Ohio: Libertarian Party – Small Government, Big Ideas

From a letter to the editor of the Sandusky Register via TPID:

I’m sure John Kasich is a great speaker. Plug your ears and watch. Here is what I know of him. He was a long time politician and elected eight times. He was the managing director of the Columbus investment banking division of Lehman Brothers, paid $587,000 salary, bonus and other benefits. He maintains he wasn’t a high-level decision maker and shouldn’t be blamed for their demise; he was 1 in 700. A managing director is subordinate only to the chairman of the board. Does anyone really believe Kasich was paid more than $500,000 to sit in Columbus and do nothing? If John didn’t see the signs he company was in trouble how is he going to manage our state?

Voters are frustrated with the flip-flopping between the Democrats and the Republicans. We need to stand up and do something different. If you do what you’ve always done, then you’ll get the same results that we get time after time.

Let’s have the courage to be different this year and take back our country and freedom. Look at the Libertarian Party that was founded in 1971 (lpo.org) and has a host of candidates who want to restore the American dream. Check out Ken Matesz for governor under the Libertarian Party. His small business is still thriving despite an unfriendly regulatory environment. The lieutenant governor candidate is Ann Leech. The Libertarian party believes in less government involvement and more personal freedom. Give the ordinary person a chance. They welcome your support.

Judy Kayden, Florence Twp.
Libertarian Candidate, 80th House District

28 thoughts on “Ohio: Libertarian Party – Small Government, Big Ideas

  1. Eric Dondero

    Voters might turn to the Libertarian Party; problem is the idiotic foreign policy views espoused by most of the Party leaders.

    You can’t call yourself a Real Libertarian yet align yourselves with individuals who want to impose Sharia Law on our country; views that run completely counter to Libertarian views of marijuana legalization, booze, gambling, legalized prostitution, rights for gays, and women’s rights.

    Lose the Losertarian approach to fighting Al Qaeda/Radical Islam, and perhaps voters will turn to the Libertarian Party.

  2. Eric Dondero

    You say the Libertarian Party believes in “less government.” Please explain how Sharia Law will bring us less government intervention in our lives?

    Bowing down to Allah 5 times a day? Is that “less government.” I’d say that just trades one ruler – the Federal Governor in Washington headed by Barack Hussein Obama – for another – Radical Islamists, Taliban, Al Qaeda.

  3. NewFederalist

    Kasich is also at least partly to blame (along with Gingrich) for no effort being made to enact any portion of the Contract with America when the GOP had the chance. I guess neither of them really believe in any of it.

  4. Robert Capozzi

    ed: You can’t call yourself a Real Libertarian yet align yourselves with individuals who want to impose Sharia Law on our country…

    me: I take your point, Eric, as far as it goes. Can you name three self-identified Ls who “align” with imposing Sharia Law on the US? I can’t.

    More important, why waste effort setting up straw men that undermine your credibility? Do you really find this tack persuasive?

  5. volvoice

    Eric….how much difference is there really between Shariah Law and Social Conservatism? Within the RLC, as its founder, do you reach out to these guys and let them know that their social conservatism is just as dangerous to our freedoms as Shariah Law?

  6. kevin knedler

    Eric. we don’t waste our time with jibber. Ohio LPO is focused on state issues and driving our own brand for OHIO.
    OH IO OH IO

  7. LP "sane" member

    Kasich and his dudes while in Washington between 1995 and 2006– they only doubled the national debt.

  8. Michael H. Wilson

    re # 1 kevin there is no reason the LP could not also be the party of the poor. Last time I looked opening the market in housing, transportation, health care, ending occupational licensing and a host of other issues will do more to help low income people stand on their own two feet than anything the U.S. government has done since ending slavery. Knock down the barriers. Get the boots off of people’s necks.

  9. Kevin Knedler

    # 11 I would hope you are correct Michael.
    I was looking at it from the angle of “low hanging fruit”, plus the Middle is far biggest target audience. At least today it is– not sure about our future.
    So many on each extreme side have been bought off or are supported by policies of the two major parties from the 19th century.

  10. Robert Capozzi

    While I don’t disagree with mhw, I suspect there is more of a propensity to align with the seen over the unseen the further one “descends” economically. The more desperate one is, the more likely one will grasp the apparently sure thing (government largesse) over the more theoretical (free markets promote prosperity for all). Of course, those higher on the economic totem pole also have the ability to game the system, which is where the really big bucks are.

    Agree with Knedler that the middle is our most target-rich environment. They are the most visibly squeezed by the State…not poor enough to get major welfare, not rich enough to game the system….on average and generally, of course, there are of course exceptions.

    This dynamic is why I find the negative income tax/citizens dividend idea appealing. It tends to make the invisible visible.

    I’d call it a start.

  11. Starchild

    Kevin Knedler @1 —

    I think the LP largely has been targeting the middle class, but that this should change. The LP will do better to be the party of the oppressed, the marginalized, the victims of government.

    We know that the victims collectively add up to big numbers, and if anyone has a reason to join and passionately support our cause, it is them.

    Middle class people are often too comfortable with the status quo. They don’t necessarily have the “fire in the belly” to really put the maximum time, energy, resources and spirit into opposing the beast of statism.

    Not only is reaching out to the oppressed the right thing to do morally speaking, but it is also good politics, because it will attract more of the young idealist activist types who now mainly gravitate to the left. The LP is a graying party — we desperately need to do more to reach out to younger people.

  12. Kevin Knedler

    Totally agree that we need new blood. Ohio has a much younger group coming into leadership roles now.
    I tell the Ohio team to think of the LP and any volunteer group as a bucket full of water. A bucket with a small hole near the bottom. The water will leak out (people quit, whatever) and it is the job of everyone of us to keep filling the bucket with more water– IE: New members and activists.

  13. Robert Capozzi

    sc: Not only is reaching out to the oppressed the right thing to do morally speaking, but it is also good politics, because it will attract more of the young idealist activist types who now mainly gravitate to the left.

    me: ya know, I recall very similar words from Bill Evers in 1983. I’d say that particular approach didn’t work out too well.

    Decades of IHS, Cato, GMU in fact HAS groomed LOTS of Ls. Perhaps they largely shun the LP because it’s stuck in a 70s-model rut. We’ve been breaking out of that rut since 06, but old habits die hard.

  14. paulie Post author

    sc: Not only is reaching out to the oppressed the right thing to do morally speaking, but it is also good politics, because it will attract more of the young idealist activist types who now mainly gravitate to the left.

    me: ya know, I recall very similar words from Bill Evers in 1983. I’d say that particular approach didn’t work out too well.

    Decades of IHS, Cato, GMU in fact HAS groomed LOTS of Ls. Perhaps they largely shun the LP because it’s stuck in a 70s-model rut. We’ve been breaking out of that rut since 06, but old habits die hard.

    Agreed with Starchild.

    Evers may have said it, but I don’t think we have ever even come close to making a real effort in that direction.

    What IHS and Cato do is something quite different.

  15. paulie Post author

    Totally agree that we need new blood. Ohio has a much younger group coming into leadership roles now.
    I tell the Ohio team to think of the LP and any volunteer group as a bucket full of water. A bucket with a small hole near the bottom. The water will leak out (people quit, whatever) and it is the job of everyone of us to keep filling the bucket with more water– IE: New members and activists.

    Exactly!

  16. Sludge Puppy and the Scum Lords

    RC @ 14 writes: “The more desperate one is, the more likely one will grasp the apparently sure thing (government largesse) over the more theoretical (free markets promote prosperity for all).”

    Low income people are not always desperate to grasp the sure thing. I spent a good portion of the last twenty years supervising low income people in my previous job and many of them simply wanted to government out of the way. Not all but many.

    Secondly some people love to bitch about people on welfare yet they ignore the fact that people cannot get to jobs or even look for work when the government runs the transit system and does not provide services to low income neighborhoods or those services are poor. That’s one example and it is an issue nationwide. I suggest you Google TCRP 49 and read the report which is one of many. Point being. If we want people off welfare we have to get the boot off their necks as well.

    Third you wrote “theoretical (free markets promote prosperity for all)”. This is not theory. It has been shown to work Econ History has plenty of examples. It works. ‘course that doesn’t mean someone on a desert island is going to get the benefits just because they are in a free market.

    Guess I could write an essay on this issue but I won’t waste my time.

  17. paulie Post author

    RC @ 14 writes: “The more desperate one is, the more likely one will grasp the apparently sure thing (government largesse) over the more theoretical (free markets promote prosperity for all).”

    Low income people are not always desperate to grasp the sure thing. I spent a good portion of the last twenty years supervising low income people in my previous job and many of them simply wanted to government out of the way. Not all but many.

    One key to this is to realize that if we do any type of targeted outreach to any group – ideological, demographic, what have you – there will be many in that group who will not respond favorably, and some that will. It isn’t just a matter of proportions, either, but of motivation level. Those who feel oppressed tend to be motivated.

  18. Sludge Puppy and the Scum Lords

    R.C. here’s a piece on housing my master wrote for the local news letter. Enjoy

    Causing Poverty

    Some years ago I was working a table at a local outdoor event when a gentleman in a wheelchair passed by and commenting on the Libertarian Party said; “You’re all me and no we”. Before I could reply he had moved on but his comment touched a nerve with me. Not for what he said but what his comment told me about how we get our message out or don’t get it out. More recently I read on the New York Times blog http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/ comments by some in reply to an article by Edward Glaeser of Harvard that Libertarians were racist and weren’t concerned about the poor.

    With that in mind I think it is important to deal with some of the issues relating to poverty and point out how government has been used to make the situation worse. In fact I’ll suggest that for all the crying about poverty in the country the government is responsible for causing a good deal of it by passing regulations that close the marketplace to low income people. This is especially true in healthcare, transportation and housing. To be clear about what my opinion is I’ll just be blunt. Just as a free press is essential for the dissemination of knowledge and ideas so too is a free market necessary for the distribution of goods and services.

    Recently The Olympian published a story pointing out the costs that government regulation add to housing. “An estimate by the Washington Chapter of the American Planning Association found that government officials add as much as 17 percent to the price of a typical home through land use regulations. A different study by the University of Washington shows that since the adoption of the Growth Management Act, as much as 50 percent of the price of a home is attributable to land use regulations.” http://www.theolympian.com/opinion/story/1122367.html
    (emphasis added)

    Regardless of the amount, every penny spent on government regulations is one not available for other uses. Regulations, permits, and fees of any kind make it more difficult for low income earners to own a home. All of the costs get added to the mortgage and since many people pay their mortgages to out of state mortgage companies the local government regulations end up transferring money to out of state mortgage banks. Mortgage notes then get bundled and sold overseas.

    Building codes and inspections are another point of contention. Lots of people seem to think building codes are a necessity but apparently eleven counties in Colorado along with a few other jurisdictions in the country don’t believe so since they don’t have any building codes.

    If you want your house inspected that is between you and the seller. There is no reason for the government to subsidize the mortgage banking system by doing inspections for them in the first place.

    Then there is Houston which is the largest city in the nation without zoning laws. The result is that the price of housing in Houston is much lower than in many other parts of the nation for comparable housing.

    Added to all of this is the deduction for mortgage interest which some suggests significantly drive up the costs of housing.

    All together the government interference in the housing market has done little to help prospective owners. In fact we can claim otherwise.
    Government interference has made it more difficult for first time buyers to enter the market, has driven up the costs for those who do qualify, has shifted money out of the local marketplace and moved it offshore all to the benefit of others.

    Of course once the government has created this problem it next has to find a solution. That usually means more taxes for affordable housing. More interference in the marketplace by requiring developers to build more affordable housing and the cycle begins all over.

    Undoing this tangled mess will not be easy. If we abolish the mortgage interest deduction overnight it might cause a severe drop in housing values and lead to a large foreclosure problem. Disrupting the market in such a manner may be acceptable to some, but to others it never will be.

  19. paulie Post author

    Low income people are not always desperate to grasp the sure thing. I spent a good portion of the last twenty years supervising low income people in my previous job and many of them simply wanted to government out of the way. Not all but many.

    My experience as well.

    Secondly some people love to bitch about people on welfare yet they ignore the fact that people cannot get to jobs or even look for work when the government runs the transit system and does not provide services to low income neighborhoods or those services are poor. That’s one example and it is an issue nationwide. I suggest you Google TCRP 49 and read the report which is one of many. Point being. If we want people off welfare we have to get the boot off their necks as well.

    Good point.

  20. Robert Capozzi

    sludge: Low income people are not always desperate to grasp the sure thing. …Secondly some people love to bitch about people on welfare yet they ignore the fact that people cannot get to jobs or even look for work when the government runs the transit system and does not provide services to low income neighborhoods or those services are poor.

    me: You seem to misunderstand me. I actually said: “The more desperate one is, the more likely one will grasp the apparently sure thing…” You might consider reading up on time preferences. And, to be clear, I almost never talk about welfare and other transfer payments…it’s not a focus of mine.

  21. Sludge Puppy and the Scum Lords

    rc @ 24 apparently like many people you prefer to blame the reader instead of admitting that maybe you failed to write clearly. And did I write that you wrote about welfare and other transfer payments?

  22. Robert Capozzi

    sludge, so sorry. What have I “blamed” you for, exactly? Help us understand how “You seem to misunderstand me” indicates “blame.”

    Are you familiar with the concept of time preference? If you are not, it’s perfectly understandable that you might project a conclusion that isn’t there.

    But, yes, blog comments are an art form, almost poetic. Keeping them short yet clear is a challenge.

  23. Sludge Puppy and the Scum Lords

    Ya know Bob C. one day I came up from the bowels of depravity and talked the old man into going out for a ride. I love to stick my head out the window and let the bugs hit me in the nose. But there was this guy on the radio who claimed to be a Libertarian and he’s rattling on about how people gotta get off their dead asses and go to work. He didn’t want them on welfare.

    Well that’s all fine but he seemed to ignore, as usual, the fact that there are all these government barriers in place.

    Maybe Root has a point with Reagan being his buddy and all. Just so y’all Libertarians get the point. Turn to Obama and holler “Mr. Obama tear down these walls”. That might be a stimulus the people can use.

    ‘Course being a dog and all I don’t get to vote, so why do I care?

  24. LP Pragmatist

    What does any of this have to do with the Ohio LP, who is busting their butts to get people elected?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *