Amit Singh is running for Congress in Virginia’s 8th District. He was kind enough to agree to participate in an interview. As you can tell from the interview he is dedicated to a limited and more open federal government. Please help his campaign by donating at his website: Amit08.com.
This is part 1 of the interview. For all Liberty Maven interviews check out the interview page.
LM: Your website (Amit08.com) has a very good description of your professional background. Could you complement that information with information about some of your hobbies and interests outside the professional realm? Additionally, could you elaborate a bit more on why you have decided to run for Congress?
Singh: I love to listen to live music especially bands like Dave Matthews that do a lot of improvisation during their performances. I used to collect a lot of live concert recordings but it is too difficult to keep up with nowadays. I also love to play basketball. I play in a league at work and I think it’s a great team sport that has a lot of skills that transfer to other areas. A little cliche, but I love to travel. I try to visit one new country a year. Last year I went to China which was amazing. This year I was hoping to go to Turkey but I’m not sure if that will happen given the campaign!
As far as running for Congress, I have always been a doer, for example I started my own company when I got frustrated working for others. I have written Jim Moran (the current VA 8th District incumbent Democrat) dozens of times with no response. This year, inspired by the presidential election and uninspired by local candidates, I took it upon myself to spread the message of limited and transparent government. Running for office is a great way to express your views and even make a difference.
Hillary Clinton announced a “child poverty plan” today. Her plan expands the government nanny state towards socialism. She’s merely playing politics here. It’s a last ditch effort to win votes from Obama. Sure, it’s nice to take care of “the children”, but why does the federal government have to do it?
She says she will pay for it by toughening enforcement to collect taxes currently owed but not paid. Uh-huh. So she’s going to use the IRS to terrorize people in to paying unconstitutional taxes so that the federal government can deliver “free” and “fresh” food to children living in poor areas.
I have a better idea to help with child poverty. Repeal the income tax to free up poor families to make more money to feed their own. Repeal the income tax so that people will be more likely to give their money away to charities and churches that always do a much better job at helping the poor than the federal government.
The federal government can’t even help people properly after a disaster like hurricane Katrina. Instead of putting free market measures in place to encourage charitable giving we get a a dose of Hugo Chavez-like socialism.
At some point we are going to have to change the term “land of the free” to “land of the coerced.”
With all the talk of groups during this election cycle in the media and by the candidates I found this Op/Ed piece from the Aspen Times intriguing. On any given day, we hear things like “Will Hillary get the hispanic vote?” or “Will McCain take independents from Obama?” All the talk is about people in groups.
While I think the article’s sentiment is dead right, he probably should have used “Angry American” instead of “Angry White Man”. I can’t disagree too much though. It certainly helped the article’s interest level.
During the debate last night Obama said the following:
“It is not going to be easy to have a sensible energy policy in this country. Exxon/Mobil made $11 billion last quarter. They’re not going to give up those profits easily.”
What in the Constitution allows the government to take profits from a private company? It is comments like these that make me ill at the thought of Obama becoming President. Of course, the federal government already takes their cut. I guess the first law of Obamanomics says they will take more.
Much talk has occurred from Ron Paul supporters about whether he should abandon the Republican Party and run as a third party or independent candidate. He has painted himself into a GOP corner. The truth is that the Republican Party has abandoned him, but he refuses to flee to the friendlier confines of another party. It seems he believes doing so is a losing proposition. It probably is.
He aims to give the GOP a much required makeover by punching at the base of it’s neo-conservative tower. This certainly is a noble effort, but is it also a losing one?
There are many candidates across the US running for various offices as “Ron Paul Republicans” or “Liberty Candidates” as I like to call them. I recommend supporting them all financially. The problem arises when you aren’t sure if they are legitimate “Liberty” candidates. Certainly, you would not want to support a candidate who will immediately forget his oath of office upon entering office.
As far as I’m concerned any candidate who claims the the “Liberty” position deserves support even if they end up being a sham. Why? It’s too difficult to determine who is and isn’t a true liberty candidate. There will be ample opportunity to vote them out of office during the next election if they don’t live up to expectations.
We are conducting interviews with several candidates. Some have already been posted on the interview page.
Here are some websites that promote Liberty candidates for your research:
With Ron Paul not getting the GOP nomination it really is now up to us to keep his message alive by helping to get these fine patriots elected. Enjoy your research. If no one is running in your district, consider running yourself.