PDA

View Full Version : We should create a Ron Paul Forums candidate questionnaire




TaftFan
01-19-2014, 06:05 PM
We spend so much time wondering and debating whether or not candidates agree with us on the issues.

Why not create an official-looking questionnaire which Bryan or a designated mod could send to candidates?

I'm interested in hearing everybody's input.

Bryan
01-19-2014, 11:35 PM
Excellent idea, I'd for sure do what I can. Below is part of the candidate questionnaire used for the Liberty Straw Poll (back in 2008) that can be a starting point. The main policy issues are true / false, which I like. Some of the ones listed should be updated, and we can add more too-- so let's come up with some ideas.

Thanks!


----------

Campaign Race Overview

Date of primary
(if applicable):

Incumbent: (if applicable):

Incumbent’s political party affiliation:



List all opponents, their political party affiliation:
Opponent / Political Party Affiliation


Policy Positions

1. Do you support or oppose constitutional limits on the growth of government?

2. Do you support or oppose the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms?

3. Do you support or oppose the Supreme Court Kelo vs. New London eminent domain decision?

4. Do you support or oppose the Security & Prosperity Partnership goal of an external North American security perimeter with expedited shared border crossing?

5. Do you support or oppose a Photo ID requirement to vote?

6. Do you support or oppose the use of Public Private Partnerships for Transportation?

7. Do you support or oppose asserting states 10th Amendment rights?

8. Do you support or oppose U.S. implementation of United Nations Agenda 21?

9. Do you support or oppose a National biometric ID?

10. Do you support or oppose participation in the REAL ID Act of 2005?

11. Do you support or oppose a Global Tax?

12. Do you support or oppose the Cap and Trade Carbon tax scheme?

13. Do you support or oppose NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA type Trade agreements?

14. Do you support or oppose the UN Law of the Sea Treaty?

15. Do you support or oppose abolishing the IRS?

16. Do you support or oppose abolishing the Federal Reserve?


Optional addition of detail for above positions:



Position paper web link (can be broad or narrow in focus):
http://


Speaking engagement video web link:
http://



Current Campaign Support


List all relevant polling data on race:


Endorsements received:

Christian Liberty
01-20-2014, 12:09 AM
What's the correct answer to #3?

Devil's Advocate (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/06/stephan-kinsella/a-libertarian-defense-of-the-kelo-decision/)

jurgs01
01-20-2014, 12:19 AM
A candidate questionnaire should not lead the candidate to the answer you want to receive. The questions should be broad, so that the person answering shouldn't be able to tell if they are coming from a far left organization, a statist, a NEOCON, or a liberty advocate. Just food for thought.

Brian4Liberty
01-20-2014, 01:31 AM
We spend so much time wondering and debating whether or not candidates agree with us on the issues.

Why not create an official-looking questionnaire which Bryan or a designated mod could send to candidates?

I'm interested in hearing everybody's input.

Good idea.

Natural Citizen
01-20-2014, 01:42 AM
All that I ask is what the candidates official position is on science and technology in general and how would they lead us given it's impact and relevance to infrastructural and social change and specifically legislation that may be, in part, or in whole, derived and applicable from it.

In other words, I'm not asking them to tell me how they feel about something like...oh...let's say genetically modified food being a great market opportunity. I would like to hear their official position on the science itself and applications derived from it that may or may not be introduced to the human species through political legislation. Seems like an honest, fair and relevant enough question.

That is all. Thank You. Good idea, taftfan...

If I just heard an answer to this one particular question, regardless of if I disagree or agree with the prospective representatives position there would be a lot less pissing and moaning from me around here. I'd be a happy camper. It's a very important question. It's the very stuff that dictyates and defines change during these very delicate times of transition from the Industrial Age to the Information and Technology Age.

William Tell
01-20-2014, 03:01 PM
Neat idea.

ClydeCoulter
01-21-2014, 08:58 AM
Good idea.

Yes it is. :)

ClydeCoulter
01-21-2014, 09:01 AM
All that I ask is what the candidates official position is on science and technology in general and how would they lead us given it's impact and relevance to infrastructural and social change and specifically legislation that may be, in part, or in whole, derived and applicable from it.

In other words, I'm not asking them to tell me how they feel about something like...oh...let's say genetically modified food being a great market opportunity. I would like to hear their official position on the science itself and applications derived from it that may or may not be introduced to the human species through political legislation. Seems like an honest, fair and relevant enough question.

That is all. Thank You. Good idea, taftfan...

If I just heard an answer to this one particular question, regardless of if I disagree or agree with the prospective representatives position there would be a lot less pissing and moaning from me around here. I'd be a happy camper. It's a very important question. It's the very stuff that dictyates and defines change during these very delicate times of transition from the Industrial Age to the Information and Technology Age.

Perhaps a couple of questions that relate to corporations writing legislation and tests on unsuspecting population (limited or not)?

jllundqu
01-21-2014, 09:48 AM
A candidate questionnaire should not lead the candidate to the answer you want to receive. The questions should be broad, so that the person answering shouldn't be able to tell if they are coming from a far left organization, a statist, a NEOCON, or a liberty advocate. Just food for thought.

No kidding! Might as well have questions like:

You don't want to take muh guns, do ya? __________________
You don't support killin babies, do ya? __________________

azxd
01-21-2014, 11:22 AM
Group Think = Not

eduardo89
01-21-2014, 11:44 AM
Group Think = Not

not what?

enoch150
01-21-2014, 11:14 PM
All that I ask is what the candidates official position is on science and technology in general and how would they lead us given it's impact and relevance to infrastructural and social change and specifically legislation that may be, in part, or in whole, derived and applicable from it.

In other words, I'm not asking them to tell me how they feel about something like...oh...let's say genetically modified food being a great market opportunity. I would like to hear their official position on the science itself and applications derived from it that may or may not be introduced to the human species through political legislation. Seems like an honest, fair and relevant enough question.

That is all. Thank You. Good idea, taftfan...

If I just heard an answer to this one particular question, regardless of if I disagree or agree with the prospective representatives position there would be a lot less pissing and moaning from me around here. I'd be a happy camper. It's a very important question. It's the very stuff that dictyates and defines change during these very delicate times of transition from the Industrial Age to the Information and Technology Age.

I can't even tell what you're asking from this. There's no question in there.

fr33
01-21-2014, 11:22 PM
Excellent idea, I'd for sure do what I can. Below is part of the candidate questionnaire used for the Liberty Straw Poll (back in 2008) that can be a starting point. The main policy issues are true / false, which I like. Some of the ones listed should be updated, and we can add more too-- so let's come up with some ideas.

Thanks!


----------

Campaign Race Overview

Date of primary
(if applicable):

Incumbent: (if applicable):

Incumbent’s political party affiliation:



List all opponents, their political party affiliation:
Opponent / Political Party Affiliation


Policy Positions

1. Do you support or oppose constitutional limits on the growth of government?

2. Do you support or oppose the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms?

3. Do you support or oppose the Supreme Court Kelo vs. New London eminent domain decision?

4. Do you support or oppose the Security & Prosperity Partnership goal of an external North American security perimeter with expedited shared border crossing?

5. Do you support or oppose a Photo ID requirement to vote?

6. Do you support or oppose the use of Public Private Partnerships for Transportation?

7. Do you support or oppose asserting states 10th Amendment rights?

8. Do you support or oppose U.S. implementation of United Nations Agenda 21?

9. Do you support or oppose a National biometric ID?

10. Do you support or oppose participation in the REAL ID Act of 2005?

11. Do you support or oppose a Global Tax?

12. Do you support or oppose the Cap and Trade Carbon tax scheme?

13. Do you support or oppose NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA type Trade agreements?

14. Do you support or oppose the UN Law of the Sea Treaty?

15. Do you support or oppose abolishing the IRS?

16. Do you support or oppose abolishing the Federal Reserve?


Optional addition of detail for above positions:



Position paper web link (can be broad or narrow in focus):
http://


Speaking engagement video web link:
http://



Current Campaign Support


List all relevant polling data on race:


Endorsements received:

Well first we need to establish if a yes or no answer to each question would be a positive towards their score. On some of those it's debatable amongst us and would further define RPF's goals which would both piss off some and justify others.

dinosaur
01-21-2014, 11:50 PM
We spend so much time wondering and debating whether or not candidates agree with us on the issues.

Why not create an official-looking questionnaire which Bryan or a designated mod could send to candidates?

I'm interested in hearing everybody's input.

What would stop people like Rubio from getting a good score?

RonPaulGeorge&Ringo
01-22-2014, 12:08 AM
Doesn't C4L do something like this?

Bryan
01-22-2014, 12:08 AM
What's the correct answer to #3?

Devil's Advocate (http://www.lewrockwell.com/2005/06/stephan-kinsella/a-libertarian-defense-of-the-kelo-decision/)
It was a trick question. :) No really, good point- the question could be better worded.


A candidate questionnaire should not lead the candidate to the answer you want to receive. The questions should be broad, so that the person answering shouldn't be able to tell if they are coming from a far left organization, a statist, a NEOCON, or a liberty advocate. Just food for thought.
At a large point, I agree with you, but I also agree with Williams that we shouldn't back down on asking hard questions on where they stand.


No kidding! Might as well have questions like:

You don't want to take muh guns, do ya? __________________
You don't support killin babies, do ya? __________________
I think asking questions on their support of particular bills / acts / initiatives is a good way to avoid this, since all of these items have people for and against it. Otherwise, I agree to not over-lead people.



Well first we need to establish if a yes or no answer to each question would be a positive towards their score. On some of those it's debatable amongst us and would further define RPF's goals which would both piss off some and justify others.
Well, first we should polish up the questions. That list is pretty dated and coming up on six years old. Otherwise, I think it's OK if some of the questions split the site, we don't all have to agree on all issues, but this will set the lay of the land. The questions should also be more clear, such as the "Photo ID" question (which we won't all agree on)- it should at least specific if the requirement is on a federal level, state level, etc.

So the questions need work-- let's come up with more questions.

Thanks!

Christian Liberty
01-22-2014, 12:21 AM
It was a trick question. :) No really, good point- the question could be better worded.

Its actually a fair question, its just not as clear as it first seems what the "correct" answer is. Hence why I posted Stephan Kinsella arguing at length that preserving federalism is more important than having SCOTUS prevent local eminent domain, as well as arguing that takings for private use are no worse than for public use. Some people obviously disagree with him and think that such SCOTUS actions would be justified, which to my understanding is the more common libertarian position. I suspect there are people here on both sides as well. Right now, I'm leaning toward Stephan Kinsella being right, you don't cure local government violence with Federal Government violence. And if SCOTUS had not done what it did, Connecticut would start arguing "well, if we can't have our "states rights" than why does Montana get to defy the Federal government on machine guns" or whatever. Better to just go with the 50 independent republics with open borders thing rather than saying "well, sometimes the Feds have a right to unconstitutionally impose themselves."

On the other hand, at an individual level I probably would appeal to SCOTUS if I felt like it might undo a wrong that was done against me, so I don't really know.

I guess the question here is, does RPF want to actually formalize a stance on this federalism debate? If it does, how would such a stance be determined? Will we simply go with whatever Bryan's opinion is on this topic? Vote? Something else?

It might be better to simply go with "Does government have a right to use eminent domain to take land for private use" or "Does government have a right to use eminent domain for any reason." Neither question being controversial from any kind of libertarian perspective. But Kelo v New London is somewhat controversial for the reasons Kinsella discusses.

ClydeCoulter
01-22-2014, 12:39 AM
I can't even tell what you're asking from this. There's no question in there.

See my response to the same post. I think that is what was being asked in so many words.


Perhaps a couple of questions that relate to corporations writing legislation and tests on unsuspecting population (limited or not)?

Natural Citizen
01-22-2014, 01:08 AM
See my response to the same post. I think that is what was being asked in so many words.

Just their official position on science would suffice. It's basically what I had asked in that first sentence but then went off into my own stake in it. I'm not particularly anti-corporation.

ClydeCoulter
01-22-2014, 01:11 AM
Just their official position on science would suffice. It's basically what I had asked in that first sentence but then went off into my own stake in it. I'm not particularly anti-corporation.

Care to take a shot at the wording so that you get an idea of their position?

Natural Citizen
01-22-2014, 01:12 AM
Care to take a shot at the wording so that you get an idea of their position?

What do you mean, Clyde?

I, for one, can tell exactly the position they'll take regarding legislation that is aligned with some of these applications just by their response on the general science position. If they start rambling off about the market aspect of it and avoid the area of the actual science, this is very telling.

Is a question that really should be asked of all representatives, elected and prospective...not just ones that we like to support in our little click. I'd just prefer that our candidates have an actual answer is all because eventually they'll have to answer and it won't be this joe six pack feller asking.

enoch150
01-22-2014, 02:28 AM
In 2010 I interviewed some candidates for the Independence Caucus. I think they give more honest answers when the questions were neutral rather than leading. But if they know the questions are coming from RPF making them neutral might be pointless. I'd go so far as to make a few of them slightly misleading. For federal candidates:

1. Would you have voted for TARP or any of the stimulus packages?

2. Do you favor free trade or fair trade?

3. Would you support an energy policy that temporarily subsidized renewable energy solutions so that they are competitive until they become viable on their own, and also would you support restricting oil imports from potentially hostile nations?

4. Many small brick and mortar business owners have complained that they are unfairly punished by a tax code that forces them to collect state sales taxes while competitors who only sell products online escape those taxes and can undercut their prices. Would you support the Marketplace Fairness Act, which was introduced in 2013 to remedy the tax imbalance by allowing states to collect sales taxes from retailers without a physical presence in their state who were selling to instate residents?

5. Would you support allowing Americans to easily opt out of programs for which they are taxed and which are nominally for their benefit, such as Obamacare and Social Security?

6. What do you believe the federal government's role is in regulating gay marriage?

7. Do you support federal restrictions on personal defense items, including licensing and registration?

8. What are your thoughts on the PATRIOT Act and the NSA revelations?

9. Given that several states have partially legalized or decriminalized marijuana, going forward, what should be the federal government's role in the War on Drugs?

10. What are the federal government's responsibilities in educating America's children?

11. A number of cities have gained a reputation as "sanctuary cities" for illegal immigrants. They offer ID cards so that illegals can have access to banks and the state of Connecticut has even gone so far as to issue limited purpose driver's licenses. What should the federal government do about this?

12. Do you believe the city of New London used eminent domain appropriately in the Kelo case?

13. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 and several other laws have allowed non-citizens who were accused of terrorism and caught inside of the United States to be detained indefinitely and denied a trial by jury. Is this an important tool in the War on Terror or a violation of civil liberties?

enoch150
01-22-2014, 02:31 AM
The biggest problem with doing this from RPF is that we can't pressure the candidates to answer. Anybody can send them a candidate questionnaire. It would help if we could send them a questionnaire and say "I represent a group with 4,000 members in your district."

enoch150
01-22-2014, 02:40 AM
What do you mean, Clyde?

I, for one, can tell exactly the position they'll take regarding legislation that is aligned with some of these applications just by their response on the general science position. If they start rambling off about the market aspect of it and avoid the area of the actual science, this is very telling.

Is a question that really should be asked of all representatives, elected and prospective...not just ones that we like to support in our little click. I'd just prefer that our candidates have an actual answer is all because eventually they'll have to answer and it won't be this joe six pack feller asking.

Like this?

Question for candidate: What is your position on science?

Candidate response: I'm for it.

enoch150
01-22-2014, 02:56 AM
Doesn't C4L do something like this?

They don't seem particularly effective in pushing candidates to fill it out. At least not in Connecticut. 3 out of 15 federal candidates filled it out in 2012 and 2 of those were for third parties. And I think they only do it after the primaries. For comparison, in 2010 the Connecticut branch of the Independence Caucus (which was mostly Ron Paul, Glenn Beck, and Tea Party supporters) got maybe 14 out of 17 Republican candidates for federal office and none of the Democrats to do an hour long sit down interview after answering an 80 question survey which required them to watch about an hour's worth of explanatory video. They did it pre-primary.

But for what it's worth, here are C4L's 2012 questions for federal candidates:

1. Will you cosponsor and call for roll call votes on Ron Paul’s Audit the Fed bill, designed to bring transparency to the Federal Reserve (H.R. 459/S. 202 in the 112th Congress)?

2. Will you support legislation removing capital gains and sales taxes on gold and silver coinage?

3. Will you vote to oppose any legislation that allows the federal government to prohibit the sale, use, or carrying of firearms?

4. Will you support a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution that includes hard spending limits and allows for no increase in taxes or other federal revenue enhancements?

5. Will you support legislation that forbids U.S. troops from serving under United Nations command?

6. Do you support and will you vote to protect states asserting their rights under the Tenth
Amendment?

7. Will you oppose Big Labor’s Card Check bill and any other legislation designed to empower union bosses?

8. Do you support U.S. withdrawal from the United Nations?

9. Will you support legislation to shut down the Transportation Security Administration and place airport security back into private hands?

10. Will you oppose using U.S. forces to occupy a foreign nation without a declaration of war?

11. Will you support legislation that will repeal ObamaCare, including H.R. 1101, the End the Mandate Act?

12. Will you oppose so-called “Cap and Trade” legislation?

13. Will you support legislation such as the Smith/Amash Amendment to the NDAA of 2012, which would prevent the indefinite detention of U.S. Citizens and would ensure full Fifth Amendment rights to due process?

14. Will you vote against any budget that increases our debt?

15. Will you oppose federal power grabs like roving wiretaps and warrantless searches and oppose Patriot Act renewal that includes such items?

16. Will you oppose any legislation that requires states and citizens to participate in a
National Identification Card program?

17. Will you vote to oppose all taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants?

18. Will you support keeping our Internet free from government control and intrusion, including opposing power grabs like SOPA, CISPA, or any other bill that mandates more government intervention in the Internet?

19. Will you oppose all tax increases?

20. Indicate the tax cuts you are willing to vote for: • Across-the-Board Income Tax Cut
• Capital Gains Tax Cut • Business Tax Cut • Estate Tax Cut