A.J. Kern: 2018 Election Guide

Welcome to WCCO.com's 2018 political guide!

We reached out to all Minnesota candidates running for U.S Senate, Governor, U.S Congress, Attorney General, Secretary of State and State Auditor this fall. Candidates were asked to provide a two-minute video discussing their platform as well as answer a set of our viewer's questions.

Above is the video and below the answers A.J. Kern provided. This is not a paid advertisement nor does WCCO endorse any candidate.

Responses from A.J. Kern, Republican candidate for the 6th District:

Do you support changing the law to release non-violent drug offenders currently serving federal prison terms?

The possibility of serving time in prison for buying, selling or using drugs is meant to serve as a deterrence.  However, the fine line when it comes to drug use may be best addressed by states.  For example, the responsible use of cannabis by adults.  I tend to believe non-violent drug offenders should not be serving federal prison terms.

Should Congress appropriate $25 billion to build a security wall along the U.S.-Mexico border?

Absolutely.  Securing and controlling our nations borders is key to national security.  In September 2017, the Federation For American Immigration Reform (FAIR) estimated that there are 'approximately 12.5 million illegal alien residents' in the U.S.  The costs incurred at all levels of government are estimated to be roughly $134.9 billion.  Building a border wall will save the American taxpayers billions over time.

Should children brought to the United States with their parents illegally be given a path to U.S. citizenship, or should they be deported to their native countries?

In general, parents should not be separated from their under aged children and all handling of under aged illegal immigrants should not violate this basic premise. If children are under the age of 18, they should stay with their parents irrespective of their parents' status relative to deportation. If there is a reason to deport parents of under aged children, those children should also be deported with their parents. Parents are responsible for their children. Extenuating circumstances, such as active gang membership or other criminal activities could warrant government intervention to insure the safety of those under aged children—with the objective of finding suitable care givers in their country of origin.

Decisions of deportation should be applicable to an entire family group, parents and their under-aged children. This is not to say that parents who brought children here illegally should be given a path to citizenship, but rather that disposition of each family should be considered jointly.   Adults should not violate our laws by crossing our borders illegally.  Newly arriving families intentionally crossing our borders illegally should be deported to their country of origin with their children. Asylum seekers should not cross borders illegally but rather should follow standard policies and procedures through US embassies. Asylum seekers who fail to follow legal processes should be treated no differently than others who cross our borders illegally. For those individuals aged 18 and older, who have been here essentially their entire lives and have not engaged in criminal behavior, congress should develop legislation that might lead to legal residency, with the stipulations that this legislation include strong prohibitions on illegal border crossing, chain migration, and that our border is fully secured to eliminate incentives for continuing illegal immigration.

Do you think North Korea will "denuclearize," as President Trump says it will?

First, preventing countries from developing nuclear weapons is much more feasible than asking them to dispose of them, and as we know weak policies from previous administrations have already allowed North Korea to develop nuclear weapons—the toothpaste is out of the tube.

Of course, no one expects North Korea or any other country with Nuclear weapons to voluntarily "denuclearize" after one sit down with the president of the United States. But it is clearly a start, and there is precedent for denuclearization in Libya, although not the greatest example since Muammar Gaddafi ended up deposed and dead. It is clear, Kim is not interested in such a deal.

But, meeting and negotiating for denuclearization and talking up North Korea's promise to do so are important aspects of developing a stable relationship that can lead to a more manageable situation and potentially lead to relief for the North Korean people suffering under an authoritarian regime. Trump's personal efforts and close communication and statements of optimism represent a carrot that may lead to normalization, human rights improvements and ultimately solution of the problem. This may indeed include denuclearization.

The seemingly preferred alternative in the media, publicly denouncing Kim as a liar, would certainly not promote progress.

Do you believe in climate change, and should the U.S. rejoin the Paris climate accords?

One need only look to the ice ages to understand that climate varies through time, and although I am not a scientist, my understanding is that the chemical makeup of the atmosphere influences these changes. That said, political policies intended to change current patterns should not be based on knee jerk reactions, and the United States should not unduly penalize itself while other countries continue discharging greenhouse gasses. According to the New York Times, not exactly a conservative news source, China' discharges are currently more than the United States and Europe combined and are increasing.

Increasing global control through carbon taxes, limiting energy use, or poorly thought through cap-and-trade systems will not mean much as long as other countries deny equitable responsibility.  The U.S. should not rejoin the Paris climate accords.

Canada is retaliating for the U.S. tariffs by imposing tariffs of its own on Minnesota products. Among the Minnesota products: grain, aluminum, boats and boat accessories, packaged dairy products, ATVs, and much more. China imposed retaliatory tariffs on Minnesota soybeans and pork products. Do you believe it will hurt Minnesota producers?

Let's start with the root of the manufacturing issue. China is and has long subsidized their steel industry dumping "cheep" Chinese Steel on US markets. Trump as president of The United States rightly has said enough. The United States will no longer sit back watching the United States steel industry disappear.  As a result, cheap Chinese steel now needs a new market, enter Canada. Canadian steel makers are already clamoring for government relief because 1) United States steel production is likely to increase, reducing demand for Canadian Steel in the US, and 2) Chinese steel, no longer welcome in the US, will need to find new markets—in Canada. The Canadian steel industry is crying the blues, evidence that steel dumping by China is as real as climate change and now Canada's reaction to impose tariffs on the U.S. is misguided and should be focused squarely on the root cause—cheap Chinese steel. Trudeau needs to shed his skinny jeans and join with Trump in a unified stance against government subsidized products and intellectual property theft by communist China—but of course that's unlikely from the "left of Sanders " Justine Trudeau.  At least President Trump is trying to untangle a lot of this complicated issue.