Douglas Alexander

Choose not to answer

Please see #3

Disagree

This is not a simple decision for me; I’m open to hearing more about it from both sides. There’s the obvious concern of a slippery slope with the state taking more decision authority, as has happened in European countries already. But it gets tricky when modern medicine sometimes “heroically” keeps someone alive without their permission. There are some heart-breaking anecdotal situations that should be considered. Experts from Hospice care and many other individuals should be consulted.

3. Under what circumstances should abortion be allowed? Please work with me here: I strive to be wise as a serpent while innocent as a dove. I’m not taking a position unless polls show I have a chance to win on Nov. 8. Politicians on both sides fundraise on abortion--under Roe it was cynical or manipulative for many. Post Dobbs, it's up to state legislatures; Congress has little to do. Both sides tend to turn their opponents into two-dimensional stick figures mouthing slogans. It’s a 3-D issue: any politician not willing to admit that isn’t serious, loving, nor compassionate. The above is ~500 characters because I thought that was my limit. It turns out I have 5,000. I’m keeping the above for those who don’t have time to read more. For those that do… When I say “work with me” I mean: As an Independent, I strive to genuinely represent all constituents. I want to understand and be able to clearly express both views on this very important, delicate issue. Besides, adding another 2-D voice helps no one. The reason an Independent runs is there is an issue very important about which the leaders of neither party are talking. For me, it’s ending the career politician dynamic in Congress, and sending normal citizens such as you and I to Washington. Term Limits is my mission! If elected, I will bring my mission to the national stage. If it appears I have a strong chance to win on Nov. 8, of course I will answer this question: it would be disingenuous to try to get elected while “straddling the fence.” However, if polls show I have little chance to win it makes no sense for me to take one side of a litmus test issue and thus lose the attention of ~half of the voters. Thus I’m not taking a position at this point to keep focused on the need to impose term limits on Congress--which both pro-choice & pro-life voters overwhelmingly support. (Did you know that?--82% of both Democrat and Republican voters consistently poll in favor of imposing term limits on members of Congress.) Now to addressing this in 3-D. First, the pro-choice perspective. I listened to the 12/28/2021 “Honestly” podcast with Barri Weiss titled:” Why You’re Right – And Wrong – About Abortion.” It provided a good example why many American’s are pro-choice. At one point she talks about a family she knew before Roe v. Wade whose teenage daughter became pregnant. The parents decided it would be best for her to get an abortion. They traveled to Mexico. The parents were told to stay in the waiting room. The girl was taken back and sexually molested! Then she was given an abortion. She was in an extremely vulnerable, dangerous position. People on the pro-life side may respond: “Well, they wouldn't have been in that position if the girl hadn’t gotten pregnant in the first place, or if they hadn’t chosen to have an abortion.” My response to that perspective: you cannot expect everyone to share the same worldview as you do. (Read more in the religious freedom section.) The pro-choice side does not share your view of the sanctity of life. What they value is for women--who have lived under a patriarchal culture for centuries--to break off any limitations on their functioning and thriving in society that are rooted in the fact that they are women. From their perspective, preventing them from the right to choose to end a pregnancy relegates them back to a second-tier status vis-a-vis men. From the suppositions of their worldview, it is a somewhat logical conclusion. The question I have to ask as a politician is “how do I want people on both sides of this difficult issue to be treated/accommodated by society as a whole?” I think of that dear young girl going into that back room, initially trusting that she’d be treated as she is by medical professionals in the USA. She had never heard the terms “pro-choice” or “pro-life;” she was just trusting her parents. Then the nightmare begins. Does she cry out? Does she forgo the procedure and run back to her parents? She probably feared for her life until they began the abortion, and then she realized that was just another price she had to pay to get the procedure. The trauma would have been devastating. I hope people on both sides of the abortion debate don’t ever want such violations to occur again. Now to the pro-life perspective. This is easier to explain: just look at photos of the product of abortion. One gets it: these were little human beings with hair, a nose, fingers and toes. People on the pro-choice side often avoid looking at such photos. Just as pro-lifers need to genuinely empathize with the challenges of an unwanted pregnancy, pro-choice people need to look at such photos if they expect to be taken seriously in the abortion debate. Unless they admit that a human life is at stake, they are not looking at it from a three-dimensional perspective.

Neutral

From the book of Proverbs: There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death. 14.12 Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker, but he who is generous to the needy honors him. 14.31 The fallow ground of the poor would yield much food, but it is swept away through injustice. Prvb. 23.13 A righteous man knows the rights of the poor; a wicked man does not understand such knowledge. 29.7 In all toil there is profit, but mere talk tends only to poverty. 14.23

Strongly Agree

Elon Musk tweet: “True national debt, including unfunded entitlements, is at least $60 trillion – roughly 3x the size of the entire US economy. Something has got to give.” Feb 10, ‘22 Per Tom Coburn: B/c the fed. government doesn't use generally accepted accounting principles, they can simply ignore unfunded liabilities. Congress knows it must pay them, but they aren't included in the official calculations of the national debt! It’s like not including your mortgage when assessing your debt.

Some social problems--healthcare--don’t need to be scrapped and started over, but instead given major renovations. Our tax code should be scrapped and started over. Setting aside how much is raised, the Q is how society is incentivized, and who gets any breaks. Has the goal of everyone owning an individual home become outdated? Who wins and who loses? I don’t have all the answers, but we first need a transparent tax code that people understand. Then let the “what’s fair” discussions begin.

Did not answer

Strongly Disagree

See #3. Whether a believer in a major religion, “spiritual but not religious,” atheist or agnostic, there will ALWAYS be people who do not share your worldview. Call them to their higher good regardless. Don’t become tribal; don’t hate those who adopt different worldviews. How you treat them will determine the trajectory of your own life between peace with joy, or frustration & conflict. Thus, I say “no:” live and let live. Patronize those who agree with you. No governmental coercion.

The pendulum started way over at society accepting the X faith, studying the Bible in schools, etc. As society became secular, the Bible was used less in schools, and in the 1950’s prayer was banned, etc. Up until then, people who did not believe had to put up with the dominance of the X faith in the public square. Now the pendulum has swung to the other side, and believers are having to put up with the dominance of those opposed to organized religion. (Sorry, I ran out of time here)

Did not answer

There is a lot to say here but I got to this questionnaire too late. If we get term limits on Congress, Congress could announce that the next term they were going to tackle the messy parts of our healthcare system. It doesn't need to be scrapped and rebuilt; we just need some major renovations. People from all aspects of the Healthcare industry could run for Congress, most would plan to only be there for two years. They would call in the experts they know, together they would hammer it out.

A is wrong; C & D are tempting but our economy is so global now that we have to pay attention to what's going on around the world. So B is (somewhat regrettably) the only informed choice.

Neutral

Regardless of how people try to influence Israel, we in the USA need to acknowledge that although enabling Israel to have a homeland after the horror of the holocaust was a good thing, it was not done in a wise manner. Specifically, we need to acknowledge that the Palestinians, and other native peoples--some of whom are Maronite Aramean Christians--were illegally ousted by the IDF. No one came to their aid. Just as we in the USA are righting wrongs done to our Natives, Israel must do the same.

Strongly Agree

We should defend ourselves assiduously against terrorists. We also should stop fostering the radicalization of young Muslim men: we to some extent have earned the “Great Satan” moniker by exporting arms, pornography and lacivious media that offend the cultural sensitivities of genuine Muslims. Add to that, dubious wars. We should mount a genuine good will effort of exchange programs to treat Arab countries with respect, and bless them in ways that would fit with their cultural norms.

Strongly Agree

Did not answer

Did not answer

Disagree

Qualification for protected classes should be reserved for those born into it, or due to medical diagnosis. It should not be possible for an individual to decide to join a protected class by adopting certain behaviors. I choose to be gracious and kind to those with gender identity issues and hope all will do the same. But the government cannot force one to treat others kindly; to coerce society to give preferential treatment to those choosing a particular lifestyle will create resentment.

Neutral

CRT is a lightning rod term; I don’t think the adjective “fundamentally” is appropriate in its definition. Anyone who does not believe there are legacy norms for selling homes, hiring people, flowing economic resources to subsets of our society over others, and treating some subsets with preferential treatment is either 1) ignorant or 2) willingly choosing not to be disabused of their perspective. Those norms are not “fundamental” but the results are real, and devastating to my black brothers.

I was taught by my parents to follow Jesus at an early age. I asked Jesus to come into my heart at age 5. During the summer after my 9th grade year I got serious about really following Jesus. I was “student chaplain” as a senior at the Christian boarding school I attended, The Stony Brook School. In college I was active in the InterVaristy chapter at Bucknell. During my junior year I went through a period of doubting: is all of this stuff really true? My worst concern: will a lot of people really go to hell? I didn't want to believe that. At some point I had to leave global questions behind and determine how I'd handle my daily life: how I'd live my life the next day, how handle a relationship, or approach my classes. There were two thoughts that kept me on the right track: I had seen in my ~20 years of life that the Bible was true at every point. It contained uncanny wisdom. I considered the wise men in my life. Not so much my parents, but people like Dr. Archie MacKinney and Dr. Robert Frykenburg at my childhood church. I decided that these men were much wiser and more experienced than I, and if they still believed, then I should just keep on going in the same direction. As the decades have passed I’m “hopelessly” a believer. I have had too long of a relationship with the risen Christ and too many experiences with Him and others who know Him to seriously question my faith any more. It is great to have the guidance and power of Jesus, whose Spirit is living within me, to live a victorious and abundant life. I love the peace and freedom of knowing that my sins are forgiven. I am free to take joyful risks and serve others in His strength. The Christian faith, when you boil it down, is not a creed of historical facts, not a collection of teachings by a group of dead men, not a list of do's and don'ts, not a magic formula for success. It is a relationship with a living person. Jesus is alive and is working in my heart, my sins are forgiven, and I can live each day in the power and joy that he makes available to us all.

Disagree

Those that were hastily passed to accommodate the conditions of the pandemic. They should have been passed as temporary from the start.

Neutral

If individuals want to take it upon themselves that is fine; I don't think it should be enforced by a governmental body, but if a city referendum is passed, that's their choice. Certainly not the federal government. There is much more to say but I got to this questionnaire late and it must be submitted w/in 30 minutes; please go to my website for more on this question. AlexanderForCongress2022.com

Did not answer

Neutral

I'm open to learning from experts on both side of this issue; We need to become energy independent.

Did not answer

Choose not to answer

I'm an independent thinker who currently is disappointed with both political parties. I find the terms "Conservative" and "liberal" to no longer be helpful terms. I use "left" and "right" since the left is not very liberal, and the right is not very conservative.

This is my first foray into politics, I have nothing to provide at this point.

No.

I am the first Independent to get on the ballot in Wisconsin’s 2nd district since 1950. Besides introducing legislation that all bills involving money outlays expire after five years unless reauthorized. and another creating an independent board that give each bill its official name, my primary thrust is to get term limits on member of Congress. That is my #1 issue . The idea behind term limits is 1) to get rid of career politicians, and 2) attract an entirely different person to run for Congress, with entirely different motivations once in office. They would much more likely have the heart of public servants. Did you know this is truly a bi-partisan issue? A recent national poll on Oct 16, 2021 shows 82% of both Democrat, Republican and Independent voters poll in favor of term limits on Congress. In 2018 a similar poll showed the same results. For details on these polls, search on “Oct 16 Scott Rasmessen term limits” and also “M&A poll voters overwhelmingly support term limits for Congress” I don't have time for more here but will leave you with an educational song that parodies the “Hamilton” song by King George III “You’re be back.” Please enjoy! "I'll be back" You say the price of my vote is a price you're not willing to pay You cry when members of Congress conglomerates merely just buy, You’re so sad! I tell you one thing then go do what the lobbyists say Now I’m making you mad Remember despite your “term limits,” I'm your man I'll be back Soon you'll see I’m-the incumbent you belong to me I'll be back Time will tell That I really haven’t served you well Pensions rise, honor falls I’ll-patronize you buddy through it all And when push comes to shove I will spend your children’s money to remind you of my love Debt, debt, debt, debt, fe-der-al debt, debt, fe-der-al debt, fe-der-al debt… You say Congress is aging and I can't go on You'll be the ones complaining when I stay on No, don't impose term limits! Incumbents know no limits! Seniority gets the action I’ll win the next election For ever And ever I’ll win my elections forever We’ll be back Like before Grid lock-works for us though you get sore No term limits! It’s just a faze We’ll be in Congress till our dying days. Don’t send us home! We’d go mad. This-is the only job we’ve ever had. So when push comes to shove We will kill this grand experiment you people all still love Debt, debt, debt, debt, fe-der-al debt, debt, fe-der-al debt, fe-der-al debt…

Agree

When Navy captains of a ship have a major accident, it ruins their career even if they were not involved in the accident. Is that Fair? Maybe not, but it causes them to “worry” about everything in a helpful way. They know their career depends upon nothing major going wrong. With the police, I recommend each city department (this is not a federal issue) let officers know that although they have qualified immunity, if they kill a civilian without good cause, their career will be over.

Neutral

First of all, this is not a federal issue. It is a community issue. Federal officials will grab the spotlight when police or gun rights issues arise, but the press should not accommodate their cynical posturing. Police should never have been saddled with mental health cases. Community leaders need to look to themselves and commit funds to ensuring safety for all. There are doubtless best practices, and more will emerge, but the solutions may look different between Los Angeles and Peoria

This is a state issue, not a federal issue. That said, I recommend that states consider that a male’s brain does not fully develop until ~age 24. States should legislate anyone <24 may only purchase a firearm under the auspices of a parent/invested adult who co-owns and takes legal responsibility for it.

Agree

Any company can go rogue and become a negative influence in society. There are 3 checks: 1) Competing companies can present a safer product or a safer way of selling it. 2) Government regulators will determine the company is violating existing regulations. 3) Citizens can sue. Ideally it doesn’t get to 3). The question is whether the citizen can present a compelling case for suing the company. If manufacturing standards or background checks were not appropriately followed, then yes.