Card image cap

Timothy Villari's Issue Positions (Political Courage Test)

Key

Official Position: Candidate addressed this issue directly by taking the Political Courage Test.
Inferred Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, but Vote Smart inferred this issue based on the candidate's public record, including statements, voting record, and special interest group endorsements.
Unknown Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, or we could not infer an answer for this candidate despite exhaustive research of their public record.
Additional Information: Click on this icon to reveal more information about this candidate's position, from their answers or Vote Smart's research.
Other or Expanded Principles & Legislative Priorities are entered exactly as candidates submit them. Vote Smart does not edit for misspelled words, punctuation or grammar.

Timothy Villari is currently being tested through the 2024 Political Courage Test.

What is the Political Courage Test?

Issue Positions

For Presidential and Congressional candidates who refuse to provide voters with their positions, Vote Smart has researched their public records to determine their likely responses. These issue positions are from 2024.

  • "Though I believe that Roe v. Wade erroneously found constitutional protection for abortion procedures, in the spirit of small government, I believe that the role of the federal government ought to be limited to ensuring the safety of the medical procedure itself - not supplanting the patient/doctor relationship - and to pursuing economic policies designed to present opportunity to pregnant women so that they have the means to carry a fetus to term should they so desire. Consequently, I believe that the federal government should be limited to pursuing policies that make abortion safe, legal, and rare." (None)
  • "Though adamantly opposed to reductions in these programs for existing beneficiaries, I do believe that we must find a way to take care of older Americans while at the same time ensuring that younger generations do not get saddled with an unbearable debt. Ultimately, I advocate for a "step up" program whereby the age to receive full benefits is raised for populations the further they are from receiving benefits, i.e. someone currently 20-30 will receive full benefits at 70, 30-40 at 69, 50-55 at 68, 55-60 at 67, and 60+ unchanged." (None)
  • Do you support expanding federal funding to support entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare? "No" (None)
  • In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket? "Yes" (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions? "Yes" (None)
  • "I believe that the best policy is to regulate campaign expenditures from corporation and unions; however, the only mechanism that I believe is appropriate to do so is an amendment to the Constitution. As it stands, I do not believe that campaign expenditures are different than my ability to spend money on products from a company with a social mission I support. To that end, I view one's disposal of their money as a form of their speech. Thus, an amendment would be necessary to put beneficial campaign finance restrictions on appropriate legal footing." (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • "I believe that robust defense spending is an insurance policy. Our adversaries know that it is not worth their time to pursue an arms race or military buildup because they know that our capabilities are exponentially superior to them. As such, the readiness and lethality of America's military forces and defense apparatus is worth the investment. Furthermore, I believe that we need to reevaluate our conception of "defense" to include, at least to a minor extent, threats to our homeland from energy security and climate threats." (None)
  • Do you support increasing defense spending? "Yes" (None)
  • "This is more complex than a yes or no can convey. I do not think that the federal government should spend money with the sole and end goal of promoting economic growth. However, I do believe that a priority consideration of any federal expenditure should be maximization of economic growth. As such, as the federal government plans infrastructure investments, it should structure its plans in a way that maximize the return on investment to the taxpayers. Regarding lowering corporate taxes, I believe that our tax system needs a structural overhaul in general, which cannot be captured by this question alone." (None)
  • Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth? "Yes" (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • "While I do not support direct government funding for the development of renewable - or fossil fuels for that matter - I believe that the government should actively support the development of a robust renewable energy portfolio via tax incentives and regulatory reduction." (None)
  • Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, geo-thermal)? "No" (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • "I support legislation aimed at behavior, not inanimate objects. I find it politically cowardly to point to an inanimate object as the source of America's gun violence problem. I believe the right for law-abiding citizens to possess firearms shall not be infringed. However, I believe that all stakeholders need to work to implement common-sense legislation such as universal background checks, red-flag laws that prioritize due process, and massive investments in mental health resources. We need to address the underlying behavioral ills rather than myopically focus on one iteration of the inanimate vessel through which the violence is carried out." (None)
  • Do you generally support gun-control legislation? "Yes" (None)
  • "This is not to say I outright oppose a government option for healthcare - that is a separate discussion on how to run/fund it. But, to the point, the law is currently under court challenge since the tax penalty has been removed. Therefore, we ought to pursue a comprehensive overhaul, with bipartisan support, that seeks staying power and that includes a public option that is fiscally responsible. Yes, this will require political bravery on behalf of both parties and compromise, which should not be a novel idea." (None)
  • Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")? "Yes" (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Do you support the construction of a wall along the Mexican border? "Yes" (None)
  • Do you support requiring immigrants who are unlawfully present to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship? "No" (None)
  • "My America is the global beacon of opportunity and was built on the backs of legal immigrants. It would be a kick in the teeth to our ancestors to take out our frustrations with illegal immigration on all immigrants. I believe that we need a "reset" on immigration. I would support a one-time amnesty program for undocumented immigrants that have been in the U.S. longer than one-year (subject to no criminal activity and conditioned on an over-time fee payment) so long as this is done in exchange for compromise on robust and strict enforcement of immigration rules going forward." (None)
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
  • Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
This candidate has responded to a Political Courage Test in a previous election. As a continued effort to provide the American public with factual information on candidates running for public office, these archived responses are made available here.
Pro-choice Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
Though I believe that Roe v. Wade erroneously found constitutional protection for abortion procedures, in the spirit of small government, I believe that the role of the federal government ought to be limited to ensuring the safety of the medical procedure itself - not supplanting the patient/doctor relationship - and to pursuing economic policies designed to present opportunity to pregnant women so that they have the means to carry a fetus to term should they so desire. Consequently, I believe that the federal government should be limited to pursuing policies that make abortion safe, legal, and rare.
Yes In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket?
No Do you support expanding federal funding to support entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare?
Though adamantly opposed to reductions in these programs for existing beneficiaries, I do believe that we must find a way to take care of older Americans while at the same time ensuring that younger generations do not get saddled with an unbearable debt. Ultimately, I advocate for a "step up" program whereby the age to receive full benefits is raised for populations the further they are from receiving benefits, i.e. someone currently 20-30 will receive full benefits at 70, 30-40 at 69, 50-55 at 68, 55-60 at 67, and 60+ unchanged.
Yes Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions?
I believe that the best policy is to regulate campaign expenditures from corporation and unions; however, the only mechanism that I believe is appropriate to do so is an amendment to the Constitution. As it stands, I do not believe that campaign expenditures are different than my ability to spend money on products from a company with a social mission I support. To that end, I view one's disposal of their money as a form of their speech. Thus, an amendment would be necessary to put beneficial campaign finance restrictions on appropriate legal footing.
Yes Do you support increasing defense spending?
I believe that robust defense spending is an insurance policy. Our adversaries know that it is not worth their time to pursue an arms race or military buildup because they know that our capabilities are exponentially superior to them. As such, the readiness and lethality of America's military forces and defense apparatus is worth the investment. Furthermore, I believe that we need to reevaluate our conception of "defense" to include, at least to a minor extent, threats to our homeland from energy security and climate threats.
Yes Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth?
Yes Do you support lowering corporate taxes as a means of promoting economic growth?
This is more complex than a yes or no can convey. I do not think that the federal government should spend money with the sole and end goal of promoting economic growth. However, I do believe that a priority consideration of any federal expenditure should be maximization of economic growth. As such, as the federal government plans infrastructure investments, it should structure its plans in a way that maximize the return on investment to the taxpayers. Regarding lowering corporate taxes, I believe that our tax system needs a structural overhaul in general, which cannot be captured by this question alone.
No Do you support requiring states to adopt federal education standards?
Local communities know what is best for their students and to that end I believe that the role of the federal government should be establishing block grants to the states and allowing the states to regulate their own education systems. Labor market forces will drive states to ensure they are educating competitive students and job candidates.
No Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, geo-thermal)?
Yes Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions?
While I do not support direct government funding for the development of renewable - or fossil fuels for that matter - I believe that the government should actively support the development of a robust renewable energy portfolio via tax incentives and regulatory reduction. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions regulation, I again see this as an area ripe for policy-via-tax incentives and market-based innovation. It should not be debatable that our climate is a national security and economic concern and we should respond accordingly.
Yes Do you generally support gun-control legislation?
I support legislation aimed at behavior, not inanimate objects. I find it politically cowardly to point to an inanimate object as the source of America's gun violence problem. I believe the right for law-abiding citizens to possess firearms shall not be infringed. However, I believe that all stakeholders need to work to implement common-sense legislation such as universal background checks, red-flag laws that prioritize due process, and massive investments in mental health resources. We need to address the underlying behavioral ills rather than myopically focus on one iteration of the inanimate vessel through which the violence is carried out.
Yes Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")?
Yes, especially given that the original law has now been partially dismantled. This is not to say I outright oppose a government option for healthcare - that is a separate discussion on how to run/fund it. But, to the point, the law is currently under court challenge since the tax penalty has been removed. Therefore, we ought to pursue a comprehensive overhaul, with bipartisan support, that seeks staying power and that includes a public option that is fiscally responsible. Yes, this will require political bravery on behalf of both parties and compromise, which should not be a novel idea.
Yes Do you support the construction of a wall along the Mexican border?
No Do you support requiring immigrants who are unlawfully present to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship?
My America is the global beacon of opportunity and was built on the backs of legal immigrants. It would be a kick in the teeth to our ancestors to take out our frustrations with illegal immigration on all immigrants. I believe that we need a "reset" on immigration. I would support a one-time amnesty program for undocumented immigrants that have been in the U.S. longer than one-year (subject to no criminal activity and conditioned on an over-time fee payment) so long as this is done in exchange for compromise on robust and strict enforcement of immigration rules going forward.
Yes Should the United States use military force to prevent governments hostile to the U.S. from possessing a weapon of mass destruction (for example: nuclear, biological, chemical)?
Yes Do you support reducing military intervention in Middle East conflicts?
Yes, while there are threats to US interests and security emanating from the Middle East, I believe that the threats presented by hybrid warfare, Russia, and China are far more pressing. I would strongly support reducing resource expenditures on kinetic capabilities in the Middle East and dramatically increasing resource expenditures aimed at countering the more pressing threats that I have identified. Doing so will allow our nation to be better poised to address non-conventional threats that are becoming the new normal.
Unknown Position Do you generally support removing barriers to international trade (for example: tariffs, quotas, etc.)?
I do not unequivocally object to removing barriers to international trade; however, any international trade arrangements that the U.S. enters cannot be on terms that allow for other nations to gain a competitive advantage solely due to intolerable standards and working conditions. The American worker should not be penalized because our government refuses to abandon the American Dream of a good-paying job and a decent standard-of-living. If an international trade agreement serves to make the American Dream more accessible, then fantastic. But if it would undercut this ideal, then I simply could not support it.
1. Campaign Finance: Significant political strife is due to the effects, real or perceived, of money in politics. Currently, I believe campaign finance limits are incompatible with the First Amendment; however, a Constitutional amendment can remedy this. A tall order, yes, but giants of history have accomplished far taller. 2. Election security: Institutional trust is vital. I will have an unequivocal zero-tolerance policy for state/non-state actors interfering in U.S. elections. 3. American Global Influence: One nation/bloc will inevitably be the de facto global leader. The U.S. must hold and carry out this sacred trustee role with integrity beyond reproach.

Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.

arrow_upward