Q&A with Alaska U.S. House candidate Otto Florschutz

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.

OTTO H. FLORSCHUTZ III, Republican from Wrangell

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

We have a citizen form of government, of the people by the people. What qualifies me is 42 years of residency. Why people would vote for me is another matter. As a 42-year commercial fisherman I have worn many hats. Besides catching fish, I have served in community elected positions, done boat repair, mechanics, welding, carpentry, business and much more. For a 16-year period I also worked for Alaska Airlines. I am known for my ability to work and build consensus with others.

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

In my experience, we are at our best when serving and helping others.

What would be your top priority if elected to Congress?

I am sure Congressman Don Young had unfinished business he was working on. Ranking those in priority to serving Alaska interests and then following through to try and complete them would be my greatest priority.


What is your position on abortion?

I am pro-life.

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 oppose abortion rights, how should the federal government support a person who is forced to carry their baby to term against their wishes?

I do not think it is the federal government’s responsibility, and they should keep out of it. The state, or better yet, the private sector can provide means for placing the baby in a loving home. Isn’t it ironic that it’s been reported that both Amazon and Tesla have vowed that they will send women who work for them to states that provide abortions? It is such a sound business decision. It’s way cheaper to offer to help kill the child than to offer maternity leave. It’s way cheaper to kill the child than pay for its health insurance or to offer a wage that would support a family.

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?

Absolutely not. We have nine highly educated people hearing and deciding these cases. I can’t see how there is not enough IQ power in the nine that they cannot make a sound decision. Having 11, 13, 15, etc. will absolutely not solve any perceived problems other than kindle short-term rage.

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

The federal government is inept with most every thing it does. Background checks consistently miss people with homicidal tendencies. We need to start addressing the cultural aspects of this problem. We also need to harden school access.

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

No. We need to ensure that honest and law abiding people continue to have access to guns.