Card image cap

George Ferriter's Issue Positions (Political Courage Test)

Key


Official Position: Candidate addressed this issue directly by taking the Political Courage Test.

Inferred Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, but Vote Smart inferred this issue based on the candidate's public record, including statements, voting record, and special interest group endorsements.

Unknown Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, or we could not infer an answer for this candidate despite exhaustive research of their public record.

Additional Information: Click on this icon to reveal more information about this candidate's position, from their answers or Vote Smart's research.

Other or Expanded Principles & Legislative Priorities are entered exactly as candidates submit them. Vote Smart does not edit for misspelled words, punctuation or grammar.

George Ferriter has provided voters with clear stances on key issues by responding to the 2016 Political Courage Test.

What is the Political Courage Test?

Wisconsin State Legislative Election 2016 Political Courage Test

Pro-choice a) Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
No b) Should abortions be illegal after the first trimester of pregnancy?
Yes c) Should abortion be legal when the pregnancy resulted from incest or rape?
Yes d) Should abortion be legal when the life of the woman is endangered?
Yes e) Do you support requiring parental notification before an abortion is performed on a minor?
Yes f) Do you support requiring parental consent before an abortion is performed on a minor?
No g) Do you support the prohibition of public funds for abortion procedures?
No h) Do you support the prohibition of public funds for organizations that perform abortions?
Available, safe, and rare. There are situations where abortions may be necessary from a medical perspective. The government has no place in interfering with this sort of women's health issue. Abortion is not birth control, it is a medical procedure.

1) Budget Stabilization:Indicate which proposals you support (if any) for balancing Wisconsin's budget.2) State Spending:Indicate what state funding levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category; you may use a number more than once.3) State Taxes:Indicate what state tax levels (#1-6) you support for the following general categories. Select one level per category; you may use a number more than once.

Yes a) Tapping into Wisconsin's "rainy day" fund
No b) Decreasing funding for public universities
No c) Reducing state employee salaries AND/OR pensions
No d) Instituting mandatory furloughs AND/OR layoffs for state employees
No e) Reducing benefits for Medicaid recipients
Maintain Status a) Education (higher)
Slightly Increase b) Education (K-12)
Slightly Increase c) Environment
Maintain Status d) Health care
Maintain Status e) Law enforcement/corrections
Greatly Increase f) Transportation/infrastructure
Maintain Status g) Welfare
Slightly Increase a) Alcohol taxes
Slightly Increase b) Cigarette taxes
Maintain Status c) Corporate taxes
Slightly Decrease d) Small business taxes
Slightly Increase e) Gas/Oil taxes
Greatly Decrease f) Property taxes
Slightly Increase g) Sales taxes
Slightly Decrease h) Income taxes (low-income families)
Maintain Status i) Income taxes (mid-income families)
Slightly Increase j) Income taxes (high-income families)
No k) Do you support applying sales taxes to all online purchases?
We must take advantage of every opportunity for savings by doing things"smart". Efficiencies, and care when directing public funds for use must be paramount. Programmatic approaches, such as minimizing the directing of public funds into private pockets must also be considered. Wisconsin can address budget needs without austerity.
In areas where we must hold the line, wiser decisions in how the funding is directed can go some distance in resolving budget issues. Public money must be kept out of private pockets. Things can be improved in terms of quality and the public good by ensuring that the revenue streams are best managed. Where increases in spending are needed, more prudent fiscal management, and enhanced input from those who may note be paying a share reflective of benefits obtained is the correct approach.
The principle of "those who benefit most contribute the most" must apply. While taxes should be reduced for the middle class, the segment of "gainers" - those who reap the most from the public area (roads, schools, infrastructure, etc.) - certainly must pay their fair share. This is not linear.

a) Do you support limits on the following types of contributions for state candidates?

Yes 1) Individual
Yes 2) Political Action Committee
Yes 3) Corporate
Yes 4) Political Party
Yes b) Should candidates for state office be encouraged to meet voluntary spending limits?
Yes c) Do you support requiring full and timely disclosure of campaign finance information?
Yes d) Do you support the use of an independent AND/OR bipartisan commission for redistricting?
No e) Do you support requiring a government-issued photo identification in order to vote at the polls?
Campaign contributions from all sources should be managed - limited, and made transparent. How much money one has must not define how loud one's political voice is. All political and advocacy spending must be absolutely transparent.The issue of redistricting is perhaps the most compelling challenge of governance we face. At present democracy is degraded by the consequences of the 2011 redistricting. Photo-IDs are fine, but not be used to prevent people from voting. Technologies exist that could ensure voter certainty without ID - bio-metrics, for example. Everyone's thumbprint is different.
Yes a) Do you support capital punishment for certain crimes?
Yes b) Do you support alternatives to incarceration for certain non-violent offenders, such as mandatory counseling or substance abuse treatment?
Yes c) Do you support legalizing the possession of small amounts of marijuana?
No d) Should a minor accused of a violent crime be prosecuted as an adult?
Yes e) Do you support the enforcement of federal immigration laws by state and local police?
Yes f) Do you support delaying the seizure of assets by law enforcement officials until after a conviction?
The law must have a light touch, and be even handed for all. Law Enforcement agencies should have the jurisdictional authority to enforce laws - but must be held accountable for abuses - law enforcement is a two-way street.
Yes a) Do you support government spending as a means of promoting economic growth?
Yes b) Do you support lowering taxes as a means of promoting economic growth?
Yes c) Do you support reducing government regulations on the private sector?
Yes d) Do you support increased state funding for job-training programs that re-train displaced workers?
No e) Do you support expanding access to unemployment benefits?
No f) Do you support requiring welfare applicants to pass a drug test in order to receive benefits?
No g) Do you support providing financial incentives to the private sector for the purpose of job creation?
No h) Do you support providing direct financial assistance to homeowners facing foreclosure?
Yes i) Do you support an increase of the minimum wage?
Yes j) Should employers be able to ask about applicants' criminal history before interviewing them?
No k) Do you support the use of public funds for the construction of professional sports stadiums?
No l) Do you support the enactment of right-to-work legislation?
The government spends money, and that stimulates the economy. On a large scale, this is a substantial growth adder/economic support. Deliberate stimulus spending must be reserved for times of economic crisis. Lowering taxes may also stimulate growth, but does not if re-investment is not encouraged or required. The risk of the reduced taxation/increase growth formula resides in how the tax savings re-enter the economy.
No a) Do you support the national Common Core State Standards initiative?
Yes b) Do you support a merit pay system for teachers?
Yes c) Is the tenure process for public school teachers producing effective teachers?
No d) Should parents be allowed to use vouchers to send their children to any school?
Yes e) Do you support state funding for charter schools?
Yes f) Do you support the state government providing college students with financial aid?
No g) Should illegal immigrants who graduate from Wisconsin high schools be eligible for in-state tuition at public universities?
Standards and baseline curricula are useful tools, but local school boards should have some elements of control over deployment. Teachers should be honored and rewarded commensurate with skill, ability, and experience. To the extent that tenure fosters experience, and encourages careers, it has value. It is another tool. Public charter schools controlled by local school boards should have state support - like other public schools. Private schools should not be state supported. Legal immigrants, yes - illegals should be guided towards citizenship while still in high school.
No a) Do you support state funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, thermal)?
No b) Do you support state funding for the development of traditional domestic energy sources (e.g. coal, natural gas, oil)?
Yes c) Do you support state funding for improvements to Wisconsin's energy infrastructure?
Yes d) Do you support state funding for open space preservation?
Yes e) Do you support government regulations of greenhouse gas emissions?
Yes f) Do you support increased regulations of the hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") industry?
Energy production should remain a private enterprise, except in those cases where there is no commercial provider. This applies to renewable and traditional methods. That said, renewable energy standards or a percentage portfolio is common sense in terms of long-range energy planning and energy independence. The state can assist or incentivize infrastructure, as well as creation of public spaces. Many greenhouse gases are also pollutants and must be controlled. Fracking is an essential tool, but has local impacts that require it to have oversight.
No a) Do you generally support gun-control legislation?
Yes b) Should background checks be required on gun sales between private citizens at gun shows?
Yes c) Should citizens be allowed to carry concealed guns?
No d) Should a license be required for gun possession?
The Second Amendment is clear. Ownership of firearms is a right. Universal background checks are a common-sense tool to ensure that those who can be entrusted with firearms are allowed to purchase them. Criminals are not allowed. The 2nd Amendment does not differentiate between open and concealed bearing of arms. Basic freedoms must never be licensed.
Yes a) Do you support a universally-accessible, publicly-administered health insurance option?
Yes b) Do you support expanding access to health care through commercial health insurance reform?
Yes c) Do you support interstate health insurance compacts?
Yes d) Do you support Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?
No e) Do you support requiring individuals to purchase health care insurance?
No f) Do you support monetary limits on damages that can be collected in malpractice lawsuits?
Yes g) Do you support allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana to their patients for medicinal purposes?
The emergent difficulties with the Affordable Care Act identify that a single-payer solution should be made available to citizens. Competition for the private sector must be encouraged, but a single-payer baseline plan will ensure some care for everyone. There may be sensible limits on malpractice lawsuits, but setting arbitrary limits is wrong. Juries should decide, with judicial guidance. Medical marijuana has a place in the pharmacy.
Yes a) Do you support same-sex marriage?
Yes b) Do you support the inclusion of sexual orientation in Wisconsin's anti-discrimination laws?
Yes c) Do you support the inclusion of gender identity in Wisconsin's anti-discrimination laws?
The government has no place in managing or interfering in matters of personal relationships, and lifestyle choices. To the extent that people's lifestyle choices expose them to discrimination, the state must be prepared to protect them.
1. Redistricting reform. Democracy in Wisconsin at the state elgislative level has been seriously impaired by allowing elected officials to choose their voters. For a representative democracy to flourish, debate and collaboration are both required - but both are inhibited by the type of partisan redistricting executed in WI in 2011. 2. Proper funding and sustainable funding for all Wisconsin transportation infrastructure must be enacted. This process starts with an understanding of needs, and advances through identifying and creating adequate investment streams. This is a crisis, and must be dealt with now.

Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.

arrow_upward