Daily Archives: July 14, 2024

Free State Project activist Dennis Pratt and Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein debate the resolution, "A better way to persuade more people of libertarianism is to convince them of the ethics stemming from self-ownership and the non-aggression principle, without relying primarily on consequentialist/utilitarian arguments."

Dennis Pratt, a libertarian writer and activist in New Hampshire, took the affirmative, arguing that the consequentialist arguments typical of libertarian economists are only narrowly effective, don't represent the core of libertarianism, and are too difficult for most people to quickly grasp. The philosophy of self-ownership, he said, has far more force in its ability to persuade the most people.

Soho Forum Director Gene Epstein disagreed. While he espouses the same philosophy as his opponent, he made the argument that the empirical facts related to the poor results of government interventions can get many people to rethink their anti-libertarian assumptions.

The debate occurred on June 20, 2024, at the Porcupine Freedom Festival in Lancaster, New Hampshire, and was moderated by Free State Project founder Jason Sorens.

Continued here:
What's the Best Argument for Libertarianism? - Reason

Well, now its getting interesting. First, there was a mad scramble to collect signatures to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who had been running as an independent candidate, on the states Libertarian ballot. State Libertarians accomplished that.

But now the national Libertarian party has filed paperwork that counters that effort. Turns out that the official paperwork has designated the Libertarian national candidate Chase Oliver as their Colorado general election ballot name.

A month ago, the state LIbertarian party held a vote and rejected the national nominee; which is what led to the wild petition process to select Kennedy. The agreement with the Kennedy campaign included getting him to agree to a set of state party principles and a fundraising collaboration.

With the petition process complete, the Colorado Libertarians got set to file documents making Kennedy and his VP pick California lawyer Nicole Shanahan, the partys official nominees in the state. At that moment the national partys secretary, Caryn Ann Harlos who happens to live in Castle Rock, filed ahead of them. Her forms nominated Oliver and his running mate, Michael ter Maat.

Colorado law is silent on intra-party conflicts regarding candidate nominations, according to the spokesman for the Colorado Secretary of States Office Jack Todd, in an email to Colorado Politics. But he added that parties can not place multiple candidates on the ballot for president and vice president.

What to do?

According to Colorado Politics, both sides accusing the other of going rogue and suggesting the dispute could land in court.

View post:
Libertarians in a Quandry Does the State, or the National Organization get to Name their Presidential Pick on the Colorado Ballot? - The Ark Valley...

Today is July 11, 2024, and here's what you need to know:

Rival factions of the Colorado Republican Party have scheduled separate meetings a week apart in different corners of the state later this month to consider whether to remove Dave Williams as the state party's chairman, though the meeting set by Williams' allies is only planned to last long enough to gavel in and then immediately recess.

Leaders of both groups accuse the others of staging "illegal" and "fraudulent" meetings in what they characterize as attempts to hijack the state Republican Party for their own gain, even as GOP candidates are left scrambling to prepare for a crucial election just months away.

The Libertarian Party of Colorado's plans to place independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the state's ballot hit a snag this week when a national party official filed paperwork instead designating the Libertarians' presidential nominee, Chase Oliver, to Colorado's general election ballot.

The move has led to a standoff between the state and national Libertarian parties over which has the authority to put a presidential and vice presidential ticket in front of Colorado voters, with both sides accusing the other of going rogue and suggesting the dispute could land in court.

After voting a month ago to reject the ticket nominated by the national party, the state Libertarians' board announced last week that it would nominate Kennedy after reaching what it described as a "groundbreaking partnership" with his campaign. Elements of the agreement included securing the candidate's signature on a pledge to abide by a list of the party's principles and an intention to collaborate on fundraising, the party said.

A new panel of Colorado lawmakers, officials and industry experts met for the first time on Tuesday to take a closer look at gaps in cell phone coverage across the state.

The newly formed Cell Phone Connectivity Interim Study Committee has begun its work to identify gaps in coverage, particularly in rural areas and underserved communities.

Whether its for work, school, meeting virtually with your doctor, searching for directions, or contacting emergency services quality cell phone connectivity is vital, Committee Chair Rep. Meghan Lukens, D-Steamboat Springs, said. However, many of our neighbors living in rural and mountainous communities are stuck with unreliable cell services. Gaps in cell phone connectivity means Coloradans can find themselves on their own in a dangerous, emergency situation.

Colorado's second-highest court clarified last week that federal law does not prohibit a person's Social Security benefits from being diverted to pay for their ex-spouse's alimony.

Although other states' courts had addressed the issue, the Court of Appeals never previously evaluated the meaning of two provisions of federal law as applied to divorced couples. First, a person's Social Security benefits "shall not be transferable or assignable." However, those payments "shall be subject" to alimony, which Colorado refers to as "spousal maintenance."

The upshot, wrote Judge David H. Yun for a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals, is that judges may "consider social security retirement benefits, as well as other non-assignable federal benefits, in awarding maintenance or child support, even in circumstances where the order effectively results in an indirect assignment of those benefits."

Colorado's second-highest court reversed a woman's felony convictions for child abuse resulting in death last month after concluding the instructions that a San Miguel County judge provided the jury did not include the necessary language.

Hannah Marshall, 8, and Makayla Roberts, 10, were discovered dead and decomposing in a vehicle located on Frederick Alec Blair's Norwood farm in 2017. A forensic examiner was unable to conclusively state the cause of death because of the condition of the girls' bodies, but evidence suggested long-term malnourishment near the end of their lives.

Among those charged was Madani Ceus. Jurors heard she was in charge of the group of itinerant adults and children living on the farm. At some point, the victims were banished to live in a car with no food. Ceus directed that no one contact them.

Go here to see the original:
Libertarians in standoff over presidential ticket in Colorado; divided Republicans plan dueling meetings over Dave Williams; Social Security can be...

His supporters were out in force (literally) appearing around the (nonpolitical) FIBArk events, waving petitions, and talking up his candidacy and now it is official. The Robert F. Kennedy Jr. -Shanahan campaign has petitioned its way onto the Libertarian ballot slot in Colorado for president and vice president.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Courtesy of NBC News

In an announcement on July 3, the Kennedy campaign said it looks forward to joining forces with the Libertarian Party of Colorado to canvass, phone bank, and turn out the vote for Kennedy and the American freedoms that we will together restore.

It points out that the partnership with the Libertarian Party of Colorado is intended to disrupt the entrenched two-party system and provide Colorado voters with a viable alternative to our last two presidents disastrous status quo in the upcoming 2024 presidential election.

Kennedy, whose own, rich, famous family has disavowed his politics, and his stance on issues, is running as an anti-vaccination, anti-government, free-market, less regulation candidate. He often touts conspiracy theories and has been accused of everything from sexual assault to bar-b-qing a dog. He recently sat for an interview in which he reported that he had a flesh-eating worm (pork tapeworm) in his brain and added that it didnt impact his reasoning.

Thank you, Libertarian Party of Colorado and Chair Hannah Goodman for your visionary leadership in defense of freedom, said Kennedy. Together, we will win the White House and steadfastly protect the Bill of Rights, the First and Second Amendments, and all the foundational liberties they secure. Our administration will restore free markets, end corporate welfare, stop the money-printing and unwind the war machine it fuels. On day one, I will pardon Edward Snowden, Ross Ulbricht, and all political and corporate whistleblowers who protect our democracy.

It remains to be seen what such a high-profile third-party candidate might do to the presidential race; but many political observers say that his appeal leans toward the right, and could take votes away from GOP presumptive nominee Donald Trump.

The Libertarian Party of Colorado partnership is a testament to Kennedys unifying independent run and how the campaign is bringing this country together, said Libertarian Colorado State Director Isaac James. Our movement has universal appeal because of its common sense values, rooted in the founding principles of our country, and its rejection of the divisive fear narratives used by the establishment parties to steal the wealth of our children and keep their corrupt hold on power.

Excerpt from:
Kennedy Gains Libertarian Ballot Access in Colorado - by Jan Wondra - The Ark Valley Voice

Next week, the Republican National Convention will choose Donald Trump to be its nominee for the third presidential election cycle in a row. Between then and now, Trump will also choose his vice president. No one can know Trump's mind for certain, but he is believed to have settled on three finalists: Sen. J.D. Vance (ROhio), Sen. Marco Rubio (RFla.), and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum.

While the vice presidency is often derided as a relatively unimportant job, there are reasons to think that Trump's choice could have significant ramifications in the future. When Trump does, at long last, exit the political stage, his most recent veep will be a likely contender for the Republican presidential nomination in subsequent cycles. Vance, Rubio, and Burgum all share certain similaritiesin that they are Republicans who strongly support Trumpbut they are also distinct personalities with significant policy differences.

When Ronald Reagan ran the party, he famously used the metaphor of a three-legged stool to describe modern conservatism, with the legs being neoconservatism (on foreign policy), religious conservatism (on social issues), and libertarianism (on economics). This triple alliance continued through the George W. Bush administration, but Trump shattered it when he won the nomination and the presidency in 2016. Neoconservatism, in particular, fell out of fashion with the GOP; Trump also pushed the party to move away from economic libertarianism, at least on trade.

The battle for control of the GOP's ideological direction is still being fought, and Trump's veep and eventual successor could play a decisive role in winning it. (Trump is himself not particularly ideological.) For libertarians who would like to see the Republican Party adopt a more market-friendly platform wherever possible, the vice presidency has some stakes.

It's unfortunate, then, that Trump's seemingly most likely choiceVanceis also the least libertarian by far.

Vance first came to public attention after publishingHillbilly Elegy, a memoir about his adolescence in Appalachia. The book chronicled the decay of the American Rust Belt and the resulting social instability among the working class, and it helped explain Trump's appeal to blue-collar voters. It is notable, however, that at the time, Vance did not endorsethe phenomenon he was describing. In fact,Hillbilly Elegylargely avoids scapegoating market forcesand instead asserts that the struggling members of Vance's community were wrong to blame their problems on sinister outsiders.

Unfortunately, avoiding demagoguery is not a winning strategy when seeking higher office. Today, Vance is a committed populist who embraces tariffs and protectionism. He has called for the federal government to break upGoogle. He has even praised Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan, a Joe Biden appointee waging a one-woman crusade against major tech companiesand indirectly, their customers.

"A lot of my Republican colleagues look at Lina Khanand they say, 'Well Lina Khan is sort of engaged in some sort of fundamental evil thing," said Vance earlier this year. "And I guess I look at Lina Khan as one of the few people in the Biden administration that I think is doing a pretty good job."

Khan's entire project is empowering federal bureaucrats to gum up the operations of major companies like Amazon for the crime of efficiently and successfully meeting human needs. Vance co-signs this effort.

In truth, Vance is fond of all sorts of progressive economic ideas. Interviewed by Ross Douthat inThe New York Times, Vance showed affection for the minimum wage, explicitly rejecting libertarian arguments against it.

"You raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour, and you will sometimes hear libertarians say this is a bad thing," said Vance. "'Well, isn't McDonald's just going to replace some of the workers with kiosks?' That's a good thing, because then the workers who are still there are going to make higher wages."

Vance went on to argue that cheap immigrant labor outcompeting American workers was in fact bad and ought to be prevented by the federal government. That is Vance's ideology in a nutshell: If American workers lose their jobs because government interference sped up the process of automation, oh well. But if these same workers lose out due to free market competition, the feds should work to prevent it.

Vance is arguably more committed to anti-libertarian ideas than is Trump himself. Trump's rhetoric is often quite at odds with his actual policies, and he is capable of dramatic policy shiftslike supporting a ban on TikTok and then dramatically backpedaling. When Trump's former secretary of defense raised the idea of mandatory national military service, Trump called it a "ridiculous idea." Vance has said he is in support of some version of the proposal, however. If Vance becomes the vice president, he will be well-positioned to hone Trump's populist instincts and bring the policy in line with the rhetoric.

Rubio, by contrast, is not a very sincere populist. He entered the Senate in 2011 as part of the Tea Party wave; his instincts at the time were traditionally Republican, but he emphasized some limited government themes, like reining in spending and opposing congressional earmarks. He also supported immigration reform and wanted to design a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants living within the United States. Unlike other prominent Republicans identified with the Tea Party such as Sen. Rand Paul (RKy.), Rubio remained reflexively hawkish on foreign policy. When he ran for president in 2016, he was arguably the candidate most similar to former President George W. Bushquite a feat, given that Jeb Bush was also in the race.

One thing Rubio has in common with Vance is that both politicians completely changed their tune with respect to Trump once his conquest of the Republican Party was complete. Rubio once called Trump a "con artist" and "the most vulgar person to ever aspire to the presidency." Now he routinely defends Trump at all costs, even comparing the criminal proceedings against Trump to "show trials" of the likes of Communist Cuba.

Rubio's incoherent defenses of Trump have also caused the senator to embrace bad policies he once opposed. AsReason's Eric Boehm has noted, Rubio previously understood that raising tariffs on China would punish consumers in the U.S., the people buying the goods in question. He quite succinctly explained this to Trump during the Republican presidential primary debates in 2016. Eight years later, Rubio is not only defending tariffs on Chinahe agrees with Trump's plan to expand them.

All that said, Rubio comes across as more ideologically flexible than Vance. He has betrayed libertarian economic ideas because the current trajectory of the Republican Party is away from this philosophy. If that were to change, one suspects that Rubio would too.

This means that Burgum is the least bad choice for vice president, almost by default. The North Dakota governor has not been on the national political scene for nearly as much time as Vance or Rubio, instead emerging last year as an unlikely Republican presidential candidate during the primaries. He did not particularly distinguish himself during the debates, though he did attract some positive attention for displaying his pocket Constitution.

According to a largely sympathetic evaluation of his tenure in office, Burgum has governed as a traditional conservative: cutting taxes, improving the business climate in the state, supporting the Second Amendment, and so on. He signed a very restrictive ban on abortion, which may be a nonstarter for Trump, who has correctly surmised that this issue is currently the biggest barrier to a second Trump term. Burgum did, however, take the position that abortion is an issue for the states and should not be decided by the federal government.

Before entering politics, he was a self-made businessman who started his own software company and sold it to Microsoft for $1 billion in 2001. While success in the business world is no guarantee of fealty to libertarian economicsVance was a venture capitalist, after allit is somewhat encouraging. Political candidates invariably end up disappointing libertarians, but Burgum's record as a governor suggests that he is less likely to abandon basic free market principles at the drop of a hat.

By contrast, Vance and Rubio have already proven that they are happy to do so.

Unfortunately, none of the candidates under consideration for Trump's veep slot are particularly libertarian. Vance and Rubio, though, are not just unlibertarianthey have moved decisively in an anti-libertarian direction on economic issues where a generic Republican might be plausibly expected to at least casually align with liberty. That's ample reason to hope Trump excludes them from the ticket.

Read the rest here:
Trump's Veep: Better Burgum Than Vance or Rubio - Reason