Question:

Once you become our congressional representative, what issue do you believe is the most important to address first?

Answer:

Increasing protection of government whistleblowers, and then open hearings on 4 issues: waste, fraud, criminal activity and evidence of human interactions with non-human intelligence (NTI) and/or technology. I find some of the evidence of human interaction with NTI compelling and credible. Recently THE HILL reported that 30 to 50 whistleblowers on this issue have given briefings to the Inspector General's office reporting, among other things, criminal misappropriation of tax-based funding to legacy programs outside of the authority of elected officials and executive branch military authorities. This is the primary issue on which I am running and is consistent with my 2008 campaign as well - one which the Park Record published on its front page as "IMMIGRATION, TAXES and LITTLE GREEN MEN. 26 March 2008 - https://www.parkrecord.com/news/immigration-taxes-and-little-green-men/

Question:

Do you support additional U.S. Taxpayer funding for the war in Ukraine?

a.     If yes, do you believe in any limits to U.S. funding of Ukraine?

b.     If not, is there a scenario in which you would vote for further funding, and what is it?

Answer:

Americans should be free to donate to Ukraine if they so choose; the government should not use tax dollars nor debt to fund Ukraine, or any other foreign aid.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the situation at the U.S. southern border and illegal migration to the U.S. in general?

Answer:

The USA should be a beacon of hope to all peaceful, productive, and enslaved or physically threatened people everywhere. We should live up to the sentiment inscribed on the Statue of Liberty - welcoming huddled masses yearning to breathe free. But the borders should be secure and immigration processed through legal means regarding public health and the ability of those immigrating to sustain themselves through family, charity, or their own means. Over 200,000 illegal immigrants crossed our southern border in September 2023. This is not sustainable, fair, nor just.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the annual budget deficit, the $33 trillion national debt, and $103 trillion in unfunded liabilities?

Answer:

The budget must be balanced, and the debt burden reduced for the economy to grow. Our current levels of debt and taxation are unsustainable and risk economic collapse. Taxation, like any taking of another's productive effort, must be eliminated wherever possible, and kept to an absolute minimum to be morally justified.

Question:

Do you support individual citizens having the same faith-based optouts from the Respect for Marriage Act as churches and faith-based organizations?

Answer:

Yes. The first marriage laws in the USA were racist - designed to prevent interracial marriage. Early in the founding of this nation marriage was a religious institution - a sacramental contract, not a legal one. In my opinion government has no business regulating religious sacraments.

Question:

Do you believe biological males competing against biological females in women’s sports should be legislated at the state or federal level? Why?

Answer:

I believe the women's sports organizations and individual athletes should be free to choose their own standards for participation without government interference.

Question:

What are your proposals for National Energy Policy? Please include your thoughts on oil drilling, fracking, alternative energy and EVs.

Answer:

Our electric grid typifies government managed technology - unreliable, unsustainable, and a national security nightmare. Decentralized electricity is the best alternative for durability and national security, with nuclear fusion and salt-based reactors replacing legacy fission reactors, especially in earthquake prone areas, as a longer-term alternative. Should, for example, the New Madrid fault shift again (as it did in 1811/12) the USA would risk having a dozen or more Fukushima like failures along the length of the Mississippi river. Unfortunately, current government regulations have delayed both those innovations and the safe storage of used nuclear rods. I've attended the Conservative Climate Summits produced by Congressman Curtis and have been favorably impressed with the reasoned energy alternatives offered there. Electric Vehicles are not environmentally friendly given the challenges of battery disposal, and the amount of fossil fuels that are consumed in their production. Unfortunately extreme green, and extreme pro-oil arguments tend to overwhelm the realities of what is both most efficient, and least environmentally damaging, in the name of shilling for votes from relatively low information voters.

Question:

How would you advocate using the power of the purse to enforce the separation of powers as defined by the Constitution?

Answer:

I would advocate for its use. Congress has abandoned its duty to require an efficient and frugal Executive Branch. Our current debt and future mandated by federal law, but unfunded, spending is an existential threat to our nation. Future generations will condemn us for our ability to have robbed from them through time

Question:

When do you believe human life begins? Would you support a federal law to protect human life inside the womb, and what would be the key points of that proposed law?

Answer:

I believe human life begins at conception, however I do not want a government so intrusive or oppressive that it knows, or acts to protect such early life. As a father of three daughters, I would encourage them to carry any pregnancy to term, even in the case of rape, and would offer whatever emotional and financial support was needed. As I would also do should they decide to have an abortion. Abortion is a matter than should be absolutely private, and the woman's choice, especially early in the term. In reality, it is. Even in areas where abortion is banned, black markets arise to provide it, often at great risk to the woman (as is the case with any law - ink on paper does not prevent crime; punishment or the threat of it discourages some criminal acts - but not all of them. It's the same with the reality of abortion prohibitions). I support easy access to all birth control products and options, including the (so called) Plan B or Day-After pills. My oldest daughter is an MD, as was my dad. Government should not interfere with the medical care provided to, or sought by any woman, or provided by her physician, including abortion. My wife and I have friends with a late-term abortion due to a genetic deformity that would have resulted in weeks to months of life with incredible to the child. IMO the morally correct and kind choice was an abortion, but that choice should not be mine, or the governments - it should be left to the woman, her physician, and hopefully the father. Late term abortions should be rare, and only performed to save the life of the mother, or where the fetus is deceased, or doomed to a brief life of pain and suffering. I also support legislation that would allow prosecution of a pregnant woman's criminal assailant, who causes the death of her fetus, for murder.

Question:

Do you believe that emergency power declarations by elected officials should override the personal rights and freedoms of citizens (for example, mandating medical treatments)?

Answer:

No.

Question:

Do you support the U.S. government implementing a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)? Why or why not?

Answer:

I support competing currencies in a free marketplace. That includes bitcoin, hard metals and other forms of currency. The Federal Reserve is a private bank and would benefit from competition. The monetization of our nation's debt by this non-governmental agency is anti-Constitutional, IMO, and a grave risk to our national security, and future prosperity and freedom.

Question:

Do you support the use of mRNA vaccines in the national food supply? Why or why not?

Answer:

I do not know enough to answer this question intelligently. I can say I support full transparency as to the nature of, and processes used in all food production. (I also don't think we have a centralized "national food supply" nor any federal agency that is capable of policing all of it.)

Question: 

Once you become our congressional representative, what issue do you believe is the most important to address first

Answer: 

The 16th Amendment needs to be repealed. It is a form of slavery. The body of the constitution provides for how the government is to be funded in article 1, section 2, and it was taxing the income of the citizens.

Question:

Do you support additional U.S. Taxpayer funding for the war in Ukraine?

a.     If yes, do you believe in any limits to U.S. funding of Ukraine?

b.     If not, is there a scenario in which you would vote for further funding, and what is it?

Answer:

No. There is no scenario in which I would vote to further funding. It is unconstitutional for our government to spend taxpayer money on any other country's war.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the situation at the U.S. southern border and illegal migration to the U.S. in general?

Answer:

I would advocate to secure our border to stop the invasion of our country. There are laws for people to immigrate to the United States legally and they should be enforced.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the annual budget deficit, the $33 trillion national debt, and $103 trillion in unfunded liabilities?

Answer

Start eliminating unnecessary Federal regulatory agencies, create a budget that reflects what is actually needed to run the government with no additional deficit and reinstate the tax apportionment in Article 1, section 2 of the Constitution, which is divided equally among the states based on population.

Question:

Do you support individual citizens having the same faith-based optouts from the Respect for Marriage Act as churches and faith-based organizations?

Answer:

Yes. The constitution grants all citizens equal protection under the law. To grant more protection based on special status takes that protection away from others.

Question:

Do you believe biological males competing against biological females in women’s sports should be legislated at the state or federal level? Why?

Answer:

I believe this is a catch 22 issue. I believe that it should be legislated at the state level based on the 10th Amendments. However, my concern comes at the collegiate level when competing with other states that have different laws which would have the issue end up in the Supreme Court and they may decide that it falls under the 14th Amendment. If a Bill was introduced in Congress, I would vote against it.

Question:

What are your proposals for National Energy Policy? Please include your thoughts on oil drilling, fracking, alternative energy and EVs.

Answer:

I believe the concept to go 100% renewable energy is currently unrealistic. We do not have the infrastructure to support it. With our current deficit and inflation, it would cause a bigger burden on the taxpayer. We should reopen pipelines and continue drilling and fracking to re-stimulate the economy and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Alternative energy options should still be pursued, but in the private sector. EVs are fine for people that want them, but should never be required by the government.

Question:

How would you advocate using the power of the purse to enforce the separation of powers as defined by the Constitution?

Answer:

By funding only the minimum amount necessary to keep the government running with a balanced budget and deficit reduction as previously answered.

Question:

When do you believe human life begins? Would you support a federal law to protect human life inside the womb, and what would be the key points of that proposed law?

Answer:

Life begins in the womb of the mother. The Supreme Court over ruled Roe v Wade and gave it back to the states. If it did become a Federal issue again I would support a Bill to protect life inside the womb.

Question:

Do you believe that emergency power declarations by elected officials should override the personal rights and freedoms of citizens (for example, mandating medical treatments)?

Answer:

Absolutely not. I believe mandates are unconstitutional.

Question:

Do you support the U.S. government implementing a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)? Why or why not?

Answer:

No, because Article 1 section 8, gives the government the power to coin money and set the value, and set a standard of weights and measure. Money should be tangible. Digital currency is not tangible and easily controlled by the Federal Government. Therefore digital currency is unconstitutional.

Question:

Do you support the use of mRNA vaccines in the national food supply? Why or why not?

Answer:

No. It is tyranny to contaminate the public food supply to exert control over the people.

Question:

Once you become our congressional representative, what issue do you believe is the most important to address first

Answer:

Fiscal responsibility.

Question:

Do you support additional U.S. Taxpayer funding for the war in Ukraine?

a.     If yes, do you believe in any limits to U.S. funding of Ukraine?

b.     If not, is there a scenario in which you would vote for further funding, and what is it?

Answer:

No, not without a congressional declaration of war, and a credible threat to America.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the situation at the U.S. southern border and illegal migration to the U.S. in general?

Answer:

I support bringing our military home from abroad and defending OUR BORDER. We need to enforce our laws, end human trafficking, and make it easier for LEGAL immigrants to come contribute to our country and its economy.

Question:

What policies would you advocate regarding the annual budget deficit, the $33 trillion national debt, and $103 trillion in unfunded liabilities?

Answer:

Use Congress's leverage over the budgetary process to reverse the trend of spending. I support ending the Federal Income Tax and going back to the pre-1913 revenue system that makes the Federal Government accountable to the States, instead of the states lobbying Congress for money from the Federal budget. I support getting the government out of healthcare completely, including putting federal employees on private group policies, and giving the military the same policies as Congress. I support allowing people to opt-out of social security, while maintaining the current levels of benefits for those who do not opt-out. Any shortages should be required to be paid from the general fund by cutting spending from other programs, since the social security fund has been spent growing government for those other programs. I want to shrink the Federal Government as much as possible. I want a government small enough to fit inside the Constitution!

Question:

Do you support individual citizens having the same faith-based optouts from the Respect for Marriage Act as churches and faith-based organizations?

Answer:

Government is prohibited from discriminating against individuals for any reason. Furthermore, it is not allowed to regulate or require anything of churches. Government should not have any place or involvement in marriage. Inversely, individuals and churches must allowed to associate and exchange freely without government interference. Marriage is a religious institution, and government should have never been allowed into the equation. To be more direct to answer the question, yes: individuals must also have the freedom to choose what unions we accept as marriage, and be allowed to discriminate without legal consequence. Freedom of association is also part of the first amendment; we must all be allowed to choose the nature and extent of our associations.

Question:

Do you believe biological males competing against biological females in women’s sports should be legislated at the state or federal level? Why?

Answer:

There is no constitutional authority for it. Title IX is the Federal Government acting outside the authority given by the Constitution. Therefore, this issue is properly an issue that must be decided by the States or the people, respectively. However, the Federal Government is intervening already. That makes it a federal issue until we can properly eliminate that involvement. Legislation is needed at the federal level to prohibit federal involvement in the matter.

Question:

What are your proposals for National Energy Policy? Please include your thoughts on oil drilling, fracking, alternative energy and EVs.

Answer:

I support an all-of-the-above approach to energy. Even our coal and natural gas power plants are part of that approach. Our fossil-fuel energy production is far cleaner and safer than similar plants anywhere else in the world. We should reform or eliminate regulations that prevent energy production from advancing to be the most reliable clean energy known to man. I support American energy independence. When America doesn't produce clean energy, other nations will produce dirty energy and flood the world with pollution. I support clean American energy as the solution to undesirable carbon emissions. The solution to this problem is likely the same as nearly every other problem: get the Federal Government out of it!

Question:

How would you advocate using the power of the purse to enforce the separation of powers as defined by the Constitution?

Answer:

Remove funding from executive agencies that exceed the authority given them by Congress. Make representatives define the role of those agencies more explicitly, and require agencies to get congressional approval for any change that increases their budget by more than a million dollars. Dramatically reduce executive authority and expense, and eliminate as many executive agencies as possible, other than those few delineated by the Constitution and keep those within Constitutional directives.

Question:

When do you believe human life begins? Would you support a federal law to protect human life inside the womb, and what would be the key points of that proposed law?

Answer:

I believe human life begins at conception. I would support a federal law to protect human life inside the womb. I believe that the Dobbs decision got it right overturning Roe vs Wade, because abortion is violence against another person and all violent crimes are regulated by and adjudicated in the State where the crime occurred. So the key point of a proposed Federal Law would be that the Federal Government prosecutes abortion that occurs on Federal Land, bases, facilities and in Washington D.C. States have an obligation to also prosecute violent crimes inside their jurisdiction, but the Federal Government doesn't have authority to regulate that. However the US Constitution is the "supreme law of the land", and that law requires government to protect life, liberty, property, and conscience. States have the responsibility to protect life, and reserve the authority to regulate that.

Question:

Do you believe that emergency power declarations by elected officials should override the personal rights and freedoms of citizens (for example, mandating medical treatments)?

Answer:

Absolutely not! Government works FOR the people and should be a servant, not a master. Government has zero authority over individuals unless and until they can prove imminent or actual harm from one person to another. That high standard is necessary to prevent tyrannical authoritarian governments. During the Covid era, mask mandates, vaccine requirements, and lockdowns or closures were inappropriate and were correctly resisted, protested, and disobeyed. However too few people were willing to fight that inappropriate use of government power; I would be encouraging it from Congress were I to win.

Question:

Do you support the U.S. government implementing a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)? Why or why not?

Answer:

No. The U.S. Government has proven themselves to be irresponsible with monetary policy and the privacy of Americans finances. The CDBC is potentially a dangerous weapon to violate privacy and for government to easily discriminate against political opponents or those with different values or priorities. Our financial system is already too political, we don't need or want the Federal Government to have more power over our money.

Question:

Do you support the use of mRNA vaccines in the national food supply? Why or why not?

Answer:

I don't support it, and would support regulation to prohibit government requiring it for any purpose. I wouldn't support regulation to ban it in the marketplace, but would support regulation requiring clear advertising for consumers to know the food it's used in has been modified in that way.

No response

No response