Issue Position: Veterans, Defense, and Foreign Policy

Issue Position

Veterans

As the daughter of a U.S. Army veteran and a physician who has interacted with countless military families, I know how important military benefits are for service members and their families.

Military benefits offer veterans the resources to transition back into civilian life, including opportunities to pursue a higher education, affordable housing, health care services, career placement and more. Many of these services are also available to family members of both current and retired service members.

​Yet gridlock in Washington continues to place some of these important lifelines for veterans and their families at risk. During the recent 2013 government shutdown, families of fallen service members were denied death benefits. Because of congressional inaction, the Department of Veterans Affairs is still struggling with providing timely disability benefits to veterans because of a growing backlog of casework.

We cannot let partisanship undermine these crucial lines of support.

In Congress, I'm committed to working with my colleagues in the House and collaborating with veterans groups to find a path forward in order to make sure that these earned benefits and opportunities are there for veterans and their families.

Defense Budget

Defense spending in the U.S. continues to operate at near record high funding levels, adding up to at least three times more on defense than everyone else. Our own military leaders acknowledge we spend more than we need, particularly as Congress continues to cut discretionary spending.

I believe that to improve our nation's fiscal health, we can responsibly pursue savings in the Pentagon's budget and identify smart cuts that do not impact veteran and/or military family benefits, or drastically undermine our ability to respond to national security threats. Those include:

Scaling down our nuclear weapon arsenal to a size more appropriate to meet 21st-century security threats
Reducing the cap on taxpayer dollars paid to private defense contractors -- because American taxpayer money should not be used to enrich private defense contractors when civilian Pentagon employees can often do the same work at a fraction of the cost
Re-locating U.S. troop commitment in Europe
Foreign Policy

I believe lethal action or troop deployment should be the last resort when confronting threats to our national security and international stability. We should exhaust all reasonable diplomatic efforts, engaging with the international community to find resolution. Toward that effort, I support providing the State Department with the funding it needs to expand our diplomatic footprint while protecting our diplomats.

The circumstances under which we should engage in any military action must be morally compelling, whether we engage our troops or our technology.

I would consider supporting military action, to the extent necessary to resolve the conflict, if the following circumstances are met: where there is a clear and present threat to our national security; where there is international consensus that military action is necessary; where the aggrieved request international assistance; where there is a clearly defined strategy and set of comprehensive, achievable goals; and where our own domestic needs do not outweigh our national security concerns.

Source