Human life begins at conception and deserves legal protection at every stage until natural death.
Abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood, should not receive taxpayer funds or grants from federal, state, or local governments.
I support the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which requires health care providers to provide life-saving treatment for infants who survive an attempted abortion.
Under what circumstances should abortion be allowed?
None. Please see the Pro-Life OB/GYN website, AAPLOG.org, for answers to questions about unusual situations in pregnancy. Abortion has, as its primary goal, the killing of a baby. However, a fetal-maternal separation operation has, as its primary goal, the preservation of the life of both mother and baby. There is a difference. Given our present technology, many babies in dire situations may not survive, but technology will evolve. Fetal-maternal separations to attempt to save the life of the mother or the baby are to be allowed. Life begins at conception, and some forms of birth control may interfere with the process of implantation or development of the baby after conception. Those technologies would fall under the abortion ban. If there is no medical consensus as to the mechanism of action of a method of birth control, then we should always decide on the side of life.
It is the government’s responsibility to ensure everyone has a livable income.
Free enterprise and the right to private property are essential elements of a productive economic system.
How would you guarantee Social Security benefits for future generations?
I am running for US House, and will be sworn to "support this Constitution." There simply is no Constitutional Power in Article 1, Section 8 to justify Social Security. According to the 10th Amendment, this would be a power vested to the States. That transition will most likely take 40 to 50 years. In the next 30 years, Medicare and Social Security will have a cash deficit of 100 Trillion dollars. For a possible solution see Manhattan Institute report, September 2018, by Brian Riedl: "A Comprehensive Federal Budget Plan to Avert a Debt Crisis." Suggestions include raise full benefit retirement to age 69 by 2030. Raise the Social Security payroll tax 1% and add a 1% income tax above the maximum earnings subject to the Social Security payroll tax. These are only part of the spending cuts and tax increases needed to stabilize the debt at 95% of GDP. The author goes to great lengths to critique both conservative and liberal "pipe dream" proposals.
What government spending would you reduce in order to balance the budget?
Please see the answer to Questions 30 and 31. According to the above mentioned Sept 2018 Manhattan Institute report by Brian Riedl, "a fully balanced budget is probably not possible" due to mandatory entitlement spending increases and debt interest. I favor sunsetting unconstitutional agencies as part of a plan. Riedl assumes no changes to structure, but cuts in SS, Midicare, Mecicaid other mandatory and discretionary spending adding up to 4.5% of GDP by 2048. There is no 30 sec soundbite fix.
Under what circumstances should taxpayers help pay off existing student loans?
None. I am running for the US House and will be sworn "to support this Constitution." See Article 1, Section 8. There is NO enumerated power of the Congress to be involved in Education. According to the 10th Amendment, such power would be reserved to the States or to the People. The cost of education has risen, just as in medical care, BECAUSE of unconstitutional involvement of the federal government.
Governments should not discriminate against individuals, organizations or small businesses because of their belief that marriage is only a union of one man and one woman.
Religious liberty is at risk in the United States and deserves the highest level of protection in the law.
I promise to protect the freedom of Christians to share the Gospel and to practice Biblical principles.
What does "separation of church and state" mean to you?
I am running for US House, and will be sworn "to support this Constitution." The 1st Amendment begins "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" There is a clear prohibition against the federal government establishing and financing an official state religion. However, all of the Founders were men of religion, and it was clear that it played a role in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The Public Square is not required to be free of religious expression. Thomas Jefferson's "Letter to the Danbury Baptists" is often misconstrued. Freedom alone is chaos. Liberty is Freedom PLUS Morality. Morality came to the Founders through the Bible. See also the "General Welfare" quote from James Madison made during the 1792 debate of the Cod Fisheries Bill.
It is the government’s responsibility to ensure everyone has health insurance.
I support the elimination of private healthcare insurance.
How would you promote healthcare coverage that is adequate, affordable and accessible for all?
The Federal Government has scant Constitutional power in the area of medical care. See Article 1, Section 8. I am running for the US House, and will be sworn to "support this Constitution." If there is to be any regulation of medicine, that is, by the 10th Amendment, a power reserved to the States. Please see my website videos on the subject. Please go to AAPSonline.org and "Common Sense Medicine" by Jeff Danby for discussions on the subject. Medicare and Medicaid and Obamacare are unconstitutional on a Federal level. It will take 40 to 50 years to transition those entitlements back to their rightful place in the States. "Cash, Catastrophic Insurance and Charity" is the mantra of effective medical care reform. That being said, the IRS code can be used to enhance HSA limits and functionality, to promote Direct Primary Care, and to eliminate the anti-kickback exemption for Group Purchasing Organizations and Pharmacy Benefits Managers (drives up drug prices).
The best way to maintain peace is through a strong military.
What should the United States do to help eradicate the threat of radical Islamic terrorism?
I am running for the US House and believe in strict adherence to the original intent of the Founders' Constitution. Only Congress has the power to declare war. If our homeland or territories (including embassies) are attacked, we may defend. If we wish to engage in offensive actions, then a formal Congressional declaration of war is required. There is a constitutional mechanism for treaties between nations, and the terms of these treaties could be designed to attempt to eliminate the threat of radical Islamic terrorism. Under the Law of Nations, we have a right to admit persons to the US under our terms, and that would include stringent vetting for the potential for illegal activity and terrorist threat. It is said that most Muslims are peaceful. However, the unknown factor is whether they are peaceful because of Islam or in spite of it. The answer to that question may never be known, but it is key to our long term safety.
I am in favor of construction of a wall and other necessary infrastructure on our border that gives complete control over entering and exiting the United States.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished.
State and federal funds should be denied to any public or private entity, including but not limited to sanctuary cities, that are not in compliance with immigration laws.
Employers should be required to use E-verify to confirm the eligibility of their employees to work in the United States.
Who should be allowed to immigrate to the U.S. and under what circumstances?
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4 states that "Congress shall have the power to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." Scholars actively debate whether or not this includes "Immigration." At the time of the founding, each State regulated immigration. Applied today, this would create chaos. A permanent solution may require an Amendment to insert "immigration" into Clause 4. In the interim, immigration and visa entry should be based only upon the needs of our society. The asylum criteria has been so abused as to question its continued existence. We should also reevaluate the question of refugee criteria. The USMCA is unconstitutional, and its terms subvert our sovereignty. Comprehensive Naturalization reform could be written to be so specific as to encompass immigration. Thorough vetting of all immigrants should be undertaken prior to admission. Eliminate birthright citizenship. Limit immigration to allow for assimilation.
Taxpayer-funded public education should be guaranteed through college.
Judeo-Christian values established a framework of morality which is necessary for our system of limited government.
I support adding sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression as protected classes in non-discrimination laws.
Briefly describe your spiritual beliefs and values.
I am running for the US House. Article 6, Section 3 of the Constitution states that "but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." I am a born and baptized Roman Catholic of Polish-American heritage. The Bible guided our Founders, and it serves also as my moral inspiration. Liberty is Freedom PLUS Morality. Founder John Adams said "Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Our inalienable Natural Rights are endowed to us by our Creator, and not bestowed by men. These God-given rights are to Life, Liberty, Property and the means to defend those to the best of our ability. Governments are instituted among men to secure these rights, as stated in the Declaration of Independence.
When you consider your views on a wide range of issues from economic and social matters to foreign policy and immigration, which of the following best describes you overall?
Please provide publicly available information validating your answer to the previous question.
If you go to my website and read the information and view the videos, it will be apparent that the isolated terms "conservative" and "liberal" are very misleading. A "conservative" is someone who values tradition and resists change. In 1776, a "conservative" was a Crown loyalist, and a "liberal" was a person who valued personal liberty. So, you see, those two terms have no fixed meaning and are misleading. However, I am a "Constitutionalist", a person who will always support the original intent, understanding and meaning of the Founders' Constitution. That does not change with time. When I hear a person describe themselves as merely "conservative", that provides no reference point. In contrast, a "constitutionalist" is a person with a known and fixed theory of government and policy. Since I am an original intent constitutionalist, you could say that I am a "very conservative constitutionalist." See Article 1, Section 8 for the limited and enumerated powers of the Congress.
Have you ever been convicted of a felony or been penalized for sexual misconduct? If so, please explain.
Is there anything else you would like voters to know about you?
I am an original intent constitutionalist. Q 12. Peace is multifactorial. Madison said that Wars lead to Armies, and Armies lead to Debt and Taxes, and Debt and Taxes are the known methods for bringing the many under the subjugation of the few. Q13, minimum sentencing. I am running for Federal office, and the Constitution specifies few true Federal Crimes. Federal statutes need reforming. Violent crime justice is mostly a State issue, and I defer. Q14. Cannabis. Very complex subject. See video on my website. No enumerated Congressional power over agriculture. Q 20. See answer to Q32. Sanctuary Cities/States are a complex constitutional issue. Consider the anti-commandeering doctrine and Federalist 46 on unconstitutional federal acts. See also the website of the Tenth Amendment Center for articles of interest. I pledge to constitutionally legislate, not delegate, so you won't have to litigate to reclaim your God-given rights and liberties.
Mandatory minimum sentencing should be required and enforced for violent crimes.
What restrictions on gun ownership are needed to protect public safety?
I am running for US House. I will be sworn "to support this Constitution." There are NO constitutional Federal Firearms Acts. There is no "but" at the end of the 2nd Amendment. "Shall not be infringed" is clear and absolute. God created Nature, and the First Law of Nature is self preservation. When considering legislation, the questions are, in this order: Is it constitutional? Can we afford it? Do we need it? Constitutionality over utility, always.
I support BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanction) against Israel if they refuse to allow the creation of a Palestinian state.
I support the legalization of recreational marijuana.
Reparations should be given to people on the basis of race.
The Electoral College should be abolished.
In priority order, what three areas of legislation do you propose to author or sponsor if elected?
I am running for US House, and believe in a strict interpretation of the original intent of the Founders' Constitution. Reduce the tyranny of the Administrative State by sunsetting all unconstitutional agencies (see Article 1, Section 8). Repeal all Federal Firearms Acts. Propose Protection at Conception Amendment.Push to repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, and to audit and eventually eliminate the Federal Reserve, and return to a commodity based currency. Eliminate Federal worker unions.
Is racism a threat to domestic security in the United States? Why or why not?
We are all children of God. Racism is not consistent with biblical Christianity. It leads to faction, and to the erosion of our constitutional, representative Republic. We should pray for those gripped with racism.