Marijuana.com

Plainsman1963

Senator Barack H. Obama (IL)


Current Office: U.S. Senator
Current District: Junior Seat
First Elected: 11/02/2004
Last Elected: 11/02/2004
Party: Democrat

Committees:
Environment & Public Works [Senate]
Foreign Relations [Senate]
Veterans' Affairs [Senate]


Background Information Additional Information

Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Michelle
2 Children: Malia, Sasha.
Birth date: 08/04/1961
Birthplace: Honolulu, HI
Home City: Chicago, IL
Religion: United Church of Christ

Education:
JD, Harvard Law School, 1991
BA, Columbia University, 1983.

Professional Experience:
Attorney
Lecturer.

Political Experience:
Senator, United States Senate, 2005-present
Senator, Illinois State Senate, 1996-2004.

Organizations:
Center for Neighborhood and Technology
Chicago Annebery Challenge
Cook County Bar
Cook County Bar Association Community Law Project
Board Member, Joyce Foundation
Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under the Law
Leadership for Quality Education
Member, Trinity United Church of Christ
Board Member, Woods Fund of Chicago.

 

Plainsman1963

Energy

Senator Obama believes that America must commit to a new national energy policy focused on improvements in technology, investments in alternative fuels, and greater efforts in conservation, efficiency, and waste reduction. Shifting from our current investment and consumption practices to this new direction will be one of the great leadership challenges in the coming decade.

With the Department of Energy telling us that U.S. demand for oil will jump 40% over the next 20 years and with countries like China and India adding millions of cars to their roads, the price of oil is approaching a breaking point.

In addition to the high economic costs of our foreign oil dependence, the current consumption of fossil fuels has threatened the future health and well-being of not only our citizens, but our natural resources and air quality as well. Investments in cleaner and more efficient energy technologies must play a central role in mitigating these threats to our health and our environment.

Recognizing the importance of energy security to national and economic security, Senator Obama has proposed the creation of a Director of National Energy Security in the Office of the President. This position, akin to the National Security Advisor, would oversee and coordinate all administration efforts on national energy security and policies.

Alternative Fuels
Senator Obama is a leading advocate for increasing the use of alternative fuels to reduce our nation’s reliance on foreign petroleum. In 2005, he enacted into law a tax credit for installing E-85 ethanol refueling pumps at gas stations across the country.

In the 109th and 110th Congress, he joined with Senator Lugar to introduce the American Fuels Act to increase domestic production, distribution, and end uses of biofuels. Among other improvements, the American Fuels Act would expand the manufacture of ethanol-capable vehicles, offer tax credits to spur cellulosic fuel production, require clean-fueled transit buses bought with federal dollars, and provide incentives to ethanol plants to invest in E-85 blending equipment on their premises.

In January 2007, Senator Obama joined Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa in reintroducing the Biofuels Security Act, which calls for 60 billion gallons of renewable biofuels in the nation’s vehicle fuel supply by the year 2030. Senator Obama also authored legislation with Senator Cochran, the Alternative Diesel Standard, to require 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels - - including agriculture feedstocks such as biodiesel - - as part of the 40 billion gallon national diesel pool.


Given that major supermarket chains are expected to comprise 15% of the vehicle fuels market in the coming years, Senator Obama has also called upon the 14 largest supermarket and discount stores that sell gas to also install alternative fuel pumps.

Fuel Efficiency
As the author of the Fuel Economy Reform Act, Senator Obama has worked to gain bipartisan support for an innovative approach to raising automobile fuel efficiency standards (also known as “CAFE” standards) and break two decades of inaction and deadlock on reforming fuel economy laws. This proposal has attracted cosponsors from both parties – maintaining support from long-time champions of improving fuel economy standards while attracting support from traditional opponents. The bill would establish regular, continual, and incremental progress in miles per gallon fuel efficiency by an increase of four percent annually, and preserve flexibility by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to vary the rate of improvement and how best to technologically achieve those fuel economy targets. President Bush endorsed a similar approach in his State of the Union speech in January 2007.

Investing in New Technologies
Senator Obama introduced the “Health Care for Hybrids Act” to provide health care assistance to domestic automakers in exchange for their investing 50% of the savings into technology to produce more fuel-efficient vehicles. His proposal has been praised by President Bill Clinton, the University of Michigan’s auto research center, and numerous newspapers.

As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Senator Obama authored and enacted language to authorize $40 million to bring a combined flexible fuel vehicle and hybrid car to the level of commercial distribution within five years.

Senator Obama is the lead Democratic cosponsor of the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act, along with Senator Bunning. It must be a national priority to improve fuel economy and expand use of renewable fuels and other low-carbon or carbon-neutral fuels, but coal is currently America’s most abundant domestic energy source and will be a critical resource for many years to come. One of America’s largest coal beds lies beneath Illinois and neighboring states. Any new coal technologies must be developed strictly in the context of anticipated mandatory carbon control legislation, using technologies to reduce carbon emissions. This bill provides incentives for the development of this diesel technology that can transform coal into cleaner diesel fuel, while sequestering carbon emissions and reducing American reliance on importing fossil fuels.

In addition, Senator Obama has been working within Congress and with the State of Illinois to bring FutureGen, the nation’s first near-zero emissions coal power plant, to Illinois. The billion dollar project would use Illinois coal in generating electricity and hydrogen gas while sequestering carbon emissions.

Working to Lower High Gas Prices
Oil companies are enjoying record profits while consumers are suffering from record high gas prices. In the 110th Congress, Senator Obama has introduced the Oil SENSE Act to eliminate unnecessary tax breaks to the oil industry. A version of the bill was passed by House of Representatives in January 2007.

In the 109th Congress, Senator Obama sponsored legislation, the FILL UP Act, requiring oil companies that made at least $1 billion in profits in the first quarter of 2006 to invest at least 1% of the their total reported first quarter 2006 profits into installing E-85 pumps.

Senator Obama also worked with Congressman Rahm Emanuel to obtain several million dollars to establish the first ethanol-to-hydrogen refueling station for refueling Chicago natural gas bus fleets.

Plainsman1963

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama, as prepared for delivery
Resources for the Future
1616 P Street, NW
Washington, DC
September 15, 2005

As the flood waters recede in New Orleans and the survivors of Katrina begin to rebuild their lives, one truth has become achingly clear over the past few weeks:

Our government wasn't ready to save its own citizens from a catastrophe of biblical proportions. It wasn't even close.

Despite years of planning, preparing, and warnings from countless scientists, experts, and government officials - that the levees would break, that our first responders didn't have the best tools for communication, that FEMA was under-funded and undervalued - despite all of this, Katrina caught the government off-guard, flat-footed, and dangerously disorganized.

The most tragic consequence of this slow response was the incalculable loss of human life.

But miles off the Gulf Coast, as the deadly storm first raged towards shore, another frightening consequence emerged from our government's failure to prepare.

In the moments before the hurricane hit, Gulf refineries that made up one-eighth of our country's total capacity were evacuated and shut down. 95% of oil production was immediately suspended in a region where we find over a quarter of America's oil. And gas prices that were already at record highs shot up even further all over the country - reaching $6 a gallon in some places. Today, they're hovering over $3 - a price that experts say will remain for the rest of the year. And what we don't see on television is how in a few months, the price of home heating oil and natural gas will reach new heights as well.

It would be one thing if this storm struck at a time of stability. But over the last few years, limited supplies and an unprecedented growth in demand have sent the global oil market itself teetering towards the edge of disaster. With our own Energy Department telling us that U.S. demand for oil will jump 40% over the next twenty years and countries like China and India adding millions of cars to their roads, the price of oil is reaching levels we just can't handle anymore.

A few years ago, we paid just $25 for a barrel of oil. Today, we're paying around $63. Since this affects the price of everything from gas to airfare to groceries, analysts at Global Insight, an economic consulting firm, say that if we hit $100 a barrel, the U.S. economy could very well tumble into recession.

Which brings me to one of the central lessons of Katrina, one that goes far beyond the gas hikes and the price gouging we're facing today:

The days of running a 21st century economy on a 20th century fossil fuel are numbered - and we need to realize that before it's too late.

Our persistent dependence on oil is a danger our government has known about for years. And despite constant warnings by researchers and scientists, major corporations and our own government officials, it's a danger they have failed to prepare for, listen to, or seriously try to guard against.

It's a danger we can no longer afford to ignore. Katrina, after all, was a natural disaster that affected only our domestic oil supply. But just imagine the threat to our national security from a geopolitical disaster - a war or an embargo - that cut off our supply from the rest of the world, where we get most of our oil.

Right now, we depend on some of the most politically volatile countries in the Middle East and elsewhere to fuel our energy needs. It doesn't matter if they're budding democracies, despotic regimes with nuclear intentions, or havens for the madrassas that plant the seeds of terror in young minds - they get our money because we need their oil.

What's worse - it's oil that's not very well protected. Over the last few years, we know that terrorists have stepped up their attempts to launch attacks on the poorly defended oil tankers and pipelines of the Middle East. And a former CIA agent tells us that if a terrorist hijacked a plane in Kuwait and crashed it into an oil complex in Saudi Arabia, it could take enough oil off the market to cause more economic damage than a direct attack on the United States.

At that point, $6 a gallon would look like a steal.

Hopefully, this short-term, hurricane-induced oil crisis will subside. But the clear and present danger to our economy and our security from America's long-term dependency on oil will not subside - unless we act now. In fact, it will only get worse.

As usual, the American people are already way ahead of Washington. Whether it's Galesburg farmers growing the corn that can fuel our cars or the Chicago factory workers making the microchip that let's us plug them in, people across the country have been taking America's energy future into their own hands with the same sense of innovation and optimism that sent the Wright brothers into the sky, led Dr. Salk to a cure for polio, and fueled Henry Ford's confidence that his workers could afford the cars they made.

But for too long now, this can-do spirit has been stifled by a can't-do government that seems to think it has no role in solving great national challenges or rallying a country to a cause. One that's content with simply giving more tax breaks to energy industries without asking for anything in return. Content with sending $650 million a day to countries like Saudi Arabia to pay for our fuel. And content with energy legislation that takes on only the easiest parts of the problem.

Now, I voted for the last energy bill. Because it took some baby steps in the right direction. It invests in the renewable, homegrown biofuels that could turn out to be some of the most promising alternatives to oil. It contains some provisions that would help us use alternative energy sources, increase our refinery capacity, and invest in clean coal technology. And recently, the administration made some executive policy changes that make it more difficult to classify cars as "light trucks," which would increase the production of more fuel-efficient cars.

None of these provisions do any harm - and a few do some good. But the energy bill and the administration's reforms don't suffer from sins of commission. Instead, they suffer from sins of omission. The solutions are too timid - the reforms too small. A bill that reduces our dependency on foreign oil by just 3% when our demand is about to jump 40% is not a serious energy policy. We need to do more.

The truth is, an oil future is not a secure future for America. Indeed, the rest of the world is already moving away from oil, and the longer we wait, the more difficult and painful it will be for our companies and our workers to catch up. Countries like China and Japan are creating jobs and slowing oil consumption by churning out and buying millions of fuel-efficient cars. Brazil, a nation that once relied on foreign countries to import 80% of its crude oil, will now be entirely self-sufficient in a few years thanks to its investment in biofuels. By getting more ethanol on the market and equipping their cars with the flexible-fuel engines that allow them to run on this fuel, Brazil has succeeded secured its energy supply while still giving consumers a break at the pump.

So why can't we do this? Why can't this be one of the great American projects of the 21st century?

The answer is, it can. We can do this with technology we have on the shelves right now; we can do it by saving, not crippling, our ailing auto companies; and we can do it by using the kind of clean, renewable sources of energy that we can literally grow right here in America.

There's no silver bullet. A solution to our energy dilemma won't come overnight. But we don't have to accept the wait-and-see attitude anymore. It flies in the face of our history and our founding principles. Katrina has shown us what could happen if we don't move away from an oil economy, but it has also provided us with a moment to challenge that kind of a future. Now is the time to seize that moment.

In the short-term, this probably means that we'll need to build even more refinery capacity and create not just a Strategic Petroleum Reserve, but also a Strategic Gasoline Reserve so that we can deal with the type of shortages we saw from Katrina. It means that we'll need to invest more in the clean technology that will allow us to burn more coal, our country's most abundant fossil fuel. And it means that we should continue to encourage the use of renewable fuels - by insisting that they make up 20% of our energy use and making sure that every new car in America has a flexible-fuel engine by 2010.

But we need to take even greater steps than these short-term measures. We need solutions that strike at the very heart of our dependence on oil.

Right now, the largest consumers of oil in this country are the cars we drive. And right now, we also have the technology to build cars that travel much further on a gallon of gas. We already have thousands of gas-electric hybrid cars driving around that can get 50 miles per gallon. Soon, plug-in hybrids will be able to get 75 miles per gallon. And experts believe that if we pump biofuels like E85 into a plug-in hybrid car, we can actually get up to 500 miles per gallon of gasoline.

So the technology is on the shelf. It's ready and available for our car companies to use. If we made sure that all passenger vehicles built in the U.S. got 40 miles per gallon, we would save consumers up to $5,000 at the pump over the life of their cars.

If we do this alone, we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil by over 1 billion barrels a year by 2020.

For years, we've hesitated to raise fuel economy standards as a nation in part because of a very legitimate concern - the impact it would have on Detroit. The auto industry is right when they argue that transitioning to more hybrid and fuel-efficient cars would require massive investment at a time when they're struggling under the weight of rising health care costs, sagging profits, and stiff competition from Europe and Japan.

But it's precisely because of that competition that they don't have a choice. As the demand and waiting lists for hybrid cars skyrocket, demand for SUVs - American car companies' biggest source of profit - is expected to plummet. The market is telling the auto industry to move away from oil - but so far only foreign companies are listening.

China now has a higher fuel economy standard than we do, and it's got 200,000 hybrids on its roads. Japan's Toyota is doubling production of the popular Prius to sell 100,000 in the U.S. this year, and it's getting ready to open a brand new production plant in China.

These companies are running circles around their American counterparts. Ford is only making 20,000 Escape Hybrids this year, and GM's brand won't be on the market until 2007. This isn't just costing us energy efficiency - it's decimating American businesses and costing American workers their jobs.

There is now no doubt that fuel-efficient cars represent the future of the auto industry. These cars will be built and bought and mass quantities. The only question is where and by who?

If American car companies hope to be a part of that future, if they hope to compete - if they hope to survive - they must make the necessary adjustments so that they can start building these cars. And we must help them do it.

There are many ways to do this and many good conversations that already taking place. One option is to provide direct subsidies to the auto industries so that it can transition its production to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Others have suggested providing tax credits for consumers to buy these cars.

Today I'd like to give you another example of a deal that Washington could make with Detroit. We'd start by raising the fuel economy standards in this country by 3% a year over the next fifteen years. But to help our auto industry make the transition - to give them the competitive edge they need against their foreign counterparts - we'd pay for part of the biggest costs they face today: retiree health care. Right now, health care costs represent $1,500 of the price of every GM car that's made. By picking up part of the tab for the health care costs of their retirees, we'd be lifting a huge burden off the auto industry so that they'll invest in the technology that will finally reduce America's dependence on foreign oil.

These solutions - investing in more hybrids and renewable energy sources; raising CAFE standards and helping our auto industry transition to a fuel-efficient future - represent a road to energy independence that will require some tough decisions and difficult politics, but as we look toward the future, it's the road we must travel as a nation. We could open up every square inch of America to drilling and we still wouldn't even make a dent in our oil dependency. We could open up ANWR today, and at its peak, which would be more than a decade from now, it would give us enough oil to take care of our transportation needs for about a month. Clearly, this is not a solution.

At the dawn of the Internet Age, Andy Grove of Intel famously said that there are two kinds of businesses: those that use email and those that will. Today, there are two kinds of car companies: those who make fuel-efficient cars and those that will. We can't follow the world anymore. We must lead. And if we don't act now, the economic and societal benefits that have always been the hallmark of American innovation will find a home somewhere else.

There are few issues in American politics that have such a far-reaching effect on almost every aspect of our well-being as a nation, yet remain so absent from public interest and action. But as we cut through all the talk and the politics in the energy debate, we can see what the debate is really about.

We see the family that thinks twice about what they'll spend at the grocery store this week, because they've been paying $40 to fill up the tank for the last month. We see the grandmother who isn't sure how she'll make her Social Security check cover January's heating bill. The autoworker who isn't sure what the future at Ford holds for him. And the mother who sees turmoil in the Middle East and worries that someday her son might have to fight to secure our oil supply.

Ultimately, we see a nation that cannot control its future as long as it cannot control the source of energy that keeps it running.

Recently, I returned from a trip to Ukraine, where I had the opportunity to meet the nation's third president, Viktor Yushchenko. Since the country first broke away from the Soviet Union more than a decade earlier, Ukraine has been trying to forge its own identity and assert its own independence from Russia. This culminated earlier this year in the Orange Revolution, a mass demonstration from thousands of protestors who stood by Yushchenko and his promise to move his country further from the sphere of Russian influence.

President Yushchenko finally won. But today, Ukraine remains almost entirely dependent on - guess who -- Russia - for all it's oil and gas supplies. And it is widely expected that in anticipation of next year's parliamentary elections, Russia will triple the prices of both. Despite all the soaring rhetoric, the demonstrations and the courage, Ukraine still finds itself at the mercy of its former patron - a nation that can now influence every political and economic decision they make - all because of oil.

This will not be America's future - but this is the stranglehold that fossil fuels can have on a nation's freedom. Ukraine may have little choice in the matter. The most powerful and wealthy nation on earth, teeming with brilliant minds and cutting-edge technology, surely does. The genius of the American people has already shown us the path towards energy independence, now they're just waiting for their government to take them there. Let's finally get it done. Thank you.

Lit_Match

Barack Obama on Abortion

* Extend presumption of good faith to abortion protesters. (Oct 2006)
* Pass the Stem Cell Research Bill. (Jun 2004)
* Protect a woman's right to choose. (May 2004)
* Supports Roe v. Wade. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Budget & Economy

* Bush's economic policies are not working. (May 2004)
* Supports federal programs to protect rural economy. (May 2004)
* Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005)

Barack Obama on Civil Rights

* Opposes gay marriage; supports civil union & gay equality. (Oct 2006)
* Marriage not a human right; non-discrimination is. (Oct 2004)
* African-Americans vote Democratic because of issue stances. (Jul 2004)
* Forthright on racial issues and on his civil rights history. (Jul 2004)
* Defend freedom and equality under law. (May 2004)
* Politicians: don't use religion to insulate from criticism. (Apr 2004)
* Supports affirmative action in colleges and government. (Jul 1998)
* Include sexual orientation in anti-discrimination laws. (Jul 1998)
* Miscegenation a felony in 1960 when Obamas practiced it. (Aug 1996)
* The civil rights movement was a success. (Aug 1996)
* Voted NO on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration. (Jun 2006)
* Voted NO on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)

Barack Obama on Corporations

* Tax incentives for corporate responsibility. (Jun 2004)
* Close tax loopholes for US companies relocating abroad. (Jun 2004)
* REAL USA Plan: Reward companies that create domestic jobs. (Jun 2004)
* Voted YES on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
* Voted NO on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Crime

* Battles legislatively against the death penalty. (Jul 2004)
* Battles legislatively against the death penalty. (Jul 2004)
* Supports alternative sentencing and rehabilitation. (Jul 1998)

Barack Obama on Drugs

Understand why youngsters want to use drugs. (Aug 1996)

Barack Obama on Education

* Guarantee affordable life-long, top-notch education. (Jun 2006)
* Sponsored legislations that recruit and reward good teachers. (Sep 2004)
* Provide decent funding and get rid of anti-intellectualism. (Jul 2004)
* Address the growing achievement gap between students. (May 2004)
* Will add 25,000 teachers in high-need areas. (May 2004)
* Supports charter schools and private investment in schools. (Jul 1998)
* Free public college for any student with B-average. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on $52M for "21st century community learning centers". (Oct 2005)
* Voted YES on $5B for grants to local educational agencies. (Oct 2005)
* Voted YES on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Energy & Oil

* 3-way win: economy, environment, & stop funding terror. (Jun 2006)
* Conserve, develop alternative fuels, increase efficiencies. (Oct 2004)
* Sponsored legislations that improve energy efficiency. (Sep 2004)
* 20% nation's power supply from renewable sources by 2020. (Sep 2004)
* 20% renewable energy by 2020. (Jul 2004)
* Invest in alternative energy sources. (Jun 2004)
* Increase CAFE to 40 mpg. (Jun 2004)
* Tradable credits for renewable energy. (Jun 2004)
* Renewable Fuels Standard: require ethanol in fuel supply. (May 2004)
* Voted YES on disallowing an oil leasing program in Alaska's AMWR. (Nov 2005)
* Voted YES on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005)
* Voted YES on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025 (instead of 5%). (Jun 2005)
* Voted YES on banning drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Environment

* Three months working on minority students recycling. (Aug 1996)
* Voted YES on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)

Barack Obama on Families & Children

Listening to evangelicals bridges major political fault line. (Oct 2006)

Barack Obama on Foreign Policy

* Never has US had so much power & so little influence to lead. (Jul 2004)
* US policy should promote democracy and human rights. (Jul 2004)

Barack Obama on Free Trade

* Insist on labor and human rights standards for China trade. (Jul 2004)
* Fair trade should have tangible benefits for US. (Jun 2004)
* Voted YES on free trade agreement with Oman. (Jun 2006)
* Voted NO on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade. (Jul 2005)

Barack Obama on Government Reform

* Hopefund PAC pushes government to honor sacred commitments. (Nov 2006)
* People are really ready for a message for change. (Jul 2004)
* Campaign race baiting works in both directions. (Aug 1996)
* Voted NO on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress. (Mar 2006)
* Voted YES on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)

Barack Obama on Gun Control

* Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
* Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
* Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

Barack Obama on Health Care

* Health care tied to balancing costs and taxes nation wide. (Jun 2006)
* Allowing seniors to bulk purchase will save taxpayers' money. (Oct 2004)
* Crises happen in our lives and healthcare is necessary. (Oct 2004)
* Believes health care is a right, not a privilege for the few. (Sep 2004)
* Lead global fight against AIDS. (Jul 2004)
* Allow prescription drug re-importation. (May 2004)
* Will expand health coverage & allow meds to be re-imported. (May 2004)
* Ensure access to basic care. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006)
* Voted YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005)
* Voted YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Homeland Security

* We are currently inspecting 3% of all incoming cargo. (Oct 2004)
* Increase funding to decommission Russian nukes. (Jul 2004)
* Give our soldiers the best equipment and training available. (Jul 2004)
* Balance domestic intelligence reform with civil liberty risk. (Jul 2004)
* Voted YES on reauthorizing the PATRIOT Act. (Mar 2006)
* Voted NO on extending the PATRIOT Act's wiretap provision. (Dec 2005)
* Voted YES on restricting business with entities linked to terrorism. (Jul 2005)
* Voted YES on restoring $565M for states' and ports' first responders. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Immigration

* Extend welfare and Medicaid to immigrants. (Jul 1998)
* Voted YES on establishing a Guest Worker program. (May 2006)
* Voted YES on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security. (May 2006)
* Voted YES on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship. (May 2006)

Barack Obama on Jobs

* Overrode federal overtime rules and raised the minimum wage. (Sep 2004)
* Make sure that African-American men have access to jobs. (Jul 2004)
* Fund Trade Adjustment Assistance for service workers too. (Jun 2004)
* Increase IL minimum wage to $6.50 an hour. (Jun 2004)
* Tax cuts for the rich do not create jobs. (May 2004)
* Obama will strengthen unions and workers? rights. (May 2004)
* Voted YES on raising the minimum wage to $7.25 rather than $6.25. (Mar 2005)

Barack Obama on Principles & Values

* Born in Hawaii; lives on Chicago's South Side. (Nov 2006)
* Hopefund PAC donated $500K to Democratic Senate candidates. (Nov 2006)
* On cover of Time magazine, about his book & presidency. (Oct 2006)
* Raised secular, but with working knowledge of world religion. (Oct 2006)
* Baptized as an adult in the Trinity United Church of Christ. (Oct 2006)
* Progressives should recognize common morality with religion. (Oct 2006)
* "Audacity of Hope" to change politics to reflect common good. (Oct 2006)
* Offer real hope-not blind optimism-to the American people. (Jul 2004)
* I'm living my parents' dreams and the American dream. (Jul 2004)
* Greatness based on Declaration of Independence, not military. (Jul 2004)
* We are one people all defending the United States of America. (Jul 2004)
* Want common-sense solutions, not liberal-conservative labels. (Jul 2004)
* Unflinching progressive but ok to downstate conservatives. (Jul 2004)
* Convention keynote speech highlights party's black targeting. (Jul 2004)
* First black president of the Harvard Law Review. (Jul 2004)
* Ryan quits Senate race amid sex scandal allegations. (Jun 2004)
* There's a call to evangelize in politics. (Apr 2004)
* I'm a big believer in the separation of church and state. (Apr 2004)
* Be strong or be cleaver and make peace. (Aug 1996)
* Mother attacked for playing with a black girlfriend. (Aug 1996)
* Guilt is a luxury that not everyone can afford. (Aug 1996)
* America's race and class problems are intertwined. (Aug 1996)
* Biracial heritage has caused identity crisis. (Aug 1996)
* There is some hope of eventual reconciliation between races. (Aug 1996)
* Poverty of political organizers was proof of their integrity. (Aug 1996)
* Spent time in both Muslim and Catholic schools. (Aug 1996)
* Racism wasn't merely the cruelty involved, but arrogance too. (Aug 1996)
* Voted NO on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice. (Jan 2006)
* Voted NO on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Sep 2005)

Barack Obama on Social Security

$2000 tax credit for Working Families Savings Accounts. (Jul 2004)

Barack Obama on Tax Reform

* Bush tax cuts help corporations but not middle class. (Jun 2004)
* Tax incentives to create jobs at home instead of offshore. (Jun 2004)
* Voted NO on permanently repealing the `death tax`. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on $47B for military by repealing capital gains tax cut. (Feb 2006)
* Voted NO on extending the tax cuts on capital gains and dividends. (Nov 2005)

Barack Obama on Technology

* Invest on transportation and clean coal technology projects. (Oct 2004)
* Voted NO on restoring $550M in funding for Amtrak for 2007. (Mar 2006)

Barack Obama on War & Peace

* Longtime critic of Iraq war. (Nov 2006)
* Saddam did not own and was not providing WMD to terrorists. (Oct 2004)
* Initial military was extraordinarily successful in Iraq. (Oct 2004)
* Invading Iraq was a bad strategic blunder. (Oct 2004)
* We must make sure that Iraq is stable having gone in there. (Oct 2004)
* Advance the training speed and get the reconstruction moving. (Oct 2004)
* Democratizing Iraq will be more difficult than Afghanistan. (Oct 2004)
* Terrorists are in Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. (Oct 2004)
* Never fudge numbers or shade the truth about war. (Jul 2004)
* Set a new tone to internationalize the Iraqi reconstruction. (Jul 2004)
* Iraq war was sincere but misguided, ideologically driven. (Jul 2004)
* Would have voted no to authorize the President to go to war. (Jul 2004)
* Problems with current Israeli policy. (Jul 2004)
* Not opposed to all wars, but opposed to the war in Iraq. (Jul 2004)
* International voice in Iraq in exchange for debt forgiveness. (Jul 2004)
* Engage North Korea in 6-party talks. (Jul 2004)
* Use moral authority to work towards Middle East peace. (Jul 2004)
* Voted NO on redeploying troops out of Iraq by July 2007. (Jun 2006)
* Voted YES on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)

Barack Obama on Welfare & Poverty

* Black churches minister to social needs out of necessity. (Oct 2006)
* Welfare receipts know how to become successful but need help. (Jul 2004)
* $100M increase in IL Earned Income Tax Credit. (Jun 2004)
* Inner city problems are the painful truths. (Aug 1996)
* Exorcise the ghostly figure that haunts black dreams. (Aug 1996)

__________________
Donation links to NORML (The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws) | MPP (Marijuana Policy Project)

Lou Cypher

Very much in depth search on Mr, Obama guys, but I dont see anyone metioning one fact that will keep him from becoming the first Black American President: He was born a Muslim and he is Black.
And all of us know that, it does not matter how much WE the citizens scream that we are ready for a Black President, WE are not the ones that we make this country choose its President. Lets not forget the 2004 voting incident in Florida, the reason that Bush got re-elected. Looking at that, what makes you believe that the rich Aglo-Saxon Society of rich republicans will ever allow something like this to happen?
In my opinion, Hillary and Obama (two people that I personaly admire for their accomplishments) are nothing but tokens in a white male monopoly race.
Please corect me if I'm wrong, but looking at the past 50 years, how many democrats stay in office long enough to get a chance to cure this country from the virus of RACISM and WHITE SUPREMACIST behavior.
Sad yes, but very truth indeed.

Peace
Live Free and Die well.

 

killian

A black man with a 'muslim' middle name won majority in a state that is 95% white, Obama is definately viable. He admits to have done both weed and coke, and he is black, so I cannot understand why he wishes to continue the Drug War. A war on both minorities and drug users, he should be the last person you would expect to continue it.

Jake

He's a politician trying to get elected...he's the first person to support the War on Drugs

__________________

Viper420

He doesn't want to appear to be "soft on crime".

Viper420

He'll lose the ENTIRE south.
BTW....his entire name is muslim.

IrishMike

I believe he will get a primary win in SC, however he could not win a general election as he is a junior Senator, 2 yrs. I believe, and his voting record in the Senate is a mirror image of Hillary's. I had my mind made up to vote Democratic this election, but i just can't get behind either of these two.