The housing crisis has deepened significantly over the last decade. Many Americans no longer believe that they will ever actually own their own home. The country must establish policies that provide every hard-working American with the opportunity to achieve home ownership without undue hardship. These policies must be varied in focus in order to be effective. Zoning laws and ordinances are often more of a state or municipal issue that must be resolved in cooperation with federal level policies and programs. The federal government should identify incentives for more local governments to relax zoning laws and thereby increase the available space for new home construction. These incentives should also encourage municipalities to consider continuing a now common trend of revitalizing old factories and business buildings as apartments where feasible. This revitalization makes excellent use of existing structures and developed land to provide consolidated housing for single individuals or those just starting families that do not yet wish to manage a standalone home. One significant problem with existing home development projects is that they often result in homes that are too expensive for the vast majority of locals to actually afford. What good are new houses that are financially out of reach for everyday Americans? The government has struggled for decades now in actually solving the growing housing crisis as each political party tends to focus on only one side of the problem instead of wholistic solutions. Several aspects of solving the housing crisis rely on cooperation at the state and municipal level as mentioned in the section on zoning. Other aspects involve federal policies that: •keep the cost of construction materials as low as possible by examining the global supply chain and ensuring access to materials from multiple markets (to include sourcing as much as possible from within the US) •limit the ability of corporations to buy excessive amounts of local housing stock just to generate rental income •support further research into 3D printed homes and how regulations might change to accommodate such home development methods •Reduce permitting costs and timelines where possible •Understand that environmental impacts vary from location to location and that federal laws requiring environmental impact assessments defer to state and municipal governments for specific requirements for relevant areas

Healthcare in America is far too expensive. Previous studies have cited the substantial increases in GoFundMe campaigns related to healthcare costs because every day Americans cannot afford necessary care. My own family had to make tough financial decisions when my older brother was diagnosed with cancer. Older Americans are also struggling to finance long term care as they work with fixed incomes that cannot compare to the ever-increasing costs of healthcare. Americans deserve better. I believe that "Medicare for All" is the ultimate and rightful goal for healthcare in America and that we should pursue it. The CBO has previously done analysis on several universal healthcare options and determined that many of them would reduce the spending deficit when it comes to healthcare spending (see https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2020-12/56811-Single-Payer.pdf). The analysis is thorough and identifies spending reductions and increases across several areas of healthcare and provides an overall assessment given those net changes. A substantial amount of savings comes from the consolidation of existing government healthcare plans which would also result in substantial savings for individual states like Maine. The CBO report does bring up questions about additional funding and possible issues in the days and weeks immediately following the transition to universal healthcare. These are legitimate concerns and any bill establishing universal healthcare needs to be extremely thorough in planning the transition phase. The current proposal in “S.1655 - Medicare for All Act” briefly addresses some points about the transition to the new program, but I do believe that there needs to be greater details addressing the CBO’s concerns. Ultimately, we must continue to work towards improving healthcare options in this country and NOT reduce options for Americans who are already struggling. Attempts to cut Medicare and Medicaid are morally reprehensible especially when politicians use those cuts to further fund other programs that do not directly benefit American citizens.

The Border and the Drug Crisis We absolutely need to ensure that border security is modernized in order to actually prevent illicit drugs from reaching into our country. DHS needs the funding to improve existing scanners at crossing sites as well as support upgrading failing scanners and technology at all points of entry. The department also needs to increase the use of surveillance drones where possible in order to cover the vast swaths of land along the southern border that currently lack deterrence measures for illegal immigration and smuggling. This support needs to support technologies that can catch even the hardest to identify drugs regardless of who is smuggling them. To be clear, the vast majority of fentanyl traffickers have actually been US citizens and not illegal immigrants (see https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/quick-facts/Fentanyl_FY21.pdf and https://immigrationforum.org/article/illicit-fentanyl-and-drug-smuggling-at-the-u-s-mexico-border-an-overview/ ). These statistics are why I support modernizing scanning and detection technology at all ports of entry and not just the southern border. However, operations along the southern border and into Mexico are still necessary for targeting the creation of some drugs in the first place. A substantial amount of support along the southern border actually comes from US Southern Command which has historically struggled with attaining required budgets in order to support anti-narcotics programs. SOUTHCOM in particular provides substantial Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) support which enables quick tracking and targeting of smugglers and criminal organizations that produce drugs such as fentanyl. That ISR, along with cooperation with Mexico, is important when attempting to stop drugs at their source. In fact, any plan to solve the drug crisis in the US needs to be comprehensive and not just protect the border but also work to dismantle drug making sites in foreign countries while also targeting the drug supply chain that often originates from countries like China when it comes to fentanyl precursors. I support legislation that actively targets all portions of the drug trade through economic and diplomatic actions as well military actions when coordinated and exercised with host nation approval and support. Refugee Programs and Temporary Legal Status Visa Programs (H1B) America needs highly skilled workers, but companies should absolutely try to get that skilled labor from within the country. There have been far too many times when major companies in the US have had layoffs of American employees while increasing H1B requests to the government. I believe that any US company that lays off more than 5% of their American workforce in a year should immediately have all H1B visa requests denied for a calendar year starting on the day the 5% layoff begins. If companies are concerned that the skilled workers they require don’t exist in the US, then they should support programs that help train those skills in vocational schools or other institutions of higher education across the country. We must support American workers.

Term Limits I believe in consecutive term limits and not absolute term limits. In other words, I believe that no Senator should be able to serve more than two terms consecutively, but that there is no limit to how many total terms a Senator may serve in their lifetime. There is an advantage to be had in having some more senior Senators who are extremely well versed in government affairs. However, those individuals should be required to take at least a one-term break to step away from government and allow the People to choose a viable alternative candidate for at least one term. This system creates opportunities for new individuals to enter government more regularly and helps minimize the incumbent advantage in cases where it may not be based on actual merit. In keeping with this belief, if the People of Maine ever saw fit to elect me, I would only serve two terms before stepping back and allowing another to take my place. Stock Trading Members of Congress should not be allowed to trade individual stocks. In fact, it is my belief that Representatives and Senators should only be allowed to trade index funds such that they only truly benefit as long as the whole of the economy continues to improve over time. Individual stock trades severely undermine the credibility of members of Congress as many of them continue to make millions of dollars using information that the general public would absolutely consider to be insider knowledge. We must now also consider cryptocurrency trades which I also believe needs to be substantially limited for members of Congress and the elected members of the executive branch. Voter ID Laws I generally agree with Voter ID laws but only under a strict set of conditions. The first condition is that the State offers a free voting ID to all individuals who can prove their identity. The State also needs to ensure that a team exists that can travel to far more rural areas of the State to ensure that all individuals have the opportunity to acquire this Voter ID prior to major elections. Additionally, some draft voter ID laws do not account for when individuals change their name after getting married or for any other reason. In other words, the laws do not account for when current names no longer match names on birth certificates which are often required as proof of identity. There must be language accounting and allowing for these individuals to still acquire voter IDs. I cannot support any Voter ID laws that do not address these points. Furthermore, any voter ID law should be phased in over time for new generations of voters. In other words, any new voter ID law should not affect anyone over the age of 18 at the time of enactment. Many older Americans simply do not have some of the very specific documents that some voter ID laws require for historic reasons. We can improve voting security without disenfranchising millions of existing voters. It will just take some time and understanding of the realities of historic documentation in the US.

I consider energy to be a national security problem. Relying too much on one source of energy creates unnecessary risks to our national security when we have the ability to diversify and create backups to important infrastructure such as electric grids. In early 2024, CISA released an advisory stating that China had successfully infiltrated several critical infrastructure organizations to include many in the energy sector. The best way (in the absence of robust security programs) to mitigate the potentially severe repercussions of attacks against the energy sector is to have a robust energy system that is both diverse and potentially redundant in key areas. Such features make it vastly more difficult for adversaries to affect the entirety of our energy systems. As a result, I support any legislation that further funds research into all types of energy production to include renewables, nuclear, and some forms of fossil fuels such as natural gas. On the renewable front, every state will have different requirements. Offshore wind in Maine, for example, would likely affect lobsters and other marine life negatively which harms the state overall. While the state has taken some action to protect local waters, more action is potentially needed to protect waters outside of Maine’s jurisdiction. I support the Northeast Fisheries Heritage Protection Act of 2025 (H.R.674) that is attempting to take that action. Luckily Maine has other options for diversifying their energy portfolio including hydroelectric power which is a substantial portion of Maine’s overall energy production. I am also looking forward to the continued research and development of molten salt reactors (especially those involving thorium as a starting point) which could prove to be a safety improvement in nuclear power that could also address some historic concerns with nuclear plants in general. Across the country we should be focusing on what energy solutions make sense in the given area. Any legislation targeting energy production must allow for local input on energy projects while also allowing flexible funding for various energy production methods.

Gay Marriage I believe that two consenting adults should be allowed to marry if they choose. There is no legitimate government interest in prohibiting marriage between two such individuals. Studies have also shown that families involving same-sex parents are no worse off than families with mixed-sex parents. As a result, there is no compelling reason for the government to get involved in this issue other than to enforce non-discrimination and equal treatment under the law. Transgender Rights I believe that we should support all transgender individuals as they navigate their lives and attempt to become comfortable in their own bodies. I do not believe in sweeping, generic military transgender bans. Our military needs access to all the greatest talent our country can offer, and there are many very capable individuals within the trans community. All capable Americans who wish to serve their country in the military should have a path to fulfilling that wish so long as they meet all other existing standards. On the matter of school sports, I disagree with immediate switching of sporting leagues originally separated by biological sex. Depending upon the specific sport, studies show that there are some inherent advantages from testosterone that put young cisgender women at a disadvantage when competing against young men. However, studies also show that, in general, all of these advantages quickly dissipate or are otherwise substantially mitigated after several months of hormone therapy with allows for a safer and more level playing field for all athletes. As a result, I believe that there are two conditions for transgender individuals to participate in sports with their cisgender peers of the opposite biological sex: 1) A transgender athlete must be on hormone therapy and already completed six months of therapy prior to joining the team of the opposite biological sex of the desired sport. 2) Transgender athletes cannot displace cisgender athletes in rankings. Put another way, transgender athletes can only tie for rankings or position in competitions. To further illustrate point two above, consider a track and field competition in which there are six podium slots for each event. In each event, the cisgender athletes are ranked first according to their scores at the end of the event. Those athletes are then placed on the podium in their respective spots. The scores for any transgender athletes are then determined and added to the overall scores. If a transgender athlete scores in the top six, then then that athlete will join the cisgender athlete on the podium in the appropriate spot similar to how ties are handled. The rankings for the cisgender athletes will remain unchanged even with the addition of the transgender athlete. This condition allows for equal participation within sports with individual rankings without displacing cisgender athletes from their well-earned spots. There should also be routine updates at the high school level on performance. If a transgender athlete continues to perform at the same level of competition and athletic ability even after six months of hormone therapy, then there should be a process for further delaying participating in sports with the opposite biological sex until such changes occur that will allow for greater safety and fair competition. All sports beyond the high school level should follow requirements set by organizations such as the NCAA or the IOC. I do NOT support surgeries for minors with the intent of changing gender. I DO support hormone therapy as the effects of such therapy are mostly reversible by simply stopping the therapy itself. The effects that do remain are often minor or can be corrected with a one-time surgery that tends to be routine plastic surgery (e.g., biological men who develop breasts as a result of hormone therapy can have them removed). We know through studies that denying those diagnosed with gender dysphoria all forms of possible transition care substantially increases suicide rates. If the choice is between suicide and letting an individual take hormone therapy that might have some minor long-term effects but could save a life, I will advocate for hormone therapy every time. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion DEI has roots in ensuring that qualified individuals are given their fair shot at employment and opportunity. DEI is not meant to reduce hiring decisions to a single meritless factor but instead ensure that organizations understand how individuals of differing backgrounds and beliefs might approach a job or interview differently. One major purpose of DEI is to understand why qualified individuals might otherwise not apply for a position within a company. Salary is obviously a major factor in that decision but there are also many considerations surrounding perceived company and role culture. An often-cited example is women in STEM roles and the fact that many of those roles are significantly male dominated. The goal of DEI is not to give unqualified women roles in such fields to somehow “equalize” the percentages of women and men. The goal of DEI in this scenario is to understand the underlying causes of the imbalance and determine if specifically qualified women are not entering into those roles as a result of readily addressable and fixable concerns. Any DEI program that specifically gauges its level of success on diversity percentages is likely entering into dangerous (and illegal) territory. Not every company is going to have a workforce that directly reflects the entirety of the hiring population when grouping by different characteristics. DEI just ensures that this fact is not the result of possible discrimination or unrealized bias. Abortion I am pro-choice and believe that such a decision is between a woman and her doctor. We have seen women die as a result of extremely draconian abortion laws and that is unacceptable. The right to choose should become federal law with the minimum standard set to those outlined in Roe v Wade. States, such as Maine, should continue to be allowed to vote and legalize more flexible standards based upon the overall voting of their citizens.

Waiting Period Laws While waiting period laws have shown effectiveness in helping prevent some suicides, they must be carefully crafted in a way that does not detract from Second Amendment rights. I do not support the current implementation of the Maine waiting period law because it is far too broad and does not have exceptions for individuals who are likely not at risk of suicide. More specifically, studies surrounding waiting period laws often draw conclusions from data related to waiting periods for pistols and not all firearms in general. But when recommending policy, this distinction is often lost and extrapolated to all firearms. While I agree with establishing a waiting period for pistols given the available data (with exceptions being discussed below), I do not agree with a blanket waiting period for all firearm purchases. Limiting the waiting period to just pistols still reduces suicides while also preventing unintended economic hardship for dealers trying to sell hunting rifles (as one example) to hunting focused tourists in Maine and other states with a large hunting focus. In addition to the current exceptions in the Maine law, there should also be exceptions for individuals who can prove that they already own firearms. There is very little data suggesting that enforcing a waiting period against existing gunowners will reduce suicides. Such enforcement is likely to be unproductive and only further negatively impact law abiding gun owners. Yellow Flag Laws I believe that Maine’s yellow flag law is an excellent example of a compromise to keep our communities safer while ensuring Second Amendment rights are not unduly violated. Ultimately, I believe that these types of laws can only be enacted at the state level while considering the extensive factors that affect gun safety and violence within each state. The challenge of Maine’s law is ensuring the availability and safety of mental health professionals called in to complete assessments of at-risk individuals. Maine, and the country as a whole, needs to do better in supporting mental health professionals. This support should also include programs to bolster the number of such professionals across the country to further help address gun violence and potentially enable similar laws in other states. Secure Home Storage Incentives In pursuit of preventing school shootings, I support initiatives that seek to increase the rate of secure storage of firearms within the home. A large portion of school shootings are carried out by minors who acquired unsecured weapons from their own homes. Had these weapons been properly secured, it’s possible that fewer shootings would have occurred. We must find better storage solutions that allow quick access for home defense but also prevent young children from accessing firearms without strict supervision. Maine has previously exempted firearm safety devices from sales tax which is a model that the rest of the nation should consider.

Unions I believe that Unions are the greatest path to wage growth and access to additional work benefits. I am very opposed to Right to Work Laws that seem to only favor corporations at the expense of collective bargaining power and the power of the workers. Proponents of Right to Work make claims of economic growth but the majority of studies show either minimal or no real growth in States that have implemented them. The few studies that show actual growth often fail to account for factors not directly related to Right to Work Laws. In other words, these studies often commit the fatal flaw of assuming that correlation is causation due to a substantial number of factors affecting economic growth. What the vast majority of studies do show, however, is that wage growth and access to benefits for workers increases as Unions grow. As a result, even if we play devil’s advocate and agree that Right to Work slightly increases available jobs, those jobs are often paying less and offering fewer benefits than Union jobs. Jobs that don’t offer a meaningful wage with benefits are hardly good for Americans trying to rise through the socio-economic landscape. We should absolutely focus on increasing Union collective bargaining power. The Congress has an obligation to American workers to ensure that the NLRB remains independent and focuses on its continued mission of protecting worker’s rights. Attempts to gut this organization and install individuals who are against worker’s rights are misguided and should be considered an attack on all American workers. Workers are the lifeblood of America, and they deserve to have good wages and safe working conditions. Trade and Tariffs Tariffs have become increasingly debated given recent policy announcements. I do not support a universal tariff minimum against all trade partners. Tariffs are only effective and beneficial when applied very specifically to industries the United States is trying to bolster. In other words, some tariffs are absolutely ok when they are part of a comprehensive plan to restore or strengthen a specific product or export. But tariffs alone will not save any industries and will instead likely lead to increased costs for Americans as businesses, who ultimately seek the greatest profit they can, will attempt to pass on costs to consumers. The United States should put together a prioritized plan of critical industries and how the government plans to protect them using a whole-of-government approach while also accounting for potential impacts on increased costs for Americans. Only then should the government start taking action starting with those prioritized critical industries. The US should also avoid tariffs on any raw materials that we cannot produce or otherwise acquire within our own borders. If our lands literally lack the raw material needed for manufacturing specific products, then tariffs on those raw materials only serve to drive up business costs and then get passed on to consumers. Manufacturing and Technology Manufacturing in the United States is a very hotly debated topic at the moment. Since I have discussed tariffs in the previous subsection, I will use this subsection to highlight the potential impacts of continued automation and advancements in AI on manufacturing and technology as a whole. Any plan to substantially increase manufacturing in the United States that does not account for innovations in automation and AI will likely fail to meet its objectives. We must begin identifying the knowledge and skills necessary to maintain and work alongside more advanced robots and systems as soon as possible so that we can continue adding new jobs at a rate greater than we potentially lose them. Ideally, advanced robotics will enable greater innovation and allow workers to focus on more complex projects that further the industry. However, if we are not careful then we may soon find fewer and fewer manufacturing jobs in the future despite producing more products in the country.

Military Spending Military spending has increased substantially over the years despite the military continuing to fail regular financial audits. To combat fraud, waste, and abuse, the government must set negative outcomes for failed audits within the relevant agencies and organizations of the Department of Defense. We must ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used as effectively as possible within the military to ensure the best national security outcomes (particularly outcomes related to force modernization). My personal experience in the Army was that many commanders were told to spend every dollar of their allocated budgets or risk a smaller budget in the following fiscal year. This often resulted in bursts of training and material requests in Q4 as commanders spent their remaining budgets on anything that could help close the gap but not seem blatantly wasteful. Commanders should not operate under such a premise as it is a major driving factor in continually increasing budgets at every level of command. We must find a solution that enables commanders to spend only what they need to while also ensuring that any budget shortfalls for critical material or operations can be addressed quickly. Flexibility in military budgets is extremely challenging, but we must rise to the challenge if we wish to ensure proper accountability of taxpayer money. Cybersecurity The current administration has taken drastic action related to the Department of Homeland Security and the intelligence community that has weakened our ability to defend our country against malicious cyber activity. As someone who has spent the majority of his professional life working in cybersecurity for both the military and then in the private sector, I am extremely concerned about our current direction in this aspect of national security. Our adversaries never stop looking for a way into our sensitive networks and have, unfortunately, already been successful many times in the past (see https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa24-038a). While these activities do not always make it as major stories in the news, we must understand that cyberspace is a new battlefront and one that will likely never see peace. We absolutely cannot afford to reduce our cybersecurity workforce in the government or turn away from planning against cyber threats from countries like Russia. I support a substantial increase in the government’s cybersecurity workforce with the absolute understanding that only highly qualified and vetted individuals should be allowed to join in order to further enhance national security. The government must also double down on partnerships with the private sector to further help keep all Americans safe. I worry that our aging Congress is not equipped to handle these technical challenges and that only having experienced technologists elected to office will help us get closer to actual solutions.