For the life of the mother, or instances of rape, incest. Out right prohibition just drives these behaviors underground.

Agree

Providing affordable OBGYN and contraceptive services are critical to reducing those seeking abortions.

Agree

It requires careful consideration and implementation. It should only apply to the terminally ill. While great strides have been made in palliative care; forcing someone to die of starvation or in great pain is reprehensible.

Disagree

At what point though does ones right to refuse service interfere with another person's right to exist?

Public emergencies and for no more than 15 days at a stretch. After that it is up to the church leadership and congregants to asses the risk that caused the closures.

I am not well versed enough in this topic, nor is it much of a local issue that the AL House can impact. Spreading of culture and economic benefit has always been a great way to sway opposition. For the die hards, funding and the spread of harmful rhetoric must be curtailed (Saudi Arabia).

Choose not to answer

I am not well versed in the happenings in the West Bank. The Alabama legislature has little to no impact on such foreign policy items.

A, but only because we won't swing the other way and allow market rate competition. The anti-competitive nature of healthcare is largely due to private insurance not allowing for clear pricing and hamstrung, halfhearted large scale government programs that have no negotiating power.

Big G government, never. The rest should be allowed to make the decision as they see fit, allowing accommodations for those who cannot receive a vaccine; or in the case of a conscientious dissenter, accommodations for access to critical services. There is a broader argument here of what does an individual owe society to operate within society and what it means to be a "good" citizen. This varies greatly by location, beliefs, etc. and cannot be legislated at a grand scale.

Cut/repeal taxation on necessary items like groceries. The bold truth of it is that people and small businesses (sub 100 employees) pay the bulk of taxes and always will as the cost is passed on to the end consumer. To overhaul the tax code in a meaningful way would require shifting the burden of taxation on to a Value Added Tax and eliminating essentially all taxes in between. Also, there should be no income tax credits only deductions. (really shouldn't be an income tax as it were).

Eliminate ABC stores in Alabama. The direct consumer sales should not be handled by the state, thus removing the budgetary burden of retail locations and warehouses.

Neutral

Well funded public universities are essential to economic growth. The problem is in retention. Alabama faces serious brain drain and it does little good to spend tax dollars on college education just for the graduate to leave the state.

Agree

Via border agents and the technology to track those illegally crossing the border. A border wall, like many construction projects, looks great on paper but usually has a higher price tag and less effect than what it was marketed to have. More should be done to police those who over stay their visas as well.

Anyone who meets the requirements set forth to be a true asylum seeker, legally obtain a visa or seek and complete citizenship. Not meeting those items should be met with swift deportation.

Neutral

I support all forms of schooling. I am myself a product of public and private education. The voucher system sounds good, but the logistics has always eluded me. If there is only capacity to take on 20 extra students at the best school district but 200 applicants; have we not turned the best public districts into a de facto private schools? What do we do about the 180 students who didn't get in? Our bigger problem is that we treat public education as daycare,

Neutral

As long as it is within departmental policy, which has also been reviewed by a citizen panel. In Alabama there are departments (Brookside) that get away with "departmental policy" that is patently illegal, but there is little oversight.

Disagree

We do need to embed social workers into police departments to help cover the areas where they can be of help (mental health, homeless, etc.) We also need to increase funding for uniformed officers. Radio cars and removing the two officer per patrol car opens everyone to greater danger by not having enough manpower to control a situation.

Most of the items on the NICS. Mental instability ( and/or convictions for violent action are clearly disqualifying events. I do think 30 minutes of classroom/range instruction should come with the purchase of a firearm, but not as a disqualifying event.

Disagree

The only reason to allow a suit of a firearms manufacturer would be if they aid and abet the crime in some capacity (even via marketing). The firearms manufacturer did not pull the trigger. This brings us full circle. Where does personal responsibility end and where does societal begin?

To champion the People and provide for those items that are difficult/neigh impossible on a small scale (defense, infrastructure, etc.) The government, as envisioned by Teddy Roosevelt, is also the bulwark against rampant corporatism which can easily run over small groups, towns, and even cities. It is the place where we can come together and take collective action to improve our communities and air of grievances.

Conservative

Mostly Libertarian. I want the government to leave me and other people alone; stepping in where there is conflict between groups. Otherwise, let people be.

I have an interview in the Vestavia Voice, though it doesn't cover the exact question.

No.

In Alabama, we must repeal the state Grocery Tax, shore up our mental health and education systems, and impose term limits on our representatives. Too many have made do nothing, know nothing, politics their vocation and are wasting the potential of the citizens with mindless legislation (if they ever propose any).

Neutral

These two items do not jive. Judeo-Christian values establish a moral framework? Yes. Do they create limited government? No. Government is limited by the desire to live and seek freedom. Otherwise government, even well meaning and moral can be used as a cudgel to limit broad swathes of freedom and choice.The fact is, whatever structure is given power over others will exercise that to garner more power.

Disagree

People are to be judged on the merits of their character.

Agree

Marriage is in the church. Government should confine itself to recognizing civil unions and the legal framework provided by that. Marriage has no place in government.

Disagree

I do not believe the bulk of institutions are fundamentally racist. However, I do know that many policy decisions over the years come from a racist/class-est mindset and were intended to harm. California gun control measures come to mind.

I believe that my spiritual beliefs are between me and my higher power. I do not seek to impose them on other people, nor do I want others imposed on me. I grew up Catholic. I disagreed with the politicization of the Church. Policy does not come from the pulpit. I value seeking and doing good. Reducing the suffering of those around me, providing grace in tough times, and understanding that we all need something to see us through in the life.

Strongly Disagree

As long as it is easy and cheap, if not free for purely identification purposes, to obtain a legal ID. Adding excessive steps and requirements brings it around to being a de facto poll tax.

The anti-competitive nature of numerous campaign and election laws. They are designed by incumbents to remain in power, not stop corruption. Likewise, private polling places should not be allowed to remove campaign staff (sufficiently far from the polls themselves) from their grounds if they are in the areas trafficked by voters for the duration of the polling place being open.

Yes. Racism in all forms and groups. Breeding hate of any group leads to more violent action over generations. It snowballs. However, the government cannot do much to combat racism. You cannot force diversity of thought. That must be brought at a community level

Strongly Disagree

There is a fine balance to walk here. There can be too much damaging regulation for the sake of regulation. There are also wildly polluting industries that to save a couple percentages points have and will poison entire towns. I think strict regulation is vital to preserving clean air, water and life. Overzealous regulation not so much.

Choose not to answer

I have not dug deeply on this topic. I have seen plenty of propaganda about it and have a natural mistrust of oil and gas companies who have lied about their levels of pollution for decades. In the near term I support it, but only to push for greater energy independence, namely in nuclear production.