What types of transportation do you use during an average week, and how has this shaped your view of transportation policy?

I commute and use uber or taxis.

What are some transportation challenges in Illinois?

Illinois faces several major transportation challenges that affect daily life, economic growth, and equity—especially across Chicago, the suburbs, and downstate communities.

1. Aging infrastructure Roads, bridges, rail lines, and transit systems are old and expensive to maintain. Deferred maintenance has led to unreliable service, safety concerns, and higher long-term repair costs across the state.

2. Underfunded public transit Systems like the Chicago Transit Authority and Metra struggle with funding gaps, leading to service cuts, staffing shortages, and inconsistent reliability—hurting workers who rely on transit to get to jobs, school, and healthcare.

3. Regional inequality Chicago has transit options many downstate and rural areas simply don’t. Large parts of Illinois lack reliable public transportation, leaving seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income residents isolated and dependent on cars.

4. Freight and congestion bottlenecks Illinois is a national transportation hub, but rail and truck congestion—especially around Chicago—slows freight movement, raises costs for businesses, and worsens pollution in surrounding communities.

5. Rising costs for drivers Gas prices, tolls, vehicle maintenance, and insurance costs are rising, while many people have no viable alternative to driving—making transportation a major affordability issue.

6. Climate and resilience pressures Extreme weather, flooding, and heat are damaging infrastructure and disrupting service, exposing the need for more resilient, climate-ready transportation investment.

Overall, Illinois’s challenge isn’t just moving people and goods—it’s doing so reliably, affordably, and equitably across the entire state.

How do you view Congress’s role in setting priorities for public transit, passenger rail, and strengthening accessibility in transportation?

I believe Congress has a central responsibility to set clear priorities for public transit, passenger rail, and transportation accessibility—because mobility is economic opportunity, not a luxury.

Congress should lead by setting national goals, funding them consistently, and demanding results. Too often, transit and rail funding is treated as discretionary or political, which leads to unreliable service, delayed projects, and higher long-term costs. Congress must provide stable, multi-year funding so agencies can plan, hire, and build with confidence.

Public transit and passenger rail deserve priority because they reduce congestion, lower household transportation costs, cut pollution, and connect people to jobs, education, and healthcare. That’s especially true in states like Illinois, where urban systems, commuter rail, and national rail corridors all intersect. Congress should treat transit and rail as core infrastructure, just like highways and ports.

Accessibility must be non-negotiable. Congress has a duty to ensure transportation systems work for people with disabilities, seniors, and families, not just the able-bodied. That means enforcing accessibility standards, funding station upgrades, accessible vehicles, and ensuring new projects are designed inclusively from the start—not retrofitted later.

Finally, Congress must pair funding with oversight. Dollars should go to projects that improve reliability, safety, and access—not just ribbon-cuttings. A strong legislative branch sets priorities, funds them responsibly, and makes sure transportation policy actually serves the public.

That’s how Congress turns transportation into opportunity—for everyone.

What’s your position on the Federal government and Illinois’ current transportation infrastructure spending, and if you could change anything, what would it be?

The federal government and Illinois are not investing enough in transportation infrastructure, and what investment we do make is too often distorted by partisan gamesmanship instead of long-term planning.

Transportation funding has become unpredictable—tied to short-term political fights, shutdown threats, and symbolic wins—rather than treated as essential infrastructure. That uncertainty hurts states like Illinois, where aging roads, bridges, transit systems, and rail corridors require sustained, coordinated investment. Delays and stop-and-go funding only raise costs and reduce reliability for the people who depend on these systems every day.

If I could change anything, I would push for stable, multi-year federal funding for roads, transit, and passenger rail that is insulated from partisan brinkmanship. Infrastructure should not be used as leverage in unrelated political battles. Congress should set clear national priorities—reliability, safety, accessibility, and climate resilience—and fund them consistently.

I would also strengthen oversight to ensure funds are spent on maintenance, modernization, and accessibility—not just new projects that look good in press releases. Keeping existing infrastructure working is often more important than building something new.

Transportation is about economic competitiveness and daily life. When Congress treats it like a political football, families pay the price through higher costs, longer commutes, and unsafe systems. We need seriousness, not standoffs, and investment driven by need—not partisan timing.

What is your position on investing to expand passenger rail service in Illinois, including the development of high-speed rail?

I strongly support investing to expand passenger rail service in Illinois, including the development of high-speed rail, because the United States is falling behind—and we don’t have to be.

Countries like China and Japan have shown that modern passenger rail is not futuristic or experimental—it’s practical, efficient, and transformative. Meanwhile, Illinois sits at the center of the nation’s rail network, yet our passenger rail system remains underdeveloped, slow, and underfunded. That’s a missed opportunity.

Expanding passenger rail would lower transportation costs for families, reduce highway congestion, cut emissions, and connect downstate communities to Chicago and regional economic hubs. High-speed rail, in particular, could dramatically shrink travel times, boost productivity, and make Illinois more competitive nationally and globally.

Congress has a critical role to play by providing stable, long-term funding, coordinating across states, and treating passenger rail as core infrastructure—not an afterthought behind highways and airports. Investment should focus on reliability first, then speed, accessibility, and integration with local transit systems.

This is also a jobs issue. Building and maintaining modern rail creates good-paying union jobs and long-term economic growth.

The bottom line is simple: other nations are moving forward -- while we sit her and argue. Illinois can lead, but only if Congress stops dragging its feet and invests seriously in the future of transportation.

Federal funding for Illinois transportation projects – such as the Red Line Extension and Red-Purple Modernization projects – has come under threat from the Trump administration. How do you plan to shore up funding for critical infrastructure projects under a hostile federal climate?

When federal support becomes hostile or unpredictable, Congress has a responsibility to fight harder, legislate smarter, and lock funding in place so communities aren’t held hostage to politics.

First, I would work to secure multi-year, legally binding funding commitments for major infrastructure projects like the Red Line Extension and the Red-Purple Modernization. Projects of this scale should not depend on the whims of any one administration. Once funding is authorized and obligated by Congress, it becomes far harder for the executive branch to arbitrarily withhold it.

Second, I would use the Senate’s power of the purse and oversight authority aggressively. That means holding hearings, demanding transparency, and forcing agencies to explain any delays or attempts to reroute funds for political reasons. Federal infrastructure dollars are not political favors—they are public investments, and Congress must enforce that.

Third, I would build coalitions across states and regions. Illinois is not alone—transit and rail projects nationwide face similar threats. A united bloc of senators and representatives can apply real pressure and tie infrastructure funding to must-pass legislation, where it belongs.

Finally, I would push to diversify funding streams so Illinois projects are not entirely vulnerable to federal sabotage—leveraging formula funds, long-term infrastructure programs, and public financing tools that provide stability.

Critical infrastructure should never be a political bargaining chip. My approach is to lock in funding, enforce the law, and make Congress act like a co-equal branch with a backbone, even under a hostile federal climate.

Our streets have become increasingly militarized in the past several months as the Trump administration has ramped up DHS and ICE activity in our cities. This past summer, Congress voted to increase the ICE budget larger than most of the world's militaries.

What is your position on ICE and related immigration enforcement?

My position is clear: immigration laws must be reformed first—then enforced fairly, lawfully, and in a bipartisan way. Enforcement without reform only produces chaos, fear, and militarization, not order.

Right now, ICE is being asked to carry out policies that Congress has failed to fix. That failure has led to aggressive tactics, bloated budgets, and enforcement strategies that strain community trust and put local leaders and law enforcement in impossible positions. Ramping up enforcement while the system remains broken is neither effective nor just.

I believe Congress must first pass serious, bipartisan immigration reform that modernizes the system, establishes clear legal pathways, fixes asylum backlogs, and sets enforcement priorities focused on real public safety threats—not families, workers, or long-settled community members. Only then can enforcement be legitimate and sustainable.

Once the law is reformed, enforcement should be targeted, transparent, and coordinated with local leaders and law enforcement—not imposed through militarized federal actions that destabilize neighborhoods. Immigration enforcement should respect due process, civil liberties, and the role of local communities.

We do not need an occupying force—we need a functioning system. A united front between Congress, local officials, and law enforcement—grounded in reformed law and shared responsibility—is the only way to restore order, fairness, and trust.