Submitted to the Sierra Club

If interest groups ask each candidate to be an expert in every problem area that our Nation faces, the public will be disappointed and the expertise verbalized by any Congressional candidate will be vague and politically timid rather than heartfelt and useful. In my case I believe it is best for the public to evaluate me by studying my life experiences, life priorities and daily approach to problem solving. An understanding of the process that a candidate uses to solve problems should provide insight into matters of fairness, lack of bias, philosophy, etc. Those insights are more valuable than false expertise, twisted and bent to make each interest group momentarily pleased.

I believe that we must work toward unity and understanding of the ways in which national problems affect each of our communities. We are interconnected. In addition I believe we need to balance the burdens and the benefits in our society. This means sharing burdens and benefits. I also believe that our goal must be to create a society that is renown, in centuries to come, for its progress, its civility, its charity and its humility. I care about our future reputation as a nation and I am committed to helping build a spirit of cooperation throughout our body politic and our international community to achieve a destiny that is admirable rather than despised. To fail in this goal is to invite the eventual, and not so distant, end to our Republic.

Finally I believe that the goal of Congress is to reduce the size of problems not debate forever in pursuit of the “perfect” solution that one’s campaign contributors desire. For this reason I am committed to resolving problems and reminding all interest groups that compromise is not always a show of weakness but oftentimes an example of wisdom.
Legislative Priorities

My website lists my major desires for congressional action at this time.

1. An immediate end to the misadventure in Iraq and a return of our troops by January 1, 2007.
2. An immediate reduction, if not complete elimination, in congressional earmarks and appropriation set-asides (pork appropriations) that have lead to a three trillion dollar increase in our national debt over the past six years and an almost nine trillion dollar deficit as of this date.
3. Immediate implementation of accounting procedures that will result in a balanced budget within two years. This means a budget that does not borrow from any trust funds and a budget that removes unnecessary expenditures from our national budget, even if the process is painful to each and every one of us.
4. Passage of People to People Programs which I call a Second Front on the War on Terrorism. These programs include:
1. A government effort to assist American families and communities to host thousands of Muslim elementary school students during short term visits to the United States. We must give thousands of Muslim families first hand opportunities to visit America and draw their own conclusions about our country and its people.
2. Creation of the American International Disaster Relief Corps which will assist in the placement of thousands of American volunteers for short periods of time at international disaster sites. Many of our citizens now have time to be disaster relief volunteers. Assisting disaster victims is always a good investment and will result in international good will and common understanding between our citizens and the needy persons whom they assisted.
3. Significant expansion of the Peace Corps. My two year Peace Corps experience in the Dominican Republic resulted in over 40 years of good will and real development in the communities where I was a volunteer. We need more American volunteers going throughout the world and bringing back insight to our more isolated citizens.
5. Immediate oversight of our foreign policy including known and unknown programs and initiatives of our government in other countries. It is clear that actions are being taken without sufficient Congressional oversight and without full knowledge of the long term implications of these actions. The current construction by our government of the largest embassy in the history of mankind in Bagdad and the building of several permanent military bases in Iraq are examples of this kind of unknown, undiscussed and perhaps unauthorized activity that is occurring in the name of citizens of the USA.

Environmental Leadership

1. What has been your greatest environmental achievement?As a child I fished in the beautiful lakes of Northern Wisconsin with my Father and Brothers. I learned of my Father’s incredible joy of nature cool breezes on his face, birds flying freely over his head, while fishing in a quiet bay. He shared his sunrises and sunsets with me. I adopted his appreciation of the gift of nature and I treasure his legacy.

As a college student I learned of Daniel Burnham and his concern for future generations by planning park lands for them during his generation. He accepted abuse and ridicule from others who cared less about future generations yet he persevered. As a result of his efforts millions of Chicago residents regularly use a string of county parks that include virgin grasslands, rivers used by ancient travelers, and hillsides of joy in summer and winter. I used those very parks when I led my younger brothers on day hikes during our summer vacations.

People like Burnham, and President Theodore Roosevelt, loved nature and realized that we all have a duty to protect the right of future generations to see, hear and feel what we see, hear and feel. I do not believe our generation yet recognizes this duty nor is willing to fulfill our duty to our children and grandchildren.

As regards any personal environmental accomplishments, I note the following:

1. Prior membership in environmental preservation community groups on St. Croix and St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands. We promoted many programs to protect and expand environmental protection in those communities.
2. Initiation of a potable water system for four communities in the Dominican republic. My efforts at promoting the beginning of the inquiry and analysis process resulted in one of the only community constructed and managed water treatment facilities in the Dominican Republic. That small water system which uses surface stream water with catchment tanks for treatment has been increased in size several times and now serves several thousand households with clean treated water for domestic use. The system has been in place for approximately 40 years.
3. Multiple visits to Vanuatu and participation in construction of several “smokeless stoves” for villager use. Prior cooking methods were limited to open fires with no ventilation in enclosed cook sheds. My efforts were in conjunction with my son’s Peace Corps residency on Paama Island, Republic of Vanuatu.
4. Assisted my wife in the introduction of solar energy panels that demonstrated the potential for minimal reading lights in homes on Paama Island. Following our demonstration effort numerous teachers, public officials and families purchased the solar panels for personal use, library use, etc.
5. I suspect my lifestyle choices represent another accomplishment on a small and personal scale. I am able to run to work in the morning so I avoid driving. Few persons have this convenient opportunity to reduce gas consumption and maximize healthy exercise. In addition I avoid excessive clothes drying since my patio serves as an energy efficient dryer for our household needs. My wife shares in these choices and agrees that they make sense in our lives.

Additional note:

I was a Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican Republic, four miles from the border with Haiti. I witnessed, first hand, the destruction of border forests for political purposes and the continued removal of trees from hillsides for survival income charcoal production, with the eventual loss of topsoil. This resulted in further lessening of farming opportunities for community members. Those scenes of environmental destruction allow me to participate in real world discussions of environmental issues.

2. If elected, how will you provide environmental leadership, and on what aspects will you focus you efforts?

My campaign focuses on shared benefits and burdens. My Congressional philosophy relies upon my life experiences in a variety of communities including the State of Arizona, the State of Idaho. Washington, D.C., the U.S. Virgin Islands and of course, Hawaii during the past 14 years. It is important that we remain open in fact-finding in order to understand the feelings and needs of citizens throughout our Nation. If we respond to issues based only upon our own life experiences we will fail to reach compromises that move issues forward. This means understanding the needs of Western ranchers who use publicly owned grasslands and even logging companies. It also means reminding ranchers, logging companies and extraction industries that we refuse to abdicate our sacred trust to future generations for short term financial gains that will only cause long term or irreparable harm to our natural resources and open spaces. And by requiring all corners of our society to share in burdens and benefits I can insist that everybody understand the needs of others and then make compromises that will meet the needs of others without jeopardizing or failing to meet our duties to preserve natural bounties for future generations.

Finally, compromise does not mean always giving in to the others when you are convinced that further compromise will damage our gift to future generations. Compromise may mean saying that off road incursions for logging are unacceptable. And compromise my mean a recognition of some logging to limit fire threats to forests is acceptable in some forests.

Smart Energy Solutions

The United States has both the opportunity and –– as the world’s largest emitter of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide –– the obligation to lead the world in addressing the problem of global warming. Decisive solutions are available to the nation such as reducing demand for fossil fuels in our two largest sectors, transportation and electricity. Making cars run farther on a gallon of gas and investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy can begin to bring down carbon emissions quickly and cheaply. Thus far, the U.S. Congress has failed to do anything meaningful to address global warming emissions or build a cleaner energy system. Energy industries are seeking to use consumer concern over high prices for gasoline and home heating fuel to dismantle our safety net of environmental laws. Further, at a time when we should be reducing emissions, we stand on the precipice of making dangerous increases in global warming emissions by building more than 100 new coal-fired power plants.

3. If elected, will you support increasing miles per gallon standards (known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFÉÉ standards) to a 40 mpg average?

Yes. Since I take no money from special interests of any kind, I have chosen to run my ideas around the State of Hawaii. During my runs I have endless opportunities to observe the large number of our citizens who have purchased vehicles that are energy inefficient. It is fair to say that those purchases were made with the encouragement of the current Administration. It is clear that the current “gas crisis” inflicting damage on families was predictable and avoidable. However, I doubt that American drivers yet have the willingness to examine the basis for their current gasoline price financial discomfort. It is this lack of introspection, this national short term pleasure syndrome, that I fear is the greatest threat to our natural world and our planet.

As a Congressman I intend to vote in favor of progressive legislation that mandates higher mileage standards and reduces emissions that are harmful to our environment. I do not support loopholes in these legislative proposals that allow the major auto manufacturers to meet artificial limits that make no actual progress toward improving gasoline efficiency. I prefer real Congressional action addressing real national problems; not word games designed to protect campaign contributors. And I am highly offended by Congressional acts protecting our Nation’s most energy inefficient vehicles from fuel efficiency mandates.

Luckily for us, due to rising gas prices major auto manufacturers are being forced by the market forces to make adjustments that will surpass the minimal efforts made by our Congress.

4. Will you support a law to mandate that at least 20% of our electricity
comes from clean, renewable sources by 2020?

Yes. My campaign is based upon a balancing of burdens and benefits, not huge campaign contributions from special interests. Thus I can honestly analyze the extraction industries and the power generating industries and make honest decisions concerning their duties and responsibilities in our society. Since I accept no campaign contributions from those industries, or any special interest group, I can vote in favor of legislation that requires those industries to make changes, whether those changes are comfortable or uncomfortable to them. We need to stop
delaying legislation that results in movement toward renewable resources We must start taking real action to achieve realistic energy goals.

I fully support all forms of renewable resource development. This includes solar energy use in schools and public buildings and tax credits to homeowners to encourage their purchase of renewable energy systems Finally I favor legislation and decisions that accelerate our use of renewable energy. And I will demand open and honest discussions with affected industries to determine their contribution and cooperation in this movement and will endeavor to truly understand the financial impact of this movement on their communities and on their employees.

5. What other measures do you believe Congress should take to curb global warming?

President Bush has held our nation up for mass ridicule around the
world. We are known as a society hell-bent upon consumption of material
goods. Yet now that the other nations of the world desire the same life
styles and are producing and consuming these material goods with
significant environmental impact, our Nation chooses to ignore both our
own contribution to environmental disaster and the emerging problems
caused by our consumer-clones.

I find the Administration’s actions to be narrow minded, short sighted
and downright evil as regards the damage those policies will do our children
and grandchildren. Those policies must be reversed. We have to honestly
look at the science of our world and its air, water, space and natural
resources. Then we have to work to develop less selfishness in our Nation
and more true concern for our future generations. At this point the
material goods that we purchase out-weight both our religious teachings
and our concerns for future generations. This has to change if our planet is
to survive.

SAFE AND HEALTHY COMMUNITIES

Our communities can and should be safe, healthy places to live and
raise children –– with clean air and water, and free from the dangers of toxic pollution. We can achieve this goal by enforcing environmental laws (Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act), requiring polluting industries to use modern pollution control technology, and investing in infrastructure to clean up and prevent pollution.

Unfortunately current policies, such as the misguided “Clear Skies”
plan and other weakening changes to the Clean Air Act, leave our communities at risk from dirty air. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized rules implementing a plan that allows “pollution trading” for mercury, in violation of the Clean Air Act. We should require that all polluters, including older power plants and factories, use available pollution control technology to reduce soot and smog forming pollution, and control toxic emissions such as mercury.

As with air pollution, the Clean Water Act has made great strides toward providing all Americans with drinkable, fishable, and swimable water. But federal guidance issued in 2003 limits the definition of waters of the United State under the Clean Water Act to exclude from protection many wetlands, intermittent streams, small lakes and ponds. Several bills are pending in Congress to ensure that the Clean Water Act is not limited in this way, and as intended, protects all of our waters, including wetlands. We must dramatically increase public investment in clean water, providing adequate resources for states and local governments to maintain wastewater and drinking water facilities.

6. Will you support efforts to force the EPA to produce a more protective rule that requires every power plant to install modern pollution control technology? Would you reject efforts to allow some power plants to continue indefinitely without cleaning up their pollution, as long as they don”t modernize, or as long as power plants in other locations are cleaned up?

I favor the repeal of all recent actions of the Administration that
weakened our ability to maintain and improve the quality of the air and water in our nation. I also favor increased legislation and agency rule-making that continually improves the quality of our air and water resources. I favor the installation of pollution control devices that will improve our air and /or water quality. I also favor an honest analysis of the financial impact that these additional requirements have on affected industries. Whenever necessary I favor tax credits and other financial assistance to allow the affected industries to fund the legislative improvements that will improve air and water quality in our nation. Since funding is often a key to passage of these industry improvements, I seek the immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq; a costly misadventure that wastes the very money we need to make the improvements that the Sierra Club advocates.
7. Would you favor having the Congress restore protection for such bodies of water as headwaters streams, isolated wetlands, and prairie potholes?

Yes I favor additional protection that is science based. I do believe
expanded definitions must take into consideration a balance of the benefits and burdens of all citizens. As a Congressman I would seek fair analysis of each issue and alleged problem, not unproven issue battles for the benefit of campaign contributors. Once this fair analysis is determined appropriate legislative action should occur.

8.Will you support dedicated funding for the maintenance and upgrading of our nation’’s sewage infrastructure and restore funding for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund that assists communities with maintaining and upgrading their wastewater treatment facilities and infrastructure?

I favor all types of legislation which uses federal fiscal resources to
encourage innovative state and local efforts to improve air and water quality and to increase open spaces for park use and preservation. I favor assistance to state and local governmental units to upgrade sewage treatment facilities. I lived in the U. S. Virgin Islands, a beautiful area faced with frequent decaying sewage treatment facilities. And I experienced Oahu’s recent sewage treatment breakdown with its costly side effects. I know we need to upgrade our sewage infrastructure. However, once again I point out the connection between the current, massive, waste of federal resources in Iraq and the desires of the Sierra Club. None of these requested legislative changes will occur if we continue to waste the very money we need to make those improvements.

AMERICA’S WILD LEGACY

Americans enjoy a rich natural heritage of parks, monuments, forests, wilderness and wildlife, but this legacy is being threatened with energy leasing, mining and logging. For the last decade, the oil industry has attempted to gain access to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge –– one of America’s greatest wild natural treasures.

The Endangered Species Act is one of our great wildlife conservation success stories, and has helped to restore species such as the gray whale and peregrine falcon. The ESA identifies those species at risk, helps repair and conserve the landscapes and waters on which they depend and put them on the road to recovery. In recent years there have been efforts to weaken this landmark wildlife conservation law, including the key requirement of designating critical habitat for the recovery of species.

Only a small fraction of America’’s publicly owned forest land is protected as wilderness. The remaining wild forest lands, which are important for wildlife, recreation and clean water are threatened by logging and road building. The 2001 Roadless Rule promulgated by the Clinton Administration put the 60 million acres of unprotected wild forests off limits to logging and other destructive uses. That protection plan has been unraveled by the Bush administration, leaving much of our wild forest legacy vulnerable to logging.

9. Would you vote against all bills and amendments authorizing drilling for oil in the Alaska Natural Wildlife Refuge?

Yes. I am opposed to drilling in that refuge. I favor conservation and a full effort to fund the promotion of existing technologies that reduce the need for oil and coal and I favor funding for scientific research to increase our ability to conserve and replace unacceptable energy technologies with developing technologies that cause less damage to our planet. Once again that money is not now available due to fiscal errors, including the war in Iraq and our lack of political will to promote these program efforts.

Since I take no campaign funds form energy companies, extraction industries or environmental groups, I am able to push for honest review of problems facing our nation. I seek a balance of burdens and benefits which includes good faith listening to others and good faith analysis of facts.

10. Do you favor the provisions of current law which require the Interior Department to designate critical habitat for the recovery of wildlife species? Would you oppose efforts to weaken these requirements?

Absolutely. I believe that extermination of even one type of bird or
animal during our lifetime would be both tragic and disgraceful. We must
pass on to future generations all existing species, in improved quantities. I
truly feel a responsibility to future generations and I will insist that other members of Congress work with me to meet our mutual responsibility.

11. Would you support reinstating the 2001 Roadless Rule to protect 60 million acres of wild roadless national forest from logging and other destructive uses? Would you support legislation such as the National Forest Protection and Restoration Act, which focuses on protecting and restoring National Forests?

I lived in the western states three times to date. I understand that there are many factors that fit into a full analysis of issues relating to national forests and timber industries. I do not favor interest group fights to the death and “all or nothing” strategies. I seek good faith analyses of burdens and benefits. This means that all logging is not bad and all roads into forests are not bad. It means that all fire protection mitigation is not bad. It means that some timber techniques are harmful and others may be acceptable. It means that some roads are unacceptable and others may be acceptable. It means that the vision of forest usage form offices in Washington, D.C. may be different from the needs of residents in western forest areas and western grassland areas. It means that ranchers and lobbyists for environmental groups need to have good faith conversations to find acceptable solutions to problems in our always changing world.

I favor all actions to preserve our national forests for future
generations. I also encourage and will participate in honest discussions of forest practices that meet these goals. I also seek good faith recognition of the existence of logging interests and local employment needs as relates to these industries. This does not mean destruction of our forests. Nor does it mean the exploitation of forests for short term employment and economic interests at the expense of our solemn duty to hand over open spaces for future generations.

As a Congressman I would work to find the scientific balances that
allow us to prioritize forest lands and preserve forest lands while meeting
the best practices use for the limitation of forest fires and for timber
extraction. Finally I would encourage all participants in this discussion to look for good faith solutions to these issues that meet the needs of others without jeopardizing the long term health of our public forest lands.

SLOWING POPULATION GROWTH

Increased global population impacts every environmental priority. Population growth escalates pollution, diminishes fresh water and clean air, adversely contributes to global climate change, and further jeopardizes threatened and endangered species. One of the most comprehensive ways to address population growth and better protect the environment is to ensure that women and families everywhere have access to quality voluntary family planning and reproductive health care. One of the best ways we can address population growth here in the US is to advocate for policies and programs that effectively work to reduce teen pregnancy through empowering youth by providing accurate and comprehensive information about human sexuality.

12. Do you support a funding increase in international and domestic family planning programs? Why or why not?

Unlimited population growth in our world, will lead to the eventual destruction of our species on this planet. Yes I favor family planning programs. I also support reallocation of some of our current military spending to fund programs that will lead to increased health and educational opportunities for “Third-world” countries. I believe that these efforts do an equal amount to safeguard our society from danger.

However we will have no money for many of these efforts if we continue to waste huge sums of money in Iraq.

13. Will you support Comprehensive Sexuality Education here in the US
to help lower the incidence of unplanned teenage pregnancy?

Teenage pregnancy is not caused exclusively because young women
do not receive formal high school training in sexual education courses. The issue of teenage pregnancy is much more complicated than the lack of that course work.

I favor human science course work throughout the educational lives
of years of our students. This means appropriate information being passed on to students at appropriate times during their maturation. I trust educators to make these decisions and to acquire the understanding and support of parents of students. I would seek to challenge all participants in these discussions to step back and seek common ground as to the best way to provide our children with the information that they need and the values that they should have to develop and prosper mentally and physically during their lifetimes.

And I believe we need to remind ourselves that parents must take the
lead roles in forming the consciences of their children. It is not the
government’s sole responsibility to develop a willingness to inquire, a
kindness toward others and less selfishness.

PROMOTING ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE TRADE

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) have been used to weaken environmental protection in the United States and abroad. The downward pressure on environmental, health and safety standards could increase with completion of bilateral and regional Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), as well as through the Doha Round of WTO talks. Regrettably, Congress cannot exercise its normal constitutional powers as a check and balance on the executive with respect to trade agreements because fast-track procedures deny Congress its normal power to make amendments or to conduct a thorough debate.

14. Fast Track/Trade Promotion Authority will come up for renewal in Congress in the spring of 2007. Fast Track/TPA limits Congressional debate to 20 hours and only allows for an up or down vote on trade agreements with no amendments permitted. Will you oppose renewal of a Fast Track/TPA agreement like the one we currently have and support an alternative to fast-track that would allow Congress to fully debate and amend trade agreements? What type of agreement would you support?

I can understand why it might be necessary to limit the ability of
Congress to make amendments to international trade proposals that have been worked out by a multitude of nations. The authority to amend those proposals would result in the permanent delay of those agreements. However I do not understand why such important agreements should be limited to only 20 hours of debate. Limitation of debate is arbitrary and suggests a desire to not fully understand the implications of the trade agreements. I favor amending the existing legislation to allow appropriate debate on these agreements in amounts of time commensurate with the scope of the proposals.

I favor trade between nations and the promotion of travel and
interchange opportunities such as the People to People proposals that appear on my website. Again I note my belief that good faith
discussions of these issues is absolutely necessary. The use of trade
agreements to limit existing environmental and health safeguards is not
acceptable. I believe out nation needs to greatly expand adult job training so as to allow reduced demand industrial workers to find new skills to support their families. The protection of dying industries, without any attempt to retrain workers for emerging international market participation is short sighted and harmful to our nation and the international community. I will promote a good faith analysis of each issue and attempt to understand but not always give in to the emotional or political nature of these issues.

Respectfully Submitted

Joe Zuiker
Democratic Candidate for Congress
Hawaii, 2nd Congressional District.