Terri Flynn

Neutral

The issue is no longer a federal one and I am running for a federal seat. Roe vs Wade was overturned on the grounds of the 10th Amendment and state’s rights. RI voted in 2021 to codify abortions if Roe vs Wade were overturned. The RI General Assembly voted to use public funds from Medicaid to pay for abortions. If it came back to the federal level, the conversation would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

Neutral

Reviewing the issues of dignified passing under specific circumstances, and keeping people from doing unwarranted self-harm has merit. The conversation would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

When the state law allows it.

Choose not to answer

This question is incomplete as the manner of redistribution is not defined.

Agree

Debt, whether in your home or in your community can only be addressed by either reducing spending or increasing revenue.

Conversations should be held to completely overhaul the federal US tax code in the interest of taxpayers nationwide. It may be worth exploring a "Flat Tax" that would be weighted at the extreme ends. Instead of hiring more IRS agents, consider eliminating or severely reducing the IRS. Don’t fire them and add to the unemployment rolls, but use the agents' auditing skills to audit government departments to identify efficiencies and redundancies. Tax revenue can only be created by increasing taxes or cutting costs. This would be an effort in cutting costs. Creating a dedicated fund, maybe even an Enterprise Fund, would facilitate record keeping of the effort. Revenue generated could either be paid into Social Security or used to pay down the National Debt. If the people in the communities of Congressional District 1 see tax reform as a priority, I am happy to work on it.

Choose not to answer

This sentence is making an assumption that would need supporting data before a response is warranted. The response would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

Choose not to answer

This question is too vague to answer. Are the individuals private citizens? Are the businesses public entities or do they receive public funding? Once more specifics are provided, the answer would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me and issues like this are best decided in the judiciary and by case law.

The clear separation of church and state is codified in the founding documents of the United States.

It seems pretty clear that the window for mandatory vaccinations has closed and in retrospect was not necessary. This response would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

B) With RI’s high senior population, health care is a top priority One issue that has come to my attention is how doctors charge high premiums based on speculative lawsuits that may arise. Advocating for lawsuit reform in the medical industry may increase services which would lower prices. I would also work across the aisle to make HMOs accessible across state lines and would support initiatives making it easier for small independent pharmacies to compete against the pharmaceutical giants.

B) For conflict engagement, part of the endgame perspective would be when the engagement, or participation in the engagement, would terminate. Not a date for termination, but an achieved benchmark for termination. Benchmarks are a necessary part of good planning and good reevaluations, which lead to good decision-making. Another challenging issue with foreign policy is the fact that we do not exist in a bubble. Things that happen in one country can impact other countries and their citizens. The philosophy of “keep resources here at home” is too simplified. I believe the United States could use more resources for domestic issues, but you can’t get away from the fact that there are extremist leaders on the globe that do unexpected things. To protect our country and our citizens, we sometimes need to have a presence in other countries. This isn’t anything new and the analysis for return on investment of any out-of-country activity or conflicts would need to show a high return, on both the financial investment and the potential bloodshed of our military. I would like to shout out to all our military, and veterans, and Gold Star Families. It is because of them that we and our children enjoy the quality of life that we have today. It is truly awesome to be an American citizen and I need to say, “Thank you, sincerely” to them all.

Choose not to answer

This is an issue that has been around for decades and is very complicated. The nation of Israel is our strategic ally in the region and it needs to remain our ally. If the issue came to the federal level the current information would have to be vetted.

Agree

Policies under the Chinese Communist Party are responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses across the globe. The United States must have policies that strengthen us domestically to reduce the United States' economic dependence on the CCP in the long term.

Continue strategic alliances with Middle Eastern allies and keep the United States from any further Middle Eastern conflicts.

Agree

Immigration enforcement is critical for the economy. In 2022, approx 5.5 million people came to the US illegally. That's ~5 times the population of RI. Negative impacts include: illegal workers taking jobs and subjecting themselves to being taken advantage of; pressure on services being used by those not paying into them, like medical, police, fire, and education. If the people in the communities in Congressional District 1 see this as a priority, I will work on a win-win solution.

Choose not to answer

This question is too definitive and also too broad. "Shall be" indicates a mandate, not an option; more details would have to be provided to contemplate anything that "shall be" done. "State and federal funds" cover an enormous number of categories like infrastructure, education, healthcare, police, fire. Funds for anything that would threaten life could not possibly be withheld.

All are welcome who immigrate legally.

Neutral

All people should be protected from discrimination. All people should be free to think the way they choose.

Choose not to answer

The conversation would have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

Faith and karma keep me positive.

Neutral

Although photo IDs might help to resolve the voter fraud controversy, they are becoming passe and are also easily forged. It seems we are on the technological cusp of being able to assure more voter participation, and certainly more accurate voter verification through things like wallet apps, fingerprint/retina scanning and 2-factor authorizations. If the people in the communities in Congressional District 1 see election integrity as a priority, I will work on possible solutions.

Legislation that will facilitate voter participation and include strong voter verification.

Choose not to answer

This question is incomplete as no particular peoples are identified nor are reparations defined.

Probably, since we are a free nation and that includes those that are free to hate based on First Amendment Constitutional grounds.

Agree

Please see my answer for #2. Balance in policy is critical for the average Rhode Islander. One issue with fracking that should be addressed is the material used for the fracking. The material could be water, a chemical "soup", a sand-based compound or something else. This material is currently proprietary to the companies doing the fracking. Legislation may want to be considered for more transparency of what material is being used.

My view falls somewhere in the middle. There must be a balance. I believe in policies of good stewardship to the environment, but not to the detriment of cost of living and the economy. With energy prices going up and our senior population also on the rise, Rhode Island needs responsible policies that balance going green with the well-being of the average Rhode Islander. We need to consider all forms of energy and, going forward, present the US as having strong domestic energy production policies across the globe.

Choose not to answer

My decision-making is data-driven, for long-range and win-win results. I am not beholden to party labels or other elected officials. My goal is to help people be heard and encourage public participation; not to make decisions for constituents, but to make decisions with their voice. As a town councilor, my goal was to walk into the room with my mind NOT made up, so the public meeting discussion and public input at the meeting held as much weight as the docket information provided beforehand.

Recordings of my participation as a Middletown Town Councilor (2018-2022) and Middletown Planning Board Member (2017-2018): https://www.middletownri.com/413/Middletown-TV

No

I am running because the people who know me know that I have already served them well as an elected official. Their grassroot efforts are what got my name on the ballot (nice to know the political process is still accessible to anyone and everyone). These constituents are people who care about their community and know I will serve in the best interests of them and the community. I am running to improve the lives of people. I care about Rhode Island and would like the opportunity to represent the people in Congressional District 1 (CD-1). I am a person who connects people and acknowledges each person’s contributions. In every community, the best ideas and solutions come from the people who live there. Elected leaders have a wealth of resources, at their fingertips, in the residents of their communities. Congressional delegates are supposed to spend a lot of time with the voters in their district. I look forward to that. I enjoy putting “boots on the ground” and talking to people. The phrase I used in my town council campaigns is “A Leader Who Listens.” I served on Middletown Town Council 2018-2022. I believe in term limits and chose not to run in 2022 so there would be a vacant seat for someone else to have a chance to represent the people and add a new voice, fresh energy and a different perspective to the decision-making conversations. I am running to give voters an alternative candidate to vote for: a citizen candidate. I am not an attorney. I am not a CEO. I do not have hundreds of thousands of dollars. I am not beholden to a party, or other elected officials. My designation has always been Republican, and I wasn’t going to change it for this campaign for 3 reasons: #1. because party labels are becoming blurred and meaningless because the law allows them to be misused as tools to strategize elections, #2. most best decisions on issues today swing somewhere in the middle and #3. Because of #1 and #2, voters need to start looking at the candidates, not the party labels. Little known fact: Middletown Town Council is a non-partisan council, so a council candidate’s party is not identified on the ballot. I will bring that approach to Congress and look at the data, not simply the party recommendations, to vote for what is best for Rhode Island and to vote the way the people of RI CD-1 have indicated they want me to. My campaign is totally grassroots. I personally knew 90% or more of those who collected signatures for me. That effort was non-partisan and I hope it is the right time for voters to look past the party label and look more at the person running for office. Ask yourself: What does the candidate say they will do … and is it what you want? Does the candidate do what they say they will do? Does the candidate vote the way they said they would? I ran for town council as an outsider, a fresh voice. I was elected in 2018 with the second-highest vote count and had the highest vote count in my 2020 re-election. During my 4 years, I served on 9 different committees. Just prior to being elected, I served on the Middletown Planning Board (2017-2018). I have already shown that I do not just sit in the seat with the title, but I participate in the conversation. Ask anyone who was paying attention to Middletown Town Council. I didn’t just review the issues, I researched them. I asked questions to make sure I understood the issues and spoke up to make sure the dots connected. I work hard to make clear to the public, all elements of the issues for transparent, data-driven decisions with a win-win perspective. I look at what every decision option will look like in 5 years, 10 years, 25 years, 50 years, and on for long-term solution-oriented thinking because if you fail to plan, then you plan to fail. I want to bring that same passion to the federal level. The power for change is in the hands of the voters. Voters realize that they are bombarded with messaging from many sources: ground mail, email, texts, TV, radio, social media, yard signs, doorhangers, palm cards. That’s what the big money war chests buy - lots of media to create name recognition. Voters know this and they have the power to vote differently and deliberately. My message: please vote for me in the primary election on Sept 5th and vote for change in the November 7th Special Election. That’s what voting for Terri Flynn will do. This is an off-year special election. Many people will think they do not need to vote and I am asking them to PLEASE: At Least Vote. If you are not registered to vote yet, you can easily register online, or with a paper form, until August 6 Apply for a mail or braille ballot by Aug 15 Early voting for the primary starts Aug 16 Sept 5th is the Primary. Please: VOTE / remind your friends!

Agree

If the conduct is "consistent with departmental policy" why would there be a question of prosecution (is this a trick question?). At the same time, this issue is mostly dealt with on a state level or in the judiciary.

Disagree

It is appropriate for more resources to be allocated to mental health and community programs, but not at the risk to public safety, which would be the result of "reduced funding from police departments".

There is a legal side to this discussion. The Bill of Rights makes it illegal to take firearms from law-abiding citizens. This is enshrined in the Constitution. There is a right to self-defense. This seems especially relevant today given the 340 mass shootings in the United States this year. The approach for increasing safety in firearm ownership should not be a burden to those seeking to own firearms legally and should include focusing on those populations most likely to attain firearms illegally: criminals and those easily influenced, or encouraged, by violence in the media. The approaches should also include non-regulatory interventions that have already been successful, like community non-violence programs, gun buy-back programs, and especially increased mental health support. This conversation would also have to include how I would best represent the district that elected me.

Disagree

On the basis of equity to all manufacturers, this argument isn't viable. There are many ways to cause deliberate death, including, for example, using an ink pen in just the right way, in the neck. To have manufacturers held responsible for misuse of their product would then put BIC and Papermate on notice. It simply is not a solution that seems sustainable.