Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry, left, introduces his running mate Sen. John Edwards at a rally at Burnham Park in downtown Cleveland, Ohio, on July 7. (Photo: AFP)

Q: Both the United States and India have been the victims of international terrorism. Both countries have established working groups and conducted joint anti-

terrorism exercises to address this issue. As President, what will you do to support and enhance this relationship?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I recognize the importance of new ---- and growing ---- relationships in meeting the new challenges we face. The fight against terrorism requires the use of a mix of military, diplomatic and law enforcement responses. The establishment and development of bilateral and multilateral working groups is crucial. I believe that the United States and India understand that the threat of international terrorism affects both democracies. I strongly believe that we must continue to work together to bolster our joint capacities.

I would continue the combined naval and special forces exercises our governments have undertaken. More broadly, I would like our counter-terrorism forces to take tougher actions against terrorist financing. Because international terrorism is always a transnational problem, we need to foster deeper cooperation between U.S. law enforcement and regulatory authorities of other countries. I want to build on the emerging cooperative relationship between the U.S. and India to further these efforts.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : Promoting a strong U.S.-Indian relationship will be one of my highest priorities. India is the world’s largest democracy and is in a critical part of the world, and the United States and India share many common interests ---- and one of the most important is fighting international terrorism. To fight international terrorism, we should enhance our efforts to cooperate in law enforcement, intelligence sharing, and non-proliferation. We also need to continue to seek a permanent end to the cross-border terrorism that India has suffered.

Q: What are your views on India’s bid to gain a permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I am interested in looking at ways to make the Security Council more effective and more representative of today’s international community. While I think that in many ways India would be a good candidate for Security Council membership, there is one notable problem: India is not a party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).

All the nuclear powers on the Council not only directly shape the NPT but are parties that abide by it. This may be the most serious issue with respect to India’s candidacy for Council membership and one that must be addressed by India.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : As a strong supporter of the United Nations, I believe that the United States must play an active role in that vital international organization. We must help reform the United Nations to make it more efficient, effective and reflective of 21st century challenges and realities. This includes reform of the United Nations Security Council. As the United States and India draw closer on all issues ---- including non-proliferation ---- I would be prepared to support India’s becoming a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.

Q: The United States and India have recently conducted a series of joint military exercises. As President, how would you approach the burgeoning defense relationship between the United States and India? Would you support greater U.S. defense sales to India?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I believe it is important, to both the United States and to India, that the relationship between our two countries continue to grow in every aspect, including defense. Decisions on U.S. defense sales, however, cannot be made in the abstract. They must be made in the specific context of the needs of the recipient nation, the weapons and systems under consideration, and the interests of the United States at the time of the purchase.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : The United States and India share many common strategic interests. I agree with Prime Minister Vajpayee that as the world’s largest democracies, and with the values and principles that we share, the U.S. and India are “natural allies.” As natural allies, we should continue to cooperate on a wide range of defense issues, including joint military exercises and the sale of military equipment when this enhances India’s security and contributes to regional stability.

Q: As President, would you support establishing a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with India?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I amto the basic concept of Free Trade Agreements, but they must move countries forward. Such agreements need to include internationally recognized core-labor standards and environmental protections as well as effective mechanisms for the monitoring and enforcement of negotiated commitments.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : As one of the world’s largest and most important markets, India is a prominent example of President Bush’s misguided trade priorities. Increased trade with India could create many jobs in the United States. Yet, instead ofng markets like India’s, President Bush is negotiating faulty deals with small countries ---- deals that are unlikely to make a real difference for our economy. Increased trade with India, in a context that provides basic labor and environmental protections, could create many jobs at home.

Q: Following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Indian Americans, specifically Sikh Americans, have been the

SEN. JOHN KERRY :victims of serious hate crimes. Do you support stronger hate crimes legislation? As President, what would you do to curb the occurrence of hate crimes?

I am an original cosponsor of Federal hate crimes legislation which would criminalize serious offenses committed against individuals because of, among other things, their religious or ethnic affiliations. While most state and local police and prosecutors are vigilant in investigating and prosecuting hate crimes, we need a backup system to assure that every hate crime is properly vindicated.

As President, I would assure that the Hate Crimes Act was properly enforced by the Justice Department and that there

were appropriate resources for the training of state and local officials in identifying, solving and prosecuting these crimes at a state level.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : America cannot allow fear to motivate crimes based on hate. Such crimes not only harm the victim and his or her family; they also have devastating effects on the community sharing the victim’s traits. That is why I have co-sponsored legislation to strengthen enforcement and penalties for hate crimes.

These laws will help provide needed federal assistance to states that have extraordinary expenses in investigating and prosecuting crimes based on race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or disability. Law enforcement officials must be better trained to recognize and prevent hate crimes, and criminals using children to commit hate crimes should be subject to enhanced penalties.

Q: How do you respond to fears that law enforcement’s increased use, or proposed use, of invasive technology is a violation of basic privacy rights?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I am deeply concerned that the Bush-Ashcroft Justice Department has thrown basic civil liberties out the window in their efforts to make Americans feel safer, while doing little to actually make them safer. I favor giving law enforcement the tools it needs to prevent, investigate and prosecute terrorism, but I also favor assuring that there is appropriate Court and Congressional oversight over the use of these powerful tools. I do not trust John Ashcroft to protect our civil liberties.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : New technologies create important opportunities to make us safer, but also great possibilities for abuse. We should use technology in a way that aids the battle against terrorism but safeguards the fundamental liberties that define our country. This requires important checks ---- limits on when different types of data mining are appropriate and with whom results may be shared, for example, as well as data trails and accountability to the public. In Congress, I authored legislation to establish new guidelines for the use of new surveillance and data mining technologies in a way that respects our privacy. Unfortunately, Attorney General John Ashcroft has abused his authority and claimed unprecedented power.

Q: Do you support the Department of Homeland Security’s plans to replace the current visa control system (NSEERS)?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I support a comprehensive approach to immigration which makes use of technology and intelligence information to assure that those who would do harm to the United States never make it to our shores in the first place. At the same time, I oppose measures which merely harass and make legitimate international travel difficult for people who wish to come to this country to learn or work.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : The goals of the new entry/exit system are important ---- facilitating legitimate travel and trade, enhancing national security, and adhering to U.S. privacy laws and policies. We need to ensure that this program is implemented in a way that protects our privacy and does not harm trade or travel. Among other things, we must use more sophisticated screening technology to identify terrorists or other dangerous individuals before they cross our borders while still allowing legitimate travelers to enter our country.

Q : Some estimates place the number of Indian American physicians at over 35,000. Given this fact, what are your views on addressing the severe medical malpractice insurance problem facing the industry?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I oppose a cap on non-economic damages because this cap disadvantages patients, in particular children and low-wage adults, whose losses cannot be fairly compensated through economic damages. That said, the current system is fundamentally flawed and must be reformed. We need a system to weed out lawsuits without merit and save money, and these savings should go to reduce the cost of malpractice insurance for health care providers. My plan would:

Prohibit any individual from bringing a medical malpractice liability action unless a qualified specialist determines a legitimate case exists.

Require mediation, to be made available by the state, prior to a trial for any medical malpractice liability action.

Prohibit punitive damages from being awarded in a medical malpractice action except upon proof of gross negligence, reckless indifference to life, or one of various types of intentional acts.

Require medical malpractice liability insurance companies to implement a plan to dedicate at least 50 percent of the annual savings to reducing malpractice premiums for health care providers.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : The rising cost of malpractice insurance for doctors is getting in the way of good health care. Any solution must free doctors from crippling insurance costs ---- without preventing the most badly injured victims from receiving the compensation they deserve. In my view, the record does not show that premium caps reduce premiums. States with premium caps average the same premiums as states without caps; insurance premiums seem most responsive to insurance companies’ gains or losses on investment, not losses to victims. I do believe we need a solution to the malpractice problem. Here’s what my plan would do. First, it will crack down on price gouging by the industry. Insurance companies can fix prices and divvy up the country in order to drive up their profits. Even when companies don’t explicitly collude, they set their rates based on a trade-group loss calculation that they know other companies will follow. Second, it will take aggressive action against frivolous lawsuits that don’t belong in court –– not against the serious lawsuits that bring help to the most badly injured. Lawyers who file three frivolous cases should be forbidden to bring another suit for the next 10 years.

Q : What are your views on the efficacy of Affirmative Action as it has been implemented?

SEN. JOHN KERRY : I strongly favor affirmative action and I opposed the Administration’s attack in the Supreme Court on the University of Michigan’s affirmative action program. I believe that we need to strengthen civil rights, enforce equal rights, and end the Bush attempt to rollback freedom. As I’ve learned in my life, some things are worth fighting for. And now is the time to stand up on critical issues that go to the heart of our liberty –– to defend inclusion and diversity and end racial profiling. America’s diversity is a strength, not a weakness, and it’s not just universities that have come to realize that.

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS : We are a country founded on equality, and affirmative action still plays a critical role in ensuring equal opportunity for everyone. I filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of Michigan’s admission policy in the recent Supreme Court case. The Court upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action, and recognized that schools have a compelling interest to promote racial diversity. Affirmative action is about expanding opportunities to everyone, and I support it.