Q&A with Alaska U.S. House candidate Adam Wool

The Anchorage Daily News asked candidates for U.S. House running in the special primary election to answer a series of questions. Read all of their responses here.

ADAM L. WOOL, Democrat from Fairbanks

What in your background qualifies you to represent Alaskans in Congress?

I’ve been elected to the state Legislature for four terms.

Why are you running for U.S. Congress in Alaska?

I didn’t see anyone running who represented my views and those of many ordinary Alaskans.

What would be your top priority if elected to Congress?

Bring some balance, normalcy, and functionality to the body, and do what’s best for Alaska.


What is your position on abortion?

I support a woman’s right to choose. I support safe and legal access to abortion. I believe a woman and her doctor should have privacy to discuss and decide the issue of abortion. I realize some people have their own opinions and that’s fine, but they should respect the opinions of others. At some point, this is a question of personal belief, and we must recognize that not everyone has the same personal beliefs — especially when considering the question as to when “life begins.”

If legislation came before the U.S. House that would guarantee the same abortion rights nationwide as the Roe v. Wade decision, how would you vote?


If you support abortion rights, what limitations, if any, do you think should be placed on those rights, such as waiting periods or a specific point in a pregnancy where abortion should no longer be legal?

I believe the issue of viability has been addressed in previous court decisions. Viability has been decided by both medical experts and courts as roughly 21 to 24 weeks. This is a very difficult determination and I realize that, and again, it must be decided upon by a medical professional and a woman. After this time period, very extenuating circumstances would be needed, mostly the health of the mother.

Would you support a bill, if it came before the House, to expand the size of the U.S. Supreme Court? Why or why not?

I believe the Supreme Court has become highly politicized. The decision in the past by the Senate president not to hold confirmation hearings in the same year as a presidential election and then subsequently to hold hearings one month before a presidential election point out the hypocrisy and politicization of the process. Something needs to be done. I don’t think Supreme Court justices should have a lifetime appointment and I am not necessarily against adding more seats if that is what is needed to bring more balance to the current court. It’s been done before.

What do you think should be done by the federal government to address mass shootings?

I thought the bi-partisan bill (Toomey/Manchin) that came before Congress in 2013, following the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, would have been a good start. The vote failed, with four Democrats opposing, including Alaska’s Mark Begich. It called for better background checks and closing gun show loopholes.

Do you support gun control legislation? If so, what kind of measures would you support? If not, why not?

I support enhanced background checks, safe storage and red flag laws. Of course, the details on these types of legislation matter. We need to take some kind of action to reduce gun violence. Most gun deaths do not occur at mass shootings, but are from suicide and lower-profile incidents.