David is a graduate of Milligan College with a degree in Organizational Management. He received an AAS degree in Respiratory Therapy from California College and a certification in Respiratory Therapy from East Tennessee State University.

David has been representing the Sixth District for eight years in Nashville. He served on the House Transportation Committee, House Government Operations Committee, House Public Safety and Rural Roads Subcommittee, and Chairman of Commerce, Labor, and Transportation Subcommittee. David is also a delegate for the White House Conference for Small Business.

David is President of the Shared Health Services, Inc. He is very active in the community belonging to several groups including: Washington County Republican Party, Sportsman Legislative Caucus, Northeast Caucus, Tourism Caucus, Coalition for Kids, board member of the Crumley House Head Injury Rehab Center, Science Hill High School-Alternative, Johnson City Rotary Club, etc.

David was the 2005 Legislator of the Year by the Tennessee Podiatric Association. he has received the Healthcare Hero Award, Respiratory Care Provider Award, Home Medical Equipment Supplier of the Year and the John W. Hines Award from the Tennessee Association for Home Care.

David is married to the former Joyce Engle and they have two children, Matthew and Rachel.

To be clear, Davis had to leave the debate early in order to accept an award elsewhere (an event that Davis tried to change in order to attend the debate, but could not.) I emailed the questions to Davis, and he emailed his answers to me today. Here are his responses (my comments are in itallics):

1. With a great deal of publicity lately, do you believe the Fair Tax is superior to the present tax code?

Absolutely. I will vote to enact the provisions of the Fair Tax as presently proposed in Congress. I believe the Fair Tax will eliminate the gross inequity of our current tax system that robs jobs from our workers and is an unfair system of taxation. The Fair Tax bill being promoted as House Resolution 25 and Senate Resolution 25 would abolish the wide range of federal personal, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, self-employment, and corporate taxes and replace them all with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax. Existing state sales tax authorities will collect this consumption tax. This legislation would repeal the 16th Amendment to the U. S. Constitution – that’s the one that provides for the Federal income tax. This proposal provides for the tax to be revenue-neutral and has safeguards to protect those living in poverty. I think it is the best idea to protect the taxpayer from the ravages of the present tax system and its excesses.

Somebody studied!! The first time I spoke with Davis he was not quite as committed to the Fair Tax, although he did praise its merits. He has either read up and decided to commit (a distinct possibility with Timothy Hill working on his campaign, as Hill is a huge Fair Tax supporter), or has felt the pulse of those in this district and decided to jump on board with his constituents.

2. Should abortion be a Federal or States Rights issue?

It should be a State issue, but it has been made a Federal issue by an over-reaching Supreme Court. I am for banning abortion at the Federal and State levels. My endorsement from the Tennessee Right to Life points out my commitment to passing pro-life legislation.

I’m a little unsure about the idea that abortion “should be a state issue.” Although murder is typically dealt with in the Court system on a state level, a state cannot decide to legalize murder, and abortion should be treated in the same way.

It is, however, quite impressive that Davis has been endorsed by the Tennessee Right to Life. This shows that Davis has had the experience to actually merit an endorsement based on his action in office and in the community.

3. Do you believe it is the Federal Government’s responsibility to bail out individual states after every natural disaster?

No, the responsibility lies first with the locality or State. However, I do understand the need for the Federal Government to maintain or rebuild the infrastructure that is part of the federal system – highways, levees, dams, etc.

I think this is a fair assessment, although I would argue that the “federal system” is something that needs to be eliminated in and of itself. We’ve seen how effective the Feds are in maintaining dams and levees, so, being a state-girl through and through, I say forget the federal system and let the states handle everything (although the Feds should lower taxes on the federal level in order to accommodate their lesser role.)

4. Do you believe the Federal Government should play a role and mandate the oil companies on a universal scale, to use the EA85 version of ethanol?

No. I do not like the idea of a mandate by the Federal Government to the oil companies. However, I do think we need free-market thinking and action in the energy sector. I also think that the Federal Government should
remove all subsidies from the multi-national oil and energy companies to allow the free market to work. The government should ease restrictions on drilling for oil and open up the tiny portion of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) as has been proposed for years. As consumers in the marketplace we need to demand that cheaper and innovative fuels be made available – such as biodiesel and ethanol/methanol fuels.

5. Why is the health care insurance industry guaranteed a profit by the Federal Government in a free market system?

They are guaranteed a profit because apparently a majority of people in the Congress listened to the insurance lobbyists and voted to allow this travesty. The health care insurance industry should be on a free-market,
unsubsidized basis. The health care industry –as a whole- should be on a free-market, unsubsidized basis.

6. Title 6 states that “No Person shall be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, or national origin.” The Supreme Court has held that undocumented aliens are considered “Persons” under the equal protection and due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Therefore the assumption has been applied by the Courts, Congress, and State Governments that undocumented aliens have the same rights to all Federal assistance programs as citizens do. What would you do about amending Title 6 to restrict services to citizens only?

There is no question that it is absolutely wrong to burden the citizens of the United States with the expense of providing for those who have illegally crossed our border. I will work to amend Title 6 to restrict its application to U. S. citizens.

Again (as I have pointed out with every candidate other than Smith, if memory serves) we cannot limit benefits only to citizens, for this keeps legal immigrants from receiving benefits as well.

It’s no secret that I like Davis, not merely based on his answers to some debate questions, but because of my opportunity to get to know him on a personal level. This has shown me that he is a man of character with a proven track record in government. I do, however, wish that Davis was a bit tougher on some issues. There is nothing wrong with being tough and unapologetic for one’s beliefs, and I hope that Davis can step up to the plate and be a real conservative “tough guy.”