(Frank McEnulty no longer met ProCon.org's eligibility criteria for inclusion on this site on Mar. 21, 2008. ProCon.org stopped updating his profile as of that date.)
Frank McEnulty
Independent Presidential Candidate
President and Chief Financial Officer,
Our Castle Homes
Pro: "Yes, within limitations. Having spoken with people who have been faced with the decision of getting an abortion or not, I realize it is probably one of the most difficult decisions most women can ever make in their lives and one rarely forgotten. My preference would be that no one would ever feel that they have to get or contemplate an abortion for any reason. However, I also believe that this is a moral issue that is best decided by a woman, her family, friends and religious beliefs. I also believe that this is an issue more properly addressed on the state level and that partial birth abortions should be outlawed."
Pro: "Absolutely, positively and without exception. If there are parents responsible for the care and welfare of a minor this must be their decision. I also believe this is a right which must be established by the states. If not, then the minor's legal guardians would be responsible for making these decisions."
Con: "No, they are equally important and must come together. A leader must be both competent and honest in order to properly lead and I do not believe anyone can be an effective leader without both characteristics."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "At this time I do not believe that China is a military threat to the United States. Although China has a very large army they do not have the capability of taking any large scale military fight directly to us and there have been no indications of any intention to do that on their part. China should be more recognized as a potential economic threat in that they have a huge, hard working population and graduate more engineers and other 'development type' of professionals each year than we do by a very wide margin."
Con: "No. The only way to improve the human rights of others is through constructive engagement and that includes trade. As we continue to do business with China and other nations with poor human rights records, the people of those nations will see a continued increase in their standard of living which will allow them to demand an improvement in their rights.
Taken another way, how would we react if Europe decided to impose economic sanctions against the United States because we still have the death penalty, something they strongly believe is a violation of human rights?"
Con: "No, the embargo against Cuba is just a payoff to the Cuban Americans in South Florida and makes absolutely no sense in today's world. If you want to affect change in a region or country you must work with them and allow the people of those areas to see how much better off they would be under our system than under theirs. That is best accomplished by allowing Americans to go there and do business there as much as possible."
Con: "As much as I would like to say yes, I find that I must say no. Without the consent and backing of the UN or the government of the Sudan it would not make sense for us to go to Darfur. My reason for this is as follows. A small force would be able to accomplish little in a country as vast as the Sudan and the Darfur region. A large force without an invitation or the backing of the UN would be seen as an invasion and soon degenerate into another Iraq type of situation.
We should be something about atrocities like Darfur and the Congo because we are the country with the best ability at this time to do so, but we must work first to get backing and agreement from the UN or at least a consortium of countries. This is why it is so important that the next President spend a lot of time on repairing our standing with the rest of the world community."
Pro: "I am not opposed to the death penalty and I believe that it is an important legal option in our justice system. However, I also believe that the death penalty system has gotten to the point where it is becoming not only impractical, but also economically unfeasible. I see the system slowly moving away from death to life in prison without parole and would not stand in the way of that migration if that is what the people continue to demand."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "It depends on the jobs and what we do, as a country, to help the displaced workers find jobs better suited to our economy. If we are going to allow the outsourcing of jobs, as a free economy must, then we must also provide for the retraining of those workers so they are not left behind economically."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "If we are giving up things to allow these agreements to take place then we have the right to ask that they be included. In order to make free trade agreements fair, however, we must try and ensure that everyone is playing by the same rules, which means including labor rights provisions where necessary. In the real world, though, getting these provisions included is often much easier than actually having the foreign governments enforce those same provisions."
Pro: "Yes, to a point. I believe that we need to take a breather before we put into affect any further provisions of NAFTA so that we can get a good look at the positives and the negatives that have resulted from the agreement. This would be especially true when it comes to the effect it has had on jobs for Americans."
Con: "I don't believe so. A one size fits all approach to education will never work in a country as diverse as ours. All it has accomplished is the establishment of another bureaucracy and a system that now does its best to teach to the test so that they look good. Whether or not the children truly learn anything is irrelevant, as long as they do well on the 'test'."
Pro: "To a certain extent I agree that this statement is true, for while I believe that many public colleges are still within a reasonable grasp of the middle class, the cost of a private college education or even the experience of going away to college at a public institution is quickly becoming far beyond the means of most middle class Americans. As the father of two teenage daughters I am acutely/painfully aware of what it will cost me for their college educations depending on where they decide to go to school."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Yes and no. The federal government should fund educational monies to the states and the states should determine how those monies should be spent without federal government interference. That being said, I believe that school voucher programs are an excellent way to give lower income students a chance at a better education and give some competition to the entrenched public school systems."
Pro: "It is always best when drastically changing systems to maintain an audit trail to ensure that the new system works as intended and to build the confidence of the user (public) in those systems. For those reasons, I believe it is important to maintain voter verified paper audit trails for the next several election cycles."
Pro: "There are lots of restrictions on campaign contributions already. The gaping hole in the system is when it comes to contributions to political parties and political action committees. A person can only contribute $2,300 to my presidential (or anyone's presidential campaign); however, they can contribute unlimited amounts to the political party, a PAC [political action commission] or some other special interest group whose true purpose is to support a candidate. Surely no one believes that someone who makes a huge contribution to the party of a candidate doesn't hope to influence that candidate or some legislation. Contributions to political parties and PAC's should be limited to the same amount as those to the presidential candidates. I also believe that there should be an annual overall individual and corporate limit on total contributions to political entities regardless of how many 'different' ones a person or company wishes to contribute to."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "No more than they are now. I believe that there should be more restrictions on the donations to special interest groups and political parties to further weaken the hold on the wealthy over our political process. The argument that this reduces freedom of speech is wrong. Freedom of speech is preserved when everyone has equal rights and when a person or group can donate hundreds of thousands of dollars to a PAC [Political Action Committee] or party how is that preserving the freedom of speech right of the vast majority of Americans who cannot make contributions on that level."
Con: "Not at this time. Such a policy will not greatly reduce our dependence on foreign oil and it will deplete reserves we may need much more in the future. The government should instead concentrate all of its energy resources on getting new nuclear power sources on line and initiating a 'Manhattan Project' for energy to eliminate our dependence on foreign sources of oil."
Con: "No, tapping into the strategic reserve now would do nothing to affect the worldwide price of oil. The only things that will affect the price of oil would be a slowing of the world economy (possibly happening) or the United States developing a comprehensive, long-term energy plan to greatly reduce our dependence on all oil."
Pro: "Yes, I see no reason not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Most of the world has ratified it and we need to be part of the solution and work together with the rest of the world on solving environmental problems.
I am an outdoorsman. There is nothing I enjoy more than hiking through open spaces, hunting and fishing. I also have children and am worried about what resources they will have as they, and hopefully someday, their children, grow older. Naturally, I am for protecting the environment. However, there is a give and take to everything. As the country continues to grow so will our demands for space and natural resources. I believe that the environment can be protected and nurtured while still being used for the greater good of all Americans. Sometimes that will require a set-aside of certain areas of the country as protected environments and sometimes that will require that we exploit the land and minerals to keep our country going. Will everyone be happy with my decisions?
Probably not, but as a President that is independent of the influences of the major parties, I can always make my decisions based on the best information and the best interests of our country, both today and in the future."
Pro: "Yes, but it should be a phased and constant improvement guideline. I believe an increase of 1 to 2 miles per gallon per year is not only achievable, but is also very fair to the industry. In the long run that also makes a very big difference. If everyone knows what the requirement is going to be and it is firm, it will be met. The problems with the standards just signed into law are twofold. First, it calls for a large increase by a date several years in the future so immediate benefits will be minimal. Second, when the deadline starts getting closer the auto manufacturers will start to whine that it can't be met and, if past history is any indication, get an extension on implementing the improved fuel efficiency standards."
Con: "No. While I believe we may be partially responsible for global climate change, I also believe that normal climate changes and the extraordinary solar flare activity of the last few years have something to do with it as well. I do, however, welcome the debate as it points out that we are severely lacking any long-term energy planning as a country and on a worldwide basis."
Con: "Although the Federal Government has instituted several nationwide gun laws, I believe that further gun control or ownership issues are more properly addressed on the state and local level. It is up to the individual states to establish the laws that they feel are fair and necessary concerning the ownership and use of guns. As an outdoorsman, hunter and recreational shooter, I do not see guns as inherently evil and believe that further action by the Federal Government to restrict gun ownership is not necessary."
Con: "No, because I don't believe that anyone has a 'Right' to health care. I do believe, however, that the system has to be thoroughly reviewed to determine what changes can and should be made so that all Americans have the ability to obtain basic, affordable health care in this country."
Pro: "An American should be allowed to purchase their prescription drugs from other countries. If someone wishes to take the chance that the drugs they are purchasing may not be as pure or even the same as the drugs they would purchase in this country it is their right as an adult to take that risk."
Con: "Not in the numbers we have been forced to try and assimilate into our economy over the last several years. Yes, most of them are productive people who hold down jobs and some even pay taxes, but they take far more out of the economy through burdens on our schools, hospitals and other governmental agencies and programs on an annual basis than they contribute."
Pro: "Yes and no. They should receive some of the rights, but very few of the benefits. For example, they should receive the same rights as everyone else in a criminal action, but they should not receive the benefits of welfare or other social programs."
Pro: "Although the effectiveness of the fence is open to debate, the fact that Congress and the President agreed that it should be built and signed laws to that effect, means it should be constructed. Promises to the electorate should always be kept, especially those that are made to get oneself elected or reelected. However, the only true way to stop the current onslaught of illegal aliens into this country is to take away the incentive for them to come here. To do that, we need to rigorously enforce the laws we have in place to make the hiring of illegal aliens too costly and dangerous for employers. If there are no jobs available for illegal aliens then there will be little incentive for them to continue coming here in the huge numbers we have seen in recent years."
Con: "No, until we have proof that the Iranians are loading nuclear weapons on planes, boats or missiles we should not use military force against Iran to make them dismantle their nuclear program. As much as certain people may not like it, Iran has the right to develop nuclear energy programs for their country. It may even be the right thing for them to do given everyone's concern about greenhouse gasses and global warming. Just because they have lots of oil, doesn't mean they have to burn it to create electricity. Maybe the smart thing for all of us to do is develop as much nuclear power as possible to lessen the world's dependence on oil."
Pro: "Yes, the Iraq war was started based on faulty intelligence and should never have occurred. Although Sadam deserved to die for the things he had allowed to occur and ordered to occur in his country, Iraq was not a direct threat to our country and should not have been invaded."
Con: "No, I believe that the war in Iraq may, in the long run have the opposite effect in that it has made us even more of a target. In addition, I also believe that because of the war in Iraq not as many people are willing to go out of their way to help us as there were prior to the war in Iraq. After 9/11 and through our invasion of Afghanistan, we had tremendous world support. That support was dealt a severe blow by our going into Iraq and it will take a long time for us to build it back up again."
Con: "No, although we went into the war based on some very fraudulent and misleading intelligence data and analysis, to set a timetable now would be a tremendous setback for all the things that have been accomplished and continue to be accomplished every day. It is up to the Iraqi people to ask us to leave. When that happens, or our commanders on the ground tell us that we should get out because further positive gains are not possible, then we should leave as soon as practical at that point."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Military aid, yes; economic aid, no. Israel has an extremely strong and vibrant economy and should be able to stand on their own economically without economic aid from us. The economic aid being provided to Israel can be put too much better uses in other parts of the world where it is more desperately needed."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "The only group that should be allowed into any Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on behalf of the Palestinians should be the recognized governing body of the Palestinian areas."
Pro: "Yes, as long as they fully recognize Israel's right to exist and they cease their constant attempts to kill Israelis and drive the Israelis from Israel. No country should be allowed to come into existence that has as one of its major underpinnings the desire to see another country destroyed."
Pro: "Since a political candidate basically runs on the premise that we should trust that person to follow through on what they promise to do if elected, I believe that an affair should usually disqualify a candidate for most public offices. If they cannot be trusted in their personal life, what makes you believe they can be trusted with promises made to people they don't even know."
Pro: "Yes, medical marijuana as a medical option should be made available to anyone to whom it will help. It is somewhat ridiculous that people with life-threatening or life-ending diseases are often forced into criminal activities in order to ease the pain of their daily suffering."
Pro: "Yes, it absolutely ridiculous that the Federal Government is involved in meddling in the lives of people with fatal and often very painful diseases who are only following the advice of their doctors and the rules of the states in which they live. That is why there is supposed to be a separation of powers between the state and Federal governments and a prime example of why the Federal government needs to be reined in."
Con: "No, it is not necessary at this time. The only time I believe a draft would be necessary would be in the case of a large scale, world war type of conflict."
Pro: "Yes, people are people and should be allowed equal, but not preferential, treatment under all laws and in all circumstances. However, there should never be a category of gay rights. Everyone should just have the same rights."
Pro: "Yes, it is the only way we will ever get back to balanced budgets and will make the process of developing bills more rational by taking out all the added extras that are piled on these days. Almost all bills passed these days are padded with dozens of extra items that have no business being on the bills they are being added onto. If the President had line item veto power, these optional extras would have to be submitted as independent bills and shown for what they truly are - pork and payoffs to special interest groups - making them a lot less likely to get passed and making our legislative process a great deal more rational."
Pro: "I believe that faith-based groups should have the same rights to apply for federal funds as any other organization as long as those funds are to be used for purely non-sectarian purposes. Sometimes faith based groups are in the best position to help out in a given set of circumstances and they should not be immediately discounted just because they are affiliated with a certain religion."
Con: "No, a candidate should be judged on his ideas and perceived ability to get the job done and nothing else. A candidate's religion or race shouldn't matter when it comes time to vote in any election."
Not Clearly Pro or Con: "Not completely, but I am for partial Social Security savings accounts for individuals.
Social Security was established as a safety net for people at a time when people were not expected to live much past the age when Social Security became effective. Fortunately for us, but unfortunately for the program, people are living much longer these days and are also able to work much longer. I believe that for Social Security to continue to be a viable program for future generations that the retirement age at which one may start to collect social security must continue to increase."
Con: "Given the recent advances in stem cell research using non-embryonic stem cells, I do not believe it is necessary at this time for the federal government to fund embryonic stem cell research. However, I do believe that the federal government should be a strong advocate for stem cell research as it holds tremendous promise for solving a lot of the medical problems that people must face every day."
Pro: "Yes, I believe the current levels of taxation are fair and equitable. However, I believe the tax code is far too complicated and twisted towards numerous special interests and should, therefore, be moved more towards a flat tax system of taxation."
Pro: "Yes. If a country allows criminals or terrorists within their borders to operate against another country and do nothing to stop these activities then the country under attack has every right to take care of the problem themselves."
Pro: "I believe that given our current illegal immigration problems that the time has arrived to review the process of allowing anyone born here to instantly become a citizen regardless of the citizenship of their parents."
Con: "Torture should not be an acceptable, legal part of our system in our war on terror or for any other purpose. It has been shown to be ineffective and sends the wrong message."
Pro: "Yes and I will go further to say that it should never have been opened. Criminals and prisoners of war should, almost exclusively, be kept in the country from which they belong or where they were captured."
President and Chief Financial Officer, Our Castle Homes
Personal Information:
Full Name: Frank Edward McEnulty
Marital Status: Married
Birthdate: 1956
Children: Two
Birthplace: Long Beach, CA
Religion: Catholic
Involvement:
President and Chief Financial Officer, Our Castle Homes
Chief Operations Officer, Tri Five Properties Management, 1989-1996
Former Chief Operating Officer, VP of Finance, and acquisition analyst for FPA Corporation, On-Site American Holdings, Angeles Corporation, and Wespac Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) I and II
Education:
MBA, Venture Management, University of Southern California, 1981
BS, Accounting/Finance, California State University, Long Beach, 1978
Affiliations and Memberships:
Potential nominee for the New American Independent Party
Explore Pros & Cons of Controversial Issues
