Arkansas PBS graciously provides a 1-hour debate for the U.S. Congressional races. Since I am on the ballot in November, I have equal time in the debate. Below I list the topic and the minutes : seconds into the video at which the topic occurs. I also provide links to data and studies that support my statements on each topic. These are generally links to the other tabs in my website.

Arkansas PBS Debate 11:00am Oct. 8, 2024 Bing Videos

International Aid.  2:40   World Police — SteveParsonsLibertarian.com

FEMA & NFIP 4:50 and 31:30 This great country survived for 190 years without FEMA. This program is political, poorly managed, and subsidizes wealthy people living in dangerous areas. See Folly of Federal Flood Insurance | Cato at Liberty Blog and Governments Subsidize Disaster—and the Wealthy | Cato at Liberty Blog and Amid Climate Change, FEMA And Government Aid Widen Wealth Inequality : NPR

Farm Subsidies: 6:30. Free enterprise is a powerful engine for economic growth and inflation control. Every subsidy, tax loophole, or protectionist policy undermines free enterprise. 2/3 of farm subsidies go to the wealthiest 10% of farms - it has become corporate welfare. See Cutting Federal Farm Subsidies | Cato Institute and Farm Foreclosures | Encyclopedia.com

Israel: 14:10 See World Police — and SteveParsonsLibertarian.com Military Spending and Casualties of the Israel–Hamas war - Wikipedia

Opioids Mental Health and Incarceration: 17:13. see Prison Reform — SteveParsonsLibertarian.com

Immigration: 28:40 and 44:25 See Immigration — SteveParsonsLibertarian.com

Banking and Marijuana:  46:09 and 112:45. In 1971 Nixon overruled his 13-member commission to criminalize marijuana; today it should be removed from schedule I. See Prison Reform — SteveParsonsLibertarian.com

My Background, Pay-Raise Lawsuit, and Libertarian Concepts: 106:35 to 115:00 I will donate my entire salary to charities in District 1 - not sue for a pay raise. I have accepted $0.00 in donations; 98% of the Congressman’s donations come from PACs or large donors (Rep. Rick Crawford - Campaign Finance Summary • OpenSecrets).

Abortion: 23:14 to 28:00 Crawford is a Hypocrite

I believe that Abortion is a state topic, to be decided by the states and not the federal government. At the state level I believe there should be an exception for rape and incest.

In a question about abortion, the Congressman was clever using the phrase “federal ban on abortion”. He could claim, for example, that Arkansas does not provide a ban on abortion since there is an exception for saving the life of the mother - it does not ban all abortions. Or he could argue that a bill he co-sponsored did not include the word “ban” - even if it used “prohibition” or “illegal”. In total the Congressman claimed that there had never been a vote on a federal abortion ban. He also stated that he had not sponsored nor voted on an abortion bill since the Dobbs decision.

Congressman Crawford voted yes for HR 26 on January 11, 2023 (6 months after Dobbs) that mentions “abortion” 27 times.  See Text - H.R.26 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress  and  Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives - Vote Details  

Congressman Crawford was also listed as a co-sponsor of HR 8814 introduced on September 13, 2022 (2.5 months after Dobbs). HR 8814 mentions “abortion” over 70 times.  See hH.R.8814 - 117th Congress (2021-2022): Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act | Congress.gov | Library of Congress This bill also cleverly uses the term “prohibition”, rather than “ban”.   

Mr. Crawford admitted that he “had voted on federal legislation as it applies to abortion PRIOR to the Dobbs decision.”  (Debate at 28:44).  Clearly, from HR 26 (1-11-2023) and HR 8814 (9-13-2022) he had voted for, and sponsored federal legislation as it applies to abortion AFTER the Dobbs decision.

At Mr. Crawford’s website is a post from the 1-year anniversary of the Dobbs decision: Rep. Crawford Statement on Anniversary of Dobbs Decision - Rick Crawford (house.gov) 6/24/2023  “This year, Rep. Crawford has cosponsored several pro-life bills, including the Life at Conception Act, the Heartbeat Protection Act, and the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.

See also, HR 8814 Rep. Rick Crawford | National Pro-Life Scorecard (sbaprolife.org)  “Rep. Crawford is among a select group of courageous Members of Congress who quickly accepted their responsibility to protect unborn children nationally by cosponsoring the Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act in the fall of 2022.”

Mr. Crawford also voted yes on amendments to bills that were related to abortion Rep. Rick Crawford | National Pro-Life Scorecard (sbaprolife.org)

Crawford is clearly a hypocrite - he claims abortion is a state topic, yet he has co-sponsored federal abortion bills. Since he has denied his voting and bill sponsoring - he is also a liar.

An exception for rape and incest?

In the 2022 debate the Congressman danced around the question of whether there should be an exception for rape and incest 12:51 to 15:00.  Arkansas PBS Debates | Election 2022: Arkansas PBS Debates – U.S. District 1 | Season 2022 | PBS. It was as if there were a new program dancing without the stars. Later when pressed by Steve Barnes about federal abortion legislation (19:51) he stated that “the 10th Amendment is clear” and “that it relegates that issue to the states”. In other words, even with two different questions on this topic, he never answered the question as to whether there should be an exception for rape and incest.

In 2024, at 26:40 the Congressman claimed, “I have made exceptions for rape, incest and the life of the mother” and that “my record is clear.” It is difficult to imagine why Crawford would have refused to directly answer a question about an exception for rape and incest in 2022 if he had “made exceptions for rape and incest”. Indeed, in the 2022 debate the Congressman had four chances (if you count his rebuttal time) to state that he “made exceptions for rape and incest”

What seems more likely is that the Congressman is marching lock step with NEW party leadership directives on this topic; he is regurgitating the NEW party line and trying to cover up his prior avoidance of this topic.