Candidate Q&A
Why are you running?
I am running for Congress because nobody is going to work harder for the Second District than someone who lives with the consequences every day. I can no longer sit back and wait for things to get better on their own — they won’t. I am stepping up because I am willing to give my full effort to building a real plan and delivering real results for the Second District.
I believe in taking care of home first. I am tired of seeing infrastructure crumbling right here in our district, the cost of living spiraling out of control, and leaders in Washington failing to do what should be simple — standing up for the American people and pushing back when federal policies are making life harder instead of better.
This campaign is about responsibility, urgency, and doing the work that others won’t.
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 in the Second District is the rising cost of living combined with crumbling local infrastructure. Families are paying more for housing, transportation, utilities, and basic necessities, while the systems they rely on every day — roads, transit, utilities, and public spaces — continue to deteriorate.
I plan to address this by focusing on practical, district-first solutions that bring resources back home and make everyday life more affordable. That means prioritizing infrastructure investment that creates local jobs, strengthens small businesses, and improves reliability and safety.
My approach is to take care of home first: fix what’s broken, invest in people and businesses here in the Second District.
What is one unique challenge your district faces and how do you plan to address it?
One unique challenge facing the Second District is that it sits at the intersection of economic activity and deep disinvestment, while too many residents feel disconnected from work that is stable, meaningful, and worth showing up for. We have industrial corridors, transportation assets, and a capable workforce, yet rising costs, deteriorating infrastructure, and a lack of accessible pathways have made steady employment feel out of reach for many people.
I plan to address this by focusing on district-first solutions that make work accessible, reliable, and worthwhile. That means investing in infrastructure, strengthening workforce pathways tied to real jobs, supporting small businesses, and removing barriers that keep people on the sidelines. I have laid out a comprehensive, district-based plan to do this, which can be viewed here.
What do you think federal immigration reform should look like?
Federal immigration reform should be fair, firm, and realistic. Our system is broken because it is outdated, inconsistent, and driven more by politics than by solutions. We need an approach that secures the border, enforces the law humanely, and recognizes the economic realities facing our country.
Reform should include stronger border management paired with a functional legal immigration system that works for today’s economy. That means modernizing asylum processing, reducing backlogs, and creating legal pathways for people who are already contributing to our communities, paying taxes, and following the rules.
We must also hold employers accountable so immigration is not used to exploit workers or undercut wages. A fair system protects American workers while recognizing that industries such as agriculture, healthcare, logistics, and construction depend on a stable workforce.
Most importantly, immigration policy should reflect our values as a nation — upholding the rule of law while treating people with dignity and respect. We can secure our borders and remain a country of opportunity at the same time.
How should Congress address the rising costs of health care?
Congress must focus on lowering out-of-pocket costs for patients while improving access. Too many families are doing everything right and still struggling to afford premiums, prescriptions, and basic care. Health care should not be a financial crisis.
First, Congress should continue to lower prescription drug prices by allowing Medicare to negotiate and by increasing competition in the pharmaceutical market. No one should have to choose between medicine and rent.
Second, we need to reduce costs by investing in preventive care and early intervention. Treating chronic illness after it becomes severe is far more expensive than helping people stay healthy in the first place. Prevention keeps people working, lowers emergency care costs, and saves taxpayer dollars over time.
Third, Congress should cut administrative waste and increase transparency so patients actually understand what they are paying for and why. Our system is too complex, and that complexity drives up costs without improving care.
Finally, any reforms must protect workers, seniors, and small businesses from being squeezed by rising premiums. The goal should be a health care system that is affordable, predictable, and focused on people.
What approach would you take on tax policy and what is your top priority?
My approach to tax policy is simple: working families and small businesses should not carry more of the burden while large corporations and special interests find ways to avoid paying their fair share. The tax code should reward work, productivity, and investment in our communities — not complexity and loopholes.
My top priority is protecting and expanding tax relief for working families while making the system fairer and more predictable for small businesses. People need to be able to plan, save, and invest without fear that the rules will constantly change against them.
At the same time, Congress should close loopholes that allow large corporations to shift profits and avoid taxes while still benefiting from our infrastructure, workforce, and consumer markets. A fair tax system strengthens the economy by ensuring that everyone contributes responsibly.
Tax policy should support growth at home, reinvest in infrastructure, and lower cost-of-living pressure — not reward offshoring or speculation.
Is the House currently using its oversight powers in the way it should be? What areas of government need more or less oversight?
Congressional oversight is one of the House’s most important responsibilities, but too often it is used for political theater instead of accountability. Oversight should be about improving how government works for the public, not scoring points or relitigating elections.
The House needs stronger oversight in areas that directly affect people’s daily lives — including infrastructure spending, healthcare costs, federal contracting, disaster response, and the implementation of major programs funded by taxpayers. When billions of dollars are allocated, Congress has a responsibility to ensure those funds are used efficiently, transparently, and as intended.
At the same time, Congress should be careful not to overuse oversight powers in ways that distract from legislating or undermine public trust. Oversight should be focused, fact-based, and aimed at solving problems — not creating headlines.
When done right, it strengthens democracy and ensures government remains accountable to the people it serves.
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 maintaining global stability while protecting American economic and security interests in a rapidly changing world. This includes managing great-power competition, supporting allies, preventing conflicts from escalating, and ensuring the United States remains economically and strategically strong.
The House plays a critical role by providing oversight of foreign policy decisions, authorizing funding, and ensuring that military, diplomatic, and economic tools are used responsibly. Congress must ask hard questions about long-term strategy, costs, and outcomes — especially when taxpayer dollars and American lives are involved.
The House should also focus on strengthening alliances, supporting diplomacy, and protecting U.S. supply chains so we are less vulnerable to global disruptions that drive up costs at home. Foreign policy decisions affect the price of energy, food, and goods, and Congress has a responsibility to consider those impacts on working families.
Ultimately, the House should promote a foreign policy that is strong, disciplined, and focused on keeping America secure while avoiding unnecessary conflicts and ensuring accountability.
How do you view AI and the role the government should play in its regulation?
Artificial intelligence is a powerful tool that can increase productivity, improve public services, and strengthen our economy if it is developed and used responsibly. The goal of government should not be to stop innovation, but to make sure AI serves people, workers, and communities — not the other way around.
Government has a role in setting clear, common-sense guardrails around transparency, accountability, and safety, especially when AI is used in areas like healthcare, finance, hiring, and public services. People deserve to know when automated systems are being used and to have protections against bias, misuse, or abuse.
At the same time, regulation should be flexible and informed by real-world use, not fear or politics. Congress should work with researchers, workers, businesses, and educators to ensure the U.S. remains a global leader in innovation while protecting jobs, privacy, and civil rights.
Finally, we should invest in training and workforce development so people can work alongside new technologies rather than be displaced by them. When AI is guided responsibly, it can help lower costs, improve services, and create new opportunities instead of widening inequality.
How would you describe the current state of your party and what changes or new approaches would you like to see your party adopt?
My party is at an important crossroads. While it continues to stand for core values like opportunity, fairness, and protecting working families, too often it struggles to connect those values to the everyday realities people are facing right now — rising costs, crumbling infrastructure, and a sense that government isn’t listening.
I believe the party needs to return to a more practical, district-first approach. That means focusing less on national talking points and more on tangible results people can see and feel in their communities. Voters want solutions that improve their lives, not endless messaging battles.
We should also make more room for ideas that bridge economic growth with dignity of work — including investing in workforce development, modern infrastructure, and local innovation without leaving seniors or small businesses behind. The future of the party depends on showing we can govern effectively, not just campaign well.
Ultimately, I’d like to see my party lead with accountability, economic realism, and respect for people who feel overlooked. When we do that, we rebuild trust and broaden our coalition.