I support strict adherence to the original intent and plain meaning of the United States Declaration of Independence and the United States and Texas State Constitutions. I recognize Life, Property, Liberty, Freedom, and the Pursuit of Happiness as inalienable universal rights. I categorically reject that these rights can be “void where prohibited by law” in any manner whatsoever, and I will uphold my oath of office, to protect and defend the United States Constitution, the Constitution of the State of Texas, and the people, their property, their liberty, their freedom, and their pursuit of happiness, against all enemies, foreign and domestic, so help me GOD.

 

Government without limitations is tyrannical at worst, and at its best, it is intrusive and meddles into every aspect of our lives, imposing its will upon us as if we the people are its servants or children. Government checks and balances are intended to restrain ambitious government officials and employees and control their lust for power and thus ensure that government promotes the general welfare. I subscribe to the concept and notion that the government that governs the best is the government that governs the least. Government should be limited in power and size to that which is no more than absolutely required to serve its purpose. I believe that government should be constitutionally restricted in its ability to enact, amend, and repel legislation; to levy and collect taxes; to borrow money and generate public debt; to appropriate funds and make loans or expenditures from the public treasury; to administer and enforce the law, that being the government must be compelled to guarantee the equal application and protection of the law; and to adjudicate disputes, that being the government must be compelled to provide due process of law.

 

I believe that government has the duty and responsibility to protect the people and their collective and individual right to life, property, liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness. I also believe that the people have the inalienable and universal right to protect these rights from those who would mean to do them harm or to otherwise deprive them of their rights without due process of law. As such, I support the second amendment right of the people to keep and bear arms for any legal or otherwise legitimate purpose, and the right of the people to protect themselves from harm and their property from destruction or theft, commonly known as the castle defense and stand-your-ground doctrine.

 

I believe that everyone has a right to life and to be free from injury and restraint. I believe that property is an extension of life itself insofar as property represents the fruits of the time and labor expended by the people to obtain such property. I believe that liberty is the right of the people to live their lives in any manner that they choose so long as they do not violate or infringe upon the equal rights of other people to live their lives in any manner that they choose. In this regard, I neither condone, condemn, approve, or disapprove of the manner in which any particular group or individual person chooses to live their life, that being a matter strictly reserved for themselves. I believe that freedom is the right to make choices, including poor choices, while responsibility is fully accepting the benefits or consequences of the choices that are made thereof. Due Process of Law requires recognition of all fundamental rights and rightful privileges and the utilization of a system of justice that is founded upon law and equity and is designed to prevent an erroneous decision that deprives a person of any fundamental right or rightful privilege in the name of any federal, state, or local governmental entity. Equal Protection of the Law is self-explanatory, it means exactly that, no one should be elevated above or subjugated below another person for any reason or in any manner whatsoever.

 

I have a litmus test for the enactment of any criminal statute. First, there must be some harm to another person’s life, property, liberty, freedom, or pursuit of happiness, that being, there must be a victim. Second, there must be an inadequate remedy under the civil laws either by way of declaration, injunction, or monetary damages. I support the amendment or repeal of any and all legislation that criminalizes any act or omission where it cannot be shown to harm any other person life, property, liberty, freedom, or pursuit of happiness as a result of such act or omission thereof, that has been, or is otherwise sought to be criminalized.

 

Where government legislates and creates laws, those laws are enforced, force being the operative term for law enforcement. Government should only enact laws where force itself is legitimately justified to be employed against the people in furthering the legislative purpose and reason for the law, and from which the purpose and reason for the law is to serve the best interests of the people. If the legislature has no intent in actually enforcing a law or the enforcement of the law will cause more societal harm than the reason or purpose for the enactment of the legislation, then the legislature should not enact the law in the first instance, and where it has been enacted, it should be amended or repealed as applicable.

 

There are countless redundant and outdated laws and regulations that currently serve no legitimate purpose. I propose enacting legislation to create a ten year sunset all state laws and regulations across the board, which is more than reasonable and sufficient time for the legislature to reconsider and reenact such legislation and regulations that is deemed to be relevant to our current time and need.

 

Government should be limited to providing fundamental and essential public services that should properly be entrusted to the government alone or that is otherwise unavailable or unaffordable in the private sector. I support the concept and notion of public-private managed competition as a method for the government to control costs while simultaneously providing fundamental and essential governmental services.

 

I believe that government must be held accountable to the people. Government should be held strictly responsible for the actions and omissions of its officials and employee made under the color of authority. I oppose sovereign immunity except in international affairs and relations. Absolute immunity should be abolished and replaced with qualified immunity where any immunity at all is required to serve a legitimate governmental purpose and from which serves the best interests of the people. In this regard, the government should be held strictly liable for the criminal and civil misconduct of its officials and employees by way of suits for declaratory and injunctive relief and for monetary damages. Government officials and employees who commit criminal activities and/or civil torts that are outside of their scope of office or employment should be held criminally responsible and/or civilly liable in their individual capacities except where qualified immunity is legitimately applicable and properly applied.