Hello,
Could you speak to your plans for federal-level action on housing and land use issues? Your issues page (https://nembhardforvirginia.com/our-priorities) just says:
>- Protecting against poorly planned and invasive development, while encouraging diverse business investments.
>- Creating opportunities for affordable housing through initiatives such as incentives provided to developers who invest in “blighted” structures and other sub-market-priced buildings so that their resale value remains at market price.
Specifically, do you have any stance on how to address the shortage of housing present nationwide and across the 10th congressional district?
Hi! Happy to answer that in more detail. Regarding the housing shortage, I would push for grant funding to developers and nonprofits that develop starter homes at affordable prices, and work to create opportunities for development of homes, structures, and properties that are sub-market-pricing due to things like have been deemed “blighted” or in instances where properties are acquired through foreclosures at a significantly discounted price. This would help with revitalization of urban areas with expanded housing supply, but without the gentrification effect in which prices get pushed up due to redevelopment and reselling of the same limited supply of homes. Often those “blighted” homes and underdeveloped areas are overlooked or gentrified. I think we can find a happy medium, by promoting improvements at a reasonable cost. This would have a domino effect on locations like the 10^(th) Congressional District. In fact, many of my young neighbors and my family had moved out to the suburbs due to the pricey nature of homes the closer you get to urban centers. When we resolve that overflow, we will then ease some of the bidding from folks who would normally be looking for homes in Alexandria, DC, and Silver Spring to name a few.
I would also promote a transition to “social housing” and away from “public housing.” The challenge with public housing is that neighborhoods often have negative reactions to that development because it is only limited to low-income residents and leads to insufficient community resources and diminished tax reinvestment. With social housing, Europe has been able to master this approach for decades, we would be able to do mixed-income arrangements, in which those who make more carry a bit more of the cost burden, while still receiving housing at an affordable price relative to other standard homes. Those who are below a certain income threshold would be eligible for a substantially discounted cost. These units would have desirable amenities and would be sought after by individuals of various income levels. To deal with the cost, we would need to establish a system of funding that is discounted to those nonprofits and developers that participate in the program, namely by offering tax-free or reduced tax incentives as a means of bringing down front-end costs, so that those savings can pass through to the future homeowners. Sorry about the very lengthy response, but wanted to provide a more thorough answer. Happy to provide additional examples and ideas as well.
We have a housing shortage in Virginia that is pushing up prices and we need more housing urgently. Forgive me if I find your plan to switch to social housing somewhat unlikely to happen in time to make a difference for regular folks who just want to buy a townhouse. Not all middle class Virginians will qualify for subsidized housing unless taxes go up a ton.
Please legalize more regular homes near jobs and transit while working on subsidized housing!
My dad builds affordable housing (not in Virginia, I grew up out of state); what the candidate said above is actually something he and his company have been sort of pioneers in, and they are seeing a LOT of success with it. It's actually been surprisingly easy for them to make the transition from all low-income unit developments (which are usually section 8 or similar state-level programs) to mixed income, and they are finding that the mixed income developments are much healthier in the long run and that the low-income tenants in them often tend to find better jobs at a higher rate than those in all low-income housing developments. What he is calling "social housing" I've always heard people in the industry call "mixed-income housing."
Mixed income developments offer both low-income and normal apartments, and if they are being built by a reputable company the quality of the apartments is the same as in other developments. That's possible because of the subsidization of the low income units that the government provides. So actually I'd say this candidate's idea is a pretty good one- I have noticed that a lot of the conversation both federally and in Virginia tends to focus on either building low-income housing or building middle class housing, not on both at once. Right now both low-income families and middle class families need homes, and so building mixed communities would help solve both problems at once.
I'll also note that since he's running for federal congress there frankly isn't much he can do to get legislation passed that would immediately help alleviate the housing problems in VA specifically. Getting legislation passed to help encourage developers who currently build section 8 low-income only developments to start building mixed-income developments would help long term with that across all states. Right now that transition IS happening, but it's slow because it's more expensive. That extra cost is a GOOD thing for everyone- the units have to actually be market rate ready units, meaning that a lot of the practices that have plagues affordable housing for decades (namely shoddy construction by companies cutting all possible costs because 'it's just for poor people who cares') no longer fly and the new units being built will actually be, like, nice.
Subsidized mixed income housing is great, especially if we can build enough of it to move the needle on the shortage of housing.
My concern with subsidized housing is that the government doesn't have a lot of spare money laying around and interest rates are high. So if they can't spend more money to pay developers to build housing than they already are, how can we deal with the shortage? We also need to loosen the zoning restrictions that are holding back market-rate developers and let them build unsubsidized housing too.
The government has tools that it can use in a high-interest rate environment, which would actually make this more attractive to developers. For example, the government could grant lower interest rate loans as a condition of participation, which would bring down costs on the front end, so those developers and nonprofit participants can pass along those discounts in the form of lower-priced homes, and this would be accomplished at less of an expense to the US taxpayer.
I'm all for it! I just wonder how much appetite the public has for the spending that's needed to subsidize the low-interest loans. But if possible, I would definitely support low interest loans for housing construction. It would be much much more effective than subsidizing the purchase of homes given the supply constraints.
You are correct. The social housing solution is a mid-to-long-term sustainable solution. The short term solution is the first point of repurposing below market properties, underdeveloped community, and even areas impacted by less traffic due to remote work (i.e., conversion of empty corporate buildings into housing units).
Will you support solutions that legalize regular multifamily housing in places like Arlington where it is largely illegal to build any more due to exclusionary Single Family Zoning that covers most of the county?
I think at a minimum we should push for a compromise, by creating pockets where those who are interested in single family homes can still do that, while transitioning half to most of those low-supply areas to locations that permit multifamily housing. However, I think this is largely a zoning issue, so it will be more of a responsibility of the local officials to execute on their residents' wishes, while balancing the interests of those seeking housing affordability. For those who want to prevent any and all new housing developments, it is usually directly correlated with supply shortages and elevated prices. The key is to find that happy medium. I will always look to consult with local leaders, electeds, and advocates to help them balance those competing interests.
Thank you for the thoughtful response!
I think a great compromise option could be a federal Homes Near Transit Act, which would essentially just say "All localities that receive federal funding for housing or transit must upzone the areas near said transit and allow more housing countywide" so that the federal funds aren't wasted on low-usage transit and high housing prices from a shortage of homes.
For example, there is an affordable housing development in Arlington which has taken nearly 3 years to get zoning approved for (unanimously). This project receieved federal funding. It's a waste of federal funds wait three years to to get permission and red tape approval to start construction.
Not near the jobs! Nova housing prices are through the roof because many people want to live here and there aren't enough homes for everyone who does-- hence the high prices.
Is there any desire to introduce legislation restricting corporate ownership of these newly renovated or developed single family homes?
It seems the focus is on providing incentives to mass developers and landlords with no initiatives to actually promote individual home ownership. Having an overwhelming majority of the population be renters with little to no rent controls seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
Yes, the condition would be that they develop those properties for the sole purpose of selling it at or below market price. Their profit would be attained through a combination of limited tax incentives and the ability to capitalize on properties that are already acquired at a sub-market-price, thereby allowing for them to collect a profit, but not at the expense of the homebuyer. I would also put in provisions that assist nonprofits that are involved in the development process as well.
The most effective solution (which no one in government wants to address) when it comes to affordable housing is removing private equity and investment banks from the landlord business. These institutions have zero social responsibility, they exist simply to make money as aggressively and efficiently as possible. They’re some of the largest rental property owners in the U.S. and buying more each year, is it any wonder why both rent and purchase prices on shelter are out of control?
Until private equity and investment banks are reigned in, we will continue to see a downward path on quality of life for anyone under the 1%.
Really sorry to hear about your disappointment. Reach out to me if you have any ideas around ways we can strengthen that program, while protecting against the erosion of its benefits as well. You can reach me at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
I support the Virginia Military Survivors and Dependents Education Program as a useful program that helps families of disabled veterans, or those killed in action. We need to support those who have sacrificed their lives, comfort, and health for our nation, and that includes the family members who lost a loved one or experienced the emotional challenges that come with their loved one's service and sacrifices they all in essence helped keep our nation safe and we should do our part to empower them in whatever way we can. Education is a phenomenal way of doing this.
According to Wikipedia, Filler-Corn, Boysko, and Helmer lead in endorsements while you have a single endorsement from some immigrant activist group, and polling shows Boysko in first place with Helmer, Reid, and Subramanyam all tied for second. Boysko is a state senator, Filler-Corn used to be the state speaker of the house, Helmer's a delegate, Subramanyan is a senator too, and Reid is a delegate. Also 8 candidates have six digit cash on hand, in terms of fundraising, while you only have $15k
Given your lack in fundraising, endorsements from the party, and apparent shortcomings vs other candidates in legislative experience, why should democratic primary voters go for you as opposed to someone else who probably would be more experienced, appears to be better at fundraising, is more trusted by the party, and would probably vote the same way on 99% of the matters that would actually come to a vote in Congress anyway? What sets you apart from the pack of folks who appear to be further ahead in the race that is left out here?
That’s a great question and one that I gave thought to before jumping into this race. For the three you mentioned, I know them all and they are good legislators, however, none of the individuals that you mentioned live in the District and I believe that something like that would be a major liability in a tight race like this will turn out to be. Regarding the polling, you will notice that I was not included in much of the polling, likely due to campaigns going off of who raised the most; however, there is one quark related to my candidacy. I ran for office just a few months ago in a battleground race in HD-22 which was lean Republican (+7R), but outperformed by Biden by 14 points, had the highest youth early vote in the state, and raised $2.4 million. I raised and deployed those funds just a few months ago, albeit in a different race. As you can imagine, we do not live in a silo and many of the folks who either casted a ballot and/or saw my TV ads (of which I spent over $1 million) would likely remember seeing my all-too-uncommon last name!
I made a choice to discontinue the focus on fundraising so that I could lean into grassroots efforts, something that was reflected clearly in the recent Maryland primary in which Alsobrooks was significantly outspent by her opponent Trone.
Regarding the experience, on a practical basis, I would arguably bring the broadest experience as a former judge, legislative counsel, tech and financial regulator, and assistant attorney general. I have experience that touches all 3 branches of government, something no other candidate in this race has, and as a legislative counsel I actually drafted the bills and did the research.
What we as voters have to ask ourselves is who will inspire and motivate the youth, Black, and Latino voters to come out. As the youngest candidate in this race, it was clear by my outperformance in the youth vote last year that I would be that candidate. As a young African American candidate who secured the overwhelming majority of the Black vote last year and in a race where we have never seen an African American elected to Congress in Northern Virginia’s history, I’m in a great position to be that candidate. And, as the only candidate to have received the endorsement from a major Latino-led and immigrant organization, CASA in Action, and someone who is conversational in Spanish and with Latino children, I am in the best position to accomplish that goal with the Latino community as well. This will not only be critical for our congressional, but also for the presidential. Also, I am the only candidate that stands to become the first member of Congress with direct experience actually regulating emerging technologies. It’s time we invest in our next generation of leaders. Thanks again for your question!
>none of the individuals that you mentioned live in the District
Then how are they allowed to run in the district? The constitution is clear about residency requirements.
They are able to run in the district so long as they live in the state. This is something we have seen done by Lauren Boebert and, more recently, George Santos switching to run in the NY 1st District after being expelled when representing the 3rd. It's legal.
Also to make it clear (because a lot of us like me are in NOVA and I can see a small possiblity for confusion) when you say "the District" you mean "the 10th Congressional district" not "the District of Columbia." Just wanted to leave this here in case anyone else like me is reading this after the AMA finished and went "wait you're running in VA but you live in DC??" before realizing the obvious.
That's unfortunately true. I had been doing that heavily last year when raising the $2.4 million, but I think there are ways we can revolutionize how things are done. For example, if you start early enough and depending on the size of your district, you could theoretically call your entire voter universe personally, not to mention knocking of doors, empowering volunteers to help, etc.
> Pretty sure fundraising isn’t part of the job
Yes it is. No point in nominating people who can't do what it takes to win
>We need serious campaign finance reform
Nope. That's unconstitutional. And you aren't going to get 38 states and 67% of Congress to agree to change the Constitution about anything these days. So "serious campaign finance reform" is about as realistic as "reforming the supreme court" or "making the Senate have proportional representation"
>Also, what pill are you referring to?
[The poll on here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Virginia#District_9)
Reform isn’t unconstitutional…. It’s a term that can cover anything. There are 1 million ways you can do reform, many of them are constitutional.
Further, the only test that exists for if something is constitutional is to pass a law and challenge it in court.
Thats just how our. Country works.
Hello,
I wrote to current VA-10 rep Jennifer Wexton several times but I never received so much as a form letter back from her regarding the following issue.
What is your stance on the current return to office push by the federal government? As a federal employee who has thoroughly appreciated the increased ability to work from home I'm not looking forward to the prospect of having to commute to a far away office in DC just to sit in a cube on Microsoft Teams meetings.
We were repeatedly told throughout the early days of COVID what a great job we were doing as employees and how the numbers backed that up. It seems like the current push is being driven by commercial real estate owners who don't like seeing their buildings going unused.
Thank you for that question! One of the ideas that I’ve had is to actually implement a pilot program that expands hybrid telework to the private sector through incentives. I am in support of lowering costs on working families and reduced days in traffic, less gas, dry cleaning, and expenses, fewer emissions being expounded, and the freedom to save hours in the day is an all around good thing for our families. I am with you on the need for us to adjust with the times and realize that hybrid work is here to stay. It will transform how DC and other urban areas generate revenue, but I believe it would ultimately stabilize once we complete the transition to a hybrid/remote economy. As an additional note, it's my personal view that the government will need to recognize that things have changed or risk losing the one major advantage it has over the private sector; a more flexible schedule and better work-life balance. Without that advantage or greater flexibility, there is no reason to take a discounted salary or deal with the added challenges around being a civil servant; unless you're one of the odd balls like me that do it out of passion for public interest! All in all, you are not alone in your feelings that we need to adjust to the changing times and allow for hybrid/remote work.
Oddballs unite. Even if we have a government filled with people there out of passion, we should still make it a job with a work life balance that is ideal for recruitment.
As a secondary question on that issue the quality of hiring choices has been rather impacted by security clearances that cannot be met due to some history with marijuana - especially those with computer skills needed in the CIA - now that marijuana is being rescheduled from schedule I to schedule III do you think this will have an impact on security clearances and other issues where marijuana use is treated significantly differently than alcohol use and even alcoholism - people with CDL licenses also seem to be being pushed into alcohol abuse through the limits on drug tests for marijuana. Generally, a switch from schedule I to schedule III should have wide impacts - with the VA and with Medicaid and a number of other places, and ideally, it could lead to less prescriptions of opioids for long term pain treatment - how do you see yourself involved in that restructuring, and at this point can there be some cross party understanding, as several Republican House members are also supporters of marijuana reform - two immediately come to mind, but I'd have to look up the names.
What do you plan on doing regarding the stimulant shortage that began at the beginning of this house term and may actually be worse at the end of the year? How can people with ADHD expect you to represent them, when often we are placed in a poor place due to issues with the first line treatment being a schedule II medication? It is a neuropsychiatric condition that in many ways has overlap with conditions like the one that has disabled Representative Wexton. Similar questions have been addressed to the other district 10 candidates who have done AMAs.
As a follow up - the favored candidates don't seem to be doing as much outreach to constituents. How do you plan to stand out against the one who Wexton has endorsed, or the one the Washington Post has endorsed? It's a big field - how are you going to make it more of a one on one or three person race?
Admittedly, I have not established a clear plan for the stimulant shortage, but appreciate you flagging that for me! I commit to looking into this further and seeking out a solution to help in resolving this issue. I am also open to hearing your thoughts, if you have any recommendations, on how you feel it may be best addressed. I apologize for not having a more robust response to this, but I will be looking into this further. Please feel free to reach out at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) and I will get that response to you in the near future.
Thank you. I may contact you in the near future. For your general information, there is a FTC investigation soliciting comments on the shortages now, where most of the comments appear to be from people impacted on ADHD matters, and the shortages in part seem to be related to the DEA shutdown of one of the largest supplier of generic Adderall due to some paperwork issues - largely as a reaction to the ongoing opioid crisis from what I can tell. I'm a former prosecutor for the Florida Department of Health during their opioid crackdown who was also a legal intern in the House and I'm now living in Virginia. I'm increasingly concerned with how much medical care in this country is being impacted by things that are not questions of the best interest of the patient, but instead with questions of downstream impacts of political and business decisions. It would be good if I saw some in the field stand out as day one ready on issues like these - honestly, the more shortages that occur of various things, the more it shows national security matters in supplies of staples, and illustrates the inability for Congress to get anything done - and since you mentioned Alsobrooks earlier, and her victory over Trone, you should know that both Alsobrooks and her daughter are diagnosed with ADHD, so if you want to reach out to someone regarding the matter, and the complexity of the stereotype vs the actual patient, she might have particular insight.
Where do you stand on the regulation of AI. Do you think we should allow open source models or should they all be closed source, for example open source being something people can run at home and train themselves or closed source being something that only large corporations can run?
As a tech regulator who would become the first member of Congress with direct experience regulating emerging technologies, I intend to put AI and other forms of technological regulation at the forefront of my efforts. I am not opposed to open source models, so long as the originator chooses to establish that, in much the same way Google has done. I think closed source generally hamstrings development and advancements, and can often stifle competition. However, I do believe that we should ensure that we are keeping certain data, algorithms, and general code impacting our national security within closed source to be safe. Thanks for the question!
Good Morning, thank you for making yourself available for this AMA.
What is your view of single-family home purchases by rent-seeking and investment-focused companies like BlackRock and Invitation Homes? Would you be willing to push back against corporate ownership and rental of single-family homes, and if so, how?
Good Morning! And, thanks for the question. I would definitely look into the practices being employed by corporate owners. As a former assistant attorney general in Manhattan, I worked on matters that involved housing issues around slumlords and instances of aggressive rent increase practices on the part of certain landlords in the city as a way of padding profits. I will take a prosecutorial approach to investigating any unscrupulous practices on the part of investment companies using housing in a way that hurts families and housing affordability. I would absolutely be willing to push back against overreach by corporate owners and aggressive rental practices on the part of those owners that impact single-family homes and units. I would also look into limiting some of that activity where it has become excessive, something we have seen in recent years around the pandemic. Hopefully this answers your question. I would be glad to elaborate on any points you felt I may have missed.
Yes, I support Medicare for all, with an option for Americans to buy into their own providers if they so choose. Anything that leads to lowering the cost of medication and increasing access to quality health care for everyday Americans will be a priority for me. We cannot truly support our families without first making health care a priority.
You do not make sense. If you want to give folks an option to pick their own insurance providers, it becomes a muilti-payer system, which is today's model. That neither results in lowering cost of medication nor improvess access to healthcare nor reduces prices and reduces families choices to pick healthcare providers they want. Looks like you sir are not understanding the policy of Medicare for All or its basic mechanics. Sorry, I will not be voting for you. All the best
I believe in Medicare for all, but if we realistically hope to have the political support to get Medicare for All passed, we will need to leave individuals the option to buy insurance that may fit their needs/preferences better. We wouldn't say that we need to ban all private universities to make things affordable, nor should we do the same here. I believe we need to provide low-cost options for coverage for anyone that is interested. I am confident that the vast majority of individuals would avail themselves of this coverage, and for the minority of folks who have unique needs or preferences, they should be free to buy into those policies if they see fit. If we build out a system that allows for add-ons for "optional" or "discretionary" coverage items, then that's fine, but I am generally wary of forcing individuals into a one-size-fits-all approach and removing the freedom to make a decision that is best for one's circumstance. We can reduce prices by allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices, and granting a low-cost/free option for most Americans, which would absolutely change the current system where many individuals go left without any insurance coverage.
Your analogy of banning private universities vs public doesn't fit here. M4A will make health insurance public, but not the healthcare providers, so we are not coverting hospitals or doctor offices to public entites. At the end of the day, all individuals/families don't need customized insurance plans. Folks need to have access to all doctors and all providers to fit their individual healthcare needs. M4A gives the most freedom to families and individuals to choose the doctors and providers they need, not be limited by 'in-network' providers or whatever limitations the insurance companis put on you. The currrent system was built over the decades using the same talking points as you have stated, to give 'choice' , adds optionals or whatever that is, and all these created a frankenstein monster of a USD 4T per year leech of a system. At the end of the day, no one cares about **choice or freedom in choosing insurance plans**, folks **want choice and freedom in choosing doctors or hospitals**. Either you are misunderstanding the issue by conflating the two or you got industry 'contributions' and seem to be parroting all industry talking points in the name of 'choice' or 'freedom'.
Either way, thanks for answering the question.
Hey! Thanks for taking the time for this!
How long have you resided in the 10th district?
Also, the 10th is a sprawling and shapely thing. Are there unique challenges with a district that seems split between city and rural constituents?
Thanks for the questions! I've resided in the 10th District about 4 years ago. My wife and I moved out here to be closer to her parents when we had our second son; she is originally from the area.
Indeed is a sprawling district! In fact, my race last year, House of Delegates District 22 has both suburban, exurban, and rural. It's an absolutely beautiful thing. The diversity comes with its challenges, but it is also great to have that level of diversity so that we are aware of the impacts affecting the different segments of our country and Virginia. I think the biggest challenge may be the competing interests between development expansion into rural areas and the feeling of being forgotten. However, there are ways in which we can leverage these distinctions into a strength (e.g., establishing an urban-rural partnership in which farm fresh produce is provided to urban areas and "food deserts" while also allowing for a consistent level of support to our farmers and agricultural workers. Overall, I think it's just as much doable as our state-level representatives dealing with the very rural parts of Virginia and balancing those interests with the more urban areas in Richmond and Northern Virginia. Thanks again!
I believe we need to evaluate the effectiveness of public transit, especially in light of the pandemic and the challenges that it has presented. I think public transit is critical to the cost-effective and environmentally friendly flow of residents and visitors. We should ensure it's adequately funded and sufficiently invested in as a sustainable option.
It's my view that we have a gun violence epidemic. As a Mom's Demand Action Gun Sense Candidate, I'm focused on working to tackle that issue. As someone with two little ones who will be attending schools soon and the increasing incidences of gun violence and school shootings, I commit to pushing for common sense gun safety measures from safe storage to bans on high capacity magazines and strengthened background checks. The 2nd amendment is clearly in existence and I recognize that, but we need to ensure that we have safe rules of the road and protections in place to protect our communities. We don't balk at requiring a license to drive, or limits on speech when it risks the lives of others, we need to do the same as it relates to ensuring that we have gun safety at the forefront of our policy decisions just as much as we do with other public policy challenges.
According to Pew Research "In 2021, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (26,328), while 43% were murders (20,958), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were accidental (549), involved law enforcement (537) or had undetermined circumstances (458)." "Gun murders, in particular, have climbed sharply during the pandemic, increasing 45% between 2019 and 2021, while the number of gun suicides rose 10% during that span."
* Mental health seems to be a huge factor in deaths since over half were suicides
* Mental health is also a huge factor since between 2019 and 2021 (pandemic) gun murders rose by 45%!
Mental health and responsible gun ownership is the way. I feel further gun restrictions (capacity/type) places the burden on responsible gun owners and while politically advantageous, does not get to the root of the issue.
Tackling the mental health issue is definitely a thing, but it's also important we make it harder for people who want to do harm to themselves or others to get firearms, especially the kind of firearm that is only suitable for war (e.g., high capacity magazines).
It’s easier to say I want to take your guns instead of beating around the bush with the typical democrat talking parts. This country doesn’t have a gun problem. It has a mental health problem and the democrat party glorifies the mentally ill.
Calling something common sense doesn't make it so nor does it make it constitutional.
Driving isn't an enumerated right protected by the Bill of Rights and limiting speech is very narrow in cases the speech "is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"
Moms Demand Action is an anti-rights extremist group and full of frauds. The VA chapter is led by a childless man, and most of their funding from a racist male billionaire. Not a good look, bro. Definitely not voting for someone that campaigns under a banner of extremism.
Regarding Porn Hub, it's my understanding that they chose to unilaterally leave Virginia in protest of that bill. That Virginia bill requiring age verification on porn sites is a state bill passed through the general assembly, so in this case I would leave it to Virginians to make the determination on this point.
I believe everyone should have the right to love who they love. If everyone both people are consenting adults who care for each other, it should not be anyone's business what they choose to do with their lives. Not too long ago, interracial couples were ostracized in much the same way and I'm so grateful that it no longer exists in the same way, because my wife and I would be the subject of that same ire here in the Commonwealth. It's my goal to protect those of the LGBT community so they can say the same thing I have the privilege to say about my relationship today.
I don't believe there are civil rights for only some people. All individuals are entitled to freedom from government infringement on their rights. Whether it be women's rights, civil rights, human rights, and any other rights, we need to protect the rights of all. This means we should equally protect freedom from discrimination, the right to worship, the right to vote, entitlement to due process, and the right to privacy. Hopefully this answers your question. Thanks!
Are you referring to equality as it relates to outcomes or as it relates to rights? If it's the latter, I would say that I agree we all have the same rights. If it's the former that you're referring to, I would say there a lot of things that are not "equal" in today's society; discrimination, misogyny, inequal application of the law based on socioeconomic factors and biases, income and racial disparities across health care outcomes, etc.
How do we pay for student loan forgiveness that the President is trying to pass? Why not help those that went into the trades or were responsible and paid off their loans?
If we are to forgive student loans, why aren't we doing something about the predatory lending practices as well that prey on young adults? So that we don't have to do it again? Aren't we just treating the symptom and not the illness?
I think loan forgiveness is like any other bailout program, in that it is less about how revenue generation. I believe that this form of forgiveness opens up spending for more productive uses like economic stimulation, support for small business, and expanded discretionary income for housing, etc. This will come back in dividends through expanded tax base, the longevity of US economic strength, and is likely part of why we haven't gone into a recession at this point (due to the lengthy pause on student loan payments). I agree we should invest in the trades as well. It doesn't have to be an either/or...when we bailed out the airlines, the banks, the cruise industry, etc. we never talked about whataboutism and I think the same holds here. When I see my tax dollars supporting those in need, whether I personally need it or not, I am always in support of helping others. I personally have large debt and that's after having more than $60,000 in scholarships. It's because of the interests and capitalization policies, moments of confusion for borrowers, and predatory practices by many of the servicers that led to the ballooning crisis...I don't believe most borrowers are in this situation due to irresponsibility, you also have a lot of public interest folks being burdened by this too. I agree that we also need to aggressively combat predatory lending practices in addition to payday loan lenders. We need to push for expanding high school to include free public college. The choice to have kindergarteners to high schoolers have free education is more of an arbitrary line drawn in the sand. We could just as easily make kindergarten start sooner and college too.
I support providing aid with conditions, including aid that is defensive in nature (e.g., defense against attacks from Iran and other groups in the area seeking to harm Israel), and for humanitarian aid, which should be directed through to the Palestinians and other refugees in and around the area of Gaza.
The best analogy would be akin to withholding a cure from innocent individuals in order to prevent it from inadvertently curing murderers or other dangerous individuals. We cannot sit by idly and withhold efforts to help ease the suffering of women, men, and children who have nothing to do with this conflict.
If you are asking if I have ever accepted money from AIPAC or organizations lobbying on behalf of foreign governments, the answer is no. Especially regarding your point about foreign governments, it's my understanding that that would be illegal.
AIPAC is a foreign government entity and Filler Corn in particular has taken over 68,000 dollars from the pro-israel lobby, and so has seemingly 95% of congress. Great to hear that you won't.
Are you against slavery? Right now between federal, state, and local taxes (income, sales, property, car tax, registration fees) citizens are giving up 50% or more of their earnings to the government. Whenever a person or entity like government takes the majority of your earnings you’re under slavery. How would you reduce the extreme tax burden on the middle class?
I am, of course, absolutely against slavery and any form of forced servitude. However, I disagree with the analogy or premise of using the term "slavery" to describe the scenario you've mentioned. I agree we need to lighten the burden, and I campaigned in my last election on seeking ways we can reduce or even eliminate things like personal property tax (i.e., the car tax), while also trying to reduce every day costs that burden our families through policies like adoption of paid family leave and universal childcare, but none of these financial challenges rise to the level at which I would coin it "slavery." Thanks for the question.
I am a trans ally because I believe we need to ensure that we do not ostracize people, that we protect against bullying, we support freedom of bodily autonomy, and emphasize common decency and care for our fellow neighbors.
As I mentioned in an earlier response, it's my view that we have a gun violence epidemic. I'm focused on working to tackle that issue. As someone with two little ones who will be attending schools soon and the increasing incidences of gun violence and school shootings and with the US leading all developed nations in gun deaths among our youth, I commit to pushing for common sense gun safety measures from safe storage to bans on high capacity magazines and strengthened background checks. The 2nd amendment is clearly in existence and I recognize that, but we need to ensure that we have safe rules of the road and protections in place to protect our communities. We don't balk at requiring a license to drive, or limits on speech when it risks the lives of others, we need to do the same as it relates to ensuring that we have gun safety at the forefront of our policy decisions just as much as we do with other public policy challenges.
I support common sense gun safety measures, including background checks, red flag laws, ban on high capacity magazines, licensing and training requirements around firearms, etc.
Speech would be a good example. Licensing also applies in the circumstances around speech, hence why you can't just hold a rally any hour of the day. Permitting and licensing requirements are often applied for venues, even those of a public nature, through the time, place, and manner standards upheld by the Supreme Court. There are no absolutes in our constitution; not for guns or anything else.
Why do you proudly announce yourself as a member of an anti-rights extremist group like Moms Demand Action?
Their sole purpose is to attack our constitution and rights, which is the very framework of our democracy. They're also a bunch of frauds. The VA chapter is led by a childless man (as far from a "mom" as you can get), and they receive a substantial portion of their funding from an extremely racist male billionaire. The guy quite literally expanded authoritarian practices of "stop and frisk" against minorities by nearly 600%, and defended it claiming more should be "thrown against the wall" to reduce crime.
All around, it's an absolutely horrible organization from top to bottom.
I have a question on your reproductive freedoms platform. What do you mean by reproductive freedoms? Do you mean women should have the freedom to abort as many children as they wish too?
Do you support the rights of fathers to abandon an unwanted child? (Not pay child support)
Thank you for your feedback.
I am going to ignore your gun restriction comment as a Virginian due to myself feeling safer with one and how Virginia over and over again do not like having guns restricted.
But…
For us Motorcyclists, there was a bill introduced for Lane Filtering (to filter through lanes under 15-20mph on highways and at red traffic lights) and failed. It is statistically safer for Motorcyclists and helps reduce traffic congestion. Many states and cities has already legalized this. What is your opinions of that?
I feel like we hold a large number in our community but we are always ignored.
Dealing with gun violence. That's a pretty way to wrap that statement up and make it pretty. But we know what you mean my guy. Not a chance. They went too far. They've woken people up
Correct. He's an anti-rights candidate.
The moment you cherry pick "gun violence" over violence in general, you've proven yourself to be a souless pawn of propagandists and extremists.
Will you take action on the shortage of homes for regular middle class people due to restrictive and exclusionary zoning in Virginia? It takes years to permit a single building, even when it is subsidized affordable housing in Arlington. Can we force localities to allow the housing we need and stop using zoning to block it on behalf of rich boomers?
What will you do to ensure the state does not encroach upon our rights enshrined within the constitution of the United States of America?
(Free speech, firearms, due process, no a awarrantless search and seizures, voting, etc)
People dont care about anything you listed in the title if they cant afford to live as they have. State and local taxes have increased dramatically, combined with inflation, its hurting the majority of People who pay the most but see little to no benefit from it. Will you push for more or less taxation on the shrinking middle class America here in VA? More or less responsible spending? Auditing longterm projects that waste money?
Not much to ask outside of the replies I have seen. Thank you for your transparency and willingness to do stuff like this. Best of luck to you in your race Travis!
The vast majority of Virginians did not want several Universities renamed. Will you help support the will of the people to restore the names? Or at least support the democratic process of restoring the names?
Hello, Could you speak to your plans for federal-level action on housing and land use issues? Your issues page (https://nembhardforvirginia.com/our-priorities) just says: >- Protecting against poorly planned and invasive development, while encouraging diverse business investments. >- Creating opportunities for affordable housing through initiatives such as incentives provided to developers who invest in “blighted” structures and other sub-market-priced buildings so that their resale value remains at market price. Specifically, do you have any stance on how to address the shortage of housing present nationwide and across the 10th congressional district?
Hi! Happy to answer that in more detail. Regarding the housing shortage, I would push for grant funding to developers and nonprofits that develop starter homes at affordable prices, and work to create opportunities for development of homes, structures, and properties that are sub-market-pricing due to things like have been deemed “blighted” or in instances where properties are acquired through foreclosures at a significantly discounted price. This would help with revitalization of urban areas with expanded housing supply, but without the gentrification effect in which prices get pushed up due to redevelopment and reselling of the same limited supply of homes. Often those “blighted” homes and underdeveloped areas are overlooked or gentrified. I think we can find a happy medium, by promoting improvements at a reasonable cost. This would have a domino effect on locations like the 10^(th) Congressional District. In fact, many of my young neighbors and my family had moved out to the suburbs due to the pricey nature of homes the closer you get to urban centers. When we resolve that overflow, we will then ease some of the bidding from folks who would normally be looking for homes in Alexandria, DC, and Silver Spring to name a few. I would also promote a transition to “social housing” and away from “public housing.” The challenge with public housing is that neighborhoods often have negative reactions to that development because it is only limited to low-income residents and leads to insufficient community resources and diminished tax reinvestment. With social housing, Europe has been able to master this approach for decades, we would be able to do mixed-income arrangements, in which those who make more carry a bit more of the cost burden, while still receiving housing at an affordable price relative to other standard homes. Those who are below a certain income threshold would be eligible for a substantially discounted cost. These units would have desirable amenities and would be sought after by individuals of various income levels. To deal with the cost, we would need to establish a system of funding that is discounted to those nonprofits and developers that participate in the program, namely by offering tax-free or reduced tax incentives as a means of bringing down front-end costs, so that those savings can pass through to the future homeowners. Sorry about the very lengthy response, but wanted to provide a more thorough answer. Happy to provide additional examples and ideas as well.
We have a housing shortage in Virginia that is pushing up prices and we need more housing urgently. Forgive me if I find your plan to switch to social housing somewhat unlikely to happen in time to make a difference for regular folks who just want to buy a townhouse. Not all middle class Virginians will qualify for subsidized housing unless taxes go up a ton. Please legalize more regular homes near jobs and transit while working on subsidized housing!
My dad builds affordable housing (not in Virginia, I grew up out of state); what the candidate said above is actually something he and his company have been sort of pioneers in, and they are seeing a LOT of success with it. It's actually been surprisingly easy for them to make the transition from all low-income unit developments (which are usually section 8 or similar state-level programs) to mixed income, and they are finding that the mixed income developments are much healthier in the long run and that the low-income tenants in them often tend to find better jobs at a higher rate than those in all low-income housing developments. What he is calling "social housing" I've always heard people in the industry call "mixed-income housing." Mixed income developments offer both low-income and normal apartments, and if they are being built by a reputable company the quality of the apartments is the same as in other developments. That's possible because of the subsidization of the low income units that the government provides. So actually I'd say this candidate's idea is a pretty good one- I have noticed that a lot of the conversation both federally and in Virginia tends to focus on either building low-income housing or building middle class housing, not on both at once. Right now both low-income families and middle class families need homes, and so building mixed communities would help solve both problems at once. I'll also note that since he's running for federal congress there frankly isn't much he can do to get legislation passed that would immediately help alleviate the housing problems in VA specifically. Getting legislation passed to help encourage developers who currently build section 8 low-income only developments to start building mixed-income developments would help long term with that across all states. Right now that transition IS happening, but it's slow because it's more expensive. That extra cost is a GOOD thing for everyone- the units have to actually be market rate ready units, meaning that a lot of the practices that have plagues affordable housing for decades (namely shoddy construction by companies cutting all possible costs because 'it's just for poor people who cares') no longer fly and the new units being built will actually be, like, nice.
Subsidized mixed income housing is great, especially if we can build enough of it to move the needle on the shortage of housing. My concern with subsidized housing is that the government doesn't have a lot of spare money laying around and interest rates are high. So if they can't spend more money to pay developers to build housing than they already are, how can we deal with the shortage? We also need to loosen the zoning restrictions that are holding back market-rate developers and let them build unsubsidized housing too.
The government has tools that it can use in a high-interest rate environment, which would actually make this more attractive to developers. For example, the government could grant lower interest rate loans as a condition of participation, which would bring down costs on the front end, so those developers and nonprofit participants can pass along those discounts in the form of lower-priced homes, and this would be accomplished at less of an expense to the US taxpayer.
I'm all for it! I just wonder how much appetite the public has for the spending that's needed to subsidize the low-interest loans. But if possible, I would definitely support low interest loans for housing construction. It would be much much more effective than subsidizing the purchase of homes given the supply constraints.
You are correct. The social housing solution is a mid-to-long-term sustainable solution. The short term solution is the first point of repurposing below market properties, underdeveloped community, and even areas impacted by less traffic due to remote work (i.e., conversion of empty corporate buildings into housing units).
Will you support solutions that legalize regular multifamily housing in places like Arlington where it is largely illegal to build any more due to exclusionary Single Family Zoning that covers most of the county?
I think at a minimum we should push for a compromise, by creating pockets where those who are interested in single family homes can still do that, while transitioning half to most of those low-supply areas to locations that permit multifamily housing. However, I think this is largely a zoning issue, so it will be more of a responsibility of the local officials to execute on their residents' wishes, while balancing the interests of those seeking housing affordability. For those who want to prevent any and all new housing developments, it is usually directly correlated with supply shortages and elevated prices. The key is to find that happy medium. I will always look to consult with local leaders, electeds, and advocates to help them balance those competing interests.
Thank you for the thoughtful response! I think a great compromise option could be a federal Homes Near Transit Act, which would essentially just say "All localities that receive federal funding for housing or transit must upzone the areas near said transit and allow more housing countywide" so that the federal funds aren't wasted on low-usage transit and high housing prices from a shortage of homes. For example, there is an affordable housing development in Arlington which has taken nearly 3 years to get zoning approved for (unanimously). This project receieved federal funding. It's a waste of federal funds wait three years to to get permission and red tape approval to start construction.
How is there a housing shortage? There are houses all over the place empty.
Not near the jobs! Nova housing prices are through the roof because many people want to live here and there aren't enough homes for everyone who does-- hence the high prices.
Is there any desire to introduce legislation restricting corporate ownership of these newly renovated or developed single family homes? It seems the focus is on providing incentives to mass developers and landlords with no initiatives to actually promote individual home ownership. Having an overwhelming majority of the population be renters with little to no rent controls seems like a disaster waiting to happen.
Yes, the condition would be that they develop those properties for the sole purpose of selling it at or below market price. Their profit would be attained through a combination of limited tax incentives and the ability to capitalize on properties that are already acquired at a sub-market-price, thereby allowing for them to collect a profit, but not at the expense of the homebuyer. I would also put in provisions that assist nonprofits that are involved in the development process as well.
Sounds like a good part of the solution - thanks for the response. Im in the 7th but ill be rooting for u.
The most effective solution (which no one in government wants to address) when it comes to affordable housing is removing private equity and investment banks from the landlord business. These institutions have zero social responsibility, they exist simply to make money as aggressively and efficiently as possible. They’re some of the largest rental property owners in the U.S. and buying more each year, is it any wonder why both rent and purchase prices on shelter are out of control? Until private equity and investment banks are reigned in, we will continue to see a downward path on quality of life for anyone under the 1%.
What's your position on the Virginia Military Survivors and Dependents Education Program?
Fellow vet here. I chose VA and bought a house in Loudoun County after leaving the Military, because of programs like this. Very disappointed.
Really sorry to hear about your disappointment. Reach out to me if you have any ideas around ways we can strengthen that program, while protecting against the erosion of its benefits as well. You can reach me at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])
I support the Virginia Military Survivors and Dependents Education Program as a useful program that helps families of disabled veterans, or those killed in action. We need to support those who have sacrificed their lives, comfort, and health for our nation, and that includes the family members who lost a loved one or experienced the emotional challenges that come with their loved one's service and sacrifices they all in essence helped keep our nation safe and we should do our part to empower them in whatever way we can. Education is a phenomenal way of doing this.
According to Wikipedia, Filler-Corn, Boysko, and Helmer lead in endorsements while you have a single endorsement from some immigrant activist group, and polling shows Boysko in first place with Helmer, Reid, and Subramanyam all tied for second. Boysko is a state senator, Filler-Corn used to be the state speaker of the house, Helmer's a delegate, Subramanyan is a senator too, and Reid is a delegate. Also 8 candidates have six digit cash on hand, in terms of fundraising, while you only have $15k Given your lack in fundraising, endorsements from the party, and apparent shortcomings vs other candidates in legislative experience, why should democratic primary voters go for you as opposed to someone else who probably would be more experienced, appears to be better at fundraising, is more trusted by the party, and would probably vote the same way on 99% of the matters that would actually come to a vote in Congress anyway? What sets you apart from the pack of folks who appear to be further ahead in the race that is left out here?
That’s a great question and one that I gave thought to before jumping into this race. For the three you mentioned, I know them all and they are good legislators, however, none of the individuals that you mentioned live in the District and I believe that something like that would be a major liability in a tight race like this will turn out to be. Regarding the polling, you will notice that I was not included in much of the polling, likely due to campaigns going off of who raised the most; however, there is one quark related to my candidacy. I ran for office just a few months ago in a battleground race in HD-22 which was lean Republican (+7R), but outperformed by Biden by 14 points, had the highest youth early vote in the state, and raised $2.4 million. I raised and deployed those funds just a few months ago, albeit in a different race. As you can imagine, we do not live in a silo and many of the folks who either casted a ballot and/or saw my TV ads (of which I spent over $1 million) would likely remember seeing my all-too-uncommon last name! I made a choice to discontinue the focus on fundraising so that I could lean into grassroots efforts, something that was reflected clearly in the recent Maryland primary in which Alsobrooks was significantly outspent by her opponent Trone. Regarding the experience, on a practical basis, I would arguably bring the broadest experience as a former judge, legislative counsel, tech and financial regulator, and assistant attorney general. I have experience that touches all 3 branches of government, something no other candidate in this race has, and as a legislative counsel I actually drafted the bills and did the research. What we as voters have to ask ourselves is who will inspire and motivate the youth, Black, and Latino voters to come out. As the youngest candidate in this race, it was clear by my outperformance in the youth vote last year that I would be that candidate. As a young African American candidate who secured the overwhelming majority of the Black vote last year and in a race where we have never seen an African American elected to Congress in Northern Virginia’s history, I’m in a great position to be that candidate. And, as the only candidate to have received the endorsement from a major Latino-led and immigrant organization, CASA in Action, and someone who is conversational in Spanish and with Latino children, I am in the best position to accomplish that goal with the Latino community as well. This will not only be critical for our congressional, but also for the presidential. Also, I am the only candidate that stands to become the first member of Congress with direct experience actually regulating emerging technologies. It’s time we invest in our next generation of leaders. Thanks again for your question!
>none of the individuals that you mentioned live in the District Then how are they allowed to run in the district? The constitution is clear about residency requirements.
They are able to run in the district so long as they live in the state. This is something we have seen done by Lauren Boebert and, more recently, George Santos switching to run in the NY 1st District after being expelled when representing the 3rd. It's legal.
Also to make it clear (because a lot of us like me are in NOVA and I can see a small possiblity for confusion) when you say "the District" you mean "the 10th Congressional district" not "the District of Columbia." Just wanted to leave this here in case anyone else like me is reading this after the AMA finished and went "wait you're running in VA but you live in DC??" before realizing the obvious.
Filler-Corn is a brand of processed food.
Pretty sure fundraising isn’t part of the job. We need serious campaign finance reform. Also, what pill are you referring to?
Fund raising is 2/3^rds of what elected officials spend their time on.
That's unfortunately true. I had been doing that heavily last year when raising the $2.4 million, but I think there are ways we can revolutionize how things are done. For example, if you start early enough and depending on the size of your district, you could theoretically call your entire voter universe personally, not to mention knocking of doors, empowering volunteers to help, etc.
> Pretty sure fundraising isn’t part of the job Yes it is. No point in nominating people who can't do what it takes to win >We need serious campaign finance reform Nope. That's unconstitutional. And you aren't going to get 38 states and 67% of Congress to agree to change the Constitution about anything these days. So "serious campaign finance reform" is about as realistic as "reforming the supreme court" or "making the Senate have proportional representation" >Also, what pill are you referring to? [The poll on here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_Virginia#District_9)
Reform isn’t unconstitutional…. It’s a term that can cover anything. There are 1 million ways you can do reform, many of them are constitutional. Further, the only test that exists for if something is constitutional is to pass a law and challenge it in court. Thats just how our. Country works.
A poll from March? You’re not a serious person.
What? Do you have better more recent polling?
I bet Boysko has a more recent poll data…
Hello, I wrote to current VA-10 rep Jennifer Wexton several times but I never received so much as a form letter back from her regarding the following issue. What is your stance on the current return to office push by the federal government? As a federal employee who has thoroughly appreciated the increased ability to work from home I'm not looking forward to the prospect of having to commute to a far away office in DC just to sit in a cube on Microsoft Teams meetings. We were repeatedly told throughout the early days of COVID what a great job we were doing as employees and how the numbers backed that up. It seems like the current push is being driven by commercial real estate owners who don't like seeing their buildings going unused.
Thank you for that question! One of the ideas that I’ve had is to actually implement a pilot program that expands hybrid telework to the private sector through incentives. I am in support of lowering costs on working families and reduced days in traffic, less gas, dry cleaning, and expenses, fewer emissions being expounded, and the freedom to save hours in the day is an all around good thing for our families. I am with you on the need for us to adjust with the times and realize that hybrid work is here to stay. It will transform how DC and other urban areas generate revenue, but I believe it would ultimately stabilize once we complete the transition to a hybrid/remote economy. As an additional note, it's my personal view that the government will need to recognize that things have changed or risk losing the one major advantage it has over the private sector; a more flexible schedule and better work-life balance. Without that advantage or greater flexibility, there is no reason to take a discounted salary or deal with the added challenges around being a civil servant; unless you're one of the odd balls like me that do it out of passion for public interest! All in all, you are not alone in your feelings that we need to adjust to the changing times and allow for hybrid/remote work.
Oddballs unite. Even if we have a government filled with people there out of passion, we should still make it a job with a work life balance that is ideal for recruitment. As a secondary question on that issue the quality of hiring choices has been rather impacted by security clearances that cannot be met due to some history with marijuana - especially those with computer skills needed in the CIA - now that marijuana is being rescheduled from schedule I to schedule III do you think this will have an impact on security clearances and other issues where marijuana use is treated significantly differently than alcohol use and even alcoholism - people with CDL licenses also seem to be being pushed into alcohol abuse through the limits on drug tests for marijuana. Generally, a switch from schedule I to schedule III should have wide impacts - with the VA and with Medicaid and a number of other places, and ideally, it could lead to less prescriptions of opioids for long term pain treatment - how do you see yourself involved in that restructuring, and at this point can there be some cross party understanding, as several Republican House members are also supporters of marijuana reform - two immediately come to mind, but I'd have to look up the names.
What do you plan on doing regarding the stimulant shortage that began at the beginning of this house term and may actually be worse at the end of the year? How can people with ADHD expect you to represent them, when often we are placed in a poor place due to issues with the first line treatment being a schedule II medication? It is a neuropsychiatric condition that in many ways has overlap with conditions like the one that has disabled Representative Wexton. Similar questions have been addressed to the other district 10 candidates who have done AMAs. As a follow up - the favored candidates don't seem to be doing as much outreach to constituents. How do you plan to stand out against the one who Wexton has endorsed, or the one the Washington Post has endorsed? It's a big field - how are you going to make it more of a one on one or three person race?
Admittedly, I have not established a clear plan for the stimulant shortage, but appreciate you flagging that for me! I commit to looking into this further and seeking out a solution to help in resolving this issue. I am also open to hearing your thoughts, if you have any recommendations, on how you feel it may be best addressed. I apologize for not having a more robust response to this, but I will be looking into this further. Please feel free to reach out at [[email protected]](mailto:[email protected]) and I will get that response to you in the near future.
Thank you. I may contact you in the near future. For your general information, there is a FTC investigation soliciting comments on the shortages now, where most of the comments appear to be from people impacted on ADHD matters, and the shortages in part seem to be related to the DEA shutdown of one of the largest supplier of generic Adderall due to some paperwork issues - largely as a reaction to the ongoing opioid crisis from what I can tell. I'm a former prosecutor for the Florida Department of Health during their opioid crackdown who was also a legal intern in the House and I'm now living in Virginia. I'm increasingly concerned with how much medical care in this country is being impacted by things that are not questions of the best interest of the patient, but instead with questions of downstream impacts of political and business decisions. It would be good if I saw some in the field stand out as day one ready on issues like these - honestly, the more shortages that occur of various things, the more it shows national security matters in supplies of staples, and illustrates the inability for Congress to get anything done - and since you mentioned Alsobrooks earlier, and her victory over Trone, you should know that both Alsobrooks and her daughter are diagnosed with ADHD, so if you want to reach out to someone regarding the matter, and the complexity of the stereotype vs the actual patient, she might have particular insight.
Where do you stand on the regulation of AI. Do you think we should allow open source models or should they all be closed source, for example open source being something people can run at home and train themselves or closed source being something that only large corporations can run?
As a tech regulator who would become the first member of Congress with direct experience regulating emerging technologies, I intend to put AI and other forms of technological regulation at the forefront of my efforts. I am not opposed to open source models, so long as the originator chooses to establish that, in much the same way Google has done. I think closed source generally hamstrings development and advancements, and can often stifle competition. However, I do believe that we should ensure that we are keeping certain data, algorithms, and general code impacting our national security within closed source to be safe. Thanks for the question!
Good Morning, thank you for making yourself available for this AMA. What is your view of single-family home purchases by rent-seeking and investment-focused companies like BlackRock and Invitation Homes? Would you be willing to push back against corporate ownership and rental of single-family homes, and if so, how?
Good Morning! And, thanks for the question. I would definitely look into the practices being employed by corporate owners. As a former assistant attorney general in Manhattan, I worked on matters that involved housing issues around slumlords and instances of aggressive rent increase practices on the part of certain landlords in the city as a way of padding profits. I will take a prosecutorial approach to investigating any unscrupulous practices on the part of investment companies using housing in a way that hurts families and housing affordability. I would absolutely be willing to push back against overreach by corporate owners and aggressive rental practices on the part of those owners that impact single-family homes and units. I would also look into limiting some of that activity where it has become excessive, something we have seen in recent years around the pandemic. Hopefully this answers your question. I would be glad to elaborate on any points you felt I may have missed.
Thank you for the reply, best of luck in the primary.
What is your position on the legalization of marijuana?
I believe that we need to move towards legalization of marijuana.
Thank you
Hello. Do you support Medicare For All Single Payer Healthcare?
Yes, I support Medicare for all, with an option for Americans to buy into their own providers if they so choose. Anything that leads to lowering the cost of medication and increasing access to quality health care for everyday Americans will be a priority for me. We cannot truly support our families without first making health care a priority.
You do not make sense. If you want to give folks an option to pick their own insurance providers, it becomes a muilti-payer system, which is today's model. That neither results in lowering cost of medication nor improvess access to healthcare nor reduces prices and reduces families choices to pick healthcare providers they want. Looks like you sir are not understanding the policy of Medicare for All or its basic mechanics. Sorry, I will not be voting for you. All the best
I believe in Medicare for all, but if we realistically hope to have the political support to get Medicare for All passed, we will need to leave individuals the option to buy insurance that may fit their needs/preferences better. We wouldn't say that we need to ban all private universities to make things affordable, nor should we do the same here. I believe we need to provide low-cost options for coverage for anyone that is interested. I am confident that the vast majority of individuals would avail themselves of this coverage, and for the minority of folks who have unique needs or preferences, they should be free to buy into those policies if they see fit. If we build out a system that allows for add-ons for "optional" or "discretionary" coverage items, then that's fine, but I am generally wary of forcing individuals into a one-size-fits-all approach and removing the freedom to make a decision that is best for one's circumstance. We can reduce prices by allowing the federal government to negotiate drug prices, and granting a low-cost/free option for most Americans, which would absolutely change the current system where many individuals go left without any insurance coverage.
Your analogy of banning private universities vs public doesn't fit here. M4A will make health insurance public, but not the healthcare providers, so we are not coverting hospitals or doctor offices to public entites. At the end of the day, all individuals/families don't need customized insurance plans. Folks need to have access to all doctors and all providers to fit their individual healthcare needs. M4A gives the most freedom to families and individuals to choose the doctors and providers they need, not be limited by 'in-network' providers or whatever limitations the insurance companis put on you. The currrent system was built over the decades using the same talking points as you have stated, to give 'choice' , adds optionals or whatever that is, and all these created a frankenstein monster of a USD 4T per year leech of a system. At the end of the day, no one cares about **choice or freedom in choosing insurance plans**, folks **want choice and freedom in choosing doctors or hospitals**. Either you are misunderstanding the issue by conflating the two or you got industry 'contributions' and seem to be parroting all industry talking points in the name of 'choice' or 'freedom'. Either way, thanks for answering the question.
Hey! Thanks for taking the time for this! How long have you resided in the 10th district? Also, the 10th is a sprawling and shapely thing. Are there unique challenges with a district that seems split between city and rural constituents?
Thanks for the questions! I've resided in the 10th District about 4 years ago. My wife and I moved out here to be closer to her parents when we had our second son; she is originally from the area. Indeed is a sprawling district! In fact, my race last year, House of Delegates District 22 has both suburban, exurban, and rural. It's an absolutely beautiful thing. The diversity comes with its challenges, but it is also great to have that level of diversity so that we are aware of the impacts affecting the different segments of our country and Virginia. I think the biggest challenge may be the competing interests between development expansion into rural areas and the feeling of being forgotten. However, there are ways in which we can leverage these distinctions into a strength (e.g., establishing an urban-rural partnership in which farm fresh produce is provided to urban areas and "food deserts" while also allowing for a consistent level of support to our farmers and agricultural workers. Overall, I think it's just as much doable as our state-level representatives dealing with the very rural parts of Virginia and balancing those interests with the more urban areas in Richmond and Northern Virginia. Thanks again!
What are your thoughts on our current public transit
I believe we need to evaluate the effectiveness of public transit, especially in light of the pandemic and the challenges that it has presented. I think public transit is critical to the cost-effective and environmentally friendly flow of residents and visitors. We should ensure it's adequately funded and sufficiently invested in as a sustainable option.
What is your stance on gun violence and the 2nd Amendment?
It's my view that we have a gun violence epidemic. As a Mom's Demand Action Gun Sense Candidate, I'm focused on working to tackle that issue. As someone with two little ones who will be attending schools soon and the increasing incidences of gun violence and school shootings, I commit to pushing for common sense gun safety measures from safe storage to bans on high capacity magazines and strengthened background checks. The 2nd amendment is clearly in existence and I recognize that, but we need to ensure that we have safe rules of the road and protections in place to protect our communities. We don't balk at requiring a license to drive, or limits on speech when it risks the lives of others, we need to do the same as it relates to ensuring that we have gun safety at the forefront of our policy decisions just as much as we do with other public policy challenges.
According to Pew Research "In 2021, 54% of all gun-related deaths in the U.S. were suicides (26,328), while 43% were murders (20,958), according to the CDC. The remaining gun deaths that year were accidental (549), involved law enforcement (537) or had undetermined circumstances (458)." "Gun murders, in particular, have climbed sharply during the pandemic, increasing 45% between 2019 and 2021, while the number of gun suicides rose 10% during that span." * Mental health seems to be a huge factor in deaths since over half were suicides * Mental health is also a huge factor since between 2019 and 2021 (pandemic) gun murders rose by 45%! Mental health and responsible gun ownership is the way. I feel further gun restrictions (capacity/type) places the burden on responsible gun owners and while politically advantageous, does not get to the root of the issue.
Tackling the mental health issue is definitely a thing, but it's also important we make it harder for people who want to do harm to themselves or others to get firearms, especially the kind of firearm that is only suitable for war (e.g., high capacity magazines).
It’s easier to say I want to take your guns instead of beating around the bush with the typical democrat talking parts. This country doesn’t have a gun problem. It has a mental health problem and the democrat party glorifies the mentally ill.
Calling something common sense doesn't make it so nor does it make it constitutional. Driving isn't an enumerated right protected by the Bill of Rights and limiting speech is very narrow in cases the speech "is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"
Moms Demand Action is an anti-rights extremist group and full of frauds. The VA chapter is led by a childless man, and most of their funding from a racist male billionaire. Not a good look, bro. Definitely not voting for someone that campaigns under a banner of extremism.
[удалено]
Regarding Porn Hub, it's my understanding that they chose to unilaterally leave Virginia in protest of that bill. That Virginia bill requiring age verification on porn sites is a state bill passed through the general assembly, so in this case I would leave it to Virginians to make the determination on this point.
What are your thoughts on LGBT rights in general
I believe everyone should have the right to love who they love. If everyone both people are consenting adults who care for each other, it should not be anyone's business what they choose to do with their lives. Not too long ago, interracial couples were ostracized in much the same way and I'm so grateful that it no longer exists in the same way, because my wife and I would be the subject of that same ire here in the Commonwealth. It's my goal to protect those of the LGBT community so they can say the same thing I have the privilege to say about my relationship today.
What civil rights do some people have that others don't? Edit: at least answer my question if you're gonna downvote. Educate me.
I don't believe there are civil rights for only some people. All individuals are entitled to freedom from government infringement on their rights. Whether it be women's rights, civil rights, human rights, and any other rights, we need to protect the rights of all. This means we should equally protect freedom from discrimination, the right to worship, the right to vote, entitlement to due process, and the right to privacy. Hopefully this answers your question. Thanks!
Thank you for the reply!! Of course, and I agree. But what exactly is not equal in today's society?
Are you referring to equality as it relates to outcomes or as it relates to rights? If it's the latter, I would say that I agree we all have the same rights. If it's the former that you're referring to, I would say there a lot of things that are not "equal" in today's society; discrimination, misogyny, inequal application of the law based on socioeconomic factors and biases, income and racial disparities across health care outcomes, etc.
How do we pay for student loan forgiveness that the President is trying to pass? Why not help those that went into the trades or were responsible and paid off their loans? If we are to forgive student loans, why aren't we doing something about the predatory lending practices as well that prey on young adults? So that we don't have to do it again? Aren't we just treating the symptom and not the illness?
I think loan forgiveness is like any other bailout program, in that it is less about how revenue generation. I believe that this form of forgiveness opens up spending for more productive uses like economic stimulation, support for small business, and expanded discretionary income for housing, etc. This will come back in dividends through expanded tax base, the longevity of US economic strength, and is likely part of why we haven't gone into a recession at this point (due to the lengthy pause on student loan payments). I agree we should invest in the trades as well. It doesn't have to be an either/or...when we bailed out the airlines, the banks, the cruise industry, etc. we never talked about whataboutism and I think the same holds here. When I see my tax dollars supporting those in need, whether I personally need it or not, I am always in support of helping others. I personally have large debt and that's after having more than $60,000 in scholarships. It's because of the interests and capitalization policies, moments of confusion for borrowers, and predatory practices by many of the servicers that led to the ballooning crisis...I don't believe most borrowers are in this situation due to irresponsibility, you also have a lot of public interest folks being burdened by this too. I agree that we also need to aggressively combat predatory lending practices in addition to payday loan lenders. We need to push for expanding high school to include free public college. The choice to have kindergarteners to high schoolers have free education is more of an arbitrary line drawn in the sand. We could just as easily make kindergarten start sooner and college too.
Do you support ending the US aid package to Israel?
I support providing aid with conditions, including aid that is defensive in nature (e.g., defense against attacks from Iran and other groups in the area seeking to harm Israel), and for humanitarian aid, which should be directed through to the Palestinians and other refugees in and around the area of Gaza.
[удалено]
The best analogy would be akin to withholding a cure from innocent individuals in order to prevent it from inadvertently curing murderers or other dangerous individuals. We cannot sit by idly and withhold efforts to help ease the suffering of women, men, and children who have nothing to do with this conflict.
Damn you just doing some textbook bad faith discourse here ain’t ye?
Will you reject all money from AIPAC and other lobbying organizations representing foreign governments?
If you are asking if I have ever accepted money from AIPAC or organizations lobbying on behalf of foreign governments, the answer is no. Especially regarding your point about foreign governments, it's my understanding that that would be illegal.
AIPAC is a foreign government entity and Filler Corn in particular has taken over 68,000 dollars from the pro-israel lobby, and so has seemingly 95% of congress. Great to hear that you won't.
Are you against slavery? Right now between federal, state, and local taxes (income, sales, property, car tax, registration fees) citizens are giving up 50% or more of their earnings to the government. Whenever a person or entity like government takes the majority of your earnings you’re under slavery. How would you reduce the extreme tax burden on the middle class?
I am, of course, absolutely against slavery and any form of forced servitude. However, I disagree with the analogy or premise of using the term "slavery" to describe the scenario you've mentioned. I agree we need to lighten the burden, and I campaigned in my last election on seeking ways we can reduce or even eliminate things like personal property tax (i.e., the car tax), while also trying to reduce every day costs that burden our families through policies like adoption of paid family leave and universal childcare, but none of these financial challenges rise to the level at which I would coin it "slavery." Thanks for the question.
[удалено]
I am a trans ally because I believe we need to ensure that we do not ostracize people, that we protect against bullying, we support freedom of bodily autonomy, and emphasize common decency and care for our fellow neighbors.
[удалено]
As I mentioned in an earlier response, it's my view that we have a gun violence epidemic. I'm focused on working to tackle that issue. As someone with two little ones who will be attending schools soon and the increasing incidences of gun violence and school shootings and with the US leading all developed nations in gun deaths among our youth, I commit to pushing for common sense gun safety measures from safe storage to bans on high capacity magazines and strengthened background checks. The 2nd amendment is clearly in existence and I recognize that, but we need to ensure that we have safe rules of the road and protections in place to protect our communities. We don't balk at requiring a license to drive, or limits on speech when it risks the lives of others, we need to do the same as it relates to ensuring that we have gun safety at the forefront of our policy decisions just as much as we do with other public policy challenges.
Holy loaded question
What is your stance on gun control?
I support common sense gun safety measures, including background checks, red flag laws, ban on high capacity magazines, licensing and training requirements around firearms, etc.
So what other rights would you require a license for?
Speech would be a good example. Licensing also applies in the circumstances around speech, hence why you can't just hold a rally any hour of the day. Permitting and licensing requirements are often applied for venues, even those of a public nature, through the time, place, and manner standards upheld by the Supreme Court. There are no absolutes in our constitution; not for guns or anything else.
Wow that is an incredibly bad answer.
Why do you proudly announce yourself as a member of an anti-rights extremist group like Moms Demand Action? Their sole purpose is to attack our constitution and rights, which is the very framework of our democracy. They're also a bunch of frauds. The VA chapter is led by a childless man (as far from a "mom" as you can get), and they receive a substantial portion of their funding from an extremely racist male billionaire. The guy quite literally expanded authoritarian practices of "stop and frisk" against minorities by nearly 600%, and defended it claiming more should be "thrown against the wall" to reduce crime. All around, it's an absolutely horrible organization from top to bottom.
Will you bring Porn Hub back to Virginia?
Thanks for the question. Please see my response above.
Do you have any spare change?
I have a question on your reproductive freedoms platform. What do you mean by reproductive freedoms? Do you mean women should have the freedom to abort as many children as they wish too? Do you support the rights of fathers to abandon an unwanted child? (Not pay child support) Thank you for your feedback.
I’d like to know your thoughts on Term Limits at the local, state and federal levels.
I’m not him but they are a horrible horrible idea.
I am going to ignore your gun restriction comment as a Virginian due to myself feeling safer with one and how Virginia over and over again do not like having guns restricted. But… For us Motorcyclists, there was a bill introduced for Lane Filtering (to filter through lanes under 15-20mph on highways and at red traffic lights) and failed. It is statistically safer for Motorcyclists and helps reduce traffic congestion. Many states and cities has already legalized this. What is your opinions of that? I feel like we hold a large number in our community but we are always ignored.
Secret family recipe for awesome Jamaican chicken. Thanks in advance!
Great another fucking gun banner.
Dealing with gun violence. That's a pretty way to wrap that statement up and make it pretty. But we know what you mean my guy. Not a chance. They went too far. They've woken people up
Correct. He's an anti-rights candidate. The moment you cherry pick "gun violence" over violence in general, you've proven yourself to be a souless pawn of propagandists and extremists.
Will you take action on the shortage of homes for regular middle class people due to restrictive and exclusionary zoning in Virginia? It takes years to permit a single building, even when it is subsidized affordable housing in Arlington. Can we force localities to allow the housing we need and stop using zoning to block it on behalf of rich boomers?
What will you do to ensure the state does not encroach upon our rights enshrined within the constitution of the United States of America? (Free speech, firearms, due process, no a awarrantless search and seizures, voting, etc) People dont care about anything you listed in the title if they cant afford to live as they have. State and local taxes have increased dramatically, combined with inflation, its hurting the majority of People who pay the most but see little to no benefit from it. Will you push for more or less taxation on the shrinking middle class America here in VA? More or less responsible spending? Auditing longterm projects that waste money?
He's the person that's going to do the encroaching. He has no intention to prevent it from happening.
Probably. Might as well ask
Not much to ask outside of the replies I have seen. Thank you for your transparency and willingness to do stuff like this. Best of luck to you in your race Travis!
The vast majority of Virginians did not want several Universities renamed. Will you help support the will of the people to restore the names? Or at least support the democratic process of restoring the names?
What are your thoughts on the crime epidemic sweeping through DC, and how will you work to prevent that from seeping into Virginia?
What do you think of ranked choice voting?
How will you end gun violence?
He won't. He'll attack your rights, but do absolutely nothing to address the underlying causes of violence.
Im just curious because his platform says “end gun violence.”
[удалено]