Barack Obama
DemocraticPresidential Nominee
Obama and McCain on the Issues
Welcome to CQ Politics' guide to the policy positions, voting behavior and public statements of Barack Obama and John McCain. Notes, Votes and Quotes provides a serious and non-partisan examination of Obama and McCain's stands on the key issues of the day; what they propose to do as president; how they have voted in the Senate, according to CQ's unparalleled coverage of congressional voting behavior; and what they have said about these issues. We'll continue to add new issues until the election, so check back regularly.
Presidential Nominee
(Photo by Brendan Hoffman/Getty Images)
John McCain
RepublicanPresidential Nominee
(Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Judiciary
Obama opposed the Bush administration's Supreme Court nominations of John G. Roberts Jr. in 2005 and Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2006. Obama was not in the Senate when the other seven current Justices were confirmed.
McCain supported the Bush administration's Supreme Court nominations of John G. Roberts Jr. in 2005 and Samuel A. Alito Jr. in 2006.
McCain also voted to confirm six of the other seven current Justices on the Court: Antonin Scalia (1986) and Anthony M. Kennedy (1988), who were nominated by Ronald Reagan; David H. Souter (1990) and Clarence Thomas (1991), who were nominated by George H.W. Bush; and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1993) and Stephen G. Breyer (1994, who were nominated by Bill Clinton. McCain was not a senator in 1975, when John Paul Stevens was confirmed.
Obama was one of 22 Democrats who voted against Roberts, who was confirmed by a vote of 78-22 (Senate Roll Call Vote 245, September 29, 2005). Obama was one of 40 Democrats who voted against Alito, who was confirmed by a vote of 58-42. (Senate Roll Call Vote 2, January 31, 2006)
McCain was one of 54 Republicans who voted for Alito. (Senate Roll Call Vote 2, January 31, 2006) He was among the 55 Republicans who voted to confirm Roberts. (Senate Roll Call Vote 245, September 29, 2005)
"I will look for those judges who have an outstanding judicial record, who have the intellect, and who hopefully have a sense of what real-world folks are going through." (Barack Obama at 3rd presidential debate in Hempstead, N.Y., Oct. 15, 2008)
“When I examine the philosophy, ideology, and record of Judge Samuel Alito, I am deeply troubled. I have no doubt that Judge Alito has the training and qualifications necessary to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. He's a smart guy, there's no indication that he is not a man of good character. But, when you look at his record, what is clear is that when it comes to his understanding of the Constitution, he consistently sides on behalf of the powerful against the powerless.” (Obama podcast, January 31, 2006)
“The problem I had is that when I examined Judge Roberts' record and history of public service, it is my personal estimation that he has far more often used his formidable skills on behalf of the strong in opposition to the weak. In his work in the White House and the Solicitor General's Office, he seemed to have consistently sided with those who were dismissive of efforts to eradicate the remnants of racial discrimination in our political process. … The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts' nomination. I do so with considerable reticence. I hope that I am wrong.” (Obama remarks, September 22, 2005)
"There will be two, and some say as many as three vacancies on the United States Supreme Court. I believe that judges should be nominated who are qualified, but also strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States. I think the judiciary, by some of their activism, has done significant damage from time to time. I'm proud of Justice Alito and Justice Roberts." (John McCain remarks at tele-town hall, Aug. 5, 2008)
“I have confidence in people like Justice Roberts and Justice Alito. … I didn't have to ask them or anybody find out what their positions on a broad variety of issues are. I think they have performed admirably. Those are the kind of justices that I would seek to nominate, find and nominate.” (McCain appearance at Associated Press Annual Meeting, April 14, 2008)
“I will vote to confirm Judge Alito, who demonstrated in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he will be an intelligent, fair, and open-minded justice who respects the judiciary’s important but limited role of interpreting the law.” (McCain statement, January 18, 2006)
Comments
when you say i'm not for abortion or gay rights[and i'm not]but i'm not gonna do anything about it....which is what bush and mccain say when they say ..let states handle it...to me that says it's a decission they don't want to make...being president you have to make decission good or bad.and if you don't want to..you shouldn't be in the race....not good leadership.
I don't think we need a president who makes all big decisions for us. Letting the states or even smaller local gov't bodies make decisions on things like abortion, or more importantly, taxes, infrastructure expenditures, environmental regulation, all that -- that dilutes the power of the federal gov't (good in my opinion) and keeps decision-making power closer to individual citizens.
Alex: Interesting theory. So by your logic, I can only assume that you are opposed to the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act as well as women's suffrage.
Joe the American - you're extrapolation is silly and I must assume the silliness is intentional. The founding fathers realized that not every decision should be federal, rather states and localities should make decisions based on the wants and needs of their localities. Like it or not, the needs are different in different regions of the country. The idea is that the federal gov't hold power on things that are require a common stance, but devolve power to state and local gov't where ever possible. It's a corollary to the power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely theory.
Though i agree with christian0008 completely and feel that people like Scott will one day be sorry for their choices and beliefs, this great country we live in and the great God I serve both allow him to feel that way. That aside, I will vote for McCain because the plan that Obama has will affect the businesses that employ 60 to 80 percent of people and when he initiates his plan, they will be forced to make cuts. I also disagree with giving people MORE money who don't even pay income taxes because of their low income. The fact is abortion and gay marriage aside(neither of which I agree with) the democrats have been basically running things for the past two years being the majority now in our congress and that seems to be where it all started heading DOWN in my opinion, which I'm entitled to. McCain is NOT Bush and I'm ready for HIS change!!
It's not silly. It's the 14th Amendment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution Gov Palin herself said that she believes there is a right to privacy in the Constitution, but that the states should decide, revealing, yet again her profound lack of knowledge of basic civics which was being echoed Ray up above.
Re abortion, how about instead of arguing whether it's a state or federal decision that we just let the individual decide for a change? If you don't like abortion, don't get one. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry one. Pretty simple to me.
After the last horrible 8 years of repub rule, anyone who votes for McCain and his not ready to be vp let alone president, Palin, is insane. Haven't we suffered enough??????????????
I FOUND THIS ARTICLE ONLINE AND BELIEVE THAT IT IS IMPORTANT TO SEE TO IT THAT AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE SEE THIS. AS A CHRISTIAN, AMONG THE 90% IN AMERICA WHO CLAIM TO BELIEVE IN GOD, THE WORD NEEDS TO GET OUT ON WHAT AN AFRICAN AMERICAN PASTOR OF FAITH IS SAYING ABOUT HIS DECISION NOT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA. UNLESS AMERICA GET'S THIS MESSAGE AND UNDERSTANDS THE IMPACT OF ELECTING THE MOST LIBERAL DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT IN HISTORY OUR NATION AS A WHOLE IS DOOME. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2008 Why I Can't Vote For Obama http://dotherightthing-cyberpastor.blogspot.com/2008/10/why-i-cant-vote-for-obama.html
Under judiciary, I recall that Obama said he would look for justices like Souter and Ginsberg for the Supreme Court. That quote, if I am correct, should be included.
I got one thing to say to Christian008: There's a reason there is supposed to be a separation of church and state. We all don't believe the same things you do, and government policy shouldn't be based on your religious beliefs. Neither should your vote.
@Christian008: What? I couldn't hear you over all the yelling and bible-thumping. I'm voting for Obama because he's the better leader. Oh, and because race doesn't matter. Let me say it again: race doesn't matter.
I agree. Individuals should have the choice in both matters of reproductive rights and marriage. I would add that it is not the province of the states to abrogate one's constitutional rights. w/r/t reproductive rights: Just as it is not a "local or state" decision about whether or not to apply the constitutional right to free speech, nor is it a local or state matter regarding the right to privacy. (see Griswold v Connecticut if you happen to disagree with Roe v Wade. The principle is the same.)
The issues?!? How quaint.
On abortion, let the states decide. On abortion, let the states decide... Here's an idea. How about we let WOMEN decide? If we want to talk about getting local with our decision making, there's nothing more local than letting an individual citizen make the choice that will effect them only and not their neighbor.
None
It is not freedom from religion, but freedom of religion. I don't know about you, but I am making more money, I own my own home, and none of this was true 8 years ago. Government is the problem not the solution. the difference in the candidates is simple.... Equal Opportunity vs. Equal outcome
Saying let the person decide if abortion is right or not is not the way to go. How about this. I am not for or against slavery. I am pro choice. I will let you decide whether or not you would like a slave. It is not for me to tell you what is right or wrong. I will let each individual decide. Your either Pro Life or Pro Infanticide. Pro Choice is just a PC way of making you feel better about it.
Doug, your faulty analogy is comical, to say the least. A woman has a right to say what happens to her biologically. Same as you. Do you want people telling you what you can and cannot put in your own body? And for you to equate that to slavery, I've seen criminals that wasn't so underhanded and misleading as you.
Ray- The reason the candidates say that the decision should be up to the sates is the 10th amendment- any powers not specifically granted to the federal government in the constitution are deferred to the states.
Womans right to choose. I agree. Could she have made the choice to not sleep with the guy? What about contraception? What about taking responsiblity for your actions? What about the unborn girls right to choose to live??
The abortion issue will never be resolved until we agree on when life begins. Pro Abortion will never accept that life begins at conception. Pro Life will never accept life begins after birth. One position believes life is a sacred gift, the other as a cosmic accident.
If males also got pregnant, there would be neither a "pro-[miserable]-life" movement, nor a pro-choice movement. The matter would have been decided about a century ago on the side of indvidualistic American-style personal choice and responsability, but womenhave only had a national right to vote for less than 80 years.
Will said earlier that "a woman has a right to say what happens to her biologically." While I'm not sure exactly what that means lets say that statement is true. The woman, except in cases of rape, does decide to have sex and pregnancy is a direct effect of sex. It isn't some indirect side effect, most biologists would argue that it is the primary effect of having sex. Again unless we're talking about rape It is not like some shadowy person is putting some foreign parasite or chemical into her body. We all know how sex and babies work and to have sex without thinking about that potential "consequence" shows poor judgment. I would argue that shows that you shouldn't be making important decisions about your life and the babies life. If the pro choice side was really pro choice they would look at all the choices along the way that lead to abortion and try to find ways to encourage life at every opportunity. I would argue that many abortions happen not because of choice but rather because the couples and women who make the decision to abort their pregnancy feel like their is no other choice. There is always a choice, that much is true, and the choice should be for life.
So all of the pro-lifers would rather have an unwanted child brought into this world than have the pregnancy terminated. Scientifically speaking a fetus is a parasite until birth, feeding off the mother and providing no benefit in return. Not to mention the potential abuse and neglect the child will receive from the parents who did not want it in the first place. The irony is the pro-life camp would have children born into an unloving and uncaring situation based on their own beliefs, regardless of the beliefs of the person affected.
We can continue to follow antiquity. To follow a system that thrives on and controls us through GREED, HATE, FEAR, TORTURE AND LIES. Or we can AS A PEOPLE, AS A COUNTRY, AS A COMMUNITY, take back our RIGHTS as HUMAN BEINGS, our PRIDE and HONOR in the face of the rest of the world. And maybe, finally, choose to make a change from a way that stopped working thousands of years ago. Lets wake up people. Lets open our eyes to the ENTIRE WORLD, and see who the PEOPLE want as the next President of the United States!
Post a Comment