Contact: Daniel Encarnacion
Tel.: 843-410-8868
Email: Secretary@RLCSC.org

REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS ENDORSES RAY NASH

Local, State, and National Boards Endorse Former Sheriff in US House District 1 Race

The Republican Liberty Caucus National Board announced Friday that it unanimously voted to endorse former Dorchester County Sheriff Ray Nash in the First Congressional District Special Primary.  They joined previous unanimous decisions by the Lowcountry Chapter Board and the RLC of South Carolina Board of Directors.  There will be a public announcement, of the endorsement, Saturday, March 9th at 11:30 AM in the Summerville Town Square at the corner of Richardson and Hwy 17-A.

According to Mr. Scott Pearson, State Chairman, “The 1st District Congressional Race this year offers the most liberty-minded field of candidates we’ve ever seen in a single race. In a field of 16 candidates, we’re blessed with at least a half dozen that would stand out as strong defenders of liberty, including John Kuhn, Mark Sanford, Elizabeth Moffly, Larry Grooms, Jeff King, and Keith Blandford. However, if we are to have an impact, we believe it is important for those who value limited government to come together behind one candidate. That’s why, today, we are endorsing a strong conservative who knows and values the Constitution, Sheriff Ray Nash.”

Ms. Laurie Turner, Interim Chair of the Lowcountry RLC, said, “We are proud to endorse a constitutional conservative like Ray Nash. His proven leadership as Sheriff in Dorchester County and his work in the community prove he knows his constituents and will represent us well in Washington.”

“In a field of excellent candidates, Ray Nash stands out with the integrity and the dedication to constitutional principles,” said Dave Nalle, RLC National Chairman, “which will make him as great an advocate for the people in Washington as he was a guardian of their rights and safety while in uniform.”

Mr. Nash has been a law enforcement professional for thirty-four years, most recently in Afghanistan as the Criminal Justice Adviser for the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.  During his career, Mr. Nash studied to become a Constitutional scholar, gaining knowledge and an unfailing respect for our country’s faith, heritage and founding principles. According to Sheriff Nash, “our nation is facing a number of moral and Constitutional crises, such as rampant fiscal irresponsibility, unbridled government expansion and an ever growing assault on our Constitutional freedoms.” He believes solutions can be found in the principles of Constitutional conservatism and takes seriously his oath to “Preserve, Protect and Defend…”  Nash demonstrates a knowledge of the Constitution, respect for limited government, and appreciation for the work of the Republican Liberty Caucus.

#####

The Republican Liberty Caucus is a nationwide grassroots organization founded in 1991 that promotes individual liberty, limited government, and free market economics within the Republican Party. You can find more information about the Republican Liberty Caucus of South Carolina at www.rlcsc.org

To find out more about Ray Nash, please visit his website at www.nashforcongress.com.  For more information on the national RLC, visit www.rlc.org.

The post RLC Endorses Ray Nash for SC CD 1 GOP Primary appeared first on Republican Liberty Caucus of South Carolina.

Here are the results from the straw poll taken by the RLCSC at the Patch/SCRN/RLCSC debate tonight:

There were 127 votes total

1. Ray Nash – 27 Votes (21%)
2. Mark Sanford – 20 Votes (16%)
3. Larry Grooms – 16 Votes (13%)
4. Tim Larkin – 15 Votes (12%)
5. Jonathan Hoffman – 9 Votes (7%)
6. John Kuhn – 6 Votes (5%)
6. Chip Limehouse – 6 Votes (5%)
6. Peter McCoy – 6 Votes (5%)
9. Teddy Turner – 5 Votes (4%)
10. Keith Blandford – 4 Votes (3%)
11. Ric Bryant – 3 Votes (2%)
11. Jeff King – 3 Votes (2%)
11. Elizabeth Moffly – 3 Votes (2%)
11. Andy Patrick – 3 Votes (2%)
15. Shawn Pinkston – 1 Vote (<1%)
16. Curtis Bostic – 0 Votes (0%)

Poll demographics:

Of those who indicated who they voted for in 2012, 33% voted for Mitt Romney, 28% voted for Ron Paul, 26% voted for Newt Gingrich, and 13% voted for Rick Santorum.

The post RLCSC Straw Poll Results SC1 appeared first on Republican Liberty Caucus of South Carolina.

This has been a long campaign for liberty and many people have earned our thanks.  Republican Liberty Caucus members played leading roles on every front in 2012 – running for office, working on campaigns, donating unprecedented amounts of money to our federal PAC, helping to promote and fundraise for candidates and serving as delegates to state conventions and ultimately the national convention in Tampa where we were witnesses to the beginnings of the events which culminated in this week’s historic defeat for the Republican Party establishment.  You worked hard with little respect or reward for a cause whose victory sometimes seemed distant and in peril.

There are many who are claiming that this election was a massive defeat for the Republican Party, but after studying the results for two days I’m surprised to be able to report what looks like some major victories for the liberty movement within the party.  Yes, the party took it on Mitt Romney’s chiseled chin, but the party’s losses are not necessarily our losses and while I certainly would have liked to have done better, in comparison to the party as a whole our candidates and our issues fared remarkably well.

Perhaps the most significant victory is a sign of change to come  While the party lost seats in both houses of Congress, the balance of power shifted and liberty candidates gained seats while the party was losing them.  Our endorsees and other sympathetic candidates now control a larger number of seats in both houses of Congress than ever before.  We lost only one incumbent House member and gained at least two solid seats in the Senate while the party lost 3 and gained more seats in the House than the party as a whole lost, effectively doubling the significance of our wins.  The failure of the party leadership and the Romney campaign did suppress turnout and that flowed down to races at lower levels, costing some of our most promising candidates wins they might have had in better years.   Yet 2014 is just around the corner and I expect many of those same candidates to run again and in an off year election we can anticipate the same kind of strong results we had in 2010 and more.

Two RLC candidates won new seats for liberty in the Senate, Ted Cruz (TX) and past endorsee Jeff Flake (AZ).  Four new liberty candidates took seats in the House, including RLC endorsees Steve Stockman (TX-36), Kerry Bentivolio (MI-11), Thomas Massie (KY-4) and Ted Yoho (FL-3) who was overlooked for endorsement.  Many previously endorsed candidates won reelection in the House, including Justin Amash, Tom McClintock, Walter Jones, Jim Jordan, Mick Mulvaney and others.  Perhaps most significantly hundreds of our endorsees won or held onto seats in state government, giving us a very deep bench to run for higher office going into the 2014 election.  Many other great candidates ran strong campaigns and came awfully close to winning, but the weakness of the national campaign and lack of support from state and national party organizations were challenges they couldn’t overcome.  With more independent funding and resources we expect them to do much better in 2014.

We also saw victories on key issues in several states.  Marijuana was legalized in Colorado and Washington and decriminalized in Massachusetts, which is likely to lead to a very important showdown over state sovereignty as the Obama administration and the DEA crack down on those states attempt to form independent drug policy.  In addition, Washington, Maryland and Maine voted to legalize same-sex marriage, a clear challenge to the unconstitutional federal Defense of Marriage Act, and while we prefer a non-governmental solution to the marriage issue, the passage of these propositions was at least a politically achievable step towards greater liberty for more people.  Less publicized but possibly equally important, Alabama, Montana and Wyoming voted on initiatives to nullify aspects of Obamacare within their borders, another development likely to provoke a constitutional showdown with the Obama administration.  It’s not going to be an easy four years for the president or his unconstitutional abuses of power.

Finally, after the attacks on the grassroots of the party launched by the Romney campaign, party leaders and special interests, in many ways a Romney defeat is a victory for Liberty Republicans.  In the long term it may benefit us more than defeating Obama would have.  The party establishment and the special interests which back them placed all their bets on Romney and his failure was their failure as well.  They have lost credibility with all the grassroots groups in the party and they are saddled with the blame for the abuses of power and bad choices which led to this debacle.  Now everyone knows what we have known for years.  If the Republican Party is to survive it needs a substantive change of leadership and a return to principles which can win elections.

After this election it is much more likely that our next presidential nominee will have strong liberty principles and Rand Paul’s stock as a presidential contender is way up.  We should also expect to see the party distance itself from single issue voters on the religious right and a deemphasis of divisive social issues.  This might well be the jolt the party needs to become the fiscally conservative and socially tolerant party which it needs to be in order to win and if it doesn’t happen quickly, we’re here to give change a push.

While this may not be the time for open celebration, this election has created many opportunities to expand the liberty movement within the Republican Party and our voices will be stronger and our opponents weaker than every before as we start a new political cycle.  We have more members with substantial campaign experience, we have better campaign funding channels and we have more experienced candidates.  Plus the Obama administration will supply us with plenty of opportunities for issue activism which can raise the profile of RLC leaders and our pro-liberty, small government agenda.

I’m looking forward to two years of great opportunities for growing liberty and winning key victories in the ongoing campaign to reclaim the Republican Party and make it the vehicle for the restoration of the Republic.

In this election year the Republican Liberty Caucus PAC has raised a record amount of money to give directly to our endorsed candidates and through strategic partnerships with other pro-liberty SuperPACs we have helped direct even more money to those candidates in indirect expenditures.
We spent about half of our money in the primaries where we were successful in helping a number of candidates get through to the general election and saw key victories, especially three wins in Texas for Ted Cruz, Steve Stockman and Jessica Puente Bradshaw.

Many of those candidates ended up in relatively safe positions in the general election so we redirected our efforts towards six key congressional races with candidates who were within striking distance of a win with a little help.  Picking the candidates was tough, because we found that we had to pass over candidates we really liked who were just polling too far behind for our support to make enough difference to help them significantly.  Once we found a set of races where we really thought we could make a difference, we got to work raising more money so that we would have enough to give each of these candidates a boost in the home stretch – enough money to help buy critical radio and television ads in the final weeks of the campaign.

With a week to go before the election it’s not too late to do a little bit more to help in these key races with a direct donation.  Our list of targeted candidate below includes links to their donation pages.

On election day keep an eye on these races.  If they win our efforts will have paid off and we’ll have more powerful and reliable advocates for liberty in Washington.

#1 – DAN HALLORAN (NY-6)

Dan Halloran is the past chairman of the RLC of New York, a longtime advocate for liberty and small government on the New York City Council and a proven winner in past campaigns. He’s running neck and neck with a big-dollar Democrat in a unique district where he has won before. His campaign got a real boost when scandal surfaced in his Democrat opponent’s family, giving him a very real chance of staging a historic upset victory. We want to help him step up to Congress where we think that with his charisma and leadership skills he will be a key asset in the fight for liberty. Contribute directly to the campaign.

#2 – DAN SEBRING (WI-4)

Dan Sebring has been running a very energetic campaign and is getting a surprisingly large amount of positive press coverage. He came very close to winning this district in 2010 and with some redistricting changes he may be better off this year. He’s a kind of working-man’s liberty candidate, an approach which works well in Wisconsin. We think he’s earned a win and we want to do what we can to help him reach the voters he needs to pull off a strong victory.Contribute directly to the campaign

#3 – JESSICA PUENTE BRADSHAW (TX-34)

In a race which has been largely overlooked by the media and party leaders, Jessica Puente Bradshaw has built a powerful coalition of Liberty Republicans and young latino voters which looks like a winning combination for her district in southeast Texas. Despite the fact that the district was redistricted to lean Democrat she has received so much local support that we think she can beat the odds and launch what we hope will be a surge of support for Liberty Republicans among latino voters in South Texas and even nationwide. Make a direct contribution

#4 – KERRY BENTIVOLIO (MI-11)

When Thaddeus McCotter failed to qualify for the ballot, Liberty Republican primary challenger Kerry Bentivolio gained a unique opportunity to run for a Republican controlled seat in Congress with no real primary opposition. He has taken that momentum and moved it on to what looks like a winning general election campaign, but the Democrats and unions are doing everything they can to stop him, so we’re doing all we can to help. Contribute directly to the campaign.

#5 – DON VOLARIC (MI-9)

With Justin Amash already representing Liberty Republican principles in the 4th Congressional District of Michigan and Kerry Bentivolio on the inside track in the 11th district, many of our Michigan RLC members have taken an interest in the Don Volaric campaign in the 9th district.  His support has been growing fast and if there is a wave of support for Liberty candidates across the state we think Volaric has a good chance of joining Amash and Bentivolio in the House next year. Contribute directly to the campaign.

#6 – THOMAS MASSIE (KY-4)

Thomas Massie was one of the first House candidates we endorsed this year, a dedicated champion of small government and individual liberty following in the footsteps of Rand Paul in Kentucky.  His campaign got off to a very strong start with a lot of national publicity surrounding his primary win, and though it has had less attention in the later days of the campaign we think that with a final push of support he can pull out a win in what promises to be a close vote in the general election. Make a direct contribution

For Release: July 30, 2012

Contact: Dave Nalle (chairman@rlc.org or 512-656-8011)

Dewhurst-Cruz Race is a Test of the Character of Texas Republicans and the Future Direction of the Party

Texas is one of a handful of states which use a primary runoff system which helps open up the process and makes it somewhat easier for insurgent candidates to challenge incumbents and establishment picked candidates.  This process has created important opportunities for liberty candidates in this year’s Republican primary.  The result is that out of a very large field of great liberty contenders we’ve ended up with four outstanding RLC endorsees in position to win their primaries.  And in most parts of Texas winning the Republican primary is almost the same as winning the general election.

The primary was about a month ago and there are about two and a half weeks to go until the runoff vote.  In the last few weeks these liberty contenders have been racking up important endorsements.  The Republican Liberty Caucus endorsed them before the primary.  This week the influential Young Conservatives of Texas endorsed all four of them.  Local Republican parties, delegates and clubs are getting on board and momentum really seems to be building behind what has turned into a kind of liberty slate for the state.

Leading the pack is Senatorial candidate Ted Cruz.  Cruz and the Texas RLC have worked closely together during the campaign.  He was the headliner at a series of candidate events we held around the state, lending his coattails to other promising candidates and going above and beyond to meet with Liberty Republicans and grassroots activists whenever he had a chance.  He made it to the runoff out of a very crowded field and is now running a very contentious campaign with a great deal of mud being slung at him by his opponent Lt. Governor David Dewhurst who is the ultimate wealthy and powerful insider – as close to an incumbent as you can get without already holding office.  Cruz has taken strong positions in opposition to the NDAA, CISPA and other civil liberties overreaches from the federal government.  He’s not perfect on every issue, but he has been endorsed by Rand Paul and Ron Paul and every other RLC endorsee in the Senate and they really want him in DC to help them push a small government, pro-liberty agenda.  Ted’s opponent is spending over $1 million a week on deceptive attack ads.  He could use your help to fight back if you can contribute anything.

A top contender among our congressional candidates is Wes Riddle who is running in CD25 just south of Austin.  Wes is a former RLC of Texas board member, a military veterans and  former instructor at West Point, and a leader of extraordinary integrity.  He has written a very good book about his ideas on liberty and he exemplifies the kind of conservative-leaning libertarian leaders we tend to produce in Texas.  Wes was just endorsed by Ron Paul, making him one of a small group Paul has tagged as his potential successors in the House of Representatives. Wes is running against a well-funded insider named Roger Williams who is a hardcore religious conservative and has a large fortune from his chain of car dealerships. He’s outspending Wes 10 to 1, but Wes has the grassroots support and they are neck and neck in polls. Williams was a big supporter of the auto bailout and his wife actually lobbied in DC for bailout money on behalf of GM. Wes needs all the help he can get to defeat Williams, so if you can give anything don’t hold back.

Jessica Puente Bradshaw is running in CD34 in southeast Texas against a party insider who has been running a pretty desperate smear campaign. She started out as an underdog, but with a cascade of new endorsements she’s taking the lead in her race. She’s been a big supporter of the RLC, appearing on our live video events and appearing as the featured guest at our RLC party at the state GOP convention last month. Her positions on liberty issues are excellent and she can be a real firebrand. Of the RLC endorsees who have made the runoffs she comes closest to embodying our ideal combination of strong pro-liberty positions and political pragmatism. Putting a hispanic Republican woman with the same philosophy as Ron Paul in Congress in 2012 would be a real coup. Help her out if you can.

Steve Stockman, running in the new CD36, is a former congressman who was an ally of Ron Paul during his brief term in Congress in the 1990s and got squeezed out by redistricting. Now he’s on his way back with a lot of support from an old guard of liberty-leaning Republicans in east Texas. His race is peculiar, with his main opposition from a wealthy former Democrat who seems to have almost no Republican credentials. Steve has backing from the RLC and local tea party groups and various statewide conservative organizations, but lags behind in fundraising. Nonetheless he has a real chance at a win and could use all the support he can get.

While it’s unfortunate that the Texas congressional delegation is losing Ron Paul next year, with such a great slate of candidates who have already made it into winnable runoff elections, it seems quite likely that Texas will have an even stronger role in promoting a pro-liberty agenda than we do now. No one can really replace Ron Paul, but four new Liberty Republicans in Congress and one in the Senate might be even better.

The runoff election is on July 31st and we’re expecting low turnout, normally a bad thing, but in this situation it favors informed and highly motivated voters and that describes the liberty constituency pretty well.

May 29, 2012 (Arlington, VA) – The Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia announced its endorsement of three Republican candidates for U.S. House of Representatives this past weekend at its annual state convention. They are Floyd Bayne, running in the 7th Congressional District, Ken Vaughn, running in the 11th Congressional District, and Karen Kwiatkowski, running in the 6thCongressional District.

All three candidates patiently pursued the RLC-VA’s endorsement patiently and persistently, demonstrating ample commitment to limited government, liberty and federalism.

Floyd Bayne is a teacher from Chesterfield County, holding a B.A. in history from Mary Baldwin College. He is running because he has “become increasingly frustrated with the lack of common sense and adherence to our Constitution in Washington, D.C. I kept waiting and waiting for a candidate to come along whom I could trust and who shared my concerns for our country. I continued to be frustrated, so I chose to act. I was not pleased with the continued actions of my own representative, which grew the federal leviathan and spent money recklessly. So, I am hoping to prove that one can serve as a citizen-legislator and not seek to become a career-politician.”, per his
website

View Floyd Bayne’s speech to the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia state convention

Ken Vaughn is a traffic engineer from Herndon, Virginia, holding a B.S. in civil engineering from Tulane University, and a Master’s in civil engineering from Texas A&M. He is running because “After obtaining my master’s degree, I settled in the metro DC area to work in the private sector, raise a family, and eventually start my own business in northern Virginia. As a career engineer, I am, by definition, interested in how things work. I feel compelled to try to fix things that do not work. Washington is broken, and I would like to help fix it. I’m running for Congress because we have too many career politicians and too few public servants. Unlike such career politicians, I will serve for a limited time, will support, protect, and defend the Constitution, will use my private sector experience to fix the mess we are in, and will return home to live under the laws that Congress passes.”, per his
website

View Ken Vaughn’s speech to the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia state convention

Karen Kwiatkowski is a farmer and rancher from Mount Jackson, holding several degrees, including an M.A. from Harvard in government, an M.S. in science management from the University of Alaska, and a Ph.D. in world politics from Catholic University of America. She’s running to “reduce, redirect and rein-in the federal government.”, per her
website

View Karen Kwiatkowski’s speech to the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia state convention

RLC-Virginia Chairman Robert Kenyon said “We’re very glad to have several candidates in Virginia this year who are solid liberty Republicans. For too long, we’ve been stuck with the same old establishment politicians. This year we have a chance to build on what we accomplished in 2010 by electing even more liberty Republicans. The State Board of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia is proud to join the National Board of the Republican Liberty Caucus in supporting these three warriors for liberty.”

Last night’s State of the Union address had a more positive tone than I had originally expected. But it still carried a hypocritical juxtaposition of calling on Americans to come together and adopt reforms that create jobs and lift the burden on businesses, improve our children’s educational opportunities, and achieve energy independence while also touting the divisive rhetoric that drives us against each other and drives us to blame the wrong causes for our current situation.

Much of what President Obama said tonight was true. It is true that mortgages were lent to those who could not afford them. It is true that companies are shipping jobs overseas and at the same time receiving tax breaks. It is true that with the death of Osama Bin Laden and numerous Al Qaeda leaders, America is much safer. And it is true that millions of new jobs have been created since he took office.

The positives may sound good when you phrase them as such. But the grim reality is that the problems America faces are so significant, that the good things that have happened under this administration are eclipsed. While these jobs were being created, millions of jobs were being eliminated. We still have fewer jobs than when the president took office. And whether he likes to admit it or not, his own policies have played a part in this anemic growth.

EPA regulations piled on by this administration have cost us over 5% of our GDP, and that’s just one federal department of many. The Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill will cost $30 billion that we don’t have. The Small Business Administration estimates that the compliance cost of our current regulatory environment is $1.75 trillion per year. President Obama alone cannot be blamed for this, as his predecessors and those in Congress passed many of these regulations prior to 2009.

The president failed to mention that government programs incentivized lending of mortgages to those who could not afford them. Federal laws demanded banks loosen their restrictions or face legal action. The Federal Reserve further incentivized banks to comply by offering them easy credit. They lowered interest rates causing investors to put their money into long term projects and many focused on residential construction.

With his re-appointment of Ben Bernanke to chair the Federal Reserve System, this inflationary policy of unnaturally and artificially low interest rates has continued. The Fed has injected trillions of dollars into our economy under this administration, money which is not backed by matching economic growth or a significant demand for US dollars. This has caused the value of our currency to drop, and commodities such as gasoline have jumped in price as a result of a speculative bubble.

President Obama could have partially alleviated this problem by promoting domestic drilling for oil and the construction of new refineries, while we wait for science to develop inexpensive renewable energy. Instead, he has chosen to stand in the way of domestic oil production, while we continue to send billions of dollars to the Saudi elite, and turn a blind eye as they send that money to violent, theocratic institutions all over the world. He turned down the Keystone oil pipeline which would run from our largest supplier of oil—Canada—to the world’s most high-tech refineries in Houston.

It would have created tens of thousands of new jobs, including many for union workers that support Obama enthusiastically. They have been denied this opportunity in favor of capitulating to a lobby of environmental zealots known for its dishonesty in promoting its agenda.

The president covered a topic that I have focused much of my attention on in recent years: education. While he briefly touted the importance of returning control to local communities and schools, the other solutions he proposed are not only wrong, but they would further damage a K-12 system that is already a miserable failure at meeting the needs of the 21st century economy.

The president proposed forcing students to stay in school until they are 18 and claimed this would improve overall education. With all due respect, this is dead wrong. We have to get out of this ‘everyone gets a trophy’ mentality and realize that some children just will not learn. By forcing them to stay in school they hold back those of our children who have the drive to succeed. It is sad and politically incorrect to mention this, but it is true.

It has been mentioned in the writings of Jim Blockey, a reform school teacher from Las Vegas, I’ve discussed it with Robert Mansfield of Pennsylvania; a man born to a drug-addicted mother who grew up on the streets of Philadelphia with nothing and who rose to success when he returned to school, got his GED and joined the Army where he rose to the rank of Sergeant.I have heard even more examples from my friends who attended failing government schools in the inner cities of Ohio.

Although early childhood education in this country is world class, by the time our children reach high school, students in European countries like Belgium beat us on a number of metrics. Students in Japan, South Korea and Singapore blow us out of the water. China isn’t messing around either. They are targeting their most skilled students and placing them into advanced programs. When those students come to our universities they trounce their American peers in mathematics and natural sciences, and then our broken immigration system forces them to return to China and use the skills that we taught them against us in the global economy. A better system would incentivize and enable them to become Americans, and grow our economy instead.

The Belgians and the Japanese emphasize on the importance of school choice and privatization of education. And the British and the Japanese both emphasize on the important of the individual. Their programs are customized to fit the abilities of each student. In Japan, education is mandatory till around 15 years of age, at which they get their equivalent of our GED. Their upper-tier secondary schools are optional, and yet over 95% of Japanese students continue their education beyond the mandatory requirements. These programs are customized as either vocational education or preparation for university.

And one third of these schools are private!

In Great Britain, when you are 16, you can stay in the system, go to a trade school, or if you are smart enough go straight to college. Some states have adopted similar programs right here in America, where gifted students can achieve associates degrees upon graduating. I propose that we don’t waste their time teaching things they don’t need in the career they want.

We need to take heed to what the Belgians, the British and especially our Japanese friends have done. We shouldn’t mandate education to 18; we should eliminate the high school diploma and require a GED at the end of what is currently 9th grade as they do in Japan. Then make tenth through twelfth grade a customizable and optional program. Let students have choices of vocational programs, college preparatory programs, and if they are skilled enough, let them go straight to college. Provide a system that can ensure our 18 year olds truly are adults by giving them the marketable skills they need to make a living wage instead of mooching off of mom and dad into their twenties.

The status quo is unacceptable! And it fosters this sort of environment. To those who are worried about the students who wouldn’t go to school beyond their GED, they can always take the unskilled labor jobs and then work their way up the ladder or choose to continue their education at a later time in life. What makes such a system work so well is that the market will determine what skills are needed and relevant programs will be supplied.

This one-size-fits-all everyone-needs-to-go-to-college mentality is causing us to fall behind the competition. It is creating an education bubble that will inevitably burst. Many of these college degrees are becoming useless, rendering starting salaries that are not significantly higher than a high school diploma. The focus must be on marketable skills. General education is never a bad thing and should be viewed as a virtue, but it can only go so far.

The best possible system we can provide for our children is a system of individual choice, with a supply of curriculum determined by the market economy’s demand. A system that empowers parents, rewards the best students, and the best teachers, and yes—a system that discourages and reprimands failure.

The president went on to claim that college tuition is too high, and if it continues to rise he will pull subsidies from those universities. He’s right to acknowledge the avarice of our university system: costing its students thousands in waste on unnecessary programs and fees that should either be privately funded or purchased a la carte at the individual level.

Yet, he fails to understand the prime reason why tuition has risen at twice the rate of inflation and four times the wage rate. The federal government’s guarantee of all student loans has given greedy academics and administrators an opportunity that they would not have in a free market. They have constantly jacked up their prices, knowing that the government would credit the money to them no matter what, and the students would get stuck with the bill.

In the state of today’s economy, no one between the ages of 18 and 22 with the exception of military, civil service and a few lucky kids who invested from their teen years would be able to apply for a loan at a bank to pay over $10,000 a year for full-time tuition and living expense financing unless they had either a parent or credit-worthy friend co-sign for them. I know because I borrow primarily from a credit union to finance my education. Without a co-signer I likely would not have been approved, and if I was approved, my interest rate would be over 10%.

But the government federally guarantees many financial options for students who have little to no credit history. This has allowed the universities to set their tuition and fees well above a true market rate. In a free market where the finance was out of pocket or credit-based, they could not do this. Their classrooms would sit empty at those prices, and they would go bankrupt. Ending the federal department of education would quickly slash tuition prices in half, and prices would finally begin to increase in conjunction with wages and inflation.

When my father went to college in the 1970s, you borrowed directly from the school. A full-time summer job was enough to cover a year’s tuition and much of your living expenses at a state university. My father came here a poor immigrant, went to a small private college, and worked part time as a manual laborer. He graduated on time and with two years of debt.

My generation has not been so lucky.

This achievement by my father is the American Dream that we should want for all of our children, and it is morally wrong to deny them the benefits of a free market where they have the power to control their own destinies.

The message of class envy is dividing us and acting against the interests of that dream. Claiming that a job creating class is not paying their fair share when the top 1% of earners pay nearly 40% of the income taxes and the top 10% pay 70% of income taxes is ludicrous. But loopholes favoring one business over another certainly must go.

Our country needs a fairer, flatter tax. We need low rates for all, but we need few to no deductions. Compliance with our current tax laws cost American businesses nearly half a trillion dollars every year. Corporate taxes only make up 9% of our federal revenue yet their punitive nature begs the question: are they really worth it? What if the economic growth that was unleashed as a result of their elimination put so many people back to work, that the income tax revenue increased not only to offset that 9%, but to surpass it?

President Obama mentioned that companies are receiving tax breaks while they offshore jobs, and he mentioned the importance of incentivizing them with tax breaks to bring those jobs back here. There are over one trillion American dollars sitting overseas because investors don’t want it to be taxed by both the foreign country and the United States upon its return. Presidential candidate Ron Paul, former candidate Herman Cain, and myself all support a common sense solution to this problem.

I call upon President Obama to eliminate taxes on all foreign money repatriated into the U.S. economy. Let these corporations and businesspeople know that if they use that money to create American jobs, they can bring it back tax free! This is something that everyone should get behind! One trillion dollars is a lot of money with the potential to create millions of new jobs. If the president and both parties in congress are serious about restoring this economy to greatness, then a bill will be brought up and soon eliminating the repatriation tax, and President Obama will not hesitate to sign it.

There is too much at stake here to play class warfare politics. If government stole the entire net worth of every billionaire on the planet, not just in the U.S., it would total up to $4.5 trillion. Under this administration, the national debt has increased by over $5 trillion . We have debt because we spend too much, not because we tax too little. Both parties are to blame. We cannot afford our so-called entitlement system as is and we cannot afford a foreign policy of being the world’s policeman.

Now that we are out of Iraq President Obama said he wants to take that money, spend half of it to pay down the debt and half to build our own infrastructure. What he failed to mention was that there are no actual savings from the end of the Iraq War. We borrowed and printed money to finance our operations there and continue to do so in Afghanistan. There is no sudden influx of revenue we can use to pay down the debt, there is only a smaller deficit.

The President must realize that this is a Now or Never moment to prevent our country from going the way of many great empires in history, destroying itself under massive debt from an affluent society at home and a thinly spread militarism.

Do not give up on bipartisanship, Mr. President. Despite the differences between you and the Republicans, you can still get started on these things. Take a look at the recommendations of the Erskine-Bowles commission. Find the things in there that you and the Republicans can agree on, and immediately pass them. It will not be the end-all-be-all solution, but it is far better than doing nothing.

We owe it to future generations to actually build them a future. I understand the pressures of an election cycle, Mr. President. But the best way to get reelected is to do right by the American people. Embracing the free-market, ending corporatism, foreign nation building, and unsustainable benefit programs is the only way to save the American Dream.

Thank you, and God Bless America!

————————————————————————————————

Aaron Alghawi is finishing his B.S. in Economics at Texas A&M University; he is a board member and Director of Student Outreach for the Republican Liberty Caucus.