Steven Greenfield'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.
Steven Greenfield has failed to provide voters with positions on key issues covered by the 2020 Political Courage Test, despite repeated requests from Vote Smart and voters like you.
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 2020.
- Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation? "Pro-Choice" (votesmart.org)
- In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket? "Yes" (votesmart.org)
- 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" (votesmart.org)
- 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 federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth? "Yes" (votesmart.org)
- Do you support lowering corporate taxes as a means of promoting economic growth? "No" (votesmart.org)
- Despite exhaustive research, Vote Smart was unable to find information about this candidate's position.
- Do you support requiring states to adopt federal education standards? "No" (votesmart.org)
- Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, geo-thermal)? "Yes" (votesmart.org)
- Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions? "Yes" (votesmart.org)
- Do you generally support gun-control legislation? "No" (votesmart.org)
- Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")? "Yes" (votesmart.org)
- 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? "No" (votesmart.org)
- 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.
| Yes | In order to balance the budget, do you support an income tax increase on any tax bracket? | ||
| Yes | In order to balance the budget, do you support reducing defense spending? | ||
| In order for our tax brackets to be fair and equitable, they must be proportional and based on all forms of income. For a country that claims to value work, income from work is taxed at the highest rate, with rent, dividends, inheritances, interest, royalties, branding, and stock dividends lagging far behind. Consumer goods have sales tax added, but buying a piece of a company does not. Our current tax policies reward high net worth, and punish work. They must be balanced. | |||
| Yes | Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations and unions? | ||
| I support publicly financed elections, distributed equally among legally qualified candidates, regardless of party affiliation, or lack thereof. Private campaign finance is incompatible with democracy. | |||
| Yes | Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth? | ||
| No | Do you support lowering corporate taxes as a means of promoting economic growth? | ||
| Corporate taxes are only charged when there is a profit. Profits being reinvested into operations or expansion are not taxed. Only retained profits are taxed. Profits do not generate growth. Only demand generates growth. Cutting corporate taxes to promote growth is a myth that needs to end. Cutting income taxes can generate growth, because it provides income to consumers. Cutting corporate taxes is neutral, or can cause contraction. Federal, or any public spending, is a form of consumption. Products and services, which have value, are provided in exchange for what is spent. And what is paid gets re-spent on consumption. | |||
| Yes | Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, thermal)? | ||
| Yes | Do you support the federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions? | ||
| Both direct public creation of renewable energy sources and infrastructure, and carbon pricing, are necessary, right now, as the devastating effects and costs of the climate crisis are already fully upon us, and growing rapidly. Firefighters, other rescue workers, and civilians are dying. Commerce is being interrupted and destroyed. We need not fear these commitments, as they will be the biggest job creators in history, which in turn will produce higher wages and consumption, along with taxes on those wages and consumption, and savings on future emergency costs from which the programs will more than pay for themselves. | |||
| No | Do you generally support gun-control legislation? | ||
| The language of this question disturbs me. I support both firearm and mental health safety, and improvements in both are easily achievable. When we create automobile and driver safety standards, we don't call it "car control." We don't call strength of materials standards for construction "house control." The phrasing of the question is designed to sow division and enmity as barriers to improved safety outcomes. | |||
| Yes | Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare")? | ||
| It must be replaced with a single-payer, Medicare-style system. Left unspoken in the health care discourse is that we pay 15-20% of our property taxes for private insurance for public employees like teachers, cops, and firefighters. That ends immediately and permanently with single-payer, whereas straight repeal, or Obamacare and any enhancements to it, drive those costs up. We also have around 20% of our product prices stemming from health care costs, the highest by far in the industrialized world, reducing demand for our products, and making imports cheaper. There is also the hidden costs from work time lost to illness. | |||
| Yes | Do you support the legalization of marijuana for recreational purposes? | ||
| What a boon it would be to treat pot like alcohol and cigarettes, both of which are far more medically and socially harmful. Set safety standards and tax it. Relive the taxpayers of police, court, and prison costs, and relieve all of society of the ills of organized crime currently supplying it. | |||
| No | Should the United States use military force in order to prevent governments hostile to the U.S. from possessing a nuclear weapon? | ||
| No | Do you support increased American intervention in Middle Eastern conflicts beyond air support? | ||
| We should reduce hostilities. That way we could worry less about any weapons, including nuclear ones, and reduce the incentives for other nations to develop them. I do not support air support intervention in the Middle East, or anywhere else, let alone other forms of intervention, except in cases of genocide or self-defense of the United States. The world never asked us to be its police force, most if it actively resents and resists our assumption of that role, and at $1.5 trillion per year and growing, we cannot sustain taxpayer payment for it. | |||
| 1. Reduce war and establish peace. 2. Eliminate poverty. 3. Convert rapidly to a post-fossil fuel economy. The first item alone could save taxpayers one trillion dollars per year, which would pay for the other two. They, in turn, would return equivalent savings in reduced crime, illness, and other social blight, and emergency costs, insurance costs, pollution, and lost life, property, and commerce. Doing all three would run at a significant net savings. The full initial outlays could be achieved with military budget savings alone. No new additional funding is necessary. |
Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.