In California's newly drawn Sixth Congressional District, two familiar figures in Sacramento politics are vying for voters support.

Former Democratic State Senator Dr.

Richard Pan and incumbent Congressman Kevin Kiley, who left the Republican Party and is running as an independent.

We are having separate one-on-one conversations with each candidate about the issues facing the District and how they would represent constituents.

Voters will decide who represents them in Washington, and the outcome of this closely watched race could help determine which party controls the House of Representatives.

First up, my conversation with former State Senator Dr.

Richard Pan.

Senator Pan.

After being out of office for a couple of years teaching at UC Davis, being involved in the community in a bunch of different health care initiatives.

Why do you want to return to public office now?

- Well, when I was in the state legislature, I worked hard to be sure we delivered for people.

So I first ran for the state legislature when I saw we couldn't pass a budget on time.

We had severe cuts to different programs because of the Great Recession.

And so when I ran, I wanted to work to solve some of these problems, right?

And in fact, we got 4 million more Californians health care coverage.

I worked to bring down the cost of generic medications, authoring a law allowing the state to provide $11 insulin.

And when we had a measles outbreak that began in Disneyland, worked to increase strengthen our vaccination laws to help stop that outbreak.

So when I left office, I thought, well, we got a lot of good things done.

But then with the election of Donald Trump, the appointment of RFK Jr.

The Republican Congress, what we saw was that the federal government was basically reversing a lot of the things that I worked on that the state government worked on to try to help people cutting health care so that more people would be uninsured.

Right.

Driving up the cost of medications and a lot of other things as well.

Groceries, gas.

Right.

And even attacking public health, including vaccination rates.

So I thought, well, I guess it's time to get back into the saddle.

And since it's happening at the federal government, time to run for Congress.

- Now, it's interesting in that you mentioned vaccines a couple of times, and you are known nationally and internationally as somebody who's been a big proponent of not only vaccines, but of public health in general.

What, in your estimation, is the risk that the country is in right now because of the policies of RFK Junior and President Trump, that assuming that you go to Congress, you're going to be working to either reverse or do a sea change too.

- Right.

Well first of all, I've always been working on the problem of disinformation.

Right.

We want parents to have accurate information to make good health care choices.

So that's really important.

The other thing is, is that when I was in training, I actually was in Philadelphia in 91 when there was a large measles outbreak, and in fact, several children died.

So I understand and seen firsthand the impact of what happens when these diseases are not controlled.

And we're seeing that right now.

Right.

We have had in Pennsylvania alone, nine children, actually, nine people have died of measles in the last two years, actually, Texas and Pennsylvania.

Right.

And we're seeing thousands of cases of measles.

In fact, we've probably lost our measles elimination status here in the United States.

And it's not just the deaths.

Every person who's been affected by measles is also more at risk of other infections, because the measles vaccine actually attacks your immune system.

So this is not what we want, but what we're seeing is that this is all happened the last two years, because we have an administration that is actually providing a lot of disinformation, a lot of confusion.

They're not providing adequate support for public health and for vaccination.

- So if you were on the ground in D.C.

in the next Congress, what is it that you specifically would be working on or introduce on day one to reverse the situation that you're so concerned with?

- Well, I think first of all, we need to have appropriate oversight.

So think about what's happened to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

This was a technical committee full of scientists before to come up with the best recommendations for families.

Instead, it's turned into a political body.

And it's not just vaccines.

It's lots of different things.

I've worked on expanding newborn screening, and the expert panel on newborn screening is gone now.

The federal government because of RFK junior.

- So again, what would you do on day one?

What's the bill you're going to introduce?

- Well, actually I would probably argue that it's less about a bill.

It's more about oversight.

- Oh, okay.

So in other words, you're going to be looking to empanel and start to investigate that.

- Right, we need to find out what is why is it that the scientists are being let go.

Why is it that the leadership is not talking to the scientists, which they've said repeatedly, right.

Why are we dismissing our expert advisory panels with the people who actually know the facts and can also help advise appropriately not only the government leaders, but also the American people.

- So your focus in the legislature and what you're known for is working on vaccine issues, public health issues, health care access issues and the like.

What part beyond the oversight?

What part of that agenda is going to be front and center?

As if we watch Richard Pan in D.C., bringing at least part of his agenda right to that city.

What are you going to do?

-Sure.

Well, so first, first of all, we we need to understand that people are struggling, right?

They're struggling the cost of living.

They're struggling with the access to health care.

Right.

People are worried they can't see a doctor when they're sick and that they can't afford it when that happens.

Right.

And so what are some of the things we could do?

Well, as the doctor said, first things triage.

Right.

So we should be talking about rolling back the cuts that were passed under H.R.1, right?

That cut not only health care, but food assistance.

All right.

We also need so we need to bring back the tax credits for people on here Covered California plans so they can afford to get health care coverage.

Right.

And then we need to think about how do we continue to move forward.

For example, let's figure out how we bring down the cost of medications.

Under the Biden administration, we actually expanded, had Medicare finally negotiate for the price of medications for seniors that got curtailed, or cut back in the H.R.1, which my opponent voted for.

So they took a lot of policy steps in the last two years.

They made a lot of changes in law that actually are driving up the costs.

And in addition to that, you know, we're in the middle of a war that the president started that greatly increased the cost of gasoline, diesel.

That's increasing the cost of groceries.

Other things as well.

You know, we have tariffs that are driving up costs.

This is something that this administration has started with the support of the Republican Congress.

And we should have the government actually not continue to take actions that are driving up the cost of living for ordinary families.

- So this office that you're running for right now is not the first office you've run for in your post legislative career.

- Yes.

The first one was a mayor.

That one didn't go so good.

Okay.

- Yeah.

All right.

But what did you learn from that experience in terms of the issues facing everyday people in this community outside of health care that are going to be front and center?

Should you go to Washington?

So, for example, when I ran for mayor, one of the big issues is homelessness, right?

We have too many people unhoused.

Most people lose their home because they can't afford it.

Right.

It's not.

And then what happens when they're homeless?

They develop mental health issues, substance use issues, all these other problems.

And that makes it very expensive to get them rehoused.

One of the things that I worked on, actually, in the state legislature, was to actually get federal money for our state to provide housing assistance to people, for people on the MediCal program.

In fact, our local United Way has helped hundreds of families either stay in their homes or if they got homeless and get them back into a home quickly because that's the cheapest time to do it, using those dollars that's dependent on a federal waiver, by the way.

And if that federal waiver goes away, then that money goes away.

So in Congress, I'm going to work to be sure that we try to continue that waiver so we can continue to provide that housing assistance, because, after all, if people can't stay in a home, not only do they become homeless, their health care costs go up.

Right.

And so so that's an example of what I'm going to do, because one of the things I learned when I was in the state legislature, and also when I ran for mayor is, is that we need all the different levels of government working together.

Right.

The federal government has a role.

The state government, most programs are state federal partnerships.

So one of the real challenges is that, frankly, that my opponent actually supported provisions that made it harder for the state of California to help people and made it harder for us to, -How so?

-Okay.

So, for example, let's talk about H.R.1.

So they penalized the state of California for actually trying they are penalizing State of California for expanding funding for in-home support services.

That's money that allows seniors and people with disabilities to stay at home instead of being forced into an institution like a nursing home.

Right, in fact right now, the Trump administration's withholding, I think, almost $2 billion of money that they should be paying the state of California for that.

Now they're saying it's, quote, fraud.

The reality is, is that we we actually expand that program because we have an aging population and we're a big state.

And so what happened is we've invested in trying to expand those services.

So because we know seniors want to stay at home and not be forced into a nursing home.

- Now, another issue that you were known for in the legislature was there was a period of time, not too many years ago, where there was a lot of anti-Asian hate going on.

And as coming from a family of immigrants and you see what's been going on with ICE, right?

What what sort of policy initiatives or actions would you be taking in Congress, to balance the need for secure borders with treating people appropriately who have come to this country.

-Right.

Well, you know, the problem is, is that ICE has a culture now of not following the law and not following the Constitution.

In fact, we've had U.S.

citizens murdered by ICE.

And, you know, going around without ID and masks and so forth.

That has to stop.

Right.

All law enforcement, including ICE, needs to follow the law and follow the Constitution.

They need to have judicial warrants, other types of things, you know, follow the law.

The other thing is, is, though, is that the the approach toward mass deportation.

So border security is good, right?

We need to keep our border secure.

But the whole approach of mass deportation, where really people are being picked up, not, you know, and sometimes just for looking like an immigrant.

We even had U.S.

citizens detained.

Right.

So that's created a culture of fear.

And by the way, that's actually costing all of us money because many of those people are the people who work not only to harvest the crops in the fields and actually build our houses.

They're also the people who provide child care and senior care as well.

And so when we create this environment where law abiding people, because they are looking like immigrants, are afraid to go to work, that's a problem.

And we can see businesses struggling because of that.

And that's hurting all of us, including, by the way, our pocketbooks.

- So with regards, though, to border enforcement and immigration controls, do you believe that this country should have safe or secure borders?

And more importantly, let me let me ask you about this.

Elections are ultimately about trust.

What is it that you can tell the viewers who are joining us this evening about you in, in 30 seconds or less.

What is it about you that gives you the advantage in terms of that they should trust you with representing them in Washington over the next two years?

Let us put it this way, we may not always agree on everything, but you can, you know who I am.

I'm straightforward with people about that.

I'm a doctor.

I spend time talking to patients, listening to them, and then they have to trust my, they trust my advice when it comes to taking care of them.

I don't go and say, are you Democrat or Republican?

I'm here to try to work to solve problems.

And I think my record is very clear and what my approach is.

People may agree or disagree, that's fine, but you can.

I'm always straightforward about who I am and what I'm going to do.

- All right.

And we're going to leave it there.

Thank you.

- Thank you.

Thank you very much, Scott.

Next up is my conversation with Congressman Kevin Kiley.

Congressman, one of the things that's noted about your career is you've spent a significant amount of time sort of challenging the business as usual of both California politics but also national politics.

Give us a sense of what has informed and shaped your political philosophy and what how you think the role of government sometimes goes too far from what it's really what it was really intended to be.

- Yeah.

Good question, and thanks for having me.

And I think there's a lot of truth to that is that I've seen that government has just broken in too many ways, and there's too many ways in which it doesn't reflect the will of the people.

It doesn't serve the interests of our communities.

It's too dominated by the political parties and special interests.

And I've seen that in both Sacramento and in Washington, D.C.

And so I've tried to be a check and balance against both overreaching policies in Sacramento and in Washington, and to chart a different course where we try to actually find common ground.

We try to find common sense solutions.

We try to prioritize what is best for our communities.

We put constituent service first as opposed to partisan politics.

And I think the results speak for themselves.

We've really been able to achieve unique things for our community here.

Getting grants for highways that no other district in California has gotten.

Getting the National Award for Best of Constituent Service.

Getting through the House of Representatives and signed into law the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act, landmark legislation to protect Lake Tahoe for generations to come.

And so I've been trying in my role amidst a system that isn't working well for people and that has produced just unending gridlock, to to try to chart a different course.

And I think that, you know, this is a small step that that I'm taking that could hopefully lead others to, to follow suit and change the way politics.

- Well, let's talk about small steps, because one of the steps you took was you were elected in the Assembly as a Republican.

You were elected into Congress as a Republican.

You decided to take what some would say is a small step.

Others would say it's a giant leap to reregister as an Independent.

What single event or sort of epiphany did you have that convinced you that you needed to step away from the either party and chart your own course?

- Well, it was a series of things.

Being in Washington, D.C., just seeing how extreme the partisanship had gotten.

And so we had the longest government shutdown in U.S.

history.

I actually went back to D.C.

when everyone else wasn't there, saying that we should be here working to find a solution.

There was a failure to extend expiring health care tax credits that I believe the vast majority of Americans wanted extended.

And yet Congress failed to act, causing people to see their health care premiums go up hundreds or thousands of dollars.

And then we had this whole redistricting war where you have state after state redrawing its maps purely for partisan advantage.

And so that was the point at which I said, maybe the right thing to do here is let's just take partisanship out of the equation.

And, you know, I have seen that many, many people have found this to be very refreshing.

Democrats, Republicans.

Independents, doesn't matter.

People think it's refreshing, this idea that we can just take the party label out of the equation and focus on the actual issues.

-Okay.

Now you talked about those health care credits.

And for small business people in particular, that has been and is a big deal.

-Yeah.

-Okay.

At the same time, you did vote for H.R.

1, correct?

- I voted for it, yes, correct.

- Okay.

And which made some fairly dramatic changes that are only going to be felt after these midterms in terms of access, particularly for those who are lower on the socio economic level, who've gotten their health care through Medicaid.

You were for extending those credits on the one hand, but you ended up voting with your party back then, I believe, to for a bill that really, really is going to have a significant, is and is going to have a significant impact on health care access through Medicaid.

How do you reconcile those two things?

- Well, so you might be thinking of an earlier version of that bill, because there were, in fact, proposals pushed by many Republicans that would have genuinely resulted in in cuts in the level of spending on Medicaid or Medi-Cal here in California.

I stood up and opposed every one of those proposals.

I said, I will not support a bill that includes those.

I will not support a bill that results in a reduction in Medicaid or Medi-Cal spending.

And because I did so along with a few others, those provisions did not make it into the bill.

And the final product with H.R.

1 after H.R.

1's passage, Medicaid spending has continued to increase in California and across the country.

- Aggregately, but not on an individualized basis.

Correct?

- The total level of spending has continued to increase.

The only thing that was in the bill, the main thing that, you know, some people continue to cite, if they have a particular narrative they want to push, is modest work requirements.

And, you know, the the provision that's actually in the bill is the one that I think the vast majority of Americans support, which is that if you are a young, able bodied person, you don't have kids then and you want to get free taxpayer funded health care from the government, then at the very least you should be working or looking for a job or volunteering for 20 hours a week.

That's the only thing that we're talking about here when it comes to those requirements.

I think the vast majority of Americans support that.

And so some of the figures that maybe you're referring to, what they're reflecting, is the fact that you actually will end up getting people no longer reliant on Medicaid when they get jobs and they get their health care through their employer.

That's a win win scenario for everyone, for the individual, for the taxpayers, for the overall quality of public health.

- Let's let's talk about work for a second.

One of the things and this is going back a little bit, that it was noted, was that you had been a voice on the whole issue of employment with regards to contractors and, and employees and, and some of the restrictions.

There was a Supreme Court decision.

There was A.B.

5.

There were other things like that, where it is that it, it really constrained the requirements or expanded the requirements of people to be employees as opposed to independent contractors.

When you're looking at the economy because the economy, affordability, employability are such big deals right now, what's your vision for how it is that in a changing economic environment, people should have access not only to be employees, but to strike out on their own as independent business people?

- Yeah, a great question.

And I believe in economic opportunity.

And I think that we unfortunately have seen in California, you know, those opportunities have not been what they should be.

We have the highest unemployment in the country right now.

First or second highest of any state.

And a lot of it is because there have been some measures that maybe they were well intended, maybe they weren't, that have served to undercut the ability of people to work or to pursue their their vocation and pursue their dreams.

And so A.B.

5 was a good example of that.

You know, you have folks who are self-employed, independent contractors across hundreds of professions, whether it's court reporters, whether it's tutors, whether it's, you know, any number of artists, musicians who have lost or had seen a significant reduction in their ability to get work in California because of laws like that.

So I believe in empowering individuals to be able to pursue, to pursue their dreams, to pursue their vocation, to pursue their calling.

And I do think it's unfortunate when you have arbitrary barriers that stand in the way of that.

-And how do you respond to those who say, all we're trying to do is protect workers so that they're not taken advantage of by employers, you know, in large corporations and things like that?

- Oh, I 100% agree with that.

In fact, I was the chair of the Subcommittee on Workforce Protections, making sure that our federal workplace protection laws are in force when it comes to to worker safety.

And when it comes specifically to the issue of independent contractors, there are already plenty of laws on the books that penalize employers who genuinely misclassified their employees.

So what I was fighting against is stopping the employees who actually want to be independent contractors from from pursuing that arrangement.

And the surveys show, is the vast, vast majority of folks who choose to be their own boss, who choose to be an independent contractor, they do that willingly.

And I don't think it's right for us to take away that ability.

- All right.

I want to go back to earlier part of your career.

You actually participate in Teach for America and were a teacher down in Los Angeles, I believe.

- That's right.

Yeah.

- What did you learn from that experience working with those kids in in those underserved communities that you've carried with you into your time as an elected official, both in the legislature, but more importantly, back in Congress, and what's what is it that you share with your colleagues, because you caucus with Republicans still, that maybe some of them need to hear?

- Well, first of all, I'm not going to be caucusing with either party in the new term.

- Okay.

- And so I had to remain with one formally in order to fulfill my commitment as the Education Chair, Chair of the education K through 12 subcommittee.

But to your question, you know, I learned a lot.

This was an incredibly formative experience for me.

It's probably the main reason I decided to run for public office was to try to fight for educational opportunity and educational equity.

- So what, pretend you're still with the Republican caucus because you have been up until now, and you say you're not going to be doing that in the future.

What is it that, what role, what voice do you provide that maybe others don't have?

- Well, I'm able to speak to what it's like to be a teacher and to the reality of of of what goes on in classrooms.

And so, as the chair of the subcommittee, I've tried to bring in people from across the educational spectrum, teachers, administrators, school leaders, policymakers to get a realistic view of how proposals actually impact students in the classrooms.

Like, for example, we've had multiple sessions on hearings on AI and how it's being deployed for good and for ill within classrooms.

I've actually made it a priority as well, to go and do site visits to schools in my district and high performing districts across the country, and I feel very fortunate to have been born and raised in our area here and to have gone to great public schools.

But to your original question, you know, one of the things I took away from my teaching experience is that unfortunately, there are far too many kids in our state and across the country who are not getting the education they deserve.

And as a country, we're continuing to fall further and further behind our industrialized peers.

And so that should be a matter of urgent national concern, is trying to assure that every child in this country has access to a great education.

- And in 30 seconds or less, answer one question.

For those constituents who are unfamiliar with you, but will be voting in the next few weeks, in 30 seconds, tell us, what is it that they need to know about you that maybe they're not aware of that will inform their vote?

- Well, it's that I'm fighting to lower your costs and that I will always put our communities first.

You know, I have fought against overreaching policies in Sacramento, like the very high gas taxes that raise your costs.

I fought against policies in Washington, D.C., like tariffs that raise your cost.

And what informs my decision on all of these matters is not some special interest or partisan agenda.

It's what is the impact going to be for folks here.

- And we're going to leave it there.

Thank you very much, Congressman Kiley.

Of course.

Thanks for having me.

We thank both candidates, former State Senator, Dr.

Richard Pan, and Congressman Kevin Kiley for joining us for these conversations.

Voters now have the say in who represents them in Washington, D.C.

Thank you for joining us.

I'm Scott Syphax.

See you next time right here on KVIE.