I do not support a gas tax, a parking space tax, a miles-traveled fee, or any other tax that would fall on the backs of working people.

When it comes to financing our vital public services, I am skeptical of rhetoric that says "all options are on the table." In practice, this often means that middle-class working people are asked to foot the lion's share of the bill.

When I am on the floor of the House, I will insist that we raise revenue by collecting more from those who have actually benefited from the economic tumult of the past decade.

In the end, I would be willing to consider any reasonable proposal (as long as the negotiating process is fair). But too often, entrenched Democrats start by accepting the talking points of fiscal conservatives. I am not going to take that approach.

Finally, we should not forget that the MBTA wound up in this position due to many years of mismanagement and neglect by our state Legislature.

The T's fiscal woes all started when the Legislature voted in favor of a risky, "forward funding" scheme that relied on rosy projections and dumped billions of dollars of debt from the "Big Dig" onto the books of the MBTA. To this day, just about every dollar that is collected in fares by the MBTA goes to servicing the MBTA's $5 billion debt.

Meanwhile, the future of the Green Line Extension remains in doubt while we wait for Beacon Hill to get its act together.

The question for voters on Nov. 6 is whether the same legislators who got us into this mess should be trusted to get us out of it.

As a member of the MBTA caucus, I have long been committed to ensuring that my constituents have consistent and reliable access to quality public transportation.

When several bus lines in my district were threatened, I worked with my colleagues to draft legislation that minimized service cuts.

Closing the T's budget gap requires a multi-pronged approach and everything should be on the table. Some measures that we are examining are a gas tax, a regional tax, establishing a "congestion zone," and creating savings through consolidation of agencies and through new technologies like open-road tolls and energy-efficient trains.

I will also work to demand accountability within the MBTA and Department of Transportation with regards to their budgets and hiring practices.

Ensuring long-term solvency for the MBTA will require a creative and realistic approach to generating additional revenue and identifying efficiencies.

While I applaud the state Legislature for attempting to tackle this critical issue, the fact remains that the new law is largely the product of a $51 million lobbying effort by the healthcare industry.

Indeed, The Boston Globe's own reporting from this summer suggests that the predicted benefits of the global payment model may have been significantly overblown.

After all, the Blue Cross/Blue Shield global-payment pilot program failed to demonstrate true cost savings. Instead, doctors were offered bonuses of up to 10% of their healthcare budget in exchange for finding savings of about 3% - hardly a good model for saving money.

My skepticism should come as no surprise, given the fact that the office of Attorney General Martha Coakley formally concluded in 2011 that "globally paid providers do not have consistently lower total medical expenses."

This latest round of legislation came with no shortage of political fanfare, but the fact remains that it did little to change the fundamental problems that are associated with a for-profit healthcare system.

At the end of the day, our healthcare industry is still driven by profit, and the lawmakers on Beacon Hill are too willing to let the system squeeze every last penny from our collective pockets.

As your new state representative, I will work to establish a not-for-profit, "Medicare-for-All" system on the state level - because the only surefire way to stabilize the cost of healthcare is to remove the profit motive from the industry.

At present, I do not support raising the cap on charter schools. I do think it's good for there to be other educational options, and I am generally comfortable with the current state-level process for establishing new charter schools.

But I am afraid that additional charter schools will drain resources from the traditional public school system - so the Legislature will have to identify new sources of revenue before I would go along with raising the cap on charter schools. Therefore, my top educational priority is to ensure that we increase funding to our public school system.

Finally, I want to note that we now have an overemphasis on standardized testing. Of course, we need to have reliable benchmarks for our schools and our students, but I am afraid that the trend toward standardized curricula has gone too far.

As your new state representative, I will emphasize the fact that education does not occur in a social vacuum - therefore, we need to teach children emotional intelligence, we need to promote the arts, and we must continue to work for social justice so that our children grow up in a world that is conducive to learning.

However, if we are going to raise the cap on charter schools, we should first take a look at how they are funded.

When students enroll in charter schools, our local public schools are required to pay the charter schools a per-student amount equal to the average per pupil expenditure of the district. For some districts, this figure is well over $20,000 per pupil.

I am committed to securing a fair reimbursement, but, as as the system currently stands, the expropriation from our public schools is just too high. Offering families more choices must not mean placing an undue financial burden on our local public schools.

Moreover, given the fact that there are currently at least 30 unused charters, it does not seem imperative to raise the cap.

Furthermore, our local communities are too often left out of the discussions on charter schools. It is in everyone's best interests for the dialogue surrounding charter schools to be open to community members and school committees.

PLAs are an effective tool for coordinating complex projects that involve multiple trades. They provide a mechanism for laborers to deliver a high-quality project on time, on budget, and without workforce-related strife.

As your new state representative, I will always work to promote the interests of organized labor, and I will do everything in my power to keep our communities affordable for everyone who works for a living.

I am proud to represent the many working families in Somerville and Cambridge. Many union workers live and work here, and I've seen how membership in labor unions strengthens a community at its grassroots. Union jobs enable families to continue to live in Cambridge and Somerville despite steadily increasing living expenses.

My primary goal is to ensure that my constituents receive the benefits and protection that they deserve from government, and that includes supporting their right to organize and collectively bargain.

Unfortunately, "pension reform" is sometimes used as a euphemism for dealing with budget problems on the backs of state workers (by cutting their pensions).

There are better ways of dealing with budget problems - such as closing corporate tax loopholes. State workers perform important services for the people of Massachusetts, and they deserve to be well compensated - and not scapegoated for budget shortfalls that are caused by the failure of the Legislature to make big corporations and the very wealthy pay their fair share.

In the past term, I worked with my colleagues to draft a law that eliminated the ability of elected officials to get a full year’s credit towards their pension for as little as one day of service.

We changed the eligibility for a state pension from six years to 10 years of full-time work.

The new law also created a cap on pension earnings at 64 percent of the annual federal limit on compensation that may be taken into account when calculating pension benefits.

The reforms we implemented have resulted in tightened scrutiny of the entire retirement system.

I will continue to be open to more pension reforms in the form of further caps or other structural changes. Over the years we have made adjustments to the system and we will continue to do so as they are needed.

As a result of our careful scrutiny of the pension system, the Commonwealth is in much better shape in terms of managing our system than other states with similar retirement protocols - states like California, New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Ohio.

That being said, no system is perfect, and I will continue to examine the pension system for potential areas of improvement or risk.

However, about two years ago, I decided to become an independent because I disagree with the way both major political parties have allowed the influence of campaign fundraising to dominate the political process.

Therefore, my "No Money" campaign accepts no financial contributions - instead, I have organized a team of 85 local volunteers who are working to provide you with a new, grassroots alternative to the status quo on Beacon Hill.

As your new, "Progressive Independent" representative in General Court, I will work with the Democrats on Beacon Hill to advance the progressive cause, but I will also stand apart from the corrupting influence of money in politics.

It is and has always been one of my guiding principles to protect the collective bargaining rights of workers.

I have also cast several votes against party leadership to protect the rights of immigrants in our communities.

For example, I was one of only 19 members of the House who supported Governor Patrick's veto of a misguided mandate that requires the RMV to check the immigration status of every person registering a car in the Commonwealth. It is an unfunded mandate, creates more red tape for Massachusetts residents, and places an unnecessary burden on already overworked RMV staff.

I also support a "pharmaceutical gift ban" that leadership opposes. This is a ban on the common practice of pharmaceutical companies gifting expensive dinners and vacations to doctors in order to win their attention.

Banning this practice is an important consumer protection measure that ensures patients get objective information about the medicine they need and are offered cheaper generics when they are available. I have taken multiple votes on this ban over the last two terms and have been consistent in my support of it.