Wednesday, December 30, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #42 “Liberty and Criminal Justice”

05.david.judgegray.0141711.avI just returned from an amazing convention in New Orleans called “Advancing Justice” that was sponsored by the Koch Institute.  It was amazing because there was actually a consensus across a wide political spectrum that our nation made a mistake by turning the political slogan “Tough on Crime” into a public policy!  Not only did this action unnecessarily deprive hundreds of thousands of people of their Liberty, it also destroyed lives, families and futures – as well as government budgets.

Everyone should have the Liberty to have a meaningful opportunity to live a good life – and that certainly includes those among us who have made mistakes.  So once people finish “paying their debt to society,” they should have at least a decent opportunity to succeed.  That means they should receive assistance, where appropriate, with education, drug treatment, housing and job opportunities.  Thus some of the many oft-repeated comments during the conference were:

“Each of us is more than the worst thing we have ever done;”

“As to prisons, we spend far too much and receive far too little;”

“Since 97 percent of the people in prison will be released someday – and most will desire a better life – we will seriously reduce crime by helping them learn social skills and find a job, housing and a driver’s license;”

“The most dangerous person in the world is one who has nothing to lose;” and,

“We are crazy not to provide mental health services to the mentally ill.”

So providing people released from prison with assistance to succeed will not only provide them with more opportunities for Liberty and independence, it will also make the rest of safer.  In other words, “Smart on Crime” is much more beneficial for everyone than “Tough on Crime” (except for the prison guard’s unions)!

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)                         

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor 

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1R9swdj
via IFTTT

Monday, December 28, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #41 “Liberty and Gambling”

GrayThere is a great deal of betting that our governments allow in today’s world.  And in many ways, not only do governments approve of these “vices,” they actually promote them, like when they advertise for their state-run lotteries!  (And the idea that “it’s for the schools” is a diversion!)   This legal betting not only includes horse and dog racing, but also complete gambling not only in Nevada, but also in many Native American casinos all around the country.  Furthermore, depending upon your point of view, the stock market and other investments are simply another form of legalized gambling.  So why should placing wagers on sports events be illegal?  (And how, by the way, is fantasy football different than other sports gambling?)

Betting upon sports events has been around as long as human civilization, and it always will be.   So not only is this a matter of Liberty, it is also a matter of practicality.  As long as people are going to bet anyway, don’t prohibit gambling, provide for it, regulate and control it, and tax it.  Imagine how much money this would take away from the Black Market, and put instead into governments’ coffers!  This is simply another example of the philosophy of Liberty being completely consistent with responsibility as well as practicality.  So help promote the concept of Liberty – in this and other areas.  It only makes sense.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)                         

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor 

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1mMRFzm
via IFTTT

Thursday, December 24, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #40 “The Love and Passion of Liberty”

Judge-Jim-Gray_600x300-590x300  Early nineteenth century humanist English writer William Hazlitt once made a comment that has haunted me ever since I heard it.  He said that “The love of Liberty is the love of others; the love of power is the love of ourselves.”  As a writer myself, and someone who came in third in the 2012 election for Vice President of the United States (although truly a distant third), I know that frequently when people talk about Liberty today others think they sound like something of a kook.   And that is really a tragedy, because our great country is actually founded upon the concept of Liberty.  In fact, Liberty is literally our country’s soul.  So I simply agree with Hazlitt.  If people have confidence in themselves and others, Liberty and free choice are best for all.  If people want power and domination over others, take that freedom away and exercise control over others.

Of course freedom has risks, and does not present those “warm and fuzzy” feelings of being protected from life.  But – as long as we implement a safety net for those among us who really need it – we can best show our love for our fellow human beings by promoting a system of Liberty.  And that will bring eternal benefits.  For example, as Milton Friedman said, no people have ever raised themselves out of poverty except through a system of free enterprise and private property rights.  And that begins with Liberty.  Do you agree?  Please think about it, and then help us spread the word.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)                         

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor 

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1Pn7cPP
via IFTTT

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #39 “Liberty and the ICD-10”

maxresdefaultLast week I wrote that I felt that the American Disabilities Act was probably the best example of governmental “do-gooding” statutes.  But now I think I was wrong.  Because this past October 1, the Tenth Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (otherwise known as the ICD-10) was ordered into effect.  This measure increased the number of billing codes from which our country’s healthcare professionals must select to bill insurance companies for services rendered from the lofty number of about 24,000 to a mindboggling 148,000!  So now injuries must be earmarked more precisely, literally forcing the billing doctors to draw the distinction between computer codes for being bitten by a cow, chicken, macaw or parrot.  Or whether their patients were injured at the opera, the driveway of an orphanage or at a prison swimming pool!

Things like these represent the logical extreme of bureaucratic absurdity.  Why can’t the government make necessary provisions for those people who cannot afford basic healthcare, and then simply leave the rest of our healthcare system alone?  The American Medical Association estimates that it will cost a small medical practice an extra $57,000 to $226,000 just to train for, perfect and monitor these new codes, and a large practice from $2 to 8 million.  And, of course, this will directly translate into increased costs to all of us for medical care.  Thomas Jefferson rightly stated that a government is best that governs least.  Less governmental interference results in more Liberty for everyone.  How did we ever get so far off track?

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)                         

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor 

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!

 




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1ThN6HJ
via IFTTT

Friday, December 18, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #38 “Liberty and the ADA”

James-GrayThere are so many examples about how “do-gooding” government statutes actually harm people that it is hard to choose the best example.  But I think I have a winner in choosing the Americans with Disabilities Act, otherwise known as the “ADA.”  When it was passed in 1990, some legislators were quoted as saying things like “No amount of money is too great to safeguard the rights of our disabled.”  (Of course, this simply shows what politics can do to a rational discussion.)

Obviously any caring society wants to make things less hard for disabled people, and that certainly includes ours.  So that means that some laws and regulations should be enacted for their assistance.  But, having said that, we must resist meeting each problem with the response of simply passing more laws.  Mostly the things that come to mind in helping the disabled is for those in wheelchairs or on crutches by shaving the curbs on our street corners and providing paths for them to gain access to buildings, etc.  Obviously there are more, but when we pass open-ended statutes the bureaucracy unfailingly kicks in and produces numerous unintended consequences.  And, of course, there are always people who will try to take advantage of any system.  In the case of the ADA, these laws and regulations are often used literally to “shake down” large numbers of businesses by extorting relatively small amounts of “settlements” from them for small and even meaningless “violations.”  Of course, little of this is helping the disabled, but it does add to the bureaucracy and reduce the Liberty of everyone.   Thomas Jefferson rightly said “That government is best which governs least.”  And the ADA is a long way away from that principle.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!

 




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1TV5UMO
via IFTTT

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #37 “The Process to Support Liberty”

2012_2_15_EfpcI6at4Vw2alrHXjkl83I learned three lessons during my training with the Peace Corps that have stayed with me throughout my life, and they apply to situations in which we are all trying to institute programs and responses to address problem areas in our world.  The first thing is that a program will only be successful if it addresses what we called a “felt need.”  That means that if the people we are trying to help do not feel that there is an important problem to be remedied, the program or response we try to implement will not be successful.  And that assuredly is true when we are trying to protect or even maintain our precious Liberties.

The second lasting lesson I learned is that programs can only really be successful if they can continue on without your involvement.  Over the years I have seen numbers of well thought-out and successful programs wither and die after the originator was no longer involved.  So if what you are addressing needs a temporary fix, go for it.  But if what you want is something permanent, do not wait too long to identify and then groom a successor, as well as the equivalent of a board of directors to ensure other good people follow thereafter.  If you do that, then your program will have a good chance of being a lasting success.

The third thing I learned is that the only thing better than an orange is a peeled orange.  But that is another story. . .

 

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/227EwBh
via IFTTT

Tuesday, December 15, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #36 “Liberty and Full Debates”

cropped-e7c0fed16153ef4ecc056b30db844849b9bc46b9.jpgOkay, I openly acknowledge that I have a direct interest in this as a potential candidate, but I also believe that everyone else does too.  On Tuesday, September 29, 2015 we filed a Complaint in the federal district court in Washington DC against the Commission on Presidential Debates, as well as the Democratic and Republican National Parties.  The thrust of the lawsuit is to force the Commission, which is completely controlled by the Republican and Democratic National Parties, to invite the presidential and vice presidential candidates of all serious political parties to participate in the final national debates.  Serious political parties is defined as any party that is on the ballots in enough states technically to win the presidency.  In 2012 that would have included the Libertarian Party and the Green Party, which were on the ballots in 48 and 40 states, respectively.  Liberty demands that all serious voices, and the issues they raise, be heard!  And, along the way, help to reduce the stagnation that has occurred during the last decades because of the predominance of only two political parties!  (More specific information about the lawsuit is provided below.)

During the 2012 election, there were some issues that President Obama and Governor Romney simply did not want discuss and, since their parties controlled the debates and their format, for the most part they didn’t.  This included our government’s irresponsible spending and military adventurism, and our failed policies on immigration, drug prohibition and Obamacare.  But had the candidates from the other two serious parties been involved, those issues and more would certainly have been openly and fully discussed.  Who would have won from this situation?  The voters, because they would be more completely informed.  Who would have lost?  Only the two main parties.  So, except for the birth and arrival of my children, this lawsuit is probably the most exciting thing I have ever been involved with!  Pass the word!  Help us; help yourselves; help our great country; and help Liberty!

 

 

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

 

 

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!

 




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1YfCG1W
via IFTTT

Sunday, December 13, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #35 “The Devolution of Liberty”

100_1437Recently I contacted two prescription lens companies to provide me with some new contact lenses.  I believe my present corrected eyesight is fine, both for reading and distances, so simply asked to have my new contacts made from my former subscription.  But I was told by both of them that they could not do that without my getting a new eye examination, because California law did not permit them to make new lenses from prescriptions that are more than a year old.

Who would have sponsored such a law?  Rather plainly, it would have been sponsored by those who provide eye examinations.  This is not a health or a safety issue.  The last time my eyes were checked, the doctor told me my prescription had not really changed.  So if I want to take the (small) risk of having somewhat poorer vision by using an older prescription, that is – or at least should be – my choice.  But this law is not to protect consumers, it is another example of crony capitalism that uses public laws to increase revenue for those favored organizations.  In other words, this is another example of the Devolution of our Liberty.  How many other examples in today’s world are you aware of?  The ridiculous prices for some prescription drugs come to mind.  (And, of course, how many examples are you not aware of?)  But presently there are about 1,760 lobbyists in Sacramento, and most are there to promote similar laws of cronyism and favoritism for their sponsors.  How can this be changed?  We will never get money out of government until we get government out of money!  Liberty means that consumers should be able to make their own choices about how and under what circumstances to spend their money.  And that means that I should have the right to have glasses of the prescription of my choice, not the one the government decides that I should have.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1TK1b0C
via IFTTT

Saturday, December 12, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #43 “Liberty and Being Smart on Crime”

C15120D0000-00-00Last week our 2 Paragraphs discussed the failure of the policy of “Tough on Crime,” and put forth realities on how we could have safer and more crime-free communities by being Smart on Crime.  What follows are specific things we all can do to achieve those goals:

 

  1. Stop “Over-criminalization!”  Many jurisdictions have turned their police and traffic laws into fundraising mechanisms.  Not only does this frequently weigh disproportionally upon the poor, it also directly results in anger and distrust against law enforcement in general.  In addition, large fines, coupled with additional penalty assessments, often result in unpayable amounts of money being owed by many people.  And if it is not paid, that inevitably results in additional fines and even being subject to arrest.  So the cycle perpetuates itself.
  2. Arrests should be seen as a last resort, just like in medicine, where surgery is seen as the last resort.  Furthermore, if people are arrested, bail should be reasonable.  That includes the proposition that suspect who are not a threat to anyone and are highly likely to appear in court should be released upon their written promise to appear.  (Actually, this is the normal rule of law, but often bail is still required.)
  3. Repeal Mandatory Minimum Sentences.  No one can determine in advance a reasonable punishment without knowing who the perpetrators are, their backgrounds, who the victims are and how badly, if at all, they were harmed.  But these “automatic” punishments often result in obscenely long sentences that are truly unfair to the defendants, their families and also the taxpayers.
  4. Body cameras on the uniforms of the police result in better conduct both by the police and also by the people in the community.  And that frequently also results in the exoneration of police officers who are charged with misconduct.
  5. Community Policing.  Get the police back to being peace officers instead of law enforcement officers.  That includes repealing the failed policy of the so-called War on Drugs, because that often results in the police treating drug violators like the “enemy.”
  6. Repeal “Policing for Profit.”  In other words, change the civil asset forfeiture laws to require a criminal conviction before anyone’s property can be forfeited to the government.  And when this does occur, the forfeited property must be placed into the general fund instead of police coffers.  Clearly our police must be fully funded for the protection of us all, but they should not have a financial incentive to forfeit property.
  7. If non-violent offenders have drug addiction or mental illness problems, but otherwise are not hurting anyone but themselves, they should be referred to medical assistance, not the criminal justice system.

Being Smart on Crime by providing reasonable assistance to help people live more productive lives, as well as bringing our police back into the peace officer business, will not only enhance Liberty for everyone, it will make all of us safer and even reduce taxes along the way.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)                         

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor 

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

 

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!

 




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1OYW11h
via IFTTT

Governor Gary Johnson

Dear “2 Paragraphs” Team Member,

I believe that a majority of voters agree with me when I say that our country is going in the wrong direction and that it needs new leadership.  During the 2012 election campaign I told people as often as I could that Governor Gary Johnson is the most qualified person to be President I know of.  Now he is contemplating running for President again as a Libertarian in 2016.

With that situation in mind, I am forwarding to you his open letter which is entitled “Why I Would  Run for President.”  I believe he is the Man for our Times.  There have always been people like Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meier and even Nelson Mandela around in times of crisis – theyjust don’t get elected.  Gary Johnson is the man for our times.  So please join me in encouraging Governor Gary Johnson again to run for President!  And spread the word to your social media contacts to do the same.

As I hope you know, we have filed a lawsuit in Washington DC against the Commission on Presidential Debates, as well as the Republican and Democratic National Parties, to require the Commission to open the final Presidential Debates to the candidates of all serious political parties.  That means that any political party which is on the ballots in enough states technically to win the presidency should have its candidate in the debates.  As of the last election, that would have included the Libertarian Party and the Green Party, which were on the ballots in 48 and 40 states, respectively.

All of this is exciting, and, if successful, will result in a coalition government of representatives from many political parties, as long as they agree with our philosophy of Financial Responsibility and Social Acceptance – which is in the mainstream of American political thought.  So please help us help our great country!

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

 

Why I Would Run for President by Governor Gary Johnson

Dear Friends,

When I completed my second term as Governor of New Mexico in 2003, I was done.

I had been elected Governor when everyone said I didn’t have a chance. A businessman who had never sought or held elected office, running as a Republican in an overwhelmingly Democratic state, my prospects for success were dismissed by Republicans and Democrats alike.

But I worked hard, financed my own campaign, and told New Mexicans what I would do if elected: Reduce the size of the government, cut taxes and apply business-like common sense to the job of governing.  They elected me, I did what I said I would do, and they re-elected me by an even bigger margin. After that second term, I walked away to resume what was — and is — a pretty good life.

I have had the good fortune to have climbed the highest mountain on all of the seven continents, build my dream home, and enjoy the freedom I gained from building a successful business from scratch, making some money, and creating the lifestyle I wanted.

As for being Governor, I did a good job — good government was easy. I worked hard. I did what I said I would do. I told people the truth, and I tried to run the state the same way I ran my business, and my life. Don’t promise what you can’t deliver. Deliver what you can on time and under budget. And most of all, don’t waste anyone’s time or money.  I vetoed bills we didn’t need nor couldn’t afford, 750 of them. To this day, some call me “Governor Veto”.

I cut the growth of government in half, and reduced the number of state employees by more than 1,000, without any mass firings or layoffs. All it took was good management and a willingness to challenge the status quo.  We cut taxes. We shifted Medicaid to a managed care system — similar to the health coverage for state employees — and cut costs by at least 20%. I scrutinized regulations to be sure they were both essential and not unnecessarily burdensome for individuals and businesses.

Dealing with a Democrat-controlled legislature, I certainly wasn’t able to do all that I wanted to do. Year after year, I proposed a full-blown education voucher program. The teachers’ unions and Democrats wouldn’t let it happen. But we put the issue on the front burner — long before it was fashionable.

In addition, I created quite a stir nationally by proposing, in 1999, that marijuana be legalized. I was the highest ranking official in the nation to do so, and at the time — as opposed to now, it was not a popular idea. Everyone recognized, beginning with me, that it would be political suicide. But I didn’t have any further political ambitions, and more importantly, it was the right thing to do.

Enforcing and prosecuting laws against simple marijuana possession were clogging up our courts, overcrowding our jails, costing taxpayers millions of dollars and doing permanent harm to thousands of young lives. All that because we had criminalized a nonviolent behavior that an estimated 140 million  Americans have engaged in at some point in their lives. It didn’t make sense, and I said so. It wasn’t about marijuana being good or bad for an individual. It was about a modern-day Prohibition that was not only not working, but doing far more harm than good, at tremendous human and financial cost.

My poll numbers fell through the floor for a couple of months, especially when the national media decided that it was a big deal that a Republican governor would take such a controversial and normally “liberal” stand. However, a funny thing happened. My approval rating recovered, and far more significantly, my political “suicide” helped prompt a national conversation that continues today, with a majority of Americans now supporting marijuana legalization.

I enjoyed being Governor. I didn’t enjoy the politics, but it was undeniably satisfying to make a difference in people’s lives, force debates on issues that needed to be discussed, and put the principles of smaller government and greater freedom into practice. It’s one thing to talk about liberty. It’s another to actually govern with liberty as a guiding policy. I’d like to think I showed that it could be done.

Apparently, some agree that it can be — and was — done. During the presidential campaign of 2012, the decidedly fiscally conservative Club for Growth looked at my record as Governor, and concluded that I would be a “pro-growth” President, citing our reductions in spending growth, the tax cuts we implemented, and the regulatory environment we created. At the same time, the ACLU also looked at my record, and gave me the highest rating on civil liberties of all the candidates, higher than Barack Obama and Ron Paul.

I firmly believe that the majority of Americans are, in fact, “conservative” when it comes to the size and cost of government, while being socially “liberal” when it comes to individuals being free to make their own choices and control their own lives. That’s how I tried to govern, and what I believe today.

After my term-limited service as Governor was finished, I largely stayed away from politics. I don’t like professional politicians, and certainly don’t want to be one. I went home, pursued my passions for skiing and cycling, climbed Mt. Everest, built my dream house and enjoyed my freedom. Sure, I stayed involved in some issues I cared about and in which I could make a contribution, such as drug policy and school choice.

Life was good, and it still is.

In 2009, I helped create the Our America Initiative, a not-for-profit advocacy organization with the mission of adding a needed fiscal conservative, socially liberal voice to America’s policy debates. That provided an opportunity to travel the country, organize at the grassroots and offer a “home” for those who share the notion of restoring freedom and opportunity as the real American values.

And in 2011, I made the decision to run for President. I entered the race as a Republican, believing that America was ready for a different kind of GOP candidate who had a proven record of governing according to what I consider to be real conservatism: Government that is truly limited in size and cost and that stays out of American bedrooms and boardrooms.

We fought hard, but the establishment and its special interest sponsors apparently didn’t want anything to do with a guy who would actually challenge the status quo and upset their apple cart. There was no room for a candidate who was once described as “the most dangerous politician in America”. After all, I wanted to talk about the spending, the wars and the freedom-robbing social policies that have become their bread and butter — literally.

The system is about fitting into their mold, and I didn’t fit. I couldn’t go to Iowa and evangelize about family “values” that are frankly none of the government’s business. I couldn’t go to South Carolina and talk about increasing defense spending at a time when we are broke. And I couldn’t go to Florida without telling the truth about entitlements and the need to reform Medicare and Social Security.

So I left the Republican primary circus and switched to the Libertarian Party. Libertarians, broadly speaking, are fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  The principles of less government and more freedom are there, and the experience of running as the candidate who could unapologetically advocate those principles was, well, liberating.

With the help of hundreds and thousands of great volunteers and supporters, I traveled to virtually every state, spoke to hundreds of groups, met with students in colleges and universities all across the country — and was gratified to be able to put our ideas on the national stage to an extent that had never happened before. We didn’t win, but we made the media and the establishment take notice and garnered more votes than any Libertarian candidate in history.

Along the way, I learned a lot about the American people — the most important lesson being a confirmation that the real majority doesn’t “relate” to either the Republicans or the Democrats, and if given the opportunity, will exercise a degree of political independence never before seen in our history. Americans, and especially the Millennials who are rapidly assuming a dominant role in both society and the economy, are fed up with politicians who lie, who don’t really want to change anything, and for whom being elected and reelected are ends in themselves.

Now, those Americans are looking ahead to the 2016 election — and if they are like me, they don’t like what they see. Is there anything about the current field of candidates that even hints at changing the disastrous trends of recent years?  We are seeing only slight nibbles around the edge of a tax code that is fundamentally wrong. An $18 trillion debt that threatens the very underpinnings of our economy and, in fact, our national security, is hardly mentioned, all while the politicians are obsessed with Hillary Clinton’s emails and a County Clerk in Kentucky whose 15 minutes of fame have already lingered for too long.

There were great hopes in some libertarian corners for Senator Rand Paul. I endorsed his father in 2008, and in fact, urged my Republican supporters in Iowa to support him in 2012. Unfortunately, Rand, in his quest to have one foot in the libertarian camp and the other in the establishment Republican museum, has emerged with a vague mix of positions that is clearly not compelling. There is a price to be paid for selling out — and he is paying it.

The previously presumed Republican front-runner, Jeb Bush, is fading fast as even “mainstream” Republican voters are increasingly refusing to take their orders from party leaders and funders who think he should be President just because he’s a Bush. Fairly or not, “been there, done that” isn’t working for a country that is absolutely fed up with business-as-usual.

I could go on, but the point is clear: On the Republican side, Americans are seeing, with one glaring exception, a battalion of candidates who look, sound and feel like the same Republican presidential candidates voters have rejected in the past two elections. None are instilling any confidence that government would be smaller, smarter or less costly if they were to be elected than it is today.

And about that exception…the Trump phenomenon. What does it say about the level of discontent that a professional salesman can launch a presidential campaign with a promise to build our very own Great Wall of China and a vague promise to “make America great again” can assemble a coalition of the pissed-off sufficient in size to make him the Republican standard-bearer?

In the other “major” party, the choices are equally alarming. Ms. Clinton, their version of “been there, done that”, is having her own problems claiming the throne she presumes to be rightfully hers. Never mind the unbelievable lack of judgment involved in storing official, sensitive emails in a private server in a bathroom. We’re looking at a “front runner” who, as Secretary of State, presided over a descent into foreign policy chaos that is virtually unmatched in American history.

As with Trump on the Republican side, the Democrats have devolved to the point that the candidate going toe-to-toe with Ms. Clinton, both in the polls and in fundraising, is Bernie Sanders, a self-described Socialist to whom the free market is not just foreign, but evil. His support, which like Trump, is befuddling the establishment, has nothing to do with socialism. He’s just the Democrats’ version of “none of the above” — and if some of the polls can be believed, he’s winning.

What does all this tell me? It tells me that America may finally be ready for a presidential candidate who DOES believe in the free market, but rejects crony capitalism and the subsidies, deals, bailouts and tax breaks that come with it. They may be ready for a candidate who actually governed a border state…and DOESN’T believe that a Great Wall is a substitute for immigration reform that today’s politicians cannot summon the courage to enact.

Those Millennials who will soon be a full one-third of American adults may be ready to become engaged in politics with a candidate who wants to give them a government that will leave them alone, get its finances in order so that they don’t inherit an economic collapse, and stop labeling them as criminals for smoking a joint in the privacy of their own homes.

And Americans who are rightfully and deeply concerned that a feckless foreign policy is allowing the likes of ISIS to not only threaten our safety, but humiliate us, may be ready for a candidate who will put politics aside and engage in reality-based foreign and military policies that actually fulfill government’s most basic responsibility to keep us — and our freedoms — safe.

Maybe, just maybe, America is ready. And maybe that’s why I would want to run for President.

Sincerely,

Gov. Gary Johnson




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1UiewxO
via IFTTT

Saturday, December 5, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #34 “Liberty vs. Policing for Profit”

0 (3)One of the cardinal rules of life is that Incentives Matter. As stated so long ago by Adam Smith, the “Invisible Hand” of economic incentives is always involved in most of the decisions we make. It may not always control the outcome, but (in addition to efficiently guiding the allocation of goods and services through a pricing system) it virtually always plays a part in it. That is why the present laws governing the forfeiture of assets involved in transactions of illicit drugs (and from many lawful activities as well) must be changed. Why? Because Liberty demands that the people of our country not be subjected to the institutional corruptions that can be caused by the economic incentives of “policing for profit.”

As a practical matter, Liberty and asset forfeiture do not have to be mutually inconsistent. If a person smuggles, possesses with intent to sell or sells presently illicit drugs, the assets used to accomplish those ends, or the assets that are purchased from the proceeds thereof, can and should be forfeited to the government. But that should occur only after that person has been charged with and convicted of one of those offenses. (In the meantime, the assets can be confiscated but held in trust for a reasonable period of time pending that conviction.) Then once that person is convicted, the same jury should decide whether those assets were so used or purchased. If that is the jury’s finding, forfeit them. But then deposit the forfeited cash or assets into the government’s general fund – not to the police.

Recently the California District Attorneys Association was successful in killing a bill in Sacramento that would simply have required a conviction before a forfeiture could occur. Why the concern? Well, according to a 1995 study by the Cato Institute, the owners of forfeited property are not even charged with such a crime about 80 percent of the time! Imagine the large numbers of innocent people who were wrongly deprived of their liberty and property because of this procedure. Of course the police need to be appropriately funded, but providing them with economic incentives to procure any of that funding can result in institutional corruptions. We need our institutions to protect our liberties not only from each other, but also from the police! And we must change the incentives accordingly!

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1Oal78R
via IFTTT

Sunday, November 29, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #33 “Liberty and Government Officials”

Judge-GrayHypothetical sign in a government office in Montana: “No hunting licenses issued: clerk a vegetarian.” Now that is not to compare nutrition beliefs to religious beliefs, but regardless of what a government official’s personal, political or even religious beliefs are, all government officials must follow the law. Of course, that brings us to the clerk in Rowan County, Kentucky, who declined to issue marriage licenses to gay couples because she believed that would violate her conservative Christian beliefs.   But she was rightfully sanctioned by a federal judge when she refused the judicial order to comply with the law. Liberty demands that no government officials be above the law, even if that law happens to do be at odds with their personal beliefs. In fact, when it comes down to it, she was not punished for practicing her religion, she was jailed for using the government to force others to comply with the practices of her religion.

As a judge, I enforced many laws even when I did not agree with them. I didn’t have to do so quietly, but I still followed the law. Why? Because when I assumed that judicial office, I raised my hand and swore to uphold and defend the Constitution and laws of both the United States and the State of California. And if there came a time that I could not do so, I should have resigned. That was also the situation for the Rowan County clerk, and she was rightfully forced to uphold that duty. Liberty demands nothing less.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1NCpqPR
via IFTTT

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #32 “States’ Rights to their Land”

judge-jim-gray-1024x686                  You are probably not aware of this, but the federal government owns more than fifty percent of all lands in the Western states. The most egregious example is Nevada, where the federal government owns about 81 percent of all of the land (compared to only one percent of the land in Nebraska). Why should that be? There is no justification in the Constitution for the federal government to own that much land, or no practical reason either.   So instead, the land should revert to the states, which would be free to administer it themselves or, better yet , to auction it off to private interests. Why would private ownership be preferable to public? That can be answered by asking another question: who takes better care of a house, an owner or a renter? Similarly, who takes better care of pasture or grazing land, an owner or someone who leases it? The answer to those questions is obvious. Public ownership yields to bureaucracies and politics, which innately involve cronyism and the less efficient allocation of scarce resources. Private ownership results most often in the most optimal and productive use of the land, which certainly can be recreational or even maintaining it as wildlands.

Just to be clear, we are not talking about national parks, national forests or military reservations. But virtually all of the land administered by the Bureau of Land Management should either be returned to the states, or sold at public auction. Of course, the land could be sold subject to restrictions, where appropriate, against the clear-cutting of forests or strip mining the earth. But not only would this reduce the administrative costs and politics, it would also generate more local control and property taxes for the states. For example, the American Land Council cites statistics that the federal government loses 27 cents for every dollar it spends on administration of these lands, but the states on average generate $14.54 for every dollar they spend. And, innately, this is a question of Liberty. The federal government should neither be our lord, nor our landlord, nor a privileged class in our society. The privileged class should be “We the People.”

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1NCptLs
via IFTTT

Thursday, November 26, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #31 “Liberty and Hate Crimes”

key_grayThis could be misunderstood (and realistically some people will do so intentionally), but all “hate crimes” should be repealed as being counterproductive. Why? Because if a law says that an assault based upon your race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. is a special or distinctive crime, then I – in most cases justifiably – will feel that an assault based upon my race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. should be seen a special or distinctive crime too! In addition, and as a practical matter, where can the line be drawn? An assault upon an Asian or a Buddhist? How about an assault upon an Italian, or someone that is Italian but for some reason looks Asian? Or upon someone who is simply thinking of converting to Buddhism? The problems and complications will never end!

Even though it is undeniably true that our society has done and even institutionally sanctioned some bad things to some people, like slavery, segregation and various other laws of prohibition, simply because of their race, sexual orientation or religion, the better approach in this complicated and multifaceted world is to realize that an assault is a crime. Of course, some are more serious than others. So if the offense is distinctively offensive for reasons based upon race, sexual orientation or religion, etc., or anything else, that can – and should – be explicitly addressed at the sentencing phase of the proceedings. But Liberty dictates that no one person by law should be deemed to be more special or distinctive than any other. And, once again, by following the dictates of Liberty we will not be required to pass so many laws, and we will also avoid a lot of legitimately hurt feelings.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1kVu9Qi
via IFTTT

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #30 “Liberty to Offend”

6a00d83451721569e2017c330a31db970b24 words on Liberty: “If you do not fight for the Liberty of those you disagree with, then you do not know the meaning of the word Liberty.” One of the most heartwrenching moments in our country’s First Amendment history occurred in 1977 when a group from the American Nazi Party sought a permit to stage a parade, complete with Nazi armbands and flags, on the streets of Skokie, Illinois, which had a large Jewish population. And the U.S. Supreme Court, to its everlasting credit, ruled that the American Nazi Party had a Constitutional right of free speech to march and express their (misguided) opinions.

This underscored those 24 words. If we allow the government to prohibit “offensive” speech, even if the majority of us deem those ideas to be misguided, obnoxious and even satanic, what assurances do we have that all minority speech might soon be curtailed? Where can the line be drawn? Thus Liberty allows speech that can be contrary to the values we hold dear. But we must protect and defend the rights of people to state their views, even if we fervently disagree with them, in order to protect our Liberty to do the same. Otherwise the Constitutional right of free speech could be eroded to nothing. (But we can all take solace that just because someone has the right to state their views does not mean that they have a right for others to listen, or even to take them seriously.) So yes, once again, there is a price for Liberty, but it is a price truly worth paying.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1Of9fGM
via IFTTT

Monday, November 23, 2015

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #29 “The Tragedy of the Commons”

judgejimgray_portrait2Why are private property rights so important in producing a thriving economy? Part of the answer is explained by discussing the theory of the tragedy of the commons. Imagine in the covered wagon days an apple orchard growing wild somewhere along the Oregon Trail. So the first wagon train finds it, and takes all of the ripe apples – more than they really need, but if they don’t take them someone else will. Then the next wagon train comes by, sees the mostly unripe apples on the trees, but takes them anyway, because if they don’t someone else will, and they can always feed them to their oxen. The next wagon train sees there are barely any apples, but they can always use some firewood, so they chop the trees down. Why not, because if they don’t, someone else will. That is the tragedy of the commons: the apples, the trees, the fish in the ocean, the water in the rivers – instead of being husbanded and protected, all will be plundered, “because if we don’t someone else will.”

But with Liberty, in the form of private property rights, the outcome would change. The owner of the apple trees would price them at a competitive rate, so the first wagon train would only purchase what they really needed. Of course, then apples would also be available for the many wagon trains to come. And, since the future apples would be worth more to the owner than selling the trees for firewood, not only would the trees not be chopped down, they would actually be watered, cultivated and fed, because that would bring a better crop for the owner to sell in the future.   In other words, and as anyone with an understanding of economics will tell you, incentives matter! So with incentives for the owners to maximize their profits, as facilitated by private property rights, there will be more good apples for everyone!

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1Sf37gX
via IFTTT

2 Paragraphs 4 Liberty: #28 “Liberty and Other People’s Money”

gray                  When I was attending USC Law School I happened to be elected to the student council as a graduate representative. In one of our meetings, a representative of the Black Panthers appeared and requested that some student activity funds be donated to their group for their program to provide breakfasts for hungry children. Although I certainly am in favor of feeding hungry children, I objected that this was an improper use of student activity funds. These funds were (involuntarily) taken from all students ostensibly to be used for their benefit, and the monies should be restricted expressly for that purpose. Nevertheless, the request was granted.

That experience has stayed with me, and I remain proud of my objection. Anyone in charge of any monies which belong to or were taken from other people, must keep in mind the reason that money has been entrusted to them. As an example, in the case of Citizens United the U.S. Supreme Court got it wrong. No corporate or labor union money should be used for any political purpose at all, because the money belongs to the shareholders or the union members. The corporations and labor unions are welcome to make recommendations, but the actual donations should be the sole choice of the individuals themselves. It is a matter of Liberty.

Judge Jim Gray (Ret.)

2012 Libertarian candidate for Vice

President, along with Governor

Gary Johnson as the candidate for President

Please forward this on to your circle of friends for their consideration.  And by the way, now I am on Facebook at Facebook at http://ift.tt/1KPuMEA, LinkedIn at http://ift.tt/1cAMtZD, and Twitter with username as @JudgeJimGrayOAI, or twitter.com/JudgeJimGrayOAI.  Please visit these sites, and pass them along to your social world.

If you wish to unsubscribe, please let your sender know, and it will be done.

And feedback is always welcome!




from WordPress http://ift.tt/1Sf358V
via IFTTT