By TODD HELBERG

cnedit@crescent-news.com

Five Republicans will seek their party's nomination Tuesday to replace Paul Gillmor as U.S. 5th District congressman.

The GOP candidates in the special primary election include two sitting state legislators, Steve Buehrer of Delta and Bob Latta of Bowling Green; a schoolteacher, Mark Hollenbaugh of Bowling Green; a business consultant, Mike Smitley of Van Wert; and an electrical lineman, Fred Pieper of Paulding.

The winner will face Robin Weirauch or George Mays, both Democrats whose primary is Tuesday as well, in a special Dec. 11 election to determine who will complete the last year of Gillmor's term. Independent candidates also have until 4 p.m. Monday to throw their names in the ring.

The biggest battles in the GOP primary have occurred between Buehrer and Latta, who are considered the front-runners.

Buehrer was just elected as Ohio's 1st District senator and had served eight years as the 74th Ohio House District's state representative before that; Latta is in his fourth term as the Ohio 6th District state representative, and served four years as a state senator before that.

Latta's name recognition goes further.

He's the son of Del Latta, who was the 5th District's congressman from 1959-1989. And, Latta also ran for this seat in the 1988 GOP primary, when he narrowly lost to Paul Gillmor, whose death on Sept. 5 prompted Tuesday's 5th District election.

One noticeable difference among several candidates is why some are running.

For example, while Buehrer and Latta talk about continuing their public service, the other two candidates speak of correcting the public perception that Washington politicians can't be trusted. A third mentions restoring conservative values nationwide.

"It's mostly because people don't trust Congress," said Smitley, 30. "It's evident more now than ever with (Congress') 11 percent approval rating."

"The main reason I am running for office is over the last 15-20 years I've been increasingly disillusioned with the representation out of Washington, D.C.," said Hollenbaugh, 42, a history and government teacher at North Baltimore High School. "Once you move away from local politics, people seem more interested in special interest groups, instead of the needs of the people they are representing at home. Since I really don't have faith in anyone, I am going to take steps to correct this myself."

Pieper, 51, has a little different reason for his candidacy.

"I am very frustrated with the declining morals and values in our country and the seeming lack of backbone from some of the 'conservative' Republicans who have abandoned their ideals," said Pieper, who ran unsuccessfully for Ohio's 83rd House District in the 1998 GOP primary. "I am a strong conservative Republican who will be guided by moral principles. Running for Congress provided the best way to speak out about the declining moral climate of our country and the need to return to traditional conservative values."

Buehrer, 40, believes he also represents this tradition, and has a record to prove it.

"This is a great conservative part of the state," he said. "It values family. It values faith. It values community. That's exactly the background and type of person I am. I've got a record that's very conservative on fiscal and social issues."

And, Latta's reason for running?

"I want to continue my service to the public," said Latta, 51. "I believe I have the right temperament, the right attitude and the right personality to do the job. I'm willing to get out there and work the district, north to south and east to west at all times. I will take that work ethic to Washington."

Here are the candidates' answers to questions on a variety of political issues.

Q. What should be done about unfunded EPA mandates?

Smitley: "I don't think the federal government should be handing down mandates to states to begin with. However, if it has to happen, those mandates have to come with funding. I would support a bill of that nature. My view of the EPA or any other government entity is the federal government doesn't really do anything as well as the local government or people themselves do if they pulled resources together."

Buehrer: "It's nice to talk about these shiny new programs in Washington, but every time we are passing along the mandates there should be funding attached. When you see communities like Defiance and others in the pinch they are (because of mandates), that's a real problem. EPA and some other agencies have some unnecessary regulations that we should look at rolling back."

Hollenbaugh: "The very essence of a mandate is that it doesn't come with money to support it. When you are talking about a small community, a project (of large magnitude) is incredibly expensive if you don't have a large base to spread the cost around. The financial impact that has on individual citizens is ridiculous. So, if the federal government is going to tell the state or local government they need to do something, they need to provide some finances to offset the cost or, at the very least, work with those communities to make sure they have the support and help they have to perform the job they are being asked to do."

Latta: "Everything should be re-examined. Any type of regulation should be looked at every so often because they might not be pertinent at the time."

Pieper: "I oppose any unfunded federal mandates in regards to the EPA. For example, a community's water supply may have met federal EPA testing levels 20 years ago. But then the EPA might change the standard and all of a sudden, all the water plants have to be replaced or retrofitted to meet the new mandates. The burden of paying for these upgrades falls on the taxpayers of the community. There are examples of mandates that are beneficial to the citizen, such as mandates on waste removal for megafarms, or dumping of waste in streams or land that drains into water supplies. In this case, the cost of compliance falls on the profit-making corporation, not the taxpayer."

Q. What, if anything, needs to be done about health care?

Pieper: "If you search 'health care' on the Thomas legislative website from the Library of Congress, you will find over 900 bills currently being discussed on the floor of Congress. Everyone wants to be heard, everyone has an idea and nothing is done. I would support legislation that limits the amount of jury awards in medical malpractice cases. Doctors have to pay such high malpractice insurance rates that they pass this cost on to the patient. Congress has authorized $250 million each year from 2005-2008 to pay a portion of the health care cost of illegals. The balance is picked up by hospitals that in turn either close their doors or pass the cost on to American citizens. This is outrageous. This $1 billion would go far in providing health care to children and people who are poorer and who cannot afford private insurance. I do not believe that universal health care is the answer. I believe the solution will be a combination of many things including tort reform, cracking down on fraud, privatization and stopping free medical care for illegals."

Latta: "When I served on the civil and commercial law committee in Ohio, one of the things affecting health care costs in this state was litigation. It is driving up costs. When you have doctors having their insurance skyrocket, they have three choices: Pass it onto patients, absorb it themselves, either curtail their practices or retire. Getting litigation under control is a major factor. That will help the malpractice carriers know what the level of exposure could be."

Buehrer: "We've got to stop the mandates. We also have to recommit to tort reform where the cost of providing care because of the risk of lawsuits is a significant factor on health care. I would favor what the president suggested: tax credits or tax deductibles for small business people. The last thing we want to do is build a new federal health care bureaucracy to be in charge of health care."

Hollenbaugh: "I don't think a fully funded (government-run) health care system would be efficient. Anytime the federal government gets involved in anything it becomes inefficient. But at the same time two of the biggest lobbying groups are insurance companies and prescription drug companies. Whenever legislation is passed in regard to health care, it favors those lobbying groups who are lining the pockets of our elected officials. If elected officials concentrate more on the needs of people and less on the needs of big industries, we will find health care becomes more manageable."

Smitley: "We have to deregulate health care and make it accessible. Basically, there are two roads that can be taken to gain affordable health care. One is socialized medicine, which is something I don't agree with one bit. The other is to deregulate it and allow people to purchase insurance across state lines. The problem is health care is not in a free market right now. What the free market would do is eliminate the middle man, which is causing the cost of health care to go up. What we need to do is create a free market system where the providers of medical services and prescription drug companies have to compete with each other."

Q. What are your views on federal tax policy?

Buehrer: "One of the first things we need to do is make the Bush tax cuts permanent. I really think they've been positive for the economy. Also, alternative minimum tax (AMT) reform is pretty important. It was meant for the rich, but now it's impacting a significant number of people in the middle class. I think (a flat tax) is an idea worth pursuing. I think those types of reform need to get on the table. I would need to consult with people to see how the shift of taxation would work."

Smitley: "We've got a tax system that needs major reform. Right now the IRS tax code is too complicated and there are too many tax shelters. There are also issues with the AMT that penalizes people for becoming wealthy. What we need is some sort of fair tax or flat tax. What is interesting about the tax issue is that no one is talking about the root cause. The root cause is that the federal government is spending too much money on unnecessary and inefficient programs."

Latta: "Government does not create wealth, only private citizens create wealth. The government spends wealth, but if private citizens have more dollars in their own pockets, they can reinvest in their businesses, invest in general or they can spend it. When individuals have the power to make those decisions, the economy will flourish. At the same time we have to make sure we eliminate the federal death tax set to expire in 2010. If Congress does not reauthorize the total elimination of the death tax, the exemption will drop back to a $1 million exemption level in 2011, which would be a disaster for small businesses and farmers alike. We need to look at rolling back the alternative minimum tax because it's been creeping down lower and lower and picking up more and more people in the middle class."

Pieper: "The tax code as it stands is an attempt at social engineering. The alternative minimum tax started out as a 'penalty tax' on the very wealthy and has slowly evolved downward to reach the middle class. This is wrong. The government needs to cut wasteful spending instead of raising taxes. We are facing a perfect storm if we do not act now. Some in Congress want to lower the AMT and allow the current tax cuts to expire in 2010 which would greatly increase the tax burden on the average citizen. I would support legislation for a flat rate sales tax. There would be no loopholes for the wealthy to avoid this tax."
Hollenbaugh: "The tax code is completely dysfunctional. It's to the point where citizens can't do their own taxes even if they want to. There are so many loopholes. If you look at the income tax, some mega corporations are paying less than individual citizens do. We need to look at simplifying the tax code, maybe with a value-added tax or a flat tax, but something needs to be done so the way we collect money is more fair to everyone. I think we need to overhaul the tax system as long as we are cutting waste so that money will go to the best possible need. Then people will be happier about the taxes they are paying."

Q. What should be done about the Iraq war?

Latta: "I'm a believer that we have to listen to the ground commanders who are there. They can also make the determination when they can start bringing back the troops. It's very dangerous to have arm-chair quarterbacks in Washington saying we can bring out X amount of troops at a time. It puts in jeopardy those who are there. I also believe we have to make sure the Iraqi Army can start fulfilling its duty so Americans can play more of an auxiliary role. I think it's very important to that region to have another democracy in the Middle East."

Hollenbaugh: "The Iraqi government is obviously dragging its feet. One of the issues that my opponents disagree with me on is they think we should stay the course. I think if we start planning to withdraw from Iraq that may put the pressure for them to take responsibility for their destiny. We can't be there 10 years or 30 years from now, not at the level we are at right now. Something has to be done to encourage them to step up and fight for democracy. I'm not saying (we should withdraw) next year. I'm saying the generals need to decide what is the safest rate to leave at, but we do need to put together a plan and make that known to the Iraqi government."

Pieper: "As a proud veteran of the U.S. Navy I have full confidence in the expertise, knowledge and experience of the officers and soldiers of our military. I believe in trusting the military to do its job by ridding Iraq of the insurgents, who bully, intimidate and destroy the lives of countless innocent civilians. The leaders of Iraq must be committed to the peace process. The people of Iraq have had a small taste of freedom. The more they taste freedom, the more their hearts will desire something they lack and the harder they will fight. The United States must maintain the deployment levels necessary to ensure success. We have the best and smartest people to advise the president and Congress. We must trust the expertise of our great military minds. Politicians never won a war, so why should we let them dictate strategy? It seems to me that the Democratic leadership is quick to offer strategies for withdrawal. In fact, they could sabotage our success and the safety of our troops. The fight for freedom cannot be put on a timetable."

Smitley: "I would like to see our troops come home as soon as possible. But what is important for voters to realize regarding the Iraq war is the U.S. is setting the wrong precedent (for the Iraqi government) to miss benchmarks without consequences. Several times we have asked the Iraqi government to step up its own security and they've missed deadlines and benchmarks. I strongly believe if the Iraqi government had no doubt about us leaving as a consequence they would work harder to secure themselves. Right now I question whether Congress has a truly clear, full picture right now."

Buehrer: "The worst thing a congressman can do is sit in Washington and Monday morning quarterback the war. What I think our appropriate role in Congress should be is to fully support the troops, both with the necessary training and equipment when in the field and services they require when they come back home. I think we all pray that the troops will come home as soon as possible. But the fact is we sent them on a mission, and I hope they wouldn't come home until we finish the mission victorious."

Q. What is the solution for illegal immigration?

Hollenbaugh: "Amnesty isn't an option because that would just encourage others to enter the country illegally. A wall would be expensive and could be circumvented. I feel we need to look at why people are entering illegally. The $2,000 processing fee for legal entry probably is a big part of that. I would like to see more agents on the border utilizing high-tech surveillance and rapid response capability, kind of a special forces boarder patrol."

Pieper: "I'm against any illegal activity. There are legal ways a person can achieve citizenship. I am dead set against any form of amnesty. Currently, the Congress is discussing a bill that will grant citizenship to the children of illegal immigrants. It is wrong that pregnant women can come into this country illegally and give birth at taxpayer expense to an American citizen. All of a sudden this new anchor baby can bring his entire family over. I will adamantly oppose any legislation that grants any form of citizenship to any person who is in this country illegally. I will also support legislation that withholds federal funding from sanctuary cities."

Smitley: "I would absolutely oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. We can't reward millions of people who broke the law in the first place. Also, it would set the wrong precedent for millions more to come illegally. We also need to secure the borders, but the work can't stop there. I'm prepared to address the root causes by reforming welfare, addressing entitlement issues and making it easier to come here legally. Our welfare system not only encourages aliens to abuse a system, it discourages Americans from taking low-wage jobs. This creates an artificial market for foreign labor to do the jobs Americans supposedly won't do."

Buehrer: "We have to start by tightening our borders. Everyone recognizes there are dangerous people out there. The first way to stop that is tighter border control. I also come down on the side of not granting amnesty for those who came into the country illegally. There is some need for immigrant labor, but folks who are coming need to come through the legal processes that are there."
Latta: "We have laws on the books right now that should be enforced and we have a lot of individuals who enter this country legally and are applying for the status of citizenship. It's not fair we are putting certain individuals and priorities over others by talking about amnesty. The laws need to be enforced. We should not give an advantage to someone who comes here illegally."