Showing posts with label I.C.R.C.. Show all posts
Showing posts with label I.C.R.C.. Show all posts

Thursday, August 25, 2016

Response to the Illinois Center Right Coalition's U.S. Congressional Candidate Survey


Written on August 25th, 2016



 

Section I: Basic Stances

Question #1:
     No Tax Increase: I believe the current tax burden on Americans is high. Therefore, I will vote against any increase of the national income tax, and various "fees" on American citizens.


Answer #1:
     Yes. I will vote against any increase of the national personal income tax, unless the income tax were to be properly authorized, and income taxation were to be reformed. I will vote to significantly decrease spending, and if I support raising any new revenues, they will not derive from increases in income taxation.



Question #2:
Spending Issues


Question #2A:
     Spending Restraint: I will work and vote for a freeze of total discretionary spending for the first two fiscal years beginning after the 2016 general election. I will not vote for any budgetary gimmicks (such as claiming non-emergency spending as emergency spending) and will not vote to waive budgetary rules restraining taxes and spending.


Answer #2A:
     Yes. I will support these measures, advocate curbing spending in fiscal-cliff  as well as ordinary scenarios, and work to move more programs and spending into the discretionary and non-emergency categories.


Question #2B:
     Spending Cuts: I agree that the federal government should deal with budget shortfalls through spending cuts and increased efficiency, rather than increasing taxes, bonds, or tariffs.


Answer #2B:
     Yes. Waste, fraud, and abuse should be eliminated; and so should redundancy, pork barrel spending, regional subsidies, support for states, and unconstitutional federal programs and departments. I will support increasing efficiency and eliminate bureaucracy in order to cut taxes while initially eliminating as few services as necessary. I will support requiring $7 of cuts for every new dollar of tax revenue raised. I will not support increasing tariffs.



Question #3:
     Pro-Growth Tax Relief: I will work for these types of pro-growth tax relief:
- Complete elimination of the marriage tax penalty
- Further across-the-board reduction of income tax rates
- Further capital gains relief
- Repeal personal alternative minimum tax
- Repeal corporate alternative minimum tax
- Repeal of the death tax


Answer #3:

     Yes to all six. Additionally, I would vote to eliminate the capital gains tax.



Question #4:
     Internet Taxation: I oppose Internet taxation. I will work and vote for a permanent ban on all types of taxes targeted to the Internet or Internet access.


Answer #4:
     Yes. I oppose taxation of the internet at the federal level, including the taxation of sales conducted over the internet. I would urge states not to tax internet sales. I would not interfere with internet providers charging websites to be accessed at faster rates.

 

 

Question #5:
     Education Funding: Some politicians say they want to put education first no matter what. Others say they want to keep their pledge to cut government spending no matter what. If a law stated that all proceeds were guaranteed to be dedicated to education, I would support a tax increase.


Answer #5:
     No. I would not support increasing, nor continuing, the funding of education at the federal level. I would vote to abolish the Department of Education.



Question #6:
     School Choice: I support school choice for students, and will support and vote for legislation giving a student in a failing school the ability to use taxpayer-supported vouchers to attend private, parochial, or alternative public schools.


Answer #6:
     Yes. I would not support federal involvement in education, nor in any education programs; but I support school choice for students, and would urge states to experiment with such voucher programs. I would also urge states to make public school classroom attendance voluntary.



Question #7:
     Private Property Rights:
I understand that the U. S. Supreme Court in Kelo v. City of New London made clear that states have the right and ability to defend the private property rights of their citizens by enacting laws that place restrictions on the exercising of takings power. I will support and vote for legislation that clearly enacts a policy imposing a more strict “public use” requirement than that imposed under the holding in Kelo. I further agree that the government’s interest in acquiring private property in order to make that property available to another private entity is subservient to the property rights held by the current properly owner.


Answer #7:
     Yes. Fifth Amendment takings of private property must strictly satisfy public use, compensate the owner fairly, and occur upon consent of the owner.

 

 

Question #8:
     Tort Reform:
I believe that our society has deviated too far into abuse and fraud from the excesses of allowing people to sue on demand for frivolous causes. I would support enacting a national law for tort reform that stipulates that punitive damages can only be awarded if compensatory damages are awarded (and if proven that there was malicious intent to injure the claimant) and allow courts to restrict fees prosecuting.
Answer #8:

     No. I would not support a national law for tort reform. I am concerned that tort reform could limit the rights of juries, interfere with the right to sue, and discourage some non-frivolous lawsuits. However, I would not interfere with states' rights to consider such legislation.



Question #9:

     Right to Bear Arms: I believe that the 2nd Amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies to the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms. I will oppose any effort to restrict law-abiding citizens from owning and using firearms for personal use and self-defense.


Answer #9:
     Yes. I believe the 2nd Amendment exists to support the right to hunt, and also to defend oneself against criminals, foreign invaders, and tyrannical government. I support strengthening the 2nd Amendment to protect the right of conscientious objection to military service. I will vote to oppose all federal gun control legislation, and I support prohibiting states from interfering in the openness of interstate trade and commerce in weapons. I will oppose any legislation that limits the gun right, as well as the travel rights, of law-abiding citizens.



Question #10:
     Rights of the Unborn: I believe that every innocent human life is sacred, from the moment of conception to the time of natural death.

 

Question #10A:
     As such, I would support reasonable, just laws on abortion like parental consent, waiting periods, and a ban on partial birth abortion.


Answer #10A:
     No. I would encourage states to adopt legislation banning partial birth abortions, and I support getting the federal government out of the issue of abortion. However, I do not support parental consent requirements (because it interferes with doctor-patient confidentiality), nor waiting periods (because they sometimes delay abortions until past points of development delineated by states as cut-off points for abortion).


Question #10B:
     I would also work to recognize the right to life by seeking to confirm pro-life judges who will not legislate from the bench, and supporting a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v. Wade.


Answer #10B:

     Yes. I support overturning Roe v. Wade on constitutional grounds, not moral grounds; but I will vote to stop funding Planned Parenthood, and support judges who will leave abortion up to the states, pending a constitutional amendment saying otherwise.

 

 

Question #11:
     Marriage: I believe traditional marriage consists of a time-honored tradition of a union between one man and one woman. I support the Defense of Marriage Act, and oppose any federal laws to change the traditional definition of marriage.


Answer #11:
     No. I oppose the Defense of Marriage Act, although I oppose federal laws changing the definition of marriage because I believe the federal government should not be involved in marriage whatsoever. I would urge the states to respect the rights of any adult partners to create a private or interpersonal marriage contract, but I would not interfere with the rights of states to govern marriage as they see fit.



Question #12:
     Term Limits: I support reasonable and just term limit laws for all major elected offices in the federal government, including Congressmen and Senators, and would vote to enact such limits.

 

Answer #12:
     Yes. I would support limiting U.S. Representatives to four consecutive terms, U.S. Senators to two consecutive terms, and Supreme Court justices to twenty-year terms.



Section II: Essay Questions

Question #1:
     Do you agree with the positions of the I.C.R.C. as found on the Platform? If not, please provide specifics, and affirmatively state where you disagree and why.

 

Answer #1:
     I agree completely with the sections "Pro-Freedom", "Pro-Constitution", "Pro-Opportunity", "Pro- School Choice", "Pro-Taxpayer", "Pro- Second Amendment", "Pro-Culture", and "Pro-America".

     On the "Pro-Faith" section, I support a secular republic with freedom of worship; so I believe religion has a proper role in the public square, but I would oppose the federal government establishing religion. On the "Pro-Family" section, I agree, and I hope that states respect same-sex couples' freedoms to marry and adopt as well as heterosexuals. On the "Pro-Life" section, I believe that life is sacred and that it begins at conception; however, I believe that legal rights begin upon live birth.

     On the "Pro-Capitalism" section, I support free enterprise, private property, and competition; however, I support the notion "cost the limit of price" more than I support the profit motive.

     On the "Pro-Environment" section, I support the notion that the free market is better than the government at taking care of the environment; however, I would urge communities to set up local trusts for land and water, to compete alongside free enterprise to provide better environmental solutions.

     On the "Pro-Citizenship" section, I agree, while noting that we should welcome undocumented immigrants whom are non-violent, those who arrived without their own knowledge or consent, and those who do not have contempt for American laws.

 

 

Question #2:
     What kind of things would you like to see the U.S. Congress enact? Please list your top three policy priorities should you be elected, and why you wish to focus on them.


Answer #2:

     I would like to see Congress enact budget controls and term limits, and curtail business privileges.
     First, I would like to see Congress enact more Cut, Cap, and Balance -type legislation, enact zero-based budgeting, and pass a Balanced Budget Amendment. I would oppose Cut, Cap, and Balance -type legislation if and when it does not go far enough in cuts. I would support requiring at least $7 in spending cuts to each new dollar in revenues raised. I hope to help reduce the federal budget to between 10% and 12.5% of the G.D.P. as soon as possible.

     Second, I would help pass a constitutional amendment limiting U.S. Representatives to four consecutive terms, and limiting U.S Senators to two consecutive terms (each with no limitation on the total number of terms), as well as legislation limiting Supreme Court justices to twenty year terms. Refraining from imposing limitations on total numbers of terms will help prevent experienced legislators from leaving office too often; and shortening terms will help reduce spending on pay for legislators, and decrease the attention and time that elections take up.

     Third, I would help pass legislation to curtail the artificial privileges of businesses. I would vote to support abolishing the Departments of Commerce and Energy, thus diminishing the lobbying power of the energy sector and big business. I would vote to limit intellectual property protections and trade promotions. I would vote to repeal subsidies, and oppose bailouts. I would urge states to abolish their Secretary of States' offices in order to stop the chartering / creation of - and extension of limited liability to - new corporations.



Question #3:
     What kind of issues would you like to focus on in the House? If elected, what three legislative committees will you ask to serve? Why?

 

Answer #3:
     I would serve on the Judiciary Committee (due to my desires to return to obedience of the Constitution, and to reform the justice system); the House Committee on Education and the Workforce (due to my interest in reforming federal labor law); and either the House Ways and Means Committee, or the Committee on Foreign Affairs (due to my desires to reform taxation policy, and to help shape foreign policy).

 

 

 

Affidavit

I understand that my answers to this survey will be published. My answers are a firm and unconditional commitment to the people of Illinois, and to the people of the United States.

 

Candidate Name: Joseph William Kopsick

Candidate Signature: Joseph W. Kopsick

 

Address: 132 Welwyn St., Lake Bluff, IL 60044-1150

Phone: 608-417-9395 (personal cell phone)

Email: jwkopsick@gmail.com

 

Websites:
     www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com (blog);

     wix.com.dontvoteforjoe/2012 (2012 campaign site)


Candidate for U.S. Congress (U.S. House of Representatives)

Party: New Party / Absurdist Party

 

District: Illinois's 10th U.S. congressional district

Date: Survey completed August 25th, 2016; election to be held November 8th, 2016

 

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Speech to the Illinois Center Right Coalition (I.C.R.C.) on August 20th, 2016



Written on August 19th and 20th, 2016
Delivered in person on August 20th, 2016
Edited on October 5th and 15th, 2016

Some content originally appeared in
“Address to the Illinois Center-Right Coalition (I.C.R.C.) on June 25th, 2016”

written on June 24th and 25th, 2016
and edited on July 19th, and August 8th, 22nd and 23rd, 2016





            Good afternoon and thank you for having me. My name is Joe Kopsick, I live in Lake Bluff, and I’m running for the U.S. House of Representatives’ seat from Illinois’s 10th District. My candidacy has been endorsed by Timothy Goodcase, David Earl Williams, Dan Rutherford, Mike Psak, Charles Allan January, Phil Collins, and William Leubscher; and vetted by the Illinois LiberTEA organization.           
            My district is Illinois’s 10th, which is most of Lake County and parts of Cook County. There, incumbent Republican Bob Dold is being challenged by former congressman Democrat Brad Schneider. I am a write-in candidate, and I am the only other candidate in the race besides Dold and Schneider.        
            I entered the race in November because I felt that the candidates were not ideologically diverse enough, that neither candidate was ideologically consistent, and that their records didn’t sufficiently support constitutional limitations on the powers of the federal government. In my opinion, both candidates supported growth of the size, scope, and cost of government; and supported continued and increased federal involvement in issues that rightfully belong to the states and to the people. For example, b
oth of my opponents support domestic surveillance, gun control, foreign aid, sanctions, keeping Obamacare in place, and federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
           
As for me, the major themes of my candidacy are: liberty and limited government; non-interventionism in foreign policy; personal freedom and individual rights; due process, and security through privacy; balanced budgets and fiscal solvency; free movement of labor and capital; and the notion that government should be funded through penalties on waste, rather than through taxation of labor, sales, and investment that has the effect of discouraging those types of productive behavior.
  
            If elected, I would vote to eliminate and/or restructure between four and seven unconstitutional executive departments; decrease spending by between $1.25 and $1.75 trillion, fire dozens of executive “czars”; and devolve the issues of health, education, retirement savings, and the social safety net back to the states. 
           I would help reduce the size of the federal workforce by voting to abolish the Departments of Commerce, Energy, Education, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development; and I would additionally support either abolishing the Department of Homeland Security, or restructuring segments of it under the Departments of Justice and Defense.
            On spending, I would vote to support a Cut, Cap, and Balance plan that requires at least a 7-to-1 ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases; and I would also support a Balanced Budget Amendment. I would additionally support decreasing taxes across the board; while making all tax rates flat, while keeping tax cuts in place; and eliminating loopholes, tax credits, and differential taxation.
           In the short term, would vote to support a reduction of the individual income tax rates to between 12.5% and 20%. I would support the abolition of the personal income tax, and repealing the 16th Amendment, unless the Negative Income Tax were to be passed. On taxes in general, I would favor transitioning to a Georgist Single Tax on the abuse, misuse, and blight of landed property, which would involve paying fees to communities and community land and water trusts in exchange for the privilege to extract natural resources. However, I would only be in the position of urging states to experiment with this, being a candidate for federal office.
     I support real free trade, and the free movement of capital and labor, as opposed to "smart trade" or "managed trade". I believe free trade can be fair trade; I believe that tariffs only contribute to human rights abuses and labor abuses of foreign workers, in order to increase profits by avoiding the price of the tariffs. I favor real free trade, and I don't think treaties are necessary to do that. I worry that too much intellectual property protections [in trade agreements] reverses what abolishing tariffs aims to do, which is decrease prices.

     I would vote to audit the Federal Reserve, and make sure that the value of the dollar is stable and increasing, so that the dollar has enough purchasing power to buy what people need. I would do all of this in order to avoid raising the minimum wage; I would not vote to support raising the minimum wage. I would vote to cut corporate welfare before considering reducing the social safety net; I think corporate welfare only makes that [the social safety net] seem necessary.
     I want to work with people on the left who recognize that it is federal law that creates free-riders in workplaces, but have a problem with Right to Work. I would support the right of states to pass Right to Work laws, but I would discourage it, because it interferes with the rights of unions and businesses to [become parties to] contract. I think the way to solve that is to urge states to require employers to tell prospective employees that they will be required to join a union as a condition of being hired.
     I would vote to devolve education to the states, and abolish the Department of Education. I would make sure that No Fly No Buy lists take transparency and due process
into account

Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Address to the Illinois Center Right Coalition (I.C.R.C.) on June 25th, 2016

Written on June 24th and 25th, 2016

Edited on July 19th and August 8th, 2016



           The following piece was originally written as a spoken address. The information was delivered by hand, on paper, rather than as a speech.


           Thank you very much for having me. My name is Joseph W. Kopsick, and I’m a candidate in the race for the U.S. House of Representatives for the election to be held on November 8th. I’m running in Illinois’s 10th Congressional District, which does not include Elgin, but which does include my home town of Lake Bluff, as well as most of Lake County, and parts of northern Cook County.
           I am the only candidate in the race besides incumbent Republican Bob Dold; and challenger and former congressman, Democrat Brad Schneider. State “sore loser laws” prevent me from running as an independent, so I’m running as a New Party candidate. My candidacy has received the endorsement of several figures in local politics and interest groups, and I may receive the endorsement of the state Libertarian Party.
           Some background about me: I attended public schools in Lake Bluff, graduated from Lake Forest High School in 2005, and in 2009 I graduated from the University of Wisconsin at Madison, with a major in Political Science. Since 2010, I have operated the Aquarian Agrarian, a blog that focuses on libertarian politics, radical political theory and philosophy, constitutional law, civil liberties and civil rights, labor laws, and elections. I previously ran for U.S. House from Wisconsin in 2012, and Oregon in 2014.
           The major themes of my candidacy are: liberty and limited government; non-interventionism in foreign policy; personal freedom and individual rights; due process, and security through privacy; balanced budgets and fiscal solvency; free movement of labor and capital; and the notion that government should be funded through penalties on waste, rather than through taxation of labor, sales, and investment that has the effect of discouraging those types of productive behavior.
           I’ve entered this race because I’m disappointed at the lack of ideological diversity among the candidates. Unlike me, both of my opponents support a strong federal government, domestic surveillance, gun control, foreign aid, sanctions, keeping Obamacare in place, and federal funding for Planned Parenthood. Additionally, both candidates have taken neutral or soft stances supporting the decriminalization and legalization of marijuana. As the only other candidate in the race, I hope to bring to the 2016 ballot for House at least some of the variety that 10th District voters deserve.


           If elected, I would vote to reduce the size of the federal workforce, and abolish unconstitutional federal departments; including the departments of Commerce, Energy, Education, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development. I would additionally consider restructuring or abolishing the Department of Homeland Security.
On spending, I would vote to support a Cut, Cap, and Balance plan; and / or a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution. I would hope that such bills would require at least a 7-to-1 ratio of spending cuts to revenue increases.
           On taxes, I would vote to eliminate tax loopholes and differential taxation rates, but I would also oppose allowing tax cuts to expire, and eliminate tax credits, while reducing taxes across the board. I would vote to support a reduction of the individual income tax to between 12.5% and 20% in the short term, and in the long term, I would support the abolition of the personal income tax, and the abolition of the 16th Amendment.
           I believe that taxes on personal income, investment, consumption, imports, property values, and the “inflation tax on savings”, have the effect of discouraging productive economic behavior. While, in the short term, I would accept a Negative Income Tax, or a value-added national sales tax, in the long term, I would hope to replace all current forms of federal revenue with user fees, voluntary contributions, and a reform of property taxes, involving a Single Tax on the abuse, disuse, and blight of landed property, including fees paid to communities in exchange for the privilege of extracting natural resources.

           On the military, I would vote to support bringing troops and private contractors home from Iraq and Afghanistan as soon as possible, as well as from Germany, Japan, South Korea, and other countries. I would vote to dismantle hundreds of overseas military bases, stop spying on our allies, stop flying drones over foreign countries to spy and launch airstrikes without their permission (and without congressional declaration of war), and cut all aid to foreign countries for military as well as domestic purposes.
           I will vote to oppose efforts to require men and women alike to register for the draft, and I would support efforts to abolish military conscription altogether. I would oppose all proposed federal gun control legislation, and I would introduce a constitutional amendment to restore the Second Amendment to its original intent of protecting the right of conscientious objection.
           Concerning the recent call for “No Fly, No Buy”, I would vote to support transparency into these secret No-Fly lists, and my record would reflect a cautious concern regarding due process for suspected terrorists and the mentally ill. I will never forget that a suspected terrorist is innocent until proven guilty; that even without the Geneva Convention, the Eighth Amendment prohibits torture; and that the Constitution promises a fair trial for all persons, not just all citizens.


           Regarding immigration: although taxpaying citizens do shoulder the burden of taking care of illegal immigrants, in my opinion this is primarily the fault of an expansive and unfunded federal welfare state, not the fault of people who crossed a border without committing any other crimes that harmed persons or damaged their property. I believe that welfare for immigrants should be dealt with on a state and local basis, and I would vote to support legislative rather than executive deferred action for childhood arrivals and their parents.
           I would vote to oppose the construction of a border fence or wall, oppose making English the national language, support issuing Green Cards and temporary work visas to non-violent immigrants, and support allowing non-violent undocumented immigrants to apply for citizenship once they reach the age of adulthood set by the state of their residence.


           On trade, I would vote to support real free trade; the free movement of labor and capital. This is opposed to “smart trade” (or protectionism of industry), and opposed to “managed trade”, so-called “fair trade” (that is, protectionism of labor). I hope to help bring about reduced prices for American consumers by reducing and repealing tariffs (in addition to reducing sales taxes).
           I believe that increasing tariffs would only embolden foreign companies to increase worker exploitation and labor rights abuses (to offset the costs of the tariffs), and that this would increase human rights abuses abroad, making trade with such countries more controversial, thus making sanctions more likely, potentially leading to trade wars, cold wars, or even hot wars.
           On the issue of wages: given the apparent effect of increasing minimum wages on unemployment and price inflation, I would vote to oppose increasing the federal minimum wage. I would work to increase the affordability of consumer goods and utilities by strengthening the purchasing power of the dollar; I would do this by voting to reduce and eliminate sales taxes and tariffs, audit the Federal Reserve annually (or as often as possible), and abolish the Department of Commerce and the artificial business privileges which it erects.
           On labor, I take a centrist approach. I believe that Compulsory Unionism and majority union voting create the problem of workers free-riding on the benefits of union negotiation (as well as contributing to stagnating wages and soft money). But I also believe that the proposed solution to this – Right to Work laws – unconstitutionally limits the types of contracts which can be made between businesses and unions within the states.
           Employers, employees, and unions should be kept on equal footing, in regards to their freedom to become parties to contracts. I would vote to ensure that the federal government protects the rights of workers to engage in concerted activity within the workplace (to form unions and file complaints against their employers). I would vote to repeal the Taft-Hartley Act, legalizing wildcat strikes and secondary boycotts), Finally, I would encourage states to pass laws requiring employers to inform prospective employees about the nature of their relationship with – and obligations to – the workplace’s union (or unions), once hired.
           On campaign finance, I would oppose attempts to overturn the Citizens United decision. Money and speech are not equivalent in the strictest sense, but spending money is an exercise of our unenumerated freedom to engage in trade and participate in the economy. I believe that unlimited campaign donations and big money in politics are not the problem itself, but symptoms of the problem; that of a government that legislates outside of its duly delegated spheres of influence. In my opinion, candidates who favor limiting donations to $2,200 per candidate per race per election cycle, should set a good example, by refusing to accept donations in excess of that amount.


           On health, I would vote to repeal most, if not all, of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. I believe that the individual insurance purchase mandate is a penalty, not a tax; and that even if it were a tax, it would be an infinite tax, which is justifiable by neither constitutional nor economic laws.
           The way to expand access to medical care is not to tax medical device sales, nor hospitals, nor the income of doctors and nurses; nor to order people to buy insurance. Instead, to legalize the purchase and sale of insurance across state lines – and to end the tax credit for employer-provided health insurance – would expand access, while reducing costs, as well as make it easier for people to keep their policies when they move across the country or lose their job.
           Additionally, I would oppose tort reform, in order to avoid taking power away from juries. I would also vote to devolve the issue of health care to the states, and in the meantime I would support capping the growth of Medicare spending.


           On education, I would vote to oppose legislation making public colleges and universities debt-free or tuition-free; instead, I would vote to abolish the Department of Education, leaving the matter of educating children and young adults to states and localities. Until the department can be abolished, I would vote to oppose all federal involvement in student loans, I would consider supporting voucher programs, and I would oppose any efforts to set up national standards in primary education.
           On the issue of housing, I believe that H.U.D., Freddie Mac, and the Federal Reserve were significantly more responsible for creating the environment that led to the mortgage meltdown than Wall Street was. Accordingly, I would vote to abolish the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
           On the environment, I would vote to abolish the Department of Energy, and end subsidies and tax credits for all energy companies and industries. I would oppose the privatization of natural resources, instead promoting an integrated approach to taxes and the environment, which would involve encouraging states and localities to establish community land and water trusts, and citizens’ dividends funded through fees on natural resource extraction. I would additionally vote to end federal maintenance of strategic petroleum reserves; oppose federal taxes on gasoline sales and oil imports; and set a goal of achieving zero non-offset carbon emissions by the year 2030, without having the U.S. become a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, instead encourage states to pursue this goal the way they see fit.
           On Social Security, I would vote to support allowing young workers to opt-out of the program. I support the personalization of retirement accounts (as opposed to privatization), and I would encourage workers to open accounts at mutual or cooperative financial institutions. I would vote to support devolving this issue to the states, I would consider block grants, and in the interim – until that can be accomplished – I would vote to oppose means-testing Social Security.


           Social issues; first, marriage.
           I would oppose Defense of Marriage Act -type legislation, opposing all federal involvement in marriage between consenting adults, which I believe is a personal, contractual, and sometimes religious institution; not primarily a political one.
           On abortion, I would support de-funding Planned Parenthood, I would make no efforts to overturn the case of Casey vs. Planned Parenthood, and my voting record would support the notion that so-called “partial-birth abortion” is not abortion, but infanticide.
           Additionally, I would oppose requiring employers’ health insurance policies to cover abortion or contraception, and oppose any attempt to interfere with contraceptive medications and devices being sold in pharmacies. I would also oppose any legislation which would require an ultrasound as a condition of getting an abortion; this would help reduce medical care costs resulting from unnecessary and unwanted medical procedures.
           As for civil rights and discrimination: while I value the right of private property ownership of residential and commercial properties alike, I believe that the federal government has a responsibility to ensure equal and integrated access to places of public accommodations, but if and only if such an enterprise is directly involved in interstate commerce, and / or receives public funding. I believe that if a business thrives solely on a voluntary commercial basis, does not operate in more than one state, and sources all of its materials and labor from within its state; its owner should retain the right to hire whom it pleases, and the right to refuse service or entry to anyone for any reason.


           Finally, I have to confess that I consider myself uninformed about veterans’ issues, especially as a 29-year-old non-veteran. Needless to say, bureaucracy and costs in that department have to be reduced, and fraud in veterans’ charities is a problem. Also, health care and employment are issues that affect veterans and non-veterans alike, so I hope that what I’ve proposed regarding jobs and health will benefit veterans in addition to ordinary citizens.
           But a good politician ought to be able to recognize when his constituents know more about an issue than he does, and listen to their suggestions when they do, so I welcome any input that you all have on the issue of veterans’ affairs.


           Thank you very much for your invitation and your time. I will have more information about the status of my candidacy within two weeks. I hope that you at the I.C.R.C. will recommend my candidacy to voters in the 10th District.
           In the meantime, I encourage you to visit my blog, and join my campaign’s Facebook group – the addresses to both of which are listed on my business card – and if you would like to make a donation to my campaign, you can send it to Committee to Elect Joe Kopsick, at my home address. But please, no donations in excess of the amount set by the McCain-Feingold Act; money is not speech, but the words of an honest politician are as good as gold, and someone’s got to set a good example.
           Thank you for your support!

Links to Documentaries About Covid-19, Vaccine Hesitancy, A.Z.T., and Terrain Theory vs. Germ Theory

      Below is a list of links to documentaries regarding various topics related to Covid-19.      Topics addressed in these documentaries i...