Jeremy Ivanovskis' Issue Positions (Political Courage Test)
Key
Official Position: Candidate addressed this issue directly by taking the Political Courage Test.
Inferred Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, but Vote Smart inferred this issue based on the candidate's public record, including statements, voting record, and special interest group endorsements.
Unknown Position: Candidate refused to address this issue, or we could not infer an answer for this candidate despite exhaustive research of their public record.
Additional Information: Click on this icon to reveal more information about this candidate's position, from their answers or Vote Smart's research.
Other or Expanded Principles & Legislative Priorities are entered exactly as candidates submit them. Vote Smart does not edit for misspelled words, punctuation or grammar.
Jeremy Ivanovskis has provided voters with clear stances on key issues by responding to the 2024 Political Courage Test.
Texas Congressional Election 2024 Political Courage Test
| Pro-life | Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation? | ||
| Yes | Do you support the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade? | ||
| When I served in law enforcement, I swore an Oath to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution and it's an allegiance that I didn't take lightly. Our Republic and Bill of Rights is based on individual Liberty. "Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)," was a landmark 1803 U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. | |||
| No | Do you support expanding federal funding to support social safety net programs such as Social Security and Medicare? | ||
| Yes | Do you support a decrease in income taxes in order to balance the budget? | ||
| No | Do you support a wealth tax in order to pay for public programs? | ||
| Social Security and Medicare are 1930's and 60's-era democrat-enacted "social safety nets." Unfortunately, generations upon generations of Americans (millions of people) have grown dependent on these big government subsidized "safety nets." As such, I believe President Trump has a reasonable proposal to address these programs long term upon his return to office. At this moment, I do not believe Social Security and Medicare should be eliminated, but I am also not in favor of expanding these programs when our borders are not even secured from invasion. For nearly 200 years, all three branches of government (Congress, Courts, President) have exploited the terms "general welfare" and "necessary and proper" (clause) found in the Preamble and Article 1 Section 8 Clause 18 of the Constitution, to further their political objective of bigger government dependance. How about ABOLISH the Federal income tax and reduce burdensome regulations so citizens and businesses can keep more of their hard-earned gains? Prior to 1913, we didn't have a FEDERAL INCOME TAX. | |||
| Yes | Do you support the regulation of indirect campaign contributions from corporations, unions, and individuals? | ||
| I am all for FULL TRANSPARENCY. As a Congressional candidate, there is a lot of money being moved, underreported, and flat-out unaccounted for. It's hard to keep track of it all ("dark money," donor surrogates, PACS and changing PAC names). I don't know what the solution is. The political establishment will do whatever it takes to maintain control. I am a self-funded candidate. The mandated $3,125 filing fee, optional campaign materials, website, and web-hosting that I used to run in a Congressional primary is paid for using my wages. | |||
| No | Do you support protecting government officials, including law enforcement officers, from personal liability in civil lawsuits concerning alleged misconduct? | ||
| I am a former law enforcement officer who served cumulatively over 10 years. When I was a sworn officer, I was a dues-paying member of Peace Officer "Legal Defense Fund." This fund, which was $28 per month, provided me a plan attorney in any critical incident, whether it be a criminal, civil and administrative investigation brought against me in my official and off-duty capacity. Fortunately, in all of my years of service, I never utilized this "insurance" to cover me in any negligent use-of-force, officer-involved-shooting, or in-custody death investigation. Police officers in the United States are highly trained professionals, however, due to many factors (life, stress, illness, etc.), lesser-experienced and even seasoned officers sometimes make mistakes. Negligence, poor training, poor decision-making, stress, homelife, outside influences, etc. are often factors. Police officers are people, too and if they are found to have willfully or negligently violated the laws or Oath they swore to uphold, they must be held accountable by a grand jury. Just like politicians, I don't believe they should be given blanketed immunity. | |||
| No | Do you support increasing defense spending? | ||
| Our Founding Fathers never intended us to meddle in the affairs of other nations, this includes funding other countries in wars and defense. President Trump proudly rebuilt our United States Military, however, I don't believe we should increase defense spending to outfit, arm and train other nations. AMERICA FIRST. | |||
| No | Do you support federal spending as a means of promoting economic growth (e.g. grants, tax incentives)? | ||
| No | Do you support the federal government increasing funding for affordable housing programs? | ||
| Yes | Do you support the federal government taking action, beyond those of the Federal Reserve, to alleviate inflation? | ||
| Federal spending is not the answer, look what happened with the "CARES" ACT during the Covid pandemic. How about we reduce spending, reduce taxes, reduce burdensome regulations and allow the free market to dictate like our Founding Fathers intended? Actions Congress can take to alleviate inflation: REPEAL the 16th Amendment, ABOLISH the Internal Revenue Service, Audit and / or ABOLISH the Federal Reserve (private Central bank), REPEAL the Federal Income Tax ("Revenue Act of 1913"), REPEAL The Federal Insurance Contributions Act ("FICA") of 1935, and REPEAL the Self-Employment Contributions Act ("SECA") of 1954. Heavy taxation doesn't benefit Americans in their short or long term. | |||
| No | Do you support the forgiveness of federal student loan debt? | ||
| Not necessarily, but if you are injured, killed, or deemed unable to care for yourself, then exceptions could be made. Like anyone else, if you take out a loan or borrow, you should re-pay the debt; same goes for the Federal Debt which will be passed onto generations of yet unborn Americans. | |||
| Yes | Do you support requiring a government-issued identification in order to vote at the polls? | ||
| Americans are comfortable using PHOTO IDENTIFICATION to do many things such as board an airplane, operate a vehicle on a public roadway, collect government checks, purchase alcohol, tobacco, and firearms - VOTING SHOULD NOT BE ANY DIFFERENT. | |||
| No | Do you support government funding for the development of renewable energy (e.g. solar, wind, geo-thermal)? | ||
| Yes | Do you support the federal government allowing permits for drilling on public lands? | ||
| Renewable energy should be free market and entrepreneurial inspired, not Federal government subsidized or mandated. As President Trump had said, "Drill, baby, drill." According to President Trump, the United States has more "liquid gold" under our feet than any other country on Earth. We must BECOME ENERGY INDEPENDENT to return to AMERICAN DOMINANCE. | |||
| No | Do you generally support gun-control legislation (e.g. red flag laws, boyfriend loopholes)? | ||
| Since 1791, our 2nd Amendment has read shall not be infringed. With recent court cases, "D.C. v. Heller," and "New York State Pistol Association v. Bruen," the U.S. Supreme Court has affirmed an individual's right to carry a concealed firearm. The right to carry a firearm is not just limited to a "well-regulated militia." I am in-favor of REPEALING all unconstitutional anti-2nd Amendment Federal laws. Criminals, thugs, mentally deranged, care not about abiding by gun laws. Red flag laws and gun free zones only victimize and criminalize law-abiding citizens. Criminals, thugs, mentally deranged, and invading armies prefer a disarmed population. Research into how "gun registration" in 1930s France worked out when the Germans invaded and occupied France. | |||
| No | Do you support a government-run (e.g. single-payer) healthcare program, such as Medicare-for-All? | ||
| No | Do you support expanding paid family AND/OR medical leave benefits (e.g. maternity leave)? | ||
| No | Should the government be able to regulate the cost of prescription drugs? | ||
| Any of the above-mentioned, NO. These issues should be addressed by the State Legislatures under the 10th Amendment (States' Rights) or dictated by the free market. I AM in-favor of individual STATE-Legislated "price gouging" laws for prescription drugs, but the Federal government has no constitutional authority to regulate what Americans put into their bodies. As with any broadly written Federal law, ANYTHING can be exploited or subjected to interpretation under the "general welfare" and "necessary and proper" clause. (Preamble, and Art. 1 Sec 8 Claus 18) | |||
| Yes | Do you support increasing security along the southern US border? | ||
| Yes | Do you support requiring immigrants to return to their country of origin before they are eligible for citizenship, regardless of their immigration status? | ||
| YES on increased security along the border as President Biden and his DHS Secretary have it wide open, but again, any allocation of funds must be accounted for. Too often, "funding increases" don't end up where they're intended. Currently, H.R. 2 (House Resolution), in the 118th Congress, is a bad border deal according to President Trump. Under his Administration we had a sound border, with a border wall that was paid for. It's all about how we manage and lead this country. | |||
| Yes | Do you support economic intervention as a means of resolving international conflicts? | ||
| No | Do you support the US providing increased offensive military aid to Ukraine? | ||
| Economic intervention, in the form of TARIFFS, are very effective. President Trump had TARIFFS on many nations as he was looking out for AMERICANS and our interests. I would never vote to provide military aid to Ukraine, Israel, to other countries or organizations like NATO though. It's unconstitutional, not a good investment, and they are usually disguised money laundering, quid pro quo pay-to-play and RICO kickback schemes. Just look at the current situation with most politicians. | |||
| Yes | Do you generally support increased regulations on social media companies (e.g. Tik Tok, Facebook, etc.)? | ||
| How about we REPEAL Section 230 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act to hold Facebook, Twitter, etc. accountable for stifling free speech of Americans? Too many of us have been censored, cancelled, blocked, suspended, or kicked-off of free speech platforms. | |||
| SAVE AMERICAN and make Texas 3rd Congressional District Great Again. 1. Foremost: Uphold my Oath to support the Constitution at all costs. Art. VI. Clause 3 (5 U.S.C. 3331 Oath of office). The sole responsibility of any elected official is to uphold a citizens' rights. Sponsor, cosponsor legislation affirming your God-given, unalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. 2. Reign-in a weaponized Federal government and restrict 3-letter agency rule-making authority. In September 2021, I received a malicious, unwarranted visit by FBI domestic terrorism investigators. Not until the FBI-raid of Mar-a-Lago did Americans realize that the targeting of ordinary citizens is real, I AM one of them. If it can happen to President Trump, it can happen to any of us. 3. End foreign wars, secure the borders and our elections, uphold our 2nd Amendment rights at all costs. Rebut all globalist UN subversive initiatives so that future generations of Americans may prosper in the freedoms that we have all taken for granted. |
Vote Smart does not permit the use of its name or programs in any campaign activity, including advertising, debates, and speeches.