By having your state representative hold a position of power in Congress, it ensures that your state's voice is heard above the rest, while you can't guarantee it will be voted upon in the way that most positively affects your state, it can be guaranteed to be heard by the masses. This goes for any state, not just Hawai'i, and goes for both the "House Majority Leader" and the "House Minority Leader". As Hawai'i's current representatives are little known on the national stage, it is very unlikely that any Democrat or Republican voted in to represent Hawai'i will ever obtain a position of power to bring Hawai'i's voice to the forefront. The Libertarian Party, with Aaron Toman as it's representative WILL have that position of power on day one and will ensure that Hawai'i's voice is heard and considered. 

This position will also allow Aaron greater ease to introduce bills from his own Platform, to bring these national issues into the national discussion. Hawai'i's current representatives introduce legislation regularly that never make it to the first step, they have no position of power and so their bills slip through the cracks, no matter how good the proposal is or how much it does for Hawai'i. As the House Minority Leader, Aaron can propose legislation that will be taken more seriously as it will be seen by more representatives and the general public through news coverage. 

It's incredibly important to understand this concept that will allow a Libertarian representative to give Hawai'i a greater voice on the national stage compared to a Democrat or Republican representative. If Hawai'i continues to elect the two major parties, then those representatives will only be another gear in the overall "political machine" which controls Washington. They don't get their own voice or platform, they have to focus on what's good "for the party", not what's good for the nation or Hawai'i. By electing the nation's first Libertarian representative, Hawai'i will not only make history, but will create a platform as the House Minority Leader to bring Hawai'i's issues to center stage of the nation.

Presidential Term Limits were not built into our Constitution. They were added by a Constitutional Amendment passed by Congress in March 21, 1947. It took 170 years after our country's founding to realize its necessity and now over 75 years since that Amendment, it is clear that the same stipulation is needed for US Congress. Aaron Toman will introduce a Constitutional Amendment to Limit the Terms for House of Representatives to six, two year terms (12 years total) and Members of the Senate to two, six-year terms (12 years total). This would limit a politician's national career in elected office to a MAXIMUM of 40 years with twelve years in the House, twelve years in the senate, and sixteen years in the White House (2 terms as Vice-President & 2 terms as President).

While 40 years seems like the same situation we have today, it is far from it. We currently have no limit for national level offices, and with this amendment a politician could only reach 40 years, IF they serve both 2 terms as Vice-President and 2 terms as President, both of which will be limited to very few politicians. With Aaron's proposed Constitutional Amendment, the average national level politician will only be able to serve a maximum of 24 years (12 in House/12 in Senate) before returning to State Level Politics, should they wish. 

As of this writing, we have one Senator, Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) that has been in national level office for almost 49 years. Without ever being President or Vice President, this politician has been able to stay in power for almost a decade longer than Aaron's proposed Constitutional Amendment. Including Grassley, we have 9 current Congress members who have been serving for over 40 years without holding a position outside of Congress. Although he has since passed, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), was the longest serving congressman in history, holding power for 51 years. If Joe Biden hadn't been elected Vice President in 2008 and continued running for his Senate position, Joe Biden would likely have taken the "longest serving congressman" title away in 2024 with 52 years in federal office. That is over HALF A CENTURY of involvement  from Joe Biden and Aaron believes the poor state of our country is a direct reflection of "leaders" being able to direct our country over such long time periods. From Joe Biden supporting the Vietnam War in 1972 to him supporting the Ukraine/Russia War in 2024, the times change, but our leaders and their opinions stay the same.

Times change and as they change, we as a nation shouldn't be stuck with those politicians who refuse to change with the times. They won't give up power voluntarily, which you will see by their votes when this Amendment is first introduced. Even if this Amendment doesn't pass into law, it will make it clear to the voters in every state how much their elected Representative values the power they receive over the will of the voters they represent. 

Time and time again, Congress approved to raise their salaries while the communities they represent live in financial uncertainty. While an increase has been denied by Congress since 2010, the amount was already too high by this time. The salary for a House of Representatives member is currently almost $175,000 per year! We should be encouraging those who wish to do good for their country to run for these offices, not those trying to enrich themselves. I will propose a bill that all congressional members be paid a salary based on the average salary of those who live in their districts, encouraging those elected to do what is best to enrich their communities, not themselves, while still making enough income to continue residing in their home district.

There is already data collected to determine average salaries in each district and congressional salaries can be updated as often as the original data is collected, but will likely be adjusted yearly. 

First, you must know what is being referred to by "US Territories". The US has had territories, or "land under US law and control", for most of its history. Some territories later became states (EX: Alaska), some achieved independence (EX: Philippines), some are still run as territories today (EX: Guam), and most are uninhabited (9 islands and atolls). Today, we have 6 inhabited territories which include: American Samoa, Guam, US Mariana Islands, US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and Washington DC.

Of the 6 US Territories, all citizens born in their borders automatically receive US Citizenship, with the exception of American Samoa, who's residents are born "Non-Citizen Nationals of the US". American Samoans therefore must pay US Federal Taxes, must follow US Federal Laws, have consistently enlisted more soldiers per capita than any other United States territory or state, and yet, receive no rights or privileges that come with Citizenship, that is automatically given to ALL other US territories. There are many negative consequences to being denied citizenship in your home country and you are encouraged to research these effects and why it is critical to these "Fellow Americans", that we fix these disastrous policies. The residents of American Samoa deserve the same rights as every other American, yet with the current system, they have no power to correct it themselves, and therefore, as the nearest state with actual representation, it is up to Hawai'i to sound the alarm and bring justice to our fellow islanders.

Now you may have heard or seen that the US Territories do have Federal Representation and can vote for President. Both of these are half-truths. The Territories are each given 1 non-voting delegate to the US House of Representatives, regardless of their population size; and no representative to the US Senate. If this is considered "representation", you'd hate to learn what "no representation" looks like. The House Delegates can introduce legislation, but aren't able to vote in favor of its passing and if it passes the House without their vote, then the legislation heads to the Senate where the territory is once again unable to vote in favor of its passing but is denied a voice completely with no representatives present. Then the Territories "can vote in US Presidential Primary Elections", but without representation in the US Electoral College, the vote is merely for show and has no effect on the outcome of the general election. 

To begin to fix this unjust system of representation we must accomplish 3 things: 1. Give all the territory delegates to the US House of Representatives the full right to vote in all Legislative Sessions. 2. Give each territory a voting-member representative to the US Senate. 3. Give each territory voting representation in the US Electoral College, based on each territory's population. This will give every territory the basic representation they require to have their voices heard, while more representation will be made available should an individual territory vote to request statehood, receiving the same voting rights as all states. 

You may be asking, "What is Qualified Immunity?" and simply stated: it's a legal doctrine that protects government officials from lawsuits who violate the rights of the people. Some may say that Qualified Immunity doesn't prevent lawsuits against statutory or constitutional rights, but in practice, it basically does prevent ALL lawsuits against government employees.

Qualified Immunity was not a law passed by the people or their representatives, but a doctrine decided upon and passed by the Judiciary. A doctrine decided by the Judiciary that also happens to protect the Judiciary itself. There was a clear conflict of interest that the judiciary should have seen and prevented them from making the doctrine in the first place. Luckily for the American people, we have a system of checks and balances that allow the people to correct such a clearly biased decision through their congressional representatives. Aaron Toman will introduce a bill that removes Qualified Immunity not only from Law Enforcement where it is most often called for, but removed from ALL government officials, including, but not limited to: state and federal judges, state and federal congressional members, governors, county and city council members, clerks, federal agents, and anyone else who earns income from the government. If you are paid by the government, you work for the people and you must be held accountable for breaking the law or violating the constitution, the same standard that is held for everyone else that earns their income from the private sector. 

This Bill is not anti-Law Enforcement, it is Pro-Citizen. We've all heard it before, "there's just a few rotten apples" and Aaron believes this mostly holds true. The vast majority of Law Enforcement already believes that they have a "Duty to Protect" and act accordingly. We hear of the heroism by individual officers throughout the years and this bill will have no effect on the majority of Law Enforcement. This bill will specifically target those "rotten apples" who see a career in Law Enforcement as a means to benefit themselves and not as an honorable career to be at the service of others. This "Duty to Protect" Bill will keep the "rotten apples" away from applying for the job in the first place and will punish those "rotten apples" who use the position to benefit themselves without care for the citizens they have promised to protect. 

"Good Apples" joined Law Enforcement to protect others and to uphold the law. If you are a Law Enforcement Officer and you see no need to have a "Duty to Protect" required by law, it's time to reconsider your career as you clearly choose this one for a different reason than the vast majority of your fellow officers. 

The Military Selective Service Act (Military Draft), is used when the standing military (Active Duty/Reserves) does not have enough bodies to keep replacing the corpses sent back home. It has only been used, and will only ever have to be used, in a foreign war, where US Citizens are shipped halfway across the world to fight on behalf of someone else (another country), wars that the US shouldn't be involved with in the first place. 

If there is ever an attack on US soil, a draft will not be necessary. People will stand to fight for their homes, their families, their property, their neighbors, and their country when they are directly under assault from foreign or domestic invaders. They will volunteer to join the military to counter attack or will volunteer to join their community in resistance. You may ask, "when has this been true to occur?" and Aaron will point you to any US History book. Whenever America or individual states have come under attack, there have always been American citizens there to fight back, whether the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Texas Revolution, or the US Civil War. 

Americans as a whole will always protect what is theirs voluntarily and will resist fighting in other people's wars by force of their own government. The draft goes against the freedoms we all have as Americans and should be repealed immediately before your elected government ramps up their involvement in the upcoming WWIII. 

The Military Selective Service Act must be repealed all the way back to its 1948 beginnings and a new law put in its place to prevent future congresses from passing new draft laws.

The title of this Act sounds like it would be beneficial to American Citizens and their children; however, when read, you'll find quite the opposite, especially with Subtitle II titled "National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program". This subtitle of the Act protects the government and the manufacturers of vaccines from legal recourse by the public and gives the government full control over the legal recourse that the private citizen may have if they are injured by a vaccine, even putting a LIMIT on how much you can be compensated, regardless of your individual situation. 

The government should be protecting its citizens, but with the amount of lobbying money that has flowed into politician pockets from the pharmaceutical industry, the government is instead protecting the pharmaceutical industry over its own citizens. This must be corrected immediately and to do so, we must repeal Subtitle II of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

This Act would also partially return the US to Constitutional Law, as stated in Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S Constitution: "No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.". The US Government has ignored the Constitution since 1933 when it removed the US from the "Gold Standard" of monetary policy as laid out in the Constitution and later striking the final blow in 1973 removing all the remaining silver from our country's monetary system. While the ideal situation would be a full return to Constitutional Law with the complete return of the "Gold Standard" in our monetary policies, that will likely prove to be a long fought battle to return to sanity. This OPTIONAL Act will allow those Americans who believe in Constitutional Law and "Sound Money" to exit the failing Fiat USD system, while allowing those unwilling to accept the future reality of Fiat USD to continue using Fiat USD until it reaches the point of collapse.

While we cannot change the minds of every American, we can help the Americans who have their eyes wide open and are begging for a return of Sound Money. The main goal of this Act is to bring America closer to Constitutional Law as America never should have strayed away from, while the secondary goal will be public education. The more Americans that wake up to the sad reality that is Fiat USD, the sooner we can completely bring America back to Constitutional Law and provide "Sound Money" that ALL Americans will benefit from, now and indefinitely. By giving the OPTION to receive your income in Sound Money (Gold and Silver Eagles), the average person will question "Why would someone NOT want USD?" and as they research, they will learn how they have been lied to by their government their entire life and sold the "lie" that fiat currency is just as good as "Sound Money". 

Is all of this new to you? Before you continue on to your own research into the topic of "Sound Money", Aaron highly recommends that anyone new to the topic watches this series as a "crash course" to learn the basics: CLICK HERE

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is a United States federal statute that provides for the promotion and maintenance of the American merchant marine. Among other purposes, the law regulates maritime commerce in U.S. waters and between U.S. ports. Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act is known as the Jones Act and deals with cabotage (coastwise trade). It requires that all goods transported by water between U.S. ports be carried on ships that have been constructed in the United States and that fly the U.S. flag, are owned by U.S. citizens, and are crewed by U.S. citizens and U.S. permanent residents. The act was introduced by Senator Wesley Jones. The law also defines certain seaman's rights.

While beneficial to the US's Maritime Industry and somewhat beneficial to the US Mainland, the effects on Hawai'i, Alaska, and all the US Islands has been far from beneficial to the point where the average resident would call the Jones Act "detrimental" to the island's economy and quality of life for its residents.

As a quick example with the Jones Act in place: if a Hawai'i resident wishes to make a bulk purchase from Japan that will be put into a shipping container and shipped overseas via boat, the boat will travel across the Pacific Ocean, passing Hawai'i to reach a port on the US Mainland. Once there, the shipping container is then loaded onto a Jones Act Qualified Vessel and shipped half way back across the Pacific Ocean to be delivered to Hawai'i. Due to the fees and tariffs imposed by the Jones Act, it makes more financial sense for the vessel operators to pass by Hawai'i and go directly to the US Mainland with their full load and because of this, the Hawai'i resident that placed the original order now has to wait nearly twice as long for their delivery (as compared to stopping in Hawai'i's port to drop off a partial load before continuing to the US Mainland) and pay nearly twice as much as they are now shipping their same order twice (Japan to Mainland and Mainland to Hawai'i), that extra shipping expense is then passed off to the customers that have to now pay more for the final product. 

If the Jones Act were not in place: If a Hawai'i resident wishes to make a bulk purchase from Japan that will be put into a shipping container and shipped overseas via boat, the boat will travel across the Pacific Ocean, stop in a Hawai'i Port to unload any shipping containers destined for Hawai'i, then would continue to the US Mainland with the rest of their load. In this scenario, the Hawai'i resident has to wait half as long for their order to be delivered and will pay half as much for it to be shipped directly without other stops. Since the products were delivered for a cheaper amount, the end products can then be sold to the public at a lower price while still earning the same profit.

There have been many attempts to outright repeal the Jones Act that have all ended unsuccessfully. While I agree that the Jones Act should be repealed, I believe that in order to bring immediate relief to Hawai'i, the quickest path forward is with an amendment to the Jones Act. Once an amendment is passed and all US Islands receive the relief from the burdens caused by the Jones Act, the broader conversation of repealing can continue to take place with factual information and data to compare the effects of the Jones Act on the US Mainland versus the effects of not being restricted in the US Islands.  

In 2021, the US was simultaneously both the 2nd largest exporter and the 2nd largest importer of beef products worldwide, with many other agricultural products in the same situation. While it may seem counter-productive, it currently makes more financial sense to export high quality American Agricultural products across the globe, while importing cheap lower quality products back into the US to replace the higher quality products that we exported.

In a world as interconnected as ours, this system only works while the world as a whole is generally "at peace", but as soon as factors arise that prevent this system from operating at the "status quo", we as a country will not be prepared for the sudden change, causing mass disruptions and possible panic. If Americans are already used to selling their agricultural products to their fellow Americans, no outside factors can arise to disrupt the American food system and ensuring that all Americans have access to American products. Federal Tax Credits will allow American Producers to continue making the profits they need to operate, while ensuring that America is not dependent on other countries to feed its people. 

Hawaii has long been plagued by mainland states exporting their homeless populations to Hawaii without the consent of the people or the government of Hawaii. Hawaii's residents have had to pay the price in numerous ways, including but not limited to: unsafe conditions while driving, unsafe recreational areas, increased litter, higher taxes to support homeless outreach programs, and government programs to address the out of control homeless problem.

The problem is not the homeless people themselves, if Hawaii only had to handle their state's homeless problem, it would be more manageable and easier to address without creating hard impacts on the tax paying citizens. But with having to handle Hawaii's homeless problem AND part of the homeless problem from across the country that has exported their homeless to our state, it becomes unmanageable and we end up with the situation we have today. We can't go back in time and stop everyone who has already been exported here by their state governments, but we can stop the future exportation with legal consequences for the state governments who continue to attempt exporting. Once we stop additional people from adding to our homeless problem, we can then begin to truly address the problem within our state.