Sheldon Whitehouse on Principles & Values Democratic Jr Senator, previously attorney general

OpEd 2006: Ran against President Bush, not Sen. Chafee

Democratic donors poured money into key Senate races around the country, including mine. They firehoused me with criticism, linking me to the right-wing failures of the president and the Senate. I was well known for fighting the president and the GOP leadership.

I was the only candidate in the race with a record of standing up to entrenched powers, but a parade of Democratic Bush enablers came to Rhode Island to campaign for my opponent. Senators Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, and others who had voted for the war in Iraq, urged my constituents, at this critical time in history, to elect one more of their own, as I saw it.

In any event, Whitehouse ran not against me, but against President Bush, whose approval rating in Rhode Island was abysmal.

Voted with Democratic Party 96.6% of 325 votes.

Brings 20 years of public experience to change Washington

Sheldon is running for the U.S. Senate because he sees the need to work for a change in Washington and a new national agenda. As a Senator, Sheldon will work to strengthen Social Security, protect the environment, and make health care more available and affordable. He will be a strong and reliable voice for the people of Rhode Island. Sheldon and his wife Sandra, a marine biologist and environmental advocate, reside in Providence with their two children, Molly and Alexander.

Voted YES on confirming of Sonia Sotomayor to Supreme Court.

"In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law--it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress's intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand."

Question Trump on Emoluments clause.

Excerpts from Letter from 17 Senators to Trump Organization: The Trump Organization's continuing financial relationship with President Trump raises concerns about whether it is a pass-through for income that violates the Constitution's two Emoluments Clauses: Article I, Section 9, Clause 8 on foreign Emoluments; and Article II, Clause 7 on domestic Emoluments. Please answer the following questions to help Congress understand:

• When the Trump Organization receives income from a government agency, how is that income segregated & reported?
• How does the Trump Organization determine if income is derived from foreign governments?
• Trump promised to "donate all profits from foreign government payments made to his hotels to the US Treasury." Has the Trump Organization created a mechanism to make such payments?
• What is the estimated value of the 38 Chinese trademarks recently awarded to the Trump Organization? And the reported 157 pending trademark applications in 36 countries?

Legal Analysis: (Cato Institute, "Emoluments Clause vs. Trump Empire," 11/29/16): The wording of the Emoluments clause points one way to resolution: Congress can give consent, as it did in the early years of the Republic to presents received by Ben Franklin. It can decide what it is willing to live with in the way of Trump conflicts. If it misjudges public opinion, it will pay a political price at the next election.

FOIA argument: (ACLU Center for Democracy, "FOIA Request," 1/19/17): We filed our first Freedom of Information Act request of the Trump Era, seeking documents relating President Trump's conflicts of interest relating to his business connections. When Trump took the oath of office, he didn't take the steps necessary to ensure that he and his family's business interests comply with the Constitution. Some have even argued that upon taking the oath of office, the new president is already violating the Emoluments Clause.