The predominant philosophy of this platform is that government should be either neutral or helpful to Americans on issues where there is a broad consensus and get out of the business in areas where there is widespread disagreement. The reasons behind this are two-fold:

1. We can no longer afford excess government intervention – government has simply gotten too inefficient and expensive

2. Political polarization is dividing us as a nation and distracting us from doing true public work

Government involvement in deeply divisive social issues is not only unwise it is dangerous. The only reason we allow government forces to bear arms is to protect us. When this protection suddenly becomes enforcement of anyone’s political ideology or agenda against the electorate, that’s when people get upset. And they should. That’s exactly what the British did to the first Americans. The problems this nation has had recently is not that these issues exist, it is that both sides of nearly every divisive social issue have made efforts in the past 40 years to force others into their ideological view. That type of social experimentation is simply “Un-American”.

The utility of this pragmatic philosophy is that it can be applied to nearly every social issue. If part of the electorate supports abortion rights, gay rights, etc., while the other condemns them, there is no reason for the government to interfere by using the tax money of all groups to support/fund the view of one. This puts the 'opposing' group in a no-win situation, cementing the walls of division.

These issues are so divisive, they feel like timbers for a civil war. We believe that is exactly where some of these issues will lead unless we can come to consensus. We simply MUST live and let live, even if we all have to tolerate a little disagreement now and then. After all, that’s what America is all about – an imperfect union of ordinary people.

But we need to be smarter. We have become duped by power-hungry politicians who have used these divisive issues as a wedge between the electorate for their own gain. We’ve taken our eyes off the ball.
We’ve allowed divisive issues to take the forefront of the political spectrum while special interests fleece us behind our backs on issues we might actually agree on.

Here is an example of what we have become

On a brighter note, what are the issues we can agree on more easily? How about providing incentives for companies that create American jobs instead of shipping them overseas? Stop fixing the labor pool with government policies that intend to reduce American wages? Tax reform? Energy policies? Health care? Lobbying? Retirement? Term limits? Education?

So a primary task, the first order of business, is to
separate those issues that will always be divisive from those that have a chance at compromise.