Indiana Libertarian United States Senate Candidate Rebecca Sink-Burris is featured on the front page of today's (September 6, 2010) Indianapolis Star. Click here for the article on the Star website. Click here for the Indianapolis Star home page, go to the left column, scroll down about half-way, and click on the link "View larger version" below the picture of today's front page. You can see the feature article's placement on a picture of the actual front page.

I'll bet good money that the result of the efforts of Cleveland to promote recycling will have an unintended consequence - illegal dumping of trash. Why don't the nanny staters get the law of unintended consequences?

Something occurred to me at the Dollar Store this week.
The prescription to correct my near-sightedness has finally gotten high enough (but still not THAT high) that it affects my ability to read things close up. So, if I'm wearing my contacts it is difficult, uncomfortable or impossible sometimes to make out the text in a book or examine something close up.
So, I finally broke down and bought a pair of reading glasses so I don't have to keep borrowing Lisa's pink ones to read at night. The glasses were a moderate +1.5 power, they were easily available at the Dollar Tree* for, yep, a whole dollar. Now, interestingly enough, I cannot purchase -1.5 (or the -2.5 I need) glasses for $1.00. I must pay for an optometrist visit, get a prescription, pick out frames, pick out lens or contact options and ultimately I'm out the door for usually between $100 and $200.
Think about this for a minute. In one case I can go to the dollar store, select what works to improve my vision to my satisfaction and it costs me a dollar. In the other, because of government regulations, I have to spend 100 to 200 times that amount to get the others.
I think I might even go back and get a few extra pairs so I always have some handy (keep a pair in my desk, in the bedroom in my laptop bag ... why not?)
Think about this massive cost difference when you consider government's role in health care, insurance or any other industry.
*note: I wanted to look at Dollar General since they support Indy Car driver Sarah Fisher; but, the nearest Dollar General store to me appears to have closed down (even thought it's still listed on their web site). Also, cheap reading glasses at CVS right in front of where the Dollar General used to be were around $16.00 - I didn't buy those.

I assume that since government law enforcement is now going after fire breathing bartenders that all of the rapists, murderers, child molesters, burglars and robbers have been arrested and convicted?

Most people in the liberty movement are well aware of Peter Schiff. Peter Schiff is the president of Euro-Pacific Capital and is running to be the Republican nominee for Chris Dodd's soon to be vacant Senate seat in Connecticut. Peter is frequently found on the cable TV news shows talking about the economy and the mistakes that government is making in their efforts to try and "fix" what government broke. He is a student of Austrian free market economic theory and predicted the big economic meltdown will eerie accuracy.
Wayne Root was recently competing to be the National Chairman of the Libertarian Party and ended up settling for a spot on the Libertarian National Committee. Wayne is high energy guy who , during and after his stint as the party's vice-presidential nominee in 2008, has built up quite a resume of television appearances promoting the Libertarian party and his continuing to mature brand of big-tent libertarianism.
This past week a bit of a stink got raised because Wayne Root (Libertarian) sent out an endorsement and fundraising e-mail on behalf of Peter Schiff (Republican). I have to admit that it caused me some pause as I read it and considered the political ramifications and appropriateness of the message; but, as a huge fan of Peter Schiff and someone who wants him to win his race I agreed with Wayne's motive and intent. I also immediately knew others would use this as another reason to try and heap criticism on Mr. Root. Sure enough, as Libertarians are often want to do, the rock throwing commenced immediately and, I'm sorry, it's just silly and shows a non-commitment to freedom, sound economics and liberty and makes the rock throwers look like any other kind of partisan party hack.
There is no Libertarian candidate vying for the Connecticut Senate seat. And Libertarians (big L and small) should always be interested in having as many great pro-liberty options on the ballot as possible. As a fictional example, who wouldn't feel great about having to pick between three candidates like Ron Paul, Peter Schiff and Michael Badnarik (or Judge Napolitano, John Stossel, etc...) regardless of the letter after their name on a ballot?? How great would that be? Knowing that whichever candidate won, you're going to get a libertarian defender of natural rights and the Constitution?
A bunch of the rock throwers in this case are publicly on record as having given money to Ron Paul's Republican presidential campaign. So, if you're a Libertarian that is going to blast Wayne for endorsing the most libertarian candidate in a race with no "big L" competitor because the guy has an "R" after his name, you better darn well make sure you didn't give enough money to Ron Paul to show up on public FEC reports. Because, well, that would make you a hypocrite would it not? Hope you didn't vote in a Republican primary (for Ron or anyone else) either.
So, at the end of the day, SO WHAT if Wayne threw some support behind one of the best advocates for free market systems we have in this country, Peter Schiff. Wayne's endorsement came on the heals of one earlier in the week from Congressman Ron Paul who is the best friend to liberty and sound economic principles we have in the entire Congress at the moment. I'll take a good advocate for freedom and liberty wherever I can find one, and if that means having to accept certain electoral realities when a really great candidate manages to sneak his way onto the ballot in one of the two "old party" systems, I'll take it.
So, for whatever it's worth. Ron Paul endorses Peter Schiff for Senate. Wayne Allyn Root endorses Peter Schiff. And so do I. Go to Peter's campaign web site and toss a few bucks his way but don't forget your local Libertarian friends either. Let the children keep throwing rocks and whining, the rest of us will take freedom and liberty wherever we can find it.

Here is part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6G1rq5LdA4

Robert Butler, Executive Director of the Libertarian Party of Texas, has written 18 Steps to Win a Local Election, consisting of an handbook and workbook.
I highly recommend both of these to Libertarians running for office.
Both the handbook and workbook are easy to understand, easy to read, and systematically lay out the necessary framework all campaigns should follow.
Both only cost $25 as well. It is an incredible bargain.

As Libertarian Party national Vice Chair - I hear a lot about campaigns across the nation. A lot of good reports come from Texas.

The Texas Libertarian Party has really grown over the last six years, and is running very good candidates, and lots of them. It has also significantly improved its fund raising prowess, and has Robert Butler as Executive Director. Robert worked for the Libertarian Party of Indiana several years ago.

Here are some candidates and campaigns in Texas in which I'm hearing some good things:

1. John Jay Meyers 32 US House www.johnjaymyers.com 214-824-4150
2. David Smith 2 US House www.dsmithforcongress.com 832-329-5313
3. Robert Nowotny for State Rep 73 www.needtovote.com 830-228-5950
4. Jim Prindle 4 US House www.prindleforcongress 214-909-2311
5. Bruce West 8 US House www.brucewestforcongress.com 281-622-0732
6. Jim Strohm 21 US House www.strohmforcongress.com
7. Jim Stutsman 25 US House 512-797-3905
8. Ed Mishou 27 US House 956-541-7091

Now who to list is always a subjective call, and information changes daily. I'm sure I've missed some good campaigns in Texas that deserve to be called out as well.

I'm writing today to publicly state that I support Wayne Allyn Root for Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee along with his running mate, Mark Rutherford who seeks the Vice-Chairmanship. I have had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Root on more than one occasion as he tirelessly and unselfishly has spent time visiting my state and engaging with some of our leaders. I have known Mr. Rutherford for what this year marks as a full decade.
There has no doubt been significant and often unflattering discussion amongst members, fans and observers of the Libertarian Party regarding who should next lead the party. The national convention approaches in just a couple of days and I know that the other individuals vying for these positions with the party are bright, well-meaning people. Even when some of the rhetoric and tactics in trying to discredit Mr. Root have been divisive or misleading I like to believe that it is over an interest in protecting the Libertarian brand however misguided the effort. Regardless, it is clear that the Libertarian Party needs leadership that goes beyond an interest in intellectual debate and rock throwing.
The current environment is ripe for the Libertarian Party, if not libertarians of any affiliation, to stand up, be heard and let America know that there is another way. So many voters have really started to realize that the two old political parties are really just clubs with an interest in raising money and seeking power via elections and that they are not really organizations dedicated to preserving liberties, rights or Constitutional government. Sure, there might be some good people holding office who are still trapped within the old two-party system; but, how often are those folks with whom we might most agree marginalized despite their broad appeal?
In order to get the libertarian message out, I firmly believe that the party needs not only the kind of savvy intellectual leadership that Mr. Rutherford brings to the table but also the energy, enthusiasm and know-how that Wayne Root desires deeply to leverage for the benefit of this great country. If you want someone who can take a message to the media and to the people, who can engage with them and spread enthusiasm for libertarian candidates and ideals than Wayne is the guy. His choice of Mark Rutherford, the once long-serving Indiana State Chairman, shows that he wants to ally himself with people who have proven they can develop a Libertarian organization into an accessible, credible and important part of the political dialog as Mark and his immediate successors have done.
If you're looking for some kind of purity test that would isolate libertarian support down to only the most anarcho-capitalist folks among the party's ranks than, indeed, you may not be ready to help demonstrate to the rest of the world the kinds of pragmatic, sensible solutions that would gradually and increasingly show people that libertarian ideals and philosophy can and will work in the real world. The kinds of things that show that we can be measured and patient while peeling back the onion of spending, taxation and government control of our lives. And more than anything the voters need to know that the Libertarian Party will pay more than lip service to these issues; but, that if given the reigns it will prove that they meant it. Let's give Wayne and Mark a chance to see what they can do. It's time for some fresh perspectives while still sticking true to our core beliefs.
(note: the author is a former Libertarian candidate for U.S. House of Representatives, a former communications director for his county party, a policy advisor and occasional speaker on libertarian issues and helped other volunteers organize and support Indiana Tea Party efforts as far back as 2007)

This is an old ad, but it’s relevant to the upcoming convention in St. Louis…

This afternoon I recieved an email from the "Indiana Defenders of Liberty" organizers Duane & Dot Ott. This email was attempt to stiffle discussion of 3rd Party Movements on their email list. We all know which 3rd Party is the largest and who they fear will "steal" their conservative votes.

Granted, they did suggest that such disscussion could be taken to group disscussion folders. This reminds me of how the Republican mainstream dealt with Dr Paul and his supporters at their last National Convention. (A site for them to gather was provided several blocks from the Convention Hall in a parking lot.)

The most offensive, in my opinion, portion of the letter is extracted below along with the reply I sent in response.

"In the same vain, discussions of 3rd party movement & recruitment need to also be moved to the Message Board for discussion. The IndianaDOL & the Indiana Tea Party understand the historical importance & urgency of regaining control of both branches of Congress (both state & federal) in this 2010 election cycle, & we can not encourage the development of 3rd party movements with no realizable opportunity of impact, except to split the conservative vote. Members are welcome to debate the 3rd party perspective, but take that discussion to the Message Board, establish your topic & debate it with those who chose to join. "


As a committed member of such a "3rd Party movement", the Libertarian Party, and the Vice-Chair of its Marion Co. affiliate, I take extreme umbrage at this suggestion. This only confirms what I've felt all along, that the Indiana Defenders of Liberty are not that interested in seeing that true Defenders of Liberty, Libertarians, have a voice in their petty little movement. The "Indiana Defenders of Liberty" is nothing but a shill for the Republican establishment.

What does it matter if we elect Liberal Progressives (Democrats) or Conservative Progressives (Republicans), the overall result will be diminished personal Liberty. The point is some form of Progressive politician will be elected.

As to those Republicans who truly do believe in the natural rights of man as espoused by Locke and Jefferson, why are you not Libertarians? Why do you not have the total strength of your convictions? It takes courage to stand apart from the crowd and follow your heart. The men of Concord and Lexington did it even though it cost some their lives, and I thank Almighty God every day that they did.

I think we are now seeing the Tea Party Movement for what is has become. It is not the Tea Party of the Sons of Liberty, but that of the Mad Hatter and it's later than you think.

Tuesday, May 4, is Primary Election Day. Libertarians don’t waste taxpayer money with primaries, BUT THAT IS NO REASON TO STAY HOME ON MAY 4!

Everyone is given three choices when arriving to the polls on Primary Day: a Republican Ballot, a Democrat Ballot, or a SCHOOL BOARD ONLY Ballot. While voting Republican or Democrat is dirty and will go on your permanent record, School Board races are non-partisan and should be voted on by everyone (schools control 50% of your property taxes). Pike & Washington Twp’s will also have a public question that you’ll want to answer.

So go vote on May 4, 6am-6pm, and ask for the School Board Only Ballot. Then, come to the Liberty Election Night Party 6pm - 10pm at Claude & Annie’s (Pike Plaza) - 5162 Pike Plaza Road, Indianapolis, 46254, hosted by the Ogden/Maguire team for School Board.  Facebook Event: http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=106138229429464

The following candidates for School Board are endorsed by the Libertarian Party of Marion County:

Allison Maguire, Pike Twp School Board
Paul Ogden, Pike Twp School Board
Jo Coleman, IPS School Board

 Allison Maguire has a new website!

http://allisonmaguire.wordpress.com/

Allison Maguire - Pike Township School Board

Allison Maguire for Pike Township School Board

allisonmaguire.wordpress.com

I don’t have kids, but I pay property taxes, and I know how to budget. I will never vote to raise your property taxes, but will instead ensure that your money is used to educate students.

April 12 at 12:48pm · Glenn O. Hatmaker and Jon McPheron like this.

Now that it’s already too late, I happened across this great article about fixing healthcare.  It’s from the great libertarian think-tank, Mises.org

http://mises.org/story/3737

A Free-Market Guide to Fixing Healthcare
Mises Daily by Mises.org | Posted on 10/2/2009 12:00:00 AM

It’s a near-universal assumption of the healthcare debate that the current system is a market system and it is broken, and hence we should try a government system. The people who assume this aren’t considering the last 100 years of healthcare policy. Government is deeply involved at all levels, from medical licensure and patents, to direct subsidies and provision, to employee mandates and insurance-pooling controls, at all levels.

It’s been a steady path to medical serfdom all the way, under both parties, and this is precisely what accounts for most of the problems that people complain about. Meanwhile, the private dimensions of the healthcare system are what accounts for its merits.

So what are we doing? The very opposite of what we should be doing: more control instead of more freedom, more spending instead of less, more mandates instead of fewer. The logic of interventionism is taking over: problems are being addressed by more of what caused the problems. The sick patient is being given more poison with the claim that it is the cure.

We’ve put together this healthcare reader as a means of providing a deeper understanding of cause and effect. This market is like all other sectors of society: it functions best under conditions of freedom rather than state control.

Dailies:

• “Understanding the Costs of Healthcare” by D.W. MacKenzie
• “Is Emergency Care a Failed Market?” by Eric M. Staib
• “What Soviet Medicine Teaches Us” by Yuri N. Maltsev
• The Real Right to Medical Care versus Socialized Medicine by George Reisman
• “A Four-Step Healthcare Solution” by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Also in MP3)
• ” Universal Coverage Means Suppressing Human Choice” by Eric M. Staib
• “Socialized Healthcare vs. The Laws of Economics” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo
• “Why Obamacare Can’t Work: The Calculation Argument” by Gabriel E. Vidal
• ” Private-Sector Health Care Leads the Way” by Chris Brown
• “The Relentless Process of Socializing Health Care” by D.W. MacKenzie (Also in MP3)
• “How Medical Boards Nationalized Health Care” by Henry Jones
• “Health Care for All!” by Christopher Mayer
• “Health Care Interventionism: A Case Study” by Christopher Westley
• “Bad Medicine” or Bad Economics?” by William L. Anderson

Journals:

• “Socialized Medicine, Take Two” by Jeffrey Herbener, The Free Market
• “Socialized Medicine in America” by Timothy D. Terrell, The Free Market
• Two Book Reviews by Dale Steinreich, Drury University, The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics Vol. 9, No. 3 (Fall 2006): 75–85 (PDF)
  1. Lives at Risk: Single-Payer National Health Insurance Around The World. By John C. Goodman, Gerald L. Musgrave, Devon M. Herrick Lanham. Rowman and Littlefield, 2004.
  2. Miracle Cure: How to Solve America’s Health Care Crisis and W:hy Canada Isn’t the Answer. By
     Sally C. Pipes.
     San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute, 2004.

Media:

“Health Economics” by Walter Block, MisesUniversity, July 31, 2009 (MP3)

“Economics of Risk and Insurance: From Healthcare to Welfare” by Hans-Hermann Hoppe, MisesUniversity, July 29, 2009 (MP3)

Mises Blog: “Health care: the government is the problem” (Video)

Comment on the blog 

*** Other recommended articles {from the above mentioned blog}:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care/ - How American Health Care Killed My Father by David Goldhill

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2007-winter/moral-vs-universal-health-care.asp
Moral Health Care vs. “Universal Health Care” - Lin Zinser and Paul Hsieh
 
http://mason.gmu.edu/~ihs/s92essay.html - The Rise and Fall of Fraternal Insurance Organizations by Leslie Siddeley
 
http://mises.org/story/3657 - Involuntary Medical Servitude by Maria Martins
 
http://mises.org/article.aspx?Id=1547 - 100 Years of Medical Robbery by Dale Steinreich
 
http://mises.org/story/1588 - Real Medical Freedom by Dale Steinreich
 
http://libertariannation.org/a/f12l3.html
How Government Solved the Health Care Crisis
Medical Insurance that Worked — Until Government “Fixed” It
by Roderick T. Long

The following question was recently asked by Mark W. Rutherford, Candidate for Libertarian Party National Vice-Chairman…

“Are we a Supper Club or a Political Party?”

I want the LP to be a Political Party; as do others, like Mark and Rebecca, and Root.

There are those, however, who seem satisfied to remain a national Supper Club.
 
So I put the question to you: What do you want?

An update from our friends at Hoosiers for Beverage Choices…

http://www.beveragechoices.com/

As you may be aware, the 2010 Session of the Indiana General Assembly drew to a close last Friday. Unfortunately, the legislature ignored the voices of the more than 50,000 Hoosiers who support the modernization of Indiana’s alcoholic beverage laws to allow for Sunday carryout alcohol sales and cold beer sales at Indiana’s drug, grocery and convenience stores. Your legislators failed to pass these common-sense changes into law.

That’s not to say that lawmakers did not take up some alcoholic beverage issues this year. The legislature did pass Senate Bill 75, which allows for Sunday carryout sales at microbreweries and also extends the hours that bars and restaurants can be open on Sundays to 3:00 am Monday morning (current law cuts off sales at 12:30 am).

The inconsistencies and unfairness in Indiana’s alcohol laws get worse every year!

Hoosiers can purchase alcohol on Sundays at bars, restaurants and microbreweries, but they still can’t shop at their local drug, grocery or convenience store. Even though opponents of this common-sense change express concern over drunk driving, a concern we all share, they convinced your legislators to extend the time that bars and restaurants can serve on Sundays from 12:30 am to 3:00 am Monday morning.

The powerful package liquor store lobby was able to protect the monopoly on cold beer sales in Indiana given to them by your legislators for another year. Hoosiers will continue to pay a “cold beer tax” because of the artificial monopoly enjoyed by package liquor store owners at a time when drug, grocery and convenience store owners are doing every they can to help struggling Hoosier families deal with a very challenging economy.

Even though we are disappointed with the outcome of this legislative session, we know that these changes take time, and we are optimistic about our prospects for success during the 2011 legislative session. First, it will be a “long” legislative session, allowing for more issues to be addressed by the General Assembly. In addition, lawmakers must also pass the state’s budget next year, and as state revenues continue to fall, we believe that the additional $10 million or more generated from Sunday sales will be recognized as part of a common sense solution to budget shortfalls.

With your continued support, we will continue our efforts to modernize and bring fairness to Indiana’s alcoholic beverage laws will continue this summer. We will keep you posted of our efforts and let you know how you can continue to support this campaign.

As always, thanks for your efforts on behalf of Hoosiers for Beverage Choices.

Sincerely,

Matt
Hoosiers for Beverage Choices
www.beveragechoices.com