Annuit Coeptis would like to thank Michael Williams and his campaign manager, Corbin Casteel, for making the time to be our first major candidate interview. Commissioner Williams is running for the senate seat being vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchison in Texas.

Changing demographics and a low spot in the road for Republicans could make holding the seat being vacated by Kay Bailey Hutchison difficult. Could you describe what makes you uniquely qualified to hold the Senate spot in Texas, and what do you think the top issues are to Texans today and over the next few years?

I am running for the United States Senate to rally Americans around conservative principles and solutions that promise greater freedom, prosperity and opportunity.

As I travel around our state Texans are telling me that you want a consistent conservative…someone with the courage to stand up to Reid and Pelosi… a leader who will not be seduced by the Washington Post and the New York Times. They say they’re looking for a game changer.

And at the risk of being immodest, I am the Republican the Democrats least want to see in the halls of the United States Senate.

I will be that voice from Middle America who stands up for taxpayers…and who defends generations not yet born from stifling debt caused by runaway spending.

I will stand up to the liberals whose climate change agenda will hit American industry and consumers with a $1.7 billion tax increase. They call it cap and trade. I call it cap and take.

I will advocate for education policies that graduate more scientists, engineers and high-tech workers from our schools and usher in a new era of innovation, entrepreneurship and economic development.

And I will renew the push for fundamental tax reform that reflects the limited nature of government; increases prosperity; rewards work, savings and investment — not punishes it.

I have a record of fiscal conservatism that includes turning down over $150,000 in pay increases as Railroad Commissioner. I have served in the Department of Justice and as a high-ranking official at the Department of Education. I have also worked as an assistant district attorney. I can make the case for Republican ideas on issues Democrats believe are their own – education, the environment, energy and urban crime.

For readers outside of Texas, could you explain how your role with the Texas Railroad Commission, which is essentially an energy commission, helps you to address some of the most hot-button energy/environmental problems we are now facing?

I have a true understanding of the crisis posed by our dependence on foreign oil – particularly Middle Eastern Oil. I have a record of advocating for clean transportation alternatives, including natural gas and propane, that will serve as the bridge fuels to the day such things as fuel cells and the electric car are ready for large-scale deployment. I am intimately familiar with our energy potential related to traditional fossil fuels like natural gas and coal, and I can call environmental extremists on their hyperbole about the responsible exploration of fossil fuels.

Concerning electricity, I have been a leader in calling for a balanced fuel portfolio that comprised on natural gas, clean coal, more nuclear power complemented with wind, solar, biomass and enhanced energy efficiency and conservation.

Energy policy is one of the critical issues facing this country and the moment I set foot on the Senate Floor I will be able to make a strong case for responsible exploration and the wise development of renewable sources so we can lessen our dependence on Middle Eastern oil.

You seem to take an “all of the above” view on energy policy and favor moving America toward renewable energy and conservation in an economically responsible way. While the Waxman environmental bill will be long approved before you take office, is it safe to assume that you oppose “cap and trade?”

Cap and trade is a pending disaster that will be the largest wealth redistribution scheme since the creation of the modern welfare state. To learn more about my thoughts on carbon regulation, go to http://williamsfortexas.com where I am writing a blog series on this issue.

Proponents of Waxman-Markey argue that the CO2 cap and trade bill is similar to the cap and trade program enacted by the Clean Air Act of 1990 (CAA), which reduced the sulfur emissions that cause acid rain.

Not quite. The sulfur dioxide program initially targeted only 110 coal-fired power plants. It was eventually expanded to 445 power plants. CO2 and Greenhouse Gases are emitted from power plants. They are also released from refineries, industrial plants, planes, trains, automobiles, ships, home furnaces, fertilizer production, farm animals, and millions of other sources, including humans. Most mosquito and insect traps emit CO2. Waxman-Markey proposes a comprehensive, economy-wide emission regulatory scheme where millions of different and individual sources of emissions come under its purview. That is a far cry from 445 power plants.

Also, many low-cost sulfur dioxide control options existed when the CAA took effect. This is not the case with carbon dioxide control technologies. There are few, if any, control technologies that are commercially available at commercially competitive prices. For instance, in 1990, power generators could reduce sulfur dioxide emissions by using “low-sulfur coal”. There is no “low-carbon dioxide coal” and clean coal with carbon capture and storage, while promising, has yet to be proven.

You take a very strong stand against illegal immigration and sanctuary cities. What kind of costs, both financially and, perhaps, socially are Texans paying for liberal immigration policies?

We are a nation of immigrants, but also a nation of laws. I understand why people want to come to this country, by any means, because we live in the greatest nation on the face of the earth. But we have a right to enforce our sovereign border, an obligation to protect an orderly immigration process that is fair, and a need to keep out of our country dangerous elements that take advantage of our porous border. There is a tremendous cost to our hospitals and schools, and the federal government has failed to meet its obligations to border states for costs accrued from their failure to secure our border.

You make a fiscal conservative’s heart cheer when you speak of supporting a flat tax and ending the death and capital gains taxes. Can you give us an idea on where you stand regarding government spending, the current deficit building, and the rampant pork and special interest spending that seems to find its way into nearly every bill, and is there anything we can do to bring responsibility back to the Legislative Branch?

You cannot spend your way out of a spending crisis. Too much of the stimulus package stimulates government, and not enough stimulates the economy. The mentality that certain corporations are “too big to fail” has led to a looting of the treasury. The long-term threat of inflation is real as Washington prints a staggering amount of money. Chinese banks are now wondering if America is worth the credit risk. Americans must demand a real plan to eliminate the deficit and begin paying down the debt. Earmarks must be completely transparent. Washington must stop attaching so many strings to dollars returning to states. We can no longer delay discussion of entitlement reform and put off reform of Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.

You take a strong stand against abortion. Do you believe that the murder of abortionist George Tiller has severely hurt the cause for those of us who peaceably disagree with abortion and is there any way to move this topic into the realm of civil debate?

There must be a strong condemnation of such horrific tactics if those of us who are pro-life are to be viewed as authentically promoting a culture that nurtures life. Conversely, with medical technology making it easier to view the development of unborn children, and discern the early heartbeats of children just weeks in the womb, I believe hearts and minds are changing in America toward the position that life begins at conception. Confrontational tactics do not changes hearts and minds like the quiet revelation of a beating heart at a few weeks.

Debating the science behind the anthropogenic global warming hysteria has created a backlash to the point that critics are being labeled as “deniers” and even as “dangerous.” One liberal policy blog even went so far recently as to suggest incarceration for those who deny CO2 global warming. What is your belief on global warming, and, either way, does it concern you that more and more frequently, dissenting speech seems to be considered something to quell on “moral” grounds.

Proponents don’t want a debate about the science of global warming, because it would impede their ability to impose a left-wing agenda. I think much more study needs to be done on the causes of global warming, such as emerging theories on solar activity. But whether you accept as fact that man-made carbon output is causing global warming, I think we can all be pragmatic about the fact that the proposed solution in Congress will do little to impact global carbon input because of the unwillingness of China and India to participate, but it will cause great harm to America, and particularly the Texas economy.

You mention God frequently on your official website, yet public attestations to Christian faith seem to be frowned upon these days. How important to you is your faith and do you see a place for faith in the public square despite the constant calls of “foul” by those who cite a separation of church and state?

My faith is important to me, and it guides me. I draw solace and inspiration from it, and it is central to my life.

Nancy Pelosi is dodging, with help from Democrats, the controversy surrounding her knowledge of interrogation techniques used under the former administration. Do you feel that the mainstream media is being as inquisitive with her as it would be if she were a Republican?
Probably not, but Republicans can’t stick our heads in the sand because we feel like we don’t get a fair shake from the press, we need to engage them more to make our case as well as use all of the new social media tools.

Many conservatives are beginning to feel disenfranchised. Election fiasco’s like the one involving Coleman-Franken in Minnesota and ongoing accusations of fraud related to ACORN and other liberal operatives are undermining the confidence that some conservatives have in our electoral processes. Add to that the universal opinion amongst conservatives that the press doesn’t give conservatives a fair shake, and you have a lot of angry rumbling going on around Internet forums and blogs. What can we do to restore a sense of fairness to our elections and a sense of balance to our media?

Anger is not an agenda for the future. We need to get beyond our grievances as conservatives and come forward with a coherent agenda that is optimistic and that creates opportunity. To some extent, the media responds to changes in the marketplace. Fox’s success is testament to the void that once existed for a different approach to news. We need to consistently advocate for positive change, making our case every chance we get. The people can filter through bias. Let’s have faith that, if we offer the right ideas, our party will be rewarded in future elections.

Thank you so much for participating in this interview. Is there anything in particular that you would like to get out to the voters in Texas? And where can readers go to help your campaign and to learn more about you?

This is a historic campaign. Because it is likely to be a special election, it will be the only thing on the ballot nationwide. That means a lot of Obama money and operatives will flood to Texas. They do not want Texas to be the first dent in their armor. We need to continue to build our grassroots army, and raise money to get our message out. The best way to get in contact with our campaign is through our award-winning website, http://williamsfortexas.com