Matthew Hill (Vermont Senate candidate, 2024)

This page was current at the end of the individual's last campaign covered by Ballotpedia. Please contact us with any updates.

Matthew Hill

Libertarian Party

Elections and appointments

Last election

November 5, 2024

Contact

Campaign website

Campaign Facebook

Campaign Twitter

Campaign Instagram

Matthew Hill (Libertarian Party) ran for election to the U.S. Senate to represent Vermont. Hill lost in the general election on November 5, 2024.

Biography

Matthew Hill was born in Connecticut and lives in Caledonia County, Vermont. Hill graduated with a degree in accounting and then passed the C.P.A. exam. His career experience includes working in the insurance industry before becoming self-employed as a C.P.A. and financial sales representative.

Elections

2024

See also: United States Senate election in Vermont, 2024

General election

General election for U.S. Senate Vermont

The following candidates ran in the general election for U.S. Senate Vermont on November 5, 2024.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Bernie Sanders (Independent)	63.2	229,429
		Gerald Malloy (R)	32.1	116,512
		Steve Berry (Independent)	2.2	7,941
		Matthew Hill (L)	1.2	4,530
		Justin Schoville (Green Mountain Peace and Justice Party of Vermont)	0.9	3,339
		Mark Stewart Greenstein (Epic Party)	0.3	1,104
		Other/Write-in votes	0.1	398

---

	Incumbents are bolded and underlined. The results have been certified. Source	Total votes: 363,253
= 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Withdrawn or disqualified candidates

• Bernie Sanders (D)

Democratic primary election

Democratic primary for U.S. Senate Vermont

Incumbent Bernie Sanders advanced from the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate Vermont on August 13, 2024.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Bernie Sanders	98.8	48,189
		Other/Write-in votes	1.2	583

---

	Incumbents are bolded and underlined. The results have been certified. Source	Total votes: 48,772
= 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. Senate Vermont

Gerald Malloy advanced from the Republican primary for U.S. Senate Vermont on August 13, 2024.

		Candidate	%	Votes
✔		Gerald Malloy	96.4	20,383
		Other/Write-in votes	3.6	772

---

	There were no incumbents in this race. The results have been certified. Source	Total votes: 21,155
= 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 Hill in this election.

Campaign themes

2024

Ballotpedia survey responses

See also: Ballotpedia's Candidate Connection

Matthew Hill did not complete Ballotpedia's 2024 Candidate Connection survey.

Campaign website

Hill’s campaign website stated the following:

“	U.S. Border and Immigration Strong border security means a safer nation, and the protection of our own citizens is being neglected in favor of the interests of foreigners. The dangers of the migrants’ journey to our country cannot be overstated. They are being extorted, abused, and exploited by the cartels who play a significant role in the growing border crisis. These cartels are pocketing big profits while treating people as commodities. They are responsible for the dramatic increase in drugs pouring into our country, often smuggled in away from the ports of entry. The cartels are taking advantage of the overburdened immigration system and are pushing migrants and drugs through the holes in border security. Streamline the Legal Immigration Process We must quicken and liberalize legal immigration so that people who want to come to this country and who are a benefit to this country can enter and establish residency. Legal immigration is a necessity as our current demographics and aging population demand it. Support ICE and Border Patrol There is widespread discontent over the practice of Texas Governor Abbott transporting migrants and illegal immigrants to northern cities like Chicago and New York. However, Texas faces a difficult situation with little federal support in fulfilling its duty to protect our borders. It is imperative that action be taken. We need to deploy the expertise of our best minds in border security to formulate and implement effective solutions. Unfortunately, the political will to address these issues have been lacking. Equally important is the need to streamline and modernize legal immigration processes. We must expedite entry for individuals who will contribute positively to our country. Demographic shifts and an aging population make this not just a matter of policy, but a critical necessity. Recently, a woman from Newport, VT, shared with me her concern that illegal crossings through her property have become a driving rather than walking issue. This anecdote underscores the urgency of addressing these challenges promptly and effectively." Quickly Apprehend Those Entering Illegally & Return to Their Country Reinstate Remain In Mexico Finish the Wall at the Southern Border Enforce Annual Limits on the Number of Immigrants Quickly Adjudicate Asylum Seekers Allow DREAMers to Stay Uphold Current Immigration Laws and Legislate for Effective Reform Law Enforcement I completely disagree with the “Defund the Police” movement. Our society needs order and cannot be at the mercy of criminals or rioters. The policies to defund or reallocate resources resulted in unintended but predictable consequences. With fewer officers on the streets, crime rates have risen, and public safety has been jeopardized. This has increased the burden on remaining officers, altered police response times, led to cuts in certain services and shifts in priorities, and compromised officer safety. Liberalism in its purest form works great on paper, but often cannot be adequately implemented in a practical sense. Protesting is an essential component of a democracy within the framework of being law-abiding and appropriate in time and scope. Once it falls outside of those parameters, the full force of the law should be exerted for any illegal acts. No protester has the right to damage any property or threaten any individual; if they do, the full extent of the law should be thrust upon them. When government buildings, sections of cities (such as Portland and Minneapolis), and some college campuses (such as Columbia, Harvard, and MIT) are taken over, the authorities should uphold the law and put a stop to those bad actors. Ohio Senate Bill 267 offers a good framework for a US Bill: “You break it, you fix it”. The Bill would require rioters to pay for damages they caused while breaking the law. The Bill’s sponsor says, "Effective law enforcement is a hallmark of a modern and civilized society," Schaffer said. "We need to do all we can to empower our law enforcement officers so that they can fulfill their sworn duty, and we are fortunate that they want to serve." Your right to protest should not interfere with my right to feel safe. Your right to protest does not mean that you can interfere with my movement. Your right to protest is protected by the constitution, your illegal conduct is not. Our citizens deserve safe communities governed by law and order, protected by a well-supported police force. As your Senator, I will stand with our police, reject any efforts to defund or dismantle law enforcement agencies, and I will support policies and legislation that will provide the necessary resources for police departments to do their jobs safely and effectively. National Debt The U.S. national debt, a crucial aspect of the country’s fiscal health, has become a focal point in economic policy discussions. As of August 2024, the U.S. national debt stands at approximately $33.6 trillion. This figure represents the cumulative total of federal government borrowing over time, including both public debt (held by individuals, institutions, and foreign governments) and intra-governmental holdings (debt held by government trust funds and other accounts). The debt-to-GDP ratio, a key indicator of debt sustainability, is around 125%. This ratio reflects the national debt as a percentage of the country’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). A high debt-to-GDP ratio suggests significant borrowing relative to economic output, which can impact economic stability and growth. Fiscal Responsibility Ensuring the long-term sustainability of federal finances is paramount. This includes controlling the growth of the national debt relative to GDP and maintaining confidence in the U.S. government’s fiscal discipline. Economic Growth Debt management should support economic growth by investing in infrastructure, education, and technology. Strategic investments can enhance productivity and create conditions for a more dynamic and resilient economy. Equity & Fairness Policies should be designed to distribute the burden of debt management equitably across different segments of society. Efforts should be made to minimize the impact on vulnerable populations and ensure that fiscal policies do not disproportionately disadvantage lower-income households. Long-term Planning Solutions should focus on both short-term stabilization and long-term debt reduction. This involves creating a clear and credible plan to manage debt while addressing the structural drivers of deficits. Policy Recommendations Comprehensive Budget Reform Implement a multi-year budget framework that includes revenue enhancements and expenditure controls. This framework should set clear targets for deficit reduction and debt stabilization, with regular assessments to adjust policies as needed. Revenue Enhancements Explore broadening the tax base and enhancing revenue through measures such as closing loopholes, progressively adjusting tax rates, and ensuring effective tax compliance. Revenue reforms should be designed to support economic growth while addressing inequities. Expenditure Controls Review and reform federal spending programs to enhance efficiency and effectiveness. Prioritize spending that drives economic growth and societal benefits while examining and reducing non-essential expenditures. Entitlement Reform Address the long-term sustainability of entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid through incremental and equitable reforms. Ensure that changes protect benefits for current retirees and lower-income individuals while aligning program costs with funding capabilities. Debt Management Strategy Develop a comprehensive debt management strategy that includes a mix of refinancing, extending maturities, and managing interest rate risks. This strategy should aim to minimize borrowing costs while ensuring that the debt remains at manageable levels. Economic Stimulus & Investment Continue to support targeted economic stimulus measures during periods of economic downturn. Invest in projects and initiatives that have high economic returns, such as infrastructure, education, and research and development, to stimulate growth and increase the nation’s productivity. Transparency & Accountability Enhance transparency in fiscal operations by providing clear and accessible information about debt levels, budgetary processes, and policy impacts. Establish independent oversight to ensure accountability in debt management and fiscal policy. Bipartisan Cooperation Foster a bipartisan approach to debt management that encourages collaboration and consensus-building. Effective debt reduction and fiscal policies require the support and cooperation of both major political parties. Managing the U.S. debt is a critical challenge that demands a thoughtful and balanced approach. By adhering to principles of fiscal responsibility, economic growth, equity, and long-term planning, and by implementing targeted policy recommendations, the U.S. can navigate its debt challenges while promoting a prosperous and stable future. Social Security The US Treasury is projecting that the Social Security system will not be fully funded within a decade which means that recipients will not receive 100% of their benefits, but rather only 89% of what they currently enjoy. It is necessary to make positive changes either to the funding or to payout limitations. This idea has been kicked around for decades, but if our legislators had the will and foresight to make these difficult decisions twenty years ago, we wouldn’t have to make the sizable changes necessary to shore up Social Security and Medicare now. I recommend funding Social Security/Medicare by increasing the withholding to both individual and employers’ tax from the combined 7.65% to 8%. I propose no cap on the tax. Currently, individuals who make over $168K do not fund this tax, and employers are also not subject to the tax. An additional 15.3% (current) or 16% (proposed) for roughly the top 10% of earners will have an immediate impact on funding Social Security. In addition, I propose a tax on all minerals mined on federal lands. This will diversify the future funding of Social Security as we transition to a country that works less than a 40 hour week. Critics might argue that higher taxes could disincentivize work or burden businesses. However, the long-term benefits of a well-funded Social Security system—such as stability in retirement planning and reduced poverty rates among seniors—outweigh these concerns. By ensuring that Social Security remains robust and secure, we can support future generations and uphold the promise of a reliable safety net. The following is the 2022 US Treasury Report on Social Security Trustees Report Summary (ssa.gov) The Trustees of the Social Security and Medicare trust funds report on the current and projected financial status of the two programs each year. This document summarizes the findings of the 2023 reports. As in prior years, we found that the Social Security and Medicare programs both continue to face significant financing issues. Based on our best estimates, this year's reports show that: The Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund will be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits until 2031, three years later than reported last year. At that point, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 89 percent of total scheduled benefits. The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund will be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits until 2033, one year earlier than reported last year. At that time, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing program income will be sufficient to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits. The Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Fund is projected to be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits through at least 2097, the last year of this report's projection period. By comparison, last year's report projected that the DI Trust Fund would be able to pay scheduled benefits through at least 2096, the last year of that report's projection period. If the OASI Trust Fund and the DI Trust Fund projections are added together, the resulting projected fund (designated OASDI) would be able to pay 100 percent of total scheduled benefits until 2034, one year earlier than reported last year. At that time, the projected fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing total fund income will be sufficient to pay 80 percent of scheduled benefits. (The two funds could not actually be combined unless there were a change in the law, but the combined projection of the two funds is frequently used to indicate the overall status of the Social Security program.) The Supplemental Medical Insurance (SMI) Trust Fund is adequately financed into the indefinite future because, unlike the other trust funds, its main financing sources--premiums on enrolled beneficiaries and federal contributions from the Treasury--are automatically adjusted each year to cover costs for the upcoming year. Although the financing is assured, the rapidly rising SMI costs have been steadily increasing demands on beneficiaries and general taxpayers. Since last year's reports, projected long-term finances of the OASI and the OASDI Trust Funds worsened due to the Trustees revising down the expected levels of gross domestic product (GDP) and labor productivity by about 3 percent over the projection window. The Trustees made this change as they reassessed their expectations for the economy in light of recent developments, including updated data on inflation and U.S. economic output. Despite the downward revision to economic assumptions, the projected long-term finances of the HI Trust Fund improved since last year’s report. The improvement is mainly due to lower projected health-care spending stemming from updated analysis that uses more recent data. SMI Trust Fund expenditures for Medicare Part B as a share of GDP are also projected to be lower than previously estimated in part for the same reason. In addition, expenditures on drugs under SMI in Medicare Parts B and D are projected to be markedly lower as a share of GDP due to the impact of provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act, which became law in August 2022. Lawmakers have many options for changes that would reduce or eliminate the long-term financing shortfalls. We urge Congress to consider such options for both Medicare and Social Security, like the proposal for Medicare in the President’s FY24 Budget. With each year that lawmakers do not act, the public has less time to prepare for the changes. By the Trustees: Janet Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury, and Managing Trustee of the Trust Funds. Xavier Becerra, Secretary of Health and Human Services, and Trustee. Julie A. Su, Acting Secretary of Labor, and Trustee. Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security, and Trustee. Student Debt The idea of using untaxed retirement funds to pay off student debt involves allowing individuals to access their retirement savings, such as those in 401(k)s or IRAs, without incurring penalties or taxes, specifically for the purpose of debt repayment. This policy aims to alleviate the burden of student debt and provide financial relief to those struggling with high-interest loans. I also support low-interest rate borrowing on retirement accounts to alleviate the potential retirement savings reduction when the individual will need it most. Potential Benefits 1. Immediate Relief: Using retirement funds could offer immediate relief to individuals facing substantial student debt, potentially improving their financial stability in the short term. 2. Reduced Interest Costs: Paying off student loans early can save money on interest over time, which might outweigh the potential growth of the retirement savings that would have otherwise occurred. 3. Financial Freedom: Clearing student debt could enable individuals to redirect their finances towards saving for retirement, homeownership, or other long-term goals. 4. Simplified Financial Management: Reducing debt can simplify financial management and reduce the stress associated with multiple payments and high-interest rates. Potential Drawbacks 1. Retirement Savings Impact: Accessing retirement funds early can significantly impact future financial security. These funds are intended to support individuals in retirement, and depleting them prematurely could jeopardize long-term financial stability. 2. Tax Implications: While the policy might allow for penalty-free withdrawals, taxes on the retirement funds could still apply. This could reduce the overall effectiveness of using these funds for debt repayment. 3. Opportunity Cost: The potential growth of retirement savings over time might be higher than the interest saved by paying off student loans early, depending on investment returns and loan interest rates. 4. Equity Concerns: This policy might disproportionately benefit higher-income individuals who have more substantial retirement savings and student loans, potentially widening existing inequalities. 5. Complexity and Misuse: Implementing and regulating this policy could be complex. There’s a risk that some individuals might misuse the funds for non-educational debt or other purposes, undermining the intent of the policy. Alternative Approaches 1. Income-Driven Repayment Plans: Expanding income-driven repayment options can provide relief based on income levels, making debt more manageable without impacting retirement savings. 2. Forgiveness Programs: Expanding or improving student loan forgiveness programs could address the debt issue directly without affecting retirement funds. 3. Tax Incentives for Savings: Providing tax incentives or credits for saving for retirement and education simultaneously could support both goals without the need to withdraw funds early. 4. Financial Education: Enhancing financial literacy programs to help individuals manage both student debt and retirement savings more effectively. While allowing untaxed retirement fund withdrawals for student debt repayment could offer immediate financial relief, it poses significant risks to long-term retirement security and could lead to broader equity and policy concerns. A balanced approach that includes other forms of debt relief and financial support may be more effective in addressing the student debt crisis while safeguarding retirement savings. Energy Policy I believe in empowering market and innovation rather than imposing heavy-handed regulations. A diverse energy portfolio is essential, and we should embrace nuclear, geothermal, solar, hydroelectric, wind energy, and conservation. Nuclear energy has faced significant opposition in the United States. However, current energy costs, the climate crisis, and new technologies are shifting attitudes. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI.org), new reactors and technologies promise a future of clean, reliable energy. Beyond electricity generation, these advancements will provide benefits such as water desalination, process heat, alternative fuel generation, and off-grid power solutions. They offer reliable and clean electricity for remote areas and immediate power in disaster scenarios. Innovative reactor designs will also allow for the recovery and recycling of elements in used nuclear fuel, enhancing energy efficiency. Geothermal energy harnesses thermal energy from the Earth’s crust. It offers a consistent and sustainable energy supply without excessive government intervention. Solar, hydroelectric, and wind energy convert natural resources like sunlight, water, and wind into electricity. These renewable sources are essential for reducing our carbon footprint and promoting energy independence. We must continually explore and develop new technologies across all energy sectors, including fossil fuels. While fossil fuels contribute to pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, they remain a reliable energy source. We should not limit discoveries but instead, encourage innovation through market incentives rather than restrictive policies. By embracing a comprehensive energy strategy driven by market forces and innovation, Congress can address climate change while ensuring energy security, economic stability, and individual freedom. When discussing energy policy that includes nuclear, geothermal, and renewable sources, it’s important to balance environmental concerns, economic factors, and energy security. Here’s a broad policy position that incorporates these elements: Nuclear Energy Promotion of Advanced Nuclear Technologies: Support the development and deployment of advanced nuclear reactors, such as small modular reactors (SMRs) and next-generation reactors, which offer enhanced safety, efficiency, and reduced waste. Regulation and Safety: Ensure robust regulatory frameworks that prioritize safety, waste management, and public health. Invest in research to improve waste disposal methods and long-term sustainability. Public Engagement: Foster public dialogue to address concerns and build trust in nuclear energy’s role in a low-carbon future. Geothermal Energy Incentives and Investment: Provide financial incentives, such as tax credits and grants, to stimulate investment in geothermal energy projects, particularly in regions with high geothermal potential. Research and Development: Support research into enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) and other innovative technologies to expand geothermal energy’s applicability and efficiency. Infrastructure Development: Invest in infrastructure to facilitate the integration of geothermal energy into the grid and support local geothermal heating and cooling applications. Renewable Resources Diversified Portfolio: Promote a diverse mix of renewable energy sources, including solar, wind, hydro, and biomass, to enhance energy security and resilience. Grid Modernization: Invest in modernizing the electricity grid to accommodate and optimize the integration of intermittent renewable sources. Support energy storage solutions to address supply variability. Research and Innovation: Fund research to improve renewable technologies, reduce costs, and increase efficiency. Support breakthrough innovations that can accelerate the transition to clean energy. Conservation & Efficiency Energy Efficiency Standards: Implement and enforce stringent energy efficiency standards for buildings, appliances, and industrial processes to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Conservation Programs: Support conservation programs that protect natural habitats, reduce environmental impact, and promote sustainable land use practices. Public Awareness and Education: Launch initiatives to educate the public on the importance of energy conservation and sustainable practices, encouraging behavioral changes that support climate goals. Economic & Environmental Balance Just Transition: Ensure that the transition to cleaner energy sources is equitable and includes support for workers and communities affected by the shift away from fossil fuels. Carbon Pricing: Consider implementing carbon pricing mechanisms to internalize the environmental costs of energy production and incentivize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Energy Security & Independence Diversified Energy Portfolio: Maintain a diversified energy mix to enhance energy security and reduce dependence on any single source or import. Resilience Planning: Develop strategies to ensure the resilience of energy infrastructure against natural disasters, cyber threats, and other disruptions. US Refining Capacity The current capacity of refining oil is roughly 18.4 MBD (Million Barrels/Day) and is at full capacity. The US has lost three out of 132 over the last few years. For security, increased growth, and obsolescence, the US needs more costly refineries. Integrated Approach Holistic Policy Framework: Develop an integrated policy framework that balances the use of nuclear, geothermal, and renewable energy sources with conservation efforts. Ensure that all aspects are aligned with broader climate goals and sustainability targets. Collaboration: Foster collaboration between governments, private sector, and research institutions to leverage expertise, share best practices, and drive innovation in all areas of climate action. Equity and Accessibility: Ensure that climate policies are equitable and provide support for communities that may face disproportionate impacts from climate change or energy transitions. This approach recognizes the unique contributions of each energy source and strategy while emphasizing the need for a coordinated effort to address climate change effectively. Cognitive Testing & Term Limits To ensure that government officials and appointees possess the necessary cognitive capacity to effectively perform their duties while respecting individual privacy and maintaining public trust. I support testing for everyone over the age of 65. Mandatory Cognitive Assessments Implement mandatory cognitive assessments for all elected officials and high-level appointees, starting at 65 or upon taking office. The assessments should be designed to evaluate critical cognitive functions such as memory, executive function, and decision-making skills. Standards & Framework Establish clear standards and guidelines for the cognitive assessments to ensure they are valid, reliable, and free from biases. Use assessments developed and administered by qualified professionals to maintain high standards of accuracy and fairness. Privacy & Confidentiality Protect the privacy of individuals undergoing cognitive testing by ensuring that results are confidential and only accessible to authorized personnel. Provide for secure storage and handling of assessment data to prevent unauthorized access. Transparency & Accountability Develop a transparent process for reporting and addressing instances where cognitive assessments reveal potential concerns. Create a protocol for follow-up evaluations and interventions, if necessary, to address any identified issues. Appeal & Support Mechanisms Establish an appeals process for individuals who may dispute cognitive test results or seek additional evaluation. Provide support and resources for officials who may need assistance in addressing cognitive challenges, including access to professional guidance and accommodations. Periodic Reviews & Updates Regularly review and update cognitive testing policies to reflect advances in psychological research and best practices. Solicit feedback from stakeholders, including cognitive health professionals and civil liberties organizations, to continuously improve the policy. Ethical Considerations Ensure that cognitive testing policies are implemented in a manner that respects individual dignity and avoids any form of discrimination or stigmatization. Balance the need for cognitive competence with respect for personal autonomy and human rights. Implementation Collaborate with experts in cognitive science, psychology, and ethics to design and refine the assessment process. Provide training for officials and appointees on the importance of cognitive health and the procedures for cognitive testing. Ensure that the policy is communicated clearly to the public and stakeholders to maintain transparency and build trust. Capitalism vs Socialism I support Social Security and Universal Healthcare as many members of our society have basic needs that they cannot afford. It saves the US taxpayers money while making our country safer. When discussing policy positions on socialism versus capitalism, especially with regaurd to government takeover of industry and universal healthcare as a safety net, it’s helpful to outline the implications and arguments for each approach: Socialism Core Principles Government Ownership of Industry: In a socialist system, the government often owns and controls key industries such as energy, transportation, and healthcare. This is intended to ensure that these essential services are provided equitably and not driven by profit motives. Economic Planning: Centralized planning is common, where the government makes strategic decisions about production and distribution to meet public needs rather than relying on market forces. Wealth Redistribution: Progressive taxation and social welfare programs aim to reduce income inequality and provide a safety net for all citizens. Government Takeover of Industry Rationale: Government takeover is seen as a way to ensure that industries critical to public welfare are managed in a way that prioritizes service and equity over profit. This can lead to greater uniformity in service quality and access. Potential Benefits: Reduces the risk of market failures, ensures essential services are universally accessible, and can lead to more equitable distribution of resources. Potential Drawbacks: May result in less competition and efficiency. Centralized control can sometimes lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies and reduced incentives for innovation. Universal Healthcare Implementation: In socialist systems, universal healthcare is typically government-funded and provided to all citizens, ensuring that everyone has access to medical services regardless of income. Benefits: Reduces health disparities, provides a safety net for individuals, and can lead to better overall public health outcomes. Drawbacks: Can lead to higher taxes and potential inefficiencies in the healthcare system. Access to advanced treatments might be limited due to budget constraints. Capitalism Core Principles Private Ownership of Industry: Capitalism relies on private ownership and market mechanisms to drive economic activity. Industries are owned and operated by private entities rather than the government. Market Economy: Decisions about production, pricing, and distribution are driven by market forces, such as supply and demand, with minimal government interference. Profit Motive: The pursuit of profit is a primary incentive, believed to drive innovation, efficiency, and economic growth. Government Takeover of Industry Rationale: Government takeover in capitalist systems is usually a temporary measure or a response to market failures. Long-term government ownership of industries is relatively rare. Potential Benefits: Can stabilize critical sectors during crises or economic downturns and protect public interests when private markets fail. Potential Drawbacks: Risk of inefficiency and reduced market competition. Government control might be less agile compared to private sector responses. Universal Healthcare Implementation: In capitalist systems, universal healthcare may be provided through a mix of private and public options, such as government subsidies or mandates for private insurance. Benefits: Can provide a safety net while maintaining private sector innovation and competition. Balances public support with private incentives. Drawbacks: May result in disparities in access and quality of care, and can be costly. The balance between public and private funding might lead to complex and varied coverage options. Balancing Perspectives Socialism Pros Ensures basic needs and essential services are universally accessible. Reduces economic inequality and provides a robust safety net. Cons May lead to inefficiencies and reduced incentives for innovation. Higher taxes and centralization can be challenging. Capitalism Pros Drives economic growth, efficiency, and innovation through competition. Offers a range of choices and can be more responsive to market demands. Cons Can lead to inequalities and gaps in service access. Government intervention is sometimes needed to address market f Taxation As a CPA and Financial Advisor for more than 20 years, I believe that I am uniquely qualified and equipped to tackle a much-needed revision of the tax structure. Prudent reforms would serve not only to simplify the existing onerous tax code but would create a more equitable system. The following are areas that I will work to reform and advocate for change: Non-Profit Corporations Tax non-profit corporations that have profits over $1MM and/or endowments larger than $100MM. In 2023, The Top 10 endowments had assets of roughly $575 BILLION. The Top 50 had assets totaling over $1 TRILLION. These entities include Harvard, MIT, Columbia, and UPenn. These entities have BILLIONS in income annually, and they are not taxed. Essentially, we are subsidizing the entities that allowed anti-Israel issues to fester and boil over with all of the rioting on college campuses. Taxation similar to C-Corp in Income is over an amount TBD. Taxation on Non-Profit Endowments as well. Long-Term Capital Gains Repeal or reduce the Long-Term Capital Gain (LTCG) tax discounts. The LTCG tax reduction primarily benefits the rich. While many people do invest in the stock market, most do so via their 401(k) or other tax-favored retirement savings. When retirement savings are withdrawn they are taxed at ordinary income rates and therefore do not enjoy the lower tax rate afforded to individually owned equities. According to an article dated September 2023, the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) stated that in order to stabilize US debt, taxes would need to be raised or non-interest spending lowered by a modest 2.2%. Senator Sanders has aways used the “Tax the Rich” policy. According to EPI, the top 1% of US earners contribute roughly 42% of their income to taxes. In order to balance the budget, the top 31.4% would see their tax rate shoot to 102%. Estate & Gift Tax The amount of the exemption allowed in 2024 is $13.61 Million per individual or $27.2 Million per married couple. This means that a couple can give away over $25 Million to others during their lifetime or at death. This further accelerates wealth disparity among the rich and not so well off. If the exemptions were cut in half, many more would be paying estate taxes. In addition, in 2024, there is no tax for gifting up to $14,000 annually to any individual. I propose that the untaxed limit be cut at least in half. We should reduce the millions that generations can continue to receive in tax free assets. Spending Cuts According to the Tax Policy Center paper in Jan 2023, some spending cuts popular with the House GOP would increase the deficit. For example, CBO estimates the House vote to slash most new IRS funding would add $114 Billion to the deficit over the next decade since fewer resources would make it harder for the agency to collect taxes owed. Assume no tax increases, which are improbable in the House. And key House Republicans, including the new Appropriations Committee chair Kay Granger (R-TX), say they won’t cut military spending. That means Republicans would have to fill the entire $20 trillion fiscal hole by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other domestic programs, plus whatever savings they’d get from lower interest payments. If Republicans protect military spending, Social Security benefits would be slashed by roughly 30 percent. If the cut occurred this year, the House would cut the average monthly benefit by $565, from $1,827 to less than $1,300. I would be in favor of increasing both the individual and corporate contribution rate from the current rate of 6.2% to 6.65 (an effective increase of roughly 0.45%) and permanently eliminate the cap on Medicare tax (currently $168.600). Corporate Taxation Corporate taxation should be revised to align more closely with international norms, while eliminating unnecessary deductions. What is your overall philosophy on taxation? It is a necessary evil and needs to be seriously overhauled. How do you balance the need for government revenue with the burden on taxpayers? Given the amount of benefits such as healthcare (especially late in life) disability income, social security income, defense, InfraStructure such as roads, trains, hospitals, water purification, public transportation, police, welfare. The US provides significant benefits for those who truly need it. Do you support changes to the current federal income tax brackets? If so, what changes? The rates need to be raised progressively. What is your stance on increasing taxes for high-income earners? The rates need to be raised progressively. How would you address the issue of tax evasion and loopholes in the income tax system? I support closing loopholes and penalizing and or criminally prosecuting tax evaders. What is your position on the current corporate tax rate? It is competitive in the world market. What changes, if any, would you propose for the IRS to make it more efficient and taxpayer-friendly? There are always changes that can be made. Military The United States is the leader of the Free World. Since its inception almost 250 years ago, many have died for this great country in order for its citizens to live in freedom. I believe the primary function of our Federal Government is to protect national security and defend our liberty. Sustaining a strong military is our country’s best defense against opposing geopolitical threats. As a Senator, one of the most important votes I will cast will be for the defense budget. According to the 2023 Congressional Budget Office report, the US spent roughly $800 Billion (13.3% of the federal budget) on Military expenditures. I will support sustained investments to ensure military readiness in the increasingly uncertain geopolitical landscape. Our military must be prepared at all times to thwart any threat. When the Houthis (Iran’s proxy army in Yemen), began firing missiles at ships in the Red Sea region, the US Navy was able to intercept most of them. While US missiles cost millions each, Yemen drones supplied by Iran are estimated to each cost only a few thousand dollars. But the US Navy’s bold and decisive actions protected global trade while saving millions in transit costs, weeks in transit time, and billions for every ship that would have been sunk. If the US didn’t have that kind of spending power, countries such as Taiwan, Ukraine and the Philippines would not exist as they currently do. US aid to these countries helps to safeguard democracy, deter authoritarianism, promote economic growth, and provide peace, stability, and security. Most likely, Russia wouldn’t have attempted a Ukraine takeover, it would have been Alaska. In recent years, African, Middle Eastern, Haitian, and Asian countries have pleaded with us for assistance either militarily, economically or technologically. We’ve helped scores of countries for decades only to be demanded that we leave once things got better for them, allowing the potential for terrorism and instability to return. We are in these countries to maintain stability, but they want us out after we have supplied aid? Something has to change, that dynamic doesn’t work-the US is not the world’s police department. My position is that all aid must stop for those countries who oppose our freedoms and ideals, those wrought with corruption, and those who seek our harm. It is not up for debate that as a result of American intervention in both World War I and World War II western democracy has been able to flourish. In particular, the United States, who fought a two-front/two-ocean war, saved and cemented the rules-based international order that all democratic and free enterprise countries enjoy today. If not for American economic might, decimated Europe would not have been rebuilt through the Marshall plan. But for American military might, Europe would have been overrun by the Soviets and dictatorial tyranny would be the norm in capitals from Paris to Berlin to Rome. In the Pacific, a militarily fanatical Japanese empire would have continued to oppress Korea and the Philippines (not to mention China) with eventually Australia and New Zealand being conquered. The United States is the reason, and continues to be the reason, for democracy and capitalism flourishing around the world. It is not only our responsibility to be democracy’s guardian, but it is our right based on the blood spilled by US servicemen and women cementing our position as the “shining city on the hill”. That being said, all the countries under our protective umbrella need to step up to the plate and start contributing significantly more for their own protection. It is in our interest but most importantly in their interest to take measures, under our leadership, to pay their fair share for collective protection. The only thing that dictators understand is force or the threat of it. That is why Russia has not invaded a NATO country. That is why China has not invaded Taiwan. That is why North Korea has not invaded South Korea. Those bad actors realize that the force the United States can levy along with its allies is so overwhelming that it would be foolhardy to attempt such an unattainable goal. Our position of strength is necessary not only to protect our friends and allies, but to bolster the global economy, preserve democracy, and serve as a beacon for human rights around the world. What is your stance on the current level of military spending? Probably not enough. At a minimum, the US needs to be on the cutting edge for everything-tech, weapons and people. We need to treat our soldiers better. What is your position on the use of military force in international conflicts? I am against funding other country's wars. What policies do you support to improve the quality of life for military personnel and their families? I am in favor of most policies to help our vets and their families. How do you propose to strengthen partnerships with allies to enhance global security? Require that our partner's increase their defense spending if they are under the 2% that they agreed to. Universal Healthcare We have the finest healthcare in the world, but there are those that think it should be free. It costs money to have a world class healthcare system; money to operate state-of-the-art facilities, conduct research, create new drugs, train future doctors, and devise advanced medical equipment, cutting-edge cures and treatments, and breakthrough technologies. All Americans should have access to affordable, quality healthcare. Rising medical expenses are not only unaffordable to the average family, but a major component of the federal deficit. We need a reformed healthcare system that works for all, and I believe that some form of a universal healthcare structure would do just that. The fundamental concerns must be access, quality, and costs, and the program could be funded by corporate and individual payroll taxes as well as exploring a tax on commodities being mined on federal lands.  In 2022, 26 million people, or 7.9 percent of the population, were uninsured, according to a report in September 2023 from the Census Bureau. As a society, we need to help the people among us that are most in need with compassion and resolve. Universal healthcare would provide a safety net for those who have the least. My proposal would include Universal Healthcare for all, as well as the continuation of Private Insurance being available for those who wish to purchase benefits independently. My second goal is to bring Universal Healthcare to all US citizens. I will not do this by screaming at the Insurance and Pharmaceutical industries that their prices are too high. My team includes a Health/Pharmacy Actuary with over 20 year’s experience designing actuarial systems for one of the world’s leading insurance companies and has ties to both industries. Given that Vermont’s biggest expense is Healthcare, most Vermont voters would not believe that THIS ALONE could save Vermont, tens of millions of dollars over my term. Preventative Care & Cost Savings Preventive care is essential for reducing long-term healthcare costs. Encouraging healthy lifestyles and preventive measures like colonoscopies and mammograms can save taxpayers money by catching diseases early and reducing the need for expensive treatments later. Quality Healthcare & Market Dynamics The United States boasts some of the finest healthcare in the world. Maintaining this standard requires significant investment in state-of-the-art facilities, research, new drug development, medical training, advanced equipment, and cutting-edge treatments. While some advocate for free healthcare, it is vital to recognize that maintaining a world-class system requires financial resources. Affordable & Accessible Healthcare All Americans should have access to affordable, quality healthcare. Rising medical expenses are unaffordable for many families and contribute significantly to the federal deficit. A reformed healthcare system must address access, quality, and costs. One potential solution is a healthcare structure funded by corporate and individual payroll taxes. This approach can provide a safety net for those most in need without compromising the quality of care. According to a September 2023 Census Bureau report, 26 million people, or 7.9 percent of the population, were uninsured in 2022. It is essential to help those most in need with compassion and resolve. Universal healthcare can offer a safety net for the least fortunate, ensuring they receive necessary medical care. Efforts to limit consumer drug costs and regulate pharmaceutical profits must strike a balance. While it is essential to make medications affordable, regulations should also allow for sufficient profit margins to incentivize continued innovation and development. The capitalist system has delivered significant advancements in pain management, health improvement, and life extension. My proposal includes a healthcare option for all Americans while preserving the availability of private insurance for those who wish to purchase additional benefits independently. This dual-system approach can ensure that everyone has access to essential healthcare while maintaining the freedom to choose personalized coverage options. By embracing market principles, encouraging innovation, and fostering personal responsibility, Congress can reform the healthcare system to work for all Americans, ensuring access, quality, and affordability without sacrificing individual freedoms. War in Gaza No $$ for Gaza Until I have more information, I cannot make a formal recommendation, but here are some facts I believe to be true. It’s horrible what has happened to Gaza in recent history. Many would say that it’s completely Israel’s fault for Gaza becoming a giant wasteland. I disagree. Israel was brutally attacked on October 7, 2023. It’s citizens were stabbed, shot, raped, kidnapped, tortured, decapitated, and set on fire. If a group had done that to US citizens, how would the US respond? Many say that Israel oppresses Gazan’s, blockading them for receiving trade from other nations, and travelling to Israel. Gazan and Palestinian people have sworn to eliminate the Jewish race from the face of the earth. All the Israelis want is to be left alone. Decades ago, a fence was erected around the entire country to protect its citizens. In 2004 it was reported that the Palestinian Authority (PA) receives one of the highest levels of aid in the world. From 2014-2020, the PA received $4.5B including $600mm in 2020 alone. What did the PA do with this money-build Infrastructure such as power, desalinization, or sanitation plants, modernize their homeland or build a great school system? No, they built tunnels under the city to cross under Israel’s borders to kill its citizens and smuggling tunnels under Egypt’s borders. In 2008 Palestinians and Israel had a brief war. Under US pressure, Israel retreated. My position is that Israel has the right to defend itself and ensure such attacks never happen again. What would the U.S. do in a similar situation? Consider the response to Osama Bin Laden. How should the U.S. respond to Israel, its only ally in the Middle East? What would our reaction be if Canada or Mexico launched such attacks on us? I will vote against any funding to rebuild Gaza. You don't start a war to gain a new country. Furthermore, neighboring countries' refusal to accept Gazan refugees speaks volumes. Gazans receive the most aid per person of any group in the world. HAMAS, Gaza's government, imposes a 15% tax on goods transferred from Egypt. Instead of building infrastructure like roads, power plants, desalination facilities, schools, and hospitals with the hundreds of millions of dollars collected annually over the past twenty years, HAMAS constructed tunnels under its cities to facilitate attacks on Israel. On October 7, 2023, HAMAS attacked, murdered, set on fire, tortured, maimed, and kidnapped over 1,000 Israeli citizens and has stated it will do so again if given the opportunity. When asked if HAMAS was wrong, Senator Sanders responded, "It's complicated." War in Ukraine My stance on funding Ukraine is nuanced. Generally, I am cautious about funding foreign conflicts. However, in the case of Ukraine, we must consider strategic factors. Ukraine, a former Soviet country, has historically struggled with corruption but stands as a democratic nation and a vital global supplier of grains and fertilizers. Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US has maintained positive relations with Ukraine. Support from Europe and the US has helped Ukraine maintain its independence, albeit temporarily. The resources provided have inflicted significant losses on Russia's military at a relatively low cost to us, without risking American lives. Moreover, the ammunition supplied, though older, would have needed replacement regardless. The geopolitical implications are crucial. A strong Ukraine serves as a buffer against Russian aggression and potentially Chinese ambitions. If Ukraine were to fall, it could embolden China to pursue aggressive actions, such as against Taiwan, a critical ally for its advanced technology sector. Considering these factors, it is in the US's strategic interest to support Ukraine. By doing so, we bolster global stability and protect our own national security. Term Limits The policy position on term limits for Congress is a debated topic with a range of perspectives. Advocates for term limits argue that they could reduce the influence of career politicians, encourage fresh ideas, and make Congress more representative of the general population. They believe term limits could help prevent entrenched interests from dominating legislative processes and improve accountability by ensuring that new voices and perspectives regularly enter the political arena. Opponents, on the other hand, argue that term limits could lead to a loss of experienced legislators, as the institutional knowledge and expertise that seasoned lawmakers bring to Congress could be lost. They also point out that term limits might inadvertently increase the influence of unelected staff and lobbyists, who have more experience and continuity in Washington compared to the frequently changing crop of elected officials. I believe that members of Congress should be allowed no more than ten terms (20years and three terms (18) years for Senators.	”
—Matthew Hill’s campaign website (2024)

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.

---

Matthew Hill campaign contribution history

Year	Office	Status	Contributions	Expenditures
2024*	U.S. Senate Vermont	Lost general	$15,511	$16,258
Grand total			$15,511	$16,258
Sources: OpenSecrets,  Federal Elections Commission ***This product uses the openFEC API but is not endorsed or certified by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
* Data from this year may not be complete

See also

2024 Elections

What's on the ballot? U.S. President U.S. Congress U.S. Congress special elections State executives State legislatures State courts Ballot measures Municipal government School boards Election analysis hub

Government

Who represents me? U.S. Congress State executives State legislators State courts Ballot measures Municipal government School boards

Newsletters

The Daily Brew The Weekly Brew The Ballot Bulletin Checks and Balances Economy and Society Hall Pass Number of the Day Robe & Gavel

External links

Search Google News for this topic

Candidate

U.S. Senate Vermont

Website

Facebook

Twitter

Instagram

Footnotes

[show]

Vermont's current delegation to the United States Congress

Senators

Bernie Sanders (I)

Peter Welch (D)

Representatives

Becca Balint (D)

Democratic Party (2)

Independent (1)