Plainsman1963

Senator John S. McCain (AZ)

Current Office: U.S. Senator
Current District: Senior Seat
First Elected: 11/04/1986
Last Elected: 11/02/2004
Party: Republican

Committees:
Armed Services [Senate]
Commerce, Science & Transportation [Senate]
Indian Affairs [Senate], Chair

Background Information Additional Information

Gender: Male
Family: Wife: Cindy Lou Hensley
7 Children: Doug, Sidney, Andy, Meghan, Jack, Jimmy, Bridget.
Birth date: 08/29/1936
Birthplace: Panama Canal Zone, Panama
Home City: Phoenix, AZ
Religion: Episcopalian

Education:
National War College, 1973-1974
BS, United States Naval Academy, 1958.

Professional Experience:
Senate Navy Liaison, 1977-1981
Pilot, Captain, United States Navy, Vietnam, 1958-1981
Beer Distributor.

Political Experience:
Senator, United States Senate, 1986-present
Primary Candidate, United States President, 2000
National Security Advisor, Dole/Kemp Presidential Campaign, 1996
Representative, United States House of Represtentatives, 1982-1986.

Organizations:
Member, American Dream Political Action Committee, 1997-present
Member, Council on Foreign Relations, 1997-present
Honorary Board Member, Hispanic Youth Foundation, 1997-present
Honorary Board Member, The Leonard Cheshire Foundation, 1997-present
Honorary Member, National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts Advisory Council, 1997-present
Honorary Vice Chairman, New Majority Council, 1997-present
Board of Trustees, Gallaudet University, 1995-present
Founding Member, Pacific Council on International Policy, University of South California, 1995-present
Board of Directors, Board of Directors Chair, International Republican Insitutute, 1992-present
Life Member, Navy League, 1987-present
Member, The Alfalfa Club
Member, Air Force Sergeants Association
Honorary Advisor Board, Arizonia Black Chamber of Commerce
Honorary Co Chairman, Advisory Board of Directors, Arizona Cancer Research Foundation
Honorary Member, Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Complimentary Member, Association of the US Army
Honorary Member, Barry Goldwater Foundation
Honorary Member, Fifty-Five Years and Up Incorporated
Honorary Member, Board of Regents, Francis Scott Key Foundation
Honorary Member, The John Goodwin Tower Center
Honorary Board Member, Kids Voting Arizona
Member, The Military Order of World Wars
Honorary Member, Mo Udall Foundation
Board of Directors, Nixon Center for Peace and Freedom
Member, Purple Heart Association
Member, The Retired Officers Association
Member, Sons of the Revolution in the State of Virginia
Member, US Naval Academy Alumni Association
Member of Board of Visitors, US Naval Academy
Honorary Member, Board of Directors, Council of Notables, US-Spain Council
Member, Veterans of Foreign Wars
Member, Vietnam Veterans Association.

Caucuses/Non-Legislative Committees:
Environmental and Energy Study Conference
National Republican Senatorial Committee
Co Chair, Porkbusters Coalition
Renewal Alliance
Senate Centrist Coalition
Senate Committee for American Indian College Fund
Senate Co Chair, National Security Caucus
Senate Steering Committee
Senate Wilderness and Public Lands Caucus
Vietnam Veterans in Congress.

On the Issues

Plainsman1963

Public Statements

Speaker: Senator John S. McCain (AZ)
Title: Senate Resolution 70--Expressing the Sense of the Senate that the Commander of Multinational Forces-Iraq and All United States Personnel Under His ...
Location: Washington, DC
Date: 02/05/2007

SENATE RESOLUTION 70--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE SENATE THAT THE COMMANDER OF MULTINATIONAL FORCES-IRAQ AND ALL UNITED STATES PERSONNEL UNDER HIS COMMAN SHOULD RECEIVE FROM CONGRESS THE FULL SUPPORT NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT THE UNITED STATES MISSION IN IRAQ -- (Senate - February 05, 2007)

Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. GRAHAM, Mr. CORNYN, Mrs. HUTCHISON, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. THUNE, Mr. HATCH, and Mr. ROBERTS) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations:

S. Res. 70

Whereas more than 137,000 members of the Armed Forces of the United States are currently serving in Iraq, like thousands of others since March 2003, with the bravery and professionalism consistent with the finest traditions of the Armed Forces of the United States, and deserve the support of all Americans;

Whereas past mistakes in United States strategy, aggression by various groups that reject peace, and other difficulties have contributed to a dire security situation in Iraq characterized by insurgent activity and sectarian violence;

Whereas a failed state in Iraq would present a threat to regional and world peace, and the long-term security interests of the United States are best served by an Iraq that can sustain, govern, and defend itself;

Whereas no amount of additional United States forces in Iraq can effect this outcome in Iraq unless the people and Government of Iraq take difficult political steps toward reconciliation;

Whereas the establishment of a basic level of security in Baghdad and throughout Iraq is an essential precondition for reconciliation and political and economic progress in Iraq;

Whereas these steps must include the fulfillment of military, political, and economic commitments that the Government of Iraq has made to the United States and to the people of Iraq;

Whereas Iraqi political leaders must show visible progress toward meeting specific benchmarks, including--

(1) deploying a significant number of new Iraqi security forces to partner with United States units in securing Baghdad;

(2) assuming responsibility for security in all provinces in Iraq in a timely manner;

(3) disarming individual militias as circumstances warrant and ensuring that security forces are accountable to the central government and loyal to the constitution of Iraq;

(4) ensuring equitable distribution of the resources of the Government of Iraq without regard to the sect or ethnicity of recipients;

(5) enacting and implementing legislation to ensure that the oil resources of Iraq benefit Sunni Arabs, Shia Arabs, Kurds, and other Iraqi citizens in an equitable manner;

(6) building an effective, independent judiciary that will uphold the rule of law and ensure equal protection under the law for all citizens of Iraq;

(7) pursuing all those who engage in violence or threaten the security of the Iraqi population, regardless of sect or political affiliation;

(8) enacting and implementing legislation that reforms the de-Ba'athification process in Iraq;

(9) conducting provincial elections in Iraq;

(10) ensuring a fair process for amending the constitution of Iraq; and

(11) expending promised funds to provide basic services and employment opportunities for all Iraqis, including a $10,000,000,000 fund for reconstruction, and ensuring that these funds reach both Sunni and Shia areas, including Sunni neighborhoods in Baghdad and largely Sunni Anbar Province;

Whereas the United States Ambassador to Iraq and the Commander of Multinational Forces-Iraq should report each month to the Senate on the progress being made by Iraqis toward achieving the benchmarks specified in the preceding clause and on their own progress in achieving their missions in Iraq;

Whereas leaders in the Administration of President George W. Bush and Congress have made it clear to the Iraqi leadership that the commitment of the United States in Iraq is not open-ended and that, if the Government of Iraq does not follow through on its promises, it will lose the support of its own people and the people of the United States;

Whereas the moderate countries of the Middle East, and other countries around the world, have an interest in a successful conclusion to the war in Iraq and should increase their constructive assistance toward the achievement of this end;

Whereas over the past year, leaders in the Administration of President George W. Bush and Congress, as well as recognized experts outside government, acknowledged that the situation in Iraq was deteriorating and required a change in strategy; and

Whereas Lieutenant General David Petraeus has been unanimously confirmed by the Senate as the new Coalition commander in Iraq and given the mission of implementing a new strategy for Iraq designed to bring security to Iraq and pave the way for political and economic progress in Iraq: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Senate that--

(1) Congress should ensure that General David Petraeus, the Commander of Multinational Forces-Iraq, and all United States personnel under his command, have the resources they consider necessary to carry out their mission on behalf of the United States in Iraq; and

(2) the Government of Iraq must make visible, concrete progress toward meeting the political, economic, and military benchmarks enumerated in the preamble to this Resolution.

THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Plainsman1963

Public Statements

Speaker: Senator John S. McCain (AZ)
Title: Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Date: 01/24/2007

FAIR MINIMUM WAGE ACT OF 2007 -- (Senate - January 24, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Gregg and others in supporting this fiscally responsible amendment to provide the President authority to perform rescissions to legislation passed by Congress. Congress would then be required to review the President's recommendation within 8 days and affirm or reject the recommendation. Additionally, this amendment correctly requires the money from rescissions to be put toward deficit reduction.

Congress has grappled with the issue of providing the President with line-item veto or rescission authority since the original law was overturned by the Supreme Court in 1998. In the last Congress, there were at least eight bills introduced, including one I authored, attempting to provide the President with the authority to review and reject objectionable sections of legislation passed by Congress. It is my hope that during the 110th Congress we will provide the President with this important tool to combat porkbarrel spending and to reduce the deficit.

Just last night, President Bush delivered the annual State of the Union Address in which he stressed the need to impose spending discipline here in Washington by cutting the number earmarks. He is not the only President to address the country about the need to curtail wasteful porkbarrel spending.

In 1988, during his final State of the Union Address, President Ronald Reagan discussed the growth of earmarks and asked for line-item veto authority for future Presidents. On that evening, President Reagan carried with him three pieces of legislation: an appropriations bill that was 1,053 pages long and weighed 14 pounds; a budget reconciliation bill that was 1,186 pages long and weighed 15 pounds; and a continuing resolution that was 1,057 pages long and weighed 14 pounds.

In reference to the continuing resolution, President Reagan chided Congress, stating, ``Most of you in this Chamber didn't know what was in this catch-all bill and report.' President Reagan then explained that millions of dollars for items such as cranberry research, blueberry research, the study of crawfish, and the commercialization of wild flowers were included in the continuing resolution ``tucked away behind a little comma here and there.'

In 1987, Ronald Reagan vetoed a highway bill because it had 157 earmarks. In the last Congress, a highway bill with 6,371 special projects costing the taxpayers $24 billion was enacted, despite my strong opposition. Those and other earmarks passed by Congress included $50 million for an indoor rainforest, $500,000 for a teapot museum, $350,000 for an Inner Harmony Foundation and Wellness Center, and $223 million for a ``Bridge to Nowhere.'

Unfortunately, this earmarking has not been limited to the highway bill. Nothing can compare to the out of control earmarking that has occurred in the annual appropriations measures during recent years. According to data gathered by Congressional Research Service, there were 4,126 earmarks in 1994. In 2005, there were 15,877--an increase of nearly 400 percent. There was a little good news in 2006, solely due to the fact that the Labor-HHS appropriations bill was approved almost entirely free of earmarks--an amazing feat given that there were over 3,000 earmarks the prior year in that bill. Despite this first reduction in 12 years, it doesn't change the fact that 2004, 2005, and 2006 produced the greatest number of earmarks in history.

Now, let's consider the level of funding associated with those earmarks. The amount of earmarked funding increased from $23.2 billion in 1994 to $64 billion in fiscal year 2006. Remarkably, it rose by 34 percent from 2005 to 2006, even though the number of earmarks decreased. Earmarked dollars have doubled just since 2000 and more than tripled in the last 10 years. This is wrong and disgraceful, and we urgently need to curtail this seemingly out of control porkbarreling practice that has become the norm around here.

President Reagan would be deeply disturbed to know that almost 20 years later, the size of spending bills has gotten much, much larger as we put more money toward porkbarrel projects. These earmarks have allowed the national debt to grow from over $5 trillion when President Reagan left office in January 1989 to over $8 trillion today. These statistics demonstrate clearly that the need for rescission authority is much greater than when President Reagan was in office.

President Reagan said to Congress during his 1988 State of the Union Address, ``Let's help ensure our future of prosperity by giving the President a tool that, though I will not get to use, is one I know future Presidents of either party must have. Give the President ..... the right to reach into massive appropriation bills, pare away the waste, and enforce budget discipline.' This amendment would do just that. It would provide the President authority to identify wasteful items of spending and move to eliminate them from the Federal budget. This would be a significant and, unfortunately, all too rare move in Washington, DC, toward fiscal discipline.

Rescission authority alone is not the solution to the fiscal crisis we face in our Nation's Capitol. We also desperately need to reform our earmarking process and our lobbying practices and the legislation the Senate passed last week makes a number of positive improvements in those areas. But above all, we must remember that it is ultimately Congress's responsibility to control spending. However, granting the President line-item veto authority would go a long way toward restoring credibility to a system ravaged by congressional waste and special interest pork.

I urge my colleagues to support the Gregg amendment.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/

Swabeky

I hope he wins the nomination because I feel he and Barack are the only candidates I can trust. Thank god he won Florida because Romney is a creep that will say whatever you want him to say.

disheartenedwamerica

I'm sorry, I think I read above that you said you thought McCain was the only one you could trust. I hope I am having dillusions... McCain is a fool. He wants us to remain in Iraq for another 100 years, not to mention he is all for policing the world. I suppose if you like to live without freedom he may be a good candidate, but the ONLY choice, or hope for America has to be Ron Paul. He is the only candidate willing to discuss REAL issues, rather than going back to the strawman of "fighting terror". If he really wants to fight terror and support our troops he would draw up impeachment charges against Bush, bring our troops home, and stop the U.S. terror of 167 countries we currently occupy.

MasterCylinder

McCain will keep us in Iraq for 4 more years. He's said as much. He's just GWB Version 2.0.

Swabeky

Ron Paul is a racist and a loony who wants us to go back to the gold standard and bring trade. So far all signs point that the surge is working, and if we leave now the Iraqi's will be more screwed then they are right now. We got them into this hellhole and we better as well fix it. Not to mention he wants to abolish public schooling and many other public services people depend on. And Giuliani was the only candidate I consistently heard scream 9/11 and terrorist, but he's done.

I'm not saying all of his ideas are crazy, I really wish the states would have more power over what they spend, but the Federal government loves it's power and Paul would accomplish nothing while in office.

Mccain was a POW; denied being released early for being a senators son and stayed with the other POW's. A man has to have A LOT of character to do such an amazing thing, and I can honestly say in those same conditions I'm not sure if I would make the same decision. He will be fiscally responsible and will work across party lines as he has done in the past. And I mean, Romney is a slime-ball who is just another bush in a mormon disguise.

And then there's Clinton, she's a democratic Neo-Con with her eyes set on Iran. Not to mention Bill was an imperialist as well. Barack would not be a bad choice either as I believe he is sincere in his rhetoric, but he hasn't said much on any issue, and from what I've heard is wanting to increase the defense department budget the most of any candidate and voted Yes to the reauthorize of the Patriot Act.

BTW I love the vague and ambigious terms you use to describe our occupation of other countries and our domestic spying policy.

Andrew87

How? Granted, Congressman Paul and I disagree on a few issues(such as his AWFUL foreign policy stance, and desire to downsize the military), but I don't see how you could consider him a 'racist.'

Agree 100% with both...


disheartenedwamerica..

And what do you want them to do when they get back here? We have a military for a reason. Believe me, I am EXTREMELY supportive of our soldiers (I plan to commission in the Air Force when I finish my degree), but you speak of the military as if they are civilians caught in a bad situation. No self-respecting soldier, sailor, airman, or marine ever joined up thinking that they COULDN'T DIE. When you enlist or commission in the military, you figuratively sign a check made payable to the U.S. government, for an amount of 'up to and including my life.' To paraphrase Rep. Jean Schmidt - "Cowards cut and run, the U.S. military NEVER does."

Oh and by the way, Bush is not the enemy, as you seem to believe. If I recall correctly, the rest of the world also suspected Hussein of having nukes.

And what is this about "the U.S. terror of 167 countries we occupy"!!?? Please. You go live under the iron hand of some insane dictator, then you can talk to me about 'U.S. terror.'

Lit_Match

He's not a racist, anybody who goes just one step further than watching the MSM knows that.

And loony? A ten term congressmen with a degree in medicine which earned him a whopping $3 an hour so anybody who needed treatment could get it? A guy that voted against a cushy pension for congress because it was a waste of tax dollars and actually gives money back to the treasury when he has a surplus because keeping it would be... immoral? I've met more than a few "loonies", none of them exhibit those characteristics.

And if you think going back to gold standard is unwise you really know nothing of monetary process. The price of virtually everything would drop, equally the value of money would rise dramatically because there is actually currency behind it. Ever seen on of those national ads on tv that offers to buy your old gold jewelery (national ads are very expensive btw), offering top dollar in as little as a week? Ever wonder why?

A gold standard is the best thing that could to happen to our economy bar none.

If you don't mind, could you clarify that for me?

From what I understand, the President is at the top of the federal food chain. The only people with more power than him is... the people (more specifically, the elected representatives of the people). Abolishing the IRS and the Federal Reserve is not impossible at all for the President, executive orders are just a start. Add to that the national audience the President has, once most Americans actually here is take on things they'd be more than in agreement.

The only negative I can see in Ron Paul becoming President (and I really mean this), is that he would be assassinated before he can get the ball rolling on anything. Too many rich men out there stand a lot to lose, and greed can pretty much convince a man to do anything necessary.

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

Plainsman1963

Old newsletters that were written by somebody else. Paul took responsibility for the statements (because they were published under his name) and apologized for the lack of oversight. Read his statements for the last 30 years on race and racism and you will see he is the farthest thing from a racist.
Sample

Bring trade??? Oh, the humanity!!!

As to the gold standard? Yeah, he believes in following the constitution in all things, including the subject of money. You know who else has advocated for returning to the gold standard? Ronald Reagan, Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and many many more.
Ron Paul, The Economy and Monetary Policy | Ron Paul Library
Really? All signs? Hard to believe they could be more screwed than they are now.
Ahh, the "we broke it we buy it argument". If we are going to throw out idiotic metaphors/parables, how about extending that one a bit? If I own a business (Iraqi citizen/politician) and somebody comes into the business (foreign military) and start breaking my stock (killing citizens/ruining infrastructure), I would kick the damn person out after the first couple of things got broke, not continuing to allow them to break stuff.
Completely untrue. He is in favor of abolishing the department of education, which has been a plank of the republican platform for decades, until the neocons took it over.
Ron Paul, Education | Ron Paul Library
Ending the welfare/nanny state? How dare he???
Ron Paul, Freedom and Personal Liberty | Ron Paul Library
Ron Paul, The Role of Government | Ron Paul Library
He would veto everything that wasn't funded and worked toward balancing the budget, making it impossible for the tax and spend politicians to keep taxing and spending unless they had a super majority. Might not stop them, sure would slow them down and shine a big bright light on their attempts, perhaps even getting the populace involved in the process. Wouldn't that be amazing?
Perhaps you would have collaborated with the enemy and then spent most of your political life trying to cover it up at the expense of fellow POW's?

Daily Dose » economy
Umm, how about joining the national guard and the coast guard and actually working to defend our borders?
To prop up puppet governments and increase the DNP of foreign nations?
Me too. I used to be one.
Was she in the military?

As we were fond of saying..."We never retreat! We're just advancing in the opposite direction!"

Talk to a Vietnam, Korea or WWII vet concerning that rah rah, rambo, john wayne rhetoric.
Could have fooled me. Civil rights, Habeas Corpus, domestic spying, signing statements, patriot act loving asshole that he is...
Based on intelligence "reports" (that our own CIA warned against) from our intelligence services that were ramrodded through over the objections of those that were fond of logic. I also take exception to the generalized hubris of "the rest of the world".
You mean, we're not living under the iron hand of some insane dictator? Again, could have fooled me and I was stationed in Panama before we got rid of Noriega and his brown shirts.