8TH DISTRICT CANDIDATE PROFILE: FIREBAUGH STRESSES BUSINESS EXPERIENCE AND REGIONAL ROOTS

Five candidates are seeking to represent the 8th District in Congress. The Southeast Missourian asked all five candidates the same 14 questions, which we feel are major issues in this campaign. Their answers will appear in a candidate profile today through Friday. Ballot order was used to determine publication date.

1. What should we do to lower the national deficit? Should we cut taxes or cut spending, or both?

Firebaugh: On the deficit, I believe that we should continue the three-year program that has already reduced it tremendously because I believe the decrease in the deficit will benefit the economy more than any other objective. First of all, I would end corporate welfare in the way of tax credits for huge corporations. I believe that it's the smaller businesses and the smaller families, in this district especially, that need the assistance, and not large corporations. The other thing I would do would be definitely stress the reform of the health care system. The third objective that I would target would be to continue to clean up fraud in welfare and I would do this by going to the front line caseworker. The caseworkers I know in the various counties know who is defrauding the system. This is once again my philosophy in the fact that we need to work with the people on the front line and not just the bureaucrats.

2. Would you support a balanced budget amendment?

Firebaugh: Definitely. As a common sense businesswoman, I've had to balance my budget. You have to balance your budget and I truly believe the government needs to balance their budget and this is the only way that we're going to require them to get this spending under control. But I do know on my Chamber of Commerce questionnaire, they said, "Do you believe in an annual budget?" I believe in biennial budgeting. When I covered city hall and county commission, I do know that if you do not have the right accounting system, you can leave your debt or your deficit out of your budget and I think we need a true accrual kind of accounting system to make what is called the balanced budget amendment truly effective.

3. What is your stand on the abortion issue? Do you favor a constitutional amendment banning abortion? Do you support a ban on partial birth abortions?

Firebaugh: Well, you've wrapped a lot of questions in on that one. I truly believe that this is a decision that belongs between a woman, her family and her physician. I do not believe that politicians should be in this decision. Partial birth abortion, I believe that procedure should be done when the health and the life of a woman is at stake. I do not believe that we should allow this type of government intrusion on individual rights.

4. Under the Medicare plan the Republican Congress passed but Clinton vetoed, did Medicare spending increase? What action or actions should be taken to keep Medicare from going bankrupt?

Firebaugh: Yes, they all increased to take care of the increased costs that are naturally built into the program. The cut is in the increment of growth.

It (Medicare spending) does under the Republican bill whatever the proposals are, and there are several out there on the table. The difference is the rate of increment that Jo Ann Emerson approves and the rate of increment that I approve. Now, in southern Missouri, when you do have the increment in cost to the individual, when it personally affects their billfold and doubles the premiums (which) are projected anywhere from $1,000 in increased costs per year to what AARP predicts could be even an increment of over $3,000 a year in medical costs for a senior in that program -- in my dealings, with, for instance, the seniors I know of that are with Medicare, that is a cut.

That's a cut into their personal finances. Most of them are on Social Security and that cut would be a harsh effect to them. As the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare states, it would be the unkindest cut of all if Newt Gingrich's program had been passed or had not been vetoed by Clinton. And once again, I think the major difference is that Jo Ann Emerson has stated that she will go along with Newt Gingrich's proposal for his budget for Medicare. My difference is that I know that we have to handle the increased growth which would account for inflation, added cost of medical care and the numbers of seniors increasing (and) coming into the program.

The program that I would like to see put into place would be a less severe cost for the Medicare senior that has paid into the program for 30 years. It was a guarantee for them. Once again, I think government needs to take responsibility, and holding to that contract with Medicare seniors is an important responsibility. I also feel that with a severe cutback in growth that the Republican Congress had proposed, the major effect it would have on our economy in southern Missouri would be the cutback of rural hospitals and their services, possibly the closing of these hospitals. In the counties that I have worked with, not only are our rural hospitals necessary for front-line medical care for seniors but it's also a major employer in our small communities. Outside of the school systems, the hospitals and medical clinics are very, very important economic instruments in the economy of our counties. First of all, I would keep it in place as it is with controlled costs and expenditures. I would definitely keep fraud, misuse of funding in check. I think this is the government's responsibility in any program that they have for the citizens, to keep them streamlined, to keep them efficient and once again I would go to the front line. I would go to the administrators, to the physicians, to the medical field that works with the Medicare seniors and not just to the bureaucrats to see where we can control these costs.

Well, I don't believe that would solve the whole problem but it would certainly give us the best start at controlling or preserving the system as it is now and is in place. Plus, as I said, don't forget, we have a contract with the Medicare seniors that they paid in and we guaranteed that they would have this service. Another issue that I would research thoroughly is I'm very hesitant on the proposals of letting the healthy and the wealthy out of the Medicare system. Then we don't have an input of money into the system on an overall payment plan by people who will be using the system. Plus we will leave only those who are severely in need of medical care there, which would be a heavier drain on the program.

5. What's the most important issue facing 8th District residents?

Firebaugh: Well, with many of the counties having 30 percent population around the age of 55, I believe Medicare and Social Security are very important issues. When I would sit in the newspaper office, I would have seniors come in and say I'm not getting my Medicare coverage or I don't understand how to pay my premium or to get this insurance cleared up. What am I to do? Or I'm not getting my Social Security benefit from my late husband. These people would come in and question this at all times of the year and year-in and year-out. And now that the 8th Congressional District has more seniors, I believe those issues are very important and this is what I hear when I'm in all 26 counties.

I know I'm accused of calling it Mediscare, but I have a 92-year-old father-in-law who truly is frightened. He doesn't understand government funding of programs, but he does understand that his premiums will be doubled. That's what he hears. I have a friend who had to put her mother in a nursing home who had lived with her for five years. And in January she placed her mother in a nursing home after hearing what Newt Gingrich's Congress was doing or threatening, as she saw it, and placed her mother into a home thinking that if I can place her now, perhaps it won't be available later or it won't be affordable later if Gingrich's plans and his cuts in spending were put into place. These are issues that came to me, these are issues that people were saying to me. And I was very fortunate to have the opportunity to say I'm concerned and I would like to serve as a representative.

6. Do you support the nation's open trade policy?

Firebaugh: I do believe in GATT, if it is reviewed frequently and if it is fair to all those who are using the treaty. NAFTA is a different issue. I have found that NAFTA has been unfair to the small industries and manufacturers in this district. I think it gives corporations one more mechanism to ship our jobs away from Americans and I truly believe our paychecks belong here. And it's the level of employment that has kept our small communities in southern Missouri going that they're shipping out to Mexico and other countries, through NAFTA: our hat factories, our shoe factories. We had three shoe factories in Fredericktown alone close. Wright County, which is in our district, has one of the highest unemployment rates in this district and in the state of Missouri and their shoe factory just closed. I'm not so sure that it's not a detriment to agriculture. Of course, there's no way for me to have the availability of research at this time, but I'm not so sure that NAFTA isn't one of the reasons why our cattle market has dropped. I would like to have the ability to research that, but I'm not so sure that NAFTA isn't just as detrimental to agriculture.

7. Do you support the current farm bill?

Firebaugh: I question the current farm bill. I was pleased for the farmers that wanted it enacted, what's typically called the Freedom to Farm Act. I was most pleased that the Democrats fought to have it as an amendment so that if it doesn't work that it comes back to the 1949 farm bill to protect our farmers. Especially our small family farmers. Now I am concerned, but as a representative and as the only candidate who makes a living off of agriculture, I'm very interested in assuring that our family farms stay strong and that embargoes and sanctions are only used to prevent war and never just targeted at farmers. And that farming issues remain a top priority since it's the life blood of our community.

Well, here, what are called the old ASCS offices which are now Farm Service Agencies keeps the farmer advised of the commodities markets, grains, storage, loans, and I am concerned with three of six of those agencies closed in the 8th Congressional District that to keep up with a new farm bill or amendment, the Freedom to Farm Act, less information from the farm service agencies, that the small farmer may be lost in the shuffle. I have to travel three counties away to get to the agent that I used to work with. The farmers that I know that come in from the fields late at night and get up and go out early in the morning, I'm a little wary on how they can keep up with the commodities market, what grain, what crop to plant; will the loan power be there if the subsidies are cut back. But as a representative, this would be one of my priorities to make sure that our farmers are not hurt.

8. Do you favor term limits for federal lawmakers?

Firebaugh: Yes, I definitely do. For many reasons. First of all, the way the incumbency empowers a legislator to stay in office hinders many from coming into the political arena as a candidate. I also find that oftentimes what we would consider a legislator would turn into a career politician. Too often, those that represent us have never collected a paycheck other than one signed by the taxpayer. And I do believe that we need representation in Washington, D.C., from people such as myself who have been out here raising a family and making a living and know what happens when Congress legislates expenditures or cutbacks. I believe we need someone with common-sense experience that says, "Wait, this is what happens on the Main Street of Cape Girardeau or on the farm in Sikeston or on the cattle farm in Texas County." This is what happens to us when you don't spend our tax dollar correctly or when you take it away from us. Once again, in all honesty, I think I would want to see the term representative come back into play instead of congressman. That is my major issue.

Most people find this very unusual but do you know I'd really like to see what the constituents have to say (on how many terms lawmakers should be limited to.) And again as never having run for office, I have no facility to research this but that's what I definitely would do. I would poll the constituents of the 8th Congressional District of what they feel is a fair time of service as a legislator.

9. Do you support making English the official language of the federal government?

Firebaugh: Yes, and I'll tell you why, which comes out of my background as a common-sense businesswoman. I've been in the printing business. I know what the expenditures are for printing materials that need to be made available to the public. And to get the deficit down, continue reducing the deficit and to streamline government, I can think of no larger cost than having available printed material in various languages. And once again, as I said, that's just a common-sense business approach.

10. Do you support managed health care? Should the federal government have a role in it? If so, what?

Firebaugh: The major problem that I have with managed health care as I have seen it work in the 8th Congressional District with the people who are covered that I know, oftentimes, the health care organization does not accredit the physicians in our small communities which adds an extra burden on the community because then our physicians, our medical clinics, our rural hospitals do not have patients coming in because the managed care system says, "I'm sorry, that's not approved." Then it makes a burden on our constituents. The patient must go to a larger community, usually a larger facility and the families cannot go along as a support unit because they can't afford to take that much time off from work or can't afford the travel time and expenses. That is one of my issues that I find very important. Another issue that I think is important on that is the fact that too often insurance companies then get to make the decision of health care and not the physician and the patient. As much as I am against government intrusion into individual rights, I have a problem with insurance intrusion into individual rights.

I believe in the free market of letting the insurance companies come up with a sensible plan. I do believe that can be made available and affordable and I would like to see if offered at the level equal to what federal employees get but not mandated by the federal government. And I believe government should only come in when it needs to take control of a huge industry like the insurance industry in saying you must or you should allow portability. You should not have pre-existing conditions be exemptions for those who need coverage.

11. Do you support collective bargaining for public employees?

Firebaugh: Yes, I do. I have been an employee in the school system and have found that many times no one listens to the classroom teacher and as with any other business, be it government personnel, I would go to the front line for information, for input, and this includes Department of Family Services employees, people who administer welfare, people who administer Medicare, Social Security, and that includes the classroom teacher. They are the front-line people. They are the ones that see the everyday workings, the procedures, and I believe in starting at the grass roots and then working your way up. Too often we go directly to the bureaucrats and statistics on paper.

Yes, I would say I would (support the right to strike) in the most extreme cases. I would hope, and the political subdivision and the employees that I know would do everything they could to prevent that. But in the most extreme cases, that's what collective bargaining can accomplish.

12. Do you support school choice and a voucher system for public schools?

Firebaugh: I support school choice in the fact that if you want to send your child to a private or parochial school, you certainly may, but I do not believe in the voucher system. The public school systems in this district, I know, are good, strong schools but they cannot afford the threat of additional monies not coming into the system. As I said, the choice is there already. It's just that I do not believe that that choice should be at taxpayers' expense.

13. Would you vote to extend the Brady Bill's five-day waiting period for purchasing guns?

Firebaugh: Well, I am a defender of the Second Amendment, and the Brady Bill, I believe, punishes law-abiding citizens who want rifles, shotguns for hunting or collecting and I do not think that's fair. What I think is fair is to get the database system that immediately does a security check so that criminals, the mentally ill, those convicted of violent crimes, whatever the exclusion is to keep our streets safe, that that system is put into place, to hinder those people from using guns as weapons. My husband has been a member of the NRA and is a collector of guns, and I know the rigorous paperwork that he has to go through when he has purchased a gun. But I'm a defender of the Second Amendment because of the values of this area. Everyone remembers the first day they went out hunting. Every family knows who inherited the grandfather's shotgun or rifle. I mean, it's a tradition here. Fortunately, it isn't a risk for people to have what I call guns and not weapons.

14. Why should someone vote for you for Congress?

Firebaugh: I'm so glad you asked that question. I've been a part of southern Missouri all of my life. My family is like your family. We know our neighbors, our friends. Your family members and my family members have the same values, the same priorities. I also have made a living in this area. I've been a businesswoman, tree farmer, and I know how to put together a budget, stick to it so that I can write a payroll. It's just good common-sense experience that I want to take to Washington, D.C., as a representative of the people that I've been a part of for 55 years.

In contrast, Jo Ann Emerson has been a Washington, D.C., lobbyist. She has not been part of this community for a very long time and she has priorities that are closely associated to Washington, D.C., values. For instance, she lobbied for corporations so that they would not have to clean up their own toxic waste. She preferred to have it done at taxpayers' expense. This is a big issue in our area. In St. Francois County alone, we're working on waste that is there from the mining industry. A study is now being done on that. She worked as a lobbyist when the minimum-wage issue was brought up, legislation I would have voted for as I said when I was running a business. We had four increases in 10 years and I found that that money turned itself over in the community seven times and came back in the front door of every mom-and-pop retail business on Main Street. There are just many differences between a proven businesswoman such as myself who is a native of this district going to Washington, D.C., to take our issues there and to get past this partisan bickering. There's never been a business that I've run that accomplished a thing by bickering. And I think we need someone up there saying, `Let's get practical, let's get real, let's get down to the business of taking care of the people in our district.' And I think I know Missouri's values and priorities best of all and if I were going to hire a representative, I'd hire one that knew what it was like to be a lifelong resident of the district.

TODAY'S PROFILE: EMILY FIREBAUGH

Age: 54

Residence: Farmington

Party: Democrat

Homnetown: Raised in Cape Girardeau

OccupationFormer teacher, former publisher of newspapers in Frederickton, Farmington and Park Hills. She now owns a timber business in Madison County.

Family: She and her husband, Robert, have a daughter and a stepson.