Today’s issues are more important than ever. They represent how the country will run, and how it’s governed.
A candidate’s position on issues represents his passion for America, his commitment to his constituents, his awareness and values.
I’ve initially chosen some issues important to me and the citizens of our country and I’ll add more as they are presented to me.
Freedom works best when freedom is free to flourish and is shared.
Candidate for U.S. Congress
Open issues with the (+) icon on their right. Watch for updates.
Being a border community, the people of CD 2 are affected every day by the issue of illegal immigration and wide-open borders. Congress has failed in its duty to defend the national sovereignty and security of the people of the United States. This must change. Our states, and in particular border communities are being over-run, and the cost, in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually, is being born by state and local governments.
An Open Border Is a National Security Threat. Whether it is the threat of gang members from infamous groups such as MS-13, or people with terrorist connections, a wide-open border is a serious threat to the citizens of this nation. Add to this the human smuggling, trafficking and drug trafficking that occurs regularly across the unfenced portions and it is a mystery that anyone in Congress would oppose securing the border by any and all means necessary.
- I support the construction of a Border Fence
- I support increased funding for our Border Patrol in order to increase the number of agents, provide them pay increases, and give them the means to get better, and upgraded equipment and technology
- I support the use of any and all methods to STOP the flow of caravans of people entering this country illegally.
There are many reasons why the problem of illegal entry into this country is so rampant, and why little has been done to stop it. To be clear, no one has the right to come to the United States. It is a privilege that should be earned. However, many of our problems regarding illegal immigrants could be easily solved by fixing our guest-worker programs, student visa programs, and citizenship process, and by fixing the loopholes that are being abused by people to gain entry to this country.
- I support the immediate changing of our asylum protocols. Everyone who does not come into this country at a port of entry should be immediately deported. No waiting. No trial. Enter illegally, be deported immediately
- I support the creation of more judges (even if temporarily) to speed up the asylum hearings, where we have over 800,000 cases in backlog
- I support an end to the so-called lottery system for determining the legal immigrants who will be allowed to come into the country
- I support the expansion of the annual number of legal immigrants allowed to come to our country
- I support streamlining the process to make it easier for legal entrants coming to the U.S.
- I strongly support the reform and expansion of the H-2B and H-2A visa programs
- I fully support the mission of ICE as they root out those who are in this country illegally
- I support the enforcement of E-verify. This is already the law, companies and corporations that are willfully in violation of hiring illegal aliens must be held accountable
- I support the passage of a law that would allow for the expedited return of all illegal aliens who are incarcerated for a criminal offense to their country of origin. We should not be footing the bill for non-citizens in our penal system.
A major concern for many people in CD2, and across the country, is the issue of healthcare, and what to do about it. To the honest observer, Obamacare has been an abject failure. From its inception, it has done nothing to lower healthcare costs, but rather has created a more expensive, less efficient, and less patient friendly healthcare system. The greatest evidence of these realities are the high-deductible plans that are offered in the Obamacare exchanges, and the long waits at hospitals and emergency rooms for services. People have coverage, but at what cost, and at what hit to quality? What else would one expect from a plan that was implemented on the basis of lies, designed to give more power to the bureaucratic state, and playing on the ignorance of the American people.
As a representative for CD2, I can promise I will fight for common sense legislation that loosens the power of the free-market to address the needs of the consumer of healthcare, by starting the conversation with the healthcare needs of each individual. So, what can we do specifically to fix our current broken system? Cries of “Repeal Obamacare” are not enough, as people must know that there is a system in place that will be better. The answers are all to be found ultimately in the free-market, which, when allowed to work, improves quality and efficiency and spurs innovation through competition. This will in turn drive down costs, which for American consumers in particular are exorbitantly high.
The solutions to lowering costs, and providing more access will not arrive over-night with a new government plan, but with new laws that cut existing regulatory bonds and unnecessary bureaucratic restraints. In all of this, those among us who are truly incapable of providing the means to care for themselves must be cared for as well. All of it can be done far cheaper and more efficiently than the current model. Here are some proposals that I will work to get through Congress on day one.
- A strong economy: This is an essential component to a workable healthcare system. Creating good paying jobs, and creating an industrious people that can fill them, is essential to creating a healthcare system that is beneficial to all members of our society no matter their place in the economic strata. A good job/career provides each of us with the ability to provide for our needs in a self-sufficient manner. Policies that promote low-taxation, deregulation, and promotion of innovation, should be pursued to this end.
- Repeal Obamacare – This must happen. All the rules and regulations connected to this are stifling any opportunity to bring competition and innovation into the healthcare marketplace, along with further eroding the doctor/patient relationship. This is a design feature not a flaw.
- Allow opt-out of Medicare – Many people’s healthcare needs are not “covered” by Medicare, which is why so many older Americans have to have supplemental coverage, if they can afford it. Many cannot. Go visit a nursing home, and you will see healthcare rationing in all its “ingloriousness.” Some people wish to have private insurance and opt-out of Medicare entirely, because they don’t want to keep paying the premiums (for something they aren’t using). This is currently against the law, unless you are willing to also surrender your Social Security benefits! Bet you didn’t know that. It is time to be honest about our healthcare system, and it is time to give people the freedom to choose what is best for themselves. Surely, if it is a woman’s right, so the theory goes, to have an abortion because it is her body, then shouldn’t it be the right of every American to decide their own healthcare options as they deem fit?
- Allow private insurance to compete directly with Medicare – Right now it is illegal for anyone to offer an insurance product that duplicates Medicare benefits. Yet, as we can see, it’s not really a benefit, because you don’t have the liberty of opting out, unless you want to forgo all the money you put into Social Security! It’s a virtual prison that the U.S. government has locked all of us in by being dishonest with us. Who knows what great products could be created if the free-market was actually allowed to operate in the insurance space for our Senior citizens? Not only is Medicare set-up to keep people in it, it is punitive for late arrivals. If you don’t enroll in Medicare when you are supposed to, and try to later, you must pay a fee, which grows exponentially the longer you wait to enroll! Why should Americans be punished for what is supposedly a benefit? Again, this is a design feature, not a flaw. You may not be aware, but legally speaking, Medicare is a tax. It is not insurance, as there is no contractual obligation to you from the government.
- Price transparency – President Trump has already begun to push us toward this by pushing for a rule change that requires hospitals to display their secret, negotiated rates to patients starting in January 2021 and forces insurance companies to show patients their expected out-of-pocket costs through an online tool. This is absolutely essential to helping bring the cost of healthcare down. This process, called price discovery, takes place in every other marketplace interaction, but healthcare! Can you imagine trying to buy food and having no idea how large your bill would be when you went to the register, but being told instead you would be sent a bill after they talked about how much to charge you for items with your bank? Insane, right? That’s what we have currently. However, this needs to be legislated. Right now, the HHS (Health and Human Services) Secretary has the power to mandate these changes, but this could easily be reversed, unless it is actually passed by Congress. Obamacare largely removed Congress from much of healthcare, by enhancing the regulatory power of the HHS Secretary. Congress needs to do its constitutionally mandated job, and make this law!
- Tort Reform. The malpractice insurance that physicians and hospitals are forced to carry, only adds to the cost of healthcare that is passed down to consumers. Lawyers who bring frivolous law suits need to be held accountable for doing so. There is plenty of medical malpractice that does occur, and I am in no way saying that doctors shouldn’t be held accountable for it, but because of the many lawsuits, and the threat they pose, one of the greatest hidden costs to you, the consumer of healthcare, is the cost of defensive medicine: the overuse of tests and procedures because of fear of malpractice litigation. This is estimated to cost $46 billion annually in the United States. Then there are the incalculable personal and professional costs of being named as a defendant or co-defendant in the typical shotgun approach of the trial bar to malpractice litigation. These costs are difficult to quantify, but cannot be ignored either.
- Allow people to deduct their major medical bills on their taxes: One of the things that makes healthcare different from every other “product” out there, is that we don’t tend to consume it until we need it. Who goes to the doctor just because? This need to try and “force” people to provide for healthcare, before they need it, when they otherwise would naturally probably not do so, is actually why the current laws governing healthcare by our government are so coercive and punitive. Making people buy, or pushing them through coercion into something, that is then paid to healthcare providers, is a way to ensure that the providers will be there when the time comes for anyone to get care that needs it. This is the purpose of the modern notion of health insurance. However, there is a better solution. The current system actually keeps people from getting to care, as costs just continue to build. And all of the current problems exist because of government’s involvement in the healthcare space. Rather than strengthen government’s ability to “take care of” people by restricting people or punishing them, my plan is to help people, the consumers, by allowing them to write off their major medical expenses entirely! I know that those who clamor for more money in government will not like this sentiment, but I actually believe people should get the most benefit from their own money. If you have a catastrophic event, say a car crash, and your insurance covers most of the costs, but you still have to fork out a large amount of money, say $20,000, then you should be allowed to deduct that bill entirely from your federal taxes! If you have to deal with cancer, like I did, and have bills in excess of $30,000, after insurance, then wouldn’t it be nice to just deduct these on your tax bill? Major corporations are allowed to write-off capital losses? Why shouldn’t the common man be allowed to write-off something that would benefit them and not leave them straddled with massive debts? Some corporation’s losses are so large that they have to carry them over into the next year. Why not give that opportunity to every American when hit with major medical bills? Anything that cannot be applied to a particular tax year, because of your tax bracket, should be carried over to the next year, until the individual is made whole.
- Tax Credits for those who cannot pay for major medical bills: One of the oft-repeated refrains from those who support socialized medicine is that any free-market based plan would necessarily mean the poor would go without access to the same quality care as those who could afford it. Even though we have laws that mandate hospitals care for anyone who is admitted for emergency care, such as serious injury, there is no mandate for things such as cancer. What if someone cannot afford health insurance? Most people agree that there should be equal opportunity to life-saving care, and so this necessarily means someone else helping pay for the care of those who cannot pay themselves. How do we achieve this? By offering tax credits to cover major medical bills for those among us who cannot afford to pay for insurance for major medical bills. To qualify, an individual would have to provide proof of their medical bills, and their low-income, similar to what is already needed to qualify for Medicaid. Then they would qualify for federal tax credits to cover all or most of their bills. These could be administered through the current Medicaid program.
- No maximum on Tax Deductions for charitable giving to health care providers and hospitals: One of the drawbacks to hospitals being forced to take all who come to them in need of emergency care is the costs of such a burden, which could translate into higher costs for others who can pay for care (something which happens now) or in hospitals actually closing down because of being unable to stay open. One easy solution to this is to incentivize charitable giving for healthcare needs. If hospitals, or even cancer clinics had a deep vault of money from people giving, then this would help offset costs caring for those who could not pay up front, plus, it would mean less need for the government to issue tax credits at all, saving money for all taxpayers. We are already a giving people; it is high time to promote legislation that brings benefit to our fellow citizens who can help succor those around them, rather than giving more power to the government.
See more below about my Prescription Drug ideas.
The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that Americans spent more than $460 billion on prescription drugs—16.7 percent of total health-care spending—in 2016, the last year for which there are definitive data, and according to the latest data their cost is growing at a faster rate than all other healthcare costs. Tie drug prices to drug effectiveness. Right now, the price of medicines is not determined by their research costs. Instead, it is determined by their value in preventing and treating disease. So, you have some of the most expensive drugs being those dealing with various types of cancers.
There are currently 600 new cancer drugs being tested by humans, but many of these drugs have low promise, where the health gains are small—weeks of added life, not big cures, yet, they have the largest price-tags. Meanwhile, 42 new drugs, with the potential for treating serious, antibiotic-resistant, bacterial infections, which is seen as one of the nation’s top health threats, were in clinical development for the U.S. market in December 2018. Six hundred drugs for cancer and only 42 for serious infections, which effect a larger pool of people seems like profit maximization. That’s because it is. Prescription drug companies are in the business of making money. There is nothing wrong with this. Pricing for drugs is very similar to most anything else. A number of factors go into the mix. These factors include: cost of business, competition, patent status, anticipated volume, and, most important, the estimate of the income generated by sales of the product. However, it is this anticipated income stream, rather than say the repayment of sunk costs, that is the primary determinant of price.
As with the healthcare system in general, there must be a balance struck between incentivizing the production of new life saving drugs, and making those drugs accessible to all Americans, not just to those who can afford them. There are answers, and more government is not among them.
- Price transparency: As with health care pricing in general, mandating that insurance companies list their prices for customers will go a long way in helping bring down prices. For 12 of the 20 most commonly prescribed drugs, patients overpaid by more than 33 percent. This is directly a result of the fact that pharmacists currently are prevented from sharing the list price of drugs because of the contracts they have with insurance companies, who impose a “gag order” of sorts preventing pharmacists from telling customers the price, unless they ask. In many cases, the cash price is actually less than what you pay for it under your insurance plan! Even if these orders are not explicitly in contracts, they are strongly encouraged, and pharmacists can be dropped from plans for being transparent about the out-of-pockets costs with customers. As part of President Trump’s blueprint to bring down prescription drug costs, this aspect of price transparency was brought up, but the administration stopped short of requiring insurers to lift such restrictions on pharmacists. This needs to be change.
- Reduce and/or eliminate patent exclusivity loopholes: Part of the incentive given to pharmaceutical companies to pursue innovative drugs is the virtual government-protected monopolies for certain drugs. The U.S. has a patent system that allows drug manufacturers to remain the sole manufacturer of drugs they’ve patented for 20 years or more! Such a system prevents generics from coming to market sooner, and reducing prices through competition. The FDA also gives drug manufacturers exclusivity for certain products, including those that treat people with rare diseases. This is not necessarily a bad thing. But monopolies are a recipe for excessive prices. A company will raise prices until its profits start to drop. Sometimes, to maintain these monopolies as long as possible, drug companies deploy questionable strategies. The tactics vary, but they include slightly tweaking the non-therapeutic parts of drugs, such as pill coatings, to game the patent system and paying large “pay for delay” settlements to generics manufacturers who sue them over these patents. This is a serious problem, because drug prices decline to 55% of their original brand name cost once there are two generics on the market and to 33% of original cost with five generics. We must get rid of all regulatory loopholes that unnecessarily inhibit generics from coming to market as soon as possible.
- Price gauging laws: For many drugs, there isn’t enough competition to hold down prices. This is especially true of older generic drugs. Many of these drugs are priced too low to be profitable anymore, so some drug-makers stop making them. Once only one or two companies is making a drug, the price usually shoots up. For older, brand-name drugs that treat conditions too rare to attract multiple manufacturers, the sole maker has a de facto monopoly. Not only does this result in drugs becoming more expensive, it also causes older, once-cheap generics, to be in short supply. Because of this, sometimes drug-makers will buy the rights to older drugs, and then hike the price! Some shocking recent examples of possible price-gouging was a widely used antibiotic, soaring from $20 for 500 capsules in October 2013 to a staggering $1,849 in April 2014, a drug used for slowing heart rate, climbing from $65 for 10 vials to $1,277 during the same period, or a cholesterol medication going from $27 to $196 for a one-year supply. All of these are a direct lack of competition in the market. Other competitors can enter the market, of course, but the truth is, it may not be profitable to do so. States have tried to pass price gauging laws only to be struck down in court. This necessitates a federal law to ensure that drug companies are not engaging in the practice.
- Tax deductions/Tax credits for expensive drugs: It should be noted that sometimes, high drug-prices are unavoidable. Many new drugs are for rare conditions or cancer sub-types involving a particular genetic mutation, so they might help just thousands or hundreds of patients. To recoup research and development costs for these, drugs drug-makers set high prices, and may even raise prices for other drugs that have more of a market. Some of these companies do offer many patients financial assistance for these. A prescription drug should do two things: improve the lives of patients and reduce medical costs – you take the drug so that you don’t end up in the hospital. Since, we want people to have access to life-saving drugs, even if they can’t afford them in their own right. This puts the money back in the pockets of the consumer, as opposed to paying out charges negotiated by a third-party, which will always be higher than they need to be.
- Increased subsidization to academic institutions for innovative research: Prescription drug companies have received billions in federal tax dollars for research and development of new drugs. Then, it is the companies who receive the lion’s share of profit. This kind of thing undercuts the claim that research and development are a reason for high-prices. Frankly, this kind of crony capitalism needs to be stopped entirely, or seriously curtailed. In fact, drugs that don’t materially improve patient outcomes should not be subsidized by the government and taxpayers at all. More money should be given to medical research institutions, who can compete for grant contracts. Then, when the drug is ready for production, it can be passed onto drug manufacturing companies.
New trade deals to protect intellectual property drug companies and increase international harmonization of regulatory standards: Many people, and politicians continue to advocate for allowing the government, through Medicare, to negotiate drug-prices. This kind of approach, apart from being bad economics, will actually hurt the whole world. Comparing the U.S. to the rest of the world when it comes to drug pricing ignores the fact that the U.S. carries the water for the rest of the world in the research and development of new drugs. The whole world spends about $1 trillion on drugs, and roughly half of that is spent in the U.S. We’re less than 5 percent of the world’s population, and yet we pay 50 percent of drug costs. Although the US produces about 22% of the global GDP and accounts for 4% of the world’s population, it accounts for 44% of global biomedical R&D expenditures and its domestic pharmaceutical market about 40% of the global market. In large measure, this is because of the strong intellectual property laws we enjoy here. You get paid for what you create! American consumers may feel some philanthropic pride about the benefits they have spurred for the world’s poorest HIV patients. But similar benefits are also enjoyed by German, British, and French HIV patients, and were financed by the same revenues generated, in large part, by HIGH American drug prices. Some might say that the rest of the world is free-riding on the backs of American drug buyers. We are a global market place, and America clearly contributes more to pharmaceutical revenue. We can afford more so we are charged more! U.S. consumers spend roughly three times as much on drugs as their European counterparts. Even after accounting for higher U.S. incomes, Americans spend 90 percent more as a share of income. Prior research suggests that a substantial share of this gap is due to greater use of newer and higher-strength medicines in the U.S. The rest is due to lower prices for the identical drug overseas. However, if other wealthy countries shouldered more of the burden for medical innovation, both American and overseas patients would benefit. More can be done through trade deals. The effort to lower drug development costs through the international harmonization of regulatory standards has been going on for decades and has made progress. Attempts to create mutual recognition of marketing approvals tend to be controversial, but data sharing and common standards (for example for the validation of bio-markers) are possible. We also need more research on the costs that free-riding imposes on the global patient population. As incomes in less developed countries rise, they will face the challenges of fighting conditions like diabetes, heart disease, and even dementia. Spending a bit more now to ensure their populations have access to effective treatment is in everyone’s interest.
Economy: A robust economy is essential to maintain a good standard of living and is a must for achieving solutions and protections for those who are working, retirees, and future generations; it will also help to arrive at sustainable and moral solutions to things like the healthcare needs of the citizenry. Unfortunately, the best ideas for obtaining strong economies involves government relinquishing control mechanisms and allowing more freedom in the economic space. There is a place for government, but when it implements tax and regulation policies that are too onerous, or actively participates in picking winners and loser by subsidizing certain industries, this creates far more problems than the positive effects intended to be produced.
As a federal government representative, though limited in having a direct impact on changing the anti-business attitude of local officials in places like Tucson, there is still things that can be done to help change things there and to help continue the robust growth that many other areas in the District have seen due to the economic policies that have been fostered by the Trump administration.
Dealing with stagnation in both wages for workers and job creation need to continue to be a priority, and will be if I’m elected, as I will make every effort to see increased real wages for the residents of CD2, while also working to bring jobs into the region.
There are several things that we can and must do.
- Continued reduction of regulations for businesses: One of the major reasons the U.S. economy has begun to kick into high gear is the voluminous and onerous regulations that the Trump administration has begun to rollback. This is a blessing for small businesses and consumers alike. The impact of getting rid of needless regulatory burdens cannot be overemphasized in growing the economy. Along with this is the need for Congress to work on things such as the standardization of the retention process for America’s smallest businesses, which would save them combined millions of dollars and countless hours in compliance time.
- I support expanding and making permanent Middle-Class tax cuts: One of the things that President Trump discussed just before the 2016 midterm elections, was his intention of an even more specific and targeted tax break for the American middle class. This is something I will advocate for as well. Tax cuts work, and when done right only help to generate economic growth. Middle America benefitted for sure, but a much bigger tax break for them is not only feasible, but it will also help continued economic growth as Americans will have more money in their pockets to spend.
- I support renegotiated, bilateral trade deals: One of the largest issues of the Trump presidency has been dealing with the global theft of American wealth through globalism. This is at the heart of his tariff policies. Some conservatives have even attacked such policies as detrimental and anti-conservative. They aren’t. They are entirely practical and necessary. We are in an economic war with China that we have heretofore refused to engage in, while American jobs wealth has been redistributed abroad. This has lined the pockets of big multinational corporations and bank conglomerates. President Trump’s move to renegotiate equitable trade deals, in a win-win for each nation, has resulted in an explosion in the American main-street economy, most notably in the manufacturing arena. Median household income has actually risen, real wages are on the rise, the job market is absolutely exploding. Why? Precisely because of these America first policies. We must continue to support the President in any of these efforts to bring the stolen wealth of the U.S. back to its citizens.
CD2 - Economic Plan:
CD2 Economic Plan
Economic security is national security. This has been the mantra of President Trump and it is a position I agree with. If we have a strong economy, then we are in a position to fix so many other things that are important to the people of this nation, and to the people of CD2. This truism has become very poignant for the citizens of CD2, as “solutions” to job growth have either been lacking entirely from local political leaders, or they have hindered or slowed that growth.
A strong economy will do the most to help solve many of the societal ills we face. Things like poverty, high incarceration rates, lack of access to healthcare, and even abortion can be dealt with in large measure just by having a population that is economically secure. There are even economic solutions to dealing with the problem of illegal immigration that respects our nation’s sovereignty. The proposed solutions are efficient, sustainable, moral, and to the general welfare of all. But they require vision, leadership, and a willingness to work with others. I believe Southern Arizona’s best days are in front of us, and that’s why I have stayed here to live and work, and one day, I hope to raise a family here.
A bright future awaits us all.
This is my SAFE action plan to see upwards of 50,000 new, high-paying, high-skilled jobs brought to Southern Arizona in the next 10 years. A brighter, hopeful future for all of us starts today, and it will require all of us to see it accomplished.
Synergy: Federal and local leaders, business developers, chambers of commerce, and educational institutions working together to achieve the goal of a successful and prosperous CD2.
Awareness: What are the key issues facing our region, and what are the things that must be addressed in getting to solutions?
- We do not have enough skilled laborers
- Lost jobs, lost revenue, lost local economy
- Poor public policy at the local level
Forward-thinking: We must have plans in place to be ready to receive money/capital so it can be put to good use. Whether waiting for proper authorization for federal contracts, or for the commission of studies to come through or dealing with political roadblocks, we must find a way to work within the bureaucratic system/systems (while maybe finding ways to get rid of any unnecessary red-tape)
Efficiency: Technological advancement and innovation is key to creating a more streamlined and efficient society as a whole. Plus, it is the key to protecting and enhancing national defense and security. It’s a win all around.
- Efficient use of tax dollars
- Efficient use of technology
- Efficient use of our workforce
- Efficient use of our resources
- Efficient use of our educational institutions
- Efficient use of our weapons/defense systems
CD2 has 15 billion in government contracts coming into the region.
- We are a national security/defense/homeland security hub.
- We have a national, critical asset: Raytheon.
- We have two, nationally critical military bases: Ft. Huachuca, Davis Monthan
These assets are among the largest employers in CD2:
- 1st, Raytheon Missiles System: 14,000 employees; 3rd, Davis Monthan: around 12,000 employees; 4th (1st in Cochise County), Fort Huachuca: around 8,000 employees; 12th, DHS/Border Patrol stations in and around the region: 4,200 employees
Raytheon ($8-$10 billion/year) receives the lion’s share of government contracts to the region.
- Possible infusion of $2 billion dollars more in government contracts
- Utilize existing contracts more efficiently to create more high-paying jobs
- Write educational funding into grants for programs that will turn-out a high-skilled, local, labor-force
- Expand cyber-security mission in contracts
- Each new $1 billion represents 10,000, high paying jobs, many approaching $100,000
- Ancillary businesses will grow from this; the service economy expanded
Davis-Monthan Air Force Base mission (Legitimate National Security Use of tax dollars)
- Expand mission = more DOD money & people here
- Manned drones and the F-35
- Tucson is a perfect fit for the F-35
- The limited window for this. Only so much will be built. Appropriation limits.
Fort Huachuca mission:
- Information/data collection of intelligence
- One-of-a-kind (electronic-test range)
- The Fort is the single, greatest contributor to Sierra Vista’s economy
- Much more to do to fix this than a physical barrier
- Technology is the key
- Advance/develop that technology here!
- More funds appropriated to DHS, for more border agents and better funding
Develop a cybersecurity hub:
- China and Russia are way ahead here
- Our missiles and power grids are at grave risk
- Private sector money
There are 16 federally designated, critical infrastructure sectors:
- DHS money can be received to help in improving security for most of these critical areas
- These have mostly been left untouched/unguarded since 9/11
- Protecting our power grids, healthcare facilities, mining, etc. from attack (cybersecurity)
Other opportunities: Creation of another 48,000 jobs.
Trump declared 27 Federal Opportunity Zones. Many are right here in CD2: Sierra Vista, parts of Tucson, Douglas, Bisbee, Benson
- Creation of 21st Century Smart Infrastructure & Photonics Technology Areas — centered in deserts around Douglas, Bisbee, and Nogales.
- Green Energy Sector – Solar Panels: lower electricity bills, international commerce, economic solution to border/immigration problems
- Utilize Public-Private Partnerships and government contracting
- Generate new border economic activity of around $23 billion!
- Lower electrical costs, and water usage in the region
Optics Valley: Rebuild “incubator ecosystem”.
- Several hundred start-up companies just 25-years ago. Most are gone.
- How can we get that back? Create new jobs, revenue generated?
- These can be suppliers of Raytheon, Fort Huachuca, DM, Extensive Healthcare Network
- A small/entrepreneurial business opportunity that needs aggressive support
Educational Infrastructure: U of A, PCC, Cochise College, GCU Local School Systems
- Federal funds written into grant proposals to create a skilled workforce to fill jobs
- Intentionally connecting students with career opportunities here
- Leverage aerospace/defense/military industry we already have
- Develop skills in our high school programs, or community college programs
- Create K-12 talent pipeline for high-paying, skilled workforce
- Pima Community College — Centers of Excellence and Good Jobs
- PCC Center of Excellence for Applied Technology, a new facility still in development
- Converging of engineering, computer science, automotive technology and the like
- Expand UA STEM programs, Optics program, schools of engineering
An emerging workforce of students and military veterans
The right to keep and bear arms, as codified in our Constitution, is a fundamental right to personal security. This includes not only the right to defend oneself from individuals who would seek to do them harm, but also from the government. It is a natural right and would exist even if we come to a point where its constitutional protections are removed. Of all the rights, it is the one that helps ensure all the rest. As such, it is not to be infringed. I believe this, and will defend it.
The first right that is explicitly laid out in the Declaration is the right to life. This is the most fundamental right. There can be no discussion of any other right without correctly defining this one. Science is very straight forward in determining the issue of life. People can debate when an unborn child is viable outside the womb, they can debate when an already born person in a vegetative state is viable as well. What one cannot do is deny the humanity of either. When a woman becomes pregnant, she knows beyond any shadow of a doubt that if carried to term, she will give birth to a child. She won’t birth a cat! Those who advocate for abortion are advocating for the delegitimization of a human life, as are those who advocate for unchecked euthanasia. I fully support the right to life, and oppose legalized abortion, except in the cases of the life-of-the-mother, as state-sanctioned murder.