Q1. Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?
Answer: I oppose federal legislation on abortion and I don’t consider the commerce clause an excuse to federally regulate, approve, intercede, impede, deny, permit or criminalize its practice. No woman should be forced by federal law (or other coercion) to have an abortion nor should there be federal legislation prohibiting her from having one.
This is an area in which states have legislative discretion and, if crafted, state legislation should be based upon the will of the majority in those states.
Having said that, I do not personally support abortion except in special instances but I do support a rational and reasonable set of state controls over the procedure.
Q2. Do you support capital punishment for certain crimes?
Answer: Yes, at both the state and federal levels. We should recognize that there are predators among us and we should remove them permanently from society. It is cruel and unjust to victims, survivors, and society at large if we keep predators alive. Absent a history of predation, capital punishment should not be invoked. Let the jury decide if prior acts -committed by the same person- are demonstrative of predatory activity.
Q3. Do you believe that human activity is contributing to climate change?
Answer: Yes, of course, human activity has an impact on climate. I do not support the federal regulation of greenhouse gases but I do support state legislation of it. I support state and federal incentives that change irresponsible behaviors to responsible ones.
A large concern to me is whether an industry or business can use its might and its money to circumvent common sense regulation of materials, waste products, and by-products. There is historical evidence that companies and industries have engaged in strategies that remove or limit regulations that protect the environment. When the by-products of an industry or a business result in bad environmental stewardship, there is room for governmental regulation. I favor regulation and laws if/when the environment cannot naturally recover from the cessation of an industrial activity within the same period of time that the material and waste product were used or produced. For example, an industry that mines materials for twenty years should not injure the environment for centuries to come as a result of its practices. I support regulations and practices that will permit the natural recovery of the flora and fauna within an equal quantity of years as the industry existed. If a mine exists for 20 years, the natural environment should recover within another 20 years.
Q4. Do you support same-sex marriage?
Answer: I don’t like this question. I recognize “marriage” as the traditional union of a man and a woman and as it is historically recognized under current state and federal laws. I support civil unions as a non-traditional union of two people of any sex (or no sex) with legal status equal to “married” unions. I do not support the civil union of more than two persons nor combinations of persons and non-persons. You cannot have a civil union, or a marriage, with your pet, your truck, or with more than one person at a time.
Q5. Do you support Social Security?
Answer: Yes. The purpose of a government is to look after the general welfare of its people. A social safety net is a reasonable approach to promote the general welfare of its people.
Q6. Do you support a national healthcare plan? Do you support repealing the 2010 Affordable Care Act?
Answer: Yes to both questions. I support national healthcare as a reasonable approach to promoting the general welfare of all citizens. I do not support ObamaCare because of its mandates and its lack of choices.
I support a national healthcare program with multiple options and approaches for citizens. I believe that a federal mandate to purchase insurance is unconstitutional and I do not support a ‘failure-to-purchase’ tax if one does not have insurance. I support increasing competition among care providers to drive costs down and I support litigation controls that prevent extended delays in malpractice justice as well as excessive awards to the injured.
Q7. What is your position on illegal immigration?
Answer: Something is wrong in America when 11 million immigrants do not …or cannot…become citizens, and they see no harm in continuing to live in this country illegally. I believe every country has the right to control its borders and the US should initiate stronger actions to prevent illegal immigration and residency. When immigrants do not see an advantage to becoming citizens or do not see a disadvantage to remaining illegal then something is wrong in America. Think about this: What value are immigration quotas if they do nothing to control immigration? I favor a fresh look at quotas, a moratorium on deportation for current illegals, an encouragement to register as an illegal, the establishment of a defined period of time to become US citizens, and then deportation for those illegals who remain here when the moratorium has expired. I call for a one-time federal and state cooperative effort that turns illegal immigrants into legal immigrants and ultimately into US citizens.
Reasonable Citizen 