Illinois


Richard Durbin, Democrat
Mark Curran, Republican

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
Ensuring families have access to quality, affordable health care has never been more important, especially as we face a once-in-a-century public health crisis and pandemic. We need to develop and implement a national strategy to increase testing, personal protective equipment, and contact tracing. We should target resources to those communities hardest hit by the pandemic, of which many are communities of color that were already feeling the impacts of health disparities due to systemic racism in our health care system. And now, more than ever, we must defend the Affordable Care Act from Republican efforts to attack and weaken its protections, including protections for those with pre-existing conditions. But we also must build on the ACA by bringing down the cost of prescription drug prices and creating a public option to further reduce health care costs.

Mark Curran, Republican:
I would like to have seen more debate on the handling of the virus. All scientists are not in agreement on the handling of COVID 19. Hence, I would like to have had discussions on both a herd approach, letting the virus run its course once there were enough hospital beds, and isolating only the most vulnerable. The costs of COVID 19 to small businesses and children that are being robbed of their childhood is substantial. We will not know the full cost for some time, but we are already seeing the economic, societal, and long-term impacts. We need to ensure our national laboratories like Argonne and Fermi (located right here in Illinois) have the resources they need to ensure another pandemic doesn’t occur.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
The science is clear: if we want to avoid the most disastrous effects of climate change, we must rapidly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That means that we need to empower the EPA to regulate emissions from stationary and non-stationary sources. We must invest in alternative fuels as well as making infrastructure, energy efficiency and weatherization improvements. In addition, we should look to add market signals to help justly transition the country to a clean energy, carbon neutral future by putting a price on carbon. That is why I've introduced America's Clean Future Fund Act, which would raise a carbon tax and invest the revenues in clean energy development, transition assistance for workers and those who have been on the frontlines of fossil fuel pollution.

Mark Curran, Republican:
The Earth has undergone changes for as long as we know. I am not convinced that climate change is currently a threat to humankind. However, humans have suffered negative effects from prior misuse of the planet. Although, I do not believe the dire warnings that the end of Earth is imminent we are still called to be good stewards of the Earth. We can work to develop cleaner alternative fuel sources. The Environmental Protection Agency serves an important purpose. Corporate polluters should be prosecuted and sent to prison. We need to protect our water supply. We need to continue to spend money to research climate issues and what can be done to protect the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
For the power sector, energy storage technology is critical to clean energy development and it will allow renewable energy sources like solar and wind power to transition into possible baseload power sources. The government should not only build on the success of the DOE Energy storage hub at Argonne National Lab and push for the deployment of grid-scale storage, it should also develop the next generation of nuclear power sources that address waste and safety issues. In addition, we must achieve wide scale adoption of alternative transportation fuels. The fact that oil still accounts for 90% of transportation fuels means that we cannot reduce emissions without finding alternatives.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Before we discuss what goals should be set, we should figure out what is actually achievable. For many in government, especially in Washington, unachievable goals get in the way of actually making progress towards solving problems. I believe there is a middle ground between “climate change is a hoax” and “we need the Green New Deal”. We need to look at the facts and recognize that currently natural gas and nuclear energy are still some of the safest and most cost-effective ways of providing energy. As senator, I would look at every way we can not only ensure greater energy independence for our nation but also ensure we are doing so in a safe manner.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
First and foremost, the EPA needs to be empowered to use it's full authority to set science-based standards that protect public and environmental health. That has not been the case in recent years, and often politics has trumped science. Second, we need to invest in renovating the entirety of our drinking water infrastructure to ensure all Americans have access to lead-free drinking water. And lastly, we need to seriously address the injustices that have required certain communities to bare the brunt of the damage associated with industrialization. We should clean up legacy superfund and other pollution sites and invest in green spaces and necessary renovations in environmental justice communities.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Although, I do not believe the dire warnings that the end of the earth is imminent we are still called to be good stewards of the Earth. We can work to develop cleaner alternative fuel sources. The Environmental Protection Agency serves an important purpose. Corporate polluters should be prosecuted and sent to prison. We need to protect our water supply. We need to continue to spend money to research climate issues and what can be done to protect the air we breathe, the water we drink and the food we eat. I am not troubled by the idea that the sin of humans, especially corporations, have engaged in behavior that has affected the temperature of the planet. Thus, I am not a denier. The big questions should be the same for all Americans whether they believe this or not. What is man’s role in contributing to the change of the climate? What corrective behavior could actually impact man’s contribution to climate change? Hence, even if you don’t believe man has contributed to climate change reasonable corrective behaviors will lead to cleaner air, cleaner water and a cleaner planet. I do not think it is necessary at this time to say what those corrective behaviors should be but many of the suggestions being put forward are alarmist. Many of these suggestions would be too costly, have little impact and would severely decrease the quality of life.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
Prior to the pandemic, we were paying our teachers too little and incentivizing high quality and experienced educators to work in more affluent schools. The impact on students in Black and Brown neighborhoods and low-income communities is drastic, with many students with the greatest need being taught by teachers with the least experience. The pandemic has exacerbated this problem as we ask teachers to do more to educate and reach students during this public health and economic crisis.

We can help address these disparities immediately by incentivizing teachers and other educational professionals to make careers in areas with the most need. My bill, the Retaining Educators Takes Added Investment Now (RETAIN) Act, would create a fully refundable tax credit for teachers, paraprofessionals, mental health providers, and school leaders in Title I schools and educators, program providers, and program directors in head start, early head start, and Child Care & Development Block Grant (CCDBG)-funded early childhood education programs. The tax credit increases as these professionals become more experienced to incentivize retention.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Ensure a more localized approach to our education system. Give parents the ability to choose where they want to send their child to school, regardless of their income level or zip code.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
Increasing federal research funding at our government agencies is a top priority for me. The American Cures and Innovation Acts and the America Grows Act would allow America’s smartest scientists and researchers to spend less time figuring out how to cut their budgets and more time finding new ways to protect our food supply, find cures for deadly diseases, and tackle the challenges of the future. Continuing to support scientific research is the smartest investment we can make for our health, our future, and our economy.

I also joined Senator Coons in introducing a bill, the Innovation Centers Acceleration Act, that would create innovation hubs--including at least two in the midwest--to help spur innovation that will create jobs and ensure we remain a leader in the world when it comes to technological advancements and innovation.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Cut red tape and allow for private industry to foster the growth and innovation. I have spent a significant part of my career as a lawyer working for and representing people against Administrative agencies. What happens under the Enabling Act is congress passes a law creating an Administrative agency. The Administrative agency then creates its own laws or regulations and other people within the agency have the role of enforcing the laws and making judicial decisions on the laws. These agencies are often run by career government employees that have little accountability and virtually no oversight. The climate in some of these agencies is extremely hostile toward business. I would work towards increased independent oversight of these agencies as well as assessing whether or not they have exceeded the limits for which they were created. We need to take a serious look at tort reform as well. Illinois is one of the least business friendly states in America and part of the reason is that it is an extremely good state for Plaintiffs lawyers. I understand these issues quite well having been a licensed attorney for 30 years. An honest businessman should not lie awake at night worrying that a trial lawyer and an unsophisticated jury are going to destroy him.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
Our national laboratories and universities are a crown jewels in our science infrastructure. I introduced the American Innovation Act to increase funding for basic science research at DOE Office of Science, NSF, NIST, DOD Basic Science, and NASA's Science Directorate by 5% annually to ensure that researchers have the support they need to make new discoveries. In addition, we should work to re-establish the US as a computing power house by standing up several exascale computers in the coming years and investing heavily in quantum information systems. Lastly, we need to maintain and advance our research instruments at our national labs--they are the underpinning and foundation of our research infrastructure. These open-access machines provide a wealth of data across disciplines and aid private industry.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Illinois is privileged to be home to excellent national laboratories like Fermi Lab and Argonne as well as excellent universities like University of Illinois, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and others. We need to ensure our national laboratories and our universities receive the grant funding they need to combat diseases and fight pandemics like the one we’re going through right now. The three highest priorities for research areas should be: infectious diseases (like COVID-19), economic prosperity, and energy security and independence. We need a healthy, financially secure, and safe America.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
I supported new Farm Bill programs to expand local and regional systems that strengthen diversity (both economically and socially) of the farm sector, like dedicated funding for the Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP) and the new Office of Urban Agriculture. Better outreach, education, and training are imperative so more local farmers know and use these programs. We must pursue more creative thinking similar to what was done with establishing microloans, Noninsurance Crop Disaster Assistance Program, recognition of organic crop economics, and expanding Farm Storage Facility Loan program eligibility. And USDA must act on the law that makes local farmers eligible for the $9.5 billion in CARES Act pandemic funding.

Mark Curran, Republican:
Access to food is something all Americans should have. The physical, social, and economic access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food should be a focus for Members of Congress and United States Senators. Right here in Illinois, we have the land, resources, and amazing farmers that help feed the rest of our beautiful nation. As your senator, I will ensure our farmers always have what they need to not only survive but to also ensure what they grow, raise, and produce helps feed Americans.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
My vote for the Affordable Care Act was one of the most important votes of my career. It cut our state's uninsured rate, protected people with pre-existing conditions by ending discriminatory insurance practices, and helped seniors by lowering prescription drug costs. We must do everything within our power to defend and expand on the ACA. We should expand Medicaid in all states, allow people the option to purchase private or public health insurance plans that ensure access to mental health care, and provide access to adequate dental care. We must also reduce the cost of prescription drugs by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices on behalf of the seniors they serve, cracking down on the abusive patent and monopoly practices used by the pharmaceutical industry to stifle competition, allowing the safe importation of cheaper drugs from countries like Canada, protecting patients from unreasonably high out-of-pocket costs, requiring drug companies to disclose the prices of their drugs to the public, including in their ads, and imposing stiff penalties on companies that unjustifiably and dramatically increase the price of their drugs year after year.

Mark Curran, Republican:
As Sheriff, I took two steps to ensure my staff, both sworn and civilian, had the training and tools to help both those experiencing a medical emergency and mental health emergency, if they were either responding to one or happened to come upon one. This training in crisis intervention and in the proper use of naloxone (Narcan), would ensure those experiencing either a mental health emergency or an overdose would have some sort of care until those individuals were able to be attended to by the right medical professionals. I believe mental health is a serious issue facing our nation, as well as an increasing number of drug overdoses, especially here in Illinois. As senator, I will be an advocate for increased mental health treatment and drug rehabilitation programs.

Richard Durbin, Democrat:
I am a firm believer in science and trust the guidance and advice of experts when making any decision, whether it is on climate change, public health, or environmental policy.

Mark Curran, Republican:
During my time as Lake County Sheriff and a county, state, and federal prosecutor, I relied heavily on the facts and data to guide my thinking and my work. It will be no different when I’m a United States Senator.


Philanise White, Republican, District 1
Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5
Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5
Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6
Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8
Dani Brzozowski, Democrat, District 16
George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
The present administration is working on ways to address this issue, the origins and measures to predict the possibilities of future pandemics. No one can be certain if and when another incident of this kind will occur, just as this one was unforeseen and others from years ago. However, we must ensure that there is a cross-section of experts across various fields at the table to discuss how to best approach all biological threats.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
The most important thing the federal government can do to address the current COVID-19 pandemic is to immediately organize and institute a national testing and contract tracing strategy. We know that short of an effective vaccine, identifying patients infected with the virus and isolating them to prevent further spread is far and away the best way to stop transmission.

To prevent future pandemics, Congress should enact the Preventing Future Pandemics Act which I authored along with Congressman Fred Upton of Michigan and Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Cory Booker of New Jersey. Our bipartisan, bicameral bill would end both domestically and globally, the dangerous and unhygenic slaughter and human consumption of wildlife, which has lead not only to the spillover of the COVID virus, but to other zoonotic pathogens such as Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Zika, SARS, MERS, Ebola, and HIV/AIDS. Unless we replace wild animals with safer sources of protein in the global diet, the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
The federal government has done enough. From now on, open up the country; let those decide for themselves whether to wear a mask or not; taking the vaccine should be optional.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Our private sector science & technology is the envy of the world, but the FDA wouldn’t allow us to import test kits or develop them domestically. Only the CDC’s worthless COVID test was allowed for almost six weeks, making it impossible to know who was infected and should avoid contact with others. The FDA wouldn’t authorize new domestic manufacturers to produce protective gear or allow importation from overseas except for already cleared vendors, resulting in health care workers having to reuse disposable protective gear and for the average American to do without. When whiskey distillers offered to make hand sanitizers when they became scarce, the FDA insisted that they adulterate their product with a poison so that people wouldn’t drink it. That would have made their equipment difficult if not impossible to clean, so distillers were discouraged from helping. Had the FDA gotten out of the way, Americans would have had test kits, protective gear, and hand sanitizer in abundance. The best thing that the federal government can do in the future is get out of the way and let the private sector do what it does best: innovate and produce.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
The federal government has ignored the most vital root of the current pandemic: widespread unhealth and pre-existing disease.

Prevalence of cancers, cardiovascular disease, obesity, diabetes, etc., have all constantly increased since the government began nationalizing the food supply in the 1950s. Our government spends billions of dollars, in fact, over a trillion in 10 years, to subsidize certain foods, and the vast majority of it is very unhealthy.

We spend billions just to subsidize white sugar, which is well-documented to inhibit immune function. No one in the mainstream discusses agricultural policy and its subsidies, and both Democrats and Republicans normally vote in favor of them, and the biggest agribusiness corporations contribute big dollars to both D and R campaigns. Nevertheless, we are what we eat, and for as long as we continue to eat a government-sponsored diet, primarily consisting of corn syrup, refined carbohydrates, and processed sugar, then the bad trend will continue. Now here is the tie-in with COVID...

Over 90% of those who do not survive COVID suffer from pre-existing conditions. In fact, most Americans have pre-existing conditions that are PREVENTABLE. That means that they are largely a result of a consistently unhealthy diet. Since the COVID pandemic took effect, popularity of unhealthy "fast" foods, like McDonald's has increased, while exercise is down. It is imperative that we reform agricultural policy to promote real, fresh, natural, healthy, local, and sustainable businesses. If we spend those "farm dollars" on health food instead of junk food, then health in America could transform overnight. This must happen, because a healthy population with healthily functioning immune systems is the only way to defeat, not only the current virus, but the next one too.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
We need swift action to address the health and economic consequences of the current pandemic – significant spending to prop up education, small businesses, and provide direct relief to working families. Over the course of the pandemic, we’ve seen the wealth of billionaires rise at a staggering rate while millions of working class families struggle and limp along. We need to divorce healthcare and employment so that families facing an unemployment crisis aren’t also subject to a sudden inability to receive health care.

Future pandemics might be prevented or the risks mitigated with proper and thorough funding of the CDC, specifically the pandemic response team. We also need to create a culture of trusting evidence and experts, and we need to pass comprehensive campaign finance reform so running for elected office becomes more feasible, accessible, and meaningful for academics and scientists. Representation matters, and that includes representation from the science community.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Currently, I would demand a national mandatory mask policy for any indoor, public place and continue to expand testing so that outbreak can be quickly contained. For future pandemics, we need in in-depth review of the protocols that were in place, why they weren’t followed, and develop a policy to prevent the same mass confusion and apparent lack of a unified response plan on the national and state levels.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
Will reserve answering pending further research into the topic.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
Climate change is the defining issue of our time and the greatest long-term threat to our continued growth and prosperity. The federal government should enthusiastically lead in the efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to a low carbon economy. Specifically, the U.S. should reassert its global leadership on climate by rejoining the Paris Agreement and exceeding the emissions reductions goals stated in the Agreement. We should re-institute agreessive efficiency and emissions reductions goals for the power and transportation sectors that that Trump administration rolled back, and we should stop the fossil fuel excavation on public lands and in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. In addition, placing a federal, economy-wide price on carbon would be an effective tool to leverage the power of the free market to tackle the climate crisis.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
I do not believe in climate change. God has supplied everything the earth will need to survive, continue and thrive; whereas the earth goes through cycles of purging the bad for the good. Global warming is a democrat political gimmick to scare their constituency into complicity – a myth.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Certainly nothing radical. I agree with this summary on Amazon.com about Bjorn Lomborg’s latest book on the climate: “Climate change is real, but it's not the apocalyptic threat that we've been told it is. Projections of Earth's imminent demise are based on bad science and even worse economics. In panic, world leaders have committed to wildly expensive but largely ineffective policies that hamper growth and crowd out more pressing investments in human capital, from immunization to education.” We live in a far cleaner world than we used to, and continued incremental climate progress is preferable to the Green New Deal or other grandiose schemes that would have serious negative economic ramifications.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
The biggest, best, and most obvious step is to stop sending millions of tax dollars to the oil companies in the form of subsidies. The overall market is already moving towards sustainable energies. If the government would stop subsidizing oil, then we will reach the future even more quickly.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
There are sensible actions we can take in this fight, including: implementing a corporate carbon tax, placing a moratorium on offshore drilling and drilling on public lands, and investing in efficient public transportation. While the US only directly contributes 15% of global carbon emissions, our responsibility as a global leader is to set an example for countries everywhere and to pick up the slack for nations that don’t have the freedom or resources to make the kind of shift we can make here. I will work toward establishing factories for green industries like solar panels and expanding our bustling ecotourism industry around places like Starved Rock State Park.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Make a national science and public policy focus for the further search, development and implementation of renewable clean energy generation technologies – the new space program. The U.S. should make it a priority to become the global leader in clean energy production. Even if not just for the benefit of reducing, and hopefully reversing, the effects of climate change, but also for economic growth and political stability.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
Will reserve answering pending further research into the topic.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
The future of the energy grid is clean, renewable power sources. Market forces like the dropping prices of solar, wind, and other renewable generation and cost competition, primarily from natural gas, and the reduction of coal utilization have already reshapped the energy landscape over the past decade, but the government can to more to facilitate this transition.

Over the last few years, I have been increasingly focused on the power trnasmission system and the electric grid itself. Cities, towns, and even individual customers across the country have done a great job of driving demand for clean energy, but we need to make sure that our power system can handle the increase in variable energy soruces and distributed generation. That’s why I recently introduced the Advanced Energy Technologies and Grid Effiecncy Act of 2020 with Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. This legislation would create a new intiative within the Federal Energy Policy Comission to improve the planning and modeling processes that could create the electric grid of the future and place a new emphasis on improving grid efficiency so that we’re able to use more of the power we generate. The nuts and bolts of grid modernization may not be the silver bullet to stop a changing climate, but it’s crucial if we’re going to build the enery future we need.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
America should continue on its path of energy independence which will strengthen our economy, military and diplomatic global relations.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
The private marketplace has done very well addressing our energy needs, unlike the federal government, which has given us a seemingly unending stream of wasteful boondoggles. My answer to your question: Nothing.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
The goal is to move towards renewable, sustainable energies as soon as possible, not just "in 50 years." We should deregulate agricultural hemp, and other plants, so that industry may innovate for better bio-fuels. We should stop subsidizing solar panels, which contain toxic components which pollute the environment. Solar is a good option, but the subsidies have actually worked to inhibit innovation. Safe nuclear reactors, such as those which employ thorium hold much promise. We must ensure that they do not pollute the environment, however. I am very concerned with nuclear processing plants located on the Mississippi River in Southern Illinois. In order to use nuclear power safely, the plants should be moved away from rivers, and seismic zones.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
We should be aiming for zero reliance on fossil fuels by 2050. We need to invest heavily in wind, solar, and nuclear, and commit to research and development for new technologies to make energy production and delivery more efficacious. We also need a $1.5T investment in infrastructure with a focus on clean energy, public transportation, and energy infrastructure. We should prioritize trade deals that make clear our commitment to clean energy and recommit to the Paris Climate Accord. We also need expansive legislation that holds corporate offenders responsible for their emissions via carbon taxation and other economic mechanisms.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
I would defer to experts as far as what can and should reasonably be expected. I could make baseless claims and demands, but I think we have enough of that in society already.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
The federal government should allow each state to address the specific needs for the residents. Residents of Illinois outside of the large metropolitan areas in the northern part of the state face an entirely different ecosystem than down state residents. One way to ensure that the environment, e.g. clean air and water is properly protected is to consider the needs of the residents of those regions and elect representatives from those areas to the state legislature. Illinois as a lopsided view of what is important to the residents; there is vast farmland and open fields in the greater part of the state, but most of the decisions are made from the lens of its largest city; Chicago. All voices are important; therefore all should be drafters of any action toward protecting the environment.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
One of the most damaging legacies of the Trump administration will be it’s shameful sacrifce of clean air, clean water, and productive land to corporate polluters. My first job was at EPA and I’ve been a card-carrying member of the Sierra Club since I was 16, which is why I believe that responsible environmental stewardship is among our most sacred responsibilities. I support strong enfocement of the Clean Air Act, NEPA, and other bedrock environmental protections and enhancing them where necessary.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
Our government should have tax incentives for innovation and technology for curbing pollution.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Too often, the EPA levies fines on companies instead of making them restore what they have polluted. If companies had to clean up their garbage, they wouldn’t pollute in the first place. The Department of Defense is the world’s biggest polluter and contaminated the groundwater in Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Denver, and Sacramento. To prevent this from happening to Illinois cities, we need to put an end to sovereign immunity, which allows the DOD to get away with much of its malfeasance.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
Again, nuclear plants and processing centers must be moved away from rivers and seismic zones. Those in Southern Illinois, along the Mississippi River, are a major hazard.

We should stop subsidizing farms that use chemicals which are toxic when they run off into water sources. Moreover, when pollution is found, it should be tracked, and polluters should be fined in order to clean the pollution and even more fines in order to strongly discourage future pollution. Finally, the US Government must itself be held accountable when it pollutes the environment. Depleted uranium has wrought havoc in Iraq, and wherever else it has been used. A great way to stop a lot of pollution is to end the foreign wars.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
The number of EPA Superfund sites in the 16th district is 14. Elementary schools, public parks, and residences all over this district are being tested for deadly pollutants and coming back with the news that public health has been compromised, and that it’s retroactive. In some cases it’s too late. The government, which for too long failed to regulate corporations and their detrimental effects on the environment, has a responsibility to invest swiftly and thoroughly in communities like mine, where cleanup projects threaten the lives of tens of thousands of people. Further, we must better fund and enforce programs that exist to prevent travesties like this by regulating private projects that come with a risk of environmental consequences. Corporations should be held accountable for the permanent effects they have on our air, water, soil, and people.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Absolutely need to tighten clean air and water policy, but to a main focus of mine would be transparency to the public about the public health issues if these policies aren’t in place. It often gets overlooked because most of our country is fortunate to have immediate concerns about air and water quality. However, we need the global issue to remain in the national conversation and not allow our complacency to jeopardize these resources. I believe good public policy and business interests that may be historic polluters can coexist. Where the two are traditional are at odds, I believe a government focused on real solutions can help to overcome those issues with through stimulating and encouraging technological solutions.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
The federal government should allow for options for parents to make the choice of the quality and direction of education for their children. There is and has always been diversity in the workforce. Ensuring that it is competitive will take joint effort and involvement of all stakeholders: family, community and commerce. But the greater part of this collaboration begins with the family and making choices that work for them individually.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
The U.S. continues to lag behind other nations on the quality of public education, especilly in science and math, and it is unacceptable. We need a renewed emphasis on stregthening our public education system, not enabling flight from it, and we must recognize and support the crucial role that STEM education has in building the economy of tomorrow.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
Every child should have school choice, vouchers to pay for education; anywhere they chose for a public or private education. Parents concerned about those issues will make their choices and be expected to live by their decisions.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Studies show that home schooling, private schools, and charter schools provide education far superior to that of the standard public school for about half the price per pupil. Taxes collected for education should follow the students to the school of their choice, which will force public schools to improve or be phased out.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
Lower grades of education are largely funded by property taxes. This is contrary to the 4th amendment, and it results in unequal funding, because some communities pay a lot in taxes, while others pay very little. Grade schools should be funded in any other way besides property taxes, and this would create a more equitable education system.

For higher education, we can see that federal policy has largely worked to inflate the cost of education. Compare 4-year university prices with those of 2-year community colleges where students do not use "FAFSA." FAFSA is a misnomer, anyway, and it reads like a predatory loan. They call it a "free application." Well of course the application is free! But the interest on the loan is not free. The best financial decision I ever made was to leave a 4 year university in order to study at a community college. I am very pleased with the community college system, and I would like to keep the government's tentacles away from it.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
The government needs to create an environment that levels the playing field for students from all backgrounds. All children should have the resources, safety, and support to spend their time in the classroom learning. K-12 education should primarily be governed by qualified state and local School Boards and governing bodies. We also need to eliminate public spending on charter schools, as the privatization of our education system harms teachers, students, and communities. We need to be both empowering teachers’ unions and incentivizing teacher performance.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Government has failed to recognize the needs of an ever-changing economy, part of this is due to financial ties with industries as they become obsolete. This important aspect must be acknowledged in order to overcome the past shortfalls. My personal solution is to pledge to not accepting corporate or lobbyist campaign contributions. More directly, there needs to be partnership with government, developing industries and universities to make sure collaboration results in efficient job training for future demand of skilled, semi-skilled or even highly-trained labor. Secondarily, I want to implement a program where-by individuals carrying student loans would be able to make monthly payments through volunteer/pro-bono work. This article discusses the application in the legal field, but I it could also be utilized for almost any social service program. https://www.isba.org/sections/yld/newsletter/2012/10/addressingunderemploymentandunderre. I would especially like to see a focus on encouraging individuals with STEM based jobs providing exposure and after school programs to low-income and rural students who otherwise might not interact with many people with science and technology backgrounds.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
The country as a whole including individual states should be looking to keep manufacturing companies in America. The only way to stimulate innovation in science, technology and engineering among other fields, is to invest in the next generation of learners and leaders. That is why it is important to allow parents to take the lead on how and where their child will be educated, including home schooling where the parent may be better equipped to expose their child to these options.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
The federal government has the ability to be a massive driving force for scientific research and innovation. I’ve worked through my position on the House Appropriations Committee to ensure substnatial and necessary funding levels for our national labs, like Argonne National Lab in Illinois, and basic science and research programs at the Department of Energy, EPA, NASA, NOAA, and other federal agencies that have a role in reasearch and development.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
Tax incentives.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Each federal regulator destroys about 160 jobs; many, if not all, of these regulations are unnecessary and keep people impoverished when they can’t find work. The FDA, for example, keeps increasing its regulatory reach, so instead of taking four years to get a new drug to market as it did in the early 1960s, it now takes over three times as long----with no increase in safety. Instead of innovating, companies spend their money jumping through regulatory hoops that increase drug prices without giving equivalent payback to consumers in terms of safety and effectiveness.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
The federal government is very inefficient with its spending, therefore federal dollars should be left in the states, like Illinois, so that Illinois may decide how best to spend its dollars in order to stimulate innovation and job creation.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
The federal government should expand its support for students and early career researchers to enfure that we can support and retain the great scientists that the United States produces, particularly scientists that belong to underrepresented minorities. I support expanding the budget of the National Science Foundation and policies that would make their funding opportunities to a greater number of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers. I also support increasing funding for climate change innovation and infrastructure, which will bring clean, sustainable, and scientific jobs to Illinois and other places in the United States.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Through the focused expansion of the federal Small Business Administration and the Illinois Small Business Development Center network, we can provide resources to science and tech-based business, so that they do are able to thrive in developing their core business. Secondarily, making taxing structure and regulation flexibility for new and emerging businesses, so that it is easier to start-up and sustain growth during a period of development and, typically, no-profit. As well as structing policy to make the U.S. and Illinois attractive locations to headquarter technology companies and manufacturing. Some of that needs to be in updating infrastructure to support these types of industries.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
Will reserve answering pending further research into the topic.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
I believe environmental sustainability will shape the next century. Climate change is an ecnomic issue, it’s a housing issue, it’s a food security issue, it’s a transportation issue, and it is certainly a national security issue. Developing solutions for sustainable geowth will be the next great challenge for both nations and corporations. The government, though the national labs, should prioitize foundational research for innovation in manufacturing, clean energy, and transportation, where climate-smart solutions can be highly effective and have a significant impact.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
Balancing the federal budget, tax incentives and growing the American economy. The rest will take care of itself.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Prevention of disease through nutrition, supplements, and herbals (which has been largely attacked by the FDA); stem cell research (which has been dramatically slowed by the FDA pushing the frontline research offshore); and age reversal, which has been demonstrated in animals in the last five years.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
Research priority 1 is to discover the negative effects of current national agricultural policy, and then to find a solution to fix it. According to the National Institute of Health, "...the interaction of biology and economics in supporting the obesity epidemic. Foods for which we have a high biological preference (i.e., foods high in sugar and hhigh in energy density), and which contribute to overeating, are currently the cheapest and most accessible." See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228640/ Research priority 2 is to discover natural cures for diseases and maladies. Certain promising substances exist, but people often think there has not been enough study. It is absurd that we pursue pharmaceutical cures when natural ones may already exist. Consider this study at the National Institute of Health which found that silver particles are useful in treating HIV. See: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2818642/ Research priority 3 is to discover more sustainable fuels that can be easily, cleanly, and safely used and transported. I would bet that hemp will prove a better bio-fuel source than corn.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
The top three priority research areas in the next 10 years will be in climate change prevention and mitigation, public health, and global food security. Climate change is the biggest threat of our generation and will require research and development to improve the efficiancy of existing technologies (e.g. solar panels) and the invention of new, sustainable technologies, such as those that capture carbon from the atmosphere. We also need to overhaul much of our existing infrastructure with innovative, carbon-neutral alternatives that can help us meet a 1.5°C target set by the Paris Climate Agreement. The coronavirus pandemic has highlighted the gaps in our public health infrastructure, and we need innovation to help prevent and mitigate future pandemics. This will require supporting research on new and emerging infectious diseases (including those in animals like bats), and improving our teachnological infrastructure for much-needed support like contact-tracing. Finally, food security is an ongoing concern for both domestic and international interests, and making sure that everyone has access to nutritious food will require higher quality foods, and more sustainable agricultural practices (and associated new technologies like harvesting technologies).

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Scalable renewable energy generation (including development of Hydrogen fuel cells for vehicles) / repurpose of waste materials (especially plastics).

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
The federal government should work within the already established departments such as the Department of Agriculture on a federal level, and those individually related agencies/organizations and stakeholders on a local level to support food-related industries and family farmers, live stock owners etc. The closer the food production is to the residents (meaning locally) the better the outcome in ensuring that the food is securely and properly grown, meets the standards of production and reaches the intended consumer while preserving quality.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
Good federal public policy doesn’t prioritize one area over another. Instead, it breaks down traditional silos to find common solutions for common problems. Smart agricultural policy that prioritizes carbon sequestration and preserving productive ecosystems will help mitigate the climate-driven changing weather patterns that currently threaten food production in the U.S. and around the world. The federal government can and should be a leader in pioneering novel approaches to agriculture that increase yields and decrease environmental impact, and government must act urgently on climate change to decrease the disruption to our food producing systems.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
More competition, less regulation, more free trade, and tax incentives.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
I don’t see where “food security” is a real problem in the United States. It is in some other nations, of course. There should not be any protectionism in agriculture whatsoever, and no price supports, which will make food more affordable. Sugar costs much more in the United States than elsewhere due to federal government protectionism. All farm subsidies should be ended. The federal debt is a potential national security issue, and, I would think, a potential food security issue. Not getting the federal debt under control could lead to a much poorer nation and potential food security issues.

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
We saw how vulnerable our food supply was when the pandemic hit. This is largely a result of nationalized agricultural policy which has put so much emphasis on a few huge suppliers. My plan to redirect dollars in the Farm Bill to local businesses will be a great step towards decentralizing the food supply so and protect it against future disruption.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
Food security is an issue that has been exacerbated and exposed by the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Even one American going to bed hungry is too many for the richest country in the world. The federal government must support safety net programs like food stamps and make them accessible to everyone who needs assistance. Schools should not only provide free lunch to low-income children, but also breakfast, which we know not only increases physical health but also academic performance. Finally, the United States needs infrastructure to protect our agricultural sector from the effects of climate change. Torrential rains ravaged crop fields in my district last year, and both farmers and constituents paid the price. We need adaptive management strategies to ensure that we support our farmers and, ultimately, support every American to make sure they have food on their table.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Diversification of production of the food supply through strategic subsidizes for farmers to grow a variety of crops for human consumption, so that large-scale industrial farming is not centralized in very few locations.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
Mental health is a huge problem in Illinois as it is in the nation. With mental health comes an array of other health related issues. There needs to be options to compassionately address the needs of the mentally ill residents of the state and work with experts in those fields to address each unique aspect of what may be the underlying cause. However, how to address this without infringing on the rights of the individual must be foremost when addressing health initiatives both physically and mentally because they are the ones that must make the choice for themselves. Government should never force itself upon the people, but provide funding and support for others (preferably family, friends) to assist.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
Years if not decades of defunding and de-emphasizing public health agencies and experts has had a devastating impact during the COVID-19 pandemic. We’ve learned hard lessons over the past few months about how important it is to have the right experts in place at the right organizations, armed with the resources they need, not to mention how necessary it is to acutally listen to their advice. In the wake of the pandemic, we must adequately fund state and national public health organizations and break down the bureaucratic barriers in government that separate issues like security, conservation, econmoic development, and health, which in reality are all integrally linked.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
There is enough in place, creating competition to offer better than before. Public/private investment partnerships.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
If you want to keep health care costs down, we need to get rid of regulations that limit competition and add costs without returning value to consumers. These include Illinois Certificate of Need Laws ( https://www.mercatus.org/publications/corporate-welfare/illinois%E2%80%99s-certificate-need-laws-effects-quality-spending-and-access), many FDA regulations which one researcher (in “Death by Regulation: How We Were Robbed of a Golden Age of Health and How We Can Reclaim It”) estimates have taken 5-10 years off each of our lives instead of protecting us, and ObamaCare (Click link here).

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
Again, the best step is to reform agricultural policy. This will have a profound effect on health, and therefore lower demand on health procedures and medications. Lowered demand will result in lower prices. Lower demand and lower prices will result in much cheaper, more easily accessible insurance. I support offering Medicare to anyone who wants it, but I also want to deregulate the private insurance market so that anyone can buy any policy that they want. What is important is to enforce contracts so that insurance companies will actually pay the benefits that they promise. All this begins with reformed agricultural policy, because we are what we eat.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
I support universal healthcare. We must join every developed nation on Earth and guarantee healthcare to all Americans--no exceptions. Here are some of the many benefits of this program: We will finally achieve full, universal coverage, Americans will be able to go to the doctor without any out-of-pocket costs, we will divorce healthcare from employment, Americans will be able to go to any doctor or hospital they like without worrying about being “out of network,” small businesses will thrive without the burden of needing to provide healthcare to workers, employers will be incentivized to improve working conditions to keep workers who might only have stayed for the healthcare benefits, the system will cost less overall because we will cut out excessive executive pay, private company profits, and many administrative costs. I also support lowering drug prices, since taxpayers provide the funding for research and development, but private companies make them expensive. This all means that mental healthcare services and medication will be available to all who need it, without having to worry about the costs of those services or drugs.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
I firmly believe that healthcare needs to be recognized as a human right, and that the current for-profit healthcare system will always be inadequate and unequal in its distribution to services. Economically it is a failure because anxiety of the cost and unknown access to health insurance is bottleneck on economic growth for a multitude of factors. I believe he need to establish a National Mental Health division of the US Depart of Health and Human services, and provide mandatory care to all police, fire, first responders, active duty military, veterans and optional care available to their families, and individuals identified at higher risk for requiring mental health services. We need a national focus on the importance of mental health as it pertains to healthcare (especially for identified higher risk groups – victims of trauma/life-changing circumstances) and a program to make sure the level of care and access is at a minimum throughout the country.

Philanise White, Republican, District 1:
Will reserve answering pending further research into the topic.

Mike Quigley, Democrat, District 5:
One of the incredible things about serving in Congress is the access we have to experts of all types, from the Congressional Research Service to the various government agencies and even outside organizations and groups. In developing legislation like the Preventing Future Pandemics Act and the Advanced Energy Technology and Grid Efficiency Act, I and my staff stayed in close contact with scores of relevent experts and spent months revising and incorporating feedback into the bills. Moving forward, I will continue to avail myself of the resources the American people provide to policymakers to make smart, empirically sound, well-informed decisions.

Tom Hanson, Republican, District 5:
It will be viewed as a reference point but not 100%.

Bill Redpath, Libertarian, District 6:
Greatly. What other way is there?

Preston Nelson, Libertarian, District 8:
Science, evidence, and data are a foundation of life, beyond politics. Unfortunately, politics and political agendas have certainly swayed some science. I believe that most all people, regardless of political affiliation, want a clean, healthy environment. I think that if people are free to innovate, then we will quickly arrive at all of our goals.

Dani Brzozowki, Democrat, District 16:
Science is hugely influential in my approach to policymaking already. For questions about science, I go to the data and to the experts. On my campaign, I’ve been fortunate to have a friend and advisor with a science PhD who has helped shape my policy platform, and I plan to continue to lean on scientists for their expertise when I’m in Congress. I think it’s unfortunate that saying, “I believe science,” is controversial in 2020, and the ongoing crises of public health and the climate are the most prominent examples of the damages not listening to science can cause. We need champions of science in our government, and I will commit to being one.

George Petrilli, Democrat, District 18:
Significantly, and I encourage the application of the traditional scientific method to everyday life problems. I think public policy development would benefit greatly from the utilizing more data-based decision-making and application of the approaches and insights of scientific research in developing solutions to economic and political issues.