*************************** 1. row *************************** old_text: '''MediaWiki has been successfully installed.''' Consult the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents User's Guide] for information on using the wiki software. == Getting started == * [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Configuration_settings Configuration settings list] * [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:FAQ MediaWiki FAQ] * [http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce MediaWiki release mailing list] *************************** 2. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. *************************** 3. row *************************** old_text: Brian submitted http://marketliberal.org/PlatCom2008.html to LNC as his application for PlatCom 2008. *************************** 4. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * The members of the 2008 Platform Committee * Draft planks proposed by PlatCom members * The 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * Minutes of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 5. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * [[Draft Planks]] proposed by PlatCom members * [[LP Platform Archive|Archive]] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [[LP Convention Minutes Archive|Minutes]] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 6. row *************************** old_text: == State Representatives == The ten states with the most sustaining members each pick one PlatCom member. Members chosen so far: * CA – Bruce Dovner * TX – Guy McLendon * FL - * GA - Glenn Tatum * NY - Eric Sundwall * PA - Henry Haller * IL - * MI - * OH – Mike Smitley * VA - == LNC Appointees == Apparently in order of net votes received: * Alicia Mattson (interim chair) * Steve Dasbach * Adam Mayer * David Aitken * Hardy Macia * Steven Burden * Robert Capozzi * Bonnie Scott * Brian Holtz * David Owens === Alternates === In order of net votes received: # Jon Roland # Rob Power # Ruth Bennett # Jim Duensing # Morey Strauss *************************** 7. row *************************** old_text: == State Representatives == The ten states with the most sustaining members each pick one PlatCom member. Members chosen so far: * CA – Bruce Dovner * TX – Guy McLendon * FL - * GA - Glenn Tatum * NY - Eric Sundwall * PA - Henry Haller * IL - * MI - * OH – Mike Smitley * VA - == LNC Appointees == Apparently in order of net votes received: * [[User:AliciaMattson|Alicia Mattson]] (interim chair) * Steve Dasbach * Adam Mayer * David Aitken * Hardy Macia * Steven Burden * Robert Capozzi * Bonnie Scott * Brian Holtz * David Owens === Alternates === In order of net votes received: # Jon Roland # Rob Power # Ruth Bennett # Jim Duensing # Morey Strauss *************************** 8. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/AliciaMattson.JPG Alicia Mattson of Cookeville, TN is a business owner. She has been Treasurer of the LPTN and was the 2005-2007 Chair[http://www.lptn.net/news/articles/92]. She was chosen by the LNC as the Interim Chair of the [[2008 Platform Committee]]. *************************** 9. row *************************** old_text: == State Representatives == The ten states with the most sustaining members each pick one PlatCom member. Members chosen so far: * CA – [[User:BruceDovner|Bruce Dovner]] * TX – Guy McLendon * FL - * GA - Glenn Tatum * NY - Eric Sundwall * PA - Henry Haller * IL - * MI - * OH – Mike Smitley * VA - == LNC Appointees == Apparently in order of net votes received: * [[User:AliciaMattson|Alicia Mattson]] (interim chair) * Steve Dasbach * Adam Mayer * David Aitken * Hardy Macia * Steven Burden * Robert Capozzi * Bonnie Scott * Brian Holtz * David Owens === Alternates === In order of net votes received: # Jon Roland # Rob Power # Ruth Bennett # Jim Duensing # Morey Strauss *************************** 10. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/BruceDovner.jpg Bruce Dovner teaches mathematics at Los Angeles Harbor College. He is a longtime activist in the LPCA, and has been on the LPCA Executive Committee since at least 2000. He was the 1996 LP candidate for the U.S. House in CA-36, polling 2.2% in a 4-way race. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_elections,_1996] He is Chair of the LPCA committee responsible for its [http://ca.lp.org/program/Program2006-2007.pdf legislative program], and his effort to pass an updated LP program fell just short of the required 2/3 LNC vote in Portland in 2006. [http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20060630.pdf] *************************** 11. row *************************** old_text: == State Representatives == The ten states with the most sustaining members each pick one PlatCom member. Members chosen so far: * CA – [[User:BruceDovner|Bruce Dovner]] * TX – [[User:GuyMcLendon|Guy McLendon]] * FL - * GA - [[User:GlennTatum|Glenn Tatum]] * NY - [[User:EricSundwall|Eric Sundwall]] * PA - [[User:HenryHaller|Henry Haller]] * IL - * MI - * OH – [[User:MikeSmitley|Mike Smitley]] * VA - == LNC Appointees == Apparently in order of net votes received: * [[User:AliciaMattson|Alicia Mattson]] (interim chair) * [[User:SteveDasbach|Steve Dasbach]] * [[User:AdamMayer|Adam Mayer]] * [[User:DavidAitken|David Aitken]] * [[User:HardyMacia|Hardy Macia]] * [[User:StevenBurden|Steven Burden]] * [[User:RobertCapozzi|Robert Capozzi]] * [[User:BonnieScott|Bonnie Scott]] * [[User:BrianHoltz|Brian Holtz]] * [[User:DavidOwens|David Owens]] === Alternates === In order of net votes received: # [[User:JonRoland|Jon Roland]] # [[User:RobPower|Rob Power]] # [[User:RuthBennett|Ruth Bennett]] # [[User:JimDuensing|Jim Duensing]] # [[User:MoreyStrauss|Morey Strauss]] *************************** 12. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * [[Draft Planks]] proposed by PlatCom members * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 13. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/Images/eCard.png http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/BrianHoltz.jpg Brian Holtz is a software engineer at Yahoo in California's Silicon Valley. Brian submitted http://marketliberal.org/PlatCom2008.html to LNC as his application for PlatCom 2008. *************************** 14. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Platform Bylaws and Convention Rules]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * [[Draft Planks]] proposed by PlatCom members * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 15. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * [[Draft Planks]] proposed by PlatCom members * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 16. row *************************** old_text:

RULE 7: DEBATING AND VOTING -- PLATFORM

1. The current Platform shall serve as the basis of all future platforms. At Regular Conventions, the existing Platform may be amended. Additional planks, or additions to planks, must be approved by 2/3 vote. A platform plank may be deleted by majority vote.

After the adoption of the convention agenda, the convention will vote whether to delete planks from the existing platform. This will be accomplished as follows:
1. The Credentials Committee shall issue five signature tokens to each delegate.
2. Tokens shall only be issued to delegates. Delegates are responsible for transferring possession of unused tokens to their alternates if necessary.
3. Each delegate may cast each token as a recommendation for deletion of one plank by noting on the token the plank to be deleted and signing the token.
4. A delegate may cumulate recommendations by casting any number of tokens for deletion of the same plank.
5. Delegates will be given until one hour prior to the scheduled start of the platform report to mark their tokens and deliver them to the Secretary.
6. Prior to the scheduled start of the platform report, the Secretary shall review the tokens received and tabulate and report the tokens submitted for deletion of each plank.
7. As its first item of platform business, the convention shall vote whether to delete each of those planks that received a number of tokens for deletion equal to 20% or more of the number of credentialed delegates. Such votes shall be cast without amendment or debate.
The Platform Committee shall meet before each Regular Convention and prepare a report containing its recommendations. At the convention, the Platform Committee's recommendations shall be reported to the floor and debated and voted upon separately. The Platform Committee shall set forth the order in which each recommendation shall be considered.
Recommendations for which there is no minority report shall be debated and voted upon in the following manner:
1. The Platform Committee Chair, or some other person designated by him or her, shall read the proposed recommendation and shall have up to two minutes to explain the recommendation.
2. The Convention Chair shall then open the recommendation to discussion and amendment for a period of 15 minutes. At the end of 15 minutes, a vote will be taken on whether to bring the recommendation (as amended, if this is the case) to a final vote. If a majority vote is in favor of immediate consideration, the vote to accept or reject the recommendation must follow immediately. If a majority vote is against immediate consideration, the proposed recommendation shall be tabled for later consideration after all other recommendations receiving a favorable majority vote from the Platform Committee have been considered.
Recommendations for which there is a minority report shall be debated and voted upon in the following manner:
1. Spokespersons for both the majority and minority positions shall each have two minutes to present their views.
2. The Chair shall then open consideration of both positions for five minutes during which time any delegates may express their views without offering amendments. After five minutes, there will be a vote on which of the two reports shall be considered for purposes of adopting a recommendation. The report receiving the greater number of votes shall then be discussed and voted upon in the manner described in Section 4b.
After all Committee recommendations have received initial consideration, any delegate may propose amendments to the Platform. The delegate may take up to two minutes to state and explain the proposal, with debating and voting to proceed as described in Section 4b.
Finally, if time permits, proposals which were considered by the Platform Committee but which received an unfavorable vote from a majority of the Committee, may be considered, with a spokesperson for the minority position giving the reasons in favor and the Platform Committee Chair or other representative of the majority position giving the reasons why it was voted down, before the proposal is taken to the floor for debate.
Challenges of adopted Party planks believed by 10% of the delegates to be in conflict with the Statement of Principles shall be referred in writing, during the Convention, to the Judicial Committee by the delegates requesting action for consideration. The challenge shall specify in what manner the plank is believed to be in conflict. The Judicial Committee shall consider the challenge, decide whether the Statement of Principles is conformed to and report their findings and reasons to the Convention. If the plank is vetoed by the Judicial Committee, it will be declared null and void but can be reinstated by a 3/4 vote of the Convention.

*************************** 17. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * [[Draft Planks]] proposed by PlatCom members * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 18. row *************************** old_text: This page documents instances in which the LP Platform was used in front of significantly-sized audiences to attack or embarrass the LP as too extreme. Many of these items were found by searching Google News Archives [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=]. * "I know of one instance when it was used against a Republican/former Libertarian in Colorado. State Senator Penn Pfiffner, who used to be in the Colorado LP, had mail sent against him by his Democrat opponent telling voters he was trying to legalize heroin and crack, and cited the LP Platform." Donny Ferguson, 2007-03-28 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertarianReformCaucus/message/1171]. * "A few days before the election a local paper did an article on the race, in which I was characterized as being "too radical for the residents of Clarion County". The article did not mention the LP platform, but when I talked to the reporter to ask why he would write that, his response was that he had done some research and looked at the LP website, and the platform was a big factor." Mik Robertson, LP Pennsylvania. 2006-08-05 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1752] * "Non-Libertarian candidates in my county have used quotes from the LP platform against Libertarian candidates and Non-Libertarians candidates who accept contributions from known Libertarians." Jack Tanner, LP Florida. 2006-08-04 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1749] * Libertarians focus on drugs by Rob Casapulla - "The Libertarian platform is self-defeating and its one claim to fame is its attempts to legalize drugs. [...] Yes, that means cocaine, heroin, acid, ecstasy, crystal meth, [...]" University Wire, 2006-02-16. * "District 3 City Council candidates Dr. Jimmy Blake and Valerie Abbott have engaged in a war of words this week, with each accusing the other of dirty politics. Thursday, Blake lashed out against what he termed "innuendos and slanderous" statements Mrs. Abbott has made about his association with the Libertarian Party. Mrs. Abbott responded that it is Blake who has resorted to personal attacks. "He's running scared," she said. "He accused my husband of being a member of the Libertarian Party." Blake, chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, said Thursday that Mrs. Abbott's husband, Rod, is a Libertarian and claimed to have national party paperwork backing up his claim. But Rod Abbott said he is not a member of the Libertarian Party. "He (Blake) says he is chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, but is claiming to not be a member of the national party," Mrs. Abbott said. Mrs. Abbott said Blake is not being truthful when he denies being affiliated with the national Libertarian Party, which in its 1992 platform advocated no minimum drinking laws and the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Blake said he is part of a reform movement within the Libertarian Party that is trying to get rid of the national party platform. Mrs. Abbott and Virginia Volker, another District 3 candidate, said they are not behind the distribution of the national Libertarian Party platform. District 3 candidate Dennis Rancont, who joined the fray Wednesday when he ran a radio ad critical of Blake's Libertarian beliefs on WYDE-AM, said he regretted the ad and withdrew it." Birmingham News, 2005-08-02. * Candidate Said Party Supports Drug Legalization; Judge Rules Free Speech - "A Troy district judge has dismissed a defamation suit that the Libertarian Party of Oakland County filed against Troy resident Cristina Pappageorge. Judge Michael Martone dismissed the suit earlier this month, ruling that Pappageorge's comments that the Libertarian Party supports legalizing drugs are protected under the First Amendment as political.." Detroit Free Press, 2003-07-31. * Indianapolis plays host to convention of party that shuns gun control, wants drugs legalized - "To mainstream voters, the Libertarian Party platform might seem extreme, even a little bit kooky. Libertarians want to legalize drugs, abolish handgun control and close down the U.S. Department of Education." The Indianapolis Star, 2002-07-06. * "At the state chair’s breakfast the next day Mark Schreiber began the same spiel by telling the sad story of how when he was running for Indiana Lt. Governor [in 2002] he did a long interview with a reporter. The final story focused on the Libertarian Party’s support child pornography, which is how the reporter interpreted the LP national platform." Carol Moore LP convention report, 2002-07-03 [http://www.carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/convention2002report.html]. * "During the past election, Redwood City Councilmember, Jim Hartnett, sent a hit piece opposing Libertarian candidates for school boards, and supporting the College and Sequoia H.S. bond measures." Jack Hickey, LP San Mateo County, California. 2001-11-13. Scan of mailing at archive.org [http://tinyurl.com/2m95vv], which quotes the Platform regarding "drugs" and "sexually explicit materials". * Two Political Parties Plenty, Thanks - "The Libertarian platform is a prescription for anarchy." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000-07-14. * Sabrin Haunted By His Libertarian Past - "Treffinger said Sabrin should explain his support for legalizing drugs and prostitution, and sanctioning gay marriages." Bergen County Record, 2000-04-21. * Libertarians score victory by securing place on 2000 ballot - "Some espouse extreme views Like the cessation of all taxation, public education and government regulation." Dallas Morning News, 1998-11-08. * Libertarian rebuts mailer by Corcoran - "Editor: This letter rebuts a campaign mailer sent out by Richard Corcoran, the unsuccessful candidate for state House District 43. [...] Mr. Corcoran in a late mailer took on the Libertarian Party [...] Mr. Corcoran's Carvillian treatment of his opponent in the mailer extended to the Libertarian Party and its platform." St. Petersburg Times, 1998-09-09. * "several citizen panelists agreed that they found the anti-government platform of his Libertarian party too extreme". Philadelphia Daily News, 1997-10-20. * Is "Libertarian politics" an oxymoron? - "to these mainstream issues the Libertarian Party platform adds such problematic esoterica as jury nullification, a reliance solely on tort law and 'strict liability' to govern pollution, and the right of individual political secession. When libertarianism is presented as an all-or-nothing bargain, interested voters are more likely to leave the whole package on the table." Reason, 1996-07-01. [http://reason.com/news/printer/29963.html] * Libertarian Candidates Wants To Do Away With Much Of Government - "other parts of the Libertarian platform call for eliminating most government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. ..." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1994-08-14. * The Other Party In The Presidential Race - "The Libertarian platform calls for the abolition of child labor laws (they inhibit the freedom of children), of income taxes, highway speed ..." Miami Herald, 1992-10-25. * Essay - The Fourth Man. "[...] a little extreme? you ain't heard nothin' yet on civil liberty: decriminalize drugs and prostitution, forget gun control or abortion limitation, eliminate federal agencies, settle environmental clashes in court, permit open immigration [...] if taken literally, the Libertarian platform is so far out of the mainstream as to be high and dry [...]" New York Times, 1992-10-22. * Libertarians are a laugh by Don Fedder - "About mid-September, when we're bored to tears by presidential politics, we can always look to the Libertarian Party for comic relief. [...] the Libertarian Party platform takes liberal-rights mania to its absurdly logical conclusion. Libertarians will brook no interference with what they designate as human rights, regardless of the suffering or chaos resulting therefrom [...] " San Antonio Express-News, 1992-09-22. * Libertarians? No, US Needs A Legitimate Fourth Choice - "Standing against things is the Libertarian Party's specialty. Its platform calls for government to cease and desist from almost everything except the repealing of laws (Social Security, the Post Office, you name it) ..." Chicago Sun-Times, 1992-07-09. Also ran in: * Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. Washington Post, 1992-07-09. * Libertarians Stew On Fringe. San Jose Mercury News, 1992-07-09. * Extreme Views Doom Libertarian Nominees. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1992-07-13. *************************** 19. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/GuyMcLendon.jpg Guy McLendon ([http://www.mclendon.net/about_guy.htm biography]) is an engineer at America's fourth largest refinery. He was Vice-Chair of the 2006 Platform Committee and wrote the taxation plank [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/2006%20LP%20Convention%20Minutes.pdf] that almost passed in Portland. He won a Lights of Liberty award in 2005 [http://www.theadvocates.org/lights-2005.html]. *************************** 20. row *************************** old_text: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing *************************** 21. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/GuyMcLendon.jpg Guy McLendon ([http://www.mclendon.net/about_guy.htm biography]) is an engineer at America's fourth largest refinery. He is the Chair of the LP of Harris County, TX, and is serving his second term as the LPTX representative to PlatCom. He was Vice-Chair of the 2006 Platform Committee and wrote the taxation plank [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/2006%20LP%20Convention%20Minutes.pdf] that almost passed in Portland. He won a Lights of Liberty award in 2005 [http://www.theadvocates.org/lights-2005.html]. === Draft Planks === [[Constitutional Government Plank]] === Platform-Related Writings === * [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/msearch?query=guymclendon LPplatform-discuss postings] - ~100 since Mar 2007 *************************** 22. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/GuyMcLendon.jpg Guy McLendon ([http://www.mclendon.net/about_guy.htm biography]) is an engineer at America's fourth largest refinery. He is the Chair of the LP of Harris County, TX, and is serving his second term as the LPTX representative to PlatCom. He was Vice-Chair of the 2006 Platform Committee and wrote the taxation plank [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/2006%20LP%20Convention%20Minutes.pdf] that almost passed in Portland. He won a Lights of Liberty award in 2005 [http://www.theadvocates.org/lights-2005.html]. === Draft Planks === [[Representative Government Plank]] === Platform-Related Writings === * [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/msearch?query=guymclendon LPplatform-discuss postings] - ~100 since Mar 2007 *************************** 23. row *************************** old_text: [[Constitutionalism|Constitutionalists]] on the Platform Committee include Jon Roland, Guy McLendon, Brian Holtz, and Steven Burden. Their latest proposals are as follows. == Holtz/Roland draft == We support a strict interpretation of the Constitution and enforcement of the Tenth Amendment rule that the federal government has no powers beyond those delegated to it by the Constitution. We support the repeal or overturning of all Acts of Congress outside the narrow powers delegated to it in the Constitution, which are primarily national defense and providing an impartial judicial system. We oppose the President initiating military hostilities in the absence of a declaration of war by Congress. We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. In order to grant voters a full range of choice in federal, state and local elections, we propose proportional voting systems with multi-member districts for legislative elections and instant runoff voting (IRV) for single-winner elections. == McLendon draft == We support an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution as amended. All legislation that violates the Constitution according to such interpretation, including when it violates the 9th and 10th Amendments, should be rescinded. Congress should reinstate the system of checks & balances, and rein in Presidential and Supreme Court violations of the Rule of Law. We support the Declaration of Independence’s assumption that We the People are sovereign, and may alter government as required to protect our unalienable rights. So, we vigorously defend the rights of citizens required to exercise this sovereignty – including the right to hire & fire elected officials via clean & unhindered electoral systems, the right to petition for redress of grievances, and the right of fully informed & empowered juries. Voting machines must have a paper audit trail that can be used to check election results. == Roland draft == We support a strict interpretation of the Constitution as originally understood and properly amended, especially the presumption of nonauthority expressed in the Tenth Amendment, and the unenumerated rights referred to in the Ninth Amendment. We support the appointment of libertarian constitutionalist judges who will make decisions according to such strict interpretation, based on historical evidence, and without regard for precedents that have deviated from strict construction. We demand that Congress repeal all unconstitutional legislation, and focus further legislation mainly on national defense and the provision of an adequate system of courts with honest, competent judges who are not biased in favor of the powerful and well-connected. We demand that Congress not authorize funds for any initiation of military action not authorized by a declaration of war or letters of marque and reprisal, and impeach and remove any president who commits such action. *************************** 24. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Draft planks proposed by PlatCom members ** [[Representative Government Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 25. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Proposals affecting multiple planks *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposals affecting individual planks *** [[Representative Government Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 26. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/2007_baseline.html *************************** 27. row *************************** old_text: __NOTOC__

Color Coding Key

Text like this is from (and identical in) the 1972, 2004, and 2006 platforms.
Text like this is from the 1972 platform.
Text like this is from (and identical in) the 1972 and 2004 platforms.
Text like this is from the 2004 platform.
Text like this is from (and identical in) the 2004 and 2006 platforms.
Text like this is from the 2006 platform.

1. Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.

1.1. Expression and Communication

We support full freedom of expression, and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

We support the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Only actions that infringe on the rights or damage the property of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control.. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. We favor all-volunteer juries and assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.

1.5. Self-Defense

The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights -- life, liberty, and justly acquired property -- against aggression, whether by force or fraud. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the right to keep and bear arms.

2. Economic Liberty

A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of existing governments in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. We oppose all government interference with voluntary and contractual relations among individuals. People should be allowed to deal with one another as free traders; and the resultant economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is the free market.

2.1. Property and Contract

The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of -- or in any manner enjoy -- their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others. Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. We oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates. We oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade -- for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, we favor restitution to the rightful owners.

2.2. Environment and Resources

Pollution of other people's property is a violation of individual rights. We support the development of an objective system defining resource rights, including riparian rights, as individual property rights. Individuals have the right to homestead unowned resources, both within the jurisdictions of national governments and within unclaimed territory.

2.3. Government Finance

Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the US Constitution that restricts Congress from spending any more than it collected in revenue the previous year. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the US Constitution.

2.4. Money and Markets

We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We call for the abolition of all regulation of financial and capital markets. What should be punished is the theft of information or breach of contract to hold information in confidence, not trading on the basis of valuable knowledge.

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

We seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals. We defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. We oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Nuclear power, transportation, and other industries should be governed by free markets and held to strict liability. We seek the elimination of occupational licensure. We support the right to associate or not associate in labor unions. An employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union.

2.6. Health Care and Education

We advocate the separation of education and State. As an interim measure to encourage the growth of private schools and variety in education, including home schooling, we support tax credits for tuition and other expenditures related to an individual's education.

We advocate the separation of medicine and State. We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care.

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

The principles which guide a legitimate government in its relationships with other governments are the same as those which guide relationships among individuals: no individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government.

3.1. National Defense

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. We oppose the government's use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.

3.2. International Affairs

American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and the defense -- against attack from abroad -- of the lives, liberty, and property of the American people on American soil. We recognize the right to unrestricted trade and travel. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights.

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

Political freedom and escape from tyranny demands that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a threat to security, health or property.

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

Government should not deny, abridge or enhance any individual's rights at the expense of other people's rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation.

3.5. Representative Government

Color Coding Key

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. In order to grant voters a full range of choice in federal, state and local elections, we propose proportional voting systems with multi-member districts for legislative elections and instant runoff voting (IRV) for single-winner elections. We support the right to secede where: (1) secession is supported by a majority within the political unit, (2) the majority does not attempt suppression of the dissenting minority, and (3) the government of the new entity is at least as compatible with human freedom as that from which it seceded.
*************************** 60. row *************************** old_text: This page documents instances in which the LP Platform was used in front of significantly-sized audiences to attack or embarrass the LP as too extreme. Many of these items were found by searching Google News Archives [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=]. * "I know of one instance when it was used against a Republican/former Libertarian in Colorado. State Senator Penn Pfiffner, who used to be in the Colorado LP, had mail sent against him by his Democrat opponent telling voters he was trying to legalize heroin and crack, and cited the LP Platform." Donny Ferguson, 2007-03-28 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertarianReformCaucus/message/1171]. * Samuels fans flames of public school bonfire - "Don Samuels has apologized for his words, but not his views. And he isn't likely to. For the Fifth Ward City Council member from Minneapolis who suggested burning down North High School is not just one man with an opinion. He is a stalking horse for a movement that wants to torch public schools. It has gotten frighteningly close to its goal. The Center of the American Experiment, a local conservative think tank, is renewing the push for school vouchers, and it tapped Samuels to endorse its position paper. [...] Other black leaders are being lobbied to convert to the vouchers cause. One, NAACP President Duane Reed, says he recently refused requests to testify on behalf of a vouchers/tax credit bill in the Legislature. He says the request came from a group affiliated with the Libertarian Party, whose platform praises tax credits and charter schools as "interim measures" that will help kill the public schools." Minneapolis Star Tribune 2007-02-17 [http://www.amsd.org/articles/Samuels_fans_flames.html]. * "A few days before the election a local paper did an article on the race, in which I was characterized as being "too radical for the residents of Clarion County". The article did not mention the LP platform, but when I talked to the reporter to ask why he would write that, his response was that he had done some research and looked at the LP website, and the platform was a big factor." Mik Robertson, LP Pennsylvania. 2006-08-05 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1752] * "Non-Libertarian candidates in my county have used quotes from the LP platform against Libertarian candidates and Non-Libertarians candidates who accept contributions from known Libertarians." Jack Tanner, LP Florida. 2006-08-04 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1749] * Libertarians focus on drugs by Rob Casapulla - "The Libertarian platform is self-defeating and its one claim to fame is its attempts to legalize drugs. [...] Yes, that means cocaine, heroin, acid, ecstasy, crystal meth, [...]" University Wire, 2006-02-16. * "District 3 City Council candidates Dr. Jimmy Blake and Valerie Abbott have engaged in a war of words this week, with each accusing the other of dirty politics. Thursday, Blake lashed out against what he termed "innuendos and slanderous" statements Mrs. Abbott has made about his association with the Libertarian Party. Mrs. Abbott responded that it is Blake who has resorted to personal attacks. "He's running scared," she said. "He accused my husband of being a member of the Libertarian Party." Blake, chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, said Thursday that Mrs. Abbott's husband, Rod, is a Libertarian and claimed to have national party paperwork backing up his claim. But Rod Abbott said he is not a member of the Libertarian Party. "He (Blake) says he is chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, but is claiming to not be a member of the national party," Mrs. Abbott said. Mrs. Abbott said Blake is not being truthful when he denies being affiliated with the national Libertarian Party, which in its 1992 platform advocated no minimum drinking laws and the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Blake said he is part of a reform movement within the Libertarian Party that is trying to get rid of the national party platform. Mrs. Abbott and Virginia Volker, another District 3 candidate, said they are not behind the distribution of the national Libertarian Party platform. District 3 candidate Dennis Rancont, who joined the fray Wednesday when he ran a radio ad critical of Blake's Libertarian beliefs on WYDE-AM, said he regretted the ad and withdrew it." Birmingham News, 2005-08-02. * Candidate Said Party Supports Drug Legalization; Judge Rules Free Speech - "A Troy district judge has dismissed a defamation suit that the Libertarian Party of Oakland County filed against Troy resident Cristina Pappageorge. Judge Michael Martone dismissed the suit earlier this month, ruling that Pappageorge's comments that the Libertarian Party supports legalizing drugs are protected under the First Amendment as political.." Detroit Free Press, 2003-07-31. * Indianapolis plays host to convention of party that shuns gun control, wants drugs legalized - "To mainstream voters, the Libertarian Party platform might seem extreme, even a little bit kooky. Libertarians want to legalize drugs, abolish handgun control and close down the U.S. Department of Education." The Indianapolis Star, 2002-07-06. * "At the state chair’s breakfast the next day Mark Schreiber began the same spiel by telling the sad story of how when he was running for Indiana Lt. Governor [in 2002] he did a long interview with a reporter. The final story focused on the Libertarian Party’s support child pornography, which is how the reporter interpreted the LP national platform." Carol Moore LP convention report, 2002-07-03 [http://www.carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/convention2002report.html]. * "During the past election, Redwood City Councilmember, Jim Hartnett, sent a hit piece opposing Libertarian candidates for school boards, and supporting the College and Sequoia H.S. bond measures." Jack Hickey, LP San Mateo County, California. 2001-11-13. Scan of mailing at archive.org [http://tinyurl.com/2m95vv], which quotes the Platform regarding "drugs" and "sexually explicit materials". * Two Political Parties Plenty, Thanks - "The Libertarian platform is a prescription for anarchy." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000-07-14. * Sabrin Haunted By His Libertarian Past - "Treffinger said Sabrin should explain his support for legalizing drugs and prostitution, and sanctioning gay marriages." Bergen County Record, 2000-04-21. * Libertarians score victory by securing place on 2000 ballot - "Some espouse extreme views Like the cessation of all taxation, public education and government regulation." Dallas Morning News, 1998-11-08. * Libertarian rebuts mailer by Corcoran - "Editor: This letter rebuts a campaign mailer sent out by Richard Corcoran, the unsuccessful candidate for state House District 43. [...] Mr. Corcoran in a late mailer took on the Libertarian Party [...] Mr. Corcoran's Carvillian treatment of his opponent in the mailer extended to the Libertarian Party and its platform." St. Petersburg Times, 1998-09-09. * "several citizen panelists agreed that they found the anti-government platform of his Libertarian party too extreme". Philadelphia Daily News, 1997-10-20. * Is "Libertarian politics" an oxymoron? - "to these mainstream issues the Libertarian Party platform adds such problematic esoterica as jury nullification, a reliance solely on tort law and 'strict liability' to govern pollution, and the right of individual political secession. When libertarianism is presented as an all-or-nothing bargain, interested voters are more likely to leave the whole package on the table." Reason, 1996-07-01. [http://reason.com/news/printer/29963.html] * Libertarian Candidates Wants To Do Away With Much Of Government - "other parts of the Libertarian platform call for eliminating most government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. ..." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1994-08-14. * The Other Party In The Presidential Race - "The Libertarian platform calls for the abolition of child labor laws (they inhibit the freedom of children), of income taxes, highway speed ..." Miami Herald, 1992-10-25. * Essay - The Fourth Man. "[...] a little extreme? you ain't heard nothin' yet on civil liberty: decriminalize drugs and prostitution, forget gun control or abortion limitation, eliminate federal agencies, settle environmental clashes in court, permit open immigration [...] if taken literally, the Libertarian platform is so far out of the mainstream as to be high and dry [...]" New York Times, 1992-10-22. * Libertarians are a laugh by Don Fedder - "About mid-September, when we're bored to tears by presidential politics, we can always look to the Libertarian Party for comic relief. [...] the Libertarian Party platform takes liberal-rights mania to its absurdly logical conclusion. Libertarians will brook no interference with what they designate as human rights, regardless of the suffering or chaos resulting therefrom [...] " San Antonio Express-News, 1992-09-22. * Libertarians? No, US Needs A Legitimate Fourth Choice - "Standing against things is the Libertarian Party's specialty. Its platform calls for government to cease and desist from almost everything except the repealing of laws (Social Security, the Post Office, you name it) ..." Chicago Sun-Times, 1992-07-09. Also ran in: * Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. Washington Post, 1992-07-09. * Libertarians Stew On Fringe. San Jose Mercury News, 1992-07-09. * Extreme Views Doom Libertarian Nominees. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1992-07-13. *************************** 61. row *************************** old_text: This page documents instances in which the LP Platform was used in front of significantly-sized audiences to attack or embarrass the LP as too extreme. Many of these items were found by searching Google News Archives [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=]. * "I know of one instance when it was used against a Republican/former Libertarian in Colorado. State Senator Penn Pfiffner, who used to be in the Colorado LP, had mail sent against him by his Democrat opponent telling voters he was trying to legalize heroin and crack, and cited the LP Platform." Donny Ferguson, 2007-03-28 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertarianReformCaucus/message/1171]. * Samuels fans flames of public school bonfire - "Don Samuels has apologized for his words, but not his views. And he isn't likely to. For the Fifth Ward City Council member from Minneapolis who suggested burning down North High School is not just one man with an opinion. He is a stalking horse for a movement that wants to torch public schools. It has gotten frighteningly close to its goal. The Center of the American Experiment, a local conservative think tank, is renewing the push for school vouchers, and it tapped Samuels to endorse its position paper. [...] Other black leaders are being lobbied to convert to the vouchers cause. One, NAACP President Duane Reed, says he recently refused requests to testify on behalf of a vouchers/tax credit bill in the Legislature. He says the request came from a group affiliated with the Libertarian Party, whose platform praises tax credits and charter schools as "interim measures" that will help kill the public schools." Minneapolis Star Tribune 2007-02-17 [http://www.amsd.org/articles/Samuels_fans_flames.html]. * "I believe most conservatives agree with the Libertarian "free market" approach to government, but when looking at the Libertarian Party's platform when it comes to social issues, one can't help but want to change their name to the "if it feels good, do it party." The party appears to want to remove every law that falls under the category of "vice" from the books, sugarcoating everything by saying that all vice is really a personal "responsibility." I've never run across a "responsible" heroin addict, saw redeeming values to the community when I saw a prostitute hanging out on a street corner, nor envisioned homosexuality, pornography, or abortion ever being used "responsibly." Our Judeo-Christian society was founded upon the principles that the betterment of the individual makes life better for all, thus holding individuals up to a higher standard." LTE in The New American 2006-09-18 [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Libertarian+looseness-a0152373725]. * "A few days before the election a local paper did an article on the race, in which I was characterized as being "too radical for the residents of Clarion County". The article did not mention the LP platform, but when I talked to the reporter to ask why he would write that, his response was that he had done some research and looked at the LP website, and the platform was a big factor." Mik Robertson, LP Pennsylvania. 2006-08-05 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1752] * "Non-Libertarian candidates in my county have used quotes from the LP platform against Libertarian candidates and Non-Libertarians candidates who accept contributions from known Libertarians." Jack Tanner, LP Florida. 2006-08-04 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1749] * Libertarians focus on drugs by Rob Casapulla - "The Libertarian platform is self-defeating and its one claim to fame is its attempts to legalize drugs. [...] Yes, that means cocaine, heroin, acid, ecstasy, crystal meth, [...]" University Wire, 2006-02-16. * "District 3 City Council candidates Dr. Jimmy Blake and Valerie Abbott have engaged in a war of words this week, with each accusing the other of dirty politics. Thursday, Blake lashed out against what he termed "innuendos and slanderous" statements Mrs. Abbott has made about his association with the Libertarian Party. Mrs. Abbott responded that it is Blake who has resorted to personal attacks. "He's running scared," she said. "He accused my husband of being a member of the Libertarian Party." Blake, chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, said Thursday that Mrs. Abbott's husband, Rod, is a Libertarian and claimed to have national party paperwork backing up his claim. But Rod Abbott said he is not a member of the Libertarian Party. "He (Blake) says he is chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, but is claiming to not be a member of the national party," Mrs. Abbott said. Mrs. Abbott said Blake is not being truthful when he denies being affiliated with the national Libertarian Party, which in its 1992 platform advocated no minimum drinking laws and the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Blake said he is part of a reform movement within the Libertarian Party that is trying to get rid of the national party platform. Mrs. Abbott and Virginia Volker, another District 3 candidate, said they are not behind the distribution of the national Libertarian Party platform. District 3 candidate Dennis Rancont, who joined the fray Wednesday when he ran a radio ad critical of Blake's Libertarian beliefs on WYDE-AM, said he regretted the ad and withdrew it." Birmingham News, 2005-08-02. * Candidate Said Party Supports Drug Legalization; Judge Rules Free Speech - "A Troy district judge has dismissed a defamation suit that the Libertarian Party of Oakland County filed against Troy resident Cristina Pappageorge. Judge Michael Martone dismissed the suit earlier this month, ruling that Pappageorge's comments that the Libertarian Party supports legalizing drugs are protected under the First Amendment as political.." Detroit Free Press, 2003-07-31. * Indianapolis plays host to convention of party that shuns gun control, wants drugs legalized - "To mainstream voters, the Libertarian Party platform might seem extreme, even a little bit kooky. Libertarians want to legalize drugs, abolish handgun control and close down the U.S. Department of Education." The Indianapolis Star, 2002-07-06. * "At the state chair’s breakfast the next day Mark Schreiber began the same spiel by telling the sad story of how when he was running for Indiana Lt. Governor [in 2002] he did a long interview with a reporter. The final story focused on the Libertarian Party’s support child pornography, which is how the reporter interpreted the LP national platform." Carol Moore LP convention report, 2002-07-03 [http://www.carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/convention2002report.html]. * "During the past election, Redwood City Councilmember, Jim Hartnett, sent a hit piece opposing Libertarian candidates for school boards, and supporting the College and Sequoia H.S. bond measures." Jack Hickey, LP San Mateo County, California. 2001-11-13. Scan of mailing at archive.org [http://tinyurl.com/2m95vv], which quotes the Platform regarding "drugs" and "sexually explicit materials". * Two Political Parties Plenty, Thanks - "The Libertarian platform is a prescription for anarchy." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000-07-14. * Sabrin Haunted By His Libertarian Past - "Treffinger said Sabrin should explain his support for legalizing drugs and prostitution, and sanctioning gay marriages." Bergen County Record, 2000-04-21. * Libertarians score victory by securing place on 2000 ballot - "Some espouse extreme views Like the cessation of all taxation, public education and government regulation." Dallas Morning News, 1998-11-08. * Libertarian rebuts mailer by Corcoran - "Editor: This letter rebuts a campaign mailer sent out by Richard Corcoran, the unsuccessful candidate for state House District 43. [...] Mr. Corcoran in a late mailer took on the Libertarian Party [...] Mr. Corcoran's Carvillian treatment of his opponent in the mailer extended to the Libertarian Party and its platform." St. Petersburg Times, 1998-09-09. * "several citizen panelists agreed that they found the anti-government platform of his Libertarian party too extreme". Philadelphia Daily News, 1997-10-20. * Is "Libertarian politics" an oxymoron? - "to these mainstream issues the Libertarian Party platform adds such problematic esoterica as jury nullification, a reliance solely on tort law and 'strict liability' to govern pollution, and the right of individual political secession. When libertarianism is presented as an all-or-nothing bargain, interested voters are more likely to leave the whole package on the table." Reason, 1996-07-01. [http://reason.com/news/printer/29963.html] * Libertarian Candidates Wants To Do Away With Much Of Government - "other parts of the Libertarian platform call for eliminating most government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. ..." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1994-08-14. * The Other Party In The Presidential Race - "The Libertarian platform calls for the abolition of child labor laws (they inhibit the freedom of children), of income taxes, highway speed ..." Miami Herald, 1992-10-25. * Essay - The Fourth Man. "[...] a little extreme? you ain't heard nothin' yet on civil liberty: decriminalize drugs and prostitution, forget gun control or abortion limitation, eliminate federal agencies, settle environmental clashes in court, permit open immigration [...] if taken literally, the Libertarian platform is so far out of the mainstream as to be high and dry [...]" New York Times, 1992-10-22. * Libertarians are a laugh by Don Fedder - "About mid-September, when we're bored to tears by presidential politics, we can always look to the Libertarian Party for comic relief. [...] the Libertarian Party platform takes liberal-rights mania to its absurdly logical conclusion. Libertarians will brook no interference with what they designate as human rights, regardless of the suffering or chaos resulting therefrom [...] " San Antonio Express-News, 1992-09-22. * Libertarians? No, US Needs A Legitimate Fourth Choice - "Standing against things is the Libertarian Party's specialty. Its platform calls for government to cease and desist from almost everything except the repealing of laws (Social Security, the Post Office, you name it) ..." Chicago Sun-Times, 1992-07-09. Also ran in: * Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. Washington Post, 1992-07-09. * Libertarians Stew On Fringe. San Jose Mercury News, 1992-07-09. * Extreme Views Doom Libertarian Nominees. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1992-07-13. *************************** 62. row *************************** old_text: * New-look Libertarians - The Libertarian Party made great strides this week toward becoming a relevant and electable third party. At its national convention, the party eliminated the most radical planks from its platform. The socially liberal, economically conservative party's message of limiting government and expanding personal and economic freedom is more reasonable and pragmatic than ever. This was a great victory for party reformists and moderates who want the Libertarian Party to fill the gaping hole in American politics where a strong and innovative third party should be. Nick Wilson LTE in Dallas Morning News 2006-07-07 [http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/letters/stories/DN-friletters_0707edi.ART.State.Edition1.24429fc.html]. *************************** 63. row *************************** old_text: * "the Libertarian Party has low national visibility and a lack of known national canditates, but an excellent platform of ideas -in writing ! ..." Detroit Free Press 2006-12-28. * New-look Libertarians - The Libertarian Party made great strides this week toward becoming a relevant and electable third party. At its national convention, the party eliminated the most radical planks from its platform. The socially liberal, economically conservative party's message of limiting government and expanding personal and economic freedom is more reasonable and pragmatic than ever. This was a great victory for party reformists and moderates who want the Libertarian Party to fill the gaping hole in American politics where a strong and innovative third party should be. Nick Wilson LTE in Dallas Morning News 2006-07-07 [http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/letters/stories/DN-friletters_0707edi.ART.State.Edition1.24429fc.html]. *************************** 64. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Destination Plus Transition]] ** [[Legislative Program]] ** [[Directional Principles]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Proposals affecting multiple planks *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposals affecting single planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 65. row *************************** old_text: This page documents instances in which the LP Platform was used in front of significantly-sized audiences to attack or embarrass the LP as too extreme. Many of these items were found by searching Google News Archives [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=]. * "I know of one instance when it was used against a Republican/former Libertarian in Colorado. State Senator Penn Pfiffner, who used to be in the Colorado LP, had mail sent against him by his Democrat opponent telling voters he was trying to legalize heroin and crack, and cited the LP Platform." Donny Ferguson, 2007-03-28 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertarianReformCaucus/message/1171]. * Samuels fans flames of public school bonfire - "Don Samuels has apologized for his words, but not his views. And he isn't likely to. For the Fifth Ward City Council member from Minneapolis who suggested burning down North High School is not just one man with an opinion. He is a stalking horse for a movement that wants to torch public schools. It has gotten frighteningly close to its goal. The Center of the American Experiment, a local conservative think tank, is renewing the push for school vouchers, and it tapped Samuels to endorse its position paper. [...] Other black leaders are being lobbied to convert to the vouchers cause. One, NAACP President Duane Reed, says he recently refused requests to testify on behalf of a vouchers/tax credit bill in the Legislature. He says the request came from a group affiliated with the Libertarian Party, whose platform praises tax credits and charter schools as "interim measures" that will help kill the public schools." Minneapolis Star Tribune 2007-02-17 [http://www.amsd.org/articles/Samuels_fans_flames.html]. * "I believe most conservatives agree with the Libertarian "free market" approach to government, but when looking at the Libertarian Party's platform when it comes to social issues, one can't help but want to change their name to the "if it feels good, do it party." The party appears to want to remove every law that falls under the category of "vice" from the books, sugarcoating everything by saying that all vice is really a personal "responsibility." I've never run across a "responsible" heroin addict, saw redeeming values to the community when I saw a prostitute hanging out on a street corner, nor envisioned homosexuality, pornography, or abortion ever being used "responsibly." Our Judeo-Christian society was founded upon the principles that the betterment of the individual makes life better for all, thus holding individuals up to a higher standard." LTE in The New American 2006-09-18 [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Libertarian+looseness-a0152373725]. * "A few days before the election a local paper did an article on the race, in which I was characterized as being "too radical for the residents of Clarion County". The article did not mention the LP platform, but when I talked to the reporter to ask why he would write that, his response was that he had done some research and looked at the LP website, and the platform was a big factor." Mik Robertson, LP Pennsylvania. 2006-08-05 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1752] * "Non-Libertarian candidates in my county have used quotes from the LP platform against Libertarian candidates and Non-Libertarians candidates who accept contributions from known Libertarians." Jack Tanner, LP Florida. 2006-08-04 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1749] * Libertarians focus on drugs by Rob Casapulla - "The Libertarian platform is self-defeating and its one claim to fame is its attempts to legalize drugs. [...] Yes, that means cocaine, heroin, acid, ecstasy, crystal meth, [...]" University Wire, 2006-02-16. * "District 3 City Council candidates Dr. Jimmy Blake and Valerie Abbott have engaged in a war of words this week, with each accusing the other of dirty politics. Thursday, Blake lashed out against what he termed "innuendos and slanderous" statements Mrs. Abbott has made about his association with the Libertarian Party. Mrs. Abbott responded that it is Blake who has resorted to personal attacks. "He's running scared," she said. "He accused my husband of being a member of the Libertarian Party." Blake, chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, said Thursday that Mrs. Abbott's husband, Rod, is a Libertarian and claimed to have national party paperwork backing up his claim. But Rod Abbott said he is not a member of the Libertarian Party. "He (Blake) says he is chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, but is claiming to not be a member of the national party," Mrs. Abbott said. Mrs. Abbott said Blake is not being truthful when he denies being affiliated with the national Libertarian Party, which in its 1992 platform advocated no minimum drinking laws and the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Blake said he is part of a reform movement within the Libertarian Party that is trying to get rid of the national party platform. Mrs. Abbott and Virginia Volker, another District 3 candidate, said they are not behind the distribution of the national Libertarian Party platform. District 3 candidate Dennis Rancont, who joined the fray Wednesday when he ran a radio ad critical of Blake's Libertarian beliefs on WYDE-AM, said he regretted the ad and withdrew it." Birmingham News, 2005-08-02. * Candidate Said Party Supports Drug Legalization; Judge Rules Free Speech - "A Troy district judge has dismissed a defamation suit that the Libertarian Party of Oakland County filed against Troy resident Cristina Pappageorge. Judge Michael Martone dismissed the suit earlier this month, ruling that Pappageorge's comments that the Libertarian Party supports legalizing drugs are protected under the First Amendment as political.." Detroit Free Press, 2003-07-31. * Indianapolis plays host to convention of party that shuns gun control, wants drugs legalized - "To mainstream voters, the Libertarian Party platform might seem extreme, even a little bit kooky. Libertarians want to legalize drugs, abolish handgun control and close down the U.S. Department of Education." The Indianapolis Star, 2002-07-06. * "At the state chair’s breakfast the next day Mark Schreiber began the same spiel by telling the sad story of how when he was running for Indiana Lt. Governor [in 2002] he did a long interview with a reporter. The final story focused on the Libertarian Party’s support child pornography, which is how the reporter interpreted the LP national platform." Carol Moore LP convention report, 2002-07-03 [http://www.carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/convention2002report.html]. * "During the past election, Redwood City Councilmember, Jim Hartnett, sent a hit piece opposing Libertarian candidates for school boards, and supporting the College and Sequoia H.S. bond measures." Jack Hickey, LP San Mateo County, California. 2001-11-13. Scan of mailing at archive.org [http://tinyurl.com/2m95vv], which quotes the Platform regarding "drugs" and "sexually explicit materials". * Two Political Parties Plenty, Thanks - "The Libertarian platform is a prescription for anarchy." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000-07-14. * Sabrin Haunted By His Libertarian Past - "Treffinger said Sabrin should explain his support for legalizing drugs and prostitution, and sanctioning gay marriages." Bergen County Record, 2000-04-21. * Libertarians score victory by securing place on 2000 ballot - "Some espouse extreme views Like the cessation of all taxation, public education and government regulation." Dallas Morning News, 1998-11-08. * Libertarian rebuts mailer by Corcoran - "Editor: This letter rebuts a campaign mailer sent out by Richard Corcoran, the unsuccessful candidate for state House District 43. [...] Mr. Corcoran in a late mailer took on the Libertarian Party [...] Mr. Corcoran's Carvillian treatment of his opponent in the mailer extended to the Libertarian Party and its platform." St. Petersburg Times, 1998-09-09. * "several citizen panelists agreed that they found the anti-government platform of his Libertarian party too extreme". Philadelphia Daily News, 1997-10-20. * Is "Libertarian politics" an oxymoron? - "to these mainstream issues the Libertarian Party platform adds such problematic esoterica as jury nullification, a reliance solely on tort law and 'strict liability' to govern pollution, and the right of individual political secession. When libertarianism is presented as an all-or-nothing bargain, interested voters are more likely to leave the whole package on the table." Reason, 1996-07-01. [http://reason.com/news/printer/29963.html] * Libertarian Candidates Wants To Do Away With Much Of Government - "other parts of the Libertarian platform call for eliminating most government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. ..." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1994-08-14. * The Other Party In The Presidential Race - "The Libertarian platform calls for the abolition of child labor laws (they inhibit the freedom of children), of income taxes, highway speed ..." Miami Herald, 1992-10-25. * Essay - The Fourth Man. "[...] a little extreme? you ain't heard nothin' yet on civil liberty: decriminalize drugs and prostitution, forget gun control or abortion limitation, eliminate federal agencies, settle environmental clashes in court, permit open immigration [...] if taken literally, the Libertarian platform is so far out of the mainstream as to be high and dry [...]" New York Times, 1992-10-22. * Libertarians are a laugh by Don Fedder - "About mid-September, when we're bored to tears by presidential politics, we can always look to the Libertarian Party for comic relief. [...] the Libertarian Party platform takes liberal-rights mania to its absurdly logical conclusion. Libertarians will brook no interference with what they designate as human rights, regardless of the suffering or chaos resulting therefrom [...] " San Antonio Express-News, 1992-09-22. * Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. - "Standing against things is the Libertarian Party's specialty. Its platform calls for government to cease and desist from almost everything except the repealing of laws (Social Security, the Post Office, you name it) [...] Police and armies that keep bad people at bay, and roads that make practical the freedom to travel, and education that makes people competent for life in a free society, these are not "opposed to individual liberty." [...] The Libertarians' extremism (they oppose laws setting minimum drinking ages, or banning concealed weapons, or restricting immigration, and so on) makes them unelectable." George Will, Washington Post, 1992-07-09. Also ran as: ** Libertarians? No, US Needs A Legitimate Fourth Choice. Chicago Sun-Times, 1992-07-09. ** Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. Washington Post, 1992-07-09. ** Libertarians Stew On Fringe. San Jose Mercury News, 1992-07-09. ** Extreme Views Doom Libertarian Nominees. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1992-07-13. ** From The Prison Of One Idea. Rocky Mountain News, 1992-07-12. *************************** 66. row *************************** old_text: This page documents instances in which the LP Platform was used in front of significantly-sized audiences to attack or embarrass the LP as too extreme. Many of these items were found by searching Google News Archives [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?q=]. * "I know of one instance when it was used against a Republican/former Libertarian in Colorado. State Senator Penn Pfiffner, who used to be in the Colorado LP, had mail sent against him by his Democrat opponent telling voters he was trying to legalize heroin and crack, and cited the LP Platform." Donny Ferguson, 2007-03-28 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertarianReformCaucus/message/1171]. * Samuels fans flames of public school bonfire - "Don Samuels has apologized for his words, but not his views. And he isn't likely to. For the Fifth Ward City Council member from Minneapolis who suggested burning down North High School is not just one man with an opinion. He is a stalking horse for a movement that wants to torch public schools. It has gotten frighteningly close to its goal. The Center of the American Experiment, a local conservative think tank, is renewing the push for school vouchers, and it tapped Samuels to endorse its position paper. [...] Other black leaders are being lobbied to convert to the vouchers cause. One, NAACP President Duane Reed, says he recently refused requests to testify on behalf of a vouchers/tax credit bill in the Legislature. He says the request came from a group affiliated with the Libertarian Party, whose platform praises tax credits and charter schools as "interim measures" that will help kill the public schools." Minneapolis Star Tribune 2007-02-17 [http://www.amsd.org/articles/Samuels_fans_flames.html]. * "I believe most conservatives agree with the Libertarian "free market" approach to government, but when looking at the Libertarian Party's platform when it comes to social issues, one can't help but want to change their name to the "if it feels good, do it party." The party appears to want to remove every law that falls under the category of "vice" from the books, sugarcoating everything by saying that all vice is really a personal "responsibility." I've never run across a "responsible" heroin addict, saw redeeming values to the community when I saw a prostitute hanging out on a street corner, nor envisioned homosexuality, pornography, or abortion ever being used "responsibly." Our Judeo-Christian society was founded upon the principles that the betterment of the individual makes life better for all, thus holding individuals up to a higher standard." LTE in The New American 2006-09-18 [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Libertarian+looseness-a0152373725]. * "A few days before the election a local paper did an article on the race, in which I was characterized as being "too radical for the residents of Clarion County". The article did not mention the LP platform, but when I talked to the reporter to ask why he would write that, his response was that he had done some research and looked at the LP website, and the platform was a big factor." Mik Robertson, LP Pennsylvania. 2006-08-05 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1752] * "Non-Libertarian candidates in my county have used quotes from the LP platform against Libertarian candidates and Non-Libertarians candidates who accept contributions from known Libertarians." Jack Tanner, LP Florida. 2006-08-04 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/message/1749] * Libertarians focus on drugs by Rob Casapulla - "The Libertarian platform is self-defeating and its one claim to fame is its attempts to legalize drugs. [...] Yes, that means cocaine, heroin, acid, ecstasy, crystal meth, [...]" University Wire, 2006-02-16. * "District 3 City Council candidates Dr. Jimmy Blake and Valerie Abbott have engaged in a war of words this week, with each accusing the other of dirty politics. Thursday, Blake lashed out against what he termed "innuendos and slanderous" statements Mrs. Abbott has made about his association with the Libertarian Party. Mrs. Abbott responded that it is Blake who has resorted to personal attacks. "He's running scared," she said. "He accused my husband of being a member of the Libertarian Party." Blake, chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, said Thursday that Mrs. Abbott's husband, Rod, is a Libertarian and claimed to have national party paperwork backing up his claim. But Rod Abbott said he is not a member of the Libertarian Party. "He (Blake) says he is chairman of the Alabama Libertarian Party, but is claiming to not be a member of the national party," Mrs. Abbott said. Mrs. Abbott said Blake is not being truthful when he denies being affiliated with the national Libertarian Party, which in its 1992 platform advocated no minimum drinking laws and the legalization of drugs and prostitution. Blake said he is part of a reform movement within the Libertarian Party that is trying to get rid of the national party platform. Mrs. Abbott and Virginia Volker, another District 3 candidate, said they are not behind the distribution of the national Libertarian Party platform. District 3 candidate Dennis Rancont, who joined the fray Wednesday when he ran a radio ad critical of Blake's Libertarian beliefs on WYDE-AM, said he regretted the ad and withdrew it." Birmingham News, 2005-08-02. * Candidate Said Party Supports Drug Legalization; Judge Rules Free Speech - "A Troy district judge has dismissed a defamation suit that the Libertarian Party of Oakland County filed against Troy resident Cristina Pappageorge. Judge Michael Martone dismissed the suit earlier this month, ruling that Pappageorge's comments that the Libertarian Party supports legalizing drugs are protected under the First Amendment as political.." Detroit Free Press, 2003-07-31. * Indianapolis plays host to convention of party that shuns gun control, wants drugs legalized - "To mainstream voters, the Libertarian Party platform might seem extreme, even a little bit kooky. Libertarians want to legalize drugs, abolish handgun control and close down the U.S. Department of Education." The Indianapolis Star, 2002-07-06. * "At the state chair’s breakfast the next day Mark Schreiber began the same spiel by telling the sad story of how when he was running for Indiana Lt. Governor [in 2002] he did a long interview with a reporter. The final story focused on the Libertarian Party’s support child pornography, which is how the reporter interpreted the LP national platform." Carol Moore LP convention report, 2002-07-03 [http://www.carolmoore.net/libertarianparty/convention2002report.html]. * "During the past election, Redwood City Councilmember, Jim Hartnett, sent a hit piece opposing Libertarian candidates for school boards, and supporting the College and Sequoia H.S. bond measures." Jack Hickey, LP San Mateo County, California. 2001-11-13. Scan of mailing at archive.org [http://tinyurl.com/2m95vv], which quotes the Platform regarding "drugs" and "sexually explicit materials". * Two Political Parties Plenty, Thanks - "The Libertarian platform is a prescription for anarchy." Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 2000-07-14. * Sabrin Haunted By His Libertarian Past - "Treffinger said Sabrin should explain his support for legalizing drugs and prostitution, and sanctioning gay marriages." Bergen County Record, 2000-04-21. * Libertarians score victory by securing place on 2000 ballot - "Some espouse extreme views Like the cessation of all taxation, public education and government regulation." Dallas Morning News, 1998-11-08. * Libertarian rebuts mailer by Corcoran - "Editor: This letter rebuts a campaign mailer sent out by Richard Corcoran, the unsuccessful candidate for state House District 43. [...] Mr. Corcoran in a late mailer took on the Libertarian Party [...] Mr. Corcoran's Carvillian treatment of his opponent in the mailer extended to the Libertarian Party and its platform." St. Petersburg Times, 1998-09-09. * "several citizen panelists agreed that they found the anti-government platform of his Libertarian party too extreme". Philadelphia Daily News, 1997-10-20. * Is "Libertarian politics" an oxymoron? - "to these mainstream issues the Libertarian Party platform adds such problematic esoterica as jury nullification, a reliance solely on tort law and 'strict liability' to govern pollution, and the right of individual political secession. When libertarianism is presented as an all-or-nothing bargain, interested voters are more likely to leave the whole package on the table." Reason, 1996-07-01. [http://reason.com/news/printer/29963.html] * Libertarian Candidates Wants To Do Away With Much Of Government - "other parts of the Libertarian platform call for eliminating most government agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. ..." St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1994-08-14. * The Other Party In The Presidential Race - "The Libertarian platform calls for the abolition of child labor laws (they inhibit the freedom of children), of income taxes, highway speed ..." Miami Herald, 1992-10-25. * Essay - The Fourth Man. "[...] a little extreme? you ain't heard nothin' yet on civil liberty: decriminalize drugs and prostitution, forget gun control or abortion limitation, eliminate federal agencies, settle environmental clashes in court, permit open immigration [...] if taken literally, the Libertarian platform is so far out of the mainstream as to be high and dry [...]" New York Times, 1992-10-22. * Libertarians are a laugh by Don Fedder - "About mid-September, when we're bored to tears by presidential politics, we can always look to the Libertarian Party for comic relief. [...] the Libertarian Party platform takes liberal-rights mania to its absurdly logical conclusion. Libertarians will brook no interference with what they designate as human rights, regardless of the suffering or chaos resulting therefrom [...] " San Antonio Express-News, 1992-09-22. * Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. - "he is the only presidential candidate foursquare against the U.N. Moon Treaty, whatever that is (it can't be good). Standing against things is the Libertarian Party's specialty. Its platform calls for government to cease and desist from almost everything except the repealing of laws (Social Security, the Post Office, you name it) [...] Police and armies that keep bad people at bay, and roads that make practical the freedom to travel, and education that makes people competent for life in a free society, these are not "opposed to individual liberty." [...] The Libertarians' extremism (they oppose laws setting minimum drinking ages, or banning concealed weapons, or restricting immigration, and so on) makes them unelectable." George Will, Washington Post, 1992-07-09. Also ran as: ** Libertarians? No, US Needs A Legitimate Fourth Choice. Chicago Sun-Times, 1992-07-09. ** Consider a Libertarian?; Get Serious. Washington Post, 1992-07-09. ** Libertarians Stew On Fringe. San Jose Mercury News, 1992-07-09. ** Extreme Views Doom Libertarian Nominees. St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1992-07-13. ** From The Prison Of One Idea. Rocky Mountain News, 1992-07-12. *************************** 67. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Proposals affecting multiple planks *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposals affecting single planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 68. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatComm members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform; * focuses on 5 or 10 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; * is written to elicit agreement from 67% of the Denver delegates; * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; *************************** 69. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatComm members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform; * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; * focuses on 5 or 10 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; * is written to elicit agreement from 67% of the Denver delegates; * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; *************************** 70. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform; * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; * focuses on 5 or 10 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; * is written to elicit agreement from 67% of the Denver delegates; * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; *************************** 71. row *************************** old_text: == McLendon Draft == The Issue: The scope of government at all levels -- federal, state & local -- has grown far beyond what is authorized by the US Constitution, and by many state Constitutions. Consequently, taxation at all levels has expanded, and now imposes a crushing burden on the US taxpayer. Collection of income taxes is highly invasive, and leads to loss of privacy. The Principle: The primacy of self ownership is the basis for property rights, and leads to a ranking of the legitimacy of various forms of taxation. Thus, individual income taxes are more onerous than consumption taxes, tariffs, and excise taxes charged against fouling or depletion of shared natural resources. Citizens should therefore have sole ownership claim to all the time that constitutes their lives, and to the fruits of their labor. To the extent taxes are necessary and proper to accomplish authorized functions of government, such functions should be funded by taxes that do not invade individuals' privacy or self-ownership. Solutions: Our vision is to reduce the size & scope of government, so that only minimal taxes are required to fund legitimate government functions. Such minimal taxes should be collected in a non-intrusive manner, so privacy is protected as an unalienable right. Many government functions could be privatized, so user fees could frequently replace taxation. Transitional Action: We support a constitutional amendment to fully eliminate all taxation on individual incomes. As unauthorized functions of the federal government are eliminated, subsequent cost savings would be applied to reduction of taxes, and the federal debt. == Holtz Draft == The Issue: Government spending at all levels now absorbs nearly a third of America's economic production, compared to under a tenth as recently as the 1920's. At the federal level alone, the tax code in 2004 was 3,457 pages (plus 13,458 pages of IRS regulations), compared to 94 pages in 1928. People accused of violating tax rules are considered guilty until proven innocent, and ignorance of one of these 16,915 pages is not considered a valid defense. Taxation in America is monumentally unjust and monumentally inefficient. The Principle: It is unjust to tax people in order to finance benefits for other people. We oppose any such tax, as distinct from taxes that serve as fees for pollution, consumption of unowned resources, or government services not yet privatized. The Solution: We favor continuously reducing taxes as the functions of government are privatized or made voluntary. We call for the eventual abolition of all taxation on wages, interest, dividends, and profits; on the sale of goods and services; and on real estate improvements. Transitional Action: If it will help speed the repeal of the above taxes while the functions of government they finance are being privatized, we support their replacement with 1) taxes on pollution based on the damage it causes, and 2) taxes on that part of land rent created by government services not yet privatized. However, we oppose any tax reform that lacks strict safeguards ensuring it will significantly reduce America's total tax burden. == Draft submitted by geolibertarian economist Fred Foldvary == Given that an imposed government exists and obtains revenue, these are the sources proposed by the Libertarian Party, as being the least worst for liberty and economic well being: 1. Voluntary user fees, for services provided by government, when feasible. Proposing such fees does not imply that the LP favors government provision, but only that given such provision, user fees are the least worst way to finance services with specific beneficiaries. 2. Pollution levies based on the damage caused by the emissions. Pollution is tresspass and an invasion of the property of others, and the levy is compensation for damages. 3. Assessments based on the value of land, as government works and services increase land value, and so long as these are provided and funded by government, a levy based on the site value returns to government that land value and rent added by the services. Proposing this revenue source does not imply that the LP favors government provision, only that given such provision, a charge on the generated land value and rent is less unjust and less economically damaging than general taxes on income and sales. 4. Tolls on highways and streets just high enough to prevent congestion. Such tolls would be charge by private providers, and make the use of streets and highways more efficient. All taxes other than the above should be abolished, in particular all taxes on wages, interest, dividends, and profits; all taxes on the sale of goods and services; and taxes on buildings and other real estate improvements. *************************** 72. row *************************** old_text: Not much to tell really, but here goes: My name is Steven Burden and I am an Army Brat. I was born in Wurzburg, Germany, and grew up speaking both English and German. My father was in Explosives Ordinance Disposal (EOD) in Germany at the time, and got himself blown up. He lost his left arm and left leg. He was shipped stateside, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and of course we followed as he was in Walter Reed for over two years. Dad was medically retired, and went to work for what was then called the National Bureau of Standards--now know as the National Institute of Science and Technology. We lived in Kensington, MD right outside of DC. Same old story, my parents were divorced after 22 years of marriage, and Dad ended up in Kentucky. So in 1977, I moved there to go to college. I majored in Physics. I loved college. Early in 1981, I joined the Military, enlisted, and went into Military Intelligence. I studied Arabic in Monterey, CA. My first real assignment after training was at Ft Campbell, KY. While there, I did two tours with the Multinational Forces and Observers in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt as a Liaison Officer between the Egyptians and the Israelis. After completing my initial enlistment, I went into the active reserves in 1985, and went back to College, again in Kentucky, this time studying International Studies. After a stint with the International Division of Kroger in Cincinnati, I decided I liked the military better, so in 1986 I went back in. I stayed in Intelligence, but this time with 1st Special Operations Command at Ft Bragg, NC. I loved my time in Special Forces. I served in Operation Just Cause (Panama) 1989-90, and Operations Desert Shield/Storm and Calm (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, and UAE) 1990-1992. After some staff jobs and a plainclothes assignment on MacDill AFB, FL from 1993 to 1997. I was seconded to UNSCOM to support the Iraqi weapons inspection teams headquartered in Manama, Bahrain in early 1997. I finished my military career teaching a course for DIA at Ft Huachuca, AZ. After I retired in September of 1998 (Sergeant First Class) My family and I settled in Tampa, FL. In November 2000 I began working at Verizon as a Software Engineer. I currently design national level systems used to engineer Fiber Optic communications installations for voice, data, and video. I turned 50 in August, 2006; My daughter, aged 21, is currently in college, but still doesn’t have a major. My wife is DoD Acquisition Executive, who was medically retired after a car accident in May 1994. She is a (breast) cancer survivor. And also the light of my life! (Even if she is a Republican.) I have been accused of being a work-alcoholic, I smoke, drink, and (rarely) cuss. And laugh as much a possible. My favorite quote (Robert Heinlein): ‘To be enjoyed, life must be taken in big bites: Moderation is for monks.’ Politically, I am a longtime 'policy wonk', and lean toward 'Classical Liberalism'. I am more of a Milton Friedman libertarian. As life in the Military (pre-internet) was not conducive to political activity, I am new to the world of politics. My fist convention was Portland. I helped out a bit on the Platform Committee, and also volunteered to help Bob Sullentrup during the convention. I belong to/support numerous organizations: Libertarian Party Libertarian Reform Caucus Citizens Against Government Waste Club for Growth FreedomWorks CATO Institute James Madison Institute Institute for Justice Milton Friedman Foundation American Enterprise Institute Foundation for Economic Education Ax the Tax MENSA American Legion Disabled American Veterans *************************** 73. row *************************** old_text: *************************** 74. row *************************** old_text: [[Image:StevenBurden.jpg]] ---- My name is Steven Burden and I am an Army Brat. I was born in Wurzburg, Germany, and grew up speaking both English and German. My father was in Explosives Ordinance Disposal (EOD) in Germany at the time, and got himself blown up. He lost his left arm and left leg. He was shipped stateside, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and of course we followed as he was in Walter Reed for over two years. Dad was medically retired, and went to work for what was then called the National Bureau of Standards--now know as the National Institute of Science and Technology. We lived in Kensington, MD right outside of DC. Same old story, my parents were divorced after 22 years of marriage, and Dad ended up in Kentucky. So in 1977, I moved there to go to college. I majored in Physics. I loved college. Early in 1981, I joined the Military, enlisted, and went into Military Intelligence. I studied Arabic in Monterey, CA. My first real assignment after training was at Ft Campbell, KY. While there, I did two tours with the Multinational Forces and Observers in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt as a Liaison Officer between the Egyptians and the Israelis. After completing my initial enlistment, I went into the active reserves in 1985, and went back to College, again in Kentucky, this time studying International Studies. After a stint with the International Division of Kroger in Cincinnati, I decided I liked the military better, so in 1986 I went back in. I stayed in Intelligence, but this time with 1st Special Operations Command at Ft Bragg, NC. I loved my time in Special Forces. I served in Operation Just Cause (Panama) 1989-90, and Operations Desert Shield/Storm and Calm (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, and UAE) 1990-1992. After some staff jobs and a plainclothes assignment on MacDill AFB, FL from 1993 to 1997. I was seconded to UNSCOM to support the Iraqi weapons inspection teams headquartered in Manama, Bahrain in early 1997. I finished my military career teaching a course for DIA at Ft Huachuca, AZ. After I retired in September of 1998 (Sergeant First Class) My family and I settled in Tampa, FL. In November 2000 I began working at Verizon as a Software Engineer. I currently design national level systems used to engineer Fiber Optic communications installations for voice, data, and video. I turned 50 in August, 2006; My daughter, aged 21, is currently in college, but still doesn’t have a major. My wife is DoD Acquisition Executive, who was medically retired after a car accident in May 1994. She is a (breast) cancer survivor. And also the light of my life! (Even if she is a Republican.) I have been accused of being a work-alcoholic, I smoke, drink, and (rarely) cuss. And laugh as much a possible. My favorite quote (Robert Heinlein): ‘To be enjoyed, life must be taken in big bites: Moderation is for monks.’ Politically, I am a longtime 'policy wonk', and lean toward 'Classical Liberalism'. I am more of a Milton Friedman libertarian. As life in the Military (pre-internet) was not conducive to political activity, I am new to the world of politics. My fist convention was Portland. I helped out a bit on the Platform Committee, and also volunteered to help Bob Sullentrup during the convention. I belong to/support numerous organizations: Libertarian Party Libertarian Reform Caucus Citizens Against Government Waste Club for Growth FreedomWorks CATO Institute James Madison Institute Institute for Justice Milton Friedman Foundation American Enterprise Institute Foundation for Economic Education Ax the Tax MENSA American Legion Disabled American Veterans *************************** 75. row *************************** old_text: Until you log in and change it, your password is: liberty == State Representatives == The ten states with the most sustaining members each pick one PlatCom member. Members chosen so far: * CA – [[image:BruceDovner.jpg|30px]] [[User:BruceDovner|Bruce Dovner]] * TX – [[image:GuyMcLendon.jpg|30px]] [[User:GuyMcLendon|Guy McLendon]] * FL - * GA - [[User:GlennTatum|Glenn Tatum]] * NY - [[image:EricSundwall.jpg|50px]] [[User:EricSundwall|Eric Sundwall]] * PA - [[image:HenryHaller.jpg|30px]] [[User:HenryHaller|Henry Haller]] * IL - * MI - * OH – [[User:MikeSmitley|Mike Smitley]] * VA - == LNC Appointees == Apparently in order of net votes received: * [[image:AliciaMattson.JPG|40px]] [[User:AliciaMattson|Alicia Mattson]] (interim chair) * [[image:SteveDasbach.jpg|30px]] [[User:SteveDasbach|Steve Dasbach]] * [[User:AdamMayer|Adam Mayer]] * [[User:DavidAitken|David Aitken]] * [[image:HardyMachia.jpg|40px]] [[User:HardyMacia|Hardy Macia]] * [[Image:StevenBurden.jpg|35px]][[User:StevenBurden|Steven Burden]] * [[image:RobertCapozzi.jpg|30px]] [[User:RobertCapozzi|Robert Capozzi]] * [[User:BonnieScott|Bonnie Scott]] * [[image:BrianHoltz.jpg|30px]] [[User:BrianHoltz|Brian Holtz]] * [[User:DavidOwens|David Owens]] === Alternates === In order of net votes received: # [[image:JonRoland.jpg|30px]] [[User:JonRoland|Jon Roland]] # [[image:RobPower.jpg|30px]] [[User:RobPower|Rob Power]] # [[image:RuthBennett.jpg|30px]] [[User:RuthBennett|Ruth Bennett]] # [[image:JimDuensing.jpg|30px]] [[User:JimDuensing|Jim Duensing]] # [[User:MoreyStrauss|Morey Straus]] *************************** 76. row *************************** old_text: [[Image:StevenBurden.jpg]] ---- My name is Steven Burden and I am an Army Brat. I was born in Wurzburg, Germany, and grew up speaking both English and German. My father was in Explosives Ordinance Disposal (EOD) in Germany at the time, and got himself blown up. He lost his left arm and left leg. He was shipped stateside, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and of course we followed as he was in Walter Reed for over two years. Dad was medically retired, and went to work for what was then called the National Bureau of Standards--now know as the National Institute of Science and Technology. We lived in Kensington, MD right outside of DC. Same old story, my parents were divorced after 22 years of marriage, and Dad ended up in Kentucky. So in 1977, I moved there to go to college. I majored in Physics. I loved college. Early in 1981, I joined the Military, enlisted, and went into Military Intelligence. I studied Arabic in Monterey, CA. My first real assignment after training was at Ft Campbell, KY. While there, I did two tours with the Multinational Forces and Observers in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt as a Liaison Officer between the Egyptians and the Israelis. After completing my initial enlistment, I went into the active reserves in 1985, and went back to College, again in Kentucky, this time studying International Studies. After a stint with the International Division of Kroger in Cincinnati, I decided I liked the military better, so in 1986 I went back in. I stayed in Intelligence, but this time with 1st Special Operations Command at Ft Bragg, NC. I loved my time in Special Forces. I served in Operation Just Cause (Panama) 1989-90, and Operations Desert Shield/Storm and Calm (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, and UAE) 1990-1992. After some staff jobs and a plainclothes assignment on MacDill AFB, FL from 1993 to 1997. I was seconded to UNSCOM to support the Iraqi weapons inspection teams headquartered in Manama, Bahrain in early 1997. I finished my military career teaching a course for DIA at Ft Huachuca, AZ. After I retired in September of 1998 (Sergeant First Class) My family and I settled in Tampa, FL. In November 2000 I began working at Verizon as a Software Engineer. I currently design national level systems used to engineer Fiber Optic communications installations for voice, data, and video. I turned 50 in August, 2006; My daughter, aged 21, is currently in college, but still doesn’t have a major. My wife is DoD Acquisition Executive, who was medically retired after a car accident in May 1994. She is a (breast) cancer survivor. And also the light of my life! (Even if she is a Republican.) I have been accused of being a work-alcoholic, I smoke, drink, and (rarely) cuss. And laugh as much a possible. Politically, I am a longtime 'policy wonk', and lean toward 'Classical Liberalism'. I am more of a Milton Friedman libertarian. As life in the Military (pre-internet) was not conducive to political activity, I am new to the world of politics. My fist convention was Portland. I helped out a bit on the Platform Committee, and also volunteered to help Bob Sullentrup during the convention. I belong to/support numerous organizations: * Libertarian Party * Libertarian Reform Caucus * Citizens Against Government Waste * Club for Growth * FreedomWorks * CATO Institute * James Madison Institute * Institute for Justice * Milton Friedman Foundation * American Enterprise Institute * Foundation for Economic Education * Ax the Tax * MENSA * American Legion * Disabled American Veterans ''‘To be enjoyed, life must be taken in big bites: Moderation is for monks.’ --R. Heinlein'' *************************** 77. row *************************** old_text: [[Image:StevenBurden.jpg]] ---- My name is Steven Burden and I am an Army Brat. I was born in Wurzburg, Germany, and grew up speaking both English and German. My father was in Explosives Ordinance Disposal (EOD) in Germany at the time, and got himself blown up. He lost his left arm and left leg. He was shipped stateside, to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and of course we followed as he was in Walter Reed for over two years. Dad was medically retired, and went to work for what was then called the National Bureau of Standards--now know as the National Institute of Science and Technology. We lived in Kensington, MD right outside of DC. Same old story, my parents were divorced after 22 years of marriage, and Dad ended up in Kentucky. So in 1977, I moved there to go to college. I majored in Physics. I loved college. Early in 1981, I joined the Military, enlisted, and went into Military Intelligence. I studied Arabic in Monterey, CA. My first real assignment after training was at Ft Campbell, KY. While there, I did two tours with the Multinational Forces and Observers in the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt as a Liaison Officer between the Egyptians and the Israelis. After completing my initial enlistment, I went into the active reserves in 1985, and went back to College, again in Kentucky, this time studying International Studies. After a stint with the International Division of Kroger in Cincinnati, I decided I liked the military better, so in 1986 I went back in. I stayed in Intelligence, but this time with 1st Special Operations Command at Ft Bragg, NC. I loved my time in Special Forces. I served in Operation Just Cause (Panama) 1989-90, and Operations Desert Shield/Storm and Calm (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Syria, and UAE) 1990-1992. After some staff jobs and a plainclothes assignment on MacDill AFB, FL from 1993 to 1997. I was seconded to UNSCOM to support the Iraqi weapons inspection teams headquartered in Manama, Bahrain in early 1997. I finished my military career teaching a course for DIA at Ft Huachuca, AZ. After I retired in September of 1998 (Sergeant First Class) My family and I settled in Tampa, FL. In November 2000 I began working at Verizon as a Software Engineer. I currently design national level systems used to engineer Fiber Optic communications installations for voice, data, and video. I turned 50 in August, 2006; My daughter, aged 21, is currently in college, but still doesn’t have a major. My wife is DoD Acquisition Executive, who was medically retired after a car accident in May 1994. She is a (breast) cancer survivor. And also the light of my life! (Even if she is a Republican.) I have been accused of being a work-alcoholic, I smoke, drink, and (rarely) cuss. And laugh as much a possible. Politically, I am a longtime 'policy wonk', and lean toward 'Classical Liberalism'. I am more of a Milton Friedman libertarian. As life in the Military (pre-internet) was not conducive to political activity, I am new to the world of politics. My fist convention was Portland. I helped out a bit on the Platform Committee, and also volunteered to help Bob Sullentrup during the convention. My personal platform is [http://freedomsadvocate.com/blog/2007/06/28/my-personal-political-platform/ here]. I belong to/support numerous organizations: * Libertarian Party * Libertarian Reform Caucus * Citizens Against Government Waste * Club for Growth * FreedomWorks * CATO Institute * James Madison Institute * Institute for Justice * Milton Friedman Foundation * American Enterprise Institute * Foundation for Economic Education * Ax the Tax * MENSA * American Legion * Disabled American Veterans ''‘To be enjoyed, life must be taken in big bites: Moderation is for monks.’ --R. Heinlein'' *************************** 78. row *************************** old_text: __NOTOC__

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance

We favor continuously reducing taxes as the functions of government are privatized or made voluntary. Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. We support the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the US Constitution that restricts Congress from spending any more than it collected in revenue the previous year. We call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the US Constitution.

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. In order to grant voters a full range of choice in federal, state and local elections, we propose proportional voting systems with multi-member districts for legislative elections and instant runoff voting (IRV) for single-winner elections. We support the right to secede where: (1) secession is supported by a majority within the political unit, (2) the majority does not attempt suppression of the dissenting minority, and (3) the government of the new entity is at least as compatible with human freedom as that from which it seceded.
*************************** 79. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Proposals affecting multiple planks *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposals affecting single planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 80. row *************************** old_text: == 2006 Minority Report Proposal == The Issue: We welcome honest workers, political refugees, and all peaceful people to the United States. Legitimate fears about harm to our country are being abused to limit individual rights and expand the scope of government. We condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new "Berlin Wall" which would keep individuals captive in unsuccessful economies. The current situation encourages employers to hire undocumented workers while leaving those workers neither subject to nor protected by the law. The Principle: Immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, occupation, age or sexual preference. Economic freedom demands the movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. If government has any legitimate function, it is to protect the lives, rights and property of its citizens, not to manipulate the economy to protect certain categories of workers. Solutions: The terms and conditions of entry into the United States must be simple and clearly spelled out. Documenting the entry of individuals must be restricted to screening for imminent and drastic threats to public health and national security. Once effective immigration policies are in place, general amnesties will no longer be necessary. Transitional Action: End federal requirements that benefits and services be provided to those in the country illegally. Simplify the immigration process to encourage the use of regular and monitored entry points, thus reducing trespass and saving lives. Repeal all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. *************************** 81. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 82. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === == Recommendation 1: A Clean Slate == == Recommendation 2: The Greatest Hits Platform == == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 83. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === == Recommendation 1: A Clean Slate == == Recommendation 2: The Greatest Hits Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 84. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === == Recommendation 1: A Clean Slate == == Recommendation 2: The Greatest Hits Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. This platform follows the classic distinction between personal and economic liberties embodied in the famous Nolan Chart. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 85. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === ==== A Clean Sheet of Paper ==== ==== A "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform Of 99% Recycled Language ==== ==== A Series Of Proposed Improvements Using Novel Language ==== == Recommendation 1: A Clean Slate == == Recommendation 2: The Greatest Hits Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. This platform follows the classic distinction between personal and economic liberties embodied in the famous Nolan Chart. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 86. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === ==== A Clean Sheet of Paper ==== ==== A "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform Of 99% Recycled Language ==== ==== A Series Of Proposed Improvements Using Novel Language ==== == Recommendation 1: A Clean Sheet Of Paper == == Recommendation 2: The Greatest Hits Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. This platform follows the classic distinction between personal and economic liberties embodied in the famous Nolan Chart. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 87. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === ==== A Clean Sheet of Paper ==== ==== A "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform Of 99% Recycled Language ==== ==== A Series Of Proposed Improvements Using Novel Language ==== == Recommendation 1: A Clean Sheet Of Paper == == Recommendation 2: The "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. This platform follows the classic distinction between personal and economic liberties embodied in the famous Nolan Chart. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 88. row *************************** old_text: == Introduction == === How The Platform Got Broken === === Our Parliamentary Strategy For Fixing It === ==== A Clean Sheet of Paper ==== ==== A "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform Of 99% Recycled Language ==== ==== A Series Of Improvements Using Novel Language ==== == Recommendation 1: A Clean Sheet Of Paper == == Recommendation 2: The "Greatest Hits" Baseline Platform == === Goals === The goals of this draft LP Platform are to * Declare our common ground instead of our battle lines; * Use directional statements of principle that are consistent with both incremental reform and a radical ultimate destination; * Avoid new phrasing in favor of language from current and prior Platforms, including the original 1972 Denver Platform; * Cover a breadth of issues equal to that of the 2004 Platform but in less than one third of its 61 planks; * Scour away decades of accreted issue descriptions, theoretical justifications, laundry lists, vouching for efficacy, etc.; and * Reorganize the planks into one section for each of the two Nolan Chart dimensions, and a third for orthogonal issues. === Common Ground === The way to unify the LP around a Platform is not to just paste together contradictory wish lists from each LP faction. Instead, we just need to write down what most liberty-lovers should be able to agree on, while not taking sides on the issues over which large numbers of liberty-lovers disagree. If we can't declare the Platform a demilitarized zone, and instead insist on using the Platform as a battleground for disputes over tactics and issues and ultimate visions, then we as a party deserve the continuing failure that this will guarantee. === Direction, Not Destination === The Platform should eloquently and elegantly describe what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy, by stating for each issue a timeless principle that is consistent with both incremental reform and radical ultimate goals. The Platform should neither rule out nor explicitly mandate anarchotopia as the final stop for the Freedom Train, but instead should simply state the libertarian principles that define a path northward in Nolan Space toward ever-increasing liberty. === Avoid new phrasing === There is very little chance of an LP convention adopting a Platform consisting primarily of brand-new language. To minimize potential controversy, this draft platfrom re-uses language from prior platforms wherever practical. === Breadth of issues === For almost all of the 61 planks in the 2004 platform, one can point to language in this platform that covers the topic in some way. === Leaner Planks === The Atlanta format (issue/principle/solution/transition) attempts to avoid factional conflict by pasting together two platforms, a radical one and a moderate one. This approach has so far been unsuccessful, as moderates continue to chafe at the explicitly radical language outside the transition sections, while radicals protest that the transition sections dilute their radical message. This problem is compounded by how the planks have over the past decades been encrusted with * laundry lists of examples and implementation details, e.g. "Yellow Pages", "digital audio tape", "conservatorships", "Antarctica and extraterrestrial bodies", "Saturday night specials", "motor vehicle records", "landfills"; * theoretical arguments that attempt drive-by justfications of a random subset of our positions; * breathless demands for immediate repeals of an alphabet soup of legislation and agencies and Supreme Court decisions; * vouching assertions in a random subset of planks about the benefits that will flow from our policies; and * redundant planks organized around contemporary complaints or specific government agencies instead of around timeless principles. === Rationalized Outline === The original 1972 "Domestic Ills" section inanely listed "Education" as an "ill", and by 2004 we had added other "ills" like Transportation, Health Care, Energy, and Agriculture. Instead of organizing our platform around the problems we don't want government to try to solve, we should organize it around the liberties we stand for. This platform follows the classic distinction between personal and economic liberties embodied in the famous Nolan Chart. With a section each for Personal and Economic liberty, the remaining planks (concerning foreign policy, franchise, and democratic procedure) are collected into a section called Securing Liberty. === Text of the Recommendation === (The text of the Greatest Hits draft lives [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform|here]].) == Recommendation 3: Representative Government == == Recommendation 4: Personal and Bodily Privacy == == Recommendation 5: Sexuality and Reproduction == == Recommendation 6: Environment and Resources == == Recommendation 7: Money and Markets == == Recommendation 8: Retirement Income and Security == *************************** 89. row *************************** old_text: Bonnie Scott was Vice Chair of the New York LP from 2003 to 2006, its Secretary from 2002 to 2003, and an at-large member of the NY state committee a few times prior to that. She was the Libertarian National Committee's alternate representative for the Northeast region from 2002 to 2004. In 2002, Scott and [[User:GeorgePhillies|George Phillies]] created a Candidate Support CD-ROM that collected various publications in a toolkit distributed to candidates. Scott served on the 2002, 2004, and 2006 Platform Committees. In 2006, she worked closely with [[User:RobPower|Rob Power]] on the Sexuality and Gender plank, and organized the minority report on the Immigration plank. (View the [http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20060630.pdf 2006 Platform]) Scott has posted occasionally to [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/msearch?query=Bonnie+Scott&submit=Search&charset=ISO-8859-1 LPplatform-discuss] since 2005. == Scott's PlatCom application to LNC == Some of you know me; I've served on the last three Platform Committees. I served two years as the Northeast Regional Alternate on the LNC, and I've served the NY party in various capacities for the last 10 years. I would like to be considered as an LNC appointment for the 2008 Platform Committee. I want to share what I'd like to see the Platform Committee accomplish in this next revision cycle, and mention some of the planks I've worked on in the past--two of which still remain in our abbreviated platform. In brief: coming out of Denver, I'd like to see a platform that can bring Libertarians with various viewpoints together, as well as speaking to the average voter. In a March note to the LNC this year, past Platform Committee Chair George Squyres recommended that I be appointed to the 2008 committee, among a list of people about whom he said: "they can be relied on to be both principled and practical in their efforts." I have enjoyed working with George as the chair of the Platform Committee and with "PlatComm" chair Michael Dixon before that. I've been told that my wordsmithing skills were appreciated in the previous Platform Committee meetings. I can often come up with the word that the group is searching for, or find a way to shorten some redundant phrasing. I'm proud of the work we did to split the platform into consistent parts, so that we could better evaluate what we had in there, but I'm not committed to that format going forward, especially given what happened in Portland. I was not in favor of the 2006 movement to drop most of the planks without having a replacement platform ready to propose and discuss at the same convention. What we ended up with is patchwork, incomplete. Thankfully, that can be fixed in Denver. One of the ideas I want the Platform Committee to consider is an even shorter form for each plank. If you haven't seen it already, I'd like to call your attention to the one-page state platform for the Vermont LP, written mostly by Hardy Machia: http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf If a state platform can be done in one page, could our national platform be written in four? Think about how having a platform in a manageable size and in everyday English could improve our appeal to those not already "converted" to Libertarianism. Like many Libertarians, I earn a living as a "computer geek" now, but I was a business major in college and the child of an entrepreneur, so I take a marketing approach to our political literature. I'd like to sit with 20 intelligent, verbally-accomplished Libertarians around a conference table in Denver and discuss the pros and cons of a shorter document that could serve the party as a more effective outreach tool. I don't think that the "purists" need to compromise their principles, nor the "reformers" their desire to appeal to a greater audience in order to agree on one platform that the public can also relate to. It's all in the wording; it takes a lot more work to accomplish these goals, but those goals cannot be compromised if we want to move forward as one successful party out of Denver. The plank samples I've appended below demonstrate my ability to work with others on creating better Libertarian text. I think that the platform should contain our current best effort at presenting the outline of our philosophy, enough so that people understand where Libertarians stand compared to the other politicians out there. I'd like to keep the very current goals, the legislative specifics--anything that could become dated in two to four years--out of the platform and in a Libertarian Program, which I'd like to see brought back, perhaps as a product of the convention for a test period. In March, George Squyres mentioned to some committee members, "We cannot afford to have only half the team." I agree with him not just about the composition of the Platform Committee as he originally meant, but also in context of how the 2008 Convention will react to the 2008 Platform Committee's output. In closing, I'd like to say that I hope you vote for the Libertarians whom you believe can represent the various viewpoints on where our Platform should head, so we can debate our best points in a room (with an open-door policy, as usual) for a few days before the convention. During that time, we will develop a complete and coherent document that all "sides" can be proud of, which can serve as a base for amendments from the floor for the alloted time at the convention. I think that's the best way to get back on track under the current bylaws. *************************** 90. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/AliciaMattson.JPG Alicia Mattson was chosen by the LNC as the Interim Chair of the [[2008 Platform Committee]]. == Mattson's self-introduction to PlatCom == My educational background includes a Bachelor's degree in computer science as well as an MBA degree. Professionally speaking, I've worked as a software developer, as IT department support staff in a manufacturing environment, and teaching computer programming courses at a nearby college. Since 2000 my husband (of 16 years - no kids - one dog) and I have owned a retail computer sales & service store. Including ourselves we have 13 employees. Small business owners must do a little bit of everything in their companies, but my primary function is the financial management of the company. I also volunteer for my church in many capacities, regularly teaching classes for children of all ages. Since 2003 I have performed all of the church's financial functions under direction of a managerial committee. I've been an LP member since 1996 and have been very actively involved in the LP of Tennessee since being elected as state party Treasurer in 2002. I was Treasurer until I was elected as state chair in 2005, and served a 2-year term in that position. I've also served my state party as a database manager, webmaster, press secretary, affiliate coordinator, etc. I've received the Lights of Liberty award from the Advocates for Self-Government as well as the Keeper of Liberty award from my own state party for my efforts on a state sales tax legislative issue. I served as a presidential elector for Badnarik in 2004 and played a prominent role in the efforts to qualify him for the ballot in TN. I've helped with local affiliate organization efforts, spoken about the LP to student groups ranging from elementary to college level, represented the LPTN at public issue rallies, and secured legislative sponsorship for ballot access bills. I recently joined Hardy and Bonnie on the LNC's IT Committee. This is my first round on the Platform Committee, and I look forward to working with all of you on the task at hand! *************************** 91. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/SteveDasbach.jpg == Dasbach's self-introduction to PlatCom == I come from a Democrat background -- my dad was President of the Plumbers Union in St. Louis. I got interested in politics in junior high (1968) by the campaign of Eugene McCarthy and walked precincts for George McGovern in 1972. I also participated in marches against the Vietnam war and bombing in Cambodia. While in college, I discovered that I was a Jeffersonian Democrat -- that is, a libertarian. I met another libertarian in married housing during my senior year in college -- he was the former head of college Republicans. A neighbor introduced us because he thought it would be fun to watch us fight -- turned out we agreed on just about everything. Together, we formed a libertarian campus group. I graduated in 1975, moved to Indiana, and started teaching HS chemistry & physics. In 1979, my friend from married housing had just graduated from law school -- he and his wife moved to Indiana to start his law practice. He was disgusted with the Republicans, I was disgusted with the Democrats, so we both joined the LP. We called the national HQ to find out who was heading up the Clark campaign in Indiana -- their response was "funny you should ask". My friend became the state coordinator for Clark and soon thereafter state chair. I became district chair and assisted him with the Clark campaign, including the ballot drive. Since then, I've run for office as a Libertarian seven times, served as state chair twice in Indiana, once in Virginia, served on the LNC from 1985-1998, including two terms as national chair, and served as LP Executive Director from 1998-2002. I believe this is my first time serving on the Platform committee. *************************** 92. row *************************** old_text: == Straus's self-introduction to PlatCom == I was introduced to libertarianism through an LP-run OPH booth at a county fair in '89, or thereabouts. In '92 I became a reglib, but I really didn't get active within the party or the larger movement until '04. I held very moderate views until shortly after that time, when the radicals in San Francisco got to me. I'm a market anarchist now, and I've finally reached the level of confidence where I can say it out loud. I'm a big fan of Rothbard's teachings up until the end of the 80s, at which point I contend that he transformed from accessible and idealistic to jaded and crotchety. It happens. Activism has been a large part of my life over the past three years. I promote liberty through LP activities and independently within my peer groups: musicians, motorcyclists, and of course, other geeks. The only formal title I've held was during my one year-ish tenure as a director of the Free State Project, a "big tent" effort to concentrate libertarians in the state of New Hampshire. I left my native California for the harsher climate of NH in October of last year. My ideal platform would be (surprise!) not unlike the previous iterations. Although I welcome moderates in the party, I think the platform should be hard line abolitionist with a moral context. I realize that isn't going to happen here. If I should have the chance to become a member of the committee I will attempt to steer us toward anarchist/minarchist neutral language -- striking references to "legitmate government functions" and the US constitution. I hope not to be authoring a series of minority reports. *************************** 93. row *************************** old_text: == Aitken's self-introduction to PlatCom == I've been a registered Libertarian since 1984. Before then I came to the conclusion that libertarians had more consistent and rational positions than the D's and R's. (Which is not necessarily what motivates people to vote and is not necessarily what works in the real world.) I served on the LP of Colorado state board 7 years including 4 years as state chair. I've been a candidate 8 or 9 times, mostly for state level office. Getting minor party status and very easy ballot access was one of the major accomplishments that I participated in. I'm a member of the Reform Caucus and this is my 3rd term on the Platform Committee. *************************** 94. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/JonRoland.jpg Jon Roland of Texas founded the [http://www.constitution.org/ Constitution Society] in 1994. His [http://www.constitution.org/jr_cv.htm curriculum vitae] indexes his voluminous scholarly writings. He was the 2006 and 2002 LPTX candidate for Attorney General, and his campaign site is http://www.jonroland.org/. A biography of Roland is [http://www.constitution.org/bio/jr_bio1.htm here]. *************************** 95. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/HenryHaller.jpg == Haller's self-introduction to PlatCom == I have been an LP member since 1983, when I attended my first LP state convention. Since then, I have been state chair in Pennsylvania twice, vice-chair twice, and membership chair for 5 years. I have run for office four times - state senate, U.S. Senate, and twice for Lt-Governor of Pa. My last campaign for Lt-Governeor, in 2002, was the most active, in which I participated in four debates with the other candidates (one televised), made two other TV appearances, and appeared before a number of college audiences. I have served on the National Platform Committee 7 times, and the Bylaws Committee once. I currently serve as Secretary for my local county chapter, and serve on the research committee for the state party. I am an engineer by training. However, my wife and I now run a small retail business, where we sell gifts and books. We have been married for 31 years, and have two grown children. *************************** 96. row *************************** old_text: ==Political Philosophy== Libertarian - pragmatic, big tent ==Experience== Elected and Appointed Positions: * 2006-2008: Elected Libertarian Justice of the Peace (inspector of elections/adjudicate property tax appeals). * 2002-2004: Elected as a Libertarian as a JP * 1999-2000: Elected to the Selectboard (town council) in a nonpartisan race where I served the second year as the chair. Other positions of great interest and power: * 1999: Appointed Weigher of Coal. * 2001: Elected to as Town Grand Juror Races run, but lost: *1998: State Senate - received 29% of vote *2000: Governor - <1% of vote *2002: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1240 votes, winner received ~1500. *2004: Governor - 1% of vote *2006: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1360 votes, winner received ~2000. *2006: Vermont ran 8 libertarians for state house office and all but one were in close contested races. Libertarian positions: *1998-2005: Secretary of VT LP *1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006: VT delegate to National Convention *2006-present: Chair of VT LP *2006-present: Region 7 Regional Rep (NY, NJ, MA, NH, CT, VT). *2006-present: LP Executive Committee Other positions: *2003-present: President of the Vermont chapter of NORML. (worked on passing medical marijuana law and expansion law in Vermont) ==Platform== ===Vermont Platform=== In Vermont I was able to replace our old platform that was long and wordy with a one page platform with 15 planks. Our state convention unanimously passed it after a couple tweaks . We got coverage and praise for the new platform and the head of the free market think tank in Vermont urged the Republicans to adopt it with the exception of a couple of the more liberal issues (his wife is vice-chair of the VT GOP). The Vermont platform is still too wordy and detailed, but a huge improvement over the old platform. http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf ===National Platform=== *It must be libertarian. *A short intro that lays out the general libertarian philosophy. *Something that is bit size that people can taste and be drawn into. *Something that is politically practical to accomplish in 2-6 years. *Planks that that the majority of our candidates can get behind. *Planks that a sizeable portion of America can agree with. *The total length would be about 10 planks and no more than 2 pages. *Each plank would be about 1-4 sentences. *************************** 97. row *************************** old_text: ==Personal== Native Vermonter. BS Computer Science. Self-employed owner of [http://www.catamount.com Catamount Software] for 13 years. Computer engineer for Department of Navy for seven years during and directly after college. ==Political Philosophy== Libertarian - pragmatic, big tent, let's work on getting the 65+% who want a viable third party into our fold with libertarian issues that appeal to them. ==Political Experience== Elected and Appointed Positions: * 2006-2008: Elected Libertarian Justice of the Peace (inspector of elections/adjudicate property tax appeals). * 2002-2004: Elected as a Libertarian as a JP * 1999-2000: Elected to the Selectboard (town council) in a nonpartisan race where I served the second year as the chair. Other positions of great interest and power: * 1999: Appointed Weigher of Coal. * 2001: Elected to as Town Grand Juror Races run, but lost: *1998: State Senate - received 29% of vote *2000: Governor - <1% of vote *2002: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1240 votes, winner received ~1500. *2004: Governor - 1% of vote *2006: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1360 votes, winner received ~2000. *2006: Vermont ran 8 libertarians for state house office and all but one were in close contested races. Libertarian positions: *1998-2005: Secretary of VT LP *1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006: VT delegate to National Convention *2006-present: Chair of VT LP *2006-present: Region 7 Regional Rep (NY, NJ, MA, NH, CT, VT). *2006-present: LP Executive Committee Other positions: *2003-present: President of the Vermont chapter of NORML. (worked on passing medical marijuana law and expansion law in Vermont) ==Platform== ===Vermont Platform=== In Vermont I was able to replace our old platform that was long and wordy with a one page platform with 15 planks. Our state convention unanimously passed it after a couple tweaks . We got coverage and praise for the new platform and the head of the free market think tank in Vermont urged the Republicans to adopt it with the exception of a couple of the more liberal issues (his wife is vice-chair of the VT GOP). The Vermont platform is still too wordy and detailed, but a huge improvement over the old platform. http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf ===National Platform=== *It must be libertarian. *A short intro that lays out the general libertarian philosophy. *Something that is bit size that people can taste and be drawn into. *Something that is politically practical to accomplish in 2-6 years. *Planks that that the majority of our candidates can get behind. *Planks that a sizeable portion of America can agree with. *The total length would be about 10 planks and no more than 2 pages. *Each plank would be about 1-4 sentences. *************************** 98. row *************************** old_text: ==Personal== Native Vermonter. BS Computer Science. Self-employed owner of [http://www.catamount.com Catamount Software] for 13 years. Computer engineer for Department of Navy for seven years during and directly after college. ==Political Philosophy== Libertarian - pragmatic, big tent, let's work on getting the 65+% who want a viable third party into our fold with libertarian issues that appeal to them. (Opposed to the Georgists land tax idea) ==Political Experience== Elected and Appointed Positions: * 2006-2008: Elected Libertarian Justice of the Peace (inspector of elections/adjudicate property tax appeals). * 2002-2004: Elected as a Libertarian as a JP * 1999-2000: Elected to the Selectboard (town council) in a nonpartisan race where I served the second year as the chair. Other positions of great interest and power: * 1999: Appointed Weigher of Coal. * 2001: Elected to as Town Grand Juror Races run, but lost: *1998: State Senate - received 29% of vote *2000: Governor - <1% of vote *2002: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1240 votes, winner received ~1500. *2004: Governor - 1% of vote *2006: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1360 votes, winner received ~2000. *2006: Vermont ran 8 libertarians for state house office and all but one were in close contested races. Libertarian positions: *1998-2005: Secretary of VT LP *1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006: VT delegate to National Convention *2006-present: Chair of VT LP *2006-present: Region 7 Regional Rep (NY, NJ, MA, NH, CT, VT). *2006-present: LP Executive Committee Other positions: *2003-present: President of the Vermont chapter of NORML. (worked on passing medical marijuana law and expansion law in Vermont) ==Platform== ===Vermont Platform=== In Vermont I was able to replace our old platform that was long and wordy with a one page platform with 15 planks. Our state convention unanimously passed it after a couple tweaks . We got coverage and praise for the new platform and the head of the free market think tank in Vermont urged the Republicans to adopt it with the exception of a couple of the more liberal issues (his wife is vice-chair of the VT GOP). The Vermont platform is still too wordy and detailed, but a huge improvement over the old platform. http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf ===National Platform=== *It must be libertarian. *A short intro that lays out the general libertarian philosophy. *Something that is bit size that people can taste and be drawn into. *Something that is politically practical to accomplish in 2-6 years. *Planks that that the majority of our candidates can get behind. *Planks that a sizeable portion of America can agree with. *The total length would be about 10 planks and no more than 2 pages. *Each plank would be about 1-4 sentences. *************************** 99. row *************************** old_text: ==Personal== Native Vermonter. BS Computer Science. Self-employed owner of [http://www.catamount.com Catamount Software] for 13 years. Computer engineer for Department of Navy for seven years during and directly after college. ==Political Philosophy== Libertarian - pragmatic, big tent, let's work on getting the 65+% who want a viable third party into our fold with libertarian issues that appeal to them. ==Political Experience== Elected and Appointed Positions: * 2006-2008: Elected Libertarian Justice of the Peace (inspector of elections/adjudicate property tax appeals). * 2002-2004: Elected as a Libertarian as a JP * 1999-2000: Elected to the Selectboard (town council) in a nonpartisan race where I served the second year as the chair. Other positions of great interest and power: * 1999: Appointed Weigher of Coal. * 2001: Elected to as Town Grand Juror Races run, but lost: *1998: State Senate - received 29% of vote *2000: Governor - <1% of vote *2002: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1240 votes, winner received ~1500. *2004: Governor - 1% of vote *2006: State Representative - Forth in 4-way race, received ~1360 votes, winner received ~2000. *2006: Vermont ran 8 libertarians for state house office and all but one were in close contested races. Libertarian positions: *1998-2005: Secretary of VT LP *1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006: VT delegate to National Convention *2006-present: Chair of VT LP *2006-present: Region 7 Regional Rep (NY, NJ, MA, NH, CT, VT). *2006-present: LP Executive Committee Other positions: *2003-present: President of the Vermont chapter of NORML. (worked on passing medical marijuana law and expansion law in Vermont) ==Platform== ===Vermont Platform=== In Vermont I was able to replace our old platform that was long and wordy with a one page platform with 15 planks. Our state convention unanimously passed it after a couple tweaks . We got coverage and praise for the new platform and the head of the free market think tank in Vermont urged the Republicans to adopt it with the exception of a couple of the more liberal issues (his wife is vice-chair of the VT GOP). The Vermont platform is still too wordy and detailed, but a huge improvement over the old platform. http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf ===National Platform=== *It must be libertarian. *A short intro that lays out the general libertarian philosophy. *Something that is bit size that people can taste and be drawn into. *Something that is politically practical to accomplish in 2-6 years. *Planks that that the majority of our candidates can get behind. *Planks that a sizeable portion of America can agree with. *The total length would be about 10 planks and no more than 2 pages. *Each plank would be about 1-4 sentences. *************************** 100. row *************************** old_text: __NOTOC__

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. In order to grant voters a full range of choice in federal, state and local elections, we propose proportional voting systems with multi-member districts for legislative elections and instant runoff voting (IRV) for single-winner elections. We support the right to secede where: (1) secession is supported by a majority within the political unit, (2) the majority does not attempt suppression of the dissenting minority, and (3) the government of the new entity is at least as compatible with human freedom as that from which it seceded.
*************************** 101. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 102. row *************************** old_text: == Holtz draft (based on his sample plank for LNC) == Healthcare is both one of the trickiest and most important issues that the LP needs to address. One thing that makes it tricky is that it is subject to multiple kinds of market failure: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_information asymmetric information] between doctors and patients, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_selection adverse selection] of insurers by insurees, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard moral hazard] tempting insurees, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem free-riding] of potential donors leading to the underfinancing of charity healthcare. Another thing that makes it tricky is that America's healthcare market has for so long been so distorted by government interventions that it's hard for most people to see how a free market in healthcare would work. Addressing this issue requires an understanding of economics and law and how those disciplines intersect with healthcare. Anyone crafting the LP healthcare plank should be familiar with e.g. * The Cato Institute Policy Handbook [http://cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb109/hb_109-7.pdf chapter on healthcare] * The Library of Economics and Liberty articles on [http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HealthInsurance.html health insurance] and the [http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HealthCareIndustry.html health care industry] * Milton Friedman's 2001 [http://www.wku.edu/%7Eedward.wolfe/350Readings/Friedman%20How%20to%20Cure%20Health%20Care.pdf How To Cure Health Care] * analyses by libertarian economists like [http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/03/the_jane_galt_h.html Arnold Kling], [http://hanson.gmu.edu/buyhealth.html Robin Hanson], and [http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/04/what_is_massach.html Tyler Cowan]. Here is a draft healthcare plank: === The Issue === The problem with health care in America is not that Americans are under-insured. It's that we're over-insured in several important ways. 1) The government provides an enormous tax subsidy for employers to provide health insurance, which hides the cost of insurance from the insured, exaggerates the problem of under-insurance among those who work for themselves or small employers or who don't work at all, and makes insurance portability a regulatory nightmare just as the 21st-century job market has become so much more fluid. 2) The government provides bloated defined-benefit insurance programs (Medicare and Medicaid) with an antiquated mix of coverages and the wrong balance between routine care and catastrophic coverage. 3) The government over-regulates private health insurance, interfering with the ability of insurers and beneficiaries to agree on lower-cost alternatives. The government also increases costs by requiring defensive medicine and high insurance costs due to excessive malpractice awards, emphasizing licensure over certification, forcing high retail prices by demanding that the government get a discount from retail, and discouraging interstate health insurance competition. === The Principle === We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care. === Solutions === We advocate the separation of medicine and State, and favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We oppose government attempts to replace or regulate private health insurers and private hospitals. === Transitional Action === While we transition to a completely privatized healthcare system, we should limit government's role to a few key tasks that government's own policies have in recent decades crowded out from private-sector accomplishment. 1) Provide a safety net of basic health care for people in immediate need. 2) Provide vouchers to people who cannot otherwise afford catastrophic health insurance. 3) Require non-poor people to buy catastrophic insurance (so that they don't use the safety net as their insurance). 4) Incentivize people to buy preventive care by means of tax-deductible medical savings accounts. The very first thing that should be done is to have the federal government use its authority over interstate commerce to prevent states form barring interstate purchase of health insurance. *************************** 103. row *************************** old_text: == Holtz draft (based on his sample plank for LNC) == Healthcare is both one of the trickiest and most important issues that the LP needs to address. One thing that makes it tricky is that it is subject to multiple kinds of market failure: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymmetric_information asymmetric information] between doctors and patients, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_selection adverse selection] of insurers by insurees, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard moral hazard] tempting insurees, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_rider_problem free-riding] of potential donors leading to the underfinancing of charity healthcare. Another thing that makes it tricky is that America's healthcare market has for so long been so distorted by government interventions that it's hard for most people to see how a free market in healthcare would work. Addressing this issue requires an understanding of economics and law and how those disciplines intersect with healthcare. Anyone crafting the LP healthcare plank should be familiar with e.g. * The Cato Institute Policy Handbook [http://cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb109/hb_109-7.pdf chapter on healthcare] * The Library of Economics and Liberty articles on [http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HealthInsurance.html health insurance] and the [http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/HealthCareIndustry.html health care industry] * Milton Friedman's 2001 [http://www.wku.edu/%7Eedward.wolfe/350Readings/Friedman%20How%20to%20Cure%20Health%20Care.pdf How To Cure Health Care] * analyses by libertarian economists like [http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/03/the_jane_galt_h.html Arnold Kling], [http://hanson.gmu.edu/buyhealth.html Robin Hanson], and [http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2006/04/what_is_massach.html Tyler Cowan]. Here is a draft healthcare plank: === The Issue === The problem with health care in America is not that Americans are under-insured. It's that we're over-insured in several important ways. 1) The government provides an enormous tax subsidy for employers to provide health insurance, which hides the cost of insurance from the insured, exaggerates the problem of under-insurance among those who work for themselves or small employers or who don't work at all, and makes insurance portability a regulatory nightmare just as the 21st-century job market has become so much more fluid. 2) The government provides bloated defined-benefit insurance programs (Medicare and Medicaid) with an antiquated mix of coverages and the wrong balance between routine care and catastrophic coverage. 3) The government over-regulates private health insurance, interfering with the ability of insurers and beneficiaries to agree on lower-cost alternatives. The government also increases costs by requiring defensive medicine and high insurance costs due to excessive malpractice awards, emphasizing licensure over certification, forcing high retail prices by demanding that the government get a discount from retail, and discouraging interstate health insurance competition. === The Principle === We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care. === Solutions === We advocate the separation of medicine and State, and favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We oppose government attempts to replace or regulate private health insurers and private hospitals. === Transitional Action === While we transition to a completely privatized healthcare system, we should remove the federal government's involvement in healthcare, and limit state government's role to a few key tasks that the government's own policies have in recent decades crowded out from private-sector accomplishment. 1) Provide a safety net of basic health care for people in immediate need. 2) Provide vouchers to people who cannot otherwise afford catastrophic health insurance. 3) Require non-poor people to buy catastrophic insurance (so that they don't use the safety net as their insurance). 4) Incentivize people to buy preventive care by means of tax-deductible medical savings accounts. The very first thing that should be done is to have the federal government use its authority over interstate commerce to prevent states form barring interstate purchase of health insurance. *************************** 104. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[ZAP Implies Anarchism]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 105. row *************************** old_text: == Holtz draft == === The Issue === Liberty has blessed America with the prosperity required to defend its freedom, and with the worldwide respect that has made such defense so rarely needed. However, modern weapons technology and high expectations for near-perfect security have combined to make Americans feel vulnerable to those who oppose America's influence on the rest of the world. America has done more to advance the cause of human liberty than any other society in human history, and yet America's foreign policy has fallen tragically short of the standard of conduct on which any liberty lover would insist. We are appalled at the loss of life and compromises against liberty that some American leaders have considered an acceptable price for advancing liberty and opposing tyranny. === The Principle === American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world and the defense of the lives, liberty, and property of the American people in a world of unrestricted trade and travel. We support the right to secede and recognize that border changes to accommodate cultural and ethnic realities may reduce conflict and support a more peaceful world. We oppose the United States being the policeman of the world, but we support both political and revolutionary actions by individuals and groups against tyrannical regimes. Recognizing that foreign intervention is a very sensitive issue and that people, including libertarians, can hold good-faith views on both sides, we are confident that our candidates when elected will hold America to the highest standards of conduct. === The Solution === End the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention and military aid. The United States should maintain a sufficient military capability to defend itself against aggression, and should maintain alliances with countries whose continued free existence is vital to the protection of the freedom of all American citizens. === Transitional Action === We call for the reform of the Presidential War Powers Act to end the President's power to initiate military action. American embassies should inform our citizens that they are subject to the laws of foreign countries when they travel or invest in those countries. We oppose placing U.S. troops under U.N. command. *************************** 106. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/Images/eCard.png http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/BrianHoltz.jpg I have used an [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms archive of past LP Platforms] to create a [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] that synthesizes a comprehensive but streamlined 17-plank principles-only platform. I hope to steer the PlatCom toward adoption of something like the Greatest Hits draft as part of a committee report published well before Denver, so that delegates will have several months to consider the changes that the committee proposes. I've also written the following Platform-related pieces: * a compilation of (so far) 23 [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]]; * an [http://web.archive.org/web/20070416062549/http://www.lp.org/lpnews/article_938.shtml article] co-authored with two other PlatCom members for the LP News in early 2006 comparing the 2004 Platform and the U.S. Constitution; * a comprehensive [http://marketliberal.org/FixLP.html analysis] of the LP's platform and strategy and how to reform them; * an [http://www.reformthelp.org/rights/generalizing/rivalry.php essay] for the Libertarian Reform Caucus explaining how the economic concepts of rivalry and excludability combine to provide the textbook minarchist prescription for the proper role of government; * a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=313 report] on the PlatCom deliberations in Portland; * a refutation of the principle-vs-pragmatism false dichotomy, showing how variants of libertarianism can define a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=324 principled path] north through Nolan Space; * an [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=400 analysis] of libertarian taxation theory, ranking nine ways for government to raise revenue; * a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=326 review] of the 1972 Platform and 1974 Dallas Accord; * an analysis of [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=371 18 free variables] in libertarian theory, demonstrating why the non-coercion principle can never decide every issue. My LP credentials are: * Life LP member since 2000 * At-Large Member of LPCA Executive Committee, 2007- ([http://marketliberal.org/FixLPCA.html campaign brochure]) * LP PlatCom member (and Portland attendee), 2006 * LPCA PlatCom member, 2005 & 2006 * 2004 & 2006 LP [http://marketliberal.org/ candidate for Congress], CA-14 (Silicon Valley) * [http://www.ca.lp.org/cafreedom.shtml LPCA Newsletter] contributing editor, 2006 * [http://lpsm.org/smlindex.html LPSM (San Mateo County) Newsletter] Chair, 2004-2005 * Santa Clara County LP Judicial Committee, 2006 * 2001 [http://marketliberal.org/SanCarlosSchoolBoardCandidateStmt.html candidate] for San Carlos School Board * Four-figure donor to LP projects like the Penn Jillette video, and Operation Breakthrough and [http://marketliberal.org/LPCA/FlamesOfFreedom/ Flames of Freedom] in California My blog is http://knowinghumans.net. I hope to contribute more hard work toward improving the LP Platform and filling in the gaps that were created in Portland. *************************** 107. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[Does ZAP Imply Anarchism?]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 108. row *************************** old_text: == Arguments that Zero-Aggression Absolutism Implies Anarchism == The state is that institution (or hierarchy of institutions) maintaining in a geographic region a formal monopoly on the authority to use 1) retaliatory force and 2) force initiation (to whatever extent it is allowed). I indeed can (barely) envision a minimal state financed entirely without obvious ongoing coercion -- e.g., interest on an endowment, collection of land rents, fees and auctions for natural resource use, and fines (perhaps collected like taxes) for pollution. What I can't envision is how a state would maintain its monopoly on retaliatory force in the presence of vigilantes who insisted on their ZAPsolutist right to conduct their own retaliations without any oversight. If an institution oversees the retaliatory force only of the people who formally sign up, then it doesn't have a monopoly and so it's not a state, but rather is more like a neighborhood watch club on steroids. Thus ZAPsolutism will always either reduce to anarchism or allow for exceptions that make it morally equivalent to coercive minarchism. Some proponents of zero-coercion minarchism deny that essential services like national defense would be have to financed through what is in effect an anarchism-style passing around of a collection plate. They argue that some of the fees that government charges for services only it can provide could be used to finance services (like national defense) that would be under-funded due to free riders. This plainly advocates that government exploit its monopoly on certain services to deliberately over-charge users of those services in order to provide benefits for other people. This is morally equivalent to coercive taxation. The problem of deciding who and how much to over-charge for an essential service is no different in principle from the problem of deciding who and how much to tax for national defense. Some minarchists indeed claim absolute fealty to the ZAP while advocating a state monopoly on law enforcement, but their position seems to be either incoherent or functionally identical to deontological anarchocapitalism. If a lifelong coercion abstainer nevertheless refused to recognize the state monopoly on law enforcement, then either the state would have to coerce him or the state would have to surrender its monopoly and would be just another voluntary anarcholibertarian protection agency. If an institution has no more authority over you than what you've voluntarily granted it by explicit contract, or if you can decline to recognize its authority or opt out of its authority without emigrating, then that institution is a club or maybe a standards body, but not a state. And if the state is going to violate ZAP and coerce a lifelong coercion abstainer for the goal of uniform law enforcement, then that is morally comparable to the minarchist state of Milton Friedman and Mises and Hayek that violates ZAP to collect minimal taxes to finance universal law enforcement. If an institution can qualify as a "government" but have no more force-initiating power than an opt-in club, then merely saying you favor "limited" or "non-coercive" government does not distinguish you from an anarchist. Anarchists don't oppose opt-in clubs either. If you eliminate the government's monopoly on coercion, you eliminate government, and what you have left is more like AAA or a book club. *************************** 109. row *************************** old_text: http://marketliberal.org/Images/eCard.png http://marketliberal.org/LP/Images/BrianHoltz.jpg I have used an [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms archive of past LP Platforms] to create a [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] that synthesizes a comprehensive but streamlined 17-plank principles-only platform. I hope to steer the PlatCom toward adoption of something like the Greatest Hits draft as part of a committee report published well before Denver, so that delegates will have several months to consider the changes that the committee proposes. I've also written the following Platform-related pieces: * a compilation of (so far) 23 [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]]; * an [http://web.archive.org/web/20070416062549/http://www.lp.org/lpnews/article_938.shtml article] co-authored with two other PlatCom members for the LP News in early 2006 comparing the 2004 Platform and the U.S. Constitution; * a comprehensive [http://marketliberal.org/FixLP.html analysis] of the LP's platform and strategy and how to reform them; * an [http://www.reformthelp.org/rights/generalizing/rivalry.php essay] for the Libertarian Reform Caucus explaining how the economic concepts of rivalry and excludability combine to provide the textbook minarchist prescription for the proper role of government; * a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=313 report] on the PlatCom deliberations in Portland; * a refutation of the principle-vs-pragmatism false dichotomy, showing how variants of libertarianism can define a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=324 principled path] north through Nolan Space; * an [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=400 analysis] of libertarian taxation theory, ranking nine ways for government to raise revenue; * a [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=326 review] of the 1972 Platform and 1974 Dallas Accord; * an analysis of [http://blog.360.yahoo.com/knowinghumans?p=371 18 free variables] in libertarian theory, demonstrating why the non-coercion principle can never decide every issue. My LP credentials are: * Life LP member since 2000 * At-Large Member of LPCA Executive Committee, 2007- ([http://marketliberal.org/FixLPCA.html campaign brochure]) * LP PlatCom member (and Portland attendee), 2006 * LPCA PlatCom member, 2005 & 2006 * 2004 & 2006 LP [http://marketliberal.org/ candidate for Congress], CA-14 (Silicon Valley) * [http://www.ca.lp.org/cafreedom.shtml LPCA Newsletter] contributing editor, 2006 * [http://lpsm.org/smlindex.html LPSM (San Mateo County) Newsletter] Chair, 2004-2005 * Santa Clara County LP Judicial Committee, 2006 * 2001 [http://marketliberal.org/SanCarlosSchoolBoardCandidateStmt.html candidate] for San Carlos School Board * Four-figure donor to LP projects like the Penn Jillette video, and Operation Breakthrough and [http://marketliberal.org/LPCA/FlamesOfFreedom/ Flames of Freedom] in California I hope to contribute more hard work toward improving the LP Platform and filling in the gaps that were created in Portland. My blog is http://knowinghumans.net. A brief autobiography is at http://marketliberal.org/Bio.html. I've written a reference hypertext called [http://humanknowledge.net Human Knowledge: Foundations and Limits]. An index to my other writings is at http://holtz.org/Writings.html. *************************** 110. row *************************** old_text: == LP Platform Committee Wiki == For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. == Contents == * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** [[Proposed Platform Outlines]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[Does ZAP Imply Anarchism?]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 111. row *************************** old_text: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing *************************** 112. row *************************** old_text: == Capozzi Draft Outline == * 1. Personal Liberty ** 1.1. Expression and Communication ** 1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy ** 1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction ** 1.4. Crime and Justice ** 1.5. Self-Defense * 2. Economic Liberty ** 2.1. Property and Contract ** 2.2. Environment and Resources ** 2.3. Government Finance and Spending ** 2.4. Money and Markets ** 2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor ** 2.6. Health Care ** 2.7. Education ** 2.8. Retirement and Income Security * 3. Securing Liberty ** 3.1. National Defense ** 3.2. Counter-Terrorism and the Bill of Rights ** 3.2. International Affairs ** 3.3. Immigration and Naturalization ** 3.4. Franchise and Discrimination ** 3.5. Representative Government *************************** 113. row *************************** old_text: == Capozzi Draft Outline == * 1. Personal Liberty ** 1.1. Expression and Communication ** 1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy ** 1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction ** 1.4. Crime and Justice ** 1.5. Self-Defense * 2. Economic Liberty ** 2.1. Property and Contract ** 2.2. Environment and Resources ** 2.3. Government Finance and Spending ** 2.4. Money and Markets ** 2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor ** 2.6. Health Care ** 2.7. Education ** 2.8. Retirement and Income Security * 3. Securing Liberty ** 3.1. National Defense ** 3.2. Counter-Terrorism and the Bill of Rights ** 3.2. International Affairs ** 3.3. Immigration and Naturalization ** 3.4. Franchise and Discrimination ** 3.5. Representative Government == McLendon Draft Outline == * Individual Rights and Civil Order ** The US Constitution ** Freedom of Communication ** The Right to Keep and Bear Arms ** Property Rights ** The Right to Privacy ** Equal Protection * Trade and the Economy ** Regulation of Commerce ** Money & Fiat Currency ** Taxation ** Government Debt ** Corporate Welfare, Monopolies & Subsidies ** Public Services * Domestic Issues ** Social Security & Medicare ** Education ** Electoral Reform ** Eminent Domain ** Victimless Crime & The War on Drugs ** Natural Disasters & Crisis Management * Foreign Affairs ** National Sovereignty & International Relations ** Power to Negotiate & Approve Treaties ** National Defense & Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy ** Immigration *************************** 114. row *************************** old_text: == Capozzi Draft Outline == * 1. Personal Liberty ** 1.1. Expression and Communication ** 1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy ** 1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction ** 1.4. Crime and Justice ** 1.5. Self-Defense * 2. Economic Liberty ** 2.1. Property and Contract ** 2.2. Environment and Resources ** 2.3. Government Finance and Spending ** 2.4. Money and Markets ** 2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor ** 2.6. Health Care ** 2.7. Education ** 2.8. Retirement and Income Security * 3. Securing Liberty ** 3.1. National Defense ** 3.2. Counter-Terrorism and the Bill of Rights ** 3.2. International Affairs ** 3.3. Immigration and Naturalization ** 3.4. Franchise and Discrimination ** 3.5. Representative Government == McLendon Draft Outline == * Individual Rights and Civil Order ** The US Constitution ** Freedom of Communication ** The Right to Keep and Bear Arms ** Property Rights ** The Right to Privacy ** Equal Protection * Trade and the Economy ** Regulation of Commerce ** Money & Fiat Currency ** Taxation ** Government Debt ** Corporate Welfare, Monopolies & Subsidies ** Public Services * Domestic Issues ** Social Security & Medicare ** Education ** Electoral Reform ** Eminent Domain ** Victimless Crime & The War on Drugs ** Natural Disasters & Crisis Management * Foreign Affairs ** National Sovereignty & International Relations ** Power to Negotiate & Approve Treaties ** National Defense & Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy ** Immigration == Haller Draft Outline == * I. Individual Rights and Civil Order ** 1. Freedom and Responsibility. (existing plank) ** 2. Freedom of Communication. (existing plank) ** 3. Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (existing plank) (Possibly expand to "Right to Self-Defense") ** 4. Freedom of Association. (new plank) ** 5. Right to Privacy. (existing plank, expanded to include elements from existing planks "Freedom of Religion" and "Reproductive Rights.") ** 6. Internal Security and Civil Liberties. (new plank, similar to deleted plank from 2004 platform.) ** 7. Property rights. (existing plank) ** 8. Justice for the individual. (new plank) ** 9. Sexuality and gender. (existing plank) * II. Trade and the Economy. ** 1. Government Finance. (new plank, will include sections on both taxation and debt) ** 2. Corporate Welfare, Monopolies, & Subsidies. (existing plank) ** 3. Public Services. (existing plank) * III. Domestic Issues. ** 1. Crime and Victimless Crime. (existing plank, expanded to include the War on Drugs.) ** 2. Education. (new plank) ** 3. Health care. (new plank) ** 4. Retirement security. (new plank) ** 5. Environmental issues. (new plank) * IV. Foreign Affairs. ** 1. National Defense. (new plank, will include rejection of conscription) ** 2. Immigration and trade. (expansion of existing "Immigration" plank) ** 3. International Affairs (new plank) * V. Omissions (Restore sentence from 2004 platform.) *************************** 115. row *************************** old_text: == Greatest Hits Draft Outline == See [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] == Capozzi Draft Outline == * 1. Personal Liberty ** 1.1. Expression and Communication ** 1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy ** 1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction ** 1.4. Crime and Justice ** 1.5. Self-Defense * 2. Economic Liberty ** 2.1. Property and Contract ** 2.2. Environment and Resources ** 2.3. Government Finance and Spending ** 2.4. Money and Markets ** 2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor ** 2.6. Health Care ** 2.7. Education ** 2.8. Retirement and Income Security * 3. Securing Liberty ** 3.1. National Defense ** 3.2. Counter-Terrorism and the Bill of Rights ** 3.2. International Affairs ** 3.3. Immigration and Naturalization ** 3.4. Franchise and Discrimination ** 3.5. Representative Government == McLendon Draft Outline == * Individual Rights and Civil Order ** The US Constitution ** Freedom of Communication ** The Right to Keep and Bear Arms ** Property Rights ** The Right to Privacy ** Equal Protection * Trade and the Economy ** Regulation of Commerce ** Money & Fiat Currency ** Taxation ** Government Debt ** Corporate Welfare, Monopolies & Subsidies ** Public Services * Domestic Issues ** Social Security & Medicare ** Education ** Electoral Reform ** Eminent Domain ** Victimless Crime & The War on Drugs ** Natural Disasters & Crisis Management * Foreign Affairs ** National Sovereignty & International Relations ** Power to Negotiate & Approve Treaties ** National Defense & Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy ** Immigration == Haller Draft Outline == * I. Individual Rights and Civil Order ** 1. Freedom and Responsibility. (existing plank) ** 2. Freedom of Communication. (existing plank) ** 3. Right to Keep and Bear Arms. (existing plank) (Possibly expand to "Right to Self-Defense") ** 4. Freedom of Association. (new plank) ** 5. Right to Privacy. (existing plank, expanded to include elements from existing planks "Freedom of Religion" and "Reproductive Rights.") ** 6. Internal Security and Civil Liberties. (new plank, similar to deleted plank from 2004 platform.) ** 7. Property rights. (existing plank) ** 8. Justice for the individual. (new plank) ** 9. Sexuality and gender. (existing plank) * II. Trade and the Economy. ** 1. Government Finance. (new plank, will include sections on both taxation and debt) ** 2. Corporate Welfare, Monopolies, & Subsidies. (existing plank) ** 3. Public Services. (existing plank) * III. Domestic Issues. ** 1. Crime and Victimless Crime. (existing plank, expanded to include the War on Drugs.) ** 2. Education. (new plank) ** 3. Health care. (new plank) ** 4. Retirement security. (new plank) ** 5. Environmental issues. (new plank) * IV. Foreign Affairs. ** 1. National Defense. (new plank, will include rejection of conscription) ** 2. Immigration and trade. (expansion of existing "Immigration" plank) ** 3. International Affairs (new plank) * V. Omissions (Restore sentence from 2004 platform.) *************************** 116. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Scott?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; ** Capozzi?, Haller, Holtz, Scott * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; * is written to elicit agreement from the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; * is written to elicit agreement from 67% of the Denver delegates; * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Holtz, Scott? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; *************************** 117. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Scott?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; ** Capozzi?, Haller, Holtz, Scott * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Holtz, Scott? * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Duensing, Macia, Smitley * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Holtz, Scott * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Capozzi?, Holtz * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Holtz * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 118. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Scott?, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Scott? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; ** Haller, Holtz, Scott * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Duensing, Macia, Smitley * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Holtz, Scott * avoids extremist language that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Capozzi?, Holtz * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Holtz * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 119. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Scott, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Scott?, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Burden?, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Scott? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; ** Haller, Holtz, Scott * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Duensing, Macia, Smitley * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * seeks approvability in Denver by being significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Holtz, Scott * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Capozzi?, Holtz * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Holtz * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 120. row *************************** old_text: Bonnie Scott was Vice Chair of the New York LP from 2003 to 2006, its Secretary from 2002 to 2003, and an at-large member of the NY state committee a few times prior to that. She was the Libertarian National Committee's alternate representative for the Northeast region from 2002 to 2004. In 2002, Scott and [[User:GeorgePhillies|George Phillies]] created a Candidate Support CD-ROM that collected various publications in a toolkit distributed to candidates. Scott served on the 2002, 2004, and 2006 Platform Committees. In 2006, she worked closely with [[User:RobPower|Rob Power]] on the Sexuality and Gender plank, and organized the minority report on the Immigration plank. (View the [http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20060630.pdf 2006 Platform]) Scott has posted occasionally to [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LPplatform-discuss/msearch?query=Bonnie+Scott&submit=Search&charset=ISO-8859-1 LPplatform-discuss] since 2005. *************************** 121. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Burden?, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 10 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * is written to educate Libertarians about what they should believe; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * avoids policy coverage gaps likely to alienate single-issue Libertarians; ** Haller, Holtz * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Duensing, Macia, Smitley * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * believes the platform should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Holtz, Scott, Macia * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Capozzi?, Holtz * avoids bloating our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Holtz * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 122. row *************************** old_text: * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** [[Proposed Platform Outlines]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[Does ZAP Imply Anarchism?]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 123. row *************************** old_text: For drafting and publishing its proposals and supporting materials, PlatCom should use a collaborative-authoring facility that * is writable only to PlatCom members, * is readable and searchable by the public, * allows authoring in rich hypertext, * offers full revision controls and version comparison tools, * is reasonably likely to persist indefinitely, and * is controlled by people the PlatCom trusts to fairly enforce the above requirements. This wiki is an attempt to satisfy these requirements. *************************** 124. row *************************** old_text: * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** [[Proposed Platform Outlines]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] *** [[Abortion Plank]] ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[Does ZAP Imply Anarchism?]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 125. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Smitley * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** Haller, Holtz, Power? * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Capozzi, Holtz * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 126. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, McLendon?, Smitley * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Smitley * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Scott * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** Haller, Holtz, Power? * should not be silent on abortion ** Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** Dasbach, McLendon * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** McLendon, Roland * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Capozzi, Holtz * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** Dasbach, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Duensing, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Holtz * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing *************************** 127. row *************************** old_text: __NOTOC__

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

We support electoral systems that are more representative of the electorate at the federal, state and local levels. In order to grant voters a full range of choice in federal, state and local elections, we propose proportional voting systems with multi-member districts for legislative elections and instant runoff voting (IRV) for single-winner elections. We support the right to secede where: (1) secession is supported by a majority within the political unit, (2) the majority does not attempt suppression of the dissenting minority, and (3) the government of the new entity is at least as compatible with human freedom as that from which it seceded.
*************************** 128. row *************************** old_text: == The Silence Option == PlatCom members who believe the Platform should be silent on abortion include: Dasbach, McLendon. == Greatest Hits Draft (keeps 1996-2006 language) == Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. == Roland Draft == We support the right of a pregnant woman to terminate her pregnancy, but acknowledge that a state may require that this be done in a way that leaves the fetus alive if that is feasible and does not burden her right to eject the fetus from her body. == Oldies Draft (uses 1972 language) == We support the right to practice voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days. *************************** 129. row *************************** old_text: == The Silence Option == PlatCom members who believe the Platform should be silent on abortion include: Dasbach, McLendon. == Greatest Hits Draft (keeps 1996-2006 language) == Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. == Roland Draft == We support the right of a pregnant woman to terminate her pregnancy, but acknowledge that a state may require that this be done in a way that leaves the fetus alive if that is feasible and does not burden her right to eject the fetus from her body. == Holtz Draft == Most (but not all) Libertarians believe that a fetus starts deserving legal protection sometime after the first trimester and before birth. We support the right to terminate one's pregnancy during the first trimester. We do not oppose requirements that ending a pregnancy in the third trimester must leave a healthy fetus alive if that is feasible. We oppose government actions that compel or subsidize abortion, sterilization, or any other form of birth control. == Oldies Draft (uses 1972 language) == We support the right to practice voluntary birth control or voluntary termination of pregnancies during their first hundred days. *************************** 130. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon?, Smitley * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** Haller, Holtz, Power? * should not be silent on abortion ** Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** Haller, Roland * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** Holtz, Mattson * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 131. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** 8: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major schools of libertarianism without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 3: Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 3: Haller, Holtz, Power? * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 132. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 3: Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 2: Macia, Mattson * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 133. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is broad enough for all Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 3: Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 134. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show have libertarian-quadrant views; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon?, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 3: Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 135. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 3: Capozzi, Duensing, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 136. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to elicit agreement from at least the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 6: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to elicit agreement from at least the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to elicit agreement from the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 137. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to resonate with the views of the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 6: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing, Macia (tepid) *************************** 138. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to resonate with the views of the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 6: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * avoids echoing Republican-style rhetoric about the severity of the threat of Islamist terrorism; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, McLendon * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing?, Macia? * takes a stand against the threat to our liberty from Islamist terrorism ** 1: Aitken *************************** 139. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to resonate with the views of the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 7: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 6: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 6: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 5: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 4: Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 4: Dasbach, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * avoids echoing Republican-style rhetoric about the severity of the threat of Islamist terrorism; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, McLendon * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 3: Capozzi, Holtz, Roland * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 2: Haller, Roland * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing?, Macia? * promotes innovative voluntary ways to reduce pollution; ** 1: Adam Mayer * takes a stand against the threat to our liberty from Islamist terrorism ** 1: Aitken *************************** 140. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to resonate with the views of the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 8: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 7: Capozzi, Duensing, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 6: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 6: Capozzi, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 6: Capozzi, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 5: Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 5: Dasbach, Duensing, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * avoids echoing Republican-style rhetoric about the severity of the threat of Islamist terrorism; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, Holtz, Roland * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 3: Duensing, Haller, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing?, Macia? * promotes innovative voluntary ways to reduce pollution; ** 1: Adam Mayer * takes a stand against the threat to our liberty from Islamist terrorism ** 1: Aitken *************************** 141. row *************************** old_text: This page tries to collect all the various criteria that PlatCom members have suggested they would use to evaluate Platform proposals. When this list stabilizes, we can ask PlatCom members to assign a weighting to how important each criterion is to them, and thus get a sense of how the committee might work toward consensus. * avoids extremist/destinational language/rhetoric that makes our party and candidates easy to ridicule; ** 11: Aitken, Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Roland, Smitley * starts with a clean sheet of paper (i.e. not necessarily keeping any of the 15 current planks) ** 10: Aitken?, Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Roland, Smitley * is written to resonate with the views of the 16% to 20% of voters who polls show fall into the libertarian quadrant; ** 9: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach?, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Smitley * focuses on 5 to 15 issues important to voters in the next election cycle or two; ** 8: Aitken?, Capozzi?, Dasbach, Duensing, Macia, Mayer?, Roland?, Smitley * is ideologically broad enough for the vast majority of Libertarians to stand on comfortably; ** 8: Burden?, Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * focuses on policy initiatives that are feasible in the next 5 to 15 years; ** 7: Aitken, Capozzi?, Dasbach?, Duensing, Macia, Roland, Smitley * highlights the idea of decentralizing/defederalizing most federal programs ** 7: Capozzi (tepid), Dasbach, Haller, Holtz, Macia, McLendon, Roland * helps educate Libertarians in developing a comprehensive Libertarian philosophy; ** 7: Capozzi, Duensing, Haller, Holtz, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * should be significantly shorter than recent Platforms; ** 7: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon, Scott * tries to state our positions in positive language about what we support, rather than in negative language about what we oppose; ** 7: Capozzi, Duensing, Haller, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, McLendon * avoids laundry lists about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 6: Capozzi, Duensing, Holtz, Macia, Mattson, Scott * makes destination and transition implicit in broad principles explaining what the Bylaws mean by "a libertarian direction" in public policy; ** 5: Burden, Capozzi, Dasbach, Holtz, Mattson * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 34% of voters; ** 5: Capozzi, Duensing, Macia, Mattson, Smitley? * consistent with the major [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism schools of libertarianism] without endorsing one of them as best; ** 5: Capozzi, Dasbach, Duensing, Holtz, Mattson * is silent on issues on which more than 10% - 20% of Denver delegates would vehemently disagree; ** 5: Dasbach, Duensing, Mattson, Macia, McLendon * has comprehensiveness approaching the pre-Portland Platform ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, Scott * describes and advocates a society without any government coercion whatsoever; ** 4: Haller, Power, Straus, Sundwall? * avoids expanding our the Platform's description of our common ground with issue complaints, theoretical justifications, and marketing promises; ** 4: Capozzi, Holtz, Macia, Mattson * avoids policy coverage gaps (e.g. abortion, RTKBA, GLBQT) that wouuld likely alienate Libertarian interest groups; ** 4: Haller, Holtz, Macia? Power? * explains the justification and benefits of our positions in a way the average voter can understand; ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, McLendon, Smitley * avoids echoing Republican-style rhetoric about the severity of the threat of Islamist terrorism; ** 4: Capozzi, Haller, Holtz, McLendon * should not be silent on abortion ** 4: Capozzi, Duensing, Holtz, Roland * includes formal sections for both ideal destination and transitional actions; ** 3: Haller, Mayer?, McLendon * should be silent on abortion ** 3: Dasbach, Mattson, McLendon * confines itself to policy initiatives that are consistent with the Constitution (as properly interpreted) that our candidates are required to swear to uphold; ** 3: Macia, McLendon, Roland * includes specificity about what legislation, agencies, and court decisions we oppose; ** 3: Duensing, Haller, Roland * avoids new language that could attract disagreement or quibbling from delegates; ** 2: Holtz, Mattson * is written to resonate with the views of the most liberty-friendly 51% of voters; ** 2: Duensing?, Macia? * promotes innovative voluntary ways to reduce pollution; ** 1: Adam Mayer * takes a stand against the threat to our liberty from Islamist terrorism ** 1: Aitken *************************** 142. row *************************** old_text: == McLendon Draft == The Issue: The scope of government at all levels -- federal, state & local -- has grown far beyond what is authorized by the US Constitution, and by many state Constitutions. Consequently, taxation at all levels has expanded, and now imposes a crushing burden on the US taxpayer. Collection of income taxes is highly invasive, and leads to loss of privacy. The Principle: The primacy of self ownership is the basis for property rights, and leads to a ranking of the legitimacy of various forms of taxation. Thus, individual income taxes are more onerous than consumption taxes, tariffs, and excise taxes charged against fouling or depletion of shared natural resources. Citizens should therefore have sole ownership claim to all the time that constitutes their lives, and to the fruits of their labor. To the extent taxes are necessary and proper to accomplish authorized functions of government, such functions should be funded by taxes that do not invade individuals' privacy or self-ownership. Solutions: Our vision is to reduce the size & scope of government, so that only minimal taxes are required to fund legitimate government functions. Such minimal taxes should be collected in a non-intrusive manner, so privacy is protected as an unalienable right. Many government functions could be privatized, so user fees could frequently replace taxation. Transitional Action: We support a constitutional amendment to fully eliminate all taxation on individual incomes. As unauthorized functions of the federal government are eliminated, subsequent cost savings would be applied to reduction of taxes, and the federal debt. == Holtz Draft == The Issue: Government spending at all levels now absorbs nearly a third of America's economic production, compared to under a tenth as recently as the 1920's. At the federal level alone, the tax code in 2004 was 3,457 pages (plus 13,458 pages of IRS regulations), compared to 94 pages in 1928. People accused of violating tax rules are considered guilty until proven innocent, and ignorance of one of these 16,915 pages is not considered a valid defense. Taxation in America is monumentally unjust and monumentally inefficient. The Principle: It is unjust to tax people in order to finance benefits for other people. We oppose any such tax, as distinct from taxes that serve as fees for pollution, consumption of unowned resources, or government services not yet privatized. The Solution: We favor continuously reducing taxes as the functions of government are privatized or made voluntary. We call for the eventual abolition of all taxation on wages, interest, dividends, and profits; on the sale of goods and services; and on real estate improvements. Transitional Action: If it will help speed the repeal of the above taxes while the functions of government they finance are being privatized, we support their replacement with 1) taxes on pollution based on the damage it causes, and 2) taxes on that part of land rent created by government services not yet privatized. However, we oppose any tax reform that lacks strict safeguards ensuring it will significantly reduce America's total tax burden. == Draft submitted by geolibertarian economist Fred Foldvary == Given that an imposed government exists and obtains revenue, these are the sources proposed by the Libertarian Party, as being the least worst for liberty and economic well being: 1. Voluntary user fees, for services provided by government, when feasible. Proposing such fees does not imply that the LP favors government provision, but only that given such provision, user fees are the least worst way to finance services with specific beneficiaries. 2. Pollution levies based on the damage caused by the emissions. Pollution is tresspass and an invasion of the property of others, and the levy is compensation for damages. 3. Assessments based on the value of land, as government works and services increase land value, and so long as these are provided and funded by government, a levy based on the site value returns to government that land value and rent added by the services. Proposing this revenue source does not imply that the LP favors government provision, only that given such provision, a charge on the generated land value and rent is less unjust and less economically damaging than general taxes on income and sales. 4. Tolls on highways and streets just high enough to prevent congestion. Such tolls would be charge by private providers, and make the use of streets and highways more efficient. All taxes other than the above should be abolished, in particular all taxes on wages, interest, dividends, and profits; all taxes on the sale of goods and services; and taxes on buildings and other real estate improvements. == Dovner Draft == Libertarians believe taxation is wrong because it coercively takes money from people who don't want a particular service, and is often put to use to fund programs which the taxpayer opposes, such as wars, and because it burdens productivity and contributes to economic stagnation. Wherever taxation cannot be eliminated, it should be continually reduced and kept to a minimum. The most odious of taxes is the income tax and we call for it to be phased out. *************************** 143. row *************************** old_text: * [[Convention Rules governing the Platform]] * The members of the [[2008 Platform Committee]] * Perspectives on Platform Purpose ** [[Platform Criteria]] ** [[Legislative Program]] * Platform proposals by PlatCom members ** [[Proposed Platform Outlines]] ** Proposed Platform Rewrites *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Platform]] *** [[Greatest Hits Remix Platform]] ** Proposed Planks *** [[Taxation Plank]] *** [[Representative Government Plank]] *** [[Healthcare Plank]] *** [[Immigration Plank]] *** [[Foreign Policy Plank]] *** [[Abortion Plank]] ** Draft Committee Reports *** [[Greatest Hits Draft Report]] * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Platforms/ Archive] of the 1972 and 1990 - 2006 LP Platforms * [http://marketliberal.org/LP/Conventions/ Minutes] of the Platform floor proceedings of the 1993 - 2006 LP Conventions * Debating Points ** [[Uses Of The LP Platform To Attack The LP]] ** [[Does ZAP Imply Anarchism?]] * State LP Platforms * Platforms of other parties * Libertarian public policy resources *************************** 144. row *************************** old_text: __NOTOC__

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

We support the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. We favor the freedom and responsibility of adults to decide what sensations and substances they knowingly and voluntarily consume. We favor the freedom of association among private parties to negotiate how they use information voluntarily disclosed to each other.

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on both sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children. We oppose all coercive measures for population control.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

We favor the freedom of all adults to engage in any consensual amorous or reproductive behavior or relationship that does not violate the rights of others. Most (but not all) Libertarians believe that a fetus starts deserving legal protection sometime after the first trimester and before birth. We support the right to terminate one's pregnancy during the first trimester. We do not oppose requirements that ending a pregnancy in the third trimester must leave a healthy fetus alive if that is feasible. We oppose government actions that compel or subsidize abortion, sterilization, or any other form of birth control. We oppose government actions that either compel or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

We favor the freedom of all adults to engage in any consensual amorous or reproductive behavior or relationship that does not violate the rights of others. Most (but not all) Libertarians believe that a fetus starts deserving legal protection sometime after the first trimester and before birth. We support the right to terminate one's pregnancy during the first trimester. We do not oppose requirements that ending a pregnancy in the third trimester must leave a healthy fetus alive if that is feasible. We oppose government actions that compel, subsidize, or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

We favor the freedom of all adults to engage in any consensual amorous or reproductive behavior or relationship that does not violate the rights of others. Most (but not all) Libertarians believe that a fetus starts deserving legal protection sometime after the first trimester and before birth. We support the right to terminate one's pregnancy during the first trimester. We do not oppose requirements that ending a pregnancy in the third trimester must leave a healthy fetus alive if that is feasible. We oppose government actions that compel, subsidize, or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor

2.6. Health Care and Education

2.7. Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. The proper source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.

3. Securing Liberty

3.1. National Defense

3.2. International Affairs

3.3. Immigration and Naturalization

3.4. Franchise and Discrimination

3.5. Representative Government

1. Personal Liberty

1.1. Expression and Communication

1.2. Personal and Bodily Privacy

1.3. Sexuality and Reproduction

We favor the freedom of all adults to engage in any consensual amorous or reproductive behavior or relationship that does not violate the rights of others. Most (but not all) Libertarians believe that a fetus starts deserving legal protection sometime after the first trimester and before birth. We support the right to terminate one's pregnancy during the first trimester. We do not oppose requirements that ending a pregnancy in the third trimester must leave a healthy fetus alive if that is feasible. We oppose government actions that compel, subsidize, or prohibit abortion, sterilization or any other form of birth control. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs, without interference by government -- unless they are abusing the children.

1.4. Crime and Justice

1.5. Self-Defense

2. Economic Liberty

2.1. Property and Contract

2.2. Environment and Resources

2.3. Government Finance and Spending

2.4. Money and Markets

We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. Regulation of financial and capital markets should be limited to prohibition of force and fraud.

2.5. Monopolies, Corporations, and Labor