Get Email Updates
Sancho's Election Toolkit: The Candidates
What the candidates are saying on
McCain: John McCain's stated views on immigration can be seen in the legislation that he authored known as the "McCain-Kennedy bill" or the "Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act". The legislation is essentially a compromise position, offering a "path to legalization" that is punitive (applicants would have to pay back taxes and at least a $2,000 fine). Since 2007 (the last time a version of this bill came up for debate in Congress), McCain has been under pressure from some elements of the Republican party to take what they consider to be a "stronger stand" on this issue - implying perhaps that the punitive measures in this bill do not go far enough. McCain also supports the idea of guest worker programs.
Clinton: Hillary Clinton has voted in favor of partial amnesty provisions in the Senate (S. 1639) that would grant amnesty for up to an estimated 6 million undocumented migrants, as well as creating a guest worker program that is seen as boon to the agricultural industry which is to a large extent dependent on migrant labor. Though she has earned endorsements from several prominent "pro-immigrant" lawmakers, Clinton has also favored some draconian measures with regard to border control. In this regard, she said in 2004 "I am, you know, adamantly against illegal immigrants."
Obama: Barak Obama has publicly stated his support both for "a path to legalization" and to "increased border security". Controversially, Obama supported the "Secure Fence Act", the 2006 bill that allowed for construction of a wall along the U.S. Mexico border. Unlike some of the other candidates, Obama's website includes mention of "getting tough on employers" who hire undocumented workers, as well as "promoting economic development in Mexico" as a way to stem the tide of immigrants, though it is unclear what Obama would actually propose in terms of policy changes on the latter.
Analysis: The three mainstream candidates have little to differentiate themselves on this issue. All are in favor of some kind of "path to legalization" for workers and their dependents who are already in the U.S., as well as guest worker programs to "legalize" migrants who have not yet arrived. None of the candidates are on the extreme end of the spectrum, either in terms of the xenophobic desire to "send ‘em home" or in terms of offering unconditional and full amnesty, along with an end to Free Trade Agreements that are encouraging the migration in the first place.
Hillary Clinton: Hillary Clinton's record on trade is mixed. While she was a supporter of NAFTA under her husband's administration, she has been vocal in denouncing elements of NAFTA since she began running for president. Her campaign's policy piece on this (Rebuilding the Road to the Middle Class) is somewhat ambiguous. It places emphasis on enforcement of trade deals (though it's not clear how improved enforcement would help) and on retraining workers who have lost jobs. She has made also made comments hostile to NAFTA and CAFTA in some of the debates, but it is unclear how those criticisms would translate into policy.
Barak Obama: Obama has been more critical of trade agreements, but a lot of those criticisms seem somewhat insular. His website advocates opening "up foreign markets to support good American jobs" without mentioning what the negative impact of that policy might be for other countries. Like Clinton, Obama emphasizes better enforcement of current trade deals (Obama specifies that this means reducing other countries subsidies and non-tariff barriers to trade), and helping laid off workers transition to other jobs. Obama also supports renegotiating NAFTA (in line with the interests of U.S. workers), but it is not clear what that specifically would entail.
John McCain: Of the three mainstream candidates, McCain's position on trade is the least ambiguous. McCain is firm believer in trade agreements. He believes NAFTA was a success, has been a supporter of CAFTA, and in general believes "free trade" with any nation is a good thing. To deal with those who will be left out of what he sees as the "gains of globalization" McCain proposes better job training.
International Debt
Hillary Clinton: Clinton has been a supporter of debt cancellation measures in the Senate, especially for Liberia. While she supports an expansion of the current debt cancellation measures by some 20 countries, she sees debt cancellation as part of the HIPC framework, meaning that the larger policy questions are largely unaddressed in her plan.
Barak Obama: Obama has also been a supporter of debt cancellation. His proposals are less explicit than those of Clinton, but do mention some of the structural issues needed to free up money for meaningful development.
John McCain: John McCain does not appear to have a position on this issue. His voting record on issues related to Africa and development indicates that he would probably not be a proponent of debt cancellation.
Barack Obama:
Obama is calling for a complete and immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops
from Iraq, and has been fairly consistent in his position over the years.
His website also claims that he will not support permanent
U.S. military bases, though he qualifies this by saying that the U.S.
Embassy, which is effectively a permanent military base, will remain
open. Obama also claims that he will "press Iraq's leaders to reconcile"
towards which a timetable for immediate withdrawal would add pressure.
In addition, Obama claims he would push for increased regional diplomacy
and humanitarian aid to those who have been forced to leave their homes
because of the conflict. Notably, the phrase "war on terror" is
missing from Obama's articulation of his foreign policy.
Hillary Clinton:
Like Obama, Clinton also backs an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops
from Iraq. Her website is perhaps more cautious than Obama's emphasizing
that it would be up for military strategists to draw up plans for withdrawal,
but in essence, this is the same position as Obama's. Clinton also
talks about aid and diplomacy in similar ways to Obama; indeed one suspects
that their positions have been formed and transformed by each other's
positions. Unlike Obama, Clinton has a mixed record on this issue, having voted for the Iraq war
in 2003, and at times against setting deadlines for a U.S. troop withdrawal.
John McCain: Unlike the other two mainstream candidates, John McCain's platform on the Iraq war is very much in line with the Bush administration's policies. He supports an increase in U.S. troop levels, ramping up rhetoric against Iran and Syria, and a strengthening of the Iraqi army and police. The most telling part of McCain's platform on this issue is his argument that the U.S. must "win" the war in Iraq because Iraq is located in "a region that produced the terrorists who attacked America on 9/11 and where much of the world's energy supplies are located." The invoking of the ghosts of 9/11 may indicate another four years of George W. Bush's policies should McCain be elected, while the reference to energy may at least indicate a bit more honesty. The implicit argument that the region's energy reserves are the U.S.'s energy reserves is refreshingly colonial.
All three of the mainstream candidates have very simmilar positions on climate change and global warming. For a quick but detailed overview, see this table over at Grist.
Hillary Clinton: Hillary Clinton supports cap and trade policies such as those included in the Kyoto protocol to bring greenhouse gas emmision levels down to 80% of 1990 levels by 2050. She also supports increased fuel standards for cars and massive increases in biofuel production as well as "clean coal". (Most environmentalists would not agree that there is any such thing as "clean coal", as coal is the most greenhouse gas heavy fossil fuel.) It's worth noting that Clinton has supported legislation in the senate that falls well below her campaign positions. Also, Clinton supports 25% of energy consumption coming from renewables by 2025.
Barack Obama: Nearly identical to Hillary, right down to supporting legislation in the Senate that is well below his current position. Obama has a clearer stand against "dirty coal" but is also in favor of "clean coal".
John McCain: McCain also supports Cap and Trade policies, but with much less rigorous targets (100% of 2004 levels by 2012, 30% of 2004 levels by 2050). He has said he is in favor of raising fuel efficiency standards, but has not set a target. Nor has he set a target on the use of biofuels or renewable energy, though he supports them both.