Libertarian National Committee, Inc. • 1444 Duke St. • Alexandria, VA 22314 • Phone: (202) 333-0008 • Fax: (202) 333-0072 www.LP.org July 2015 America Isn’t Getting More Liberal — It’s Getting More Libertarian. Today the public is broadly more libertarian than it was just decades ago ization of unauthorized immigrants. In years to measure the public’s “policy By David Bier and Daniel Bier 2013, those numbers were 63 percent mood” (a measure of preference for Excerpted from Anything Peaceful and 69 percent, respectively. more or less government). They found (Foundation for Econ. Education) On economic issues, Americans are the public has become dramatically Published on July 2, 2015 also growing skeptical of bigger gov- more economically conservative since This week the New York Times’ ernment. the 1960s, and this shift happened in “Room for Debate” columnists dis- In 1993, 37 percent thought busi- all fifty states and in every region of cussed the question “has America nesses should be regulated less; in the country. become more liberal?” Debater Molly 2014, a plurality, 49 percent, wanted The public has also become more Worthen, a professor at UNC Chapel fewer regulations. In 2000, just 38 per- libertarian on foreign policy, the draft, Hill, is no libertarian, but even she cent said it was not the federal govern- and the environment. sees what many others have been say- ing: America isn’t getting more liberal Public Opinion on Economic Policy and Federal Power or more conservative—it’s getting 75% more libertarian. A wide range of Gallup polls agree. Take guns. In 1990, just 19 percent 50% opposed “stricter laws covering the sale of firearms.” In 1991, barely half opposed a law that would “ban the 25% possession of handguns.” In 2014, those numbers had risen to 52 percent and 73 percent, respectively. 0% On gay rights, Americans have 1993 1998 2003 2008 2013 also turned dramatically libertarian. Too much federal power Business (no more regulations) In 1988, just a third of Americans thought gay and lesbian relations Health care (not a right) should be “legal.” In 1996, only 27 percent thought gay marriage should ment’s responsibility to ensure every Perhaps the most startling sign of be legal. In 2014, Americans favored American had health care; last year, how quickly the culture has changed is legalizing both homosexuality and 52 percent said health care was not the on interracial marriage, something that same-sex marriage by 69 percent and government’s job. we absolutely take for granted today. 60 percent, respectively. This corresponds with an increase But as late as 1994, only 48 percent of Views on marijuana underwent a in the percentage of respondents indi- American thought it was “acceptable” similarly quick turn. In 1995, just 25 cating that the federal government has for blacks to marry whites. Today, it’s percent of Americans favored legal- “too much power.” In 2003, the first 87 percent. izing marijuana. In 2014, it was [at] 51 year the poll was taken, 39 percent Unfortunately, while the public at percent. agreed. In 2013, the number hit 60 large is moving in a libertarian direc- On immigration, Americans are percent. tion on many issues, the [old] politi- also much more open today. In 1996, This isn’t a fluke. Political sci- cal parties are still representing the only 38 percent opposed further entists Peter Ens and Julianna Koch preferred statism of their base, even if restrictions on immigration; in the pooled together hundreds of thousands 1980s, just 41 percent favored legal- of poll responses over the last fifty continued on page 4 Liberty Pledge Newsletter — July 2015 In 2016, Let’s Have New and renewing Liberty Pledgers Real Presidential Debates David Aschmann Gregory Laugle Excerpted from River Cities’ Reader Mark Ayen Joel R. Leininger By Thomas L. Knapp Alvin C. Bailey Nathan D. Loman Published on June 30, 2015 Jon T. Baldvinsson Todd E. Lucas Every four years, the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) Mark P. Bartoli Mark Manning puts on a series of campaign commercials disguised as presiden- Vern K. Benson Robert B. Matthews tial and vice–presidential debates. Gary Brunsman Matt McDougald The CPD is, in theory, a not–for–profit organization “established William J. Chiarchiaro Joe Mikus ... to ensure that debates, as ... part of every general election, pro- Hyeokchan Choe Russ L. Monchill vide the best possible information to viewers and listeners.” Linda S. Comstock Rachel Moore But the CPD is really just a scam the Republican and Demo- cratic parties use to funnel illegally large “in kind” campaign dona- Joel Cool–Panama Benjamin Morin tions, in the form of tens of millions of dollars’ worth of free media Wesley F. Deitchler Jeffrey Motta exposure, exclusively to their own candidates. Ashley Denning Robert Muenkel A real nonpartisan, not–for–profit debate organization would Daniel J. DiCicco Mike R. Newsome use objective criteria for deciding which candidates may partici- Paul Ehlers Tyler Ovard pate in debates. The CPD continuously refines its criteria with an Thomas C. Ehlers, Jr. Ron Patterson eye toward ensuring that no third–party or independent [candidate] Emerson Ellett Howard A. Pearce qualifies for a microphone at a CPD “debate.” Ray Elliott John Peirce Billionaire independent/Reform Party candidate Ross Perot William Ely Michael T. Penrow managed to jump through their hoops in 1992, afterward polling Michael N. Fein Lawrence Peterson 19 percent in the general election. The CPD excluded him in 1996, Melanie Folstad Shawn Peterson cutting his vote percentage down to 8 percent. Since then, the CPD Charles Franklin John R. Reid has successfully excluded additional candidates from their Demo- David N. Fries Joe E. Retford crat/Republican campaign infomercials. James W. Gallup Roland C. Riemers Libertarians aren’t fans of laws limiting the people’s ability to Glenn Goodman Dan L. Rycroft give their money—as much of it as they want—to the candidates Randall Grant Pamela Sanderson they support. But if there are going to be such rules, they should Joel Gregory Nicholas J. Sarwark apply across the board. Michael A. Gregory David K. Schrader That’s why the Libertarian Party, the Green Party, both parties’ 2012 presidential and [VP] candidates, and 2012 Justice Party Michael Grogan Timothy Scott presidential nominee Rocky Anderson are suing the CPD. The Our George S. Halepis Stanislav Sharovskiy America Initiative, headed up by 2012 Libertarian Party presiden- Cary Harlos Cisse Spragins tial nominee Gary Johnson, is coordinating the legal challenge. Thomas F. Hastings Randy G. Szabla The relief the plaintiffs seek is simple: If the CPD is going to David Hogan Ron J. Theriault pretend to be a not–for–profit, nonpartisan debate organization, it Marta A. Howard James T. Thomas should be required to start acting like one. Instead of giving the Re- David Hunt Jim Tucker publicans and Democrats a free series of campaign infomercials, Kenneth Ikeda Kevin N. Tucker the CPD must put on real debates, open to all candidates who are William T. Irwin Robert W. Vance legally qualified...and whose names appear on enough state ballots Shane Jackson Ryan N. Verling for them to hypothetically win the election. Kerry Johnston Gene L. Warren Would victory in this suit make a real difference for third–party Clinton D. Jones Michael Wester and independent candidates? Absolutely. Exposure in the debates G. Jason Karluk Michael Wilson might or might not put Libertarians or Greens over the top, but it Nathan Kleffman Eric M. Witcher would at least expose the American public to the real panoply of Scott A. Kohlhaas Brandon Young choices instead of to one pre–selected pair. Liberty Pledge Newsletter — July 2015 Libertarian Party Chair and WAU Grad Talks About Freedom Excerpted from Spectrum Magazine ventists who are active within the LP. because I chose to. by Gary Chartier [Founders of Seventh–day Adventism] Question: Others would be doubtful... Published on April 17, 2015 were deeply skeptical of a government us- they believe Christianity means a com- ing policy to enforce Sunday laws for the mitment to social justice [that’s] incon- Nicholas Sarwark, chair of the Libertar- benefit of the dominant Christian sects or sistent with the libertarian philosophy. ian National Committee, graduated from to push unhealthy diets for the interests of Answer: Nothing within libertarianism is Washington Adventist University in 1998 big business. There is also a long history of incompatible with a commitment to social with a BS in computer science and a minor principled pacifism and conscientious ob- justice. Jesus called his followers to go out in philosophy, going on to earn a JD from jection that dovetails nicely with the Liber- and live their witness, not to force others American University’s Washington College tarian Party’s foreign policy. to do so. of Law, cum laude, in 2008. Question: Some Adventists would be The Adventist Church does wonder- uncomfortable with libertarianism as a Question: Why should anyone be ful work to help the underserved, funded political position because they think it interested in “America’s third–largest through the voluntary tithe of the members. implies support for libertinism. political party”? [But] forcing non–Adventists to tithe to the Answer: There is a difference between Adventist Church would be wrong. One Answer: Neither old party has a plan to allowing other adults to make libertine can’t achieve justice through injustice. get our government to stop spending our choices in their own lives and support for Libertarians are convinced that, with- grandchildren into bankruptcy; they only libertinism as a good. As a public defender, out government interference, productivity have different arguments for what govern- [I] met many whose lives were ravaged by would be greater, and people who wanted ment programs the national debt should be drugs like methamphetamine.