I-Tim Bishop (D) vs. Lee Zeldin (R) The soldier, the scholar and the war at home
By Gregory Zeller	write the author
October 30, 2008 | 09:51 AM Win or lose, Republican Lee Zeldin will take at least one thing with him after Tuesday's election: A newfound respect for officeholders and office-seekers alike. You'd be hard-pressed to get the Shirley resident to acknowledge such esteem for U.S. Rep. Tim Bishop (D-Southampton), the three-term congressman Zeldin's aching to replace. The contest between the 28-year-old Iraq War veteran and the 58-year-old former provost of Southampton College has been contentious at best, with the young challenger raking the incumbent's record on the economy and the war and the experienced lawmaker describing his rival's positions as "hopelessly naive." But even Zeldin admits running for office is exhausting, and more so for those with additional priorities, whether at home or in the House of Representatives. Arriving late one recent Monday for a candidate screening before the Times Beacon Record Editorial Board, Zeldin cited a child care emergency — he's the father of twin 2-year-old girls — and noted, without humor, "I can now appreciate what anyone in politics has gone through." "You get your schedule for the next day," he said, "and that's it." It's a lesson Bishop has learned well through six years in the House. Whether bringing over $135 million in federal funds to local causes, administering student financial-aid packages — the only House member to do so, Bishop claims — or contributing "broad strokes" to the federal budget, the congressman prides himself on keeping busy, and is "proud of the service I've performed." "I have used my service to bring the power of the federal government to my constituents," Bishop said. "We have done a very good job serving the vast and varied constituents of this district." Service is something Zeldin also understands. The East Meadow native — who graduated from William Floyd High School, earned a bachelor's degree in political science at the University of Albany and received a JD from Albany Law School — joined the ROTC as an undergraduate and was commissioned in 2003. After completing the Military Intelligence Officer Basic Course at Fort Huachuca, Ariz., he transferred to the Judge Advocate General Corps. In 2006, the Republican served as a paratrooper in Iraq with the 82nd Airborne Division's infantry battalion, doubling as a JAG magistrate. He left active duty in 2007 with a captain's rank and joined the U.S. Army Reserves. As an attorney, Zeldin — the youngest lawyer in New York when he passed the state bar exam in 2004, just shy of his 24th birthday — has been counsel for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and currently is an associate of the Mineola law firm Raiser & Kenniff P.C. The "privilege of deploying overseas," as well as "watching those girls go through what they went through" (his twin daughters were born several weeks premature), has prepared him well for the challenges ahead, the candidate noted. "This run for Congress is where I belong," Zeldin said. "I'm not intimidated by what's waiting for me in Washington." Bishop, seeking his fourth term since upsetting U.S. Rep. Felix Grucci (R-Patchogue) in 2002, is another not easily intimidated. He's worked his way onto myriad influential committees; he currently serves on the House's critical Budget, Education and Labor and Transportation and Infrastructure committees, as well as 28 other Congressional Caucuses, including the Democratic Budget Group, of which he is vice-chairman. Born and raised in Southampton, the father of two adult daughters graduated from Southampton High School in 1968 before earning a bachelor's degree in history from Holy Cross College and a master's in public administration from Long Island University. He served Southampton College for 29 years, beginning in 1973 as an admissions counselor and moving through such varied fields as fundraising, institutional planning and community relations before ascending to provost. The rivals' opinions on several key issues is a varied as their life experiences. Bishop voted twice for the much-debated $700 billion federal bailout, supporting both the first version (which the House defeated) and the second, which was eventually signed into law by President Bush; Zeldin calls the plan a "disaster" and likens it to a Wall Street rescue. Instead, the challenger champions a suspension of the capital gains tax, suggesting that private capital is the way out of the nation's financial crisis. Over the last 40 years, he noted, "as capital gains [tax] rates go down, tax receipts go up." "As you put more money into Wall Street, you're going to create more jobs," Zeldin said. "You're going to have more people pay income taxes. You're going to have more people paying their bills." "This is a problem that goes beyond the ability of private capital to resolve," countered Bishop, who noted he does not use the word "bailout" — "one of the reasons there's so much anger out there" — and that the $700 billion plan is "a very important first step in addressing this massive problem." Zeldin also supports the idea of refinancing current mortgages at lower interest rates "to give people the opportunity to pay their own debt," rather than watching the federal government "reward" banks by buying up defaulted mortgages. But Bishop, who agrees with the idea of refinancing mortgages to keep people in their homes, called most of Zeldin's other economic theorizing "a treatise on ... a dying commitment to supply-side economics." "What we have is a crisis of confidence," the congressman said. "People with money are not not investing because they don't want to give the government 15 percent [in capital gains taxes], but because they think they won't get their money back." As for Zeldin's assertions that tax cuts are ultimately self-funding, "Only the most committed ideologue believes that now," according to Bishop. "Tax cuts have to be funded. We either have to identify revenues somewhere else ... or we have to cut expenses." The idea of cutting expenses sits well with Zeldin, who lambasted Bishop and all House Democrats and Republicans for "wasteful spending" and "ethics issues." Among other things, the challenger suggested some $130 billion a year in "fraud and waste" in Medicare and Medicaid spending. "The Bear Stearns bailout didn't work," Zeldin said. "The Freddie/Fannie bailout didn't work. The AIG bailout didn't work. Enough is enough. Congress doesn't know how to spend our money responsibly." The candidates are also far apart on their definitions of "independence." Zeldin, who noted he's "not running to be a lapdog for [GOP Minority Leader] John Boehner (R-Ohio)," criticized Bishop for voting "99 percent of the time" with the Democratic majority; Bishop noted that "it's easy to come up with this rhetoric" and all but dared Zeldin to question a single one of Bishop's House votes. "Pick any one bill I've voted for — any one — and debate me on why it wasn't the best thing for this district," the congressman said. Zeldin denounced several of Bishop's higher-profile endorsements — Republican Smithtown Supervisor Pat Vecchio, who endorsed Bishop last month, "sold out cheap," the challenger said — and promised he could do a better job bringing federal funds to the First Congressional District. Bishop has done well "for those who are happy with the big cardboard check presentation for $60,000," the Republican said, "but there are press conferences out there with $1 million checks. "We're not getting the average," Zeldin added. The two have also sparred over the nation's immigration policies. Citing the economics of the issue, Bishop said he backs the so-called McCain-Kennedy bill, which includes provisions for guest-worker programs and "earned" legalization for immigrants who entered the country illegally. Zeldin, who noted that "rule of law is any nation's backbone," said he doesn't support McCain-Kennedy, and insisted that illegal immigrants should not be granted citizenship — unless they're willing to serve in the U.S. armed forces. Illegal immigrants who volunteer for military duty should be granted immediate citizenship, Zeldin said, and Bishop agreed. But the issue that divides these men most is the two-front war being waged in Iraq and Afghanistan. Zeldin, a veteran of the conflict, and Bishop — who this year visited Iraq to glean firsthand accounts from American soldiers and Gen. David Patraeus, supreme commander of the multinational occupying force — remain diametrically opposed on how the war should be fought and funded. They actually agree that the 2003 Iraq invasion was a colossal mistake — Bishop called it America's "worst foreign policy decision ever," while Zeldin said he had a "serious problem" with the timing of the invasion, noting United Nations sanctions against Iraq were on the table for 13 years, but there was no real attempt to enforce them until six months before the invasion. "You lost the legitimacy of the invasion when you said there were weapons of mass destruction over there," the challenger noted, "because there wasn't." They also agree that some form of redeployment shifting U.S. troop strengths from Iraq to Afghanistan is essential, and that a military draft is not in the cards — Bishop cited "no political tolerance" on either side of the aisle for mandatory conscription, while Zeldin noted "we really like our volunteer army." But the accords stop there. Zeldin suggested that "everyone agrees we need to withdraw from Iraq as quickly and responsibly as possible," but disparages Bishop's call for a "date certain" to pull out; Bishop insists the Iraq War has not made America safer, which "should be the fundamental result of any troop deployment," while Zeldin counters that the war "has made Iraq safer, and making Iraq safer serves American interests." The challenger's biggest beef is with Bishop's vote against funding supplies for troops in the field. "I cannot think of a more un-American vote," Zeldin said, noting the "demoralizing" effect on field soldiers who learn "the congressman back home is voting against the ammunition in your weapon." Bishop bristles at the "slur" and the suggestion that "voting against giving the president a blank check was un-American." "I voted for the war funding President Bush requested, provided it was tied to time lines," Bishop said, noting Congress was attempting to use "the power of the purse" to force the president to "discuss a phased withdrawal" from Iraq. "We're not arguing about funding, we're arguing about time lines," the congressman said, adding Zeldin's approach would seem to favor "blind loyalty" to the president. "The logical extension of his position is whenever the president commits troops to a conflict, we all have an obligation to line up and support it." In this case, it's Bishop who's employing rhetoric, according to his opponent. "Support our troops means support our troops," Zeldin said. "You can't pay lip service to it." "I'm an independent Republican with conservative values, running against a liberal Democrat," said Zeldin, who's received endorsements from various veteran's organizations and the backing of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. "I promise I will go down to Washington and be beholden to no one." "My office has delivered first-rate constituent services," Bishop said, citing endorsements from regional teachers, law enforcers and political players of all stripes. "We have served our constituents and served this country well."