I had the pleasure of interviewing Senator Susan Collins of Maine.
I met Senator Collins at the 2008 Republican Jewish Coalition Candidate Forum. I spoke with her and one of her legislative aides, and she was receptive to doing an email interview.
This was not easy to put together. Senators are very busy people, and I have never even been to Maine. In addition, Senator Collins is up for reelection in 2008.
Despite time constraints that are tougher than I could possibly imagine, I can say that her staff was very polite, friendly, and honest. They told me upfront that it would take time to complete the interview, but that it would get done. They occasionally sent me emails to let me know that I was on their radar, and that they had not forgotten.
In short, the Senator has some good people working for her. Given the quality of her character, this does not come as a surprise.
Friends of mine all across the political spectrum have met her at various conferences, including AIPAC. The consensus from those who have met her is that she is an incredibly nice person. This is consistent with my interaction with her.
With that, I bring you my interview with Senator Susan Collins.
1. ) What can ordinary citizens do, besides donating money and voting for you, to help you win the War on Terror? What obligations do we have, and how can we help?
A warning, last year, that terrorists may be conducting “dry runs” at our nation’s airports is another reminder of the very real threats that confront our homeland. This warning is consistent with a National Intelligence Estimate report advisory that the U.S. homeland faces a “persistent and evolving terrorist threat” from Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups driven by an undiminished intent to attack us here at home.
Our nation’s intelligence gathering capabilities have improved significantly since September 11, 2001. The Collins-Lieberman Terrorism Prevention and Intelligence Reform Act resulted in improved coordination among agencies to better enable us to detect and thwart terrorist attacks. But despite these improvements, the terrorist threats to our nation are ever-present and evolving. Keeping our homeland safe depends on more than our intelligence and law enforcement community; it also depends on vigilant and watchful citizens.
It is particularly imperative that citizens be watchful and report suspicious behavior in the area of mass transportation where there is the potential for mass casualties, where vehicles and aircraft can be used as weapons, and where there is only a brief period of time for assessing and reacting to threats.
It is because our reliance of an alert citizenry is so great that Senator Joe Lieberman and I authored legislation that would encourage individuals to report suspicious activity to appropriate officials without the fear of being sued. This provision was approved by Congress as part of a comprehensive homeland security bill that the President signed into law last year.
Our provision is simple: it will protect individuals from lawsuits when they, in good faith, report reasonable suspicious behavior that may reflect terrorist activity. This protection would not apply to individuals who knowingly make false statements. Our laws and legal system must encourage, not discourage, citizens to be the eyes and ears that are so helpful to our law enforcement and intelligence communities.
The message that this new law conveys to the American public is, “If You See Something, Don’t Be Afraid to Say Something.” Our nation’s homeland security depends on it.
2.) It is one thing to ask people to have faith in God. It is much tougher to ask people to have faith in Government. What does our government do right, and what does it need to do better, and how would you make it better so people can start believing in their government again?
I think there is no better way to answer such an important question than to borrow the words of a person who embodies faithful public service, former Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming: “If you have integrity, nothing else matters. If you don’t have integrity, nothing else matters.” To me, the extent to which our government deserves the faith of the American people is directly related to the level of integrity that guides our actions.
Integrity is more than abiding by the laws and rules that govern the conduct of public officials. It is more than avoiding conduct that is legal but questionable. Those are the bare minimum.
True integrity is acting in the public interest, not in seeking personal glory or partisan advantage. It is seeking common ground and forging solutions. Simply put, it is getting the job done.
I am fortunate to be a leader of a committee that possesses such integrity. The Senate Homeland Security Committee deals with some of the most difficult and urgent issues facing our nation. Yet, again and again, from our landmark legislation on intelligence reform following the terrorist attacks of 9/11 to our more recent work to secure our seaports and to rebuild our nation’s emergency management structure after the failures of Hurricane Katrina, we dig into those issues and reach bipartisan consensus.
Such integrity should not, however, be reserved only for issues in which the immediate safety and security of the American people are at stake. Far too often, issues that are of great importance to the American people, long-term problems that have to be confronted, never make it over the partisan divide.
There is no easy answer to the question of how we can make a system that works in urgent circumstances work in more circumstances. We know it can be done. We need to cultivate the kind of integrity that gets it done.
3. ) What were the main challenges you faced when you became Senator of Maine? What are your greatest successes as Senator, and what do you need more time to accomplish?
The main challenge I faced when I became Senator from Maine is the partisan gridlock that stymies progress in Washington, D.C. I have always made it a priority to battle partisanship in the Senate. Although I am proud to be a Republican, I recognize that neither political party has a monopoly on good ideas. Oftentimes, the best solutions are crafted from the center.
Throughout our nation’s history, we have solved problems by engaging in civil, constructive debate, and by holding to our principles while respecting the principles of those on the other side of the debate.
I am proud of my bipartisan record of accomplishments. In 2004, working together with Senator Joe Lieberman, we passed the Collins-Lieberman Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act. This law represents the most sweeping changes to our intelligence community in more than 50 years and implements most of the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. I also authored bipartisan legislation to strengthen the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, after Hurricane Katrina, as well as legislation to better protect our nation’s ports and chemical facilities against terrorist attacks or other disasters.
There is more that needs to be done. Currently, as Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, I am working closely with Senator Lieberman to continue our investigation of homegrown terrorism and violent radicalization as well as to pass legislation that will strengthen competition in federal contracting, add transparency to the process, and help to curtail fraud, waste, and abuse of taxpayers’ money.
4.) Who is your favorite American political leader of all time? Why?
Former Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith is a special inspiration to me. Senator Smith was my senator the entire time that I was growing up. I had the good fortune to meet Senator Smith when I was a senior in high school, and was participating in the Senate Youth Program in Washington. Senator Smith was in her 30th year in Congress! She was a legend, and I was so excited about meeting her. We talked for nearly two hours, discussing many important issues, and she answered my many questions. But, what I remember most was her telling me always to stand tall for what I believed.
5.) Do you support the Bush Doctrine of pre-emptive action? Do you feel that it may be necessary to take pre-emptive action against Iran? What Americans call 9/11, Israel refers to as every day life. Israel is then asked to show restraint. What is your view on Israel taking pre-emptive action, including a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities if necessary? What about with regards to the disputed territories such as Gaza? What about against Damascus, who funds Hezbollah?
Iran’s nuclear ambitions, combined with the missile technology it already possesses, are troubling. A nuclear-armed Iran, whose president and other top leaders regularly threaten to destroy the United States and Israel, would pose a major threat.
I continue to hope and believe that the threats posed by Iran can and should be addressed through diplomacy. That is why I am cosponsoring legislation, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act (S. 970), to expand our non-military efforts to end the activities of countries and entities that are enabling Iran to pursue nuclear weapons. In addition, I am a cosponsor of the Iran Sanctions Enabling Act (S. 1430), which would direct the Secretary of the Treasury to publish biannually in The Federal Register a list of anyone who has an investment of more than $20 million in the energy sector in Iran and to maintain that list on the Department of the Treasury website. I am also a cosponsor an amendment, offered by Senator Lieberman, to restore full funding at the President’s requested level of $75 million to support democratization efforts in Iran. This amendment was included in the omnibus funding bill, which was signed into law on Dec. 26.
Other threats to Israel’s security are cause for concern. Palestinian terrorists in Gaza are trying to replicate Hezballah’s example in southern Lebanon by upgrading and expanding their offensive military capabilities. Hamas and other terrorist groups are amassing tons of increasingly advanced explosives and weaponry, carrying out daily rocket attacks and preparing for wider-scale future operations. Israel has demonstrated extreme restraint, but may be forced to take additional measures to forestall the growing threat posed to its citizens. Hamas and Hezbollah are jeopardizing prospects for peace in Israel. Recognizing that Israel has a right to defend its citizens and soldiers, I supported a 2006 resolution that condemned the actions of Hezbollah and Hamas and their state sponsors, Iran and Syria, and reaffirmed Israel’s right to self-defense.
6.) Attempts to partially privatize social security have been met with hysteria about throwing old people on the street and leaving them to die. Do you favor any privatization of social security? If not, why not? If so, how can you frame it in terms that do not frighten seniors?
During my service in the Senate, I have consistently adhered to certain guiding principles about Social Security. The first, and most fundamental, is that Social Security is the foundation of retirement income for most Americans. We must preserve the Social Security system as it is for those individuals who are at or nearing retirement age, especially those Americans who are 55 and older. Our current and near retirees deserve the peace of mind of knowing they will get the benefits they have earned.
I have long supported proposals for a Social Security “lockbox” to prevent Social Security payroll taxes from being spent for programs unrelated to Social Security or to finance tax cuts. In times of war or recession, we may need to temporarily run a deficit on the non-Social Security side of the budget, but we should always safeguard the Social Security trust fund.
Some have proposed investing a portion of the Social Security trust fund in the stock market as a means of building up reserves and addressing or delaying the Social Security shortfall. These investments could be made directly by the government – like our State retirement funds – or they could be made by individuals through what have come to be known as “personal retirement accounts.”
We should consider a variety of proposals to improve the system, including the pros and cons of personal retirement accounts, but I would not support an effort to privatize the Social Security system. That approach could expose Social Security recipients to an unacceptable degree of risk, given the fact that Social Security benefits are the safety net that protects our nation’s retired and disabled workers from poverty. As we look for ways to modernize Social Security, we should ensure that the program continues to provide recipients with a guaranteed benefit, regardless of fluctuations in the financial markets.
7.) Without delving into your personal life, what would you want Americans to know about Susan Collins the person? 100 years from now, what would you want people to remember about you, and what would you hope the history books say about you?
My values were shaped by growing up in the small, northern Maine city of Caribou, a community my ancestors founded in the 1840’s. I was born into a family with a strong tradition of public service. My parents were both involved in state and local politics and they taught me that I have a duty to get involved in my community. They also taught me that girls can grow up to become anything they want and to never to give up—which is a truly valuable lesson.
I hope the history books remember me as a dedicated and hard-working public servant who made it a priority to seek bipartisan consensus and, as a result, accomplished a great deal for Maine and America.
I would like to again thank Senator Collins for her graciousness, and her incredibly thoughtful answers. I would also like to again thank her staff for their accessibility and timely responses.
The one element that I hope everybody takes away from my interview with Senator Collins is that reaching across the aisle is not a betrayal of principles. Anybody can lob verbal grenades. Leaders have to get things done. Solving problems requires working with people that may share opposing views. To be effective requires that one be likable, trustworthy, and willing to consider good ideas from various sources.
It was an absolute pleasure meeting and interviewing Senator Collins. Maine is lucky to have her service. America could use more public servants like her.
eric
Colins is a real throw-back to a time when the GOP was far to the left o fwhere it is now and politic comity was far more prevalent than today. I love how she mentioned Alan Simpson, a republican I truly liked and respected. As the GOP reinvents itself over these next years it would be well advised to recall those days past.
Good interview, though I would love to have read more about the economy and less about fear.
JMJ
JMJ;
“I would love to have read more about the economy and less about fear. ”
Gimme freebees and forget the threat.
No, Micky. Give me relevent discourse and less paranoia.
JMJ
Chess: Long term threat, Checkers: I’m hungry. Who’s buying?
Relevance is based on perception ,a concept that can be discussed forever in discourse. Whats relevant to the conversation you want is relevant only to wealth redistributionI .
Of course my opinion would be that another terror attack on the levels of 911 would be a far greater threat to our economy than anything threat you could mention.
Paranoia ? Most paranoia is developed out of pyschotic and manic imagination of non existant threats.
My fear (not paranoia) is developed from years of irrefutible facts that we are being pursued by Radical Islamists and terroristic elements. Along with quite a few undeniable incidents. That big hole in the ground might be reminder to those who would like to hide and forget.
Your paranoia is foolish due to the fact that we have more control over what our economy does than we do the actions of those who wish us dead.
Please, America is the greatest nation on Earth. The irrationally over-the-top fear of Islamic terrorism is paranoia. Period.
By “relevent,” of course, I meant things relevent to the duties of a senator, which are matters of the state and the nation. There is far, far more to all that than just terrorism.
JMJ
If you would say what youi meant up front you would make a better appearance.
Just because someone says “period” at the end of their sentence accomplishes and solves nor proves anything.
This senator in particular feels that her main duty is to protect the countrys citizens.
everything else is secondary.
Without security, every other point is irrelevant.
I wasnt born and raised in a cave. I’m well aware of the duties of our elected officials.
And that they have to function on all maters of interest to the country.
We could have all the things the left and right wants. But if we sufferd a major attack none of it would really matter.
And since the economy is such an issue we had better make sure that oil keeps coming.
An Amazing interview .. Thanks for posting it….. It requires much speculation to decide the priorities to freezed on the Top…. looking into the profiles of elected officials.. what I can say is God bless America!!
Is it still paranoia if someone has sworn to kill you?
Great work and congrats!! Voted.
Charly,
If a man walks up to me and threatens to kill me, I have a problem. If a bee flies up to me and treatens to sting me, I just swoosh it away. It may sting me, but I’ll survive. If it stings me just right, it could really hurt me. So, while I have to be concerned, I wouldn’t go out and hire Blackwater to protect me from it. It’s like that example I use of the Mosquito Hunter sketch from Monty Python.
Terrorism is a serious problem, but we shouldn’t go all wacky over it. If anything, the wackier we get about it, the more the terrorists are self-affirmed. It’s like when you deal with a spoiled child looking for negative attention: You don’t give him the negative attention – you be the adult and put the child in his place and end it.
Now I realize that concern over terrorism and what to do about are matters of degrees, and you guys are not entirely wrong (or right) about it. But it just seems to be to be too all-consuming, too over-the-top, too just plain paranoid to my taste. In other words, there is more to life than just fretting over terrorism.
JMJ
Eric, I enjoyed the interview. I especially liked her comments, “I recognize that neither political party has a monopoly on good ideas. Oftentimes, the best solutions are crafted from the center. Throughout our nation’s history, we have solved problems by engaging in civil, constructive debate, and by holding to our principles while respecting the principles of those on the other side of the debate. ” I think as Alpha Dogs we don’t even think about the other person’s perspective in an argument – as soon as there is a disagreement, each side takes a position and starts shooting it out, and no one wins. President Bush tried the bipartisan approach early, was nuked, and has stayed with his principles. I’m hoping that both sides will get over themselves, quit criticizing our President, and work toward some solutions.
Eric, I forgot to ask… I know you don’t go trolling for support, but I noticed someone posted an “I voted” message – can you provide the web site for us to vote on the blogs? Thanks in advance.
JMJ;
“If a bee flies up to me and treatens to sting me, ”
First you call terrorists ” unruly children” now they’re Bees.
Hmmm, lets see…
A bee carrying an AK47, straped with explosives, a remote for an IED and flying a 747 into a skyscraper.
I’ll keep an eye out for that bee.
JMJ;
“If it stings me just right, it could really hurt me. ” (me me me )
And 3000 other people.
JMJ;
“It’s like that example I use of the Mosquito Hunter sketch from Monty Python.”
Let the flying circus and the full Monty run our military ?
JMJ;
” a spoiled child looking for negative attention:
God good almighty he really equates bloodthirsty killers to children, Amazing.
( Or bees)
Im sorry Jersey. with as much due respect as I can come up with these are some of the most insane things I’ve ever heard. No exageration, no sarchasim, no humor.
Its insane.
JMJ;
“In other words, there is more to life than just fretting over terrorism.”
There will be considerable loss of life as proven already when terrorism has free reign.
Theres a difference between “fretting” and “dealing with”
Bill Clinton had the same philosiphy and look at what happened.
I’m sorry Eagle, forgive my interjection, but…
“President Bush tried the bipartisan approach early, was nuked, and has stayed with his principles.”
He did what? When? And stayed with what??? Are you talking about the guy that decried “nation biulding?” How about the guy that promised to rein in spending, and then signed off on trillions of dollars of debt? Is that the guy you’re talikng about??? Are those the “principles” to which you refer???
“I’m hoping that both sides will get over themselves, quit criticizing our President, and work toward some solutions.”
Susan Collins, like Alan Simpson, is a moderate republican who works well with both sides of the aisle. How can we have a civil political discourse if we “quit criticizing our President” like pathetic, stupid sheep? How can we “work toward solutions” if we are disallowed dissention from some all-powerful executive?
JMJ
I don’t expect to do anything about terrorism. Neither do I sit around worrying about it. That’s what I expect our law enforcement and military to do. I just want to elect lawmakers who don’t feel like they should handcuff the military or law enforcement. Every one of those lawmakers took an oath to protect THIS country. I don’t think they know the first thing about the economy, or health care, or even education. Every time they try to intervene in those areas, they make things worse.
Terrorists are like children throwing a tantrum in a room with several loaded guns and a couple of live hand grenades, except we love the children, and the terrorists DESERVE all the negative reinforcement we can give them.
Charly,
“I just want to elect lawmakers who don’t feel like they should handcuff the military or law enforcement.”
Then what do you think about Bush’s budget proposal that eliminates the COPS program? Is that cool with you?
“I don’t think they know the first thing about the economy, or health care, or even education.”
So, you “don’t think” that a bunch of lawyers and other professionals just don’t know” the first thing about the economy, or health care, or even education.” Look, whatever they do or don’t know, they’re what we got, we ought to vote for people who feel the gravity of that.
You, like Micky, are apparently having a hard time with the metaphor.
JMJ
Jersey, You sucked that bait hook line and sinker… “…as Alpha Dogs we don’t even think about the other person’s perspective in an argument – as soon as there is a disagreement, each side takes a position and starts shooting it out,”… start shooting and don’t even consider history… about 7 years ago President Bush tried to work with Congress and was stiff-armed. He’s the only President who has shown principles since his Dad left office, and he maintains those principles today. I think you have the President confused with Donald Rumsfeld when you criticize him for not accepting dissention. As an admitted history buff, you should know these things. I’ve said it before, please consider the other perspectives… there are many sides to a story.
What’s a “wrote license”… is that like a handwritten permission?
JMJ;
“You, like Micky, are apparently having a hard time with the metaphor.”
I watched Kennedy get shot!
Metaphors have their place when they are relevant in some way.
you could of said gangsters or criminals or rogue soldiers and of made a lot more sense.
But bumblebees and children ?
Sometimes we all need to back up and say ” hey! I’m sorry! that was a bad analogy/metaphor.
In addition to Eagles statement I would like to remind Jersey not to forget that when this war started the country and our government was united in the effort. Almost all of congress voted for this war. And when things went wrong Bush got no support from Congress. Instead he was accused pf fabricating intelligence and lying to Congress.
That was all very convenient due to the fact that as soon as 04 elections rolled around Dems started singing a different tune so they could appeal to the anti war vote and sentiment they helped create just for the election landscape.
Yes Jersey. whether you like it or not there are always more points to a story or different accounts and views.
Off topic … I truly appreciate your post on Michelle Malkin’s blog. It was spot on. The choice between McCain or two liberals weak on defense/gwot is a no brainer for this conservative. Thanks for posting a link to your blog too.
Eagle, I don’t recall Bush reaching out about anything. I know his entire history quite well. Why you think this man is principled is beyond me.
Micky, I know why we went to war and I know how – it had NOTHING to do with a united government and everything to do with cowardly/sleazy politics.
JMJ
Jersey, Your veiled reference to “knowing his entire history quite well” doesn’t fly. If there were an iota of doubt, the blood hungry media and dems would have a field day. You may disagree with his policies and positions – many people do. One man can’t be all things to all people. Fortunately for this country, though, our President stands on principles.
How’s this for principles, Eagle?
I’ve known others with higher principles than Bush.
JMJ
JMJ;
“Micky, I know why we went to war and I know how – it had NOTHING to do with a united government and everything to do with cowardly/sleazy politics.”
O.K. Lets get out my machete here.
First we’ll start with “I know why we went to war and I know how ”
You have your own interpretation of the reasons we went to war. And I’ve heard those beliefs and interpretations before.
1) No bid contracts for Bushs buddys.
2) Colonization
3) Bush lied about WMDs
“How” we went to war is pretty obvious.
This arguement has been shredded so many times now I have lost count. Such arguements were dismantled by a little stash of facts.
JMJ;
“Why you think this man is principled is beyond me.”
He has remained stuck to his principles and convictions since day one. Whether you like it not. All the opposition from all sides has not swayed his intentions or goals one bit.
Principles are a matter of personal moral choice. You despise the man only because he views the world differently than you. And the last I checked, his view was a 99% better than most of ours.
It works both ways seeing as how you speak so highly of Jimmy Carter whom was just giving hugs to Hugo Chavez not too long ago and writes books full of half truths.
When the majority of the hill votes to go to war and the president leading that war is re-elected its a irrefutable sign that we were united on many fronts. I now you must hate the thought of all of us actually getting along at one time or another but it actually happened. History and fact can prove this, your opinion will not.
Eagle and Micky, look up the NAFTA Highway. So many Bush backers hate McCain – McCain IS principled.
JMJ
That does not change the fact that you on one hand think we should support the Mexican economy and help these “hard working people” and then you tear apart the NAFTA and the superhigway. Maybe we should just all trade countries ?
The highway in and of itself is not really the problem – the Cheap Labor Cons? They are. And the American people are sick of them.
JMJ
Oh give me a break. Its corporate greed on both sides. it has absolutly nothing to do with either party. We’ve had the same problem through at least 7 or 8 administrations now.
Its my opinion thatthe left that wants illegals in this country being paid below scale because that puts them in a bracket vulnerable to the endless cycle of entitlement.
And voila ! You have more dem voters.
“Oh give me a break. Its corporate greed on both sides”
Yes. Exactly. So why do you put more onus on one actor more than the other? We have no choice but to bail them all out. They are all an asset-ic part of the economy. ;)
JMJ
I never said they were that important to our economy.
They get paid for what they work for. Even though its not much its their choice when they come here. Its the entitlement costs to the country that are bad for the economy.
The money we save at the produce stand is lost in taxes that pay for their medical at the ER, their kids school, and whatever other goodies they manage to grab.
That makes you and I the mark. And them the freeloaders.
Its the Dems that need them during an election cycle. Guess what ?
Good idea!
P.S. A U realy girl?