Editor’s note: This is the fifth in a series of stories reflecting the answers given by candidates for county, state and federal offices during a political forum May 14 ahead of the June 5 primary election. Candidates will appear in The News Courier today through Thursday.

Two Democrats and two Republicans are vying for the District 2 seat in the state Senate in the June 5 primary election.

The seat is up for grabs because state Sen. Bill Holtzclaw, R-Madison, is not seeking re-election.

Amy Wasyluka, an appellate attorney, cancer survivor and mother from Madison, and Mike Smith, a retired Decatur firefighter from Athens, are competing on the Democratic ballot. Tom Butler, a former District 2 state senator, and Steve Smith, Madison City Council member, both of Madison, are competing on the Republican ticket. The winner of the Democratic and Republican primaries will face each other in the Nov. 6 general election.

The two Democrats recently answered questions during a political forum at Athens High School, an event sponsored by the Greater Limestone County Chamber of Commerce, Alabama Veterans Museum & Archives and The News Courier.

(Butler, a former District 2 senator, was not questioned during the forum because his opponent, Steve Smith, did not attend because he had a council meeting. Butler was allowed to speak about his goals if elected.)

The questions for Wasyluka and Mike Smith were prepared and posed by News Courier Managing Editor Adam Smith. Here are some of their answers: 

Question for Wasyluka: The state is currently under a court order to improve prisoners’ access to mental health care. In some cases, crimes committed by Alabamians could have been prevented if they had access to adequate mental health care. How would you as a senator address the state’s mental health issue and how do you propose the state pay for it?

Wasyluka 1-minute answer: “One of the biggest things we can do to address health care in the state of Alabama, including mental health care, is to expand Medicaid. Expanding Medicaid not only would provide jobs for Alabama, but it would ensure that many more Alabamians that are currently not being covered would get covered for health care needs, including mental health. We also have to take a realistic look at the fact that several years ago we closed our mental health systems. … The idea was that some treatments given on an inpatient basis would follow them out to outpatient facilities. We have to recognize that that hasn’t happened and look at creative ways we can fund them along with the state of Alabama, including at the high school and education levels by addressing putting more counselors in our schools. Ensuring that we have children who have access to counseling very early on in life to try to treat some of their needs before they get in prison.”

Smith 1-minute response: “It is very important to campaign for the livable wage. You all look at my website. The people have to have hope. They have to be able to make ends meet. We begin with livable wages. Get that livable wage above the poverty level, and we can reduce spending on assistance by about $200 million. We take that and expand Medicaid. Medicaid is a benefit to all of us. … If we can do that, we can generate about $240 million in sales tax every year and enhance our budget. … We begin like that and we can build a medical health care system — a functional medical health care system statewide — and we can reduce the population in prison by about a third. This can be done. Medicaid is the key. The way you pay for it is to create a livable wage.”

Wasyluka 30-second followup: “I will go ahead and say I agree with Mr. Smith that we need to raise our livable wage, but we have to be very careful and ensure that we do that in a way that is both responsible and appropriate and acknowledges what Alabama communities can support. What businesses in Birmingham can support may not be what businesses up in Madison and Limestone can support. So we need to be very careful.”

Question for Smith: There have been a number of ideas floated in Montgomery to help keep children safe in the classroom, including allowing trained school personnel to carry a firearm. In your opinion, what is the safest yet most fiscally responsible approach to protecting Alabama’s school children?

Smith answer: “We need common sense gun laws. We don’t need teachers armed. I am absolutely adamant about that. We do not need to arm teachers. I don’t think we need to put anyone in our schools who are not following orders. We need fewer guns in schools, not more. We have to do some common-sense gun legislation. I have always been an advocate of having the background check. I am an advocate of us not being able to carry more rounds in our firearms than our police officers. I want to protect law enforcement. … The problem we’ve got with the guns in the school shootings is that they can shoot too many rounds too fast. We can do that simply by not allowing anybody in public to have (a high firing rate weapon). At home, you can have all you want or you can go to the shooting range and have all you want. If you look on my website, I go into detail on that. But no, I don’t think we should arm teachers. We need to do more passive things than that.”

Wasyluka response: “I am a supporter of the Second Amendment. I am an Army wife; my husband has served many years in the Army National Guard. I even go to the shooting range with him now and then. That being said, I don’t think we need to be having the knee-jerk reaction of arming our teachers. However, we also have to look at options that we do propose. People coming into our school districts, their tactics will change with response to what we do. None of us can put forward a solution today that is going to be applicable tomorrow, two years down the road or five years down the road. And in a financially strapped state like Alabama, the most responsible thing to do is to act like the adults in the room that we are in and look at a commission to give us a menu of options — whether that be security checkpoints, whether that be ensuring that we have more school resource officers, so that we can quickly apply those things that are financially responsible for us to do.”

Smith followup: Smith said he agreed. The rest of his answer was inaudible due to background noise and poor sound.

Question for Wasyluka: The Limestone County legislative delegation receives funding each year from the Tennessee Valley Authority in-lieu-of-tax dollars, which is generally distributed to various groups and agencies, school and community projects. What will you do to ensure those funds are distributed to project that benefit the entire community and not those that are politically beneficial?

Wasyluka answer: “That’s one of the things I’m running on. I want to be a senator who puts the needs of constituents over our party agenda, and that’s either party. We need to be taking those steps that benefit our constituents. Now, ourdistrict covers both Madison and Limestone counties. That means I have a responsibility to each of you as Limestone County constituents to use my power in the state Senate to do things that improve the quality of your life that are not politically motivated.”

Smith response: “I agree with that answer. I know that the TVA money has been an issue for a long time. A lot of it goes toward schools. Education is very important. The trade schools are important, and I think a lot of the TVA money is supporting the trade school in Limestone County, which is nationally recognized. So we will spend that money for the people of Limestone County, Madison County and the people of Alabama.”

Wasyluka followup: “I will say that in my time running for state Senate, I have noticed that sometimes people of Limestone County feel that this office has overlooked them in favor of Madison County, and it is my promise to you that we will not do that, that we appreciate people of Limestone County and everything they bring to this district and that we will be sure that many of the wants in Limestone County will also be met. The trade schools in Limestone County, as Mike has said, are fantastic.”

Question for Smith: Nearly every industrial project recruited to Limestone County over the last several years has been lured through a number of state and local incentives. Some believe using taxpayer money to lure a for-profit industry is wrong, while others believe it is the price of doing business. Where do you stand on this issue? Is there anything you would change about the way we recruit business and industry?

Smith answer: “The way we recruit business and industry — part is a livable wage and part is we have a strong, vibrant economy. We have parks, and we have entertainment and that kind of thing, and good schools. If you are going to give a 20-year abatement on a plant and they are going to bring 4,000 jobs, if we tie that to the amount of money (we offer) and in 10 years they are only producing 2,000 jobs, then they only get half the abatement. In other words, if we do our part, I think they should do their part. I worry about economic development when we buy property like we did with Remington and two years later they go bankrupt. Any economic development has to be a net gain for our community. If they come in with $12.50-an-hour jobs, that is not a net gain.”

Wasyluka response: “We definitely need to be doing what we can to bring business to our area. In many respects, it is a good thing, but we need to be transparent about it. My husband is a government contract attorney, and every time the military accepts a contract, there are independent investigators who ensure the military is getting its money’s worth. We need the same thing at the state level when we are making a monetary commitment, and there needs to be periodic assessments (to make sure the contract is being fulfilled).”

Smith followup: “That’s my point. We welcome economic development, but let’s just make sure we have a net benefit.”