Where Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton - and third parties - stand on the issues
We get it: You're sick of presidential election coverage. It's all horse-race polling, name-calling and gaffes. No substance, all filler.
Wouldn't it be nice to know where Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton — and their third-party opponents, Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party candidate Jill Stein — actually stand on important issues like the economy and immigration?
Well, have no fear, gentle reader. We're tabulating it for you!
Below are highlights from For the Record, USA TODAY's presidential election newsletter. Follow the links in the subheads below for more policy details.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Why it matters: Scientists say rising global temperatures are producing more weather extremes: Bigger floods, drier droughts, hotter heat waves and rising sea levels, which over time can lead to water shortages, poor crop yields and costly storm damage.
Where Trump stands: He doesn’t buy the science on climate change and has promised to pull the U.S. out of the Paris climate deal, which aims to rein in greenhouse gases, and nix the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, which does the same for carbon pollution at American power plants.
Where Clinton stands: She's said that climate change is an “urgent threat” and has promised to reduce greenhouse emissions up to 30 percent by 2025. Clinton says she’ll do that, in part, by defending the Clean Power Plan and boosting efficiency standards for cars, trucks and appliances.
Where third parties stand: Johnson mostly buys the idea of climate change, but don't expect him to make mandates for solar panels or more efficient cars. Stein, by contrast, has made climate change a centerpiece of her campaign. She wants the country to rely fully on renewable energy by 2030, among other ideas.
ENTITLEMENT REFORM
Why it matters: The Social Security trust fund is set to run out of money in 2035; Medicare in 2028. Absent any reforms, the percentage of the federal budget devoted to these programs will continue to grow, shrinking what's left for other important things, like infrastructure repairs, education and research.
Where Trump stands: Both candidates oppose raising the retirement age and cutting cost-of-living increases for Social Security. Trump says the fix lies in ridding the program of waste and bolstering economic growth through tax reform, but his plans for Medicare are less clear. Trump's advisers have hinted that he’d be willing to cut benefits. And Trump has suggested he’d like to negotiate prescription drug prices.
Where Clinton stands: Clinton says she can make Social Security solvent by making people who bring home more than $250,000 pay the full amount into Social Security (anything above $118,500 is capped now). She has bigger changes in store for Medicare. Clinton would allow people to buy into the system at 55 (it’s 65 now), allow Medicare to negotiate prescription prices and bundle payments for multiple providers involved in care, instead of the current a la carte billing we do for services provided.
Where third parties stand: Johnson wants to phase out Social Security but also supports raising the retirement age and allowing retirees to put their contributions into private savings accounts, ideas touted by some Republicans but rejected by Trump. Johnson's Medicare reforms are unclear. Meanwhile, Stein wants to eliminate the Social Security payroll cap, instead of Clinton’s plan to simply raise it. Stein also would open Medicare to anyone as part of her single-payer health-care plan.
EDUCATION
Why it matters: Education is in trouble. There’s a massive teacher shortage. Most states have cut funding for schools. And while we’re told that most everyone needs some form of post-high-school education to get a decent job, the cost of a college degree continues to skyrocket.
Where Trump stands: Trump is big into local control and school choice: He wants to take $20 billion in federal money and give it to states to send poor kids to better schools, be they district, charter or private schools. He supports merit pay for teachers and a repeal of Common Core but hasn't released a detailed higher-education plan, noting in broad terms that he opposes ideas to make public universities and community colleges tuition free.
Where Clinton stands: Her stance is basically the opposite of everything above. She touts universal preschool for 4-year-olds and more support — including higher pay — for teachers. Clinton proposes free in-state public college tuition by 2021 for anyone whose family makes less than $125,000. She also wants a three-month moratorium on student-loan payments and the federal government to step in with refinancing options.
Where third parties stand: Johnson is Trump squared on education: He floated a plan for universal vouchers as governor, is against Common Core mandates and has proposed dismantling the Department of Education. Stein takes free tuition much further than Clinton: She would offer it to anyone, anywhere, and absolve all student-loan debts. She’d stop tying diplomas and teacher evaluations to standardized test performance.
FOREIGN POLICY
Why it matters: It's a good idea to know how candidates see the rest of the world because 1) we live in nasty times with people who'd love to attack us and 2) the president is ultimately in charge of our armed forces (not to mention that big red “nuke ‘em all” button).
Where Trump stands: Trump said we should have taken Iraq’s oil when we invaded, that we should keep Guantanamo Bay in business and that we should spend a lot more to build up the military with more ships, planes and troops. But Trump also has argued that we should scale back our roles in Asia, the Middle East and NATO. And he has heaped praise on Russian President Vladimir Putin. He hasn't released a detailed plan to stop the Islamic State.
Where Clinton stands: The former secretary of state's views are often the polar opposite of Trump's. She favors closing Gitmo and continuing our roles in Asia and the Middle East. She also says NATO is “one of the best investments that America has ever made” and has called Putin a “bully.” Her plan to stop ISIS includes more air strikes in Iraq and Syria and more diplomacy to resolve Syria's civil war.
Where third parties stand: Johnson aligns with Trump's view that we should butt out of everyone’s business. He’s against putting boots on the ground to fight ISIS. Stein is even more hands-off than Johnson. She says we should withdraw all troops from Iraq and Afghanistan, reduce our nuclear arsenal and make the National Guard the centerpiece of national defense.
OBAMACARE
Why it matters: The problem is in the name: The Affordable Care Act may have extended benefits to and improved the health of millions of people, but for many, it’s just not that affordable.
Where Trump stands: Trump’s solution involves repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something else. His written plan includes allowing the sale of insurance across state lines, allowing people to deduct insurance premiums from their taxes and offering block grants for Medicaid, giving states more freedom to handle the program as they see fit.
Where Clinton stands: Clinton says the solution lies in defending and expanding Obamacare. Her plan includes mandating lower prescription drug costs and offering incentives for states to expand Medicaid coverage. She also supports a public option (though not as robust as Bernie Sanders’ Medicare-for-all idea), allowing people to buy into Medicare at 55.
Where third parties stand: Johnson is no fan of Obamacare. But does that mean he would repeal or modify the Affordable Care Act? Don't know. He's been non-committal. Meanwhile, Stein believes health care is a human right and is pushing for a single-payer system. She says such a system would pay for itself.
IMMIGRATION
Why it matters: We haven’t had wide-ranging immigration reform since the 1980s. The last attempt came in 2013 and passed the Senate but quickly died in the House, primarily over cost concerns and how (or whether) undocumented immigrants should be given a path to citizenship.
Where Trump stands: Trump's solution includes building a taller wall with Mexico and sending them the bill, and temporarily barring Muslims from entering the country. He briefly promised a "softening" of his stance on deporting the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants who live here, later tweaking it to say we should be focusing on deporting criminal illegal immigrants instead. He continues to support “extreme vetting” for immigrants to weed out those who think Sharia law should supplant the Constitution.
Where Clinton stands: Clinton backs comprehensive reform with a path to citizenship for the 11 million and has vowed to work with Republicans in her first 100 days in office to make it happen. She supports Obama’s executive actions to defer deportation for “dreamers” and their parents and has vowed to do even more to keep families together. Clinton also has promised to close privately run immigration detention centers and allow undocumented immigrants to buy health insurance under Obamacare.
Where third parties stand: Johnson appears to be positioning himself somewhere between Trump and Clinton, saying walls are ineffective and that the only way to handle the 11 million is to allow them to earn legal status (but not necessarily citizenship). Stein looks to be positioning herself somewhere to the left of Clinton. She supports a path to citizenship and has criticized Clinton's willingness to deport refugees from Honduras.
THE ECONOMY
Why it matters: By some indicators, the economy is strong. Our gross domestic product is growing. Inflation rates are low. But median household income continues to decline, and a lot more people of prime working age aren’t even looking for work anymore. In effect, if things are better economically, they don’t feel better for many of us.
Where Trump and Clinton stand: Given how far apart the Republican and Democratic platforms are on the economy, you’d think these two would have wildly divergent ideas. But they’ve got more in common than you’d think.
Both would like to see a higher federal minimum wage: Trump supports raising it to $10 an hour, while Clinton sets the bar at $12 an hour. Both would like to spend a lot more on infrastructure. Clinton would seed an infrastructure bank with $275 billion to jump-start projects; Trump says he’d double her investment, though he hasn't explained much more than that. And both oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Obama’s signature agreement that aims to improve trade with Asia. Where do they differ? On taxes (see below).
Where third parties stand: Stein supports a federal $15-an-hour minimum wage, but it’s unclear where Johnson stands on the idea. Johnson likes a free market with limited regulations, so he’s all for the TPP. Stein is against the trade deal. It’s unclear where either stands on child-care tax credits, though it’s probably a safe bet that Johnson is against them, as he favors a simpler tax code and flat sales tax.
TAXES
Why it matters: Americans have said for decades that the rich pay too little in taxes, and a slim majority says we should "redistribute wealth by heavy taxes on the rich." The tax code is enormously complex with lots of loopholes and may be enticing some companies to move overseas.
Where Trump stands: Trump recently changed his tax plan, calling for fewer tax brackets and a higher tax rate for the richest Americans than he had previously sought (it's still a lower rate than what the ultrarich currently pay). He supports tax breaks for child care, no income tax for low-income folks and a moratorium on economic regulations
Where Clinton stands: Clinton supports a higher tax rate for millionaires, a surcharge on those who make more than $5 million and increases in the capital gains tax (the tax charged on returns on investment). She also would offer tax breaks for middle-class taxpayers with high medical costs, who are paying for higher education or who are helping a sick family member, among others.
Where third parties stand: Johnson wants to replace the system of personal and corporate income taxes with a flat-rate retail tax that offers rebates for food purchases. Stein says on her website that she would “rewrite the entire tax code to be truly progressive with tax cuts for working families, the poor and middle class, and higher taxes for the richest Americans.” But does that mean heftier cuts and higher taxes than what Clinton has proposed? The details are slim.