VOTER GUIDE: Colorado District 6 race

Incumbent Mike Coffman (R) is running against Andrew Romanoff (D), Gary Swing and Norm Olsen (L).

The following questions and their respective topics were sent to each candidate:

GOVERNMENT

Is a government shutdown ever warranted as a means of achieving policy goals?

• Coffman (R) – Both parties were to blame for the government shutdown. There's too much bickering in Washington, and not enough bipartisan leadership. But this question -- and this questionnaire -- misses the most important question facing our nation: how do we get control of the mountain of debt that threatens to crush the future prosperity of our great nation? Balancing the budget is a major priority of mine. It is the beginning of my agenda. I've also worked to reform the VA. I've led the fight to crack down on sexual assault in the military. I have been working to cut spending and get the Keystone XL pipeline built. My focus isn't on partisan bickering -- it is on working hard and driving solutions for the good people I represent.
• Romanoff (D) - When I was Speaker of the House of Colorado, Governor Bill Owens and I disagreed many times, but we never shut down the government over our differences. Instead, we passed a balanced budget ahead of schedule each of the four years I was Speaker. Disagreement is a healthy part of our democratic process. But shutting down the government is irresponsible, and it hurts us all. The people who represent us should be willing to compromise and work across the aisle. That's how Colorado works, and it should be how Washington works too.
• Swing (G) - The world would be better off if the US military, the CIA and the NSA were shut down permanently. A federal government shutdown could be warranted as a tactic for achieving policy goals such as ending the United States' illegal, immoral wars of aggression or halting climate change. The Republican Party's government shutdown to oppose the Affordable Care Act was totally absurd. It is ridiculous to cut off funding for the positive services that government provides (such as health care, education, social welfare, and environmental protection) while continuing to fund destructive programs like the military and illegal surveillance programs.
• Olsen (L) - No. Government shutdowns have evolved into politically motivated publicity stunts. In the end, everyone gets paid, no money is saved, and the average citizen is inconvenienced. As evidenced by the fact that currently (supposedly temporarily) there is no debt ceiling, there is no pragmatic purpose to these events. As citizens, we must demand that those in charge of our government operate same in a fiscally responsible manner. Achieving this noble goal essentially requires that significant portions of the government be permanently shut down which is what I will advocate as a Congressman.

AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

On balance, has the Affordable Care Act been helpful or harmful? What changes are needed?

• Coffman (R) – This is a point of key disagreement between myself and Andrew Romanoff. When running against Michael Bennet for the US Senate, Romanoff hammered Bennet for not taking Obamacare further in the direction of government-run, European-style socialized medicine. On Obamacare, Romanoff is an extremist, and he is wrong.Obamacare has been harmful and we haven't seen the worst impacts of it yet, as the Obama administration has delayed the employer mandate past the election. If a policy has to be delayed past an election because it is so unpopular and harmful, it is probably bad policy and shouldn't be implemented at any time. We need to repeal Obamacare and replace it with a patient-centric system that helps bring down costs, ensures protections for pre-existing conditions and expands access to essential medical services. I did it at the state level. When I was a state legislator I authored and passed landmark legislation that protected patients with pre-existing conditions from being denied coverage, banned insurance companies from charging women more than men, and did it without causing hundreds of thousands of Coloradans from having their health insurance plans cancelled or double in price. I have sponsored a bill to ensure that insurance companies cannot discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions if Obamacare is repealed, and will continue working for common sense healthcare reform that doesn't bankrupt our country or our families.
• Romanoff (D) - There's no question that the rollout of the Affordable Care Act was botched. However, Congress should be working to fix the law, not repeal it. We can't go back to the days where people were denied coverage for preexisting conditions or where women were charged more than men for coverage. In Congress, I will work with Democrats and Republicans to improve the law. We must continue to rein in the cost of health care, and we need to improve transparency in pricing and outcomes so that consumers can make more informed decisions.
• Swing (G) - The misnamed Affordable Care Act has been harmful. It coerces people into signing up for unaffordable private insurance plans that fail to provide the health care people need. This program is really a form of corporate welfare. The Affordable Care Act should be repealed and replaced with a single payer "Medicare for All" national health insurance plan.
• Olsen (L) - Harmful. As reported by the Congressional Budget Office, upon the complete implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), there will be almost as many uninsured as there was before the ACA was enacted. The ACA achieves the political goals of the Democratic Party and requires all citizens to become customers of government approved insurance companies. Note that in the 2,000+ pages of the ACA, no mention is made of tort reform (a definitive reform which would reduce costs significantly) as the legal profession is a loyal supporter of the Democratic Party. The ACA is not about healthcare. It's about politics and insurance company profits.

ENERGY

Should the government use financial incentives to encourage the growth of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar?

• Coffman (R) – I believe tax incentives to support the burgeoning renewable energy industry are appropriate and beneficial. Companies should not become dependent on government largesse to operate, but it's in our national interest to support renewable energy. And meanwhile, we need to grow production of traditional energy sources too. Andrew Romanoff has aligned with extreme environmentalists on these major questions related to oil and gas production, in particular construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Even though the pipeline is the lynchpin of a policy that would bring us greater energy freedom, Romanoff says we need to study it more, siding with environmental interest groups. Energy independence, it would seem, takes a back seat to the extreme positions of the environmental groups who fund Andrew Romanoff's campaign. Romanoff is wrong on Keystone XL -- it is part of an all-of-the-above energy policy, just like expanded wind and solar production.
• Romanoff (D) - It is in the best interests of our economy and our environment to accelerate our transition to clean energy, and Congress can and should promote this transition. Investing in renewable energy brings good, middle class jobs to Colorado, and our state is uniquely positioned to be a leader in this field.
• Swing (G) - Yes, absolutely. The US government should eliminate subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear energy, ban fracking, prohibit the production of oil from tar sands or shale, stop the KXL Pipeline, and increase subsidies for conversion to wind, solar, hydroelectric and geothermal power. Carbon taxes should be implemented to account for the ecological impacts of energy production.
• Olsen (L) - No. Energy produced by renewable energy sources costs two to four times as much as energy produced by conventional means; that's why they have to be subsidized. A government that habitually runs $500 billion deficits has no business using non-existent funds to subsidize inefficient means of energy production. An economy which has been in recession for five years does not need to be hindered by inefficient energy production. Our nation needs efficient energy production such as that provided by nuclear plants which are currently prohibited by governmental actions. Eventually, renewable energy technology will become economic as the renewable technology improves its efficiency and the cost of conventional energy increases. Financial incentives for select industries, and select participants in those industries, is again more political than economic or environmental (e.g. Solyndra et al).

IMMIGRATION

What is the most important policy change needed in immigration reform?

• Coffman (R) – I believe there are three essential elements to immigration reform -- it must secure our borders, grow our economy, and be compassionate in keeping families together. We have far too many people who live in fear of deportation every day -- people who have broken no other laws than immigration laws, people who help strengthen the fabric of our nation. We must let them come out of the shadows, work and pay taxes. I have authored a bill that will allow undocumented children, brought here through no fault of their own, to earn a path to citizenship through service in the military. Our immigration policy must also strengthen our economy. That is why the House passed a bill increasing the visas available to graduates with degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering or Mathematics (STEM), so they can put the skills they learned in school to use in our economy, not overseas. The Senate has refused to vote on this legislation. As a national security imperative, we must also secure our borders so we know who is in our country.
• Romanoff (D) - We need comprehensive immigration reform, which must include improved border security, reform of our broken visa programs, and a pathway to citizenship for individuals who have been living in and contributing to our community for years. This issue is personal to me, as it is to many in our district. I would not be here today if America had not opened its doors to my mother and my grandparents. Aurora alone has people who've come from over 130 countries. We should celebrate that diversity, and in Congress, I will do all I can to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
• Swing (G) - High immigration levels are caused by an unsustainable, high consumption lifestyle in the United States, economic globalization policies that exploit Third World nations for the benefit of transnational corporations, and labor policies designed to drive down wages. International trade policies should be reformed to protect labor, human rights, and the environment. Fair trade should promote local self-reliance, not foreign corporate domination. I support international work permits that are not tied to a specific employer.
• Olsen (L) - Our borders must be secured and immigration laws as they exist (as poor as they may be) enforced. Without enforcement of the law, the border is not our border; it's their border. Without enforcement, Congress can pass a hundred 2,000 page laws every day and it will not make any difference. In short, without enforcement, there is no "immigration policy". That being said, our immigration policies should be opened up to make wait times substantially less; work permits issued to illegal immigrants; but a pathway to citizenship should available only to those who have immigrated legally. That our nation is a nation of laws is something of which we are very proud and is the primary reason we are wealthy and are able to pursue happiness as each so chooses. As a nation of laws, we must not reward those who intentionally flout our laws while simultaneously penalizing those who respect our laws.

MARIJUANA

Do you support the nationwide legalization of marijuana?

• Coffman (R) – I believe this is a decision best left up to states, and wouldn't support a nationwide legalization initiative. When Colorado legalized marijuana, it was my responsibility to fight for them in Congress and I have co-sponsored legislation to allow legal marijuana businesses access to banking services. Without access to banks, a cash-based marijuana industry is at higher risk of criminality, which isn't good for anyone.
• Romanoff (D) - I support the right of states to make this decision for themselves. Here in Colorado, the voters have spoken, and the federal government should respect Colorado's right to implement this policy.
• Swing (G) - Yes, I support the legalization of cannabis. The term "marijuana" has racist connotations. The United States has more prisoners per capita than any other nation. Roughly half of those prisoners have been convicted of victimless "crimes."
• Olsen (L) - Yes; regulate but legalize. As is true of most all prohibited drugs, legalization of marijuana will create some new and different problems but these problems will be substantially less in nature and effect than those caused by prohibition. Dealing with the new and different problems will be easier and more effective as all will be in the open, those who have a problem with the drug will be able to seek help without having to confess to being a felon, and funds derived from tax revenue can be used to treat addiction problems and the health issues related to these addictions. Test yourself. List the major problems caused by prohibited drugs. Examine the list. I believe you will find that most all of the problems associated with the drug are due to its prohibition, rather than the drug use itself. By the way, if I said I had a proposition which would fully eliminate one half of all crime in our nation, would you support it? Doing away with drug prohibition will eliminate one half of all crime, almost all corruption, and over time reduce prison population by 50%.

MARRIAGE EQUALITY

Should same-sex marriage be legal?

• Coffman (R) – I also believe this is a decision best left to the states. As the recent Supreme Court decision overturning the Defense of Marriage Act found, Congress has no business determining marriage laws.
• Romanoff (D) - Absolutely – this is a fundamental question of freedom and fairness. I support full equality under the law. In the Colorado House, I voted to ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, strengthen hate-crimes legislation, and extend legal rights to same-sex couples. I will continue to champion the cause of equality as a member of Congress.
• Swing (G) - Yes. I oppose discrimination on the basis of gender or sexual orientation.
• Olsen (L) - Yes. There will be some legal bumps which will need to be dealt with, but these will be minor compared to the benefits derived from allowing consenting same-sex adults to make legal commitments to each other and have the law respect those commitments just as it does for heterosexual marriage.

INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE

Are more restrictions needed on the ability of intelligence agencies to monitor the communications of US citizens?

• Coffman (R) – Yes. While our country needs a strong and robust intelligence gathering effort, we also need to know that our civil liberties are not being violated. We can be secure and free at the same time. Greater oversight is essential.
• Romanoff (D) - The civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution are not up for negotiation, and those we entrust to protect us must respect these boundaries. I'm alarmed by what we've learned about NSA surveillance programs over the last few years. We need more restrictions to ensure that NSA programs respect our Constitutional right to privacy, and we need more Congressional oversight. It's unacceptable that Congress was kept in the dark on critical details about these programs. Congress has a responsibility to provide oversight over all intelligence programs to ensure that Americans' constitutional rights are being protected.
• Swing (G) - Government surveillance of US citizens without a warrant should be prosecuted as a felony. The NSA and the CIA should be abolished.
• Olsen (L) - Existing restrictions need to be enforced. Our Bill of Rights, which we consider unalienable, specify that we have a right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures". What part of this do the so called intelligence agencies not understand? That the use of electronic media has substantially replaced the use of "papers and effects" does not alter the basic rights referred to here. Intelligence agencies habitually violate the constitution. This must stop.

2ND AMENDMENT

Do you support new restrictions on the sale or possession of firearms?

• Coffman (R) – More gun laws won't stop evil people from doing evil things. When it comes to setting gun policy, I believe it is best done at the state level. At the federal level we must ensure a national background check database is funded and accessible for any state that wants to utilize it. Additionally, when it comes to gun violence we need a greater emphasis on mental health reform. There has been too much emphasis in the debate on gun control and not enough on addressing mental health. All that said, law abiding citizens do have a right to defend themselves and their property. Andrew Romanoff was one of the most extreme, anti-gun, anti-sportsmen politicians in the state capitol during his time in the legislature. That isn't the right balance in the West, where citizens value their rights and their freedoms.
• Romanoff (D) - No single policy or set of policies can ever eliminate every instance of gun violence, but there are common sense steps we can and must take to improve public safety. Universal background checks are one step we should take to reduce the risk of gun violence.
• Swing (G) - My short answer is no. Congress has no legal authority to restrict the sale or possession of firearms. The larger issue is that the US Constitution and the Second Amendment were written in an age when the United States had no standing army and no weapons of mass destruction. Thomas Jefferson believed that the Constitution could only be binding upon his generation. He wrote that: "every generation needs a new revolution." He believed that each generation should create its own Constitution. We are about two hundred years overdue for a new Constitutional Convention to modernize our form of government. There are so many firearms in the United States today that broad restrictions on private gun ownership would be unrealistic. I am much more concerned with taking dangerous weapons away from the government than with restricting private gun ownership. US military imperialism and domestic police brutality are totally out of control. Nobody should be allowed to own weapons of mass destruction. Not the government; not private citizens.
• Olsen (L) - No. Just as we have an unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, we have an unalienable right to protect our lives, liberty, and private property without relying on government protection or a justice system which is horribly expensive and produces very little justice.

ABORTION

On abortion, do you consider yourself generally "pro-life" or "pro-choice?"

• Coffman (R) – I consider myself Pro-Life but believe in exceptions for cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother.
• Romanoff (D) - I am pro-choice. I believe that women have a right to make their own health care decisions, and I strongly oppose (and have always opposed) the Personhood amendment. It's absurd that in the year 2014, we're still debating whether or not women should have access to birth control. Neither politicians nor employers should get in between a woman and her doctor. In Congress, I will vote to protect a woman's right to make her own health care decisions.
• Swing (G) - I generally consider myself "pro-choice." Abortion must remain legal, safe, and accessible. This should not be an issue. The anti-abortion movement is completely out of touch with reality. The real issue today with human reproduction is overpopulation. The world's human population has grown from one billion people in 1803 to two billion in 1927 and 7.3 billion today. We have passed the limits of growth. It would take 1.5 Earths to sustain the current world human population with our present ecological footprint. If the average person on Earth consumed as much as the average American does today, the Earth could not sustain more than 1.4 billion people. Studies by MIT and NASA have concluded that current patterns of growth and consumption will lead to the permanent collapse of the global economy by 2030. We must reduce our ecological footprint and lower birth rates dramatically. Towards this end, I support public funding for family planning programs and birth control, public education about the seriousness of the overpopulation crisis, and restructuring of the economy to make it environmentally sustainable.
• Olsen (L) - I believe the government has no business being involved with this very personal decision which must be left to the pregnant woman who may choose to seek advice from others. Further, as many in our nation consider abortion to be tantamount to murder, it is improper for government to fund, subsidize, or encourage abortion. Those who find abortion abhorrent should seek to provide alternatives via private means; and those who believe abortion is a proper alternative should support private organizations which do fund, subsidize, and encourage abortion. However, I do not dodge this question about me personally. I, as a private citizen, personally support organizations which provide alternatives to abortion.

(KUSA-TV © 2014 Multimedia Holdings Corporation)