(AP) Republicans rushing to embrace Fred Thompson's would-be presidential candidacy might have trouble figuring out what he would do if he actually won the White House.

On most public policy issues, the former Tennessee senator and "Law & Order" actor has offered few, if any, specifics. Even on the dominant issue of the 2008 campaign — the war in Iraq — Thompson has carefully stopped short of wading into what he would do about the conflict should he inherit it, although he has generally backed President Bush.

And while not yet offering a broad foreign policy vision, some of Thompson's statements on the subject border on the impolitic, including comments maligning the Mexican, French and Russian governments.

What few clues there are about the direction a Thompson administration might take come from his growing body of online writings, a smattering of recent speeches and statements, and a somewhat sparse eight-year Senate record.

Thompson, who is expected to enter the presidential race formally in September, but plans to campaign in Iowa on Friday, was not known as a big-ideas guy and was hardly a heavy-hitter when it came to legislation during his Senate career from 1994 to 2002. Still, he was considered a reliably conservative vote on economic, security and social issues alike. He backed Bush's tax cuts, a prohibition on a late-term abortion procedure and voted to give the president the authority to invade Iraq.

More prominently, he established a reputation for working to limit the role of the federal government and protect states rights — an issue that remains very important to him and, perhaps, is an indication of what may lie at the root of his candidacy.

Broadly, he favors a strong federalist approach that emphasizes personal liberties and fiscal conservatism.

"Centralized government is not the solution to all of our problems and, with too much power, such centralization has a way of compounding our problems," Thompson wrote in a recent column on his Web site. "This was among the great insights of 1787," when the Constitution was adopted, "and it is just as vital in 2007."

He adds: "How we draw the line between federal and state roles in this century, and how we stay true to the principles of federalism for the purpose of protecting economic and individual freedom, are questions we must answer."

©MMVII, The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Back To Top