With prospects of a Republican takeover of Congress, Libertarian Party (LP) Chair Mark Hinkle posed this question: "In order to balance the budget, where will the GOP pull the plug first: on Granny, or on foreign wars?"
Hinkle continued, "Of course, Republicans may have no serious intention of cutting federal deficits or spending, and their complaints about 'out-of-control spending' might be hypocrisy."
Over 60% of federal spending is in three areas: Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and the military. It would be impossible to eliminate the federal deficit without cutting entitlements or military spending, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Tea Party leader Dick Armey recently called Social Security a ponzi scheme.
LP Executive Director Wes Benedict said, "Social Security is universal mandatory welfare for seniors. It's very un-libertarian."
Benedict continued, "I suppose one way to maintain the Social Security scheme would be to rapidly grow the U.S. working population, such as by opening up our borders to increase immigration. However, Republican congressmen have tried to duck their responsibility for the bad economy by scapegoating illegal immigrants, so allowing a massive influx of immigrants is politically infeasible in the near future.
"Each child born in the U.S. immediately faces a debt of over $40,000. Ironically, it might not be long before American youth start ditching this debt foisted on them by their parents and grandparents, and start leaving America in search of better opportunity abroad.
"To make Social Security solvent as our population ages, the federal government either has to raise the tax, or cut the benefits. The last significant change to Social Security was a tax increase approved by Ronald Reagan. Libertarians favor cutting Social Security benefits, and we oppose tax increases. Libertarians would prefer to allow workers to opt out of Social Security. Perhaps entitlements can be cut gradually, rather than slashed abruptly, but that depends on taking action sooner rather than later.
"On the October 17 'Fox News Sunday,' I saw that Republican senate candidate Carly Fiorina was repeatedly asked what parts of entitlements she would cut to balance the budget, and she repeatedly dodged the question."
The recent Republican 'Pledge to America' makes no mention of cutting entitlements or the military.
Benedict continued, "Republicans refuse to say where they would cut entitlement spending, and of course Republicans oppose cutting military spending or ending America's foreign wars. Therefore, I'd say that Republicans are hypocrites who aren't serious about solving the federal debt problem."
A video lampooning John Boehner and the Republican 'Pledge to America' was created by Travis Irvine, Libertarian for U.S. Congress in Ohio District 12.
Benedict continued, "Only Libertarians recognize that we can't have it all for much longer. The longer Republicans and Democrats flush money down the toilet in Iraq and Afghanistan, the sooner the government will have to cut benefits for Granny. Of course, Congress may never have the courage to pass legislation to cut entitlements. In that scenario, Granny will eventually start experiencing 'rolling blackouts,' or perhaps a total system collapse.
"Libertarians stand ready to cut spending across the board. Perhaps the question Granny needs to answer is, 'Which do you love more: your Social Security check, or foreign wars?'"
The Libertarian Party has 21 candidates for U.S. Senate and 169 candidates for U.S. House in the upcoming November 2010 elections.
-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP
Showing posts with label libertarian party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label libertarian party. Show all posts
Monday, October 18, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Libertarians fight to break cycle of battered gay voter syndrome
Like abused spouses who keep returning to their aggressors, gay voters keep handing their votes to the Democrats who abuse them.
The Libertarian Party (LP) wants to break this self-destructive behavior and offers LGBT voters a better alternative.
LP Chairman Mark Hinkle said, "Exit polls indicate that Democrats get over 70% of LGBT votes in federal elections. Those voters must really love the Democrats' rhetoric, because they certainly aren't seeing any action.
"President Obama and the Democrats had almost a year of complete control of the federal government: the Presidency, the House, and a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate. They could have repealed 'don't ask don't tell.' They could have gotten rid of the Defense of Marriage Act. But they didn't do either of those things. That's a complete and total betrayal of all the promises they made to gay and lesbian voters for years.
"After a carefully orchestrated failure in the Senate, the Democrats are now blaming Republicans for blocking the repeal of 'don't ask don't tell.' Of course, three Democrats just voted against it too, including Majority Leader Harry Reid. Reid claims he voted for procedural reasons, but the whole situation seems calculated to look like they're trying to help, while making sure they don't actually help."
Unlike the Democratic and Republican Parties, the Libertarian Party believes that gays and lesbians deserve equal treatment under the law.
LP Executive Director Wes Benedict added, "The Libertarian Party neither supports nor opposes gay relationships. Libertarians are black, white, young, old, straight, gay, Christian, atheist, yuppie, hippie, rich, poor, greedy, generous, eccentric and just plain average. Though their backgrounds and lifestyles are diverse, they are united on the principle of minimum government and maximum freedom."
The LP Platform states:
"1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."
The Libertarian Party has 21 candidates for U.S. Senate and 170 candidates for U.S. House in the upcoming November 2010 elections.
-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP
The Libertarian Party (LP) wants to break this self-destructive behavior and offers LGBT voters a better alternative.
LP Chairman Mark Hinkle said, "Exit polls indicate that Democrats get over 70% of LGBT votes in federal elections. Those voters must really love the Democrats' rhetoric, because they certainly aren't seeing any action.
"President Obama and the Democrats had almost a year of complete control of the federal government: the Presidency, the House, and a filibuster-proof 60 votes in the Senate. They could have repealed 'don't ask don't tell.' They could have gotten rid of the Defense of Marriage Act. But they didn't do either of those things. That's a complete and total betrayal of all the promises they made to gay and lesbian voters for years.
"After a carefully orchestrated failure in the Senate, the Democrats are now blaming Republicans for blocking the repeal of 'don't ask don't tell.' Of course, three Democrats just voted against it too, including Majority Leader Harry Reid. Reid claims he voted for procedural reasons, but the whole situation seems calculated to look like they're trying to help, while making sure they don't actually help."
Unlike the Democratic and Republican Parties, the Libertarian Party believes that gays and lesbians deserve equal treatment under the law.
LP Executive Director Wes Benedict added, "The Libertarian Party neither supports nor opposes gay relationships. Libertarians are black, white, young, old, straight, gay, Christian, atheist, yuppie, hippie, rich, poor, greedy, generous, eccentric and just plain average. Though their backgrounds and lifestyles are diverse, they are united on the principle of minimum government and maximum freedom."
The LP Platform states:
"1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."
The Libertarian Party has 21 candidates for U.S. Senate and 170 candidates for U.S. House in the upcoming November 2010 elections.
-----
Community News You Can Use
Click to read MORE news:
www.GeorgiaFrontPage.com
Twitter: @gafrontpage & @TheGATable @HookedonHistory
www.ArtsAcrossGeorgia.com
Twitter: @artsacrossga, @softnblue, @RimbomboAAG
www.FayetteFrontPage.com
Twitter: @FayetteFP
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Libertarians pleased by ruling on gun rights
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on gun control in the McDonald v. Chicago case, Libertarian National Committee Chairman Mark Hinkle issued the following statement June 30:
"We are very pleased that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects individuals from state governments wishing to violate their right to own handguns.
"Libertarians have always firmly supported the individual right of self-defense.
"Now there is some hope that Chicago's horrible violent crime problem can be reduced by law-abiding citizens who will now be able to deter and resist criminals. More guns = less crime.
"It is disturbing that four justices voted to uphold Chicago's gun ban. Their position is an attempt to pursue a policy goal from the bench, not to apply the Constitution -- and to make matters worse, it is a policy goal that would be very harmful to the people of Chicago, and potentially to everyone in America.
"This ruling follows the District of Columbia v. Heller ruling, which overturned D.C.'s ban on handguns. That case was originally brought by Dick Heller, Libertarian Party member and treasurer of the D.C. Libertarian Party.
"We hope that this ruling will lead to further court decisions that reduce the government's ability to infringe on gun rights with burdensome restrictions and red tape.
"Republicans and Democrats both deserve blame for violating gun rights. While Republicans often position themselves as Second Amendment defenders, it is worth noting major examples to the contrary:
"Republican 2008 presidential nominee John McCain received an F- rating from Gun Owners of America;
"Republican president George W. Bush supported a program called Project Safe Neighborhoods that sought to toughen and federalize prosecution of gun control laws;
"When he was running for Massachusetts Governor in 2002, Republican Mitt Romney said, 'We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them; I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.';
"In 1991, former Republican President Ronald Reagan announced his support for the Brady federal gun control bill."
The Libertarian candidate for New York Governor, Warren Redlich, has commented that the ruling will affect New York gun control laws. On June 28 Redlich wrote, "This landmark ruling will require New York State to take immediate action to amend its gun laws so they do not violate the constitution. It is a striking victory for gun owners and for anyone who believes in the fundamental rights the constitution provides."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"We are very pleased that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects individuals from state governments wishing to violate their right to own handguns.
"Libertarians have always firmly supported the individual right of self-defense.
"Now there is some hope that Chicago's horrible violent crime problem can be reduced by law-abiding citizens who will now be able to deter and resist criminals. More guns = less crime.
"It is disturbing that four justices voted to uphold Chicago's gun ban. Their position is an attempt to pursue a policy goal from the bench, not to apply the Constitution -- and to make matters worse, it is a policy goal that would be very harmful to the people of Chicago, and potentially to everyone in America.
"This ruling follows the District of Columbia v. Heller ruling, which overturned D.C.'s ban on handguns. That case was originally brought by Dick Heller, Libertarian Party member and treasurer of the D.C. Libertarian Party.
"We hope that this ruling will lead to further court decisions that reduce the government's ability to infringe on gun rights with burdensome restrictions and red tape.
"Republicans and Democrats both deserve blame for violating gun rights. While Republicans often position themselves as Second Amendment defenders, it is worth noting major examples to the contrary:
"Republican 2008 presidential nominee John McCain received an F- rating from Gun Owners of America;
"Republican president George W. Bush supported a program called Project Safe Neighborhoods that sought to toughen and federalize prosecution of gun control laws;
"When he was running for Massachusetts Governor in 2002, Republican Mitt Romney said, 'We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them; I won't chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.';
"In 1991, former Republican President Ronald Reagan announced his support for the Brady federal gun control bill."
The Libertarian candidate for New York Governor, Warren Redlich, has commented that the ruling will affect New York gun control laws. On June 28 Redlich wrote, "This landmark ruling will require New York State to take immediate action to amend its gun laws so they do not violate the constitution. It is a striking victory for gun owners and for anyone who believes in the fundamental rights the constitution provides."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, June 3, 2010
New Libertarian Party National Chair Opposes California Proposition 14
Mark Hinkle, newly elected chair of the National Libertarian Party, and former chair of the Libertarian Party of California, issued the following statement today about California's Proposition 14, the "Top-Two" elections measure:
"Californians, please vote NO on Proposition 14. This is not the change we need. This Top Two system will shut out all but two voices in our November elections, which are the elections that count. Now more than ever, we need more political voices and broader representation on the November ballot, but this proposition will do just the opposite.
"Today, I'm putting out a call to all Libertarians, and everyone who values having ballot choices, to help us fight Proposition 14 in California. The Libertarian Party of California has organized a volunteer effort to make thousands of personal calls to California voters encouraging them to vote NO on Proposition 14. This drive will continue until the June 8 election, and the National Libertarian Party has pledged to give financial support to efforts opposing Proposition 14.
"I also want to call attention to StopTopTwo.org, a website with much more information about the bad effects that Proposition 14 would have. This website was created by Free And Equal, an organization led by Christina Tobin, who is also the Libertarian candidate for California Secretary of State."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"Californians, please vote NO on Proposition 14. This is not the change we need. This Top Two system will shut out all but two voices in our November elections, which are the elections that count. Now more than ever, we need more political voices and broader representation on the November ballot, but this proposition will do just the opposite.
"Today, I'm putting out a call to all Libertarians, and everyone who values having ballot choices, to help us fight Proposition 14 in California. The Libertarian Party of California has organized a volunteer effort to make thousands of personal calls to California voters encouraging them to vote NO on Proposition 14. This drive will continue until the June 8 election, and the National Libertarian Party has pledged to give financial support to efforts opposing Proposition 14.
"I also want to call attention to StopTopTwo.org, a website with much more information about the bad effects that Proposition 14 would have. This website was created by Free And Equal, an organization led by Christina Tobin, who is also the Libertarian candidate for California Secretary of State."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, May 21, 2010
Libertarian National Convention to be held May 29-31 in St. Louis
The Libertarian Party (LP) will hold its National Convention in St. Louis from Saturday, May 29, through Monday, May 31.
The convention will take place at the Renaissance Grand Hotel in St. Louis. The press is welcome to attend.
Information about the convention, including the schedule, is available at the convention website. The convention has been titled "Gateway to Liberty."
Additional meetings and related events will occur on May 27 and 28.
Unlike the Democratic and Republican parties, the Libertarian Party holds a national convention every two years. At this convention, delegates from around the country will be amending the party's platform and bylaws, and will elect officers and other members to the Libertarian National Committee.
One of the highlights of the convention will be the hotly contested election to replace outgoing Chairman William Redpath. Five Libertarians have declared their candidacies in that race.
Redpath commented, "We're seeing tremendous voter antipathy toward the Democratic and Republican parties. This is shaping up to be an exciting year for the Libertarian Party."
Currently, there are 632 Libertarian candidates declared for the November 2 elections, including 172 candidates for U.S. Congress. A list of candidates may be viewed here.
Among the speakers at the convention will be Bob Barr, the LP's 2008 presidential nominee.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
The convention will take place at the Renaissance Grand Hotel in St. Louis. The press is welcome to attend.
Information about the convention, including the schedule, is available at the convention website. The convention has been titled "Gateway to Liberty."
Additional meetings and related events will occur on May 27 and 28.
Unlike the Democratic and Republican parties, the Libertarian Party holds a national convention every two years. At this convention, delegates from around the country will be amending the party's platform and bylaws, and will elect officers and other members to the Libertarian National Committee.
One of the highlights of the convention will be the hotly contested election to replace outgoing Chairman William Redpath. Five Libertarians have declared their candidacies in that race.
Redpath commented, "We're seeing tremendous voter antipathy toward the Democratic and Republican parties. This is shaping up to be an exciting year for the Libertarian Party."
Currently, there are 632 Libertarian candidates declared for the November 2 elections, including 172 candidates for U.S. Congress. A list of candidates may be viewed here.
Among the speakers at the convention will be Bob Barr, the LP's 2008 presidential nominee.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Libertarians say Kagan is bad, but bigger problem exists
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the Libertarian Party, issued the following statement today:
"Elena Kagan is another bad pick for the Supreme Court. If confirmed, it is likely that she will vote on cases with the intent of advancing political policy goals.
"Kagan will probably vote to advance liberal policy goals, just as some other justices vote to advance conservative policy goals. That is not the place of justices, who should be applying the Constitution, not trying to rewrite it to make society work better according to their views.
"However, the bitter battles over Supreme Court justices expose a more serious problem in our federal government: the legislative and executive branches simply refuse to take the Constitution seriously.
"Once upon a time, Congress felt it had a duty to legislate in accordance with the Constitution. Likewise, past presidents believed that they should veto laws that were not clearly constitutional. But in more recent years, both branches have thrown this crucial duty away. Now their attitude seems to be, 'We can pass anything we want to, and let the Supreme Court deal with it if they don't like it.' That was absolutely not what the American Founders had in mind.
"We shouldn't have to worry so much about who gets appointed to the Supreme Court. It shouldn't be the case that a single justice can make all of American society lurch from one direction to another. They shouldn't have that much power.
"Republicans who want to throw stones at Kagan, ought to ask themselves why they supported the Bush Administration's blatantly unconstitutional Patriot Act, or why they supported huge expansions of the blatantly unconstitutional Medicare program. When they were in power, they showed absolutely no respect for the Constitution.
"I wish that President Obama had picked a nominee with more regard for the original intent of the Constitution. But even more than that, I wish that he and the members of Congress would stop shirking their responsibility to apply the Constitution themselves."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"Elena Kagan is another bad pick for the Supreme Court. If confirmed, it is likely that she will vote on cases with the intent of advancing political policy goals.
"Kagan will probably vote to advance liberal policy goals, just as some other justices vote to advance conservative policy goals. That is not the place of justices, who should be applying the Constitution, not trying to rewrite it to make society work better according to their views.
"However, the bitter battles over Supreme Court justices expose a more serious problem in our federal government: the legislative and executive branches simply refuse to take the Constitution seriously.
"Once upon a time, Congress felt it had a duty to legislate in accordance with the Constitution. Likewise, past presidents believed that they should veto laws that were not clearly constitutional. But in more recent years, both branches have thrown this crucial duty away. Now their attitude seems to be, 'We can pass anything we want to, and let the Supreme Court deal with it if they don't like it.' That was absolutely not what the American Founders had in mind.
"We shouldn't have to worry so much about who gets appointed to the Supreme Court. It shouldn't be the case that a single justice can make all of American society lurch from one direction to another. They shouldn't have that much power.
"Republicans who want to throw stones at Kagan, ought to ask themselves why they supported the Bush Administration's blatantly unconstitutional Patriot Act, or why they supported huge expansions of the blatantly unconstitutional Medicare program. When they were in power, they showed absolutely no respect for the Constitution.
"I wish that President Obama had picked a nominee with more regard for the original intent of the Constitution. But even more than that, I wish that he and the members of Congress would stop shirking their responsibility to apply the Constitution themselves."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, April 30, 2010
Libertarians call for more finance industry freedom
Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict issued the following statement today, regarding the financial regulation legislation in Congress:
"The Libertarian Party opposes the legislation currently in Congress. Instead of removing harmful regulations that reduce competition, create winners and losers, and stifle the choices of consumers and financial firms, this legislation merely adds to that heap of regulations.
"It is remarkable that so many people have blamed the banking and financial company failures on the 'free market.' The American finance industry is probably the most regulated industry in human history. It doesn't remotely resemble a free market, and that's been true for many decades. It would be much more accurate to blame the failures on government interference.
"The 2008 TARP bailouts were strongly supported by both Republicans and Democrats. Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain both supported them--Senator McCain even 'suspended his campaign' to rush back to Washington and help push through the massive bailouts. On the other hand, Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr firmly opposed those bailouts, and the Libertarian Party has continued to express our opposition since then.
"We're seeing the typical cycle of government regulation:
1. Add more regulations.
2. Watch the new regulations create new problems.
3. Blame the free market.
4. Go to step 1.
"The 2008 TARP bailouts were rationalized with the 'too big to fail' phantom -- the notion that if a big company goes bankrupt, then all financial activity will cease, and the world will basically end. It was one more example of government creating a 'fear of catastrophe' to get people to knuckle under to big government payouts.
"Another major problem with protective government regulation is that it gives consumers the false impression that 'everything's OK, the government will make sure you can't be hurt.' That causes consumers to stop doing their homework, and stop keeping an eye on the businesses they depend on. Then, when the government regulators fail in their job (as the SEC has repeatedly, for example), consumers get hurt much worse than they would if they had never been told the government was taking care of them.
"The problem isn't too little regulation, but too much. Banks, insurance companies, and other financial companies must be allowed to operate freely in a free market, and they must be allowed to fail. No other system will work. Heaping more regulations on top of the already enormous financial regulation pile will only lead to new problems."
Mark A. Calabria of the Cato Institute, writing in the New York Post, commented, "Far from protecting the little guy and sticking it to the fat cats, this bill keeps good, old-fashioned political patronage alive and well."
The Libertarian Party's Platform states: "We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"The Libertarian Party opposes the legislation currently in Congress. Instead of removing harmful regulations that reduce competition, create winners and losers, and stifle the choices of consumers and financial firms, this legislation merely adds to that heap of regulations.
"It is remarkable that so many people have blamed the banking and financial company failures on the 'free market.' The American finance industry is probably the most regulated industry in human history. It doesn't remotely resemble a free market, and that's been true for many decades. It would be much more accurate to blame the failures on government interference.
"The 2008 TARP bailouts were strongly supported by both Republicans and Democrats. Presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain both supported them--Senator McCain even 'suspended his campaign' to rush back to Washington and help push through the massive bailouts. On the other hand, Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr firmly opposed those bailouts, and the Libertarian Party has continued to express our opposition since then.
"We're seeing the typical cycle of government regulation:
1. Add more regulations.
2. Watch the new regulations create new problems.
3. Blame the free market.
4. Go to step 1.
"The 2008 TARP bailouts were rationalized with the 'too big to fail' phantom -- the notion that if a big company goes bankrupt, then all financial activity will cease, and the world will basically end. It was one more example of government creating a 'fear of catastrophe' to get people to knuckle under to big government payouts.
"Another major problem with protective government regulation is that it gives consumers the false impression that 'everything's OK, the government will make sure you can't be hurt.' That causes consumers to stop doing their homework, and stop keeping an eye on the businesses they depend on. Then, when the government regulators fail in their job (as the SEC has repeatedly, for example), consumers get hurt much worse than they would if they had never been told the government was taking care of them.
"The problem isn't too little regulation, but too much. Banks, insurance companies, and other financial companies must be allowed to operate freely in a free market, and they must be allowed to fail. No other system will work. Heaping more regulations on top of the already enormous financial regulation pile will only lead to new problems."
Mark A. Calabria of the Cato Institute, writing in the New York Post, commented, "Far from protecting the little guy and sticking it to the fat cats, this bill keeps good, old-fashioned political patronage alive and well."
The Libertarian Party's Platform states: "We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Libertarians question Republican participation in Tea Parties
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the Libertarian Party, issued the following statement today:
"Many Libertarians around America are planning to go to Tea Party rallies tomorrow. I also expect lots of Republican activists and politicians to be there. But frankly, I don't think those Republicans belong there. The people participating in these rallies are saying 'There's too much government spending,' but Republicans, decade after decade, have supported massive increases in government spending. During the George W. Bush administration, Republicans in Congress supported spending trillions of dollars on foreign wars, a massive Medicare expansion, and banker bailouts. Republicans doubled the budget and doubled the federal debt. Why can't the Republican Party just admit that it loves big government?
"If I thought there would be many Democrats at these rallies, I'd criticize them too. However, I think it's safe to say that they'll be few and far between.
"Many Libertarians are enthusiastic about the Tea Parties, but many are not. Many Libertarians are concerned that participating causes us to get lumped in with conservatives and Republicans. In our online poll at LP.org, 28% so far say that 'The Tea Parties have become too Republican-flavored.'
"Libertarians are often frustrated when the press characterizes us as 'right-wing' or 'conservative.' Although we certainly support reducing government spending, which most conservatives also claim to support, we differ from right-wingers on many issues: for example, we oppose foreign interventionism, support immigrant-friendly policies, oppose overreaction to terrorism, and oppose the War on Drugs.
"Libertarians are neither left-wing nor right-wing. We're in a different place on the political map, as illustrated by the popular World's Smallest Political Quiz.
"Some of the people in the tax day Tea Party crowds will be right-wingers, and some will be Libertarians. For those Tea Partiers who support Libertarian principles of very limited government spending, government tolerance on social issues, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, the Libertarian Party is ready to welcome them with open arms."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"Many Libertarians around America are planning to go to Tea Party rallies tomorrow. I also expect lots of Republican activists and politicians to be there. But frankly, I don't think those Republicans belong there. The people participating in these rallies are saying 'There's too much government spending,' but Republicans, decade after decade, have supported massive increases in government spending. During the George W. Bush administration, Republicans in Congress supported spending trillions of dollars on foreign wars, a massive Medicare expansion, and banker bailouts. Republicans doubled the budget and doubled the federal debt. Why can't the Republican Party just admit that it loves big government?
"If I thought there would be many Democrats at these rallies, I'd criticize them too. However, I think it's safe to say that they'll be few and far between.
"Many Libertarians are enthusiastic about the Tea Parties, but many are not. Many Libertarians are concerned that participating causes us to get lumped in with conservatives and Republicans. In our online poll at LP.org, 28% so far say that 'The Tea Parties have become too Republican-flavored.'
"Libertarians are often frustrated when the press characterizes us as 'right-wing' or 'conservative.' Although we certainly support reducing government spending, which most conservatives also claim to support, we differ from right-wingers on many issues: for example, we oppose foreign interventionism, support immigrant-friendly policies, oppose overreaction to terrorism, and oppose the War on Drugs.
"Libertarians are neither left-wing nor right-wing. We're in a different place on the political map, as illustrated by the popular World's Smallest Political Quiz.
"Some of the people in the tax day Tea Party crowds will be right-wingers, and some will be Libertarians. For those Tea Partiers who support Libertarian principles of very limited government spending, government tolerance on social issues, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, the Libertarian Party is ready to welcome them with open arms."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, March 19, 2010
Libertarian Party opposes health care plan
The Libertarian Party adamantly opposes the health care bill passed on Christmas Eve by the US Senate that is currently being considered in the US House of Representatives. The Libertarian Party calls on the US House to vote down this disastrous plan, and instead to pass laws reducing federal involvement in health care.
Libertarian Party Chairman William Redpath commented, "We oppose this horrible federal government expansion into health care, just as we have consistently opposed all the increased government intrusion into health care proposed by Republicans and Democrats over the years. For example, we vocally opposed the huge Medicare expansion pushed through Congress by Republicans in 2003."
Redpath continued, "It is a virtual certainty that the cost estimates of this legislation are drastically understated. When Medicare Part A started in 1965, the projected cost for 1990 was $9 billion. It turned out to be $67 billion. Should this bill become law, when the debt of the United States government is downgraded by ratings agencies shortly thereafter, it will not be a coincidence. That will increase interest rates, and the entire economy will suffer."
The Libertarian Party Platform says the following about health care: "We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions."
The words "health care" and "medicine" are not found anywhere in the Constitution. Accordingly, the Libertarian Party asserts that Congress has no authority to regulate or appropriate money for health care. (The Libertarian Party has consistently argued for decades that the "general welfare" and "interstate commerce" clauses are not generic authorizations for spending and regulation.)
Redpath concluded, "This is a top-down, Washington-mandated control of health insurance and health care in this nation. It is the antithesis of consumer-driven health care, which is what will ultimately be necessary to control health care costs and to provide the best health care for the greatest number of people."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Libertarian Party Chairman William Redpath commented, "We oppose this horrible federal government expansion into health care, just as we have consistently opposed all the increased government intrusion into health care proposed by Republicans and Democrats over the years. For example, we vocally opposed the huge Medicare expansion pushed through Congress by Republicans in 2003."
Redpath continued, "It is a virtual certainty that the cost estimates of this legislation are drastically understated. When Medicare Part A started in 1965, the projected cost for 1990 was $9 billion. It turned out to be $67 billion. Should this bill become law, when the debt of the United States government is downgraded by ratings agencies shortly thereafter, it will not be a coincidence. That will increase interest rates, and the entire economy will suffer."
The Libertarian Party Platform says the following about health care: "We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions."
The words "health care" and "medicine" are not found anywhere in the Constitution. Accordingly, the Libertarian Party asserts that Congress has no authority to regulate or appropriate money for health care. (The Libertarian Party has consistently argued for decades that the "general welfare" and "interstate commerce" clauses are not generic authorizations for spending and regulation.)
Redpath concluded, "This is a top-down, Washington-mandated control of health insurance and health care in this nation. It is the antithesis of consumer-driven health care, which is what will ultimately be necessary to control health care costs and to provide the best health care for the greatest number of people."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Libertarians criticize CPAC conservatives
As the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) holds its annual conference, Libertarian Party Executive Director Wes Benedict offered the following statement:
I'm sure we'll hear an awful lot about "limited government" from the mouths of CPAC politicians over the next few days. If I had a nickel every time a conservative said "limited government" and didn't mean it, I'd be a very rich man.
Unlike libertarians, most conservatives simply don't want small government. They want their own version of big government. Of course, they have done a pretty good job of fooling American voters for decades by repeating the phrases "limited government" and "small government" like a hypnotic chant.
It's interesting that conservatives only notice "big government" when it's something their political enemies want. When conservatives want it, apparently it doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants a trillion-dollar foreign war, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants a 700-billion-dollar bank bailout, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to spend billions fighting a needless and destructive War on Drugs, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to spend billions building border fences, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to "protect" the huge, unjust, and terribly inefficient Social Security and Medicare programs, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants billions in farm subsidies, that doesn't count.
It's truly amazing how many things "don't count."
Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh can't ever be satisfied with enough military spending and foreign wars.
Conservatives like Mitt Romney want to force everyone to buy health insurance.
Conservatives like George W. Bush -- well, his list of supporting big-government programs is almost endless.
Ronald Reagan, often praised as an icon of conservatism, signed massive spending bills that made his the biggest-spending administration (as a percentage of GDP) since World War II.
Some people claim that these big-government supporters aren't "true conservatives." Well, if a person opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, opposes the War on Drugs, opposes border fences, and opposes mandatory Social Security and Medicare, it's hard to believe that anyone would describe that person as a conservative at all. Most people would say that person is a libertarian (or maybe even a liberal).
Obviously, most liberals don't want limited government either. It's just that their support for big government leans toward massive handout and redistribution programs.
The fact is, liberals and conservatives both want gigantic government. Their visions sometimes look different from each other, but both are huge. The only Americans who truly want small government are libertarians.
An article posted at CNS News, linked prominently from the Drudge Report, noted that the Obama administration is on track to beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration in terms of average federal spending as a percentage of GDP. However, the article failed to note that the Reagan Administration already beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration easily. Roosevelt's average was 19.4 percent of GDP, while Reagan's average was 22.3 percent of GDP. (Source: White House OMB data)
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
I'm sure we'll hear an awful lot about "limited government" from the mouths of CPAC politicians over the next few days. If I had a nickel every time a conservative said "limited government" and didn't mean it, I'd be a very rich man.
Unlike libertarians, most conservatives simply don't want small government. They want their own version of big government. Of course, they have done a pretty good job of fooling American voters for decades by repeating the phrases "limited government" and "small government" like a hypnotic chant.
It's interesting that conservatives only notice "big government" when it's something their political enemies want. When conservatives want it, apparently it doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants a trillion-dollar foreign war, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants a 700-billion-dollar bank bailout, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to spend billions fighting a needless and destructive War on Drugs, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to spend billions building border fences, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants to "protect" the huge, unjust, and terribly inefficient Social Security and Medicare programs, that doesn't count.
* If a conservative wants billions in farm subsidies, that doesn't count.
It's truly amazing how many things "don't count."
Conservatives like Rush Limbaugh can't ever be satisfied with enough military spending and foreign wars.
Conservatives like Mitt Romney want to force everyone to buy health insurance.
Conservatives like George W. Bush -- well, his list of supporting big-government programs is almost endless.
Ronald Reagan, often praised as an icon of conservatism, signed massive spending bills that made his the biggest-spending administration (as a percentage of GDP) since World War II.
Some people claim that these big-government supporters aren't "true conservatives." Well, if a person opposes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, opposes the War on Drugs, opposes border fences, and opposes mandatory Social Security and Medicare, it's hard to believe that anyone would describe that person as a conservative at all. Most people would say that person is a libertarian (or maybe even a liberal).
Obviously, most liberals don't want limited government either. It's just that their support for big government leans toward massive handout and redistribution programs.
The fact is, liberals and conservatives both want gigantic government. Their visions sometimes look different from each other, but both are huge. The only Americans who truly want small government are libertarians.
An article posted at CNS News, linked prominently from the Drudge Report, noted that the Obama administration is on track to beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration in terms of average federal spending as a percentage of GDP. However, the article failed to note that the Reagan Administration already beat the Franklin Roosevelt administration easily. Roosevelt's average was 19.4 percent of GDP, while Reagan's average was 22.3 percent of GDP. (Source: White House OMB data)
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Libertarians respond to State of the Union address
Libertarian Party (LP) Chairman William Redpath issued the following statement today in response to President Barack Obama's State of the Union address:
"Tonight's speech was a reminder that, for decades, the policies of Republicans and Democrats alike have failed. Libertarians are asking people to take matters into their own hands. Instead of just complaining, we're encouraging ordinary Americans to step up and run for Congress on the Libertarian Party ballot line.
"I can say exactly the same thing about President Obama's speech tonight that I said about George W. Bush's State of the Union speech in January 2008: 'Tonight's State of the Union address went much as expected. Instead of calling for a more limited role of the federal government in American society, the President laid out plans that would only increase the government's intervention into the realm of economics, health care, education and foreign policy.'
"I am weary of the President's unspoken premise that only government--indeed, only the federal government--can accomplish good in our society.
"President Obama seems to be totally blind to the concept that government can cause problems rather than solve them. His speech was filled with 'More': more handouts, more spending, more programs, more bailouts, more regulations. We Libertarians want less government, not more.
"Not to be outmatched by the Democrats, the Republican Party conveyed its lack of seriousness in addressing this nation's government spending problems by having Bob McDonnell, Virginia Governor for eleven (11) days, deliver its rebuttal to the President. If they were really serious about addressing the dire fiscal circumstances of this nation, they would have had Paul Ryan, a six-term congressman from Wisconsin, who has proposed the most serious plan of anyone in the two older parties to keep us from going off a fiscal cliff.
"Last week, Alan Auerbach, Professor of Economics and Law at UC Berkeley and US government fiscal policy expert, said that the Democratic and Republican parties are in a 'death embrace' with their government spending. The only political party that is rationally and forthrightly addressing the need to cut government spending and end our culture of ever expanding entitlements is the Libertarian Party.
"As Americans lose hope in Obama, we Libertarians are warning voters against running back to the Republicans who got us into such big messes in the first place. Republicans started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Republicans made the false intellectual case for bailing out banks and car companies. Republicans argued that deficits don't matter. Republicans gave us the giant Medicare expansion bill.
"The President's suggestion of a 'spending freeze' was especially ludicrous and insulting to the intelligence of Americans. The amounts involved are minuscule, and Congress won't accept them anyway. Will Obama sign the spending bills that ignore his 'freeze'? You bet he will. Instead, the President should demand across-the-board cuts in all areas, including entitlements.
"The President talked a lot about jobs. Unfortunately, the policies he supports are responsible for most of the unemployment we see today. High taxes, minimum wage laws, hiring regulations, firing regulations, mandatory unemployment benefits, and other government interference make it much more difficult for businesses to hire and keep employees. As expected, the President's prescription is to increase the dosage of this government poison.
"While our nation is declining dangerously right now, a turnaround could be straightforward and simple with steps like these: 1. Bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2. Stop rewarding failed companies with bailouts; 3. Cut taxes and spending and let the free market work.
"Finally, on the matter of political rhetoric, I call upon the two older parties to stop spoon feeding politics to the American people as if we are a bunch of overgrown children. These are difficult times that call for more than rhetorical flourish or positioning a group of diverse people around a politician. Older party politicians need to be specific about their proposed policies, as Libertarians are.
"And, I know I'm probably just wasting electrons, but can't we go back to the days in which the President sent a copy of his speech to Congress and left it at that. The speech last night took 1/7000th of an entire year. I think the vast majority of the American people would agree that we have better ways to spend our time."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
"Tonight's speech was a reminder that, for decades, the policies of Republicans and Democrats alike have failed. Libertarians are asking people to take matters into their own hands. Instead of just complaining, we're encouraging ordinary Americans to step up and run for Congress on the Libertarian Party ballot line.
"I can say exactly the same thing about President Obama's speech tonight that I said about George W. Bush's State of the Union speech in January 2008: 'Tonight's State of the Union address went much as expected. Instead of calling for a more limited role of the federal government in American society, the President laid out plans that would only increase the government's intervention into the realm of economics, health care, education and foreign policy.'
"I am weary of the President's unspoken premise that only government--indeed, only the federal government--can accomplish good in our society.
"President Obama seems to be totally blind to the concept that government can cause problems rather than solve them. His speech was filled with 'More': more handouts, more spending, more programs, more bailouts, more regulations. We Libertarians want less government, not more.
"Not to be outmatched by the Democrats, the Republican Party conveyed its lack of seriousness in addressing this nation's government spending problems by having Bob McDonnell, Virginia Governor for eleven (11) days, deliver its rebuttal to the President. If they were really serious about addressing the dire fiscal circumstances of this nation, they would have had Paul Ryan, a six-term congressman from Wisconsin, who has proposed the most serious plan of anyone in the two older parties to keep us from going off a fiscal cliff.
"Last week, Alan Auerbach, Professor of Economics and Law at UC Berkeley and US government fiscal policy expert, said that the Democratic and Republican parties are in a 'death embrace' with their government spending. The only political party that is rationally and forthrightly addressing the need to cut government spending and end our culture of ever expanding entitlements is the Libertarian Party.
"As Americans lose hope in Obama, we Libertarians are warning voters against running back to the Republicans who got us into such big messes in the first place. Republicans started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Republicans made the false intellectual case for bailing out banks and car companies. Republicans argued that deficits don't matter. Republicans gave us the giant Medicare expansion bill.
"The President's suggestion of a 'spending freeze' was especially ludicrous and insulting to the intelligence of Americans. The amounts involved are minuscule, and Congress won't accept them anyway. Will Obama sign the spending bills that ignore his 'freeze'? You bet he will. Instead, the President should demand across-the-board cuts in all areas, including entitlements.
"The President talked a lot about jobs. Unfortunately, the policies he supports are responsible for most of the unemployment we see today. High taxes, minimum wage laws, hiring regulations, firing regulations, mandatory unemployment benefits, and other government interference make it much more difficult for businesses to hire and keep employees. As expected, the President's prescription is to increase the dosage of this government poison.
"While our nation is declining dangerously right now, a turnaround could be straightforward and simple with steps like these: 1. Bring our troops home from Iraq and Afghanistan; 2. Stop rewarding failed companies with bailouts; 3. Cut taxes and spending and let the free market work.
"Finally, on the matter of political rhetoric, I call upon the two older parties to stop spoon feeding politics to the American people as if we are a bunch of overgrown children. These are difficult times that call for more than rhetorical flourish or positioning a group of diverse people around a politician. Older party politicians need to be specific about their proposed policies, as Libertarians are.
"And, I know I'm probably just wasting electrons, but can't we go back to the days in which the President sent a copy of his speech to Congress and left it at that. The speech last night took 1/7000th of an entire year. I think the vast majority of the American people would agree that we have better ways to spend our time."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Friday, January 15, 2010
Libertarians applaud Joe Kennedy for standing firm
The Libertarian Party (LP) today expressed its support for independent Libertarian Joe Kennedy's determination not to drop out of the Massachusetts special election for U.S. Senator.
The New York Times recently published an article that considered Kennedy's effect on the January 19 election. While some claim that Kennedy will steal votes from Republican Scott Brown, others think his strong support for civil liberties and his anti-war position will cause him to steal votes from Democrat Martha Coakley.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, commented, "In fact, no one is 'stealing' anything. The votes belong to the voters, not the candidates. If voters choose Kennedy over Brown, it's probably because they understand that Brown is a typical big-government Republican. If voters choose Kennedy over Coakley, it's probably because they understand that Coakley is a typical big-government Democrat."
Benedict added, "If the next Massachusetts senator gets elected with less than 50 percent of the vote, blame the foolish plurality election system implemented by Republicans and Democrats -- not Joe Kennedy."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
The New York Times recently published an article that considered Kennedy's effect on the January 19 election. While some claim that Kennedy will steal votes from Republican Scott Brown, others think his strong support for civil liberties and his anti-war position will cause him to steal votes from Democrat Martha Coakley.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, commented, "In fact, no one is 'stealing' anything. The votes belong to the voters, not the candidates. If voters choose Kennedy over Brown, it's probably because they understand that Brown is a typical big-government Republican. If voters choose Kennedy over Coakley, it's probably because they understand that Coakley is a typical big-government Democrat."
Benedict added, "If the next Massachusetts senator gets elected with less than 50 percent of the vote, blame the foolish plurality election system implemented by Republicans and Democrats -- not Joe Kennedy."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Libertarian Party wants open health care negotiations
The Libertarian Party (LP) calls on President Obama to not break yet another campaign promise by directing Congress to have an open, televised format for all future negotiations on the health care overhaul bills under consideration in Congress.
In 2008, then-Senator Obama promised at least eight times on the campaign trail to have open, transparent negotiations regarding a health care overhaul bill. That promise has been broken. Most substantive negotiations have occurred behind closed doors, not "on C-SPAN" as the President repeatedly promised.
The LP urges President Obama and Congressional leaders to hold all future negotiations in an open, televised format, as the President promised.
William Redpath, LP National Chairman, commented, "The President has no power to force Congress to hold televised negotiations, but he is clearly the driving force behind the health care legislation being considered by the Congress. Unfortunately, the President doesn't want to keep his promise. And, we all know why. Public approval of health care overhaul is down to about 40% and is sure to plummet further once a little sunshine is inserted into the legislative process."
Redpath continued, "Open negotiations would let Americans see how esthetically pleasing sausage making is when compared to Congress' negotiation process and the details of the health care legislation. The public would gain a much better understanding of how horrible this legislation is. President Obama and Democratic Party leaders probably think open negotiations would create a public groundswell that would effectively kill their ill-considered remake of one-sixth of the American economy that would likely bring the day of our next financial crisis that much closer."
Redpath concluded, "Government has an enormous cost estimate credibility problem. When Medicare Part A started in 1965, the projected cost in 1990 was $9 billion. It turned out to be $67 billion. When Medicaid's special hospitals subsidy was added in 1987, it was only supposed to cost $100 million per year, but, by 1992, it cost 110 times that amount. If the government is wrong by a factor of 7.5 or more this time, the result will truly be catastrophic for the US economy."
The LP opposes both the House and Senate versions of the current health care overhaul bill.
On the subject of health care, the LP Platform states:
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
In 2008, then-Senator Obama promised at least eight times on the campaign trail to have open, transparent negotiations regarding a health care overhaul bill. That promise has been broken. Most substantive negotiations have occurred behind closed doors, not "on C-SPAN" as the President repeatedly promised.
The LP urges President Obama and Congressional leaders to hold all future negotiations in an open, televised format, as the President promised.
William Redpath, LP National Chairman, commented, "The President has no power to force Congress to hold televised negotiations, but he is clearly the driving force behind the health care legislation being considered by the Congress. Unfortunately, the President doesn't want to keep his promise. And, we all know why. Public approval of health care overhaul is down to about 40% and is sure to plummet further once a little sunshine is inserted into the legislative process."
Redpath continued, "Open negotiations would let Americans see how esthetically pleasing sausage making is when compared to Congress' negotiation process and the details of the health care legislation. The public would gain a much better understanding of how horrible this legislation is. President Obama and Democratic Party leaders probably think open negotiations would create a public groundswell that would effectively kill their ill-considered remake of one-sixth of the American economy that would likely bring the day of our next financial crisis that much closer."
Redpath concluded, "Government has an enormous cost estimate credibility problem. When Medicare Part A started in 1965, the projected cost in 1990 was $9 billion. It turned out to be $67 billion. When Medicaid's special hospitals subsidy was added in 1987, it was only supposed to cost $100 million per year, but, by 1992, it cost 110 times that amount. If the government is wrong by a factor of 7.5 or more this time, the result will truly be catastrophic for the US economy."
The LP opposes both the House and Senate versions of the current health care overhaul bill.
On the subject of health care, the LP Platform states:
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter: @GAFrontPage
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Libertarians opposed to new war plans for Afghanistan
The Libertarian Party (LP) today expressed its opposition to the Afghanistan war plans announced by President Barack Obama last night.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, said, "Rush Limbaugh should buy Obama a nice cigar. The liberal president has done exactly what the conservative leader wanted: escalate the war."
William Redpath, Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), commented, "This is further evidence that the differences between Republicans and Democrats are, at most, rhetorical. This president, whose votes made him the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, has just announced an escalation of a foreign war. His campaign promise of 'Change' now sounds a lot more hollow."
Redpath continued, "Some congressional Democrats may make a rhetorical show of opposing Obama's decision, but that is all it will be. Obama is guaranteed to get the additional troops and funding that he wants."
Redpath continued, "Instead, Congress should re-assert its authority in matters of war, by passing legislation that terminates the president's authorization to make war in Afghanistan, and that calls for an orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. If the president vetoes it, Congress should override the veto."
In September 2008, the LNC adopted a resolution calling for a military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Benedict commented further, "One problem with the president's strategy is that it demonstrates a hyperinflated fear of terrorists. When we act worried and threatened, we make the terrorists feel like they're having their intended effect, which encourages them to keep doing what they're doing."
Redpath continued, "According to the Cato Institute, 'the U.S. military's counterinsurgency doctrine says that stabilizing a country the size of Afghanistan would require far more troops than the most wild-eyed hawk has proposed: about 600,000 troops.' President Obama is proposing to put a total of about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, which won't come close to accomplishing anything."
Redpath concluded, "The president's speech was surprisingly content-free. The speech was nearly all platitudes, which is typical for politicians, particularly presidents. Will someone please restore substance to American political discourse?"
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wes Benedict, Executive Director of the LP, said, "Rush Limbaugh should buy Obama a nice cigar. The liberal president has done exactly what the conservative leader wanted: escalate the war."
William Redpath, Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC), commented, "This is further evidence that the differences between Republicans and Democrats are, at most, rhetorical. This president, whose votes made him the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate, has just announced an escalation of a foreign war. His campaign promise of 'Change' now sounds a lot more hollow."
Redpath continued, "Some congressional Democrats may make a rhetorical show of opposing Obama's decision, but that is all it will be. Obama is guaranteed to get the additional troops and funding that he wants."
Redpath continued, "Instead, Congress should re-assert its authority in matters of war, by passing legislation that terminates the president's authorization to make war in Afghanistan, and that calls for an orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan. If the president vetoes it, Congress should override the veto."
In September 2008, the LNC adopted a resolution calling for a military withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Benedict commented further, "One problem with the president's strategy is that it demonstrates a hyperinflated fear of terrorists. When we act worried and threatened, we make the terrorists feel like they're having their intended effect, which encourages them to keep doing what they're doing."
Redpath continued, "According to the Cato Institute, 'the U.S. military's counterinsurgency doctrine says that stabilizing a country the size of Afghanistan would require far more troops than the most wild-eyed hawk has proposed: about 600,000 troops.' President Obama is proposing to put a total of about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan, which won't come close to accomplishing anything."
Redpath concluded, "The president's speech was surprisingly content-free. The speech was nearly all platitudes, which is typical for politicians, particularly presidents. Will someone please restore substance to American political discourse?"
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Libertarians pleased by new federal marijuana policy
The Libertarian Party (LP) today expressed its approval of the Obama administration's new, more laissez-faire policy toward medical marijuana. The policy appears to end the practice of federal prosecution of medical marijuana patients and providers in states where medical marijuana is legal.
Wes Benedict, LP executive director, commented, "This is a small step in the right direction. The federal government currently wastes tremendous resources in the War on Drugs, creating a huge, vicious, violent black market. This new policy will reduce the damage and destruction, and it will hopefully end some of the unjust prosecution of peaceful medical marijuana providers and patients."
The LP has long called for the repeal of laws that criminalize the medicinal or recreational use of drugs.
Benedict added, "We urge the Obama administration not to stop with this small step, but to take further steps to end the destructive, unjust, unconstitutional War on Drugs."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wes Benedict, LP executive director, commented, "This is a small step in the right direction. The federal government currently wastes tremendous resources in the War on Drugs, creating a huge, vicious, violent black market. This new policy will reduce the damage and destruction, and it will hopefully end some of the unjust prosecution of peaceful medical marijuana providers and patients."
The LP has long called for the repeal of laws that criminalize the medicinal or recreational use of drugs.
Benedict added, "We urge the Obama administration not to stop with this small step, but to take further steps to end the destructive, unjust, unconstitutional War on Drugs."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Friday, September 11, 2009
Libertarians respond to President Obama's health care speech
In the wake of President Obama's speech to Congress, America's third-largest party wants to remind voters about Republican support for government-run health care plans.
William Redpath, chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) commented, "Make no mistake, the Libertarian Party is opposed to President Obama's health care plans, and his speech last night has not budged us. But we also opposed Republican plans for big-government health care, many of which have been implemented in recent years."
In 2003, President Bush and the Republican Congress enacted a Medicare prescription drug expansion. It was originally expected to cost $400 billion, but just two years later the cost was revised upward to $1.2 trillion.
In 2006, Republican Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney supported and signed a bill that required all residents to purchase health insurance, and increased state health insurance funding.
In 2007, Republican Texas Governor Rick Perry issued an executive order to force sixth-grade schoolgirls to receive HPV vaccinations.
This year, congressional Republicans put forward the "Patients' Choice Act of 2009," which would increase federal government spending and control of health care in a variety of ways.
The Libertarian Party has put a poll on on its home page to allow voters to choose which Republican plan is the most hypocritical.
Redpath said, "Republicans are living in glass houses when they complain about the President's health care plans and the bills in the Democratic-controlled Congress."
Redpath continued, "It's time for President Obama to be intellectually honest, himself, and to stop inferring that his ideas of health care reform are the only ones out there. With neither of the major parties is there any serious discussion about letting individuals control their own health care dollars, moving away from employer-provided health insurance, and increasing competition among insurance companies by letting people purchase health insurance across state lines and among providers by taking a good, long look at medical education and licensure laws to allow potential providers to freely respond to health consumers' needs."
Redpath continued, "But, before the President and the Gang of 535 even do that, it would be refreshing to at least hear them debate whether the federal government is empowered to be in the middle of all of this. An honest reading of the Constitution might stimulate the right move -- punting this to the states and the people."
The Libertarian Party favors a free market health care system. The party's platform states, "We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
William Redpath, chairman of the Libertarian National Committee (LNC) commented, "Make no mistake, the Libertarian Party is opposed to President Obama's health care plans, and his speech last night has not budged us. But we also opposed Republican plans for big-government health care, many of which have been implemented in recent years."
In 2003, President Bush and the Republican Congress enacted a Medicare prescription drug expansion. It was originally expected to cost $400 billion, but just two years later the cost was revised upward to $1.2 trillion.
In 2006, Republican Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney supported and signed a bill that required all residents to purchase health insurance, and increased state health insurance funding.
In 2007, Republican Texas Governor Rick Perry issued an executive order to force sixth-grade schoolgirls to receive HPV vaccinations.
This year, congressional Republicans put forward the "Patients' Choice Act of 2009," which would increase federal government spending and control of health care in a variety of ways.
The Libertarian Party has put a poll on on its home page to allow voters to choose which Republican plan is the most hypocritical.
Redpath said, "Republicans are living in glass houses when they complain about the President's health care plans and the bills in the Democratic-controlled Congress."
Redpath continued, "It's time for President Obama to be intellectually honest, himself, and to stop inferring that his ideas of health care reform are the only ones out there. With neither of the major parties is there any serious discussion about letting individuals control their own health care dollars, moving away from employer-provided health insurance, and increasing competition among insurance companies by letting people purchase health insurance across state lines and among providers by taking a good, long look at medical education and licensure laws to allow potential providers to freely respond to health consumers' needs."
Redpath continued, "But, before the President and the Gang of 535 even do that, it would be refreshing to at least hear them debate whether the federal government is empowered to be in the middle of all of this. An honest reading of the Constitution might stimulate the right move -- punting this to the states and the people."
The Libertarian Party favors a free market health care system. The party's platform states, "We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Monday, August 17, 2009
Libertarians press Congress on Defense of Marriage Act, "don't ask, don't tell"
America's third largest party challenged House and Senate Democrats Monday to fully commit to the equal justice for gay and lesbian Americans by rejecting a proposed hate crimes law and repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring military service by 'out' gays and lesbians.
"Libertarians are the only party committed to equal justice under the law, whether it is protection from violence, marriage equality or the ability of a qualified person to serve in the military," said Cat Sumner, Libertarian National Committee gay and lesbian policy advisor. "So-called " hate crimes' bills further divide America by creating different classes of victims for the same crime. Instead of dividing the gay and straight communities, we should be treating everyone equally."
"This so-called "hate crimes" bill is just an attempt by Democrat opponents of marriage equality to hold on to gay and lesbian support without actually fighting for them," said Sumner. The Libertarian Party is the only party in America not afraid to engage in a no-compromise fight for a country where gays and lesbians can live their lives without government-sponsored harassment. Libertarians challenge Congress to prove they are truly committed to equal justice for gays and lesbians by dropping so-called hate crimes legislation and instead repealing DOMA and "don't ask, don't tell."
Libertarians consider the hate crimes bill not just a violation of equal justice under the law, but an attempt by legislators to buy gay and lesbian support while still opposing gay marriage and military service. The original sponsor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, then-Republican Congressman Bob Barr (GA,) has recanted his support of the bill and is seeking its repeal. He was the Libertarian presidential nominee in 2008, winning the party's second-highest presidential vote total in its 38-year history.
The House passed a hate crimes bill, H.R. 1913, on Apr. 29. On Jul 16. the Senate attached a hate crimes amendment to a military spending bill, both of which were approved. The House bill and Senate amendment must be reconciled in committee before being sent to President Obama for his signature.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
"Libertarians are the only party committed to equal justice under the law, whether it is protection from violence, marriage equality or the ability of a qualified person to serve in the military," said Cat Sumner, Libertarian National Committee gay and lesbian policy advisor. "So-called " hate crimes' bills further divide America by creating different classes of victims for the same crime. Instead of dividing the gay and straight communities, we should be treating everyone equally."
"This so-called "hate crimes" bill is just an attempt by Democrat opponents of marriage equality to hold on to gay and lesbian support without actually fighting for them," said Sumner. The Libertarian Party is the only party in America not afraid to engage in a no-compromise fight for a country where gays and lesbians can live their lives without government-sponsored harassment. Libertarians challenge Congress to prove they are truly committed to equal justice for gays and lesbians by dropping so-called hate crimes legislation and instead repealing DOMA and "don't ask, don't tell."
Libertarians consider the hate crimes bill not just a violation of equal justice under the law, but an attempt by legislators to buy gay and lesbian support while still opposing gay marriage and military service. The original sponsor of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, then-Republican Congressman Bob Barr (GA,) has recanted his support of the bill and is seeking its repeal. He was the Libertarian presidential nominee in 2008, winning the party's second-highest presidential vote total in its 38-year history.
The House passed a hate crimes bill, H.R. 1913, on Apr. 29. On Jul 16. the Senate attached a hate crimes amendment to a military spending bill, both of which were approved. The House bill and Senate amendment must be reconciled in committee before being sent to President Obama for his signature.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Libertarians: Obama promises of postal system-style health care fail to deliver
America’s third largest party Wednesday took aim at comments made by President Barack Obama in a New Hampshire press event Tuesday, in which he took questions from a pre-selected audience. Obama compared his proposed government-run health care system to the nation’s postal system, which he admitted is “always having problems.”
“My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining…then I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time. I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It's the Post Office that's always having problems," said Obama.
“For once, President Obama is right. His proposal for government-run health care is exactly like the current government-run postal system,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman.
“Like the postal system, which is cutting post offices, delivering less often and runs multi-billion dollar deficits, government-run health care always leads to fewer facilities, rationed care and crippling deficits,” said Redpath. “Obama admitted the postal system he wants to model health care on is ‘always having problems.’ It’s one thing to have ‘problems’ when delivering a Christmas card on time. It’s a matter of life or death when the government-run health care system is ‘always having problems.’”
Libertarians urge Democrats and the White House to make health care accessible and affordable by dropping massively unpopular plans for government-run care and to instead repeal laws restricting competition in the health insurance industry.
“Like most Americans, Libertarians oppose government mandates that force you to pay for coverage you don’t need, driving up costs. Libertarians also believe you should be able to pool together freely to buy group plans and should be able to shop across state lines,” said Redpath.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining…then I think private insurers should be able to compete. They do it all the time. I mean, if you think about it, UPS and FedEx are doing just fine, right? No, they are. It's the Post Office that's always having problems," said Obama.
“For once, President Obama is right. His proposal for government-run health care is exactly like the current government-run postal system,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman.
“Like the postal system, which is cutting post offices, delivering less often and runs multi-billion dollar deficits, government-run health care always leads to fewer facilities, rationed care and crippling deficits,” said Redpath. “Obama admitted the postal system he wants to model health care on is ‘always having problems.’ It’s one thing to have ‘problems’ when delivering a Christmas card on time. It’s a matter of life or death when the government-run health care system is ‘always having problems.’”
Libertarians urge Democrats and the White House to make health care accessible and affordable by dropping massively unpopular plans for government-run care and to instead repeal laws restricting competition in the health insurance industry.
“Like most Americans, Libertarians oppose government mandates that force you to pay for coverage you don’t need, driving up costs. Libertarians also believe you should be able to pool together freely to buy group plans and should be able to shop across state lines,” said Redpath.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Monday, August 10, 2009
Libertarians turn up August heat on health care takeover
America’s third-largest party urged its members Monday to attend public forums being held by House members over the August recess and put their signature to one simple pledge – will they promise not to vote for any health care reform legislation they haven’t personally read in full and understand?
“No responsible Congressperson would vote to drastically alter one-seventh of the American economy, whether it is health care or something else, without first reading the bill,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman. “It comes down to one issue. Will you promise to be responsible and not approve something you didn’t even read?”
In a Monday e-mail, the Libertarian Party provided members and supporters with a one-page pledge form they can ask their congressman to sign. The pledge simply requests a commitment to not support any health care reform legislation he or she has not fully read in its entirety, and understands.
“If a Congressperson won’t be responsible and read the entire bill, he or she should make sure they understand in detail all of its provisions, then read something that is a lot shorter: The United States Constitution. Then, they need to ask where is the authority for any federal government involvement in medical care at all. That alone is sufficient reason to vote ‘no’ on the President’s version of health care ‘reform,’” said Redpath
Libertarians oppose the proposed “reform” of the nation’s health care system, citing its unsustainable costs and reliance on tax hikes and rationing. Libertarians instead support proposals to open up the health insurance market. More competition and choice in health insurance would drive down costs and force insurers to offer more choices in coverage.
The Libertarian Party Responsible Legislator Pledge is available to download at http://www.lp.org/files/ReadTheBillPledge.pdf.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“No responsible Congressperson would vote to drastically alter one-seventh of the American economy, whether it is health care or something else, without first reading the bill,” said William Redpath, Libertarian National Committee Chairman. “It comes down to one issue. Will you promise to be responsible and not approve something you didn’t even read?”
In a Monday e-mail, the Libertarian Party provided members and supporters with a one-page pledge form they can ask their congressman to sign. The pledge simply requests a commitment to not support any health care reform legislation he or she has not fully read in its entirety, and understands.
“If a Congressperson won’t be responsible and read the entire bill, he or she should make sure they understand in detail all of its provisions, then read something that is a lot shorter: The United States Constitution. Then, they need to ask where is the authority for any federal government involvement in medical care at all. That alone is sufficient reason to vote ‘no’ on the President’s version of health care ‘reform,’” said Redpath
Libertarians oppose the proposed “reform” of the nation’s health care system, citing its unsustainable costs and reliance on tax hikes and rationing. Libertarians instead support proposals to open up the health insurance market. More competition and choice in health insurance would drive down costs and force insurers to offer more choices in coverage.
The Libertarian Party Responsible Legislator Pledge is available to download at http://www.lp.org/files/ReadTheBillPledge.pdf.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
Friday, August 7, 2009
Libertarians to Democrats: Call off the thugs
America’s third largest party Friday called on Democrats to end what appears to be a budding campaign of union violence targeted at citizens who differ with the White House at town hall meetings across the country. Libertarians oppose not only the White House’s plans for government-run medicine, but the use of violence to achieve political or social goals.
A Tampa Bay Tribune story and a video posted to the Drudge Report both report physical assaults on dissenting citizens by union organizers brought to meetings by Democrats. In Tampa, union organizers blocked citizens who differed with the White House from entering a public town hall with Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL,) and allegedly scuffled with some of them. A video posted to YouTube appears to show union organizers physically attacking citizens who disagreed with the White House.
“The Libertarian Party is founded on one principle. We do not support the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals,” said Donny Ferguson, Libertarian National Committee Communications Director. “Democrats seem to think differently. When the Obama administration ordered Democrats to ‘punch back twice as hard’ against citizens who question them, Democrats responded. This Chicago-trained White House has brought Chicago-style union violence to small towns across America.”
“The White House told Democrat leaders Thursday to ‘punch back twice as hard’ when citizens express disapproval. That kind of irresponsible rhetoric is never proper when discussing popular dissent. The also made it clear they will bend Senate rules and force through government-run health care whether or not America supports it. That is a frightening departure from the traditional American practice of governing though popular will,” said Ferguson.
“If bringing in union thugs is an attempt by Democrats to scare citizens into not questioning them, it won’t work. Union violence may be how communities are organized in Chicago, but the American people won’t stand for people who think violence is the proper response to the fact they no longer have majority support.”
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“Americans still believe in the consent of the governed. Libertarians urge Democrats to listen to the American people, call off their union enforcers and drop their wildly unpopular scheme of government-run medicine,” said Ferguson.
A Tampa Bay Tribune story and a video posted to the Drudge Report both report physical assaults on dissenting citizens by union organizers brought to meetings by Democrats. In Tampa, union organizers blocked citizens who differed with the White House from entering a public town hall with Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL,) and allegedly scuffled with some of them. A video posted to YouTube appears to show union organizers physically attacking citizens who disagreed with the White House.
“The Libertarian Party is founded on one principle. We do not support the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals,” said Donny Ferguson, Libertarian National Committee Communications Director. “Democrats seem to think differently. When the Obama administration ordered Democrats to ‘punch back twice as hard’ against citizens who question them, Democrats responded. This Chicago-trained White House has brought Chicago-style union violence to small towns across America.”
“The White House told Democrat leaders Thursday to ‘punch back twice as hard’ when citizens express disapproval. That kind of irresponsible rhetoric is never proper when discussing popular dissent. The also made it clear they will bend Senate rules and force through government-run health care whether or not America supports it. That is a frightening departure from the traditional American practice of governing though popular will,” said Ferguson.
“If bringing in union thugs is an attempt by Democrats to scare citizens into not questioning them, it won’t work. Union violence may be how communities are organized in Chicago, but the American people won’t stand for people who think violence is the proper response to the fact they no longer have majority support.”
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.politicalpotluck.com
Political News You Can Use
“Americans still believe in the consent of the governed. Libertarians urge Democrats to listen to the American people, call off their union enforcers and drop their wildly unpopular scheme of government-run medicine,” said Ferguson.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)