.

What Would You Ask 47th Congressional Candidates?

What would you like Patch to discuss with the four who are vying to represent Long Beach, Los Alamitos, Rossmoor, and other Orange County cities?

As the June 5 primary election campaigns begin to kick into gear for the new 47th Congressional District, the party forums and luncheons have begun. Sometimes there are too many candidates to speak at any length about important and often complex local issues.

As the election nears Patch will interview each candidate (willing) about biographical information and where they stand on important concerns. Their campaign websites or Facebook pages are linked in their names so you can get a quick read on positions or promises already stated.

The Republican field and Democratic fields each feature four candidates.

Republicans

Gary DeLong

Steve Foley

Sanford W. Kahn

Steve Kuykendall

Democrats

Peter Mathews

Jay Shah

Usha Shah

Alan Lowenthal

Lowenthal and Mathews are the two Democrats running for the Congressional seat, and though they're not on the ballot for the June 5 primary, Republicans already have been running against Lowenthal, the only officeholder at the state level rather than a city council.

So here's your chance to ask them what you want to know, and don't worry if your interests are not broad enough to be relevant to every city in the new district. You are among 700,000 people this Congressman (there are no female candidates) will represent.

Do you want to know their position on military spending, deficit tolerance, Israel, Social Security or Healthcare reform? Fire away with those questions.

John B. Greet March 21, 2012 at 01:34 PM
1. Do you believe that the constitution is a document that is intended to impose strict limits upon the power and scope of the federal government and, if so, what do you, personally, plan to do to see that Congress' legislative and fiscal activities remain with the constitution's specifically enumerated bounds? " 2. "Congress is in charge of the federal purse strings. If you are elected to Congress, what do you, personally, plan to do to reign in our of control federal spending?"
Rick McGilton March 21, 2012 at 02:43 PM
1. Would you support a bill to eliminate of DOMA? if not, why? 2. Would you support EDNA? If not, why? 3. Would you support a bill that would recognize marriage between a man and women? If so, why? 4. Would you support a bill that would allow gay spouses who are immigrants to be allowed to stay in this country like their straight counterparts? If not, why? 5. Do you believe that being gay is (1) a protected group and (2) should be protected like other minority groups? Please explain. 6. Would you try to work across the aisle to work on solutions to our countries issues? 7. Would you go against your party on issues that go against their platform? 8. If elected, who do you represent...your backers, the voters in your party or everyone in your district whether they voted or not?
Nancy Wride (Editor) March 21, 2012 at 03:33 PM
Excellent, folks. Keep them coming.
met00 March 21, 2012 at 05:23 PM
Would you fight for and support replacing the current Federal Tax Code with Dwight D Eisenhower's 1958 Federal Tax Code with the dollar numbers adjusted for inflation? If not, why not? Would you fight for and support the re-institution of Glass–Steagall Act. If not, why not? Do you believe that the United States is the worlds policeman? If not, would you fight to close every military base overseas, or have 100% of the costs of those bases covered by the host country before another one at home is closed? Do you believe that there is a right to privacy for the individual or do you support domestic spying without warrants? Do you believe that corporations are people? Do you believe that money is speech? Do you support the Citizens United ruling from the SCOTUS? If not, what are you willing to do to overturn it legislatively? Will you fight to get the United State military out of Afghanistan? By what target date? Will you fight to change the military process of discharge so that there is a reverse process of "basic" to prepare those discharged to return to civilian life? Will you fight to obtain more money for PTSD treatment for our military veterans? Since 1980 there has been a consistent effort to change the tax codes to benefit the wealthiest (trickle down theory /the Laffer Curve). Since it has clearly faild, do you support reversing the policy? Which is more important "deficit and debt reduction" or "increasing income" to balance the budget?
LBC Resident March 21, 2012 at 05:24 PM
We all know DeLong re[resents his backers.
met00 March 21, 2012 at 05:41 PM
Do you believe that civil marriage is between two persons past the age of majority, or is the gender of the individuals important? Do you believe that contraception and family planning is a private issue between a doctor and patient? Do you support Planned Parenthood being able to get Federal Funding to provide women's health services excluding legal pregnancy termination procedures? Do you believe that America is a Christian Country? Do you believe America was founded on Christian biblical ideals (ie: The Ten Commandments")? Is Social Security an entitlement? Do you support raising the maximum base income for social security taxes to increase income, or do you support changing the way COL adjustments are made and/or raising the age? Do you support single payer healthcare or a "public option" in addition to or to replace the current healthcare model? In immigration do you support more enforcement and penalties for immigrants, or for the employers that hire them? Do you support a guest worker program for low cost labor intensive industries like farming? Do you support continuing to provide federal monies to the fossil fuel industries in tax breaks, price supports, fee and cost reductions, or direct funding? As a consumer-based economy, what are your immediate plans once elected to generate more consumers? Do you support allowing cannabis to be grown and sold in the United States like liquor? [there are many more...]
met00 March 21, 2012 at 08:24 PM
On March 21, 2012 the Joint Committee on Taxation, Congress’s scorekeepers on taxes, released a report stating that implementing a “Buffett rule” to require a minimum 30 percent tax rate for the highest U.S. earners would raise $47 billion over the next decade. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), the top Republican on the Finance Committee, said in a statement, "The proposal would have little effect on reducing the federal budget deficit.“ Do you think that $47 billion dollars income would have little effect on reducing the budget deficit? Would you support institution the "Buffet rule" if it was presented on the floor of the House? Would you sign on as a sponsor or co-sponsor to the "Buffet rule"? If not, why not?
met00 March 21, 2012 at 08:48 PM
On March 21, 2012 House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) released his Budget Plan. The plan includes substantial changes to the American tax code, both for corporations and individuals. Ryan’s tax plan shrinks the number of income tax brackets from six to two, with marginal tax rates set at 10 percent and 25 percent. He repeals the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), slices the top corporate tax rate to 25 percent, and repeals all of the health care taxes contained in the Affordable Care Act. It also repeals the repatriation tax on profits corporations earn overseas then bring back to the United States. In all, those tax breaks amount to a $3 trillion giveaway to the richest Americans and corporations, according to the Tax Policy Center. Repealing the repatriation tax would add roughly $130 billion to that. This does not include the privatization of Medicare, which would decimate incomes for the elderly as they would have to pay a large percentage of their income for private health care. Do you support the Ryan budget?
met00 March 22, 2012 at 04:47 AM
"Drill Baby Drill" is a mantra that has been told to the people many times. "If we only allowed more drilling then the price of gas would fall." is a common theme among many of those running for public office. Two questions. The first is, do you agree that the solution to our current prices for gasoline can be offset or resolved by more development and drilling of fossil fuels in the United States? "When you put the inflation-adjusted price of gas on the same chart as U.S. oil production since 1976, the numbers sometimes go in the same direction, sometimes in opposite directions. If drilling for more oil meant lower prices, the lines on the chart would consistently go in opposite directions. A basic statistical measure of correlation found no link between the two, and outside statistical experts confirmed those calculations." Based on this data do you still believe that the solution to gas prices is to drill and exploit US petroleum?
tinytom March 22, 2012 at 06:12 PM
Do you favor the T Boone Pickens plan of converting 18 million commercial trucks in the US to run on natural gas which could free us from dependency on OPEC oil?
Panglonymous March 22, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Where do you see yourself in two years? Where do you see America in two years? Does everybody know? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUfS8LyeUyM
Panglonymous March 22, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Can you approach and maintain anything like this kind of adult candor? http://youtu.be/zrp-v2tHaDo Can you get through this process and keep the core of yourself? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/fashion/20speechwriter.html
BSResident April 02, 2012 at 10:39 PM
Do you support the elimination of the alternative minimum tax?
Panglonymous April 09, 2012 at 09:51 PM
Gary DeLong has started a new Patch blog (at the invitation of the editor) and is interacting personally with readers - currently on the subject of deficit spending. Check it out: http://patch.com/B-HQK
Steve Foley April 28, 2012 at 02:54 PM
Thanks John, my answer to question #1: Our Founding Fathers plainly spelled out the powers granted to the federal government in Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. If the federal government is doing something not specifically listed in Article I, Section 8, it is almost certainly engaging in an overreach of its authority. Article I, Section 8 clearly indicates that the primary responsibility of the federal government is the common defense, or the protection of our nation's sovereign borders. In recent decades, the federal government has noticeably failed to adequately fulfill this primary duty, while creating numerous other responsibilities for itself that lie entirely beyond its explicitly enumerated powers and purview. Moreover, re-interpretation of the Founders' original intent has permitted much of this overreach. The Commerce Clause is a prominent example of such re-interpretation. Where the Founders intended the Commerce Clause to ensure that commerce between the states remained regular, the federal government now wrongly uses it to justify its own control over any interstate commerce that occurs. Beyond defending our borders, the two most important responsibilities the federal government could adopt today are: 1) To create an environment in which the free market can thrive by removing itself from the market to the greatest degree possible; and 2) To keep itself small and limited.
Steve Foley April 28, 2012 at 02:56 PM
My answer to question #2: For starters, we should pass a balanced budget amendment. That amendment or related legislation should stipulate that each chamber of Congress must produce a budget plan within a specified period or forfeit the salaries of its members. In addition, it is time to stop mob-style bookkeeping in Washington, D.C. The federal government should keep one set of books, using GAAP accounting principles. Standard practices that keep the rest of us out of jail ought to be standard practice for our federal government.
Steve Foley April 28, 2012 at 03:26 PM
Thanks Mett00, my answers: 1) No I'm for replacing the current tax code with the 999 Tax Reform Legislation! http://stevefoleyforcongress.com/issues/tax-policy/ 2) Yes! 3) No I don't believe the United States should be the worlds policeman...as a Marine I know the strategic value of maintaining and operating overseas bases I'm willing to have a conversation about host countries footing the bill. 4) I believe in an individuals right to privacy and do not support warrant-less domestic wiretapping with the exception of emanate danger to US citizens or property. 5) Yes Corporations are made up of people and should be treated as such just like Unions! 6) Yes! 7) Yes! 8) Yes! I would never offer a date certain we don't have any obligation to supply our enemies with that information. 9) No! But is Military commanders suggested that this type of program was a necessity I would be extremely open to that conversation. 10) Yes! 11) I disagree with your assessment but as I've stated previously I'm in favor of throwing out the tax code and replacing it will the 999 plan which is the first phase in getting this county to a consumption tax! 12) Deficit and Debt Reduction.
Steve Foley April 28, 2012 at 03:27 PM
I like the T Boon Pickens plan and I'm for a true "all of the above" approach to energy independence! http://stevefoleyforcongress.com/issues/energy/
Steve Foley April 28, 2012 at 04:21 PM
Answers to your second round of questions: 1) Yes I do and No I don't 2) Yes! 3) No! 4) Yes It's not a belief it's historical fact. 5) By definition No! But 2012 will mark the first year SS pays out more than it takes in. Also recipients get more money than they pay in so in that sence it's a form of entitlement For example, a single man who retired in 1980 at age 65 after earning an average wage of $43,500 would have paid about $96,000 in Social Security taxes, and probably received $203,000 in lifetime benefits, according to a study by the Urban Institute, a non-partisan policy think tank in Washington D.C. 6) Right now I'm supporting the The Rand-Lee-Graham Plan that protects the economy from collapse by making Social Security solvent without raising taxes, principally via: Gradual increase in the Social Security retirement age, Gradual increase in the early retirement age, Indexing the retirement age to longevity to ensure a constant ration of years worked to expected years in retirement, and Slower benefit accumulation for higher lifetime earners 7) No! 8) Both 9) Yes! 10) Yes just like pharmaceutical and other industries who receive these incentives until such time as we pass the 999 Tax Reform Legislation ending the overburdening taxes placed on all business and put lobbyists and special interests out of business. 11) implement 999 legislation that institutes a 9% business flat tax 12) Yes!

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something