Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Alan Rapoport
Alan Rapoport (Republican Party) ran for election to the U.S. House to represent Ohio's 11th Congressional District. He lost in the general election on November 5, 2024.
Rapoport completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2024. Click here to read the survey answers.
Biography
Alan Rapoport was born in Cleveland, Ohio and lives in Cleveland Heights, Ohio. He earned a high school diploma from Cleveland Heights High School, an undergraduate degree in history, magna cum laude, from Kenyon College in 1971, and a J.D. from Case Western Reserve School of Law in 1975. His career experience includes working as an attorney. He was elected to the Cleveland Heights City Council, becoming president with the title of mayor.[1] Rapoport has been affiliated with Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association and Ohio State Bar Association.[2]
Elections
2024
See also: Ohio's 11th Congressional District election, 2024
Ohio's 11th Congressional District election, 2024 (March 19 Republican primary)
Ohio's 11th Congressional District election, 2024 (March 19 Democratic primary)
General election
General election for U.S. House Ohio District 11
Incumbent Shontel Brown defeated Alan Rapoport, Sean Freeman, Tracy DeForde, and Christopher Zelonish in the general election for U.S. House Ohio District 11 on November 5, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ |  | Shontel Brown (D) | 78.3 | 236,883 |
 | Alan Rapoport (R)  | 19.6 | 59,394 | |
 | Sean Freeman (Independent) | 2.0 | 6,107 | |
 | Tracy DeForde (Independent) (Write-in) | 0.0 | 27 | |
 | Christopher Zelonish (Independent) (Write-in) | 0.0 | 2 | |
| Total votes: 302,413 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Withdrawn or disqualified candidates
- Tony Evans (Independent)
Democratic primary election
Democratic primary for U.S. House Ohio District 11
Incumbent Shontel Brown advanced from the Democratic primary for U.S. House Ohio District 11 on March 19, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Shontel Brown | 100.0 | 61,573 |
| Total votes: 61,573 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Republican primary election
Republican primary for U.S. House Ohio District 11
Alan Rapoport defeated James Hemphill and Landry Simmons Jr. in the Republican primary for U.S. House Ohio District 11 on March 19, 2024.
Candidate | % | Votes | ||
| ✔ | | Alan Rapoport | 56.8 | 8,385 |
 | James Hemphill | 22.7 | 3,350 | |
 | Landry Simmons Jr. | 20.5 | 3,024 | |
| Total votes: 14,759 | |||
| = candidate completed the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection survey. | ||||
| If you are a candidate and would like to tell readers and voters more about why they should vote for you, complete the Ballotpedia Candidate Connection Survey. | ||||
Do you want a spreadsheet of this type of data? Contact our sales team. | ||||
Endorsements
Ballotpedia did not identify endorsements for Rapoport in this election.
Campaign themes
2024
Ballotpedia survey responses
See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection
Alan Rapoport completed Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection survey in 2024. The survey questions appear in bold and are followed by Rapoport's responses. Candidates are asked three required questions for this survey, but they may answer additional optional questions as well.
| Collapse all
- I support the Lower Energy Costs Act, which would increase domestic energy production, stop inflation, and make our country energy independent. I differ with Shontel Brown, who voted "no" on it.
- I support the Secure the Border Act of 2023, which would end "catch and release" and prevent invasions by criminals and terrorists. I differ with Shontel Brown, who voted "no" on it.
- I agree with Congressional Resolution 40, which condemned efforts to defund law enforcement agencies. I differ with Shontel Brown, who voted "no" on it.
Note: Ballotpedia reserves the right to edit Candidate Connection survey responses. Any edits made by Ballotpedia will be clearly marked with [brackets] for the public. If the candidate disagrees with an edit, he or she may request the full removal of the survey response from Ballotpedia.org. Ballotpedia does not edit or correct typographical errors unless the candidate's campaign requests it.
Campaign website
Rapoport’s campaign website stated the following:
| “ |
THE ECONOMY The cost of living is higher than it should be. It is higher than it used to be. When I was younger, I could afford to pay rent. Eventually, I could afford to take out a mortgage and buy a house. Too many younger families cannot say the same now. And with interest rates rising to fight inflation, problems for younger families only are increasing. It now takes a lot more money for them to buy a home than it did not so long ago. For too many people, life is worse than it used to be. Shontel Brown avoids any real discussion about inflation. It is not on her special list of concerns. But inflation is a cruel “tax” that affects rich and poor alike. It is an important problem for all Americans. This especially is true for those who live paycheck to paycheck and worry about having enough in savings in case of emergencies. Brown does not spend time discussing how right Americans are to worry about inflation. She prefers instead to dwell on other subjects. Shontel Brown claims she is concerned about job creation. But the greatest sources of job creation are small businesses. The types of over regulation that Brown supports are making it much too hard for such businesses to be successful. It helped these businesses when taxes were cut. It is time now to make such small business tax cuts permanent. That is a much better way to create jobs than the expensive social programs that Brown and her fellow progressives advocate. Inflation may rise more or less in any given month. Inflation “dropping” only means prices are rising at a slower rate. But inflation is cumulative. People experience that cumulative effect. They cannot be asked to unsee the truth. Since 2021, prices have risen almost 17%. Such prices have been rising faster than wages. Food costs are higher. Sometimes the cost of a can of food stays the same. But that can of food now contains 15 ½ ounces instead of 16. That is called “shrinkflation.” Gasoline, natural gas, and electricity are much more expensive. Mortgage rates are the highest in over 20 years. Credit card and other loan interest rates are rising. Child-care prices are increasing at twice the rate of inflation. This election should be about how real people are living their real lives. Bidenomics is creating problems, not solving them. The level of prices is painfully high compared to three years ago. Their lives can be made better. It is ironic that the progressive agenda will harm most those people that progressives claim they wish to help. This is because Bidonomics has had the greatest negative effect upon people who are young, poor or are on fixed incomes. And Shontel Brown has been a strong supporter of Bidonomics. Excessive government spending causes inflation. All economists know that is true. Our government needs to go on a financial diet. Nothing else will put an end to harmful inflation. Spending money you do not have is not a plan. There was much spending when COVID hit. But that was spending during an emergency. The emergency has ended. But under the Biden Administration, the excessive spending has continued. For instance, Shontel Brown supports spending created under the poorly named “Inflation Reduction Act.” Its true purpose never was to cure inflation. Its true purpose was to fund an expensive Green New Deal program. The very name of the Act is fraudulent. It instead should have been called the “Inflation Creation Act.” Massive government spending because of this law actually will increase inflation. Brown and other progressives have authorized the spending of money that the government does not have. To fund such spending, the government must issue bonds and borrow more money from China. Or it must raise taxes significantly. Or it must print more paper money that over time will have less worth. None of these options will be good either now or in the future. Shontel Brown now brags about a new government mandate to lower the price of insulin. But she neglects to mention that the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” actually raised the cost of medicines because of how the Medicare drug rebate was created by progressives like Brown. According to the Wall Street Journal, prescription drug prices increased by 2% during the Trump Presidency because of generic competition. But they have increased 5% so far under the Biden plan and in November, they rose at an annual rate of 6%. And experts say the IRA is driving up Medicare Part D prescription drug premiums by as much as a whopping 57% in some states, compared to 2023. The devil, as usual, is in the details. Shontel Brown and other progressives favor still more expensive new social programs. These programs will have nice sounding names. But there is no such thing as a free lunch. Brown’s programs are not affordable at a time when the national debt and annual deficits are so high. These programs will require an increased level of government spending that will make inflation even worse. That will particularly affect those on fixed incomes. It will harm those at the poverty level who already are in economic pain. Government needs to do less right now, not more. Doing less would cure inflation, reduce the national debt, and improve the quality of life for all Americans. Instead of exercising financial discipline, the Biden Administration has issued costly Presidential executive orders. One example was a cancelation of student loans that was found to be unconstitutional. Taxpayers bear the cost of such orders. And these costs result in more inflation. Congress must exercise more oversight to monitor the costs of Presidential executive orders. H.R. 347, the Reduce Exacerbated Inflation Negatively Impacting the Nation Act (REIN-IN) would have created a method for such oversight. It would have mandated a report with any major presidential executive order to explain its inflationary impact. But Shontel Brown voted “no” on H.R. 347. She rejected a very reasonable attempt to make inflationary results of executive orders more apparent to everyone. The national debt is another problem. It now over $34 billion and growing. Interest on that debt soon will become the largest line item in the federal budget. Paying it will cost more than the government spends on defense. It will cost more than what is spent on elementary and secondary education, disaster relief, agriculture, science and space programs, foreign aid, and natural resources and environmental protection combined. And as interest rates continue to move upward, those costs will become greater still. Shontel Brown calls herself a “progressive,” but the economic policies she favors are “progressing” our country in the direction of a historic economic disaster. Both political parties created the debt crisis. So both must cooperate and solve it. The first step is for all members of Congress to acknowledge there is such a crisis. But Shontel Brown is silent on this subject. That is not a good sign that she is willing to cast the necessarily tough votes to solve it. Congress must come to grips with mathematical reality. Change would not come easily. But if Congress does not make painful changes in the short run, there will be dire consequences in the long run. For instance, the Social Security trust fund as presently managed will run out in 2034. Too few workers are contributing for the future support of too many people. A retirement age of 65 set decades ago was made obsolete because Americans live much longer now. The retirement age for those now in the 20s should be adjusted in accordance with increases in life expectancy. Social Security and other programs must be modified if they are to survive. That is a truth that too many politicians are unwilling even to discuss. It is time to make changes to entitlement promises that cannot be kept because the numbers clearly do not work. Budgets for other government programs also must be more balanced so expenditures do not continue to exceed revenues. There is no alternative. Without the courage to act soon, the future legacy of Congress to our children and grandchildren will be financial disaster. ENERGY I favor a free market approach that will unleash private companies from over regulation. That would lower the price of every product that uses oil. Here is a partial list of those products: Solvents Diesel fuel Motor Oil Bearing Grease Ink Floor Wax Ballpoint Pens Football Cleats Upholstery Sweaters Boats Insecticides Bicycle Tires Sports Car Bodies Nail Polish Fishing lures Dresses Tires Golf Bags Perfumes Cassettes Dishwasher parts Toolboxes Shoe Polish Motorcycle Helmet Caulking Petroleum Jelly Transparent Tape CD Player Faucet Washers Antiseptics Clothesline Curtains Food Preservatives Basketballs Soap Vitamin Capsules Antihistamines Purses Shoes Dashboards Cortisone Deodorant Footballs Putty Dyes Panty Hose Refrigerant Percolators Life Jackets Rubbing Alcohol Linings Skis TV Cabinets Shag Rugs Electrician’s Tape Tool Racks Car Battery Cases Epoxy Paint Mops Slacks Insect Repellent Oil Filters Umbrellas Yarn Fertilizers Hair Coloring Roofing Toilet Seats Fishing Rods Lipstick Denture Adhesive Linoleum Ice Cube Trays Synthetic Rubber Speakers Plastic Wood Electric Blankets Glycerin Tennis Rackets Rubber Cement Fishing Boots Dice Nylon Rope Candles Trash Bags House Paint Water Pipes Hand Lotion Roller Skates Surf Boards Shampoo Wheels Paint Rollers Shower Curtains Guitar Strings Luggage Aspirin Safety Glasses Antifreeze Football Helmets Awnings Eyeglasses Clothes Toothbrushes Ice Chests Footballs Combs CD’s & DVD’s Paint Brushes Detergents Vaporizers Balloons Sunglasses Tents Heart Valves Crayons Parachutes Telephones Enamel Pillows Dishes Cameras Anesthetics Artificial Turf Artificial limbs Bandages Dentures Model Cars Folding Doors Hair Curlers Cold cream Movie film Soft Contact lenses Drinking Cups Fan Belts Car Enamel Shaving Cream Ammonia Refrigerators Golf Balls Toothpaste Gasoline Oil is used in even more products. It is used for construction materials. It is in kitchen items such as non-stick pans. Oil is in asphalt for our roads and plastics containers. This is why a war against oil makes no sense. The progressive war against fossil fuels is a war against the American way of life. Increasing supply and reducing the cost of oil would lower the cost of so many products and services that inflation will decline. It will remove our national dependence on energy purchases from other countries. It will help foreign countries in Europe and elsewhere that need American support. It will penalize hostile oil producing countries such as Russia and Venezuela. And it will generate revenues to reduce the national debt. It would make the American economy boom once again. And it will make our lives much more pleasant. American ingenuity has made our energy the cleanest in the world. It is much cleaner than coal and oil used in China and India. The way to address climate change concerns is to let the free market do what it does best – create and innovate. When that free market is ready, a transition away from fossil fuels to alternative energy sources certainly will happen. For instance, there already are major advances made in using plentiful hydrogen as a fuel of the future. If our country manages energy use in the short term, the future is bright. Oil supplies are not what they could be. The Biden Administration has misled the public about why that is so. It claims plenty of drilling leases were issued. But it uses regulations to deny permits for actual drilling. It gives with one hand and takes away with the other. Oil companies understandably are reluctant to make major investments for exploration. They fear market insecurity because of these government actions. Congress needs members who will pressure not only for leasing, but also for exploration, permitting, and production. Shontel Brown would not be such a member. I would be. Moreover, the Biden Administration actually has been abusing its legal authority, with no objection from Shontel Brown. It has abused its authority under the 1906 Antiquities Act to wall off nearly 1.5 million acres of land from fossil-fuel development. It has misused the Clean Air Act to shut down coal and gas power plants and ban gasoline-powered cars. It has ignored specific congressional commands to lease federal land for oil and gas drilling. And it has delayed holding auctions for leases even after being ordered by a federal court to do so. Not only are such actions detrimental to national security. They are lawless. Proposed H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act would have increased production and reformed permitting. Shontel Brown and other progressives voted against it. I would have supported it. This law would not have prevented transitions over time to wind, solar or nuclear power. It only would have recognized that in the short term, our country and our foreign allies urgently need more American fossil fuels. This law would have started a restoration of economic sanity. The alternative that progressives like Shontel Brown advocate is more state control. She has announced that she wants to achieve “environmental justice.” Brown offers no definition how “justice” would be determined, or which unelected bureaucrats will determine it. There may be electric cars but few charging stations. There may be windmills that kill birds and do not operate when wind does not blow. There may be solar panels inactive on cloudy days. There may be no new nuclear plants to provide clean energy. And there definitely would be gasoline shortages. State control will cause major economic problems for most Americans. And state control with Brown’s frankly socialist approach will cause other problems. Think Solyndra. That was the solar cell company which the Obama Administration heavily subsidized with a $535 million loan guarantee. It went broke and filed for bankruptcy. As this example shows, government does a bad job of picking winners. Private enterprise and the free market do a much better job of making economic success possible. H.R. 21, the Strategic Production Response Act at least would have assured that the national Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) of oil would be available during any emergency. Use of the SPR by either political party for non-emergency or political purposes would be prohibited. In particular, H.R. 21 would have prevented the cynical sale of emergency supplies to lower gasoline prices in time for elections. The Biden Administration made just such sales in 2022. Shontel Brown voted against H.R. 21. I would have voted in favor of it. Hers was not a responsible position for a public official to take. It was a vote to put our country at risk in the event of a true emergency. Our country needs to use common sense and move away the craziness of the progressive energy war. There are problems but there also are solutions. IMMIGRATION The immigration problem is not really about compassion. It is about border security. And it is about what happens when security is lacking. Put aside for a moment the threat to national security that is occurring. And put aside the fact that most migrants are not really seeking “asylum.” As economic migrants, they are violating current laws that regulate legal admission and they are getting away with that. It is line cutting. And it is unfair to those immigrants who have been following the rules. Moreover, these economic migrants are putting a severe and unreasonable strain on our society. Increased costs of education, health care, and public safety are being imposed on all taxpayers. Most everyone agrees that a change is necessary. But Shontel Brown does not even discuss immigration reform. It seems as if she does not think there is a serious problem. Like other progressives, she encourages a continuance of the status quo. The welcome mat is out and to hell with the consequences. Shontel Brown is a partisan who never criticizes the Biden Administration. Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas says the southern border is secure and not open. But as cities like New York, Washington, and Los Angeles have discovered, he is not telling the truth. Every U.S. state has become a border state. The illegal crossing of 12,000 in a single day cannot be ignored. It demonstrates a serious problem that Shontel Brown and her fellow progressives refuse to acknowledge publicly. They have been silent while the Biden Administration has made it easier and easier for economic migrants to cross borders illegally and then stay. Moreover, the sheer hypocrisy of progressives is on full display. They only wanted economic migrants to come to our country until they did come to their sanctuary cities. Their solution now is to ask all taxpayers to subsidize the migration and thereby encourage an even grater migration. That would solve nothing and make matters worse. Real consequences occur because of failures to protect our national borders. Chinese men of military age and foreigners on terrorist watch lists are among the “got aways.” Too much fentanyl enters our country. Too many criminals cross the border. Unaccompanied children and women are at risk from sex traffickers. Millions have entered who lack vaccination against diseases like measles and polio. Many arrive without language or work skills and become public charges. Cities face increased costs at taxpayer expense for food, housing, education, and care. People who illegally enter our country are being rewarded. And all these situations are getting worse. There is a threat to public safety that should not be ignored. I had to laugh when Secretary of State Tony Blinken recently described what he called “irregular migration” at the southern border. According to the latest data, several millions have entered our country illegally. That strikes me as very “irregular.” But it does not seem to bother Shontel Brown at all. Proposed H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act of 2023 would have been a good first step. It would have restarted construction of the border wall, which even President Biden now seems to admit would be beneficial. H.R. 2 also would have deployed technology, increased the number of Border Patrol agents, strengthened laws to protect unaccompanied children, ended catch and release, and streamlined the asylum process. H.R. 2 presented a comprehensive approach to restoring security and public order. Shontel Brown voted against it. I would have supported it. But H.R. 2 alone would not be enough. Even more measures are necessary. I would work with other Members of Congress to:
The Biden Administration ignores the rule of law. It consistently fails to enforce laws already on the books. For instance, it treats all who claim to be “asylum seekers” as if they potentially qualify. This results in “catch and release.” But they are given court dates with little likelihood they will appear. And current law requires that at least they are processed before they are released. That is not happening. The backlog of unprocessed illegals also has the effect of penalizing those truly eligible for asylum. They cannot get their cases decided promptly. Such disregard of law and such incompetence is not acceptable. Worse, Shontel Brown consistently ignores many of the foreseeable consequences of massive illegal invasions of the southern border. For instance, House Resolution 5283, the Protecting our Communities from Failure to Secure the Border Act of 2023 would have prohibited federal funds from being used to house illegal immigrants on federal lands, including National Parks. It would have prevented converting these national parks from areas of recreation into virtual concentration camps for unvetted migrants. Shontel Brown voted “no” on it. This is yet another case in which unreasonable burdens are being placed on the public in the name of a “progressive” agenda. It also is a case of perpetuating an inhumane policy of de facto incarceration. There remains a need for additional laws to allow legal entry of both skilled and unskilled immigrants.' Our economy needs their talents and energies. They are the scientific, construction and agricultural workers of the future. But they must come to our country legally. Other countries have merit based immigration systems. It is time for our country to find out what types of workers are needed in our economy and help businesses obtain them. And some groups deserve special consideration. “Dreamers” need a path to citizenship. They are innocent victims. They did not intentionally break the law when they first were brought to our country as children. Certain other classes of refugees deserve preferences. One example are Afghans who helped our soldiers in wartime and were forced to flee the Taliban. And preventing family separations should be a goal. That goal is not realized when smugglers use children as pawns. Congress can fix the system, but only if progressives put aside partisan talking points and muster the will to compromise during negotiations and fix it. It needs more moderate members who understand how to reach true consensus. CRIME For instance, it could continue distributing surplus military supplies to financially strapped local communities. I also propose that police officers be exempted from federal income taxation just as military members serving in combat zones are. Measures such as these will show national support for police forces and appreciation for what they do to serve and protect. H. Con. Res. 40 was a resolution passed in the House to condemn efforts to defund or dismantle local law enforcement agencies. It passed with strong bi-partisan support by a vote of 301-119. But progressives like Shontel Brown voted against it. I would have voted otherwise. Progressives claim they only wish to “reimagine” law enforcement. And yet, when confronted with a specific resolution to oppose “defunding” or “dismantling” law enforcement, Shontel Brown and they showed their true colors. I am as concerned about gun violence as Shontel Brown. There are too many murders by guns and too many children being shot and killed. A world in which churches are invaded by lunatics with guns is a sick world. Better mental health systems would help. But Congress also should consider stronger laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Such laws of course must be consistent with the Second Amendment. But I believe that is possible. Other forms of crime concern me as well. Car jackings, physical assaults, and mob attacks on retail stores are but a few. That is yet another reason why the lack of support Shontel Brown gives to police departments is unfortunate. And Shontel Brown also wants to end cash bail. I do not agree with her about that. Keeping many criminals off the streets would be one important way to reduce crime in general and gun violence in particular. Lessons must be learned from sad experiences in Detroit, Portland, San Francisco, New York City and elsewhere with the ending of cash bail. Shontel Brown does not even mention the fentanyl crisis. More Americans die each year from fentanyl than from guns. More have died than in the Afghanistan, the Iraq, and the Vietnam wars combined. All deaths are tragic. But Shontel Brown should be paying more attention to the fentanyl crisis, which clearly is even a bigger national problem than gun violence. Interrupting the supply of fentanyl is an international matter. It is beyond the effective control of cities and states. Destroying this supply chain must be taken more seriously. Congress must take aggressive actions that force China to stop making and shipping ingredients for this poison. I also support re-defining fentanyl in schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act to have the same legal classification as heroin. 'H.R. 467, the Halt All Lethal Trafficking (HALT) of Fentanyl Act would have done that. This law also would have given researchers the ability to conduct necessary research by streamlining the registration process. H.R. 467 passed in the House by an overwhelming vote of 289-133. But Shontel Brown voted against it. I would have voted for it. Her vote did not show sufficient concern about the fentanyl problem. CHINA China engages in hostile conduct. It spies and it steals intellectual property. It caused fentanyl and COVID epidemics. It commits genocide against Uyghurs. It flies balloons over our military bases and sets up military operations in Cuba. It buys up American farmland and food companies. It violates international trade agreements. It engages in unfair practices designed to destroy and replace American businesses. It sets up its own secret police stations in American cities. It harasses our military and civilian planes and sails fleets of warships near the Alaska coast. It builds larger and larger supplies of nuclear weapons and will have rough parity with our country by 2035. It encourages and assists actions by North Korea and Russia that threaten our country and our allies. It builds hostile military bases in the South China Sea and in Africa and is trying to make similar arrangements in South America. All of this activity cannot be ignored. Bad behavior by China must have consequences. Otherwise, such bad behavior will continue and get even worse. Doing nothing is not an option. One positive step already taken was H.R. 22, the Protecting America’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve from China Act. It was a bipartisan initiative to prevent sales of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to any entity associated with the Chinese Communist Party. The overwhelming and bi-partisan vote in its favor was 331-97. But Shontel Brown voted against it. She therefore voted to allow sales to China of our emergency oil supplies. I do not agree with her position. Another step considered was H.J. Res. 39. This was a resolution that called for rescinding a Commerce Department rule allowing Chinese solar manufacturers to circumvent U.S. tariffs by delivering their products to the U.S. through third-party countries. Shontel Brown voted against it. The House tried to prevent Chinese cheating and Brown was not supportive of the effort. I do not agree with her. We need even more laws and actions:
The Biden Administration has been in no special hurry to take such actions. And so, Congress must apply pressure on it to develop a sense of urgency. Dangers posed by China to Taiwan are significant. These dangers threaten not only the United States. They also threaten our allies. Taiwan is the world’s major supplier of semi-conductors needed for modern technologies in the United States and elsewhere. The Taiwan Straits is a shipping route that links our country with Japan, South Korea, Southeast Asia, and India. Chinese claims to sole ownership of this area puts world trade at risk. Taiwan now is the big test of American credibility after the disastrous exit from Afghanistan. Independence of Taiwan has become vitally important to our national interests. America must prepare Taiwan to defend itself. And it must not act slowly as it does in Ukraine. Nothing less will deter China from an invasion. America also must form and strengthen alliances with Japan, Australia, India, the Philippines, Vietnam, and others in case military actions do become necessary. Shontel Brown is a member of the important House Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party. This committee examines economic relationships between the two countries. It can recommend measures to help our country compete. It can recommend defensive measures. The House voted 365-65 to establish that committee. But Shontel Brown actually voted AGAINST that resolution! She opposed the very creation of an important committee about China on which she now serves! This brings into question her usefulness on that committee. Moreover, in a press release announcing her membership on this Select Committee, Shontel Brown showed how much she lacks concern about Chinese threats. She was mostly concerned about “actively fighting against dangerous rhetoric that could lead to irreparable harm to our Asian American communities.” So she will not be a forceful advocate of confronting China. Shontel Brown will be too fearful of being politically incorrect. On this subject, she already has shown herself to be both weak and naive. War in Ukraine has depleted our supplies of equipment and ammunition. More supplies must be purchased. And Chinese aggression in the South China Sea proves why there is a need to build more ships. The amount presently budgeted for military readiness has become inadequate. And Shontel Brown and other progressives would vote to allocate even less money for national defense. They would prefer to divert resources to their wish list of social programs. But such programs will not mean much if our country is not safe. Our country is not prepared to confront China. And some confrontations already are happening. There is an economic battle with China over primacy of the dollar as the world’s reserve currency. If the Chinese yuan replaces the American dollar, our country will have less access to capital, higher borrowing costs and lower stock market values. Having the world's reserve currency also has allowed the U.S. the luxury of running large deficits in terms of both international trade and government spending. This is a battle with potential consequences. There also is a political contest with China all over the world for influence, especially in Africa. There, the Chinese used its “Belt and Road Initiative” to dump over $1 trillion as loans in 150 developing and least developed countries with high rates of interest. China has become the world's largest creditor. It has used its creditor status if/when African countries default with their debt payments to acquire control of African minerals and ports. This is yet another battle with potential consequences. There are cyber-attacks by Chinese actors. Threats from China have increased in outer space where communications satellites linking all parts of American society are located. There have been Chinese infiltrations of American universities and research facilities. These all are forms of economic and ideological contests. We will lose them if we do not prepare better. And, of course, there is all that fentanyl that the Chinese help send and that kills so many of our fellow citizens. We can choose to believe that the Chinese government cannot do anything serious to interrupt the supply of ingredients. But that belief would be naïve. China knows full well what it has been doing. Clearly, Americans care more about the economy than they care about foreign policy. But they must pay more attention to our country’s place in the world. In the modern world, our country cannot afford isolationism. And it cannot afford to ignore China. EDUCATION Brown does not offer to reimburse those who paid their debts. They are treated differently and unfairly. And others who are asked to bear the costs of loan forgiveness either could not afford to attend college or chose not to. Brown would treat them differently, too. Some groups like wealthy graduate students who can afford to pay their debts are favored for political reasons. Loan forgiveness is a form of political bribe supported by progressives like Shontel Brown to buy votes. That is morally wrong. Students may have difficulty making loan payments because of unexpected financial reverses or health problems. They should be able to discharge their debts in bankruptcy. But federal law makes student loans incredibly difficult to discharge, and that must change. Students with loan debts deserve the same second chance in life that other debtors are granted by bankruptcy laws. Right now, they do not have that. Over the years, loans from the Department of Education have flooded the market with money. Colleges poured such money into new buildings, sports programs, and salaries of administrators. They passed costs to students. The economic result was inflation of the price of a college education. A related result was an increased amount of student loan debt. Loans made college affordable for some. But eventually, they had bad consequences for everyone. All taxpayers are being punished. Government loans should be phased out and discontinued. That would pressure colleges to lower the cost of education instead of raising it. Loan programs have outlived their usefulness. It is time for them to end. In the alternative, more emphasis must be given to types of education that assist entry into the trades. It is too hard to find a good electrician, plumber, or carpenter. Vocational education in high schools should be encouraged. Shop once was a required course. It should be one again. It is past time for children to learn again how to build things. This problem cries out for a national solution. Training, apprenticeships, and courses at community colleges need more support. Too much emphasis has been placed on the importance of a college degree. Young people need better choices between incurring student loan debt for college or finding a path to career growth that does not require a college degree. Another national problem is a general lack of understanding of how governments operate. For instance, only 26 percent of Americans can name all three branches of the federal government. Many Americans could not pass the citizenship test given to immigrants. Civics once was a required course. It is time for it to become one again. Civic education would give students the knowledge, skills, and disposition necessary to become informed and engaged citizens. It would not be the same as teaching history. It would teach about the structure of government, rights and responsibilities, and methods of public engagement. Political leaders on all levels should encourage it. Parents are – and should be – primary decision makers for their children. So, they must have a more effective say in how their children are being educated. Proposed H.R. 5, Parents Bill of Rights Act would have helped them. It would have guaranteed parents the right to know what is being taught, the right to be heard, the right to see the school budget and spending, the right to protect their child’s privacy, and the right to be updated on any violent activity at school. Shontel Brown voted against H.R. 5, and I would have voted for it. As consumers of educational services, parents deserve to be made more aware of what happens in classrooms. 'Women deserve more legal protection in school sports program. Title IX of federal law requires that women receive access to systems of sports participation that truly are parallel and equal to those offered to men. Proposed H.R. 734, the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act would have protected such access. It would have recognized that allowing a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program designed for women or girls is sex discrimination. Shontel Brown voted NO on H.R. 734. I would have voted for it. This law would have guaranteed that women can participate in sports programs as true equals, just as men can participate as true equals in their own programs. Finally, it is past time to call out programs in education that champion “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) policies. While these programs are meant to sound high minded, the reality is that they use race, gender and sexuality as political weapons to enforce intellectual conformity. That is not consistent with American traditions and values. They do not call upon people to judge others on the content of their character, as Dr. King urged. Instead, they call upon them to judge people by their characteristics. We can and must do better than that. FREEDOM Shontel Brown actually opposed a House initiative to combat government censorship. She voted against H.R. 140, the Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act. This law would have prohibited federal agencies and officials from using their power to censor speech. It also would have prohibited government coercion of private companies to affect lawful speech. A law upholding First Amendment restriction on government censorship should have had her full support. After all, she swore an oath to support the U.S. Constitution. Shontel Brown also never mentions over regulation by the administrative state. James Madison wrote that freedom is most often abridged by “gradual and silent encroachments of those in power.” The Biden Administration has imposed more regulatory costs on the economy than any administration in recent memory, according to the Wall Street Journal. Government spends too much and does too much. It uses regulatory “mandates” to force others to spend resources. Mandates affect state and local governments and also private individuals and companies. Shontel Brown is silent about all of this. She raises no objection to these encroachments upon freedom. One example of federal over regulation is a proposed 696-page rule requiring all passenger cars to achieve 66.4 miles a gallon. This is too much change mandated too soon. Consumers will suffer when new automobiles become expensive as present cars need replacing. Another example is a proposed 236-page policy requiring all federal agencies to consider “environmental justice.” This policy never defines “justice.” It puts the unelected too much in charge of everyone. Shontel Brown lists “environmental justice” as one of her objectives. She is a supporter of utopian programs that are neither economically viable nor socially productive. Another example is the recent announcement of the Environmental Protection Agency of its plans to enforce a climate agenda though “a suite of rules” imposed under programs with no credible connection to climate. Congress never approved of EPA doing this. But the EPA is proceeding anyhow. It chooses to ignore recent Supreme Court rulings about the limits of bureaucratic authority. 'This is administrative tyranny of the worst kind. It does not matter whether some objectives sought may be praiseworthy. The way these objectives are being forced on the public by an unelected bureaucracy is terrible. It totally is inconsistent with democracy. This poses a serious threat to freedom. Proposed H.R. 1640 – the Save Our Gas Stoves Act demonstrated yet another example of bureaucratic overreach. The House offered this resolution in response to attempts by the Energy Department to regulate gas stoves or prohibit new construction from installing gas stoves. Shontel Brown vigorously defended the administrative state. She claimed these regulations only were meant to guarantee energy efficiency and safety. She voted NO on H.R. 1640. I would have vote in support of it. These regulations are just one step in a progressive war against natural gas. That war intends to decrease free choices. Everyone deserves freedom to decide for themselves whether particular gas appliances are efficient and safe enough. In a free market system, their choices and competition will cause the gas industry to improve energy efficiency and safety. Consumers do not need supervision by the nanny state that Shontel Brown favors. Proposed H.R. 277, the Regulations from the Executives in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2023 would have reasserted Congress’ role in supervising the adoption of such regulations by unelected bureaucracies. It would have required congressional approval for new “major rules” proposed by federal agencies. Shontel Brown voted NO on H.R. 277. I would have voted otherwise. Without effective congressional oversight, the Administrative State will become an unelected and unconstitutional fourth branch of government. Shontel Brown is part of the problem and not part of the solution. ETHICS As Chair of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party, Jimmy Dimora used one party rule in Cuyahoga County to create a political culture. Political insiders made and benefited from deals. That culture was often corrupt. It encouraged favoritism. And occasionally it enabled unethical or illegal conduct. Jimmy Dimora went to jail because of his deals. There still is one party rule in Cuyahoga County dominated by insiders. Insider status helped Shontel Brown raise a lot of campaign money. She spent over $4 million during her last campaign. She presently has almost $480,000 in her campaign account. This gives her the potential to buy influence by giving financial support to other progressives. The deal making culture lives on. Shontel Brown received large donations from political action committees and from “dark money” sources. This funding effectively prevented real competition from less well-funded opponents. They paid for a sea of media to drown out communications of her opponents. Such large donations create the real potential of the corruption of a public official. Even if they were legal, such large donations should raise ethical questions. Shontel Brown has claimed in the past that she supports “initiatives to get money out of politics” to “reduce the role of money in politics.” That did not deter her from raising incredible sums of campaign money. 'There should be questions asked about how such large donations made Brown’s political success possible. And questions should be asked about those large donations she will solicit for the current election campaign. It should be asked what return on investment (“ROI”) Shontel Brown promises large donors in return. Brown has failed to discuss publicly serious accusations about the ROI made during her last campaign. Using public office to make money and enrich oneself is unethical at least and illegal at most. It was suggested then that she might have used her insider position on Cuyahoga County Council to help steer $17 million in public construction contracts to companies connected to her boyfriend and whose principals donated money to her campaign. These accusations were referred to the Ohio Ethics Commission. The Commission has not issued any reports. Its records are not public. Shontel Brown could ask for disclosure of these records so that her past activities are more transparent. To date she has not done so. Brown previously pledged to recuse herself from such public contracts “as necessary.” But she did not recuse herself before County Council awarded these construction contracts. Her activities may or may not have been legal. But at the very least, these activities looked bad. What Shontel Brown did had an appearance of impropriety.' She should never have voted to award those particular contracts. She should have recused herself. Her failure to do so showed her ethical standards to be suspect. Such conduct on her part has continued. Shontel Brown recently demonstrated her lack of concern for ethical standards once again. Progressive Democrat Representative Jamaal Bowman intentionally set off a fire alarm in a U.S. Capitol office building while the chamber was in session. His clear intent was to cause chaos in order to stop the House of Representatives at the time from having a vote to fund the government before a shutdown deadline. His act forced an evacuation of a House building for over an hour. Bowman eventually pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge. But when a motion to censure Bowman for such conduct was offered, fellow progressive Democrat Shontel Brown voted no. She voted that way in spite of the admission of Bowman that he had engaged in criminal conduct. The Plain Dealer once described Shontel Brown as an “undistinguished member of Cuyahoga County Council who has little to show for her time in office.” Nothing about that description has changed since her election to Congress. Shontel Brown has a good attendance record but mostly has been just a reliable vote for progressive causes. And when it came time on occasions to stand up for ethical principles, she has been AWOL. ABORTION ISRAEL AND IRAN The Middle East is where wars often begin. Think Iraq and Afghanistan. Now a war has broken out because of the Hamas invasions of Israel. This is not just an attack on Israel. It is an attack on the core values of western civilization. War will put to the test the nature of American support for Israel. Israel is a fortress ally that bolster our defenses in the Middle East and provides us with offensive capabilities. Its military importance should not be underestimated as it become clear that a military conflict with Iran now may no longer be merely a theoretical possibility. To bring about an expanded Abraham Accord that includes the Saudis, this war absolutely must result in the destruction of Hamas and the punishment of Iran. Iran is responsible for this new war. It is a part of a new Axis of Evil that consists of Russia, China, North Korea, and all their proxies. Doing nothing about Iran is not an option. For too long, the Biden Administration has neglected to enforce financial sanctions against Iran that were approved by Congress. And Shontel Brown has been silent about that neglect. It is Israel’s turn to suffer now as its border is being overrun. But with a non-existent southern border allowing all sorts of unknown persons to enter, America’s turn could be next. A lesson should be learned. Israel is one of America’s best friends. Defending it is a moral imperative but also a matter of American security and self-interest. The Abraham Accords prove how important Israel is to world peace. Advances in drug development, de-salinization projects, and computer technology prove how important Israel is to the world economy. Israel needs the United States, but the United States and the world also need Israel. And Israel cannot continue to exist without U.S. support. Such support always must be strong and unshakable, especially during its new war with Hamas. Enemies of Israel must never believe for a moment that American support might falter. But members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are not supportive of Israel. Public demonstrations that celebrate Hamas butchery were organized by the Democratic Socialists of America (“DSA”). This group that boasts six members of the House of Representatives, including these Caucus members: Reps. Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib, Bush, Omar, Bowman, and Casar. Shontel Brown also is a member of that Caucus. She has not joined the DSA -- but neither has she criticized by name her fellow Caucus members or this organization. Her failure to criticize is not consistent with full support of Israel. To her credit, Brown did condemn Hamas by name for its recent butchery. But too often, when domestic enemies of Israel are vocal, Shontel Brown goes silent. She is not the strong public supporter of her Jewish constituents that they deserve. And that may be due to her unwillingness to take issue in public with her fellow members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. For instance, when fellow Caucus member Rashida Tlaib blamed Israel, Shontel Brown went silent. Tlaib called Israel an “apartheid regime” and supports a “Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions” movement which aims to end “military occupation” by exerting economic pressure on Israel. Brown has not publicly criticized her fellow Caucus member Tlaib for her history of anti-Semitism. This should be a cause for concern. When the House voted to censure Tlaib for antisemitic remarks, even 22 House Democrat members voted in favor of the censure resolution. But Shontel Brown voted “no.” She chose not to speak out on behalf of her Jewish constituents. When fellow progressive Representative Pramila Jayapal made antisemitic remarks, Shontel Brown went silent. Congress responded to Jayapal’s remarks by passing H. Con. Res. 57, Expressing the sense of Congress supporting the State of Israel. This resolution did not name Jayapal. It passed 412-9. But 40 House Democrats found this resolution inadequate. They issued a joint letter to condemn Jayapal by name. And Shontel Brown did not add her name to that letter. When it came time to stand up for Israel in public, Brown went into hiding. That sent another signal from her to Israel’s enemies. When $6 billion in sanction relief was given to Iran as ransom in a prisoner exchange, Shontel Brown went silent. Such a deal will be used to fund terrorism. Brown should understand that even the mere promise of this money allows Iran to reallocate part of its budget to terrorism that otherwise would be allocated to aid its own suffering people. Not only has this ransom money rewarded kidnapping and hostage taking. Not only will it provide an incentive and lead to more kidnapping and hostage taking. It has enabled bad actors to take very bad actions against innocent civilians. Moreover, the Biden Administration relaxed financial sanctions against Iran. Once again, Shontel Brown was silent. These sanctions were designed to block Iranian access to financial systems. They would have prevented Iran from funding Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen. The $6 billion in sanction relief is dwarfed by the much larger amount of oil revenue Iran has realized because of the waiver of sanctions by the Biden Administration. And when the Biden Administration revived an Iran Deal that is an existential threat, Shontel Brown again went silent. This deal would give Iran a license to develop atomic weapons. It is dangerous to world peace. It eventually may force Israel to take military action against Iran to guarantee its survival. And it may force the Saudis to build their own nuclear bombs, which would destabilize the entire Middle East. And when the House of Representatives voted 311 to 14 to declare that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism,” Shontel Brown lacked the courage to take a position. She did not vote either yes or no. She voted “present.” True friends are not silent. Shontel Brown should care more, and say more. As a District 11 representative in Congress, she has an obligation to speak out forcefully for her Jewish constituents, especially on the subject of antisemitism. In the 1930s and 1940s, Nazis came after the Jews. Many Americans initially felt at the time that this was someone else’s problem and not theirs. Our country came to learn differently. Evil that pursues others will eventually turn and pursue the rest of us. Crowds in Tehran shout “Death to Israel!” but they also shout “Death to America!” on every occasion. A united front against the forces of destruction is important. And it is why I am so concerned about the lack of commitment being shown by Shontel Brown.[3] |
” |
| —Alan Rapoports’s campaign website (2024)[4] | ||
Campaign finance summary
Note: The finance data shown here comes from the disclosures required of candidates and parties. Depending on the election or state, this may represent only a portion of all the funds spent on their behalf. Satellite spending groups may or may not have expended funds related to the candidate or politician on whose page you are reading this disclaimer. Campaign finance data from elections may be incomplete. For elections to federal offices, complete data can be found at the FEC website. Click here for more on federal campaign finance law and here for more on state campaign finance law.
See also
2024 Elections
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Alan Rapoport for Congress, District 11, "ABOUT ALAN RAPOPORT," accessed January 20, 2024
- ↑ Information submitted to Ballotpedia through the Candidate Connection survey on October 1, 2024
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
- ↑ Alan Rapoport for Congress, District 11, “Issues,” accessed January 20, 2024
