Mr. John Cox,  Businessman

Chicago, IL

2008 GOP Presidential Candidate

www.cox2008.com

Mr. Cox, thank you very much for participating in NHInsider’s 10 Questions section.

1. Liberals and conservatives alike have begun to question the value of the "No Child Left Behind" act; what reforms, if any do you think should be made to the public education system in America?

Education always has been properly a local function. Why? Because parents should know what is best for their children and will be the ones most interested in making sure their children are educated well. No Child Left Behind had a noble goal - alerting parents and others to the miserable job done by many inner-city and other government monopoly school systems - but it was a huge mistake because it expanded the federal role in education and did not include vouchers. I would push for two major reforms - end NCLB and dissolve the Federal Department of Education in favor of block grants to the states. At the same time, I would argue strongly for states to adopt voucher programs to return the power over education to the parents and allow competition to improve our primary and secondary education.

2. Some have said that our nation is in an impending energy crisis, if you were President what would be your #1 goal in energy policy and how would you accomplish it?

Diversity and increasing supply are the major ways I would improve energy policy in America. Our nation runs on energy and it is foolish to put all our eggs in one basket - we need to do more to diversify our sources with more nuclear power, coal gasification, wind and solar energy. I would argue for more investment in new technology, including electric cars, that would diversify away from oil and be less polluting. More investment will be available when we end the tax code and adopt a consumption tax, which is one of my major domestic priorities and the kind of major reforms that Republicans should be leading on. I would also argue for more supply in America, including drilling in an environmentally sensitive way in the Artic, outer Continental shelf and using new technology to derive oil from shale. I would also encourage investment in renewable and cleaner biofuels, although I disagree with subsidies - I want the free market to work, not political power.

3. Many would say that the chances at the Presidency of a businessman with no service in major office would be extremely low, how and why are you different?

Given the experience of the past dozen years, with the corruption and excessive partisanship exhibited in Washington, I believe the American people are ready for a political outsider to bring some common sense and civility to bear in solving our many challenges. We can do better than the political dynasties of the Bushes, Doles, and Clintons. We have too many leaders who have gone into politics as a career to make money for themselves and their families. We need to return to statesmanship; to the idea of public service of a limited time; with a return to the private sector to make money to support one's family. I am a different kind of Republican; I have struggled, I worked my way through school and built a successful business while giving back to the community and country that made my success possible. That is the essence of the American Dream and my candidacy will signify a commitment to that dream for all our citizens.

4. Social Security is the so-called Third Rail of Politics, what is your position on Social Security; does it need fixing, how would you make it solvent while protecting the people's retirement?

As a CPA and investment adviser, I have implemented many pension plans for my clients and managed their money for decades. I understand the value of investing and savings and appreciate that this is the only way to save Social Security from certain demographic financial disaster. There just aren't enough new workers and the beneficiaries are living longer. The only realistic way to make it solvent for the long term is to convert it to a guaranteed private account plan. In simplistic terms, this means taking a large chunk of the tax dollars paid in by those under 40 years old and putting them into a private account for those workers. These accounts will, with conservative assumptions, build to provide much larger benefits than those workers could expect from Social Security. As we are losing those tax dollars, Social Security will run a deficit and we will have to issue debt to cover this - this is the so-called transition cost - but this is no different than the liability for future benefits that exists now. The payoff is that in 25-50 years, when those under 40 today retire, they will no longer be in the system and the revenues that would have been needed for their benefits can be used to pay back the transitional debt. Thus, in around 50 years, we would have all workers deriving benefits from a guaranteed private account that would provide more than is promised today and would be able to be left to heirs. That is a vast improvement over the plan that exists today.

5. Who do you consider the greatest American President and what was his most admirable quality?

I believe Ronald Reagan was our greatest President and his most admirable quality was the courage of his convictions and his willingness to stand on principle in the face of harsh criticism. Reagan's buildup of our military, his placing of the Pershing missiles in Europe and his standing up to Mikhail Gorbachev on missile defense resulted ultimately in the fall of the Soviet Empire and a lessening of nuclear tensions. His supply side tax cuts awakened the slumbering animal spirits of the American economy and launched an unprecedented growth spurt we are still enjoying today. His defense of values instilled confidence in the goodness of America and pride in our communities. I have admired other Presidents who gave so much of themselves to their country in the face of extreme difficulties, like Washington, Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and John Kennedy but Reagan stands out head and shoulders in his ability to lead and stand by his principles. Reagan was not a career politician and that is one of the reasons I identify so much with him (especially since we will be the only two Presidents born in Illinois).

6. Legal and illegal immigration have been in the news as of late, what do you believe should be done to solve what many see as a broken immigration system?

This crisis is born of a failure to adhere to principle; that is a failure to enforce the rule of law. This problem exists because Mexico cannot employ its workers and our government has looked the other way as US businesses continue to employ undocumented workers. We need to enforce the law and secure the border, plain and simple. We also need to totally reform the immigration bureaucracy; streamline the admission of legal immigrants and increase the quotas based upon market needs. It is ridiculous for us to send back home engineers educated at our colleges while we allow millions of illegal unskilled workers to steal across the border.

7. Your website says that you believe "in the Reagan principle of peace through strength; we need to make sure we use diplomacy and involve the world as much as we can. But in the end, we may have to take the reins and make our point clear." In what ways would your foreign policy be the same or different from President Bush's?

I would more strongly address the economic promise and opportunity of people living in nations under the duress of dictatorial tyrants. I agree with President Bush in the spread of democracy but that alone, without economic opportunity, will not lead to lasting peace and coexistence. Reagan knew this was the key to breaking down the barriers that separate us; he stood up for the Polish people and other peoples of Eastern Europe who were politically and economically depressed under the thumb of the Soviet oligarchs. They secured their freedom but did so with the information and military backing provided by the US. We need to do the same for the oppressed people of North Korea, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, not to mention those under the thumb of Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez and his satellite partners in Latin America.

8. What is currently the Republican Party's greatest weakness? What should be done to resolve this problem?

I think the Republican Party's greatest weakness is a failure of confidence in its foundational idea of limited government. The rise of Big Media and the career politicians has led to sacrificing those principles on the altar of re-election. In the short term, that may appear to work, but in the long term, it means an erosion of our values and the base of support we count on. We need to be the party of Big Ideas and long-term thinking; people count upon us to be good fiscal stewards, which we haven't been recently. We are due for a shake up and I think that may happen this year. We must remake our party along the lines of the Reagan Revolution; reaffirming our commitment to the free market and individual liberty and responsibility.

9. Some fiscal conservatives have criticized the Bush administration over large deficits and increased spending do you believe that the size of Government must be reduced, and if so, how?

As I have noted, the Republican Party has become the party of incumbent career politicians looking to do anything to be re-elected, including vastly increasing spending. We are the party that understands that the growth of government crowds out the private sector and it is in the private sector, not government, where the innovation and creation that improve our lives takes place. Liberty and freedom are not just buzzwords; they are founding principles of not only our Party but also our country. We have to do more than just mouth the words; we must act to reduce the size and scope of government and that means major reductions in spending, particularly in the areas where the spending threatens to consume us, as in the so-called entitlement spending.

10. Do you support New Hampshire's first in the nation primary?

Absolutely. The people of New Hampshire are used to being the first in the nation primary and are very open to discussing politics. I often joke that this is not the case in Illinois, where there has been so much corruption and criminal prosecution of political leaders, that any attempt to discuss politics indicates to people that you might be from the U.S. Attorney's office. On a more serious note, tradition is very important, New Hampshire has a strong tradition of welcoming independent and outsider candidates and that is a good thing for the future of our country.