Adam Cote lives in Portland, where he practices law, and grew up in Sanford.  He has international experience both in the private sector, where he worked in the energy fields in Bosnia, Croatia, Romania, and Bulgaria, as well as serving on the front lines in two conflicts - Bosnia and Iraq.  In Iraq, he worked to reconstruct schools, medical clinics, and “adopted” an Iraqi village, providing backpacks, school supplies, clothing, shoes, and blankets for the villagers. 

He had a near brush with death when, in December of 2004, a suicide bomber blew up a mess hall in Iraq in which Cote was eating.  Only a refrigeration unit between him and the bomber saved his life.  In Bosnia, he was a peacekeeper and apprehended several suspected war criminals, organized a toys for tots campaign, and taught English.  He is currently a lawyer with Pierce-Atwood, and is president of the Maine Young Democrats.  He attended Colby, and Maine Law School.  As is our practice, we allow the candidates to speak for themselves on the issues.  Here, then, is Adam Cote. 

Iraq:  What frustrates me is that 535 people in Congress are debating Iraq, but only one has served.  Those who have gone to see it have basically been served wine and cheese, are shown what they want to see, and hold a press conference.  I spent a year there, with a hundred convoys, leading reconstruction efforts.  I have seen my share of combat.  That, combined with my experience in Bosnia is the kind of experience that is needed now in leadership.  We have a pattern of electing people who spend most of their time running for office - they’re very good at holding news conferences and polling - but what we really need is someone with real world experience with a seat at the table.  You don’t have to go to Iraq to know what’s really going on there ... everyone knows now ... but now we have to figure out what to do next.  I get frustrated with politicians on both sides of the aisle ... Bush and the GOP are wrapped in the flag, if you love the country, you have to stay the course without debate, regardless of the outcome.  Using patriotism as an excuse to stay there stifles the debate.  On the Democratic side, we are not providing leadership.  We have to get out in a way that will not lead to chaos, all-out civil war, such as we see in Darfur and we saw in Cambodia.  Right now, for the people who are running for office, what I see is a competition, trying to convince the public that this candidate or that one hates the war the most.   I hate the war, too ... I saw friends killed, I treated people who died there, I missed the birth of my first daughter.  What we need is not mudslinging, we are there now.  We need statesmen. 

Maine has a tremendous history of electing statesmen.  I’d like to follow in those footsteps.  We must withdraw, but it has to be done in a way that will not spiral into civil war.  The way to do that is to follow a model similar to the Dayton Peace Accords.  What you have in Iraq is basically three factions, a roving paramilitary, an active civil war with civilians getting killed, and neighboring countries interested in filling the power vacuum.  They’ve been killing each other for a thousand years, except for brief periods when a totalitarian regime was in charge.

That scenario also perfectly describes Bosnia in 1994.  Clinton, to his credit, sent Richard Holbrook to Dayton.  We have to stop worrying about a civil war in Iraq ... there is one there already.  Let’s send George Mitchell to Iraq, or Jim Baker.  We used the military to address a political problem ... that was a lack of understanding about the role of the military, and the nature of the middle east.  But a kneejerk inside-the-beltway partisan political solution can’t be allowed to come between a bad situation and rational foreign policy.

War on Terror:  The war on terror is much more than a law enforcement issue, or a military issue.  It is a war of ideas and ideology.  The first way to have a rational, sane foreign policy is to base it on real threats to national security, the rule of international law, and a strong national defense, but sparingly used military.  This is something that will last for decades, but should involve the use of diplomats, engagement with our allies, the use of financial aid an other means with which to respond to those who are are opposed to what we stand for.  We need a strong military, but the major flaw with how it is being used now is that its role is not properly defined.  We also went after the wrong perpetrators.  We used the military in a shoot-first, ask questions later fashion, and we did not do all of this in concert with our allies.  As a result, we went in with a misguided plan of operation, with an undermanned, ill-equipped military, which didn’t have a proper plan.  The 2008 election is critical, because we have a short window of opportunity to steer the country in a different direction and repair our standing in the world.  One of the things I would like to do is ask people to consider that I would be looked to as a spokesman in this, because of my real world experience.

Oil and Global Warming:  We have a very misguided energy policy.  Oil is an environmental issue, because it relates to climate change, but it is also an economic issue.  With skyrocketing energy costs, Maine’s working families are hurt ... so are small businesses.  It is also a national security issue, because it has guided so much that we have done with the military, and every other foreign policy front.  Wouldn’t it be nice if we didn’t have to go to war with Venezuela or the former USSR? We need a Marshall Plan to deal with those nations which are still developing and who have oil or other natural resources to use.  The worst week of my life was not in Bosnia or in Iraq, but reading the Bush energy policy of 2005.  There were incentives for big oil, but no real plan to diversify and address runaway demand.  The answer will lie on both the supply side and the demand side.

On the supply side, we need to tap into American innovative technology, to find renewable energy sources, wind, solar, hydro, tidal, and co-generation.  Maine could benefit from a boom in renewable energy R&D, electric generation expansion, and improvement of the transmission lines.  We have to think long term.  This is really a new economy issue.  Lots of politicians are saying, we need to wean ourselves off foreign oil.  Beyond the bullet points, there is not really a lot of energy expertise in Congress.  How can Maine be a part of a new energy-driven economy? We have a hard time attracting high-paying jobs here.  If properly positioned, Maine could strongly benefit from an increase in renewable energy generation here.

Other countries had to take the lead on global warming ... it shows how far down we’ve gone.  We need to sign Kyoto, and enforce cap and trade.  Internally, we will have to deal with our own usage.  We are using 25% of the world’s oil, but we have only a tiny fraction of the world’s population.  Eventually, we will have to deal with China and India, whose economies are expanding.  But right now, we are still the number one consumer of energy in the world. 

Health care: First, universal coverage and second, focus on keeping costs down.  Everyone needs basic health care.  Beyond that, people need to pay for specialties.  It is critical that we try to keep costs down.  Universal health care can help Maine, even the playing field for businesses.  I disagree that states need to be the laboratory for health care.  The federal government needs to step forward and take leadership.

Social Security:  We need to preserve Social Security, and the primary way to do it is to remove the cap on earnings.  It doesn’t make sense that only the middle class is funding the program.
Free trade/fair trade: Sanford has been hit hard, as have many other mill towns, with the loss of their tax base, and the loss of jobs that are moving overseas. We have to demand fair labor standards for those countries that export goods back to the U.S., and we have to keep a close eye on product standards.  We don’t know where something is made half the time.  We need more accountability and oversight.  There are two main issues here ... economics, and national security.

Immigration:  I favor an immigration policy that is tough, rational, and fair.  We need to improve border security.  I think we need a rational policy in place to get illegal immigrants into the system, get them documented, paying taxes.  It has to be realistic.  We are not going to deport 12 million people ... it’s economically unrealistic to do that.  And we have to be fair.  There should be a guest worker program, and a path to citizenship for some workers who learn English, pay back taxes, and get included into the system.  The Kennedy-McCain bill was good, and I favored that, but unfortunately, it didn’t pass.

Education:  I am the only candidate, I suspect, still paying my own student loans, while saving for the college educations of my three daughters.  Maine has a high level of high school graduation, and one of the lowest levels of college graduations.  That’s because it is so expensive to go to school here, and people aren’t earning as much as they are in other states.  Education costs are through the roof.  We need to increase opportunities for Pell Grants, and keep Stafford Loan costs low.  We also need to establish a loan forgiveness program for teachers, doctors who practice where they are needed most, and other public servants.  I come from a long line of teachers, and education has always been vital to my family.   The federal government needs to be committed to supporting public schools, colleges, universities.  There are myriad challenges, but the first step is to agree that everyone needs higher education, and make that a national goal.