Evan Jones

Neutral

Neutral

Agree

"Who am I to judge?" Congress currently does not have jurisdiction over this kind of determination. So I feel it is irresponsible and manipulative for candidates to take definitive positions on this complex constitutional issue just to score political points. Whatever we do in Congress that affects this delicate area of public policy, the goal must be fewer unwanted children, fewer mothers suffering, and fewer or even zero abortions. Our actions must be based on realities that families face in our communities. We must respect the constitutional process. We have to base all judgments and decisions on all matters like these on balanced and unbiased data that we should be getting from our representatives (as opposed to the manipulation for self-promotion that we get now): we don't need party- or activist-driven propaganda, cable-news hysteria, Internet memes, or even politicized sermons to make both the moral and necessarily empathetic decisions in our public and our private lives.

Disagree

Strongly Agree

This is another issue that it is easy to make a declaration on (to score political points) but is much more complex to make actual progress on. Many politicians base their answers to questions like these on how to best manipulate and distort awareness that exists in their District on the future prospects of Social Security, or on the various proposed schemes to keep it afloat. They usually opt to declare an "answer" based on where the partisan propaganda out there has their voters "leaning" on the various blue-sky fixes, as opposed to outlining a truly defensible long term plan. The most important thing I can do for constituents on this issue will be to provide all the unfiltered and unbiased information I can about the current state and future prospects for Social Security, and what alternatives exist for everyday folks to fund or supplement their retirements. That way we all will be able to make decisions and judgments on this matter for ourselves and our future economic security.

A serious candidate must answer this question with "all of the above" and must add "increase revenues" as well. For example: If to score political points a candidate cries "cut defense", that doesn't take into account either security concerns or the often-hidden reality that defense is America's number one economic stimulus tool. If one said "cut welfare" that would ignore the fact that in reality this is just a drop in the federal bucket and has already been pared to the bone. Let's be serious.

When educational institutions (profit and non-profit) can be shown to have lured students into taking loans and defrauded them by failing to provide effective education, this could be a grounds for federal intervention. As is the case with Superfund industrial sites (where the government funds clean-up of commercial sites that have been polluted) the resources for the pay-offs must be at least partially recovered by fines and forfeitures levied on the responsible parties behind the fraud.

Agree

Neutral

Yes

Judeo-Christian values are the core underpinning of our Constitution and our way of life, even in these modern United States. The founders understood that America was "the last best hope on Earth" for a place where all could freely make everyday decisions and judgments based on an uninterrupted personal search for truth. They believed it our right and responsibility to come to secular decisions on our own (using Judeo-Christian thought as guidelines). The idea that any one person or group could be allowed to impose their view on anyone else was repugnant to them. They knew America couldn't succeed if one "orthodoxy" could ever win a monopoly over all others. I think this means we have to resist anyone (partisan politician, TV-pundit, Internet screamer, or even a politicized pastor) who tries to tell us how to think with manipulation, guile or self-interest as their motivation. In the secular realm, unbiased information and broad perspective will always win the day.

Agree

Strongly Disagree

Let's focus on common ground where we know fixes can be made right now: In January 2021 we can eliminate geographic limitations on insurance pools and expand the portability of personal insurance plans between jobs, life changes, etc. Let's stimulate expansion (and competition) in insurance coverage options (government, private, non-profit, parochial, etc.) without taking anyone's current options away. Let's make a version of government-administered insurance (a la Medicare) available to all that actively competes on cost, efficiency and service quality in the open market with for-profit plans. Let's pursue a plan whereby every American can opt for free or very affordable access to basic wellness-care programs through their work, local community organizations or faith-based institutions. Finally, let's take this opportunity now to bolster the training, career prospects, quality of work-life, and safety profile experienced by our dedicated health care providers.

Neutral

It would be arrogant for me or any candidate to prescribe a solution to a challenge few of us completely understand in all its complexity. My goal in Congress will be to get solid information and all the different perspectives in the debate onto the table for constituents, well before crises hit the fan. That way, we (the people) can make judgments and decisions in our lives to see that our families and businesses can have a chance to thrive going forward. This is just as true of matters in foreign affairs as in domestic ones. Islamic terrorism is an excellent example of an issue on which we have been told what to think for a long time by self-interested politicians, partisan pundits on the cable networks, radio, and across the Internet, and by shadier forces who have slowly taken over our social media. We need solid information so we can determine how this threat and others affect our lives and communities here at home. Only then can we help determine the shape of the US response.

Agree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Future immigration policies must be curated carefully to reflect the realities of our economy (i.e. the work-skills needs and job-availability we can reasonably expect to have in the next 25-years) and the assessed capacity of our communities to absorb new arrivals without sacrificing quality of life standards. We have to be open-eyed as we study this and carefully consider all perspectives and facts we gather (and then discuss among our neighbors and communities). We have to acknowledge that this is a sea-change in American culture and values based on the unique resource and sustainability challenges of the 21st Century and we have to accept that it is also a fundamental shift in who we are to the world. The origin and ethnicity of new arrivals must not enter into this equation either positively or negatively. In doing this we have to acknowledge that all past entrants who have otherwise "played by the rules" in becoming responsible neighbors must be acknowledged now as citizens.

Neutral

Strongly Agree

Neutral

My personal motto has always been "Shrewdness must guide us, but Kindness Always Wins". I believe in a world guided by the Golden Rule. I do not believe in a dog-eat-dog community or in zero-sum mind games. I think the American Amish tradition of barn-raising is about as close to the ideal union of free religious commitment and democratic progress-making ever conceived. I was brought up by great American regular-people in my parents, grandparents and elder neighbors to use revelations such as the Beatitudes as a guide to living long, well and wisely. They also said to never wear my religious convictions on my sleeve (or on the tip of my pointing finger.) I strongly believe we all need the wherewithal to make big and small decisions in our lives and that it is our responsibility to make those determinations -- and to not let others tell us how to think. I don't believe in "dittoing" a talking head who tells me how to think or feel. Prayer helps me center myself on what really matters.

No Answer

It is the height of vanity and chicanery to label yourself to an electorate. It is about as useful a test of my fitness to serve as one of those silly political yard signs with a name and an American Flag stamped on it. All the time I knew my wonderful grandparents, I never once knew who they voted for or how they might be "labeled" politically. It was just not something people of their generation shared or evangelized about. They were as patriotic as Americans I've ever known, but not once did I see them seek out a fellow citizen to hate or blame for our challenges -- even during Vietnam, the assassinations and riots of 1968, or Watergate. But I knew where they stood every moment because they lived their principles: An always empathetic ear; careful consideration of all the facts; use of parables from self-experience to guide me toward answers; their openness to new ideas. "Anything that gives us progress" is what they would say, "I don't care who gets the credit." Or the label.

No.

The cynical partisan manipulation of the information available to us as we make decisions for our families and businesses is the moral issue of our times. The politicization of our values by pandering politicians seeking re-election instead of progress is leading to decay in our moral fiber as a nation. I cannot claim to be the candidate who matches the value-system of your particular family. But I will be the representative who gives you the information you need to make your own decisions on matters that affect life in your neighborhood and business. I'll give it without filtering, with both sides of the argument detailed, and with as much data I can get my hands on. I pledge to never campaign while in office: I will do no political fundraising; I will post no attack ads or negative messages. There will be no tweetstorms, no snarky memes, no PAC or lobbyist speeches and no closed-door deals. Like it should be on "Caesar's side of the house." You decide what to think, and how to act.

Agree

I do not agree with the approach of activists on this issue. I believe we can protect the rights of gun owners and also acknowledge the concerns of reasonable neighbors on firearms safety. Gun ownership is an inalienable fact of American life. But we share our communities: So, universal gun registration is reasonable. Temporary restrictions when a gun user is deemed unstable is reasonable. Limitations on when and where military-style rifle enthusiasts can discharge their weapons is reasonable.

Disagree

Agree

Disagree

Agree

I will propose legislation to make adult skills-training tools and professional/career development programming as readily available to all working Americans in the 2020s as PK-12 Public Schooling has been for children since the 19th Century. I will propose legislation to increase federal investments in small business and grassroots entrepreneurship in community economies. The aim of this bill is to unleash local ingenuity and workplace innovation with federally funded micro-enterprise financing, more shared-resource work-hubs and business-startup learning programs in challenged rural and urban communities, and to provide federal support for expanded availability of workplace apprenticeships in a range of trades and industries (including agriculture). I will propose legislation to expand funding to federally-driven research facilities (such as PNNL) and establish new ways for citizens and businesses to access the unclassified results of this groundbreaking work to use in their lives.

Absolutely, and not only overt racism but the unconscious racism that all of us who aren't perfect (meaning all of us) lapse into from time to time. (I recommend any thoughtful American be open to learning more about unconscious racism.) The best way I've seen this framed as a true community threat was through teacher Jane Elliott's lessons to her white Iowa students in the 1960s. (She would say) "Stand up if you would prefer to be treated in your life the way any minority here in America is in their everyday life." When she would do this in any classroom, auditorium, or PTA meeting, no one would ever stand. Not one. You might wonder, if you and your family were treated in that unacceptable way, and nothing changed year upon year, what do you think you all might one day want to do about it? The fact is, if we can't thrive as neighbors, we cannot move forward. This is a critical question for our nation; like it our not, systemic racism and unconscious bigotry is at the root of it all.