Michael McGarr

Michael McGarr served in the U.S. Air Force from 1973 to 1976. McGarr graduated from Bella Vista High School. McGarr earned a bachelor's degree from California State University, Northridge in 1996. McGarr's career experience includes working in journalism.[1]

Who are you? Tell us about yourself.

I am a centrist progressive. I have a bachelor's degree in political science, and I recently retired from a career in fact-based journalism.

Please list below 3 key messages of your campaign. What are the main points you want voters to remember about your goals for your time in office?

I promise to represent everyone in my district as I would want them to represent me: With honesty, integrity and an open mind. And no hypocrisy.Democrats and Republicans must work together on issues that move America forward, not hunker down in their corners and view the other half -- of the country -- as enemies who must be ignored or thwarted at every turn. We need progress, not a pendulum.I promise not to do the things I don't like others doing. In everything I do. When campaigning, I promise to speak to your intellect, not your emotions. I won't attack other candidates (although their legislative actions are fair topics). I won't spam the street corners with name-only posters, or fill mailboxes with glossy but fact-free mailers. No robocalls. I won't waste my money and your time on that.

What areas of public policy are you personally passionate about?

Medicare for all, moving away from fossil fuels, Supreme Court reform (term limits), protecting and strengthening our farmers.

Who do you look up to? Whose example would you like to follow, and why?

Barack Obama. He brought intelligence, dignity and elegance to the office. Plus, he was so much fun.

What characteristics or principles are most important for an elected official?

Honesty. An open mind. Intellectual curiosity.

What do you believe are the core responsibilities for someone elected to this office?

To represent the interests of everyone in the district, not just the ones in their own party.

What legacy would you like to leave?

That I left things better than I found them.

What was your very first job? How long did you have it?

Camp counselor for summer camp. I was 16. I had it for the summer.

What is something that has been a struggle in your life?

Public speaking. I'm a much better thinker than a talker.

What qualities does the U.S. House of Representatives possess that makes it unique as an institution?

Ideally, but there's not much now thanks to gerrymandering. But the way it was designed to be replenished every two years., to represent the current emotions of the country. The way bills start in this branch before moving through the other ones.

What do you perceive to be the United States' greatest challenges as a nation over the next decade?

Healing our internal divide. Preparing for and dealing with climate change. Weaning ourselves off fossil fuels.

Do you believe that compromise is necessary or desirable for policymaking?

Absolutely! What we have now is one side claiming a razor-thing majority is a "mandate" and enacting laws and policies that completely ignore the other half of the country, only to see those changes undone a few years later. An eagle can't fly on only one wing.

What organizations or individuals have endorsed your campaign?

None as of this writing.

What was the first historical event that happened in your lifetime that you remember?

Bits and pieces of earlier ones, but I remember listening to the moon landing over the radio while the family was on vacation. It was fascinating.

Campaign websiteMcGarr's campaign website stated the following:Affordable Health careThere are many reasons why health care has become so expensive, and providing better insurance doesn't really address any of them, it just shifts the burden of cost. Why blame your auto insurer for the high cost of repairs?I support Medicare for all. I don't think of health care as a "human right" so much as a societal obligation. We're long past the point where we put our sick and elderly on ice floes and send them off to live or die on their own. And even though I don't blame the insurers, they still get their take merely for being the middlemen. That would end with a one-payer system. About 15% to 18% of healthcare premiums go toward insurance company administrative costs and overhead, with 3% to 5% of that being net profit. That's a lot of money when you're talking abut the estimated $5.3 trillion we spend each year on health care in America. Medicare's fees run about 3%.Another prime driver in health care costs is the hospital sector. Competition -- the least intrusive way to keep prices down -- has shrunk drastically over the last decade, as hundreds of mergers have been approved with nothing but the market left to regulate the prices. Congress should take action to ensure consumers and patients are protected. There are several good studies, and several lawmakers have proposed solutions, but health care reform is just another victim of a partisan Congress.A related Big Idea: Give the surgeon general an army. The U.S. could open a few hundred clinics around the country offering free care of the low-hanging, everyday fruit of medical care, such as treating non-surgery injuries and offering preventive care. I know the larger corporations are starting to offer low-cost options at their megastores, but there's still a needless profit margin when many people are struggling to keep up with costs elsewhere. We should take care of our own.ImmigrationMany years ago, I heard an immigrant comedian talk about why he loved America. He said, "You can move to Germany, but you'll never be German. You can spend the rest of your life in Russia, but you'll never be Russian. Only here, in America, can you move to the country and become an American."America needs immigrants. Plain and simple. And for most of our history, immigrants have loved America. But we are a nation of laws, and everyone who lives and/or works here must abide by them. That includes how they arrive here. We must have secure borders and strong immigration laws. And those who violate those principles must be held accountable.We very nearly had a bipartisan approach to the crisis, reached in Congress after years of work, named the Lankford Bill after the Oklahoma Republican senator who was a chief architect. It was near passage in 2024 when partisan politics got in the way and tanked it, keeping immigration as a contentious political issue. I would strongly support reviving the Lankford Bill, along with other reforms aimed at taking the criminality away from people who only want to work here.I'm certain there are humane ways to resolve this. We don't need to chase immigrant workers through farm fields or arrest them outside courtrooms just to claim we're being "tough" on illegal immigration. And we don't need masked federal officers wielding weapons on our neighbors.We should simplify worker visas for people who, frankly, do the jobs we won't, such as farmworkers, who work harvest seasons and then just want to return home knowing they can come back next year easily, not having to pay thousands of dollars to be smuggled in. There are a number of relatively easy, common-sense solutions to most of our immigrant problems, once we remove the partisan posturing.Term limits for the Supreme CourtOur Founding Fathers gave federal judges lifetime appointments to ensure their independence from the other two branches of government, and so that they need not fear retribution from voters for their decisions. That's still a great idea, but appointment to the highest court in the land -- the court of final appeal -- has become highly politicized, as lawmakers cede their powers to the referees. No other member of our government has anything granting such lifetime immunity to make nation-changing decisions as our Supreme Court.There have always been "conservative" and "liberal" views of a law, but when the court overturned Roe v. Wade, they lost their claim to impartiality, in my opinion. Every justice who voted to end a decades-old personal right had testified during their confirmation hearings that they would "respect precedent" when asked their views on it. So they either lied to or intentionally misled the Senate, which in my opinion should be cause for their impeachment, but that's much too extreme a measure.So I propose term limits on appointments to the Supreme Court. The justices would still have lifetime appointments to the federal courts as the Founders intended, just not to the last court in the land. After, say, 12 years they would revert to presiding judges in whatever circuit they currently represent. The Supreme Court would thus be regularly refreshed with newer viewpoints as society evolves.Another important reform would be to restore the filibuster. As frustrating as it can be, it ensures minority party input and debate. I know this is something that can only be done in and by the Senate, but I think it should be mentioned.Water, water everywhere but where it's neededWhether the causes are part of a natural cycle or man-made, we can all agree the Earth's climate is getting warmer. We can certainly see it here in our own Evergreen State, where our snow seasons are drastically shortened and our summers are turning into severe and extreme droughts.Every year, throughout the year, different parts of the United States are flooded by melting snow or baked by unrelenting sun. We need to save the water that comes from, for example, the flooding Mississippi River in spring and early summer to the parched Midwest and Southwest in late summer.I would propose a national retention and distribution effort along the lines of Eisenhower's interstate highway program to move that water around to storage sites. It would cost billions, but we could replenish reservoirs -- starting with the rapidly depleting Ogallala Aquifer, which supports our heartland farmers, and the Hoover Dam, which supports millions of Americans in the Southwest.Additionally, we could use the system to reclaim areas of land that have already been ravaged by drought and reforest or otherwise repurpose them, which would help with global warming.Yes, it's expensive and time-consuming. That's why it's on the "Big Ideas" page.Impeachment: Why bother?Only three presidents have ever been impeached -- two of them in modern times. Richard Nixon resigned before the House could vote to impeach him, after members of his own Republican Party came to him and told him he didn't have enough support among them to prevent the impeachment. That was the last time the process was so bipartisan.Since then, all the votes have been mostly along party lines, regardless of the charges or evidence. I'm sure Democrats are champing at the bit to impeach our current president and/or some of his Cabinet officers, but without significant Republican support -- extremely unlikely -- any such efforts will just be wasted time and energy, just to say they've "done something." We need bipartisanship in our government, and putting the former president on what is basically a partisan, political trial will only make things worse, and force people into corners needlessly.So unless there is significant support from Republicans in both branches of Congress, I will not be supporting any effort to punish the president or members of his Cabinet. There are more important things to be doing.Of, by and for usI believe that a well-represented (i.e., with people from all walks of life) government is the best way for us to improve our lives and secure our future. Republicans, I believe, have come to view the government as the enemy. It began crystallizing with Ronald Reagan smiling as he said, "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: 'I'm from the government, and I'm here to help,'" and it's only gotten worse over the decades. It's become a Republican mantra that they want to "drag [the government] into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." (Grover Norquist, 2001)I don't believe that. I think the government gets things wrong all the time -- it is, after all, comprised of people -- but the solution is to right those wrongs, not to view everything it does and all the people in it as our enemy. We've all heard of "Big Pharma" and "Big Auto" and the like. Where is "Big People"? Where is the entity that represents us and takes on those industry giants? It's our government.I also believe that Congress is the most important of the three equal branches of government. It raises the money and makes the laws. Everything else -- the chief executive described in Article Two and the courts described in Article Three -- follows from the leadership that Congress determines. But that separation and delegation of power has been seriously undermined by what I believe is a complacent Congress in the same party as the president. It's a threat both parties face, btw.Congress must reassert its role as Big People and ensure that the chief executive properly exercises the will of the people, not his own personal whims. Donald Trump and Elon Musk can certainly do what they please with their private companies, but the United States has much larger concerns and responsibilities than the bottom line or its chief executive's whims, and it cannot be run like that. One way would be to use more forceful, explicit language in the laws that the president cannot misinterpret or ignore.To be updated at a later dateI'll be adding something soon...Powering the futureWe must wean ourselves off fossil fuels. Whatever you think about their role in pollution, we are destroying our planet in pursuit of them. We're scraping down mountains for coal, fracturing the earth beneath our feet for natural gas, and heading out farther into the ocean and into nature preserves for oil.And we can't ignore the oil companies' profits from this. Every year, whether during worldwide pandemics, wars, or any natural disasters, they post record profits -- major oil companies make hundreds of billions annually. The Strait of Hormuz crisis didn't hurt their bottom lines, but everyone who buys gas sure felt pain. And yet they continue to receive subsidies and tax breaks, estimated at between $10 billion and $50 billion every year.And in the end, every dead dinosaur we burn is just stored solar energy anyway. When we burn wood or charcoal, we're just releasing the solar energy that was stored thereFossil fuels are the whale oil of the 20th century. Yes, workers in that industry will lose jobs as we transition, but it won't be overnight, so we can provide a soft landing. Just redirecting the billions of oil company subsidy dollars should do it.Shifting to solar energy will also remove the motive for interfering with other countries' governments that has been the cause for so much strife around the world for decades. The conflict in the Strait of Hormuz has caused billions of dollars in damage around the world, in countless ways, from the loss of fertilizers at the beginning of planting season to hospital closures, to our own pain at the gas pumps. (The oil companies are still reporting record profits, by the way. Always have, always will.)Whose fair share?In 2024, the federal government spent $6.8 trillion on all its programs (except for $0.9 trillion on interest payments), and took in $4.9 trillion in income taxes - a deficit of nearly two trillion dollars, or $6,000 for every man, woman and child in America. The interest payments alone came to about $2,500 for each of us. $200 a month for literally nothing but an accounting line.We hear a lot about the wealthy "not paying their fair share," but in actuality, with some exceptions, they do, according to the rules we have set up. The top 1% of taxpayers in the U.S. pay the highest share of federal income taxes, accounting for roughly 40% of the total revenue. The top 50% pay over 97% of all federal income tax revenue. Even so, tax avoidance is a multibillion-dollar industry, so "fairness" is merely a concept.I think our tax policy should be as income-neutral as possible. The best way to achieve that would be with a flat tax. But the tax must apply to every source of income, not just "earned" (i.e., salaries and wages) but also capital gains (i.e., from the sale of real estate, stocks and bonds, etc.). If we make a certain minimum income -- say, $50,000 -- exempt from the tax, it would ease the burden on our lower-income earners. We could set a flat rate (10%? I haven't delved that deeply into the math. In 2025, our Gross National Income was $31.4 trillion.) to make it fair for all.This would end all the inherent unfairness of progressive taxation, in which different incomes pay different rates (we currently have seven brackets), so people wouldn't be forced to reject pay raises that would put them into a higher tax bracket. It would also end tax "fakeouts" such as the "no tax on tips" in the "Big Beautiful Bill" so loudly touted by Republicans that will expire shortly after the 2028 elections. Yoink! Psych!— Michael McGarr's campaign website (July 17, 2026)Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.