Voter’s Edge California
Get the facts before you vote.
Voter’s Edge California
Go to top
Brought to you by
MapLight
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
June 5, 2018 — California Primary Election
Share your knowledge

Do you feel better informed having used Voter's Edge?

Help us inform other voters.

District 52 —U.S. House of RepresentativesJune 5, 2018 —California Primary Election

United States
June 5, 2018 —California Primary Election

U.S. House of RepresentativesDistrict 52

Election Results

  • 100% of precincts reporting (402/402).

About this office

Representatives are elected to two-year terms to represent the people of a specific congressional district in the federal government. They introduce and vote on new laws, hold hearings, and are responsible for approving federal taxes.
Access additional information about this contest in the tabs in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.

Who’s Running?

For this office, only the two candidates who get the most votes in the primary election advance to the general election. The two candidates may be from the same political party.
Candidates are sorted in order of election results.
Please scroll down to see all candidates.
Democratic
U.S. Representative
98,744 votes (59%)Winning
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has provided information.
Thank candidate for sharing their information on Voter’s Edge.
  • Supporting the innovation economy and helping small businesses grow by fighting for investments in science and our military.
  • Ensuring that America keeps its promises to our veterans by making sure they get they healthcare, benefits and transition assistance they've earned and deserve after their service and sacrifice.
  • Standing up to the reckless Trump Administration that is putting the nation's global leadership at risk, threatening the prosperity of working families, and dismantling protections designed to keep our air and water clean.
Profession:U.S. Representative
U.S. Representative, California's 52nd Congressional District — Elected position (2013–current)
Commissioner and Chairman, San Diego Unified Port District — Appointed position (2009–2012)
City Councilman and President, San Diego City Council — Elected position (2000–2008)
Partner, Peters and Varco, LLP (1996–2000)
Deputy County Council IV, County of San Diego, Office of County Council (1991–1996)
Associate, Baker & McKenzie (1989–1991)
Associate, Dorsey & Whitney LLP (1984–1988)
Economist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1980–1981)
New York University School of Law JD (1984)
Duke University BA (1980)

Scott Peters is a proven leader with a track record of working with everyone to achieve common sense solutions and get things done. Since becoming a member the U.S. House of Representatives in 2013, his priorities have been to fix a broken Congress, create high-quality jobs, keep America safe, keep our promises to our veterans, and make college more affordable for middle-class families. Since his time on the City Council, and as a Port Commissioner, Scott has developed a solid reputation as someone who is willing to reach across the aisle and achieve bipartisan solutions to tough problems.

Before being elected to Congress, Scott served as chair of the San Diego Unified Port District – a major economic engine that produces tens of thousands of high-skill, high-wage jobs for San Diegans. The Port manages the state tidelands in and around San Diego Bay, which produces around $3.3 billion in direct economic impact to the region and supports middle class jobs for around 40,000 San Diegans.

Scott served at the Port after completing two terms on the San Diego City Council, where he was San Diego’s first City Council President, elected to the role three years in a row by his colleagues. While at the City, Scott pursued greater accountability and efficiency in government, with a results-oriented approach. He led the creation of a new council/mayor form of government with an independent budget review function; created an independent audit function; hired the City’s first independent budget analyst; completed over $2 billion in downtown redevelopment including a new major league ballpark that generated more than 19,000 jobs; delivered an 80% reduction in sewer spills and beach closure days; set new standards for energy and water conservation in new development; and completed major district infrastructure, including Highway 56.

Prior to entering public service, Scott had a 16-year legal career in private practice, specializing in environmental law. He worked as an associate at large law firms, as a Deputy County Counsel for the County of San Diego, and then had his own small law firm for a number of years. 

Scott has also worked extensively as a community leader to grow our economy, improve education, and protect the environment – including service as a member of the boards of the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation, CleanTECH San Diego, and the UCSD Chancellor’s Community Advisory Board, and as Chair of the Climate Initiative at The San Diego Foundation.

Scott earned his undergraduate degree from Duke University and worked as an economist for the United States Environmental Protection Agency before attending New York University School of Law. He and his wife of 30 years, Lynn, are 27-year residents of the 52nd District. They live in La Jolla and have a grown daughter and son.

1.
Question 1

Family reunification is a process that allows immigrants already residing in the U.S. to bring in additional family members. Do you support limiting this process? Why or why not?

Answer from Scott Peters:

I support family reunification.

2.
Question 2

Do you support expanding the current border wall between U.S. and Mexico? Why or why not?

Answer from Scott Peters:

No. There are better ways to secure our southern border than by building a wall from coast to coast. Donald Trump wants to waste $18 billion of taxpayer money on a wall that most Americans oppose and that won’t secure the border as well as other more innovative, less expensive technology. What we need is better, newer more innovative technology to detect underground tunnels used to smuggle drugs and people, and more customs agents with better technology to screen cars and cargo driving through border crossings. 

San Diegans view the border as an opportunity, not a threat. It is an economic engine for San Diego and our country.

3.
Question 3

Do you support creating additional regulations on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Answer from Scott Peters:

Yes. As a member of the Congressional Gun Violence Prevention Task Force, I have been a consistent, vocal advocate for Congressional action to address gun violence. In the wake of Sandy Hook, Aurora, Pulse nightclub, Las Vegas and now Parkland, Congressional action is long, long overdue. After each of these tragedies, Congressional Republicans hold a moment of silence in honor of those whose lives were senselessly cut short, and then send “thoughts and prayers,” and then do nothing to make it better. That needs to change. I am ready to make our background check system work better, and I’m ready to ban bump stocks, high-capacity magazines and weapons of war that have no place in our schools or in our communities. My priority now is to raise the volume on this issue — to make it so that Congressional Republicans can’t just move on — and to help all of those who have been calling for action from Congress to have their voices heard.

I have focused on pushing legislation to establish universal background checks because it has broad bipartisan support and, thus, the best chance of passage in the House. 

4.
Question 4

Should the U.S. remain in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Why or why not?

Answer from Scott Peters:

Yes. Pulling the U.S. out of NAFTA would rip the rug out from underneath our economy and devastate small business owners, workers, and families in San Diego and across the country. It would create new barriers that make it harder to sell American-made products and crops to our two largest customers. And it would raise the prices that working families pay for everything from cars to groceries.

All but ten states in the U.S. count on Mexico or Canada as their largest export markets. In San Diego, they are our two top customers, with $5.5 billion in annual exports to Mexico alone. San Diego’s economy has benefitted greatly from being a center for international trade and it has made our binational region a more attractive place to start a business and manufacture products. Pulling out of NAFTA could hurt this ecosystem and the 120,000 San Diegans whose jobs depend on trade.

NAFTA isn’t perfect. It makes sense to prioritize raising enforceable environmental and labor standards through trade agreements to further level the playing field for American workers.

5.
Question 5

What programs or legislation, if any, would you support to help Americans of all ages secure affordable health care?

Answer from Scott Peters:

As a member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, which has jurisdiction over health care, I fought back attempts to strip access to health care away from millions of Americans.  I support the Affordable Care Act. And it was a huge undertaking. That means it was bound to need fixes over time and I’ve sought ways to repair and improve those elements that aren’t working the way they were intended.

Here are some reforms I’ve supported:

1. Congress should reauthorize and make permanent federal reinsurance programs, which protect insurers against the costliest medical claims. Without a sufficiently funded reinsurance program, insurers with sicker enrollees would have to charge higher premiums to all of their customers to stem their financial losses.

2. Congress should shield Cost-Sharing Reduction Subsidies (CSRs) from the uncertain appropriations process and commit to long-term funding. These subsidies reduce out-of-pocket health care costs for hardworking American families. If CSRs ended, insurance would become unaffordable for many, more insurers would hike premiums or leave the exchanges altogether, and the federal government would foot the bill for newly uninsured families flocking to the emergency room for basic care.

3. One of the most important ways to keep insurance available and premiums down is to get young, healthy people into the insurance pool. The ACA tries to do this with an “individual mandate” — everyone has to get insurance or pay a fine. As an alternative to the mandate, Congress could authorize an automatic enrollment system, where young individuals who do not purchase insurance would be automatically enrolled in an inexpensive health plan that covers basic primary care and catastrophic illness or injury.

Many individual insurance markets need help today, and the fixes are available and need not be partisan. This is what Congress should be doing.

Total money raised: $2,268,514

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
Scott Peters
$51,377
2
Cox Enterprises and employees
$44,750
3
General Atomics and employees
$20,100
4
Employees of University of California, San Diego
$15,005
5
Employees of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd
$14,050

By State:

California 38.46%
District of Columbia 31.97%
Virginia 5.48%
New York 3.37%
Other 20.72%
38.46%31.97%20.72%

By Size:

Large contributions (92.86%)
Small contributions (7.14%)
92.86%

By Type:

From organizations (58.33%)
From individuals (41.67%)
58.33%41.67%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.

While so many in Washington seem interested only in political gamesmanship and blaming others for the problems we face, Scott has forged a different path; he’s introduced multiple bills to make college more affordable, become a nationally recognized leader in the fight to reduce gun violence, has been a strong voice for our nation’s military, and has repeatedly stood up to attempts in Congress to take away a woman’s right to make her own healthcare decisions.

Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

SCOTT PETERS

U.S. Representative: Veterans, Energy & Commerce Committees

Creating Jobs: I was named Legislator of the Year by biotechnology groups for securing investments in scientific research for our universities and research institutions that create thousands of jobs. I passed a bill to help small businesses reduce legal fees.

Keeping Us Safe: I’ve fought to get assault weapons off our streets and close loopholes in our gun purchase background check laws. I’ve supported increased Defense budgets to fight dangerous, emerging threats.

Caring for Veterans: It’s unpatriotic that veterans wait months for healthcare they've earned. I helped pass laws to get veterans more health services, reduce wait times and launched a program to get veterans jobs. I passed a law to get Purple Heart veterans injured in battle the full education benefits they were denied.

Fixing A Broken Congress: I helped pass a 'No Budget No Pay' bill that withholds Congress' pay if they don't do their jobs and pass a budget.

Standing Up for Families: I’m the only pro-choice candidate in this race, endorsed by Planned Parenthood. I helped pass a bipartisan law to lower student loan interest rates and ease college debt for families. I support providing DREAMers with a path to citizenship in the only country they know.

I’ve worked hard to get things done and solve tough problems. Ranked one of America’s most independent lawmakers, I have opposed divisiveness and worked with both political parties to achieve commonsense solutions.

It’s an honor to represent you. I ask for your vote. www.scottpeters.com

— May 2, 2018 Scott Peters for Congress

Rep. Scott Peters supports common-sense gun safety reforms to reduce senseless gun violence. 

— May 2, 2018 Scott Peters for Congress

Rep. Scott Peters passed a bill to help address the tragic epidemic of veteran suicide. 

— May 2, 2018 Scott Peters for Congress

Reforms to fix a broken Congress. 

— May 2, 2018 Scott Peters for Congress

Why Barack Obama endorsed Scott Peters' re-election to Congress in 2016. 

— May 2, 2018 Planned Parenthood Action Fund

Rep. Scott Peters on a woman's right to make her own health care decisions. 

Campaign Name: Scott Peters for Congress
Email info@scottpeters.com
Phone: (858) 848-7515
Address:
PO Box 22074
San Diego, CA 92192
Photo of  Omar Qudrat
No information provided.
Encourage candidate to share their information on Voter’s Edge.
Are you this candidate? Add more info.

Omar Qudrat

Republican
Counter Terrorism Attorney
25,530 votes (15.3%)Winning
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has not provided information.
Encourage candidate to share their information on Voter’s Edge.
Are you this candidate? Add more info.
Total money raised: $282,893

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
Omar Qudrat
$70,005
2
Employees of Glaser Weil
$7,700
3
ROAD TO FREEDOM POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
$6,000
4
Employees of Archer Capital Management
$5,400
4
Employees of Axiom Internationals
$5,400
4
Employees of Elliott Broidy Capital Management
$5,400
4
Employees of One America News Network
$5,400

By State:

California 52.92%
District of Columbia 26.78%
Virginia 5.90%
New York 5.19%
Other 9.21%
52.92%26.78%9.21%

By Size:

Large contributions (95.03%)
Small contributions (4.97%)
95.03%

By Type:

From organizations (3.08%)
From individuals (96.92%)
96.92%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.
Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

OMAR QUDRAT

Counter Terrorism Attorney

I was born and raised in Southern California, a native SoCal son with my two older sisters. I am a military officer, I prosecuted terrorists at Guantanamo Bay as a U.S. Department of Defense official, I worked for the team that prosecuted the 9/11 alleged mastermind, I spent 18 months in Afghanistan during the surge as a Defense Department official, and I dedicated my life to advance the future of my nephews, my parents, my sisters, you, and all Americans who I am fighting for.

I lived the failed policies I’m fighting against and I have the experience to deliver results— With my leadership and proven solutions, I know how to solve San Diego’s veteran homelessness crisis. I will ensure our children have a future with education and skills that apply to tomorrow’s technologically advanced world. I know how to secure and protect our nation and community from criminals and terrorist networks. I know the struggle of business owners first hand I will fight to advance tax and regulation-cutting policies that will bring jobs that pay well and keep them here.

I will defend the Constitution with my life. In the military we don’t accept mission failure and as your Congressman I won’t stop until the mission is accomplished.

My family lived and achieved the American dream and we must preserve the American Dream for our children.

Time to take our community back. I would be honored to represent San Diego’s 52nd district. I am respectfully asking for your vote.

Photo of  James Veltmeyer
No information provided.
Encourage candidate to share their information on Voter’s Edge.
Are you this candidate? Add more info.

James Veltmeyer

Republican
Physician/Surgeon
19,040 votes (11.4%)
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has not provided information.
Encourage candidate to share their information on Voter’s Edge.
Are you this candidate? Add more info.
Total money raised: $247,754

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
James Veltmeyer
$134,921
2
Employees of Premier B.H.
$5,400
2
Employees of Skyline Church
$5,400
3
Employees of Bear Holdings
$3,500
4
Employees of ResMed
$2,710

By State:

California 97.95%
Texas 1.47%
Tennessee 0.46%
New York 0.12%
97.95%

By Size:

Large contributions (95.90%)
Small contributions (4.10%)
95.90%

By Type:

From organizations (0.00%)
From individuals (100.00%)
100.00%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.
Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

JAMES VELTMEYER

Physician/Surgeon

I am a 40-year resident of San Diego, graduate of UCSD, and Chief of the Department of Family Medicine at one of our most prestigious local hospitals. I have been voted San Diego County’s “Top Doctor” four times and am the author of a nationally-recognized health care reform plan. I am a parishioner at All Hallows Catholic Church in La Jolla and am married to Laura, a cancer survivor, and we have two children.

Having risen from poverty and homelessness abroad to achieve the American Dream, I am running to ensure that all members of our society can find success through education, freedom, and free markets, not government programs.

As a doctor who saves lives, heals the sick every day, I will work to enact health care legislation in Congress that removes power from government and giant insurance companies and gives that power back to patients and doctors. My plan will reduce costs, slash premiums, and increase choice and competition.

As a legal immigrant to America, I will work for legislation that builds the border wall, ends chain migration, stops the lottery visa program, and defunds sanctuary cities and states. I am opposed to providing benefits to people who broke into our country while our veterans go hungry on our streets.

With your vote, we can achieve real reform, real change, and real opportunity for each and every American who knows a better life lies just ahead. I am endorsed by Senator Joel Anderson, among many others. Please visit VeltmeyerforCongress.com to learn more.

Republican
Retired Army Sergeant
7,680 votes (4.6%)
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has provided information.
Thank candidate for sharing their information on Voter’s Edge.
  • Veterans - Focusing on better healthcare and benefits
  • Small Businesses - less regulations to promote growth and sustainability
  • National Security - support the administration to keep our country and its citizens a top priority.
Profession:Retired Army Sergeant
Sergeant, United States Army — Elected position (1994–2008)
1.
Question 1

Family reunification is a process that allows immigrants already residing in the U.S. to bring in additional family members. Do you support limiting this process? Why or why not?

Answer from Danny Casara:

Yes,  I support limiting the process to spouse and children only. 

2.
Question 2

Do you support expanding the current border wall between U.S. and Mexico? Why or why not?

Answer from Danny Casara:

Yes, to assist  with the enforcement of our current immigration laws   

3.
Question 3

Do you support creating additional regulations on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Answer from Danny Casara:

 No, our Second Amendment is already being eroded. 

4.
Question 4

Should the U.S. remain in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Why or why not?

Answer from Danny Casara:

 Yes, if we can negotiate better terms for the United States of America. 

5.
Question 5

What programs or legislation, if any, would you support to help Americans of all ages secure affordable health care?

Answer from Danny Casara:

 I support commonsense legislation that  will offer a variety of products that will best suit the consumer. 

Total money raised: $30,803

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
Danny Casara
$6,500
2
Employees of The Club At Ravenna
$2,500
3
Employees of Clubcorp
$2,000
3
Employees of United States Department of Veterans Affairs
$2,000
4
DEFENDERS OF FREEDOM AND SECURITY
$1,000
4
Employees of Ford Motor Company
$1,000
4
Employees of Robert Winegard
$1,000

By State:

California 68.25%
Colorado 9.51%
Illinois 8.75%
Texas 8.75%
Other 4.75%
68.25%9.51%8.75%8.75%

By Size:

Large contributions (85.38%)
Small contributions (14.62%)
85.38%14.62%

By Type:

From organizations (3.80%)
From individuals (96.20%)
96.20%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.
Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

DANNY CASARA AGE: 43

Retired Army Sergeant

As a Purple Heart recipient, I proudly served my country in the U.S. Army for nearly 15 years. I deployed in 2005 to South Baghdad, Iraq. On September 23rd, my patrol vehicle rolled over an anti-tank mine, killing two; wounding four. To date, I have undergone 24 surgeries and countless hours of physical therapy just to walk again.

After returning from war, I began advocating for the veteran community and their families by working with non-profit organizations across the country. I desire to continue serving my country and community by running to be your next U.S. Representative.

I believe our government needs More Patriots and less politicians. I will focus on creating economic opportunities, supporting small business owners, securing our nation’s borders, and being an unwavering advocate for veterans and their families.

I stand on the word of God and the Constitution of the United States. My commitment to God, family, and country, allows me to be a better father and husband.

“Listen now to me and I will give you some advice, and may God be with you. You must be the people’s representative before God and bring their disputes to him. Teach them His decrees and instructions, and show them the way they are to live and how they are to behave. But select capable men from all the people-men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain-and appoint them as officials over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens.” Exodus 18:19-21

Thank you for your vote.

www.casaraforcongress.com

Republican
Direct Democracy Advocate
6,561 votes (3.9%)
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has provided information.
Thank candidate for sharing their information on Voter’s Edge.
  • Bring real change to Washington by committing to truly represent the voters of my district.
  • Reduce the size and scope of the Federal Government and encourage individual liberty and personal responsibility.
  • Reduce the influence of special interests and lobbyists by returning the power of government back to the people.
Profession:Direct Democracy Advocate
Direct Democracy Advocate, Croydon LLC (2017–2018)
President, COO and CFO, Bit Stew Systems (2015–2016)
Chairman and CEO, SoCalGas (2010–2012)
President and CEO, Sempra Generation (2006–2010)
International Management Consultant and Partner, LEK Consulting (1987–1998)
University of Chicago Booth School of Business Graduate, MBA with a Finance Specialization (1985)
Michigan State University B.S., Chemical Engineering (1982)

Michael Allman, a long-time San Diego County resident, is an experienced businessman with a distinguished career spanning technology, energy, and international businesses.

From 2014 to 2016, Mike was with Bit Stew Systems, a software company operating in the “Industrial Internet of Things” industry that links computers with machines. Mike’s roles at Bit Stew included President, Chief Operating Officer, and Chief Financial Officer. Mike led the sale of Bit Stew to General Electric in 2016, in a deal that was awarded “Deal of the Year” by the Canadian Venture Capital and Private Equity Association.

From 1998 to 2012, Mike held leadership positions with Sempra Energy, a Fortune 300 energy holding company based in San Diego.  During this period, Mike was the Chairman, President, and CEO of Southern California Gas Company, the largest natural gas distribution company in the United States.  Prior to leading the Gas Company, Mike was the President and CEO of Sempra Generation, a pioneering electric generation company, where he launched the large-scale solar power industry, and built one of the largest renewable energy businesses in the country.

Additional prior roles with Sempra include being the Chief Financial Officer of Sempra’s non-utility energy businesses, Vice President of Internal Audit, President of Sempra Communications, and Vice President of Strategic Planning and Business Development.

Before joining Sempra Energy, Mike was a Partner with The LEK Consulting Group and held postings in Los Angeles, London, Johannesburg, and Chicago.

Mike was raised in Michigan, and attended Michigan State University, where he earned a B.S. in Chemical Engineering. In 1995 he received an MBA with a Finance Specialization from The University of Chicago Booth School of Business.

 

Mike currently resides in North San Diego with his wife, Lee Ann Allman, where he advocates for direct citizen engagement to hold elected officials accountable to the voters. Mike and Lee Ann have two adult children.

1.
Question 1

Family reunification is a process that allows immigrants already residing in the U.S. to bring in additional family members. Do you support limiting this process? Why or why not?

Answer from Michael Allman:

I support limiting family-based immigration to the immediate family only.  That is, only to spouses and minor children. We should encourage the core family to remain intact, but should not automatically extend this to aunts and uncles and other relatives.

As we secure the border, we need to address the issue of illegal immigrants that currently live in the US.  For those that are productive members of society, we should provide a simple and straightforward path to legal permanent residency.  This path would be open to those who have been here for some period of time, have a job or are going to school, have served in the military or with volunteer organizations, and most importantly those who are not criminals or associated with criminal activity.  Those who are not contributing to society or who are criminals should be deported when they are found.

Once we have a secure border and a path to permanent residency for upstanding people who are already here, I am generally in favor of a relatively lenient immigration policy.  Of course, we should conduct background checks and only let in those who are law abiding and are not associated with terrorist or other undesirable groups. We should also favor those who we think can assimilate into American culture. In addition, we should base our immigration decisions on individual merit, and do away with the current lottery system and quotas.  We should not provide welfare support to new immigrants for a number of years. We should not let people immigrate under the assumption that if they can’t make ends meet, our government to support them. We should not become a welfare state to the rest of the world.

2.
Question 2

Do you support expanding the current border wall between U.S. and Mexico? Why or why not?

Answer from Michael Allman:

It is important that we secure and protect our border, so that we can regain control of who comes into our country.  Without a secure border, immigrants, drug dealers, and other criminals would be free to enter the US illegally. For areas of the border where illegal crossings are easy, then we need to secure the border by building a wall.  

However, we don’t need to build a wall the entire length of the US / Mexico border.  We have natural barriers such as mountains and deserts where it is not practical and not economic to build an actual physical wall.  Instead, it is much more efficient to secure the border through other means, such as electronic surveillance.

Experts estimate that out of the entire length of border, which is 1,984 miles, it be practical and effective to build a wall across approximately 500 miles, with the remaining miles to be monitored with electronic technology and border patrols.

3.
Question 3

Do you support creating additional regulations on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Answer from Michael Allman:

I support the Second Amendment and I am an advocate for sensible gun regulations. Law-abiding citizens who pass a background check should be able to purchase guns, including hand guns, and should be able to carry them on their person.  

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment to the US Constitution provides an individual right for people to own a firearm. However, the court ruled that this does not mean someone can carry any type of gun, anywhere, and at any time.

We should continue to ban fully-automatic weapons, but I am against banning all semi-automatic weapons.  Most handguns today are semi-automatic, and attempting to ban them will make criminals out of millions of law-abiding people.

I am not in favor of arming teachers in schools, although individual school districts may decide to have armed guards at schools.  That decision is up to the local school board and local government.

The terrible mass shootings that have happened in our country are conducted by people with mental illness.  We should address the problem of mental illness in our country to minimize the occurrence of these senseless tragedies.  

Finally, I would allow the individual states to determine their own gun laws consistent with the will of their citizens.  The people of California may decided to have different gun laws that the people of Texas. That decision is up to the individual states.  The role of the federal government should be limited to ensuring that our constitutional right to bear arms is protected and upheld.

4.
Question 4

Should the U.S. remain in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Why or why not?

Answer from Michael Allman:

Free and fair trade is a benefit to the American economy and to American consumers.  Our trade policy should encourage the removal of tariffs that inhibit the free flow of goods and services across our border.  For these reasons, we should remain in NAFTA while working with our Canadian and Mexican neighbors to even further reduce destructive tariffs and other barriers to trade.

International trade is one of the most misunderstood areas of our economy.  Even the language that is used often presents international trade as a “zero-sum game”, suggesting that any “gain” realized by a trading partner (such as China or Mexico) must be associated with a “loss” to America.  Phrases such as “trade deficit” and “trade war” further this misunderstanding, when in fact, international trade makes America and Americans wealthier. This is especially true when a foreign country decides to subsidize one of its industries to sell more goods in America.

As a simple example, consider what happens when the Japanese government decides to tax its citizens so that Japanese car makers such as Honda and Toyota can reduce the cost of cars that they export to America by, say as an example, an average of $1,000 per car.  Americans win in this deal because they get access to these cars at a lower cost, with the savings provided by the Japanese taxpayer. To make this easier to understand, imagine if the Japanese government provided a subsidy of even more than $1,000 per car. Imagine if they cut the cost of new cars in half, or even offered them free to Americans!  Does anyone really believe that if the Japanese were to offer us cars for free that we, as Americans, are actually worse off? We should be thanking the citizens of other countries for giving us money in the form of lower prices when their governments decide to subsidize an industry in order to help them export goods to America.

The opposite is true when America creates tariffs on imported goods.  Tariffs are a tax on American consumers that is used to support a politically-favored industry.  The net effect is a lower standard of living in America. That is why I am against President Trump’s tariffs on imported steel and aluminum.  The effect of this is that every American will pay a few hundred dollars more for a car. That may get lost when we are paying $20,000 or more for a new car, but it exists in any case.  Some of this extra tax will help the US Steel industry, but the rest is just a loss born by consumers. The fact that the costs of tariffs are dispersed (we all pay a bit more for our cars) but the benefits are concentrated (the steel companies get the benefit) is what makes tariffs so attractive for politicians.  They can take credit for saving jobs in the steel industry, when in fact is it us as consumers and customers who are subsidizing these companies.

 

5.
Question 5

What programs or legislation, if any, would you support to help Americans of all ages secure affordable health care?

Answer from Michael Allman:

The United States has some of the best health care in the world, but due to a bad market design for both health insurance and medical care we spend too much money on healthcare and receive poor overall service.

To begin, we need to separate health insurance from health care services.  Health insurance is designed to spread the risk of poor health before anyone gets sick.  Each of us spends a smaller amount of money on insurance when we are healthy, so that if some of us get sick we can afford the appropriate medical treatment.  We are familiar with this in other insurance markets, such as fire insurance on our home, or car insurance in case of an accident.

However, people with pre-existing medical conditions are already sick and their care needs to be paid for.  This is not an insurance issue anymore, it is simply a question of who pays for the necessary medical care. Just like you can’t buy fire insurance after your house has burned down, you can’t buy medical insurance after you get sick.

The only realistic solution is to take people with pre-existing medical conditions out of the insurance pool altogether and pay for their care directly.  There are different ways we can do that, but it will surely require some funding from the government.

By removing pre-existing conditions from the insurance market, medical insurance will become much more affordable.  In addition, if we make medical insurance more of an individual market than a corporate market, then individuals will be able to retain their health insurance even when they change employers or lose their job.  We can use the tax laws to encourage the purchase of individual insurance policies that are portable.

Look at changes to retirement savings as an analogy.  Most of our country has moved from pensions that were tied to remaining with a company until retirement, to today where we have portable retirement plans like 401(k) accounts that are owned by the individual.  In a similar way we need to make health insurance portable. No one should lose their insurance coverage because they change jobs.

We also need to fix medicare.  Medicare is broken for a number of reasons, but the main issue is that it is unsustainable.  The average couple pays about $150,000 in their lifetime in Medicare premiums and taxes, but collects about $450,000 in lifetime benefits.  “Medicare for All” means bankruptcy for all.

We have largely removed the consumer from the health care purchasing decision.  Even before Obamacare, consumers only paid for 13% of total healthcare costs, with the government directly paying for more than 50%.  When consumers are insulated from price, prices will rise. That is the problem with all third-party payment systems such as government payments.  

The solution lies in recognizing these truths and moving to a system with true market-based reforms.  A number of ideas are out there; we just need to do what is right and make them happen.

Total money raised: $415,109

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
Michael Allman
$300,076
2
Employees of Mcloud
$5,900
3
Employees of Western National Group
$5,400
4
Employees of Wellhead
$5,000
5
Employees of Ascribe Capital Llc
$2,700
5
Employees of Cooley LLP
$2,700
5
Employees of Craig Realty Group
$2,700
5
Employees of Hanna Capital Management Inc.
$2,700
5
Employees of Hanna Ventures
$2,700
5
Employees of Jas. D. Easton, Inc.
$2,700
5
Employees of Kaleidoscope, Inc.
$2,700
5
Employees of L.e.k. Consulting
$2,700
5
Employees of Stem
$2,700
5
Employees of Tiodize Co. Inc
$2,700

By State:

Virginia 75.81%
California 18.55%
Pennsylvania 0.87%
Texas 0.75%
Other 4.03%
75.81%18.55%

By Size:

Large contributions (98.52%)
Small contributions (1.48%)
98.52%

By Type:

From organizations (0.51%)
From individuals (99.49%)
99.49%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.

My political philosophy is rooted in four important principles that go back to the founding of our country: individual liberty and personal responsibility, limited and efficient government, free market capitalism, and a strong military to promote peace.

I believe in upholding the US Constitution as it is written, and believe in many areas we have forgotten the true meaning of our founding document.  Although I support the entire US Constitution, I would particularly point out three Amendments in the Bill of Rights.

I support the First Amendment, including freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Individuals should be able to speak their minds and engage in civil debate, something we often don’t see in today’s hyper-partisan environment.  People should be free to practice religion according to their own individual beliefs, and should not be compelled by the government to act against their sincerely-held religious beliefs.

I support the Second Amendment and I am an advocate for sensible gun regulations. Law-abiding citizens who pass a background check should be able to purchase guns, including hand guns, and should be able to carry them on their person.

I support the Tenth Amendment, which says that the powers not explicitly granted to the Federal Government are reserved for the the individual States and the people.  Our Federal Government has taken power that was never granted to it by the people, and has grown to be too large and often unaccountable. We need to shrink the size and scope of the Federal Government.  A good government is one that is closest to the people.

In addition to these key Constitutional provisions, I have specific positions on other key issues facing our Country, State, and District.

I believe in securing our borders in the most effective way possible. I’m for good, strong border protection that’s effective and targeted. That includes a crackdown on extended visas, getting rid of the lottery system, and tightening controls on our physical border.

I don’t believe California should be a sanctuary state. Immigration is an issue solely for the federal government.  State and local governments should not be involved in immigration policy, it is a national issue.  I support the lawsuit brought by the federal government against the state of California for its so-called Sanctuary Law – the California Values Act of 2017.  The State of California should not be allowed obstruct the federal government when enforcing immigration law.

I believe in tax reform. The recent tax law is a great start, especially with regard to corporate taxes. Trillions of dollars that has effectively been trapped overseas is no able to coming back to the United States to fund new investment, improve the economy, and reward shareholders and employees. But more has to be done to lower personal taxes and simplify our tax code.  Real tax reform would remove all tax deductions driven by special interests and go back to a simple tax form with just a few tax brackets.

We need to stop the Gas Tax Hike in California. The Gas Tax Hike bill was passed in the state legislature last year without the vote of the people, and we need to repeal the Gas Tax Hike this November.  This is a great example of the people flexing their power to act as a check on the government. I will bring this same power to the people when it comes to the federal government.

 

I urge you to send someone to Congress with solid business experience, instead of a professional politician. With your support, we can change Washington, and get back to our roots as a nation with good old American values – “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Second Amendment Position Paper

Summary

I support the Second Amendment and I am an advocate for sensible gun regulations. Law-abiding citizens who pass a background check should be able to purchase guns, including hand guns, and should be able to carry them on their person.  

Position Paper

 

Upgrade and Incentivize NICS Reporting

 

The federal NICS system (National Criminal Background Check System) is a United States system for determining if prospective firearms buyer's name and birth year match those of a person who is ineligible to purchase a firearm. It is this system that states run background checks against in the instance someone is trying to purchase a firearm.

 

Currently it is not required by law to report state and local crimes and mental illness issues to the NICS system, so criminals like the Fort Hood Shooter and the Florida Shooter slipped through the cracks and were able to purchase a firearm in another state. It is this failure to update the NICS system that allowed many of these shootings, and I believe if we can strengthen this system and incentivize states to upload their crime and mental health statistics to this system, we could prevent many of these terrible tragedies. I believe you should not be able to simply cross the state line in order to use this loophole. An increase in state reporting could prevent a criminal from legally obtaining a firearm in another state as well as their own state.

States Rights

 

Over the years, the US Federal Government has become a larger force in many people’s lives, and has taken more power than it was granted by our constitution.  Whenever possible, we should push the power of government down to the states and away from Washington. Gun control is one such area, and gun laws should be determined by the legislators in each state as they see fit without undue interference by Washington.  There is nothing wrong with the state of California having stricter gun laws than Texas, if that is what their people, through their legislators, decide is proper. However, per the Constitution, guns cannot be banned outright.

Concealed and Open Carry The issue on concealed carry and open carry is a difficult one and something that should be left to the states to decide. Each state has independent autonomy to create and enforce laws of their own aside from federal law. If some states want stricter gun control, they should be allowed to do so, as such a state that may want less gun control also has that freedom as long as it does not violate federal law.

 

Legal and Illegal Firearms

 

Whichever level of government is regulating firearms, they can certainly determine that certain types of firearms can be illegal.  For example, I support the continued ban on machine guns or other weapons that can operate in “fully automatic” mode. The purchase of fully-automatic weapons (machine guns) has been illegal in the US since 1934.

 

There has been much discussion about banning Assault Rifles.  An Assault Rifle is a specific kind of rifle with certain characteristics, the most important being able to switch from “semi-automatic” mode (one bullet for each pull of the trigger) to fully-automatic.  I am in favor of the continued ban on firearms that can operate in fully-automatic mode, and thus I am in favor of a ban on Assault Rifles or any instruments (such as bump-stocks) that are used to turn a semi-automatic weapon into a nearly fully-automatic weapon.

 

I am not in favor of banning semi-automatic weapons.  Nearly every modern pistol is a semi-automatic. It is both impractical and unnecessary to ban semi-automatic weapons.

 

Who Can Own a Firearm

 

The Second Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees an individual right to have and use firearms for self defense in the home.  The court ruled that the Constitution allows for restricting ownership in circumstances such as convicted felons or the mentally ill.  I support these restrictions, and also support denying gun ownership to other criminals, not just convicted felons. However, law-abiding citizens aged 21-years or older, who are without any known mental issues, should be allowed to own a legal firearm after an appropriate review, background check, and licensing process.

 

Mass Shootings

 

Large-scale mass shootings, like we have seen recently in Parkland, Orlando, and Las Vegas are tragic, and the loss of life senseless.  In a vast majority of cases, the perpetrators suffer from mental illness. Our nation’s ability to properly care for the mentally ill has deteriorated over time, and more resources need to be provided to identify and treat people with mental illness.  In many cases today, the largest treatment centers for our mentally ill is our jail system. (statistics.) This is not effective nor is it the right thing to do. We should and must do more to serve our mentally ill, and should do whatever is necessary to prevent them from accessing firearms.  Increased gun regulation is not the answer. Treating the mentally ill and preventing them from obtaining weapons should be our priority.

Mental Illness

 

The issue with mental illness is nothing new to us. This has been a discussion we should have been having for the last two decades, but for whatever reason we have not. Well, now is the time to do so while we have momentum on the topic of firearms. Since the 1950’s funding for mental health services and institutions has been dramatically reduced -- causing the shutdown of hundreds of mental institutions all over the country. Over time, through defunding, stigmatization, and reported abuses, our country has had a reduced capability to handle mental health problems. With increased attention and funding to mental health institutions, there could finally be a buffer zone for potentially unstable people. Since you cannot arrest someone for just being disturbed, we could have them evaluated by a mental health professional to determine if that individual is truly a public safety threat. This process could help save the lives of innocent people.

 

Return the Money for Mental Health Services to the State

 

Proposition 63 created in 2004 created a 1% tax on California residents who make more than $1 Million per year. This money was intended to fund mental health services, but California state auditor Elaine Howle found that counties are hoarding the money instead. County mental health programs helped around 231 million form the tax that should have been returned to the state by years end 2016. According to her audit, local governments in California have collected as much as $2.5 billion for mental health programs, but that money is not being used for mental health. This money should be released to the state government immediately and used to help with our mental health issues statewide. We need to hold our state and local leaders accountable on this, and I am ready to change that system.

 

Other Restrictions

 

Extended waiting periods, enhanced background checks, minimum training requirements, and reasonable magazine restrictions are sensible regulations, and should be considered by the individual states.  Should a state decide to enact these or similar restrictions, care must be taken to avoid restricting ordinary citizens from obtaining a gun permit. What is important is that sane and law-abiding citizens be allowed to own and carry a gun.

Summary and Policy Conclusions
  1. Decisions on how to regulate firearms should be left to the individual states.  The Federal Government’s role should be limited to requiring that ordinary citizens have access to firearms for self defense, as protected by the second amendment.  

 

  1. Whoever regulates guns should ensure that ordinary citizens who are not criminals and are not mentally ill can own and operate a firearm.  States should be prohibited from outright banning gun possession and/or use.

 

  1. Background checks should be expanded and more comprehensive, and include a full mental-health review.  Individuals should be required to authorize release of mental-health records to facilitate a mental-health review.

 

  1. Firearms that can operate in fully-automatic mode should be outlawed.  

 

  1. Assault Rifles should be restricted because they can operate in fully-automatic mode.  Semi-automatic pistols, rifles, and shotguns should should remain legal.

 

  1. States should not be able to outlaw both open-carry and concealed-carry of weapons.

 

  1. States should prohibit the carrying of weapons in schools, government buildings, and other sensitive areas.

 

  1. Mental-health issues need to be addressed to help reduce gun violence.

Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

MICHAEL ALLMAN

Direct Democracy Advocate/Businessman/Renewable Energy

Expert/High-Tech Entrepreneur

Government in Washington is broken. Excessively partisan politics leads to shouting matches and government shutdowns, and little is accomplished. Representatives need to truly represent their voters.

Voting With the People. I am the first candidate for national office to run on a platform of transparency through Digital Direct Democracy. My message is simple. If you elect me to Congress, I pledge to vote the way you, my constituents, tell me to vote on an issue-by-issue basis, using my web-based voting platform. I won’t be swayed by special interests or lobbyists.

Background. I have lived in San Diego with my family for 20 years. We care deeply about our community and our nation. I built the largest solar power plants in the world to improve our environment and help California meet its renewable energy goals. As the CEO of a big company like the Southern California Gas Company, and the President of tech startups, I know how to work hard, build a business, and meet a payroll.

Core Beliefs. I believe in individual liberty and personal responsibility, limited and transparent government, free market capitalism, and a strong military to promote peace. With your support, we can change Washington, and get back to our roots as a nation - “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Let’s send someone to Congress with solid business experience, instead of a professional politician.

Michael Allman

allmanforcongress.com

— April 24, 2018 NBC San Diego

Michael Allman joins Politcally Speaking to talk about his campaign. 

— April 24, 2018 Fox Business

Michael Allman joins Neil Cavuto to talk about the Economy 

— April 24, 2018 Fox and Friends

Michael Allman joins Fox and Friends to discuss his unique camapign. 

— April 24, 2018 Fox and Friends

Michael Allman joins Fox and Friends to discuss his unique camapign. 

Republican
Cyber Security Engineer
5,654 votes (3.4%)
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has provided information.
Thank candidate for sharing their information on Voter’s Edge.
  • Return ownership of all data arising from our economic activity to the individual.
  • Keep taxes as low, and government as small, as possible.
  • Return all employees in the VA to probationary status to clean house.
Profession:Cybersecurity Engineer
Cybersecurity Manager, Large Defense Contractor (2017–current)
Cyber Security Engineer, Major Defense Contractor (2017–current)
Information Security Specialist, Small Defense Contractor (2008–2017)
Chairman, Mira Mesa Community Planning Group — Elected position (2014–2017)
Secretary, Mira Mesa Community Planning Group — Elected position (2009–2014)
Treasurer, Mira Mesa Town Council — Elected position (2009–2012)
Bethel University Master of Divinity (M.Div.), Church Leadership (2008)
Asia Pacific Theological Seminary, Baguio City, Philippines Master of Arts (M.A.) w/ Honors, Theology (1994)
Treasurer, (ISC)2 San Diego Chapter (Cybersecurity Professional Association) (2012–2014)

Only two when my Navy officer father moved us here from Milwaukee, WI, I have grown up here in San Diego, graduating from St. Augustine High School in 1985.  I have lived and studied in Asia, where I met my wife (from Malaysia).  We married in 1995 and have raised our two boys in Mira Mesa.  They are now off to college, with the older boy heading to UC Irvine and the younger to Arizona State University.

During this time I have built a successful career and business in information technology, specializing in cyber security.  I have also given thousands of volunteer hours in my community, having been elected to two terms on the Mira Mesa Community Planning Group where I served as Secretary for five years and Chairman for three.  During that time I saw up close what kind of leadership and support our locally elected officials need from their congressional representative.  I am running to provide that leadership.

Coming to this race from a career in cyber security, I understand the direction the debate needs to be taken.  We must start asking questions about "ownership" of the data we originate as we go about our daily lives.  If we "own" the data, we will have enforceable rights to require that data we originate be deleted once "the bill has been paid."  Our unique genomic sequence - perhaps the very essence of the "digital you" - can now be "owned" by companies providing ethnic makeup reports.  We must be asking what they are doing with this data... And what happens to it should the company go bankrupt and its assets (including the data) be sold.

I have the professional background needed to lead this conversation.

1.
Question 1

Family reunification is a process that allows immigrants already residing in the U.S. to bring in additional family members. Do you support limiting this process? Why or why not?

Answer from John Horst:

As one who has been through the immiigration system with my wife (from Malaysia), when family members are sponsored, the sponsor is required to agree that the sponsored member will not becoime a public charge.  If this requirement were honestly enforced, I could support allowing immigrants to bring in family members.  It is not enforced, and as such I believe we have to limit this.

2.
Question 2

Do you support expanding the current border wall between U.S. and Mexico? Why or why not?

Answer from John Horst:

As long as our legal immigration system continues to be the dysfunctional mess that it is, we need the wall.  If we take the administrative portfolio of immigration away from government and get the line moving, there will be no need for human traffickers, and therefore no need for the wall.

3.
Question 3

Do you support creating additional regulations on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Answer from John Horst:

We do not need more restrictions.  We need better technology to allow states to share data about people who are not allowed to buy a gun.

4.
Question 4

Should the U.S. remain in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Why or why not?

Answer from John Horst:

Yes, we should leave NAFTA.  The Chinese are gaming the "country of origin" designation to the detriment of U.S. manufacturing.  We should have a credible plan to leave NAFTA if it cannot be renegotiated to require genuine reciprocal access to markets.

5.
Question 5

What programs or legislation, if any, would you support to help Americans of all ages secure affordable health care?

Answer from John Horst:

We need to expand access to group policies to include trade associations, credit unions, and religious organizations.  We need to expand access to HSAs as a means to pay the premiums for these group policies.  If we grant a tax credit to employers for matching employee contributions to their HSA, and make it possible to get a group policy outside of employement then millions of part time workers will be able to get a policy they can afford - and afford to use.

Total money raised: $29,092

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
John Horst
$14,364
2
Employees of Garden Communities
$2,500
3
Employees of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton
$2,200
4
Employees of Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo
$1,500
5
Employees of United States Postal Service
$550

By State:

California 88.69%
Colorado 8.43%
1.92%
Vermont 0.96%
88.69%8.43%

By Size:

Large contributions (89.69%)
Small contributions (10.31%)
89.69%10.31%

By Type:

From organizations (0.00%)
From individuals (100.00%)
100.00%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.

I consider myself a conservative.  But I am deeply disappointed with how - since the financial crisis - conservatism has morphed into corporatism; they are not the same things.  Big Business is not free enterprise.

I believe conservatism essentially prefers civil society over political society.  As I work in the community with people from all political persuasions I am struck by how much we agree on when we consider our intentions for our community, state, and country. I am skeptical, however, of government when it comes to realizing these good intentions.  I have been around government enough to see how a bureaucracy's first priority is perpetuating its own existence and expanding its claim on the budget.  Too often government is where good intentions go to die.  I believe we will be much more successful seeing our good intentions come to fruition if we insist on pursuing them in civil society.  This means government becomes smaller and does less, and funding migrates away from bureaucracies (political society) and to local community groups - who understand the needs better and can make more productive use of public funds.

Cannabis

Summary

The authority to govern arises from the consent of the governed... and the legitimacy of our laws is found in our consent to be governed by them.

The authority to govern arises from the consent of the governed... and the legitimacy of our laws is found in our consent to be governed by them. Over and again, voters have withdrawn their consent to laws making cannabis illegal.  Elections matter, and it is time for federal law to reflect the will of the voters.  Cannabis needs to be removed from Schedule I of the Controlled Substance Act.

There are too many stories.  Too many veterans have come back from the precipice of suicide by making moderate, responsible use of cannabis.  Too many cancer patients tell of how they were able to keep working and earning a living while going through chemotherapy.  Too many people with seizure disorders - even parents with children who have epilepsy - tell of how the seizures almost stopped entirely once they started making responsible use of cannabis-derived products.

The states should be left free to manage this issue in accordance of the will of their voters.  The federal government simply needs to get out of the way.

Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

JOHN H. HORST AGE: 50

Cybersecurity Engineer

I am the only candidate for California's 52nd congressional district with a local record of overcoming bureaucratic excuses with leadership.

As your neighbor I served eight years as Secretary and Chairman on the Mira Mesa Community Planning Group. I have fought for the communities of our district at all levels of government. I have a unique grasp of what local leaders need from their congressman. I will go to Washington and push aside the red tape so we can solve problems like homelessness and traffic together.

I am also the only candidate with professional experience in cybersecurity. I will work to return ownership of data about you, to you. Once you have paid their bill, you will be able to demand companies delete your data. And when we own the data, we will drive a stake through the heart of the surveillance state.

We will continue to keep taxes low. With other California representatives I will form the Cut California Taxes Caucus. Each election we will go to ballot here in California with an initiative to reduce state taxes or regulations.

Together we will make America great again. Together we will make California golden again!

Email john@johnhorstforcongress.com
Phone: 858-254-8575
Address:
9051 Mira Mesa Blvd #262219
San Diego, CA 92196
Republican
Internal Medicine Doctor
4,027 votes (2.4%)
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My List'.
For more in-depth information on this candidate, follow the links for each tab in this section. For most screenreaders, you can hit Return or Enter to enter a tab and read the content within.
Candidate has provided information.
Thank candidate for sharing their information on Voter’s Edge.
  • Improving our Health Care system
  • Improving our VA System
  • Improving our Infrastructure
Profession:Internal Medicine Doctor
Medical Director, VA Escondido Clinic (2014–2016)
Medical Director, Interventional Pain Management (2006–2014)
Attending Physician, Rush University Medical Center (1997–2004)
Structural Engineer, Sargent and Lundy (1977–1990)
Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago M.PP., Public Policy (2006)
Rush Medical College at Rush University Medical Center M.D., Internal Medicine (1994)
Cornell University B.S., M.Eng., Civil Engineering (1977)
Assistant Professor- Emeritus, Rush University Medical Center (1997–current)
Member, American Medical Association (1997–current)
Member, American College of Physicans (1997–current)

I have been a practicing Internal Medicine and Pain Management doctor for over twenty years.  I have worked as a Medical Director in the San Diego VA system and in a group private practice.  Before entering medical school, I worked for over ten years as a Structural Engineer at Sargent and Lundy, one of the world's largest consulting engineering firms.  While there, I rose to the Administrative Staff of the Structural Engineering Division, helping to lead a group of over 1,200 engineers.  In addition to my engineering degrees from Cornell University and my medical degree from Rush Medical College, I have earned a Master's degree in Public Policy from the University of Chicago. 

1.
Question 1

Family reunification is a process that allows immigrants already residing in the U.S. to bring in additional family members. Do you support limiting this process? Why or why not?

Answer from Jeffrey Cullen:

I would support immigrants already residing here being able to bring in first degree relatives, that is parents,siblings and children, after appropriate background screening.

2.
Question 2

Do you support expanding the current border wall between U.S. and Mexico? Why or why not?

Answer from Jeffrey Cullen:

Ensuring border security is very important, and in some areas expanding/enhancing the existing wall is the best approach.  At the same time, building an 1.800 mile long border wall is not a realistic approach.  Using increased staff and technology such as infrared surveillance is a better alternative in some areas.

3.
Question 3

Do you support creating additional regulations on gun ownership? Why or why not?

Answer from Jeffrey Cullen:

I believe in the Constitution and I support the Second Amendment.  At the same time, I support universal background checks.  I believe that those people on terrorist watch lists should not be able to purchase guns.  I would support the banning of bump stocks or other devices that convert semiautomatic guns to automatic weapons.  After the recent Las Vegas and Parkland shootings, I also believe that, as a country, we must reassess why private citizens should have the right to military weapons such as assault rifles.  

4.
Question 4

Should the U.S. remain in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Why or why not?

Answer from Jeffrey Cullen:

As a Republican, I support free trade, and I believe that trade agreements such as NAFTA on the whole are mutually beneficial to the countries who participate.  Canada and Mexico have been important neighbors and allies, as well as trading partners, for a number of years.  While we must ensure that it is fair, I would support remaining in NAFTA, subject to renegotiation as needed.

5.
Question 5

What programs or legislation, if any, would you support to help Americans of all ages secure affordable health care?

Answer from Jeffrey Cullen:

I support provisions in the Affordable Care Act that ensure coverage for preexisting conditions and allow young people to remain on their parent's insurance until the age of 25.  I support the expansion of Medicaid as pursued by many states to help provide an adequate safety net.  I would oppose converting Medicare to a voucher system; asking our Seniors to use a voucher to obtain insurance on the open market is unfair and inappropriate.  I would provide additional tax incentives for individuals to carry health insurance and for employers to provide it for their workers.  I would also oppose privatization of the VA health care system; I believe that our Veterans would be better served by streamlining the procedures/bureaucracy already in place there.

Total money raised: $20,795

Top contributors that gave money to support the candidate, by organization:

1
Jeffrey Cullen
$20,795

By State:

California 100.00%
0.00%
100.00%

By Size:

Large contributions (100.00%)
Small contributions (0.00%)
100.00%

By Type:

From organizations (0.00%)
From individuals (100.00%)
100.00%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.

As a Republican, I support limited government, fiscal responsibility, individual liberties, strong national defense, free trade and limited taxation.

Researched by Voter’s Edge
Source: San Diego County Registrar of Voters

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

52nd District

JEFFREY CULLEN

Internal Medicine Doctor

Health Care, Veteran Affairs and Infrastructure Projects are all critical issues in our Congressional District. I have the knowledge and experience to help resolve these problems in our area. As a primary care and pain management doctor for over twenty years, I have focused on providing medical care for our Veterans and underserved population. As a Medical Director in the San Diego VA system and the Medical Director of a private practice group, I led significant improvement in clinical performance; my foremost consideration has always been to maximize the health and wellbeing of each of my patients. I earned a Master’s Degree in Public Policy at the University of Chicago to better understand how our health care system works, what we do well and what we can do to improve, always striving for high quality and appropriate access while controlling costs.

In addition, after earning engineering degrees at Cornell University, I began my professional career working for Sargent and Lundy, one of the world’s largest consulting engineering firms, eventually rising to the Administrative Staff of the Structural Engineering Division. As a result, I understand the design and construction of large scale engineering projects, such as our district’s infrastructure.

My professional education and extensive experience in Health Care, Veteran Affairs and Infrastructure Projects uniquely qualifies me among the congressional candidates in this election.

I ask for your vote to give me the opportunity to serve you and our district.

Please share this site to help others research their voting choices.

PUBLISHING:PRODUCTION SERVER:PRODUCTION