2012 CANDIDATE QUESTIONNAIRE
Eighteenth Candidate Forum – Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Sponsored by: The New Testament Christian High School, Plymouth
Candidate: Daniel Botelho Position Sought: US House of Representatives 9th CD
Address: P.O. Box 1064 Fall River MA 02722. Phone: (774)-226-8663
1. What do you believe the role of civil government is in relation to rights and services?
Answer: The role of Civil Government is to ensure the rights by rule of law for all people falling under its jurisdiction. Services provided shall not infringe on the rights and liberties of the individual citizen and the basic services provided are public safety, defense, interstate commerce & infrastructure. With a growing populace, the need for safety net programs has become evident. Such programs are to be limited and not self-defeating to the purpose of ensnaring an individual form achieving prosperity.
2. Briefly define the responsibilities of the office that you are seeking and what you believe are the most important issues that separate you from your opponent?
Answer: The main responsibility of the office is to represent the constituents of our district. The delegate has the role of voicing the people’s opinion on proposed laws that will govern the citizens of our country. The House of Representatives specifically is tasked in article one section seven to originate bills to raise revenue for our Country. This specific area, which has as of late been a particularly sour spot on the 112th Congress’s record, is where my experience in the private sector will come most in hand. Further working as a financial reporting analyst on hedge funds heavily laden with derivative instruments, I have a unique perspective that will be quite useful in repealing and replacing the Dodd Frank act, which I see as a having a lot of bark but very little bite.
3. How do you think it is best to deal with the terrorist attacks on U.S. Embassies abroad?
Answer: From my press release on the topic:
In light of recent events in the Middle East I am deeply saddened by the loss of life and the senseless violence groups have demonstrated around the region. It seems no matter what the United States does in relation to humanitarian aid or tactical support to help bring conflicts to an end as quickly as possible our sons and daughters suffer.
We are at a point in our history that even with one of the best trained, well equipped, and extremely dedicated armed forces; our nation building agenda has backfired. I truly feel that with no clear mission our governing body is setting the men and women of our military up for failure across not just the Middle East region but the world.
Our lack of focus has led to a confrontational China; striking deals with Saudi Arabia for exclusive oil exports in exchange for a missile defense system. As well as taunting Japan with a fleet of Naval War ships whose sole purpose is to rival our own.
In the Middle East we must come to the realization that no matter how hard we try bringing democratic ideals to a people who govern themselves solely with rules of faith is extremely difficult. Rules of law separate from religious principles allow for discussion and even disagreement, but societies solely governed by religious stand points will perpetually breed extremists based on a very narrow often male dominated belief structure.
For that reason I would call for the closing of our Consulates and evacuation of ambassadors and supporting American personnel from hostile hot spots in the Middle East. I would support sending in our troops to get all of our people out and for an appropriate show of force if needed to achieve that goal. The people of this region who incite violence view our compassion as weakness and although my heart goes out to the good people of the region who are stuck in the middle, I can no longer turn the other cheek.
In my thoughts the evacuation of consulates and other American interests in areas with great Anti American sentiment would last as long as needed. Such areas would include Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Egypt, Pakistan and Syria. Additionally all foreign aid to such locations would be suspended including any percentage of foreign aid given to the UN that would be allocated to those types of locations.
In this regrouping we would strengthen our relations with dependable allies in Europe, Australia and Japan and send a clear and stern message to China. Honor your trade agreements and Japan’s sovereignty or lose your largest trading partner.
4. What do you think should be done to stimulate and grow the American economy?
Answer: First and for most we need drastic taxation reform. I favor a national consumption tax. In our regulatory environment we must level the playing field. Too often large conglomerate or industrial entities have unfair advantages that are extended to them because of mere scale. Although I believe in the economic principle of economies of scale, I do not believe regulation should be geared to bar entry or discourage the small entrepreneur.
These two areas Taxation and regulation touch all facets of industries across our country and are crucial to bring jobs back. The second stage of the plan would be to then champion our state and district to bring firms back to our area. To highlight the existing infrastructure and plans that are already in place to improve upon that infrastructure. Adding and expanding to our current freight rail system which can be used to ship large and heavy materials across our district and state. Taking advantage of our deep water ports, which can receive and ship goods to and from our entire district.
The people of our district have the drive and the ambition to get back to work and earn a living The Universities and Community Colleges in and around our district position us well to be marketable to potential employers who need skilled labor. By forming partnerships & coops between educational institutions and private business we could tap into an engine that drove our country towards great innovation. Our district, with its many educational institutions, could help firms be the leaders in innovation and it can all happen right here in our newly reconfigured ninth congressional district.
5. Would you retain, repeal or adjust the present Universal Health Care law?
Answer: First, it is not a Universal health Care Law. Under the current Law which was molded after our very own here in Massachusetts; individuals can and will still be without health insurance coverage. The swift kick to the back side is that thanks to the Supreme Courts ruling which practically gave the U.S. Congress unlimited power in its decision to tax someone for not buying insurance. This means that a person who refuses to participate will end up paying a tax and will still have no coverage. So they have in a sense purchased a product via a tax penalty without having any benefit of the product. With that I would look to remove the law completely.
As a society and prosperous nation I see the argument for a national system. But as an economist and someone who has family in Europe I know the draw backs of a social healthcare system. Long lines, waiting for non life-threatening procedures, one need not look at Europe, but the Health First Clinics in New Bedford and Fall River to see those lines. Innovation is also stifled as the for-profit motive is completely eliminated and providers do the bare minimum as R&D becomes non-existent.
For those reasons I would like to seriously explore a two party payer system where the U.S. government provides a basic very well defined coverage to all U.S. Citizens. What is considered basic would be drawn up by medical professionals and industry leaders and not the bureaucrats in DC. Supplemental insurance coverage to cover non basic items could then be purchased via insurance exchanges in or out of state. Employers could continue to offer this supplemental coverage as part of their benefit packages as well which would be sold by current third party payer insurance companies. This paradigm I believe will insure choices within the market place; ensure continued completion and quality of care, innovation, while keeping costs in check.
Non-US citizens would have the option to buy third party coverage only. The consequences of not having insurance would be that the individual is on the hook solely for the bill. Some may call it harsh but the continued coverage of illegal immigrants is severely straining our States abilities to take care of our own. By taking a hard line position I maybe being harsh but a clear message will be sent to those seeking to come to the United States illegally, no free rides here..
6. How would you express your views on abortion, marriage and any other social/moral issues?
Answer: I am pro-life with the consideration for medical, incest, and rape. Medical is defined by a medical professional with real life threatening issues to mom abnormalities.
Marriage is a faith based sacrament defined by my Judeo Christian values. That being stated the government has no business defining marriage in any form. The legal ramification of obtaining a marriage certificate is to enter into a legally binding contract for the duration of one’s life for the purpose of defining a tax status as well as financial purposes. Neither the certificate nor the Justice of the Peace is ordained by God rather authorized by the state. In that light what the government performs to any couple is a Civil Union and the government cannot segregate any person on any basis in regard to performing a civil union. We all have the right to Life, Liberty, and Happiness however that may be defined.