What House and Senate candidates think

The News & Observer asked candidates in three Triangle congressional races and the U.S. Senate race their thoughts on several economic bills and issues facing Congress. Here's how their campaigns responded. Some are edited for length.

Candidate Bill Randall, the Republican challenger in the District 13 race, did not respond.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which established the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) under President George W. Bush

District 2

Rep. Bob Etheridge, Democrat: Voted yes. Said the legislation has been credited with preventing a global financial meltdown that would have plunged America into a second Great Depression with millions more workers losing their jobs through no fault of their own.

Renee Ellmers, Republican: Would have voted against the "Wall Street Bailout." It was passed in a panic and Wall Street got a payback from Etheridge.

Tom Rose, Libertarian: Would not have voted for it.

District 13

Rep. Brad Miller, Democrat: Voted yes, said he shares in the outrage over the rescue of the financial industry. It offends my sense of justice that the Americans who suffered the most were entirely innocent of causing the financial crisis and the people who did cause the crisis are making as much money as ever. I voted to help avoid a collapse of our economy, caused by the reckless policies of the previous administration. I have fought to make sure the banks pay back every cent and to make sure we never have to rescue the financial industry again.

Bill Randall, Republican: N/A

District 4

Rep. David Price, Democrat: Voted yes, saying he didn't "delight" in President Bush's plan to rescue the financial sector, but he didn't have the luxury of allowing the economy to collapse into another Great Depression.

B.J. Lawson, Republican: Would have voted no. This money bailed out the people who caused this mess in the first place and left the rest of us to pay for it.

U.S. Senate

Sen. Richard Burr, Republican: Voted for it. Said that the vote was a sad day and that he was angry about the circumstances that required Congress to act. While many believe that this action is a bailout of Wall Street, the fundamental reason the Senate is compelled to act is to stop an economic collapse of Main Street.

Elaine Marshall, Democrat: I would have voted against the bank bailout. We needed to do something to stabilize the financial sector, but this bill was a blank check that provided no accountability. It let CEOs pay huge bonuses with our tax dollars, and it did not work to increase lending.

Michael Beitler, Libertarian: Would not have voted for it. As a former chief financial officer of a bank, I know that the bank bailout was a bailout of bank stockholders and executives. Taxpayer money should not be put at risk, in the form of loans, to bailout bankers who engaged in gambling.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, to overhaul federal bank regulation. Became law July 2010.

District 2

Etheridge: Voted yes ... to build on the new credit card reform law to protect consumers and put in place commonsense rules of the road for the financial markets and bring the values of Main Street to Wall Street.

Ellmers: Would have voted no. This so-called "federal regulation bill" was actually Obama and the Democrats setting up a whole new layer of government bureaucracy. The legislation institutionalizes "too big to fail" and government bailouts.

Rose: Would have probably voted against it. We should have never gotten rid of Glass-Steagall during the Clinton administration or we wouldn't be in this mess.

District 13

Miller: Voted yes. Introduced legislation in the House that included two key elements of the bill: the national mortgage lending reform provisions and the creation of an independent consumer financial protection agency.

Randall: N/A

District 4

Price: Voted yes. Wall Street reform puts in place a strong consumer protection agency, limits the size and scope of financial institutions, establishes tough new rules on risky financial instruments and restricts the ability of banks to gamble with the college and retirement savings of Americans.

Lawson: Would have voted no. Dodd-Frank is crony capitalism at its worst that favors the too-big-to-fail banks at the expense of smaller ones. I will work to reinstate Glass-Steagall, insisting on honest accounting for everyone and prosecuting the financial fraud that led to this crisis.

U.S. Senate

Burr: Voted no, saying it would spend nearly a trillion dollars on projects to expand government programs and would provide little stimulus to the overall economy. He supported an alternative bill with one-year corporate and payroll tax cuts that was offered by Republicans.

Marshall: I would have worked to make the Recovery Act more targeted, but ultimately I would have voted for it. The Recovery Act put a floor to the economic fall; it prevented a second Great Depression, and it saved millions of jobs.

Beitler: Would have voted no. The government cannot stimulate the economy. The government's resources come from the private sector. Depleting the resources of the private sector harms the economy. The government should reduce taxes to keep more resources in the private sector.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, also known as the federal stimulus bill. Passed January 2009.

District 2

Etheridge: I voted for the Recovery Act: a tax cut for 95 percent of the American people; funding to prevent the layoff of thousands of teachers, firefighters and police officers; infrastructure like school construction bonds.

Ellmers: I was opposed to adding another $800 billion to the debt. Too much debt is the problem, not the solution. President Obama's stimulus has failed.

Rose: Would not have voted for it. If we had just let the free markets reign, we would already be out of this recession.

District 13

Miller: Voted yes, said ARRA is expected to help create or save 105,000 jobs in North Carolina, 9,000 of which will be in North Carolina's 13th District. ... As tough as the economy is, it would have been much worse without the Recovery Act.

Randall: N/A

District 4

Price: Voted yes. The new N.C. National Guard headquarters in Raleigh has created 3,500 jobs because of the Recovery Act; local universities were able to initiate groundbreaking medical research and hire new workers, and 95 percent of North Carolinians got a tax cut because of the law.

Lawson: Would have voted no. This didn't stimulate the economy, this stimulated government at the expense of the economy. All those jobs that were created? Those are government jobs that do nothing to increase the strength of our economy. This is big government waste.

U.S. Senate

Burr: Voted no. Said that the bill would constrict the availability of credit to deserving Americans and businesses, which rely on that credit and the formation of capital to create jobs, and that it did nothing to address the risk posed by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He said the bill did not address loopholes allowing regulators to spend unlimited taxpayer-provided funds to prop up firms on the brink of collapse.

Marshall: I would have voted for Wall Street reform. This bill helps protect consumers, reins in Wall Street abuses and brings some needed transparency and accountability to our financial system.

Beitler: Would have voted no. I can assure voters that the banking industry is already heavily regulated. Regulators in the banking industry were looking the other way while regulations were being violated.

Would you vote to extend the Bush tax cuts to everyone, to just the middle class, or not at all? And would you extend the 2009 Obama "Making Work Pay" tax credit? Why or why not?

District 2

Etheridge: The Making Work Pay tax cut I voted for has lowered taxes for working Americans to their lowest rate in 60 years, and I support extending tax cuts, focused on the middle class that is feeling the effects of family budgets getting squeezed.

Ellmers: Yes to extending the Bush tax cuts. I would support extending the tax credit for people who pay taxes.

Rose: Yes. They need to be extended until we can pass the FairTax plan.

District 13

Miller: I favor extending middle-class tax cuts, but favor letting the tax cuts for millionaires expire. Tax cuts for millionaires explode the deficit, do little to help the economy and make the tax system more unfair to middle-class families. I would favor extending the "Making Work Pay" tax credit because it does help families who need help.

Randall: N/A

District 4

Price: I favor extending the Bush tax cuts for 98 percent of American taxpayers. Extending the tax cut for the top 2 percent is fiscally irresponsible, adding $700 billion to the debt, and the economic benefit is questionable. Congress should seriously consider extending the Making Work Pay tax credit, but should do so only if the economic benefit outweighs the cost to the deficit.

Lawson: Yes. The government needs to learn how to spend less money and live within its means. Your money is yours, keep the Bush tax cuts and Obama tax credit so that we have more money to invest and grow businesses in our communities.

U.S. Senate

Burr: I agree with almost every economic expert and believe that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts need to be renewed, especially during an economic downturn. Don't increase taxes - next year, if taxes on virtually every American and business go up, it will harm our struggling economy and hamper economic growth. Small businesses, the innovators and job creators that drive our economic engine, would be particularly hard hit by these tax increases. That would kill our already struggling economy.

Marshall: I support extending tax cuts for the middle class and getting more money in the pockets of working families with policies like the Making Work Pay tax credit. But if we're serious about dealing with our national debt, our country cannot afford to give tax cuts to millionaires and the super-rich.

Beitler: I would extend all the Bush tax cuts. The economy cannot handle what would be, in effect, a tax increase. The government does need more income; the government needs to cut spending. Those resources are better spent in the private sector.

What would be the best and worst thing Congress could do in the first six months of the next term to continue the economic recovery?

District 2

Etheridge: The worst would be for Congress to enact my opponents' radical agendas like privatizing Social Security, shutting down the Education Department and using taxpayer money for private school tuition vouchers. I want to extend the HIRE Act to give small businesses a tax credit to hire workers and replace unemployment checks with paychecks.

Ellmers: Obama has increased spending 21 percent. We should start by cutting spending back to where it was before. The worst thing Congress could do is increase spending; the best thing would be to cut spending.

Rose: The best thing they could do is pass the FairTax plan. The worst thing they could do is not pass the FairTax plan.

District 13

Miller: The best thing: I would continue efforts to fix housing first and to ensure that credit is available for small businesses that do the majority of hiring and creating jobs. We need to give homeowners with predatory mortgages a legal right to a judicial modification of their mortgage. Continuing foreclosures are killing home values, which is the bulk of the net worth of most middle-class families.

The worst thing: Not extending unemployment compensation for workers who have lost their jobs in the recession.

Randall: N/A

District 4

Price: One of the best things Congress could do for the Triangle area's economy is to increase and permanently extend the tax credit for businesses that invest in research and development. The worst thing Congress could do in its first six months would be to abolish the Department of Education as my opponent proposes, eliminating nearly $2 billion in elementary and secondary education funds and $2 billion in federal student loan aid, unilaterally disarming one of our country's (and our area's) biggest advantages.

Lawson: Best: Provide more tax cuts to lower and middle class Americans immediately and vote to implement the FairTax that would remove our upside-down system of taxation. Insist on honest accounting for everyone - especially our government and Wall Street's "too-big-to-fail" banks. Prosecute financial fraud and stop rewarding failure with bailouts. Worst: Take on more debt and continue to think we can stimulate our way out of this economy with government spending.

U.S. Senate

Burr: Has said that in order to get the economy moving again and create jobs, tax policy should be reformed to create certainty in business environment. The first thing should be voting to extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. He would repeal the requirement in the health care bill that makes companies file tax forms on almost every supplier. ... The worst thing Congress could do is continue to focus on short-term political fixes for jobs and ignore our nation's real long-term challenges. We already know that spending trillions of dollars on failed government "stimulus" programs does not work.

Marshall: Washington needs to focus on jobs and not get distracted by partisan-fighting over other issues. Congress should cut taxes and increase credit for small businesses so they can grow and hire. Congress should not raise taxes on middle-class families - we need more money in the pockets of the middle class and out on Main Street, not less.

Beitler: The best they can do is tell small business owners that there will be a moratorium on new regulations for two years; once small business owners know the "rules of the game" they will start creating jobs and growing their businesses again. The worst they can do is create more regulations.