My Entire Platform

This document has no summary of my long-windedness, but it does have some pretty good subtitles if you just want to skim it until you find something that looks interesting.

15-18 Minute Read

First and foremost, if you remember nothing else about me, remember this.  My platform as I run for office consists of one main goal. If I’m elected, I will be different than everybody in Raleigh because I will not be a part of a political party.  I will do everything in my power to find middle ground on every divisive issue, I will demand compromise, and I will do all of that with respect and open-mindedness, because that is what’s required of me as an American who believes in individual freedom. 

I refuse to tether myself to a major political party not out of spite, and not simply because I am a true centrist, but also because I believe we have reached a very dangerous time in American politics, and all North Carolinians, regardless of party, need someone like me in Raleigh to help represent a very large percentage of North Carolinians who are simply sick of partisan politics.

Politicians have earned all the negative stereotypes that exist about them.  I will personally attempt to break all of them. And if I should lose this election or the naysayers try to break me down, I will be unfazed.  I spent twenty years as an alcoholic; I’ve been sober since May 28, 2017. You can’t break a man that’s been completely broken. So whether I win or not, my second act in this life will make an impact on people, and there’s nothing anybody can do about that.  Said another way, I will not compromise my beliefs of goodness and respect and compromise and decency at any point between now and November of 2020 or whenever the day comes that I last serve the citizens of North Carolina.  I’m going to run the right way, and if I lose, I’m okay with that.

And now on with the rest of my platform.  And please note that I am a VERY open-minded, contemplative, adaptable, creative, thoughtful man who refuses to EVER stop learning.  I have some opinions on a few subjects, but Raleigh doesn’t need anymore politicians who are rigid and unable to be creative and adaptable with their beliefs.  We need leaders who can make an impact and work together.

There are now more independent voters in the US than either Democrats or Republicans.  39% of Americans are registered independent or unaffiliated, compared with 32% Democrat and 23% Republicans.  So why are there so few unaffiliated representatives in Raleigh or Washington? Why are we okay accepting the partisan wars that anger voters like me so badly that we took the plunge and said, “It’s not okay with me anymore?”

I am proudly and unapologetically unaffiliated with any national political party.  I am this way, and have been for nearly a decade, because I have watched our great nation become as divided as it has been in my lifetime.  Because of that, it has become strikingly obvious that politicians feel a requirement to vote along party lines or at the request of a rich donor, as if this was their job.  I always thought the job of a public servant was to serve the best interests of the citizens they represent. Because I am unaffiliated, I get to do that.  

If I am elected, I will make every decision based on what is best for the majority of those who I represent.  As divided as we are as a country, somebody has to be the bridge. In other words, in a General Assembly that consistently votes along party lines and will not extend a hand across the aisle to seek compromise, I will be the person standing in the middle demanding negotiation from both sides.  No matter what you believe and what side of the aisle you are on, you cannot disagree that compromise is a foundational item in government and one that is being roundly ignored at this present time.  

The following is my platform on the most important issues.  I have begun each topic with what I believe to be the middle ground of every partisan issue we face in this country, and I’ll elaborate with my feelings on the topic.  You’ll notice that my views are extremely centrist and very no-nonsense. These are written in no particular order because every issue is the most important issue to somebody.



Where’s the Middle Ground?

Spend five years cleaning up our immigration system and hire enough people to go through every welfare or Medicaid recipient to see if they are legal immigrants.  If they’re not, fix it. Either they go back home or we give them a fast track way to become citizens. I have one such idea on how to do this on the drop down menu above under “Issues.”  I think most people are thrilled to have LEGAL immigrants. I also believe most people would rather their tax money go to support those people who are legally here or truly seeking asylum.

If that works, and we’ve made it a little less hospitable to come here illegally, we may not need a wall.  If it doesn’t work, build the darn wall. That’s called compromise, and it’s not the only idea. It’s just one of potentially hundreds of ideas on how to fix the problem.  Because I’ll be the first to agree that illegal immigration is a very big problem and it does need fixing.

One last thing.  Why are we getting so upset about this issue and causing such a partisan divide when the ones who are actually responsible for making our country hospitable to undocumented immigrants are skating by with barely a mention?  It is estimated that there are 340,000 undocumented immigrants in North Carolina alone (, 2016,) and the ones who are old enough either work for themselves or they work for somebody else.  Those who employ illegal immigrants are complicit with their illegal status and should be punished for it.  I have a feeling we will find that scaring them all away or deporting them is going to leave a rather difficult void in our agriculture and construction businesses, but if we’re going to fix this problem, we have to go after the ones who are employing them.  

My Elaborated Views:

I work at a high school with a 40% Hispanic population.  Most of them will admit that either they or parts of their family are not here legally.  It’s a problem. It must be fixed. It is not racist to say that people who live in our country should be here legally, whether they are a true American citizen, here on a work VISA, vacationing, whatever.  I am expected to obey the law every single day. That means every person who lives here should obey the law every single day. It is not racist to say that. It is also not racist when I pay $720 a month on health insurance for my family and it angers me a little bit when illegal immigrants are sometimes getting medical care for free.

We need to fix this, but we need to do it with compassion towards the family unit who we have allowed to live here illegally for, in most cases, many, many years.  Part of this problem is our fault as a country for allowing it to go on unchecked for so long. Anyone who is here illegally should be treated with compassion while they are going through the naturalization process.  If they refuse the process or do not complete it in a set amount of time, they should be returned to their home country.

Lastly, I did quite a bit of research on the deportation process and the reasons undocumented immigrants stay undocumented, and I came up with an idea that would greatly reduce the number of undocumented immigrants in our country.  Check it out above in the drop down menu or click here.


The Second Amendment

Where’s the Middle Ground?

People can have, keep, purchase, trade, or otherwise own handguns, shotguns, and rifles because the Second Amendment says so.  Current background check procedures seem to have little argument from the masses, so they should stay.  If they were a little more strict, most people wouldn’t complain because most gun owners aren't criminals.  Beyond that, the middle ground on this topic is basically this:  if the government tries to disarm its citizens, there WILL be civil war. It’s the only platform issue that should be maintained as is even in spite of the threat of violence.  No other partisan issue in America would be as heated as this one should the attempt at control or abolishment (in this case, disarmament) transpire. We should never vote to disarm law-abiding citizens.  In turn, those law-abiding citizens would never have any reason to follow through on that violence.

My Elaborated Views:

I have already been blasted about the following tired, overused claim, but it CANNOT be proven wrong.  And that’s a problem not for gun-lovers but for gun-haters.  They have to be able to prove this wrong to have any case against assault rifles or other gun legislation.

Guns don't kill people.  They never have and they never will.  Mentally ill people sometimes do, however.  Angry people sometimes do, too.  Sometimes it’s white nationalists.  Sometimes it’s socialism worshipers.  Sometimes it’s Muslims.  Sometimes it’s fascists.  Sometimes it’s a regular Joe who just snaps.

Fight the correct battles. A stout education system with a full range of support personnel in place would certainly help with recognizing at-risk youth who can then receive help before it is too late.  A diverse country that preaches tolerance would certainly help.  The very easy to accept realization that people are different than you in life and you are no better than anybody would help, too.  Background checks?  Well I know this much about background checks.  If somebody wants to kill another somebody, a background check might slow them down, but it will not stop them. 

In addition, I’m truly in love with the analogy comparing guns to drunk driving. We as a nation have not banned vehicles simply because a few bad apples drive drunk. Likewise, we cannot ban guns simply because a few bad apples kill people with them.

I’ll be honest and say I do not understand the love affair with assault rifles, but that doesn’t mean I think they should be banned or even regulated.  Criminals – those people for whom laws do not matter – will likewise not care if their clip size is too large or if they have the proper conceal/carry permit to ride around with their gun of choice.  

The bottom line is that I’ve still never seen a gun jump out of a gun cabinet and kill anybody.  And I mean what I said about gun lovers fighting to the death to keep their guns.  That WILL happen.  And because the extreme anti-gun people says stuff like, “We WILL take your AR’s,” they have killed any chance at a conversation about assault rifles.  Has anybody ever considered that gun lovers MIGHT come to the table to discuss this ONE type of gun (because that’s the only argument, right?) if somebody offered to give them a new shotgun or handgun in return?  They have mentioned this buyback stuff, but that doesn’t put ANY trust in Second Amendment purists.  Offer a trade.  Give them something better than what they’re giving up.  It’s better than anything else the anti-gun lobby has offered.  I mean, they aren’t going to take your trade, but you could at least try.



**I wrote extensively about this topic earlier in 2020 because I know how important it is for most people, but I took an angle on the subject that you might not have seen before.  You can find it on my blog HERE.

Where’s the Middle Ground?

End elective abortions at 12 weeks, period.  Nobody needs longer than that to decide. Past that time, abortions should be allowed only when the mother’s life is in danger or the fetus is not viable to live outside the womb.  That’s all the language necessary to make it land in the middle of political debates. We have to put faith in our doctors to make moral decisions about necessary abortions after 12 weeks.  

We also have to find the middle ground of understanding that belief systems across races, cultures, nationalities, classes, ages, and education levels differ greatly in a country with the freedom enjoyed in the United States.  Not everyone believes abortion is murder, but the great thing about America is that you are free to believe that if you choose. People are also free to believe it is not. That means you are free to believe (and raise your children to believe) that abortion is not right for you and your family.

My Elaborated Views:

I am pro-life with an asterisk.  I have watched my wife suffer a miscarriage - nature’s unwanted abortion.  I have watched my sister raise the most amazing adopted son. I have taught students who have made the decision to end their pregnancies.  I have seen many sides of abortion, one of which was a young student who sought my advice the day after she left Planned Parenthood too emotional for the doctor to perform the abortion.  The next week, she ended the pregnancy, ignoring my advice.  

History, however, cannot be ignored with this topic, even at a time when there are countless birth control methods.  In addressing it in hindsight, doctors at the time of illegal abortions prior to Roe vs. Wade refer to the era as the “bad old days.”  Hospitals all over the country literally had entire wings dedicated to treating young girls and women who were given unsanitary and dangerous abortions, leaving the women with deadly infections or sepsis or countless other complications.  The reality is that a Constitutional Amendment banning abortion is irresponsible and unrealistic.  

As long as there are hormones, poorly educated citizens, normal drunk people, lower class citizens, cheating spouses, and even rebellious teens who believe they are bulletproof, there will be unwanted pregnancies.  And as long as there are unwanted pregnancies, there will be women so desperate to end their pregnancies - and so anxious to ignore the holier than thou chorus of “You should have been more responsible” - that they will resort to illegal and dangerous means of aborting the baby.  And as long as there remains a First Amendment, there will be differing opinions on when life begins. This is reality, and it’s freedom, and a full ban on abortion installs a form of big government impeding our lives and the freedoms of women.

Like most charged political topics, there is a middle ground.  In order for us to come together as a nation, there has to be. Nobody wants abortions to happen.  Nobody. No matter how vehemently people are against the more liberal laws throughout the country, nobody cheers abortions.  It is tone deaf and irrational to think so. Abortion is awful. No one is disputing that. But history proves that a total ban on abortions - not to mention a Constitutional amendment stating as such - ignores the reality of the problem.

Lastly, if you are a man, and you are so vehemently against abortion that you are willing to say, “Two wrongs don’t make a right” to a woman who has been raped and subsequently impregnated, I would like you to imagine that you - a grown man - have been raped by a very large man who saddled you with Herpes and/or AIDS.  I’m guessing you would want to get rid of those as quickly as you could, correct? Men should NEVER have an opinion on what women do with a pregnancy after a rape. Ever.


Gay Marriage

Where’s the Middle Ground?

There isn’t one.

My Elaborated Views:

I had my first real kiss at a very young twelve years of age.  I kissed a girl. And I liked it. I was a straight male from birth and have not thought twice about that.  There was no decision to be made. I was made a straight man. It is not my job to judge whether or not another person was made another way because I cannot truly empathize with their innate attractions or the passions of their heart.

First and foremost, the United States of America is a land where freedom rings.  To me that means we are free to love who we were meant to love, without the judgment of others.  I’ve never wanted people to make judgments about who I love, have you? Besides, the most conservative of our fellow Americans want far less government in our lives.  And I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment.  Why, then, would we want to legislate our bedrooms?

Love who you love and be happy.  It’s actually none of my damn business who you love anyway, now is it?


Where’s the Middle Ground?

I’m pretty sure we’re already there.  Well, we would be if we balanced a damn budget.

My Elaborated Views:

Our current economy is a mix of capitalist (free market) economy and socialism.  When legislated and regulated correctly, this is already a mix of conservative and liberal ideals, and that’s the way it should stay.  I would like to clean up the social programs to insure those who are receiving them are actually qualified for them, though I do not have the answers as to how we would attempt to tackle that gigantic problem.  It is perfectly reasonable for a candidate for office to admit they don’t have all the answers. I wish more did that.

The first legislation I would promote on that topic, however, would be random drug testing for welfare and food stamp recipients.  In an effort to not be careless with humor, drugs are a luxury item on which those people on government assistance should not be spending taxpayer money.  If they are receiving money that they did not work for, they should be micromanaged a little more strictly than I am. This would not apply to Social Security recipients because they are simply getting their own money back.

The topic of government handouts brings up the similarities between individual handouts in the form of welfare, unemployment, and food stamps with the corporate handouts by way of corporate bailouts, subsidies, and tax incentives.  I’m sorry, but if the tax dollars of the collective are being used to prop up anybody or any company, the government has at least a small say on how that money is spent.

Beyond that, we are a free market economy, and this is really the only way to allow the market to set the price of goods and services.  I do not want the government doing that for us.  

An example of why we don’t want the government making so many decisions that directly affect us would be to look at Social Security again.  If you were forced to take a certain percentage out of your check every month for “Social Security,” but instead of the government being in charge of that money, YOU were able to decide where it went, you would choose a mutual fund or some other safe investment.  Over the years, your money would grow at about 6-12%, and you would retire a millionaire, even if you worked your entire career for $14-$18 an hour. Instead, the government is responsible for your social security, and you’ll never see it all.

Well regulated social programs are a necessity in our country, but pure socialism is dangerous.  The theory is well-intended, but it lacks fairness and reality. The “have nots” in this country would soon figure out that it actually enables them to be very, very lazy, and this would very soon anger the “haves.”  I think about it like a group project in school. If there are four people working on a project, but only two of them are working on it while two people are riding their coattails, there would eventually come a time when this scenario would stop working and tumult and disorder would ensue.  

Here’s another way of looking at it, and it is the very bedrock of what it means to be an American.  I have always had this dream (as most people do) that one day I would strike it rich. Whether that means I inherit money or win money or work my ass off to earn money, I have a dream of being rich so I can take my family on amazing trips and give my kids more than they need and support charities near to my heart.  If I succeed at that dream, I don’t want 80% of my money to go to people who don’t work as hard as me. That’s simply not fair.

Lastly, NOTHING needs to happen with regards to new programs in this country until we can balance a bipartisan budget for three consecutive years and develop a plan to pay back our debt.  And that pertains to state OR Federal. We cannot add any more debt to our country or we will one day be owned by China. This has to end NOW. We have not had a federal surplus in this country in 18 years.  That is shameful.


Where’s the Middle Ground?

The middle is that wonderful place called a balanced budget.  It is also that place where everybody goes into a debate about taxes with a rational take on the fact that there is no United States without taxes.  It doesn’t exist.  All of these people that say “Taxation is Theft!!” are being completely irrational.  Taxes are required to make our country run and they are NEVER going away.  A middle ground to me would be to make the entire topic of taxes markedly simpler so that “normal” people (like me) could understand them better.  Take a look at the numbers below and then let’s have a REAL open-minded debate about taxes.

My Elaborated Views:

The Federal Budget plus State of NC Budget for 2019 (Coletti, 2019) is  $4,430,900,000,000 (, 2019.)  If you take that number (and assume other states’ budgets are roughly the same per capita) and you divide that total annual budget number by the number of people over 22, which, based on the population clock is estimated to be approximately 237,000,000 people, that makes each person responsible for approximately $18,695 per year of the state and federal budget.  

Seems pretty obvious that people living on Social Security aren’t paying that much money per year in taxes.  Same goes for people fresh into their careers, especially if they are saddled with college debt. I’m a teacher making less than $45,000 a year.  That much tax burden would be 42% of my gross income. That’s a little high. So who offsets that cost? Corporations and people in the upper-middle and upper classes.  Shouldn’t we be able to come up with some kind of linear scale based on income (or wealth) to find the percentage everybody would pay? This stuff needs simplifying and streamlining.  It’s too hard for most Americans to figure out.

And I know it’s a pipe dream, but the grotesque number of taxes we pay on an annual basis is getting pretty ridiculous.  We pay federal tax, state tax, social security tax, welfare tax, property tax, sales tax, estate tax, capital gains tax, real estate tax, excise tax, and even sin tax.

Free College

Where’s the Middle Ground?

Free community college?

My Elaborated Views:

No.  Just no.  Did you read what I said earlier about the 18 year consecutive budget deficit?  There is no way in heck we can afford to pay for people to go to college, especially when not everybody was built for college.  What will we do for the people who are headed to work right out of high school?  Hand them a check for what college would have cost them?  It would be unfair otherwise, right?  This is a terrible idea, and there are just no scenarios that exist where I can get behind my tax dollars going to pay for a two hundred thousand dollar degree for a kid whose parents are worth eight million dollars.  No.  Just no.

However, if you want to talk about why higher education has gotten so freaking expensive, we can absolutely have that conversation.  Over the past 20 years, inflation has been roughly 30%.  The average cost of tuition and fees at public universities in the US has risen 181%.  Wow.  Yeah, that conversation needs to happen yesterday.

War on Drugs

Where’s the Middle Ground?

No idea.

My Elaborated Views:

I was an active alcoholic for 20 years.  I can promise you that I would have probably tried something harder if it was easier to get.  In other words, it’s probably a good thing that it is still pretty hard to get. As for the prison sentences drug dealers should receive, I think we can get more creative than shoving them into prisons with violent criminals.  Make them work off their time in halfway houses and drunk tanks. Make them pick up trash on our highways. Force them to provide free labor in a skilled trade where they can learn the ropes and maybe find a career after their forced “apprenticeship” is over.  They don’t need to be jamming up our prisons and turning violent in jail because turning violent is their only option. We have to be a more creative society than that.

And legalize marijuana everywhere.  It’s safer than alcohol.


Where’s the Middle Ground?

No idea.

My Elaborated Views:

Recently, the topic of reparations has gotten more front and center, especially after Bob Johnson, the owner of BET came out with a $14.7 TRILLION plan.  And if that seems a little absurd, that only means the demands might get negotiated down, but they aren’t going away completely.  I mean, somebody had to finally come up with a starting point, right?

I am a 42 year old teacher making less than $45,000 a year with a wife and three kids.  I never owned a slave (nor was I a slave,) I never displaced the Native Americans (nor was I forcibly displaced,) I committed no lynchings (nor was I lynched,) I was not a Nazi (nor was I thrown into a concentration camp,) and I did not commit a terrorist attack or hate crime (nor have I been a victim of one.)  I am but one person, but the last sentence could be written by approximately 95 - 99% of the population.  I do not believe you cannot ask taxpayers to contribute to a potentially never-ending stream of ancestral “victims” that will NEVER end with slavery reparations.  This is not any taxpayer’s responsibility in 2020, 155 years after slavery ended.

That being said, I fully understand the argument FOR reparations.  I understand that a large percentage of the black and African American populations have never recovered from the VERY poor start we afforded them after slavery ended.  They still own very little land, they still have a very low percentage of the wealth in this country, and they are still forced to almost segregate themselves because that life is all they can afford.  So I can see a scenario where we offer tax incentives or mortgage rate deductions or even infrastructure improvements in places where the largest populations live. I do not, however, believe it is smart to simply hand anybody cash for these reparations.

Now if we’re talking reparations for civil rights, at least we’re talking about people who were directly affected and their immediate descendants.  There are no doubt areas or programs or educational opportunities provided to the black community that are underfunded and therefore still insufficient for pushing a certain population of blacks onto equal footing with other races (particularly whites) within the country.  If that is the case, I would support funding those programs in lieu of cash payout reparations as some have suggested.  

Overall, however, I cannot support the topic of reparations if it means further indebting our own descendants or diminishing programs where ALL citizens currently have needs.  I am sorry slavery happened, but I do not feel guilt. In this case, guilt is reserved for those people who performed a heinous act. I did not. There is nothing about which I should feel guilty.  On the other side of that, I am not aware of any living person who was actually a slave. But I would not be against some very specific programs to HELP them own a little more land or assist in keeping a little more of the wealth they accrue.  This is not the kind of thing that is corrected overnight.  But there are small ways we can start bridging that gap.  With the indebtedness of our nation, however, I simply cannot support cash payouts.

Health Insurance

Where’s the Middle Ground?

No idea.

My Elaborated Views:

My wife had a baby recently.  The nurse brought her a can of Dermoplast.  You can buy a can of that on Amazon for about $7.00.  The hospital bill showed that we paid $30 for that $7 can of pain relieving spray.  This is called price-gouging, not free enterprise. And we all know the game. The hospital will send the bill to the insurance company who will turn around and give them a heavily discounted counter-offer and they’ll settle somewhere far less than the original cost but still enough to help offset the hospitals other losses.  Why is this happening when everybody knows the game?

As vaguely referenced earlier, one reason for these inflated prices is that the uninsured among us, who often do not pay for their medical care, still incur a bill, right?  Well, since the hospital doesn’t want to take a loss on that, they simply raise their prices on the people who CAN pay to help offset these losses. How is that fair to those of us with jobs and health insurance?  Is it not another form of socialistic tax because our hard-earned money is going to support the healthcare of other people? I don’t have any answers for this - it’s just not in my wheelhouse - but I exist in a world that sees balance in things that make sense.  This does not make sense, just as it doesn’t make sense for everybody to know the insurance company “counter offer game” and allow it to continue.

Speaking of that, doesn’t it seem rather high that I am a teacher and pay $720 per month for my family’s health insurance?  That’s basically a fourth of my income every month. That’s my only personal rant. It’s very expensive.

I don’t have any answers for health insurance issues, but I would absolutely champion one very big idea.  Those who eat well, stay in shape, and have a track record of low medical bills should pay much less than those people who do not.  A second idea would be to add up all of the hospital bills that were never paid and put them into categories by country of origin. If we ended up with $17,000,000 in unpaid medical bills from people who immigrated from Venezuela, we need to simply pass on that bill to goods being exported to that country.  That way, their citizens would pay us back, not ours. And yes, that might be a stupid idea, but it might be brilliant.

HB2, “The Bathroom Bill”

Where’s the Middle Ground?

Only using the bathroom at home?

My Elaborated Views:

If you were born with a penis and still have it, you go to the men’s bathroom.  If you were born with a vagina and still have it, you go to the women’s bathroom.  I honestly don’t know why this is an argument. Is this an issue for some transgender people?  Yes, I’m aware that it is. And yes, I’m aware that HB2 was eventually repealed, but it wasn’t fully repealed, so it is still an issue.

But in an era when defendants of open bathroom policies are using science to defend abortions, global warming, and other issues meant to combat religious-based counter-arguments, they are ignoring science with regard to biological makeup of gender.  That can be seen as hypocritical to use science for one issue but not another. And if a transgender woman is biologically male, science says (s)he goes in the men’s bathroom. I believe LGBTQ rights in all things should be the same as straight rights, and with this, it also should be.  I’m biologically male. I go to the men’s bathroom. All biologically (and anatomically) male citizens should do the same.  That keeps us ALL treated equally.

Voter ID

Where’s the Middle Ground?

No idea.  Showing an ID with just your first name and a stick figure drawing of your face?

My Elaborated Views:

Well, the last time I got my license renewed, I sat at the DMV for three hours.  I believe everyone should have to experience that hell. In addition, it is another way of making sure our citizens are here legally.  This seems like it shouldn’t be an argument.

That being said, there IS an argument.  It’s happening right now.  Judges keep calling a Voter ID law racially motivated and unconstitutional.  Sometimes, however, there is a simpler  answer.  This should be one of those times. 

Let’s use North Carolina and it’s population as an example.  We have roughly 10 million people.  Let’s say 7 million are of voting age.  Of those, maybe 2% can’t get an ID or won’t get an ID or don’t have the means to get an ID or whatever.  So that means 140,000 people might not be able to vote if it required an ID.  Well how about this?  Allow the State Board of Elections to remit legal ID’s to people who are registered to vote.  With all the many ways we have of verification nowadays, there simply has to be a way to verify who people are, and when the board of elections finds out about those people who can’t get an ID, they develop a process of verifying the identity of those people, take their picture, and then send them an ID.  This is 2020, for goodness sakes.  You cannot tell me we can’t get every person in America an ID.

Climate Change

Where’s the Middle Ground?

Go with common knowledge and common sense.  We all know that in the history of the world, seas rise and fall, another ice age will probably happen, and that will probably happen thousands of years after our current trend where we will lose most beaches in the next few hundred years because of cyclical warming before the trend reverses.  It’s all cyclical. That’s common knowledge.

Common sense is that we have a responsibility - no matter your beliefs on climate change - to be good stewards of this Earth while we are here.  So if we’re doing something that is not good for our planet, we should stop.  To me, that is the entire argument for at least acknowledging the possibility of climate change.

The other issue we have to consider is that the Earth is probably not used to the amount of fossil fuels we have used in the past two hundred years.  For literally millions of years, living things gave back to the land pretty much exactly what they took.  Now we are burning through our fossil fuels at rates the Earth has never seen, and we can’t put those back.  It would be naive to say that this has not had an impact on our planet.  Do we freak out and stop flying airplanes and stop allowing cows to fart?  No.  That’s ridiculous.  But responsible stewards of our planet are required to know what that might be doing to the planet our grandchildren will inherit.

My Elaborated Views

Same as the middle ground.

Term Limits

Where’s the Middle Ground?

Somewhere between one term and unlimited terms.

My Elaborated Views:

Let’s say that somebody worked their way up from state government all the way to the Presidency, and they stayed the maximum number of years that I, Denton Lee, proposed they stay at each stop along the way.  That means that the president spent 12 years in state government, 12 years in federal government, and 8 years as president. 32 total years is more than enough for anybody, and the breakdown I proposed above for each legislature should not be exceeded.  If a person only does state government, he or she only gets 12 years, no matter whether they spend that time in the House or Senate or a combination of the two. Twelve years is enough. Same goes for Federal, but with the difference in term lengths between House and Senate, there may be a need to tinker with the numbers slightly.  But my vote for that would be that if someone spent more than four terms in the House, they could never run for a Senate seat.


Sources: (2016). North Carolina Listed Among States With The Most Undocumented Immigrants. [online] Available at: [Accessed 26 Jul. 2019].

Coletti, J. (2019). North Carolina Budget Fiscal Year 2018-19. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 Sep. 2019]. (2019). 2019 United States federal budget. [online] Available at: [Accessed 7 Aug. 2019].