Response:

My top priority for the United States is (1) to help grow our economy and create jobs. Our public officials need to quit focusing on partisan politics and the next election, and put their attention on solving real problems for real people. We also need to (2) ensure genuine fiscal responsibility (not just engage in political rhetoric about it); and (3) bring ethics to government.

Response:

Illegal immigration is a serious problem, and nobody has the political courage to propose a real solution. Everybody is focusing on the symptom rather than the cause. The cause? We have a broken, unworkable immigration system that for years has given people more incentives to come illegally than legally. Instead of fixing the laws, our government has watched and done nothing as bureaucratic inefficiencies, red tape, outdated, ineffectual quotas, and changes in our society have made the laws impractical. The government has NOT fully enforced the laws, either.

This is unacceptable. We're a nation of laws, and those laws must be enforced. But it's much better to enforce WORKABLE laws than unworkable laws. To say that all we need to do is enforce our current laws is disingenuous. And it's harsh, irresponsible rhetoric to suggest we round up illegal immigrants and detain them in concentration camp-like tent cities surrounded by barbed wire.

I advocate fixing our laws NOW so that enforcement is more successful, less arbitrary, more targeted at the criminal elements, and less damaging to our economy, human dignity and families. We need a smart, workable temporary work permit system. The visa process needs to be more flexible
and efficient. Such a system must have rigorous background checks and effective internal tracking. The program can't expand government welfare, or displace good American workers. We must effectively encourage other countries to fight government corruption and improve their own economies. By doing this, we can ensure that people and businesses are abiding by the law, and our enforcement efforts can better zero in on the real, dangerous criminals.

I support a pathway to legal status for those who qualify, but I oppose amnesty. I don't believe in granting automatic citizenship, letting those who have violated the law escape penalty or consequence, nor do I believe in giving undocumented workers special advantages unavailable to others. Getting right with the law must be a separate path than getting permanent residency or citizenship. We can help those who have not committed crimes, who are willing to support themselves, pay taxes and live by the rules, get right with the law, without directly tying the process to citizenship. Instead, these people may apply for a temporary work permit. Approved applicants who have been illegal would be subject to a penalty fee that would not be required of other applicants. This encourages circular migration, and for those interested in citizenship, they can get in the back of the line and go through a more rigorous process — another process that needs reform.

Response:

I would NOT have voted for the Affordable Care Act. It had a lot of problems and was pushed through too fast. I would have gotten involved early in the process and worked in a bi-partisan fashion to produce an acceptable product. Obstructionism accomplishes nothing; I'll offer up solutions.

The Act didn't solve what it was meant to solve: the ever-escalating costs of health care. We need to focus more on bringing down costs. We do have a health care crisis in America, and we need to work towards making it possible for every American to have access to basic healthcare. But this needs to be done in an innovative manner, NOT by imposing mandates, growing government-sponsored health care, and increasing taxes or premiums.

I'm committed to combing through the bill with a fine-tooth comb, taking into account all of the stories we're hearing out there as the bill is being implemented, and making the necessary changes to create more competition, choice, flexibility and portability in insurance coverage. We need to better address needed reforms in Medicare and Medicaid, starting with waste, fraud and abuse. We need real litigation reform, and we need to provide greater incentives for first-line health care clinics and hospitals to service those with low income or no income. We need to maintain our high level, cutting edge capabilities by encouraging research in medical procedures, products, pharmaceuticals and nano-technology.

It was certainly time to tackle such problems as life-time caps on people's coverage, and the inability of people with pre-existing conditions to get insurance. Here are some other specific things we need to do: encourage state health insurance exchanges, but remove over-federalizing regulations on them; facilitate the development of personal electronic health records controlled by the individual; address current and projected shortages in health care professionals; work to prevent Medicare fraud rather than just prosecute it; incentivize the use of more preventative medicine in general; work to reduce the burdens of long term care; enable the movement of treatment away from high overhead general hospitals and expensive specialists to lower-cost venues; promote the use of diagnostic tools and medical devices in lower-cost venues; curtail subsidies for R&D costs; work towards getting away from "fee for service;" increase the use of Health Savings Accounts; and improve health education.

Response:

We need to revive our economy by creating jobs in future growth sectors, so that we can maintain our status as a world leader. Too many of our jobs are becoming obsolete or going overseas. With the proper incentives and policies, we can empower small businesses and entrepreneurs to find innovative solutions, which will spur job growth. We need to be on the cutting edge of technology in many fields . . . medical, high tech, auto, energy and more. Not only will successful new energy technologies help our economy, but they will help us end our dependence on foreign oil.

We also need to help our children get the best education in the world; they need to learn to think outside the box and be problem solvers if we're going to maintain our status as a world leader. Educational methods and standards cannot be mandated by the federal government; education must be local, but the federal government can play a role in facilitating effective strategies at the state level.

I have extensive experience in the real world - I've owned a few small businesses; I've been a rancher and a farmer; I've been a researcher at a medical center; I've been a teacher and a professor, and I have a lot of international experience. I will use my experience and spend my time focused on ways to grow our economy and reduce our debt burden. I'll bring ethics to government, and will focus on serving my constituents, not on serving special interests or making TV appearances to increase my ratings for the next election.

Response:

I support protecting our beautiful landscapes, but I do not believe that protection should come through presidential signing statements or be dictated by the federal government through land grabs or over-burdensome regulations. Instead, I believe all interested parties need to come to the table at a local level and find ways to strike the right balance between protecting our wilderness and open space and allowing for multiple use of our public lands. I believe in protecting our air, water and land through balanced management. I support the right to access and responsibly use our public lands for hunting, fishing, and other recreational activities, while maintaining the integrity of our land's peerless natural beauty. I also believe we should be allowed to wisely utilize our abundant energy resources.

Our congressional delegation and state and local leaders need to work together with environmental groups, business leaders, farmers, ranchers and interested citizens. The Washington County Lands Bill was a good example of how to work together towards striking the appropriate balance. I will work with the counties in my district to come up with similar legislation appropriate to their areas.

Response:

So long as we're using frozen embryos from invitro fertilization that would otherwise be destroyed and are voluntarily and freely donated, I support federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. I also support funding of adult stem cell research. This is an investment in our future, for breakthroughs in science and medicine. In the long term, it will help our people and our economy, and for this reason is a worthwhile expenditure.

Response:

Absolutely. I've been a Republican all of my life, but I'm running on the Democratic ticket against the incumbent because in our one-party state, we need a viable no-nonsense alternative. We urgently need to solve our problems and can no longer afford to engage in polarized, partisan bickering. Experience, ethics and hard work will accomplish a lot more than empty ideological rhetoric.

I have experience in the real world, and I'm an American first. My core values are conservative, but I think outside the box and I'll work with others to find new and workable solutions to our problems. Our current political environment labels "compromise" as a bad word. Well, it's only a bad word if "compromise" means making back-room deals that benefit the lawmakers and the special interests more than the constituency. But when it means having an honest dialogue with all interested parties in order to come up with new approaches that address concerns and solve problems, engendering a win-win consensus, then that's exactly what we need.

Response:

I oppose further testing of nuclear weapons. It's expensive, harmful, and unnecessary. We in Utah have a lot of sensitivities to such testing, as thousands of our residents were exposed to deadly down-winder effects.

I do believe we need to engage in high level research for possibilities of clean, safe nuclear energy. But such would not require the same kind of testing as is required for nuclear weapons.

Response:

I strongly believe in the concept of getting many divergent views together in a productive conversation before forming a final opinion or making a decision. Each issue would bring different people to the table. First, I do my own research through books and articles, and then I seek out those closely affected by the issue, whether they be opposing interest groups, small and large business owners, researchers and educators, or regular citizens. I believe every issue has at least two sides, and it's important to understand all sides of an issue before forming an opinion. Often, neither side is totally correct, and therefore, by hearing both sides, I might be able to come up with a new solution that helps both sides reach more of a consensus.

Response:

I have courage. I'm here to serve the people, not myself or special interests. I support term limits and am not accepting special interest PAC money. I've already had a few successful careers; I'm not here to make a career out of politics.

Back when I was operating my own cattle ranch and farm, I noticed cattle and crops dying on the ranch. I investigated, and uncovered a corrupt scheme. Huge, powerful agribusinesses were donating to politicians in both parties, who, in turn, were subsidizing those interests at taxpayers' expense. They colluded to let the big money interests use federal canals to dump poison run-off water on a wildlife refuge and all of the nearby family farms. When they couldn't buy us off, they threatened us and tried to bankrupt us. But we didn't back down and we put a stop to the devastation.

This experience taught me that a lot of our problems in Washington are due to corruption in both parties. I'm an American first with the political courage to fight government corruption and work honestly to solve real problems for real people.