Congressman John Doolittle visited with the editorial staff of The Union on Friday. He answered questions on subjects ranging from the controversy surrounding his wife's role as his campaign fundraiser to economic growth in Nevada County.

What follows are selected excerpts from the interview.

The Union: You recently said you would stop having your wife as campaign fundraiser. Now you say you will retain her as your PAC manager. Won't that still bring money to the Doolittle household and cause a conflict of interest?

Doolittle: There's a confusion about this. In the middle of the campaign, the fundraisers decided they wanted to quit. I didn't have room to make any mistakes at that point. I knew that Julie [Doolittle] knew how to do it, because she'd done it for my leadership PAC for nine years.

I never believed that her involvement in my campaign would become so controversial. The method of [her] payment was selected to make sure that she went the extra mile, so she wasn't paid for anything that she didn't actually do. Hence the performance-based commission.

I never viewed it as it came to be viewed, as some way of funneling money into the Doolittle account. Fundraising is very time-consuming, very hard work and nobody does it for free as far as I know.

[Julie] told me that she would prefer not to do it any more. So I said, under the circumstances I can understand that. With some of the concerns expressed about it, it's probably better if we go back to having an outside fundraiser.

As far as the [PAC] goes, she had raised money for years for this leadership PAC. The leadership PAC isn't my campaign. It gives money to other candidates. We haven't actually made the decision as to what role, if any, she's going to have. If she does do it, I've determined that we will do a flat fee rather than a percentage.

The Union: With the change of leadership in Congress, do you expect stepped-up scrutiny into the lobbying scandal surrounding Jack Abramoff?

Doolittle: I haven't heard any plans on the part of the House to get into it. I'd be very happy to have all of this out and behind me. It will be three years in June since it's been out there. To this date I've never been interviewed by the Department of Justice.

I know what the truth is, and I'm eager to get it out there. I think people will see that I've done nothing improper, and I'm tired of having these questions swirling around. It seems utterly ridiculous to me that it could be out there for three years and still unresolved.

The Union: You've recently stated you have reservations over how the war in Iraq is going and how it is being run. What should we be doing there, if anything at all?

Doolittle: I don't know how anyone who looks at it couldn't have reservations. I supported going there. I had hoped and believed that the administration had a plan that would work.

I'm less convinced of that now. The President feels this new increment of troops is essential to protect the troops that we have on the ground there, and that to me needs to be the first concern.

Having said that, I'm skeptical that adding a few more thousand troops is really going to make the difference. It seems to me, in order for this plan to succeed, that you have to have the near-flawless performance of the Iraqi government and that seems to me unlikely.

The Union: You've expressed your disbelief in global warming. Do you support President Bush's proposal to raise fuel efficiency standards and require fuel makers to produce alternative fuels?

Doolittle: I'm strongly supportive of alternative energy. That's one of the exciting developments in this congressional district. It was through my efforts that we were able to get Lake Tahoe designated as a test area for hydrogen fuel cells.

I anticipate soon we will see some manifestation of that, such as being able to lease hydrogen vehicles in the Tahoe Basin, and having refueling stations along the corridor running from West Sacramento up to the Tahoe area.

I do support the president's latest proposals.

The Union: You've also said it is time for America to begin working together again without such pronounced divisiveness. How does that happen?

Doolittle: Somebody has to begin. I would suggest the logical person to begin is the Speaker of the House. Now, both sides will tell you that this has been tried. I think people are frustrated with the constant fighting that seems to go on.

I do think that if Nancy Pelosi reached out and in some significant fashion conveyed a true willingness to work together, the Republicans would be shocked, and they would try to respond.

The Union: What can Nevada County do to make itself more economically viable?

Doolittle: Infrastructure is a large part of economic viability here. I've always heard talk about finding some way to link up [Highway 49] to Highway 65. I think that would be a real advantage for the region if that would happen.

You do have the advantage of having a community that a lot of people want to belong to. It's definitely its own community.

The Union: Can you talk about the status of the Auburn dam?

Doolittle: There is a study that was commissioned by Congress and is overdue. I understand that it's coming out very shortly. Within the next week or 10 days you'll know about it.

The Union: What is the status of the Secure Rural Schools Act, which is designed to take the place of the old timber receipt funds for rural schools and roads?

Doolittle: We're working to have a one-year reauthorization and funding put into the supplemental appropriations bill that's pending before Congress in the House. If we're successful, this could happen fairly quickly within the next month or so.

The Union: You said you have invited Charlie Brown and Mike Holmes to help you shape policy. What is the status of their participation?

Doolittle: I did speak with both of them. Charlie Brown at the time wanted to know more, but subsequently I'm informed that he decided not to participate. Mike Holmes did accept, and we're in the process of forming a veteran's advisory committee.

The Union: Were you surprised at how close the recent election was?

Doolittle: I was not surprised in the end at how close it was. At the beginning of the cycle, I would not have believed that it would have been that close.

It was a very negative election. Many of my colleagues were defeated outright. In fact, I don't know of anybody who withstood the assault that I did and still lived to tell about it. But I was fortunate and still won despite all of that.

I feel like I need to reach out to my constituents. I think that they have a real misperception of me that came about through the last campaign.

The Union: Do you believe voter demographics are changing in Nevada County?

Doolittle: Voter demographics are changing throughout the district. It's not entirely clear to me how they're changing. We continue to have an influx of people from the Bay Area. I don't necessarily interpret that as a change in the character of the district, although some have asserted that. We're a growing district for sure, one of the fastest growing districts in the state. That creates opportunities and problems.

ooo

To contact Staff Writer Jill Bauerle, e-mail jillb@theunion .com or call 477-4219.