I am very consistent in my support of bodily autonomy and in resistance to government interference with individual decisions relating to health. I was totally sincere when I referenced the phrase “my body, my choice” in pushback against vaccine mandates; and I hope pro-life voters will recognize the importance of intellectual honesty when it comes to these matters. I empathize deeply with pro-life voters, I cannot imagine a government so morally uncorrupted that we should give an inch on the expectation that they totally keep out of such personal matters. We should not pass laws for the purpose of enforcing moral standards on our fellow citizens because we wouldn’t want them to do the same to us. Even laws that allow for commonly agreed exceptions invite government to meddle in our private lives more than we should permit.

Furthermore, I don’t think that the government should funnel any money to organizations that (directly or indirectly) provide abortion services. If you simply consider that some tax-payers are morally opposed to abortion you will see the immorality in forcing them to pay taxes that (in part) ultimately support that activity.

My position on drugs also comes back to bodily autonomy. The government has no business restricting an adult’s consumption of recreational intoxicants. Why should we trust bureaucrats and politicians to decide what’s right for us?

Addiction in itself is a health problem, not a criminal matter. Stress and spinning in circles can induce feelings of intoxication, should we pass legislation against those?

The Libertarian party has been consistently in defense of our 2nd amendment rights since the party was formed in 1971. Gun violence in America will not be solved through gun legislation. Criminals are not deterred by gun laws, but those laws surely cause suffering to many honest citizens.

Some promote red-flag laws as a form of “common sense” gun control, but they fail to recognize the rate at which those mechanisms are abused and the violent nature of executing such warrants to confiscate the property of someone who has committed no crime.

Comprehensive background checks are already in place; to whatever extent that system doesn’t work as it should, it’s unlikely legislation will fix the organizational failings of the entities responsible for that operation.

Additionally, the Pennsylvania constitution plainly states that “The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.”

First, lets address the loan forgiveness offered by the Biden administration. I think it’s bad policy and I think we should hold no ill will against anyone benefiting from it. I also think that those benefitting from it should be humble and appreciate the perspectives of taxpayers who didn’t go to college.

There is an opportunity, though, to learn something valuable now that we are all finally talking about this topic. . .

Every single time the government meddles with the free market they cause harm!

I remember when candidate Bill Clinton appeared on the Arsenio Hall Show in 1992, I didn’t remember him playing the sax, I didn’t remember his explanation about how he didn’t inhale that joint, I did remember him telling us of his plan that would guarantee loans for every kid who wanted to go to college. As a middle-class kid entering 10th grade, with no money saved for college, this really got my attention! Guaranteed student loans decreased the barriers to entry which increased demand for college education and disproportionately increased tuition. But that demand increase wasn’t organically driven, meaning there were no other factors in place that would have increased demand, including an increase in jobs that required a degree . . . So the next sector of the market to correct under this new paradigm was the job market. When candidate pools became flooded with college graduates the job market was next in line to correct for this inorganically increased supply of accredited applicants - employers simply began requiring degrees for jobs that one could previously attain with just some experience & proven talent. So now people had essentially taken out a mortgage on their future earnings just to end up with a job they could have gotten (essentially) for free 10 years earlier. All of this economic ruin spread across the country like a cancer until we had an entire generation of over-educated kids who weren’t living as prosperously as their under-educated parents. And that’s how a little government interference in the free market wreaks havoc on the natural order of things.

Taxation, in its current form, is theft.

The absence of voluntarism is what makes it immoral; taking money from individuals under the threat of violence (fines and imprisonment) is theft. I don’t oppose programs which provide benefits to those in need, or meet the needs of the general public. But the money we would each willingly contribute to prop up the programs we personally approve of is a very small fraction of what the government actually takes from us.

Further to this argument against taxes, please consider that virtually every government-managed program lacks the competitive nature of a free market which would typically oust any “service-provider” not sufficiently or cost-effectively meeting the consumer’s needs. The government can provide bad service but the consumers of that service have virtually no recourse and are forced to pay for it even if they also pay to obtain the service elsewhere.

To address a common argument that Libertarians field, “What about the roads?” . . . Many roads were built before income tax was enacted. Also, many communities don’t benefit from public maintenance of their roads and they manage (at least) just as well as publicly maintained roads.

Consider watching this video for a simple and sober counter to arguments often made justifying taxation as a moral obligation to society (and thank you for being so thoughtful to explore this topic further): George Ought To Help

Hahahaha! No way!

Please see Taxes for a very clear idea of how liberal I’ll be with giving away your tax dollars. Those dollars aren’t mine to give. Check War & Veterans for my one soft-spot (spoiler alert, it’s our veterans to whom we owe so much more than we can ever give).

I believe we should support our veterans by ending all wars. I have to admit that I will likely make the most concessions on spending when it comes to providing the care and services that our veterans deserve. But I remain consistent in my disdain for government-run services, especially when we consistently hear of the nightmares experienced attempting to get proper veteran care.

I would begin doing something here in Pennsylvania by supporting Defend the Guard legislation which would require a proper declaration of war from Congress before we would send any of Pennsylvania’s National Guard troops to active combat.

I also believe that, more often than not, when the US meddles in foreign conflicts it unnecessarily extends that conflict and leads to more death and suffering. I don’t think that we can always trust the morality of our political leaders to make just determinations about which side is the good guys.

I believe that the US should ends its quiet support of the Saudi-driven civil war in Yemen which is not only killing Yemeni people through direct combat but also by blocking trade and inducing starvation and famine on millions.

As a representative for the state of Pennsylvania in Harrisburg there isn’t a lot I can do about decisions made in Washington DC regarding war, but I share these perspectives so you know what I think about these matters that should weigh heavily on all our hearts.