Both Republicans and Democrats have primary elections Tuesday to select their candidates for U.S. Senate.

The Republican field is the most crowded, with incumbent Sen. Jim Inhofe drawing three challengers — Dennis Lopez, of Thackerville; Evelyn Rogers, of Tulsa; and Ted Ryals, of Oklahoma City.

Democrats vying for the nomination are Andrew Rice, of Oklahoma City, and Jim Rogers, of Midwest City.

Inhofe, 73, of Tulsa, has been in the U.S. Senate since 1994. He previously served as District 1 representative from 1986-94. He also served in the Oklahoma House of Representatives and Senate and served as mayor of Tulsa.

He is the ranking member on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and he’s a member of the Armed Services Committee.

Lopez, 48, is a bivocational Southern Baptist minister at Jimtown Baptist Church. He said he is running for the Senate on a “totally biblical platform.”

Ryals, 59, is an attorney.

Evelyn Rogers, 55, is a perennial candidate who has run for several offices in the past.

Rice, 35, has served as a state senator in District 46. He was born and raised in Oklahoma City. His older brother, David, was killed in the terrorist attack on New York City’s World Trade Center Sept. 11, 2001.

Jim Rogers, 73, also has been a perennial candidate on the Democratic side, previously running for lieutenant governor and also for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Don Nickles.

All candidates except for Jim Rogers answered a specific survey sent by the Enid News & Eagle regarding issues facing Congress. Rogers responded with a three-page, typewritten rambling statement, which is not included here.

1. What policy do you support as far as keeping a military presence in Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries as part of the War on Terror?

Inhofe: I anticipate that some type of U.S. presence will be required in Iraq and the Middle East for the foreseeable future. The United States and its allies made commitments to this region and we must fulfill these commitments. The number and type of forces required in the Middle East will obviously depend upon the security situation and what is required to provide peace and stability. The requirement will change over time depending on the situation, such as in Iraq, where continued force reductions will occur based on the political and security environment. An American and coalition presence in the region will ensure freedom and democracy have a chance to flourish.

In the Global War on Terror, we face an ever-changing threat to peace and security, not just in the Middle East, but around the world. We must provide the support to nations fighting terrorists within their own borders. The Horn of Africa remains an area of strategic importance in the War on Terror. This area is critical to the stability of the entire continent of Africa and is a national security interest of the United States. I have worked to build global partnerships with the nations of Africa, not only to provide humanitarian relief, but the security support they need to fight terrorism. I worked for the development of USAFRICOM, which will provide African nations and regional organizations a coordination point to help address security and related needs

Achieving stability in the Middle East is vital to U.S. national security and stability in the world. We must remain committed to supporting democratically elected governments through the region and the world. We must also continue to fight extremism wherever it exists. Supporting Israel and resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is essential to realizing peace in the region.

Lopez: We need to have bases in order to strike our enemies. We need to allow Iraq to govern themselves and bring our troops home as soon as possible. This is a spiritual war. Islam is only held by the sword. We are a Christian nation who supports Israel and that makes us a target for Muslims.

E. Rogers: Short-term goal: Teach Iraq how to defend themselves. Long-term goal: Prepare for withdrawal of U.S. troops. Middle East goal: Back up our allies.

Ryals: Keep military forces in Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries indefinitely, but with specific purpose of not only keeping the peace, but also apprehending the terrorist leaders, bin Laden, et al and assisting in the government and economic development of the region, while establishing more advanced diplomatic ties for multi-national support for the efforts.

Rice: There is no easy way out of Iraq, but Congress should force the president to implement an orderly redeployment of American troops from the Civil War in Iraq and adequately finance their health and well-being as they return home. It is time for the Iraqis to assume more responsibility for their own security and political future.

Once the Iraq Civil War is no longer draining American lives and our treasury, the U.S. can refocus more fully on identifying and destroying terrorist cells around the world. Just 18 days before the start of the Iraq War, America enjoyed one of its greatest successes since Sept. 11 when our intelligence forces cooperated with Pakistani intelligence to capture Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. Unlike refereeing a civil war in Iraq, this surgical raid in a Pakistani village five years ago serves as an example of American strength against terror that could be better emphasized were it not for our ill-conceived and poorly executed (by our political leaders, not our troops) activities in Iraq.

2. What policies do you support or propose to encourage and enhance energy development in the United States?

Lopez: Alternative fuels, nuclear power plants, wind power, solar are all methods tried and proven. America needs to quit complaining and begin to act. If we seek God’s blessings and His guidance, we will have a better future.

E. Rogers: Encourage wind power, solar power, alternative fuels development and drilling in new areas for oil as well. Encourage transportation alternatives as well.

Ryals: I support and would agree to propose measures that allow American oil companies to increase drilling and refinery capacity. We must not turn our backs on the incredible economic and energy-related resource of our domestic oil companies. OPEC has its supporters, we must support our own oil companies first, not tie their hands development-wise.

Inhofe: America’s energy supply should be stable, diverse and affordable. This means we must work to increase domestic energy production by expanding development and refining of oil, increasing exploration and production of natural gas and continuing development an innovative uses of renewable source of energy such as wind and cellulosic biofuels. I believe it is possible to explore oil sources in Alaska and offshore and produce energy nationwide in an environmentally friendly way. Oklahoma plays a key role in America’s energy independence. The oil and natural gas industry that helped build our state years ago is experiencing a resurgence and is contributing to our economy.

There are no simple solutions to the energy crisis that exists in America, but one thing is certain: continued inaction will only result in shorter supply and greater burdens on Oklahoma families. In the end, the best way to address soaring prices is to increase our production of domestic energy using every option available to us: oil and gas, nuclear, wind power, clean coal technologies, etc.

Rice: As a state senator, I worked with Republicans and Democrats to craft legislation that would have converted the state government’s vehicle fleet to clean burning natural gas or other alternative fuels. I also proposed electric energy conservation goals for Oklahoma’s public schools. Both initiatives were stymied by partisan politics in the state House of Representatives. As U.S. senator, I will work to shift federal tax incentives away from the single-fuel economy that leaves us dependent on foreign oil and toward development of alternative fuels that can be produced right here at home. I would prefer that Oklahoma, with our boundless natural resources like wind, switch grass and natural gas, should have the opportunity to lead the shift to a new, clean energy economy. If not, China, Japan or Europe will take the lead. I believe that our actions do have climate consequences, but rather than have the debate about whether global warming is real, we should move forward with investments into renewable energy sources that can create thousands of jobs in Oklahoma while reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

3. What policies do you support or propose regarding the rising costs of health care and using taxpayer money to pay for health care for the uninsured?

E. Rogers: Consider initiatives for basic health care/pharmacy coverage for every American citizen.

Ryals: Health care costs are skyrocketing partly because of abuses and mismanagement. Administrative costs of health care implementation appear to be one of the areas that could use some reform. A patient should have preventive care available and should be served by professionals in the decision-making processes and not by third-party administrators or insurance personnel concerned less with the health of the individual than with the profit to the insurance company. But there are patient abuses of the system as well, and refinement of coverage should be a priority. As for tax money to pay for health care of the uninsured, I believe that one answer to that problem lies in providing tax breaks and incentives for small businesses to provide health care, even if it means partial reimbursement for small companies. And one area of health care that needs even more attention is health care for our veterans. Veterans should not be forgotten or disregarded when it comes to health care.

Inhofe: I believe all Oklahomans and Americans should have access to quality health care through choice and flexibility in the health market, all-owing individuals to have control over their own health care. I have sought out ideas and promoted legislation that work to create more choices and flexibility with less government interference in health care.

I support the following concepts: private insurance options within Medicare and Medicaid; health promotion and disease prevention activities; health care tax credits; state high risk pools.

Some policies I support that could aid with the rising health care costs:

• Health savings accounts give Americans the ability to make their own decisions regarding health care, so they can receive the care they need and deserve.

• Medicaid liability reform. I have been a consistent advocate of medical liability reform and consistently been an original co-sponsor of the Medical Care Access Protection Act and the Healthy Mothers and Healthy Babies Access to Care Act. These bills protect patients’ access to quality and affordable health care by reducing the effects of excessive liability costs and alleviate the burden placed on physicians and patients by excessive medical malpractice lawsuits.

• Small Business Health Plans (SBHPs). I am a proud cosponsor of S. 2818, the Small Business Health Plans Act. This bill will decrease the costs for small businesses by allowing small business associations to pool their members together across state lines, so they can negotiate for health benefits and obtain prices they can afford.

In terms of taxpayer-funded efforts, I co-sponsored More Children, More Choices Act, which reauthorizes SCHIP for uninsured children at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. It also seeks to encourage greater state involvement and private coverage by creating a new federalism initiative and providing a $1,400 tax credit for children in families with incomes between 200 and 300 percent of the federal poverty level. I have consistently supported the Medicare physician reimbursement fix each year and would like to work with colleagues toward a permanent fix so that doctors can continue to provide quality care for seniors.

Lopez: The love of money is the root of all evil. Prices are out of hand. Greed is driving our nation. We need to return to God and seek his forgiveness. We must put an end to all abortions and homosexual sin or we will face God’s judgment.

Rice: As co-chairman of the state Senate Health and Human Services Committee, I am deeply concerned about the thousands of Oklahoma children and working families who must depend on government-assisted health care. Thousands more earn too much to qualify for health care assistance and are left with no insurance coverage. Recent reports show that one-third of Oklahomans are on Medicaid. In May, the Commonwealth Fund ranked Oklahoma as the worst state in the nation for “Child Health System Performance.” And in June, the Oklahoma Healthcare Workforce Center estimated the state will face a shortage of about 3,000 nurses by 2012, a problem that will dramatically hurt seniors and children. The entire nation’s uninsured population continues to climb, and millions of Americans who pay for health insurance — for their children, their families — find that insurance company bureaucrats are making decisions that should be left to physicians and patients. Hard-working Oklahomans are denied care by their insurance providers every day, and yet their premiums continue to rise. Meanwhile, thousands of uninsured Oklahomans are unable to pay for preventive care, so they seek care for acute illness in our public hospital emergency rooms. They delay their medical problems as long as possible, arriving in the ER when care is most expensive. Emergency room care for nearly 46 million uninsured patients is one of the driving factors for rising health insurance premiums among Americans who can afford health insurance. I believe that access to quality health care for every American is one of the great moral issues of our time. As U.S. Senator, I will work with the business community, insurance companies, health care providers and patient advocates to ensure that basic health care is affordable to every American worker and their dependent children.

4. What policies do you support or propose to address the illegal immigration issue in the United States?

Rice: After Washington failed for the last decade to effectively address illegal immigration, Oklahoma was forced to act. As state senator in 2007, I voted for the toughest immigration law in the country to enforce accountability on employers who hire undocumented workers. Our immigration system is broken and our first priority must be to secure our borders. However, the solution to illegal immigration cannot end with border security alone. We must also decide what to do about the estimated 12-15 million undocumented immigrants who currently reside in the United States. Wholesale deportation of all of these individuals is not a practical solution. The direct cost to law enforcement agencies to deport 12 million people, estimated at more than $200 billion over five years, would be prohibitive. We must adopt immigration reform that holds employers accountable, forces undocumented workers back into the system, requires them to learn English and pay a fine for crossing our border illegally and imposes extraordinary requirements to qualify for citizenship

E. Rogers: Allow time-frame opportunities for immigrants to register to be considered for green card status to work in the USA.

Ryals: Immi-gration law reform is another priority for me. Our federal immigration law is terribly antiquated, and we should revamp the entire system. This is not a call for amnesty, although there may need to be included a certain type of amnesty for those illegal immigrants who have children that were born in the U.S. and are citizens; and this is not a call for unfettered immigration — but we do need equitable immigration. Why should we allow doctors from India and not allow semi-skilled labor from Central America, for example? We promote free trade for goods, and yet we prohibit free trade as to human resources. That is not to say that every person who comes here to work needs to become a citizen; rather, it means that when persons come here to work they should be provided the opportunities to grow and prosper in the United States and be placed in a position to gain citizenship under certain circumstances. I believe it is wrong for us to have a state law that places the small business owner in jeopardy for not becoming an enforcement arm of the government, while also promulgating human rights abuses. It is federal law that needs to be fixed, however, and I intend to work diligently until the reform is complete. As an attorney that works in this area of law, I will be able to lend a critical eye and provide essential input to resolve the problem.

Lopez: We need to allow others into our country. We are accountable to God for how we treat others. We need strong security to fight drug and terrorist threats while allowing those who wish to work and better themselves as Americans. Remember we also were once aliens or our ancestors were.

Inhofe: Certainly our immigration system is broken and must be fixed. The first step in any significant immigration legislation must be to secure our borders. Last year the Senate focused far too much on controversial and irresponsible programs and far too little on ensuring that our borders are no longer porous. I believe it is an injustice to those immigrants who have gone about the citizenship process legally to grant illegal immigrants a shortcut to citizenship.

In the wake of last year’s failed immigration reform efforts, I joined with 11 other Republican senators earlier this year to introduce 15 specific enforcement bills, each designed to make important improvements to America’s immigration system. Each bill in the package represents a specific step toward securing America’s borders, increasing enforcement at the workplace or restoring law and order to our nation’s immigration system.

There is no doubt immigrant workers comprise an ever growing portion of U.S. labor force, especially in the agricultural, construction and energy sectors. I would support the responsible reorganization and restructuring of the federal government’s current temporary worker program or a new program, if the program does not grant amnesty, shortcut the naturalization process or reward illegal aliens for their illegal acts.

5. What policies do you support or propose to mitigate nuclear threats from Iran, North Korea and China?

Inhofe: The United States and the international community cannot and should not accept proliferation of nuclear weapons and associated technology. If a country does not adhere, we should take appropriate measures to ensue their compliance. No element of our national power should be taken off the table — political, economic or military. Last year I co-sponsored the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007 to make it clear the U.S. will not back down in the threat that Iran poses.

I am a firm supporter of our missile defense initiatives to counter the growing threat of ballistic missile proliferation. These weapons when topped with nuclear or conventional warheads threaten the safety and welfare of our nation and our friends and allies. I have consistently fought for full funding of the Missile Defense Agency and their research and development of viable missile defense technologies and defensive weapon technologies to include our efforts at securing radar and ground bases interceptor sites in Czechoslovakia and Poland, respectively. These sites will enhance our ability to defend against long range ballistic missile threats and are necessary to our national security and the security of our allies.

I am also proud to co-chair the Senate Taiwan Caucus. Taiwan is one of the strongest democratic partners of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region and serves as a model of freedom and democracy. Last month I joined my Senate colleagues to send a letter to President Bush urging him to carry out the United States commitment to provide Taiwan with weapons systems consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act. The relationship between Taiwan and the United States has benefited both our counties for over half a century and will continue to for centuries to come. A strong Taiwan helps bolster peace and stability in this strategically important region.

We must always maintain a military capability that will deter foreign aggression and the threat of nuclear proliferation. Operating from a position of strength both offensive and defensive, we show foreign aggressors that it is not in their best interests to acquire or use nuclear weapons.

Lopez: Use of force in Iran or North Korea if necessary. China is a whole other issue. China seems more stable and responsible. Iran is a terrorist’s haven and we need to take a stronger stand. If the threat is there we have the means to take out the threat. We need God’s hand upon our nation and leaders. We need Christians in places of leadership who will put God first where He rightfully belongs. Proverbs says “When a man is right with God, he will even make his enemies at peace with him.” We as a nation have turned our backs on God, and we must change this serious sin.

Ryals: Mitigating nuclear threats is like lighting a short fuse and trying to run fast enough to escape the blast. When I was in the Navy I was a nuclear power plant supervisor on a submarine. I know more than a little about nuclear energy, and am not uninformed about nuclear weaponry. We cannot totally rely upon diplomatic measures for resolving such dangerous issues as nuclear threats. We must 1) support Israel to the utmost; 2) communicate clearly and firmly with each of the nations stating that our position is for nuclear arms controls, but that 3) if they do not comply then our nuclear capabilities are going to be increased, our economic sanctions increased, and perhaps consider actual embargoes and more invasive reconnaissance. As to Iran in particular, in my opinion, if we can prove to absolute certainty that Iran has nuclear weapons of mass destruction, I would support military measures via Israeli military, and U.S. military if necessary.

E. Rogers: All three nations need to be watched and further dialogue as needed concerning nuclear possibilities. Possible sanctions may need to be considered if nuclear escalation occurs.

Rice: As U.S. Senator, I will work to stem the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction expertise from the former Soviet Union. I will support efforts to secure nuclear material in the former Soviet Union and around the world, so that we do not have to take military action to disarm or respond to a nuclear-armed terrorist. Unfortunately, the United States lacks information about many foreign weapons programs. We must focus and invest the resources necessary to improve our intelligence capabilities so that we can identify the number of weapons or amounts of materials a country has produced.