Candidate Q&A
Why are you running?
We are at a unique point in American history and a unique point for the 7th Congressional District. The incoming Member will be tasked with representing the youngest, bluest district in Illinois in the middle of the crisis of the Donald Trump administration. The first order of business for whoever wins this seat will be to jump onto a speeding train, and it is important that person know how to grab the levers to slow down the march of violent authoritarianism threatened by Donald Trump’s administration.
At the same time, we have an opportunity unlike any we have had in the past several decades. As more people, especially young people, tune out of politics because they feel it cannot deliver for them, we will have an opportunity that only comes after a great crisis: to rebuild something big and exciting in its place. Too often, people assume that lofty and progressive goals are independent from pragmatic and effective ones. But that is just a matter of expertise. I have spent the past years of my life working in the federal government, learning the intricacies of the markets that make people’s lives unaffordable and the machinery of government that has in the past, and can again, address those issues. In this moment, where we need both recent, relevant federal expertise and a bold progressive vision, I believe that I uniquely offer both.
What do you think is the most pressing issue facing your constituents and how do you plan on addressing it?
The most pressing issue facing constituents is their ability to access to affordable housing, healthcare, and food. This basic economic freedom, the freedom from want and the ability to live without fear of deprivation, has been neglected here for decades. Wealth inequality is among the highest in the country, and the racial wealth gap is even more startling.
When people cannot afford basic necessities, life becomes harder, and it opens the door to the kind of racist, authoritarian demagoguery that candidates like Donald Trump exploit. A society where everyone’s needs are met is stronger, more resilient, and less vulnerable to division.
Addressing this crisis requires bold and structural action. We need Medicare for All to control healthcare costs, expand coverage, and invest in new hospitals, clinics, and training programs for doctors and nurses. We must rebuild our capacity to produce essential medications so that lifesaving treatments are not held hostage by corporate pricing.
A New Deal-like commitment to affordable housing is needed to build new units at the speed and scale required to meet demand. We must also confront rising grocery prices by investing in food infrastructure that connects small farmers to markets and prioritizes healthy, affordable foods over commodity crops that enrich multinational corporations while leaving families behind.
The government should set a bold vision for an economy that lowers costs and reinvests in communities. By aiming high, we can build a stable, thriving middle-class economy that truly supports the people of this district.
What is one unique challenge your district faces and how do you plan to address it?
A unique challenge that this district faces is the lack of adequate, reliable public transportation, particularly the absence of meaningful bus and rail extensions into neighborhoods on the West and South Sides. Too many residents are left with long walks, unreliable transfers, or no practical transit option at all. This inequity is compounded by outdated, crumbling, and often unsafe stop infrastructure that forces people to wait in harsh weather without shelter or lighting. Every resident deserves stations and bus stops that reflect dignity, safety, and modern standards.
This challenge is rooted in decades of car‑centric planning that prioritized parking requirements and sprawling development over walkable, transit‑oriented communities. When neighborhoods are built around cars, public transit becomes less efficient, less frequent, and less accessible. Reversing this pattern is essential not only for mobility but also for economic opportunity, environmental sustainability, and community well-being.
Congress has a critical role to play. Federal funding can help modernize stop infrastructure, extend bus and rail lines, and build new stations in areas that have been overlooked for generations. It can also support transit-oriented development, improve accessibility, and ensure that every neighborhood benefits from reliable, frequent, and safe service. With strong federal investment, we can build further and build back better, creating a transportation network that truly serves the people who rely on it every day.
The challenge is clear: we must expand, modernize, and rethink our transportation system so that every resident has the freedom to move through their community with dignity and opportunity.
What do you think federal immigration reform should look like?
I support abolishing ICE. We must end the harmful, unconstitutional enforcement tactics we have seen in operations like Midway Blitz. These actions have operated more as a political spectacle than a public safety strategy, and the result has been fear, economic disruption, and physical harm inflicted on people who are integral to the civic and cultural life of our communities.
ICE must be broken down, and we should remake immigration and customs enforcement under competent, accountable leadership. Immigration violations are civil matters, and enforcement should reflect that. I would support eliminating the authority of federal agents to conduct armed arrests based on arbitrary factors like skin color or accent, curbing the use of firearms in immigration operations, and establishing clear accountability for officers and decision makers who overreach or harm civilians. Strengthening anti-commandeering protections is also essential to prevent future federal takeovers of state and municipal resources.
At the same time, reform must create a comprehensive, accessible pathway to citizenship for people who have lived, worked, and contributed to our communities for years. This pathway should be realistic and grounded in community participation and stability rather than punitive hurdles. I also support affirmative programs that recognize immigrants’ contributions, such as a national public works initiative to build affordable housing that includes a pathway to citizenship for the workers who help construct it. Immigrants strengthen our country every day, and our laws should reflect that truth.
How should Congress address the rising costs of health care?
The rising cost of healthcare is one of the most urgent crises facing families today, and Congress must confront it with bold, structural reform, not half‑measures that preserve a system built around corporate profit. The US spends more than twice as much on healthcare as other developed countries, yet millions still struggle to access basic physical, mental, dental, maternal, and vision care.
I would fight for a universal single‑payer system like Medicare for All, ensuring that every person has comprehensive coverage without the crushing burden of premiums, deductibles, and out‑of‑pocket costs. We must cap copays, eliminate surprise billing, and ban the shadowy middlemen that eat up profits in our pharmaceutical system, or make them obsolete by doing that work at the federal level.
Congress must also address the structural shortages and inequities that drive up costs. That means a New Deal–scale investment in public health: building new hospitals, expanding community clinics, and training more doctors, nurses, and allied health professionals. We should ban for‑profit corporate ownership of hospitals and expand existing state‑level prohibitions on the corporate practice of medicine so that patient care, not investor returns, guides medical decisions.
To lower drug prices, the federal government should manufacture essential medications like insulin, inhalers, and chemotherapy drugs, reducing dependence on pharmaceutical companies that hold lifesaving treatments hostage. And we must protect access to reproductive healthcare by codifying abortion rights in federal law. Healthcare is a human right, and Congress must build a system that treats it that way.
What approach would you take on tax policy and what is your top priority?
Taxes are a reflection of our values. My top priority is creating a true, unavoidable progressive income tax and instituting a wealth tax. In a country with nearly 1,000 billionaires, where people are still forced to set up GoFundMe pages for medical care or to avoid homelessness, the very wealthy must pay their fair share back into the system that made that wealth possible. This is the directional goal. In the lead-up to that, there is much we can do to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share: closing loopholes like carried interest, simplifying exemptions, and eliminating contribution caps, such as those for SSI. I also support making the first $50,000 of income tax free.
Is the House currently using its oversight powers in the way it should be? What areas of government need more or less oversight?
The House is not currently using its oversight powers effectively. We need real, deep oversight, not just a one-off hearing on C-SPAN. We need sustained investigations that build records for prosecution by individuals, states, and eventually the DOJ after this administration leaves office.
We also need political accountability, including impeachment. Of course, there isn’t currently a majority for that, but there is far more that could be done. We should hold shadow hearings and investigations. And members should be using their personal authority to expose abuses. For example, members of Congress have an unfettered legal right to enter ICE detention centers. They should be using that right to go in, film, livestream, and build the record for prosecution of ICE and CBP agents, as well as the impeachment and prosecution for government officials who have instituted policies that violate our constitutional rights.
What is the most pressing foreign policy issue facing the country and what role should the House play in dealing with it?
The most pressing foreign policy issue facing the country is the unaccountable use of force in America’s name. Rather than building consistent presence, alliances, and investment based on continued partnership with allied nations and potential partners, the U.S. has overrelied on the threat, enablement, and use of force.
We do this directly through military engagements, including unconstitutional regime-change actions in places like Venezuela, Greenland, and elsewhere, without congressional authorization. This is an outgrowth of the imperial presidency, which can wield power without meaningful checks, especially when Congress rolls over.
But it also includes continued spending on defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, aid to Israel as it continues to perpetuate a genocide, and expanded military engagement across the Middle East. Our resources continue to fund military force and materiel that the American people do not want and that are not consistent with democratic values.
As we move into an era of multiple great powers, this haphazard militarism will isolate the United States and diminish American influence in the only remaining relevant spheres: economic and moral leadership.
How do you view AI and the role the government should play in its regulation?
The federal government has a responsibility to regulate AI in a way that protects people rather than corporations. I oppose an AI moratorium, but I believe strongly that AI development must be paired with robust public‑interest safeguards. That begins with requiring new data centers to pay for the green energy and water infrastructure they consume so that local communities are not forced to subsidize their enormous resource demands.
I support strict bans on algorithmic price‑fixing and wage‑collusion tools that allow corporations to coordinate in ways that would be illegal if done by humans. I also support strong AI safety standards to prevent the deployment of harmful or untested systems at scale. At the same time, creators, journalists, and ordinary people deserve far greater copyright and data protections. Their work and personal information are being harvested to train models without compensation or consent, and Congress must establish clear rights, enforcement mechanisms, and avenues for redress.
Finally, meaningful AI regulation requires confronting monopoly power. I support merger moratoriums, retrospective antitrust lookbacks, and a wholesale reimagining of federal subsidies and procurement to break up concentrated power rather than reinforce it.
How would you describe the current state of your party and what changes or new approaches would you like to see your party adopt?
The current Democratic Party is not meeting the moment we are in. Democratic Party leadership is quick to cave on critical issues like ACA subsidies and ICE funding, and is woefully out of step with what Democratic voter want. We need new leadership, including the replacement of both Rep. Hakeem Jeffries and Sen. Chuck Schumer as leaders in their respective chambers.
I want to see a Democratic Party that reflects consistent progressive values, one that fights for regular people and against concentrated corporate power.
While Donald Trump is president, the Democrats also need to act like a real opposition party: designating shadow cabinet style leaders to drive opposition on major issues, doing the deep work of building a record and developing consistent policy alternatives, rather than everyone running in different directions.
And the Democratic Party must propose and build toward affirmative solutions to the crises that we face. We can’t just be the party of “not Trump.” Democrats must offer a vision of what we are going to do when we have the majority to actually deliver for people. That means fighting for democracy and campaign finance reform, Medicare for All, building millions of new housing units, pushing for a Green New Deal, and breaking up food and healthcare monopolies.