Mario DeSantis: Candidate For US House First District

CAMDEN COUNTY and GLOUCESTER COUNTY, NJ – Mario DeSantis is one of four candidates running for the first district of the United States’ Congress.

The top vote-getting Republican and the top vote-getting Democrat in New Jersey’s June 7 primary will then go head-to-head on Election Day in November.

Patch asked each candidate to complete a questionnaire outlining biographical information, their platform and their stance on a handful of issues.

DeSantis’ answers are provided below. None of his responses have been edited beyond basic proofreading and formatting.

Use this information, as well as Patch’s Voters Guide (for Cherry Hill, click here; for Collingswood, click here; for Gloucester Township, click here and for Haddonfield, Haddon Heights and Haddon Township, click here) to help you make informed decisions on New Jersey’s Primary Election Day, which is June 7.

Name:

Mario DeSantis

Age:

34

Town Of Residence:

Glassboro

Position Sought:

U.S. House of Representatives, First District

Party Affiliation:

Democrat

Family:

Same-sex partner

Education:

Undergraduate Rowan University, graduate and current doctoral (ABD) candidate Boston University (dissertation topic: educational inequity)

Occupation:

Teacher at Collingswood Middle School and High School

Previous Or Current Elected Or Appointed Office:

No former public office

Why are you seeking to run for Congress?

The issues I’m talking about can’t be effectively rectified at the local or state level.

Sure, we can use the tools we have at the state level to try to mitigate our healthcare problems, but these are just Band-Aids that neglect the root causes of our problems. For example, states can expand their Medicaid program to increase the number of insured residents. New Jersey has done this. Despite this expansion, New Jersey is among the states with the fewest doctors even accepting Medicaid patients (NJ FamilyCare) – “You have a card saying you have health insurance, but if no doctors take it, it’s almost like having one of those fake IDs.”

The same is true for climate mitigation. Despite New Jersey “leading the country in offshore wind” and taking climate mitigation seriously, our state is the quickest warming state in the country. We're not unaffected by the neglect of other states. Fighting climate change requires a federal war-time effort.

If we are to advocate for these issues, we’re compelled to look at the record of our federal representative – the person with the capacity to influence these policies. The health care and climate advancements we seek are undermined by our federal representative. Donald Norcross was the only leadership member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus not supporting House Resolution 1976 – a single-payer, universal healthcare system that Yale University, Harvard University, and the Congressional Budget Office suggest would save hundreds of billions of dollars a year and tens of thousands of lives. On climate, he was one of the only House Democrats who supported the Keystone XL Pipeline – energy described as the most destructive on the planet by National Geographic. He also celebrates the Covanta Incinerator in Camden, New Jersey – the largest polluter in the county and the second-largest emitter of lead in America. He accepts campaign contributions from the private insurance industry, ExxonMobil and the Covanta Incinerator.

If our current representative wasn't undermining our progress on universal healthcare and climate mitigation, there'd be no reason for my primary challenge. This isn’t about career advancement; it’s about realizing we don’t have the luxury of time to wait for our representatives to do what’s right.

What is the most important issue in your district and how do you intend to address it?

Campaign Finance Reform:

No matter what our policy priorities are, removing private money from the political process is a prerequisite. Our electoral system has been tainted by the overwhelming influence money plays in determining which candidates are elected and how they legislate once in office.

It’s a cycle that undermines our progress: corporations fund their preferred candidates, and those candidates legislate on behalf of the corporation’s interest. This isn’t speculative. The ExxonMobil Political Action Committee, for example, is explicit in describing how they determine to which candidates they donate: “Before giving to any political candidate [we have] a robust process to assess the candidate’s platform, prior voting record, and consistency with the company’s priorities.” Needless to say, efforts to decarbonize the planet and electrify our energy sources are at odds with ExxonMobil’s priorities. Their unrestricted ability to fund candidates to maintain their interests severely undermines our chances of effectively mitigating a climate catastrophe. How can we trust our representatives are working for our interests while also accepting money from corporations whose interests are often at odds with our own?

To end this perpetual cycle, I support a public campaign finance system which rectifies the damage our democracy has incurred due to Citizens United – corporations are not people.

Health Care:

Despite the improved coverage accomplished by the Affordable Care Act, 30 million Americans uninsured and 44 million underinsured – these are patients with premiums, deductibles, and co-pays so high that they cannot afford to even use their insurance. What good is having health insurance if it’s too expensive to use?

Our current for-profit health care system results in inexcusable failures and immoral tragedies: diagnoses of the four most common types of cancer in the United States spike at age 65. This is because uninsured and underinsured patients become eligible for Medicare at age 65 and can finally see a doctor. There are over 250,000 fundraisers on GoFundMe each year to benefit patients who cannot afford their treatments. Medical debt is the leading cause of bankruptcy and patients have died avoiding necessary treatments after losing their health coverage. These tragedies are not isolated; in fact, in 2019, 34 million Americans reported knowing someone who died because of not receiving medical care.

Some suggest we can improve our health care system by expanding Medicaid. While such suggestions are made with the best intent, Medicaid expansion does not rectify the problems we face. Our state, for example, has generously expanded Medicaid benefits; despite this expansion, New Jersey is among states with fewest doctors even accepting Medicaid.

Others suggest we should increase our federal health care investments. This solution neglects the reality that a considerable portion of our health care expenditures we’ve made isn’t even going towards healthcare: “Although [the Affordable Care Act] expanded coverage…the new public dollars it offered were funneled through private insurers whose exorbitant overhead and profits drain funds before they reach the clinic.” In 2017, health care administrative costs totaled $812 billion – 25% of our national health care expenditures. For context, in the same year, the Medicare, public K-12 education, and defense budgets were cheaper than healthcare administration.

Health care is also a women’s rights issue: “health insurance has been…a common reason for…staying married when one would rather not.” The prospects of a divorce disproportionately burdens women: “Ultimately, divorce leaves some 65,000 women uninsured each year, with men being far more likely to maintain coverage after their marriages dissolve.” What if women didn’t have to choose between staying married and health care?

It's an issue which has even undermined our local property taxes and school resources. Last March, the school district for which I work passed a resolution citing the rising costs of health insurance as a burden which has the potential to lead to program and staff cuts: “Many [school districts] are experiencing...an increase in their health care costs, which may result in cuts to critical programs, services and staff in order to balance their budgets.” Several other schools in our Congressional district passed this resolution as well.

If we are the party that believes in science and research, we are compelled to support a single-payer universal healthcare program. The Lancet, among the world’s most prestigious medical journals, suggests a single-payer system has the potential to save $450 billion and 68,000 lives annually and is the quickest way to rectify health care inequities. The Congressional Budget Office and even a Koch brothers-funded study also support these savings.

With many patients in one fund, we have the leverage to negotiate cheaper health care costs. This is how Medicare patients pay far less for comparable services. For example, Medicare patients seeking a musculoskeletal system/connective tissue biopsy at Cooper University Hospital are charged $25,257.76, while private insurance patients seeking the same treatment at the same hospital will be charged $109,125.00, $125,514.96, or $134,480.31, depending on their plan. These savings are common.

Even providers are grieving their experiences with private insurance companies: “Most of my colleagues wanted to be doctors because they had a strong desire to help heal the sick…. They now spend more time reading procedural rules and entering routine data than diagnosing illness or comforting patients.” The American College of Physicians estimates doctors spend two hours on administrative work per each hour spent with patients. Increasing a significant amount of patient care time, a single-payer system relieves this burden and facilitates the increase of per-physician revenue by between $39,816 and $158,412 annually. These are two of the many reasons the American College of Physicians, the second-largest doctors’ group in the country, endorsed a single-payer universal health care plan.

There was a point at which every other developed country chose to guarantee the health of its people. I refuse to believe it should take any greater tragedy than the past two years to join the rest of the civilized world and guarantee health care as a human right.

What other issues do you feel must be tackled in your district?

Environment:

I spend a lot of my time in Camden, New Jersey. The number of times I’m greeted with a “No Smoking – Oxygen in Use” sign on the front door is sobering. Asthma-related hospitalizations in Camden are among the highest in the state. Camden is also burdened by the Covanta Incinerator, the largest polluter in Camden County and the second-largest polluter of lead in the entire country, the side effects from which have been identified as asthma irritants. The NAACP highlights the ways in which communities of color are disproportionately burdened by such polluters: “Toxic facilities, like coal-fired power plants and incinerators, emit mercury, arsenic, lead, and other contaminants into the water, food, and lungs of communities…. Race – even more than class – is the number one indicator for the placement of toxic facilities.” While accepting their campaign contributions, Donald Norcross celebrates Covanta's "clean, renewable energy."

Voter suppression/voting rights:

We often think of voter suppression as a red state issue, but New Jersey is just as guilty; we’re just more covert about it. Our primary election ballot is the subject of a lawsuit for the ways its design affords candidates awarded “the line” an average advantage of 30%. This is quantitative research published by Rutgers University. If we believe in democracy, we must challenge any systems that undermine democracy – that includes our primary ballot design.

“Divide a vertical line in two equal parts by bisecting it with a curved horizontal line that is only straight at its spot bisection of the vertical.” This prompt was from the Louisiana Literacy Test – a prerequisite test given to some voters. If voters couldn’t pass, they couldn’t vote. This was one of many absurd measures meant to prevent Black voters from successfully voting.

Voting only takes seconds but gaining the right to vote took decades. While racism under Jim Crow laws was explicit, voting rights suppression has become implicit, packaged under the guise of voting security.

There are two bills in Congress that protect the right to vote – The For the People Act and The John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Under these bills, voter registration would be automatic, early voting would be expanded, and voting would be more accessible. Gerrymandering and voter roll purging would be effectively eliminated. As a voting rights and healthcare activist, I joined 50,000 organizers with Martin Luther King, III and Reverend Al Sharpton to call on Congress to lift the filibuster and pass these bills.

What sets you apart from the other candidates?

Left blank

What else would you like to share about yourself or your campaign?

Left blank

Got a news tip? Story idea? Email janel.miller@patch.com. Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.