UF student Andrew Meyer is tased at a John Kerry speech after asking Kerry some tough questions.

Tasers were introduced as less-lethal weapons to be used by police to subdue fleeing,  or potentially dangerous subjects. However, following instances of Taser use which have resulted in severe injury and death, I believe tasers should be banned. Certainly, as a libertarian, I don’t support a federal ban on tasers, but would encourage local advocates of civil rights and liberties to encourage their local authorities to ban the instruments.

At NolanChart, Michael McDonnough presents a plethora of evidence of taser abuse by officers. Tasers are used by roughly two-thirds of the nation’s law enforcement agencies, but the consequences are drastic:

•A study from Rosalind Franklin University of Medical Science found that tasers (not surprisingly) impair cognitive functioning;

•The instruments are being used by officers to enforce police orders, to retaliate against handcuffed suspects who are being difficult, and as punishment in prisons;

•Thus, tasers have become weapons of choice for officers in essentially any situation they feel the need to use the taser.

Lord Acton would agree with me: Eliminate the taser from the hands of its abusers.

James A. Barnes of National Journal takes a look at the GOP’s nominee, John McCain, and how his nomination is impacting or shifting the GOP. The article certainly is an intriguing piece that provides a lot of substance, however it has several shortcomings as well.

Among its most glaring shortcoming is that it barely mentioned the GOP’s growing libertarian wing, which were instrumental in electing Norm Semanko to his post as Idaho GOP Chair or in electing Shawn Steel, an RLC Advisery Board member and former California GOP Chair, to the Republican National Committee post.

The author contends that the GOP is becoming more conservative despite McCain’s coming nomination. I don’t know if that is the case or not, however the platform changes outlined in an earlier post certainly show that GOP is not becoming more conservative on issues related to the housing crisis or global warming. However, according to this article, the makeup of the RNC has tilted right.

At the DailyKos, the nomination of Sarah Palin as the Republic VP has them running scared. One of their ‘diarists’ suggests that the Palin selection will be as divisive for the GOP as the competition between Obama and Clinton was for the Democrats and that the media will immediately leap on the situation and play up the disgruntled outrage of VP also-rans like Pawlenty and Romney. ‘Chumley’ writes:

Just run the same exact story next week, and substitute the names “Mitt Romney” and “Tim Pawlenty” for “Hillary Clinton.” Make that THE big story of the convention: how the Republican party is divided into factions that loathe each other, and how that schism severely endangers John McCain’s chances of winning in November…Easy, right? And unlike the Clinton story, this one is mostly TRUE.”

And this is followed by over 800 enthusiastic comments about how the Republican party is going to fall apart as a result of the Palin nomination and how the media is going to go to town on the GOP or alternately how they will be lap dogs for the GOP and not follow up this vital story of division and dissension.

If the DailyKos is any measure, the left seems to have forgotten the vital maxim “know your enemy,” because they clearly have no idea what the impact of the Palin nomination is going to be on the GOP. There’s no question that McCain consulted with and smoothed the feathers of Romney (future Secretary of Commerce) and Pawlenty (future Secretary of the Interior). He’s an experienced politician and knows how to build bridges and build unity. They’ll be at the convention, cheering and making speeches and giving Palin and McCain manly and supportive embraces on the podium. There also isn’t going to be some sort of rebellion, because unlike Hillary Clinton, Pawlenty has no followers at all and Romney’s followers are pragmatic and not all that fanatical.

In defiance of the hopes of the left, Palin’s effect in uniting the Republican Party will be dramatic.

The only figure in the GOP with fanatical followers who want to disrupt the convention is Rep. Ron Paul who is holding an alternative anti-convention in Minneapolis next week to promote his Campaign for Liberty. It may be a commentary on dissension in the party that the organizers of Paul’s rally are now having to give away tickets on the internet. About 150 Paul supporters are delegates to the Republican convention and they have certainly planned some sort of disruption, but the Palin nomination takes a lot of the wind out of their sails, because she’s basically one of them. She subscribes to the same belief in small government and individual liberty and reforming the Republican party and government in general which has been Ron Paul’s main appeal.

The response has been very positive on renegade republican websites. On The Daily Paul ‘Fountainhead’ wrote:

“This is an absolutely monster smart move by the McCain campaign, something big has happened at the RNC I mean this is a major stunning 360. The fingerprints of true conservative Republicans is on this decision make no mistake about it and there is nothing but very positive feedback coming from the alternative media.”

This reaction seems typical, with a lot of the more reasonable Paul supporters feeling that they have won a victory and perhaps are seeing McCain move back towards his more libertarian roots with the alliance with Palin. This may make a big difference in states like Nevada where large enough numbers of disgruntled Paul supporters to throw the election to the Democrats feel that they have been abused and excluded by party insiders.

Palin doesn’t just appeal to paleoconservative Ron Paul supporters. Her bonafides on key family values issues are strong enough that she will also draw the religious right back into the fold and reassure them that McCain isn’t such a bad guy. She’s a lifetime member of the NRA, strongly pro-life and has even advocated teaching the story of creation in public schools, though apparently not as part of the science curriculum. That’s enough to reassure the evangelical right that McCain isn’t as hostile to them as they have feared.

As for moderates and secularists, who are a significant presence within the GOP even if they don’t get much attention, Palin may be a fundamentalist Christian, but she appears to be one who exercises her religion rationally and with a relatively open mind, and knows how to separate issues of faith from matters of policy. For example, on the issue of teaching creation she made a fairly rational argument when she said:

“Teach both. You know, don’t be afraid of information… Healthy debate is so important and it’s so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject — creationism and evolution. It’s been a healthy foundation for me. But don’t be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.”

Given the need to pander a bit to the religious right, that is the kind of rational approach to a contentious issue which ought to provide at least some reassurance. Palin even seems to have won over the Log Cabin Republicans whose President, Patrick Sammon wrote in a press release:

“Alaska Governor Sarah Palin can help Sen. McCain win this election by appealing to independent and young voters. She’s a mainstream Republican who will unite the Party and serve John McCain well as Vice President. Gov. Palin is an inclusive Republican who will help Sen. McCain appeal to gay and lesbian voters.”

Palin’s record on gay rights issues is mixed, but she has expressed support for their interests and as governor her first veto was issued to protect the right of state employees to partnership benefits.

Perhaps the most powerful unifying factor is that putting Palin on the ticket substantially increases the chance of victory, and nothing is more unifying than the restoral of hope in a situation which may have looked desperate. The Palin selection is so politically astute that it restores everyone’s confidence in McCain’s leadership ability and his ability to delivery victory, and that is ultimately what it is all about in politics. All of these factions within the GOP may have different agendas, but the one thing they can all agree on is that none of them will achieve any of their goals if they don’t win in November.

In a victory for drivers and taxpayers, a private consortium led by Citigroup and Spanish toll road operator Abertis Infraestructuras has, through a competitive bidding process, won the right for a 75-year lease of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. The deal now waits on a final vote in the state legislature.

As noted in the Summer 2008 issue of Reason Reports, a quarterly update on activities of the libertarian Reason Foundation, the proposed $12.8 billion lease would be the largest ever in the U.S., dwarfing the $3.8 billion concession agreement for the Indiana Toll Road in 2006.

The deal is also a victory for the Reason Foundation and, in particular, Reason founder and Florida RLCer Robert Poole. Poole, as director of transportation studies at Reason, has been laying the groundwork for the success of this deal with research and commentary for years.

Currently, the Pennsylvania Turnpike is one of the country’s least cost-efficient toll roads, in a state whose roads have earned a ‘D’ from the American Society of Civil Engineers and has the county’s most deficient bridges.

Poole and Reason have long pointed to the advantages of using private – rather than government — capital and know-how to improve and maintain infrastructure. In fact, Poole is credited in inventing and popularizing the word ‘privatization,’ which refers to transferring resources and functions from the government to the people — the reverse of socialist ‘nationalization.’

Poole is also known as an advocate of variable-pricing HOT lanes on highways and the Trans Texas Corridor, dubbed the “NAFTA Super Highway” by free-trade opponents and conspiracy-minded populists.

Everyone knows the tension between libertarians and neo-conservatives. Bill Kristol’s father, Irving Kristol, was the chief architect of the neo-conservative movement. His son, its current philosophical leader, predicted (with hope) — nearly two months ago — that McCain would pick Sarah Palin. Bill Kristol’s excitement about Sarah Palin should be a cause of concern for all libertarian-leaning voters. The video:

MSNBC is reporting that John McCain has picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. Palin, mother of five, is Alaska’s first female governor and the first woman to run on a Republican presidential ticket.

Governor Palin was not endorsed by the RLC in 2006, but is somewhat allied with libertarian Republicans in Alaska. The RLC recently endorsed her closely allied Lt. Governor, Sean Parnell, in his race against Don ‘Pork-barrel’ Young, a race in which the results are too close to call at this time.

McCain’s choice is an indicator that perhaps his campaign is interested in receiving votes from libertarian Republicans.

I could not think of a better Governor to choose, other than perhaps Mark Sanford of South Carolina. We’ll have to see how things play out.

A video of Sarah Palin addressing the liberty-oriented Alaskan Independence Party follows.

Several reasons I like Palin that don’t relate to her being a woman: She is decidedly independent yet consistently conservative, a Washington outsider, will appeal to middle and lower class voters, and her lack of experience may be beneficial in the long run (read: ‘professional politicians’ haven’t been doing a very good job).

A draft of the 2008 National GOP Platform has been made. Bloomberg.com provides a good analysis of the platform changes. I have broken down the issues with very brief summaries of proposed platform changes, as follows.

ABORTION: The platform committee was unwilling to compromise on its abortion plank to accommodate John McCain’s view of the issue. Instead, the language was kept the same, which supports banning abortion in all cases without exception.

GAMBLING: What was a great victory for the online poker industry yesterday, became a telling defeat for the industry today. Poker advocates berated language in the Republican platform that called for a strong prohibition of Internet gambling. And yesterday, that language was removed from the platform and the industry fell at ease once again with the Republican Party. Today, the language was put back into the platform.

GAY MARRIAGE: The platform draft still calls for a federal constitutional ban on gay marriage.

GLOBAL WARMING: While the 2004 platform did not mention global warming, the draft document Republican delegates took up today in committee includes a one-page section “addressing climate change responsibly.” For the first time, the platform acknowledges that human activity has contributed to global warming: “The same human activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmosphere. Increased atmospheric carbon has a warming effect on the earth.” The plank also says: “Republicans caution against the doomsday climate-change scenarios peddled by aficionados of centralized command-and-control government.” It calls technology and markets the keys to reducing carbon emissions without damaging the economy. McCain has said addressing climate change would be a top priority if he’s elected. He supports mandatory limits on greenhouse-gas emissions and a cap-and-trade system to help bring that about.

HOUSING CRISIS: In a reference to the housing crisis, the document supports “timely and carefully targeted aid to those hurt by the housing crisis” without encouraging people to borrow more than they can afford. There is no mention in the draft of the current credit crisis or turmoil in the financial markets. The document was altered in committee to add language opposing government bailouts of private institutions: “Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself,” the text now says.

IMMIGRATION: The draft platform states opposition to any plan that would provide amnesty for people in the country illegally. This is a change from the 2004 document, which endorsed a guest worker program. “The rule of law suffers if government policies encourage or reward illegal activity,” the new platform says.

STEM CELLS: Like the 2004 document, this year’s text opposes the use of embryonic stem cells for medical research.

In the aftermath of Barack Obama’s uninspiring choice of Joe Biden as his running mate, I have to face the question of whether John McCain will do any better with his Vice Presidential selection.

For Obama Biden was a safe, relatively non-controversial and uninspiring choice. He’s not remarkable enough to challenge Obama’s legitimacy and he was clearly willing to grovel for the job. He probably won’t stir up much controversy or much excitement either. He’s a low risk surrogate for Hillary Clinton, with a similar stand on the issues, perfect for balancing Obama’s radicalism and inexperience while not being threatening as Clinton would have been. He was such a perfectly bland choice that in the latest Gallup poll, despite the hoopla of the Democratic convention, Obama dropped behind McCain for the first time since the election started, trailing 44% to 46%.

For McCain the equivalent to Obama’s choice of Biden would be to pick Mitt Romney. Romney has led the race in groveling and fawning and is clearly desperate for the job. He also balances McCain’s perceived lack of executive and economic experience. He’s a seemingly obvious, safe choice. He’s also even more of a potential liability for McCain than Biden is for Obama. Hard though it may be to believe to outsiders, bland and well-coifed Romney is a divisive figure for many in the GOP. He’s seen as an opportunist who changes his views with the wind, and who has advocated relatively moderate positions on key issues like abortion and gay marriage which trouble the religious elements within the party who already suspect McCain of having similar leanings. He’s also seen as a big business and big government politician with elitist roots which make the more populist and reactionary elements of the party enraged.

Worse than his negative perception within the party is Romney’s blandness and obviousness. He doesn’t bring with him a core constituency which McCain doesn’t already have well in hand. He appeals to the same moderates, independents and crossover Democrats who McCain has relied on as his constituency. He doesn’t do anything to add energy or ‘wow factor’ to the ticket. The most exciting things about him are his hair and his noble chin. McCain might be comfortable with Romney’s politics, but if you want to run a really effective campaign you need something more than comfort. You need excitement.

McCain ought to be considering candidates who are unexpected. He ought to look to the example of William McKinley who wiser heads in the party forced to take on a young and unexpected running mate. McKinley was boring and McCain is boring. McCain needs a Teddy Roosevelt as much as McKinley did. Rather than showing weakness as Obama did by picking Biden, McCain should show strength by picking someone exciting and dynamic, demonstrating confidence that his own stature and substance cannot be challenged by a younger and more interesting running mate.

McCain also ought to be looking at people who will draw in elements of the party who are looking for a greater role. There is an impending struggle in the party between the small but vocal factions of religious conservatives and liberty republicans and McCain should reach out to one of those factions to expand his base within the party. Picking the right Vice President is an easy way to do that.

Obviously I’m not going to advocate picking some troglodytic religious fanatic, though I admit it might be a good strategy. I’m with the other guys. McCain could win a lot of support in the liberty-oriented part of the GOP by picking someone like South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford or Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. They also carry the benefit of being governors rather than legislators, adding a component of executive and state government experience to the Republican ticket with Obama/Biden lacks. He could even win a lot of approval by picking Jeff Flake, the most libertarian member of Congress. Some might even argue that failed paleoconservative candidate Ron Paul might fit the bill. Of these choices Mark Sanford is probably the best. He has the most experience and the most established reputation. He even has some crossover popularity with religious conservatives.

These are the kinds of candidates McCain ought to be looking at. They’re young and dynamic leaders who would give his ticket a burst of energy which tired old Joe Biden certainly can’t match. Is McCain brave enough to consider them? His campaign has been very good at muddying the waters around their VP choice, so it might actually be a possibility. McCain’s reputation as a ‘maverick’ would certainly be reinforced by such a creative choice, just as it would suffer from a pedestrian choice like Romney. It’s time for McCain and the GOP to have some balls and do something unexpected. That’s the only way they’re going to win this election. This choice is a make or break test for McCain to see if he can do soemthing clever and gutsy or if he’s just another hack who plays it safe. A lot of Republicans are waiting to be inspired. Let’s hope he doesn’t let us down.

I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that McCain will, in the next week, announce Mitt Romney as his Vice-Presidential choice. Sources close to me have indicated that this will happen. Of course, I’ve been wrong before.

Romney is not a good choice for McCain.  Although he would likely assure McCain’s victory in Michigan and would help in Nevada, Romney is a rather divisive figure in Republican Party politics.  Neither the religious right nor the libertarian wing of the party find much attractive about Romney.  I’ve never heard anyone mention the word ‘Jihad’ more than Romney, either.

Mitt Romney’s positions on key issues have flipped and flopped like the wind.  There is nothing “maverick” about him.  His background is one of wealth and power.  He has spent his entire life in the spotlight.  I don’t believe he will add much to the McCain ticket.

Speaking of former Presidential contenders, I just came across this quote from Mike Huckabee (from May 26, 2008) on the Texas RLC list-serve:

“Republicans need to be Republicans. The greatest threat to classic Republicanism is not liberalism; it’s this new brand of libertarianism, which is social liberalism and economic conservatism, but it’s a heartless, callous, soulless type of economic conservatism because it says ‘look, we want to cut taxes and eliminate government. If it means that elderly people don’t get their Medicare drugs, so be it. If it means little kids go without education and healthcare, so be it.’”

RLC member Ron Wheeler responds: “Unfortunately, this quote reflects the reason why our own party has turned on us. One, it shows that Huckabee has no idea what libertarianism is because he would have known that its been in American politics for centuries. Additionally, it shows that social conservatives are becoming more and more out of step with the ideals of the Republican Party, which leaves a big void for us to fill.”

Mr. Wheeler concludes, “Political parties are always changing. Hopefully we can take advantage of this as our party continues to evolve.”

The Amethyst Initiative, an effort recently launched to inform on the debate over the 21 year-old drinking age, is calling upon elected officials to weigh all the consequences of current alcohol policies and to invite new ideas on how best to prepare young adults to make responsible decisions about alcohol use.

The Republican Liberty Caucus supports the principles of federalism as outlined in the Tenth Amendment: “The power of the federal government should be limited, as per the tenth amendment to the U. S. Constitution.” When the federal government passed the National Minimum Drinking Age Act in 1984, the states surrendered all control over the issue, nationalizing the issue to a set of uniform standards largely influenced by special interest groups such as Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

The new Amethyst Initiative will, hopefully, revive the debate on this important issue. The initiative has empowered university presidents and chancellors to speak out against the 21 year old drinking age. Among the actions the initiative encourages its members to take include:

1. Urge your college presidents and chancellors to support the proposal. A listing of those supporting the initiative is available at http://www.amethystinitiative.org/signatories/.

2. Sign up at http://www.chooseresponsibility.org/get_involved/ to receive updates from the Amethyst Initiative or to volunteer for the cause.

3. Read why each president, in his or her own words, signed the Amethyst Initiative at http://www.amethystinitiative.org/article/view/21723/1/3831.

4. Educate yourself on the issue by reading up on opposing views at http://www.chooseresponsibility.org/debating_the_issues/.

RLC member Michael Mikkelsen has started a campaign to lower the drinking age in the state of Missouri. The initiative, Missouri 18 to Drink, will appear on the ballot in November 2008. Activists in other states can follow Mr. Mikkelsen’s lead.

At the Missouri Secretary of State’s website, it warns: “This proposal would cost state and local governmental entities an estimated $50 million in federal transportation funds, and generate an estimated $6.91 million in state sales taxes, $1.89 million in state excise taxes, and $4.10 million in local sales taxes.” Where is the provision warning Missouri residents of the tremendous harms of ignoring the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution?

Alcohol prohibition ages are much lower in most other countries. Federal involvement in the issue, as in most other issues, has not helped solve the quandary of alcohol abuse.

When current law is not working, it’s time for a change.  A vigorous debate on the issue would do us some good, and that’s all the Amethyst Initiative is encouraging.