Why are you running for office?
Mo Brooks Response: Numerous factors compel me to run for office. There are many things the federal government could be doing better, or should not be doing at all. Generally speaking, I perceive that our nation is at risk. I can either sit back and watch America decline or I can fight to return us to the principles that have made us a great nation. I have chosen to fight.
A major factor in my decision to run for Congress is that America is threatened by the twin evils of unsustainable budget deficits and a mad rush away from free enterprise and towards Socialism. Either of these two threats, standing alone, can wreck America’s economy and bring America to its knees. Together, they are a disaster waiting to happen. As your Congressman, I will strongly push for a balanced budget Constitutional Amendment (not just co-sign an amendment and passively watch to see what happens). As your Congressman, I will vote against anything that supports Socialism and vote for everything that removes barriers to proper operation of our free enterprise system.
If America will take the above steps, we will have done much to prevent America’s decline and remain the greatest nation the world has ever known.
Another major factor is the Tennessee Valley’s Congressional election history. For at least the last 70 years, every single candidate who has run for Congress, regardless of party, who had not first proven himself in public office . . . . lost.
Voters have had a “prior elected office” requirement for two reasons.
First, voters are naturally skeptical of campaign rhetoric and are more comfortable believing a candidate if that candidate’s representations match his elected office record.
Second, a large segment of 5th Congressional District voters’ livelihoods and jobs (NASA, Defense, TVA, etc.) are dependent on the effectiveness of their Congressmen. These voters seem uncomfortable risking their livelihoods and jobs on unproven candidates. Hence, they tend to vote en masse for those candidates who have an elected office record that establishes that they are up to the task of being a Congressman.
I have been elected to public office eight times. I am a candidate, in part, because no other officials elected as Republicans are running for Congress. We have to maximize our chances of electing a conservative to this seat and denying House Speaker Nancy Pelosi a vote she needs to get re-elected as House Speaker. If I did not run, and if no other elected Republicans challenged the incumbent, then history suggests the incumbent would be re-elected. It is not in America’s interest for that to happen.
Is it better to have individual or collective rights? Why?
Mo Brooks Response: In America and generally speaking, individuals have rights. Groups do not. A group only has the rights of its individuals. Hence, there are very few collective rights recognized in America that are not, in fact, simply a summation of the rights of the group’s individual members.
While the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights speaks of the rights of the collective “people” (the rights to free speech, religious freedom, bear arms, assemble, petition government, and the like), in practice, each of these rights is in fact a right granted to individual persons.
There are limited circumstances in which the rights of individuals are subservient to the rights of the “collective” (i.e. – the collective rights of America as a whole). For example, during war where the survival of the nation is at issue, individual rights are often suspended and made subservient to the rights of the nation. Martial law, the draft, and suspension of habeas corpus are historical examples of extraordinary circumstances in which individual rights are subservient to collective rights.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in my opinion, it is better to have individual rights rather than collective rights because, whenever individual rights are subservient to collective rights, America loses the respect for individual freedoms that distinguishes us from the rest of the world and which have allowed us to become the greatest nation in history.
What is the role of our federal government?
Mo Brooks Response: The role of the federal government is to wisely exercise the powers expressly granted by the U.S. Constitution and its subsequent amendments. Interpretation of the Constitution should be based on original intent. Changes to original intent (or expansion of federal government powers) may only occur via the amendment process established in the Constitution.
What are your solutions for job growth in Alabama?
Mo Brooks Response: As an overview comment, the fastest way to create jobs for American citizens (and Alabamians in particular) is by removing illegal aliens from America, thereby immediately freeing up millions of jobs for American citizens.
Otherwise, my answer is in two parts (first, national policy; second, specific local needs).
Alabama does well if the national economy does well. As Ronald Reagan said it, a rising tide lifts all boats.
The solution to job growth in America rests within our free enterprise system. The cause of the problem is socialism and unfair foreign competition. The federal government must stop its march towards socialism, reverse its course, and promote free enterprise. The federal government should promote free enterprise by lessening tax burdens on employers, reducing the cost of government regulations on employers, and intervene in the market place only in those few instances in which the free enterprise system is not working because there is insufficient competition.
The federal government should make American companies more competitive in the international market place by insisting on fair trade policies. For example, we must stop China from artificially setting currency exchange rates at levels that do not reflect market values and which, in turn, undermine the ability of American companies to compete. We must help American employers by leveling the playing field in those instances in which the federal government forces costs on American employers that foreign employers do not have to absorb. These government-imposed costs give foreign employers an unfair competitive advantage that they use to put American companies out of business, thereby costing Americans jobs.
While our Congressman must focus on national issues that impact our economy in general, he must also ensure the Tennessee Valley is well-positioned to contribute to America’s defense, space exploration and power generation needs. Because of my 20+ years as a state legislator and Madison County Commissioner, I am well aware that an elected official’s duty is to both protect the general welfare while also promoting district needs.
Over the years, I’ve worked hard to help obtain funding for I-565 construction, Huntsville’s Parkway overpasses, greenways, hiking trails, public schools, a more than ten-fold increase in my Commission district’s disposable budget over the past 13 years, and the like.
I’ve been successful at helping those I represent even though I’ve always been a member of the minority political party (both as a legislator and Commissioner). I’ve successfully navigated the politics of constituent services without voting for any general fund tax increases as a County Commissioner and while being ranked #1 out of 140 legislators by the Alabama Taxpayer’s Defense Fund in the fight against higher taxes and bigger government.
I mention my Commissioner and legislative successes to emphasize one point. As your Congressman, I’ll represent the Tennessee Valley as well as I’ve represented my legislative and commission districts.
