John Edwards in The Huffington Post

On Education: Make community colleges & public universities free

A: What I proposed is something called College For Everyone. The idea is for any young person who commits to work while they're in college, a minimum of 10 hours a week, we pay for their tuition and books. We've actually put a similar model in place, in Green County, a relatively poor county in eastern North Carolina. About 70% of the kids were signed up.

Q: You're proposing free college for everybody for four years for a four-year program, not just community college for two years and not just the first year?

A: The other requirement is since private colleges and universities cost so much, this is what I propose requires either a public community college or public university.

Q: But it's four years?

A: Yes, sir. But I wanted to be clear that what we've done in Green County is not just the first year.

On Education: Think of education as a birth-to-death experience in America

A: Yes, I believe we do. I think that we tend to think of education as K through 12, maybe college and in some rare cases, graduate school. We should think of education as a birth-to-death experience in America. That means we get the kids as early as we possibly can. [Then, for college], we know if you graduate from college this year that the information you learned, a huge amount will be outdated in 5 or 10 years. So we need an infrastructure for continuing education after high school, college, or graduate school, whichever is the last part of your formal education. So we continue to learn. Now, we have an ad hoc system, where we leave it to individuals or their employers the enormous responsibility of ensuring that 50-year-old workers in America are up-to-date and best trained, best educated they can possibly be. I think we have to develop a national infrastructure for making sure people continue to learn as they age.

On Energy & Oil: Give up SUVs & other sacrifices, to deal with climate crisis

A: I want to see the US lead the charge on dealing with this crisis in a really aggressive way. Because we have to. I mean, first of all, we have to get off our addiction to oil in America. I've laid out a specific set of ideas about how to do that, reducing greenhouse gases by 80% by 2050 and transforming the way we use and produce energy in this country. But I would add, with regards to SUVs, I do think we need a president who actually says to America, you have to be willing to sacrifice, who calls on Americans to sacrifice. The president needs to say I'm willing to drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle and I'm willing to conserve in my home and workplace, because all of us have to do this together. If we don't want to be driven by the addiction to oil and we want to actually preserve the planet, we have to do it together.

On Health Care: $90B-$120B per year for healthcare, by ending Bush tax cut

A: $90 to $120 billion a year. I know that there will be some who argue that they can do universal health care either for free or for very low cost. I don't believe that's the truth. And I think we need to tell people the truth about this. My plan is $90 to $120 billion a year. And I pay for by rolling back President Bush's tax cuts for people who make over $200,000 a year.

On Health Care: If not universal coverage, which people wouldn't be covered?

A: Well, basically what I decided was, first, the only way to have universal coverage was to actually mandate it, in other words, to have a legal requirement that every man, woman, and child in America be covered. That was probably the single most controversial element of my proposal when I made it. I believed that that was important because if anybody's plan is not universal, then they should be made to explain to the American people what man or woman in America is not worthy of health care. I think they're all worthy of health care. And then I constructed it in a way that everybody required to be covered, that people could choose between a private plan and the government plan, which is essentially Medicare plus.

On Health Care: Let people choose between private plan and single-payer

A: I constructed my healthcare plan in a way that everybody is required to be covered, but that people could choose between a private plan and the government plan, which is essentially Medicare-Plus. I did that for a very simple reason. Because there is a very good and legitimate argument that we should go straight to single-payer health care as other countries have. I've also heard the flipside of that from lots of people, who are nervous about going to a Canadian system, for example. We're going to have the American people deciding what provides the most cost effective, most efficient, best health care.

Q: You would not necessarily eliminate a single-payer system as the best way to go?

A: Oh, no, I would not. I mean, there are huge advantages to single-payer. Much lower administrative costs. But I thought it was something that we should let Americans decide. Get everybody covered, get rid of the holes in the system.

On Health Care: Take on insurance & drug companies, who have blocked reform

On War & Peace: Focus on political progress in Iraq

A: My view about it is that both the administration and Gen. Petraeus are not focused on what is the only important question, which is, has there been political progress in Iraq? Because unless and until there's some political compromise between Sunni and Shia, there could not be stability in Iraq and the violence will continue. Without political progress, what's the purpose of us being here? I mean, what is the purpose of all the lives being lost? What's the purpose of now $500 billion and counting? But there's absolutely no indication that the Sunni and Shia are any closer today than they have been in reaching a political solution. So I think the Congress needs to make him change course. If he vetoes a funding bill with the timetable for withdrawal, I think that they should submit another bill with a timetable for withdrawal and they should continue to do that until he's forced to change course in Iraq.

On War & Peace: Congress has a mandate to defund war to force Bush out

A: Congress has a mandate from the American people, and that mandate is not to provide funding to this president unless there's a timetable for withdrawal in the bill. No timetable, no funding. Because I do not believe George Bush will ever change course unless or until he's forced to change course. And right now, I think the troops in Iraq are stuck between a president who has no plan for success. He just wants more of the same. He wants more troops. He wants more time. He wants more money. He wants more war.

Q: Do you think Congress is worried about being charged with not providing funds for men and women who are at risk?

A: This is way beyond politics now. This is literally about life and death now. The American people are behind the Congress standing its ground against the president. The Congress needs to have the strength to do what's right and force Bush to end this war.