This is a Republican primary race.  Do you promise, if elected, to abide by the RPT platform?  And if not, please enumerate what problems you have.

I have been a big supporter of the GOP platform for many years, I don't ever agree with it completely. But I have always longed for elected officials to just follow half of what it says, that would be a great improvement. I usually support around 80-90% of the platforms

using the 2016 version of the Texas GOP Platform...

Preamble - I agree with it, but the last sentence is vague so i am not sure about that one. I could mean we must be sovereign over the world, which I do not agree with or it could mean that we must be strong internally, and not controlled by others, which I would agree with.

Principles - Are right up my alley. Some are again very broad and vague and can mean different things to different folks.

Preserving American Freedom - I agree with this section. The phrase "we support an aggressive war on terrorism" can be taken to a wrong extreme by some and used as manipulation by others.

Reforming the Judicial System - I agree with these

Strengthening familes, protecting life and promoting health - I agree with these

Educating our children - I agree with this, except #120 is vague in the last sentence about funding in districts "that do not have a sufficient tax base" to be funded by the state. My opinion in general regarding public education is too much money is spent, which puts a burden on tax payers.

For sake of time I only made it to page 17 of the current 26. Because of short time to get this in and work and holidays I could not finish this section. Hopefully you understand me a little better from what I have had time to write.

Do you support current RPT chair James Dickey in full and if not, what do you disagree with?

James Dickey is new. I am not aware of any disagreements. I imagine a few will show up with time. I have not seen him at state convention, this will tell me a lot. The history of state chairman in Texas over the last 25 years have shown a strong bias toward their own agenda. I believe this is weak leadership for a chairman to shove their own agenda on those they are serving.

Did you support liberal Texas house-speaker Joe Straus?  Why or why not?

No I do not support Joe Straus, never have, and unless he changes for the better, never will. Because he is part of the big government, power and money grabbing part of the Republican party.

Please describe what you believe are the most significant issues in this race, why and what you'll do to address them?

The most siginificant issue facing our culture is that too many people believe government (local, state, federal) is needed for our survival. These levels of government have taken over so many areas of life ... safety, water, health care, welfare. Government has always been the most inefficient way to do anything. Think of any government services that is more efficient than any other private entity. I can think of none. Until we become more independent of government we will always be one crisis away from poverty. We assume social security will not be able to last. We know the government is invading our privacy (that includes local, just ask your local police friends). They are spending way too much of our money.

I have been working for many years to get voters to be aware of our of control government and the need for voters to be aware & to get involved to make it better.

Which supreme court cases should Texas just ignore?

Any supreme court case not involving one of the enumerated powers granted to the federal government.

here is a list of a few...

Brushaber v Union Pacefic & Stanton v Baltic Mining & Peck v Lowe that allowed the federal government to tax individuals directly - the income tax

Helvering v Davis 1937 upholding Social Security on the basis that congress has a general power to spend on whatever it deems to be in the general welfare

Roe v Wade that treated unborn babies as not human

Dred Scott decision that considered blacks not to be citizens

Korematzu v US upheld interment of Japanese Americans during WW2

NFIB v Sebelius allowed national health care

Lawrence v Texas striking down texas sodomy laws

Kelo v City of New London allowed taking of private land for a developer

Buckley v Valeo allows congress to regulate campaign finance

Wickard v Filburn allowing congress power to regulate local commerce

Home Building v Blaisdell allowing states to alter bank contracts

There's discussion about making major revisions to the RPT Platform. Please describe the nature of any major changes you support.

Anything that ...

1. increases personal liberty from government control
2. reduces the spending of local, state, or federal government
3. reduces the power and cost of the police state

On a practical note, I have been saying for the last 8 years that the platform is a tool that the GOP has been using to keep voters voting for the party while the elected officials have for the most part ignored the principles in the platform.

I will say there has been one notable exception to this and that is the legislative agenda that has been in the last 2 platforms. I would say this has been a great change to the party platform.

As a Republican, if you had to give up one of the following core principles, which one would you select first and why? 
a. pro-life;
b. 10% reduction in state, fed, local spending;
c. 2nd amendment;
d. illegal immigration;
e. foreign bases; 
f.  10th amendment

This is an easy one - Foreign Bases. I am a big proponent of avoiding war if at all possible and only support wars in self defense, not for oil, not for regulating other countries. the US is not the world police. And all war must be declared by congress, it is sort of a constitution thing.

For what offices should term limits be implemented?

All party and elected official offices, even precinct chairman.

What distinguishes you from your opponent?

I have a long term proven record of supporting small government, educating conservative voters on the better candidates, and working for 17 years in the county to promote smaller government agenda, in various roles.

I have been involved in party and local politices for over 20 years and I have found that many people get motivated to change our state or local government and within 6 to 12 months are discourages and lose motivation and quit. Changing our societies government is in my view a life long responsibility. It starts with learning and listening. The "will" of the people actually is what gets implemented, but often time voters get influenced by deceitful people, our countries media is a prime example of this.

I would like to see a group of selfless leaders organize together based on their personal strengths, using Patrick Lencioni's team principles, to put the time, thought, money, effort into supporting a plan to educate themselves and our community, lead and train others on how Montgomery county can be good balance between government, liberty, open to others, efficient, honest, and not get corrupt as so many of our good elected officials have been.

This currently is my passion in politics to create an impressive group of leaders in the county that can lead us well. I plan to write and think and colaborate with others to make this a reality. I had hoped the the Tea Party movement would have brought that out but for a variety of reasons I doubt that will happen. But the label does not matter as much as the thoughts and integrity and clarity of the leaders involved.

Please list 3 federal agencies that are popular in our culture and should be abolished

Using the list of federal agencies listed on wikipedia ..... those with an 'x' in front should go away over the next 10 years, those with a ? I would need more information to decide, those with neither 'x' or '?' should stay 

3.1    Executive Office of the President
x 3.2    United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
x 3.3    United States Department of Commerce
3.4    United States Department of Defense (DOD)
x 3.5    United States Department of Education
x 3.6    United States Department of Energy
x 3.7    United States Department of Health and Human Services
x 3.8    United States Department of Homeland Security
x 3.9    United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
? 3.10    United States Department of the Interior
3.11    United States Department of Justice
x 3.12    United States Department of Labor (DOL)
3.13    United States Department of State (DOS)
x 3.14    United States Department of Transportation
3.15    United States Department of the Treasury
? 3.16    United States Department of Veterans Affairs
x 3.17    Independent agencies and government-owned corporations
?4    Special Inspector General Office
5    Quasi-official agencies
x 5.1    Arts & cultural agencies
x 5.2    Museum agencies
x 5.3    Commerce & technology agencies
? 5.4    Defense & diplomacy agencies
x 5.5    Human service & community development Agencies
? 5.6    Interior agencies
5.7    Law & justice agencies

Are the United States and Texas constitutions living documents?  Please answer in the context of Progressivism versus Originalism.

I interpret the US constitution as an originalist. It is only living in the context of changing by amendments. There is sufficient evidence to doubt the 16th actually passed.

What form of federal tax law do you support and why (e.g., current, flat tax, fair tax, other)?

There are benefits and problems with each method. The method of collection/calculation of taxes is a much smaller issue than the amount the federal government takes from tax payers. The federal government is taking too much money from citizens for things they do not want to spend on. Massive change in tax systems has all sorts of side affects. So I say reduce spending and tax rates and we will all be better off (I guess all except those who use taxes to benefit themselves).

Do you believe the Second Amendment grants an individual right or a militia right?

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

I view the "State" in this language to be each of the original colonies and which apply to all 50 states we have today. I view this as 2 parts. First acknowledging that each state was seen as crucial with having a volunteer army to protect themselves from harm. Second do not infringe the right of individuals to protect themselves from harm. The 2nd is necessary for the first.

Please explain your interpretation of the Tenth Amendment and the principle of nullification. Do states have a right of nullification? What should the federal government do if a state attempts nullification?

My understanding of the 10th amendment was put in there because many people would not approve the constitution unless it limited the growth of power of the federal government. The 10th amendment is very clear, but many people want centralized power.

All states have the right and duty to ignore or nullify any federal law that is not derived from a power granted to the federal government in the constitution. The people of a state need to have the will to stand up to a federal bully.

The federal government should follow the constitution, but the federal goverment has crossed that line many times as all goverments have throughout history.

At what point should the "right to life" or "personhood" be granted to new human beings (e.g., at conception, 13 weeks of gestation, birth, 5 days old, 18 years old, etc)? What action, if any, will you take to reflect this in law?

At conception to natural death.

Actions I have and will take is in whom I support to others, petitions I have signed, rallies I have participated in, and whom I vote for.

Do you support or oppose federal funding for Planned Parenthood and other agencies that perform abortions, both in the U.S. and abroad (even if they use money derived from other sources)?

Oppose

Do you support or oppose allowing parents direct the flow of federal education funds (e.g., to their school or home school of choice)? Support? Oppose? Please explain.

This is tricky issue because government will put 'strings' on this but ultimately I support parents to direct this money.

What, if anything, should be done to protect our borders from illegal immigration?

in my opinion ....

step 1 - non citizens receive no welfare of any sort except life threatening healthcare and return them as soon as possible to their origin of country

step 2 - all government documents are done in English only

step 3 - no government paid interpretors

I am not fond of a border fence for several reasons, cost, it will always have weak spots, someday we may need to escape.

Do you support or oppose the referendum passed by both the MoCo GOP Executive Committee and SREC to allow voters, at the statewide level, to decide in the voting booth whether or not they want a particular toll road?  Why or why not?

I support this because elected officials has been dishonest regarding the use of toll roads as another revenue source when we are already taxed for roads and funds are diverted to other expenses. The state gasoline tax is a great example of this issue.

I voted for this when it came up in MC GOP executive committee.

What does being a conservative mean to you?

in the 1990s and 2000s 'conservative' meant 'right wing' but in the last 5-10 years even moderate Republicans consider themselves 'conservative'. So from my viewpoint the word has been watered down. I am certainly not a moderate Republican, as you can tell from my other answers.

'Conservative' to me means 'good guy' but I find that many people consider themselves to think properly 'conservative' but are okay with using government to infrenge on another's life, liberty, or property.

I believe our virtues should be in this order ... my life, my liberty, my property and I should not infrenge on another's life, liberty, or property through private or government means.