BY MIKE CETERA
After much eye-rolling and smirking from the candidates, we've just completed our editorial board endorsement session with Bill Foster and Jim Oberweis.
The best line of the day: "Jim, you're just making stuff up." That's Foster after Oberweis tried to tell the editorial board what he thought Foster's position was on immigration reform. It might just as well have been the quote either candidate used throughout the session to describe the other's positions.
This will come as no surprise, but while the primary election was a study in nuanced differences, the special general election is all about the chasm separating Oberweis and Foster on the issues. If you support the concept of universal health care, Foster's your man. If you support the war effort in Iraq, Oberweis is your guy.
Some nuggets:
* Foster clarified his campaign's reasoning for why he won't appear at any debates between now and March 8. Foster said it was a "matter of scheduling." "It's not part of some plan that we've come up with," Foster said.
Oberweis: "Nonsense...What helps voters is being able to listen to candidates" discuss the issues together.
-- I tend to agree with Oberweis on this one. Foster should find the time.
* Oberweis disputed a Tribune story that paraphrased his position on health insurance: "Oberweis said employer-provided health insurance should be eliminated in favor of a system where consumers use tax incentives to purchase their own insurance and have health savings accounts," according to the Trib.
Said Oberweis: I never suggested we "completely abandon" employer-provided healthcare. He wants to see employees get the option of purchasing their own insurance but wouldn't require employers to increase wages if that happened.
-- I haven't had a chance to review the radio debate that the Tribune story is taken from, so I'm not sure what Oberweis said.
* Foster may have suggested a different take on the war in Iraq. Oberweis certainly pounced on him for it. He borrowed an often used Oberweis line when talking about removing troops from Iraq. He said "We'll leave it up to the military experts." That sounds different than his previous suggestions of a gradual withdrawal.
-- I think Foster meant that he wants the military experts to make a suggestion for how long it will take to withdraw, not when to begin the process. But I need to watch our video (plug: watch our videos on the endorsement session beginning Wednesday) to know if Foster misspoke or we all misheard or if it was a change in position.
* Oberweis says their own polling shows he has a small lead (disputing a poll released by the Foster campaign showing he has a lead). Oberweis conceded that the lead isn't as big as he would like.
-- This shows the unreliability of candidate-financed polls and the closeness of this race.
* Foster said he felt bad he didn't stand up for Chris Lauzen in the primary, whom he said Oberweis unfairly attacked.
* Foster denied knowing about a flier produced by a Democrat-party group accusing Oberweis of hiring illegal immigrants; Oberweis didn't believe him.
-- Surprise.
Mr. Cetera
Thanks for the 'nuggets', look forward to the video coverage of the endorsement
sessions when they become available tomorrow.
One aside on the clarification by Oberweis on his health care position, nice to
know he feels middle class and lower income workers are undeserving of a wage increase
to help offset the monthly costs required to pay for them. For those who can get coverage
and afford it.
A tax incentive sounds nice, but with many families struggling to keep from falling further
behind in paying their bills, housing costs, etc. this would be a poor option. Plus there are
those 'pesky and inconvenient' pre-existing condition and exemptions clauses in most health plans.
How would Oberweis propose dealing with this or what solutions does he bring to the table?
I'll hedge a bet he would be in favor of maintaining full medical coverage (paid for by the
corporations or companies) in the executive suites and Boards of Directors. But then again, even
if they did pay out of pocket for their coverage, am sure they would have little difficulty in voting
themselves another 'compensation package increase' to pay for it.
Mike, Foster has been clear on Iraq.
Begin to withdraw immeidately, and let the experts decide how to do it effectively. In the radio debate you mentioned (WBBM - At Issue program) he said the same thing. I believe he said it is generally expected to take between 12-18 months to remove most troops safely.
Here is the link to the radio debate for those interested...
http://www.wbbm780.com/topic/play_window.php?audioType=Episode&audioId=1513622
I guess 14th Dist Voter is living in a dream world if they think that we aren't already losing parts of our wages with employer-based healthcare. What would an additional requirement to arbitrarily increase wages do, other than increase the costs of the company and reduce the number of people they employ? I mean, all those small businesses would struggle with that situation if they had to increase wages by law, which increases operating costs at that level, and would either drive some businesses to go in the red and eventually shut down, thus losing jobs for the community, or lay off people, thus losing jobs for the community. But all the Dems want to do is trust the government. Like we can afford that! As someone said, if the government was trusted to cure TB, all we'd have is one heck of an iron lung.
Allowing small businesses to pool with associations and establish group insurance plans to help drive down the cost of healthcare, and allowing more access to HSA's across this country, would be a great step towards medical reform. It wouldn't solve all the problems, but it would be a step in the right direction.
NO, Foster has not been clear on Iraq, in fact Foster's position is self contradictory. Which is it, begin an immediate withdraw of troops, or allow the experts to decide how to do it effectively? The experts have said that an immediate withdraw would be a disaster in Iraq, Foster’s position is misleading. In fact Bill Foster has placed himself on the wrong side of every major issue issue. By praising European and Canadian health care systems he has exposed his ignorance. Talk to Canadians, they can’t stand their health coverage bemoaning the fact that they are taxed so heavily for coverage that is minimal. On my last trip to Canada in the fall of ’07 one Canadian described his health care as “Get in line and wait to die.” He continued by saying that if someone needs a procedure done and doesn’t want to wait 6 to 8 months they head south of the boarder to the US and pay for it themselves. In the UK it is just as bad. Many of the best doctors in the UK are leave and heading to the US. The US healthcare system is the best in the world but the rising costs need to be addressed. However, universal coverage forced by the Federal government is not the answer. On taxes all I will say is “Foster, keep your hands off my money and make the Bush tax cuts permanent!” Foster continues to show himself as someone who lacks understanding of the issues. He claims to be the candidate for change and I believe him. The only problem is not all change is good. On every major issue Foster’s change would be destructive to this nation’s security and economy, so thanks but no thanks Bill.
Don't know that much about Foster, but enough that I will vote for him.
We had supported Sen. Chris Lauzen,and I feel Oberweis was out of line in that race.
My biggest concern is that after spending millions ans millions of dollars running for the Senate, Governor, and Senate, Oberweis was resoundingly rejected STATEWIDE. Why would our district be so dumb to accept sloppy fourths??
Worse yet- Oberweis has spent so much money trying to buy an elected seat-yet he has done virtually nothing financially to help local social agencies.
I wish President Bush would make him Ambassador to Antartica, or better yet Sudan.
As an independent, I will be casting my vote for Bill Foster. While Jim Oberweiss has been very successful since taking over his families business, Bill Foster is a self-made millionaire. He is also a respected scientist a has the endorsements of several nobel laureates.
I find Oberweiss' agreement with most of Bush's economic and foreign polices very disturbing. Which ones have worked? It only took four years to take a huge surplus and turn it into a record-setting deficit. These so-called conservatives have out-spent every liberal president combined and with little here to show for it.
I read where the Beacon lauded Oberweiss' "pit-bull" demeanor. I think I've seen enough "pit-bull" wrecklessness with our economy and our soldiers already.
We need Bill Foster's advanced reasoning skills in Washington to solve the complex problems we are facing today.
Bill Foster is a proponent of Universal Health Care similar to that of Canada and England. His words!! Yikes. If this is such a great system, why are people waiting for months to have necessary surgery such as gall bladder etc. Why are doctors leaving in droves? Why are those who can afford it in these countries coming to the US for treatment? Because we have the best health care in the world. Yes it is expensive. But this has been brought on by the tort lawers of the country who continue to push frivilous lawsuits against hospitals, doctors etc. The malpractice insurance premiums hospitals and doctors have to pay in order to continue are outrageous. Not the fault of the insurance companies either. After all they have to pay out thess ridiculous settlements. This will never change since the majority in government are lawyers.
Back to Bill Foster, his ideas are dangerous, expensive and after all do we really want the government to run health care? They have done such a marvelous job with Social Security!!
And finally to the person who responded that he didn't know much about Foster but enough to vote for him. Please do some research. Find out what he stands for before you cast your vote. What we need are intellegent and well informed voters.