Libertarian Michael Munger comments on insurance and health care costs

Creating competition and offering the right incentives

newsobserver.com

DURHAM -- I hear people complain they can't afford insurance. They need to realize that the real problem is they can't afford health care.

The U.S. has the world's most expensive health care, $8,000 per person per year, eating up 16 percent of our GDP. There are many ways of paying these costs, ranging from private insurance such as Blue Cross to public insurance such as Medicare. Many people pay out of their pockets; local and state taxpayers pick up the rest.

Full article.

The Fear of Violence: Governments vs. Liberty

Deficits are Bad, but the Real Problem is Spending

Hannity Calls Ron Paul Supporters Nuts, Extremists, says Military Complex Gives Us Freedom of Speech

by Martin Hill

In response to the previous article Sean Hannity continues demonization of Ron Paul, calling his supporters crazy, youtube poster SaveOurSovereignty3 has posted the full audio of the Ron Paul caller, George from Chicago, who managed to orchestrate a skillful masterpiece in calling Hannity out for being a "spokesman for the merchants of death." Hannity had called Ron Paul nuts a few weeks ago while interviewing Chuck Norris, and had smeared Ron Paul continuously during the 2008 presidential campaign, claiming that the 9/11 Commission report and CIA admissions were "conspiracy theories."

Hannity began the Monday, December 14th, 2009 segment by reading an article about a bill sponsored by Ron Paul, not missing a chance to denigrate Congressman Paul and his "followers":

Hannity: "'A Republican and Democrat have put forward legislation that would rescind the automatic pay increase lawmakers are slated to recieve in 2011.' Ron Paul – yes – and by the way some of Ron Paul's followers are nuts but Ron Paul I like him, I like him a lot of the times. We got George in Chicago WLS, George hi."

George: "Hi Sean, maybe President Obama should stuff you into a bunker and call you an ememy combatant..." Sean laughs and they then proceed to have a discussion about Khalid Sheik Mohammed, with the caller continuing "if you concede that the federal government can hold whomever they want then you're conceding that President Obama can hold you and [Mark] Levin and throw you guys in a bunker and call you enemy combatants." Read More @ Lew Rockwell

by William Redpath

(originally published in the December 2009 issue of LP News)

I can’t know what each of you thought when you read the headline above, but probably the most charitable thought was “Poor Bill Redpath. He almost made it to the end of his second term as Chair before he cracked up.”

Please be assured that I don’t really mean it. But, until I get a law passed making it illegal to skip past the Chairman’s column when reading LP News, kindly forgive my grabbing your attention by stooping to headlines that would make the editors of the late Weekly World News proud.

But, there is a point to it.

We’ve all heard it many times. “I can’t (sign your petition/vote for you/all of the above), because you’ll take votes from Republicans and then The Really Bad People will win.”

In 2008, when I was the Libertarian candidate for US Senate in Virginia, we had to circulate separate petitions for the Libertarian presidential ticket and me. Many people gladly signed my petition (getting my charm tank topped off beforehand helped, I guess), but when it came to signing for the LP presidential ticket, “Nooooooooo! Barr will screw things up for John McCain!”

Let’s see how that philosophy has worked out for those people.

I just read the recently published Recarving Rushmore, written by Ivan Eland of the small-l libertarian Independent Institute, in which he ranks forty presidents (too early in Obama’s presidency/Cleveland served twice/Garfield and William Henry Harrison both served less than a year) on a “PP&L (Peace, Prosperity & Liberty) scale.”

What appeared to chafe Dr. Eland was the tendency of historians to judge presidents as “great,” or not so, based on the times in which they served, not the actual decisions made by them when they were President. Dr. Eland’s goal is to judge presidents on the extent to which their actual policy decisions contributed to Peace, Prosperity & Liberty for the United States.

As a libertarian, Dr. Eland does not play favorites. Thomas Jefferson is rated a woeful 26th by Eland, who calls TJ “A Hypocrite on Limited Government.” I have not asked Dr. Eland if he thinks we should save our rotten tomaters for whomever next sings that “Thomas Jefferson” song at an LP convention (non-old-timers may not remember this).

Surprisingly, in Dr. Eland’s judgment, the best president in American history was John Tyler (vetoed the revival of the national bank/ended the worst Indian war in US history/responded with restraint to Dorr’s Rebellion in Rhode Island/ditto with a border dispute between Maine and New Brunswick/opposed big government in fact and not just rhetoric), while the second best was Grover Cleveland, a fat guy who liked slim government. The worst president (#40) in his view was Woodrow Wilson (got the US into World War I/post-war policies set the table for World War II/plenty more, but ain’t that enough?).

But, what really struck me, as I reviewed Dr. Eland’s presidential rankings, was how low recent Republican presidents were on his PP&L scale. I know some people will dispute this, but Eland ranks Ronald Reagan as #34 (landing him in Eland’s “Bad President” category), and he has sensible reasons. Eland claims that the Iran/Contra scandal was worse than Watergate, Reagan did not reduce big government, started “surreptitiously” raising taxes soon after his 1981 tax cuts were enacted, and helped keep Social Security limping along in 1983 (with tax increases, of course) when he could have worked to privatize it. Dr. Eland also thinks Reagan’s role in ending the Cold War was overblown, and that the Soviet Union failed largely on its own. Other low recent Republican president rankings (W. at #36, H. W. at #33 and Nixon at #30) are no surprise.

What is somewhat surprising is that Dr. Eland ranks Jimmy Carter as “The Best Modern President” at #8 (restrained foreign policy/evenhanded Middle East policy/deregulated industries/appointed Paul Volcker to the Fed, who then slayed inflation). Eland even ranked Bill Clinton as the 11th best president on his PP&L scale, so he thinks that over the last forty years, Democratic presidents have actually been more libertarian than Republican presidents.

According to Dr. Eland, to find a Republican president who ranks higher in his PP&L rankings than Jimmy Carter, one must go all the way back to Warren Harding. And, to write that pains me; the Marion Harding Presidents (what else would their nickname be?) were rivals with my Findlay Trojans in the Buckeye Conference when I was in high school.

What I took away from Dr. Eland’s enlightening book was that the frequently heard advice to libertarians and supporters of small government to not “waste their vote,” and to hold their nose and vote Republican, makes about as much sense as the headline at the beginning of this column. The people who have done that over the last several decades need to look around and observe what that admonition has wrought.

Bill Redpath is the Chairman of the Libertarian National Committee

Federal Drug Policy: Time to Shift Priorities

CAPITOL HILL BRIEFING
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
12:00 PM (Lunch Included)

Featuring Hon. Bob Barr, Liberty Strategies; Pat Nolan, Vice President, Prison Fellowship; and Tim Lynch, Director of the Cato Institute's Project on Criminal Justice.

B-339 Rayburn House Office Building

President Obama's new drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske, says he wants to banish the idea of a "war on drugs" because the federal government should not be "at war with the people of this country." An important and welcome announcement, to be sure, but what government policies will be actually adjusted, canceled, or reversed? At a minimum, the time is right to reverse the militarization of law enforcement, abolish mandatory minimum sentencing, and stop federal meddling in the state referendum and initiative process. Join us for a wide-ranging discussion regarding new directions for federal drug policy.

Cato events on Capitol Hill are free of charge and open to the public. To register for this event, please fill out the form below and click submit or email events@cato.org, fax (202) 371-0841, or call (202) 789-5229 by 12:00 PM, Monday, July 6, 2009. News media inquiries only (no registrations), please call (202) 789-5200.

Press Release: Libertarians reach out to gay, lesbian Democrats picketing DNC fundraiser

For Immediate Release
Friday, June 26, 2009

LGBT Democrats express outrage over Obama administration defense of DOMA

WASHINGTON -- Representatives from America’s third-largest party greeted Democrats protesting the Obama administration’s legal arguments defending the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) outside a Thursday Democratic National Committee fundraiser aimed at gay and lesbian donors, and shared with them information on the Libertarian Party’s advocacy for marriage equality.

“The Obama administration extends their hand for donations from the LGBT community, and then slaps us in the face with the other hand with the defense of DOMA,” said Catherine Sumner, Libertarian National Committee Gay and Lesbian Policy Adviser.

“Libertarians agree that government should stay out of the marriage issue, and that DOMA should be repealed,” said Sumner. “We welcome Democrats who agree with us to join the only party that will defend their rights, the Libertarians.”

The activists voiced their disappointment over a legal brief filed by the Obama administration asking a federal court to uphold the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which allows states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages. Standing outside the Madarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C., which hosted a DNC fundraiser featuring Vice-President Joe Biden aimed at collecting funds from gay and lesbian donors, the protestors voiced their displeasure.

While the Obama administration has voiced its opposition to marriage equality and support for DOMA, and the DNC refuses to call on the administration to change its policy, Libertarians have no qualms about their support for marriage equality.

“White House lawyers take over two pages of documentation, citing case law, purposely not citing Loving vs. Virginia, that in so many words, indicates that gay marriage is not natural and thereby not an inherent constitutional right,” said Sumner.

For more information on this issue, or to arrange an interview with the Libertarian Party, please call Director of Communications Donny Ferguson at 703-200-3669 or 202-333-0008, x. 225, or email Donny.Ferguson@lp.org.

The Libertarian Party is America's third-largest political party, founded in 1971 as an alternative to the two main political parties. You can find more information on the Libertarian Party by visiting http://www.LP.org. The Libertarian Party proudly stands for smaller government, lower taxes and more freedom.

Who are 'the uninsured?'

posted by Donny Ferguson on Jun 25, 2009

Today's Washington Times editorial takes an eye-opening look into the Obama insinuation that America's 45 million uninsured are middle-class families who simply can't get health insurance unless Congress gives in to his proposed government takeover of health care.

Click here to read the editorial, or pick up a copy of the Times if you live in the metro D.C. area. The Times writes, in part:

This leads us to ask: Who are the uninsured? In 2006, the Census Bureau used a Department of Labor survey to estimate that there were 46.6 million uninsured people -- about 15.5 percent of the population.

Fourteen million of the 47 million are already eligible for government insurance, Medicaid, but have not signed up. (Pre-existing conditions do not exclude someone from joining Medicaid.) Those 14 million have not signed up because they do not want to pay the small monthly premium that Medicare charges. As a result, many who are eligible for Medicaid wait until they need care before they register. They are effectively insured at all times even when they are not formally enrolled in the program.

What about the uninsured who are not poor enough to qualify for Medicaid? Most are not in dire financial straits. After all, 27 million of the uninsured have personal incomes of more than $50,000.

True, there is a group of people who are borderline poor but not eligible for Medicaid, but the group is relatively small and many (if not most) of those people are illegal immigrants. Unfortunately, government surveys never ask respondents if they are legally in the United States.

If you exclude those who are essentially covered by Medicaid, nearly 70 percent of the remaining uninsured lack insurance for less than four months. Many of those temporarily uninsured are simply switching jobs and waiting for human resources departments to process their paperwork. In addition, two-thirds of the uninsured are between 18 and 34; these folks, on average, have few health problems and are uninsured by choice.

The truly uninsured are, thus, largely young people who can afford insurance but who make the decision to temporarily go without it as they move between jobs. This tends to be for very short periods of time.