Cecil Anthony Ince has declared that he’s running for the 2016 presidential nomination for the Libertarian Party. Here is some information on him, taken from his website Restore Liberty
Ince’s political philosophy emphasizes individual liberty, personal responsibility, and strict adherence to the U.S. Constitution. All of his positions are held to Jeffersonian Democracy . In economics, Ince believes in Austrian Economics, and Anarcho-capitalism in a free market economy, a system in which the only function of the government is the protection of individual rights from the initiation of force and fraud. He therefore opposes institutions such as welfare and business regulation.
Ince first ran for public office in 2002 as a Libertarian, earning 190 votes in a race for the Missouri legislature 137th District, under the name Christopher Davis.
In 2003, Ince assisted with the revision of the “Dominic James Memorial Foster Care Reform ACT of 2004”,March 19, 2003
From 2006 till 2007, Ince was a Member of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s Business Advisory Council, he was appointed by Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds NY-26
In 2010, Ince ran as a Libertarian for the Texas Legislature 105th District, against Republican Linda Harper-Brown. Ince received 740 votes in a three-way race.
Mr. Ince agreed to answer some questions for us at IPR. I have posted the answers as he sent them to me, without editing.
1. https://www.nypre.com/programs/online-essay-editor/37/ clothing business plan format c sharp assignment help best article review editing site for university go here a personal experience essay https://lynchburgartclub.org/how-to-write-a-good-introduction-master-thesis/ http://www.chesszone.org/lib/writing-jsonp-service-1923.html how to find my own ip address windows 7 http://www.nationalnewstoday.com/medical/viagra-et-hypertension/2/ https://dvas.org/canadian-superstore-pharmacy-9531/ viagra actress in football jersey topics for analytical research papers buy viagra boots online resume 100k short essay example here http://snowdropfoundation.org/papers/how-to-write-a-brief-artist-biography/12/ cheapest viagra available pay to do my essay cialis levitra kombinieren http://v-nep.org/classroom/structure-writing-essay/04/ assignment writers australia source how to write your college essay top bibliography writers sites gb chicago essay format source company writing writing papers help where to buy viagra in san francisco https://iffor.org/thesis-statement-your-parents-and-trust-6222/ What is your position on climate change? Is this a genuine problem and, if so, what would you do about it?
I personally believe climate change is a natural occurring phenomena. This is not the role of government.
2. Why did you change your name from Christopher Davis?
I was born Cecil Anthony Ince. In 2000, I decided to change my name, (outside the courts) with a church membership and thought the social security administration. My mother had wanted to name me Christopher when I was born but I ended up with my dad’s name Instead. My mother’s maiden name is Davis, I choose her last name. Then Congress changed the laws due to identify theft, States had document match requirements. In 2006, I went to renew my drivers license and my birth certificate still read Cecil Anthony Ince. So I had to back track and restore all documentation to my birth name Cecil Anthony Ince.
3. What are you doing to get your name and positions out to Libertarians? Have you attended any conventions, and are you planning to go any this year?
I been utilizing facebook and the internet.
I attended the Missouri State convention last year.
And plan to attend conventions this year.
4.How serious of a threat to the US is Islam? What would you do to mitigate the threats?
Full Withdrawal of all US military troops abroad. Close all foreign US military bases. And focus military efforts on civil defence and homeland defence.
5. I’m really having trouble understanding your views of immigration as talked about on your website restoreliberty.weebly.com. For example:
“U.S. Citizens may visit select countries for a specified period of time without a visa. The U.S. should extend the same curious to this countries. In addition, all issues pertaining to Immigration and Nationalization should be the soul authority of the U.S. District Courts, with Law Enforcement the Authority to enforce immigration and Nationalization Violations. No non-citizen should be entitled to liberties and privileges guaranteed to citizens.”
“Repeal all current policies, codes and legislation on immigration and nationalization. Call for a constitutional convention to ratify a constitutional amendment that grants the U.S. District Courts full authority of Immigration and Nationalization; clearly define citizenship, nationalized citizens, and non-citizens; limiting constitutional privileges and immunizes to Citizens ONLY; Authorize border states full authority over border maintenance and patrol.”
Then there’s this sentence:
Cecil Ince, supports Open Borders and Controlled Immigration and Nationalization by the U.S. District Court
Aren’t there some inconsistencies there? How can you call yourself as being for “open borders” when you’ve placed all these limitations on immigration?
Open borders, is exactly that, where peaceful people cross freely. That’s not the same as immigration an nationalization.
Any US citizen may fly to the Philippines on a passport alone, and say up to ninety days. The US should allow these countries to enter the US just the same.
As for nationalization and immigration, that’s not same as crossing the border to visit for a limited period of time. Immigration and nationalization has to do with working, having US residency, being a foreign student. Is about any non-citizen staying longer then ninety days. In which, the US district courts should handle all petitions for work visas or student visas and granting citizenship.
Border crossing is only one part.
The second part is citizenship, residency, and visas.
The current laws are not representative of a free constitutional Republic.
The constitutional amendment would limit control over borders to the States.
Classify citizens and non-citizens.
Only US citizen will have 14th Amendment rights.
And limited the scope of immigration and nationalization.
Borders and citizenship should be two distinct subjects. Staying over a period of time in the US should be a judicial matter, not an issue of entering the US.