Stefanie Smith For U.S. Congress

Stefanie Smith is a political novice running for the 13th District of U.S. Congress against Democratic establishment favored Betsy Dirksen Londrigan. Londrigan won the 2018 Democratic nomination, but lost the general election by a razor thin margin of 1.4%. Londrigan and Smith will face off against each other in the primary election on March 17th. The winner will go on to face incumbent Republican Rodney Davis.

I sat down with Stefanie in Decatur at a local pub where she was holding a campaign event with the public.

Zachary Gittrich: You’re running against Betsy Dirksen Londrigan? What are the reasons you think you’d be a better representative of the 13^th district than Betsy Dirksen Londrigan? What are the specific differences you have with her?

Stefanie Smith: I am more representative of the district – as a person. Because of my financial situation: having medical debt, having student loan debt, understanding poverty. Those are issues that are widespread in our district that Betsy doesn’t really have to add or any knowledge of that. Betsy said at the forum when asked how she would deal with poverty, she said, “I support the Middle Class.” So, she’s willing to leave behind the majority of the district in my opinion.

I am also a champion of human rights and civil rights. I’m against war. Betsy is pro-ICE, and I’m against ICE. I’m for single-payer healthcare and Betsy is not. I’m for the Green New Deal, because I really like having a world to live on; Betsy does not. Those are some specific differences.

ZG: Do you have any pets?

SS: I do; I have a Cat, and I have a Rabbit.

ZG: You participated in one forum with Londrigan. You seemed particularly reticent at that event. Can you explain why?

SS: Absolutely. So, we were denied a debate. Betsy would not agree to a debate. The public forum was the only public event with the two of us she was willing to do. The conditions for the forum were I wasn’t allowed to reference or criticize any of her policies. So, they basically silenced me from criticism. I decided because it was the only type of forum and there were a lot of questions, I was going to give very terse very direct answers so we could cycle through as many as possible and get Betsy on the record on these issues. So, that’s why it looked the way it did, out of respect to the questioners.

ZG: Do you want more debates with your opponent?

SS: She’s still refusing as far as I know. We’re not going to get a debate; I’d do a debate and have said so since the beginning. I think debates contribute to a healthy democracy to have these ideas discussed, criticized and expounded on. That is a democratic tactic Betsy is abandoning. And, I find that really disappointing.

ZG: Do you think you could defeat Rodney Davis in a debate and the election?

SS: Oh, yeah I do. I think that people really respond to authenticity, even if you don’t necessarily agree with everything you say, they at least appreciate that you’re not bullshitting them. Rodney has really misled the voters in an enormous sort of way and has not provided any resources for the district; our district has fallen further into poverty. I think that his incompetence alone – its a challenge cause he’s heavily supported by Trump, so he’ll get a lot of support from Trump country. I think it will be a grueling nasty campaign, but I don’t think Rodney has the integrity to keep up.

ZG: You’ve noted in the past friction between you and the local democratic parties. Can you elaborate the details?

SS: We have a lot of people trying to get involved to disrupt, suppress, and get rid of me from the start. They’ve made it a point to show that meetings were very hostile to us. They’re very dishonest. Like, I would go to a meeting and talk, then they’d say I refused to talk to them. That was the Macon County Democrats.

Emily Rodriguiz of Champaign County Democrats has been around our campaign trying to disorganize the campaign. Just really needling things trying to undercut the work we’ve done in the community. They’ve tried to block us from using LGBTQ venues.

Laurie Bell of Mclean County has been spreading lies and disinformation about a protest that wasn’t a campaign action. Just a lot of backstabbing and childish behavior all around. We’re here to work. We said we were going to be transparent about what we want to do.

ZG: You’ve said that we as citizens need to organize a coup against the current administration. Can you elaborate what you mean by that?

SS: No, I’m not saying we need a coup against the administration. I’m saying the administration has already successfully pulled off a coup. We need a network community response. It is very clear that the Federal government has fallen: its fractured. Legislation isn’t getting through. People vote on legislation in the house, they sits in the Senate, or the president doesn’t sign them. So we aren’t going to get our needs met through those avenues. We’re going to have to create the networks to survive. We have to start making mutual aid avenues. How do we get resources to people who are isolated at the margins. No one is coming to save us. We have to organize. That’s what I mean.

ZG: You have stated you support Medicare 4 All single-payer and that anything less is eugenics. If enacted, how would the transition from private to public healthcare work for the 160 million people who currently have private insurers?

SS: Hopefully swiftly because I would actually like to be able to afford my doctors. I have insurance through my husbands employer. If that insurance ended today, and Medicare 4 All was immediately implemented, I’d finally be able to go to the doctor and I think that’s true for a lot of people.

It’s something that has to be implemented quickly. I don’t have tears for the insurance industry. They’ve exploited us for so long. I’m not worried about their profits or opinions on it, I’m worried about getting people healthcare.

I would like to see it as an immediate option for the completely uninsured as its passed. From there I feel like having a window for people to be able to transfer over to government insurance. I see that as an important step. I’d like to see all that completed within a year. But, we should definitely immediately get healthcare to those without.

ZG: What kind of assistance would be available to private insurance company employees who may lose their job?

SS: I do think by switching there will still be a need behind the scenes to make this happen. So, I see merit for including those people in the process. For those jobs that are going to be created by Medicare 4 All, to go firstly to those who were in the for-profit system.

If we get to the point where we’re able to pass Medicare 4 All, we’ll likely be able to pass other bills that are for workers rights and unionization. My hope is that it’ll be less of a blow because other jobs are going to provide living wages. When we’re talking about the Green New Deal, housing, infrastructure. We really need people to get into the trades and health care. We have shortages of nurses and teachers. There are lots of jobs that are very important that people aren’t doing cause they don’t pay enough. We don’t need a ton of administrators working on medical bills for insurance. We need teachers, we need nurses, and they need to be able to live. We make those jobs a living wage; we support training to be a CNA and other union jobs like electricians and plumbers. We’re always going to need those people. So, I feel like there are a lot of ways to offset that issue.

ZG: How would you rate the Democrats efforts to impeach the president? Do you think there were other issues they should have focused on when it came to impeachment?

SS: Yeah. The Democrats are like its a technicality: Trump went after Joe Biden’s son and now were really mad about it. They didn’t go after Trump for any of his crimes against humanity or war crimes. They went after him cause he went after one of their own. So it looked petty cause it was petty, especially in the context of crimes against humanity! It looks terrible; it looks weak; it’s ineffective governing. All it does is disorganize and upset people. It alienates even more people. The Democratic party doesn’t look like the moral champion in this: they just look like petulant children. I honestly think it was misguided. I’ve been asked a lot if I support impeaching the president. And I said if I was in the House and the vote came up I would vote yes to impeach him. But, I don’t think people understood how impeachment works. People were like, “Oh yea, he’s impeached.” But then there’s the senate and all these procedures. I feel like the Democrats exploited the fact that we have low civic education to make a spectacle of the impeachment to try and get votes.

ZG: Government is regularly viewed as criminally inefficient. Conservatives automatically say everything government is bad; and Liberals argue its better than the private sector and it’s the duty of the government to do these things, but even they seem to acquiesce to the seemingly natural fact that government is inefficient. How would you address inefficiency in government services?

SS: We have wild redundancies. Terrible service, terrible filing. But, when it comes to money the fact that the Pentagon pays thousands of dollars for a fucking screw: that’s ridiculous. And, those are my tax dollars. So, I don’t disagree that the government is inefficient and ineffective. But if they’re taking my money anyway I don’t want it to go to a $1500 bolt. I want that money going into services that are going to hurt people. I want that money going into SNAP and into disability. If you take money from the people then that money should be used to support the people not murder other people.

ZG: So, basically allocating funds more towards social services so they aren’t as inefficient?

SS: Exactly, you have to invest in these things if you want them to work. They’re not investing in them, but purposely sabotaging it by under funding them and under staffing them. That’s why its inefficient; that’s why the government sucks.

ZG: You have stated you support the Green New Deal. Do you support a complete ban on all new oil drilling and fracking?

SS: Yes

ZG: How do we continue to manufacture all the things that require oil, especially plastic?

SS: There are… a lot of things we don’t need, right? I’m open to talking about these things but there are a lot of things we would need to prioritize production on, e.g., medical equipment. We’re supposed to be finding alternatives. We have brilliant scientists; there are people working on the stuff. I feel like we should be focusing on the worst offenders first. We should stop fracking immediately because earthquakes and brown water is really terrifying. I definitely understand that some things are higher priority than others. But, we have to move away from that source very soon if we are to survive. Like, if it’s between survival and making more action figures, I’m going to go with survival. I know it sucks, but we don’t live in a way that is sustainable to the planet and our population. We have to figure out other ways. We either figure it out or we die.

ZG: Do you support court-packing to readjust the politics of the Federal judiciary?

SS: I’m really freaked out with the federal judiciary and the way the judges have been stacked. Honestly, I try to be open when I don’t have solutions; I don’t know the best way to address that issue right now. I’m interested in that path and learning more about it. But I don’t have a good handle on how that works. My work has been predominately in human trafficking policy. This is a very new area for me. I’m a working-class person. I don’t know a lot of judges. I need to meet more people who have a robust experience and get a better view of the short term and long term goals of restructuring the judiciary would be. I’m just not qualified to strategize on that right now.

ZG: Are there any current federal judges you would support impeaching and removing?

SS: Brett Kavanaugh is springing to mind for obvious reasons. As somebody that believes in survivor-centered politics, his rise in the judiciary is rather suspect. I would also like to reexamine anyone who didn’t get a bar association recommendation.

ZG: Do you support a constitutional amendment creating term limits for Federal judges? If so, what should be the limit?

SS: Again, I feel like I don’t quite have a grasp on the repercussions of that sort of decision. Given the way we have seen the Trump administration manipulate the judiciary, I see a massive benefit to that. I’m not clear what the criticism of that would be. I don’t see why a term limit would be bad, even for myself.

ZG: Do you support granting statehood to Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Washington D.C., Guam, Mariana Islands, and America Somoa?

SS: Yes.

ZG: Do you support a constitutional Amendment creating term limits for members of congress? If so, how long?

SS: Yes. But I don’t think that’s a question for me but for the voters. I think things get stale if you have the same voices in politics all the time. I don’t think anyone should be able to make a career out of being a government representative. The idea of a career politician is horrifying to me because it says to me this is someone who seeks power, who wants to rule not govern. I’m very supportive of term limits but again its important to figure out what the voters want cause they may want a representative multiple times in a row and they should have that chance. Obviously when were talking about the DCCC blacklisting progressive challenges, that’s not healthy democracy. I think there are a lot of areas we could improve and I think it should be driven by the will of the people.

ZG: Housing is increasingly unaffordable, and most people on waiting lists for public housing wait years. What policies would you propose to address this issue?

SS: I endorsed the homes guarantee from Peoples action that covers affordable housing, public housing, it addresses environmental racism infrastructure disaster response reparation. There’s a Green New Deal public housing policy as well that looks very promising. I think we’d have a few policies that would address that issue. But, also the way that crisis intersect with other issues. For example, the homes guarantee updates appliances for energy savings to help with utilities which is a huge housing cost. I really prefer looking at policies that view issues as holistic that work to address everything. I also support lifting bans on rent control. We want rent control. We’ve been canvassing for Lift the Ban.

ZG: Do you support a maximum wage?

SS: I would support something like that, absolutely.

ZG: What type of taxes do you expect to support?

SS: That is a really interesting question because I don’t see any benefit in taxing lower income people. I see a great deal of benefit in taxing companies, billionaires; for me taxes need to be heavily applied to the rich, and the people who are suffering the most need tax relief. So, any sort of tax that I would support would be directed towards the wealthy; it’s time they give back to our society.

ZG: We have been in a state of perpetual warfare since our childhood. We are currently in military conflicts with 7 different nations. Do you support these wars? Would you end any of the wars?

SS: I am staunchly anti-imperialist and anti-war. I don’t believe in violating the human rights of others.

ZG: How do we deal with the Geo-political consequences of this?

SS: I mean, honestly, these sort of things need to be taken on a case-by-case basis. Because the ways that our bases are used in support are different around the world. I don’t think a blanket solution would be appropriate right now.

There are countries that we have been meddling that have wanted us out for a very long time. We should respect those wishes and remove ourselves immediately. In other nations where we have a good strategic working relationship that has proved fruitful and not mortally dangerous for people – that’s a different circumstance.

The way that Trump handled the Kurds was very upsetting. That was an alliance that was really important for their safety. That was an inappropriate removal [of military force]. A lot of these issues have to be taken on a case-by-case basis. It should be the people who live there, their will should affect our policy when we are talking about staying or leaving.

ZG: What do you see as the military’s responsibility on the world-stage?

SS: At this point, our military needs to stop doing war actions. Those costs a ton of money and are an environmental blight. The military should at this point be redirected towards focusing on national crisis such as disaster relief. We have wildfires – we are using prison labor to fight wildfires in California and these people can’t even become firefighters after they are released [from prison]. I think it would be a better use of the military to have them support resiliency of our communities in the face of natural disasters. On the global stage, I think that is where we should be talking about [using the military]: towards support, not war.

ZG: There are some very serious issues happening regarding immigration, especially with regard to ICE & CPB. You have called for abolishing ICE. How would you regulate immigration?

SS: We need to have a robust system that allows for people to get citizenship. One of the things that is really important to me is this notion of immigrants having a right to a civil attorney so we don’t have toddlers representing themselves in immigration court. That is inappropriate. For me, a fundamental component is making sure these people have representation. Having materials for them in their language, which sometimes is not just Spanish but includes indigenous languages. We need to have those components in place so people are able to navigate the system successfully. We need more advocates for people seeking asylum, refugee status, immigrating for work. We need to stop banning people from entering our company on the basis of… Trump has changed so many laws on visas regulation, that it’s really complicated and a lot to figure out, but another component is undoing the things Trump has done.

I think a lot of people don’t realize that ICE and Border Patrol are fairly new; they came about post-9/11. They were built to be authoritarian surveillance nightmares. The way they question citizens and journalists. So many backwards things are happening: ties to corruption and human trafficking. It’s such a corrupt system that I don’t think it can be overhauled. I don’t think you can fix ICE.

ZG: What about situations like what recently happened in Illinois where an undocumented person with a violent criminal record was released from prison? Do you think undocumented people with violent criminal records should be deported?

SS: Again, its not an area to make a blanket statement cause we know how corrupt our criminal justice system is. When we say violent crimes, what do we mean? Whether we’re deporting them or imprisoning people, neither of those solve the problem in my mind. We have restorative justice practices we can use in these scenarios. I think just cause someone is undocumented that they don’t have less of a right to humane systems of justice.

ZG: Do you think serious crimes have been committed regarding immigration and the border by these institutions and this administration?

SS: Crimes against humanity, definitely.

ZG: What kind of border policy do you envision?

SS: A border is kind of a fake idea.

ZG: So, is money, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t real.

SS: Agreed. But the border as a concept doesn’t mean what you think. I do not believe that a wall is a solution at all. Its going to be an environmental blight and waste of money and its not going to be particularly effective. This notion that a border zone should be expected to be a war zone or combat zone, that’s not how the border has worked when I’ve gone into Canada. So whats the difference? How can people move freely in Europe? The way Americans think about borders is really toxic. They view them as impenetrable force fields that we’re supposed to defend. I don’t think that’s how you should go about it. I think you should reasonably be able to cross borders safely and quickly. When I’ve gone through Canada its a fairly easy process.

ZG: I will point out there are a lot more cartels in Mexico than Canada. Maybe that’s why there is some distinction between the two borders.

SS: Right. And, the cartels are moving their products through the border not like people think they are. They’re moving them across check points and in underground tunnels.

ZG: But, it’s still moving product from one country into another.

SS: Yes. But even in terms of the border security we have now is not adequate to deal with the problem. It’s not addressing the actual criminal activity that is occurring.

ZG: But you do think some kind of border security is required to deal with underground tunnels bringing in drugs?

SS: Yes. Absolutely. But I think a wall and these overly militarized check points haven’t actually fixed the problems at all. So we need to find new solutions. I don’t think these things are helpful to international relations. Right now, if you shoot across the Mexican border and murder someone, you’re not responsible cause you’re on American soil. That’s not good for anyone. If we’re talking about widespread cartels & human trafficking those are things that require lots of investigation, resources, and time. But your average border patrol agent isn’t checking a car and saying, “Oh, I found a cartel member.” That’s not happening. I don’t see cartels or human trafficking as even related to the border. Cause when we’re talking about human trafficking were talking about migrant laborers. Companies exploit that they get these people here, get them to work, and when the migrants complain about their working conditions, the corporations get them deported. That’s human trafficking and corporations are doing it and our government is not going after those corporations. That has nothing to do with a border wall or militarized borders. That is capitalist exploitation. So I think if we’re going to talk about human trafficking and drug trade, we need to actually look into those problems instead of acting like it is connected to this disparate thing.

ZG: The country is obviously in a perpetual state of gridlock, political crisis, and general decline. Do you think parts of the constitution need to be changed in order to guarantee more political stability? If so, what constitutional amendments you propose?

SS: I think that nobody really knows what is going to happen. Nobody knows if Donald Trump wins what’s going to happen, if he loses is he going to give up power. These people obviously don’t respect the constitution cause they’ve been violating our constitutional rights. I don’t think amending a document they don’t respect is going to give us any more rights or powers than we do. The Trump administration and all of his buddies don’t care about morals or the constitution. It’s really bleak, but the federal government has fallen. That is a reality. We’re in uncharted territory. How do you recover democracy after fascism? Can you just go in and make a few tweaks?

ZG: What are ways you would address issues of voter suppression?

SS: We need more polling stations. I believe it should be a national holiday. I believe you should be able to leave work and leave school. We should make it easier to vote by mail especially for people with disabilities. I think abolishing the electoral college and moving towards rank-choiced voting to help chip away of this binary party fold so people don’t think if their candidate loses they’ve wasted their votes. There’s people who have already voted and then their candidate dropped out. That’s not fair.

ZG: You’ve stated you support abolishing prisons. Can you further articulate just exactly what that means?

SS: We have a prison industrial complex. The school to prison pipeline. This is just institutionalized slavery for the most part. That’s what it is. We have so many people incarcerated for nonviolent crimes. I would like to move towards restorative justice. There are prison models based in places like Norway that are built around rehabilitation that aren’t abound in imprisoning and dehumanizing them. Its about engaging them and bolstering them to become whole people. Our system is the opposite. We just strip the humanity from people through abuse. That’s just state-sanctioned violence.

ZG: How do you go about articulating prison abolition to the average person who can’t conceive of such a thing?

SS: I think it comes down to showing that there are alternatives that have been really really successful throughout the course of human history. Most people think this is the only option. And that’s just not true, I think its about bringing in a diversity of ideas to the floor. We need to be using the same strategies as Medicare 4 All and referencing its success in other countries.

ZG: Do you think there is any class of crime that necessitates incapacitation in prison? Like, if you’re a serial killer lets just lock you up forever.

SS: I think even if we’re talking about serial killers that doesn’t mean that we should have institutionalized torture chambers for them. That’s not humane. Do I believe that you could have someone who needed life-long incarceration because they didn’t respond to rehabilitative methods, yes that could absolutely happen. But those people could still stay in an environment that is not abusive or dehumanizing. That’s not a requirement for prison. I think that’s the thing most people don’t understand? You don’t have to beat, rape, and abuse people and cage them and starve them and put them in solitary: that is all optional. That’s a choice and a poor one at that.

ZG: What are specific policies you have to address mass incarceration?

SS: I think just decriminalizing drugs and sex work would get a lot of people out of prison and keep them out. We need to direct these people to resources that are actually supportive and actually cause people to be rehabilitative instead of being sucked up in a cycle of fines, fees, incarceration, and poverty.

ZG: Is there anything else you’d like to add?

SS: We’ve covered a lot. The most important thing to me is to remind everyone that nobody is coming to save us. That hoping & praying for federal legislation that wouldn’t even be able to be enacted immediately doesn’t solve the problem that we actually need organizing and networking now. We mutual aid; we need harm reduction; we need crisis intervention. And we can’t rely on government to fund these things because we have to create these networks ourselves if were going to survive. I hate this idea of politicians making all these promises, like “if you elect me ill get you all of this stuff.” That’s not how it works, especially now. Not for the House of Representatives cause we can’t get things through the Senate. So I cant make any promises in that regard, except that ill fight like hell for you.

Honestly, its local politics. People need to get involved in city council and county boards. City politics controls law enforcement. County boards are stuff related to affordable housing, public health, disaster response. We need more people in working in those areas to bolster our safety services.

Stefanie Smith will be running against opponent Betsy Dirksen Londrigan in the Tuesday, March 17th, 2020 Democratic primary.