Hornberger enters Libertarian POTUS race (video)

Candidates Vie to Represent the Libertarian Wing of the Libertarian Party – Reason.com - Matt Welch:

November 7, 2019- "[T]his past weekend at the South Carolina Libertarian Party state convention ... Jacob Hornberger, the 69-year-old founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation, formally announced his candidacy for president, immediately becoming one of the most well-known of the dozen or so names working actively to take the baton from two-time nominee Gary Johnson....

"Hornberger, the third-place finisher in the 2000 Libertarian presidential race, portrays his candidacy as a way for the party to return to principle, an implicit critique of nominating former Republican elected officials in the past three cycles.... Hornberger, notably, is a longtime antiwar activist."

Read more: https://reason.com/2019/11/07/candidates-vie-to-represent-the-libertarian-wing-of-the-libertarian-party/
'via Blog this'

New York City adopts ranked-choice voting

Ranked-Choice Voting, Once Seen as a Novelty, Gains Ground Nationally | Fortune - Mike Hofman:

November 6, 2019 - "Voters in New York City have revised the city charter to adopt ranked-choice voting, a new way of deciding who has won an election that is steadily gaining in popularity across the country....

"Ranked-choice voting allows voters to select a favorite candidate, and then a second-favorite candidate, and so on. In New York City, the plan calls for allowing residents to rank their top five choices. If no candidate achieves a majority of the vote after the first round of counting, first-place votes for candidates at the bottom of the heap are set aside and those voters’ second-place votes are distributed among the top candidates, and so on, until a candidate achieves a majority....

"[T]he system reduces the need for arduous runoff elections, and ... it is particularly well-suited for municipal elections in which a diverse, multi-candidate field — often from within a single political party — results in a narrow win for a candidate with a strong base of support in, say, a particular neighborhood, but sometimes little appeal beyond that base....

“'First across the post' races also create weird, specific tensions with third-party options. On the one hand, a third-party candidate who has a passionate following nevertheless has a hard time breaking through because some group of voters will opt for a less dynamic but more 'electable' candidate — the lesser-of-two-evils approach to democracy that can feel so demoralizing. On the other hand, a third-party campaign can be used as a spoiler in a tight race, taking just enough votes away from a candidate whose views are broadly preferred by a slim majority of the electorate.

"In the close Kentucky governor’s race, for example, a third-party Libertarian Party candidate won 28,000 votes, about 23,000 votes more than the apparent, 5,000-vote margin of victory of Democrat Andy Beshear over Republican Matt Bevin. It’s impossible to know which alternative those Libertarian voters would have picked as a second choice, but it is well within the realm of possibility that they would have given Bevin the slim margin he needed to win a second term....

"New York City joins 20 other cities nationwide in adopting ranked-choice voting—many of them liberal bastions such as San Francisco, Berkley, and Oakland, Calif.; Santa Fe, N.M.; Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn.; and Cambridge, Mass.

"Maine is also a laboratory for ranked-choice voting, having implemented it by voter initiative in 2016 for federal elections. Last year, the state’s hotly-contested second congressional district provided a test case in ranked-choice voting outcomes. The incumbent Republican congressman, Bruce Poliquin ... filed a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of ranked-choice voting, ... asking the courts to order a do-over race. A federal judge who had been appointed to the bench by President Trump flatly rejected Poliquin’s argument and call for a new election."

Read more: https://fortune.com/2019/11/06/new-york-ranked-choice-voting-nyc/
'via Blog this'

Russian Libertarian Party leader resigns

Rising Russian political star leaves Libertarian Party leadership — Meduza:

November 4, 2019 - "Mikhail Svetov, who has become the public face of Russia’s Libertarian Party in recent months, has announced his departure from the party’s federal board. 'I’ve stepped down from my position on the federal committee of the LPR [Libertarian Party of Russia],' Svetov tweeted, adding, 'I haven’t left the party, don’t worry ^_^ But I’ll be taking a break to work on my book and other projects.'

"While the Libertarian Party is not officially registered as a political party in Russia, it still served as the central organizing body for the wave of opposition protests that swept Moscow in the summer of 2019. At one point, Svetov was jailed after he led negotiations with Moscow City Hall in an attempt to obtain a permit for one of the protests. His rise to public recognition has accompanied a new wave of interest in libertarianism in the former Soviet Union."

https://meduza.io/en/news/2019/11/04/rising-russian-political-star-leaves-libertarian-party-leadership
'via Blog this'

No compensation due for home cops destroyed, US court rules

Federal Court Rules there is no Taking if the Police Destroy an Innocent Person's House During a Law Enforcement Operation - Ilya Somin, Volokh Conspiracy, Reason.com:

October 31, 2019 - "Earlier this week, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment does not require the government to compensate an innocent man for the destruction of his house during a police operation:

When they were finished, it looked as though the Greenwood Village, Colo., police had blasted rockets through the house ... where an armed Walmart shoplifting suspect randomly barricaded himself after fleeing the store.... For 19 hours, the suspect holed up in a bathroom as a SWAT team fired gas munition and 40-millimeter rounds through the windows, drove an armored vehicle through the doors, tossed flash-bang grenades inside and used explosives to blow out the walls.... [T]he home was utterly destroyed, eventually condemned by the City of Greenwood Village....

"The city refused to compensate the Lech family for their losses but offered $5,000 in temporary rental assistance and for the insurance deductible....

"The Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment requires the government to pay 'just compensation' to property owners any time their land or other property is 'taken' by the state. That includes many situations where the government destroys or damages the property in question, rather than appropriates it for its own use.... As far back as 1872, the Court ruled that 'where real estate is actually invaded by superinduced additions of water, earth, sand, or other material ... so as to effectually destroy or impair its usefulness, it is a taking, within the meaning of the Constitution'....

"Why then, did the court rule that no taking had occurred, thereby denying the Lech family any right to compensation? Because the destruction of the house occurred in the course of a law enforcement operation intended to promote 'the safety of the public'.... The court is right to point out that this distinction between  the 'police power' and eminent domain has been adopted in many ... previous takings decisions.... But the rule still makes no sense, and should be done away with....

"The fact that the 'police power' may have been involved does not normally immunize the government from takings liability.... Outside the context of law-enforcement operations, the fact that the government was trying to promote public safety does not create blanket immunity from having to compensate innocent owners whose property is taken or destroyed in the process. There is no good reason to exempt law-enforcement operations from takings liability of the same kind that applies to other government actions that might enhance public safety....

"If the use of various destructive tactics pays large dividends for public safety, then the government can continue using them, secure in the knowledge that the compensation paid was well worth the price. And it is only proper that the costs be borne by the general public  whose safety these operations protect, not by innocent owners.... If, on the other hand, authorities find that they routinely end up paying compensation that far exceeds any plausible benefit arising from the use of such aggressive tactics, then they would be well-advised to issue stricter guidelines for the use of force by their officers. Perhaps they shouldn't seize and destroy as much property as they currently do....

"The Supreme Court would do well to overrule this case and make clear that the Takings Clause protects innocent owners whose property is destroyed during the course of law enforcement operations. Unfortunately, I am far from optimistic that will actually happen."

Rand Paul makes The Case against Socialism

PYE: Rand Paul Makes The Case Against Socialism | The Daily Caller - Jason Pye:

October 17, 2019 - "As self-proclaimed 'democratic socialists' continue to rant and rave against capitalism, ... there still remain dedicated men and women willing to wade into the intellectual fog-of-war that is American politics and stand resolutely for ... our nation’s founding principles. Chief among these champions for liberty is Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

"In his latest book, The Case Against Socialism, Paul ... directly challenges proponents of new-wave socialism like Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). What’s more, he unabashedly demolishes the Oliver Stone-esque perception that socialism 'really isn’t that bad.'

"Before even concluding the introduction, Paul jumps straight to the heart of the matter, informing the reader that '[t]his is the story of an evil well documented and yet somehow still enticing … of socialism in all its drab and dreary machinelike destruction of individual thought, creativity, and ambition.... This is the story of socialism in all its violence, bloodshed, and tyranny. It is a cautionary tale of how America has so far eluded the siren call of something for nothing … but also of how close we still are to succumbing to socialism'....

"Paul wastes no time in attacking the misinformed “Hollywood socialists” who praise the likes of Hugo Chavez, Nicolás Maduro, and Fidel Castro. He reminds us that, not very long ago, important American figures like Noam Chomsky and then-Representative Bernie Sanders praised the election of Hugo Chavez, pointing to poverty statistics as evidence of socialism’s virtue....

"Yet, as history has consistently proven time and time again, the fruits of socialism quickly give way to oppressive violence, food shortages, and utter devastation.... [I]n the words of Venezuelan professor Daniel Lahoud: 'I have known the reality of the failure of socialism in my own flesh. And as I live in Venezuela, I want to show that this is an absolute failure always and everywhere.'

"Simply pointing out the failures of despotic socialist regimes is not sufficient for Paul to fully discredit socialism. For this, he addresses the common misconception of Scandinavian socialism. Countries like Denmark, Sweden, and Norway are often used as props that American socialists can point to as evidence of socialism’s success.... So strong is this misconception that the Prime Minister of Denmark reprimanded Sanders 'and asked him to stop insulting his country as "socialist"'....

"Socialism is a scourge on the human condition. Time and time again, elites and intellectuals have sought to remold society only to fail miserably. What’s more, the centralized planning of men like Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot resulted in some of the worst atrocities in human history. Yet, democratic socialists in Congress continue to believe that things will be different this time. This time socialism will work. Such a belief is not only foolhardy and ill-informed but downright dangerous....

"For this reason, it is important that ... we support those who are willing to stick up for the truth of history against the revisionism of political elites. Paul is ... and I am proud to consider him such a strong ally in the battle against socialism."

Read more: https://dailycaller.com/2019/10/17/pye-paul-case-socialism/
'via Blog this'

2019 election was deja vu for LP of Canada

by Jean-Serge Brisson 

Brisson, Libertarian Party of Canada leader (2000-2008), responds to 71 Republic's recent hatchet job on the Party:

You accuse the Libertarian Party of Canada of failing to get any kind of traction in this country. I don't think that you are well versed on the history of how libertarianism has developed and is developing in Canada.

Have you ever heard of a man named Preston Manning? Manning arrived on the scene in 1987 with a Western Canada-based political party called the Reform Party, notable for adopting more of the libertarian playbook than any other Canadian political party had in the past (other than the Libertarian Party itself). His Reform Party lasted 13 years, only to amalgamate in 2000 with the Progressive Conservatives to become the Conservative Party of Canada.

Manning was well known in the political arena. When he popped onto the scene we lost members and organizers to him. After that exodus, the Libertarian Party of Canada didn't make much noise for many years and in 1996 even lost its official party registration. When the law was changed in 2004, we were able to get re-registered and we immediately started running candidates again.

Rising from the ashes in a few years, we made headway in a manner that we had never known before. In 2018, in the province (like an American 'state') of Ontario, the provincial party reached a level of success unprecedented for any libertarian party in Canada. We came close to achieving what is called a full slate, which is a candidate in every constituency.

Also in 2018 that same federal Conservative Party had a leadership race, and a charismatic Member of Parliament, Maxime Bernier, ran on a libertarian platform. He lost after 13 ballots by less than half a percent. His frustration led him to form his own party, the "Peoples Party of Canada," in 2019. What happened then? The same thing that had happened 3 decades prior when Manning came on the scene. We had another exodus of people who thought that a charismatic individual could bring them victory at the polls. Deja vu.

Nothing could have been further from the truth. Bernier's sole intent was to get revenge against his leadership rival. But Bernier had a very libertarian agenda at first. Thus many of the LPoC executives and many other members went to support what they thought was going to be a quicker route to power.

It didn't happen. The Peoples Party garnished less than 300,000 votes, hardly enough to make a dent in the Canadian political structure. Bernier didn't hurt his rival, but did hurt us. Volunteers, donors, resources, and voters that would normally have come to us, went to Bernier at the last minute.

It is actually because the libertarian idea was catching on that these two upstarts were able to get off the ground so well. To have two parties within 3 decades start up with "Messiahs," draining and crippling the Libertarian party infrastructure, does not show lack of traction. It was the traction we had gained that caused the upstarts to do so well, but they had no stamina to maintain their drive.

The Libertarian Party of Canada got a punch that knocked us to the floor in this election. But unlike the last time, we were not knocked out. On the contrary, we are more like a boxer who is determined to see this fight to the end, no matter who stands in front of us. Because whether you realize it or not, the libertarian movement now is stronger in Canada than ever before.

When I ran in my first federal election, I was an unknown as a libertarian. But today, the word "libertarian" is not an unknown quantity anymore. It is well understood that it stands for less government. That is the result of many individuals in Canada working hard at getting our name and ideas into the media and also in front of politicians and voters.

Just like the Reform Party, Bernier's Peoples Party will be folding soon. Where do you think its members and organizers will turn to look for a political home?

Hillary Clinton is a 'Trump asset' says Amash

Rep. Justin Amash labels Hillary Clinton a 'Donald Trump asset' over accusations about Gabbard - Washington Times:

October 19, 2019 - "Hillary Clinton is boosting President Trump’s voter base by suggesting Russia is rooting for Rep. Tulsi Gabbard to win the White House, Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan ... stated ... on Twitter after Mrs. Clinton referred to Ms. Gabbard, a Hawaii Democrat seeking her party’s presidential nomination, as a 'Russian asset.'

“'The thing we know for sure is that Hillary Clinton is a Donald Trump asset,' Mr. Amash wrote on Twitter. 'Hillary does — and did — drive many people into the arms of Donald Trump.... Her attack on Tulsi does likewise.'

"Mrs. Clinton, the former Democratic presidential nominee who lost to Mr. Trump in 2016, caused an uproar after suggesting in an interview released this week that Russia is 'grooming' the Hawaii congresswoman and current White House hopeful to drop her bid for the party’s nomination and instead run in 2020 as a third-party candidate. 'She is a favorite of the Russians,' Mrs. Clinton said without mentioning Ms. Gabbard by name.

"Ms. Gabbard fired back Friday, saying she would not run as a third-party candidate and blasting Mrs. Clinton as 'the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party.' Her campaign has since challenged Mrs. Clinton to enter the Democratic primary....

"Amash was first elected to Congress in 2010 and is currently serving his fifth term representing Michigan’s Third Congressional District, which includes Grand Rapids, the state’s second-largest city. He left the GOP in July, weeks after becoming the first Republican member of Congress to publicly accuse Mr. Trump of committing 'impeachable conduct.' Democrats have since initiated impeachment proceedings against the president.

"The U.S. intelligence community has assessed that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 race using a range of tactics meant to undermine public faith in the democratic process, denigrate Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and harm her electability. The Department of Justice has since filed criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals implicated in the effort, several accused of meddling in the race on social media in part by posting content encouraging American users to vote for a third-party presidential candidate."

Read more: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/oct/19/rep-justin-amash-labels-hillary-clinton-a-donald-t/
'via Blog this'