Congressional Incumbent Jahana Hayes
Jahana Hayes was elected in November 2018 and represents Connecticut’s 5th District in the United States House of Representatives. She serves on the House Committee on Education and Workforce as the Vice Ranking Member and the House Agriculture Committee. She is the Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Foreign Agriculture and Horticulture.
Areas of legislative focus are: equitable access to quality education, affordable health care, labor, agriculture, and veterans issues as well as environment, immigration reform, gun violence prevention, social justice and transportation.
Hayes was a history teacher for 15 years at John F. Kennedy High School in Waterbury, her home town, where she was named Waterbury Teacher of the Year, Connecticut Teacher of the Year and 2016 National Teacher of the Year (NTOY). She has been quoted as saying that “education saved her life” and is a fierce advocate for ensuring equitable access to opportunity for all.
Hayes is a graduate of Naugatuck Valley Community College, Southern Connecticut State University, the University of Saint Joseph and the University of Bridgeport, having earned a Bachelor’s of Arts in history and secondary education, a Master’s of Arts in curriculum and instruction, and a 6th year degree in administrative leadership.
What's your understanding of the war between Israel and various militant groups in Gaza?
My position on this conflict has always been clear that we have allies in Israel that we support as a democratic partner in that region. Israel has a right to exist. Right now this conflict has gone on for too long.
What do you think is the most likely short-term resolution to ending the current war?
We need to have a negotiated ceasefire that releases the hostages, but we also need to start thinking about what a path forward looks like that gives Palestinian self-determination and agency over themselves.
In terms of a long-term resolution, any thoughts as to which plan might be in the best interest of the United States?
I don't know what it looks like, but it has to include Palestinians at the table having input on what that looks like. It's not going to come from the United States. It's definitely not going to come from the Congress. It is working out a negotiated settlement with, as we see now, countries in the region who are going to support the stabilization of the region, but it has to include the Palestinian people at the table.
What's your understanding of the war between Russia and Ukraine?
I know that we have to support Ukraine because Putin will not stop there. He will continue to advance. I know that for my part, we could have literally provided support much sooner than we did if we weren't blocked by Republicans in the House and the Senate. Ukraine has asked us for financial support. We don't have soldiers on the ground. And their success is all of our success. I don't know why there's opposition from the other side, because it just doesn't make sense, because fundamentally we all benefit from a democratic Ukraine.
How do you see our relationship with NATO?
I think that it's very important for people to remember that the only time Article 5 in NATO was ever used was to support the United States. So just like our friends, allies, and partners stood up for us, we should be willing to do the same. And I thank President Biden for stabilizing and recommitting the United States to NATO and letting our allies around the world know that you can trust the word of the United States of America, because there had been a clear erosion of that trust from his predecessor. President Biden has set us on a clear path to strengthen our NATO alliances, to bring new countries in, to ask other people to support NATO. We all benefit from those types of partnerships.
In November of last year, the Supreme Court adopted a code of ethics for its justices. What should Congress do if they violate those standards?
I think the Supreme Court, like every other department, should have a code of ethics, and it should be codified, and the penalties for that should be negotiated and agreed upon. They have a chief justice who should adopt a plan and enforce it from their level.
Congress has, I mean, we are separate but co-equal branches of government. The Supreme Court really has to be the one to do that, but there has to be a clear understanding that no one is above the law, no one is above reproach. And if someone takes that position, that they should be held to the same standard as everyone else. The fact that the Supreme Court themselves are not adhering to and following the law is incredibly problematic.
Do you think there should be term limits for Supreme Court justices?
At this point, that would require a constitutional amendment. So I just think that the Supreme Court needs to adhere to the law as it's written right now.
In its last term, Roe v. Wade was struck down by the Supreme Court, eliminating the national right to obtain an abortion. Recognizing that there are deeply held views on both sides of this issue, what do you think the practical and political implications are of that decision?
I don't think that the federal government or the Supreme Court should make decisions like that over a woman's body. There are no similar laws that mandate health care over a man's body. It should be between a woman and her doctor and the only way to protect that right is to codify Roe v. Wade to make sure that doctors are able to follow their best medical advice for their patients and not have the Supreme Court or any other court step in.
I also think that the fall of Roe was just the beginning of an erosion of freedoms and rights for women. We've seen attacks on IVF. We've seen it extend to mailing mifepristone to rural areas. We've seen it even extended to birth control for women. So these are all just a series of super conservative views that are being imposed upon people.
Well, I think it's really hard to dismiss the fact that we had a global pandemic and supply chain issues around the world. It wasn't just in the United States. But I think it's very important that some of the easing of inflation and the numbers that we see are a result of the surge of resources and support that was passed through the American Rescue Plan. Our economy has recovered faster than any economy in the world. We have brought back jobs to America. So we're seeing the leveling out of that, but there are ebbs and flows to inflation, but it is remarkable how we have these conversations in a void as if for almost two and a half years the world's economy hadn't slowed down. The war in Ukraine hadn't stopped the delivery of resources and a lot of the supply chain issues that we saw, our ports being closed, all of those things were super important and that is what we're seeing right now.
What do you think it means in terms of the overall direction in which the economy is headed?
Well, I think we've seen these trends over time where it is continuing to improve. We see the price of gas coming down. We see jobs coming back. But I also like to remind people that the economy isn't just a measure of the stock market. We are talking about all of the things that contribute to a family's expenses.
How well or poorly should the American people feel about the current state of election integrity?
Well, I think despite all of the reporting about inaccuracies in elections, the data does not show that. I think our elections have been relatively secure and the instances where we've seen fraud or malfeasance, they're one-off incidences. And I think that both Republicans and Democrats should be committed to making sure those things do not happen again and working together to secure our elections, to invest in our elections. We have had legislation, the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, that would attempt to address some of these things, that was blocked over and over in the Congress. Right now, there is a lot of talk about the SAVE Act. Basically my Republican colleagues are promoting it as a piece of legislation to make voting by noncitizens illegal. It is already illegal for noncitizens to vote. One of the most egregious parts of this legislation is that it requires you to prove citizenship to vote, which generally for most people would be a passport. Less than 35 percent of people in my district have a valid passport. So, if we're going to enact this law that says you have to have a passport to vote, it is the equivalent of a poll tax. If you can't afford to have a passport, that means you can't vote.
It has always been my position that we need to remove barriers to voting and provide for safe and secure elections
In five presidential elections, the winner of the popular vote has not won the electoral vote. Do you support efforts to replace the Electoral College with a national popular vote?
I would be open to putting that up for a vote and letting the American people decide on that one. Right now, I support the Constitution. The Founding Fathers recognized that as time went on, there would be a need to amend the Constitution. So I think that that would be up for the people of the United States to take a vote on whether or not they wanted to amend the Constitution to make that change.
