The Lion of Liberty - Patrick Henry

"When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: Liberty, sir, was the primary object."

Patrick Henry

... In Their Own Words - Special Guest Dr. Richard Davis

Dr. Richard Davis is a dentist from Hurlock, Maryland.  He is the Libertarian Candidate for Congress in the First District of Maryland.

"...In Their Own Words" is designed to provide a format where news makers on the Lower Shore of Maryland can provide the public with answers about themselves or information on a variety of topics at a deeper level. There are no canned answers, time limits or talking points.

This video was produced by www.nowbeingserved.com

LP Monday Message: High Unemployment on Labor Day

September 6, 2010

Dear Friend of Liberty,

It's hard to celebrate Labor Day when unemployment is 9.6 percent.

Government interference is the single biggest cause of unemployment. Minimum wage laws, OSHA, ADA, etc., etc., make it difficult both to hire and to fire workers. (And when it's difficult to fire workers, it's much less likely that they will be hired in the first place.) To reduce unemployment, we need to start repealing laws!

Section 2.7 of the Libertarian Party platform states: "We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain."

I read today that President Obama wants another $50 billion in Keynesian stimulus spending. Stimulus supporters think that government spending creates jobs. What they don't seem to understand is that the money is taken out of the private sector, which decreases private sector spending and investment, and that destroys jobs. I believe that stimulus spending destroys more jobs than it creates. We'd be much better off with the laissez-faire policies advocated by Austrian economic theory.

It makes me mad to think of all the ways the Republican and Democratic congresses, and presidents Bush and Obama, have hurt the private sector with all their stimulus and bailout programs. (Remember George W. Bush's 2008 "Economic Stimulus Act" with all the $600 "rebate" checks?)

If you'd like to help fight them, please participate in Quiz Across America.

Sincerely,

Wes Benedict
Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee

P.S. If you have not already done so, please join the Libertarian Party. We are the only political party dedicated to free markets and civil liberties. You can also renew your membership. Or, you can make a contribution separate from membership.

Making Government Irrelevant

by Mike Calpino

One of the great causes of division in America is the fact that everything, and I mean everything, has become a political issue. Any problem, any complaint, any issue that someone has is now thrown into the political sphere. Consider some of the big news on "the hill" this week. Rodger Clemens, a baseball player, is being prosecuted for lying to congress. What did he allegedly lie about? State secrets, embezzlement, fraud, treason? No. It was whether or not he ever used "performance enhancing" substances. Not to excuse his alleged lying but why was he ever before congress in the first place?! What authority does the government have to regulate A GAME!

We the people, unfortunately, have come to believe that it is right and proper to use the power of government to solve all our problems and meet all our needs. Every time one American citizen says "there ought to be a law" to fix some complaint or offense and another one says "government ought to..." to meet some need or want, our government is happy to intervene and in the process take more or our freedom and more of our money. Did you ever stop and wonder why we have all the special interest groups and lobbyists we love to complain about? It is because each one of them represents some group of citizens, small or large, that want to use the power of government for their own ends. In this game there are winners and losers and the animosity between the two increases as the stakes get higher and government becomes larger and more powerful. For every citizen that wants the government to do something, there is another citizen that must pay for it and give up some bit of freedom to accommodate this new government activity. That other citizen must now "lobby" on his own behalf, playing the game for his own protection. The government becomes no more than a legalized criminal enterprise, granting arbitrary favors and demanding payment for protection. 

China Celebrates Status As Number One Polluter

Libertarians: Obama is shockingly pro-war

WASHINGTON - Following President Obama's "end of our combat mission" speech, Libertarian Party chairman Mark Hinkle released this statement:

"President Obama needs to stop lying. In his speech, he repeated the ridiculous and false claim that the U.S. combat mission is over in Iraq. He seems to think that if he keeps talking about the war in a nice way, then the war isn't really happening.

"Unfortunately, even though President Obama is the one person on Earth with the authority to withdraw the U.S. military from Iraq, he has chosen instead to keep over 50,000 troops there, risking their lives, and bleeding American taxpayers.

"The Republicans in Congress are just as bad. They have consistently failed to own up to the terrible financial impact of these wars, all the while claiming that they want to cut government. They want to nit-pick Obama's past statements about the war, but in fact they should be showering him with praise for doing exactly what they want.

"This war has been a shameful failure from the beginning. But even if the U.S. military could impose a sustainable modern democracy on Iraq, it would in no way be worth the hundreds of billions of dollars, and thousands of American lives, lost in the process. The Bush-Obama War in Iraq has done nothing to safeguard the rights of Americans -- on the contrary, it has probably made Americans less safe, and certainly poorer.

"The purpose of the U.S. armed forces is to defend the territory of the United States, not to re-engineer foreign societies.

"Contrary to his rhetoric before being elected, the president has proven himself to be shockingly pro-war. In addition to sustaining the American war presence in Iraq, he has greatly escalated the War in Afghanistan. Just like his predecessor, Obama believes that government force is the answer to everything."

The Libertarian Party platform states under "3.3 International Affairs": "American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid."

For more information, or to arrange an interview, call LP Executive Director Wes Benedict at 202-333-0008 ext. 222.

The LP is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971. The Libertarian Party stands for free markets and civil liberties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party at our website.

QUESTION 1: CAN WE DO IT?

30 August, 2010
Dear Editor:

Here begins a short series on what I think a Congressman should consider about every issue. Washington abounds with wonderful ideas of things the federal government could do to make life better for the people, the country, and the world.

QUESTION 1: CAN WE DO IT?

The quick response is the President’s glib “Yes, we can!” After all, this is the country that has repeatedly put men on the moon. Yes, if we have a well-defined goal we can usually work out the details. That if, however, can be a big one. Yes, we have sent men to the moon, and, more impressive, brought them back to earth alive. We have NOT explored the moon, or established commercial mining there, or established a base to try to control tides or weather; we have simply sent men there and back.

Our record is not so impressive on less well-defined goals. In 1917-18 we sent troops off to “the war to end all wars” to “make the world safe for democracy”. It looks to me like war is still going on, and currently we’re just trying to make Iraq and Afghanistan safe for democracy – 92 years later. We’ve had a “war” on poverty for 45 years now and one on drugs for about the same. When your goals are poorly defined or you keep changing them, it’s a lot harder to meet them.

NEXT MONTH: PART 2 – SHOULD WE DO IT?

Sincerely,

Richard J. Davis D.D.S.
Libertarian for Congress

What's the Libertarian way to protect the environment?

 

by Mark Grannis

I’m an environmentalist. I spend several weeks each summer in New York’s Adirondack State Park, enjoying the mountains, lakes, and rivers in that beautiful place. But I’m against the “cap and trade” bill and most other ideas for new environmental laws and regulations, because they don’t work. Environmental protection has been dominated for decades by large government regulatory initiatives, but experience shows that government regulation can’t and doesn’t protect the environment as effectively as private ownership and a strong dose of civil liability for actual environmental damage.

In the short term, I favor waiving the government’s sovereign immunity in environmental litigation, so that government is fully accountable for the environmental harms it covers. In the longer term, I favor a transition away from government regulation, which doesn’t work, and toward strict enforcement of property rights so that people can sue for restitution from polluters who put things in our air, water, and soil that we don’t want there.

The first thing to understand about environmental protection is that government is the main culprit. Our federal government (particularly the military) is the nation’s largest polluter, and a great deal of pollution by commercial enterprises occurs on government lands that are being poorly managed. Why are government lands poorly managed? Because government managers do not take care of them as well as a private owner would. The Izaak Walton League, the Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club—any of these would manage our national parks better than the federal government does.

Sharptown Meet & Greet - Question for At-Large Candidates

A High Quality version will be available later.

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 7

This is the least controversial piece of legislation.  This is just an informational sheet that would require each tenant to receive and sign at the same time they sign a rental or lease agreement.  I was expecting a little more with this from all the hype about it.  I certainly do not have a problem with this.

Tenants' Rights Information Sheet

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 6

The repeated Calls for Service Ordinance
My biggest concern with this legislation is people being presumed guilty due to a verified call for service.  Sometimes issues arise, they are out of your control and the police are called.  This should not be counted against a law abiding citizen.  

I do feel it should be focused on criminal activity that is accompanied by a conviction.  Also, civil citation convictions for loud noise should be included.

I think this is a good start, I just disagree with the guilty until proven innocent attitude.

Below is the link for this legislation.
Repeated Calls for Service Ordinance

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 5

This legislation is giving NSCC the authority to inspect properties and are using the term area searches.  This language is very interesting and the authority here seems to be very broad.  There is no mention of giving the property owner or manager advance notice upon entering a property.  There is no mention of giving the tenant or individual occupying the residence advance notice.  

If this is the case, are there going to be accompanying search warrants?  Will the police be escorting the NSCC officers on these searches?  Does this include owner occupied residences as well?  These are very important questions and the grayness of the language brings forth many concerns for privacy and liberty. 

Periodic Area Search 

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 4

This the second most controversial piece of legislation.  

My whole issue with these code violations is the fact that an issuance of the violation acts as a conviction.  So that when you go for an appeal you have essentially already been convicted and are considered guilty.  You must now prove your innocence as the burden of proof is on you. 

I am not for this legislation, as I believe all burden of proof must be on the government or the one accusing you.  I also believe all should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 3

Equitable Relief for Prostitution Actions  This is the link for this piece of legislation.

I believe this is a good piece of legislation and I support it.  Prostitution is a real problem that needs to be addressed and this legislation will provide that to law enforcement and NSCC to address those properties that knowingly allow this activity.

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 2

I only have few a issues with this piece of legislation.  Mainly the loose determination of at or near the residence.  It is to vague because anybody could be near their cousin's house committing a crime, do we hold the person accountable who did not commit the crime or did not have knowledge.  It is a little to gray. 

Certainly if a place of residence is being used for criminal activity landlords need laws that help them get those people out quickly.  My concern is the use of "verified call for service" and that "a criminal conviction is not required to be in breach" is very shaky ground.  What if the individual has been falsely accused and it takes a year for them to go through the legal system?  In the process they get evicted and then the city could be potentially liable because of the law that was passed.  

That is my concern with the wording in this piece of legislation.  I think this is a good tool for landlords and property managers to remove people from their properties that engage in criminal activity.  It also needs to have protections in it for people who are found not guilty and/or people who are falsely accused.

Wisdom from Madison

"The purpose of separation of church and state is to keep forever from these shores the ceaseless strife that has soaked the soil of Europe with blood for centuries. "

James Madison

My view on Mayor Ireton's Legislative Package Part 1

I will go through Mayor Ireton's Neighborhood Legislative Package focusing on each piece one by one, offering my opinions.  I will begin with the most controversial issue.  My writing will be in blue, underlining is for items I am emphasizing concern.

Amortization Provision Eliminating Lawful Nonconforming Uses 

This legislation is intended  "TO ELIMINATE UNLAWFUL NONCONFORMING MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, CREATE AN AMORTIZATION PROVISION ELIMINATING LAWFUL NONCONFORMING USES THAT EXIST DUE TO THE CONVERSION OF SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS TO MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS, AND ALLOW PROPERTY OWNERS TO RECOUP THEIR INVESTMENTS."  The ultimate goal of this legislation is simply to take neighborhoods that have had high conversion rates of Single Family homes into Multi-Family Units and reverse those homes back to Single Family homes.  As we go through some sections of this legislation, I will share some of my concerns.

Remember these next two paragraphs, which are explaining part of the reasoning behind this legislation.

WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council recognize that the City of Salisbury’s records concerning zoning enforcement do not always provide sufficient data to determine the scope of conversions to unlawful multifamily uses and, in many cases, there exists no adequate means of determining which residences have been unlawfully converted to multifamily residential use subject to prosecution under the zoning ordinance;

WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council have determined that it is difficult for enforcement officials to ascertain which residences located in a single-family zone are lawful uses, unlawful uses, or lawful nonconforming uses and that attempting to enforce the zoning code on a case-by-case basis in this context would place an undue burden on the taxpayer;  It is important to understand their admittance of the difficulty of the government's inability to prove if a property is nonconforming.

Taking Economic Liberty Seriously

Does the Constitution protect the right to earn a living?

Damon W. Root | August 26, 2010

On March 5, 1934, the U.S. Supreme Court declared New York shopkeeper Leo Nebbia to be a criminal because he sold two quarts of milk and a 5 cent loaf of bread for the combined low price of 18 cents. As Justice Owen Roberts explained in his 5-4 majority opinion in Nebbia v. New York, the state’s Milk Control Board had fixed the minimum price of milk at 9 cents a quart to eliminate the “evils” of price-cutting.

As for the constitutionality of this action, which raised the price of milk during the lean years of the Great Depression in an effort to boost the profits of New York dairy farmers, while doing absolutely nothing to improve the health or safety of the milk-drinking public, Roberts simply shrugged. “A state is free to adopt whatever economic policy may reasonably be deemed to promote public welfare, and to enforce that policy by legislation adapted to its purpose." Furthermore, “If the laws passed are seen to have a reasonable relation to a proper legislative purpose, and are neither arbitrary nor discriminatory, the requirements of due process are satisfied.” In other words, when it came to economic regulations, the courts needed only to rubber stamp whatever the lawmakers deemed “reasonable.”

Read more Reason

Ron Paul, former LP Presidential candidate, supports property rights of Islamic cultural Center supporters

posted by Mark Hinkle on Aug 23, 2010

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014453-503544.html 

Libertarian Congressman Ron Paul is breaking with many of his fellow Republicans - among them his son Rand - to support the creation of the planned Islamic cultural center near the former site of the World Trade Center that has come to be known as the "ground zero mosque."  

In a statement decrying "demagogy" around the issue, the former Republican presidential candidate wrote late last week that "the debate should have provided the conservative defenders of property rights with a perfect example of how the right to own property also protects the 1st Amendment rights of assembly and religion by supporting the building of the mosque." 

 "Instead, we hear lip service given to the property rights position while demanding that the need to be 'sensitive' requires an all-out assault on the building of a mosque, several blocks from 'ground zero,'" Paul continues.   

 He goes on to argue that "the neo-conservatives who demand continual war in the Middle East and Central Asia...never miss a chance to use hatred toward Muslims to rally support for the ill conceived preventative wars."

The Real Costs Of Social Security

by James A. Dorn

This article appeared in Investor's Business Daily on August 20, 2010.

When President Obama told the nation last week that Social Security could be put on a sound basis with minor changes, he forgot to tell Americans about the real costs of that system.

Initially, the costs were low: The combined payroll tax rate was only 2% on a wage base of up to $3,000, for a maximum tax of $60 per year. Although the tax was legally split between workers and employers, the incidence of the tax (the effective burden) has always been on workers in terms of lower net wage rates.

Today, workers pay an effective payroll tax of 12.4% for Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance on earnings up to $106,800, for a maximum tax of $13,243.20 a year. That tax rate and the cap will continue to increase as the number of retirees grows relative to the working population.

Read the rest at Cato.org.

James Dorn is vice president for academic affairs at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., and editor of the Cato Journal.