Libertarian Candidates Oppose Supreme Court Decision to Uphold Obamacare

Dear Fellow Libertarians,

Having trouble finding clarity, truth and common sense in the sea of commentary addressing yesterday’s Supreme Court’s health care ruling?

Here’s what some Libertarian candidates have to say about it.

Libertarian presidential nominee and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson issued this statement in response to the Supreme Court ruling:

“It has been clear for a while that we need a new President and a new Congress. Now it appears we need a new Supreme Court.

“Whether the Court chooses to call the individual mandate a tax or anything else, allowing it to stand is a truly disturbing decision. The idea that government can require an individual to buy something simply because that individual exists and breathes in America is an incredible blow to the bedrock principles of freedom and liberty. It must be repealed, and Congress needs to get about doing so today.

“There is one thing we know about health care. Government cannot create a system that will reduce costs while increasing access. Only competition and the price transparency that competition will bring can accomplish the imperatives of affordability and availability. Whether it is the President’s plan or the Republican prescription drug benefit, the idea that anyone in Washington can somehow manage one of the most essential and substantial parts of both our quality of life and the economy is, and always has been, fundamentally wrong.

“We can never know how many Americans are out of work today because of the uncertainty the monstrous health care law has caused. The Court has done nothing to remove that burden.

“Nothing about today’s decision changes the basic reality that it is impossible to eliminate deficit spending and remove the smothering consequences of federal debt without dramatically reducing the costs of Medicare and Medicaid. And neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have given the slightest hint of willingness to do so.”

Libertarian Dan Cox for U.S. Senate of Montana, who’s running in a high-profile race that could determine the balance of power in the senate, said:

“Chief Justice John Roberts (a Republican President George Bush appointee) cast the deciding vote that declared Obamacare constitutional.  For years the argument has been that we need to vote Republican, so we can get good Supreme Court justices.  I guess that theory has been blown wide open.  It is a very sad day for America when the Republican majority Supreme Court is openly trying to destroy the Constitution. 

“Don’t worry though Mitt Romney is going to save us?  Really? The father of Romneycare is going to save us?  Did you know that Romney is standing next to campaign signs that say repeal and replace Obamacare?  Is that what we want?  Do we really want to replace Obamacare with Romneycare?  I don’t think so.

“We need to stand together against these unconstitutional Democrats and Republicans. Liberty needs your vote more than ever.”

Libertarian Andrew Ian Dodge for U.S. Senate who’s running in a six-way race in Maine against a Republican and Independent former Maine Governor Angus King (who endorsed Barack Obama) issued this statement:

“The SCOTUS decision to uphold Obamacare deals freedom and individual liberty another hammer blow. It allows the federal government to penalize American citizens via taxation if it disapproves of our behavior and upholds the largest tax hike in recent American history.

“Republicans are as responsible as Democrats for this sad day. Sending yet another republican senator to D.C. will not help matters. And sending already declared Obama yes-men masquerading as independents will not help either.

“There’s only one way to restore freedom: Vote Libertarian!”

Click here to see the list of 2012 Libertarian candidates. Check back frequently – more candidates are being added to this page every week.

Yours in Liberty,

Carla Howell

Executive Director

National Libertarian Party

26 thoughts on “Libertarian Candidates Oppose Supreme Court Decision to Uphold Obamacare

  1. Mark Hilgenberg

    How many days in a row do we need to send out releases that actually promote sticking with the GOP?

    This just plays into the false game of left(bad)/Right(not as bad). Either side we pick in this debate we are picking corporatism, why not focus on that?

    Here is what I sent Carla.

    Hello Carla,

    I am becoming increasingly disappointed in the Libertarian reaction to the supreme court ruling, it seems like everything I have seen reinforces the left/right, conservative/liberal axis and does little to set us apart from the scripted debate.

    While many of the things said are technically correct, all they do is reinforce to the right that they better not risk a vote for a third party and keeps the left looking at us as nothing more than right wingers who support more corporatism.

    I would love to see a piece that is similar to the link I am providing, this is short, to the point and sets our message radically apart from the scripted rhetoric we have been hearing.

    “The Manufactured Debate Over Obamacare”

    “Contrary to outraged cries from Republicans that it’s some sort of radical departure from our “free enterprise” system, Obamacare is in fact a direct continuation of the bipartisan neoliberal consensus of the past thirty years. The guiding principle of this consensus is the use of state power to protect corporate profits — which consist mostly of rents on artificial scarcity — from the radical deflationary effects of technologies of abundance. In the spirit of the original American state capitalist, Alexander Hamilton, this consensus seeks to maintain the value of the enormous concentrations of land and capital owned by the rentier classes, and guarantee the returns on them.” (For more click)

    Let me know if I can be of any help.

    Take Care,

    Mark Hilgenberg
    Vice Chair
    Libertarian Party of Utah

  2. Bubbalicious

    Hi Mark.

    I don’t know what Carla said but here is what I would say.

    Kevin Carson’s piece is right on the money but it is above the reading level of the average person.

    Can you re-write or boil that down to where Joe Twelvepack and a Half can read it and have some idea on what in the blue blazes you are talking about?

    That would be of help.

  3. Hugh Mann

    Maybe not quite as short? Say…An essay making the points Carson makes, but not quite as high brow?

  4. Mark Hilgenberg

    @ 4

    Tough Crowd! 🙂

    I’ll see what I can do this weekend. One thing I post whenever I see a left or right post regarding the decision is post.

    “It is a strange world when the left is happy about mandated corporatism and the right is pissed about it.”

  5. Joe Buchman


    They have become ONE party. Gary is not the “Third Choice” he is the ONLY choice.

    DemoPubliCrap verses Libertarian.

    THAT is the choice.

    (At least in terms of being on the ballot in all (or almost all) 50 states.)


    #1, those of us with many years invested in libertarian ideas can agree with all the points. However, the public we are seeking to convince and convert has little to no idea what the hell any of this means. Stossel is about the onlyguy whose writing is specific and comprehensible to the non-libertarian and even he uses too many buzzwords. We have a long hard row to sow and 30 sec. soundbites tend to go over nearly everyone’s head.

  7. Andrew Ian Dodge

    Mark in my comment above I lambasted both sides of the aisle for getting us to this mess. After all our dear Republican Senator from Maine, Olympia Snowe voted it out of committee & sent the putrid bill on its way.

  8. Al Abrams

    Yes, this one said they are both to blame, it doesn’t say Obama is better than Romney or Romney is better than Obama. I agree we should never go down that road. They are both equally bad.

  9. Mark Hilgenberg

    It depends on your crowd, the independent and left leaning youth understand corporate collusion very well. Older conservatives no, they see it as “capitalism” so it is a hard sell. Being an underdog team in the league, who are our potential fans, the older guy who bleeds red or blue, or the unaffiliated youth?

    I have had friends who aren’t political tell me that the C4SS piece explained things as the really are better than anything.

    @ Andrew 9

    I was glad to see that you hold both sides responsible but the problem is, the way it reads to me is you are defending the status quo and the GOP Judge didn’t protect “capitalism”.

    Our current system is as far away from pure free market capitalism as ObamaCare is, so by aligning with the “ObamaCare winning is bad” side, puts us in line with conservatives who keep telling that lie about our current system. We need to set ourselves apart by calling the game for what it really is, a con by both sides.

    We need to stop being also ran republicans and promote true liberty.

  10. Al Abrams

    The present system certainly has problems but Obamacare makes them even worse.

  11. Al Abrams

    “Just” mandates? Seems like a pretty big step to me, and not a good one.

  12. Alan Noyes

    I’m looking at it from a non-conservative view, but on some issues conservatives claim to agree with us (at least until they get in power) just as on other issues liberals pay lip service to libertarian views until they get in power.

    That would be like saying we sound like liberals if the Supreme Court rules in favor of mandatory wiretapping or medical marijuana raids and we say the court screwed it up.

  13. Mark Hilgenberg

    @Alan 18

    But the conservative version of freedom in economics means government protected concentrations of corporate, not individual rights.

    Sounding liberal when talking about the protection of individual rights is a good thing.

  14. Alan Noyes

    So where in the article above do you see the LP supporting government protected concentrations of corporate rights? Even Green Jill Stein says Obamacare is corporate welfare. I believe she is correct. I don’t agree with her about Single Payer but that is a separate question.

  15. Mark Hilgenberg

    ““The SCOTUS decision to uphold Obamacare deals freedom and individual liberty another hammer blow.”

    One version of corporate welfare won over another, liberty was not in play. The huge percentage of people who don’t like corporate power and think in concrete terms will see it that way.

    This explains it.

    It all comes down to communication style.

    Most people active in politics and the largest segment of society are concrete communicators. Here is how Dr. David Keirsey describes this type of communication. “Some people talk primarily about the external, concrete world of everyday reality: facts and figures, work and play, home and family, news, sports and weather — all the who-what-when-where-and how much’s of life.”

    They are also cooperative in action, “they try to do the right thing, in keeping with agreed upon social rules, conventions, and codes of conduct, and only later do they concern themselves with the effectiveness of their actions.”

    “As Concrete Cooperators, Guardians speak mostly of their duties and responsibilities, of what they can keep an eye on and take good care of, and they’re careful to obey the laws, follow the rules, and respect the rights of others.” They make up 40-45% of the population.

    Most Libertarians are abstract communicators: “This group of people talk primarily about the internal, abstract world of ideas: theories and conjectures, dreams and philosophies, beliefs and fantasies –all the why’s, if’s, and what-might-be’s of life.”

    They are often Utilitarian in action: “act primarily in a utilitarian or pragmatic manner, that is, they do what gets results, what achieves their objectives as effectively or efficiently as possible, and only afterwards do they check to see if they are observing the rules or going through proper channels.”

    As Abstract Utilitarians, Rationals speak mostly of what new problems intrigue them and what new solutions they envision, and always pragmatic, they act as efficiently as possible to achieve their objectives, ignoring arbitrary rules and conventions if need be.

    This group makes up 5-10% of the population, yet they are the vast majority of Libertarians.

    How does this work out in a typical political conversation.

    Libertarian: “We need to cut government by 50%”

    Now in their thought process they are thinking abstract and tangentially, they see millions of forks in the road. Paths leading to various solutions, ideas abound in their vision of this simple statement. All of the benefits of the various liberty oriented ideas are wrapped up in that statement.

    Guardian: “What!!? You want chaos in the streets and people dying?”

    Their thought process is concrete, they “hear” cut government and they immediately envision the removal of things they feel help (police, Fire, defense, etc.). No forks, no alternative paths or solutions, just an immediate thought to the worst case scenario.

    Unfortunately few rational will look into this stuff being that they think it isn’t scientific but more like astrology. It is ironic considering that for the most part “they do what gets results, what achieves their objectives as effectively or efficiently as possible.” Maybe more of them will realize that they are not being effective or getting results.

    This must be why I am an idealist.

    “As Abstract Cooperators, Idealists speak mostly of what they hope for and imagine might be possible for people, and they want to act in good conscience, always trying to reach their goals without compromising their personal code of ethics.”

  16. Ken Tucker

    This was much better than the other LPHQ press release which appeared to endorse Obama.

  17. Mark Hilgenberg

    Here are a few posts regarding the upcoming freak show on the 4th.

    “It will probably be the usual suspects of the lunatic fringe. For your entertainment, the press release:”

    Lots of comments here.

    Swing electoral votes, AKA get them to Romney.

Leave a Reply

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