Democrat Jeromie Whalen and independent Nadia Milleron debate on Aug. 11. Both hope to unseat Richard Neal in Massachusetts’s 1st Congressional District.
Reminder Publishing photo by Sarah Heinonen
SPRINGFIELD — Two people looking to unseat U.S. Rep. Richard Neal in the Massachusetts 1st Congressional House District met at a debate on Aug. 11 to discuss their politics, priorities and approach. Of those, the most daylight between Nadia Milleron and Jeromie Whalen was in their approach.
Whalen, a Democrat, will face Neal in the Sept. 1 primary. while Milleron, running as an independent, will face the winner of the primary on Nov. 3.
During the event, hosted at 52 Sumner and sponsored by more than 40 local nonprofits, Milleron and Whalen answered questions from the community that had been collected ahead of time. Moderator G. Michael Dobbs explained to the audience that the questions all pertained to districtwide or national issues, which are the purview of members of Congress.
The candidates agreed on several topics. Each would work to abolish the electoral college to remove the outsized influence of a few swing states. Both Milleron and Whalen were proponents of universal healthcare, with that one topic being Milleron’s top priority. Both were also in favor of impeaching President Donald Trump, should the Republicans lose the majority.
To address poverty in Western Massachusetts, Milleron said she favored eliminating federal income tax on the first $100,000 earned. Similarly, Whalen said he would raise the threshold, easing the tax burden for the lowest income earners.
The two also agreed that there should be term limits for representatives. While Whalen envisioned 12 to 15 years, Milleron said she would commit to six years. Whalen, who is 39, also said he felt there should be an age cap, and suggested 70 years old, but also said people vary in how age affects them. At age 62, Milleron was silent on the issue of an age cap.
Whalen and Milleron were also in agreement that the Congress needs to assert its power over funding allocation, ensuring the executive branch follows through distributing funds, and not allow the president to enter military action without Congressional approval.
Where the candidates differed was in their methods. Whalen emphasized the need to create relationships with representatives on both sides of the aisle, as well as independents.
“It’s not relationships that are going to make this happen. It’s pressure,” Milleron said. She said being an independent in a House with narrow margins would make her influential. And, as an independent, she said she would caucus with whichever party is in the majority and withhold her vote for leadership to accomplish her goals. “We’re in such dire straits that we have to take every angle, pressure, every advantage, every leverage we can muster,” Milleron said.
Whalen took a different approach. He said there is influence through working the “halls of Congress,” but also influence that comes from public opinion. He later spoke about building coalitions, saying, “We need to build that community, and that’s how we break the partisan divide that we see.”
Milleron responded, “You can’t just influence people. You have to leverage, you have to pressure, you have to threaten their jobs and their reputations … You can’t just get what you want by being nice and … having discussions with people.”
On some issues, the candidates had different ideas. Milleron said her “day one” priorities would be proposing income tax relief, “get insurance companies out of our healthcare systems” and eliminate supply chain issues in medicine by bringing manufacturing back to the United States.
For Whalen, the focus would be on passing Medicare for all, abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement and implementing a surtax on the “ultrawealthy,” using Massachusetts’s Fair Share Amendment as a model.
To protect voting access and increase turnout, Milleron said it should be made mandatory and cited Australia’s system in which there is a monetary penalty for not voting. Voters there can vote by mail, vote early or obtain an absentee ballot.
Whalen said, “We have voter apathy in this country. We don’t have voter fraud.” He said he is in favor of enshrining vote by mail in law. He also said the current environment around immigration is causing people in Black and brown communities not to feel safe voting in person.
Asked about avoiding gentrification as a side effect of West-East Rail, Whalen said he fully supported expanding rail service, “But, at the same time, we need to be prepared to increase the housing stock in central and western Massachusetts. He said he was also a proponent of rent control to stabilize the housing industry.
Milleron warned that the region will be “flooded with people” escaping the climate crisis and that West-East Rail would bring them to Western Massachusetts. “We have to prepare,” she said.
Each candidate was asked how their background qualified them for Congressional service. Milleron said her experience as an activist, mobilizing people and advocating in the halls of Congress gave her the experience needed.
Whalen said that, as a teacher, he sees first-hand how decisions made at the national level affect the youth of America. In Neal’s 37 years in the House of Representatives, “Has your life gotten better? Have your bills gone down?… We need to go in a new direction.” He added, “The people I want in Congress are the individuals embedded in this community.”
Whalen’s comment was not the first time the candidates mentioned Neal and his absence from the forum. When speaking on Aug. 7, Neal said he would not attend “a forum that was organized by my opponent. They chose the site, the date and they chose the moderator.” Speaking of the forum organizers, he said, “One of them is a financial contributor and the other is a spokesperson for the campaign and they’re going to set the timetable?” Forum organizers Wes Weidemann, and Erica Swallow are public Whalen supporters. Neal has accepted a debate against Whalen organized and televised by WWLP for Aug. 26.
