Daniel Brackins is an Army Brat, the globetrotting son of a soldier who got to experience first-hand the diversity of cultures in this country and in our world.

Unmarried but in a long-term relationship with a supportive woman named Julie Chang, Brackins received a B.A. in political science from Temple University, and in true libertarian ever-learning fashion, is currently working on his MBA in economics from Hawaii Pacific University.

He is the Hawaii Assistant State Coordinator for the Ron Paul 2008 campaign, and he is running for Hawaii's Congressional District 1.

We spent a couple of days talking through email about himself, his background, and the issues. Here's the skinny:

FF: Well, why don't you just start by just telling me a little bit about yourself, your experience, political education, your qualifications?

Brackins: My background is very eclectic. Since my father is in the U.S. Army I was able to travel throughout the world and experience various cultures not only abroad but within the United States. I have lectured throughout the U.S. and Japan on the ideals of the free market. I have also worked on two other campaigns before on both sides of the aisle while I was an undergraduate. When people speak of experience I must point out that political experience isn't the only kind of experience. Including my political experience, my experiences are the same as the ones most Americans are facing: rising inflation, higher cost of living, and greater government intrusion in our personal lives.

FF: Can you elaborate on your lectures, a little? Who sponsored you? How did you get involved?

Brackins: I have lectured at various universities including Temple University, University of Madison-Wisconsin, and the University of Texas. My primary focus during these lectures was to address how the introduction of the free market increases personal liberty in socialist and communist countries. I was sponsored my Temple University during these lectures. I got involved because I wanted to share my knowledge of free markets with students of universities who usually aren't taught anything in regards to this subject.

FF: No doubt. So, economically, are you an Austrian (Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises), or more Chicago School (Milton Friedman, The Cato Institute)?

Brackins: I am an Austrian economist, and I am a member of the Ludwig von Mises Institute. While I do support much of the work that the Chicago School has done, their failure to address the Federal Reserve issue has caused me to question some of their philosophy.

FF: And what is your general view of good government?

Brackins: In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "The government is best which governs least." It would be great to see a government whose officials actually follow the Constitution. I would like to see government officials held accountable for their decisions along with greater transparency.

FF: Sounds good to me. Is this your first time running for office? If so, why now?

Brackins: This is my first time running for office. I have always considered myself a "behind the scenes" guy until my work with the Ron Paul campaign. With increasing instances of our government limiting peace, prosperity, and liberty the one thing that must be limited is the government itself. I am concerned with the problems America's economy is facing and our governing officials' failure to support and defend the Constitution. We wouldn't have many of the problems we are facing today if these officials simply followed the words of the Founding Fathers.

FF: That is so true. Are you running as a Republican, like Paul?

Brackins: Yes. Many have asked me why I am not running as a Libertarian. Well, although I was a member of the Libertarian Party in the past, I feel that the most effective changes we can make are within the already established parties. We must elect officials within these parties that are liberty minded and will then ultimately be able to create greater ballot access to third parties and independents. The Republican Party once held the ideals of liberty, but has fallen away from this. This is a great opportunity to restore the GOP.

FF: That seems to be Ron Paul's motivation, as well. On that note, how would you say you are most like Ron Paul? How are you different?

Brackins: Well besides his age, Ron Paul and I are similar in most regards. I am actually running on his platform because there is no need to fix what isn't broken. Therefore, you can imagine how happy I was to support a presidential candidate who shared my views nearly 100%.

FF: The Freedomphiles are certainly going to like the sound of that. Now, onto the issues. What would you say are the three most important issues on which you are running?

Brackins: The first issue is the economy. Many people are leaving the island to work on the mainland where the cost of living is cheaper. With this these "economic refugees" are taking all of their skills and talents. Living in Hawaii means the cost of living will always be higher than in most other parts of the nation. With gas already approaching $4 per gallon, and milk costing $6 per gallon you can see how a sound economic policy can benefit not only the rest of the country but Hawaii as well. Many of these issues stem from the problems of the Federal Reserve System and our failed foreign policy.

FF: How do you plan ..ping the migration of workers and business from Hawaii?

Brackins: One of the first things we can do is give freedom to small businesses in order to compete with many of the subsidized industries in Hawaii. We must also lower taxes for these businesses so they may invest more in their industry and thus are able to expand by hiring more workers at a higher salary. Another thing that must be done is decrease taxes not only for individuals. Many families are forced to work multiple jobs in order to keep up with the rising cost of living. With more money in their pockets to spend the economy will be stimulated. Ultimately by increasing economic freedom more people will be willing to work and spend their money in Hawaii.

FF: Freedom and prosperity do seem to go hand in hand, don't they? What's the second issue?

Brackins: The second issue is health freedom. Along with the rising cost of living, health care costs have also risen. These costs force many families to choose between buying necessities such as food or paying for health insurance. Ultimately one has to provide for his family by purchasing basic necessities. By allowing for health freedom and deregulating the health care industry families would be able to afford health care.

FF: What are the best first steps for increasing health freedom and lowering costs? Are you for removing the tax breaks companies get for "providing" health insurance to employees. It seems the best system would be pay-as-you-go with supplemental catastrophic/hospitalization health insurance. Do you agree? If so, how do we get there?

Brackins: I think the first step is allowing all Americans to have access to a Health Savings Account, without the requirement of a high insurance deductible. This will provide tax breaks for those companies that help pay into the savings account as incentive to support the HSA. It will also provide tax breaks for employees on the money they have contributed.

Health care should not be left up to HMOs and big drug companies, who are in bed with government bureaucrats. We must make all medical expenses tax deductible, give freedom to small business by removing regulations that limit the coverage they can provide, give doctors the freedom to negotiate with insurance companies to reduce the cost of care, and also we should reform licensing requirements so that pharmacists and nurses can perform some basic functions to increase access to care and lower costs.

Ultimately it would be great to see a 100% consumer driven health care system. The quality would be outstanding and the price lower than we could imagine.

FF: Indeed. And what's the third issue for you?

Brackins: Definitely education. Hawaii's rank is one of the worst in the nation. The state tends to fluctuate between 46th and 49th in the nation. Education should be in the hands of the state and not the federal government. The Department of Education cannot possibly understand the varied local issues concerning education. Along with this must be the support of non-public education and opportunity scholarships for children. This way the parents hold the power and not the government monopoly. This will undoubtedly increase the quality of education and lower the price at the same time.

FF: When you say, "opportunity scholarships," are you talking about vouchers? If you approve of vouchers, what is the best way to implement them? Should it be for kids in failing schools? Minorities? Or should they just give vouchers to everyone, and let them decide where to send their kids?

Brackins: Voucher is a bad word these days in many political circles, opportunity scholarships is a much more acceptable term. The best way to implement educational freedom is to give the scholarships to the parents of the students no matter the race, gender, religion, etc. This will create a competitive environment among schools similar to the way nonpublic colleges and universities are run. Failing schools will the be forced to improve their quality or suffer the consequences, as parents will not send their children to subpar schools. Giving failing schools more money only rewards them for their shortfalls.

FF: Let's just hit some hot-button issues, here. Federal Reserve. Keep it or lose it?

Brackins: Lose it! The Fed is the greatest theft in American history, and I will fight tirelessly to abolish it. We must return to Constitutional sound currency and restore the power to the Congress and not the private bankers.

FF: Is it your opinion that just abolishing the Federal Reserve and going to commodity-based currency the best plan, or do you prefer the Paulian approach of just allowing a competing currency and letting the market make the fiat currency "whither on the vine," as Newt once said.

Brackins: Congress introducing a competing currency would be the best way of transitioning from fiat currency to sound money. This way would avoid any market problems that could arise by simply abolishing the Fed with no other money for people to use. The transition would be smooth since the Federal Reserve note could never compete against sound money.

I urge everyone to write their congressman to support H.R. 2755, introduced by Ron Paul, to repeal the Federal Reserve Act.

FF: How about gay marriage? Federal or state issue? For or against?

Brackins: The Declaration of Independence says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." The Bill of Rights also reasserts these. Since a right is not a privilege the government has no authority to grant or take them away.

Marriage, in whatever capacity, is a deeply personal issue and it is my belief that this issue should not even be discussed by the government. It is definitely not a federal issue.

FF: Drug War. Fight it or surrender?

Brackins: Surrender is not what we should call it. I would rather just call it being smart. America's elected officials haven't learned from the impact of the prohibition of alcohol. The laws that the U.S. has passed against drugs has created most of the problems that they are now trying to avert. In economics it is called the law of unintended consequences. The large profits that the drug business receives from the markup of the drugs, because of its illegality, support the business that the drug war was meant to stop.

FF: Last question. What is your plan for getting elected? Where can people go to help you? What can people do to help you?

Brackins: Well, I can't give away the details of my plan, but we do have a strategy. The current phase of my campaign is primarily fund raising and getting volunteers to help with whatever they can. There are so many people with varied skils out there that our campaign will be happy to utilize.

The biggest help now is donations. The special interest groups that are donating to Neil Abercrombie don't favor a candidate like myself, because I will actually vote in accordance with the Constitution. Neil Abercrombie has become a puppet for the special interest groups and lobbyists who care more about their own profit than the Constitution. These groups reward Abercrombie with plenty of money to fill his coffers. No donation is too big or too small. I will fight for every penny I receive. Each penny represents a voice that needs to be heard.

FF: We'll definitely do what we can to help. Thank you for your time, Mr Brackins, and good luck in the election! If you need anything, or have any news you want to get out to the rEVOLution, don't hesitate to drop me a line, and I'll put it in the Roundup.

Brackins: Thanks a lot for taking the time to put together these questions and spread the message. We need more people like you.

FF: I think the same could more accurately be said about you, sir.

If you'd like to get involved in or donate to the Brackins Campaign, please visit his campaign website , and to find out who else may be running in your neck of the woods, visit PaulCongress.com .

OVER UNITY: Maybe you can explain to me how introducing a competing honest currency can overcome Gresham's Law? People will simply hoard the good stuff and the rotten FRNs will remain the currency in circulation because everyone wants to spend them. This may even send the false message that people PREFER them! And if, when you remove the legal tender status, people simply refuse to accept them, then you have the problem of artificially halting economic activity and destroying any real capital that those FRNs may have represented.

BRACKINS: Gresham's Law only applies when a government creates a "legal tender." If the government forces you to use debased currency then Gresham's Law would apply. That is bad money drives out good money. Yet the Constitution does not grant government the power to declare legal tender. It does declare that gold and silver are the only acceptable forms of currency. With the absence of legal tender laws Gresham's Law can no longer be applied. This is because people are now free to reject the debased currency since there is no law that requires people to use it. I would disagree with the assumption that if the legal tender status is removed from real money that people would no longer accept them. Prior to the 1864 Coinage Act gold and silver was used as standard currency throughout America, andthere was no US Mint. The coins where minted in private mints. The same holds true throughout history. For example in the 16th and 17th century the Spanish gold doubloon was accepted worldwide for the purchase of a variety of goods.

FF: A couple of readers noted that we didn't talk about the war at all. So, what is your view on the Iraq War? The War on Terror? What is the role for the United States in world affairs, diplomatically and militarily?

BRACKINS: Just as Thomas Jefferson said, "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations--entangling alliances with none, I deem one of the essential principles of our government, and consequently one of those which ought to shape its administration."

The Iraq war is an undeclared war and is therefore not authorized by the Constitution, and I believe it will never be won as long as we are involved. The War on Terror is another war that can never be won. Whenever the government declares war on an idea or concept I am skeptical. This is because when there is no clear defined enemy it is an excuse for government to group anyone they wish into the category of an enemy at the expense of civil liberties and billions of dollars. In a nutshell the United States needs to mind its own business. We have no right to get involved with the affairs of other nations. I often wonder why we don't recognize the rights of other nations that we ourselves so dearly uphold within the United States.

FF: Who is your favorite president, and why?

BRACKINS: While not perfect, my favorite president is Thomas Jefferson. For the most part he espoused the ideas of libertarianism. He had a great understanding of individual liberty and rights. It was he who made sure that our rights were enshrined in the Constitution. He also warned us about the dangers of a central bank and intervening in the affairs of other nations. Only Jefferson would greet White House guests in a robe and slippers, and relaxed all the formalities associated with his presidency.

FF: Thanks again, sir.

So, there you have it. I agree about Jefferson, even though I think he caved to the Federalists too often. But the fact that he repealed the Alien and Sedition Acts are enough to make him an awesome president in my book.