"Local news worth reading" — The New York Times
SUBSCRIBE
The independent voice for West Orange County news
A U.S. Army veteran turned high school teacher who coaches boys basketball, Royal Webster II, 63, decided to run for Congress “to try to make a difference one more time,” he told VoxPopuli in a recent phone interview. “When you join the military, you take an oath to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States of America. That oath does not have an expiration date. And I think that this administration has tried to trample all over the Constitution.”
The Winter Garden resident faces Dan Williams and James Pericola in the Aug. 18 Democratic Primary for the FL-11 District, which encompasses parts of Orange County (including Winter Garden, Oakland, Windermere and Ocoee) as well as Lake and Sumter counties. U.S. representatives serve for two years and earn $174,000 annually.
VoxPopuli profiled Webster in November. Here, he answers questions from VoxPopuli and the News Collaborative of Central Florida. Responses have been edited for brevity and clarity.
1. Affordability. My number one issue is affordability. It is a word that is widely used — and perhaps even overused — in today's political discussions, but for millions of Americans it is a daily reality. Families are struggling with the rising costs of housing, insurance, groceries, healthcare, and other basic necessities. Too many hardworking people are doing everything right and still finding it difficult to make ends meet.
I believe we must address affordability in a meaningful way. That is why I have proposed the R.I.S.E. Act (Revenue Income Support and Empowerment). The purpose of the R.I.S.E. Act is to raise the economic floor beneath working Americans and provide greater financial stability for individuals and families. By ensuring that people have a stronger foundation, we can help them better afford housing, healthcare, groceries, insurance, and other essential expenses.
The R.I.S.E. Act is about creating opportunity, reducing poverty, and helping people move forward. It recognizes that when people have a secure foundation, they are better able to support their families, pursue education and training, participate in the workforce, and contribute to their communities. My goal is not simply to help people survive, but to help them thrive.
At its core, the R.I.S.E. Act is about restoring economic dignity and ensuring that every American has a fair opportunity to build a stable and successful future.
2. Education. As a teacher, I see every day why we must make public education a national priority, especially when it comes to literacy. In my classroom, I witness both the incredible potential of our students and the challenges many face when they have not been given the literacy foundation they need to succeed.
The United States currently faces a literacy crisis that I find unacceptable. Too many students and adults struggle with reading proficiency, limiting their opportunities for higher education, employment, civic participation, and economic mobility. In my view, literacy is one of the most important issues facing our nation because it impacts virtually every other challenge we seek to address.
While the office I am seeking is at the federal level, I believe Congress has a responsibility to support and strengthen public education. I support rebuilding and strengthening the Department of Education so it can better serve students, teachers, and communities across the country.
I am also proposing Project Literacy 2040, a national initiative with the goal of raising the nation's literacy rate to 92 percent by the year 2040. Just as importantly, I believe we should rethink how we define literacy. For too long, literacy has often been measured at a level that does not adequately prepare individuals for the demands of modern society. My goal is to move our national standard from functional literacy at approximately a fifth-grade reading level to a ninth-grade reading level, ensuring that future generations have the skills necessary to thrive in college, careers, trade school, and civic life.
Investing in literacy is not simply an education policy — it is an economic policy, a workforce policy, a public safety policy, and a national competitiveness policy. If we are serious about America's future, we must be serious about literacy.
3. Veteran Issues. As a veteran, I strongly support policies and programs that improve the lives of those who have served our nation. We ask young men and women to make extraordinary sacrifices in defense of our country, and we have a responsibility to ensure they receive the care, support, and opportunities they have earned when they return home.
I am particularly committed to addressing veteran homelessness. It is unacceptable that any veteran who served this nation should find themselves without stable housing. I support expanding access to affordable housing, mental health services, substance abuse treatment, job training, and employment opportunities that help veterans successfully transition to civilian life.
I also believe government cannot solve this challenge alone. Organizations such as AMVETS are taking on veteran homelessness head-on through advocacy, outreach, housing assistance, and direct support to veterans in need. I support working in partnership with organizations like AMVETS and other veteran service organizations that are already making a difference in communities across the country.
I also support strengthening the Department of Veterans Affairs, improving access to healthcare, reducing wait times, expanding mental health resources, and ensuring that veterans in both urban and rural communities can receive the services they need. Our obligation to veterans does not end when their military service concludes—it continues for a lifetime.
As a veteran, I will be a strong advocate for veterans' issues in Congress and will work to ensure that those who served our country are treated with the dignity, respect, and support they have earned.
Not Incumbant (sic)
Affordability is my number one issue. As noted, Floridians across party lines are deeply concerned about the rising cost of housing, insurance, groceries, and healthcare. I hear the same concerns directly from families in my community.
My approach to affordability is grounded in both immediate relief and structural reform. First, my R.I.S.E. Act is designed to raise the economic floor for working Americans, helping individuals and families better manage the rising costs of everyday life. By providing a stronger baseline of economic security, we can reduce financial instability and give people more room to afford essentials like housing, healthcare, food, and insurance.
Second, I believe we must address broader economic forces that drive inflation and cost increases. One area I would focus on is trade and tariff policy. I support amending the Trade Act of 1974 to place clearer limits on the President’s ability to unilaterally impose tariffs, and to restore greater oversight and authority over trade policy to Congress, consistent with its constitutional “power of the purse.” I believe major economic decisions that impact consumer prices and supply chains should be more transparent, deliberate, and accountable to the legislative branch.
That is a State (sic) issue but I am against voting to slash property taxes. And will vote no as a citizen.
As someone running for federal office, I believe this issue has to be addressed at the national level, not left to states alone.
First and foremost, I support a one-year moratorium on the approval of new large-scale data centers nationwide, or at minimum a federal pause on major expansions, while Congress and federal agencies develop clear, bipartisan standards for their regulation. The growth of this sector is outpacing our ability to manage its impact on the electric grid, water usage, and consumer costs.
From a federal perspective, agencies such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Department of Energy should be directed to work with Congress, state utility regulators, and industry stakeholders to establish a consistent national framework. That framework must address energy demand forecasting, grid reliability, cost allocation, and environmental impact.
For Florida specifically, federal policy should ensure that utility regulators are not forced to absorb unchecked demand growth without safeguards that protect residential ratepayers. Utility costs are already rising for families across the state, and the rapid expansion of data centers risks accelerating that trend if it is not properly planned for and regulated.
I believe regulators should require full transparency from utilities and large data center operators regarding projected energy consumption and infrastructure impacts. Most importantly, residential customers must not be subsidizing the energy needs of large commercial operations.
My overall approach is not to stop innovation, but to ensure responsible growth. Data centers are critical to the modern economy, but they must be developed within a framework that protects affordability, strengthens grid stability, and ensures fairness for everyday consumers.
My first endorsement was from the Orange County Democratic Environmental Caucus, and in conversations with them—and with many others—I’ve emphasized that Florida faces environmental challenges that are unique compared to many other states. From climate impacts to unchecked urban sprawl, to the rapid growth of data centers, to stress on our aquifers and water systems, we are dealing with multiple pressures at once that require serious, science-based leadership.
In my view, the biggest environmental issue the government must address is the erosion of science-based decision-making in public policy. When science is ignored, delayed, or politicized, the consequences are not theoretical — they are felt in our flood-prone communities, our drinking water systems, our insurance markets, and our long-term economic stability.
Florida in particular cannot afford to make environmental decisions without relying on data, research, and the expertise of environmental and climate scientists. Whether it is protecting our aquifers, managing development and urban sprawl, or planning for energy demands from new industries like data centers, we must start with science and let policy follow evidence — not ideology.
I believe restoring trust in science at both the state and federal levels is essential to addressing every other environmental challenge we face. Without that foundation, we will continue to fall behind in preparing for the realities already impacting Florida communities today.
The whole reason why we attacked Iran was at the beck and call of Netanyahu. And if you notice, he has gone into Lebanon now, and he's not going to come out. He's not going to give back the land that he's already gotten. And that was his sole reason he wanted us to attack Iran. He wanted us to attack Iran, so Iran will be too occupied with the United States and defending itself, and he can go into Lebanon. I mean, if you've ever played the game of Risk, that's just telling this guy, Hey, you should attack over there so I can take over this area over here. It’s that simple. Our country's leaders got played by him, and he's gone into Lebanon. He's taken over, I don't know how many miles into South Lebanon, and he's not going to retreat.
I would be reaching across to every congressman that would listen to me and say, We need to get out. We need to put our tail between our legs and say, This was a huge mistake. It's incredibly difficult for the United States to admit that because we don't like admitting that we that we lost, but we could. We can't change their culture. They fought an eight-year war against Iraq and lost close to a million people and didn't flinch. We have to pull out. There's no other peaceful solution.
How does this play into America first? How is any of this putting American citizens first? You know, the ballroom that people, the common people will never dance in, the arch that he just wants for himself, the reflecting pool that had no bid and had no business going to the people that actually did it. This money is all going into, it's going to end up going into our deficit and the American people are going to pay for it. And I don't understand how people could support this. It's a mystery to me.
[The president is] prioritizing what he wants. He won't sign the Affordable Housing Act, which is America First, putting people that are hurting first. Instead, he spends $14 million or whatever the cost the pool is now. He wants to spend a billion dollars on its priorities. It's the same thing with everything. It's what are this administration's priorities? I don't understand them. Maybe I'm not smart enough. Maybe I don't see the big enough picture.
You know, everybody always says that you should not infringe the right to bear arms, but they forget about the “well-regulated” part of it. So I think that states do have the right to regulate the usage of guns in their states. And they have the right to not regulate it. But most people, when they read or when they quote the Second Amendment, they're always talking about That the right to bear arms shall not be infringed. They forget about the rest of it.
I think that it should be regulated more at the federal level. Let's look at I think it was the Brady bill that President Bush allowed to expire and did not re-sign it. And that curtailed the amount of school shootings. And as soon as that ended, school shootings went out. I work in a high school. We have active shooter drills. I can’t imagine having an active shooter drill for a second-grade student. I think the Second Amendment should be upheld, but I really believe that it needs to be regulated.
I do not support a national abortion ban. I support restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade into federal law because the decision to have an abortion is deeply personal and should ultimately be made by a woman in consultation with her healthcare provider and anyone else she wants to discuss the decision with. A woman's fundamental rights should not change simply because she crosses a state line.
It should be an open relationship, but I don't understand why we give more. Let's go back five years when or three years or four years when there was a Democratic president. We give Israel, a country with 9 million people, more money on average than we give the entire Western Hemisphere that has, without the United States, over 600 million people. And we give Israel more money and they have free education all the way through college. They're doing pretty well on their own.
We want to sell them defensive weapons, that’s fine. But we can't just give foreign aid to Israel to help them when we have countries that are in more dire need in our own hemisphere, that could use that money too.
I understand the relationship with Israel, but we don't work hard enough to get the relationship going with the countries around them, primarily because of our relationship with Israel. It can't determine what our relationship with other countries are. And how are we pushing back on Israel about their invasion of Lebanon? I haven't heard anybody come out against it from the current Administration. We're just letting them do whatever they want and supporting them blindly.
I don't know what the president has against wind energy because he's always talking about things that don't occur. We talked about the birds, for example, being killed. The number one killer of birds is buildings. The buildings, what are we going to do? Get rid of all the buildings? No, wind energy is one source. We need to invest more in solar energy. We need to look into hydro energy. We just need to widen and not focus on one thing. The downfall of Venezuela economically was because they put all its eggs in one basket, oil. It did not diversify its economy. Well, if we don't diversify our source of energy, it's going to be our downfall at some point. We need to diversify, we need to invest, and we need to improve and we do improvement by searching in research and development and we need to invest like China and Norway. There's countless countries that invest in alternative energy.
Has never held elected office.
Educator
