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

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

Charles Koch relentless in pursuing his goals
BY ROY WENZL AND BILL WILSON
The Wichita Eagle Sunday Oct. 14, 2012 


Charles Koch’s wife says there is much endearingly quaint about the man so many now vilify.
He doesn’t know how to dress like a sophisticated grown-up, she said. She’s given him every haircut he’s had in their 44-year marriage.
Yet even Liz Koch’s stories about him show a drive and a relentlessness that sometimes scares her.
Until his knees gave out, Charles Koch took his wife skiing.
On the ski slopes, he made it clear that she should ski with him even though the slopes he took were two levels beyond her competence.
She spent 25 years flying down mountains, staring at the back of his head, feeling terrified.
“You want to be a part of something, be a part of it,” he told her. “If you don’t want to, that’s fine.”
“He pushes and he pushes and he pushes,” Liz Koch said. “But …with 20/20 hindsight, it was all good for me, I’m still alive, I never broke a limb.
“But man, I hated it.”
And she’s suffered for some of his decisions that have demonized Charles and David Koch in American popular culture.
Forbes reported in June that a proposed smartphone app would help people find Koch products, so they could boycott them.
David Letterman has lampooned them; so has Jon Stewart on Comedy Central. The Kochs are villains in HBO’s “The Newsroom” and in the movie, “The Campaign.” Cable news mentions the Kochs almost nightly, implying that they are greedy billionaires trying to buy an election.
“I’m so hopeful that there will be something, SOMETHING in the world out there besides ‘Evil Koch Brothers,’ ” Liz Koch said. “Jesus H., I’m sick of it.”
The family now lives night and day with bodyguards.
“We get a lot of death threats,” said Charles Koch, 76. “We get threats to fire-bomb our facilities. We get attacks by ‘Anonymous,’ trying to break in, destroy our communications, computer systems – cyberattacks.”
David Koch, 72, who lives in New York, told his three children, ages 6 to 14, that their bodyguards are like nannies, hired to help the family.
What drives Charles Koch most, Liz Koch said, is a conviction that free markets are the only way to create prosperity. Even those who live in poverty, he believes, have more money and more opportunities for jobs if they live in a free-market economy rather than one controlled by dictators or socialists intent on redistributing wealth.
“He is a family man, he’s a human being, he’s kind and he’s generous, and I just don’t know where this picture (comes from) of this person who’s greedy,” Liz Koch said. “Do you honestly believe that he works for money?”
What’s ironic about accusations, Liz said, is that both Koch brothers have given millions to charities. Charles and David Koch, their foundations and companies, have given about $1 billion in the past 12 years, more than $46 million to charities in Kansas.
One other significant irony about her husband, Liz Koch said, is that even his political allies don’t know or understand how wonderfully independent-minded he is. Many conservatives have adopted Charles Koch’s ideas, uttering his pet phrases about liberty and economic freedom and cronyism and advocating for low taxes, little regulation and a government kept as small as possible. But he also says things many conservatives would never dare say: Cut subsidies. Cut defense spending substantially. He also never says anything about religion, abortion, immigration or gun rights. And while political conservatives paint themselves as advocates for business, Charles Koch has accused corporate CEOs of cowardice for not speaking out for economic freedom.
Friends and family
Wichita Realtor Nestor Weigand said the fight has taken a toll on his friend. Charles Koch is accused of politicking to help Koch Industries make more money, but Weigand said he would make more money with silence. “He could just relax, and sit back and run his empire.”
When both Liz Koch and Weigand first met him in the early 1960s, Charles was a skinny young guy who read about economics night and day, and spoke about helping the world. Now he’s a skinny older guy running a company with more than $115 billion a year in revenue. And he is sure now, not only that he can help people, but that he’d better do it big, and do it soon.
“He really believes that if good business people do not get involved as he is, that they won’t have a business economy much longer,” Weigand said.
President Obama and Charles Koch’s other enemies have underestimated what Charles has accomplished politically, Weigand said. His success in winning allies, he said, comes not from his spending but from the frustration business people feel about government, not only from taxation but from irrelevant and deadening regulations.
And it’s not only federal regulations, Weigand said, but state, municipal and county regulations of all kinds. Every business person he’s ever known, Weigand said, can tell nightmare stories about paperwork, delays and unconcerned inspectors “who make you do unnecessary things, whether they are practical or irrelevant doesn’t seem to matter. If there were more business people among Democrats, perhaps they’d better understand why many people regard Charles as heroic.”
Going all out
Friends and family say he’s attentive and unfailingly nice. But something happens when Charles Koch gets into a competition. His friends say that when he plays, he plays hard.
In a game of squash years ago, Charles injured Weigand with a hard-hit ricochet shot to the head. “Charles wanted to take me to the hospital,” Weigand said. Weigand said it was his own fault for not playing alertly.
In the late 1970s, schoolteacher and later Eagle columnist Bonnie Bing played a game of doubles tennis with Liz, Charles and another friend. Charles Koch rushed the net and smashed an overhead shot, accidentally hitting Bing in the mouth. Her lip swelled so big, Bing said, that she could see it growing under her nose.
“What the f--- are you doing?” Liz screamed. “This is NOT f------ WIMBLEDON!”
Thirty years later, he still apologizes. But as he does with everything, he hit that shot to win.
Losing candidates say he plays politics like that.
Dan Glickman was a Democratic member of Congress from Wichita until 1994, when he says the Kochs opposed him for supporting a BTU tax on energy. He lost to Todd Tiahrt.
“I was on the receiving end of their campaign decisions,” Glickman said. “I viewed it as…I was on their target list.
“I had grown up in Wichita, and Charles and his brothers grew up there; I knew Charles, and knew David, and I had met Bill. We would go to Colorado, to Aspen, and I’d meet them. And we all got along fine. We have a lot of mutual friends, actually. So I knew it wasn’t personal. I never viewed it as personal. But I had voted for an energy tax, and they don’t like energy taxes. So they opposed me, which was their right. And I lost the election.”
Two years later, in 1996, when an ex-governor’s daughter-in-law named Jill Docking ran against Sam Brownback for the U.S. Senate, money got dumped into ads supporting Brownback.
Docking had known and liked Charles and Liz Koch most of her life; She had played tennis with Liz. But she and her family will never forget what happened in that campaign. An outside group, Triad Management Services, tried to influence the elections without disclosing its donors. She lost.
Her husband, Tom, remembers counting six or seven television ads in one evening attacking her, one of them with “dark, shadowy images, and dark voices” saying that Jill “is not who she says she is.” Her full name appeared on the TV screen, including her Jewish maiden name: Jill Sadowsky Docking from Springfield, Mass.
“The implication was that she was an East Coast Jew,” Tom Docking said.
People told him robo callers were telling voters that Jill and Tom Docking were raising their children not as Christians but as “heathens.”
“You kind of laugh at the time,” he said “But the ads were very effective.”
Mark Holden, Koch Industries’ senior vice president and general counsel, said the company donated $1,000 for one to two years to Triad to help elect candidates who supported free-market ideas.
“We were understanding that it would be used for legitimate purposes, proper purposes under the law,” he said.
But Democrats on the Senate Governmental Affairs committee found “circumstantial evidence” that a trust fund supported by the Kochs gave $1 million to Triad to run attack ads to influence the outcome of 29 congressional races, four of them in Kansas.
“While the Senate Democrats and others claimed in 1998 that there was ‘circumstantial evidence’ supporting their allegations, I’ve never seen any such evidence,” Holden said.
Triad spent $420,000 to elect Brownback and $131,000 to re-elect Todd Tiahrt. At the time, federal election law banned direct corporate contributions to candidates and held that voters had a right to know who was funding campaigns.
Sixteen years later, Docking says, she admires the Kochs, and says Kansans owe Charles and Liz a debt of gratitude for the millions they’ve given to charity. But that political campaign is hard to forget.
“It was hard for me personally, because I am a terrible politician in that way,” Jill Docking said. “It was such a huge force against me that I couldn’t help but take it personally….the same way that they take it personally, right? It’s painful, and we all live in a small town.”
Traditions
Charles Koch says Americans are drifting dangerously away from traditions of honesty, independence and personal responsibility.
He learned after many years to hire for values rather than talent, he said.
“A lot of companies, and we’ve been guilty of this in the past, want to hire the smartest person, the most talented person. Well, the worst thing we can do, as we found, is hire a very talented person with poor values. If we’re going to hire somebody with poor values, we want somebody who’s not very smart. ’Cause he or she will do less damage.”
People sometimes ask why he stays in Kansas – there are no beaches or mountains, and the wind, insects and temperatures are ruthless. But he says it’s not just that he loves Wichita – it’s a business decision.
“We’ve done pretty well here,” he said. “And companies that have moved (away from Wichita) have missed this. You think, ‘Okay we few smart people at the top ... We have all this knowledge, and we’re going to move, and let’s say we lose half the people. No big deal. We’ll replace them.’ And then they find that their computer systems don’t work, their accounting system is a mess, the back office is screwed up. Why? Because people have tacit knowledge. They can’t even communicate all the things they know, how to make the system work. And they’ve learned to work together in a way that makes an organization highly effective, highly efficient, highly productive. And you lose that tacit knowledge, and lose that culture, and it isn’t going to work the same way.”
He said he has no plans to move the company out of Wichita, but can’t say what will happen after he is gone.
He also prefers hiring people from Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas, because he says they are honest and have a strong work ethic.
“A lot of them grow up in a rural area, where they’re out there having to work, and there are no fantasies about who is producing value and who isn’t,” Charles said. “If a cow dies because you didn’t feed her, you get a lesson. Somebody’s got to feed the cow.”
Charles Koch believes so devoutly in pursuing talents with passion and bearing the costs of our behavior that when his son, Chase, half-heartedly played a tennis match years ago, he sent the 13-year-old to work in a cattle feedlot in western Kansas. Liz said that the feedlot was so big that Chase could smell it from 20 miles away.
Charles Koch in person
Inside the massive black-glass building where Koch Industries manages 60,000 employees in 60 countries, Charles Koch steps to his office door and smiles in greeting.
He’s got a soft voice and a full head of white hair, and because he rubs his head excitedly when talking, he’s got a tuft sticking up from the back of his head. He is 6 feet 3, lean from disciplined diet and what Liz says is a ruthless, nearly daily 90-minute workout – 30 minutes of Pilates, 30 of aerobics, 30 of weight lifting.
Surgeons have replaced both knees and his right shoulder; his joints took a pounding from decades of athletics, including tennis, squash, golf and polo. He once told a meeting of employees that he used to take glucosamine with meals but “nowadays I just need a shot of WD-40 and I’m fine.”
He deliberates over every sentence, frequently stopping in the second clause to re-word the first.
Charles Koch tells the feedlot story. How he summoned his son to his office. “I think he thought he’d have a job here in Wichita and he could go out with his friends at night,” he said with a grin.
Instead, the manager of the Koch-owned feedlot picked up Chase Koch in Wichita and drove him to western Kansas. “And he lived with him on a couch, and worked 7 days a week, 12, 13 hours a day.”
Focus
In 44 years of marriage, Liz Koch says, she has given him every haircut because he doesn’t want to take time to go to a barber shop.
His ride to work takes only 10 minutes, but he pops an audio book into the player, using those minutes to learn something. “There is so much to learn, so much you need to know that there is not enough time,” he said.
His hatred of wasting time has sometimes led his wife to stare at him in wonder, on the golf course when he impatiently scoops up her ball when she plays slow, or when he gets in a hurry and runs his cart over her ball.
He is a perfectionist at everything. “Occasionally I’ll misuse a word about market-based management and he practically gets hysterical on me,” Liz Koch said.
After the kids came along, Charles coached son Chase and daughter Elizabeth on values and virtues daily at the dinner table, as his father had done.
“Sunday afternoons was economics,” Liz said. “That was at least an hour of sitting in the library, Chase with his baseball hat pulled down over his eyes with his eyes shut and sound asleep so his father wouldn’t see. And Elizabeth pretending to be the bright-eyed and bushy-tailed student.”
While Obama and his campaign directors portray Charles Koch as formidable, the man described by Liz seems clueless about some things. When they first met, he showed up dressed in madras shorts, with a pin-striped shirt. “God help you,” she said. “He looked like Willie-Off-The-Pickle-Boat.”
But to her, that showed he wasn’t vain, because no vain man would dress like that. After they married, she forbade him “to ever set foot in a retail clothing store again.”
They often finish each other’s sentences, but he can be remarkably obtuse, she said. After the death threats, he hired security guards for the family – and neglected to tell her. “Sometimes I get notified after the fact, if you get my drift.” She was furious.
Charles Koch sometimes tells stories on himself.
Several years ago, he said, the family owned Lucy, a small and mischievous shepherd dog, and Rufus, a huge Rhodesian ridgeback. Lucy, fearless, pounced on Rufus so much that Rufus cringed by the front door when Charles tried to take him outside.
“The big sissy,” Charles Koch said. Puzzled, he asked his son why Rufus acted like that.
“It’s obvious,” Chase Koch said. “He just sees the way you act around Mom.”
Accused
Now her husband stands accused: A rich guy who doesn’t care about the poor or the vulnerable.
“Prove it!” Liz said. “Prove that comment to me! Look at the money that goes into charities – and to innovation to make life better. Seriously, do they think all this stuff just comes out of thin air? People love their Internet, their cell phones…somebody came up with the ideas... Nobody thinks about where these things come from, they just think, ‘oh, greedy, greedy, greedy.’
“What is greed? Greed is a return on investment, the risk you took. And if you’re lucky, you get to employ more people. And more people.”
“In business, there’s risk and there’s reward,” she said. “The pride that I see, the upside, is that so many people have put their trust and their faith in him as being the beacon for saving the country.”
He believes sincerely that the country is going into debt so extreme “that we’ll never recover,” she said. He believes we’re losing a virtue that made us great. “When you see the courage and the tenacity of the people who settled this country, you just can’t believe that we want to give it away. I really think there’s something seriously wrong with education that people don’t understand what they’re giving away.”
Government giveaways like subsidies or other redistribution of wealth have created the idea “that there is something for nothing. The idea that you can take, and make everyone the same.” As a result, she said, “you have a country of non-risk takers. That just want to be coddled, and taken care of. It never entered their heads that they might be able to do it themselves and do it better.”
Charles Koch was so passionate about these ideas that in the first years of their marriage, besides insisting that she learn to cook, he insisted that she go to economics seminars.
“That was five years of training,” she said. “Intense training.”
Liz Koch said she and Charles hardly ever talk about the criticism from Obama or others.
“We’re at a point now where we both enjoy a good night’s sleep, and we know that if we have certain conversations too late in the day, it isn’t going to help us at all,” she said. “And...what are you going to say after somebody has tried to destroy your character, who you are, what you’ve built? What’s to talk about?”
Like father
Charles was the rebel son, born Nov. 1, 1935; David was born May 3, 1940, the same year their father, Fred Koch, founded the Wood River Oil & Refining Co., the precursor to Koch Industries.
From their yard in east Wichita, David said, they could all hear the voices of friends at the Wichita Country Club while they worked. Their father made them work, picking dandelions in the yard when little, shipping out to shovel manure on ranches when they got older.
“He kept saying, ‘I want all you boys to grow up to be great men,’ ” David said. There were four boys in all. The other two sons, Fred and Bill, are not involved in Koch Industries.
Fred rode Charles hard, and Charles was glad to get away to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Charles Koch achieved: Bachelor’s degree, general engineering, 1957. Master’s degree, nuclear engineering, 1958. Master’s degree, chemical engineering, 1959.
For the next two years he worked for Arthur D. Little & Co. consulting, living in Cambridge, half a continent from the demanding father he adored.
His father pleaded with him to come back
No, Charles Koch said. “I thought, ‘my God, I go back, he won’t let me do anything and he’ll smother me.’ ”
Charles went to work for his father in 1961 only after Fred, weakened by illness, threatened to sell the company. Charles Koch took over the division called Koch Engineering. The first thing his father said when he showed up: “I hope your first deal is a loser, because otherwise you’ll think you’re a lot smarter than you are.”
“I didn’t disappoint him. I got us in a lot of losers.”
He challenged his father immediately after coming home.
One day, after hearing out Charles’ proposal to buy two trucking companies, his father went on safari in Africa. Fred, preoccupied with saving money to pay federal “death taxes,” told his son to buy only one. Charles bought both.
“He was FURIOUS,” Charles Koch said. “I met him at the airport when he got back, and he would just barely talk to me. The only thing he’d say was, ‘Son, I’ve been trying to save enough money to pay my death taxes, and you’re going out and just wasting it.’ ”
By then, Charles Koch’s mind was on fire. Inspired in part by stories his father told at dinner, about Stalinist Russia and how economics really worked, Charles was devouring books on history, philosophy, anthropology, psychology, science, economics. Charles said he read everybody, “all the way from anarchists to communists. And I read everybody.”
He read “like a demon,” David Koch said. Nestor Weigand, Charles Koch’s longtime friend in Wichita, would see Charles’ small apartment floor, the couch and tables covered wall to wall with books, many of them open, and Charles would talk excitedly about how he thought the world could be made vastly better if people grasped how free economies work.
After he married Liz, he stuffed their small apartment so full of books that there was no closet for her clothes.
He read until he reached his own conclusions, especially this one:
“There are certain laws that govern the natural world,” he said recently. He started to wonder “if the same isn’t true for societal world. Were there also laws that determine to what extent people can achieve their ends? That will determine the extent to which people are more prosperous? That they are better off. There’s more civility. That there’s peace. Progress. And so I became very passionate.”
He read Adam Smith, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman – economists deeply committed to keeping government out of private enterprise. The key ingredient in a prosperous society is private enterprise, because private enterprise is all voluntary – people are doing things they want to do, rather than things they have to do to fulfill some government-imposed obligation.
In all those books, the guy with three degrees from MIT saw what happens, as he believed, when freedom is curtailed, whether by dictators using guns or liberals using laws to redistribute wealth.
He put these ideas into action, as he now says himself.
First, he built a company that had $70 million in annual revenue in 1960, the year before he came home, to one with more than $115 billion in annual revenue. Charles and David Koch are now worth $31 billion each, according to Forbes.
Second, he created think tanks like the Cato Institute to push his philosophy of a free-market society.
He said economists ponder why we have poverty. “We’re asking the wrong question. We ought to ask what do we need to change so we can become more prosperous? Not how we eliminate poverty. Poverty’s the natural condition. If we just sit around and guarantee each other, and no one produces, we have extreme poverty.”
Motives
Like Weigand, Liz Koch says the fight with Obama and the strain of work have taken a physical toll.
He’s lived a full life, she said. Their daughter, Elizabeth, now 36, lives out of town, and is not employed by Koch Industries. But their son, Chase, who slept through some of his dad’s economics lectures, is now, at 35, senior vice president at Koch Agronomics Services – and shows many of the relentless and workaholic traits of his father, Liz said.
But Charles’ full life has its limits, and she wonders whether at age 76 he pushes them too hard.
“I watch him like a hawk, because it’s a concern, to work as hard as he does, and push as hard as he does. Even the things he does for relaxation are ridiculous.”
Charles still acts like he’s pushing a time clock, she said.
“What are you doing?” she’s demanded.
But she knows what he’s doing. He worries about employees and business partners who depend on him to keep Koch Industries growing. And he’s convinced his economic ideas can help the country.
Slow down, she has told him.
“Please don’t nag me,” he’s replied. “If I didn’t want to do it, I wouldn’t do it. It’s why I get up in the morning. I love what I do. I love the people I work with.”
So he gets up every morning. He goes to work. He doesn’t plan to retire. “I like to say I’m going to ride my bicycle till I fall off,” he said. “I mean, I don’t want to go play golf every day, and I can’t read all the time.”
Charles Koch said his parents taught him to be humble and that he feels embarrassed every time he drives past the Wichita State University campus and sees “Charles Koch Arena” in big, dark letters on the wall of the basketball complex that he donated $6 million to renovate.
He felt the same way when Koch Industries built the black-glass block-shaped building that houses his headquarters. He came home from the Barcelona Olympics in 1992 to his new spacious office – and felt embarrassed. “I said, ‘My god, what’d I do? Why should I have an office that big?’ I mean it’s just, I don’t know, maybe it’s the way you’re brought up. It reminds me of the story of what the mama whale said to the baby whale: ‘Son, the time you get harpooned is when you come up to spout off.’ So it just makes me insecure.”
Yet with all his claims of humbleness there is soaring ambition: In recent months he has likened himself to the revolutionary who defied the Catholic Church and changed history to this day:
“The best way to describe it, which may be ridiculous, but is in a way similar to what Martin Luther must have thought when he said, ‘here I stand, I can do no other,’ ” Charles said. “I mean, if you believe these ideas are right, and they’re going to benefit the overwhelming majority of people, and you have some capability to advance them, how can you not?”
He’s that serious about politics. But he makes fun of himself, too. At a Koch Industries gathering after the White House criticism started in earnest, he told employees: “Liz reminded me the other day that when she married me, she knew it would be an exciting life.
“But she didn’t know it would be one of sheer terror.”
© 2012 Wichita Eagle and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.kansas.com
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/10/14/v-print/2528663/koch-relentless-in-pursuing-his.html#storylink=cpy
The Kochs' quest to save America
By Bill Wilson and Roy Wenzl
The Wichita Eagle Sunday Oct. 14. 2012


In January 2009, just days after the inauguration of President Obama, Charles and David Koch met in their company headquarters in Wichita with their longtime political strategist, Rich Fink.
The country was headed toward bankruptcy, they agreed. Fink told them bluntly that Obama’s administration represented the worst of what Charles and David fear most: a bloated, regulation-heavy, free-spending government that could plunge the country into another deep recession. That day, Fink advised two of the richest men in the nation that it would be the fight of their lives to stop the government spending spree and to change the course of the country, starting with the 2012 election.
“If we are going to do this, we should do it right or not at all,” Fink, 61, recalled telling the brothers. “But if we don’t do it right or if we don’t do it at all, we will be insignificant and we will just waste a lot of time and I would rather play golf.
“And if we do it right, then it is going to get very, very ugly.”
Three and a half years later, President Obama accused the Koch brothers of engineering “a corporate takeover of our democracy.”
The brothers’ political spending and the network of conservative political organizations and think tanks they fund have sparked protests.
Two years of condemnations and criticism prompted Charles Koch to break his silence about politics. In his most extensive interview in 15 years, Charles Koch, along with his family and friends, talked about why he wants to defeat Obama and elect members of Congress who will stop what he calls catastrophic overspending. Government recklessness threatens the country and his business, he said.
The Kochs say the price for their political involvement has been high: Death threats, cyberattacks on their business, hundreds of news stories criticizing them, calls for boycotts of the company’s consumer goods, and what the brothers see as ongoing and unjustified public attacks from the Obama administration.
The Kochs aren’t finished. Win or lose in November, they plan to start a new fight. They are organizing dozens of business and grassroots groups to build support for eliminating all corporate and agricultural subsidies.
The country must deal with corporate welfare, which they say exceeds $350 billion a year, before it can rein in spending on Social Security and Medicare, Fink said.
“How is any American going to feel good about reforming Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security when there is so much cronyism going on with these companies and businessmen are making off with so many tax dollars?” Fink asked.
The Kochs won’t say how much they are spending or specifically what they are doing to defeat Obama, but it’s enough to prompt critics to question how much political influence one family should have.
“The Koch political machine is the most elaborate, comprehensive financial dip into American politics since Standard Oil and the robber barons a century ago,” said Larry Jacobs, a political scientist at the University of Minnesota.
“This is the 21st century version of how you buy yourself a government in America.”
Their motive, Jacobs suspects, is wealth. “The rest of this may well be the means to an end.”
Charles Koch says his enemies accuse him of maneuvering “so that we can be free to plunder or exploit people, exploit our employees, exploit our customers.
“And if that’s true, why are we the only large company that’s doing this?” he asked. “If this were the easy way to make money, why wouldn’t they be doing it?”
Charles Koch said he would prefer not to get involved in politics.
“I look at those activities as defensive,” he said. “That is, we need to preserve enough liberty and enough of a market economy so people can speak out and have independent resources to provide diverse opinions, and try to put some limits on the growth and intrusiveness of government.”
Attacks multiply
The brothers say they are taking risks by speaking out. Mark Holden, Koch Industries’ senior vice president and general counsel, said there has been a progression of attacks and lies about the company since Obama’s election, including:
Summer 2010:
Austan Goolsbee, then Obama’s chief economic adviser, commented on Koch Industries’ tax status during a briefing with reporters in Washington, accusing the company of not paying taxes.
Under federal law, it’s a crime to improperly access or disclose confidential tax information, according to Holden, who suspects the administration was trying to intimidate them because of their political views.
“It was false and malicious, too,” Holden said. “We pay a lot of taxes.”
May 2012:
Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, said in a video that the campaign is “going to call their BS,” referencing the Kochs.
“Really?” Holden said. “If my kids said that to me, they’d be going to their room. This is the deputy campaign manager? This is the discourse in this country?”
May 2012:
David Axelrod, Obama’s senior political consultant, told the media in a telephone conference that Mitt Romney is being aided by “the (political strategist) Karl (Rove) and Koch brothers’ contract killers in super PAC land,” according to news accounts.
“And when you have Axelrod, one of (Obama’s) top campaign officials, saying we are contract killers. I mean, I don’t know how somebody in the administration can say that about a private citizen,” said Charles Koch. “The attacks are unbelievable.”
“It’s frightening because you don’t know what they’re going to do,” he said. “They have tremendous power. They can destroy just about anybody, whether you are totally innocent or not.”
July 2012:
U.S. Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., read a statement on the floor of the U.S. Senate accusing the Koch brothers of being “two of the biggest sources of secret money in politics.”
With photos of the Koch brothers as a backdrop, captioned “The Koch Brothers: Subverting the Democratic Process,” Lautenberg spoke for three minutes accusing the brothers of picking their preferred politicians.
“If these wealthy individuals want to pick our next president, they should have the muscle and the courage to stand up and say so, tell everybody ... what they want to do to our democracy. They don’t have the courage,” Lautenberg said.
Lautenberg also read a list of Koch Industries’ consumer products into the record, detailing the various companies the Koch brothers own. Koch officials called that action tantamount to inviting a boycott by consumers.
The attacks have forced the brothers to increase security around themselves and their families, both said. David Koch said Obama’s criticisms might tempt disturbed people to hurt them.
Obama’s “criticism can stimulate a lot of anger and dislike toward us,” David Koch said, “so there’s a huge security concern.”
The threat the Kochs fear most from the government is the potential for harassment by regulation.
“The government can shut our refineries down just by not letting us take an old heater and replace it with a more efficient heater,” Fink said. “You need a permit for that. They have the power to shut us down.”
The White House did not return calls seeking comment.
Fink said he warned the brothers that January day in 2009 about the perils of taking on the president and upsetting the special interests that fund the political system.
“I said that you guys will possibly risk the businesses that you have built and your family legacy and there’s going to be a lot of fallback from this,” he said.
“They both of them said, ‘Absolutely not. We are committed. We believe it is the right thing to do. If we don’t save the country we are not going to have a company anyhow. So what’s the big difference?’ ”
Economic predictions
The Kochs believe the country is racing inevitably to economic disaster. They blame Republicans and Democrats alike.
They say that overspending, coupled with future shortfalls in Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, along with interest on the national debt, will push the country into bankruptcy, just as surely as a family that consistently spends more than it makes will end up broke.
“We’re running well over a trillion-dollar-a-year deficits with our national debt climbing inexorably to greater and greater level,” David Koch said. “The Federal Reserve, of course, is buying the bonds the federal government issues to finance the debt. And my God, if this continues to increase, we’re going to have ever-increasing inflation, it could become runaway inflation that would raise interest rates on our national debt enormously, and our country could spiral into bankruptcy.”
The interest alone that the United States will owe to China in 2025 is projected to be enough to fund that country’s entire military, Fink said.
The Kochs say neither Obama nor Romney will address overspending or expanding government.
“You go through history, the rate of increase in federal government has been almost the same under Republicans as under Democrats,” Charles Koch said. But he said that under Romney the country’s economic decline will proceed more slowly.
They also say that the country is threatened by cronyism, companies that would lobby for regulations to cripple their competitors or for subsidies rather than compete in the marketplace.
“Businesses, rather than focusing on finding what products and services will add value for people, will improve their quality of life, go to the government and get subsidies, mandates and other things, so the economy is no longer directed by individual consumers, but it’s directed politically,” Charles Koch said. “And we’ve seen what happens to societies that go there. And so that’s happening to this society.”
Although the Kochs have long complained about corporate subsidies, saying they increase taxes and the price of goods, the company accepts subsidies for production of ethanol. Not accepting them would put the company at a competitive disadvantage, they say.
Their political views date back to the 1930s, when their father, Fred, an engineer, told stories at the dinner table about building cracking units in refineries for Josef Stalin in the Soviet Union, a nation that controlled economics from central planning. Their father despised the socialism of the Soviet Union.
He “was extraordinarily fearful of our government becoming much more socialistic and domineering,” David Koch said. “...So from the time we were teenagers to the present, we’ve been very concerned and worried about our government evolving into a very controlling, socialist type of government.”
The Kochs believe that no government program can create real prosperity, and that when government interferes with the markets, whether through subsidies, taxation or excessive regulation, it diminishes prosperity.
A case in point, Charles Koch said, is low interest rates.
“I worry about the policy of the Fed, with zero interest rates. Okay, that may make some of the banks a lot of money, but what does it do to the person who saved? Who’s counting on income? How are they going to invest? They’re going to make now very risky investments to get any return. It’s zero return on depositing your money now. That wasn’t what they banked on when they saved this money and thought they’d have enough to live on when they retired.”
Another is the housing crisis. The problems, he said, started with regulations.
“Fanny and Freddie were subsidizing the majority of houses, and they were directing the banks where to put it, and underwriting losses. So once again, this is, the banks profited from this, and the losses were socialized. Taxpayers, the ordinary person, the poor people are bearing that — to enrich a few bankers.”
Critics
The Kochs think government is an obstacle to making money that should be removed, said Jim Steele, who with Don Barlett just released “The Betrayal of the American Dream.” The book accuses the “ruling elite” — including the Kochs — of impoverishing the American middle class by pushing initiatives such as deregulation, outsourcing and balanced budgets to enrich themselves.
The Kochs have spent more than three decades building a vast, sophisticated network of think tanks, university researchers and citizen groups to advocate for limited government, lower taxes and limited regulation.
“We feel that the views of the foundations that they support ... have been really instrumental in undermining the economic well-being of the middle class,” Steele said.
Free markets to the Kochs mean freedom to make money, Steele said.
“I think they view government as an intrusion in their liberty to make money,” he said. “Any government regulation is seen as an intrusion that would interfere with that process.”
Steele said the Kochs are using money they gleaned from lower taxes on dividends and on the wealthy to finance a disinformation campaign against Obama.
Steele said claims by Republicans that Obama is responsible for the current budget deficit are preposterous.
“His predecessor ran up the deficit, and because of the issues with Bush II, the economy slows down, tax collections are down and that contributes to the deficit.
“So now they’re going to run ads basically with free money, the money they’ve saved not paying taxes on their dividends, to accuse him of the deficit problems.
“It’s truly preposterous.”
The wealthy trying to influence an election isn’t new. George Soros, a billionaire hedge fund investor, contributed around $40 million to defeat President George W. Bush in 2004, according to Bill Allison, a campaign finance expert with the Sunlight Foundation in Washington, D.C.
But checkbook politics got a huge boost in 2010. The U.S. Supreme Court, in the Citizens United decision, held that government has no right under the First Amendment to restrict political contributions by corporations and unions. The spending, while controversial, is legal.
“What we’re seeing this time around is an escalation of scale,” Allison said. “The Citizens United decision has legitimized this kind of spending in a way it was never legitimized before. Soros was interviewed by lawyers for the FTC asking why he had given the money and about possible campaign finance violations. With Citizens United, you’ll never see that kind of scrutiny again.”
Ideas and education
Only a crisis can produce real change, economist Milton Friedman wrote in 1982. “When that crisis occurs,” he wrote, “the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.”
The Kochs spent three decades making sure they had plenty of ideas lying around.
One of the biggest idea generators is the Mercatus Center, started by Fink with seed money from Charles Koch. The group has studied the privatization of Social Security and analyzed environmental regulations asking if they do more harm than good. The answer is often yes.
In 2004, the Wall Street Journal called the Mercatus Center the most important think tank you’ve never heard of. When President George W. Bush’s Office of Management and Budget late in 2001 sought suggestions for regulations in need of reform, 14 of the 23 “high priority” changes it considered came from Mercatus. Eight of those dealt with environmental regulations.
The center is housed at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va., where Fink once taught economics. George Mason also is home to the Institute for Humane Studies, chaired by Charles Koch, and the Charles G. Koch summer internship, a ten-week program for college students who believe in limited government and low taxes and who want a career in public policy.
The institute places students with 80 like-minded nonprofits. When nonprofits need someone to testify before state legislatures, speak to groups or write letters to the editor, they can tap the institute’s talent pool.
Charles Koch says the bulk of his charitable spending goes to these type of educational activities. The family gives money to about 200 universities each semester to further research and teaching of free-market economics and support students who believe in those ideas.
The family won’t say how much it has spent to build its network. But the Charles Koch Foundation alone has given about $60.5 million to think tanks and universities since 2000, according to IRS filings. About $40 million of that has gone to George Mason and its affiliated groups. The foundation is just one of many sources of money for the network, Fink said.
It’s been money effectively spent, according to Joe Aistrup, a political science professor at Kansas State University. The Koch brothers’ political genius, he said, began in recognizing the absence of Libertarian think tanks in the 1970s promoting that individual well-being and prosperity are fostered by individual freedom and limited government.
Prior to that, there was “nothing at all devoted to government not doing anything, essentially,” he said.
The Kochs probably wouldn’t be nearly as successful if it hadn’t been for Fink, who said he began pestering Charles Koch around 1977. Fink, then a PhD candidate at New York University, was searching for $150,000 over three years for an educational and research program on a new approach to market-based economics.
Charles Koch, his last hope for money, agreed to meet with him if he came to Wichita. Fink, who says he looked and dressed outlandishly even by late 1970s standards, bought a $1,200 plane ticket and flew to Wichita.
He had hair and a beard down to his shoulders. He bought his first suit — made of black polyester with white piping. Under it he wore a black-and-white checkered shirt and a blue tie anchored by a Phi Beta Kappa tie clip that he put on backward. As he got off the plane in Wichita, people kept staring at him.
“I thought, ‘Man, am I looking hot. I am looking sharp.’ And I said, ‘Man, it’s the suit, I am going to get me another one of these babies.’... Never did I realize what a jackass I looked like.”
After his presentation, Charles had nothing to say and Fink got on the plane thinking he had blown his last chance.
Then someone from the company called. They would give him the money on one condition: If he didn’t meet his measurable goals he would never bother them again. That was the start of what became the Mercatus Center.
Years later, Fink told Charles, “If a guy came up to me with a black polyester suit, white piping, dressed like that with a beard and hair down to his shoulders, I don’t think I would probably meet with him let alone give him the equivalent of about $500,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars. I said, ‘Why did you do that?’ And he said, ‘I like polyester. It’s petroleum based.’ ”
In 1983, Charles asked Fink to evaluate four groups he was funding, including the Council for a Competitive Economy, made up of 2,000 business leaders who had pledged to lobby Congress for an end to corporate subsidies. But when it came time to testify against their own subsidies, most dropped out of the group. “It was like a failing institution,” Fink said.
Fink and his economic students spent six weeks studying ways to bring about social change and came up with a blueprint to invest Charles’ money to advance free-market economics.
They gave money to hundreds of universities to generate ideas. They funded dozens of think tanks to turn those ideas into public policy proposals. They created grassroots groups to push for the proposals. And they helped elect politicians who would turn the proposals into law.
In 1984, Fink, the Kochs and another businessman created their first grassroots group, Citizens for a Sound Economy, with about $1.5 million in seed money from David Koch. They statistically tested economic issues — international trade, a balanced budget amendment, a supermajority vote on tax increases — on membership lists of about 130 organizations and discovered that a flat tax had the greatest appeal.
The group initially called for privatizing government and adopting a flat tax. It opposed President Reagan’s highway bill because it was loaded with pork projects. It opposed Hillary Clinton’s health care reform. It also helped defeat President Clinton’s BTU tax — a tax on energy — in 1993. In selected states, including Kansas, it fought tax increases and sought tort reform.
After major victories, the brothers and Fink made a mistake, according to Charles Koch. They had built a network of universities, think tanks, grassroots organizations, politicians and industry officials. “Then we kind of let it wither away. So we got new threats, we had to start over, in large part. Not completely, but in large part,” Charles Koch said.
In 2003, with Republicans in charge of the White House and Congress, but failing to control spending, the Kochs redoubled their efforts.
They launched their twice-a-year, invitation-only economic seminars to encourage business leaders to promote free-market ideas by educating their employees, running ads, raising money and contributing to think tanks and universities. The first was in Chicago with 17 people attending nonstop economic lectures.
“We didn’t even let people take a bathroom break,” Fink said. “We just ... wore everybody out. We presented economic analysis, basically from morning to night.”
The next year only eight business leaders came back. The seminar brought in celebrities and politicians, while still slipping in economic lessons. The sessions are now typically attended by hundreds of business leaders. The one in Palm Springs in 2011 also attracted hundreds of protestors and resulted in 25 arrests.
In 2004, internal disagreements caused Citizens for a Sound Economy to splinter into two groups. Dick Armey, the former House majority leader from Texas, launched FreedomWorks. The Kochs launched Americans for Prosperity, which called for an end to corporate subsidies and for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget.
Fink won’t discuss what the brothers and Americans for Prosperity have accomplished recently.
“We’re just besieged day and night with attacks and the more visible we are, and the more we’ve done, the more attacks we get,” he said. “But we’re very aggressive on almost all the major economic issues we’re generally involved in. I think that’s actually one of the things that happened at the Obama administration, is that every rock they overturned, they saw people who were against it, and it turned out to be us.”
Some have accused the Kochs of starting and funding the tea party.
Fink says they didn’t start it; CNBC reporter Rick Santelli did when, on the floor of the Chicago Stock Exchange, he called for a tea party to protest government spending. But Fink believes they laid the groundwork for it to take hold.
“We met for 20 or 30 years advancing free-market ideas in universities, think tanks and citizen groups,” Fink said. “I am hopeful that those ideas filtered down and were part of the cause of the tea party taking off.”
They haven’t funded the tea party directly, largely because they haven’t received any proposals that meet their criteria, Fink said. But Fink said they do fund groups, including Americans for Prosperity, which give money to, and work with, the tea party.
Frayda Levy, a former book distributor who founded the New Jersey AFP chapter and is on the board of directors of the national organization, works with the tea party.
“We try to meet with these groups and try to talk to them about being a little more sophisticated about how they think about economic liberty,” Levy said.
“We hold town meetings with these other groups, and invariably, somebody there wants to talk about immigration or Agenda 21. And we try to tell them, ‘Look, Agenda 21 is not our problem. The problem is government spending and the deficit.’
“We are trying to enable the tea party movement to think through an economic framework and get some of these people out of what sometimes tends to be a more xenophobic framework.”
Causes and candidates
Charles and David Koch, each worth an estimated $31 billion, directly support causes and candidates at the national or state level.
They won’t say how much they are spending to influence the election.
Charles Koch refuted early media reports that put their tab to defeat Obama at $200 million.
“Well, the Obama campaign said they were going to spend a billion. No, we’re not going to spend that much,” he said, referring to the $200 million.
“We’re going to participate effectively in the election, let’s just put it that way,” David Koch said.
Fink said simply, “We are doing a lot.”
Providing more information, he said, would increase criticism. “Anybody who sticks their head up is going to get shot. We understand that. We’re sticking our head up and getting shot.... Any information you put out there just increases the number of bullets and arrows, so why do that?”
The Koch Industries Political Action Committee has spent $2.3 million in the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
They’ve spent more than $60 million lobbying Washington in the past decade and $13.6 million backing political candidates, usually Republicans, since 1990.
The total amount being spent isn’t public, thanks to campaign finance laws that allow nonprofit groups to keep the identity of their donors secret.
Americans for Prosperity plans to spend $110 million to defeat Obama, its director, Tim Phillips, told the national media in early August.
When the Obama administration called on the nonprofit earlier this year to release its donor list, it refused. The Kochs say that only a small part of the money is coming from them. In 2009, the Kochs donated about 8 percent of the AFP’s $27 million budget, according to the company. This year, David Koch told Weekly Standard, they are donating less than 10 percent of the organization’s budget.
In additional to the presidential race, the Kochs are influencing Congressional and state races. Republicans need to win control of four seats to control the U.S. Senate. In Ohio, a spokeswoman for Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, said the Koch family has invested more money to defeat him than any other senator.
“The Koch brothers have joined numerous other third-party, secretly-funded groups to pump more outside money into this race against Sherrod than has been spent against any other Senate candidate in the country, and it is the only reason Josh Mandel is remotely competitive,” said campaign spokeswoman Sadie Weiner.
In Kansas, Koch Industries was the largest donor to the Kansas Chamber of Commerce’s political action committee in the August primary, contributing $125,000 to help defeat 10 moderate senators, a quarter of the state senate.
Fighting for what they believe in
The Citizens United ruling has made it possible for families like the Kochs to successfully dominate political debate, Steele said.
Middle-class America is losing its influence in the political process, he said.
“The idea that a handful of folks who just happen to have a lot of money have everyone’s best interests at heart, that’s not what America’s about,” he said.
But Fink says the Kochs aren’t doing anything for their cause that labor unions and Hollywood aren’t doing for Obama and Democrats.
“If you look at the money that comes in from the labor unions, plaintiffs attorneys, whatever, it far exceeds the resources coming in from this side,” he said. “So I would say that if it is one family or a group of people, the point of view we are trying to represent is underfunded, not overfunded... This is going to sound wrong, but what do you say to the Founding Fathers? There was a very small group of people that were a minority that changed the whole country. You say George Washington had too much influence? We shouldn’t allow them to do that? And we should have spread the influence around?”
Jacobs, the Minnesota political scientist, calls the Kochs the powerbrokers of the Republican Party, but warns that if Romney loses they may be ostracized.
The American business community, Jacobs said, is almost certain to take a dim view of the Kochs’ move against corporate subsidies.
“Once you get into the other things businesses rely upon — subsidies and tax exemptions — there’s a tension between the Koch brothers and mainstream business that hasn’t played itself out yet.”
The Kochs realize as they prepare for their campaign to end corporate subsidies that they are about to become even more unpopular with political parties and special-interest groups that depend on government.
But throughout the history of the world there have been small groups of people who have changed society, Fink said.
They aren’t backing down.
“We believe America is at a tipping point,” Fink said. “That with our debt, with our government spending, if you look at the economics of it, it is totally unsustainable.... We are in the process of destroying America, of destroying the American dream. We believe just like the... American revolutionaries did, there is going to be a small group of people who stand up and fight to save the country. Otherwise we have lost it.”
© 2012 Wichita Eagle and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.kansas.com
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/10/13/v-print/2528807/the-kochs-quest-to-save-america.html#storylink=cpy

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Why Crony Capitalism Doesn't Work
By Jeanette Petersen from the Institute of Justice at www.IJ.org

As the smell of garbage still lingers across Seattle following this summer’s strike by garbage and recycling drivers, 220,000 homeowners in the area learned the hard way that protecting multibillion-dollar corporations from competition is, unfortunately, our government’s highest priority. But this is a lesson many should have already learned. After all, four years ago, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that Seattle could ban competition and reserve exclusively for two large, out-of-state corporations the right to haul construction, demolition and land-clearing waste. But as the debris piled up and cooked in the summer heat, it came as a surprise to many that we were in this mess because the government thought it was for our own good.
In 2002, the Seattle city government changed its code to ban small companies from transporting construction waste and the like. In making the change, Seattle contended that the market had to be closed to competition from nonunion businesses so it could ensure that the public health and safety were protected. With a stroke of a pen, the government insulated all but two large corporations from competition and made illegal all other businesses that had been successfully operating in the market. With the help of the Institute for Justice Washington Chapter, two small business owners sued, arguing that Seattle’s actions constituted economic favoritism in violation of the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Washington Constitution. But their challenge fell on deaf ears and a majority of the Washington Supreme Court decided that hauling waste is a “government service” and that constitutional protections do not apply to government-provided services. The dissenting justices warned that the court’s decision advanced an “unholy alliance between the government and big business, which ultimately not only disserves the excluded businesses but also the public in general.”
How right they were.

Examples of this “unholy alliance” abound. Take the case of Institute for Justice client Hector Ricketts, who wished to operate a commuter van in New York City. At the behest of the public transportation union, the New York City Council vetoed virtually all new commuter van licenses. And for the lucky few with licenses, arbitrary regulations forbade vans from providing timely and convenient service. When faced, however, with a massive public transit strike in the early 1980s and then with a taxicab strike in the late 1990s, commuter vans like Hector’s mobilized to rescue the city’s transportation system from grinding to a halt. Thanks to IJ litigation, Hector and other operators at last had their day in court and vindicated their right to earn an honest living. But other similar arbitrary, government-imposed-and-enforced monopolies remain to this day to the detriment of would-be entrepreneurs and consumers alike.
When courts fail to enforce constitutional limits on government power, we are left to rely on the self-restraint of public officials. But experience has shown that this is no restraint at all and it leads to the inevitable loss of freedom and the proliferation of laws that protect the politically connected.
In Seattle, as waste haulers walked out on strike and all other service providers were banned, the public was right to question how this system of crony capitalism advances anyone’s health or safety. Something definitely stinks—and this time it’s not just the garbage.

Jeanette Petersen is an IJ Washington Chapter attorney.

  


Government jobs hold back growth
from the Friday October 5, 2012 Wichita Eagle Letters To The Editor

There’s no question that government employees provide essential services such as education, protection, justice and peace. The services that government employees provide should justify their employment, not their purchasing power, as argued in “Government jobs big part of economy” (Oct. 2 Letters to the Editor).
Government employees are paid via a transfer of money from taxpayers – meaning any reduction of government employment, and spending, will allow private individuals to retain their hard-earned money. One need look no further than The Eagle’s Business Today section to find examples of local entrepreneurs expanding and prospering, such as a new business startup that assists homeowners with garage sales.
In fact, it is often growth in government that holds back private investment – the engine needed to create more jobs. Between 2001 and 2011, the Wichita metropolitan area saw federal, state and local government employment grow 10.1 percent while private-sector employment declined 6.2 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. We have fewer taxpayers supporting more government employees. This can only mean fewer jobs, as there is less money in the hands of entrepreneurs and businesses seeking to expand.


TODD DAVIDSON
Fiscal policy analyst
Kansas Policy Institute
Wichita
 
Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/10/05/2515078/letters-to-the-editor-on-government.html#storylink=cpy

Friday, October 12, 2012

From The Washington Times

A Real Presidential Debate

by Andrew Napolitano

Gary Johnson makes three.

Gary Johnson
In this arena, Mitt Romney has it half-right. He does understand that only free market forces can produce prosperity, but he fails to see that when the government spends what it doesn't have, the result is inflation and higher taxes for future generations. Why does the federal government now spend half a trillion a year in debt service? Because every president, Republicans as well as Democrats, from FDR to Obama has borrowed money in order to spend more than he collected and has let future generations deal with repaying the debt. Because the feds do not repay (they merely roll over) their debt, the cost of interest payments has skyrocketed. Mr. Romney's ability to articulate the virtues of the free market and to dance around the issue of debt, while the president nearly fell asleep, are the reasons he did so well in the presidential debate last week.
In the realm of foreign affairs, the president has unleashed a torrent of violence in the Middle East by supporting some of the people his predecessor was fighting a few years ago. Those folks now run the governments in Libya and Egypt, and those places are now unsafe for Americans. What would Mr. Romney do? He'd insert the U.S. military to extend American dominance and build a new world order. What has Mr. Obama done? He's bombed and killed innocents with drones. Neither has learned the lessons of 9/11: You cannot kill people or occupy foreign lands without moral and legal justification, lest you suffer deadly consequences.
Because Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama are different only in degree, I wish the cabal of former leaders of the two major political parties that runs the debates would permit former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson to participate. He is the Libertarian Party candidate who is on the ballot in all 50 states and the only current national candidate who if elected would shrink the government and keep it within the confines of the Constitution.
Don't hold your breath. The debates are crafted by the folks who run the Romney and Obama campaigns. Mr. Romney is afraid of Mr. Johnson because he might take the votes of those who are tired of unconstitutional government and deficits and war. Mr. Obama is afraid of Mr. Johnson because he might take the votes of those who are appalled at the government's murderous drug wars and its assaults on personal freedom and who also are tired of war. Both sides fear Mr. Johnson because he is essentially fearless when it comes to his belief that the Constitution means what it says -- meaning if it does not authorize the feds to regulate health care, fight undeclared wars or mortgage the future, then they simply cannot do it.
The powers that run the means by which we elect presidents have decided that they can ill-afford a frontal assault on the big government they have created, on national television much less, and four weeks before a presidential election. You see, without Mr. Johnson in these debates, the argument will remain how much the feds should regulate, rather than whether they should do so.
I was disappointed but not surprised when Mr. Romney defended the concept of the feds regulating ordinary commercial transactions and borrowing money to spend it on things like federal aid to education, rather than defending the free market and the constitutional restraints on the feds. Mr. Obama is either a Marxist who doesn't believe in personal freedom or private property, or a nihilist who doesn't believe in anything except his own ability to exercise governmental power. Mr. Romney sounds like another big-government Republican who wants to regulate part of the economy, fight wars on a credit card and let your grandchildren pay for it.
If you want a real debate -- one that will explore the proper constitutional role of the federal government in our lives before it gets so big that we cannot safely challenge it -- you will be disappointed, unless Gary Johnson is let in.
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. He is author of "It Is Dangerous to Be Right When the Government Is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom" (Thomas Nelson, 2011).


Read more: NAPOLITANO: A real presidential debate - Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/oct/10/a-real-presidential-debate/print/#ixzz298vu7wFV
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Only 25 Crucial Days Left Until Election Day:
110 Million American Voters Are Willing to Listen
to Our Libertarian Candidates – IF We Speak Up Now

Dear Fellow Libertarian,

“We’ve Got to Get Out Our Libertarian Campaign Message Now!”
During the critical, last 3 weeks before Election Day, 3 times as many Americans will tune in and turn on to political candidates as did during the last 6 months of this year.
That’s right, 30 million Americans watched and listened to candidates during the last 6 months of this year, while over 110 million will pay attention during these last 3 weeks before Nov. 6th.
This is why Republican and Democratic campaign pollsters are tracking Libertarian Presidential candidate Gov. Gary Johnson’s campaign in weekly polls…in tipping point states.
This is why Republican Party Operatives hired $800-an-hour lawyers, wearing $3,000 suits, to try to kick our Libertarian Presidential Ticket off the ballot in Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.
This is why it matters that we just beat the Republican Ballot Bullies Big Time this week in Pennsylvania – after whipping them in Iowa, Ohio and Virginia.
This is why it matters that our Libertarian Presidential candidate Governor Gary Johnson is on the ballot in 48 states + D.C. right now – and we’re in the courts to win back our ballot status in Michigan and Oklahoma.
This is why More and More and More major New Media News Sources are regularly covering our Libertarian candidates. Huffington Post, Drudge Report, Politico, Fox, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, Christian Science Monitor, LA Times, NPR, ABC, CBS, and NBC. 
The Final 3 Weeks before Election Day!
During these last 3 weeks of the 2012 Campaigns, we can easily, effectively, quickly, and cheaply reach out and bring in massive numbers of libertarian-leaning people. New voters, supporters, and members – who are tuned in now.
3 Times as many voters as we could attract during the last 6 months!
Look at what’s already breaking and brewing.
“Gov. Gary Johnson Polls 6% Nationally against Obama and Romney” - finds new nationwide PrincetonPoll of likely voters
State and National Polls reveal:
10.6% of Ohio Voters plan to cast their ballots for Libertarian Presidential nominee Gov. Gary Johnson
9% to 11% of Independent voters plan to vote for him
2% to 6% of voters in Razor-Close Tipping Point States say they’re voting for Governor Gary Johnson – while Obama and Romney are locked in a dead heat.
3% to 7.5% of Hispanic voters plan to vote for him
3% to 9% of 18-29 year old voters plan to vote for him
2% to 5% of 30-49 year old voters plan to vote for him
Imagine what this can mean for media coverage for our Libertarian Presidential Ticket – Governor Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray - during the last 3 weeks.
Think of the ‘Coattails Effect’ it may have for news coverage and votes for our 503+ Libertarian Party candidates from coast to coast.
Seven pollsters and 13 Republican Campaign Operatives tell us: “Your Libertarian Presidential candidate Gov. Gary Johnson could change the outcome in several Battleground/Tipping Point states. No guarantees, but it’s very possible.”
You and I and our fellow Libertarians can seize this huge opportunity – IF we pour it on these last 25 days before Election Day.
We have to move fast – to give YOU the maximum benefits of this 3-week window of opportunity for Libertarian candidates and the Libertarian Party.
Will you help us help you seize this 3-week Libertarian Party opportunity?
Will you help us increase our news releases, boost our blog links, increase our NEW media promos, and get our Libertarian campaign message out NOW?
This is the time that every dollar you donate – and every volunteer hour you put in - produces 3 to 5  times the impact.
If you can possibly donate $10,000 or $5,000 or $2,500 now, you can make a huge difference now. Will you please make this generous donation today?
Will you, can you donate $1,500 or $850 now – during these maximum-impact last 3 weeks?
If you can contribute $250 or $500 today, will you please?
Or $35 or $85 or $150. Won’t you please help us help you advance liberty?
Please either click and donate now or mail your donation to the address below with "Final 3 weeks" in the memo.
Your donation gets the LP publicity and news coverage. Your donation gets us votes this November 6th. Your donation builds the Libertarian Party. Thank you.
Yours in liberty,

Carla Howell, Executive Director
Libertarian Party
P.S. We only have 25 days left to promote and publicize our Libertarian Campaign message. We’re nearly broke.  Please help our Libertarian Party candidates campaign, get publicity and news coverage, and get votes - NOW.  Will you please donate $25 or $50 or $100 or $1,000. Your donation is our budget.     

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.

Thursday, October 11, 2012

Libertarian Party Fights Back Against
NEW Republican Party Attacks
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Dear Fellow Libertarian,
Today, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Senior Judge James Gardner Colins is expected to rule on the Republican Party’s final attempt to nullify the Libertarian Party’s hard-won ballot status for 2012.
How did the Republicans try to nullify LP ballot status? They falsely claimed that we falsified thousands of petition signatures.
The truth? According to legal testimony and documents filed with Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams, Pennsylvania Republicans hired Reynold Selvaggio, “a private investigator to pose as an FBI officer and visit people who had gathered signatures for the Libertarian Party, offering them $2,000 in exchange for saying in court that the petitions they had gathered were falsified.”
Bribery? Suborning perjury to knock the Libertarian Party off the ballot?
That’s what we’ve been up against. That’s what we have to overcome.
Do you think that’s the end of the Republican Party’s Dirty Tricks to undermine and sabotage the Libertarian Party during this 2012 Election?
Not hardly.
Republicans have mounted a targeted stealth campaign to neutralize, compromise, and con our voters into staying home – or voting for Mitt Romney.
Which voters? Libertarian Party members, Ron Paul supporters, fiscal conservative independents, and True Blue Tea Party loyalists in razor-close Tipping Point states – New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Colorado – and even Montana.
Hundreds of these stealth Republicans, pretending to be Libertarians or Ron Paul activists, are regularly calling into Talk Radio shows, and telling listeners why they just can’t, can’t let Obama win – why they must, must vote for Mitt Romney.
These Republican Judas Goats are trying to use ‘Social Proof’ – a manipulation strategy – to trick liberty lovers into voting for Big Government Mitt Romney for President.
We have reports from Colorado and Montana of boiler room telephone operations – with fakers, counterfeits, and imposters pretending to be ‘tormented,’ ‘struggling,’ and ‘torn’ over whether to vote for Gary Johnson or Mitt Romney…and deciding that they must, must vote for Republican Mitt Romney.
Are YOU torn between voting for Libertarian Presidential candidate, Governor Gary Johnson – and Republican Mitt Romney?
Me neither!
Then there’s the direct mail flood from “Libertarians” for Romney, “Ron Paul Activists” for Romney, “Tea Partiers” for Romney.  All trying to wear you down. Trying to convince us that Big Government Mitt Romney is really on our side. Trying to plant doubts, undermine our resolve, weaken our efforts – so we give up and stay home, or, vote Republican.
Talk Radio, phone calls, direct mail – and, of course, all over the Internet and Social Media.
Lies, half truths, and cons to talk our supporters out of voting Libertarian. To shut us up, grind us down, and demoralize us during these last 4 weeks before Election Day.
Republicans are working hard to drive down voter turnout for Libertarian Party candidates up and down the ticket.
The Mitt Romney Republicans will say anything and do anything to silence your voice for liberty. Your vote for liberty. And the votes of everyone that you and I win over to the cause of freedom.
Especially to push down the votes and turn out for our Libertarian Presidential Ticket: 2-Term Governor Gary Johnson and 25-Year Superior Court Judge Jim Gray.
Fight back. Help us fight back. We only have 28 days left.
Are you able to donate $10,000 or $5,000 to help us cancel out the Republican lies to Libertarian voters? Will you please step forward and donate now?
Or, are you a libertarian who can contribute $2,500 or $1,000 to help us revitalize Libertarian supporters and voters this election? Will you please donate it now?
Or, do you have a budget that would allow you to give a one-time $500 or $250 donation now to make sure that hundreds of thousands of Americans hear our freedom message? Will you, please?
Or could you possibly give $150 or $85 or $50 or $25 today – to take advantage of this only-once-every-four-years opportunity?
Please either click and donate now or mail your donation to the address below with "Fight Back 2012" in the memo.
Thank you.
Yours in liberty,

Carla Howell, Executive Director
Libertarian Party
P.S. Don’t let the Republican Dirty Tricks Gang get away with it. We only have 28 days. Please help our Libertarian Party candidates get publicity, get news coverage, and get votes - NOW.  Will you please donate $25 or $50 or $150 or $1,000? Your donation is our budget.                                  

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.