This Sunday's Guest - Steve Adams

WHO???

Steve Adams is another independent candidate for president and he will be my guest on my blogtalk radio show this weekend.

Here is his stance on some topics:

Abortion
Though I know many well intentioned people will disagree with me, I believe that life begins at conception. Therefore abortion should not be used for birth control, gender selection, or anything short of a life threatening emergency. Partial birth abortion is particularly horrible and should be banned.

Two comments or questions pop up whenever this topic is discussed.

First is the assumption that I do not support "women's rights". This is far from true. I recognize the agonizing decisions that can be involved and the struggles of life vs. life. I simply believe that the children too are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life..."*

Second is the question of appointing Supreme Court nominees. The answer is no, I will not have a "litmus test" of a pro-life judge. Overturning Roe v. Wade is not my goal. I will look for the best qualified judge who will interpret the constitution and not rewrite it.

*The Declaration of Independence


Balanced Budget / Deficit Spending / Taxes
Immediately balance the budget; stop deficit spending; and stop adding to the debt.
Reduce federal spending.

Replace federal income tax with national sales tax to fully pay for valid federal spending and pay down the debt.

I am required to keep my checkbook in balance; because if my bills did not get paid, there would be trouble. There is no reason that the United States Government should not be held to the same standard. Smart spending and smart taxation are required.

I believe in smaller government, not bigger; one that is fiscally responsible. We will have to take a hard look at what government spending is critical and beneficial, and what is not. I believe in letting Americans keep as much money from their paychecks as possible to drive the economy. I support a FairTax plan* such as the one currently being discussed in Congress (HR 25//S 1025) described here - a tax code that is so simple that my 13 year old son can explain it to you.

There are a dizzying amount of terms and concepts to be weighed in this discussion including national debt, public debt, taxation vs. borrowing (savings bonds and Treasury bills), and who owns what. Not being an economist, I can't answer every question now. But why not put the brilliant minds of American economists to work? Ask the experts to help find a solution to solve today's problems. That is what I will do.

*From www.FairTax.org:
What is the FairTax plan?
The FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll taxes with an integrated approach including a national retail sales tax, a rebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar revenue neutrality, and the repeal of the 16th Amendment. This non-partisan legislation (HR 25/S 1025) abolishes all federal personal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes and replaces them all with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax – collected by existing state sales tax authorities. The FairTax taxes us only on what we choose to spend, not on what we earn. It does not raise any more or less revenue; it is designed to be revenue neutral. So it is also cost neutral – the final cost for goods and services changes little under the FairTax. The FairTax is a fair, efficient, transparent, and intelligent solution to the frustration and inequity of our current tax system.

What is Americans For Fair Taxation (FairTax.org)?

FairTax.org is a non-profit, non-partisan, grassroots organization dedicated to replacing the current tax system. The organization has hundreds of thousands of members and volunteers nationwide. Its plan supports sound economic research, education of citizens and community leaders, and grassroots mobilization efforts. For more information visit their web page: www.fairtax.org or call 1-800-FAIRTAX.

Education
Having two children in school and working with youth for years has shown me that the measurement of teachers and schools has become burdensome to the point of interfering with education. In some cases, children are taught to pass tests, not to learn. Teachers are instructed to improve test scores by doing "whatever it takes." We receive notes sent home during testing periods to encourage us to send snacks and make sure our kids get adequate rest during these testing times. The lack of emphasis on the rest of the school year is revealing.

Measurement must be a part of education, but we already have grades and graduation. These can be falsified, at the expense of our children, but some better way of measuring schools and their success must be put in place.

I do not have the entire answer today. I promised I would not claim to be an expert in every arena. But I will consult with educators at every level, from the teachers in the classrooms to principals, to city and state coordinators; and we will find a better solution.


Energy / Environment
My energy plan would be complete independence from foreign sources - mostly oil - and that will help the environment as well by reducing polution.

We must all do our part. My wife drives a gas/electric hybrid vehicle. I ride a gas efficient motorcycle when possible. I support the move to hybrid vehicles for those who can afford to, but you can not punish people who have no recourse.

One proposed alternative fuel is ethanol. The distribution of ethanol as well as steps to increase the majority of vehicles to handle more than 10% ethanol is not easy.

I prefer to support electric use. Electricity can be generated by wind, geothermal, nuclear or emerging technologies. Build electric or electric hybrid cars and we will be well suited for the future.

Convert houses/business to electric heat/energy use as well to wean them off oil or natural gas. Reduction of our dependence on foreign oil has the positive side effects of lessening the power of troubled Middle Eastern countries and lowering greenhouse gas emission as well.

Electoral College / Gerrymandering / Every Vote Must Count
People do not vote in our country because they feel disenfranchised. They feel like their vote doesn’t count. We have had a President not elected by the popular vote, but elected by the Electoral College. We have elected officials that win because their party is in power in a state and can draw voting districts to keep them winning.

Remove the outdated Electoral College which was put into place as a safeguard against the common man.

Prohibit gerrymandering - the drawing of voting district boundaries to unfairly aid one party. This gives the party that is in power, the ability to draw lines for voting districts so they will win.

Immigration
Every border and port must be made secure using a combination of fences/obstacles, technology, and manpower. No amnesty should be granted to those who chose to break the law, no matter how long they have broken it. Employers should be legally liable for illegal aliens working without proper documentation.

The FairTax has a nice side effect in that spending by illegal aliens would now be taxed where today their wages are not.


Marriage
Though many write this subject off as political maneuvering; I support any legislation, involving a constitutional amendment or otherwise, that continues to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The reasons are legal, reduction of confusion, and financial. To many, there are moral questions at hand, but we must understand that the basis of one’s morality is not shared by all Americans.

The discussion of the meaning of marriage must first be a legal one. There is beauty in marriage, but if we reduce marriage to its basics, it is not a right or entitlement, but a legal act. It is defined as, "the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a legal, consensual, and contractual relationship recognized and sanctioned by and dissolvable only by law." Redefining marriage to remove the “opposite sex” part would be a government decreed, morally based change which would effectively force all Americans to endorse a sexual behavior.

Next we need to reduce the confusion and congestion of our court system. States and even cities have passed laws that give certain rights or the title of marriage to same sex couples, but those rights may or may not transfer to other states. The number of court cases, ballot issues, and appeals on the topic is countless. I am a firm believer that courts should interpret laws and not make them, so we must remove this battle from the court system.

Financial ramifications must be considered. Some companies recognize domestic/same sex partners and give them equal benefits as compared to married couples. The IRS does not. How does such a company report that kind of support on their employees’ W2s? They either have to report that as additional "pay" to the employees (for the person that the IRS does not recognize as a dependent/spouse) or the companies are being dishonest in some way on their tax reporting.

It is difficult to separate the moral from the legal on this one, and everyone in the United States has an opinion. My stance is that the government should stay out of the moral and stick to the legal. As a Christian, I have strong personal views on this, but none of those should be shoved onto the country. Realize that the government today, to some degree, already tells you who you can sleep with. We have laws about prostitution, relations with under aged children, polygamy, etc. However they do not regulate every other aspect. You can legally pick up any consenting adult you want to in a bar/off the street and take them home... two or three of them if you want... same sex if you want. Live with them if you want. There are moral issues there, but the government has stayed out of those as they should.


National Defense / War
Some may claim the term pacifist in the name of faith or on principle, and expect me to claim the same. I would be a pacifist in a perfect world, but history has taught us that we do not live in such a world. As WW II martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer said, "If I see a madman driving a car into a group of innocent bystanders, then I can't, as a Christian, simply wait for the catastrophe and then comfort the wounded and bury the dead. I must try to wrestle the steering wheel out of the hands of the driver." Whether that madman is headed toward one of our children at home or abroad, America must act.


I have several friends, former students from my youth group, and church members in the military. I take seriously the responsibility of sending our children, spouses, or friends into harm's way. We must defend our nation, our allies, and others in that order. I favor proactive military action where necessary. Therefore a military force with the most modern and effective weapons must be maintained. It must be a priority in our balanced budget.

I favor a consolidation of US armed forces within our borders, protecting our homeland. Then at bases around the world that help us to react quickly. Lastly limited engagements with overwhelming force and decisiveness. At the same time our intelligence agencies and special forces units must be given the best training and assignments - then the government gets out of the way - political constraints must never prevent US forces from using their might to full advantage. In other words, after a decisioin is made to engage in military options by myself, Congress, and the leadership of the military; the plan and responsibility for the actions that follow are left up to those who have chosen the military as a profession. They will not then be sway to public opinion or selective reporting from the press.

I favor a comprehensive plan consisting of pieces of Eisenhower's Massive Retaliation (overwhelming force to strike back against any agression), Kennedy's Flexible Response (having multiple military options during a crisis), and the Powell doctrine (a clear exit strategy being required.) The end result being that the United States will use military action wherever necessary, in whatever form necessary. I also favor taking the military "off the radar screen." This does not mean that they are allowed to do whatever they want. Rather it means that you won't be able to find out where forces are by a simple internet search. Restrictions on military protection for the press must also be increased, allowing all our forces to do their job without looking good for or protecting a camera.

With regard to our current war in Iraq: First we must realize that no one who reads this site has the real facts. We hear the spin from the government and the media, but we don't know what's really happening over there. That said, we need to leave Iraq as soon as possible. Talk to the generals; speed up the timetable; but don’t set an arbitrary date just to make people happy. Stop the “cut and run” or “surrender” talk. We fought and won our war and the troops can come home proudly. They have done everything that we have asked them to and more. If a civil war is indeed raging, we are enabling it by protecting the borders from foreign invasion. Take away that protection and the Iraqi people must step up and deal with threats to their nations instead of fighting amongst themselves. Finally we must realize that this is a redeployment at best. The war on terror will continue, but on other battlefronts, in times and places of our own choosing.



Separation of Church and State
Some people may fear my Christian faith, while others may rejoice. To address both, my faith makes me a better person. It has shaped my life since my childhood. It does not however mean I will force America to be a Christian nation. Jesus Christ himself would not make such a decision because he prefers people come to God out of their own free will. It is the basics of grace and the core of Christianity. If God wanted to force a religion on you, He would have already done so.

Many people like to quote the phrase "separation of church and state", thinking that it comes from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or some such document. In fact it comes from a letter (available from the Library of Congress) from Thomas Jefferson to three Baptist gentlemen in Connecticut in 1802 and is not part of our legal system.

The law that does apply is from the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, Amendment I, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" What this means is the government can not say you have to be a Presbyterian or a Christian or a Jedi to be an American. It does not say the government should encourage or discourage school prayer or saying Happy Hanukkah in the hallways. It does not prevent the government from talking to faith based institutions to bring help and hope to those in need.