CHARLESTON, W.Va. - The low profile of Republican Marty Gearheart's underfunded campaign to unseat Democrat Nick Rahall masks stark philosophical differences between the 3rd Congressional District candidates.

Rahall, whose congressional career dates to the Carter administration, backs raising taxes for the wealthy, greater government regulation of Wall Street, and energy development, but he's mostly running on his 32-year record - and $1.3 million in campaign cash.

Gearheart, a Bluefield businessman, has been pushing a conservative agenda heavy on lower taxes, smaller government and encouragement for domestic energy production during campaign stops at community events, football games and the like. It's a campaign befitting a budget so low he's not been required to file finance reports.

His agenda highlights two key differences from Rahall: taxes and government regulation.

Rahall says he sides with Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama's position on getting rid of tax breaks for people making $250,000 or more annually.

Gearheart calls that position folly.

"Now that we have a stock market on a roller coaster and the stock market reacts to things like tax increases, then, in my opinion, tax cuts could really drive this economy into places that we don't even really want to talk about,'' Gearheart said.

Rahall describes himself as open to the idea of raising gasoline taxes to replenish the empty federal highway trust fund, although he adds that he's not advocating the hike. A tax increase, which was recommended by a bipartisan panel this year, is one option before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said Rahall, who serves as the committee's vice chairman.

"Bonding, tolling, privatizing, all those options will be on the table next year when it comes to reauthorizing the transportation bill. I can't pick out a winner right now,'' Rahall said. "None of them are pleasing, no, but with less gas tax going into the highway trust fund, that's the main cause of this bind.''

The difference between Rahall and Gearheart on government regulation is equally stark.

Gearheart, for instance, calls some coal mine safety measures adopted since the Sago Mine disaster in 2006 little more than "pandering'' to people who say the industry isn't safe.

"It is safe,'' he said.

Gearheart's take on the financial meltdown is much the same. He blames regulations for driving what he called ordinarily conservative banks to make loans to people who couldn't repay them.

"I don't know that more regulation is necessarily the answer. It may be part of the problem here,'' Gearheart said. "Was the problem in that circumstance the fact that we didn't have enough regulation or was it in the fact that we had regulation that was misplaced?''

Rahall places blame for the financial meltdown on a decade of rolling back regulation.

"Hands off is what got us where we are,'' Rahall said. "Perhaps today shows us we went too far. There is a role for government.''

Despite their differences, Gearheart and Rahall do share some beliefs, chiefly on energy development. Gearheart follows more of "drill, baby, drill'' philosophy. Rahall is a proponent of drilling in areas such as the outer continental shelf that have been off limits.

Wall Street is another area of common ground - at least to a certain extent.

Gearheart says he agreed with Rahall's vote in favor of the first version of a $700 billion financial industry bailout, but not the congressman's support of the version that passed in early October.

"I would have voted the same way Mr. Rahall did and, believe me, there are Republicans and Democrats both right now fussing about that,'' Gearheart said. "Our economy is in a dire circumstance.''

Gearheart said he found it objectionable that the final bill contained approximately $150 million in what he considers pork. "I would have voted against the second bill.''

Rahall counters that the final bill was improved dramatically from the Bush administration's original proposal. He says some of the extras, including tax breaks for the coal industry and money for rural schools, were good additions.

"I was concerned about the small mom-and-pop businesses in West Virginia,'' Rahall said. "I hate as much as the next person to have to bail those crooks out.''

CHARLESTON, W.Va. - The low profile of Republican Marty Gearheart's underfunded campaign to unseat Democrat Nick Rahall masks stark philosophical differences between the 3rd Congressional District candidates.

Rahall, whose congressional career dates to the Carter administration, backs raising taxes for the wealthy, greater government regulation of Wall Street, and energy development, but he's mostly running on his 32-year record - and $1.3 million in campaign cash.

Gearheart, a Bluefield businessman, has been pushing a conservative agenda heavy on lower taxes, smaller government and encouragement for domestic energy production during campaign stops at community events, football games and the like. It's a campaign befitting a budget so low he's not been required to file finance reports.

His agenda highlights two key differences from Rahall: taxes and government regulation.

Rahall says he sides with Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama's position on getting rid of tax breaks for people making $250,000 or more annually.

Gearheart calls that position folly.

"Now that we have a stock market on a roller coaster and the stock market reacts to things like tax increases, then, in my opinion, tax cuts could really drive this economy into places that we don't even really want to talk about,'' Gearheart said.

Rahall describes himself as open to the idea of raising gasoline taxes to replenish the empty federal highway trust fund, although he adds that he's not advocating the hike. A tax increase, which was recommended by a bipartisan panel this year, is one option before the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, said Rahall, who serves as the committee's vice chairman.

"Bonding, tolling, privatizing, all those options will be on the table next year when it comes to reauthorizing the transportation bill. I can't pick out a winner right now,'' Rahall said. "None of them are pleasing, no, but with less gas tax going into the highway trust fund, that's the main cause of this bind.''

The difference between Rahall and Gearheart on government regulation is equally stark.

Gearheart, for instance, calls some coal mine safety measures adopted since the Sago Mine disaster in 2006 little more than "pandering'' to people who say the industry isn't safe.

"It is safe,'' he said.

Gearheart's take on the financial meltdown is much the same. He blames regulations for driving what he called ordinarily conservative banks to make loans to people who couldn't repay them.

"I don't know that more regulation is necessarily the answer. It may be part of the problem here,'' Gearheart said. "Was the problem in that circumstance the fact that we didn't have enough regulation or was it in the fact that we had regulation that was misplaced?''

Rahall places blame for the financial meltdown on a decade of rolling back regulation.

"Hands off is what got us where we are,'' Rahall said. "Perhaps today shows us we went too far. There is a role for government.''

Despite their differences, Gearheart and Rahall do share some beliefs, chiefly on energy development. Gearheart follows more of "drill, baby, drill'' philosophy. Rahall is a proponent of drilling in areas such as the outer continental shelf that have been off limits.

Wall Street is another area of common ground - at least to a certain extent.

Gearheart says he agreed with Rahall's vote in favor of the first version of a $700 billion financial industry bailout, but not the congressman's support of the version that passed in early October.

"I would have voted the same way Mr. Rahall did and, believe me, there are Republicans and Democrats both right now fussing about that,'' Gearheart said. "Our economy is in a dire circumstance.''

Gearheart said he found it objectionable that the final bill contained approximately $150 million in what he considers pork. "I would have voted against the second bill.''

Rahall counters that the final bill was improved dramatically from the Bush administration's original proposal. He says some of the extras, including tax breaks for the coal industry and money for rural schools, were good additions.

"I was concerned about the small mom-and-pop businesses in West Virginia,'' Rahall said. "I hate as much as the next person to have to bail those crooks out.''