Arizona

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

As a sustainability student, I have learned is that we cannot look at water, energy, agriculture, development, extreme heat, and industry as separate issues. A decision we make in one area can create consequences across the entire system. I am not an environmental scientist, hydrologist, or engineer, and I won’t pretend to be, but what I can do is make sure we are listening to those experts and using the best available science before making decisions that could affect Arizona for generations.

First I understand we need a comprehensive audit of our water situation and an updated long-term water plan, we also need to do better in protecting agricultural land, investing in conservation and heat resilience, and holding industries responsible for the resources they consume and the environmental impacts they create. I am particularly concerned about the rapid expansion of data centers, which is why I support pausing new development while independent research evaluates their cumulative impacts on our water, electrical grid, environment, and communities

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Did not respond

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona needs practical solutions that protect our environment while allowing our communities and economy to grow. Water scarcity is one of our most serious challenges. I support investment in water conservation, recycling and reuse, groundwater monitoring, desalination research, and technologies that help agriculture, industry, and communities use water more efficiently.

As AI data centers expand, they must not shift their water and infrastructure costs onto taxpayers or existing residents. New facilities should demonstrate reliable water and energy supplies and contribute to the infrastructure necessary to support their operations. We should also encourage cooling technologies that reduce water consumption.

Mining remains an important part of Arizona’s economy, but responsible development requires strong standards for managing extraction waste, protecting groundwater, and restoring affected land. Companies should be held accountable for the environmental impacts of their operations.

Extreme heat requires investment in resilient infrastructure, reliable energy, water systems, and technologies that reduce energy consumption.

I support science based environmental policies grounded in measurable evidence. However, regulations must also be practical and economically responsible. Arizona can protect its natural resources while preserving jobs, energy reliability, economic opportunity, and the industries that support our communities.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona is on the frontlines of current and future environmental challenges. Water is our most important long-term concern. Before approving major new development, including large data centers, we need to understand its impact on water supplies, electricity demand, infrastructure, and surrounding communities. Development should not receive a blank check to consume scarce resources. Companies benefiting from Arizona’s infrastructure should pay their fair share of the costs they create. I support increased water conservation, wastewater reuse, improved groundwater monitoring, aquifer recharge where appropriate, and continued investment in water-efficient technologies. We also need better data so that policymakers and communities understand how much water is available and how development will affect it over the long term. Arizona has a long history of mining. However, mining must be responsible. That means appropriate environmental standards, monitoring, financial assurances, and accountability for contamination and mine waste. Extreme heat also requires practical preparation. We should invest in resilient infrastructure, shade and cooling strategies, energy efficiency, emergency response, and technologies that reduce water and energy consumption. With urban planning that incorporates future focused problem solving, Arizona could be a leader in adaptation and mitigation efforts.
I support responsible development that recognizes Arizona’s environmental limits and protects opportunities for future generations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental future depends on treating water, heat, and mining as connected problems with shared root causes: outdated regulation and a lack of independent scientific oversight.

On water, my focus is rural equity: expanding meaningful groundwater accountability tools to areas like the Verde Valley that remain outside Active Management Areas, so rural aquifers aren’t quietly drained while attention stays on Phoenix and Tucson. For large new water users, especially AI data centers, I support requiring public disclosure of projected water and energy draw before permitting, giving local communities a real say rather than facing decisions after infrastructure is already built.

On extreme heat, I support directing state resources toward the communities with the least capacity to adapt, funding cooling centers, weatherization assistance, and enforceable heat-safety protections for agricultural and outdoor workers, based on tracked heat-illness and mortality data rather than statewide averages that obscure who’s actually at risk.

On mining, I support requiring independent, third-party water-quality monitoring near extraction sites, not self-reported industry data, and holding companies financially accountable for reclamation before permits are approved, not after damage occurs.

What ties this together is process: I don’t believe Arizonans should be told to trust that industry or agencies are managing these risks responsibly. I believe in independent verification, public transparency, and giving rural communities like LD1 a seat at the table before major water or land decisions are made, not after.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I would ban or seriously curtail data centers, or at least require them to find and use alternative cooling and power systems. I would push for greater creation and use of reclaimed water, especially for agriculture, and seek experts to advise as to the merits of desalination, cisterns, or other solutions. Mining companies need to be held to a high standard of waste disposal, or they shouldn’t be mining.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Once again, it is important for legislators to listen - openly and without prejudice - to the experts in these areas. We cannot go into discussions about how to address these issues with our own pre-conceived notions, biases, and ideas. I support bringing experts in to listen to the specifics of the problem, their suggestions on how to best approach dealing with areas like heat, water and mining waste, then working cooperatively to come up with workable solutions that will benefit the citizens of Arizona and make their future, not just livable, but comfortable. Regarding AI data centers, we can demand that any proposed data centers Bring Their Own Grid and demonstrate the near-zero impact they will have on the water issue. There are data centers that are moving away from using extensive water supplies. This must be a non-negotiable requirement.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I support a balanced approach that protects Arizona’s natural resources, public health, and economy while recognizing that agriculture, mining, technology, and responsible development are important to our state.

Water security is one of my highest priorities. Arizona remains in both short- and long-term drought, making conservation and diversification essential. I support expanding water recycling and reuse, recovering brackish groundwater where environmentally appropriate, exploring desalination partnerships, improving infrastructure, and aggressively protecting Arizona’s interests in Colorado River negotiations.

Regarding AI data centers, I support a Day-One moratorium on new facilities while Arizona evaluates their cumulative impacts on water, energy, infrastructure, surrounding communities, and public health. Future facilities should demonstrate sustainable water and energy supplies rather than shifting those costs onto Arizona families and communities.

Arizona also needs responsible mining, particularly as demand grows for critical minerals. I support strong monitoring of mining waste, groundwater and surface-water impacts, enforceable cleanup requirements, and reclamation of contaminated and abandoned sites. Arizona is already addressing pollution from legacy hardrock mines that can release metals into waterways.

Finally, extreme heat requires practical community-level solutions: increasing shade and tree coverage, heat-resistant infrastructure, cooling resources, emergency planning, and protecting workers and vulnerable populations.

Economic growth and environmental protection should not be treated as competing goals. My approach is to use science, measurable data, conservation, innovation, and accountability to ensure Arizona can grow without sacrificing the resources future generations will depend upon.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona is facing a genuine convergence of environmental pressures, and I support policies grounded in current data rather than assumptions. On water, Arizona is currently under a Bureau of Reclamation Level 1 Shortage Condition on the Colorado River, requiring the state to cut 512,000 acre feet of water for 2026, while Lake Mead sits around 32 percent full and Lake Powell around 24 percent full. At the same time, data center water use in the Phoenix area is projected to grow substantially in the coming years. I support requiring new data centers to disclose projected water and energy usage before receiving state incentives, and I support local ordinances, similar to those already adopted in Mesa, Avondale, and Phoenix, that cap industrial water use and require developers to secure supplemental water supplies rather than depleting local aquifers. Arizona currently relies on groundwater for 41 percent of its total water use, so protecting that resource is essential. On mining waste, I support continued state investment in research, such as the University of Arizona’s ongoing work assessing whether the state’s billions of tons of historic copper tailings can be safely reprocessed to reduce environmental risk while recovering critical minerals. On extreme heat, I support expanding funding for the Arizona Department of Health Services heat surveillance program and investing in shaded infrastructure and cooling centers in the districts most affected, particularly for outdoor workers and older residents.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

My number-one strategy is to build a Legislature that treats Arizona’s environmental challenges as urgent, science-based policy priorities. Arizona is facing increasingly extreme heat, groundwater depletion, pollution from mining and other industrial activities, and new demands on our water and energy systems from the rapid growth of AI data centers. These issues require stronger oversight, transparency, and long-term planning.

I’m part of an informal legislative climate caucus among House and Senate Democrats, and we are currently prioritizing legislation for the upcoming session. I hope to serve on the Natural Resources Committee, where I would work to advance practical policies that protect Arizona’s natural resources while recognizing the needs of communities and our economy.

We are developing roughly 100 bills (some we have carried and adapted year to year) addressing issues including data-center water and energy use, rural groundwater management, utility transparency and governance, PFAS and microplastic pollution, outdoor-therapy programs, the Green Amendment, and protections against extreme heat.

For data centers in particular, I believe Arizona needs clear standards for water use, transparency about their impacts on local resources, and policies that ensure the costs of increased demand are not simply shifted onto residents and ratepayers. We need to immediately end the tax exemption for data centers, which is draining up to $60 million dollars from our state revenue. For groundwater, we need better monitoring and stronger management in rural areas where communities can be especially vulnerable to depletion – in other words, we need to pass a Rural Groundwater Act

We also need to address pollution from mining and abandoned mine sites through stronger monitoring, accountability, and cleanup efforts. Arizona tribal nations are disproportionately impacted. Arizona’s environmental agencies already identify abandoned mine lands as a significant potential threat to surface and groundwater resources.

Finally, extreme heat needs to be treated as a public-health and infrastructure issue, not simply as an unavoidable feature of living in Arizona. That means considering heat protections for workers, investments in shade and cooling infrastructure, and policies that help communities become more resilient.

Arizona has the opportunity to grow its economy and embrace new technologies without sacrificing its water, health, and natural resources. My goal is to make sure environmental protection and responsible growth are addressed together, using sound science, transparency, and accountability.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental challenges are interconnected, so our response should be as well. I support policies that improve water security, reduce extreme-heat risks, restore damaged lands, and require major industries to account for the resources they consume.

On water, I support stronger conservation standards, expanded reuse and recharge, watershed restoration, forest-health projects that protect our headwaters, and better groundwater monitoring and planning. New high water use developments, including data centers, should demonstrate that they have a sustainable water strategy and should not be allowed to undermine the long term water security of surrounding communities.

For extreme heat, I support investments in urban shade, trees, cooling infrastructure, heat-resilient buildings, emergency-response planning, and protections for workers exposed to dangerous temperatures.

Arizona also has a responsibility to address the legacy of mining. I support stronger reclamation requirements, enforcement of cleanup obligations, remediation of abandoned and contaminated sites, and investment in technologies that can reduce waste and recover useful materials where that can be done safely. I also believe environmental investment can create economic opportunity. Watershed restoration, wildfire mitigation, mine remediation, water infrastructure, and clean energy projects can support skilled jobs and workforce training throughout rural Arizona.

Economic development and environmental stewardship should not be competing goals. Arizona can pursue both by requiring responsible resource use, measuring outcomes, and ensuring that growth leaves communities stronger rather than passing environmental costs on to future generations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

implementing mandatory water transparency for data centers, scaling closed-loop cooling technologies, and expanding state conservation grants.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona cannot continue treating extreme heat, water scarcity, and industrial development as separate issues because they affect one another. Any environmental strategy should protect people first while recognizing that Arizona also needs economic growth. For extreme heat, I would support increased federal investment in heat-resilient infrastructure, including shade, cooling centers, urban tree coverage, energy-efficient buildings, and protections for workers exposed to dangerous temperatures. Extreme heat is not simply an environmental issue; it is also a public health and infrastructure issue. Mining is important to Arizona, but extraction should not allow companies to leave taxpayers and communities responsible for contaminated land, tailings, or other waste. I would support stronger cleanup requirements, financial assurances before extraction begins, and enforcement requiring companies to pay for remediation when their operations create environmental damage. With Arizona’s access to Colorado water being reduced, water requires even greater scrutiny. Arizona has limited water resources, and large industrial users, including AI data centers, should not receive preferential access simply because they promise economic development. I would support transparent reporting of water usage, stronger conservation requirements, and environmental review of major water-intensive projects before federal support is provided. Technology should advance society, not place additional burdens on communities already facing water shortages and extreme heat. Economic development must account for the actual environmental costs it creates. Federal policy should encourage innovation while requiring industries to conserve resources, disclose their impacts, and remain responsible for the consequences of their operations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Moratoriums on data centers, updating water policy to limit overuse and prioritize living over individual recreational or decorative water features in the event of emergency, also protecting water to preserve aquifers, and fight for a solar based future in our sunny state.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental challenges require solutions that recognize both our natural limits and our economic needs. Water security would be one of my highest priorities. Arizona has experienced decades of long-term drought, and rising temperatures are increasing pressure on already limited water supplies.

I support stronger water-efficiency standards, expanded wastewater recycling and groundwater recharge, repairs to aging infrastructure, and continued investment in conservation technology. As data centers and other water-intensive industries expand, I support requiring greater transparency about their water and energy use and encouraging technologies such as closed-loop or low-water cooling. Economic development should not come at the expense of long-term water security for residents, agriculture, or existing businesses.

Mining remains important to Arizona’s economy and to domestic supply chains, but extraction must be paired with responsibility for its environmental impacts. Mining waste can affect surface water and groundwater, and Arizona continues to deal with contamination from legacy mine sites. I support strong cleanup requirements, rigorous monitoring, responsible waste management, and holding operators financially responsible for remediation rather than leaving taxpayers with the bill.

Finally, extreme heat should be treated as an infrastructure and public-health challenge. I support research and investments in heat-resilient infrastructure, shade, energy efficiency, cooling technologies, and emergency preparedness, with federal resources directed toward solutions proven to work in Arizona’s climate.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s extreme heat, mining waste, and water scarcity are symptoms of treating the desert as an unlimited resource for extraction and growth. AI data centers that consume vast amounts of water and electricity only intensify the problem.

I support a steady-state approach based on ecological limits. That means strong protections for public lands, strict limits on new mining that contaminates water and leaves toxic waste, and full cleanup liability for existing operations. Water must be allocated according to science and long-term sustainability, not short-term industrial demand. Data centers and other heavy water users should face strict efficiency standards, public disclosure of consumption, and preference for locations and technologies that minimize desert impact - or be required to fund water-saving offsets.

Carbon and pollution taxes that reflect true environmental costs would discourage wasteful energy use and encourage renewables and efficiency. Federal policy should prioritize restoring watersheds, protecting aquifers, and funding community-scale adaptation to heat rather than subsidizing more extraction.

The Green pillars of ecology and social justice require us to stop externalizing costs onto the land, Indigenous communities, and future generations. Growth that depletes finite water and heat-stressed ecosystems is not progress. We need policies grounded in the reality of a desert climate, not the fantasy of endless expansion.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I believe protecting our environment is of the utmost importance. We should focus our resources on things that provide the best return for the people of Arizona while ensuring our long-term future. As an executive of a technology solutions company, I understand the balance needed between our further development and preserving our environment. I believe there is a responsible way to develop instead of the current method of giving subsidies and resources to companies without protections or positive returns for state.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

As a sustainability student, I have learned is that we cannot look at water, energy, agriculture, development, extreme heat, and industry as separate issues. A decision we make in one area can create consequences across the entire system. I am not an environmental scientist, hydrologist, or engineer, and I won’t pretend to be, but what I can do is make sure we are listening to those experts and using the best available science before making decisions that could affect Arizona for generations.

First I understand we need a comprehensive audit of our water situation and an updated long-term water plan, we also need to do better in protecting agricultural land, investing in conservation and heat resilience, and holding industries responsible for the resources they consume and the environmental impacts they create. I am particularly concerned about the rapid expansion of data centers, which is why I support pausing new development while independent research evaluates their cumulative impacts on our water, electrical grid, environment, and communities

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Did not respond

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona needs practical solutions that protect our environment while allowing our communities and economy to grow. Water scarcity is one of our most serious challenges. I support investment in water conservation, recycling and reuse, groundwater monitoring, desalination research, and technologies that help agriculture, industry, and communities use water more efficiently.

As AI data centers expand, they must not shift their water and infrastructure costs onto taxpayers or existing residents. New facilities should demonstrate reliable water and energy supplies and contribute to the infrastructure necessary to support their operations. We should also encourage cooling technologies that reduce water consumption.

Mining remains an important part of Arizona’s economy, but responsible development requires strong standards for managing extraction waste, protecting groundwater, and restoring affected land. Companies should be held accountable for the environmental impacts of their operations.

Extreme heat requires investment in resilient infrastructure, reliable energy, water systems, and technologies that reduce energy consumption.

I support science based environmental policies grounded in measurable evidence. However, regulations must also be practical and economically responsible. Arizona can protect its natural resources while preserving jobs, energy reliability, economic opportunity, and the industries that support our communities.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona is on the frontlines of current and future environmental challenges. Water is our most important long-term concern. Before approving major new development, including large data centers, we need to understand its impact on water supplies, electricity demand, infrastructure, and surrounding communities. Development should not receive a blank check to consume scarce resources. Companies benefiting from Arizona’s infrastructure should pay their fair share of the costs they create. I support increased water conservation, wastewater reuse, improved groundwater monitoring, aquifer recharge where appropriate, and continued investment in water-efficient technologies. We also need better data so that policymakers and communities understand how much water is available and how development will affect it over the long term. Arizona has a long history of mining. However, mining must be responsible. That means appropriate environmental standards, monitoring, financial assurances, and accountability for contamination and mine waste. Extreme heat also requires practical preparation. We should invest in resilient infrastructure, shade and cooling strategies, energy efficiency, emergency response, and technologies that reduce water and energy consumption. With urban planning that incorporates future focused problem solving, Arizona could be a leader in adaptation and mitigation efforts.
I support responsible development that recognizes Arizona’s environmental limits and protects opportunities for future generations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental future depends on treating water, heat, and mining as connected problems with shared root causes: outdated regulation and a lack of independent scientific oversight.

On water, my focus is rural equity: expanding meaningful groundwater accountability tools to areas like the Verde Valley that remain outside Active Management Areas, so rural aquifers aren’t quietly drained while attention stays on Phoenix and Tucson. For large new water users, especially AI data centers, I support requiring public disclosure of projected water and energy draw before permitting, giving local communities a real say rather than facing decisions after infrastructure is already built.

On extreme heat, I support directing state resources toward the communities with the least capacity to adapt, funding cooling centers, weatherization assistance, and enforceable heat-safety protections for agricultural and outdoor workers, based on tracked heat-illness and mortality data rather than statewide averages that obscure who’s actually at risk.

On mining, I support requiring independent, third-party water-quality monitoring near extraction sites, not self-reported industry data, and holding companies financially accountable for reclamation before permits are approved, not after damage occurs.

What ties this together is process: I don’t believe Arizonans should be told to trust that industry or agencies are managing these risks responsibly. I believe in independent verification, public transparency, and giving rural communities like LD1 a seat at the table before major water or land decisions are made, not after.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I would ban or seriously curtail data centers, or at least require them to find and use alternative cooling and power systems. I would push for greater creation and use of reclaimed water, especially for agriculture, and seek experts to advise as to the merits of desalination, cisterns, or other solutions. Mining companies need to be held to a high standard of waste disposal, or they shouldn’t be mining.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Once again, it is important for legislators to listen - openly and without prejudice - to the experts in these areas. We cannot go into discussions about how to address these issues with our own pre-conceived notions, biases, and ideas. I support bringing experts in to listen to the specifics of the problem, their suggestions on how to best approach dealing with areas like heat, water and mining waste, then working cooperatively to come up with workable solutions that will benefit the citizens of Arizona and make their future, not just livable, but comfortable. Regarding AI data centers, we can demand that any proposed data centers Bring Their Own Grid and demonstrate the near-zero impact they will have on the water issue. There are data centers that are moving away from using extensive water supplies. This must be a non-negotiable requirement.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I support a balanced approach that protects Arizona’s natural resources, public health, and economy while recognizing that agriculture, mining, technology, and responsible development are important to our state.

Water security is one of my highest priorities. Arizona remains in both short- and long-term drought, making conservation and diversification essential. I support expanding water recycling and reuse, recovering brackish groundwater where environmentally appropriate, exploring desalination partnerships, improving infrastructure, and aggressively protecting Arizona’s interests in Colorado River negotiations.

Regarding AI data centers, I support a Day-One moratorium on new facilities while Arizona evaluates their cumulative impacts on water, energy, infrastructure, surrounding communities, and public health. Future facilities should demonstrate sustainable water and energy supplies rather than shifting those costs onto Arizona families and communities.

Arizona also needs responsible mining, particularly as demand grows for critical minerals. I support strong monitoring of mining waste, groundwater and surface-water impacts, enforceable cleanup requirements, and reclamation of contaminated and abandoned sites. Arizona is already addressing pollution from legacy hardrock mines that can release metals into waterways.

Finally, extreme heat requires practical community-level solutions: increasing shade and tree coverage, heat-resistant infrastructure, cooling resources, emergency planning, and protecting workers and vulnerable populations.

Economic growth and environmental protection should not be treated as competing goals. My approach is to use science, measurable data, conservation, innovation, and accountability to ensure Arizona can grow without sacrificing the resources future generations will depend upon.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona is facing a genuine convergence of environmental pressures, and I support policies grounded in current data rather than assumptions. On water, Arizona is currently under a Bureau of Reclamation Level 1 Shortage Condition on the Colorado River, requiring the state to cut 512,000 acre feet of water for 2026, while Lake Mead sits around 32 percent full and Lake Powell around 24 percent full. At the same time, data center water use in the Phoenix area is projected to grow substantially in the coming years. I support requiring new data centers to disclose projected water and energy usage before receiving state incentives, and I support local ordinances, similar to those already adopted in Mesa, Avondale, and Phoenix, that cap industrial water use and require developers to secure supplemental water supplies rather than depleting local aquifers. Arizona currently relies on groundwater for 41 percent of its total water use, so protecting that resource is essential. On mining waste, I support continued state investment in research, such as the University of Arizona’s ongoing work assessing whether the state’s billions of tons of historic copper tailings can be safely reprocessed to reduce environmental risk while recovering critical minerals. On extreme heat, I support expanding funding for the Arizona Department of Health Services heat surveillance program and investing in shaded infrastructure and cooling centers in the districts most affected, particularly for outdoor workers and older residents.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

My number-one strategy is to build a Legislature that treats Arizona’s environmental challenges as urgent, science-based policy priorities. Arizona is facing increasingly extreme heat, groundwater depletion, pollution from mining and other industrial activities, and new demands on our water and energy systems from the rapid growth of AI data centers. These issues require stronger oversight, transparency, and long-term planning.

I’m part of an informal legislative climate caucus among House and Senate Democrats, and we are currently prioritizing legislation for the upcoming session. I hope to serve on the Natural Resources Committee, where I would work to advance practical policies that protect Arizona’s natural resources while recognizing the needs of communities and our economy.

We are developing roughly 100 bills (some we have carried and adapted year to year) addressing issues including data-center water and energy use, rural groundwater management, utility transparency and governance, PFAS and microplastic pollution, outdoor-therapy programs, the Green Amendment, and protections against extreme heat.

For data centers in particular, I believe Arizona needs clear standards for water use, transparency about their impacts on local resources, and policies that ensure the costs of increased demand are not simply shifted onto residents and ratepayers. We need to immediately end the tax exemption for data centers, which is draining up to $60 million dollars from our state revenue. For groundwater, we need better monitoring and stronger management in rural areas where communities can be especially vulnerable to depletion – in other words, we need to pass a Rural Groundwater Act

We also need to address pollution from mining and abandoned mine sites through stronger monitoring, accountability, and cleanup efforts. Arizona tribal nations are disproportionately impacted. Arizona’s environmental agencies already identify abandoned mine lands as a significant potential threat to surface and groundwater resources.

Finally, extreme heat needs to be treated as a public-health and infrastructure issue, not simply as an unavoidable feature of living in Arizona. That means considering heat protections for workers, investments in shade and cooling infrastructure, and policies that help communities become more resilient.

Arizona has the opportunity to grow its economy and embrace new technologies without sacrificing its water, health, and natural resources. My goal is to make sure environmental protection and responsible growth are addressed together, using sound science, transparency, and accountability.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental challenges are interconnected, so our response should be as well. I support policies that improve water security, reduce extreme-heat risks, restore damaged lands, and require major industries to account for the resources they consume.

On water, I support stronger conservation standards, expanded reuse and recharge, watershed restoration, forest-health projects that protect our headwaters, and better groundwater monitoring and planning. New high water use developments, including data centers, should demonstrate that they have a sustainable water strategy and should not be allowed to undermine the long term water security of surrounding communities.

For extreme heat, I support investments in urban shade, trees, cooling infrastructure, heat-resilient buildings, emergency-response planning, and protections for workers exposed to dangerous temperatures.

Arizona also has a responsibility to address the legacy of mining. I support stronger reclamation requirements, enforcement of cleanup obligations, remediation of abandoned and contaminated sites, and investment in technologies that can reduce waste and recover useful materials where that can be done safely. I also believe environmental investment can create economic opportunity. Watershed restoration, wildfire mitigation, mine remediation, water infrastructure, and clean energy projects can support skilled jobs and workforce training throughout rural Arizona.

Economic development and environmental stewardship should not be competing goals. Arizona can pursue both by requiring responsible resource use, measuring outcomes, and ensuring that growth leaves communities stronger rather than passing environmental costs on to future generations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

implementing mandatory water transparency for data centers, scaling closed-loop cooling technologies, and expanding state conservation grants.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona cannot continue treating extreme heat, water scarcity, and industrial development as separate issues because they affect one another. Any environmental strategy should protect people first while recognizing that Arizona also needs economic growth. For extreme heat, I would support increased federal investment in heat-resilient infrastructure, including shade, cooling centers, urban tree coverage, energy-efficient buildings, and protections for workers exposed to dangerous temperatures. Extreme heat is not simply an environmental issue; it is also a public health and infrastructure issue. Mining is important to Arizona, but extraction should not allow companies to leave taxpayers and communities responsible for contaminated land, tailings, or other waste. I would support stronger cleanup requirements, financial assurances before extraction begins, and enforcement requiring companies to pay for remediation when their operations create environmental damage. With Arizona’s access to Colorado water being reduced, water requires even greater scrutiny. Arizona has limited water resources, and large industrial users, including AI data centers, should not receive preferential access simply because they promise economic development. I would support transparent reporting of water usage, stronger conservation requirements, and environmental review of major water-intensive projects before federal support is provided. Technology should advance society, not place additional burdens on communities already facing water shortages and extreme heat. Economic development must account for the actual environmental costs it creates. Federal policy should encourage innovation while requiring industries to conserve resources, disclose their impacts, and remain responsible for the consequences of their operations.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Moratoriums on data centers, updating water policy to limit overuse and prioritize living over individual recreational or decorative water features in the event of emergency, also protecting water to preserve aquifers, and fight for a solar based future in our sunny state.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s environmental challenges require solutions that recognize both our natural limits and our economic needs. Water security would be one of my highest priorities. Arizona has experienced decades of long-term drought, and rising temperatures are increasing pressure on already limited water supplies.

I support stronger water-efficiency standards, expanded wastewater recycling and groundwater recharge, repairs to aging infrastructure, and continued investment in conservation technology. As data centers and other water-intensive industries expand, I support requiring greater transparency about their water and energy use and encouraging technologies such as closed-loop or low-water cooling. Economic development should not come at the expense of long-term water security for residents, agriculture, or existing businesses.

Mining remains important to Arizona’s economy and to domestic supply chains, but extraction must be paired with responsibility for its environmental impacts. Mining waste can affect surface water and groundwater, and Arizona continues to deal with contamination from legacy mine sites. I support strong cleanup requirements, rigorous monitoring, responsible waste management, and holding operators financially responsible for remediation rather than leaving taxpayers with the bill.

Finally, extreme heat should be treated as an infrastructure and public-health challenge. I support research and investments in heat-resilient infrastructure, shade, energy efficiency, cooling technologies, and emergency preparedness, with federal resources directed toward solutions proven to work in Arizona’s climate.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

Arizona’s extreme heat, mining waste, and water scarcity are symptoms of treating the desert as an unlimited resource for extraction and growth. AI data centers that consume vast amounts of water and electricity only intensify the problem.

I support a steady-state approach based on ecological limits. That means strong protections for public lands, strict limits on new mining that contaminates water and leaves toxic waste, and full cleanup liability for existing operations. Water must be allocated according to science and long-term sustainability, not short-term industrial demand. Data centers and other heavy water users should face strict efficiency standards, public disclosure of consumption, and preference for locations and technologies that minimize desert impact - or be required to fund water-saving offsets.

Carbon and pollution taxes that reflect true environmental costs would discourage wasteful energy use and encourage renewables and efficiency. Federal policy should prioritize restoring watersheds, protecting aquifers, and funding community-scale adaptation to heat rather than subsidizing more extraction.

The Green pillars of ecology and social justice require us to stop externalizing costs onto the land, Indigenous communities, and future generations. Growth that depletes finite water and heat-stressed ecosystems is not progress. We need policies grounded in the reality of a desert climate, not the fantasy of endless expansion.

Q3 Arizona faces many environmental issues, including extreme heat, mining extraction waste, and water scarcity, especially with the rise of AI data centers. What strategies, if any, do you support to tackle these issues?

I believe protecting our environment is of the utmost importance. We should focus our resources on things that provide the best return for the people of Arizona while ensuring our long-term future. As an executive of a technology solutions company, I understand the balance needed between our further development and preserving our environment. I believe there is a responsible way to develop instead of the current method of giving subsidies and resources to companies without protections or positive returns for state.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

We cannot expect world-class outcomes while continuing to defund our schools.

We need to fully fund public education, pay educators competitively, and give our schools the resources they need to succeed. Students should learn how to ask questions, evaluate evidence, understand the world around them, and think critically, not be shielded from scientific information because it is controversial or politically inconvenient.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

The NEA is a propagandist organization. I’m not surprised they’d rank Arizona low, because Arizona is one of the best states for school choice in the nation, and it should remain that way. Parents have a right to choose how to educate their children; parents are their children’s primary educator.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona’s education system needs improvement, but the answer is not simply spending more money. We must demand accountability and give parents meaningful choices. I support Education Savings Accounts because parents should have the ability to choose the educational environment that best meets their child’s needs, whether that is public school, private school, charter school, or homeschooling.

Public schools should receive adequate resources, but funding should follow students and be tied to results, not simply increased spending. We need to focus on teacher quality, literacy, mathematics, career and technical education, and preparing students for real opportunities after graduation.

Science should be a fundamental part of K 12 education. Students should learn how to evaluate evidence, understand the scientific method, think critically, and distinguish established scientific findings from opinion or political claims.

Arizona should encourage strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education while giving parents the freedom to choose the education that best serves their children. Our goal should be better outcomes, greater parental choice, and accountability for every education dollar spent.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

This question was not asked of this candidate.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

The lack of funding of schools, and the hemorrhaging of those funds to ESA’s, is a crime in Arizona that has been going on for decades, and must be stopped. The second problem in education is that parents and PACs decide what is taught, not professional educators, and one of the victims of that (along with history) is science. Our society and world are doomed to fail if we don’t educate our youth as to how it works, or to spark the interest of a future scientist who will save us.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

I’ve been advocating for properly funding public education for nearly two decades. The statistics quoted above are an embarrassment for Arizona. Unfortunately, our current Republican-controlled legislative majority has set this course for several years. During the 2009 recession, Arizona lawmakers decided to balance the budget on the backs of public schools and we haven’t recovered yet. The legislature has prioritized private schools for far too long. They’ve refused to renew major sources of education funding (Prop 123). They refuse to address a 40+ year old spending limit for public district schools, causing districts to not know if they are able to spend the money that they’ve already received. Meanwhile, the Empowerment Scholarship Account program redirects state funds to private schools/homeschools, reduces the general fund, and subsidizes families that were already sending their children to private schools. Additionally, there are no requirements regarding what is being taught in these schools, and no state testing requirements. We don’t know what is being taught or how well it is being learned. Science is an absolutely necessary subject that must be taught in K-12 education. The important element of teaching facts has become very important in these uncertain times. Teaching facts and explaining the scientific method for testing hypotheses are crucial concepts that need to be taught. Again, this has become even more important when ESA requests include purchasing flat earth curriculum. This is a frightening thought. We need good, dedicated science teachers teaching our students real scientific laws and theories.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona must do better for our students. Our own state budget documents acknowledge that Arizona ranks near the bottom nationally in education funding effort, and Arizona’s four-year graduation rate remains a serious concern.

As Governor, I support increasing investment in K-12 public education while also ensuring that education dollars are transparent, accountable, and reaching classrooms. I want to improve teacher pay and retention, reduce class sizes, strengthen special education resources, and ensure students have access to quality educational opportunities regardless of their ZIP code. I also support school choice and believe families should be able to choose public, charter, online, private, or homeschool options that best meet their children’s needs.

Science must remain an important part of K-12 education. Arizona already has statewide science standards spanning kindergarten through high school that incorporate science and engineering practices. I want students learning not only scientific facts, but how to ask questions, evaluate evidence, test ideas, understand data, and distinguish credible information from unsupported claims.

Arizona’s future workforce will increasingly depend on STEM skills. We should expand hands-on science, technology, engineering, mathematics, computer science, and career-technical opportunities while creating stronger partnerships between schools, universities, community colleges, and Arizona employers.

Education should prepare students to think critically—not tell them what to think.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona’s public school funding crisis is well documented, and I take it seriously both as a candidate and as someone who values evidence based decision making. According to a 2025 Consumer Affairs analysis, Arizona ranked dead last in the nation for public school funding and 49th for student performance, with an average student to teacher ratio of 23 to 1, the highest in the country, and a high school graduation rate around 78 percent, also the lowest nationally. State data show Arizona spent about 12,371 dollars per student in fiscal year 2024, well below the national average and far below top spending states like New York. I believe adequate, sustained public school funding is a prerequisite for improving outcomes, and I support increasing per pupil funding, addressing teacher shortages through competitive pay, and reversing the trend of expanding voucher spending, which reached roughly 1 billion dollars last year, without a corresponding increase in public school investment. On science education specifically, my own background in biochemistry has shown me how early exposure to hands on, inquiry based science instruction shapes whether students pursue STEM fields later in life. I support restoring and expanding funding for K through 12 science lab equipment, teacher training in science curriculum, and partnerships between public schools and Arizona’s research universities, so that students in Legislative District 25 have access to quality science education comparable to better funded districts elsewhere in the state.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Public education is non-negotiable.

Arizona’s public schools remain underfunded while billions of taxpayer dollars are being directed to Education Savings Accounts (ESAs). I will continue fighting to restore funding for neighborhood schools, strengthen oversight of ESA spending, and ensure every child—regardless of ZIP code—has access to a quality education.

I support stronger guardrails for ESA funds, including closing unused accounts and returning those funds to public schools, appropriate eligibility requirements, restrictions on luxury purchases, and meaningful financial accountability. Taxpayer dollars should be used to educate Arizona’s children, not be vulnerable to waste or abuse.

The study of science is equally essential—to a person’s education, to a healthy society, and to our ability to respond to the grave environmental and technological challenges we face.

Science education should teach students how to think critically: how to ask questions, evaluate evidence, test ideas, understand uncertainty, and distinguish reliable information from unsupported claims. Science should be taught based on evidence and the scientific method, not political ideology.

This is particularly important in Arizona, where our children will confront challenges including extreme heat, water scarcity, drought, pollution, public health, and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.

Every Arizona student deserves a strong foundation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, preparing them not only for the jobs of today, but to understand and solve the challenges of tomorrow.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona is not investing enough in its public schools, and the consequences are visible in teacher shortages, large class sizes, outdated facilities, and uneven student outcomes. I support substantially increasing the share of education funding that reaches classrooms, especially for teacher pay, proven instructional tools, career and technical education, and student support services. I also believe we need stronger accountability for how education dollars are spent. Public investment should be tied to measurable outcomes, transparency, and evidence about what actually improves student achievement.

Science should play a central role in K-12 education. Students should learn established scientific principles, but just as importantly, they should learn how science and inquiry works: how to ask questions, evaluate evidence, test hypotheses, distinguish reliable sources from misinformation, and revise conclusions when new evidence emerges.

I would like to see science education connected more directly to Arizona itself. Students can learn through real-world challenges involving water, agriculture, wildfire, energy, public health, technology, mining, and environmental restoration. Partnerships with universities, community colleges, employers, and research organizations can also create internships, certifications, and career pathways.

A strong public education system should prepare students not only to pass exams, but to think critically, participate thoughtfully in democracy, pursue meaningful careers, and help solve the problems their communities will face.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

cut classes that most kids, they dont need or want,,school is to learn math reading and writing,,too many extra classes call for more teachers and equipment

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona’s public schools are underfunded, and as a public school teacher, I see firsthand what happens when schools are expected to do more without receiving the resources necessary to properly support students and teachers. So, I support increased investment in public education, including competitive teacher salaries, smaller class sizes, updated facilities, special education, classroom technology, and programs that prepare students for college, skilled trades, and employment. However, I also believe one of the larger issues affecting school funding and enrollment is that fewer young people can afford to have children. The cost of living has increased to the point that many families struggle financially before children are even added to the household (especially in Phoenix, AZ). If younger generations cannot afford housing, healthcare, childcare, and other basic necessities, fewer families will have children, which eventually affects school enrollment, staffing, and funding. Education policy cannot be separated from broader economic policy. Looking back at my science teachers like Mrs. Oliveri, Mr. Beversdorf, Mr. Forsman, Mr. Desrch, I believe that my analytical, objective viewpoint comes from the invaluable education they provided to me. Without it, I would not be who I am today.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

End the vouchers, and increase revenue so we can get this ship back on track. We should be aspiring to #1 not #50 and we will not sit quietly while this happens.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona is not investing enough in its public schools. NEA’s 2026 data places Arizona near the bottom nationally in per-student spending, and the U.S. Census Bureau likewise reports Arizona among the lowest-spending states.

I support increasing investment in public education, with particular attention to teacher recruitment and retention, manageable class sizes, modern instructional materials, career and technical education, and ensuring rural schools have access to the same opportunities as larger districts.

Science must also remain a fundamental part of K-12 education. Students should learn established scientific knowledge, but just as importantly, they should learn how science works: how to ask questions, evaluate evidence, test ideas, distinguish reliable information from misinformation, and revise conclusions when the evidence changes.

Arizona’s existing science standards incorporate science and engineering practices alongside core scientific concepts, and I support maintaining rigorous, evidence-based standards.

A strong science education is not only about preparing future scientists. It prepares students for healthcare, agriculture, advanced manufacturing, technology, skilled trades, and countless other careers and gives every student tools to think critically about the world around them.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

Arizona’s ranking at the bottom in school funding and graduation rates is a failure of priorities. Public education is a core public good. Starving schools of resources while subsidizing extraction industries and military spending is shortsighted and unjust. I support substantial, equitable increases in public school funding - paid for in part by cutting the bloated military budget and ending corporate welfare - so every student has access to well-paid teachers, safe facilities, and the tools they need to learn.

Science belongs at the center of K-12 education. Students should learn the scientific method, evidence-based reasoning, and the basic findings of biology, climate science, and ecology. That means teaching evolution, the reality of human-caused climate change, and the physical limits of our planet without political interference or watered-down standards. Critical thinking and media literacy are just as important so young people can evaluate claims for themselves rather than accept whatever appears on a screen.

An educated public is essential for grassroots democracy. When schools are underfunded and science is treated as optional or controversial, we produce citizens less equipped to deal with real environmental and social problems. Fully funding public education and grounding it in evidence is both practical and a matter of social justice.

Q6 According to Consumer Affairs and the National Education Association (NEA), Arizona is ranked last in public school education and has the lowest high school graduation rate in the nation. Arizona is also one of the US states with the least funding put into public schools. What are your opinions on the current state of public school funding in Arizona, and how do you view the role of science in K-12 education?

I believe our current public schools need a change of leadership and policy as the current superintendent and legislature are working to actively destroy our public schools for the benefit of the private school system. We first need to support our schools and work to make sure every student in Arizona is given the best opportunity to get ahead instead of only those whose families can afford to send their kids to private schools. When we work to improve public schools in Arizona, we need to focus more on STEM programs which will help students be ready for the world of the future.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

A good legislator can recognize when they are not the expert on a topic and reach out to those who are for information on the subject. I would seek to establish advisory groups made up of various stakeholders including independent researchers, and those affected. I would also consult peer reviewed articles, and university research labs, or the relevant agencies whenever necessary.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I have a background in physics and astronomy, so I would prefer to read the articles and see the data myself than to rely on others’ judgments. Scientific truth doesn’t depend on opinion or majority consensus.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I will ensure evidence and scientific findings play a central role in policymaking by establishing independent advisory panels of qualified scientists, researchers, engineers, medical professionals, economists, and other subject matter experts.

These advisors will evaluate the evidence behind proposed legislation, identify what is known and unknown, examine competing claims, and assess potential costs, benefits, and unintended consequences. I will seek input from universities, federal and state agencies, industry professionals, and local experts rather than relying on a single source or political viewpoint.

I will also promote transparency. When scientific or technical claims are used to support legislation, the underlying data and methodology should be available for independent review whenever possible. Policymakers and the public deserve to know how conclusions were reached.

At the same time, science should inform policy, not dictate it. Elected officials must consider scientific evidence alongside constitutional principles, individual liberty, public safety, economic realities, and the needs of their constituents.

My commitment is to make decisions based on the best available evidence, remain open to legitimate disagreement, and change course when credible new evidence demonstrates that a policy is not producing the intended results. Good government requires facts, transparency, accountability, and the willingness to follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

After 30 years in public education, including 24 years teaching AP Chemistry and then overseeing K–12 science, I have learned that good decisions begin with good questions and reliable evidence. I would bring that same approach to policymaking. I would establish a process for consulting qualified scientists, educators, engineers, medical professionals, economists, and other subject-matter experts when legislation involves technical or scientific issues. These advisors should be selected for their expertise, disclose potential conflicts of interest, and provide information that is accessible to both policymakers and the public. I also believe we need to distinguish between established scientific knowledge, emerging research, and areas where legitimate scientific uncertainty exists. Policymakers should understand both what we know and what we do not know before making significant decisions. Science should inform policy, but it should not replace elected leadership. As an elected official, I would consider scientific evidence along with constitutional rights, fiscal responsibility, economic impacts, and the needs of Arizona communities. Finally, I would support measuring the results of major policies after implementation. If evidence demonstrates that a policy is not achieving its intended results, we should be willing to adjust it. My philosophy is simple: respect the evidence, ask questions, listen to experts, be transparent with the public, and remain willing to change course when the facts warrant it.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

As a college professor and retired counseling psychologist with a Ph.D., I have spent nearly three decades trained to weigh evidence before drawing conclusions. That discipline will define how I legislate.

First, I will establish a nonpartisan Science and Data Advisory Council for LD1, drawing on university researchers (including from the U of A system, NAU, and Yavapai College), public health professionals, water and land management experts, and healthcare providers, to review proposed legislation with a direct impact on public health, water security, education, or the environment.

Second, I will require that any bill I sponsor affecting water policy, healthcare, education, or environmental regulation include a cited evidence summary, peer-reviewed research, agency data, or expert testimony, attached to the bill file for public review, not just committee testimony.

Third, I will hold regular open office hours and town halls specifically inviting scientists, educators, healthcare workers, and researchers in LD1 to bring concerns and data directly to me, ensuring rural voices in STEM and healthcare fields aren’t drowned out by Phoenix-centric lobbying.

Fourth, I will support restoring and strengthening legislative staff capacity for independent research and fiscal/scientific analysis, rather than relying solely on industry-funded studies.

Finally, I commit to transparency: when evidence conflicts with political convenience, I will say so publicly and explain my reasoning. Arizona’s water crisis, wildfire risk, and public health challenges are too urgent for policymaking driven by ideology over evidence. My professional life has been built on evaluating evidence rigorously and honestly and that’s exactly the standard I will bring to the Senate.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I would form partnerships with ASU and leading organizations for their expertise in may areas. I would call for hydrologist and climate scientists to be major players in the decisions we make about water for our future.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

Science is real. Facts are important. I will make sure that all work I do in the Senate, any relevant bills I sponsor or support are based on the research done beforehand. I am a special education teacher that has been showing students how to do research, look for facts, and come to their own conclusions based on that research and those facts. We have far too many factions espousing their beliefs as if they were facts. That type of situation has caused far too many problems and contributed to the divisiveness we find ourselves with today.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

As Governor, I will ensure that evidence, scientific research, and reliable data have a meaningful place in Arizona’s policymaking process. I will establish advisory groups that include Arizona scientists, researchers, healthcare professionals, engineers, educators, economists, environmental and water experts, and other specialists relevant to the issue being considered.

I believe these advisory groups must remain focused on evidence rather than political agendas or special interests. When experts disagree, I want differing scientific perspectives presented openly so that decisions are based on the strongest available evidence rather than selectively choosing information that supports a predetermined outcome.

I will also require state agencies to use measurable data when recommending major policies and to identify the evidence supporting their recommendations, expected outcomes, costs, benefits, and potential unintended consequences. After policies are implemented, we should continue collecting data and evaluating results. If the evidence shows that a policy is not working, government should be willing to change it.

I also believe scientific expertise should be paired with transparency and public input. Arizonans should be able to understand what evidence influenced a decision and how conclusions were reached. Good government should be willing to ask questions, follow the evidence, measure results, and remain accountable to the people it serves.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

As a candidate with a background in biochemistry and mental health counseling, I understand that sound legislation depends on rigorous evidence. If elected to the Arizona State Senate, I will support the creation of a nonpartisan scientific advisory council, modeled on similar structures used in other states, made up of researchers from Arizona State University, the University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University, along with representatives from Arizona’s tribal nations, agricultural sector, and public health agencies. This council would review proposed legislation with clear scientific dimensions, such as water management, public health, and environmental regulation, and provide written findings before final votes. I will also commit to holding regular public briefings, similar to the ballot measures briefing I co-presented earlier this year, so that constituents can understand the evidence behind policy decisions. I will prioritize direct relationships with the Arizona Department of Health Services, the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, and the Arizona Department of Water Resources, requesting data and testimony before votes on relevant bills rather than after concerns have already surfaced. I will support transparency requirements that require legislative committees to disclose the sources and methodology behind any scientific claims used to justify a bill, so that both lawmakers and the public can evaluate the underlying evidence. My own professional experience relies on evidence based practice, and I intend to bring that same discipline to policymaking in the State Senate.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I am an ASU Senior Global Futures Scientist, having led community engagement for the Global Institute of Sustainability and Innovation for decades. I serve on the Elections/Judiciary, Appropriations, and Government committees in the Arizona State Senate and look to my policy staff and outside organizations for science-forward policy development. I bring a scientific perspective to the Senate and connect regularly with ASU researchers on policy decisions.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I believe good policymaking begins with evidence before ideology and requires decision makers to actively seek out expertise, including perspectives that challenge their assumptions.

As a legislator, I would support stronger, routine connections between the Legislature and Arizona’s universities, community colleges, scientific institutions, Tribal governments, professional associations, and researchers working directly in our communities. For major policy proposals involving areas such as water, public health, education, energy, wildfire, emerging technologies, or environmental management, I would seek input from relevant subject-matter experts early in the legislative process, not after legislation has already been written. I also support greater use of nonpartisan research staff, scientific advisory panels, public expert testimony, and legislative working groups that bring researchers together with community members, practitioners, businesses, and affected stakeholders.

Just as importantly, we should evaluate policies after they are implemented. Whenever practical, legislation should establish measurable outcomes, appropriate data collection, and opportunities for periodic review so we can determine whether a policy is actually accomplishing its intended purpose.

Science should not be partisan. Evidence cannot make every value judgment for elected officials, but it should clearly inform the choices before us. When credible new evidence shows that an existing policy is ineffective, I believe policymakers should be willing to change course.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

Establish standing science advisory committees comprising multidisciplinary experts to peer-review data– Appoint someone to facilitate communication between researchers decision-makers

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

Evidence and science should be a major part of policymaking because government decisions should be based on what actually works, not simply on political ideology. Science is not emotional nor supposed to be colored by bias. Therefore, I would support independent scientific councils made up of qualified experts who can review existing research, new data, and emerging technologies and provide objective recommendations. These councils should be nonpartisan, and their findings should be made public whenever possible. I would also support having chief science and data advisors within major federal departments. Their responsibility would be to protect research integrity, review the evidence being used by agencies, and make sure policymakers understand both what the research shows and the gaps in the knowledge, information. Additionally, I would also create stakeholder panels that include researchers, community members, technical experts, and the people actually affected by the policy. Experts can explain the science, but people living with the consequences of government decisions also need a voice. Finally, I believe the government should maintain transparent evidence registries showing the studies, data, and reviews used when developing major legislation or regulations. This is due to science being the mechanism upon which guides government decisions, but it should never operate behind closed doors. The evidence should be public, reviewable, and open to challenge when better information becomes available.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I will take advice from trusted and qualified organizations that are legitimate, and have no obvious incentives to enrich themselves over the will of the people. I will refuse to accept any financial incentives and will do the job from a purely fact based and ethical people-first system.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

I believe good policymaking starts with good information. My academic training taught me to value the scientific method: ask clear questions, examine the evidence, test assumptions, recognize limitations, and be willing to change course when better information becomes available.

In Congress, I would seek regular input from nonpartisan scientific and technical experts, researchers, federal scientific agencies, universities, and professionals working directly in the fields affected by legislation. For complex issues, I would support advisory groups that include subject-matter experts with diverse professional perspectives and clear conflict-of-interest standards.

I would also expect my office to evaluate the quality of the evidence behind policy proposals, including whether findings have been peer reviewed, replicated, and supported by a broader body of research rather than relying on a single study or politically convenient statistic.

Scientific evidence should not be selectively used to justify a predetermined position. When the evidence is uncertain or evolving, policymakers should be transparent about that uncertainty. And when new evidence shows that a policy is not working as intended, we should be willing to reassess it.

Science will not answer every value judgment Congress has to make, but it should help establish the facts from which those decisions are made.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

Evidence and science should drive policy, not lobbyists or political pressure. As a Green, I start from the ecology pillar: we face real limits on a finite planet, and ignoring the data on climate, extinction, and pollution is reckless.

I would rely on independent scientific advice rather than industry-funded studies. That means consulting career scientists at agencies like the EPA, NOAA, and NIH without political interference; requiring transparent disclosure of funding sources for any research used in legislation; and creating public advisory panels that include independent researchers, local experts, and community voices - not just corporate representatives.

I’d support restoring scientific integrity rules that protect agency scientists from political meddling, and I’d push for open data so the public can see the evidence behind decisions. For major environmental or public-health bills, I’d insist on clear summaries of the consensus science, including uncertainties, so voters and colleagues know what’s settled and what’s still debated.

Grassroots democracy also matters: town halls, written public comment, and accessible online records so ordinary people can weigh the evidence alongside experts. I’m not a scientist, but I trust the method - observation, testing, peer review - over ideology or donor preferences. Policy that ignores the data on climate, public health, or resource limits fails everyone. This approach keeps decision-making honest and accountable.

Q1 What advisory mechanisms will you implement to ensure that evidence and scientific findings play a crucial role in your policymaking process?

In order to have the best information and results for my policymaking decisions I will draw on my experience in both the US Army and as a financial statement auditor. I will work with my team, discuss concepts with experts and stakeholders, and evaluate the options to determine what the best course of action to help the most people possible is.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

I support routine vaccinations that are readily accessible and affordable, strengthening disease surveillance, and ensuring our state and county health departments have the staffing and resources necessary to respond quickly when an outbreak occurs. The MMR vaccine is our most effective protection against measles, and we should make sure families have access to accurate information from trusted medical professionals when making healthcare decisions.

I also think we need to rebuild trust in public health People deserve clear, transparent information about what is happening in their communities, and why particular public health recommendations are being made. We cannot wait until an outbreak is already spreading to begin communicating with the public.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

I wouldn’t be surprised if that outbreak were caused by by the measles vaccine, which isn’t effective and is produced unethically, by cell-lines based on tissue from aborted human fetuses. Active immunity is better. See the research by Dr. Theresa Deisher, founder of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute https://soundchoice.org/.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

I support policies that strengthen public health preparedness while respecting individual rights and personal responsibility. Preventing future outbreaks requires better disease surveillance, rapid communication, access to accurate information, and strong cooperation between local, state, and federal health agencies.

Vaccination remains an important tool for preventing measles and other highly contagious diseases, and I support ensuring families have access to reliable information and affordable vaccines. Parents should also have access to qualified medical professionals who can answer their questions and help them make informed decisions.

We should improve our ability to identify outbreaks early, quickly notify communities and healthcare providers, and ensure hospitals and public health departments have the resources necessary to respond.

I also believe public health recommendations must be based on credible scientific evidence, not politics. Government should clearly explain the evidence behind its recommendations and be transparent about risks and uncertainties.

My goal is a prepared public health system that protects communities, provides accurate information, respects individual liberties, and responds quickly when outbreaks occur.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Yes. I support evidence-based public-health policies that prevent disease while respecting individual rights and maintaining public trust. My 30 years as a science educator taught me that people make better decisions when they have accurate information and understand the evidence. Public health should be approached the same way. Vaccination is one of the most effective tools available for preventing measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases. I support maintaining appropriate school immunization requirements consistent with Arizona law and medical guidance, while making it easier for families to understand requirements and access recommended vaccinations. I would also support strengthening Arizona’s ability to detect and respond to outbreaks. That means adequate public-health staffing, timely disease surveillance, effective communication among state and local health departments, schools and healthcare providers, and clear procedures for responding when cases are identified. Most importantly, public health requires public trust. The government should communicate honestly about risks, benefits, and uncertainties rather than politicizing scientific or medical issues. People deserve to know what the evidence shows and where uncertainties remain. My approach would be prevention, preparation, transparency, and rapid response. We should listen to qualified medical and public-health professionals, communicate directly with Arizona families, and use proven strategies to keep communities healthy.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Yes. The Mohave County measles outbreak was preventable, and it’s a warning sign for LD1 and rural Arizona more broadly. As someone with a background in psychology and human behavior, I understand that public health failures are rarely about access alone. They’re about trust, communication, and outreach failing to meet communities where they are.

First, I support restoring and protecting state funding for county health department vaccination outreach, particularly in rural and tight-knit communities where distrust of state institutions runs deep and messaging must come from trusted local messengers, not just state press releases.

Second, I support strengthening real-time public health data reporting between county, state, and federal health agencies, so outbreaks are identified and contained before they spread across county and state lines, as this one did between Arizona and Utah.

Third, I support protecting reasonable school vaccination requirements while ensuring legitimate medical exemptions remain accessible, paired with transparent public data on vaccination rates by school and county so parents and health officials can identify gaps early.

Fourth, I support funding mobile and school-based vaccination clinics for rural communities where distance and cost are real barriers, not just hesitancy.

Public health policy has to be built on epidemiological evidence and delivered with cultural competence, not top-down mandates disconnected from community trust. That combination is where real outbreak prevention happens.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

We need to try to reclaim our sanity when it comes to vaccines. Individuals can choose exemptions only up to the number where it threatens herd immunity. I am a polio survivor and am so thankful to doctors and vaccines that there are not more people like me or worse. We can’t go back to those times.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

The fact that we even have to discuss this is mind-boggling.Between 1953 and 1963, the ten years immediately preceding the measles vaccine, measles caused an average of 400 to 500 deaths, 48,000 hospitalizations, and 1,000 cases of encephalitis every year. Measles was declared eliminated in the U.S. in 2000 because our society understood the importance of vaccines and the mandates that required vaccines for schools. However, a recent rise in vaccine hesitancy, caused by the spread of misinformation and debunked myths, caused a resurgence, resulting in 3 preventable deaths in 2025 - all of whom were unvaccinated. Scientists and medical experts are the voices that should be listened to. Any politicians that espouse misinformation that results in the unnecessary death of a child should be prosecuted.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

As Governor, I will support a strong, evidence-based public health system that focuses on prevention, early detection, rapid response, and public education. Measles is highly contagious, and the CDC identifies MMR vaccination as the most effective tool for preventing measles and limiting outbreaks.

I support ensuring that Arizona families have convenient access to recommended vaccines and accurate information about their benefits and risks so they can make informed healthcare decisions. I also want public health agencies working proactively with physicians, hospitals, schools, pharmacies, Tribal communities, and local health departments to identify outbreaks before they become widespread.

Arizona should strengthen disease surveillance, laboratory capacity, rapid testing, and communication systems so suspected cases are identified and investigated quickly. CDC guidance emphasizes that prompt identification, reporting, investigation, and response are critical to limiting measles transmission.

We also need targeted outreach in communities experiencing outbreaks or lower vaccination rates. That means working with trusted local healthcare professionals and community leaders rather than relying solely on government messaging.

Finally, Arizona must maintain emergency preparedness plans for measles and other infectious diseases, including coordination with federal and local public health partners when additional expertise, testing, vaccines, or other resources are needed.

My goal is to protect public health through science, transparency, education, accessibility, and rapid action while maintaining public trust.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

As a licensed mental health counselor with an academic background in biochemistry, I understand how quickly public trust in health guidance can erode, and how much that trust affects outcomes. The current measles outbreak, concentrated along the Arizona Utah border and centered on Colorado City and Hildale, has made Arizona one of the largest outbreaks in the nation. I support policies that strengthen the Arizona Department of Health Services ability to track and respond to outbreaks in real time, including sustained funding for school based vaccination reporting and rapid public communication when exposure events occur, similar to the alert issued after a Phoenix concert exposure in November 2025. I support protecting access to the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, which is roughly 97 percent effective after two doses, and ensuring that primary care and public health clinics in rural and underserved areas of Legislative District 25 have adequate staffing and vaccine supply. I also support funding community health outreach that respects local communities while providing clear, accurate information, since national data show that the vast majority of this year’s measles cases involve unvaccinated individuals. Given my professional background, I recognize the role of accurate health communication in reducing vaccine hesitancy, and I support funding public health messaging campaigns developed in partnership with medical professionals and communication researchers rather than relying on assumptions about what the public will respond to.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

The measles outbreak was a wake-up call. As an ASU Global Futures Scientist and advocate for science-based public policy, I believe prevention must be grounded in evidence, transparency, and access to care.

My legislative record reflects that commitment, including sponsorship for a Pandemic Resilience Plan (SB 1362) and efforts to strengthen Arizona’s healthcare workforce. I support fully funding public-health departments, protecting access to vaccines, strengthening disease surveillance, and ensuring schools and healthcare providers can identify and contain outbreaks quickly.

We must also rebuild public trust by communicating clearly about what the scientific evidence tells us. Public health should not be partisan. Preventing outbreaks protects children, seniors, and vulnerable Arizonans—and I will continue advocating for policies that put science and public health ahead of politics.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Yes. Arizona should treat infectious disease prevention as basic public infrastructure. Our goal should be to prevent outbreaks when possible, identify them quickly when they occur, and give communities reliable information and resources to respond.

I support maintaining strong disease-surveillance systems, adequately funding state and county public-health departments, improving communication between healthcare providers and public agencies, and ensuring access to rapid testing, contact tracing, and outbreak response capacity, particularly in rural and underserved communities.

Vaccination remains one of our most effective tools for preventing diseases such as measles. I support evidence based immunization policies while placing strong emphasis on access, education, and public trust. Families should be able to easily obtain accurate information, speak with qualified healthcare professionals, and access recommended vaccines regardless of income or geography.

We also need to communicate better. Public health officials should explain not only what they recommend, but why, what evidence supports the recommendation, what uncertainties exist, and how individual decisions affect vulnerable members of the community. Trust is built through transparency and conversation, not simply instructions.

Finally, Arizona should regularly evaluate outbreak responses and use the resulting data to improve preparedness. Public health works best when scientists, healthcare professionals, schools, families, and community leaders are working together before a crisis occurs, not meeting for the first time during a public health emergency.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Promoting the two-dose Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccine as the primary defense against infection.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Public health outbreaks should be addressed through prevention, transparency, education, and access to care before a disease spreads throughout a community. As a candidate who worked for five years for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention information line, CDC-INFO, I understand the importance of providing accurate, understandable, and timely public health information. So, I support strong vaccination programs and making vaccines readily available, particularly in schools, rural communities, and areas with limited healthcare access. Public health agencies also have a responsibility to clearly explain why vaccines are recommended, their known risks, and the scientific evidence supporting their use. Public trust must be earned through transparency. Additionally, I would support stronger disease surveillance and rapid-response systems so federal, state, tribal, and local health agencies can identify outbreaks early and coordinate testing, treatment, public notification, and vaccination efforts before cases multiply. Public health agencies should also make the data and research supporting their recommendations publicly available whenever possible. We must address misinformation, inadequate healthcare access, and delayed reporting without turning public health into political propaganda. The objective should be simple: identify threats early, provide accurate information, make prevention and treatment accessible, and reduce the spread of preventable diseases throughout Arizona.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

I am running against the #1 anti-vaxxer in the state and am a strong advocate from my experience in Veterinary medicine and medical assisting. I support evidence based policy for public health over this current situation.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Preventing outbreaks starts with strong public health infrastructure, accurate information, and access to proven preventive care. Arizona’s recent measles outbreak—the state’s largest since the early 1990s—shows how quickly vaccine-preventable diseases can spread when immunity levels fall.

I support maintaining strong federal partnerships with state and local health departments for disease surveillance, laboratory capacity, rapid-response teams, and clear public communication. We should also make routine vaccinations easy to access through pediatricians, pharmacies, schools, community clinics, and rural health providers, particularly in areas where geography or cost creates barriers.

Public health guidance should be grounded in the best available scientific evidence and communicated transparently, including what we know, what remains uncertain, and why recommendations change when new evidence emerges. Building public trust requires answering questions honestly rather than dismissing legitimate concerns.

I also support protecting the independence of federal scientific agencies, strengthening our ability to track emerging infectious diseases, maintaining strategic medical supplies, and ensuring hospitals and local health departments have preparedness plans before a crisis occurs.

The goal should be straightforward: prevent outbreaks when we can, identify them quickly when they occur, and give families reliable information so they can make informed health decisions.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

Public health decisions must follow evidence, not ideology or politics. The measles outbreak in Arizona last year was preventable. Measles is highly contagious and dangerous, and the vaccine is safe and effective according to decades of scientific data.

I support maintaining high vaccination rates through accessible, science-based immunization programs, strong public-health infrastructure, and clear communication grounded in evidence rather than misinformation. That includes adequate funding for state and local health departments, rapid outbreak response capacity, and protecting the ability of public-health agencies to act on the best available data without political interference.

Broader access to care also matters. Medicare for All would remove financial barriers that keep people from preventive services, including vaccines and routine check-ups. Healthy communities are more resilient when everyone can get care without worrying about cost.

I would oppose efforts to weaken vaccine requirements or undercut scientific agencies for political reasons. At the same time, public trust depends on transparency: open data, honest discussion of risks and benefits, and accountability when systems fail. Prevention works best when it is rooted in evidence, equity, and community confidence rather than coercion or corporate influence.

Ecology and social justice are linked here too - healthy people need healthy environments and reliable public systems.

Q4 Arizona saw the second-largest measles outbreak in the nation last November. Do you have any plans or support any policies to prevent future public health outbreaks?

I would work to reverse causes of the outbreak by using evidence-based policies to create requirements while providing evidence for the decision and counters to the misinformation that led to the bad strategies behind the issue.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

As a state senator, I wouldn’t have authority over federal science funding, but I can make sure Arizona is positioned to take full advantage of it. I support partnerships between our universities, community colleges, and state agencies to pursue federal research grants and bring those dollars into our communities; Particularly for research and innovation addressing Arizona’s needs, including water conservation, agriculture, extreme heat, energy, infrastructure, and emerging technologies. I would also advocate with Arizona’s congressional delegation for continued federal investment in science and research.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Science works best when privatized. I do not want to see the U.S. going down the route of Soviet-style centralized, bureaucratic science funding. The U.S. has been more innovative in science than the U.S.S.R. or other socialist/communist countries, and the innovation comes primarily from small, private groups or individuals.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I will support federal investment in innovation that strengthens America’s economy, national security, infrastructure, and quality of life. Federal science funding should prioritize research with the potential to produce practical benefits while also supporting basic research that creates the foundation for future breakthroughs.

I will support competitive grants for universities, small businesses, entrepreneurs, and research institutions, with an emphasis on developing new technologies and bringing promising discoveries from the laboratory into the marketplace. I will also encourage partnerships between government, universities, and the private sector to reduce duplication and help move innovations into production.

For Arizona and Southern Arizona, I will advocate for research and development in areas important to our region, including water conservation, advanced energy, mining technology, agriculture, aerospace, defense, and emerging technologies.

Federal funding must also be accountable. Grants should be evaluated on scientific merit, measurable outcomes, and responsible use of taxpayer dollars. I will support innovation while demanding transparency, competition, and results.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Arizona has tremendous potential to be a national leader in science, technology, and innovation. We should aggressively pursue federal research funding and make sure Arizona receives a strong return on the federal tax dollars our citizens contribute. I would advocate for continued federal investment in basic and applied research through agencies such as the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy, NASA, National Institutes of Health, and other research programs. These investments can lead to new businesses, better-paying jobs, improved technologies, and solutions to some of Arizona’s most difficult challenges. I would particularly encourage research partnerships involving Arizona universities, community colleges, K–12 schools, businesses, and entrepreneurs. Areas such as water conservation, semiconductor manufacturing, artificial intelligence, aerospace, renewable energy, advanced manufacturing, biomedical research, and environmentally responsible mining offer significant opportunities. As an educator, I also believe innovation begins with students. We should expand STEM education, internships, apprenticeships, research opportunities, and career pathways so that Arizona students can become the scientists, engineers, technicians, and entrepreneurs of tomorrow.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

As a state senator, I won’t control federal appropriations directly, but Arizona’s state government plays a critical role in positioning our universities, research institutions, and workforce to compete for, and make full use of, federal science funding, and I intend to use every lever available.

First, I will champion state matching-fund programs that make Arizona institutions more competitive for federal grants (NSF, NIH, DOE, DOD), particularly for water security, semiconductor research, solar and renewable energy, and public health, sectors where Arizona already leads and where federal dollars can be transformative for rural districts like LD1.

Second, I will advocate for state-level infrastructure investment, broadband, lab facilities, and STEM workforce pipelines at community colleges like Yavapai College, that make our region ready for federal research partnerships instead of leaving that capacity concentrated in Phoenix and Tucson.

Third, I will work to protect and expand technical and community college pathways into STEM careers, ensuring rural students in LD1 aren’t cut off from the innovation economy.

Fourth, I will use my voice in the legislature and in coalition with Arizona’s congressional delegation to publicly oppose federal cuts to NSF, NIH, and other basic research funding, and to advocate for restoring funding where it has been slashed, because basic research is the foundation innovation is built on.

Finally, as someone who has spent my career in higher education, I understand firsthand how fragile research funding pipelines are, and I will be a consistent, informed voice for protecting them at every level of government.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

If federal science funding still exists when I am in office, I would partner with CAP, ASU, and any agencies looking at innovative solutions to our water problem. Likewise, with Data Centers and AI use, traffic control, land management, air, noise, and light pollution in our cities, and more.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I want to find ways to bring scientists and technical experts into the state legislature to help inform our decisions. I want to see an increase in state funding for early-stage research to help turn ideas into products that can qualify for federal grants. Once federal approval has been received, I will work to speed up state approval processes for water, energy, and research facilities so they don’t get delayed by state regulations. I will support using state funds to help our universities and companies match the money needed to secure federal grants.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I will make Arizona more competitive for federal science and research funding by strengthening partnerships among our universities, community colleges, state agencies, Tribal communities, research institutions, entrepreneurs, and private industry. Federal programs increasingly support collaborative research that connects scientific discovery with workforce development, commercialization, and regional economic growth.

As Governor, I will support a coordinated statewide strategy to identify federal research opportunities and help Arizona institutions build competitive proposals. I want our state actively pursuing funding for areas where Arizona has both significant needs and opportunities, including water conservation and reuse, energy, semiconductor technology, advanced manufacturing, biotechnology, healthcare, cybersecurity, and responsible emerging technologies.

Arizona is already demonstrating what these partnerships can accomplish. The NSF Futures Engine in the Southwest, led by Arizona State University, brings together more than 180 partners and focuses on water and energy technologies with potential economic and community benefits. I want to build on partnerships like this throughout Arizona, including rural communities.

I will also encourage public-private partnerships that turn federally funded research into Arizona businesses, jobs, and practical solutions. Federal science dollars should not simply produce research—they should help educate our workforce, support entrepreneurs, solve real problems, and create long-term economic opportunities.

Finally, I will advocate at the federal level for continued investment in competitive, merit-based scientific research while ensuring transparency and accountability for how taxpayer-funded research dollars are used.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

As a state senator, I would not control federal appropriations directly, but I can use the office to advocate for Arizona’s research institutions and to protect state level investments that complement federal funding. In fiscal year 2026, Congress rejected the White House’s proposed cuts to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, instead increasing NIH funding by 415 million dollars and reducing the NSF budget by only 310 million dollars rather than the proposed 5 billion dollar cut. I will use my position to formally communicate with Arizona’s congressional delegation, urging them to continue rejecting deep cuts to NIH, NSF, NASA, and Department of Energy Office of Science budgets in future appropriations cycles, since Arizona’s universities and hospitals rely heavily on these grants for research jobs and student training. At the state level, I will support increased funding for the Arizona Board of Regents research initiatives, including efforts like the University of Arizona’s Tailings Center, which is using a 3.6 million dollar ABOR funded grant to study whether the state’s mine waste can be reprocessed for critical minerals. I will also support state matching grant programs that help Arizona institutions compete for federal research dollars and workforce development funding tied to STEM fields. Protecting graduate fellowship and research assistant pipelines matters directly to Arizona’s economy, since our universities depend on a stable federal and state funding relationship to retain talent and remain competitive nationally.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

The Republican majority in the Arizona legislature  advocate for reductions in federal science funding and seem to think that innovation can only happen in private enterprise. The Democratic Caucus is continually fighting this perspective. We stand in support of innovation and investment.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Federal science funding is one of the most powerful ways we can turn research into new industries, better jobs, and practical solutions to Arizona’s challenges. As a state legislator, I would work to make Arizona more competitive for those investments and ensure their benefits reach communities across the state.

I support strengthening partnerships among Arizona’s universities, community colleges, Tribal governments, national laboratories, local governments, nonprofits, and private employers to pursue federal research, demonstration, and innovation grants. The state can help by providing strategic matching funds, technical assistance for grant applications, and infrastructure investments that make Arizona projects more competitive. I would particularly prioritize research and commercialization in areas where Arizona has both significant challenges and opportunities: water conservation and reuse, wildfire and forest restoration, drought-resilient agriculture, semiconductor and advanced manufacturing, renewable and nuclear energy technologies, mining remediation, public health, biotechnology, and responsible artificial intelligence.

Federal investment should also create opportunities beyond the laboratory. I want research funding connected to apprenticeships, internships, community college credentials, small business development, and pathways that allow Arizona students and workers to participate in the industries that research creates.

Finally, I would advocate strongly with Arizona’s congressional delegation for sustained federal investment in basic and applied science. Scientific discovery is a long term investment, but when we connect research, education, entrepreneurship, and workforce development, those dollars can produce benefits for Arizona communities for generations.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Providing critical early-stage small business funding and entrepreneurial training

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Federal science funding should be treated as an investment in the future of the United States, not simply as another government expense. Innovation creates new industries, improves productivity, strengthens national security, and can improve the lives of people who may never directly see the research that made those advances possible. So, I would support increased and stable federal funding for basic and applied research through agencies such as the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Department of Energy, and other federal research programs. Basic research is especially important because some of the most significant discoveries begin without an immediate commercial application. We cannot lay the groundwork for future technologies, future advancement without the funding that allows the trained professionals to do the research. I would also support competitive grants for universities, public research institutions, small businesses, and independent researchers developing new technologies. Funding decisions should be based upon scientific merit, potential public benefit, and transparent standards rather than political influence. Additionally, I would encourage stronger partnerships between federally funded researchers, universities, businesses, and communities so discoveries do not simply remain in laboratories but can be developed into useful technologies, products, and services. However, funding requires accountability. Research results, expenditures, conflicts of interest, and measurable outcomes should be disclosed. The purpose should be to create an environment where new ideas can be tested, challenged, improved, and ultimately benefit the public while the public is aware that the institutions are providing reliable information, not additional propaganda.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I support expansions to stem programs, and technical schools. Affordable continuing ed for adults is a must and all Americans want to be educated and feel competent, so it would be amazing to enrich education from K-12 and beyond. I am not an incumbent and have gaps in knowledge and am open to further education on these matters.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I will support sustained, predictable federal investment in basic and applied research through agencies such as the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, Department of Energy, NASA, and other federal research programs.

Federal science funding is especially important for early-stage research that may not offer an immediate commercial return but can lead to major breakthroughs, new industries, better health outcomes, and stronger national competitiveness.

I also support expanding competitive research grants, strengthening partnerships among universities, national laboratories, community colleges, and the private sector, and creating more opportunities for researchers and institutions outside traditional research hubs to compete for federal funding.

We should invest in the next generation of scientists and technical workers through fellowships, apprenticeships, internships, and STEM education while ensuring that federal grants are awarded through transparent, merit-based processes.

Finally, Congress should provide researchers with greater funding stability. Scientific discovery often takes years, and repeated uncertainty in federal budgets makes long-term research more difficult. Innovation requires both accountability for taxpayer dollars and the willingness to invest patiently in discoveries whose full value may not yet be known.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

Federal science funding should serve the public interest, not corporate profit or endless military projects. I support strong investment in basic research and innovation, especially in areas that address real ecological and social needs: renewable energy, energy efficiency, climate resilience, public health, sustainable agriculture, and ecosystem restoration.

The clearest way to free up resources is to cut the military budget by 90 percent, as I have long advocated, and redirect those funds toward civilian science and green technology. We do not need more advanced weapons systems; we need breakthroughs that help us live within planetary limits. I would prioritize competitive grants to universities, national labs, and independent researchers over no-bid contracts to large defense contractors. Public funding should come with open-data requirements and limits on exclusive private patents so the benefits are widely shared.

I oppose using science budgets as corporate welfare. Innovation thrives when researchers can follow the evidence without political or donor pressure. That means protecting agency scientists, expanding peer-reviewed grant programs, and supporting collaborative international research on climate and biodiversity.

A steady-state economy needs smart technology, not endless growth. Federal investment should focus on solving concrete problems - clean water, carbon reduction, habitat protection - rather than subsidizing industries that externalize their costs. Redirecting resources from militarism to science is both practical and necessary.

Q2 What initiatives will you take to support investment in innovation via federal science funding?

I believe Arizona has tremendous potential to be a leader in innovation with three world-class universities, cutting edge space/technology programs, and a growing high-tech sector. I would advocate for continued federal investment in basic and applied research for projects which could enhance the already stelar reputation of Arizona R&D while creating whole new industries. I believe we could use these funds to expand our STEM programs which would improve our schools while also growing the pipeline for mandy of the trade and expert career paths new technologies require.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

As a teacher and a parent, I see the effects of social media on kids every day. Personally, I don’t think children under 16 should be on social media at all. For kids under 18, I think these platforms need much stronger restrictions. Kids shouldn’t be targeted with advertising, have their personal information collected and sold, or be fed content by algorithms designed to keep them scrolling for as long as possible. I also think we need much stronger protections for student privacy, especially when social media and technology cross into our schools.

I don’t have all the answers for what that legislation should look like, and technology changes faster than government ever will. But I do think we need to stop pretending these platforms were designed with kids’ best interests in mind and start putting some real protections around how they can interact with young people.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

No, I do not support censorship. That is against the 1st Amendment.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

I support reasonable protections for children and teenagers on social media, while protecting free speech and parental authority. Social media can provide valuable access to information, including science and public policy, but young people can also be exposed to misinformation, manipulation, harmful content, and addictive design features.

I support stronger age verification and meaningful parental controls, particularly for younger children. Parents should have the ability to understand what platforms their children are using, control access when appropriate, and limit the collection and use of minors’ personal information.

Social media companies should also be held accountable for protecting minors’ privacy and clearly disclosing how algorithms recommend content to young users. Platforms should not be allowed to deliberately exploit children’s vulnerabilities simply to increase engagement and advertising revenue.

However, I do not support government deciding what legitimate political or scientific opinions young people are allowed to see. Parents, not government agencies or technology companies, should remain the primary decision makers regarding their children.

My approach would focus on protecting children, increasing transparency, strengthening parental control, and holding platforms accountable while preserving constitutional free speech rights and access to information.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes. I support reasonable, evidence-based protections for children and teenagers on social media, while protecting free speech and the rights of families. I support stronger privacy protections for minors, reasonable parental controls, and greater transparency regarding how social-media platforms collect information and recommend content to young users. Young people increasingly receive information about science, politics, health, and current events through social media. That makes digital and scientific literacy more important than ever. It is imperative we teach students how to evaluate sources, recognize misinformation, understand the difference between evidence and opinion, and determine whether a scientific claim can be independently verified. Throughout my time as a science educator, I have advocated for these skills, and will continue to do so as a legislator. Technology will continue to change. Our policies and education system need to keep pace.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes. As a psychologist who has spent nearly three decades studying human development and behavior, I take the impact of social media on young people seriously, both the mental health effects and the way platforms can spread misinformation about science, health, and civic matters faster than accurate information can catch up.

I support age-appropriate design and safety standards for platforms accessible to minors, including limits on manipulative engagement features, like infinite scroll and autoplay, that are specifically engineered to maximize compulsive use in developing brains, based on research these companies’ own internal studies have confirmed.

I support requiring greater transparency from platforms about how content is algorithmically promoted to minors, particularly around health and science misinformation, so parents, schools, and regulators can understand what’s actually being amplified to kids.

I support funding media literacy and scientific literacy education in Arizona schools, so students are equipped to critically evaluate what they encounter online rather than relying solely on platform-side fixes.

I support stronger data privacy protections for minors, limiting what platforms can collect and monetize from young users.

At the same time, any regulation must be written carefully to withstand First Amendment scrutiny and avoid outright bans that push kids toward less regulated corners of the internet or cut off legitimate access to information. My approach is evidence-based: age-appropriate design and transparency requirements, not blanket prohibition, paired with genuinely investing in kids’ ability to think critically about what they see.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

I believe in free speech, but free speech does carry limits. In the wild west, people sold “snake oil” until truth in advertising came about; radio and television had censors - social media is more pervasive than any of those, yet carries little to no restrictions. That is a problem for all of us, but especially younger audiences (and others who haven’t learned to discern mis- and dis-information) so I believe regulations are necessary.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

I cheer, and 100% support, the actions Attorney General Kris Mayes took to hold social media - Facebook - accountable for using algorithms that “preyed on the developing minds of kids.” I support the restrictions implemented after this lawsuit regarding restrictions of young people. I feel these restrictions need to be required for all social media platforms. There should be no access for those under 13 years old. There should be strict and specific limits on older teens. And anyone caught creating work-arounds to avoid these restrictions should be held legally responsible.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

I support policies that better protect children and teenagers on social media while preserving parental rights, privacy, free speech, and access to legitimate educational information. Research has identified potential benefits of social media, but also meaningful risks to young people, including exposure to harmful content and concerns about excessive use and mental health.

As Governor, I would support age-appropriate safety and privacy standards, stronger protections for minors’ personal data, effective parental controls, and greater transparency regarding how platforms’ algorithms recommend content to young users. I also believe parents should have meaningful tools to manage their children’s social media use rather than government attempting to replace parents in those decisions.

Because young people increasingly encounter scientific, health, and political information online, education is equally important. I support strengthening digital and media literacy so students learn how to evaluate sources, distinguish evidence from opinion, recognize misinformation, and understand how algorithms can influence what they see. The U.S. Surgeon General has similarly recommended digital and media literacy education as part of protecting young people online.

I would also support independent research examining social media’s effects on youth and policies encouraging platforms to provide researchers with appropriate, privacy-protected data.

Our goal should not be to censor legitimate ideas or scientific debate. It should be to give Arizona’s young people and parents the protections, information, and tools they need to navigate online environments safely and thoughtfully.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

I support policies that protect young people online while respecting family decision making and personal privacy. Arizona House Bill 2991, introduced in 2026, would require social media platforms to obtain parental consent before allowing account holders under 14 to create accounts, require parental approval for 14 and 15 year old users, and give parents a clear process to request that a minor’s account be terminated. As of this year, the bill had passed a House Committee of the Whole vote and was under consideration with a Senate strike everything amendment. I support the core protections in this kind of legislation, including account termination rights for parents and permanent deletion of a minor’s personal data upon termination. As a licensed mental health counselor, I am concerned about the documented relationship between heavy social media use and youth mental health outcomes, and I support requiring platforms to disclose algorithmic design features, such as infinite scrolling and autoplay video, that are associated with compulsive use among minors. I also support Arizona’s existing age verification requirements for websites where a substantial portion of content is sexual material harmful to minors, while ensuring that any verification method used does not require platforms to retain or transmit a minor’s identifying information to government agencies, which protects both child safety and family privacy. Any legislation I support must be paired with independent research on effectiveness and unintended consequences before permanent adoption.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes, we should return to the pre-Trump era when Twitter and Facebook had protections in place.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes. I support reasonable, age appropriate safeguards for young people using social media, particularly around data privacy, targeted advertising, addictive design features, and greater transparency about how algorithms promote content. However, regulation should not be developed only by adults talking about young people. Young people should be included in the conversation. They understand how these platforms are actually used, where misinformation spreads, what pressures they experience online, and which approaches are likely to gain their trust and participation.

I would support creating opportunities for students, educators, parents, researchers, mental health professionals, and technology experts to work collaboratively on recommendations for Arizona. That should include stronger digital and media literacy education so students learn how to evaluate sources, distinguish evidence from opinion, understand how algorithms shape what they see, and recognize misleading scientific or policy claims.

I am cautious about government becoming an arbiter of acceptable political or scientific speech. The goal should be to give young people better tools, greater protections, and more transparency, not to shield them from every disagreement or controversial idea.

Ultimately, policies affecting young people will work better when we educate them, listen to them, and involve them in developing solutions. Collaboration creates understanding and, importantly, the buy in necessary for those solutions to succeed.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

the debate over regulating social media platforms for youth in Arizona and across the United States involves several key perspectives from lawmakers, public health officials, and free speech advocates

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes. Social media is one of the primary ways young people receive information, including information about science, health, and public policy. However, young people may not understand that these platforms are not truly free. Their consumption of media provides companies with valuable personal and behavioral data. These companies are not collecting that information out of altruism; the data can be used to build marketing profiles, target advertising, influence purchasing decisions, or otherwise generate profit. I would support tighter controls on how companies collect and utilize data from people under 18. This should include restrictions on targeted advertising, unnecessary behavioral tracking, and the sale or transfer of minors’ personal data. Companies should also clearly disclose what information they collect, how they use it, and who receives it. Additionally, I would support greater transparency regarding recommendation algorithms, particularly when they direct young people toward misleading or harmful information. However, regulation should not become government censorship. Government should not determine which political opinions young people are allowed to see. The focus should be protecting privacy, increasing transparency, strengthening parental controls, and improving digital literacy. Young people should have access to information without unknowingly becoming a source of valuable marketing data for comp anies seeking to profit from them.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes, these platforms have no real accountability and are too big and unregulated for the amount of negative repercussions on our society. We must protect kids and help expand public broadcasting to ensure a stream of legit, no-corporate knowledge.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes. I support stronger protections for children and teenagers online, including establishing a minimum age of 16 for independent social media accounts.

Social media platforms are designed to maximize engagement, and children are particularly vulnerable to misinformation, harmful content, addictive design features, and the social pressures these platforms can amplify. Parents should have more control, and technology companies should bear greater responsibility for protecting young users.

I support privacy-protective age verification, strong limits on the collection and sale of minors’ personal data, restrictions on targeted advertising to children, and greater transparency about how recommendation algorithms expose young users to content. Any age-verification system should collect as little personal information as possible and prohibit companies from retaining or repurposing that information. The FTC has similarly emphasized privacy safeguards when age-verification technology is used.

I would also support continued research into how social media affects child development, mental health, learning, and exposure to scientific misinformation so that future policy evolves with the evidence.

Technology can be an extraordinary educational resource, but protecting children should take priority over maximizing engagement and advertising revenue.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Social media has become a major source of information - and misinformation - for young people. I support targeted protections that reduce harm without turning platforms into tools of political control.

Kids deserve privacy and safety. That means strong limits on data collection from minors, restrictions on addictive design features that keep them scrolling for profit, and clear age-verification tools that do not create a surveillance system. Platforms should face real liability when their algorithms amplify demonstrably false claims that endanger public health or safety, just as we hold other industries accountable for foreseeable harm.

At the same time, I am wary of broad content regulation. Government or corporate gatekeepers deciding what counts as “approved” science or policy information risks suppressing legitimate debate and dissent. The better path is transparency: require platforms to disclose how their algorithms rank and promote content, fund independent media literacy education, and break up monopolistic power so a handful of corporations cannot dominate the information landscape.

Public health and democracy both depend on evidence and open discussion. We should protect young users from exploitation and manipulation while preserving the ability to share and challenge ideas. Corporate profit motives that prioritize engagement over accuracy are the core problem - not free inquiry itself.

Q5 Arizona youth regularly use social media. Given that social media profiles may spread information about science and policy matters, do you support any policies that regulate these platforms for younger audiences?

Yes, I support restrictions on usage of social media platforms by youth of certain ages as it is adverse to their development. I would work to out in restrictions similar to other states and countries in order to protect the children of Arizona. In order to determine the best policies, I will consult with the appropriate experts.