Like communities across the country, Sacramento is facing an aging infrastructure. Poor infrastructure endangers residents, discourages new business, and slows down our economy. To create jobs and build an economy that works for the middle class, we need to get back to the bipartisan American tradition of investing in our future. We should be exploring new revenue streams such as infrastructure banks in order to pay for the much-needed increase in investments for infrastructure. Improving Sacramento County’s infrastructure will help modernize our economy, help our businesses, and make our communities safer.

As a doctor, I know that health care should be a right, not a privilege. And getting sick shouldn’t mean bankruptcy or a second mortgage. Our nation deserves a healthcare system that enables both opportunity and prosperity.

I am proud to be leading the bipartisan efforts in Congress in bringing about universal coverage to ensure everyone has access to quality, affordable health care. While not perfect, the Affordable Care Act has insured more Americans across the country, including in California. We have to continue to build upon the gains made under the ACA, including expanding coverage and reducing premiums. I have introduced two pieces of legislation to do just that. The Pathway to Universal Coverage Act would provide grants for states to experiment with auto-enrollment for the uninsured, with the potential of expanding health care coverage to millions of Americans. The Easy Enrollment Act would help maximize health insurance coverage by aligning tax season with health care open enrollment, which would allow families to make more informed decisions when they are not financially strained.

As the son of parents who immigrated to America in the 1950s, I know the value of hard work and that America is a land of opportunity. Unfortunately, our immigration system is broken, and Washington gridlock has gotten in the way of meaningful reform. We need policies that make our country safe and our economy strong. I continue to support bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, much like which passed the Senate under the previous administration, which would secure our border, allow our economy to grow, and provide a pathway for citizenship. We need policies that keep families safe while encouraging the best and brightest people to stay in America so they can start their companies and create jobs here in the U.S.

Yes, the federal government has a role to play in helping California with homelessness, which has reached crisis proportions across the state. The most immediate action the federal government can take is by increasing the availability of tax credits, grants, and housing vouchers. The federal government must also work with local communities and governments to find ways to expand shelter capacity, including support for more permanent housing. I’ll continue to be a strong advocate for cities and communities across the 7th Congressional District to ensure they are receiving adequate resources from the federal government. We also cannot lose sight of the growing homelessness crisis facing our veterans. Our veterans have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country and we must be there when they need us the most. I’ve repeatedly pressed the Veterans Affairs Department to ensure funding for programs that reduce homelessness among our veterans. I’m also proud that I helped secure housing vouchers for the Mather Veterans Village in Rancho Cordova to stay on schedule. The Village provides critical assistance and housing to homeless and disabled veterans.

I think the focus of the question should be “how are we going to fund our needed infrastructure improvements, rather than what  new financing methods are we going to adopt.”

We need to look at lowering the costs of repairing our infrastructure and there are a variety ways of doing it-

• Adopt design-build process, rather than a lengthier, costlier design-bid-build process for all Federally funded projects.
• P3s ( Public/Private Partnerships) Allow private entities to fund construction.
• Amending Davis- Bacon Act to allow for less costly labor
• Requiring States to to cost-share for Federal projects.
• Prioritize funding for critical infrastructure and allow for the streamlining of National Environmental Protection Act reporting for those projects- the Federal Government shouldn’t be paying for bike trails and other non-critical infrastructure.

One area that we need to focus on very soon is the Federal Highway Trust Fund. It is going to go broke in FY2022 if nothing is done.

Five solutions are being suggested: 

• 1.)VMT Tax- (Vehicle Miles Traveled) is a commuter tax- the government would track your mileage- it is a little too big brother for me- it would require government to monitor your mileage.
• 2.)Increase in Federal Gas Tax ( It hasn’t been raised since 1993) and is a flat tax ($0.1853) and the inclusion of an increase on the Federal Excise Tax on tires so that electric and hybrid vehicles pay their fair share. Likely to be a solution, although not a popular one in California.
• 3.)P3s and tolls- probably wouldn’t fix the problem completely but could be a part of the solution. 
• 4.)Roll back the 2017 tax cuts ( top tier 37% back to 39.6% and dedicate to Highway funding. Not a favorable solution ion my eyes.
• 5.) Prioritize and realign spending on interstate highways and regional transit and not local transit. Should a CA commuter pay for the subway in NY?

I don’t support Medicare for all. Like Obamacare, it is a big-government -one-size-fits-all approach that in the end will raise healthcare costs and will only satisfy politicians and bureaucrats. And it will be hugely expensive.

The Republican Study Committee in the House released on November 1, 2019, a plan for Healthcare that can help with affordability by concentrating on protecting, empowering, and personalizing Healthcare for patients. Its key components are:

• Unwinding ACA’s “Washington-centric approach” and returns most of the regulatory authority back to the states;
• Undoing ACA’s expensive and mandatory essential health benefits, annual lifetime limits, preventive care with no cost-sharing, dependent coverage, and metal actuarial tiers (bronze, silver etc.), and allows states to prescribe these principles;
• Not allowing insurance carriers to rescind, increase rates, or refuse to renew a person’s health insurance if they should develop an illness after enrollment;
• Allowing individuals with chronic and risky medical conditions to have access to affordable state-run Guaranteed Coverage Pools, subsidized by federal grants;
• Restructuring the guaranteed issue and prohibition on coverage exclusions to reward continuous coverage and promote portability in the individual marketplace;
• Restructuring ACA premium subsidies and Medicaid Expansion federal matching programs to fund state-administered grants to subsidize health insurance for low-income individuals, while protecting the medically vulnerable, such as low-income pregnant woman and children, that Medicaid was created to help;
• Changing the tax code to provide for equal treatment of employer and individual health insurance markets;
• Expanding the use of pre-tax Health Savings Accounts (HSA), including using them to pay for insurance premiums, and increases allowable yearly contributions from $3,500 to $9,000 for individuals and from $7,000 to $18,000 for families;
• Extending portability protections (contained in the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act for employer-sponsored health insurance) to the individual market;
• Eliminating the employer mandate; and
• Promoting the use of innovative healthcare solutions such as telemedicine, direct primary care, association health plans, and health sharing ministries.

I would support this effort.

I believe that any immigration policy that comes forward needs to be based upon several core principles:

Immigration is  first a national security issue. Allowing millions of unidentified persons to enter and remain in this country poses grave risks- whether it be from terrorism, crime or economic burden. One only needs to look at the prison population, to know that the undocumented place a severe burden on our society. I believe America’s borders can, and should be secured.

Secondarily I believe that we need to follow existing law in terms of a strict enforcement policy. Specifically, for enforcement at places of employment, including prosecution for using false social security numbers; limiting the rights of aliens in deportation proceedings and abuses of the refugee status; tracking down aliens who overstay their visas; and denying federal funds to “sanctuary cities.”

I believe that we should prioritize immigration to people that can contribute to society, and to those that have family to vouch for their support, so they won’t be a burden on the taxpayer.

In terms of the DREAMERS, I believe that we should create a path to residency- given certain conditions such as not having criminal convictions and being gainfully employed or completing their education or military service.

I believe that there are three areas that are likely to achieve bipartisan agreement in the next term of Congress. 

The first being infrastructure which is receiving the attention of both the Trump Administration and Speaker Pelosi.

The second is Criminal Justice Reform which has received support from both the President and Democrats and Republicans in the Congress.

Thirdly, homelessness and the plight of our veterans who've we dispatched overseas to fight our wars,

 The last are is the continuation of support for National Defense and the War on Terror.

Yes, the Federal Government does have a roll in solving the homeless problem, but really in very specific areas such as homeless veterans, affordable housing and drug interdiction in respect to opioid crisis and the explosion of methamphetamines. In addition the Federal Government should seek to expand funding opportunities for local agencies through the Continuum of Care process in order to address addiction and mental illness.

I think that the more important question is, “can we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow?” The Federal Debt and Budget Deficits are at all time highs;The Trump tax cut was a good stimulus to the economy, but in the absence of further need for economic stimulus I believe the focus should be on reducing spending.

I'm for a balanced budget going forward and fiscal responsibility.  

I believe our nation needs another ICE-TEA bill or major infrastructure plan, and I favor ensuring a significant portion is dedicated to expanding public mass transit. There is definitely a lot of backlogged infrastructure maintenance and repair work. I work for Caltrans, and even with SB 1 funds, the needs are greater than the available fund.

But we can’t just protect existing infrastructure assets. We need to use the next big infrastructure bill to invest for the future. That means investing to transition our country to be less dependent on GHG emitting modes and investments that have long-term benefits.

That is why I am a proponent of ensuring expanding mass transit be a major goal of any next infrastructure plan. in future needs and address climate change. That’s providing federal matching dollar to increase prioritization of this by state and local agencies.

I would stick with the government’s regular financing method through the standard budget process. We could pay for a $2 trillion program over 10 years with half the money coming from undoing half of the Trump business tax cuts, and the other half coming from ending corporate welfare programs that benefit solidly profitable major corporations. (I am not a fan of Trump plan to use special bonds outside of our normal Treasury bills. It struck me as a typical real estate developer scheme that only adds extra costs on the backend.)

I support Medicare for All, which would simplify, reduce the cost and improve healthcare outcomes. Most studies estimate it would reduce overall medical costs in America by 10% from its current $3 trillion total. Plus, according to the most recent Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 77% of Democrats already favor Medicare for All and 53% of Independents/Unaffilitated voters, with 51% overall in support.

I also support comprehensive drug cost reform to let Americans pay the same price for the same medicine as the rest of the world. This is supported by 80% of voters of all stripes.

I am partial to the 2013 Senate Immigration Reform bill as a good starting point. It passed the Senate with 68 votes. It provided a pathway to citizenship, required paying back taxes. It reformed aspects of the H1B program, eliminated the visa lottery, and protected the Dreamers. The 2013 bill also included increased funding provisions for border patrol and facilities. Given all the funding increases since then, I would need to review the current state of border funding to see what, if any, increase is still needed for modern equipment, etc.

The one change I would recommend to this bill is greater enforcement provisions and penalties against business owners who hire illegal immigrants. It is a puzzling aspect of our immigration enforcement system that goes easy on law-breaking business owners, but demonizes illegal immigrants. By letting the business owners off so easily, this allows private leveraging of the profits from illegal immigration through lower cost illegal workers, but socializes the cost of interdiction to the taxpayers. Major penalties should exist for such businesses that are caught employing undocumented workers. This would reduce the demand, and in turn the supply.

This question reflects a flawed understanding of the fundamental cause of gridlock in D.C. The true cause of most gridlock is our corrupting campaign finance system that has infected both political parties and all three branches of federal government. Consider how many issues exist on which a vast majority of Americans already agree, but that moneyed interests have effectively bought a veto right from them ever coming to a floor vote in one or both houses of Congress. See prescription drug reform, campaign finance reform, guaranteeing a women’s right to choose, banning assault weapons, immigration reform, addressing the opioid crisis, net neutrality, fighting income inequality, making vaping illegal, a la carte cable, Wall Street reform, selling personal data, runaway college tuition, curtailing corporate welfare, ending corporate personhood, and combating climate change. 

Thus in our current system, the issues with the greatest chance for bipartisan agreement would actually benefit average voters the least and benefit rich industries the most. We already see that in the bipartisan agreements to regularly increase Defense Department spending and how the 2016 DEA bill was passed by unanimous voice vote. But that bill took away key enforcement power from the Drug Enforcement Administration. This only helped big Pharma, and lengthened and deepened the Opioids Crisis. Think about that. In our famously gridlocked political system, a major bill passed with significantly harmful health effects but with no floor debates and not a single dissenting vote. How does that happen, but for the half billion dollars spent every election cycle by Big Pharma.  

So the most critical fundamental change we need is to reform our broken election system can only come by a 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That is why key to my platform is running to introduce and lead passage of a nonpartisan Election Reform Constitutional Amendment. This would fix several fundamental flaws in our elections that most voters already agree on, but that the Supreme Court has either refused to fix or has made worse through its rulings. This includes removing 80% of the money from our federal elections by only allowing federal candidates to accept donations from individuals who can vote for them (no PAC, corporate, Union or outside donations); overturning the 2010 Citizens United ruling that opened the dark-money flood gates; ending corporate personhood; and ending gerrymandering.

With these and a few other smaller reforms, we can remove most of the corrupting money and partisan gamesmanship from our electoral system and return voters of all political persuasions to their rightful central position in our political system. This will allow more candidates to run who are more interested in public service than telemarketing and diminish the extreme partisanship we see in Washington.

As someone who once volunteered at a homeless shelter for nine years, this is an issue with which I am passionate about and well-acquainted. In the short-term, the federal government has some role to play in helping California with its homeless population, but its most significant role is making fundamental long-term fixes that address income inequality and reduce the other causes that lead so many individuals and families live so close to financial ruin.

In the short-term, the federal government can work with the state on loosening rules involving government-owned properties in urban areas that can be used for temporary housing. Emergency funds could also be made available to subsidize more low-income housing – both of a permanent and transitional variety. Additional funding can also be provided for so-called “wrap-around services” that work to address root causes that contributed to and lengthen an individual’s unsheltered time. This includes providing service to address mental issues that afflict roughly a third of the homeless population, and addiction recovery services that would benefit another third of this population. Job counseling, interview training, temporary housing, lease/downpayment assistance and meals are also common services that help the most in this population return to independent living.

In terms of long-term benefits, the most important contributions the federal government can make is by addressing the root causes of income inequality and the increasing percentage of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, with little cash reserves to survive a life emergency –such as major medical expense or loss of a job. And the fact that there are already so many Americans in this category during a supposed “booming economy” is extremely distressing.

But this underscores the need for passing a $15 national minimum wage index for inflation, passing Medicare for All to remove access and cost issues of health care as a cause of homeless. This includes providing access to mental and addiction-recovery services early on. And by reducing our income inequality, we would see market forces flatten housing costs from our current conditions of extreme spiking that can so quickly and dramatically push current residents out of a community through rent spikes and extreme gentrification.

The federal government can also address assist with the housing shortage issue by investing in a new ICE-TEA bill or major infrastructure plan that features a significant portion dedicated to expanding public mass transit. This would reduce commuting costs for middle-class citizens, students, and low-income workers, and would increase the attractiveness of more infill development in urban areas and slow the tendency toward sprawl that pushes more and more home buyers further away from job centers. This in turn leads to more households less able to adjust to the loss of a vehicle and being able to quickly find another proximate job following an employment disruption.

No, federal incomes should not be reduced. We need to reverse a good portion of the Trump tax cuts for the very rich and corporations as part of lessening income inequality. I would increase rates on seven-figure and higher incomes, I would remove the FICA tax cap on income over $130,000, and I would cut in half the Trump business tax cut by at least half. The Trump business tax cut dropped the tax rate from 35% to 21%, but I would increase this to at least 28%. This would generate more than $1 trillion over 10 years for deficit reduction. The impact of halving the business tax cut would be lessened by Medicare for All removing health care as a business expense. Medicare for All would also save most Americans some money on health care, especially senior citizens who would no longer need to pay out of pocket or for supplementary insurance to cover vision, dental and hearing needs.

I do not foresee a need for any net tax increase for middle- and working-class taxpayers. This includes to pay for Medicare for All. Furthermore, any additional costs from expanded coverage for seniors and covering the uncovered could be paid for by eliminated corporate welfare programs. The non-liberal Cato Institute has conservatively identified at least $100 million per year that goes to already highly profitable corporations. This would result in another $1 trillion in savings over 10 years.

I support the Green New Deal and increasing federal spending to improve our infrastructure nationwide.

Universal healthcare is a moral imperative. I support Medicare for All, and specifically Bernie Sander's Bill (S.1129); it is the most cost-effective, efficient, and fiscally sound way to provide universal healthcare throughout America.

I would support a plan that provides for comprehensive reform of our immigration system. Anyone who is already living in our country should be granted citizenship. The byzantine, unfair, and cruel immigration and naturalization system should be completely rethought. ICE should be abolished. And America should be taking on more refugees than any other country. To make up for our recent immoral behavior, such as seperating families at the border, we should attempt to go "too far" in welcoming people to our country. Maybe in 50 years we can talk about border security again without extreme shame. 

No. That's not how any of this works. We have to stop pretending that this machine that collects billions of dollars in "contributions" cares about policy.

If someone doesn't want to do their job in Congress and chooses to obstruct our policy goals, we find out where they live, and we support a primary or general election opponent that will get things done. I don't care if they are a Democrat or a Republican, if they are taking bribes from giant corporations to obstruct our Congress, then a progressive Republican can beat them, and that's what we'll do. We'll beat them.

There isn't a single part of my platform that shouldn't get full bipartisan support. There is no compromising with corrupt politicians. We have to win elections.

Programs that build public housing and provide assistance to put people in homes are useful tools for combating homelessness. And so I support fully funding and expanding such programs at the federal level.

We must also tackle our housing crisis and record-level wealth inequality. These systemic problems lead to homelessness and economic failure for more and more Americans each year. These problems need a local, state, and federal response. 

Here in California, the Democratic Party has failed to give a good response to these systemic issues. We are facing record levels of homelessness and displacement. If Congress can find a way to move forward, then it should, while also encouraging California’s government to do its job.

We should implement a wealth tax to recover unpaid income taxes from the world's richest people and the world's richest multinational corporations. They've openly moved money overseas through shady accounting methods to avoid taxes, and it's time to make them pay up. Workers should not be paying higher tax rates that the world's richest people.

The latest attack on workers comes from the neoliberal idea of "expanding the tax base." Instead of raising taxes on the rich, California has led the way on raising taxes on working class people. We don't want that same trend in Congress. Over the last 40 years, America's rich have seen their wealth skyrocket, while wages for the rest of us have remained the same. It's time for the rich to pay their fair share.