Get started: Type your information into the form below to compare candidates in key contested races and create your own ballot.

U.S. House, District 26

Choose two candidates from below to compare.
  • Candidate picture

    Mark Boler (L) Software Engineer

  • Michael Burgess (R)

Change Candidates

Social Media

Biographical Information

Length of residency in your district:

Occupation/main source of income:

Education (include all degrees):

Highlights of current civic involvement/accomplishment:

Highlights of past civic involvement/accomplishment:

Previous public offices sought or held:

How much funding have you raised for your campaign?

Who are your top three contributors?

Have you ever been arrested or involved in any criminal proceedings? If so, please explain:

Have you ever been involved in any civil lawsuits or declared personal or professional bankruptcy? If so, please explain:

What is an example of how you led a team or group toward achieving an important goal?

What political leader do you most admire and why?

Why are you running for this office?

Why should voters choose you over your opponent?

How would you rate the leadership of House Speaker John Boehner?

What changes, if any, would you favor to the U.S. tax code? How would you build a coalition to enact those reforms?

Medicare’s finances still face serious problems, and the reckoning date is getting closer. What should Congress do to solidify the system’s funding?

Beyond Medicare, what changes would you recommend as a way to deal with the federal debt? Please be specific about the programs you would like to cut, reform or eliminate.

What approach should the U.S. take toward Afghanistan going forward?

What foreign policy challenge do you see as the next big international issue? And how would you recommend the U.S. deal with it?

Should Congress take a piecemeal or comprehensive approach to overhauling immigration laws? What is your solution to address the flood of unaccompanied Central American minors who came across the border this summer?

Should the Affordable Care Act be repealed? If so, what would you put in its place? If not, how would you improve it?

Congress has tried but never succeeded in reforming the No Child Left Behind Act. What would you like Washington to do with this bipartisan law?

What role should the federal government play in promoting alternative sources of energy?

Do you favor regulations to control carbon emissions? If so, what kind of regulations? If not, what approach would you favor?

What role should the federal government play in promoting alternative sources of energy?

City/Town Oak Point
Campaign Phone Number (972) 896-0047
Fax Number I don't still use faxes
Email Address mark@markboler.com
I've lived in the 26th congressional district of Texas since 2007.
I'm a software engineer by trade.
I've been to college both as a student and an instructor.
I am currently and in the past been involved in the process of trying to get people to see what I believe to be the erosion of our liberties in this country. For me, if I can get a person to see what has happened in our country and try to get them to do something about it as well, then I've accomplished something.
I am currently and in the past been involved in the process of trying to get people to see what I believe to be the erosion of our liberties in this country. For me, if I can get a person to see what has happened in our country and try to get them to do something about it as well, then I've accomplished something.
I've run for the US House of Representatives for the 26th district of Texas in 2010 and in 2012 as well as running now.
I've been self funding everything in my campaign so far. I could use all of the help I can get.
You want to know my 3 top contributors, however, as I said, so far it's only been myself.
No.
No.
I ran my own business in the mid 2010s, and prior to that I was vice president of a software group in a major corporation.
Thomas Jefferson is the type of leader I admire most. He lived back in a time when the founder of the country stood up to tyranny and was an integral part of the forming of the country.
I believe that the country is headed down a path that is not conducive to allowing it's inhabitants the ability to pursue happiness and enjoy their lives.

The country takes far too much in taxes, and provides far too little in return. I want to return the country to when it was a powerhouse that had an economy that was the envy of the world, where everyone could find an occupation easily whether it was working for themselves or creating their own endeavors. Where the fruits of their labors aren't stolen at a rate that discourages them from even trying. Where they can raise a family or pursue their dreams without fear or worry that they won't have enough.
My opponent regularly votes to redistribute wealth, encourages crony capitalism, sides with big businesses, and doesn't think the government should be as small and unobtrusive as I do. He might say he doesn't agree with this, but then will vote for things like the Halliburton loophole or the Food Safety act which has a nice sounding name, but does things like ensure that big businesses will have the upper hand and any smaller newcomers will have more barriers to entry and can't compete.
Very low. That's all I'll say.
I would abolish the IRS and make the federal government live on less than 10 percent of the amount it lives on now. If the federal government needs more money than that, they should come to the states to get it.

The corporate income tax in this country is far too high as well. It needs to be lowered so that it is nearly the lowest in the world. The federal government could be made to live on much less if it were to dissolve and abolish all of the agencies in which there is no constitutional authority.

I would try to phase out the IRS and slowly dissolve the agencies over time. If the agencies provide a function that the states feel they need, the states could all agree to fund the agencies voluntarily. Once they have to compete to survive then they will become a lot more efficient, or die. This is the way it should be because any agency that is not providing a value to the country should be abolished, not kept on sucking the money and life from everyone that pays taxes.

I would do this by communicating, talking, introducing legislation and encouraging support from the people.
There is no constitutional authority for the federal government to be involved in medicine. The right thing to do is to turn this all over to the states. It could be turned over slowly over time to minimize the impact, but to ask me what congress should do to solidify it's funding presupposes that medicare is good in the first place. To assume that we can just continue to let our kids pay for it is wrong.

Once the states have control of their medicine funding, the people will see what works and what doesn't. But in general, the role of the government is to protect the individual rights of the people - not provide a savings account for medicine, nor a method of redistribution of money for medical care. We need to be reducing the size of government, not figuring out how we can make failed, centrally planned bloated programs work better.
Eliminate all of the alphabet soup agencies that the constitution doesn't authorize. We should stop spending our money and our lives on defense of rich countries all over the world. Germany, Japan, Korea and others do not need this. They can afford to pay for their own defense.

End foreign aid. Again, we can't afford our own debt. Why should we go into debt giving away things to other countries. Keeping them on welfare of state keeps them dependent on us. Teach them to be self sufficient.

End the Department of Education. We spend 4 times more federally on education than we spent 12 years ago, and we have gotten no increase in education quality. Education is a state and local issue. Let the people keep their own money and chose how best to educate their own children.

End the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Federal housing projects are a disaster. Again, state, local and private systems fare better than federal meddling.

End the War on Drugs. This is a complete disaster and has failed to control any drug use. Instead it brings the same violence that alcohol prohibition brought us in the 1930s. This would save 41.4 billion dollars, and if taxed at the same rate as alcohol and tobacco would yield nearly $46.7 billion in tax revenues.

End Farm Subsidies. In a free market economy, the market will choose what and how much food to grow. Paying someone to not grow a certain type of food is wasteful, immoral and disrupts the free market. Why should we spend our tax money in order to increase the cost of food and distort the economy.

End the Department of Energy. This department was created in the 1970s in order to make the country less dependent on foreign oil. We all should know by now how well this has worked.

End the Union Wage Rule (Davis-Bacon). This would save our country 11.4 billion dollars. Reform Social Security, with younger people allowed to save and direct the investment of their own money.
Get out of it as fast as we can. We are spending far too much time and money and lives and we are getting nowhere.
Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says Congress shall have power to ... declare War.

We should never go to war without this declaration, and we should never go to war under the UN colors. When and if we declare war, we need to go in, fight to win the war, and come home.

Thomas Jefferson said that America should have peace, commerce and honest friendship with all other nations, yet entangling alliances with none. So we should never engage in nation-building.

I am advocating the free trade with all nations, not isolating ourselves. This is the same foreign policy that President Eisenhower advocated. He entered the 1952 presidential race to counter the isolationism of Sen Taft, and he was instrumental in ending the Korean conflict.

I would support the immediate end to the undeclared and sometimes unnanounced wars and drone strikes in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and anywhere else we are engaged in hostilities and bring the troops home as soon as it is safe to do so.

I would also close many of our overseas military bases and bring our troops home. We spend far too much money on defense for nations like Germany, Japan and South Korea. Those countries can now afford to spend their own money on their own defense. Instead, we run up the deficit on their defense while they save money and use it for socialized medicine.

These entangling alliances and foreign interventions incite what our own CIA calls blowback and puts our country and our soldiers lives at more risk.

The United States spends almost as much money on our military as the rest of the world does combined on military, including China. Our military is spread too thin all across the planet and only serves to feed the money machines of what President Eisenhower called the Military-Industrial Complex.

I want to remain the strongest military in the world, but I want to use it for defensive purposes. We do not need to be the policeman of the world and run around picking sides in every conflict we see. We wind up getting into such a tangled mess that sometimes the ones we arm are the ones we fight a few years later.
The United States is a land of opportunity. I want to keep it that way.

Our current immigration law makes it way to hard for people to come here. We can fix that. But currently we allow such a small amount of people in that we have "lotteries" to give away slots and those slots for the year are gone in hours. That's not good.

If a potential immigrant has an idea that just might turn out to be the next cure for AIDS, and he wants to move here, work, support himself and his family while he obtains funding for this idea, then I want him to have a path for legal immigration.

If another potential immigrant wants to come here and work to provide food and shelter for himself and his family, and not be a burden on the system, then I want him to be able to come here too.

However, if another person wants to come here to live off of the system and enjoy the free social programs we have, then I don't want that person to come here. And of course, if another person wants to come here to do harm to the people that live here, I also don't want them here.

If we, as a country did not provide so many free things to everyone, then we would not have a problem with immigration.

My long term solution would be to stop giving so many freebies away. I would phase out welfare, free health care, and replace them with non-profit based systems. I would phase out the current system of funding for education and let the states decide how to fund education. If we did that, we wouldn't have a need to so severely restrict immigration with regards to the people we want to have here.

We could immediately increase our numbers of persons we allow in with no economic harm to society. Until we get to the point where we don't give so much away, we must enforce our current immigration laws. It is not fair to those waiting to get in that we offer amnesty or an immediate path to permanent residency for those already here. We have created this unfair system, and it will take time to solve it.

I do not support the current guest worker visa system. The wages in those jobs affected by it are driven artificially low because of the restrictions on the visas. It works like this; a worker holding a visa isn't allowed to chose who he works for. The worker is bound to a particular employer. Normally, when the free market is working, a citizen or permanent resident worker is free to go work elsewhere if his employer isn't compensating him well enough. This causes the wages to settle at a fair market price. However, employers that employ workers holding visas that are bound to them know that the employee can't go elsewhere to get more compensation. The employer knows this and doesn't offer as much compensation. Consequently the worker will work for wages far below what is fair. And employees that can chose their employer will not work in that sector because the market is flooded with people holding visas who work for less. Corporations love these low-priced workers and will lobby congress to allow more and more worker visas. They claim there is a shortage of such workers and must be allowed to go outside the country in order to obtain such cheaper labor. They will claim this even when it has been demonstrated that the sector has a high unemployment rate. For that reason, I cannot support worker visas unless or until the restrictions on them are removed so that the free market can work to raise the wages to a fair value. I am not advocating protectionism here. I am only advocating that the free market be allowed to work unimpeded. If this happens, the American worker can compete on par with anyone else in the world.

As for the Central American minors that came here, they came because of a law that allowed minors to be given a hearing within a certain amount of time. That law was signed by President Bush 43 and not Obama. We passed that law and now we need to live with it until we repeal it or put in place a sensible immigration law.
Yes. It should be repealed. And then government should stay out of health care.

The insurance companies wanted a personal mandate and no public option. They got both.

The health care system we now have called Obamacare is the opposite of what needs to be done. The giant mega-monster insurance companies will grow larger. The smaller insurance companies will call it quits. The pharmaceutical giants will get bigger. No competition will occur and prices will go even higher. We will continue to pay increases of 10 to 20 percent per year for our health care. And now we will be forced to buy into this.

Despite Justice Robert's opinion, I believe that Obamacare's mandate is unconstitutional. Why should anyone be forced to subsidize the medical care of others? How many people would go to their neighbor and steal thousands of dollars to pay for their own medical needs? In a free society, people should be free to plan and pay for their own health care needs.

When Obamacare was debated, free-market advocates insisted that no matter what the president promised, the laws of economics cannot be repealed. Now that it has started to take effect, the laws of economics kick in. Insurers like Wellpoint, Cigna, Aetna, Humana and CoventryOne will stop writing policies for all children, because Obamacare requires that they insure already sick children for the same price as well children. In 2014, the same rule will apply for adults. You can guess what will happen then. Insurers will simply stop writing policies.

I will work to repeal Obamacare, and work to repeal any laws that prevent true free-market competition in the health care industry. I will also work to pass laws that punish those companies that commit fraud like insuring people, taking their money and then denying coverage. Not only is that immoral, but if an individual did something like that, they could be prosecuted for fraud. Why should individuals operating under the guise as a corporation be any different.
The federal government should not be involved in education at all.

I support ending the United States Department of Education.

It is a giant bureaucracy that wastes our money. The federal government spends billions of dollars that would be better left in the hands of the states or the people. The states and local governments know best what is right for their students, not some clerk in Washington. The No Child Left Behind law is a complete and total failure. It has failed to do anything it was established to do except make federal regulators more money. It should have been called No Child Has a Chance.

Furthermore, the Constitution does not authorize the Department of Education. It is yet another function that has been taken from the people and the states and placed in central control.

Government education worked far better in those years past when key decisions were made by parents (consumers), school boards, and the voters. With the federal government making the rules, all we have are schools that are teaching to the tests. Students are not challenged to actually learn and discover, but rather are forced to keep the national timetable. They can rebel by being disruptive or by simply dropping out. Local control, and experimentation on what works best (charter schools, vouchers, etc), will be the answer, and those won't happen if one massive, central authority is calling all the shots.

I support H.R. 1056, the Family Education Freedom Act, which would allow parents a tax credit of up to $5,000 per student per year for the cost of attendance at an elementary and/or secondary school. This includes private, parochial, religious, and home schools.

I also support H.R. 1059, which allows full-time elementary and secondary teachers a $3,000 yearly tax credit. And I would support H.R. 193, the Make College Affordable Act, which gives a full tax deduction for undergraduate college tuition, reasonable living expenses, and interest on student loans.

I also support making all public governmental positions into right-to-work positions. This means that a person in that position can chose to join a union if they desire, but it will not be a requirement of the position that they do so. If we make joining a union optional for being a teacher, and allow the pay to be commensurate with performance, we can vastly improve the quality of our education system.
The DOE should be abolished. The constitution provides no authority for the federal government to control or regulate energy other than to keep it regular.

The states can do all of the regulation. The federal government should play no role in picking and choosing winners or losers in this.

End Farm Subsidies and the corn ethanol requirements that gasoline contain it in some areas.
The EPA should be abolished. Each state can play a role in the emissions standards. It is already against the property rights of others to pollute the air, water, land, etc. Start using the courts to enforce those laws. Put people in jail that harm the property of others and you will see a stop put to most of the pollution. As it is, the EPA allows big corporations to pollute that are powerful enough to enact loopholes to the laws. Take the Halliburton loophole that my opponent voted to allow.
This question was already answered above.

The DOE should be abolished. The constitution provides no authority for the federal government to control or regulate energy other than to keep it regular.

The states can do all of the regulation. The federal government should play no role in picking and choosing winners or losers in this.

End Farm Subsidies and the corn ethanol requirements that gasoline contain it in some areas.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.
The Dallas Morning News did not receive a response from the candidate prior to the deadline.