under a different set of rules than the rest of America lives under.

We must reform Congress with a balanced budget amendment, the line-item veto, term limits for members of the Congress. I would add a new way to amend the constitution of the United States. That is to allow the states to suggest or propose focused amendments to the constitution. Only the Congress now can propose focused amendments to the constitution and as a result we never get any amendments that would limit the power authority or enhance the responsibility of the Congress.

What do you feel is the biggest problem facing the people of Missouri, and how do you as a senator intend to address that problem?

People of Missouri want their children to have the level of opportunity at least as good as the level of opportunity that the people have enjoyed themselves. This is the challenge I face. I want my three children to participate in a nation the standing in which is at the top of the world as America has been throughout my lifetime.

We must promote the kind of opportunity in the society which will reinforce productivity and promote civic virtue and individual responsibility in the society which will make us competitive and productive as people in a global market which will demand more and more from us.

We need for the government to act responsibly within in its means. We need to reduce the impact of crime in society because it robs us of opportunity and productivity. We need to lift the weight of welfare from society which again robs us of a serious component of society. We need to make sure government is limited in both taxing authority and its regulatory power because regulations become a tax or a weight on society and so do taxes.

What can be done to expand economic development opportunities in Missouri?

First of all, I think we can use Missouri as a model. We used enterprise zones very effectively here. We used investment credits who invested in job generating plant and equipment. Those kinds of devices need to be employed. Reducing the capital gains tax would result in the right kind of potential for small business, which I think would increase jobs and opportunities.

I think the major challenge for jobs and opportunities in our society, the most difficult one, relates to the core of our urban centers. In that setting we have seen regulatory demands from government almost redline those areas from development. I have been to business after business that said they are moving out of the business center to a green field because they have to fear the environmental responsibilities that would come with expansion in the business centers. The buildings don't have the right kind of doors or access.

I propose that we develop a way for state, local and federal authorities to have a cost-benefit analysis of those regulations.

How serious is the health-care problem? Is it a crisis?

We have the best health care in the world. It is hard for me to refer to health care as a problem. Access to health care has been a problem and a challenge to individuals. It is also a priority challenge, but it is not a challenge which requires us to act with the kind of haste that would result in bad policy.

When the effort was made in the last year or so to stampede the American people into the Clinton health-care plan it was a counterproductive effort. Velocity is the enemy of reason. It is worth our while to go slowly enough in this process to do things.

Here are the things I think we should do: preserve the best quality of health care in the world, which we have and preserve choice for individuals in the system, choice not only of their physicians but choice of the therapies they receive.

We need to have some insurance reform. We need to provide for portability. We need to provide for access to people with existing conditions. However, we do not need governmental mandates and we do not need to sweep the entirety of the health-care industry into the bosom of the governmental bureaucracy. It would be a serious mistake to do so.

We need to outlaw arbitrary cancellation of insurance when people get sick. The reason you get health insurance is so when you do get sick you are covered.

We should reduce cost by standardizing and simplifying the forms. We have 1,500 insurance companies and thousands of hospitals wanting all the information on their own forms. That results in the high paper cost of health care. About 20 to 25 percent of all health-care costs are paperwork costs.

What role should the federal government play in providing all Americans access to health care?

I think the federal government should be involved in preserving quality, protecting choice, providing tax fairness, helping in cost reduction strategies as a result of insurance reform, providing for access for existing conditions, portability, and for the low income workers who may not be able to afford coverage out of the savings described in the answer above we should work to help those individuals with their health-care costs.

There has been a lot of talk about problems with Congress as an institution, and the need to make changes in the way it operates. How do you assess Congress and what changes or reforms do you believe are needed?

Congress has failed the people in terms of setting priorities and managing its responsibilities. Congress needs to conform itself basically with a balanced budget amendment and line-item veto.

Congress should pass the A-Z legislation, which gives Congress itself, the ability to vote on each line of the appropriations. It should stop the duplexity by where it co-sponsors the A-Z legislation then hides it in committee and refuses to bring it out and vote on it. Congress should not pass laws which it do not live under itself.

Next year, a new farm bill will be written. What direction do you think it should take?

I think we should work toward market orientation and agriculture policy. We should make sure we keep our farmers free to farm. The federal government has been increasingly intrusive in many businesses but the next on the agenda seems to be the farm.

When flood relief was brought to the state last year, it appeared to be flood relief for awhile but quickly became apparent to many that it was an active environmental agenda designed to displace farmers who had been farming ground in Missouri that had been part of our agriculture community for over a century.

Farmers have been great friends of the environment and have worked very well in Missouri with soil conservation and a variety of other programs to protect and preserve the resources of this state and to make them productive. We will have to very carefully monitor the kinds of proposals that are forwarded in a number of areas that might have an impact on farmers, not the least of which, would be the clean water and other similar enactments.

Are you satisfied with efforts being made now to bring the budget deficit under control, and what further steps do you support?

I am not satisfied with the efforts. I would reform the welfare system to put a cap on it then to allow states broad authority. I would also provide structural mechanisms where by the President of the United States would have the authority and responsibility to set priorities and cut from the budget those things which aren't affordable within the limits for what we have for funding.

What direction should be taken with welfare reform in the United States?

There are only two groups of people who are offended by welfare in America: the people who are not on welfare and those who are on welfare. It is a financial offense, and it is a personal affront and an affront to a person's liberty to capture people in a system of dependence.

Real welfare reform is the agenda of the people of Missouri. The president's welfare-reform package would increase welfare and the amount of money we spend on welfare. My opponents would do the same.

I want to cap welfare and then provide a program for the reduction of welfare. That means to stop self-inflicting disability from qualifying if you qualify for welfare payments. If you now allege that you are disabled as a result of your narcotics or as result of addiction to alcohol, you are entitled to $405 a month.

The people, I believe, reject the notion of never married teen parents getting free apartments, free food stamps, free checks so that they have a standing that makes that situation attractive. I believe it has aggravated the problem rather than reduced the problem.

That reform in welfare should be directed towards work the first day in welfare, is part of my program for welfare reform.

What do you see as the role of the United States military in the post-Cold War era?

The most important role is to defend the strategic interest of the United States. I don't believe we should be an international 911 that runs around the world solving domestic disputes in a variety of interests. Where there are strategic American interests involved we should deploy to protect those interests only when we have a specific objective and we have a planned expectation how to meet that objective and a planned capacity for withdrawal.

From your campaign experience, how do you think people feel about government, and what can be done to improve their feelings?

People are disappointed with the government particularly with Washington. They would like to see more responsibility. So they would like to have term limits.

I disagree with this whole concept that Congress is a privileged class. It's a group of people who don't have to obey the financial rules. They don't have to obey the rules of hiring and firing people because the employment rules don't affect the Congress, and they don't have to live by the OSHA laws that affect other industries because they don't affect the Congress. They wouldn't have to live under the new health-care proposal because it was written so as not to affect the Congress.

How much do you intend to spend on this race?

To date my opponent has outspent me in this election. I am not sure what the race will be. The cost of political races are largely consumed in communicating a message on the electronic media. I think we will spend in the neighborhood of $4 million total on this race.

BIOGRAPHY:

John Ashcroft

Age: 52

Party: Republican

Occupation: Lawyer

Hometown: Ballwin

Political experience: Served as governor, attorney general, auditor of Missouri

Opponents: Alan Wheat, Democrat; Bill Johnson, Libertarian

Election Day: Tuesday, Nov. 8