Jamil Ahmad for Congress
Top priority: Revoke the Comstock Act
Currently, Oregon women have more access to abortion than most other states. It is important to extend that access to other states. However, the top priority needs to be revoking the Comstock Act, which could be interpreted by a court as a nationwide ban on abortion.
The Comstock Act is a federal law that was passed over 150 years ago. Some portions of the law have been revoked. However what has not been revoked is a section which bans the shipping of items which may be used for abortions. In 1973, the Comstock Act became irrelevant due to the Roe v. Wade decision. Unfortunately Roe v. Wade was overturned in 2022. Currently, it takes just one court ruling (or one executive order) to cite the Comstock Act and ban abortion nationwide, in every state, without exception.
The Democratic Party has had multiple opportunities to revoke the Comstock Act over the last 150 years, including opportunities while Suzanne Bonamici has been in office. Results matter. The Democratic Party has failed to revoke the Comstock Act, putting access to abortion in Oregon at risk.
Additional agenda items
Federal law protecting abortion
Revoking the Comstock Act is necessary to ensure Oregon women do not lose access to abortion. However, revoking the Comstock Act will not ensure access to abortion in States which have passed restrictive abortion laws. Therefore, it is important to also pass a new federal law which explicitly legalizes abortion, nationwide. The new law should be consistent with the original Roe v. Wade decision:
A woman should always have access to abortion when her health is at risk.
A woman should always have access to abortion until fetal viability.
Again, the Democratic Party missed multiple opportunities to pass such a law.
U.S. Constitutional amendment protecting abortion
The new abortion access law would supersede state laws that restrict access to abortion. However, federal law generally does not supersede state constitutions, including any future state constitutional amendment restricting abortion. It is important to start the process of amending the constitution to protect abortion rights. It is a long process, but it needs to start.
Personal position
It goes without saying that a woman should always have access to abortion when her health is at risk. I want my position to be unambiguous: A woman should also have access to abortion until fetal viability. A pregnant woman is the best judge as to whether the conditions are right to raise a child. If a woman has determined that the conditions are not right, it is not the role of government to question her decision or delay an abortion.
From a practical standpoint, enforcing restrictive abortion laws will result in cruel persecution of women. To go further, I have a very simple question to those who wish to ban abortion:
Once you force a woman to carry a child for nine months and give birth, do you plan on forcing her to parent a child for 18 years?
Summary
In 2023 & 2024, President Biden involved the United States in a war between Israel and its adversaries (Iran & others):
- We provided active support to Israel during a war, including actively participating in Israel’s air defense.
- Three American service members died due to hostile action.
- The Department of Defense needed a funding supplemental (HR8034) to cover the cost of operations.
Representative Bonamici voted to fund that war via the supplemental (HR 8034). Among the consequences of Representative Bonamici’s vote are:
- Future presidents will start wars and presume Congress will fund them later.
- It becomes politically more difficult for Representative Bonamici to argue against those future wars (and their funding).
- It becomes legally more difficult for Representative Bonamici to be part of litigation against those future wars (via Separation-of-powers litigation).
The 1st Congressional District deserves a representative who can fight against the Trump Administration’s current war without being hindered by past votes.
Details / References
Israel was at war, and President Biden provided active support, such as air defense
October 2023 (Israel vs Houthis)
Here is a news article at the time:
https://time.com/6326185/us-downs-yemen-missiles-attacking-israel-biden-faces-escalation-risk
April 13, 2024 (Israel vs Iran)
Here is the statement from President Biden:
Note that President Biden characterized the nature of the Iranian attacks as follows:
Air attack against military facilities in Israel
October 2024 (Israel vs Iran)
There is a news report at the time:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/01/biden-reaction-iran-israel-attacks
Three service members died due to hostile action
Here is the Central Command press release:
The Department of Defense needed a supplemental to cover the cost of operations
Here is a link to HR 8034 (2024):
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8034
The summary accurately states the what the funding is for. Here are the first six items:
- supporting current U.S. military operations in the region;
- replacing defense articles that were provided to Israel;
- reimbursing DOD for defense services and training provided to Israel;
- Defense Production Act purchases;
- procuring Israel's Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Iron Beam defense systems to counter short-range rocket threats;
- procuring advanced weapons systems, defense articles, and defense services for Israel through the Foreign Military Financing Program;
Representative Bonamici voted for it
Here is the vote record:
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024152
Future presidents will start wars and presume Congress will fund it later.
The war is occurring now, the funding request will come later:
https://www.notus.org/defense/trump-supplemental-funds-iran-war-disaster-aid
It becomes politically more difficult for Representative Bonamici to argue against those future wars (and their funding)
Link:
Quote:
Florida Rep. Brian Mast, the committee chairman, said Congress never voted on a war powers resolution when the US attacked Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen in 2024 while Democrat Joe Biden was president.
It becomes legally more difficult for Representative Bonamici to be part of Congressional litigation against those future wars (via Separation-of-powers litigation).
No such litigation is likely until the Democrats gain control of at least one house of Congress. If it does happen, you can trust that Representative Brian Mast (R-FL) will file an amicus brief in support of the Trump Administration (see quote, above). I fear he will argue: Not only did Democrats not actively stop Biden’s war, they actually voted to fund it via HR8034. That argument works against Representative Bonamici. It will not work against me.
Summary
Problem statement
Hyper scale data centers (and government subsidies for them) are proliferating faster than government regulation of data centers. The result is data centers are putting a strain on water and power systems to the detriment of everyone else. Representative Bonamici (who has served at both the state level and federal level) owes an explanation for the lack of regulation. I owe an explanation of what I would do differently.
State and local
I am not running for state or local office. However, these issues need to be addressed at the state and local level:
- Lack of data center regulation.
- Lack of transparency.
- Tax incentives for data centers.
Federal
At the federal level, all options for regulation need to be explored. I believe that Congress has the authority to regulate data centers as they affect the following:
Watersheds (particularly those which span more than one state)
- Electrical grids
- Commerce
- National security
Details / References
Problem Statement
National example
In Georgia, we have the following:
- Data center understates how much water they will use.
- Data center somehow gets secret, unmetered water connections (which helps keep #1 secret)
- When caught, local government seems to side with the Data Center.
https://www.eenews.net/articles/georgia-residents-seethe-over-30m-gallons-of-missing-water/
Oregon example
In The Dalles, we have the following:
- Data center wants to keep its water usage secret (claims it is a “trade secret”)
- City sides with data center and fights journalists from disclosing the water usage.
- Interestingly, the data center paid the legal bills for the city’s fight.
https://www.govtech.com/analytics/the-dalles-ore-settles-lawsuit-over-google-data-centers
Note that different phases of the project received the following tax incentives:
County level enterprise zone subsidies
Oregon level rural enterprise-zones & electronic commerce operations.
Sate level Strategic Investment Program
State and Local Solutions
End subsidies for Data Centers
In 2012, the Oregon Legislature specifically allowed Data Centers in “enterprise zones” to be (partially) exempt from (tax) assessment via SB1532:
https://apps.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2012R1/Measures/Overview/SB1532
The Oregon Legislature needs to (essentially) reverse SB1532 (2012)
Regulate data center’s use of utilities
The Oregon legislature was very efficient at subsidized data centers via legislation (14 years ago). We should expect them to be equally efficient at regulating data centers.
Public utility usage is NOT a “trade secret”
Oregon’s Public Records Law (ORS 192.311 - ORS 192.478) needs to be updated so that public utility usage cannot be claimed as a “trade secret”. The word “public” (utility), by definition, is the opposite of the word (trade) “secret”.
Federal Solutions
Currently, federal law requires Federal Environmental Impact studies in limited cases (i.e. when Federal funds are used). Privately funded projects are generally not required to perform an Environmental Impact Study.
The laws need to be changed. The Federal Government needs to enforce regulation over projects (including data centers) that affect the following:
- Watersheds (particularly those which span more than one state)
- Electrical grids
- Commerce
- National security
Watersheds
From a technical perspective, evaporative cooling systems for data centers need to be phased out. These systems are where (essentially) water is continuously fed in, heated and then evaporated. Other options with less environmental impact need to be used.
Legally, we need to put as many barriers to installing large scale evaporative cooling systems as possible. We need to set a water use threshold, and require an Environmental Impact Study for all projects which exceed that threshold.
Electrical grids
There is no way to operate a data center without energy. My objective is not to regulate how much energy a data center uses. My objective is to ensure that it is properly planned and paid for by the data center company with no adverse effect to other customers. If a data center needs 100 MW of power, then they need to pay the fair price for both the energy and the infrastructure to generate and transmit that energy. As with water usage, a threshold needs to be set (above which an Environmental Impact Study is triggered).
Commerce & National Security
The fact that data centers are used for commerce and they are increasingly relevant for national security provide a justification to have them regulated at the Federal level. It is important to draft legislation with proper justification, so that it can survive a court challenge.
Summary
The policy of shifting our clocks twice a year has no benefits and many costs. The law allowing daylight saving time needs to be modified to allow each state to choose between one of two choices:
Choice 1: year-round standard time
Choice 2: year-round daylight saving time
Personal Statement
While I prefer Choice 1, we should leave it to each state to decide.
Details/ References
DST increases energy usage
In 1918, daylight saving time (DST) was introduced. The premise was that if people return home in the evening earlier (relative to the sunset), they would use less electricity for lighting in the evening.
However, that premise fell apart with the advent of air conditioning. Having people return home earlier in the summer causes more energy consumption for air conditioning. Here is a study showing that DST causes an increase in energy usage:
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w14429/w14429.pdf
DST time shifts have a human cost
Motor Vehicle Accidents
Spring Shift: 6% increase in motor vehicle accidents
Fall Shift: No effect
Source:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982219316781
Heart Attacks
Spring Shift: 27.2% increase in heart attacks
Fall Shift: No effect
Source:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167268124004050
Law which needs to be changed
15 U.S.C. §§ 260-64
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title15/chapter6/subchapter9&edition=prelim
Education is the backbone of economic opportunity in our country. Unfortunately, the cost of higher education is rising above the rate of inflation. The costs are too high for lower income individuals to pay for the education needed to increase their income. It is a catch 22, which not only affects individuals, but society as a whole. Rather, barriers to higher education cause shortages of professionals such as K-12 teachers and medical providers.
There are many issues that need to be addressed in order to make education more affordable for students. Below I describe two issues, which involve the federal student loan program. I also describe how I would approach each issue.
Issue #1: Botched student loan application website
In 2020 Congress passed the “FAFSA Simplification Act” (part of Public Law 116-260). Suzanne Bonamici voted for it. It required many changes, and gave a deadline for final implementation (which was later pushed to the 2024-2025 academic year). Unfortunately, the new system was not properly tested or piloted. This has inserted chaos into the student loan application process for the 2024-2025 academic year.
As an engineer, I have never forced a rigid deadline for final implementation of a system before it was developed, let alone tested. A system must meet certain criteria (including quality checks) before proceeding with final implementation. While it is appropriate to set target dates and goals, it is bad policy to pass a law which requires implementation on a certain date, regardless of the consequences. This is the equivalent of passing a law which says that a bridge must open on a certain date, regardless of whether it has passed quality checks.
I realize the desire to move away from the old system. However, the public would have been better served by remaining on the old system for the 2024-2025 academic year.
Issue #2: Student loan default & forgiveness
The Biden Administration claims to have forgiven at least $146 billion in federal student loans. When writing off $146 billion, it is a good idea to identify and address the underlying problem as well.
The underlying problem is that the tuition for many degree programs costs too much relative to how much graduates will earn. Rather, students are not getting economic value for their degree. The easiest way to quantify this is to look at the student loan default rate for a particular school (with statistical adjustment for demographic factors). The default rate allows us to determine the economic value a school is providing its students. Schools with a high default rate should be removed from the federal student loan program (for new students only). Over time, we should continue to require even lower default rates from schools. This will incentivize schools to provide good economic value for their degrees.
It is worth repeating: statistical adjustments are needed to avoid penalizing schools which serve disadvantaged individuals, such as low income students. If done properly, this will allow us to determine which schools serve disadvantaged individuals and which schools prey on disadvantaged individuals.
Below are three ideas on how to reduce gun violence that should be enacted into Federal Law. All three ideas are focused on limiting private gun ownership, which I believe is the root cause of gun violence. While it is better to implement all three ideas, any one of them will help reduce the rate of private gun ownership as well as gun violence.
Idea 1: Firearm licensing
Inspiration: Massachusetts’ Gun Licensing Law.
We should pass a law requiring all individuals purchasing or possessing a firearm to have a fire arm license from an accredited law enforcement agency with jurisdiction over the individual’s residence. If the individual needs to transport or store a firearm outside the jurisdiction of the issuing agency, additional licenses will be needed, to cover the jurisdictions where the firearm is to be transported or stored. A fire arm license will also be required to purchase ammunition.
The licenses must be renewed annually. At the federal level, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will grant licenses on an extremely restrictive basis, along with a significant annual fee (inflation adjusted). States will be allowed to determine which state and local law enforcement agencies may issue firearm licenses.
The licenses must itemize each firearm that the individual owns or plans on purchasing.
Penalties for having a firearm without a firearm license should include a fine, jail time, and (most importantly) confiscation of the firearm.
Idea 2: Firearm insurance
Each firearm should have a minimum of one million dollars of liability insurance. The minimum insurance requirement should increase over time, until it reached ten million dollars (and will then be inflation adjusted thereafter).
The objective is not to secure compensation to gun violence victims. Instead, the objective is to put a financial barrier to gun ownership, based on risk. A duck hunter who wants a shotgun which can only fire three rounds without reloading will have a low insurance rate. However, an individual who wants to buy a three AR-15s will have a higher insurance rate that they might not be able to afford.
Penalties for having an uninsured firearm should include a fine, jail time and (most importantly) confiscation of the firearm.
Idea 3: Birthdate Phase out
Based on Oregon and federal law, the minimum age to possess a firearm is generally 18 (21 for handguns). This restriction should stay in place. No one under the age of 18 should be allowed to buy firearms.
However, a new federal law should be passed with an additional birthdate restriction. This will lead to a slow phase-out of private firearm ownership. For example, January 1, 2010 can be selected as the cut-off birth date. Individuals born on or after January 1, 2010 will never be allowed to buy or own firearms. For about two years, the new law will not be relevant, as individuals born after January 1, 2010 are younger than 18. However, starting January 1, 2028, individuals who turn 18 will not gain the right to buy firearms.
Regarding the 2nd amendment
Implementing these ideas needs to be done carefully, to avoid violating the 2nd amendment. In particular, the legislation should point out that the guns which exist today could not have been envisioned by the authors of the 2nd amendment. When the constitution was written, firearms generally had to be reloaded after each round. The law could exempt any fire arm which requires reloading after each round. In that way, the law does not infringe on the right to bear arms, as “Arms” was defined when the 2nd amendment was written. This argument should be solid. To argue otherwise would mean that the 2nd amendment allows individuals to bear machine guns, rocket propelled grenades, singer missiles, chemical weapons, and biological weapons.
If needed: Constitutional amendment
While I believe my argument regarding the 2nd amendment is solid, it may be rejected by the court system. In that scenario, we need to amend the constitution.
Summary
Our failed immigration policies are the biggest threat facing the 1st Congressional District. The individuals who are violently targeted by immigration agents are at the greatest risk. However, preventing hardworking and talented individuals from working in our country is a risk to everyone. It would be catastrophic if we did not have any first-generation immigrants in our health care system, agricultural industry, or tech industry.
Individuals who can pass a background check and have a job offer in a critical industry should be allowed entry and the right to work. Laws that provide the executive branch too much discretion should be revoked. In addition, outdated visa quotas need to be revised. The country needs laws that require the executive branch to act in the best interest of the United States (and explicitly allow judicial review to ensure compliance).
Details / References
End executive discretion
Congress should revise laws that unconstitutionally allow use of administrative warrants (8 USC. §1226 and 8 USC §1357(a)(2)) and unconstitutionally allow the Secretary of State to unilaterally revoke visas (8 USC §1201(i)).
Revise employment visa rules
This section is regarding EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, EB-4 & EB5 visas, where the applicants have to demonstrate economic value.
Since 1990, the law (8 U.S.C. § 1151(d)) limits the number of employment-based visas to 140,000. This quota is outdated, and should be gradually increased.
The law (8 U.S.C. § 1152) limits each country to at most 7% of the worldwide limit. It makes no sense to limit India to 7% of the worldwide limit when India represents 18% of the world’s population. If country level quotas are imposed, they need to be a function of the country’s population.
“Other workers”
This section is regarding EB-3’s “Other workers” (this is the phrase used in 8 U.S.C. § 1153(b)). As the phrase implies, lawmakers consider these workers as an afterthought. However, they work on farms and in factories, and are critical. They are limited to 10,000 visas per year. In addition, the bureaucratic burden (i.e. PERM requirement) is proportionally higher for this category of workers.
The laws and the system are broken. This results in immigrant workers coming to this country outside of the system (i.e. undocumented). That enables a tyrant to come and deport these workers, to the detriment of our country. The laws need to be changed.
Pick who represents you
If you want your representative to point their finger at a tyrant, you should vote for Representative Bonamici. If you want your representative to change the laws which enable tyrants, please vote for me.
Summary
Per our constitution, only Congress can authorize war.
In 2024, President Biden involved the United States in an unauthorized war in the Middle East. Representative Bonamici retroactively funded that war (HR 8034). Doing so encourages future presidents to launch wars and assume Congress will fund them later.
It is predictable that President Trump has launched an unauthorized war against Iran, and expects Congress to provide the funding later.
While Representative Bonamici has retroactively funded unauthorized wars, I will not. I will do the opposite. For every dollar the “Department of War” spends on unauthorized wars, their subsequent budgets need to be reduced by one dollar (or I will vote "No").
Details / references
Representative Bonamici voted to fund President Biden’s unauthorized Middle East war
In 2024, Representative Bonamici voted for HR 8034. It provided Aid to Israel, as well as funding for the United State Military for President Biden’s unauthorized Middle East war:
Here is a link to the bill:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/8034
The summary accurately states the what the funding is for. Here are the first six items:
-
supporting current U.S. military operations in the region;
- replacing defense articles that were provided to Israel;
- reimbursing DOD for defense services and training provided to Israel;
- Defense Production Act purchases;
- procuring Israel's Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Iron Beam defense systems to counter short-range rocket threats;
- procuring advanced weapons systems, defense articles, and defense services for Israel through the Foreign Military Financing Program;
Here is the vote record:
https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2024152
Cost of war
Human Cost
First and foremost, we must recognize the loss of American service members due to unauthorized wars against Iran:
- President Biden’s unauthorized Middle East war: 3x service members died.
- President Trump’s unauthorized Iran war: 13x service members died.
Direct Monetary Cost
Biden’s unauthorized war’s cost is documented in HR 8034 (Which representative Bonamici voted for).
The total cost of Trump’s unauthorized war will only be known once there is a ceasefire. For now, estimates range between $100 billion and $200 billion dollars:
https://www.notus.org/defense/trump-supplemental-funds-iran-war-disaster-aid
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2026/03/18/iran-cost-budget-pentagon/
Broader economic cost
The IMF predicts that Global GDP will reduce from 3.4% to 3.1% and 3.2% in 2026 & 2027, respectively:
https://www.imf.org/-/media/files/publications/weo/2026/april/english/execsum.pdf
With a $110 trillion dollar economy, that represents about $550 billion dollars of lost economic activity.
“Department of War” budget
The “Department of War” Budget is $901 billion for 2026, and the Trump Administration is asking for $1.5 trillion for 2027:
Reducting the “Department of War” budget
The “Department of War” 2026 budget ($901 billion) apparently had hundreds of billions of dollars to spare for the unauthorized war against Iran. It should be reduced accordingly (with inflation adjustments) for the remainder of President Trump’s term in office. It is a simple formula:
$901 – cost of war against Iran
I will vote against the “Department of War” budget if it is above that number.
Regarding “borrowing” from other programs
I am aware that President Trump’s “Department of War” “borrowed” funds from other programs to fund the war against Iran. Short term, national security is harmed unless Congress retroactively funds the cost of the war against Iran (i.e. repay the “borrowed” funds). I am prepared to let that harm occur and be the legacy of President Donald J Trump. Long term, our national security is best served by ensuring that future presidents don’t replicate the behavior of President Trump. President Trump chose to prioritize the war against Iran over other programs. Let the American people see what that looks like so they can better choose their future leaders.
Summary
During her tenure in Congress, Suzanne Bonamici has voted to provide over $52 billion in military aid to Israel, a religious state. I believe this is in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s separation of church and state. As your representative, I will vote against military aid to any religious state.
Suzanne Bonamici asserts that she wants a two-state solution for peace. The two-state solution has been pursued for thirty years, to no avail. There is no Palestinian State, there is no peace, and both the Israeli Government as well as the US Government have rejected the creation of a Palestinian State. It is bad policy to keep doing the same thing which has failed for 32 years, hoping for a different result.
As your representative, I will be ready with new ideas and different approaches to bring peace to the region. However, a necessary condition for peace is Israel (and other countries in the region) must treat all individuals under its control with equality, regardless of religion.
Details / References
Representative Suzanne Bonamici funded Israel’s military
Representative Suzanne Bonamici has voted for thirteen bills providing Israel with over $52 billion in military aid. In 2024 alone, she voted for two of those bills, containing over $17 billion in military aid for Israel. The table below shows the bills for which Suzanne Bonamici voted, that provided military aid to Israel. The final column includes both direct military aid and indirect military aid.
|
Date of House Vote |
Bill |
Military Aid to Israel |
|
$479,736,000 |
||
|
$3,604,091,000 |
||
|
$225,000,000 |
||
|
$3,587,595,000 |
||
|
$3,700,735,000 |
||
|
$3,805,800,000 |
||
|
$3,300,000,000 |
||
|
$3,300,000,000 |
||
|
$3,800,000,000 |
||
|
$4,800,000,000 |
||
|
$3,800,000,000 |
||
|
$3,800,000,000 |
||
|
$13,901,400,000 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$52,104,357,000 |
Israel is a Religious State
Israel is a self-declared religious state
Israel is a self-declared religious state. For example, Israel’s common law of 2018 states:
-
The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.
Suzanne Bonamici’s acknowledges Israel is a religious state
Suzanne Bonamici acknowledged that Israel is a religious state by voting for four bills describing Israel as a “Jewish State”.
|
Date of House Vote |
Bill |
Verbiage |
|
"Jewish State of Israel" |
||
|
"Jewish state of Israel" |
||
|
"Jewish state of Israel" |
||
|
"Israel is the only Jewish State" |
The independent Pew Research Center has identified Israel as a religious state
In 2017, the Pew Research Center identified Israel as a religious state:
https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2017/09/FULL-REPORT-FOR-WEB.pdf
(search for “Israel”, which has 7x mentions)
Separately, the Pew Research Center tracks the Government Restriction Index (GRI), which is a measure of how much a country restricts religion. Israel’s GRI is trending in the wrong direction. It has increased from 3.9 in 2007 to 6.7 in 2022:
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/feature/religious-restrictions-around-the-world/
(Scroll to bottom, until you see a “Search for a country” drop down. Then select Israel. Then select “2007-2022”)
The Constitution requires separation of church and state
The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires separation of church and state:
-
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
I interpret this to mean that Congress cannot pass bills which provide military aid to religious states, such as Israel.
The faulted two-state solution
In theory: It is faulted
The premise of the two-state solution is:
-
There will be a separate state for Jews and a separate state for Arabs.
-
The Jewish state will favor Jews (A Jewish homeland)
-
The Arab state will favor Arabs (A Palestinian homeland)
Under this plan, there will be a border between a state that favors Jews and a state that favors Arabs. The risk is that these non-diverse states will slide into extremism. There will be two extremist populations opposite one another. Inevitably, those populations will go to war with each other. In a sense, that was the de facto situation on October 6, 2023. It led to a war.
In practice: It has failed
It has been more than 32 years since the Oslo 1 accord. There is no Palestinian State. There is no peace. The majority of those who are dying in the periodic/perpetual wars were born after the Oslo 1 accord was signed in 1993.
The Israeli government has rejected a Palestinian State. On April 18, the U.S. Government rejected a Palestinian State by vetoing a UN Security Council Resolution, which would have led to recognition of a Palestinian State. It is clear that the two-state solution has failed.
Equality is the solution
There are millions of Jews and Arabs who live in the United States. They are living together more peacefully than Jews and Arabs in the Middle East. As a nation, we strive to treat each person with equality, regardless of religion or ethnicity. Our government is constitutionally forbidden from favoring a religion or ethnic group. Our system works, and I am proud of it.
For 59 years, Israel has ruled over Israel proper, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem). These are areas of long-term Israeli control. The question is simple:
Does every person born in areas of long-term Israeli control have equal rights under Israeli law, regardless of their religion?
-
As long as the answer is no, Palestinians and Israelis will continue to become more extreme, and there will be no peace.
-
Once the answer is yes, Hamas will lose its claimed purpose for existence and there will eventually be peace. Rather, Hamas will lose its ability to recruit people willing die fighting Israel.
As your representative, I will vote against any bill that provides Military Aid to Israel, until the answer to the above question is yes. Israel deserves a grace period to implement equality. They have had 59 years. Time is up.
Summary
Jordan and Egypt are both religious states. Both have a terrible record on human rights in general, and women’s rights in particular.
Representative Bonamici has voted for over $7 billion in military aid to Jordan and $13 billion in military aid to Egypt. Her votes are in violation of the Constitution’s separation of church and state, and do not reflect the values of the 1st Congressional District.
I will vote against military aid to religious states such as Jordan and Egypt.
Details / References
Jordan and Egypt are religious states
In 2017, the Pew Research Center identified both Jordan and Egypt as religious states:
https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2017/09/FULL-REPORT-FOR-WEB.pdf
Page 19 says this about Jordan, for example:
In Jordan, for example, Islam is the state religion, and converts from Islam to Christianity were occasionally questioned and scrutinized by security forces in 2015.
Separately, the Pew Research Center tracks the Government Restriction Index (GRI), which is a measure of how much a country restricts religion. Egypt’s GRI is the second worst in the world at 8.2. Jordan is marginally better at 6.0.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/feature/religious-restrictions-around-the-world/
(Scroll to bottom, until you see a “Search for a country” drop down. Then select Egypt or Jordan.)
Representative Bonamici’s voting record
Here is a record of Representative Bonamici’s votes for Military Aid to Jordan and Egypt:
|
Date of House Vote |
Bill |
Mil Aid to Egypt |
Mil Aid to Jordan |
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$640,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$600,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$500,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$925,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$425,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$425,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$1,075,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$1,075,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$1,075,000,000 |
||
|
$1,300,000,000 |
$1,075,000,000 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$13,000,000,000 |
$7,815,000,000 |
The Constitution requires separation of church and state
The first amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires separation of church and state:
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
I interpret this to mean that Congress cannot pass bills which provide military aid to religious states, such as Jordan and Israel.
Authoritarian and violate human rights
The Economist classifies Egypt and Jordan as Authoritarian regimes.
Direct source:
https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/democracy-index-2024/
Wikipedia summary:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Economist_Democracy_Index
In addition, both countries systematically violate women’s rights. For example, a 29 year old female in Jordan cannot marry without permission from a male relative (guardian)
https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2026/country-chapters/jordan#:~:text=Jordanian%20law
Representative Bonamici owes her constituents an explanation regarding her past votes for military aid to Jordan and Egypt. I owe the 1st Congressional District an explanation of my position, and a path for the future: I will vote no.
Opioids
Currently, government is not focused enough on preventing opioid addictions. Most opioid addictions can be traced back to a prescription from a doctor. While it is good to provide mitigations such as Naloxone and addiction treatment programs, we need more focus on preventing addictions in the first place.
Based on the latest data from the CDC, our current policies are simply not working:
(source: https://www.cdc.gov/opioids/basics/epidemic.html)
The plot above represents over half a million deaths, with the most significant increase occurring since Suzanne Bonamici assumed office in 2012. Results matter. Our current leadership has failed, and we need new ideas. Below are two ideas to help reduce the rate of opioid addictions and deaths.
Idea #1: Require best practices for treatment of pain
The Unites States prescribes opioids at a higher rate than any other country, and it follows that we have the highest rates of addictions and deaths. Part of the problem is that we have less regulation of opioid prescriptions than other developed countries.
In 2022 the CDC created a Clinical Practice Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Pain. The guideline states when it is better to use non-pharmaceutical therapies or non-opioid drugs to treat pain. Notably, the recommendations are voluntary to “provide flexibility”. I question whether providing “flexibility” to prescribe opioids is a good policy, given that we have the highest rates of opioid prescriptions, addictions and death within the developed world.
It is my opinion that it is time for the guideline (or a revision thereof) to be made mandatory. It is within the scope of the federal government to regulate when a drug can be legally prescribed. It is time to use that regulatory power to reduce the number of opioid addictions, and deaths.
Idea #2: Develop new therapies
While use of the guideline will prevent opioid prescriptions for many cases, there are still “Severe Pain” cases where opioids are the best option for pain management. Rather, even when using the guideline, some people will still be prescribed opioids and will be at risk of addiction.
It is my opinion that we need to develop less addictive alternatives for those “Severe Pain” scenarios. It is within the scope of the federal government to invest in research to develop such alternatives. Note that this effort should not be limited to “find a less addictive pill”. Instead, all options need to be explored. For example we need to improve our ability to diagnose and treat the root cause of pain.
Personal Statement on Religion
I am not part of any organized religion.
Policy Statement on Religion
- I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute, as did John F. Kennedy.
- I believe in a wall of separation between church & state, as did Thomas Jefferson.
- I believe that congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion, as our founders wrote in the Bill of Rights.
- I believe that a country cannot claim religious freedom until it is implemented for both domestic policy and foreign policy. This was laid out in the Flushing Remonstrance, the foundation of religious freedom in The New World.
Currently, Oregon and federal law ban the sale of tobacco to individuals under the age of 21. This restriction should stay in place. No one under the age of 21 should ever be allowed to buy tobacco.
However, a new federal law should be passed with an additional birthdate restriction. This will lead to a slow phase-out of tobacco usage in this country. For example, January 1, 2010 can be selected as the cut-off birth date. Individuals born on or after January 1, 2010 will never be allowed to buy tobacco products. For about five years, the new law will not be relevant, as individuals born after January 1, 2010 are younger than 21. However, starting January 1, 2031, individuals who turn 21 will not gain the right to buy tobacco products.
Summary
I am aligned with how Representative Bonamici has supported Ukraine. However, I am not aligned with how Representative Bonamici has harmed Ukraine. Her votes for military aid to Israel and funding for unauthorized military action in the Middle East has harmed Ukraine.
In addition, legislation is needed to require intelligence sharing and weapon sales to Ukraine. Finally, legislation is needed to promote a “brain drain” on the Russian Federation.
Details / References
Hypocrisy harms Ukraine
Our ability to create a world coalition against Russian aggression is hampered by our support for Israel and our own wars in the Middle East.
The Increased price of oil harms Ukraine
Our war on Iran increased the price of oil, which harms Ukraine. Please don’t trust me, trust Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky:
https://www.axios.com/2026/03/30/zelensky-russia-iran-war-ukraine
We all know that the cost of gasoline has gone up. It would be one thing if the increased cost went into a black hole. Unfortunately, it is (partially) helping to fund Russia’s war against Ukraine. Rather, Representative Bonamici’s prioritization of military aid to Israel and wars in the Middle east forces us to subsidize Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Shortage of U.S. weapons
We used half of our Patriot missile interceptors in our war against Iran:
They could have been used to save lives in Ukraine.
Diversion of Ukraine’s air defense systems
Ukraine has had to divert air defense systems from Ukraine to the Middle East:
In my mind, Ukraine is forced to prevent damage to energy infrastructure in the Middle East, because such damage helps fund Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Weapons and intelligence sharing
Intelligence sharing and weapon sales to Ukraine must NOT be subject to the discretion of the President. It needs to be required by law, with very few exceptions (subject to Congressional review). It is a simple principle: Until the territorial integrity of Ukraine is restored, we should share intelligence with Ukraine (unless it compromises our sources) and sell weapons to Ukraine (unless it compromises our national security).
Brain drain
What worked in the past
We need to fight the Russian Federation the same way we fought the Communist Block during the Cold War. One facet of that fight was the “brain drain”. For example, East Germany had to build a wall to keep their own people from leaving the country.
What is needed now
Provide a visa to any Russian who is currently contributing to the Russian economy who wants to leave and contribute to the American economy. As always, passing a background check would be required. Priority needs to be given to individuals working in a field related to Russia’s war effort. We also need to show leadership by convincing our European partners to adopt a similar policy. Russians do not have the ability to choose their own government. So, give them the ability to choose between life under Putin and life in America. Putin will lose that battle, and will then lose the war against Ukraine.
Women’s Rights
Note that I have discussed abortion in a separate section on this page.
Personal Statement
There are two main reasons I want to advance equality for women:
- Individuals have the right to equality.
- No society can reach its highest potential until all of its women reach theirs.
The first reason should be obvious to everyone. I want to elaborate on the second reason.
I have worked in the semiconductor industry for 15 years. As far as technical ability is concerned, the women I have worked with are amazing (there are no exceptions). They have forever shattered the fallacy that men are better at math and science than women. Their contributions are irreplaceable. If they had not pursued a technical career, a less qualified man would have taken their place, which would be detrimental to society at large. It is within the role of government to ensure that every woman can pursue her highest potential.
Policy Statements
Education
Females are underrepresented in certain degree programs. We should target the schools with the worst representation for a particular degree. For example, take all mechanical engineering programs and, for each one, determine the percentage of female graduates in the last 10 years. The schools associated with the lowest 1 percentile (of female representation) need to be put on a form of probation. They need to come up with a plan to improve the situation, or risk losing federal funding.
This is a top down approach. For example, part of the problem might be in the K-12 system in a particular state. Since states do not want their public universities to get on probation, they will be incentivized to fix their K-12 programs. They might mandate measures for each school district to take.
Separately, we need to change the way we are running the student visa program. Here is a table from page 12 of this report.
| Country of Citizenship | Female | Male | 2021 Total Active Student Count |
| China | 48% | 52% | 348,992 |
| India | 37% | 63% | 232,851 |
| Republic of Korea (South Korea) | 47% | 53% | 58,787 |
| Canada | 49% | 51% | 37,453 |
| Brazil | 55% | 45% | 33,552 |
| Vietnam | 54% | 46% | 29,597 |
| Saudi Arabia | 30% | 70% | 28,600 |
| Taiwan | 47% | 53% | 25,406 |
| Japan | 49% | 51% | 20,144 |
| Mexico | 46% | 54% | 19,680 |
Saudi Arabia, which has a relatively small population, receives the seventh highest number of student visas. Why are we giving them that many visas when only 30% are going to women? This is easy to fix, yet our leaders have failed to take action.
Equal Pay
Currently women are paid about 80%-85% of what men are paid. There is some variation from state to state. The Equal Pay Act of 1963 puts the burden on the employee to prove pay discrimination. A new law is needed to put the onus on large employers to show that they comply with equal pay. Large employers are required to submit EEO-1 Employer Information Reports, which already contain some gender pay data. More data should be included in these reports to measure equal pay compliance. Most importantly, there must be penalties for large employers that are not in compliance with equal pay.
Paid Leave
Unpaid protected leave is provided at the federal level by Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and at the state level by the Oregon Family Leave Act (OFLA).
Currently there is no federal paid leave program, but some states have paid leave programs. Oregon provides paid leave via the Paid Leave Oregon program. The Paid Leave Oregon program includes paid leave for pregnancy, family (including parental leave), and safe leave (survivors of sexual assault, for example).
However, about half of the states do not have paid leave programs. The Federal Government needs to step in and require states to either have their own paid leave program or join a (newly created) federal paid leave program. While this will likely not change the benefits in Oregon, it is an important priority for the country as a whole.