Natasha Pettigrew, 1980-2010

I write this in tears. In case you haven't yet heard the dreadful news, Natasha Pettigrew, Green candidate for US Senate died today after being hit by a Cadillac Escalade while riding her bicycle early Sunday morning.

I met her several times on the campaign trail, and she was simply one of the nicest, loveliest young women you could ever hope to meet. Just now, for the first time, I visited her website. Rather than being ideological and shrill, it's full of positivity and wholesomeness. She writes about making herself accessible to her constituents, and making Maryland live up to the words of Lincoln's Gettysburg address: Government of, by and for the people. She mentions her love of running, biking and swimming, and the joy her eight year old, three legged dog Bill gives her.

The first time I met Natasha was at a candidate forum in Westminster. Her mother Kennis was with her as an informal campaign manager and chief supporter. I cannot imagine how devastated she must be to lose her beautiful daughter.

To a certain extent, all of us candidates who represent the Libertarian, Green and Constitution Parties feel that we are on the same side, because we are fighting a common enemy - the Demopublican/Republicrat duopoly. Lorenzo and I had intended to vote for Natasha Pettigrew for US Senate.

Natasha, you are sorely missed.

Susan Gaztañaga
Libertarian candidate for Governor of Maryland

Libertarianism and the Poor

Date: 

Mon, 09/20/2010

Author: 

Mark Grannis

We know free markets produce more prosperity, and we know government spending is often ineffective or worse.  But many are nonetheless reluctant to embrace libertarian ideas because of their commitment to social justice.  Without the welfare state, how would Libertarians take care of the poor?

The short answer is:  Voluntarily.  Libertarians know as well as anyone that many people in our society sometimes find themselves in difficult circumstances through no fault of their own.  We are as likely to believe that looking out for least fortunate among us is not only compassionate but essential to a healthy community.  And many of us, including this writer, come from religious traditions that leave no room for doubt about the obligation to help the poor. For most of us, then, the question is not whether to help the poor, but how.  And our historical experience strongly suggests that government programs just don't improve the welfare of the poor as well as voluntary assistance does.

The first problem with government aid is that it is easily misdirected.  Government anti-poverty programs may be intended as boons for the poor, but they tend to become boondoggles for the powerful.  This shouldn’t surprise us, because when we make charity part of a government budget we inevitably place it in competition with other budgetary priorities.  In a politically driven process, if it’s the nameless needy versus failed Wall Street banks, the needy don’t stand a chance.  The working poor would have a much better chance of getting ahead if they were simply permitted to keep more of what they produce.

Establishment is to blame for country's problems -- consider voting Libertarian

Many years ago, one of our founding fathers, Thomas Jefferson, provided us with this warning:

"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds ... (we will) have no time to think, no means of calling our mis-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers. ... And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for (another) ... till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery. ... And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression."

 The greatest threat to our national security and our sovereignty is our national debt. It is not terrorism, Iran or North Korea, but the financial crisis that is bearing down upon us.
Who is to blame for this? The same people we continue to elect to the same seats in every election from the same political parties.
Establishment candidates have prevailed in the primaries in Maryland. There are Libertarian choices on Election Day: Susan Gaztañaga for governor, Dr. Richard Davis for Congress and Mike Calpino for Wicomico County Council District 2.

Don't we need a strong government to protect us from business?

by Mark Grannis- Libertarian Candidate for Congress in Maryland's 8th District

Yesterday we looked at how liberty creates prosperity, and how government interference with our economic liberty distorts investment decisions and makes us worse off. But some people think we need a strong government to protect us from powerful economic interests. That theory sounds reasonable—if you don’t know what it’s like to run a business and you don’t pay any attention to how government works in practice.
But in practice, even large businesses don’t have anything like the power screenwriters give them in the movies. As the late Harry Browne used to say, “No matter how big a business is, you don’t have to deal with it; there’s always an alternative—including not buying at all.” Show me a business that treats its customers the way the Post Office and the Motor Vehicle Administration do, and I’ll show you a stock you should short.

And in practice, career politicians and industry regulators almost always use government to advance the interests of the largest and most politically connected businesses rather than their smaller competitors or their customers. Indeed, when I ask people to give me an example of a business from which they need to be protected, most reach for government-sponsored monopolies, like the old AT&T. Occasionally someone mentions a firm that figured prominently in the credit meltdown of late 2008, but those firms would no longer exist if it weren’t for their political clout. As a purely economic matter, the free market was all set to discipline those firms with bankruptcy until the government stepped in.

LP Monday Message: Candidates, Campaigns, Polls, Fundraising

Dear Friend of Liberty,

We have a great slate of over 800 Libertarian candidates for the upcoming November elections. Many of them are looking for more coverage on our website, in our emails, and in LP News. They want publicity, donations and help. That's a good thing.

Unfortunately, there's just too much information about our candidates for us to convey directly. And even though there are probably a hundred candidates around the country who would be happy to email all Libertarians nationwide each week, we know that you might not appreciate getting that much unsolicited email.

We have to rely on our state and local affiliates to provide announcements about the campaigns. I also encourage you to seek out candidates you might be interested in, and get more information. You can visit all 800 candidates listed here. Some of them have websites with email announcements you can sign up for.

Even though it's impossible to give you a picture of what's going on with all our candidates, I would like to pass along some notes about a few of this year's campaigns. (The selection of campaigns is arbitrary, but hopefully interesting, even if you live in a different state.)