Candidate Q&A: Michael Sullivan

1. Former Senator Scott Brown spoke often about his independence and not always voting with the Republican leadership. Which one or two issues do you most agree with Republican leadership? Which one or two issues do you most disagree with Republican leadership? 

I’m not sure because I don’t have any particular issue before me. But I will certainly take an independent review of any issue that comes before me as a United States Senator. The test is going to be is it in the best interests of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the best interests of our country? And ultimately I’ll make a decision based on if its in the best interests of our country and the people of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Regardless of where the idea comes from, from the Democratic caucus, the Republican caucus or from a joint proposal, a bipartisan bill, my test is going to be is it in the best interest of the people that I serve?

I will never vote on party lines for the purposes of voting on party lines. The test to me will always be and always has been, is it in the best interests of the people that I serve regardless of who’s proposing it or who is serving it.

2. Our region benefits a lot from defense spending, including bases and the development of new weapons. There has been a lot of talk about cutting defense spending. How would you do that without hurting defense contractors and companies (and all their high-paying jobs) in your home state?

You take a global review in regard to defense spending. You have to determine exactly what we need to have for funding to protect our national security and our national interests. When Dwight Eisenhower left the White House national defense costs were about 51 cents for every dollar of revenue. Today it’s down to about 19 cents per every dollar of revenue. The investment in terms of national security and national defense has eroded over a period of time. The national security and national defense budget has to be determined based on need. We have to ensure we are fully funding our national security and national defense. Every project and every investment has to meet that standard, regardless of where that investment is taking place. I will be vigilant with regards to making sure that the young men and women who serve in the military have all the right equipment, the right training and the right support in order to successfully and safely as humanely possible complete their mission.

3. There's been increased use of drones internationally, as well as domestically, primarily as a law enforcement tool. Are you comfortable with the use of drones internationally and domestically? What sort of rules should be in place for the domestic use of drones?

I suspect we don’t fully know the extent and use of the drones. I would imagine that some of the drone use is likely considered to be classified, so I think it would be hard pressed for any candidate for the United States Senate to know fully in terms of how drones are being used. The use of drones for purposes of military operations, particularly as it helps keep men and women in uniform safer, is a good and effective use of technology. We should use drones if it advances our national security and national defense interests outside the United States.

It is unclear to me in terms of how drones are being used within the United States. I have a much more serious problem with regards to the use of drones within the United States if they are used for purposes of spying or surveillance of U.S. citizens. If that is happening, it should be done based on our Constitution and on the laws. Along the border, it is a little bit different, particularly if you’re looking at it from a border security perspective. We know that our borders are porous and we have to fortify our borders for two reasons: for security, principally, and secondly as part of an immigration policy.

4. When federal transportation money is discussed, the conversation usually focuses on highway construction and expanding public transit. Yet the MBTA's core service is in desperate need of repair and funding. What can you do at the federal level to improve the quality of T service for current riders? Or does expansion to Fall River and other economic areas in the state trump the needs of Bostonians trying to get to work in a safe, timely manner?

It has to be based on a couple of things. First and foremost, a financial ability in terms of the federal government to invest in these areas. The federal government has to begin prioritizing its expenditures. There’s a lot of things the federal government wants to do, there are far fewer things the federal government needs to do. As part of a priority, particularly around balancing the budget, we have to take a look at where all the federal dollars are going, whether it’s going in terms of foreign aid or investments in terms of the expansion of rail. We have to make sure we are not putting ourselves in significant deficit spending that is unsustainable, and that’s what we’ve seen over the last several years. You have to prioritize your spending to determine first and foremost whether or not you have the ability to invest in these areas. Secondly, whether there’s a real need to invest in these areas. Is there some return on the investment that we’re going to get, whether it’s in terms of ridership or environmental impact. I think every project has to stand on its own merits to determine whether or not we have the financial ability to invest. Particularly as we’re faced with trillions of dollars of debt – $16 trillion that’s likely to grow to $25 trillion. The government has to take a step back and re-order its priorities.

5. Do you support the most recent catch limits on commercial fishing? Why or why not?

The big challenge here is trying to get accurate information from those people in the federal government that are making some of these assessments. The fishing industry and in particular some type of stock fishing in Northeastern New England has been decimated over these past decades. But earlier there were some suggestions that the stock was rebounding and fishermen were prepared to re-fish the stock.

The information that has been developed has been completed unreliable. You need reliable information. Fishermen would much rather fish than get a hand out from the federal government. So I think you have to start with reliable information and then give people an opportunity to participate in the industry.

Unless and until we figure out exactly what’s happening, in terms of the fishing stock, and getting the fishing industry to participate in these discussions as to how do we best support the industry in the short-term and the long-term to ensure that it’s survivable., I think you have to at least keep the disaster aid on the table. I’d ask the industry itself: What is the best course of action that allows the industry to survive?

6. MetroWest suffered a blow with the loss of New England Compounding Center and the associated fallout: will you be working to draw other medical companies to the MetroWest area and how will you do that?

This is an area that needs some significant review, not only at the state and local level but at the federal level as well to ensure that pharmaceutical products that are reaching the market are actually as safe as they can be. It is the role of the FDA to make sure they have sufficient resources to do their job. At the state and local level, other regulators need to make sure they have the resources to do theirs. There has to be a commitment on the part of the industry that the standards are being met.

7. As in the call for more federal oversight in the wake of the New England Compounding Center scandal, is there a similar role for the federal government in the state's drug lab scandal? Or do you believe the prosecution of Annie Dookhan and court reviews of the 34,000 affected cases is a sufficient response?

I suspect that the federal government and particularly the Justice Department with the United States Attorneys Office are closely monitoring that to see what federal interest remains after or during the state prosecution. If the federal interest is satisfied as a result of the state prosecution, they would stand down. But if it’s not, then the federal government would reserve its rights to continue its investigation or interest in the matter.

8. For many who live along the coast in Massachusetts, the only option for home insurance is the FAIR plan. It's expensive, with many paying more for insurance than in real estate taxes, and it does not have a good reputation for paying out claims. Yet, it is the only game in town. If a storm like Sandy were to have hit the Mass. coast, it is unlikely the FAIR plan would be able to cover the loss. What would you do to encourage insurance companies that offer residential insurance to come back to coastal Mass.?

I’d certainly listen to the industry as to why there are not competitive plans available. I suspect it’s because of the potential cost in the event of a coastal disaster. I’d look to see if there might be some opportunities for pooling amongst insurance carriers to provide coverage in the event of some of those disasters. But I think the industry can explain the reasons why it’s so cost prohibitive and then look to see if there might be an opportunity to reduce the costs so homeowners would have the ability to have at least have some level of coverage to protect them.

9. Increasingly, police departments in Massachusetts, and especially on the South Shore, are dealing with drug problems, especially among the youth. Where do you think the war on drugs stands now? You’ve spoken in support of mandatory minimum sentences in the past – how do you balance treatment versus imprisonment and how can the federal government continue to lead in this area?

Most of the criminal cases are investigated and prosecuted at the local level. The federal participation is minor compared to what’s happening at the state and local level. There has to obviously be a balance. The best course of action would be keeping kids from using drugs, and the longer you are able to keep kids from using drugs the chances are they will never become drug addicted or participating in the drug trade. For those people that deal in drugs, the traffickers, there has to be a series of harsh penalties. Those things I think deters some people from participating in that type of criminal behavior. It helps take drug dealers off the streets for a period of time and it helps improve the quality of life in the neighborhoods.

There is clearly a partnership between federal, state and local law enforcement as we’re looking at major drug traffickers, particularly those that are national and international in scope. You can take out a whole regime from top to bottom and at the same time make sure there is treatment available, whether it is treatment for people prior to getting into a facility. But certainly for people in a facility treatment would be critically important to ensure that they don’t have a relapse and become drug users that are often the targets of these drug trafficking organizations. So there has to be a balance between prevention and punishment. There’s a big difference between the drug traffickers and the drug users.

10. What Senate committees and leadership posts would you seek if you become a senator and why?

There’s a number of areas certainly I’d have an interest in participating in. One is going to be job growth. It’s critically important, growing the economy, so every opportunity I would have to participate in the areas to grow the economy, particularly growing the economy in the private sector. It’s the only way we can grow the economy. Government can’t grow the economy. Government can grow debt and deficits. Government can cause inflation. But working to grow the economy on the private sector is an area that I would focus in on. The greatest risk on national security is our growing debt and our continued deficits so I’ll be working hard on that.

Beyond that, I think it is premature for me to identify particular committees to work on. I have two campaigns: one the primary election on April 30, which I’m working hard to win, and if we win that then the general election on June 25.