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.

Yes. I strongly support the RPT platform.

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

Yes, I strongly support James Dickey. He created a brilliant plan to engage the grass roots in getting conservative legislation passed in the special session (STAT). He used the RPT platform as his foundation. I have found him to be conservative and innovative and believe he is an excellent leader!

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

Absolutely not. He obstructed the passage of good, conservative legislation that was supported in the RPT platform. At the very least, even if he disagreed personally with a bill, it should have made its way to the floor for a vote by the people’s representatives. He and his allies prevented this. 

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

Precinct 86 has not been represented at the county party executive committee meetings. The incumbent has not attended a meeting in several years. My fellow citizens deserve representation that will “show up.” 

Additionally, the MCRP has not, in my view, been an effective voice of the people of Montgomery County in the past (I have been attending for 2 years). However, this past year has seen some dramatic changes as the precinct chairs have successfully impacted major conservative issues (Prop 2 and the 20% homestead exemption) because they have increased their numbers and have chosen to be bold, standing up to the status quo. I hope to be another vote to ensure that conservative values prevail on the executive board. 

Which supreme court cases should Texas just ignore?

I am not sure how to answer this question. I will presume that you are asking about federal cases that go against Texas’ values, such as the ruling on gay marriage, for example.

Our Constitution is very specific about the limitations of the federal government. Unless enumerated in the Constitution, all power is left to the states. The ruling on gay marriage, in my view, far exceeds any enumerated power found in the Constitution. 

I am reluctant to say that a Supreme Court ruling should be ignored, however. The rebel in me says ignore it; the other part of me says we can’t do that.

I would seek a lawful way to get this repealed, I think. Nullification should be explored. I believe in the sovereignty of our state and believe that the federal government is out of control.

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

I do not know what revisions are being proposed. 

However, I would support shortening the platform as long as the basic foundations remain intact. I would not support removing any foundational values, such as taking out social issues. I don’t know if this is being proposed, but if it is, I would strongly object. 

The platform IS who we are. It must be thorough but short enough for any citizen to pick up and comfortably read and learn who we are and what we stand for. 

I would need more information about proposed changes to answer this question in any more depth.

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 impossible question. It is like asking what appendage (arm or leg) you would be willing to have cut off or what organ you would be willing to have removed from your body. If you take off an appendage or have an organ removed, the result would be that you operate less efficiently than if you remain intact. You can adapt, of course; we see adaptation all the time. But you cannot adapt if you choose to have your heart or lungs removed. You will die.

In looking at the list above, all of those values/ principles are necessary for a free nation and one that is true to the intentions of our founders.

But if I must choose one, I would choose e, foreign bases. That’s risky and non-negotiable (in my view) to keep us safe from a volatile world who has the USA in their crosshairs. I strongly support President Reagan’s policy of Peace Through Strength....having our armed forces around the world is a part of that.

For what offices should term limits be implemented?

In general, I am opposed to term limits. In general, I believe that voters should have the right to vote for any candidate, even if they have been in office for a long period of time. 

In a perfect world, an elected representative would be true to their constituents and vote according to their wishes, no matter how long they serve. Sadly, what I have observed is that congressmen/Senators get caught up in the fundraising machine and eventually serve at the behest of lobbyists and special interests, not their constituents. Term limits would take them out of office before they could become corrupted, allegedly.

Term limits also assure that Congress gets infused with “new blood” routinely. This can be good or bad. 

All of that having been said, I would consider term limits for members of Congress and cry a lot when Louie Gohmert was term limited out.

Locally, I have no views on any particular offices that should be term limited. If a local official gets term limited, they would likely just run for a different office (from Commissioner to County Judge for example or Justice of the Peace to Commissioner). Musical chairs, so to speak. So I don’t know what value term limits would bring to local office.

What distinguishes you from your opponent?

I have attended more executive committee meetings than my incumbent opponent.

I am more involved in MCRP than the incumbent.

I am clear about my values and will communicate those values to the electorate. I support the RPT platform and do not know if my opponent does/does not.

I will be present and available to constituents. I will return phone calls.

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

EPA, Dept of Education, and any/all agencies that promote “diversity”, “tolerance” and LGBT issues for example. We are all Americans and have the same rights under the law and according to our Constitution. Dividing Americans into groups and awarding the members of that group special rights is unAmerican and divisive. Those agencies promoting special rights should be abolished. The focus needs to be on equal treatment.

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

NO.

Our culture is in decline. The evidence is everywhere. Attempts to change the original intent of the Constitution to reflect these “changing values” will undermine the foundation of our country.

The best example I can think of is the growing desire of the progressives to eliminate the electoral college. The founders included this mechanism to elect our president for a good reason that can be found in the results of the most recent presidential election. If the president is elected by popular vote, the Americans in flyover country would never be represented in the executive branch again. Large cities (mostly east and west coast) are filled with progressive liberals; their numbers would ensure that only progressives could be elected president. The founders recognized this and acted accordingly.

Progressives find the Constitution to be too restrictive; even Obama said that his job would be easier if not for the Constitution. If Americans do not like certain provisions, there is always the process available to amend the Consitution. It is tough to do; by design. 

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

The current tax laws are too cumbersome and the average taxpayer cannot possibly understand them all. The IRS has been found to use their immense power against conservative organizations. The current system, in my view, needs to be thrown out and we should start over. Will that happen? No, but I had to say it anyway.

I would support a flat tax or a fair tax. This keeps the lobbyists and special interests out of the formula.

I do not support the progressive taxation that exists today. It is not “fair” to those with high incomes. Even JFK recognized that a tax rate of 90% was too burdensome. The progressive taxation makes assumptions about how much a wealthy American “needs” and should be allowed to keep. Just because their income is high, it should not mean that they should give it up because some bureaucrat believes that they do not “need that much money.”

I don’t know enough about the tax reform that just passed to speak to whether this is a good thing. If it reduces the burden of filing and leaves more money in the pockets of those that earned it, then it may be good for a first step. But it is still progressive. I would like to see that changed.

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

I strongly believe that the 2nd amendment provides an individual right to own an firearm.

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?

Any actions not specified in the Constitution (enumerated powers) belong to the states.

Our federal government is out of control and has far exceeded what the founders intended.

As I understand it, states have the power to nullify unconstitutional actions of the federal government. States have used it successfully against federal marijuana laws for example (Washington and Colorado). The state of Washington has legalized the sale/use of marijuana by a vote of their people who chose to make marijuana legal. They have that right, in my view. However, in doing so, persons exercising their right are not allowed to use any federally controlled system, such as electronic purchase or writing a check (the banking system is under federal regulations). Cash only. In response, it is my understanding that the feds will not be initiating prosecutions of individuals using/ purchasing marijuana in the state of Washington. 

The feds should honor any constitutional nullification attempts. 

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. I will campaign as a pro life candidate and support pro life legislation.

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)?

I do not support funding Planned Parenthood or other agencies that provide abortions.

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.

Yes, parents should have the right to direct federal dollars to the school of their choice. 

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

I support increasing border patrol agents and building the wall. 

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?

Absolutely I support this vote! 

Tax dollars are paid by voters. They have the right to determine how those dollars are spent.

Toll roads are not endorsed in the RPT platform. They are specifically NOT supported. 

The people do not support more toll roads. 

A vote is necessary.

What does being a conservative mean to you?

Being a conservative defines my values and principles; those defining characteristics that determine how I live my life and how I view my country.

I love my country and will fight to make sure it remains as close to the founders’ intent as possible. That is, our government exists to assure our freedoms and provide for national security. It was never intended to provide food, shelter, income and health care (for example) for the people (redistribution of wealth). It was never intended to create winners and losers in the marketplace. Sadly, we have seen that our welfare laws have created a permanent underclass of people trapped in hopeless poverty for generations. The conservative’s antithesis, liberalism, has destroyed lives and entire cities as government has taken over to accomplish that which men can and should do for themselves. Conservatives honor and respect success and do not view the successful entrepreneurs as the ATM for government programs. 

As a conservative, I believe in a smaller federal government that is strictly limited in what powers it has. Those powers are definded in the Constitution. Because the federal government is presently out of control, as a conservative, I believe that my efforts must go towards electing officials who share my view of limited government to hold back any further growth and perhaps even scale back some of the current overreach. I believe in being active in the political process!

As a conservative who recognizes the role of the federal government to ensure national security, I support a strong military. I support President Reagan’s principle of Peace through Strength. I support our veterans. I oppose the imposition of politically correct policies on the military. 

I believe that the fruits of ones labor belongs to those that have earned them. I believe that the right to own private property is essential to our liberty. I am opposed to confiscatory taxes but recognize that there are some things that government can do better than I can. I appreciate that the airways are safe to fly in because of the FAA. But these examples are few and far between and do not preclude a private company from providing the service either. I support the use of tax dollars to fund our military and first responders. Cities, counties and states require tax dollars to build roads (cronyism is a problem though!). Property taxes are immoral. Taxes should not exceed 10%; if 10% is good enough for our Creator, it is good enough for government!

I believe in fewer regulations by any level of government. I don’t think government at any level can or should try to control what Americans should eat/ drink/ by imposing taxes on “sinful” behaviors (sugar sweetened drinks, cigarettes). I don’t believe that government at any level should try to control driving habits by imposing confiscatory tolls on roads to “encourage the use of mass transit; getting Americans out of their cars.” Conservatives do not support these efforts at social engineering. 

I don’t believe that we should give up any of our God given Consitutional rights to an international organization (Obama told members of the UN in one of his last speeches that the US may have to forgo some of our freedoms for the benefit of the world). NO. We are a sovereign nation and as a conservative, I believe that we must ensure our sacred national sovereignty. 

As a conservative, I believe strongly in religious freedom. That means that if I am a baker or a florist or a photographer, I should not be required by any level of government to participate in an activity that goes against my religious beliefs. A private business is just that; private. They should be allowed to run their business in any way they choose. This also means that if a local community of consumers do not agree with the right of a baker to refrain from participation in a gay wedding, for example, they do not have to do business with that baker. But the decision re: whether to participate or not rests with the business owner and their religious beliefs. 

I strongly believe in charity by people and institutions such as churches. We are commanded to love our neighbors. No government can do for our neighbors what we, as charitable beings, can do. The response to Hurricane Harvey by Texans by private people and institutions are examples of what conservatives believe in. Conservatives do not wait for government when neighbor are in trouble; we step up and help.

It is not the role of the government to determine social norms. I oppose the government determining that gay marriage is legal when the Bible speaks against it. America is a Christian nation, regardless of what the Supreme Court has ruled. 

And finally, last but certainly not least, I believe that the “right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” means just that. Our unborn children have the right to live. Unborn children need and deserve protection. Millions have lost their innocent lives since the SCOTUS ruled in Roe vs Wade. Conservatives need to continue, every day of every week of every year to join in this fight. 

I have tried to be complete in my response to this question. But I am sure that I may have missed a value or an idea that defines my view of conservatism. If you see a glaring absence of something, feel free to ask me!