Particularly as the nation deals with the consequences of the coronavirus pandemic, what federal action would you support to help create good, high-paying jobs for Montana workers?

Since the start of this campaign over a year ago we've been the only ones in this race on either side to release a comprehensive policy platform. The vast majority of that platform addresses the systemic failures of our politics and government in employing policy that benefits Montana's working families. Not only have we not had to change much of it in response to the coronavirus pandemic, but it is clear that these policies are needed more now than ever.

As we rebuild our broken economy and health care system — both during and after this pandemic — we have an opportunity to do it for the benefit of all this time, rather than for the wealthy and powerful. That's why I am pushing for health care for all, climate action, universal childcare, student loan debt relief, and a litany of individual policies that will help lift up our working families. We must get our government to start working for us for a change.

What separates you from your primary opponents as your party’s best candidate to represent Montana in Washington, D.C.?

While I like and respect my primary opponent there is a wide gulf of difference in how we would represent Montana in D.C. and in how we view the future viability of our party.

As previously stated, we are the only campaign with a comprehensive policy platform. We were the first campaign in state history to unionize our staff. We are the only campaign that refuses to take fossil fuel money and has never taken a dime of corporate PAC money. When the pandemic hit we were the only campaign to step up and lead where our current congressman is missing, by purchasing and donating much-needed personal protective equipment (PPE) to frontline workers all across the state.

Any other campaign on either side of the aisle could easily take any of these actions and lead with our shared Montana values. Yet, I think the main difference is that I believe that our next representative needs to use the bully pulpit of the office to fight loudly and proudly for working Montanans and the underrepresented.

If elected to the House, how would you attempt to bridge partisan divides to represent the concerns of Montanans who don't share your political orientation in Washington D.C.?

Our next member of Congress needs to have a track record of getting things done in a tough, hyper-partisan climate. Myself and my primary opponent have both passed four bills as minority members of our GOP-dominated statehouse. The only difference is I passed all those bills in one session, and moved the ball forward on 20 more.

What I think is important is that we not pretend that we can just wave a wand and get us back to some nostalgic bipartisan era that frankly never really existed. Our politics feels broken and too partisan right now because it is. One person in a 435-member body is not going to change that. So, I won't offer any false promises.

For all the toxicity in D.C. it still has the ability to get some things done by mutual self interest. The Democratic Party does not have a member from the rural Mountain West, nor any representative from an at-large district. I would leverage my position in that regard to be a voice on issues that we can bring wins home for Montanans.

Would you have voted to impeach President Donald Trump based on the evidence presented to the U.S. House last year? Why?

Yes. I want to stop there because the answer is so blatantly obvious when you take a look at all the facts. But, I recognize that not all Montanans agree with me on a lot of those baseline facts. And that's OK. We can disagree and still all be Montanans. But it also won't stop me from following the oath of office I take to defend the Constitution of the United States.

The president used taxpayer money to bribe a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent. That is an abuse of power and the president was appropriately impeached by the House of Representatives. The Senate in their wisdom chose to acquit him of that impeachment.

Furthermore, to duck this question is abandoning a primary component of the job. The state legislative seat that I won last election was previously won by President Trump by 11 points. They voted for him and then me. Montana's voters reward candidates of any party that aren't afraid to tell them the truth and lay out their case.

Do you see reining in the federal debt as a priority? If so, how should that be accomplished? If you support new taxes, whom specifically should that burden fall on? If you support spending cuts, which specific places in the federal budget should be targeted? (We assume that working to minimize waste, fraud and abuse is a given.)

Respectfully, this question is a political football that has been kicked around for years. I'm tired of seeing it be insincerely — and hypocritically — answered. I was a small business owner and understand the necessity and obligation of balancing the books. But the federal government is not a business, so let's stop pretending the same simplistic principles apply.

I watched for eight years as one political party shouted from the rooftops about our impending collapse if we didn't tackle the federal debt and kept running deficits. Then, I watched that same party run larger and larger deficits for the last three and a half years when they assumed power. Where did they choose to spend those trillions of dollars they found under the couch cushions? On tax cuts for the wealthy and international corporations.

In Congress I will fight for our hard-earned taxpayer money to be put back into our communities and working families' pockets — not needlessly given away to billionaires and corporations.

Do you support keeping the Affordable Care Act in place? What if any alternate federal policies would you support to promote Montanans’ access to safe, affordable health care?

Health care is a right. That must be our starting point.

I support keeping the ACA in place and building off of it as we transition to a system that provides truly universal coverage without raising taxes on the middle class.

While comprehensive reform is a necessity so are policies we need to help Montana's health care landscape now — especially in rural and tribal communities. As a volunteer EMT and small business owner that provided in-home care in rural western Montana, I've seen firsthand how broken our rural health care is.

Some of my plans are: equipping more telemedicine services; alternative-payment models (APM) like value-based purchasing (VBP); control costs by mandating true universal exchange of health data; expand Global Payment Systems to help rural hospitals cut on overhead costs and incentivize preventative care; expand residency programs in HPSAs across the rural west; increase Medicare reimbursement rates specifically for providers in underserved communities.

Do you believe the federal government has enacted effective policies to keep Montana’s family-owned farms viable businesses? If not, which pieces of federal policy would you push to change?

No. Our federal government has undermined and endangered the viability of family-owned farms and ranches for decades. I am a generation removed from the family-owned ranch on both sides of my family. My grandparents were pushed out by the government's "get big or get out" agriculture policy that more or less still exists, especially under the current administration.

We must reorient our policies back towards the small and medium-sized producers rather than the Big Ag corporations that reap all the profits. Federal policy currently forces producers to over-leverage themselves and constantly teeter on the edge of bankruptcy. Add in tariffs and trade wars, and our AG policy is chaos when what our producers need most is stability in their markets.

I will fight to rein in the imperial presidency in regards to unilateral tariffs and trade wars. I will champion right-to-repair legislation. I will push for food sovereignty. And I will fight for more investment in AG research.

Should the federal government consider transferring some federally held land into state ownership?

No. Anyone that advocates for transfer of federal lands into state ownership is an opponent of our public lands. There may be some cases when a land swap or transfer may be a necessity or in the state's best interest. But, transferring federal lands to state governments as a concept is a nefarious attempt and first step in selling off our public lands to the highest private bidder.

The biggest fight our state Legislature has every session is balancing the budget. We are constantly pushing back against Republican attempts to recklessly cut spending across the board without ever providing (or accepting) any revenue increases. Simply put, we can't afford the costs of managing federal lands if they are transferred over. At some point we will have to sell them off to raise the revenue to balance the books.

Don't trust anyone that proposes this dangerous idea that threatens our outdoors heritage.

Do you support the Montana Water Rights Protection Act implementing the Confederated Salish-Kootenai Tribes Water Compact in its current form before Congress?

Yes. The CSKT Water Compact has been negotiated over a long period of time and has culminated in a bipartisan agreement. The majority of both the parties involved feel that it is fair and equitable, so it is time to close the book on this compact.