League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	Los Angeles County, CA June 5, 2012 Election
	Candidates Answer Questions on the Issues United States Representative; District 33

The questions were prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund and asked of all candidates for this office.     See below for questions on Economy, Budget, Energy, Health care, Campaign financing Click on a name for candidate information.   See also more information about this contest. 1. In this time of high unemployment, what are the most important steps that should be taken to improve our nation’s economy? Answer from David William Steinman: Keeping Jobs in America. Stop shipping jobs overseas and fight to protect workers' rights and wages here in America--and globally. I support the highest labor and environmental standards both in America and throughout the world. As a businessman I have a four point plan for improving the economy: 1) America must engage in fair trade and support high labor and environmental standards throughout the world as part of trade. 2) As an author who has specialized in empowering people and your representative in Washington, I will work tirelessly to make sure every homeowner is able to modify his or her loan to a new low interest rate. This will free up thousands of dollars every month for homeowners who are likely to spend their money in the economy--and this is only fair after the bailout we have given the banks. 3) As an environmentalist and businessperson, I believe it is important to replace our fossil fuel and nuclear-based energy sources with renewables such as geothermal from the Salton Sea, wind and solar and to build a smart grid from our vast geothermal reserves into the metropolitan region. This will create thousands of jobs and keep money in the local community. 4) My own business depends on a healthy Main Street and a healthy Main Street depends on a strong dollar. For too long our government and federal reserve have favored a declining dollar to serve the interests of multinational corporations that ship jobs overseas. I support strong dollar policies which will favor local businesses and make the price of gas also much lower. Answer from Bruce Margolin: Economic democracy is a precondition of political democracy. The current economic inequality means that democracy is also out of balance. There is truth to Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis' warning that "We can have democracy in the country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." We can make sure that everyone pays their fair share back into the system and use the increased revenue for true job growth and economic justice. Our government must transform into one that is responsive to the practical aspirations of people for education, jobs and retirement security. My overlaying platform for smart tech based reform and my ultimate goals for public education, and the Veterans Administration, all offer ample opportunities for job creation in both public and private sectors. Congress should be debating every day the best way to create jobs and how to provide better basic services and infrastructure. We must upgrade our aging roads, bridges, mass transit and rail, water and sewage lines, as well as expand and update our broadband internet--these are the basic parts needed to manufacture goods and get them to market. China spends 9% of its GDP on infrastructure, and Europe spends about 5% of GDP, while the US is spending 2.4% and looking for cuts. We have a critical opportunity to create jobs and restore our crumbling infrastructure with the creation of a new WPA + rebuilding America's schools, libraries, roads, bridges, water systems, sewer systems, mass transit systems, hospitals, universities, and more with an eco-sustainable focus. With a new eco-focused WPA, our government will become an engine for sustainability and environmental stewardship. We can create millions of new jobs incentivizing the designing, engineering, manufacturing, installation and maintenance of millions of wind and solar micro-technologies and insulation in tens of millions of American homes, businesses and industries, reducing our utility bills, our environmental impact and our reliance on carbon and nuclear-based energy. Answer from Zein E. Obagi: We are in need regulatory certainty and the repeal of outdated regulations. For example, tax incentives that promote the renewable energy sector are set to expire at the end of this year. Even if renewed by Congress soon, Congress waited too long and kept too many investors on the fence about whether they would invest in this essential part of our economy. This same is true for the new market tax incentive, which draws capital to our low income areas. That incentives is renewed each year as part of appropriation; it needs to be kept on the books long term to work. Locally, our companies are hurt by the International Trade in Arms Regulations that prohibit American technology companies from selling declassified satellites and satellite-related parts internationally. American businesses cannot compete fairly in the global market for satellites, satellite parts, launch rockets and related equipment due to the fact that we are functioning under an outdated International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) that is in need of change. 2. How should the federal budget deficit be addressed, now and into the future? How should budget priorities for defense and domestic programs be adjusted? Answer from Zein E. Obagi: First, we need to address Medicare fraud because nearly a quarter of our budget is spent on Medicare, and the system is rife with abuse. By placing an initial and extendable limit on a senior's spending in a year, we will ensure every senior is attentive to charges made by healthcare providers. Overall, Medicare is not sustainable as written. We cannot ignore the simply mathematical truth that putting in $150,000 and taking out $300,000 will not work. People are living longer than ever, which is great, but that was not expected when Medicare was developed. We must therefore adjust Medicare to preserve it as a vital program that demonstrates our sustainable dedication to our elderly. We will have to reduce our defense budget, but we must do so intelligently. We cannot let go of 100,000 combat-tested troops, and we must keep our air-fleet up to date and at the edge, so I support the purchase of F-35s. After all, 1/3rd of those monies do come back to California. We must also enhance our cyber security and protection of the military investments we have already made. As for cuts, I will look to generals in the military for where we can cut their budget. Cuts are inevitable, they must happen but must happen intelligently and keeping in mind that our local economy heavily relies on defense spending. Answer from Bruce Margolin: The federal budget deficit should be reduced by 1.Ending all foreign wars and occupations. 2.Reducing the bloated and excessive military budget. 3.Ending the Failed War on Drugs 4.Ending corporate welfare programs 5.Tapping the great resource of our nation's wealthiest citizens. Answer from David William Steinman: I am strongly in favor of government accountability and financial sustainability. We can trim trillions from our budget. I support our troops 110% and believe in a strong national defense but many military experts believe that we can save over one trillion dollars over the next decade with cuts in the Pentagon budget without sacrificing national security or veterans' services. Duplication is a huge problem in Washington. We have some 19 different job training programs in Washington, for example. Consolidation of duplicate programs is a must. Corporate tax loopholes must be closed. Corporations that ship jobs overseas should not be rewarded with tax credits. As a businessman, I know that we can trim five to ten percent from our budget and still retain excellent social services, simply by becoming more efficient. Our future priorities must include education, social services and most of all keeping America strong and peaceful. We must stop getting into wars that are draining our treasury (much less our blood). As the father of three children who will be likely to be called into action if there is another war, people can count on me to make sure America stays strong--and peaceful. 3. What are your priorities with respect to our nation’s energy policy? Should there be an emphasis on clean energy and reducing carbon emissions, and/or on reducing our dependence on foreign sources? Answer from David William Steinman: As a businessman, author and consumer rights advocate, I am strongly in favor of energy independence and renewable clean energy sources. I founded the Green Patriot movement and wrote Safe Trip to Eden to promote the great advances in renewable energy that are creating energy independence and to show why even if you don't believe in all of the global warming science that it is still good for America and our communities and economy. As a candidate and your representative in Washington, I am the only one who has called for decommissioning the San Onofre nuclear plant and replacing our fossil fuel and nuclear energy sources with clean renewables, which we have in abundance nearby our community, including vast geothermal reserves. I will work ceaselessly with environmental groups to make sure that a smart grid is built from these resources into the metropolitan region, which will create thousands of jobs and help the local economy as well. I am strongly in favor of tax credits that encourage solar and wind energy as well as the use of electric vehicles. I will push local government to create building regulations requiring solar in every home, including thin film cell technology, as well as tax credits and amortization plans for making these affordable to all home purchasers and builders. I will call for smart urban planning that positions communities within walking distance of commercial centers, encouraging alternative forms of transportation. I have met with mayors of our local cities who have told me this is key to a vital local economy. Answer from Zein E. Obagi: Businesses will not invest into America's renewable energy sector unless they have firm assurances that the regulatory framework will remain unchanged for a period long enough to allow them to recoup their investments. Our permitting processes for all energy projects needs to be streamlined and centralized to give companies prompt decisions + yay or nay + on projects. Businesses need to see the U.S. as the most friendly place to develop renewable energy. We also cannot permit China's subsidized renewable energy sector to cost undercut American renewable energy companies. We must impose tariffs on foreign renewable energy equipment when that equipment is directly subsidized by foreign governments. As a fresh voice in Congress, I will develop respectable relationships across the aisle with Republicans, and raise their awareness to the adverse effects of irresponsible energy projects that do not adequately protect our environment or serve our national interests. Rather than present mere stubborn opposition, I will use my experience as an attorney to bring creative solutions to negotiations. Answer from Bruce Margolin: A Manhattan Project level of commitment to resources and effort needs to be put forth in order to move our nation onto a public solar grid; to do so would be no more ambitious nor any less attainable FDR's New Deal Infrastructure advances nor JFK's goal of traveling to the Moon. The Sun is our most infinite resource, it gives and gives and never asks for anything in return. 1.Current energy policy causes a great imbalance in the U.S. economy. America's attachment to oil was responsible for an energy trade deficit of nearly $260 billion in 2010 + half of the total U.S. trade deficit. 2.Current energy policy results in waste. Today, the U.S. economy wastes a staggering 87% of the energy it consumes. 3.Current energy policy creates chronic instability in our economy. Oil and gas interests spent $145 million and electric utilities spent $144 million last year to lobby for public policies that prolong America's dependence on fossil fuels. 4. What, if any, changes should be made to federal health care policies or programs? Answer from Bruce Margolin: The HR-4789 Bill, know as the Medicare You Can Buy Into bill was introduced by Alan Grayson in 2010, it immediately had 50 co-sponsors and quickly gained 32 more co-sponsors before being sent off to quietly die in the Ways and Means committee. The idea behind this 4 page bill known as the Medicare You Can Buy Into Act is simple and practical. It would easily allow all citizens and permanent residents to buy into the Medicare system at cost. A system which our tax dollars have already paid for, one which spans from Anchorage to Key West, no need to reinvent anything, it already exists, we already paid for it. Medicare You Can Buy Into is the simplest and most cost effective way forward on healthcare. Simply put, it wouldn't cost anything to add more people to the Medicare system, if they each covered their own costs of participating in the program. Answer from David William Steinman: When the Food and Drug Administration finally stops telling us that toxic sludge and bisphenol A are good for us and raw milk dangerous, our health quotient will begin improving--but that will take stopping the revolving door policy at FDA and other agencies that put people from the pharmaceutical industry into positions of power with implicit agreements that they will return to their corporate homes after enacting policies that favor their companies. I will work to stop this. I am a strong believer in health and medical freedom and believe that we must incorporate preventive medicine into all health care. We must have more federal oversight over insurers and hospitals to ensure that people are not being harmed. We must be sure no one again is ever dropped from a policy for getting sick or prevented from getting affordable insurance because of a pre-existing condition. I believe insurers should be run more like nonprofits, as people will feel cheated if they do not get the best medical care because an insurer wants to rewards its shareholders. It isn't fair to the insured. Answer from Zein E. Obagi: We must become proactive about Medicare fraud as I have expressed above. Every person in America must have access to affordable healthcare. That means, even if you have pre-existing conditions, are employed, unemployed, self-employed, or under new employment, you must be able to access affordable health care. Binding a person to employment so he or she can retain healthcare coverage is practically slavery, so my unequivocal position is that affordable healthcare coverage must be accessible to all. My position on the Affordable Care Act is wholly dependent on whether it is constitutional, and whether it adds to the federal deficit. If it does increase our national debt, then I cannot support it and will seek to replace it (see below). If ACA does not add to the deficit then I will support it and review the bill to cut out the special-interest flack in its 2,700 pages. The truth is not even ACA's "author" has read the bill. We must make sure that health insurance costs do not skyrocket for everybody as a result of augmented demand, so I am concerned about how ACA will play out in practice and will monitor the situation closely. Two U.S. circuit courts (federal appellate courts) have upheld ACA, and two have deemed it unconstitutional. The Supreme Court could strike ACA down in part, strike it down in its entirety or uphold it. If the Supreme Court strikes down ACA, then we will need to replace it with a public insurance option, and those who want private insurance can take a voucher to a private health insurer and pay the difference if any. Of course, to be sustainable this "single-payer option" must be coupled with tax reform, too, so that the wealthiest Americans do not continue to pay taxes at a 14.5% marginal rate. We also need to contemporaneously reform Medicare to weed out the opportunities for fraud, and ensure they are not duplicated in any public option. I would fight against public health care because government does few things efficiently. Competition between the public insurance plan and private insurers would keep both competitive. As a Conservative Democrat, I am the only person in this race who can work across the aisle and also within my own party to reach accords. It is time to address health care responsibly and sustainably. 5. What, if any, changes should be made to federal rules on campaign financing? Answer from Zein E. Obagi: We must provide public financing of federal campaigns, so all serious candidates have a fair basis to voice their ideas, and the competition is between ideas rather than who has received the most special interest support. Answer from David William Steinman: Get the money out of politics. It corrupts. Public financing of all campaigns. Corporations are NOT people. They are driven by the need for profit and do not necessarily have a social conscience or ethics or sense of morality like most people. Corporate funding of campaigns through independent organizations must be limited or eliminated. It is corrupting our system. Answer from Bruce Margolin: A constitutional amendment to undo the Citizens United ruling, and/or a re-visitation to the unfortunate ruling by the Supreme Court, should be the first order of business for removing the undemocratic influence of money in politics. Responses to questions asked of each candidate are reproduced as submitted to the League.  Candidates' statements are presented as submitted. References to opponents are not permitted. The order of the candidates is random and changes daily. Candidates who did not respond are not listed on this page.