{news} Manchester Journal-Inquirer reports on Fournier and opponents

[David Bedell]

http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2008/10/26/connecticut/doc490290970027b098533302.txt

Larson foes face uphill challenge to convince voters they could do better

By Kimberly Phillips
Journal Inquirer
Published: Saturday, October 25, 2008 1:46 AM EDT

In a state where voters in the 27 towns that comprise the 1st Congressional
District also are primarily Democrat, Republican Joe Visconti, come the
close of polls on Election Day, could be singing the blues.

After a decade in Washington, U.S. Rep. John B. Larson again is seeking a
return to Congress, and is favored to beat Visconti and Green Party
candidate Stephen Fournier with the same ease he's enjoyed during the last
several campaigns.

But that's not for lack of trying on his opponents' part.

Visconti's supporters, rooted in his hometown of West Hartford where he
serves on the Town Council, have dotted the landscape in neighborhoods in
towns including East Hartford, East Windsor, Manchester, South Windsor,
Windsor, and Windsor Locks with his campaign signs.

*
And he's delivered plans to reform taxes by allowing residents to deduct
some or all of their heating costs on their federal income tax returns, curb
illegal immigration by investigating municipalities with sanctuary laws, and
cope with the energy crisis by releasing petroleum from the country's
strategic reserve for use this winter.

Similarly, Fournier, of Hartford, criticized Larson's recent vote supporting
the $700 billion dollar Wall Street bailout calling the legislation "a
patchwork of political deals," and criticizing the congressman's aversion to
election debates.

Nevertheless, few can compete with an incumbent who's collected $1.3 million
in contributions for the campaign through Sept. 30, according to the Federal
Election Commission's Web site.

Larson - who started in politics in his hometown of East Hartford, serving
on the Town Council and Board of Education there before moving to Hartford
as a legislator - has been the man to beat in the 1st District since he
first set up office in Washington.

In 2002, he secured 67 percent of the vote against Hartford Republican Phil
Steele. Then in 2004 and 2006, he trounced Wethersfield Republican John
Halstead and East Granby Republican Scott MacLean, respectively, by 3-to-1
margins.

A third Republican, New Canaan resident Miriam Masullo came onto the
political landscape in 2002 and 2006, pledging to move into the 1st District
should she actually beat Larson and win the seat. But Masullo never started
house hunting - she lost her party endorsement to Steele in 2002 when he
forced a primary against her and to MacLean in 2006 when she challenged him
for his nomination in a primary.

This time around, Masullo has been quiet, saying in March that she planned
to stay out of the 1st District race.

Campaign aside, Larson has spent the last several years visiting the Middle
East as a dignitary and then returning to criticize the Bush administration'
s handling of the war in Iraq and the military's continued presence there.

But during the last several months he turned his focus to domestic issues,
tending to the nation's economic crisis and soliciting input from
constituents, most recently during a forum at Manchester Community College
explaining the bailout plan and his vote in favor of it.

This week, Larson announced his creation of the "First Congressional
District Youth Cabinet," designed to engage area youth in politics and
national issues and to provide them access to Washington's legislative
process. According to Larson, the cabinet is the first congressional youth
advisory board in the nation.

He's also been a staunch advocate of fuel-cell technology, supporting the
efforts of South Windsor-based UTC Power, and has shepherded military
contracts to East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney.

Still, his opponents believe they can do better.

"Congress is disconnected, out of touch, and out of time," Visconti said
during his campaign announcement. "I intend to bring some old-fashioned
common sense to Washington and influence all those around me to do the
 same."

Fournier, who's indicated he entered the race when Larson refused to support
Fournier in his call to impeach Bush, said simply that cleaning up Congress
is "a dirty job that somebody has to do."

QUESTIONNAIRE

1) What steps do you favor, apart from conservation, to reduce U.S.
dependence on foreign oil?

VISCONTI: Moratoriums should be lifted off of all off-shore drilling
restriction. New legislation, which would encourage and increase hybrid,
hydrogen, and fuel cell technology in the production of cars in the auto
industry. Increase in shale-to-oil and coal-to-gas production with
environmental precautions. Encourage the increase in development of wind and
solar production.

LARSON: This issue is critical to rebuilding our economy. We must challenge
the ingenuity of Americans to develop the technology we need to move beyond
oil. That means significant investments in alternative energy. Fuel cells,
like those made in Connecticut, are a key, and I have already helped pass
legislation that provides grants and tax incentives to grow this technology.
We must use a mixture of natural gas, clean coal, wind, solar, and nuclear
power in innovative ways to limit our need for foreign oil. It is vital for
both our economy and our national security.

FOURNIER: I favor no-fare public ground transportation and rapid conversion
to non-fuel-burning sources, especially solar, wind, and geothermal. Modern
technology makes free ground travel possible, and the injurious effects of
fuel burning, along with the scarcity of fuel, make it imperative. If we pay
the fares for bus and train, people will leave their cars in the garage, and
the demand for gasoline will plummet. We'll save a bundle. We should also be
installing photovoltaics wherever the sun shines and windmills wherever the
wind blows. We must break the stranglehold of Big Oil (foreign and domestic)
over our political system.

2) What, if any, initiatives by the federal government do you favor to make
medical insurance more available to people who do not have it through their
employment or cannot afford it on their own?

VISCONTI: Encourage employers, through federal tax incentives, to offer
health care to all employees. For those that cannot afford it on their own,
the states offer specific programs, like Husky, to cover the individuals and
their families.

LARSON: Health care is a complex issue that requires all of us to balance
humane and economic issues. I believe that we must work to ensure equal
access to quality health care. Our health care system must change to
emphasize wellness and preventative care as well as personal responsibility.
The federal government has an important role to play by providing a safety
net and ensuring basic care is available to all. Government, together with
businesses, health care, and insurance companies, must work to control
spiraling administrative costs.

FOURNIER: I support universal, single-payer health care. Workers in Europe
have free health care, funded with taxes. Americans don't have a comparable
system because the insurance industry finances our public officials.
Employers must provide most of the coverage, and they're cutting benefits
every year. Health costs are a major cause of bankruptcy in our nation. If
Medicare - the national health care system for people over 65 - were
extended to everyone, we would save billions in administrative costs, and
Americans would be healthier and more secure. In Congress, I would press for
a universal, taxpayer-funded health system, starting, immediately, with
Medicare for all.

3) What kind of situations around the world justify the use of U.S. military
force?

VISCONTI: Where American interests and its citizens are in harm's way and
diplomatic relations have deteriorated to a point where failure to utilize
military force could lead to catastrophic outcomes.

LARSON: Successful foreign policy is centered on diplomacy, deterrence, and
containment. Both Democratic and Republican presidents have employed these
principals for the past 50 years. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has
chosen preemption and unilateralism. In the process, the United States
violated both the Weinberger doctrine, which holds we should never enter a
war unless our vital interests are threatened or an eminent threat exists,
and the Powell corollary - if we do go to war, we should use overwhelming
force and have a clear exit strategy. I believe that those principals should
guide us. One area where I believe military force must continue to be
applied is dealing with Osama Bin Laden. He is still at large and represents
an imminent threat and should be dealt with immediately.

FOURNIER: The United Nations charter defines the circumstances under which a
nation may use military force, and our Constitution requires a formal
declaration of war. Any killing that takes place outside these legal
boundaries is murder. Both of the current U.S. engagements are crimes under
international law and under our own laws. Both are being waged for political
advantage and both are aggressive and preemptive in character. I favor the
application of the rule of law to warfare, and I insist on impeachment,
removal and prosecution of any federal officer that breaches legal
requirements, including the president and vice president.