2024 HOD Candidate Questionnaire Response
Name Robyn R. Kincaid
Office Sought House of Delegates
Party Affiliation Democrat
District 51
Your Hometown Victor, WV
Campaign Website FB: Robyn for All
On June 24, 2022, the US Supreme Court overturned Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, effectively overturning Roe v. Wade. As a result, the WV legislature enacted a near total ban on abortion less than three months later. With no access to or Constitutional protections for abortion, what do you think abortion policy should look like in West Virginia?
With the fall of Roe, the illegitimate SCOTUS reduced more than half of the people of the U.S. to sub. citizens. Abortion in WV should be uniformly legal and a right belonging only to the person who is pregnant.
Several West Virginia municipalities have passed ordinances that expand the definition of racial discrimination to include discriminating against traditional or natural hair textures and styles. Would you support expanding this protection statewide? Why or why not?
I unequivocally support the Crown Act. The choice of how to wear one's hair is intensely personal and discrimination based on hairstyle is just another form of racism.
Many states have created laws that seek to limit the teaching of "divisive concepts" or "critical race theory". West Virginia narrowly missed passing a similar law during the 2022 Legislative Session. What is the value or harm in teaching these topics and what role should the legislature play in determining this curriculum?
"Critical Race Theory" is a grad-level topic that doesn't even exist at lower ed. levels. History must be taught warts and all otherwise, it isn't history at all, but rather myth and
Currently there is no statewide law protecting people in matters of employment, housing, and public accommodations based on their sexuality or gender identity. Proponents claim these protections are necessary to end the ongoing discrimination against the LGBTQ community. Opponents claim that such protections infringe upon religious beliefs. What do you believe and would you support or oppose a statewide law?
As a member of a despised and marginalized minority, I will always be a vocal supporter of non-discrimination. We deserve the gold standard of rights, namely the same rights white, cis, straight christian men have.
During the 2024 legislative session, the Senate passed legislation mandating, “In God We Trust” be posted in all West Virginia schools and permitting teachers to discuss ‘creationism’ and ‘intelligent design creationism’ as part of public-school science curricula. What role do you think religion should play in the public school system, and why?
As has been said, "Don't pray in our schools and we won't think in your churches." "Intelligent design" is neither. It's also been previously struck down by the courts.
In 2023, West Virginia lawmakers passed HB2007, severely restricting access to gender affirming healthcare services for West Virginians under the age of 18. Proponents of the legislation claimed it was about keeping kids safe, and opponents argued in favor of parental rights and medical freedom. What role, if any, do you believe government should play regarding medical decisions relating to gender affirming healthcare services, and why?
Trans adolescents deserve the best possible care, including gender affirming care. The only role of gov't is to protect access to that care.
Though abolished in 1965, lawmakers have introduced multiple bills designed to reinstate the death penalty. What are your thoughts on capital punishment in general, and would you support or oppose the effort to reinstate the death penalty in West Virginia?
The fact that right-wing "christian" extremists want to kill people in the name of the state, the same as was done to their God, is mind-bogglingly ------- and cruel.
There is increasing tension with communities of people who are unhoused or face housing insecurity. Police breakups of encampments are common, and municipalities have shown growing opposition to low-barrier housing and recovery housing. How would you address community concerns while protecting the rights of unhoused people?
Let's start with Matthew 25. House the unhoused is an obligation. The existence of unhoused people in society is a choice society makes. We must choose more wisely and far more compassionately.
Police violence has been in the forefront of national headlines for several years. Some propose more civilian oversight of law enforcement through civilian review boards that could review incidents and policies. Others view these boards as "anti-police" and point out that civilians are ill-equipped to understand the nature of police work. Do you support the use of civilian review boards? What other steps, if any, should the state take to provide transparency and accountability for police?
We badly need laws that can charge, convict, and imprison dirty cops. There should be an entirely separate prosecutor for nothing but police malfeasance. I absolutely support civilian review boards.
Jails in West Virginia are above capacity and are bankrupting some counties. Prisons are understaffed, making them dangerous for residents and staff alike. What steps, if any, should West Virginia take to address these issues?
The first step is to clear non-violent prison populations. Those charged with non-violent offenses shouldn't be jailed pending trial. Beyond that, state deserve better pay and benefits commensurate with the risk.
Currently, people coming out of incarceration on probation, parole, or supervised release for a felony conviction are unable to vote. When, if ever, do you think people should lose their right to vote? When, if ever, should that right be restored?
At a bare minimim, any voting disability should be automatically lifted upon completion of any sentence. Generally, I find it disgusting that we disenfranchise people whose offenses have nothing to do with election law violations. It is insane that it is easier for a felon to own a gun than to vote.
Across the country, there is controversy about what is obscene. Often these focus on sexual education, content that discusses sexual orientation or gender identity, profanity, and references to sex. This controversy has led to renewed attempts to censor or restrict access to controversial material. What do you think is the proper role of the government in restrict material like this and where do you draw the line at what is obscene?
Government has no business whatsoever in any of these issues beyond zealously supporting both the letter and spirit of the First Amendment. Anything else is un-American.