Voter's Edge California Voter Guide
Get the facts before you vote.
Brought to you by
MapLight
League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
November 3, 2020 — California General Election
Invest in unbiased information

With your support, we can reach and inform more voters.

Donate now to spread the word.

United States

U.S. House of RepresentativesCandidate for District 7

Photo of Buzz Patterson

Buzz Patterson

Pilot/Author/Father
Use tab to activate the candidate button. Use "return" to select this candidate. You can access your list by navigating to 'My Choices'.
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.

My Top 3 Priorities

  • Small Business / Lower Taxes
  • Homelessness
  • Veterans Affairs

Experience

Experience

Profession:Combat Pilot, White House Aide, Author, Speaker,
Author & Speaker, Self (2003–current)
Candidate, CA-7, Citizens (2019–current)
Commercial Airline Pilot, Delta Air Lines (2001–2016)
Pilot, Commander, White House Military Aide,, United States Air Force (1981–2001)

Education

Webster University Master of Arts (M.A.), business administration (1988)
Virginia Tech Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), political science (1981)

Community Activities

Member, Air Force Association (2000–current)

Who supports this candidate?

Questions & Answers

Questions from The Sacramento Bee (3)

In an era of polarized politics, which issues show the most promise for bipartisan agreement?
Answer from Buzz Patterson:

I believe that there are three areas that are likely to achieve bipartisan agreement in the next term of Congress. 

The first being infrastructure which is receiving the attention of both the Trump Administration and Speaker Pelosi.

The second is Criminal Justice Reform which has received support from both the President and Democrats and Republicans in the Congress.

Thirdly, homelessness and the plight of our veterans who've we dispatched overseas to fight our wars,

 The last are is the continuation of support for National Defense and the War on Terror.

 

Should the federal government help California with its homelessness problem? If so, how? If not, why not?
Answer from Buzz Patterson:

Yes, the Federal Government does have a roll in solving the homeless problem, but really in very specific areas such as homeless veterans, affordable housing and drug interdiction in respect to opioid crisis and the explosion of methamphetamines. In addition the Federal Government should seek to expand funding opportunities for local agencies through the Continuum of Care process in order to address addiction and mental illness.

 

Should federal income taxes be reduced again? If so, for whom? If not, why not?
Answer from Buzz Patterson:

I think that the more important question is, “can we continue to spend like there is no tomorrow?” The Federal Debt and Budget Deficits are at all time highs;The Trump tax cut was a good stimulus to the economy, but in the absence of further need for economic stimulus I believe the focus should be on reducing spending.

I'm for a balanced budget going forward and fiscal responsibility.  

Questions from League of Women Voters of California (3)

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

I don’t support Medicare for all. Like Obamacare, it is a big-government -one-size-fits-all approach that in the end will raise healthcare costs and will only satisfy politicians and bureaucrats. And it will be hugely expensive.

 

The Republican Study Committee in the House released on November 1, 2019, a plan for Healthcare that can help with affordability by concentrating on protecting, empowering, and personalizing Healthcare for patients. Its key components are:

 

  • Unwinding ACA’s “Washington-centric approach” and returns most of the regulatory authority back to the states;
  • Undoing ACA’s expensive and mandatory essential health benefits, annual lifetime limits, preventive care with no cost-sharing, dependent coverage, and metal actuarial tiers (bronze, silver etc.), and allows states to prescribe these principles;
  • Not allowing insurance carriers to rescind, increase rates, or refuse to renew a person’s health insurance if they should develop an illness after enrollment;
  • Allowing individuals with chronic and risky medical conditions to have access to affordable state-run Guaranteed Coverage Pools, subsidized by federal grants;
  • Restructuring the guaranteed issue and prohibition on coverage exclusions to reward continuous coverage and promote portability in the individual marketplace;
  • Restructuring ACA premium subsidies and Medicaid Expansion federal matching programs to fund state-administered grants to subsidize health insurance for low-income individuals, while protecting the medically vulnerable, such as low-income pregnant woman and children, that Medicaid was created to help;
  • Changing the tax code to provide for equal treatment of employer and individual health insurance markets;
  • Expanding the use of pre-tax Health Savings Accounts (HSA), including using them to pay for insurance premiums, and increases allowable yearly contributions from $3,500 to $9,000 for individuals and from $7,000 to $18,000 for families;
  • Extending portability protections (contained in the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act for employer-sponsored health insurance) to the individual market;
  • Eliminating the employer mandate; and
  • Promoting the use of innovative healthcare solutions such as telemedicine, direct primary care, association health plans, and health sharing ministries.

 

I would support this effort.

 

Describe an immigration policy that you would support if presented to the House of Representatives.
Answer from Buzz Patterson:

I believe that any immigration policy that comes forward needs to be based upon several core principles:

Immigration is  first a national security issue. Allowing millions of unidentified persons to enter and remain in this country poses grave risks- whether it be from terrorism, crime or economic burden. One only needs to look at the prison population, to know that the undocumented place a severe burden on our society. I believe America’s borders can, and should be secured.

Secondarily I believe that we need to follow existing law in terms of a strict enforcement policy. Specifically, for enforcement at places of employment, including prosecution for using false social security numbers; limiting the rights of aliens in deportation proceedings and abuses of the refugee status; tracking down aliens who overstay their visas; and denying federal funds to “sanctuary cities.”

I believe that we should prioritize immigration to people that can contribute to society, and to those that have family to vouch for their support, so they won’t be a burden on the taxpayer.

 

In terms of the DREAMERS, I believe that we should create a path to residency- given certain conditions such as not having criminal convictions and being gainfully employed or completing their education or military service.

 

What financing method(s) would you support to repair or improve roads, rails, ports, airports, the electrical grid, and other infrastructure in the U.S.?
Answer from Buzz Patterson:

I think the focus of the question should be “how are we going to fund our needed infrastructure improvements, rather than what  new financing methods are we going to adopt.”

We need to look at lowering the costs of repairing our infrastructure and there are a variety ways of doing it-

  • Adopt design-build process, rather than a lengthier, costlier design-bid-build process for all Federally funded projects.
  • P3s ( Public/Private Partnerships) Allow private entities to fund construction.
  • Amending Davis- Bacon Act to allow for less costly labor
  • Requiring States to to cost-share for Federal projects.
  • Prioritize funding for critical infrastructure and allow for the streamlining of National Environmental Protection Act reporting for those projects- the Federal Government shouldn’t be paying for bike trails and other non-critical infrastructure.

 

One area that we need to focus on very soon is the Federal Highway Trust Fund. It is going to go broke in FY2022 if nothing is done.

Five solutions are being suggested: 

 

  • 1.)VMT Tax- (Vehicle Miles Traveled) is a commuter tax- the government would track your mileage- it is a little too big brother for me- it would require government to monitor your mileage.
  • 2.)Increase in Federal Gas Tax ( It hasn’t been raised since 1993) and is a flat tax ($0.1853) and the inclusion of an increase on the Federal Excise Tax on tires so that electric and hybrid vehicles pay their fair share. Likely to be a solution, although not a popular one in California.
  • 3.)P3s and tolls- probably wouldn’t fix the problem completely but could be a part of the solution. 
  • 4.)Roll back the 2017 tax cuts ( top tier 37% back to 39.6% and dedicate to Highway funding. Not a favorable solution ion my eyes.
  • 5.) Prioritize and realign spending on interstate highways and regional transit and not local transit. Should a CA commuter pay for the subway in NY?

Who gave money to this candidate?

Contributions

Total money raised: $43,926

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

1
Citizens United
$2,500
1
Buzz Patterson
$2,500
2
Employees of John Shwope
$1,000
2
Employees of Sibsco, Llc
$1,000
3
Employees of Delta Air Lines
$500
3
Employees of Harvard University
$500
3
Employees of Neocomp Systems
$500
3
Employees of Royal Bod Spa
$500

More information about contributions

By State:

California 53.26%
District of Columbia 14.16%
Michigan 5.67%
Ohio 5.67%
Texas 5.67%
Other 15.58%
53.26%14.16%15.58%

By Size:

Large contributions (67.47%)
Small contributions (32.53%)
67.47%32.53%

By Type:

From organizations (14.16%)
From individuals (85.84%)
14.16%85.84%
Source: MapLight analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission.

Videos (1)

— February 20, 2020 Campaign

Who else is running?

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

PUBLISHING:PRODUCTION SERVER:PRODUCTION