Dillan Vancil

Candidate Q&A

Why are you running?

I’m running because our district deserves a better path forward for the next generation, and real relief for the working families and retirees who feel left behind here in Illinois. I’m not in this for a title, I’m going to Washington to work for you.

I’ll work to fix our broken healthcare system with more transparency in healthcare costs, so people can see a doctor without fearing the bill. I’ll work to lower taxes and make Illinois more affordable, instead of raising taxes like JB Pritzker has supported in Springfield. And I will always defend our constitutional freedoms, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and the rights that make this country strong and free. These rights were promised to every American, and they have been under attack.

What do you think is the most pressing issue facing your constituents and how do you plan on addressing it?

The biggest challenge facing my district is affordability, and our energy crisis goes hand in hand with why everything costs more. When energy prices rise, it creates a domino effect that hits families at the gas pump, on their utility bills, and in the checkout line. 

Eric Sorenson and the Green New Deal Democrats have driven up costs with their obsession over unreliable renewable energy, and working families are paying the price. We need to unleash American energy — firing up our clean coal plants, expanding natural gas, and investing in safe nuclear so we have reliable, affordable baseload power. 

We will never bring in more jobs or lower energy bills if we don’t have the energy in the first place; this is simple supply and demand. In Congress, I will work to reverse the policies that are driving up prices, open the door to real American energy production, and bring down the cost of living for families and seniors in this district.

What is one unique challenge your district faces and how do you plan to address it?

One of the unique challenges my district faces is that cities like Rockford, Peoria and small towns like Galesburg went from being a true manufacturing hub to a place where manufacturers are leaving almost every day, taking thousands of good jobs with them. Over the past several years, major employers have closed facilities or moved them to other states, citing Illinois’ punishing tax climate, unstable policy environment, and concerns about crime and costs. 

On the federal level, I will do everything in my power to make our communities safer, our taxes lower, and our regulatory environment more competitive so that, when Illinois finally fixes its problems in Springfield, our district is ready to grow again. That means fighting against new federal mandates that would punish employers, supporting pro‑growth tax policies, and backing law‑and‑order measures that make it easier not harder for companies to invest and create jobs here. But we also have to be honest with voters: Washington can help set the stage, yet this manufacturing exodus was created by atrocious state policy and taxes, and until Illinois changes course on crime, spending, and its crushing tax burden, we will be competing with one hand tied behind our back.

What do you think federal immigration reform should look like?

Federal immigration reform is not needed right now; what we need is full enforcement of the laws that already exist, including the Laken Riley Act. Local elected officials and police departments should work closely with federal immigration agencies to ensure community safety stays intact while the law is fully enforced. When local leaders share information about serious offenders, cooperate on arrests where appropriate, and coordinate with federal partners on detaining and removing individuals who violate our laws, they help prevent dangerous people from falling through the cracks and reassure residents that their community is safe.

How should Congress address the rising costs of health care?

The current administration has already driven down prescription drug costs through the Trump RX initiative "Most Favored Nation" Pricing, proving that when Washington has the courage to act, families feel it at the pharmacy counter. But the job isn’t finished. The real outrage in American health care isn’t just what we pay, it’s that no one can ever tell you why you’re paying it. Prices jump year after year, hospital bills read like a foreign language, and families are stuck trusting a system that refuses to show its math. 

It’s time to flip the script. If Americans can compare prices on flights, hotels, and cars from their phones in seconds, there is no excuse for hiding the price of an MRI or a surgery until weeks after the fact. Real transparency would let patients see what hospitals and insurers are charging, put honest providers at a competitive advantage, and force the high‑priced players to either lower their bills or explain them. When people can actually shop for care, markets start working again, and the days of health care prices skyrocketing with no good explanation come to an end.

What approach would you take on tax policy and what is your top priority?

Washington has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. My approach to tax policy starts with a simple principle: work should pay. My top priority would be to raise the threshold so there is no federal income tax on the first $25,000 of income for individuals and $50,000 for married couples. That means the person working a starter job, the single mom picking up extra shifts, and the young couple just getting on their feet would keep every federal income tax dollar they earn at the beginning of the year, instead of watching Washington take it before they can pay rent or buy groceries. 

At the same time, we should not raise the payroll tax for Social Security, because that is a direct tax on every paycheck and a heavy burden on small businesses that are already struggling with higher costs for everything from rent to health care. When you hike the payroll tax, you make it more expensive to hire that next worker, give a raise, or keep the doors open during a slow month. A pro‑work, pro‑growth tax policy should let low‑ and middle‑income Americans keep more of what they earn not tax them to death.

Is the House currently using its oversight powers in the way it should be? What areas of government need more or less oversight?

Yes, the House is using its oversight powers in important ways today, but it should be doing even more, especially where the stakes are highest: how Washington spends our defense dollars. Oversight is not harassment; it is how Congress makes sure taxpayer money goes to the men and women who serve, not to waste, bad contracts, or politically connected NGOs. 

Right now, our Department of War pushes billions of dollars out the door to contractors and NGOs, while basic needs on the ground are still missed. There are real-world stories of units in the field short on proper winter gear while other bases have closets stuffed with extra coats that will never be worn, all because no one is watching the logistics and the books closely enough. That is exactly what happens in a system where vendors can charge the Pentagon outrageous markups for everyday items and get away with it, like recent audits showing parts bought at several times their reasonable price, and even thousands of percent over market for simple components. 

I would push for even tougher, targeted oversight of the Pentagon and our broader Department of War spending, with aggressive investigations into contracting, NGO grants, and logistics so that every dollar goes first to our service members’ pay, training, and equipment.

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 we face is the sheer number of foreign conflicts where the United States is sending money, weapons, and aid with no clear limit and no clear definition of success. Every year, tens of billions of American tax dollars flow to countries all over the world in economic, military, and security assistance, while many of our own problems at home go unsolved. 

Our job is to do what is necessary for American national security, but that is very different from trying to be the world’s policeman. The House holds the power of the purse under the Constitution, and it should use that power to end open‑ended funding streams for foreign conflicts and sharply narrow our commitments to what directly protects the United States and our allies. Funding package after funding package for different countries needs to stop being automatic; if a case cannot be made that it clearly advances American security and prosperity, then those dollars should stay here at home instead of being shipped abroad.

How do you view AI and the role the government should play in its regulation?

AI is one of the greatest opportunities of our time, and also one of the clearest national security threats we face if we fall behind our adversaries. We have to win this race, because whoever leads in AI will shape the future of the global economy, modern warfare, and the information space. I take a strongly pro‑AI view: the role of government should be to unleash American innovation, not bury it in red tape, while treating advanced AI as a strategic asset that must never be ceded to authoritarian regimes.

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 Republican Party has become the only major party truly focused on putting Americans first. Today’s Republican Party is increasingly the party of the working and middle class, fighting for people who work with their hands, raise families, and feel the squeeze of inflation, bad trade deals, and open borders. 

If you look at where the money comes from, you see a very different picture on the other side: the Democratic Party is fueled by the richest elites, by Wall Street, big tech, and massive corporate and pharmaceutical interests, and the legislation they push reliably tilts toward those same powerful players. Too often their policies end up helping big pharmaceutical companies, big business, and global institutions and hurt the middle class while making the poorest in our nation more reliant on the government instead of expanding opportunities to get them out of poverty. 

What is new and important about the Republican Party today is that it is finally governing like a working‑class party. You see it in legislation that takes on Big Pharma with Most Favored Nation–style drug pricing so American patients never pay more than people overseas for the same medicines, and in pro‑worker, pro‑family tax reforms that cut taxes for lower‑ and middle‑income earners instead of writing new loopholes for multinational corporations. This is the shift that matters: Republicans are writing laws for the people who punch a clock and run small businesses, not for the people on Wall Street.