Iowa Public Television

 

Rep. Leonard Boswell & Sen. Jeff Lamberti

posted on September 8, 2006

>>

Yepsen: THE CAMPAIGN IN CENTRAL IOWA'S THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT HAS DRAWN NATIONAL ATTENTION. WE DISCUSS THE RACE WITH INCUMBENT DEMOCRAT LEONARD BOSWELL AND WITH REPUBLICAN CHALLENGER JEFF LAMBERTI ON THIS EDITION OF 'IOWA PRESS.'

FUNDING FOR 'IOWA PRESS' WAS PROVIDED BY 'FRIENDS,' THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS.

ON STATEWIDE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION, THIS IS THE FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 8 EDITION OF 'IOWA PRESS.' HERE IS DAVID YEPSEN.

Yepsen: TWO CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS IN IOWA ARE IN THE POLITICAL SPOTLIGHT THESE DAYS. BOTH HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AS MUST-WIN SEATS BY THE TWO MAJOR POLITICAL PARTIES. EASTERN IOWA'S FIRST DISTRICT FINDS DEMOCRAT BRUCE BRALEY OF WATERLOO MATCHED UP AGAINST BETTENDORF REPUBLICAN MIKE WHALEN FOR THE OPEN SEAT THERE, AND THOSE TWO CANDIDATES WILL JOIN US LATER THIS MONTH AT THE 'IOWA PRESS' TABLE. IN CENTRAL IOWA THE SPOTLIGHT IS ON THE THIRD DISTRICT, WHERE INCUMBENT DEMOCRAT LEONARD BOSWELL IS CHALLENGED BY ANKENY REPUBLICAN JEFF LAMBERTI. SENATOR LAMBERTI SERVED TWO TERMS IN THE IOWA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BEFORE BEING ELECTED TO THE IOWA SENATE WHERE HE CURRENTLY SERVES AS COPRESIDENT. CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL ALSO STARTED HIS POLITICAL CAREER IN THE IOWA SENATE. ELECTED IN 1986, HE LATER SERVED AS PRESIDENT OF THAT BODY. TODAY HE'S SEEKING HIS SIXTH TWO-YEAR TERM IN THE U.S. HOUSE. GENTLEMEN, WELCOME TO 'IOWA PRESS.' GOOD TO HAVE YOU BACK.

Lamberti: GOOD TO BE HERE.

Boswell: GOOD TO BE HERE, DAVID.

Yepsen: ALSO WITH US AT THE 'IOWA PRESS' TABLE ARE KAY HENDERSON, NEWS DIRECTOR WITH 'RADIO IOWA,' AND MIKE GLOVER, SENIOR POLITICAL AND LEGISLATIVE REPORTER WITH THE 'ASSOCIATED PRESS.'

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, LET'S START WITH YOU. WE ASSUME AT SOME POINT DURING THIS PROGRAM YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A COMMERCIAL FOR YOUR REELECTION. SO LET'S START OFF WITH THAT. WHAT'S THE CASE FOR LEONARD BOSWELL GETTING A SIXTH TERM IN CONGRESS?

Boswell: WELL, THE WORLD IS IN KIND OF A BAD SITUATION AND A LOT OF THINGS GOING -- A LOT OF TURMOIL, A LOT OF STRESS, AND EXPERIENCE IS A BIG FACTOR. AND I BRING THAT EXPERIENCE TO THE TABLE. I'M A VETERAN. I'VE BEEN TO WAR. I'M A FARMER. WE HAVE I THINK 20 FARMERS IN THE CONGRESS NOW, AND WE'RE GETTING READY TO DO THE FARM BILL, WHICH IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT TO IOWA. WE'RE AN AGRICULTURE STATE. AND I PUT FAMILIES FIRST, BEING A FAMILY PERSON. OF COURSE WE BOTH ARE. AND I HAVE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN, AND I'M CONCERNED FOR THEIR FUTURE, SO I WANT TO BRING THIS EXPERIENCE BACK TO THE TABLE AND OFFER IT TO THE PEOPLE OF IOWA.

Glover: AND YOU HAD A HEALTH PROBLEM LAST YEAR. CAN YOU ASSURE VOTERS THAT'S IN YOUR PAST?

Boswell: THANK YOU FOR ASKING. I'M GLAD YOU DID. JUST LAST WEEK I HAD SORT OF MY ANNUAL CHECKUP, IF YOU WILL. I'VE BEEN HAVING THREE-MONTH CHECKS. AND THIS IS A DIRECT QUOTE, THE DOCTOR CAME IN THE ROOM AND A BIG SMILE AND HE SAID, 'HOME RUN, IT COULDN'T BE BETTER.' HE WENT DOWN THE LIST. AND SO IT'S BEHIND ME. IT'S BACK THERE. I'M FEELING GOOD. AND I TELL PEOPLE, MIKE -- AND I EVEN SHAKE HANDS ONCE IN A WHILE. IF YOU WANT TO KNOW, JUST TAKE A HOLD OF IT.

Glover: SENATOR LAMBERTI, THE SAME QUESTION TO YOU. WHAT'S THE CASE FOR DENYING CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL ANOTHER TERM IN OFFICE AND REPLACING HIM WITH YOU?

Lamberti: I THINK THE CASE IS FOR CHANGE. AND AS I'VE TRAVELED THROUGHOUT THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT FOR FIFTEEN OR SIXTEEN MONTHS, THERE'S A STRONG DESIRE FOR CHANGE. PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT THINGS ARE BROKEN IN WASHINGTON AND IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED. YOU KNOW, THIS IS ABOUT THE FUTURE. IT'S ABOUT THE FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR GRANDCHILDREN AND MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT I HAVE HAD, THAT WE HAVE ALL HAD. AND WE CAN'T CONTINUE DOWN THE PATH OF WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING, RAISING TAXES TO SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, AND MORTGAGING THE FUTURE. WHAT THE PEOPLE OF THIS DISTRICT WANT IS SOMEBODY WHO'S GOING TO BE RESPONSIBLE ON THE BUDGET, WHO'S GOING TO LIMIT THE WASTEFUL SPENDING, WHO HAS A PLAN FOR CHANGE. AND THAT'S WHAT I BRING TO THIS RACE.

Glover: AND IS HIS HEALTH AN ISSUE?

Lamberti: NO.

Henderson: LET'S TURN TO IRAQ. CONGRESSMAN, WHAT SHOULD THE PATH BE FOR THE U.S. IN IRAQ IN THE FUTURE?

Boswell: WELL, THANK YOU, KAY. I THINK THE FIRST THING WE NEED IS OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF, THE PRESIDENT, TO LEVEL WITH US AND TELL US REALLY ARE THE IRAQIS READY TO TAKE OVER THEIR RESPONSIBILITY. NOW, WE HEAR REPORTS THAT THEY'RE UP TO, LIKE, 250,000 IRAQIS, POLICE -- MILITARY TRAINED AND EQUIPPED IN THE FIELD. SO THAT BEING THE CASE, THEY'VE GOT THEIR GOVERNMENT, THEY'VE GOT IT IN PLACE. THEY'VE GOT THEIR MILITARY IN PLACE, SO WE'RE TOLD BY THE ADMINISTRATION. SO WHAT'S THE PLAN TO START BRINGING OUR TROOPS HOME? WE OUGHT TO HAVE A PLAN. NOT CUT AND RUN. THAT GETS THROWED AROUND. I WOULDN'T SUBSCRIBE TO THAT AT ALL FROM MY OWN -- NOW, LET ME FINISH. SO THE THING -- WE NEED A PLAN. WHAT DO WE DO BEST? WHEN THE PRESSURE IS ON, WE PRODUCE. AND IT'S TIME TO FISH OR CUT BAIT AND SO, IRAQIS, WE'RE GOING TO START WITHDRAWING. YOU'VE GOT YOUR FORCES. SO, MR. PRESIDENT, TELL US IF THEY'RE READY. AND IF THEY ARE, THEN WE OUGHT TO START BRINGING THEM OUT OF THERE AND LET THEM TAKE THEIR RESPONSIBILITY.

Henderson: DOES THAT MEAN THERE SHOULD BE A DATE SET WHEN TROOPS COME HOME.

Boswell: I DON'T THINK SO. I THINK WE OUGHT TO HAVE A PLAN. AND I'VE DONE A LOT OF THAT IN MY BACKGROUND. I WAS A TEACHER AT COMMAND GENERAL STAFF COLLEGE IN TACTICS. I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT IT. I'VE OFFERED EVEN TO HELP TO WRITE A PLAN, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE DONE. BUT THE FIRST THING, THE PRESIDENT NEEDS TO LEVEL WITH US AND SAY THIS IS ACCOMPLISHED, THEY'VE BEEN LIBERATED, WE'RE IN OCCUPATION NOW, THEY'VE GOT THEIR GOVERNMENT, THEY'VE GOT THEIR TRAINED TROOPS, WE'RE GOING TO START BRINGING OUR TROOPS HOME.

Henderson: MR. LAMBERTI, DO YOU AGREE THAT IT'S TIME TO FISH AND CUT BAIT, AS THE CONGRESSMAN SUGGESTS?

Lamberti: WELL, I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT IT'S NOT TIME TO CUT AND RUN. THAT'S THE WRONG APPROACH. THAT WOULD BE DESTABILIZING FOR THE MIDDLE EAST. SO I AGREE WITH THAT, THAT IT'S NOT TIME TO CUT AND RUN. WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO TURN OVER MORE AUTHORITY. AS WE SAW THE OTHER DAY, THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT TOOK CONTROL OF THE ARMED FORCES. THAT'S ANOTHER STEP IN THE PROCESS OF THEM TAKING MORE AND MORE RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT'S GOING ON THERE. IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT ABOUT HOW WE LEAVE IRAQ, AND IT'S GOT TO BE STABLE. WE DO NEED TO CONTINUE TO APPLY PRESSURE ON THEM TO TAKE MORE OF THAT RESPONSIBILITY. SO I THINK IN LARGE PART WE DO AGREE ON HOW TO DEAL WITH THAT ISSUE, AND WE WANT OUR MEN AND WOMEN HOME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT ONLY WHEN WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED THE MISSION.

Glover: BUT DO YOU AGREE THERE SHOULD BE SOME SORT OF A PLAN FOR WITHDRAWING?

Lamberti: I THINK THERE IS A PLAN FOR WITHDRAWAL ACTUALLY. THE PLAN IS WHEN THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT CAN MAINTAIN THEIR OWN SECURITY, WE WILL START DRAWING DOWN OUR FORCES. AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THEM TO DO THAT. THIS WEEK WAS ANOTHER STEP IN THAT PROCESS.

Glover: HOW LONG SHOULD THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT BEFORE THIS HAPPENS?

Lamberti: WHEN THE JOB IS DONE. I THINK IT'S MORE IMPORTANT HOW WE LEAVE IRAQ THAN WHEN. I WANT OUR MEN AND WOMEN HOME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE LEAVE IN THE RIGHT WAY.

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, THE SAME QUESTION TO YOU. HOW LONG DO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE TO WAIT?

Boswell: I DON'T THINK THEY SHOULD WAIT ANY LONGER. I THINK THEY OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO BE TOLD THE PLAN, THAT IT'S TIME FOR THE PLAN. AND I THINK THE PRESIDENT OUGHT TO LEVEL WITH US AND SAY THIS IS THE PLAN. YOU KNOW, HE'S THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF. SO WE OUGHT TO HAVE THE PLAN. AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THIS, I HAD SOME EXPERIENCE PUTTING TROOPS IN ON ASSAULTS THAT SOMETIMES DIDN'T GO WELL. I HAD TO GO BRING THEM OUT, AND THE LAST LIFTS WERE VERY, VERY -- A LOT OF CASUALTIES. SO I WANT THE PLAN TO BE WELL PREPARED AND WELL EXECUTED, AND WE CAN DO THAT. AND IT'S TIME TO START LAYING THE PLAN OUT AND SAY, IRAQIS, IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY.

Henderson: WHAT SHOULD BE THE LONG-TERM U.S. PRESENCE IN IRAQ? SHOULD THERE BE A MILITARY BASE IN IRAQ, MR. LAMBERTI?

Lamberti: IF THEY CAN MAINTAIN CONTROL OVER THEIR OWN COUNTRY, NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT'S NECESSARY. BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WE'VE GOT TO GET THEM IN A POSITION WHERE IRAQ IS STABLE.

Glover: BUT YOU'D HOLD OPEN THE OPTION FOR HAVING A BASE THERE?

Lamberti: FOR SOME PERIOD OF TIME, CERTAINLY.

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL?

Boswell: WELL, I THINK WE HAVE TO TURN THE RESPONSIBILITY OVER. AND THE IRAQIS FEEL NOW THAT WE'RE OCCUPIERS, THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE THERE FOREVER AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE PERMANENT BASES AND EVENTUALLY TAKE OVER THEIR OIL SUPPLIES. AND THAT'S NOT THE INTENT AT ALL. AT LEAST THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING; THAT'S MY FEELINGS. AND SO THE -- IT'S TIME FOR YOU TO TAKE OVER, FOLKS. YOU'VE GOT YOUR GOVERNMENT. YOU'VE HAD AN ELECTION. YOU'VE GOT YOUR GOVERNMENT IN PLACE. YOU'VE GOT YOUR TROOPS TRAINED AND EQUIPPED IN THE FIELD. SO, MR. PRESIDENT, WHAT'S THE PLAN?

Glover: MR. LAMBERTI, LET'S TURN TO ANOTHER COUPLE OF TROUBLED AREAS OF THE WORLD. NORTH KOREA AND IRAN, BOTH PLACES WHERE THERE ARE EVIDENCE OF NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT, UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS WOULD YOU GO TO WAR WITH THOSE TWO COUNTRIES?

Lamberti: WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S PRETTY EARLY TO SAY WE'RE GOING TO BE CONTEMPLATING WAR WITH EITHER ONE OF THOSE. WE ALWAYS HAVE TO KEEP THAT OPTION AVAILABLE. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S IN THE INTEREST OF THE UNITED STATES FOR EITHER OF THOSE COUNTRIES TO BECOME A NUCLEAR POWER. I'M MORE CONCERNED RIGHT NOW ACTUALLY ABOUT IRAN AND THE DESTABILIZING FORCE THAT THEY ARE THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE MIDDLE EAST AND THE WORLD. I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE ALL OF THE OPTIONS TO A PRESIDENT, INCLUDING MILITARY FORCE, AT SOME POINT IN TIME. BUT I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF OPTIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THEN IN TERMS OF WORKING WITH OUR ALLIES AND PUTTING PRESSURE ON THEM TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT. AND I THINK WE'RE A LONG WAYS AWAY FROM MILITARY ACTION.

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, THE SAME QUESTION TO YOU. WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH YOU WOULD USE MILITARY FORCE IN EITHER IRAN OR NORTH KOREA?

Boswell: WELL, IF WE HAD FACTUAL INFORMATION -- FACTUAL INFORMATION I'M GOING TO SAY, NOT LIKE WE HAD BEFORE; WE HAD MISINFORMATION -- BUT FACTUAL INFORMATION THAT MASS DESTRUCTION WOULD BE BROUGHT AGAINST AMERICANS. AND THAT WOULD -- WE'VE GOT TO HAVE SAFETY FIRST. BUT IF WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, MIKE -- AND WE ARE, SHOULD BE. I KNOW A LOT ABOUT IT I CAN'T TALK TO YOU ABOUT BECAUSE OF MY POSITION ON THE SELECT INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE. BUT IF WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT IT, THEN THE COUNTRIES IN THE REGION OUGHT TO BE A LOT MORE CONCERNED. AND WE OUGHT TO BE PUTTING A LOT MORE PRESSURE, IN MY OPINION, FROM STATE DEPARTMENT TO THE PRESIDENT AND EVERYBODY ELSE, AND SAY, FOLKS, THIS IS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SO YOU OUGHT TO BE STEPPING UP AND JOINING IN AND SAYING THIS IS NOT THE THING TO DO AND IN TODAY'S SOCIETY, IN THIS WORLD COMMUNITY, IT'S JUST NOT ACCEPTABLE.

Glover: ONE OF THE CRITICISMS OF THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS BEEN THAT THEY HAVEN'T DONE AS GOOD A JOB AS THEY COULD HAVE IN ENLISTING OTHER COUNTRIES IN OUR FOREIGN POLICY EFFORTS, THAT WE'RE SORT OF A GO-IT-ALONE COWBOY. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT CRITICISM?

Boswell: SOME OF THAT'S VERY TRUE. AND I FEEL -- OR AT LEAST I FEEL IT'S TRUE. AND I WOULD SAY THIS, THAT -- AND I HAVE SAID THIS TO THE SECRETARIES OF STATE ALONG THE WAY, WE MUST BE PUTTING OUR BEST FOOT FORWARD. WE NEED TO TALK. WE DON'T NEED TO GO TO WAR. WE NEED TO TALK AND BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER. WE'RE A WORLD COMMUNITY AND WE'VE GOT TO REALIZE THAT AND THEN FIGURE OUT A LITTLE BIT BETTER ON HOW WE CAN BE NEIGHBORS, NOT ADVERSARIES.

Glover: SENATOR LAMBERTI, SAME QUESTION TO YOU. HAVE WE DONE A GOOD ENOUGH JOB IN ENLISTING OTHER NATIONS IN OUR FOREIGN POLICY EFFORTS?

Lamberti: FIRST AND FOREMOST, WE HAVE TO DO WHAT'S IN THE INTEREST OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, IT'S INTERESTING WE GET CRITICIZED FOR GOING IT ALONE IN SOME PARTS OF THE WORLD, AND AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE'RE ENGAGING IN MULTINATION DISCUSSIONS IN NORTH KOREA AND IRAN, NOW THEY WANT US TO ENGAGE IN UNILATERAL DISCUSSIONS WITH THOSE NATIONS. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A MESSAGE THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. WE NEED TO DO WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF AMERICA. AND WHERE THERE CAN BE MULTINATIONAL TALKS, WE SHOULD DO THAT, BUT ALWAYS MAINTAIN OUR BEST INTEREST FIRST AND FOREMOST.

Henderson: AMERICANS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR POCKETBOOKS, THE PINCH THAT ENERGY PRICES ARE PUTTING ON THAT POCKETBOOK. WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP BEYOND THE PLATITUDES ABOUT ETHANOL? WHAT DOES THIS COUNTRY NEED TO DO TO BE ENERGY INDEPENDENT?

Lamberti: ENERGY INDEPENDENCE INVOLVES A LOT OF THINGS. IT DOES INVOLVE RENEWABLE FUEL, ETHANOL, BIODIESEL. AND THIS YEAR IN THE IOWA LEGISLATURE, WE PASSED I THINK THE MOST SIGNIFICANT LEGISLATION OF ANY STATE IN THE NATION IN TERMS OF MOVING FORWARD ON THAT. THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT PART OF ENERGY INDEPENDENCE, AND WE NEED TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP THAT MARKET --

Henderson: SO WHAT DOES CONGRESS DO?

Lamberti: -- AS WELL AS THE MARKETS IN THE FUTURE. CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE INDUSTRIES AS WE'VE DONE HERE IN IOWA. ALSO SUPPORT RESEARCH INTO THE NEXT GENERATION OF RENEWABLE FUELS. BUT IT'S MORE THAN JUST RENEWABLE FUELS. IOWA IS THE THIRD LEADING PRODUCER OF WIND ENERGY, AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE WORK THAT WE'VE DONE IN THE IOWA LEGISLATURE. BIOMASS AND THE RESEARCH THERE IS AN IMPORTANT PART. BUT I'VE GOT TO TELL YOU, IN THE SHORT RUN, PETROLEUM, GAS IS ALSO AN IMPORTANT PART OF THAT, AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES THAT WE HAVE IN THIS COUNTRY. AND THAT'S WHERE I THINK WE DISAGREE, BECAUSE I SUPPORT DRILLING IN ANWR IN ALASKA, I SUPPORT DRILLING OFF THE COAST OF FLORIDA, AND I KNOW THAT CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL HAS VOTED FOR AND AGAINST DRILLING OFF THE COAST OF FLORIDA. WE NEED A CONSISTENT POLICY THAT SAYS WE ARE GOING TO DEVELOP OUR OWN NATURAL RESOURCES. YOU COMBINE ALL OF THOSE, THAT'S HOW YOU GET TO ENERGY INDEPENDENCE.

Henderson: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL --

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT?

Boswell: WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO. FIRST OFF I THINK, MR. LEGISLATOR, YOU MISSED A CHANCE TO FOLLOW MINNESOTA AND GET SOMETHING MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT. BUT I HOPE THEY DON'T TAKE THE LEAD NOW BECAUSE YOU FAILED TO DO THAT.

Henderson: AND, OF COURSE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE MINNESOTA MANDATE THAT ONLY ETHANOL BLENDED FUEL WILL BE DISPENSED.

Boswell: THAT'S RIGHT. AND, YOU KNOW, WE PRODUCE THAT HERE IN IOWA AND THE ECONOMY COMES BACK INTO IOWA AND WE ARE LEADING AND WE ADVANCED THAT SOMETIME AGO. AND --

Henderson: BUT IN RESPONSE TO HIS QUESTION ABOUT YOUR VOTES OF DRILLING IN --

Boswell: FIRST OFF, MY WHOLE CRITERIA HAS BEEN TO PUSH THE ALTERNATIVES, PUSH THE ALTERNATIVES. I'VE BEEN DOING IT FOR TWENTY YEARS, AND I CAN GIVE YOU A LOT -- I DON'T HAVE TIME TO TELL YOU GOING BACK TO MY -- WHEN I WAS IN NATO IN PORTUGAL AND I REALIZED WHAT A BONDAGE WE WERE IN TO OPEC. BUT NEVERTHELESS WE PUSHED THE ALTERNATIVES AND SO, THEREFORE -- BUT WE'VE GOT TO HAVE THE ENERGY, SO WHEN WE DISCOVERED WE COULD GO ON OUT FURTHER IN THE GULF AND DO THIS AND NOT HURT THE LANDSCAPE, WHY, A THINKING PERSON IS ALLOWED TO CHANGE THEIR MIND. AND THE ANWR SITUATION, THAT'S A POSSIBILITY, BUT THAT'S NOT THE FIRST ALTERNATIVE. THE FIRST ALTERNATIVE IS TO GO TO THE ALTERNATIVE FUELS, AND WE'RE PREPARED TO DO THAT. WE'VE DONE OUR RESEARCH. IT WORKS. WE CAN DO BETTER. WE CAN DO MORE. THAT'S WHERE WE OUGHT TO PUT OUR ENERGIES BECAUSE THAT MAKES US SELF-EFFICIENT AND PUTS THE ECONOMY BACK INTO IOWA.

Yepsen: WHAT ABOUT THE LARGER ISSUE OF THE RURAL ECONOMY? YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT THE STATE'S LARGEST COUNTY IN THIS DISTRICT, AND YOU'VE ALSO GOT A LOT OF RURAL COUNTIES. CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, WHAT DO YOU DO -- WHAT WOULD YOU DO IN THE NEXT TERM TO IMPROVE THE RURAL ECONOMY OF IOWA?

Boswell: WELL, WE'VE GOT A FARM BILL COMING UP AND, YOU KNOW, POLK COUNTY IS A BIG CITY, BUT IT'S ALSO A LOT OF FARMLAND HERE. AND THE FARM BILL IS COMING UP. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOT, LIKE, I THINK IT'S AROUND 20 FARMERS IN CONGRESS. I THINK WE'VE GOT 160 SOME LAWYERS, SO WE'RE PRETTY WELL EQUIPPED THERE FOR LAWYERS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE MANY FARMERS. AND I THINK THE EXPERIENCE FACTOR AGAIN IS VERY IMPORTANT TO OUR PRODUCERS IN THIS STATE. AND SO WE'LL WORK VERY HARD ON THAT, AND WE'RE DOING -- LISTING POSTS AND HEARINGS AND SO FORTH ON TO GET THE INPUT FROM THE GRASS-ROOTS ON IT. AN I THINK WE'RE READY TO GO FORWARD WITH IT NOW. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO. THE TIME HAS COME.

Yepsen: SENATOR LAMBERTI, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO TO --

Lamberti: FIRST AND FOREMOST, I'M GOING TO GET THE FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER IN WASHINGTON. I'M GOING TO -- I'VE GOT A PLAN TO CUT OUT WASTEFUL SPENDING. YOU KNOW, THIS YEAR THERE WERE 19 OPPORTUNITIES TO CUT PORK BARREL SPENDING, AND MR. BOSWELL VOTED AGAINST ALL OF THOSE, VOTED FOR ALL OF THE SPENDING, HAS NO PLAN ABOUT HOW WE BALANCE THIS BUDGET. I DO. ONE IS TO ALLOW THE PRESIDENT TO HAVE THE LINE-ITEM VETO AUTHORITY, WHICH HE VOTED AGAINST. TWO IS TO REQUIRE ALL MEMBERS TO PUT THEIR NAMES ON PROJECTS WHEN THEY'RE SUPPORTING IT. NUMBER THREE IS TO ALLOW 48 HOURS FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW WHAT'S IN THOSE BILLS. SO I'M GOING TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT GETTING THIS FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER. SECONDLY, I'M GOING TO REDUCE TAXES. THAT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE ECONOMY, WHETHER IT'S RURAL OR URBAN IN IOWA. AND I'VE GOT THE RECORD IN THE LEGISLATURE OF DOING THAT, AND ALSO THE RECORD OF BALANCING THE BUDGET WITHOUT RAISING TAXES.

Yepsen: ALL RIGHT. MR. BOSWELL, HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THAT?

Boswell: WELL, I SAY SEVERAL THINGS. AGAIN, REPHRASE THE QUESTION FOR ME, IF YOU WOULD.

Yepsen: WELL, I WANT YOU TO RESPOND -- GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO WHAT SENATOR LAMBERTI JUST SAID.

Boswell: WELL, WE HAVE MADE EFFORTS TO REDUCE TAXES FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, DIFFERENT THINGS OF THAT NATURE, INVESTMENT AND SO ON. STATE TAX, RAISED THAT, ET CETERA. WE'VE OFFERED TO DO THAT A NUMBER OF TIMES. BUT I'M IN A COALITION CALLED THE BLUE DOGS, AND WE'VE OFFERED A SUBSTITUTE BUDGET TIME AND AGAIN, PAY AS YOU GO, PUT OUR HOUSE IN ORDER. AND, OF COURSE, THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY HAS TURNED IT DOWN. BUT THAT'S -- I'VE PUT A LOT HOURS INTO THAT AND BASED ON -- IF YOU GO BACK A FEW YEARS, YOU WERE ALL THERE IN '91-'92, I WAS APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR AND WE PUT OUR FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER IN IOWA. AND I DID THAT. I'VE TAKEN THOSE IDEAS WITH ME THERE. BUT THEY GOT ALL THREE LEGS OF THE STOOL. AND I AGREE WITH MR. LAMBERTI, WE NEED A CHANGE, NOT THE KIND OF CHANGE HE'S TALKING ABOUT. NO, LET ME FINISH. WE NEED A CHANGE. THE CHANGE IS WE NEED SOME OPPORTUNITY TO PUT SOME NEW IDEAS FORTH THAT THIS CURRENT MAJORITY WILL NOT ALLOW TO EVEN BE DISCUSSED.

Yepsen: SENATOR LAMBERTI, WHAT ABOUT THAT? I MEAN YOU'RE A REPUBLICAN. REPUBLICANS HAVE HAD CONTROL OF THE CONGRESS, THE WHITE HOUSE FOR A LONG TIME -- FOR SEVERAL YEARS. HOW IS ELECTING ANOTHER REPUBLICAN GOING TO AMOUNT TO MEAN ANY CHANGE?

Lamberti: BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT INDIVIDUALS. IT'S ABOUT ISSUES. IT'S ABOUT IDEAS. IT'S ABOUT ELECTING PEOPLE WHO WANT TO MAKE THAT CHANGE. YOU KNOW, WE HAD A DEBATE SOME TIME AGO, A FEW WEEKS AGO, WHERE MR. BOSWELL INDICATED THAT HE DID NOT FEEL PARTICULARLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FEDERAL BUDGET. I THINK IOWANS WANT A CONGRESSMAN WHO WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY. IT'S REALLY ABOUT CHANGE. YOU MENTIONED WHEN YOU WERE APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR, YOU BALANCED THE STATE BUDGET BY PASSING THE LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN THE HISTORY OF IOWA. I WAS APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR FOR THREE YEARS IN IOWA IN THE IOWA SENATE. I BALANCED THE BUDGET WITHOUT RAISING TAXES DESPITE THE FACT THAT SOMETHING LIKE 40 STATES ACROSS THE NATION WERE. I KNOW HOW TO MAKE THOSE DIFFICULT CHOICES TO BALANCE A BUDGET. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED IN CONGRESS. WE'VE GOT TO GET THIS FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER. SECONDLY, YOU VOTED TO RAISE TAXES 32 TIMES IN YOUR RECORD IN CONGRESS. THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED TO GROW THIS ECONOMY.

Yepsen: NOW, WAIT A MINUTE. CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO REPLY HERE.

Boswell: WELL, I THINK A LITTLE OUT OF CONTEXT IS TAKING PLACE HERE. AND, OF COURSE, THAT'S GAME. WE'VE SEEN IT -- WHOSE COME OUT TO ADVISE AND SO ON, THE ROVE TECHNIQUE, SO LET IT GO. BUT THAT'S NOT SO. AND WE DID RAISE THE SALES TAX, AS YOU RECALL. AND, OF COURSE, THE GOVERNOR AGREED TO IT. THIS WAS A CLOSE COORDINATION WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE. WE WORKED TOGETHER. IT WAS BIPARTISAN AND WE SPENT A YEAR WORKING ON IT. WE GOT TOGETHER AND IT WORKED. AND WE STILL HAD LESS TAXES THAN THE STATES AROUND US. SO TO CRITICIZE THAT IS KIND OF A REACH, IT SEEMS TO ME. AND I WOULD THINK THAT HE WOULD DO BETTER THAN THAT TO PICK ON THAT, WHICH IS PROBABLY A LANDMARK LEGISLATION. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF YOUR LANDMARK LEGISLATION YET, BUT THAT WAS.

Glover: SENATOR LAMBERTI, LET'S TURN TO ANOTHER ISSUE THAT CONGRESS SEEMS UNABLE TO RESOLVE, AND THAT'S IMMIGRATION. EVERYBODY TALKS ABOUT BOOSTING BORDER SECURITY, MAKING THE BORDERS MORE SECURE, BUT THE FIGHT SEEMS TO BE OVER. UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES SHOULD SOMEONE HERE LEGALLY BE ALLOWED TO STAY? HOW DO YOU APPROACH THAT?

Lamberti: WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A MAJOR ISSUE TO THE PEOPLE IN THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTINCT. AND THE FIRST THING I SAY IS I THINK THEY WANT A CONGRESSMAN WHO'S GOING TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT ADDRESSING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION NOT JUST IN AN ELECTION YEAR. WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT DISAGREEMENTS ON THIS ISSUE, BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE THAT MY OPPONENT HAS SENT A CONSISTENT MESSAGE. AS RECENTLY AS LAST YEAR, HE VOTED AGAINST COMPLETING A SECURITY FENCE. HE VOTED TO ALLOW ILLEGAL MEXICAN IMMIGRANTS TO USE THEIR CONSULAR ID CARDS TO OPEN UP FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS, BANK ACCOUNTS, AND THEN ALSO VOTED TO ALLOW ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO HAVE FOOD STAMPS. I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE OF THE THIRD DISTRICT WANT THEIR HARD-EARNED TAXPAYER DOLLARS GOING FOR FOOD STAMPS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. WE NEED TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT CONTROLLING THE BORDER. I DON'T BUY THE IDEA THAT WE CAN'T CONTROL THE BORDER. THAT'S FIRST AND FOREMOST. WE HAVE TO CONTROL OUR BORDERS. IT'S MORE THAN JUST AN ISSUE OF IMMIGRATION. IT'S A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY, AND WE NEED SOMEBODY WHO IS GOING TO BE SERIOUS ABOUT THAT NOT JUST IN AN ELECTION YEAR.

Glover: ANY CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH YOU WOULD ALLOW AN ILLEGAL ALIEN TO EARN CITIZENSHIP?

Lamberti: NO.

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, HOW DO YOU APPROACH THE ISSUE?

Boswell: WELL, THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE IS A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. AND A LITTLE BIT OF MISREPRESENTATION HERE GOING ON AGAIN. BUT THERE HE GOES AGAIN. BUT NEVERTHELESS, MONTHS AGO, CONGRESS BEFORE THIS CONGRESS, I VOTED TO PUT TROOPS ON THE BORDER WHILE WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE BORDER PATROL TO GET READY TO DO THIS. I AM IN FAVOR, AND I'VE SAID SO, IN FAVOR OF FENCING IN CERTAIN AREAS, BUT NOT WHOLE LENGTH OF IT. WE'VE GOT A THING CALLED UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES THAT'S VERY GOOD. WE'RE USING IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN, IT WORKS. SO WE CAN PUT THEM UP AT MUCH LESS EXPENSE AND ALSO BETTER SURVEILLANCE. A FENCE OUT IN AN AREA THAT'S NOT POPULATED, THEY GO OVER IT OR GO UNDER IT, AND THAT'S WENT ON THROUGHOUT HISTORY. SO WE COULD USE THESE VEHICLES, AND I'M PUSHING FOR THAT. AND I THINK THAT WE CAN HAVE THAT. AND TO GO ON A LITTLE FURTHER, I THINK THAT THE EMPLOYERS NEED TO KNOW WHAT'S EXPECTED OF THEM. AND SOMEBODY SHOWS UP, THEY'VE GOT AN IDENTIFICATION, THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'VE GOT TO DO, AND THEY'RE EXPECTED TO DO IT, BUT NOT TO LEAVE IT TO WHERE THEY HAVE TO COME UP WITH THEIR OWN BACKGROUND CHECKS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE A GOOD PROGRAM. WE CANNOT HAVE ILLEGALS. WE CAN'T DO THAT. WE HAVE TO HAVE IT LEGAL. AND WE SURELY COULD DO THAT IF WE JUST PUT THE EFFORT INTO IT.

Glover: ARE THERE ANY CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH AN ILLEGAL ALIEN WHO IS IN THE UNITED STATES SHOULD BE ABLE TO EARN CITIZENSHIP?

Boswell: ILLEGAL? NO. BUT I WOULD SAY THIS, THAT WE OUGHT TO TAKE -- REALIZE THAT THERE'S 11- TO 12 MILLION SCATTERED ACROSS THE COUNTRY --

Glover: SO WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THEM?

Boswell: WELL, WE'RE GOING TO FIRST OFF PUT INTO EFFECT THE LAWS THAT ARE IN PLACE NOW, WHICH IS NOT GOING ON. THEY'RE NOT BEING PRACTICED AND THEY SHOULD BE. AND I -- I DON'T THINK WE'RE IN FAVOR OF NOT FEEDING SOMEBODY THAT IS HUNGRY SO, YOU KNOW, BACK TO THE EARLIER REMARK THERE. BUT THEY NEED TO BE LEGAL, AND WE NEED TO PROTECT THE BORDERS. AND IF I WERE A TERRORIST, I THINK I WOULD PROBABLY FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET INTO THIS COUNTRY. SO WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR FAMILIES. WE HAVE TO PROTECT THE BORDERS. AND I'VE SUPPORTED THAT A LONG TIME, AND I'LL CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

Henderson: MR. LAMBERTI, THE FARM BILL WILL BE REWRITTEN SOON. WHAT, IF ANYTHING, WOULD YOU DO DIFFERENTLY?

Lamberti: WELL, I THINK IN LIGHT OF THE BREAKDOWN ON THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION DISCUSSIONS WHERE WE'RE TRYING TO GAIN ACCESS TO MARKETS FOR OUR PRODUCTS, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD MAKE ANY FURTHER CONCESSIONS. THE UNITED STATES HAS MADE A LOT OF CONCESSIONS TRYING TO OPEN UP MORE FREE TRADE. I THINK WE SHOULD IN LARGE PART CONTINUE THE PROGRAMS WE HAVE, STRONG ON CONSERVATION, BUT WE NEED THE REST OF THE WORLD TO COME TO THE TABLE BEFORE WE GRANT FURTHER ACCESS TO OUR MARKETS WHEN WE DON'T GET IT IN RETURN. NOW, I WANT TO GO BACK JUST QUICKLY TO THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE. THERE WAS NO DISTORTION IN THE THREE VOTES I MENTIONED ON IMMIGRATION IN TERMS OF FOOD STAMPS FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS, VOTING AGAINST COMPLETING THE FENCE, AND ALLOWING MEXICAN ILLEGALS TO USE THEIR CONSULAR CARD. NOW, THE ISSUE HERE IS YOU MAY NOW --

Boswell: THOUSANDS OF MILES OF FENCE. YOU THINK -- COME ON, LET'S GET REAL.

Lamberti: WELL, YOU MAY NOW THINK VOTING TO GIVE FOOD STAMPS TO ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS WAS A MISTAKE, THAT'S OKAY. BUT THERE IS NO DISTORTION IN THOSE VOTES.

Yepsen: MR. BOSWELL, DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND ANY MORE TO THE IMMIGRATION ISSUE.

Boswell: I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS A LOT OF RESPONSE TO PUT A WALL CLEAR ACROSS THAT BORDER AND PAY FOR IT. WHERE IS THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM? WE'VE GOT A $9.6-TRILLION DEBT RIGHT NOW WE'RE PAYING INTEREST ON, AND WE CAN DO IT BETTER BY USING TECHNOLOGY WITH THE UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES AND SO ON AND HAVE PATROLS OUT THERE, QUICK RESPONSE TEAMS. THAT CAN BE DONE. AND IN THOSE REAL HIGHLY POPULATED AREAS, I'VE NEVER BEEN AGAINST PUTTING INSTRUCTIONS UP THERE. OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA. BUT THAT VAST ISOLATED AREA, THERE'S A BETTER WAY TO DO IT.

Yepsen: CAN YOU GO BACK TO KAY'S ORIGINAL QUESTION ABOUT THE FARM BILL AND WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE IN THAT?

Boswell: WELL, HE'S CORRECT, THE WTO -- THE DOHA ACTION IS BOGGED DOWN. BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M A FARMER, SO I'M KIND OF AN ETERNAL OPTIMIST THERE. I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD WORK IT OUT. BUT I'VE JOINED WITH OTHERS IN THE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE AND CONGRESS TO EXTEND THE CURRENT FARM BILL TO SEE IF THEY DO MAKE SOME PROGRESS WITH WTO. IT WOULD BE KIND OF TOUGH TO GO THROUGH THE MECHANICS OF PUTTING A FARM BILL TOGETHER, WHICH WE MUST DO, AND THEN FIND OUT SOME ADJUSTMENT WOULD HAVE TO BE MADE RIGHT AWAY BEFORE WE HAD IT IN PLACE. WELL, WHAT'S THAT DO TO THE PRODUCERS OUT THERE? AND WE ALL KNOW THAT PRODUCERS NEED TO KNOW WHAT THEY'VE GOT BEFORE THEY GO IN THE FIELD. THEY'VE GOT A CASH FLOW. THEY'VE GOT TO GO IN AND SEE THEIR BANKER. THEY'VE GOT TO PREPARE TO DO THIS, AND THEY NEED SOME STABILITY THERE. SO I WOULD EXTEND IT TILL WE SEE. BUT I WOULD SAY THIS, YOU KNOW, A BAD -- NO DEAL IS BETTER THAN A BAD DEAL, AND I AGREE WITH THAT. AND WE MAY NOT GET ONE. IT LOOKS A LITTLE GRIM RIGHT NOW.

Glover: SENATOR LAMBERTI, LET'S GO BACK TO ONE OF THE MAJOR ISSUES THAT'S FACED THE NATION OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS, AND THAT'S REFORMING THE NATION'S SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM. THE PRESIDENT HAS SUGGESTED USING PRIVATE ACCOUNTS. DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

Lamberti: NO, I DON'T. I THINK WE CAN MAINTAIN OUR PROMISES THAT WE MADE TO SOCIAL SECURITY TO THE RECIPIENTS THAT ARE GETTING IT AND THOSE WHO ARE GOING TO RETIRE. WE CAN ALSO MAINTAIN THE SYSTEM WITHOUT RAISING TAXES, WHICH WE SHOULD DO, AND WITHOUT RAISING THE RETIREMENT AGE. BUT I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD BE GOING DOWN THE ROUTE OF PRIVATIZATION OF SOCIAL SECURITY.

Glover: SO WE KEEP THE SAME SYSTEM IN PLACE, DON'T MAKE ANY CUTS IN BENEFITS, NO RAISES IN TAXES? THE ACTUARIES SAY IT GOES BROKE THAT WAY.

Lamberti: WELL, HERE'S SOME THINGS WE CAN DO. WE CAN QUIT SPENDING THE SURPLUS. I GET A KICK OUT OF THESE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS LOCKBOX, WHICH HAS NEVER EXISTED EXCEPT TO HOLD IOUs FROM THE GOVERNMENT. WE ARE STILL RUNNING A SURPLUS, AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO RUN A SURPLUS FOR SEVERAL YEARS TO COME. WE OUGHT TO BE TAKING THAT MONEY AND SETTING IT ASIDE TO MEET THOSE FUTURE OBLIGATIONS.

Glover: CONGRESSMAN BOSWELL, SAME QUESTION TO YOU, PRIVATE ACCOUNTS AND WILL YOU DO NOTHING WITH SOCIAL SECURITY?

Boswell: NO ON PRIVATE ACCOUNTS, AND APPARENTLY WE'VE HAD A CHANGE OF MIND OVER HERE, BUT THAT'S OKAY. HE'S ALLOWED TO DO THAT. BUT, NO, I DON'T SUPPORT CHANGING SOCIAL SECURITY. I THINK WE MIGHT NEED TO TWEAK IT SOME. WE'VE DONE THAT OVER THE YEARS, BUT IT'S BEEN AN EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM. AND IF WE WENT TO THE PRIVATE ACCOUNTS, FIRST OFF, THE ADMINISTRATION IS NEVER -- THE PRESIDENT HAS NEVER TOLD US -- AND HE STILL WANTS TO DO THIS -- WHAT IT WOULD COST. AND THERE WOULD BE AT LEAST A TRILLION OVER TWENTY YEARS, MAYBE FIVE TRILLION. FROM WHERE? WHERE WOULD IT COME FROM? AND ALSO THAT PROGRAM PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, FIVE YEARS AGO EVERYBODY THOUGHT ENRON WAS A GREAT INVESTMENT. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN WITHIN TWO MONTHS, WOW. WELL, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO SOCIAL SECURITY IF IT HAD BEEN INVESTED INTO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO OUR SENIORS DESERVE BETTER AND THERE'S A LOT OF WOMEN OUT THERE THAT RELY ON IT, PARTICULARLY. ALL AGES DO -- OR BOTH MEN AND WOMEN, BUT A LOT OF WOMEN OUT THERE THAT RELY ON THIS, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN DURING MY WATCH. I WILL NEVER SUPPORT CHANGING SOCIAL SECURITY. WE MAY HAVE TO TWEAK IT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP IT IN PLACE. IT'S WORKED. IT'S WORKED VERY WELL.

Yepsen: GENTLEMEN, WE'VE ONLY GOT ABOUT THIRTY SECONDS LEFT, SO I'LL CUT IT IN HALF. WHAT DO YOU WANT VOTERS TO REMEMBER ABOUT YOU AS THEY GO INTO THE VOTING BOOTH? FIFTEEN SECONDS, SENATOR LAMBERTI.

Lamberti: THAT WE ARE THE CANDIDATE FOR CHANGE. WE'RE GOING TO GET THE FISCAL HOUSE IN ORDER. WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE YOUR TAXES. AND WE ARE GOING TO BE A CANDIDATE THAT'S SERIOUS ABOUT DEALING WITH A PROBLEM OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, NOT JUST IN AN ELECTION YEAR BUT ALL THE TIME.

Yepsen: CONGRESSMAN, FIFTEEN SECONDS.

Boswell: WELL, I'M FOR CHANGE TOO, BUT CHANGE TO HAVE SOME RESPONSIBILITY IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND THE ADMINISTRATION, ONE OF THOSE LEGS OF THE STOOL THAT WOULD BE FROM THE OTHER PARTY AND BE ABLE TO PUT THINGS FORWARD. I'M FOR THE CHANGE AND WE KNOW WHAT THE CHANGE NEEDS TO BE AND I THINK THE PEOPLE OF IOWA KNOW IT AS WELL, NOT SOMEBODY JUST TO RUBBER STAMP IT AND CONTINUE THESE SAME POLICIES.

Yepsen: THANK YOU. THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING WITH US TODAY. APPRECIATE IT.

Lamberti: THANK YOU.

Yepsen: NOW, ON OUR NEXT EDITION OF 'IOWA PRESS,' WE TURN TO THE BUSINESS OF THE 109TH CONGRESS IN WASHINGTON. SENATOR CHARLES GRASSLEY JOINS US TO DISCUSS THE FALL AGENDA LEADING UP TO THE NOVEMBER 7 GENERAL ELECTION. WE RETURN NEXT WEEKEND AT OUR REGULAR 'IOWA PRESS' AIRTIMES: FRIDAY AT 7:30 P.M. AND SUNDAY AT 11:30 A.M. I HOPE YOU'LL BE JOINING US. I'M DAVID YEPSEN OF 'THE DES MOINES REGISTER' SITTING IN FOR DEAN BORG ON THIS WEEK'S EDITION OF 'IOWA PRESS.' THANKS FOR JOINING US. CAPTIONS BY: MIDWEST CAPTIONING DES MOINES, IOWA

FUNDING FOR 'IOWA PRESS' WAS PROVIDED BY 'FRIENDS,' THE IOWA PUBLIC TELEVISION FOUNDATION; AND BY THE IOWA BANKERS ASSOCIATION... FOR PERSONAL, BUSINESS, AND COMMERCIAL NEEDS, IOWA BANKS HELP IOWANS REACH THEIR FINANCIAL GOALS.

 


Tags: campaign 2006 Congress Democrats Iowa Republicans