Joe Miller on Government Reform



Photo ID for voting

Question topic: People should be able to vote without photo identification.

Miller: Strongly Disagree

Source: Faith2Action iVoterGuide on 2014 Alaska Senate race , Jul 2, 2014

Stop federal systematic spiritual and religious apartheid

Q: Last year, you said, "The President and his allies are engaged in a form of systematic spiritual and religious apartheid." How so?

A: We've seen a president with a complete disrespect for religious institutions to decide whether or not they want to provide certain things under their health plan that they pay for. if you have a religious organization, they certainly have the right not do things that they believe violate their doctrine and their conscience.

Q: What is the apartheid comparison? Is there one group that you think is being privileged over another group?

A: Well, we're talking about religious groups and irreligious groups.

Q: So are you suggesting that irreligious groups have more rights than religious groups?

A: Well, a religious group has a free exercise right to practice their religion--a right to be free of government interference and government mandates that require them to act in a way that violates their fundamental worldview.

Source: Salon.com CPAC interview on 2014 Alaska Senate race , Mar 10, 2014

Federal aid to Alaska is coming to an end

Murkowski took aim at Miller's contention that the era of earmarks is dead, saying aid to further build infrastructure in this still-young state is vital, not pork. She suggested--to loud applause--that if such cuts are to be made, perhaps the best place to start looking to make them is in the Lower 48.

Miller said a new day is coming and Alaska needs to be prepared. While the past few decades have been a blessing, he said--a period in which members of Alaska's delegation brought home billions in federal aid and projects--it's a "dream" to think that will continue. He believes the fights should be waged during the appropriations process.

But McAdams, like Murkowski, argued the need for Alaska to continue fighting for what he calls its fair share. Murkowski stressed her seniority as critical to helping to ensure Alaska's voice is heard.

Source: Associated Press coverage of 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Oct 7, 2010

Limit federal powers to those spelled out in Constitution

A big issue was money. Miller, who believes the powers of the federal government should be limited to those spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, has argued that federal deficits are crippling, Washington is out of control and Alaska must be weaned off its heavy reliance on federal help and given greater control of its own resources.
Source: Associated Press coverage of 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Oct 7, 2010

Get rid of earmarks and regulations that limit development

During the debate it struck me that Joe Miller was a two-issue candidate who kept referring to the need to get rid of earmarks and regulations that limit development. Remember, he is supported by the tea party which would like to abolish Social Security, food stamps, federal education funding, Medicare and the new health care plan. It was very disturbing to me that he spoke as though all regulations were bad. Just think of what that could mean if regulations regarding mining development were repealed: Pebble Mine could start up and, oops, there goes the Bristol Bay fishery. Is this what Alaskans want, no one overseeing our industries? No regulations on pipeline construction and maintenance, the pharmaceutical industry, food? Sure it would be easier and cheaper for corporate interests but we've already seen the catastrophic results of poor regulatory control.
Source: Juneau Empire Op-Ed on 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Oct 6, 2010

Pledge against earmarks: we're over-dependent on feds

At a luncheon debate, "pork" and "earmarks" were also on the menu, the two buzzwords of the day reiterated dozens of times throughout the debate. McAdams began his introductory speech with a reading of a "no earmarks" pledge from the Citizens Against Government Waste signed by Miller.

"As we continue to responsibly develop our natural resources, we will bring our state into maturity," McAdams said. "But to say no to earmarks now is a threat to Alaska."

Miller argued that he was not against funds being brought to Alaska, but rather was concerned with the state's over-dependency on federal dollars. "We can pretend that this economic calamity isn't going to impact the state of Alaska," he said. "Or we can do our darnedest to find the direction that provides us with an economic base to move forward in the future."

McAdams said that arguing against projects--like the much maligned & lampooned "Bridge to Nowhere"--was arguing against the future of Alaska.

Source: Capital City Weekly coverage of 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Sep 22, 2010

Increase campaign limits; deregulate corporate donations

Q: Do you support increasing the amount individuals are permitted to contribute to federal campaigns?

A: Yes.

Q: Should Congress regulate indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?

A: No.

Q: Do you support removing all contribution limits on federal campaigns?

A: Yes.

Q: Should candidates for federal office be encouraged to meet voluntary spending limits?

A: No.

Q: Do you support giving the President the power of the line item veto?

A: Yes.

Source: Alaska Congressional Election 2010 Political Courage Test , Sep 9, 2010

No Pork Pledge: decrease earmarking; increase transparency.

Miller signed Citizens Against Government Waste's "No Pork Pledge"

Despite congressional reforms over the past several years to reduce pork barreling and increase earmark accountability and transparency, earmarks continue to figure prominently as the "currency of corruption" on Capitol Hill, undermining the federal budgetary process and our democratic system of government. In an effort to encourage more members of Congress and candidates for office to kick the earmarking habit, CCAGW has launched a new no-gimmicks, anti-pork pledge.

Source: Citizens Against Government Waste's "No Pork Pledge" 10-CAGW on Aug 12, 2010

Identify constitutionality in every new congressional bill.

Miller signed the Contract From America

The Contract from America, clause 1. Protect the Constitution:

Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does.

Source: The Contract From America 10-CFA01 on Jul 8, 2010

Audit federal agencies, to reform or eliminate them.

Miller signed the Contract From America

The Contract from America, clause 5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington:

Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality,

Source: The Contract From America 10-CFA05 on Jul 8, 2010

Moratorium on all earmarks until budget is balanced.

Miller signed the Contract From America

The Contract from America, clause 9. Stop the Pork:

Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark.

Source: The Contract From America 10-CFA09 on Jul 8, 2010

Signed term limit pledge: 6 years House; 12 years Senate.

Miller signed pledging 6-year term limit

Organizational Self-Description: U.S. Term Limits, the nation's oldest and largest term limits advocacy group, announced that 14 new signers of its congressional term limits amendment pledge have been elected to the 114th Congress. The group includes five new senators, eight new House members and one House incumbent who signed the pledge for the first time this cycle. The pledge calls for members to co-sponsor and vote for a constitutional amendment limiting House members to three terms (six years) and Senators to two terms (12 years). The USTL President said, "The American people are fed up with career politicians in Washington and strongly embracing term limits as a remedy. Gallup polling shows that 75% of Americans support term limits."

Opposing legal argument: [ACLU, Nov. 7, 2014]: In U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton (May 22, 1995), the Court ended the movement to enact term limits for Congress on a state-by-state basis. The Court held that the qualifications for Congress established in the Constitution itself could not be amended by the states without a constitutional amendment, and that the notion of congressional term limits violates the "fundamental principle of our representative democracy 'that the people should chose whom they please to govern them.'"

Opposing political argument: [Cato Institute Briefing Paper No. 14, Feb. 18, 1992]: Several considerations may explain political scientists' open hostility to term limitation:

Source: Press release from U.S. Term Limits 16-USTL on Nov 8, 2014

Other candidates on Government Reform: Joe Miller on other issues:
AK Gubernatorial:
Bill Walker
Mead Treadwell
Sean Parnell
AK Senatorial:
Dan Sullivan
Mark Begich
Mead Treadwell

AK politicians
AK Archives

Retiring in 2014 election:

Retired as of Jan. 2013:
Senate races 2017-8:
AL: Strange(R) ; no opponent yet
AZ: Flake(R) vs. Ward(R)
CA: Feinstein(D) vs. Eisen(D) vs. Sanchez?(D) vs. Garcetti?(D)
CT: Murphy(D) ; no opponent yet
DE: Carper(D) vs. Biden?(D) vs. Markell?(D)
FL: Nelson(D) vs. DeSantis(R) vs. Jolly(R) vs. Lopez-Cantera(R)
HI: Hirono(D) ; no opponent yet
IN: Donnelly(D) vs. Hurt(R)
MA: Warren(D) vs. Ayyadurai(R)
MD: Cardin(D) ; no opponent yet
ME: King(I) vs. LePage?(R)
MI: Stabenow(D) vs. Bouchard?(R)
MN: Klobuchar(D) vs. Paulsen?(R)
MO: McCaskill(D) vs. Kinder?(R)
MS: Wicker(R) vs. McDaniel?(R)
MT: Tester(D) vs. Racicot?(R)

ND: Heitkamp(D) vs. Becker?(R)
NE: Fischer(R) ; no opponent yet
NJ: Menendez(D) vs. Chiesa(R) vs. Codey?(D) vs. Chiesa?(R)
NM: Heinrich(D) vs. Sanchez(R)
NV: Heller(R) vs. Sandoval?(R)
NY: Gillibrand(D) vs. Kennedy?(D)
OH: Brown(D) vs. Mandel(R)
PA: Casey(D) vs. Saccone(R)
RI: Whitehouse(D) ; no opponent yet
TN: Corker(R) vs. Crim(I)
TX: Cruz(R) vs. Bush?(R)
UT: Hatch(R) vs. McMullin?(R) vs. Romney?(R)
VT: Sanders(I) vs. Giordano(D)
VA: Kaine(D) vs. Cuccinelli?(R) vs. Fiorina?(R)
WA: Cantwell(D) ; no opponent yet
WV: Manchin(D) vs. Raese(R) vs. Goodwin?(R)
WI: Baldwin(D) vs. Grothman?(R) vs. Gallagher?(R)
WY: Barrasso(R) ; no opponent yet
Civil Rights
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Social Security
Tax Reform

Other Senators
Senate Votes (analysis)
Bill Sponsorships
Policy Reports
Group Ratings

Page last updated: Aug 28, 2017