The Libertarian Party is the third largest and fastest growing political party in the U.S. The Libertarian party is dedicated to strictly limited government, a pure free market economy, private property rights, civil liberties, personal freedoms with personal responsibilities, and a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace, and free trade. Libertarians of South Central Kansas (LSOCK) are an affiliate of the Libertarian Party of Kansas (http://www.lpks.org/) We meet every Tuesday night (except holidays) from 5:30 to 7:00 pm at Cathy's Westway Cafe located at 1215 W. Pawnee (just west of Seneca Street) in Wichita, Kansas. All who support personal responsibility and individual liberty are invited to attend!
LPKS/LSOCK P.O. Box 2456 Wichita, Kansas 67201
1-800-335-1776
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Libertarian Party considers fighting tax increases
Tax increase this year substantially higher than past
10
Earl McIntosh, spokesman for the Libertarian Party of Topeka,
says the party is considering filing a series of petitions to fight increases on
property taxes.
The typical Topeka home saw its property tax bill climb by about $200 in the
past decade — nearly half of which will hit just next year.
This time, Topeka homeowners are fighting back, said Earl McIntosh, spokesman
for the Libertarian Party of Topeka. The party, he said Monday, is considering
filing a series of petitions to fight the increases.
“It’s easy for them to raise property taxes,” McIntosh said. “But we’ve got a
shrinking base of property owners, and they are paying more than their fair
share. It’s unfair and it’s unsustainable.”
A $100,000 home in Topeka will add $100 to its property taxes next year after
the city of Topeka, Shawnee County and the Metropolitan Topeka Airport Authority
voted this month to raise their mill levies by a collective 8.7 mills. The other
main four taxing entities in Topeka didn’t raise their taxes.
That is the single highest mill levy increase for the city’s main seven
taxing entities in the past 10 years, according to past county tax levy sheets.
Mill levies won’t be official until assessed valuations are finalized in
November.
In response to this year’s tax increase, members of the city’s Libertarian
party are gathering information to potentially petition the city’s and county’s
budget, along with a few other items aimed at limiting the taxing authorities’
abilities to impose taxes. The goal, McIntosh said, is to give the public more
of a voice in the budgeting process.
“It may not happen, but there’s a serious effort to look into it,” he
said.
Some elected officials seemed to support the effort.
“I am a fiscal conservative, and believe the more scrutiny of budgets and tax
increases by the public the better,” Commissioner Bob Archer said.
McIntosh’s Topeka councilwoman, Elaine Schwartz, said she is awaiting a
clarification from the Attorney General’s Office regarding petitions against
budgets. She commended McIntosh for his efforts.
“I am and always have been supportive of citizen’s input into the
legislative/governing process,” Schwartz said. “I’d also comment that while
being the only council member to consistently vote against spending and tax
increases, I will sign the petition if and when it comes into being.”
Councilman Chad Manspeaker said he is “a proponent of direct democracy” and
wished the group the best.
“The thing to keep in mind in such an endeavor, though, is that if
successful, the level of service and quality of life in our city would no longer
be in the hands of those the citizens have elected to represent them,” he
said.
Shawnee County elections commissioner Andrew Howell indicated at least three
statutes could come into play with the efforts, though which ones will depend on
if and how the group follows through. Until a petition if filed, he said, he
wouldn’t feel comfortable guessing how many signatures the party would need or
what the process would look like.
Topeka’s Libertarian Party also is looking into what it would take to file
three Topeka ordinances by petition, McIntosh said.
One would prevent the city council from raising property taxes, sales taxes
and franchise fees without a public vote.
The second would require a public vote on any mill levy increases from the
MTAA, the Topeka Metropolitan Transit Authority and the Topeka and Shawnee
County Public Library and, potentially, Washburn University.
Currently, the boards to these bodies are appointed by elected officials and
have authority to approve their own budgets and to set their own mill levies.
The transit service relies on the city of Topeka to set its mill levy cap.
“That’s taxation without representation,” McIntosh said, adding that the
party completely supports those services. “We believe it’s unconstitutional, and
we’re ready to challenge it.”
Archer also welcomed a review into the practice.
“I have always been a critic of unelected boards setting mill levies and
raising property taxes,” he said.
The third petition ordinance would make members of the city council
independent contractors rather than employees of the city, he said.
“There’s a major conflict of interest there,” McIntosh explained. “This way,
they would more represent the homeowners and the people of the city better.”
Topeka’s mill levy since 2003 increased by 19.6 percent. That means the
city’s mill levy has outpaced its assessed valuations by almost 4 percent,
according to tax levy data.
Shawnee County, meanwhile, has increased 11.95 percent — roughly 6.44 percent
lower than changes to the county’s assessed valuation.
Shawnee County and Topeka have increased their mill levies an average of
roughly 0.6 mills since 2002 — meaning next year’s increase of nearly 4 mills
each is several times their average.
Together, the next year’s increases are twice as high as any tax hike in the
past 12 years. This year was the second highest increase since 2002, at a
collective 3.941 mill jump.
Now is not the time to be raising taxes, McIntosh said. What elected
officials don’t consider, he continued, are the other factors pulling for
homeowners dollars, making these tax hikes more painful than ever before.
“Every day I talk with people who are homeowners and I can tell you people
are hurting and hurting bad,” McIntosh wrote in a presentation before the city
council. “Most people on fixed incomes can’t ever begin to keep up with all the
tax increases and price increases on essentials like food, water, heat and gas.
I’m telling you, homeowners can’t afford a penny more in taxes or expenses.
Please get the money somewhere else.”
RISING TAXES
Taxing entities in Topeka and Shawnee County have increased mill levy rates
by 17.58 mills over the last decade, amounting to a $202 tax increase for a
$100,000 home in Topeka.
Thanks to the brave and patriotic actions of whistleblower Edward Snowden,
Americans now know that their Fourth Amendment rights have been blown out of
the water; that the government has been routinely spying on millions of
Americans.
Your telephone calls, emails, text messages, chat sessions, and Skype
sessions are no longer private. The National Security Agency — the NSA — has
put virtually every American under surveillance. You're being watched,
listented to, and tracked just about everywhere.
And it's not just the NSA that is invading your privacy. Cameras, mounted on
toll booths and in cities across America, enable government officials to know
where you are and where you've been. Authorities can break into your home with
a no-knock "sneak and peak" court order from a secret judge. The IRS
and other government regulators can access your bank records without your
knowledge or consent. And the government has authorized thousands of agents to
look at your personal medical records. If Obamacare ever goes into effect, it
will get even worse. Read
the rest at LP.org!
Fox News covers
Libertarian Sarvis, Virginia candidate for governor
Rob Sarvis, LP Virginia Candidate for Governor
Rob Sarvis' governor campaign continues to gather momentum, with recent
coverage including home page of Fox News national web site.
Fox News reports:
"Sarvis is hoping to ride the country’s recent wave of Libertarian
enthusiasm long enough to at least shake up a race in which voters are showing
unfavorable opinions for Democratic nominee Terry McAuliffe and Republican
nominee Ken Cuccinelli."
"Chuck Moulton, the state party chairman, told the Huffington Post that
Sarvis’ background as an entrepreneur and lawyer impressed party leaders,
who...saw in him the 'opportunity to give voters a different choice.'” Read
full article, "Libertarian trying to shake up Va. governor's race gets
tough on top candidates."
Will record low
approval ratings for Democrats and Republicans mean more Libertarian votes? Republicans
and Democrats have a stranglehold on the U.S. political system, and the media
helps them maintain their power, said Libertarian Party director Carla Howell
in an
interview with PressTV last week. By supporting the Libertarian Party and
its candidates, voters can reject the the astronomical taxes, spending, debt,
and regulations that both Democrat and Republican politicians almost
consistently support. Read
the rest at LP.org!
Libertarian
Michael Brennan hopes to slash millions in proposed county spending
Michael Brennan, LP Michigan Candidate for Livingston County Commissioner
Michigan's Livingston County has a low crime rate and a small budget
surplus, but officials there want to spend $12 million on a county jail.
Libertarian Party candidate for county commissioner Michael Brennan hopes he
can help put a stop to these plans for runaway spending.
"This is after saying for a few years that we're short on money,"
Brennan said. "I can't see the need for spending $12 million."
Brennan acknowledged that so much prison space wouldn't be needed in the
first place if not for the sweeping trend of regulation, prohibition, and
criminalization sponsored by Big Government politicians. Although he wouldn't
have purview over changing those laws as a county commissioner, he does hope to
get other people thinking about these issues while in office.
"I think we could start the conversation," Brennan said. "We
can withhold some funds, and the townships are going to have to figure out what
they call crimes." Read
the rest at LP.org!
Libertarian
response to question about whether President Barack Obama’s vacation is overly
extravagant
President
Obama’s vacation on Martha’s Vineyard, which cost taxpayers an estimated
$250,000–$500,000, is chump change compared to what the federal government
spends every hour ($434,132,420.00) of every day
($10,419,178,082.00).
From statement made by Carla Howell, Director, National Libertarian
Party, to PressTV:
“When President Obama is at work, he raises taxes, raises government
spending to dangerous levels, and causes further unemployment in America. [He]
meddles in foreign affairs, causes unrest in foreign countries and expands the
military-industrial complex. He expands the welfare state, making more people
dependent on government and leaving fewer people able to earn money on their
own.
“Rarely does he do anything to help.
“This is why most libertarians are happy for him to be on vacation and hope
that he would stay on vacation for the rest of his presidential term.” Read
the rest at LP.org!
Please
donate today to the Libertarian Party today. Shrink government — expand
liberty.
Paid
for by the Libertarian National Committee
2600 Virginia Ave, N.W. Suite 200, Washington D.C. 20037
Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
America's Libertarian Moment
By Molly
Ball from The Atlantic Monthly Magazine
Libertarianism is on the march. From the rapid rise to prominence of
first-term Senator Rand Paul to the state-level movements to legalize gay
marriage and marijuana, the philosophy of fiscal conservatism, social
liberalism, and restrained foreign policy seems to be gaining currency in
American politics. But it's nothing new, of course. (New York Times
Magazine, 1971: "The New Right
Credo: Libertarianism.") A lonely band of libertarian thinkers have been
propounding this philosophy since the 1960s, when the late thinker Murray
Rothbard published his first book, Reason magazine was founded, and, in
1974, Rothbard teamed up with Charles Koch and Ed Crane to found the Cato
Institute, one of Washington's most influential think tanks. David Boaz, Cato's
executive vice president, has been with the organization since 1981, giving him
a good perch to put the current libertarian vogue in perspective. In an
interview this week, we talked about the political currents propelling
libertarianism into the political mainstream, the Supreme Court's libertarian
turn, whether Paul will be our next president, and much more. This is an edited
transcript of our conversation. Is there a libertarian moment happening in
America?
Libertarian ideas -- and I'm never using a capital L [i.e., referring to the
Libertarian Party] when I say that; in this case I don't even mean consciously
libertarian, so not just the people who read Reason magazine and Murray
Rothbard and call themselves libertarians -- libertarian ideas are very deeply
rooted in America. Skepticism about power and about government, individualism,
the idea that we're all equal under the law, free enterprise, getting ahead in
the world through your own hard work -- all of those ideas are very
fundamentally American. Obviously, from a libertarian point of view, America
nonetheless has done a whole lot of things, from slavery to Obamacare, that
offend some number of those libertarian values, but the core libertarian
attitude is still there. And a lot of times when the government suddenly surges
in size, scope, or power, those libertarian attitudes come back to the fore.
I think that's what you're seeing. I think you're seeing a growth of
self-conscious libertarianism. The end of the Bush years and the beginning of
the Obama years really lit a fire under the always-simmering small-government
attitudes in America. The TARP, the bailouts, the stimulus, Obamacare, all of
that sort of inspired the Tea Party. Meanwhile, you've simultaneously got
libertarian movements going on in regard to gay marriage and marijuana. And I'll
tell you something else that I think is always there. The national media were
convinced that we would be getting a gun-control bill this year, that surely the
Newtown shooting would overcome the general American belief in the Second
Amendment right to bear arms. And then they pushed on the string and
it didn't go anywhere. Support for gun control is lower today than it was 10
or 15 years ago. I think that's another sign of America's innate
libertarianism.
This year you have a whole series of scandals that at least call into
question the efficacy, competence, and trustworthiness of government. The IRS,
maybe the Benghazi
cover-up, and the revelations about surveillance. All of those things
together, I think, have lit a fire to the smoldering libertarianism of the
American electorate.
None of which necessarily means that there's a libertarian majority that will
sweep Rand Paul to the White House or anything like that. But there are a lot of
people who care a lot, and a lot more people who care some, about these things,
and a majority of Americans think our taxes are too high, a majority of
Americans think the federal government spends too much, a majority of Americans
think it was a mistake to get into Iraq. A bare majority of Americans now favor
gay marriage, a bare majority favor marijuana legalization, a huge majority
think there should be a requirement to balance the federal budget. So if you're
a presidential candidate you don't call yourself a libertarian and run on Murray
Rothbard's book, you run on those issues. And on those issues, you find a lot
that a majority agrees with. What is the significance of Rand Paul to this
discussion?
Rand Paul is clearly the most significant libertarian-leaning American
political figure in a long time. There are a couple of issues I disagree with
him on, but when you look at issues that cut across left-right boundaries, like
his interest in reduced spending, less regulation, reining in our adventurous
foreign policy, protecting America's rights against surveillance -- that's a
combination of issues that libertarians have waited a long time to find together
in one candidate. I think he can have a lot of appeal. A lot of libertarians,
including those who came out of the Ron Paul movement but also others, are very
interested in seeing how far his political ambitions might take him. How does libertarianism figure into the war of ideas that's going on
in the Republican Party? Is the GOP poised to embrace
libertarianism?
I think they're poised to debate it. Rand Paul is going to be in the middle
of the people debating the future of the Republican Party. Rand Paul has said he
doesn't call himself a libertarian; he calls himself a libertarian Republican,
small L-capital R, and he does sometimes say that the party needs to move in a
more libertarian direction to broaden its appeal to young people and independent
voters.
One of the things Ron Paul's campaign showed was that a lot of young people
who were not Republicans were interested in these ideas. But [as a Republican
politician] you either have to get those people into Republican primaries or you
have to get the nomination for that to do you any good. Rand Paul's supporters believe as soon as he starts to look like a
contender, the establishment is going to see him as a threat and try
to destroy him.
There are all sorts of Washington establishments who are going to want to
take down Rand Paul. The spending establishment is certainly not going to like
what he's talking about. The Republican political establishment doesn't
particularly want to change. And certainly the national security establishment
is extremely eager not to debate our policy of global interventionism. They have
always sought to rule out of bounds any challenge to it.
They tried it in the Republican primary in Kentucky [in 2010]. The neocons
organized one of their emergency committees to stop Rand Paul in the primary. I
think they will continue to do that. And yet some libertarians have started
to criticize Rand Paul for going squishy as he tries to appeal more to the
GOP mainstream.
If you want a pure libertarian to run for president, you've got the
Libertarian Party. If you think the Libertarian Party's candidates aren't pure
enough, you can write in Murray Rothbard. When we talk about a U.S. senator
running for president, you are talking about the real world of politics. Nobody
is going to be a doctrinaire Ayn Rand libertarian. Rand Paul has rounder edges
than his father. He has a number of other advantages over his father: He's not
77 years old; he's a not a House member, he's a senator; and he has rounder
edges in the way he presents libertarian ideas. There may even be issues on
which they actually disagree, though I'm not sure I can think of one. Well, Rand Paul says he would audit the Federal Reserve, not end it
as his father promised to do.
Does he, in his heart, believe in ending the Fed? I believe he does. But the
next president is not going to get rid of the Fed. If we can audit the Fed --
and, more important to me, we can rein in the incredible powers the Fed seized
in 2008 and put some governor in control of the creation of new money -- we will
have accomplished a lot. Rand Paul is also strongly against abortion rights, which many
libertarians disagree with. What is the libertarian position on
abortion?
I don't think there is a libertarian position on abortion. There was a study
done by a graduate student at UCLA that found that about two-thirds of people
you would identify as libertarian are pro-choice. From a philosophical
perspective, libertarians generally believe the appropriate role of government
is to protect life, liberty, and property. The question is, is forbidding
abortion a way of protecting life, or should it be viewed as a restriction of
liberty? There's a plausible libertarian case on both sides. People who are
consciously libertarian are more respectful of the other position on abortion,
in my experience, than most pro-lifers and pro-choicers. I do not think there is
an official position. The Supreme Court had a remarkably libertarian term, and Cato had a
very successful
year at the Court, isn't that right?
Yes, we filed briefs in 18 cases and were on the winning side in 15 of them.
[Cato was also the only organization to file briefs on the winning side of the
four highest-profile cases: affirmative action, voting rights, the Defense of
Marriage Act and Proposition 8.] That's maybe less a sign of the zeitgeist and more a sign that
Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's swing vote, is a bit of a
libertarian.
Of the 15 cases we won, Justice Kennedy was with us 14 times. If you look at
his record over his 25 years on the court, you could argue he's the most
libertarian member of the Court. He's made some egregious errors in that time.
He was wrong on the Kelo
case [in which the Court ruled that the state has the right to take private
property for private development]. However, on a lot of civil liberties,
personal freedom, and gay-rights issues, he's been on the liberal side, and on a
lot of business regulation, size of government, and federalism cases he's been
on the conservative side. And that means we often agree with him. There was a lot of whiplash among partisans over the big Court
decisions -- progressives anguished about voting rights one day and thrilled
about gay rights the next, and vice versa for conservatives. But from your point
of view, a libertarian point of view, there was a consistency to be
seen.
Yes, and not just the broad consistency of individual freedom versus the
power of government, but on the narrower issue of treating people equally under
the law. We would say that the issue of race in college admissions and the issue
of equal marriage rights in the DOMA case are both applications of equal
protection of the law. We actually had a similar experience 10 years ago, in
2003, when we were the only organization to have filed amicus briefs in support
of Lawrence in Lawrence v. Texas [the case that struck down sodomy
laws] and Jennifer Gratz in her lawsuit against the University of Michigan [for
its affirmative-action policy]. There were a lot of gay-rights and liberal
groups on our side in the Lawrence case, and a lot of conservatives on our side
with Jennifer Gratz. We felt that we were asking for equal freedom under law for
both Gratz and Lawrence. Is this part of the attraction of young people to libertarianism --
that it seems to stand outside partisanship, in a pure, consistent
way?
I think that's true. I think having a consistent principle that organizes all
these issues was very helpful for Marxism, and I think it's also an attraction
of libertarianism. It may also be that on a gut level, there are a lot of people
who like not being a Democrat or a Republican. Millions of Americans -- 59
percent, according to one poll -- would tell you they are fiscally conservative
and socially liberal, and that's a real loose definition of libertarian. We
consider those people to be a large constituency that libertarians should be
able to access. Especially for young people, saying, "Nobody tells me what to
say, I'm not a partisan Democrat or Republican," is attractive. To see Ron Paul,
in the Republican primary debates, clearly challenging the things the rest of
the Republicans were saying, but also clearly not a Democrat.
You mention Marxism. Some would extend the parallel and say
libertarianism is another ideology that works in theory but not in
practice.
I'll tell you the difference. We've tried stunted and cramped versions of
libertarianism in the world, and we've tried versions of Marxism that were less
stunted and cramped because they had all the levers of power. I am willing to
match England, the United States, Canada, and Hong Kong, which are all
approximately libertarian societies, against the Soviet Union, China, and Cuba
any day.
In my view, the farther you go toward actual, existing libertarianism, the
closer you get to a society with prosperity, economic growth, social dynamism,
and social harmony. More and more countries in the world are moving toward
broadly libertarian principles. Freedom of religion, freedom of the press,
freedom of travel, freedom of movement, freedom of occupation. Sometimes we
forget how different these things are than what went before. Economic and
personal freedom, and the extension of the promise of the Declaration of
Independence to more and more people -- to black people, to women, to gay people
-- all of those things are trying libertarianism in real life, and I think it
works pretty well. Can someone like Rand Paul win a national election? Won't he get
painted as weak on national defense by his political opponents?
It's not clear that a strongly libertarian, noninterventionist program could
command a majority. But I think a mildly noninterventionist retrenchment, and
[proposing to] do a better job of protecting people's privacy, could be a viable
political alternative. I do think the reaction to the NSA spying and Americans'
weariness with the wars in the Mideast is changing that game. You say people want more freedom, but the counterargument is that
people really want the welfare state. They don't want Social Security and
Medicare taken away or cut. Doesn't that limit the political viability of
libertarianism?
Certainly people on Social Security and people who anticipate being on Social
Security are supportive of it. Isn't that everyone?
Well, I'm not sure people your age think of themselves as future Social
Security recipients. You might be thinking, "I want someone taking care of my
parents." But people want economic growth. They want low taxes. They also like
people to give them stuff. So part of the political argument is which side wins
those battles. It changes. Reagan did say we have to rein in spending and
government is the problem right now, and he won a big victory twice. It's also
true that he didn't really touch Social Security or Medicare. He tried to change Social Security, and he paid a big price for it
politically and changed his tune.
That's right. So those things are tough. For a libertarian policy wonk, that
is a very frustrating thing. We actually have a plan that would work to put
Social Security on a sound footing and eventually liberate people from being
reliant on government, and we couldn't even get a hearing in Congress for it.
And Social Security is so much easier a topic than Medicare. You mean in policy terms it's an easier fix, not that it's easier to
attack politically.
Right, it's a much easier problem to solve. With Medicare, the unfunded
liabilities are far greater, transforming it into a privately funded system of
accounts is much more difficult. So absolutely the entitlement state is a huge
challenge for libertarians in any modern welfare state. But it's also true that
people don't like paying what it takes to pay for these programs in Europe, and
it's getting to be that way here.
The political battle is to get people to recognize that the cost in taxes and
lost economic growth is more than they are willing to pay for an expanded
welfare state. The current welfare state is a tougher argument. In Europe, they
are running into walls. They're going to have to do something, and some of them
have. Sweden has significantly reined in their welfare state. They figured out
that they can't afford it. Are there other libertarian-leaning politicians you're interested in
besides Rand Paul?
One of the problems for libertarians is they aren't much interested in
politics. The three most libertarian governors of past decade -- the brilliant
lawyer William Weld, the true citizen-politician Gary
Johnson, and the eccentric entertainer Jesse
Ventura -- all walked away from politics. In the House you have Justin Amash
[of Michigan] and Thomas Massie [of Kentucky] -- I once did a study that
determined that Kentucky was the least libertarian state in the country by
several criteria. Then they elected Rand Paul and Thomas Massie, so maybe I have
to reconsider.
There are a few other members of Congress who say they are inspired by Ron
Paul. Then there are people on the conservative side like [Pennsylvania Senator]
Pat Toomey, who is a strong fiscal conservative, even though he would probably
vote wrongly in my view on things like gay marriage and the Iraq war. Jeff Flake
is a very good fiscal conservative. Mike Lee has interesting ideas on the
Constitution and the role of the federal government.
I keep hearing about libertarian Democrats out West, like [Senator Jon]
Tester and [former Governor Brian] Schweitzer in Montana -- they're good on
privacy issues and gun rights. [Oregon Senator] Ron Wyden is doing a great job
on privacy even though I disagree with him about other things. [Texas Rep.] Beto
O'Rourke spoke at a conference of ours on drug policy in Latin America. I assume
on other issues he's a standard big-government Democrat, but he does want to
change the drug war. [Colorado Rep.] Jared Polis is a guy who I think is very
interested in personal freedom and civil liberties issues. Is Ted Cruz a libertarian?
No, Ted Cruz is a two-fisted Goldwater conservative. He's very strong on
national sovereignty issues in a way libertarians tend not to be, aggressively
so. He defended the Ten Commandments on the grounds of the Texas state Capitol,
which to me smacks of entangling government and religion. He is very strongly
against gay marriage. I am glad to see him standing up against Obamacare and
showing up on filibuster night to spell Rand Paul for a little while. He's a
smart guy. But I wouldn't call him a libertarian.
What should a libertarian candidate be running on? I would say fiscal
conservatism and social tolerance. Get the government out of people's lives. Why
do you care who marries someone else? But that's one thing that Rand Paul can't
run on in a Republican primary. He's not in favor of marriage equality. He says he would leave it up to the states to define
marriage.
That was a defensively softer-edges libertarian position until the Supreme
Court cases. Six years ago, that was a libertarian position because it meant you
were not in favor of a federal amendment [banning gay marriage nationally].
These days, it's pretty clear there's not going to be a federal amendment
banning marriage equality. What there may be is a Supreme Court decision
striking down marriage bans [in the states] on equal protection grounds. So Rand
Paul is still behind the curve on that issue. He's where President Obama was
about a year ago, so it's not like he's stuck in the 1950s. And the social conservatives see his position as opening the door to
gay marriage in the states.
From their point of view, they're still pushing for a federal marriage
amendment, but that's not going to happen. And didn't Rand Paul do a radio
interview after the Supreme Court decision where he talked about people
marrying dogs? [Ed. note: Paul later
said he had been joking.] He's trying to do a balancing act. He doesn't
think you can win the Republican presidential nomination without the religious
right, or at least not with them united against him, You don't have to get all
of them. And he probably believes, along with Karl Rove, that you can't put
together a 51 percent Republican majority without making sure Christian
conservatives show up and vote. What about the many religious voters there are in America? What does
libertarianism have to say to them?
If somebody's Catholic values inform what they believe, on welfare or
marriage or whatever, that's their business. They can say in public, "God says
we should take care of our neighbors" -- that's fine, that's legitimate. What's
not legitimate to me, and goes against the American Constitution, the American
tradition, is to entangle government policy with religion. We don't have an
established church. We don't have a religious test for public office. That's why
I am against things like school prayer -- that is an establishment of religion.
And if your best arguments for banning gay marriage are, in fact, religious,
then I think you can expect a limited reception in the courts, because the
courts want to know what does the Constitution say. They're not going to care
what your religion says. You're rather dismissive of the Libertarian Party. Why is
that?
It appears that Americans are not much interested in third parties,
especially third parties not led by existing political figures or celebrities.
Ross Perot was a celebrity and a billionaire. George Wallace was an existing
political figure with a regional base. [1980 independent presidential candidate]
John Anderson was kind of an interesting one, but still, he got 7 percent of the
vote. That's not exactly what you'd call successful. And none of them created
anything lasting, they were just individuals.
What's next?
I believe that that libertarian policies work, and that over long periods of
time we figure out what works. A whole lot of things we have tried -- actual
socialism, established churches, rigid class distinctions, racial distinctions,
even 90 percent income tax rates -- have fallen by the wayside. A lot of really
bad, unlibertarian policies have fallen by the wayside, and I think we will
broadly, gradually move in a more libertarian direction over the next 100
years.
Over the next five or 10 years, I don't know. There could always be another
9/11, another financial crisis. Looking at what the Fed's doing, I can't believe
there won't be inflation that won't significantly affect our politics, but
that's not showing up yet, at least in consumer prices.
My guess is that Rand Paul will make a serious bid for the Republican
nomination. If had to bet on Rand Paul versus the field, I'd take the field.
After that, I don't know. There will be more libertarian-leaning politicians in
Congress, but we're a long way from being a caucus at this point. What's more
important is what do the Republicans and Democrats who actually get elected want
to do. I hope they will recognize that the country wants to move in a more
tolerant direction on marriage and marijuana, and that we are overextended
financially and need to restrain spending and the entitlement state.
This article available online at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/americas-libertarian-moment/278785/
Based on a book by Matthew Spalding,
of The Heritage Foundation
The Fire
of Opportunity: Private Property and the Spirit of Enterprise
The previous sessions covered the roots of American society.
These roots begin to flourish in this session where the focus is incredible
opportunity that exists when people are treated equally. The virtue of private
property is the individual security which gives people pride and dignity in
their self-worth. A society that bases itself in private property is a society
that creates the atmosphere of unbounded prosperity. These roots,
properly understood, grew into the garden of enterprise, industry,
and a commerical republic beyond compare in World History. Our job now to
ensure we understand them.
Suggested
Reading: Chapter 4 The book has a website with a great intro video
The
Kansas Chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP-KS) is committed to advancing
every Kansan's right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP-KS is an
organization of grassroots citizen leaders who engage in spreading the message
of fiscally responsible government, free market ideals and regulatory restraint
to policymakers on the local and state levels.
Monday, August 12, 2013
FFF Webinar:
"The Myth of Market Failure"
DATE: August 14, 2013 –Wednesday
PLACE: World Wide Web
TIME:7:00 pm eastern
ADMISSION: FREE
SPEAKER: Sheldon Richman
FFF vice
president and editor Sheldon
Richman will host a free, interactive online webinar entitled “The Myth of
Market Failure.” This will be an interactive experience with Sheldon and
will be limited to 24 participants.
The webinar
will be held Wednesday, August 14, 2013 from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m. eastern.
Participants will need a computer with a video camera as well as headphones
with an integrated microphone. Computer speakers are not permitted as they
cause feedback problems during the broadcast.
Participation
will be on a first-come, first-served basis. To make a reservation for the
webinar, please email Bart Frazier at bfrazier@fff.org
with your name, email address, and telephone number. Participants will be
notified before the event with instructions.
The
Kansas Chapter of Americans for Prosperity (AFP-KS) is committed to advancing
every Kansan's right to economic freedom and opportunity. AFP-KS is an
organization of grassroots citizen leaders who engage in spreading the message
of fiscally responsible government, free market ideals and regulatory restraint
to policymakers on the local and state levels.
Libertarians Of South Central Kansas (LSOCK) meet for Supper and discussion
every Tuesday at Mike's Steakhouse located at 2131 S. Broadway in Wichita,
Kansas at 5:30 PM. If we have official business to conduct or a featured guest
speaker, that will begin at 6:00 PM. All who support personal responsibility
and individual liberty are invited to attend.
To receive the LSOCK NEWS and LSOCK
NEWS Alerts! via email please contact Steven Rosile at sarasile@att.net or 316 618-1339
Contact the Kansas
Libertarian Party or LSOCK at:
LPKS / LSOCK
P.O. Box 2456 Wichita, Kansas
67201
Ph. (800) 335-1776
On the Web please go to www.lpks.org
or to the LSOCK Blog at:
Once again, it is time to prepare for
the Kansas State Fair . We need volunteers to staff the LPKS Outreach Booth,
aka the Politically Homeless Booth, this coming September.
We will again be located in the
Meadowlark Building, which is in the far southwest corner of the Fairgrounds.
The LPKS Booth will be on north wall, east end, just across from the
Kansas Secretary of State's booth.
Tickets to get into the Fair will be
provided for our volunteers and can be picked up at the Exhibitors Kiosk,
across from Gate 1, at 20th Street and Poplar.
The best place to enter the
Fairgrounds is Gate 2, which is just west of Gate 1, the Meadowlark Building is
directly north of Gate 2. On street parking is available near 20th Street and
Main and t is a short walk to Gate 2 from there.
Our booth must have at least one
(preferably two or more) person(s) manning the booth from 9:00 AM to 9:00 PM
every day from September 6 through the 15.
That is Friday the 6th to
Sunday the 15th.
I will be doing the scheduling for
this event again this year. The day is split into morning (9 AM to 3 PM) and
evening (3 PM to 9 PM) shifts but I can schedule you for anytime through the
day that you may have available to volunteer.
The LPKS does outreach booths at a
variety of festivals around the state but the Kansas State Fair allows us to
contact a wide cross section of Kansans from all over the entire state at this
one event.
If you want to assist us please
contact me, Steven Rosile, at sarasile@att.net
, or call me at 316 618-1339.
Thank you.
Steven
A.Rosile
4th
District Coordinator
LP
of
Kansas
Monday, August 5, 2013
Posted on Sun, Aug. 04, 2013
Nation has arrived at a new ‘libertarian moment,’ experts
say
By DAVE HELLING and STEVE
KRASKE The Kansas City Star
For half a century, the micro-government movement known as libertarianism has
lapped at the beach of American politics.
Sometimes, the tide rolls slowly; other times, it’s a bigger wave.
This summer, the surf is up.
From issues such as same-sex marriage and legal marijuana to restrictions on
government spying and U.S. intervention in foreign affairs, the nation is
engaged in a new “libertarian moment,” politicians and political scientists
say.
“The libertarian mindset — just leave me alone, get government out of my way,
government shouldn’t tell me what I can or cannot do — that is definitely a
larger and more active group than I’ve ever seen before,” said Missouri Sen.
Brad Lager, a Republican from Savannah.
Brink Lindsey, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, sees the
same phenomenon.
“The libertarian impulse is especially prominent right now, and getting
attention,” he said.
That impulse isn’t aimed at dramatically increasing support for the existing
Libertarian political party. That’s been stuck in the low single digits for
decades and is likely to stay there, observers said.
It’s also likely to have little impact in the Democratic Party, which shares
libertarians’ enthusiasm for civil liberties, but little else.
Instead, “small-l” libertarians have turned their attention to the Republican
Party, where a fierce battle for message control is underway.
Consider:
• Kentucky GOP Sen. Rand Paul, a leading libertarian voice, recently engaged
in a nasty public battle with New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie over government
surveillance policy. Paul wants more limits on secret surveillance; Christie,
also a Republican, does not.
• Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, libertarian Republicans,
threatened to shut down the federal government over funding for the Affordable
Care Act.
• In July, Rep. Tim Huelskamp of Kansas voted against a new farm bill,
earning applause from libertarian groups but frowns from the House GOP
leadership.
• Huelskamp recently joined with Rep. Emanuel Cleaver and other liberal
Democrats to support new libertarian restrictions on government eavesdropping.
• Libertarian Republicans in statehouses across the country this spring
approved new expansions of gun rights, a popular libertarian goal.
• Lawmakers in Kansas and Missouri, worried about libertarian privacy
concerns, considered bills this spring limiting drone aircraft.
In these cases and others, GOP libertarians fought mainstream, business- and
compromise-oriented Republicans in an effort to promote their views.
“It’s animosity towards government,” said Jim Staab, a University of Central
Missouri political science professor.
Libertarian movements aren’t new, of course. In the 1970s and again in the
1990s, many small-government conservatives drifted toward the libertarian
approach whenever they believed GOP positions had drifted too far to the
middle.
But the current libertarian moment may be getting a unique boost from younger
politicians and voters. They’re blending socially tolerant views on same-sex
marriage and drug use, experts said, with the anti-authoritarian ethos of the
online generation to embrace a libertarian worldview.
“They came of age in a very different world than their parents,” said
longtime GOP consultant Jeff Roe, who called libertarians a “significant” force
in the Republican Party.
“Fifteen years ago, (we were) a bunch of middle-aged white guys debating
philosophy,” said Al Terwelp, chair of the Kansas Libertarian Party. “That has
significantly changed ... there are lots and lots of young people.”
Libertarians may soon face a similar choice between ideological purity and a
message aimed at a broader audience, some said.
“In the past, there have been libertarians who have said ‘you can’t be a
libertarian because you’re not libertarian enough,’” Terwelp said. “We have been
working on that ... (But) we’re not changing our principles.”
Broadening libertarianism to include traditionally conservative views on
social issues could draw more regular Republicans into the anti-government
effort. At the same time, classic libertarians might be lost.
Vicki Sciolaro, chair of the Kansas GOP’s 3rd District, wants the party to
unite around a single message instead of arguing over a libertarian vs.
traditional approach.
“It’s a combination,” she said. “We need to focus on working from the grass
roots up ... and let the people decide.”
