Campaign Issues

I will be working on updating this page over the next several days (today is August 25th). Check back soon.



Health Care Reform

The Second Amendment


When I am asked why I am running for Congress, my one word answer is, “Freedom”. Our country was founded on the principle that the primary function of government is to protect the freedom of its citizens. From the first battles of the Revolutionary war, fought at Concord and Lexington, to the battles that continue across the seas, men have fought, bled and died defending that freedom.

And yet, much of what happens in government diminishes the freedom of our citizens. Whether it be high taxes, excessive regulations, or bureaucratic bloat, our freedoms are slowly being whittled away.

Freedom is not free. My personal experiences in both Afghanistan and Iraq have seared this statement into my soul. I have seen the broken bodies, I have comforted the troubled spirits, I have knelt far too many times before a pair of empty boots. I cannot stand idly by, watching our freedoms slowly be reduced, bit by bit by bit. When one of comrades fall, we do not give up--we close ranks and continue fighting. To do less than that would be to dishonor the sacrifice that these men and women have made. I stand for freedom.


Every tax dollar collected reduces the personal freedom of the taxpayer.

Let me repeat that—every tax dollar collected reduces the personal freedom of the taxpayer. When that dollar is in the taxpayer’s hand, he can do whatever he chooses with that dollar. He can use it to purchase something, can put it towards savings, or can give to charity. Once that dollar is paid to the tax collector, the taxpayer no longer has direct say over how that dollar is spent.

There are a couple natural corollaries that follow from this concept of taxes limiting freedom.

In order to optimize individual freedom, taxes should be kept to the minimum possible to carry out essential government functions.

Government should be a bare bones operation, not the bloated monstrosity of bureaucracy that it has become. The federal government has assumed missions that more rightfully belong at the State or local level or don’t belong in government at all. Those functions should be defederalized.

Taxes should be regarded as a sacred trust. Our elected officials, acting as stewards over those funds, should be cognizant of the sacrifices that are made in paying those taxes. There needs to greater accountability for the funds that are spent. Deficit spending is a repudiation of that stewardship. Another repudiation is fraud, waste and abuse, which constitute one of the top ten “expenditures” in the government. This is unacceptable.

Our elected officials should be looking for ways to cut taxes. Instead they are constantly seeking new ways to spend taxpayer funds. They regard the taxpayers as an unending source for home district pork or for their pet project.

Perhaps the most egregious examples are the thinly veiled efforts by some politicians to buy votes with other peoples’ money.

Trying to buy the African American vote with talks of “reparations”. Reparations are patently unfair. Slavery was an egregious sin but no one should be held responsible for the sins committed by another more than 150 years ago.

Trying to buy the student vote with promises of “free tuition”. Free tuition preferentially benefits whites and preferentially benefits children of the rich and middle class.

Trying to buy the working class vote with promises to “make the rich pay their fair share.” With a top tax bracket currently sitting at 37%, I’m not sure what they consider a “fair share” but when you are taking away more than a third of an individual’s freedom, I argue that those taxpayers are already paying more than “their fair share”.

In each of these cases, the politicians making these promises are willing to limit the freedom of a subsection of taxpayers for political gain.

An ideal government is small, limits taxes, avoids debt, and appropriately manages the funds collected.

The Economy

American Exceptionalism

Health Care Reform

The person who controls the purse strings is the one who makes the decisions. Ideally the patient should be making health care decisions, in consultation with his or her healthcare team. This means that, ideally, the patient should have control of the purse strings.

Right now, control of the purse strings is in the hands of an insurance bureaucrat. Because of this, we have to deal with prior authorizations, denials and appeals.

The Democrats claim that they can improve on the current health system through a single payer plan but this would only mean that the bureaucrat would work for the government rather than the insurance company.

Single Payer is the opposite of what we truly need, which is to return control of health care decisions to the individual. There is an alternative to Single Payer that would do just that. It is called "The Health Care Choices Proposal" put forth by the Health Policy Consensus Group. The Health Care Choices Proposal will increase choices, expand patient freedom, and lower costs by 1/3rd.

More information about the Health Care Choices Proposal can be found here:


The Second Amendment

A few years ago, my wife and I visited Scotland. Towards the end of the trip we stayed at a bed and breakfast outside Inverness. The host loved talking politics. Our trip occurred shortly after some mass shooting here in the States and he brought up the subject. He expressed disbelief that Americans were unwilling to give up their guns, like the Brits had done, in order to prevent future such incidents

We parried back and forth for a few minutes about gun ownership, gun rights and gun responsibilities. For every argument I brought forward, he had a counterargument--except one. I said that the real purpose of the second amendment is to protect Americans from our own government. That stopped him cold. He thought about it for a minute, then said, "That's actually a good reason".

Each and every Senator and each and every Representative has taken an oath to support and defend the Constitution. The last time I checked, the second amendment was still part of the Constitution.

Hold on...

Yep, I just checked again and it's still there.

Don't you think it's time for Senators and Representatives to affirm the Constitution, including the second amendment, instead of trying to tear it to shreds? The second amendment should not cause them any concerns...unless, of course, they have nefarious plans to subjugate American Citizens.