Name: Mark Rice
What office are you seeking: U.S. House of Representatives, Illinois 8th CD
What is your political party? Republican
What is your current age? 62
Occupation and employer: CEO, EnergyCX
What offices, if any, have you previously held? NA
City: Arlington Heights and Chicago
Campaign website: https://rice4congress.com/
Education: University of Texas Austin, Economics and History
Community involvement: Jewish Community Center of Chicago, Camp Apache, Project Interchange, Founder of Trevian Youth Football
Marital status/Immediate family: Yes, married to Ellen Rice. Four Kids.
What are your top three legislative priorities for your first year in the U.S. House?
• Restore and strengthen the middle class
• Crackdown on government waste and corruption
• Apply a “liberty litmus” test to legislation and policy
What specific local issues in this district will guide your work in Congress?
People in the 8th district are struggling, as Illinois has some of the highest taxes in the country. These taxes and the increase in prices for everyday needs have made living in Illinois all too expensive. I want to work to bring prices down and cut taxes for those in my district and across the state of Illinois. On top of this, it’s time that politicians stop using their positions for financial gain, and put their constituents first. Politicians are elected by the people, for the people. Not so that they can increase their net worth or have inside information.
What federal funding priorities would you advocate for this district, including infrastructure needs like roads, bridges, broadband, and transit?
My priority would be reliability and safety upgrades, not wasteful spending or blank checks. Would support regionally vetted projects such as improvements on Metra’s Union Pacific lines, which have upcoming plans that focus on rebuilding and capital modernization.
How will you prioritize the concerns of your district versus the priorities of your party?
I believe the role of a member of Congress is to be an independent advocate, not a rubber stamp. That means pushing back against wasteful spending, political posturing, or one-size-fits-all mandates when they don’t make sense for our communities. It also means working across the aisle when collaboration delivers better results for the district. I’ll listen to the district, measure policies by their real-world impact, and vote accordingly.
Has Congress given up its Article I powers during the Trump administration? How would you restore congressional authority?
During the Trump administration, we saw a strong executive willing to act decisively, often because Congress wasn’t doing its job. I believe President Trump did what he believed was necessary for the American people, but it’s also important that Congress step up and reassert its constitutional role.
As a pro-Trump Republican, my goal isn’t to undermine what President Trump achieved, but to restore a healthy balance. That means Congress should no longer pass the buck on tough decisions or hide behind broad delegations of power. We need to reclaim our Article I responsibilities in a way that complements a strong executive, not fights it.
Do you believe any conduct of the current administration needs to be investigated?
If there are legitimate issues that concern the people of the 8th District, I would support appropriate congressional oversight to get answers. I think issues should be looked into both fairly and transparently, with the goal of ensuring that the government remains effective and honest, rather than to score political points.
Has the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gone too far in its recommendations?
In my view, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is doing exactly what it’s supposed to do: identify ways to cut waste, streamline processes, and make government more efficient. Sometimes that means making tough recommendations, but that’s part of good governance.
How will you work across the aisle to pass legislation?
I believe the best way to get things done is to find common ground and build relationships based on mutual respect. My approach to working across the aisle is pretty straightforward: listen first, look for shared goals, and focus on practical results rather than partisan wins.
Do you support term limits for House members, and if so, what limits?
Yes, I support term limits for House members, and I have signed the U.S. Term Limits Pledge. I believe that having a set limit of three terms can help bring fresh ideas into Congress and reduce the kind of entrenched incumbency that can lead to stagnation and those in power using their positions for personal gain, rather than the good of their constituents.
Do you believe the President should have the constitutional authority to order military strikes and detain a foreign head of state without prior Congressional authorization? Why or why not, and where should Congress draw the line between executive action and its own constitutional war powers?
The Constitution gives the President clear authority as Commander in Chief to act decisively to protect U.S. national security and American interests, especially when time is critical. In situations like Venezuela, where the Trump administration acted to confront a hostile, illegitimate regime and protect regional stability, I believe those actions were appropriate and justified.
The Constitution gives the President clear authority as Commander in Chief to act decisively to protect U.S. national security and American interests, especially when time is critical. In situations like Venezuela, where the Trump administration acted to confront a hostile, illegitimate regime and protect regional stability, I believe those actions were appropriate and justified.
What is your position on U.S. intervention, specifically Ukraine, Israel and Venezuela?
I believe U.S. intervention should be strong, selective, and rooted in clear American interests, not endless wars or blank checks. I support President Trump’s foreign policy approach: stand firmly with our closest allies, confront hostile regimes from a position of strength, and demand accountability when U.S. resources are involved. That means unwavering support for Israel’s right to defend itself, backing partners like Ukraine in a way that is strategic, limited, and accountable to taxpayers, and taking a tough, proactive stance against dangerous, illegitimate regimes like Venezuela that threaten regional stability and U.S. security. America must lead with strength and moral clarity when supporting allies, deterring adversaries, and avoiding open-ended conflicts that lack clear objectives or exit strategies.
What is your stance on border security and immigration reform?
I believe border security and immigration reform must start with enforcing the law and securing the border. A nation without a secure border cannot have a fair or functional immigration system. I support President Trump’s approach of restoring control at the border through physical barriers where they make sense, increased Border Patrol resources, tougher consequences for illegal crossings, and an end to policies that incentivize abuse of the asylum system.
At the same time, real reform means fixing what’s broken rather than allowing open borders or blanket amnesty. We need a legal immigration system that is orderly, merit-based, and serves America’s economic and security interests, while respecting those who follow the rules. That includes faster processing for legal immigrants, cracking down on cartels and human trafficking, and holding employers accountable for knowingly exploiting illegal labor. Compassion and security are not opposites; we can be humane and enforce the law.
Do you support changes to Social Security or Medicare to ensure long-term solvency?
I fully align with the current administration’s position that Social Security and Medicare must not be cut for current seniors or those nearing retirement. It’s very clear: Americans who paid into these programs their entire lives deserve the benefits they were promised.
Ensuring long-term solvency means focusing first on economic growth, job creation, and higher wages, because a stronger economy brings more workers paying into the system. It also means aggressively tackling waste, fraud, and abuse, especially in Medicare, before asking seniors to sacrifice anything. I support targeted reforms that strengthen program integrity and efficiency, not across-the-board cuts.
What should Congress do to address healthcare affordability?
I believe Congress should focus on lowering costs through competition, transparency, and patient choice, not full government takeovers. Healthcare is too expensive because it’s weighed down by bureaucracy, mandates, and a lack of real price accountability.
Is the CDC a trustworthy, qualified source of information under RFK Jr.? How should public health policy be managed?
Yes. Under Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is a trustworthy and qualified source of public health information. RFK Jr. was empowered by President Trump to restore credibility, transparency, and accountability to an agency that lost public trust after years of politicization and top-down mandates.
Public health policy should be guided by science, transparency, and respect for individual liberty, rather than fear-driven bureaucracy. The CDC should focus on research, data collection, and clear guidance, while avoiding one-size-fits-all mandates that ignore local conditions and personal risk.
How should Congress regulate artificial intelligence, if at all?
I believe AI poses real risks when it is used to exploit, manipulate, surveil, or psychologically harm young people. Congress should set clear guardrails that protect youth, including limits on AI-driven content targeting minors, safeguards against data harvesting and exploitation, and strict penalties for companies that use AI in ways that endanger children or undermine parental rights.
At the same time, regulation should be narrow, targeted, and pro-innovation. The goal is not to micromanage technology or hand control to unelected regulators, but to establish basic standards for safety, transparency, and accountability that allow American companies to lead the world in AI development. Protect kids, respect families, and keep America competitive.
What issues do you feel like you differ from President Trump on?
I strongly align with President Trump on the vast majority of issues, especially border security, economic growth, energy independence, America-first foreign policy, and standing up to bureaucracy. Where I may differ is style and emphasis, not core values.
I believe Congress should be more disciplined in reclaiming its Article I responsibilities, particularly on spending and oversight, so strong executive leadership is matched by a legislature that actually does its job. I also place a slightly greater emphasis on long-term fiscal restraint and structural reforms to reduce waste and debt without raising taxes.
If Republicans hold the House in 2026, what issues should oversight committees investigate first?
If Republicans hold the House in 2026, oversight committees should start by investigating corruption inside Congress itself. Too many members have engaged in insider trading, self-dealing, and special-interest back-room deals, using their offices for personal financial gain while shielding themselves from accountability. That culture has allowed lawmakers to enrich themselves, spread benefits to family and political allies, and operate beyond meaningful scrutiny.
What issues, if any, do you agree with Democrats on?
I agree that members of Congress should be held to higher ethical standards, including banning insider trading and increasing transparency, so public office is not used for personal gain. I also believe we can work together on protecting children, particularly when it comes to guarding against exploitation, whether online, through emerging technologies like AI, or from criminal activity. In some cases, there is also room for bipartisan cooperation on infrastructure improvements that are practical, fiscally responsible, and directly benefit local communities.
That said, agreement ends when proposals grow government, undermine individual liberty, weaken national security, or burden taxpayers. I’m willing to work with anyone, Republican or Democrat, who is serious about accountability, protecting families, and putting the American people first.
Should private equity and hedge funds be allowed to purchase so many homes?
No. I do not believe private equity firms and hedge funds should be allowed to buy up large numbers of single-family homes at the expense of families and first-time buyers.
This practice drives up housing costs, reduces homeownership, and turns neighborhoods into investment portfolios instead of communities.
A healthy housing market is essential to a strong middle class.
Do you support or oppose the expansion of work requirements for SNAP recipients? Why?
Work requirements help ensure the program remains a temporary safety net, not a permanent dependency, while encouraging able-bodied adults to participate in the workforce, gain skills, and move toward self-sufficiency. That approach aligns with efforts to restore the dignity of work and protect taxpayers who fund these programs.
Who are your top donors? How often do you speak with them?
I don’t have “top donors” who dictate my positions, and I don’t take orders from special interests. My campaign is powered by individual supporters, many of whom contribute because they believe in restoring accountability and common sense in Washington.
How would you reform U.S. trade policy so that farms don’t need repeated bailouts from tariff impacts?
We need a trade policy that’s tough on cheaters but predictable for producers, so farmers aren’t used as bargaining chips and forced to rely on emergency bailouts. I would push for an America-First trade strategy with clear, enforceable goals: target tariffs narrowly at countries that subsidize, dump, or steal, and pair them with strong enforcement and defined off-ramps to allow markets to plan.