Author: admin

Nearly every government policy is intended to stop future disaster but does not have the intended effects.  Rather these policies are over expensive and cause unintended consequences.  Big Government political parties believe policies and regulations can keep us safe from ourselves.  Licenses, permits, security checks, public service announcements… It is abundantly clear government aims at controlling our actions instead of holding people responsible for their actions after the fact.

Our courts system or justice system is the traditional means of convincing people to consider whom and what they may damage.  Relying on courts and police is certainly a more direct response to perceived threats than pre-checking everyone for dangerous objects and necessary skills before we take any action.  We must be licensed to drive or buy a permit to install a Jacuzzi or be admitted to “the bar” in order to handle the legal issues of others, for example.  But to punish us for the damage we have done is also appropriate if we cause others damage when we drive or install a Jacuzzi or give bad legal advice.

The attempt to keep people from causing damage while at the same time holding people responsible for their actions is certainly more expensive and very difficult to judge the effectiveness of our two part system.  We cannot control the future or stop people from causing damage, either accidental or deliberate.  But there are many examples of our attempts to legislate against such future actions which show how expensive and ineffective these things are.

One may study the Transportation Security Agency or TSA for its glaring  and expensive and inconvenient ineffectiveness. For every dangerous item of contraband found the TSA searches 350,000 people.  And none of the contraband found to date has been intended for terrorism.
  TSA’s 95% Failure   
From the article “… the TSA is hassling more than 99.99% of passengers to catch 1/20 of the dangerous items, none of which are terrorism-related.

“In fact, since 9/11, there have been only two terrorist attacks on American airplanes, both Al Qaeda-related—Richard Reid, the shoe bomber, and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the underpants bomber. In both cases, the flights began abroad (Paris and Amsterdam, respectively), and the men made it through airport screening but were stopped by fellow passengers.”

Big government advocates often argue that saving one life is worth the hassle, expense and effort.  Some of us counter that reducing civil rights for the good of everyone must have limits.  Reducing accidental death is a praiseworthy goal, but at some point we need to use resources for other things as well.  And some of us would enjoy not constantly worrying that what we  do might be illegal because of a plethora of growing laws seemingly against just about any action or inaction.

And so we accept that our freedom is limited when relate to certain activities. Usually those limits are rooted in a choice.  I don’t have to drive a car, so I willingly reduce my freedom by submitting to the many licensing and insurance requirements to owing and driving a car, using publicly financed roads mitigating any future damage I may cause. I don’t have to enter a plane so if I choose to enter an airplane I submit to the hassle and humiliation of effectively useless TSA indignities.

At some point the entire philosophy will be questioned.  If avoiding arrest and prison is not enough deterrent we need to examine why.  Most of us who think about the issue believe the problem is unreasonable fear.  We see government requirements to relinquish our rights to protect all of us from that rare person intent on causing harm.  The joke is we aren’t using those rights for anything important so we won’t miss them.

So making items illegal is not enough, to some people, we must eliminate the possibility that objects can be misused to cause damage.  So we all remove our shoes for the TSA, we show IDs before buying alcohol or paint, we submit plans to our City Hall before adding electrical options in our homes, we see a doctor to get antibiotics and we want to remove plans and designs of illegal items from libraries and internet repositories.

Libertarians are often accused of stealing votes from the partisans.  Our aims are principled and simple: Smaller Government and More Freedom.  Democrats have trouble with the former and Republicans the latter. Supporting both aims is the most reasonable political position, we believe, and any other support is support of bigger and bigger government and more and more restrictions.

But a vote for either party is a vote for business as usual.  Trump is hated for his character and loved because he is shaking things up.  Libertarians like me love the idea that Trump is shaking things up, but fearful of the fall-out sure to follow.

We want simpler, smaller, non-intrusive government we can trust.  Government should provide necessary services for the taxpayer on a non-profit basis.  That is not what we have today.  Today we have government restrictions and government looking for evidence against us while charging us higher and higher taxes every year to pay more career government employees to ramp up the cycle.

Any vote for any Libertarian demonstrates a protest against business as usual and support for smaller government and more freedom. If you support a non-Libertarian candidate and you think the Libertarians should vote for that candidate because that candidate supports some Libertarian principles, well, you are wrong.  If that candidate is Libertarian that candidate should say so.

You should vote for the Libertarian unless you want bigger government, more scandals, more and higher taxes, less freedom, interventionist military,  and government support for criminal privacy laws.  Any vote for any Libertarian will be seen by the career government worker as a reminder who they serve and why.

Only congress can stop these insidious restrictions on freedom that serve no purpose.  And no one side, one person or one faction is responsible.  Everyone in government wants more government.  Only Libertarians support the change we need to simplify our laws, lay off government employees, stay out of affairs that don’t involve us, and fully transparent public dealings with business and government while respecting individual rights.  If you believe those things you are Libertarian and only your Libertarian vote will bring Libertarian principles to government.

Bureaucracy should have been killed by computers. A well designed access point to a comprehensive data base should make the constant presence of dozens of highly paid professionals unnecessary. But not in government.

City Hall has rules that are not strictly according to law which makes things difficult to accomplish. Hence a dozen highly paid professionals. If our government ran like a business we could understand and pay our taxes and buy our licenses and permits. We could use the internet or a local node to pay for and download our documents and only occasionally, by appointment, meet with officials who would help us, not hinder us, and we all could accomplish our goals.

There are solutions to monopoly:

There is no reason why it is preferable to give, for example, profit to a utility monopoly than it is to pay the government directly as a non-profit. To use taxpayer dollars to audit and regulate a for profit monopoly is paying double.

If the government creates a monopoly the government should provide a non-profit alternative. If business can do better, please, do better. For example government forces drivers to buy auto insurance. Why doesn’t government provide non-profit car insurance? Same with health insurance, or legal services, or electricians and plumbers and carpenters.

If you are required to have a license to do work why can’t the government provide the standard for that work? Competition.  Education is the prime example of this.  Let people make schools and allow the free market to make better, competitive, schools.  All the while the government sets the example with free public education, but without the unfair advantage of everyone paying for one school but not the others.  Fair non-profit schools run by the government can compete with for profit schools all of whom receive the same tax dollars per student.  The winners are the students who get a better education.

Utilities are a bit different, of course, since they are the only ones allowed in an area. So the government should run them as a non-profit.  There is no way to make a parallel  utility, but allow all sorts of off-the-grid alternatives.

It all depends on complete transparency and complete fairness to everyone, whether they are a government employee or not. That is one libertarian take on the subject.

Kevin Scarpati ordered Meriden police to evict and remove Libertarians who were asking for signatures on petitions to get on the Meriden ballot.  He claims it was not politically motivated.  The police have guns.

So the choice was leave or be arrested.  Libertarians, however are prone to seek relief in the courts.  We rely on the Constitution, and so in this case it is a Deprivation of Rights lawsuit.  We have to be able to talk to people in a public place in a free society.

Rule of Law is eroding. The Rule of Law has become ridiculous in so many places. A town near me has outlawed confetti. Only criminals have confetti there. Another town outlaws whistles.

Trump calls “collusion” a witch hunt.  And it is.  Collusion is not illegal except under anti-trust laws, like organized crime, when they plot to commit crime. No one thinks these guys were selling drugs, sex, or guns. The issue is whether or not the Trump campaign was recruited by foreign nationals and traded information for the purpose of influencing the campaign.  And even then the foreign nationals are the ones who broke the laws unless Americans actually did some spying on behalf of the Russians.

Consider what spying is, though.  Passing them information.  Doesn’t really matter what information. The information itself has nothing to do with whether or not spying is a crime.  The crime is probably “Aiding and Abetting” while the Russians committed fraud. But it also fits the definition of Treason.  That is how the police work, they can charge you with treason and talk about the death penalty in order to get you to tell what you know under immunity.

For those of you who are not interested in the legalities of things skip this paragraph:  Aiding and abetting Title 18 USC 2 is a crime that probably could stick in court if information was traded.  Conspiracy  (18 USC 371) is notoriously harder to prove.  Unless they have recordings and several witnesses this one won’t stick.  But it could if the charge is specific, like that they talked long and hard about what lies to spread (fraud) on the Facebook  (18 USC 1030), or if they paid for the information or accepted campaign donations (really stupid laws).  But the trump card, no pun intended, is 18 USC 2381 because there is no need to have a declared war since 2006  in order to commit the treason of  giving “aid and comfort” to our enemies

And we are asked to consider if the President is above the law, not how stupid the law is to begin with.

The laws on the books are so frigging stupid judges have to let lots of them slide. For example a “controlled substance” requires a prescription, and if that prescription is expired or doesn’t belong to you and the substance is in your medicine cabinet is illegal possession of a controlled substance, one year and $1000, but if you have been convicted of a previous drug crime that is 5 years and $5000.

We all know that even if cannabis is “decriminalized” in our states it is still illegal federally. And although you can make beer or wine in your home quite legally, even share it with friends (no sales of course) if you have a distillery that is 10 years and $10,000, and just having illegally distilled liquor is 5 years and $5,000.

It is certainly not just drugs, but look at traffic laws. Everyone who has ever driven is guilty. Permits are required to work on your own home. Copyright laws if you have sung songs or copied them. Peeing outside, using someone else’s wireless signal, jaywalking, litter, marker or paint in public, throwing away someone else’s mail…

Then look at Title 8 Immigration Law. There is no possible way around an expired visa, which is called Amnesty. So judges have become more and more lenient for the past 30 years by-passing the law by using the idea of more and more unlikely dangers immigrants are forced to leave as the law requires. That way the strict requirement of the laws are null and void.

I can go on with examples, but the erosion of our system is the result. No one seriously considers these laws should be enforced. So how do we choose which ones to enforce?

It often becomes a partisan issue. We want our candidate to pass while the politicians who are on the other side are clearly criminals. Police can arrest you for you the shoes you wear while driving if they want. If you are approached by police and they think they will be reasonable to you, well, you must be white.

To salvage the rule of law we must repeal stupid laws.

There are 80 members of the Torrington police department according to a statement I heard on WZBG radio news.   A starting police officer in 2016 would get a salary of  $66,166 and according to their own statistics there are 638 crimes reported in Torrington every year.  That is eight crimes per member of the department per year.  I propose lowering the number of people in the department to save us all another budget crisis.

Who in their right mind would criticize the local police?  The First Amendment guarantees my right to criticize and the 14th Amendment guarantees my right to equal protection, to be treated the same as everyone else.  But that doesn’t protect me from the Police.  We have all seen the videos.  Police shoot people and lose their jobs, but I would be dead.

Maybe you think I am over-reacting.  Maybe you think the police are good people and would never unjustly treat anyone for any reason.  I wish that were true.  I can tell you stories, lots of stories, from people in Torrington.  And you reply, oh, those people are bad people you can’t believe what they say….  The point is I am judged a fool, a maniac to propose cutting the Torrington tax burden by cutting the number of police in town.  But I am doing just that.

I am under no misconceptions.  I can list all the objections, the continued personnel costs regardless of the loss of manpower, the fear that crime would increase, that for every call there would be three instead of five officers responding, the fact that neither Republocrats or Demopublicans support cutting police departments, that costs will be significantly higher in the future if we have to re-hire, that we will be placing highly paid professionals out of work and their families at risk…

Yes I admit I am judged a fool for suggesting it.  I am likely to see no results. I want smaller government, fewer taxes, competition and value in government service.  I want to pay my taxes and see results, not pay a tribute and hope the government will remember me when I want something.

I have a plan, but the plan is judged as crazy, as too radical.  Cut Government on the local level?  It would save us Big Bucks, no one will doubt that, but they may argue that the savings are not that big since every officer will get severance benefits, pensions and all the things big government promised them when they were hired.

Just like a plan to privatize teaching.  Everyone knows big government has made a monopoly on teaching and the only option to make education any better is to pay higher taxes.  I know it is an uphill battle.

In Meriden, CT earlier this month people like me, crazy Libertarians, were in a public place soliciting signatures to be placed on the ballot in November for State and Federal elections.  We are doing this because it is the only way to break Big Government’s monopoly.  We are the third party and the Constitution guarantees us Free Speech and Equal Protection.  Also please note that our big government was built by both big political parties, hand in hand, and is protected and maintained by them.

The Mayor of Meriden Connecticut, where the use of the bean whistle is against the law, called on the Police force to keep Libertarians from Constitutionally exercising their rights to free speech, free assembly and equal protection by the law.  This should be a big deal to us all, this should show us that we are not the free people we think we are.

Here is the complaint filed in State courts, but if it is not settled is sure to go to a Federal Civil Rights court.

Libertarians are on the ballot in every State for Federal elections and some States for local elections.  Connecticut is a Democrat State who unashamedly looks for “revenue streams” so they don’t have to say “increased taxes” out loud.  Republicans would never, ever touch the issue of Police employment levels or back down on the war on drugs, sex, immigration, regulation of all manner of protective trade and government based on fear.

Libertarians trust out country, we trust the people.  We find it ridiculous when someone is arrested on account of a dozen laws when one would do, then plea bargain to a mere 7 years on prison for a non-violent offense.  In 2018 we have many cheaper and better ways to supervise people effectively without sending them to a prison which costs taxpayers more per year than sending them to Yale University.

But I digress.  I am a fool, tilting at windmills, dreaming the impossible dream to think we can lower taxes and strengthen Connecticut by giving its people, you and me, MORE freedom instead of further restricting and further supervising and further surveying us.  But I believe I am right, and I believe Libertarians have been right since 1971, when the Libertarian Party was founded on a platform that included gay rights and legalization of cannabis.

In 2016 cannabis won more states than Hillary.  It is a freedom issue.  And the man who promised to de-fund and dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency won the election.   Good.  That is $8,000,000,000 and 55,000 government employees who have served us well, but are not needed any more.  All endangered species are growing, weather models predicting disaster since 1970 have been wrong, global warming is accelerating much slower than predictions and no direct tie has been found from that acceleration to Carbon Dioxide emissions regardless of Greenhouse Gas theory.

Dismantling the EPA will not cause disaster, and neither will a reduced police force in Torrington Connecticut.

I am not running for office because I want to be a politician. And I hope everyone knows that state congress is not a good job. And it shouldn’t be a good job. Public service was designed to be a sacrifice but it has become a bid for social power.  Only Libertarians like me can change that.

The forces of big government, the Demopublicans and the Republocrats, see government jobs as a career, a way to make more money and better benefits than the public sector.  In Connecticut tax payers pay 20% more to their public servants in salary and benefits on average than what they make themselves.

Libertarians are the only alternative to More-Of-The-Same.  The two forces of big government fight among themselves how to make government grow.  We think government should shrink. Libertarians are the way of the future, calling from the inception of the party in 1971 for Choice, Civil Partnership, Legalization of Marijuana, personal responsibility, and freedom of fear from our elected government.

Think of Connecticut Congress like board of directors for a diverse non-profit with 66,000 employees who have lost their mission to serve their 3.6 million clients.  Bring in a new philosophy, please, to guide the citizens toward freedom and away from more and more control, and more and more rich politicians, more and more personal responsibility.

Congress  should not be professionals. We need to be common sense tax payers with ideas.  We should be gate keepers. We need to be on the side of the citizens who are paying for 66,000 Connecticut government workers and all the services they provide us.  We need to be quality control for the largest non-profit service provider.

I am running for office because I want everyone to vote for any person with the courage to be a Libertarian. We are the third party the  Libertarians and we are not partisan stooges.  We know people are good, we know there are alternatives to locking up the non-violent at the cost to the tax payer of more than an Ivy League education.

We are different because we know what is wrong and, with votes, we can make the changes that the government does not want. How do I know the government doesn’t want the necessary change? Because 95% of the government is not elected. The lion’s share of taxpayer money goes to government workers and they want to keep their paychecks. They want their pensions. And they want raises. The government employee in Connecticut makes 20% more than the non-governmental employee.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that government employees are not hard working, responsible or undeserving of their salaries and benefits. I am saying the system is skewed toward bigger government, more and more, richer leaders and fewer options for all of us. Any libertarian will tell you freedom and competition is lacking in our society, our economy, our way of life.

A public servant should sacrifice, like a soldier. A servant to the public good, but what has happened is the opposite. We have put government employees above those they serve. They make more money have better jobs, and the hold more and more power over us every day.

There are other systems. If business were running, say, a City Hall or a Police Station or a Public Works department they would have a phone bank and a receptionist and they would schedule appointments. They would not have several highly paid professionals all in the same building at the same time talking to each other. They would serve their clients who pay the bills in a cost effective way. Our present system has lost the notion that they are serving the people who pay their salaries, and only Congress can remind them of that fact.

My daughter is a public school teacher and the last thing in the world I would want is for her salary to be cut. But the way politicians frame the issue of public education is always in terms of money. Better education means higher taxes. Give teachers more money or you are against education. You are for ignorance. You are a RepUUUUgnant person. But anyone who is not in politics, or who is a Libertarian, can easily see the problem should not be framed as if money for teachers is money for education. Education is a responsibility of all of society, but especially parents, and the only option to better education is not to raise taxes. We have tried that and it doesn’t work. More taxes only leads to bigger government, not better government.

What will work is freedom. Take away the government monopoly on education. Take away all the government monopolies. If the government makes a monopoly the government has a responsibility to provide a non-profit service, like education. But in the case of education the only reason it is a monopoly is because the two-party system has decided that is how it has to be. If we want freedom, change, choice and the power to guide our children we only have choice #1: higher taxes, or choice #2 Libertarians and those with Libertarian ideals like home schooling.

And the main reason a family will choose home schooling over any other alternative is because there is no other alternative. There is no other alternative because you don’t vote Libertarian and the two party system has decided to make every educator of your children a government employee.

Well, you could send your children away to boarding school at a huge cost. But the public school system does not allow fair competition. You pay your taxes and the government does not earmark your taxes for your children, but rather they will allow you child to come to the schools you paid for. And they will complain we all did not pay enough.

Libertarians don’t think this system is the best. We don’t think this system can’t change. We know this is not the only system American taxpayers deserve. We deserve the right to see if the government is the best educator and if a free market can offer choice. We believe in free competition, fair completion, equality, and transparency. Government should provide a non-profit school and business should be allowed to do better if they can. Business should be invited to please do better.
Name any government service, or any monopoly created by government. I am fond of pointing out that any time there is a budget disagreement motor vehicle departments in Connecticut must lay people off. No matter that license registration fees alone cover three times the costs of the running the entire DMV, and DMV also brings in revenues from several other services all in one window. We still have to wait three and four hours to conduct business that other states can do in under five minutes.

And look at auto insurance. We are required to buy it if we want a car, and the only reason doesn’t offer non-profit auto insurance is to protect their friends in the insurance industry. If business can do better, please, do better. As it is business profits from a state created monopoly. And we all know business wrote the insurance law, and business contributed to the campaigns and help support our two party system. Business doesn’t want competition because only the taxpayer benefits by competition.

It is the same across all business that is licensed by government. We have all heard the statement that someone who is not a lawyer cannot give legal advice. Sure you can. But government wants to protect the licensed professionals who pay their salaries. I will give you advice about anything you want, but please make your own decision. That is Libertarian.
Congress should not be a good job. It should be a tough job. It should be a sacrifice. There should not be perks except in knowing that you are helping your neighbors and your State. It is a part time job and it is the only job that can protect us all from big government. It is the only access the common man has to politics today.

Any thinking person today sees that Libertarian ideals are what we need. That government is too big and needs to be dismantled. A vote for any Libertarian candidate is not a wasted vote. It is the only vote that counts. It is a vote for an ideal, a vote against the one big political party of partisans who insult each other and don’t listen to anyone. If you don’t vote for them they will listen.

Your vote matters only if you vote Libertarian.