Pro-life: Advocating the legal protection of human embryos and fetuses, especially by favoring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life.
Pro-choice: Advocating a woman's right to control her own body (especially her right to an induced abortion).

This is consistently a hotly debated issue. Recently, one of the primary issues being discussed which relates to the abortion debate is how the ACA handles employers who provide health care to their employees, but oppose the use of contraception.

1. Voting records are not very reliable for this question. It is possible that the candidate agrees broadly with pro-life/choice, but cannot support a specific policy relating to abortion. The general rule for only accepting “Yes” votes as evidence applies here.
2. Legislation concerning the funding of abortion is not strong evidence, as candidates may consider him or herself pro-choice, but disagree with funding for abortion services. (They don't think tax money from people who oppose abortion should go into funding programs which support abortion.)
3. If a candidate is personally pro-life but will not legislate against pro-choice policies, the candidate will be marked “Pro-choice”
4. If a candidate is personally pro-life but believes that abortion should be a state issue, the candidate will be marked “Unknown Position”
5. Keep in mind that while this is a very nuanced issue, the question you are attempting to answer is how will this candidate legislate regarding abortion (their personal beliefs are less important).

Keywords: abortion, life, choice/choose, women/woman, sanctity (“sanctity of life”), planned parenthood

Balancing the budget refers to actions being taken to equalize any deficits created from a government's expenditures exceeding their revenue. These actions can either reduce the expenditures on increase revenues. Tax increases can come in many forms, not just income taxes; although generally, that is the association made when discussing tax brackets. Some other forms of taxes as considered to affect different socio-economic classes differently. For instance, sales taxes are said to disproportionately affect lower income citizens while capital gains taxes affect the wealthy more.

Traditionally, in economics, their are two ways to help balance the budget: reduce spending, or increase revenue. Recently, politicians have become very split between which to do, with some favoring tax increases on the wealthy to help balance the budget. The opposition argues that increasing taxes on the wealthy will reduce investment and therefore hurt jobs, furthering the deficit.

The “Taxpayer Protection Pledge” can very useful because if the candidate has signed this stating that they oppose all new taxes, they obviously answer no to this question. Discussions about the wealth gap can also be useful as it is often connected to this question. Please also note that any evidence relating to tax credits and/or deductions should not be used to make a determination (mentions of these can be used as supporting evidence).

Keywords: wealth, rich, 1%, tax increase, increase, taxes

Mandatory minimum sentences are legal mandates for how long criminals can be sent to jail. In particular, these sentences apply to drug offenders. The minimum sentences are determined by the severity of the infraction (which drug/how much of it) and repetition of the infraction (has that person done it before? How many times?). However, when violence is involved, the legal system follows a somewhat different track based on those offenses as well.

The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the world and the majority of those prisoners have been jailed for non-violent crimes, often relating to drugs. This has lead to a national discussion about whether or not our justice system is properly punishing offenders in a manner which is proportionate to the crimes committed. As such, one of the primary targets for revision is mandatory minimum sentencing, with proponents of reform saying that incarceration often only exacerbates the situation and that counseling and rehabilitation programs would be a better use of government funds to reduce drug offenses. On the other hand, some oppose revisions to the status quo, claiming that a loosening of the laws and a weakening of the punishments could lead to more widespread use of drugs.

This has been a hot topic lately and is currently the primary political conversation when it comes to drugs, so most of the evidence will likely come from the past few years.

Keywords: mandatory, minimum, drug, non-violent, incarceration

The use of government funds to stimulate and improve the economy refers to direct economic stimulation through government intervention in the market, such as the bail-out of key players in the financial sector and key industries, and financing infrastructure projects for the purpose of job creation. The provision of incentives (tax breaks/credits) to the private sector to stimulate economic growth does not suggest support for using government funds.

Supporters of state economic stimulus claim that government has an inherent role in preventing economic collapse through the infusion of capital in the market. Critics of government stimulus either claim that, fundamentally, the government does not have a role in the marketplace, or that the government simply lacks the financial means to intervene.

If a candidate’s legislative record indicates support for economic stimulus, that legislation can be used as solid evidence. However, be sure to check for statements which back up this sentiment. It is possible that a candidate will have voted in favor of government spending even though they have publicly stated their opposition. Many fiscal conservatives who disagree in principle with government intervention were obliged to support economic recovery mechanisms back in 2008 at the risk of global economic meltdown, and thus candidates’ statement may conflict with their voting record.
Comments about wanting smaller government are a good indicator of their opposition to the idea of federal spending; while this is not necessarily the best evidence, a quote discussing smaller/limited government can be used to make a determination if there is no other evidence on this matter.

Keywords: stimulus (or economic stimulus), big/small government, bailout

As discussed for Q2, taxes can come in a variety of forms, not just income taxes. As such, lowering taxes can refer to decreasing income taxes on the middle class, reducing the sales tax, or reducing the corporate tax rates, as well as many many other more specific options.

Supporters argue that by reducing taxes, people will then have more money to spend; thus, more demand for goods is created which thereby increases the demand for workers to make those goods. On the other hand, opposition to using tax reductions as a means of economic stimulus argue that often times the money saved on taxes is not actually put back into the economy through spending, but rather saved. By putting the money into a savings account there is minimal benefit to the economy, so the government has essentially lost revenue for no gain. And while not everyone puts all of their money saved on taxes into savings, the argument is still made that it is not an efficient way of stimulating the economy. The criticism is similar to that of arguments against direct stimulus such as the tax rebate given out by President Bush as part of the 2008 Economic Stimulus Act where all taxes payers making less than a set amount were given $600.

Generally, if candidates make statements about wanting to reduce taxes, it is inferred that it is for the purpose of promoting economic growth. The point of letting people keep more of their money is so that they can then spend that money on other non-tax expenses, thus boosting the economy. So several statements about a candidates intention to lower taxes can be enough evidence for a determination, even if they never explicitly state that the tax reductions are intended to help the economy. Please also note that any evidence relating to tax credits and/or deductions should not be used to make a determination (mentions of these can be used as supporting evidence).

Keywords: tax, big/small government, pocket (“putting money back in their pockets”), decrease, stimulus

As a means of standardizing the education received by students all across the country, the federal government often implements programs and standards which all schools are expected to abide by. These standards can vary from what occurs on standardized tests, how long students must attend school, what topics are covered in the classroom and how they are taught. Examples include the Common Core State Standards Initiative and the No Child Left Behind Act.

Advocates on federal standards for education claim that it would be beneficial for education standards to be uniform across the country as opposed to the current variations which exist from state to state. The benefit would come from having strong standards which provide proper education for all children, independent of environmental factors such as the wealth of the family or school system. Opponents to the idea of federal education standards argue that because children vary so much in interest and ability, a one size fit all system is not appropriate when certain teaching techniques work better for some kids than others. They argue that the parents, teachers, and local officials are better suited to determine how students are taught.

This question has been recently updated and should now be relatively straight forward to research. If they oppose federal education programs such as Common Core or Race to the Top, no to this question; if they support Common Core the determination for this question should be “Yes” (see here for more info: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-debate-over-common-core/). Comments on standardized testing can also be a good signifier of the candidate's position on the Federal Government's involvement in education. Lastly, candidates saying that teachers or parents are best suited to make the decisions likely oppose federal standards.

The XL portion of the Keystone pipeline refers to a proposed section of the pipeline which would travel directly from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska. This is the only portion of the Keystone pipeline which has not yet been built. There is already a pathway from Hardisty to Steele City; however, it is not direct.

Supporters of the pipeline's construction highlight the potential for job creation and increased energy independence for the U.S., as the pipeline would allow from a greater quantity of oil to be pumped from the Bakken formation in North Dakota to the refineries in the south. Conversely, opponents point to the fact that the pipeline would largely be used to transport Canadian tar sand oil to the gulf coast where it would then be sold over seas, with no benefit to the U.S. The tar sands point i also a sticking point to environmentalists would see the pipeline as too big a threat to polluting the Ogallala aquifer in Nebraska

This topic is particularly easy to determine for incumbents based on their votes on the recent Keystone Kl legislation such as S1 A Bill to Approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. Because the bill is so black and white, we can even use no votes as solid evidence for determinations. Also, look for pledges or signed letters from incumbents and challengers alike that indicate their stance on building the Keystone XL pipeline.

Keywords: Keystone, pipeline

As mentioned in the question, renewable energy resources refers to energy sources such as solar and wind as well as many others. For the most part, renewable energy refers to any fuel source that is not a fossil fuel.

The controversy over whether or not to fund renewable energy sources is three fold. The first aspect has to do with funding; some oppose the funding based on their belief that the government should not be involved in energy development and the government already spends enough money, other support it on the basis that much of the research is not profitable and therefore would not garner the necessary funding from private organizations to make meaningful advances. The second aspect of contention involves U.S. Energy independence. Some support the notion based solely on the need for the U.S. To be independent from the international energy market, for fears of what being reliant on other countries can incur. Finally, their is the ongoing debate concerning climate change. Many politicians may support funding for renewable resources in an effort to decrease our reliance on fossil fuels and the pollution that they emit. For those that deny climate change, the pollution from fossil fuels is not as much of an issue and therefore they see no need to move away from fossil fuels.

Please use these guideline when making determinations for this question: if a candidate supports increasing offshore drilling, fracking etc, they should be a “No”.

Keywords: renewable, alternative, energy source, wind, solar, pollution, fossil (fuels),

Federal regulation of greenhouse gases implies that industries will be held accountable for the amount of greenhouse gases they emit into the atmosphere. This can come in the form of cap and trade programs, carbon taxes, regional environmental agreements (Western Climate Initiative) or support for international environmental policy (Kyoto Protocol, Copenhagen proposals).

The regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is the primary political manifestation of the climate change debate. The climate change controversy centers on the nature, causes, and consequences of global warming. The disputed issues include the causes of increased global air temperature, whether this warming trend is unprecedented or within normal climatic variations, whether humankind has contributed significantly to it, and whether the increase is wholly or partially an artifact of poor measurements. Some global warming skeptics in the science or political communities dispute all or some of the climate change scientific consensus, questioning whether climate change is actually occurring, whether human activity has contributed significantly to the warming, and the magnitude of the threat posed by global warming. Consequently, politicians who acknowledge the threat of climate change generally support the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, while skeptics generally oppose additional regulations on industry.

It may be difficult to determine if the candidate supports environmental regulation based on his or her legislative record as the candidate may oppose legislation for non-environmental reasons (for example, a candidate may oppose emissions regulations on industry because they feel the potential economic detriment outweighs the environmental concerns). Because of this, any opposition vote to an environmental regulation is not good evidence.
With this issue being fairly black and white ideologically, if candidates mention their skepticism of global warming, we can assume that that implies their opposition to regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. Likewise, candidates who express their concern over the threat that climate change poses, will likely support these regulations.

Keywords: climate, global warming, greenhouse, regulate, emissions, pollution

In this case, support for gun-control legislation implies that the candidate supports additional regulations on purchasing or possession of guns. Meanwhile, opposition to gun-control legislation implies that they oppose any additional regulations on guns.

There is a sharp divide between gun-rights proponents and gun-control proponents. Political arguments of gun politics in the United States center around disagreements that range from the practical (does gun ownership cause or prevent crime?) to the constitutional (how should the Second Amendment be interpreted?) to the ethical (what should the balance be between an individual's right of self-defense through gun ownership and the People's interest in maintaining public safety?) Political arguments about gun rights fall into two basic categories, rights-based (does the government have the authority to regulate guns?) and public policy (is it effective public policy to regulate guns?).

Because this is such a generic question, some personal judgment may be required to make a determination. As with any question, it is best to stay on the tentative side and if a candidate's position is unclear, include more relevant evidence than usual and allow staff to make the judgment call. Many candidates have public statements relating the 2nd amendment. Generally, if a candidate proclaims their support for the 2nd amendment, it implies that they would oppose gun-control legislation. It is also important to keep in mind that this question is specifically asking about how a candidate would legislate on this matter; be mindful that their personal beliefs may differ from how they would legislate. Please also note that while it may be difficult to determine where the line is for “generally” supporting gun-control legislation, as a general rule of thumb if they are highly rated or endorsed by the NRA (National Rifle Association) the determination for this question should be a “No”. Ratings and endorsements will be particularly useful for this question; please refer to organizations such as the afore mentioned NRA and Gun Owners of America. Previous NPATs/PCTs have a fair amount of variation on this question in how they were interpreted. As such, older answers are best used to supplement other solid information.

Keywords: 2nd amendment, bare arms, restrict, control, gun-control, gun

The 2010 Affordable Care act establish a multitude of new factors in the health care market. The primary result was the establishment of federally provided health care. Additionally, it requires employers of a set amount of full time employees to provide health care for those employees. Another parameter made it so that all health care providers had to meet a certain minimum for quality of coverage, which changed some people's existing setups. Perhaps most controversially, the ACA requires that all adults have health care or they will be fined.

The ACA or “Obamacare” has been one of the most contentious parts of American politics for the past five years because it embodies the argument between small government and big government. Proponents say it is a necessity in order to avoid people being held hostage by privately owned insurance companies while opponents see it as the government reaching where it doesn't belong and believe that the free market is best suited for controlling the cost and quality of health care.

For incumbents, this question can be answered fairly easily based on voting records given the number of times votes have been taken on the issue. That being said, a “nay” vote on a movement to repeal the ACA is still not a surefire indication of a candidate's support for the law. Multiple votes would be needed. There is also a fair amount of gray area in which candidate's may express a distaste for only certain segments of the ACA, but never mention repealing it. In these cases, include more evidence than usual and allow staff to make a judgment call on it.

Keywords: Obamacare, ACA, Affordable Care Act, health care

The central focus of this question is on the concept of amnesty. Amnesty has been granted in the past in which unlawfully present residents could petition for citizenship if they could prove that they had been living in the United States for a specified number of years. The alternative to amnesty, which this question addresses, is the forcible deportation of unlawfully present immigrants who, upon returning to their country of origin, could apply for permanent resident status in the United States.

Immigration reform has been a legislative priority for decades; however, the design and implementation of comprehensive immigration reform has been highly contested. In November 2014, the President Obama enacted and executive order that opens a door to amnesty and deferred deportation for an expanded number of unlawfully present immigrants.
Supporters of amnesty suggest that legalization will reduce abuses against unlawfully present immigrants, who are often afraid to report crimes for fear of being deported. Additionally, they argue that considerable financial costs are incurred in locating and sending unlawfully present immigrants back to their home countries and that many important sectors of the economy, especially agriculture, depend on the labor of immigrants. Furthermore, many unlawfully present immigrants have family members, including children, who are citizens or legal residents in the country.
Opponents of amnesty claim that it increases the pressure for further illegal immigration at the nation’s borders; it will be costly to taxpayers to grant amnesty to unlawfully present immigrants, especially with regard to providing education, health care, and other social services. Opponents also argue that providing amnesty to unlawfully present immigrants penalizes legal immigrants who have properly followed the rules and that it will delay the immigration of others patiently waiting abroad. As it is clearly unlawful to enter, remain or work in a country without proper governmental authorization, granting amnesty undermines the rule of law. Finally, amnesty of unlawfully present immigrants depresses the wages of lawful workers by increasing the supply of workers, many of whom are willing to work for much less than the prevailing wages.

Public statements that relate specifically to amnesty are particularly useful as evidence. Some candidates may advocate for a “pathway to citizenship,” but still require unlawfully present immigrants to return to their countries of origin first. Other candidate's may never say that they want unlawfully present immigrants to be deported first, but support policies which generally align with this pool of thought. For instance, if a candidate supports the construction of a fence/wall along the border, they most likely oppose amnesty, but this cannot be used alone as proper evidence, merely as an indicator. Many candidates discussed this topic immediately following Obama's executive order, so that would be a good time period to look at public statements. If the DREAM Act is being discussed by a candidate, you should likely be able to make a determination based on that statement (those in favor of the DREAM Act should receive the determination “No” while those that oppose it would receive “Yes”).

Keywords: amnesty, DREAM Act, immigration, deport

There are various forms of legal partnerships; this question deals specifically with the legally or socially recognized marriage between two persons of the same sex. Civil unions are legally recognized unions similar to marriage, granting nearly all of the state-recognized rights of marriage to same-sex couples. Supporters of civil unions contend that civil unions grant same-sex couples equal rights to married couples. Some commentators are critical of civil unions because they say they represent a separate status unequal to marriage. Domestic Partnership is a legal or personal relationship between two individuals who live together and share a common domestic life but are neither joined by marriage nor a civil union. However, in some jurisdictions, a domestic partnership is almost equivalent to marriage, or to other legally recognized same-sex or different-sex unions.

Conflict arises over whether same-sex couples should be allowed to enter into marriage, be required to use a different status (such as a civil union, which usually grants fewer rights), or not have any such rights. The term “marriage” is at the center of much of the controversy. The opposition to same-sex marriage arises from a rejection of the use of the word “marriage” because it is associated with the “traditional family” of a man and woman, described in religious teachings. Other stated reasons include direct and indirect social consequences of same-sex marriages and parenting concerns. Support for same-sex marriage is often based upon what is regarded as a universal human rights issue, mental and physical health concerns, equality before the law, and the goal of normalizing LGBT relationships. Other supporters of same-sex marriages claim that the government should have no role in regulating personal relationships, while others argue that same-sex marriages would provide social benefits to same-sex couples. In recent years there has been a push to federally allow same-sex marriage, but for the time being it is largely a states' issue with an increasing number of states allowing for same-sex marriages.

It is critical to make the distinction between “marriage” and alternatives that “grant the same rights as marriage.” While the differences may be subtle (depending on the state), please be cautious when determining the candidates’ issue position. Statements relating specifically to constitutional amendments that define marriage are particularly useful. References to a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman are also useful. It is critical to make the distinction between “marriage” and alternatives that “grant the same rights as marriage.” Statements relating specifically to disagreeing with or overturning the Defense of Marriage Act are especially useful.

Keywords: marriage, same-sex, gay, man and a woman, traditional marriage/family, civil union, DOMA

Significant portions of Iraq and Syria are currently being controlled by ISIS/ISIL/Daesh, a jihadist militant group which adheres to radical Islamic religious movement known as Wahhabism. Many in the U.S. view this organization as one of the primary threats to the safety of Americans because of ISIS's stated mission to inflict harm on the United States.

The predominant conversation in international affairs centers around ISIS/ISIL/Daesh and what the U.S. should do about them. Much of Iraq and Syria are now controlled by ISIS/ISIL/Daesh and there are constant stories of the atrocities taking place in the areas that they control, so the pressure for the U.S. to intervene in the region has grown significantly. Currently, the U.S. is employing the tactic of strategic bombing in order to destabilize ISIS.

This question is structured as a litmus test in which we try to determine which side of the status quo a candidate leans toward. If a candidate makes a comment along the lines of wanting to "neutralize the radical islamist threat of ISIS" or "do all that we can to protect Americans", they are a yes to this question. On the flip side, if candidates support more isolationist policies, they are a no.

Keywords: drone, terrorist, ISIS

As it currently stands, all Social Security taxes go into the federal fund. Some have proposed to allow people to instead divert those funds into a private retirement account which is controlled by a private company rather than the government. This restricts access to those funds to only the individuals or other customers of that company who also have their funds going into that pool.

This notion has been established as an alternative option to status quo over fears that Social Security is going to run out of funding some time in the near future. Additionally, supporters argue that the free market can better stabilize the need for Social Security type programs better than the government can. Opponents view privatization as a dangerous option because of the potential dangers of the free market taking advantage of the public. On top of this, in order to private the system, many benefits will have to be cut from the current level coverage.

The primary way of finding evidence on this question while be focused on whether candidates support privatizing social security at all. Unfortunately, this has not been a major topic for a few years so the most solid evidence is likely to come from around 2008.

Keywords: social security, privatize