Platform Positions
Positions on Political Issues:
Pro-life, Constitutional, Conservative Republican
Under the Constitution, Congress bears responsibility for our budget and debt. The House of Representatives is the place to fix these problems.
I favor smaller federal government, with less spending, and a reduced debt. We should rely on a free market economy for growth and a return to prosperity.
I am Pro-life. I believe life is a right given by God at the moment of conception and is protected by the Constitution.
We must strengthen our obligations to Social Security and Medicare. Please see "Barrilleaux Plan " on Social Security page of this site.
Immigration reforms must observe the law and respect human dignity. First, control the border.
I defend the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
I oppose Common Core. Local control and individual choice should take priority. A decentralized approach to education is better than imposed national uniformity.
I oppose Obamacare or any attempt to socialize medicine or any other aspect of our economy or our lives.
Recent ORIGINAL Policy Proposals: Social Security: Restoring solvency to Social Security with a simple tax cut that offers incentive for beneficiaries to fore-go benefits , resulting in a decrease in the Social Security obligations. Campaign Finance Reform: Restore confidence in legitimacy of representation with good citizenship by voting for candidates who are not accepting money for or spending money on a campaign. Louisiana 2012 Master Plan Funding: Federal funding for both national harbor dredging requirements and Louisiana 2012 Master Plan from expected enhanced revenue from tariffs on cargo following repeal of Harbor Maintenance Tax.
Pro-life, Constitutional, Conservative Republican
Under the Constitution, Congress bears responsibility for our budget and debt. The House of Representatives is the place to fix these problems.
I favor smaller federal government, with less spending, and a reduced debt. We should rely on a free market economy for growth and a return to prosperity.
I am Pro-life. I believe life is a right given by God at the moment of conception and is protected by the Constitution.
We must strengthen our obligations to Social Security and Medicare. Please see "Barrilleaux Plan " on Social Security page of this site.
Immigration reforms must observe the law and respect human dignity. First, control the border.
I defend the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
I oppose Common Core. Local control and individual choice should take priority. A decentralized approach to education is better than imposed national uniformity.
I oppose Obamacare or any attempt to socialize medicine or any other aspect of our economy or our lives.
Recent ORIGINAL Policy Proposals: Social Security: Restoring solvency to Social Security with a simple tax cut that offers incentive for beneficiaries to fore-go benefits , resulting in a decrease in the Social Security obligations. Campaign Finance Reform: Restore confidence in legitimacy of representation with good citizenship by voting for candidates who are not accepting money for or spending money on a campaign. Louisiana 2012 Master Plan Funding: Federal funding for both national harbor dredging requirements and Louisiana 2012 Master Plan from expected enhanced revenue from tariffs on cargo following repeal of Harbor Maintenance Tax.
Voter Guides and Surveys
'16 Voter Guide Survey
All of my pro-life constitutional conservative positions are reported in this guide. Also ivoter guide accurately reports that I take "no donations" and spend no money on a campaign. Not my money or anyone else's. Also to our credit, I have no newspaper, establishment or union endorsements !
(click the link below)
ivoterguide : https://ivoterguide.com/Candidate.aspx?RaceK=5171&ElecK=407&PrimaryPartyK=-&CanK=10836
Louisiana Conservative Crew Question and Answer
Comprehensive Position Statement
https://www.facebook.com/groups/197028037321648/
Q & A SESSION WITH BRYAN BARRILLEAUX, CANDIDATE FOR THE 3rd CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT
Moderator: Tell us about yourself. Briefly describe your qualifications, education, experience, background.
Bryan Barrilleaux: I am in the best position of all the candidates to represent the citizens of the 3rd district because I am the only candidate who accepts no campaign donations and who spends no money (not mine or anyone else’s) on a campaign. When I serve, I will serve with No Conflict of Interest and No Distractions from endless fund-raising activity. I was nominated to run for the U.S. House of Representatives by petition of 1366 registered voters who know me and my qualifications. With their signature dated and witnessed signature on the petition they attest for you that this candidate is worthy and capable. My name is Bryan Barrilleaux . I am a physician practicing in Lake Charles for the last 25 years. I was born in Thibodaux LA, grew up in New Orleans where I met my wife of 35 yrs, Kathy. I attended public school in New Orleans followed by Tulane Univ and Medical School. We have 6 home schooled children and 2 grandchildren. My office practice is operated as a small family business. We are active in our Catholic Church and Community. I volunteer regularly at our Community Clinic, serve actively in the Knights of Columbus, and am on the Board of Directors for our local crisis pregnancy center where we offer pro-life counseling.
Moderator: What is your position on immigration reform?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Immigration policy is the responsibility of the Congress, not the President. The borders must be controlled. The laws must be followed. Human dignity should be respected. Immigration is good for the U.S. if it is lawful and if the new arrivals are good candidates for citizenship. Illegal immigrants currently in the country must leave this country to apply for citizenship and if qualified they may be allowed to participate in the Naturalization process. They should participate in the same Naturalization process that all other legal immigrants participate in. Applicants who fail the process are not allowed admission into the country. To process the vast number of illegal immigrants now in the U.S., Ellis Island style facilities could be established at the border and also in places that are technically outside of the U.S. such as embassies, or Indian Reservations. Applications could be staggered by the month of birth of the head of the household over a 1 - 2 year period. After this application period any illegal that remains in the U.S. must be detained and deported. Strict prosecution of employers who hire illegal immigrants will deter incentive for remaining or returning. Illegal immigrants are often exploited in a black market for cheap labor. Human dignity of these people should be respected at all times. Regarding Muslim immigration, it is appropriate to ask if the devout practice of Islam is incompatible with a devotion to the Constitution and whether a devoutly practicing Muslim can, in good faith, take an oath of citizenship that expresses an attachment to the Constitution. If not, then they are ineligible for citizenship and a poor candidate for immigration.
Moderator: Do you support any form of amnesty or legalization for the millions of illegal immigrants in the country? Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: No amnesty should be given. "Legalization", if earned, should be conducted as described in question #2
Moderator: Are you in favor of repealing Obamacare? If so, would you reform healthcare? Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: We must repeal Obamacare. Obamacare was misconceived and has clearly failed to accomplish the intended goals. It has harmed the economy and has functioned as a job killing tax on full time employment and has violated religious liberty. Obamacare is yet another example of the failures of Socialism in which a vague but appealing utopian goal is passed into law. The implementation of the law imposes rules regulations and coercions that violate liberty and freedom and create suffering. We must repeal Obamacare, and return healthcare to a very successful free market that had given us the greatest healthcare system the world has ever known.
Moderator: What policies would you promote to address the national debt?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Change the way we choose our representatives. The budget process is corrupted by campaign money bribes buying access to power, to influence and ultimately to our tax dollars in the public treasury. We should elect politicians who do not accept campaign money from lobbyists and who can make budget decisions with no conflict of interest. This will be accomplished by attention to public affairs and good citizenship of voters. We do not need a new law or a Supreme Court Decision or term limits. All we need is the good citizenship to vote for candidates who do not take the money. Congressmen now waste a colossal amount of time and effort on fund-raising activity. We do not have their full attention to the budget or any other issue before Congress. We can expect that Congress will continue to disappoint us until we elect ethical representatives who do not take the money. Until then, we will only get pretty lies and broken promises. When we have elected an ethical Congress that can be attentive to its duty, we can balance the budget. Until then, no "Balanced Budget Amendment" or other laws will make Congress follow a responsible budget. They will allow exceptions or declare emergencies and nothing will change. When we have an ethical and dutiful Congress we will be able to lower spending and simultaneously provide favorable conditions for thriving economic growth with lower taxes and minimal regulations. Economic growth will bring more revenue as more wealth moving as commerce will create more taxable events.
Moderator: What is your stance on addressing National Security with regards to:
Middle East - Strength and resolve. Standing by our allies, particularly Israel
Iran - Revoke the Nuclear treaty on the basis of violations (missile testing by Iran on three occasions following the agreement). Re-instate sanctions and cripple Iran economically until they relent or their people revolt against the tyrannical government. By our dealing with Iran, make a severe example to other adversary countries who may have nuclear ambitions.
China - Strength and resolve. Negotiate better trade. Use our trade position to influence China to discipline North Korea. Find common purpose in fighting ISIS. Help the people of China to reject communism and institute a form of Government that can be a friend and ally to the U.S.
North Korea - Help the people of North Korea to reject and overthrow tyranny. Maintain strong shield for S Korea and Japan against North Korean aggression, but insist that as those countries enjoy greater prosperity, that they would assume greater responsibility for their own defense.
Russia - Continue to contain the ambitions of expansion by enlisting more NATO partners in Eastern Europe. Help the Russian people reject tyranny. Cooperate cautiously with an untrustworthy adversary, if we can eliminate ISIS as a mutual enemy and find common ground for peace in the Middle East.
Terrorism in general (ISIS, etc.) - A threat to U.S. security exists and peaceful negotiations have been exhausted. A plan of elimination should be implemented with either arming and supporting enemies of ISIS in the region, and / or if necessary U.S. attack and destruction of ISIS. The plan must provide for swift decisive overwhelming victory and a concise exit strategy. A Congressional Declaration of War is needed.
Border security. The border must be secure and controlled. This is necessary for preventing domestic terrorism, minimizing drug traffic, and preventing illegal immigration. An overwhelming show of force and resolve is needed now, to be followed by a "wall" if needed. A virtual wall made with technology and manpower should be deployed immediately.
Moderator: What policies would you promote to create jobs?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Lower taxes and decrease regulation starting with repeal of Obamacare. The government is not capable of creating jobs or promoting economic growth. This has been proved in the last 8 years. Higher government spending, even when well intentioned, only serves to burden and depress economic growth. True economic growth and prosperity occurs as a spontaneous result of economic activity of individuals in a free market. Government serves economic growth best by providing conditions that are favorable for commerce such as protecting individual rights (private property), providing national security and peace, a sound currency, infrastructure, and low tax with minimal regulation.
Moderator: What is your position on tax policy?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Lower taxes promote commerce and economic growth. More economic activity leads to more taxable opportunities and generates more revenue to the treasury. Prosperity results.
Moderator: Do you have a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Dedication to strict interpretation of the Constitution, and pro-life.
Moderator: Do you support any form of gun control? If so, elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: I support the 2nd Amendment. Laws are correctly used to keep guns away from criminals, but not to make criminals out of law abiding gun owners.
Moderator: Do you support legalization of marijuana or do you see this as a state issue?
Bryan Barrilleaux: State issue.
Moderator: Do you support religious liberty?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Vigorously!!
Moderator: Would you support private businesses from refusing to offer services to customers that do not represent their religious beliefs? (Ex. Priests marrying gay couples, bakeries refusing to bake cakes for gay couples, religious groups being forced to offer insurance that covers employee’s birth control, etc.).
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, as a matter of religious liberty.
Moderator: Do you support reform of entitlement programs? If so, elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, Social Security disability is vulnerable to fraud and needs reform. Entitlements that harm families by rewarding single parent and illegitimate parenting need reform. In general, the federal government is a poor administrator of charity. Charity is better done privately or locally. Government programs for charity create resentment from the beneficiaries because of the meagerness of the benefit and resentment from the taxpayer because of the magnitude of the tax burden. This mutual resentment is harmful to communities. By contrast, private or individual charity helps communities because the recipient of the charity receives "blessings and a gift," while the donor "gives alms and receives blessings." The mutual blessings are good for a community.
Moderator: What policies would you support to address poverty for children that are born into a bad situation at no fault of their own?
Bryan Barrilleaux: This is best done locally by private and nonprofit charities in communities.
Moderator: Do you see mass incarceration as a burden on taxpayers? How would you reduce crime to lower the prison population?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Social programs that destroy families lead to higher crime. Law enforcement deters crime. Incarcerated criminals should be put to work in prison and should be productive enough to support themselves in prison and support their dependents back home. Idle prisoners are a burden on taxpayers. Requiring productivity, and responsibility contributes to successful rehabilitation and better chance to reenter society and remain law abiding.
Moderator: Would you consider legislation that reduces jail time for non-violent drug offenses in lieu of rehabilitation/probation?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No, but I would see them productive and not idle while incarcerated.
Moderator: Do you support capital punishment?
Bryan Barrilleaux: It is sometimes necessary but not desirable.
Moderator: What is your stance on abortion? Do you support it in the case of incest, rape, or if the mother’s life is in danger?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I oppose abortion in all circumstances when the purpose is to end an innocent life. If the mother is in danger, procedures to save both the mother and baby should be attempted. The baby may be lost in the attempt, but never should a procedure intentionally kill an unborn child.
Moderator: How would you address the future insolvency of Social Security?
Bryan Barrilleaux: A Tax Cut to Save Social Security, The Barrilleaux Plan
Social Security faces insolvency. Expenses in payments to beneficiaries exceed revenue and this gap is expected to widen. Proposed solutions have taken two approaches. One approach will suggest some version of benefit denial, delay, or reduction of benefits. The second approach imposes more taxes to cover the increasing obligations. Neither approach is palatable public policy because it creates anxiety among beneficiaries and resentment among taxpayers. I propose a better solution that utilizes a tax cut to reestablish solvency for Social Security with additional benefits of economic stimulus. This proposal recognizes the healthier longevity enjoyed by modern seniors and the potential and desire to remain productive. Best of all, this proposal relieves anxiety and resentment and may genuinely please citizens. The fundamental problem of social security solvency is of course that the current and foreseeable revenue falls short of obligations. The tax cut that I propose is one designed to create an incentive for beneficiaries to forego Social Security benefits and thus reduce obligations.
This is what I propose.
All beneficiaries of Social Security at or above retirement age who voluntarily forego social security benefits for one year will be exempt from all federal income tax and social security tax on earned income in that same year.
Participation would be voluntary and an individual choice. The tax exemption creates a reward of retaining income that would otherwise be paid in taxes. It would appeal to those beneficiaries who do or could earn income that would result in a tax liability that would be larger than the expected Social Security benefits for that year. The reward may motivate participants or aspiring participants to even greater earnings. Beneficiaries who have underfunded retirement plans, and wish to work a few more years, would appreciate this plan. Others may wish to continue, or return, to work to fund college for a grandchild, a wedding, purchase of a new boat, or travel. The proposal allows for individuals to choose to participate in one year and return to traditional social security benefits the next year and perhaps work tax exempt again in the future for any year that they elect to forego Social Security benefits. The decision could be retroactive and be made at the time of tax filing.
The reduction in Social Security obligations would be proportional to the number of beneficiaries who would choose to forego their benefits. The 2014 shortfall could be met if only 5 % of beneficiaries participated in this plan. If a greater percentage participated, a surplus could be realized. Some have suggested that a surplus could reestablish the trust fund. This would be a mistake. We have learned that a trust fund is a very untrustworthy place for any funds to be reserved from this government. Any surplus should be applied to a reduction of Social Security taxes. This tax reduction would produce economic stimulus and generate greater tax revenue to Social Security.
The Treasury would benefit from this plan. There would be no lost revenue because taxes retained by people who would have otherwise not been working is not a loss. The potential for loss to the treasury occurs from individuals who would have been working regardless of this proposal. The Treasury would stand to lose the difference between the individual’s tax obligation and the savings in Social Security payment not made. As we considered above , the tax funds retained by the individual would likely be spent and would circulate in economic activity that would create multiple occasions for taxes to be paid and would likely result in an increase of revenue to the Treasury.
Employers will appreciate as lower cost the exemption from the employer paid portion of the Social Security tax. Further incentive for employers to retain senior workers can be made by allowing Medicare premium support or vouchers to assist the employer in meeting healthcare premium expenses. These incentives would make hiring or retaining older employees more attractive. Economic stimulus would be achieved in two ways by this plan. First, seniors who remain in or return to the work force add to productivity and commerce. Second, as suggested above, taxes in the hands of individual seniors will likely be spent in ways that create jobs and commerce and will likely strengthen the economy and add revenue to the Treasury.
The Barrilleaux Plan has the merits of being simple and easy to understand. It uses constructive economic incentives and rewards. It can be implemented with no risk. Best of all it can relieve anxiety of feared cuts for current beneficiaries and resolve resentments of taxpayers who can now see a more promising future for their investment. The probability of success can be estimated as very high. This estimate is not based on any intricate formulas or computer models or complex economic analysis. The estimate of success can be simply based on human nature, and the natural behavior of markets to answer incentive with productivity. This approach can restore solvency to Social Security and versions of this approach may also solve funding challenges for state retirement plans and a version could also relieve the crisis of public funding of pensions in European countries such as Greece.
I humbly submit this plan for inspection and criticism.
Moderator: How would you address the future insolvency of Medicare/Medicaid?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I would add VA medical benefits to this list and suggest that resources be placed in the hands of the beneficiary, who will then act as a consumer in the healthcare market and purchase insurance and other health care products. Competition in the market and consumers motivated to shop carefully for their best advantage will produce from the marketplace a combination of the highest quality, easiest access and lowest price.
Moderator: What is your policy on Energy?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Low regulation and access to offshore and public lands for exploration while observing good stewardship over the environment. We also need a national policy to address the manipulation of supply and price fixing that OPEC engages in. We now have the oil and gas resources to turn the tables on them.
Moderator: What is your stance on Climate Change?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Global warming is a hoax. Global temperature evidence has been fraudulently produced and fabricated. It has been 11 years since Al Gore released the film " An Inconvenient Truth." On revisiting the predictions from that film, we find that none of them has come true. The "computer models" and other techniques that were used to make the conclusions in the film are obviously flawed and are therefore not a sound basis for making public policy. Scientist should continue to study climate issues, but the "global warming" theory should not be the basis for any public policy.
Moderator: Do you support protectionism/tariffs or do you support free trade? Please Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Free trade is desirable and will lead to the greatest opportunity for prosperity. Trade must be fair, and tariffs may be necessary to counter unfair practices by international trading partners. Some areas of our economy require protection form international competition as a matter of national security and stability.
Moderator: Do you support subsidies of any kind? If so, which ones?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, for vital national interests in defense, and in food supply.
Moderator: Would you consider proposing a "balanced budget" amendment to the Constitution?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No. Our Congress does not follow the Constitution now and a new Amendment will not change that. We have a good Constitution. What we need is a good congress. We must change the way we elect our representatives. We must stop voting for politicians who take campaign money and who spend money on a campaign. We need them to focus on their duty and not on their campaign fund-raising. We need to end the conflict of interest that we allow when we vote for them. Our good citizenship is needed to get better government that will accomplish a balanced budget.
Moderator: Do you support term limits?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No, the Constitution already provides a limit to the term of a Congressman, and that is two years. After 2 years, the voters may remove him. The problem that proponents of term limits seek to solve is that incumbents tend to have unfair advantage for fund-raising by exploiting their position and they tend to get preoccupied by fund-raising activity that distracts them from their duty. We solve this problem best with our good citizenship. Simply do not vote for candidates who take and spend campaign money. In this way, by our good citizenship we can remove campaign money corruption from the political process. The election or reelection of a congressman will then be determined by the will of the people, as it should be, and not by an arbitrary rule.
Moderator: How would you address the abuses of the executive branch regarding passing laws and regulations via administrative agencies such as the EPA, etc.?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Congress needs to use its Constitutional authority and observe its Constitutional responsibility. Congress will only do this if we change the way we elect our Congressman by removing campaign money and only voting for candidates who do not take the money. In this way we will stop sending career professional politicians to Washington and instead send citizens who will go to Washington to serve and do their duty and "do the right thing."
Moderator: What do you think about using the Article V amendment process in the U.S. Constitution to call for a Convention of States to propose constitutional amendments that limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government?
Bryan Barrilleaux: The people that we elect now do not follow the Constitution and we have no reason to expect that they would follow any amendments that emerged from a convention of States. We need only the good citizenship to elect representatives who will follow the Constitution.
Moderator: Do you support rebuilding our military? If so, by how much and how do you propose to do so and remain within budget?
Bryan Barrilleaux: We must maintain strength in our military. National security is a primary responsibility for our government. We stay on budget by first eliminating the bribery of our elected official that occurs when military industry gives money in the form of campaign donations to our politicians. Donald Trump correctly recently said, "donors, lobbyists and special interests have complete power over our politicians." Congress betrays our sons and daughters in the military when they allow themselves to be influenced by campaign money from industry. We fund the military best when we elect only representatives who have no conflict of interest because they take no campaign donations of any kind from anyone!
Moderator: Would you support reducing the size and scope of government? Would you support eliminating any departments of government (IRS, Dept. of Education, Dept. of Energy. Dept. of Commerce, etc.). Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes. I support reducing the size and scope of our Federal Government. All programs departments and spending should be scrutinized in strict context of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. We can only accomplish this if we stop voting for representatives who are bribed with campaign money by those who profit from all of this wasteful and misguided spending.
Moderator: What differentiates you from your republican opponents?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I am nominated by petition. 1366 registered voters have attested, by their witnessed and dated signature on the petition, for the district that these ideas and this candidate are worthy and capable. I am the only candidate who can serve with no conflict of interest because I am the only candidate who accepts no campaign donations and spends no money on a campaign. I am offering to serve, not making an investment in a political "career." I have the best ideas to bring to Washington that will serve the 3rd District and the entire country. Campaign finance reform by good citizenship and social security improvement by a tax cut are two good examples. And finally, I have demonstrated by running a campaign against tremendous odds and opposition without wavering that I have the courage and fortitude to lead the good fight against a corrupt establishment in Washington.
Moderator: What are your goals for Louisiana with regard to your tenure in the U.S. House? Which "home grown" issues do you intend to fight for?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Home issues that I will fight for include local infrastructure to enable commerce such as harbors and waterways, highways and flood control/prevention. I will also fight for all of our industry and commerce to promote prosperity in oil and gas, agriculture, chemical industry, fishing, tourism, and all of the commerce and endeavors that are vital to our livelihood. I will fight for stewardship of our natural resources that are so important to our district. I will fight to ensure our safety and security, I will fight for us to prosper ethically, morally and spiritually by fighting for the rights of the unborn, religious liberty, and for honest ethical government. We need to restore confidence that our government can "do the right thing."
Moderator: How would you address the problems with our Veterans Administration?
Bryan Barrilleaux: We have a moral obligation to serve the needs of our veterans that we accept when we send them to war. We have not lived up to that obligation when we allow vital healthcare services to be poorly provided by a bureaucracy that everyone agrees is doing a very poor job. Many reasons explain the poor job such as union contracts for VA employees that put Veterans at a disadvantage, and the fact that our Congressmen take campaign money bribes from corporations and individuals who sell good s and services to the VA and corrupt the entire department. In general, the government is not good at administering healthcare and we should recognize that fact and stop subjecting our Veterans to third rate service. We should put the resources in the hands of the Veteran who can then act as a consumer in the healthcare market to purchase insurance and other healthcare needs. By competition, the market will provide choices that will allow the Veteran to shop for the best quality, easiest access and lowest price. The current Veteran’s Hospitals should remain open, but be required to bill to the Veteran’s insurance for services and compete in the market. If the VA hospital is successful it will remain open. If it competes poorly and the Veterans prefer other services, then it will close. The free market, not central government planning, will provide the quality and access that Veterans deserve, and at the lowest price that taxpayers prefer.
Moderator: Tell us about yourself. Briefly describe your qualifications, education, experience, background.
Bryan Barrilleaux: I am in the best position of all the candidates to represent the citizens of the 3rd district because I am the only candidate who accepts no campaign donations and who spends no money (not mine or anyone else’s) on a campaign. When I serve, I will serve with No Conflict of Interest and No Distractions from endless fund-raising activity. I was nominated to run for the U.S. House of Representatives by petition of 1366 registered voters who know me and my qualifications. With their signature dated and witnessed signature on the petition they attest for you that this candidate is worthy and capable. My name is Bryan Barrilleaux . I am a physician practicing in Lake Charles for the last 25 years. I was born in Thibodaux LA, grew up in New Orleans where I met my wife of 35 yrs, Kathy. I attended public school in New Orleans followed by Tulane Univ and Medical School. We have 6 home schooled children and 2 grandchildren. My office practice is operated as a small family business. We are active in our Catholic Church and Community. I volunteer regularly at our Community Clinic, serve actively in the Knights of Columbus, and am on the Board of Directors for our local crisis pregnancy center where we offer pro-life counseling.
Moderator: What is your position on immigration reform?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Immigration policy is the responsibility of the Congress, not the President. The borders must be controlled. The laws must be followed. Human dignity should be respected. Immigration is good for the U.S. if it is lawful and if the new arrivals are good candidates for citizenship. Illegal immigrants currently in the country must leave this country to apply for citizenship and if qualified they may be allowed to participate in the Naturalization process. They should participate in the same Naturalization process that all other legal immigrants participate in. Applicants who fail the process are not allowed admission into the country. To process the vast number of illegal immigrants now in the U.S., Ellis Island style facilities could be established at the border and also in places that are technically outside of the U.S. such as embassies, or Indian Reservations. Applications could be staggered by the month of birth of the head of the household over a 1 - 2 year period. After this application period any illegal that remains in the U.S. must be detained and deported. Strict prosecution of employers who hire illegal immigrants will deter incentive for remaining or returning. Illegal immigrants are often exploited in a black market for cheap labor. Human dignity of these people should be respected at all times. Regarding Muslim immigration, it is appropriate to ask if the devout practice of Islam is incompatible with a devotion to the Constitution and whether a devoutly practicing Muslim can, in good faith, take an oath of citizenship that expresses an attachment to the Constitution. If not, then they are ineligible for citizenship and a poor candidate for immigration.
Moderator: Do you support any form of amnesty or legalization for the millions of illegal immigrants in the country? Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: No amnesty should be given. "Legalization", if earned, should be conducted as described in question #2
Moderator: Are you in favor of repealing Obamacare? If so, would you reform healthcare? Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: We must repeal Obamacare. Obamacare was misconceived and has clearly failed to accomplish the intended goals. It has harmed the economy and has functioned as a job killing tax on full time employment and has violated religious liberty. Obamacare is yet another example of the failures of Socialism in which a vague but appealing utopian goal is passed into law. The implementation of the law imposes rules regulations and coercions that violate liberty and freedom and create suffering. We must repeal Obamacare, and return healthcare to a very successful free market that had given us the greatest healthcare system the world has ever known.
Moderator: What policies would you promote to address the national debt?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Change the way we choose our representatives. The budget process is corrupted by campaign money bribes buying access to power, to influence and ultimately to our tax dollars in the public treasury. We should elect politicians who do not accept campaign money from lobbyists and who can make budget decisions with no conflict of interest. This will be accomplished by attention to public affairs and good citizenship of voters. We do not need a new law or a Supreme Court Decision or term limits. All we need is the good citizenship to vote for candidates who do not take the money. Congressmen now waste a colossal amount of time and effort on fund-raising activity. We do not have their full attention to the budget or any other issue before Congress. We can expect that Congress will continue to disappoint us until we elect ethical representatives who do not take the money. Until then, we will only get pretty lies and broken promises. When we have elected an ethical Congress that can be attentive to its duty, we can balance the budget. Until then, no "Balanced Budget Amendment" or other laws will make Congress follow a responsible budget. They will allow exceptions or declare emergencies and nothing will change. When we have an ethical and dutiful Congress we will be able to lower spending and simultaneously provide favorable conditions for thriving economic growth with lower taxes and minimal regulations. Economic growth will bring more revenue as more wealth moving as commerce will create more taxable events.
Moderator: What is your stance on addressing National Security with regards to:
Middle East - Strength and resolve. Standing by our allies, particularly Israel
Iran - Revoke the Nuclear treaty on the basis of violations (missile testing by Iran on three occasions following the agreement). Re-instate sanctions and cripple Iran economically until they relent or their people revolt against the tyrannical government. By our dealing with Iran, make a severe example to other adversary countries who may have nuclear ambitions.
China - Strength and resolve. Negotiate better trade. Use our trade position to influence China to discipline North Korea. Find common purpose in fighting ISIS. Help the people of China to reject communism and institute a form of Government that can be a friend and ally to the U.S.
North Korea - Help the people of North Korea to reject and overthrow tyranny. Maintain strong shield for S Korea and Japan against North Korean aggression, but insist that as those countries enjoy greater prosperity, that they would assume greater responsibility for their own defense.
Russia - Continue to contain the ambitions of expansion by enlisting more NATO partners in Eastern Europe. Help the Russian people reject tyranny. Cooperate cautiously with an untrustworthy adversary, if we can eliminate ISIS as a mutual enemy and find common ground for peace in the Middle East.
Terrorism in general (ISIS, etc.) - A threat to U.S. security exists and peaceful negotiations have been exhausted. A plan of elimination should be implemented with either arming and supporting enemies of ISIS in the region, and / or if necessary U.S. attack and destruction of ISIS. The plan must provide for swift decisive overwhelming victory and a concise exit strategy. A Congressional Declaration of War is needed.
Border security. The border must be secure and controlled. This is necessary for preventing domestic terrorism, minimizing drug traffic, and preventing illegal immigration. An overwhelming show of force and resolve is needed now, to be followed by a "wall" if needed. A virtual wall made with technology and manpower should be deployed immediately.
Moderator: What policies would you promote to create jobs?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Lower taxes and decrease regulation starting with repeal of Obamacare. The government is not capable of creating jobs or promoting economic growth. This has been proved in the last 8 years. Higher government spending, even when well intentioned, only serves to burden and depress economic growth. True economic growth and prosperity occurs as a spontaneous result of economic activity of individuals in a free market. Government serves economic growth best by providing conditions that are favorable for commerce such as protecting individual rights (private property), providing national security and peace, a sound currency, infrastructure, and low tax with minimal regulation.
Moderator: What is your position on tax policy?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Lower taxes promote commerce and economic growth. More economic activity leads to more taxable opportunities and generates more revenue to the treasury. Prosperity results.
Moderator: Do you have a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Dedication to strict interpretation of the Constitution, and pro-life.
Moderator: Do you support any form of gun control? If so, elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: I support the 2nd Amendment. Laws are correctly used to keep guns away from criminals, but not to make criminals out of law abiding gun owners.
Moderator: Do you support legalization of marijuana or do you see this as a state issue?
Bryan Barrilleaux: State issue.
Moderator: Do you support religious liberty?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Vigorously!!
Moderator: Would you support private businesses from refusing to offer services to customers that do not represent their religious beliefs? (Ex. Priests marrying gay couples, bakeries refusing to bake cakes for gay couples, religious groups being forced to offer insurance that covers employee’s birth control, etc.).
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, as a matter of religious liberty.
Moderator: Do you support reform of entitlement programs? If so, elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, Social Security disability is vulnerable to fraud and needs reform. Entitlements that harm families by rewarding single parent and illegitimate parenting need reform. In general, the federal government is a poor administrator of charity. Charity is better done privately or locally. Government programs for charity create resentment from the beneficiaries because of the meagerness of the benefit and resentment from the taxpayer because of the magnitude of the tax burden. This mutual resentment is harmful to communities. By contrast, private or individual charity helps communities because the recipient of the charity receives "blessings and a gift," while the donor "gives alms and receives blessings." The mutual blessings are good for a community.
Moderator: What policies would you support to address poverty for children that are born into a bad situation at no fault of their own?
Bryan Barrilleaux: This is best done locally by private and nonprofit charities in communities.
Moderator: Do you see mass incarceration as a burden on taxpayers? How would you reduce crime to lower the prison population?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Social programs that destroy families lead to higher crime. Law enforcement deters crime. Incarcerated criminals should be put to work in prison and should be productive enough to support themselves in prison and support their dependents back home. Idle prisoners are a burden on taxpayers. Requiring productivity, and responsibility contributes to successful rehabilitation and better chance to reenter society and remain law abiding.
Moderator: Would you consider legislation that reduces jail time for non-violent drug offenses in lieu of rehabilitation/probation?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No, but I would see them productive and not idle while incarcerated.
Moderator: Do you support capital punishment?
Bryan Barrilleaux: It is sometimes necessary but not desirable.
Moderator: What is your stance on abortion? Do you support it in the case of incest, rape, or if the mother’s life is in danger?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I oppose abortion in all circumstances when the purpose is to end an innocent life. If the mother is in danger, procedures to save both the mother and baby should be attempted. The baby may be lost in the attempt, but never should a procedure intentionally kill an unborn child.
Moderator: How would you address the future insolvency of Social Security?
Bryan Barrilleaux: A Tax Cut to Save Social Security, The Barrilleaux Plan
Social Security faces insolvency. Expenses in payments to beneficiaries exceed revenue and this gap is expected to widen. Proposed solutions have taken two approaches. One approach will suggest some version of benefit denial, delay, or reduction of benefits. The second approach imposes more taxes to cover the increasing obligations. Neither approach is palatable public policy because it creates anxiety among beneficiaries and resentment among taxpayers. I propose a better solution that utilizes a tax cut to reestablish solvency for Social Security with additional benefits of economic stimulus. This proposal recognizes the healthier longevity enjoyed by modern seniors and the potential and desire to remain productive. Best of all, this proposal relieves anxiety and resentment and may genuinely please citizens. The fundamental problem of social security solvency is of course that the current and foreseeable revenue falls short of obligations. The tax cut that I propose is one designed to create an incentive for beneficiaries to forego Social Security benefits and thus reduce obligations.
This is what I propose.
All beneficiaries of Social Security at or above retirement age who voluntarily forego social security benefits for one year will be exempt from all federal income tax and social security tax on earned income in that same year.
Participation would be voluntary and an individual choice. The tax exemption creates a reward of retaining income that would otherwise be paid in taxes. It would appeal to those beneficiaries who do or could earn income that would result in a tax liability that would be larger than the expected Social Security benefits for that year. The reward may motivate participants or aspiring participants to even greater earnings. Beneficiaries who have underfunded retirement plans, and wish to work a few more years, would appreciate this plan. Others may wish to continue, or return, to work to fund college for a grandchild, a wedding, purchase of a new boat, or travel. The proposal allows for individuals to choose to participate in one year and return to traditional social security benefits the next year and perhaps work tax exempt again in the future for any year that they elect to forego Social Security benefits. The decision could be retroactive and be made at the time of tax filing.
The reduction in Social Security obligations would be proportional to the number of beneficiaries who would choose to forego their benefits. The 2014 shortfall could be met if only 5 % of beneficiaries participated in this plan. If a greater percentage participated, a surplus could be realized. Some have suggested that a surplus could reestablish the trust fund. This would be a mistake. We have learned that a trust fund is a very untrustworthy place for any funds to be reserved from this government. Any surplus should be applied to a reduction of Social Security taxes. This tax reduction would produce economic stimulus and generate greater tax revenue to Social Security.
The Treasury would benefit from this plan. There would be no lost revenue because taxes retained by people who would have otherwise not been working is not a loss. The potential for loss to the treasury occurs from individuals who would have been working regardless of this proposal. The Treasury would stand to lose the difference between the individual’s tax obligation and the savings in Social Security payment not made. As we considered above , the tax funds retained by the individual would likely be spent and would circulate in economic activity that would create multiple occasions for taxes to be paid and would likely result in an increase of revenue to the Treasury.
Employers will appreciate as lower cost the exemption from the employer paid portion of the Social Security tax. Further incentive for employers to retain senior workers can be made by allowing Medicare premium support or vouchers to assist the employer in meeting healthcare premium expenses. These incentives would make hiring or retaining older employees more attractive. Economic stimulus would be achieved in two ways by this plan. First, seniors who remain in or return to the work force add to productivity and commerce. Second, as suggested above, taxes in the hands of individual seniors will likely be spent in ways that create jobs and commerce and will likely strengthen the economy and add revenue to the Treasury.
The Barrilleaux Plan has the merits of being simple and easy to understand. It uses constructive economic incentives and rewards. It can be implemented with no risk. Best of all it can relieve anxiety of feared cuts for current beneficiaries and resolve resentments of taxpayers who can now see a more promising future for their investment. The probability of success can be estimated as very high. This estimate is not based on any intricate formulas or computer models or complex economic analysis. The estimate of success can be simply based on human nature, and the natural behavior of markets to answer incentive with productivity. This approach can restore solvency to Social Security and versions of this approach may also solve funding challenges for state retirement plans and a version could also relieve the crisis of public funding of pensions in European countries such as Greece.
I humbly submit this plan for inspection and criticism.
Moderator: How would you address the future insolvency of Medicare/Medicaid?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I would add VA medical benefits to this list and suggest that resources be placed in the hands of the beneficiary, who will then act as a consumer in the healthcare market and purchase insurance and other health care products. Competition in the market and consumers motivated to shop carefully for their best advantage will produce from the marketplace a combination of the highest quality, easiest access and lowest price.
Moderator: What is your policy on Energy?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Low regulation and access to offshore and public lands for exploration while observing good stewardship over the environment. We also need a national policy to address the manipulation of supply and price fixing that OPEC engages in. We now have the oil and gas resources to turn the tables on them.
Moderator: What is your stance on Climate Change?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Global warming is a hoax. Global temperature evidence has been fraudulently produced and fabricated. It has been 11 years since Al Gore released the film " An Inconvenient Truth." On revisiting the predictions from that film, we find that none of them has come true. The "computer models" and other techniques that were used to make the conclusions in the film are obviously flawed and are therefore not a sound basis for making public policy. Scientist should continue to study climate issues, but the "global warming" theory should not be the basis for any public policy.
Moderator: Do you support protectionism/tariffs or do you support free trade? Please Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Free trade is desirable and will lead to the greatest opportunity for prosperity. Trade must be fair, and tariffs may be necessary to counter unfair practices by international trading partners. Some areas of our economy require protection form international competition as a matter of national security and stability.
Moderator: Do you support subsidies of any kind? If so, which ones?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes, for vital national interests in defense, and in food supply.
Moderator: Would you consider proposing a "balanced budget" amendment to the Constitution?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No. Our Congress does not follow the Constitution now and a new Amendment will not change that. We have a good Constitution. What we need is a good congress. We must change the way we elect our representatives. We must stop voting for politicians who take campaign money and who spend money on a campaign. We need them to focus on their duty and not on their campaign fund-raising. We need to end the conflict of interest that we allow when we vote for them. Our good citizenship is needed to get better government that will accomplish a balanced budget.
Moderator: Do you support term limits?
Bryan Barrilleaux: No, the Constitution already provides a limit to the term of a Congressman, and that is two years. After 2 years, the voters may remove him. The problem that proponents of term limits seek to solve is that incumbents tend to have unfair advantage for fund-raising by exploiting their position and they tend to get preoccupied by fund-raising activity that distracts them from their duty. We solve this problem best with our good citizenship. Simply do not vote for candidates who take and spend campaign money. In this way, by our good citizenship we can remove campaign money corruption from the political process. The election or reelection of a congressman will then be determined by the will of the people, as it should be, and not by an arbitrary rule.
Moderator: How would you address the abuses of the executive branch regarding passing laws and regulations via administrative agencies such as the EPA, etc.?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Congress needs to use its Constitutional authority and observe its Constitutional responsibility. Congress will only do this if we change the way we elect our Congressman by removing campaign money and only voting for candidates who do not take the money. In this way we will stop sending career professional politicians to Washington and instead send citizens who will go to Washington to serve and do their duty and "do the right thing."
Moderator: What do you think about using the Article V amendment process in the U.S. Constitution to call for a Convention of States to propose constitutional amendments that limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government?
Bryan Barrilleaux: The people that we elect now do not follow the Constitution and we have no reason to expect that they would follow any amendments that emerged from a convention of States. We need only the good citizenship to elect representatives who will follow the Constitution.
Moderator: Do you support rebuilding our military? If so, by how much and how do you propose to do so and remain within budget?
Bryan Barrilleaux: We must maintain strength in our military. National security is a primary responsibility for our government. We stay on budget by first eliminating the bribery of our elected official that occurs when military industry gives money in the form of campaign donations to our politicians. Donald Trump correctly recently said, "donors, lobbyists and special interests have complete power over our politicians." Congress betrays our sons and daughters in the military when they allow themselves to be influenced by campaign money from industry. We fund the military best when we elect only representatives who have no conflict of interest because they take no campaign donations of any kind from anyone!
Moderator: Would you support reducing the size and scope of government? Would you support eliminating any departments of government (IRS, Dept. of Education, Dept. of Energy. Dept. of Commerce, etc.). Elaborate.
Bryan Barrilleaux: Yes. I support reducing the size and scope of our Federal Government. All programs departments and spending should be scrutinized in strict context of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the Constitution. We can only accomplish this if we stop voting for representatives who are bribed with campaign money by those who profit from all of this wasteful and misguided spending.
Moderator: What differentiates you from your republican opponents?
Bryan Barrilleaux: I am nominated by petition. 1366 registered voters have attested, by their witnessed and dated signature on the petition, for the district that these ideas and this candidate are worthy and capable. I am the only candidate who can serve with no conflict of interest because I am the only candidate who accepts no campaign donations and spends no money on a campaign. I am offering to serve, not making an investment in a political "career." I have the best ideas to bring to Washington that will serve the 3rd District and the entire country. Campaign finance reform by good citizenship and social security improvement by a tax cut are two good examples. And finally, I have demonstrated by running a campaign against tremendous odds and opposition without wavering that I have the courage and fortitude to lead the good fight against a corrupt establishment in Washington.
Moderator: What are your goals for Louisiana with regard to your tenure in the U.S. House? Which "home grown" issues do you intend to fight for?
Bryan Barrilleaux: Home issues that I will fight for include local infrastructure to enable commerce such as harbors and waterways, highways and flood control/prevention. I will also fight for all of our industry and commerce to promote prosperity in oil and gas, agriculture, chemical industry, fishing, tourism, and all of the commerce and endeavors that are vital to our livelihood. I will fight for stewardship of our natural resources that are so important to our district. I will fight to ensure our safety and security, I will fight for us to prosper ethically, morally and spiritually by fighting for the rights of the unborn, religious liberty, and for honest ethical government. We need to restore confidence that our government can "do the right thing."
Moderator: How would you address the problems with our Veterans Administration?
Bryan Barrilleaux: We have a moral obligation to serve the needs of our veterans that we accept when we send them to war. We have not lived up to that obligation when we allow vital healthcare services to be poorly provided by a bureaucracy that everyone agrees is doing a very poor job. Many reasons explain the poor job such as union contracts for VA employees that put Veterans at a disadvantage, and the fact that our Congressmen take campaign money bribes from corporations and individuals who sell good s and services to the VA and corrupt the entire department. In general, the government is not good at administering healthcare and we should recognize that fact and stop subjecting our Veterans to third rate service. We should put the resources in the hands of the Veteran who can then act as a consumer in the healthcare market to purchase insurance and other healthcare needs. By competition, the market will provide choices that will allow the Veteran to shop for the best quality, easiest access and lowest price. The current Veteran’s Hospitals should remain open, but be required to bill to the Veteran’s insurance for services and compete in the market. If the VA hospital is successful it will remain open. If it competes poorly and the Veterans prefer other services, then it will close. The free market, not central government planning, will provide the quality and access that Veterans deserve, and at the lowest price that taxpayers prefer.
BRYAN BARRILLEAUX A 57 year old traditional solo practice physician. Catholic Home School father of 6, married once for 34 years . First time political candidate in 2012, returning in 2014 and again with fortitude and perseverance in the 2016 election and remaining a Candidate nominated by petition of voters for LA District 3 U.S. House on a non-traditional Republican pro-life conservative platform that emphasizes campaign finance reform by accepting no campaign contributions and spending no money on a campaign. Other original policy proposals include a tax cut to save Social Security, and funding for the LA Master Plan 2012. Born 1957 in Thibodaux, LA. , childhood and youth years in New Orleans, Graduated Tulane University '80 and Medical School '84. Lake Charles is home for 25 years. Physician who together with his wife, Kathy, manages his office practice as a small family business. He is a practicing Catholic.
Qualifying by Petition, With Louisiana Secretary of State Tom Schedler
BARRILLEAUX IS NOMINATED BY PETITION
to the U.S. House of Representatives for District 3 in Louisiana. The petition signed by 1260 voters in 6 parishes was certified by the Registrar of Voters, and was presented to the Louisiana Secretary of State on 8/20/14 . Barrilleaux accepted the nomination.
Barrilleaux's candidacy is the product of a grass roots campaign aimed at eliminating conflict of interest attributed to campaign donations in Washington. Barrilleaux's campaign will accept no donations and will spend no money on a campaign so that he may serve in Congress with no conflict of interest. By campaigning and serving with absolutely no campaign donations Barrilleaux is determined to represent the interest of the people in District Three with "absolutely no ethical compromise or impropriety." By this method Barrilleaux hopes to "restore confidence" in government.
to the U.S. House of Representatives for District 3 in Louisiana. The petition signed by 1260 voters in 6 parishes was certified by the Registrar of Voters, and was presented to the Louisiana Secretary of State on 8/20/14 . Barrilleaux accepted the nomination.
Barrilleaux's candidacy is the product of a grass roots campaign aimed at eliminating conflict of interest attributed to campaign donations in Washington. Barrilleaux's campaign will accept no donations and will spend no money on a campaign so that he may serve in Congress with no conflict of interest. By campaigning and serving with absolutely no campaign donations Barrilleaux is determined to represent the interest of the people in District Three with "absolutely no ethical compromise or impropriety." By this method Barrilleaux hopes to "restore confidence" in government.
Petition Certified by Registrar of Voters Angela M. Quienalty
Personal Biography Interview