THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, November 2, 1996 TAG: 9611020325
SECTION: LOCAL PAGE: B3 EDITION: FINAL
SERIES: Decision '96
LENGTH: 81 lines
SENATE
John W. Warner (R)
Virginians know me, and I know Virginia. I don't make campaign promises that I can't or won't keep. I have a clear record of not compromising on matters of principle and integrity. I put my country first, Virginia second, and my political party third. I'm not perfect. I have made mistakes, and I have changed votes to take the correct position.
Mark R. Warner (D)
We must give our elected officials the opportunity to adapt as circumstances change. I don't believe that type of flexibility should be viewed as a negative. However, when political figures flip-flop solely to win votes or campaign contributions, we should question why they're interested in public office in the first place. I believe our current system of financing campaigns occasionally forces candidates to switch away from principled positions in order to gain the support of special interest groups. That's why I have decided not to accept contributions from special-interest PACs in this campaign.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2ND DISTRICT
Owen B. Pickett (D)
There are a lot of times when you might not agree with a particular policy objective and you may agree to a watered-down version or one that for some reason has no adverse impact on your own district or people. I can't think of an occasion that comes quickly to mind. If I started out believing that my constituents felt one way and later found they felt differently, then I would be compelled to reflect those views.
John F. Tate (R)
Holding true to a campaign promise and getting results are not competing expectations. Going back on your given word may be one way to get ``results,'' but the results you get are usually bad. A better method is to stick to your stated principles - the things that voters elected you for - and work to build support for those things.
3RD DISTRICT
Elsie Goodwyn Holland (R)
We live in a fluid society. I wouldn't hesitate to change a position if there is a need to change it for the good of the people. I wouldn't call it flip-flopping because I wouldn't do it without citizens' input. I would be a person who listened.
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott (D)
The first thing you need to do is know what you're talking about before you speak so you will have less reason to switch later on. If you are honest and explain how you evaluated an issue, some apparent flip-flops will be the result of the legislation changing in midcourse because of an amendment or because new research made available leads you to a different conclusion.
4TH DISTRICT
Norman Sisisky (D)
I don't think any of my opponents have ever accused me of that one. They may not like what I say, but they've never accused me of pandering to anyone. And I simply haven't done it.
Anthony Zevgolis (R)
One reason they flip-flop is because a congressman didn't inform himself totally on the impact of a particular bill to begin with. They could eliminate a lot of the flip-flopping by doing some research on what the issues are. But I think a congressman should always stand corrected. If he makes a campaign promise, and then if he gets up to Congress and finds out there is more information he was not aware of during the campaign, he needs to go back to his constituents and explain things to them, and give them a reason for why he needs to change his position. It all goes back to keeping people informed.
KEYWORDS: CANDIDATE ELECTION U.S. SENATE RACE U.S.
CONGRESSIONAL RACE ISSUES by CNB