Matt English
DemocraticQ1 Iowa currently has the nation’s second-highest cancer rate and is one of only a few states where the cancer rate is increasing. What policies, if any, would you support regarding this issue?
Creating grants for homeowners to add active Radon mitigation systems to existing homes. Return to responsible and sustainable farming practices; smaller scale, diversified food production, regional processing, and demonopolization of ag industries. Increased taxes on alcohol and tobacco to deter consumption.
Keywords: Mitigation, sustainability, diversification
Q2 Iowa’s universities receive roughly $350 million annually in federal research funding. NIH funding for research at the University of Iowa and Iowa State University fell by over $125 million from FY2024 to FY2025. What is your view on these funding reductions, and what policies, if any, would you support regarding funding for scientific research conducted in Iowa?
Post secondary institutions and their research are vital for the continued progress being made by societies around the world. A decrease in state funding leads to outside investment and special interests delegitimizing the findings of our scientists. I would support an inflation adjusted increase in funding year over year to keep research well funded into perpetuity.
Keywords: Adequate funding
Q3 Scientific evidence is generated through the systematic testing and evaluation of ideas. It provides knowledge that helps us understand the world and predict the likely consequences of different choices, such as policy making related to public health, energy, agriculture, and environmental regulation. What role, if any, should scientific evidence and expert input play in your policymaking process, and how would you evaluate competing or uncertain scientific claims when making policy decisions? What role, if any, should that process play when scientific consensus and public opinion diverge?
Evidence and compassion must be the core or legislative decision making. Scientific, economic, and historical evidence should all be heavily considered when policies are changed. In navigating competing uncertain scientific claims, I would weigh the body of evidence for each claim and go with the stronger claim. When scientific consensus and public opinion differ, I would likely side with scientific consensus one falsehood can easily destroy truth, but millions of truths can seldom undo that damage.
_Keywords: Evidence and compassion