For Immediate Release: June 24, 2010

Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas Calls on Party Leaders to Address Problems with Anti-Gay Platform Planks

CONTACT: Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas
(512) 656-8011

AUSTIN, TX – At the state Republican convention earlier this month, Texas Republicans opted to abandon the Republican tradition of respecting the Constitution and protecting individual liberty and privacy rights by adopting a platform which includes planks attacking the civil liberties of certain Texans.

The platform advocates policies which would make it a felony to perform a same-sex marriage in Texas, which would re-criminalize sodomy and which would take away the rights of gay parents in custody cases. These proposals are contrary to the values of most Texans and run counter to the Republican tradition of vigorously defending individual liberty.

The Republican Liberty Caucus strongly opposes the Texas GOP platform’s anti-gay and anti-liberty planks. We call for the state party to take action to address this problem. While it may not be possible to repeal or change the party platform, the state leadership should issue a clear statement that the platform is non-binding and does not represent the core, shared beliefs of Texas Republicans or of our candidates.

In a year in which we are looking forward to extraordinary opportunities for a great slate of Republican candidates in Texas, it would be a terrible mistake to shackle them to a platform which will alienate many potential supporters. This platform will weaken the party at a time when a strong coalition of Republicans and independents is needed to stop the radical agenda of Democrats in both Austin and Washington.

“We need to focus on keeping the government out of our pocketbooks; especially in Texas,” said Texas RLC Chairman, Joey Dauben of Ellis County. “There are far more pressing problems for the GOP in our state to worry about. While I personally disagree with same-sex marriage from a Biblical perspective, marriage is a contract between individuals and God, not with the government. If we want government out of our wallets and our boardrooms, we should also keep government out of our churches and our bedrooms.”

The Republican Liberty Caucus believes that cutting government spending is more important than wasting our limited resources on policies that open Texas to lawsuits and treat some citizens in a different manner than other citizens. Texas RLC members believe divisive social issues should be put on the back burner and instead the focus should be on solving real problems.

We call on the state party to send a clear message to voters that the this platform does not represent the highest ideals of our party and that as a party we support individual liberty and equal rights for all Texans.

–30—

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas advocates constitutionally limited government, individual liberty and traditional Republican values. It is part of a nationwide organization which shares those goals and has local organizations in almost every state. This year the RLC has endorsed hundreds of candidates nationwide, including Rand Paul (KY), John Dennis (CA), Peter Schiff (CT), Mike Lee (UT), and Nikki Haley (SC).

For more information on the Texas chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus, visit http://www.rlctx.org. For information on the national RLC, visit http://www.rlc.org.

Yesterday I discussed the Maine Republican Party Convention, where Delegates decided to adopt a new platform. Above is a very brief video of the vote taking place. Note how the Chair required two votes because she obviously did not think the Constitution-friendly platform was going to pass.

I wasn’t at the Maine Republican Party Convention this weekend, so it’s hard for me to comment on what occurred. From the accounts I have read, it appears that some of the constitutionalist wing of the Republican Party (Ron Paul supporters, mostly) — including some Tea Party activists — felt unrepresented at the previous Maine Republican Party Convention and planned to make themselves a known quantity at the Convention this weekend.

They did so by organizing in advance. Several of them made it onto the Platform Committee and several others had proposed changes to the platform that would strike moderate phraseology and replace it with more hard-line stances. I commend these activists for actually working to change the Republican Party from within. That’s the mission of the Republican Liberty Caucus!

About 1,800 folks attended the Convention, so for the Ron Paul faction of the party to have any impact at all shows just how much influence Ron Paul and the Tea Parties have had over the Republican Party in the past two years.

The platform now features:

- A declaration of state sovereignty
- A call for the passage of “read the bill” legislation
- Opposition to the fairness doctrine
- Opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act
- Investigation of global warming shenanigans
- Balancing the federal budget and paying off debt
- A call for Auditing the Federal Reserve
- Rejecting cap and trade
- Freezing future stimulus payments
- Institute zero based budgeting
- A statement that health care is not a right
- Eliminating the Department of Education
- Prohibiting funding for ACORN or like organizations
- Opposition to any and all treaties with the United Nations
- The passage of a Congressional reform act, including:
….. o 12 year term limits for all members of Congress
….. o Removal of Congressional pensions
….. o Forcing Congress to participate in Social Security and health care (the same system we use)
- “Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion”
- Nativist anti-immigrant language, including the removal of Maine’s “sanctuary state” status
- A declaration to “Seal the Borders”
- a statement that marriage should be between a man and woman
- “Return to the principles of Austrian economics”
- Resisting the creation of “one world government”

At first glance, this seems like a major victory, but hold on.

Republican Liberty Caucus of Maine Chairman Ken Lindell and former RLC National Committeeman Matt Gagnon (who hails from The Pine Tree state) both find several problems with the platform overhaul. I do, too.

According to Lindell, a former Maine State Representative, “There is a whole lot of stuff in the new platform that I really like and really dislike. It would have been better if the Platform Committee had done its job and taken the proposals for changes to the platform seriously. The end result would have been better written and more presentable.” Although he does conclude, “I think that it is a very positive development that activists who are new to the party have been able to succeed where earlier they were simply ignored and dismissed.”

Says Gagnon: “It is very obviously slapped together, and almost entirely Federally focused in nature. I do not believe this platform gives very many reasons at all for Maine voters to vote for the Republican Party.”

I agree with my colleagues.

But more importantly, when did gay-bashing, a fence along the border, or religious dogma become part of the movement for less government and more freedom?

Ron Paul supporters should respect Ron Paul’s original positions on these issues:

1) Homosexuals are fellow human beings who should be afforded equality under the law.
2) Immigrants should be respected with the same dignity we afford other Americans; people should be free to seek out better lives for themselves and their families; the problem is with the entitlement society that has been fostered by decades of government dependency.
3) Religion is a private matter that should be kept out of government.

I would have preferred the platform without the last six points mentioned above. I don’t know how returning to Austrian economics is possible when our country has never been guided by Austrian economics.

Overall, the platform is a step in the right direction, but it still not a libertarian document.

Chris Moody at Cato blogs about a panel held at Cato in which three Members of Congress admit that most Republican Members of Congress now recognize it was a mistake to invade Iraq.

Check it out.

So why are the NRSC, NRCC, and Republican National Committee still propping up Dick Cheney and Karl Rove again?

The Alameda County Republican Party (ACRP) in California has a history of hostility, lawsuits, and in-fighting. But the November 17th monthly meeting is shaping up to be a war zone.

Last week, the ACRP Executive Committee gave their approval (4 ayes, 1 no, 1 abstain) to a resolution that would make a non-interventionist foreign policy the official position of the county party.

To pass, the resolution must receive 2/3rds approval from County Committee members at the November 17th meeting in San Leandro.

The county party is lead by RLC member Jerry Salcido, and most of its officers are also RLC members.  Looking at the Alameda County GOP Central Committee, I see at least 12-15 RLC members, too.  I guess we’ll find out if we have a majority on November 17.

Hopefully other county Republican Parties also consider adopting this proposed resolution.

Alameda County Republican Party — Proposed Resolution
Submitted by: Walter Stanley III, David LaTour, and Jerry Salcido

“Whereas, our foreign policy of the past century is deeply flawed and has not served our national security interests; and

Whereas, the terrorist threat is a predictable consequence of our meddling in the affairs of others and has nothing to do with us being free and prosperous; and

Whereas, propping up repressive regimes in the Middle East endangers America and our allies; and

Whereas, occupying countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan is directly related to the hatred directed toward us; and

Whereas, losing over 6,000 American Military personnel in the Middle East since September 11, 2001 is not a fair trade off for the loss of nearly 3,000 American citizens, no matter how many Iraqi, Pakistani and Afghan people are killed or displaced; and

Whereas, torture, even if referred to as “enhanced interrogation techniques” is self-destructive and produces no useful information and that contracting it out to a third world country or a corporation is just as evil; and

Whereas, war and military spending is always destructive to the economy; and

Whereas, war time spending is paid for through the deceitful process of inflating and borrowing; and

Whereas, war time conditions always undermine personal liberty; and

Whereas, we as small government conservatives see our government’s interventionist foreign policy providing the greatest incentive to expand the government; and

Whereas, the only logical, conservative position is to reject military intervention and managing an empire throughout the world; and

Whereas, the official positions for going to war are almost always based on lies and promoted by war propaganda in order to serve special interests; and

Whereas, the quest for empire eventually destroys all great nations; and

Whereas, our aggressive foreign policy and seemingly permanent presence in other countries throughout the world has served to weaken our national defense at home; and

Whereas, the borders’ of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are more secure than our own borders here at home; and

Whereas, our foreign policy has nothing to do with national security and never changes from one administration to the next; and

Whereas, Christianity teaches peace and not preventive wars of aggression; and

Whereas, diplomacy is superior to bombs and bribes and the illusion of protecting America; and

Whereas, the aggressive foreign policy of so called “neo-conservatives” is anything but conservative and has wasted more than $1 trillion on nation building and billions more on foreign aid; and

Whereas, there is a strong tradition of non-interventionism in the Republican Party that is exemplified by the legacy of Senator Robert Taft and the Old Right.

Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Alameda County Republican Party supports a non-interventionist foreign policy as advocated by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, and believes costly undeclared wars and the occupation of other countries only serves to weaken our national defense and strengthen the resolve along with the ranks of our enemies.

2009 is the year of the party purge.

That’s one way of characterizing what has been taking place in the Republican Party as it relates to Republican Liberty Caucus members.

As voters that identify as Republicans continue to plummet to new lows (just 20 percent according to an October ABC/Washington Post survey), some state or local Republican Parties have targeted their most liberty-oriented members (undoubtedly members of the Republican Liberty Caucus) for removal.

An interesting strategy to build the Republican coalition — let’s boot out the Republicans that most value the Republican Party platform!

RLC members in Florida and Indiana — and, now, Tennessee — have been removed from elected positions, or have been targeted for removal.

Last week, the Davidson County Republican Party — representing the largest county in Tennessee — announced an effort to remove Vice-Chairman Matt Collins from his elected position. The Davidson County Republican Party Executive Committee voted 14 to 5 to begin the process to remove Mr. Collins from his position.

Collins is also the Vice-Chairman of the recently formed Republican Liberty Caucus of Tennessee. In response, the RLC has issued a press release defending Mr. Collins.

“This is the third state in the last year in which party insiders have tried to purge grassroots activists belonging to the Republican Liberty Caucus,” said Dave Nalle, National Chair of the Republican Liberty Caucus. Purges also took place in Marion County, Indiana, where RLC member Liz Karlson was removed from her Ward Chair position, and in Florida, where five Republican Liberty Caucus members were removed from the party for criticizing party leadership or opposing candidates with a history of fiscal irresponsibility and raising taxes.

The Republican Party has a tradition of diversity, tolerance, and support for freedom of speech and the right of dissent. The Republican Liberty Caucus is encouraging its members to contact RNC Chairman Michael Steele and Tennessee RNC Committeemembers Peggy Lambert and John Ryder to ask for their intervention in the matter. The RLC press release includes additional contact information for interested parties.

According to RLC Chairman Dave Nalle, “It looks like a weak faction which barely gained control of the county party decided that Matt Collins and his supporters threatened their positions of power, so despite the fact that he has not violated any rules, they decided to override the party members who voted him into office and force him out.”

I was very interested to see the reaction of many Republicans to the over-the-top behavior of the extreme right in the wake of the assassination of abortion doctor George Tiller earlier this week. On The Next Right they quickly removed an offensive article and comments had loudly condemned the author. On Little Green Footballs they posted a substantial article condemning commenters and posters on several other right-leaning blogs for their comments about Tiller. These reactions give a clear impression that more and more mainstream Republicans are fed up with the fanaticism of the religious right, sickened over their behavior over the Tiller issue and just about ready to give them the boot.

Is it possible that this incident is the straw which finally broke the camel’s back and has created an unhealable rift between rational conservatives and the extremists of the religious right? Even Republicans who are socially conservative seem to have had enough of the extremist rhetoric and support for violence coming from people like Fred Phelps and Randall Terry. They seem to have woken up to the fact that the fanaticism and terrorism they oppose in the Islamic world is not much different from the beliefs held by some they considered allies.

As Barry Goldwater pointed out many years ago, the one thing which Republicans ought to be extreme about is liberty and on all other issues they ought to be rational and pragmatic. Maybe that lesson which he spent decades trying to teach with his own actions, is finally sinking in.

The obsession with legislating morality and with opposition to abortion and gay rights is really not part of the core Republican agenda. These ideas and the fanaticism they inspire were brought into the party through its alliance in the post-Reagan era with religious conservatives. Historically, Republicans have had a laissez faire attitude, not just to the economy, but also on moral issues. Republicans used to be dispassionate, leaving moral decisions in the hands of individuals and keeping government out of the picture. It seems like the pendulum might be swinging back in that direction.

As Abraham Lincoln said many years ago, our nation and by extension the Republican Party, was “conceived in liberty” and that idea of individual liberty ought to be the basis of every policy and every decision which Republicans make. There is very little question that abortion is a sin, but shouldn’t that sin be a matter of personal responsibility to be resolved between the individual and his or her soul and church and god? Once you get government involved, a change in policy or administration could as easily mean forced abortion and sterilization as you have in China as it could mean protecting unborn fetuses. Putting such personal decisions in the hands of government can only work out badly when there is the potential to go to either extreme.

This change in attitude in the GOP seems real and very significant. It has been building for years, starting with uneasiness with many Bush administration policies and perhaps culminating with the Tiller incident. That doesn’t mean that I expect a wholesale casting out of the religious right, but it does seem as if the more reasonable elements of the religious wing of the party are finally realizing that they have to distance themselves from the exrtremists, and perhaps put broader priorities first if they want to continue to play a role in the party and if they want that party to be successful. Extremism has been like an anchor dragging the GOP down and if the party cannot cast itself free of that extremism and chart a better course for itself it will never be successful.

Fanaticism and extremism breed violence and terror and are the enemies of liberty. If we are determined to fight them in the War on Terror how can we be less vigilant in opposing them at home? If we are to have a Republican party which makes liberty its first priority, then it must reject extremism and intolerance in every form. We can still embrace conservative and moral values, but we must accept that these are personal values and that only evil and oppression can come from giving government the power to dictate morality and institutionalize the prejudices of religious fanatics.

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com posted earlier in the week at his blog, asking “Are Republicans Going Galt?”

Pointing to the Tea Party’s origin within the libertarian movement, Silver questions whether the Republican Party is tilting in the libertarian direction in wake of their solid defeats in 2006 and 2008.

The objective evidence Mr. Silver presents includes:

• A recent Gallup survey suggests that 80 percent of Republicans believe that Big Government is a bigger threat than big business, versus just 10 percent who think the opposite. He says “it has now become almost a definitional issue for Republicans.”

• “The Republican alternative budget could be considered a somewhat radical experiment in libertarianism”; and

• Republican insiders are increasingly uncertain about whether gay marriage, which was such an important issue for the party over 2000-2004, is any longer a winning issue at all for them.

Comparing Big Government to big business doesn’t really tell us what we need to know, unfortunately. Big business may be one of the entities competing with limited government that Republicans “sell their souls to” — however, there are a plethora of other entities that Republicans have chosen before smaller government, including puppet politicians, special interest groups, neo-conservatives, pork projects, and religion, to name just a few.

The idea that the Republican alternative budget is radical in any way is foreign to me. It is a far better budget than any one that Republicans proposed under the Bush Administration (no surprise there), and this budget would ultimately reduce the size of government if adopted. However, it is not even close to “a radical experiment in libertarianism”.

Speaking to Mr. Silver’s final point: I’m no Republican insider, but I never believed gay marriage was an important issue for the GOP. Ditto on abortion.

In 2004, for example, the RLC issued a press release against the Federal Marriage Amendment.  My recent post at this blog, “Are Republicans Shifting on Gay Marriage and the War on Drugs?“, indicates that at least some Republican legislators — most of whom were already in the moderate wing of the party — have had the courage to support equal rights for gays.

To this point, I count just two libertarian-leaning legislators (both from New Hampshire) who had the courage to take a principled stance of supporting marriage equality for gays and lesbians. If Republicans are going to stand up for equal rights in the near future (and why shouldn’t we?), it will have to be libertarian-leaning Republicans who lead on the issue.

As evangelical social conservative commentator Cal Thomas wrote recently, “The battle over same-sex marriage is on the way to being lost [for social conservatives]. For conservatives who still have faith in the political system to reverse the momentum, you are — to recall Harold Hill [in The Music Man] — ‘closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge’.”

In summary, I think the Republican Party is shifting, but it is not proven with the evidence provided by Nate Silver.  Instead, I measure it by how fast the RLC is growing (at a very rapid pace — we can barely keep up!), the enthusiasm of the Ron Paul movement, and the anger in the faces of those who attended the Tea Party protests last Wednesday.

The battle for liberty has just begun. Brace yourself.

According to the Log Cabin Republicans, 36 GOP legislators in six Northeastern states (including several RLC-endorsed legislators) have voted to affirm individual rights on gay marriage votes. Widely-respected conservative commentator Cal Thomas recently wrote that perhaps its time for evangelicals to give up on the issue of gay marriage. He says:

“To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve ‘traditional marriage’ in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings?

Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention? Most of those who are disturbed about same-sex marriage are not as exercised about preserving heterosexual marriage. That’s because it doesn’t raise money and won’t get them on TV. Some preachers would rather demonize gays than oppose heterosexuals who violate their vows by divorcing, often causing harm to their children. That’s because so many in their congregations have been divorced and preaching against divorce might cause some to leave and take their contributions with them.

The battle over same-sex marriage is on the way to being lost [for social conservatives]. For conservatives who still have faith in the political system to reverse the momentum, you are — to recall Harold Hill [in The Music Man] — ‘closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge’.”

As evidence of Cal Thomas’s commentary, the Log Cabin Republicans have recorded the following recent legislative action affirming equal (not special) rights for gays and lesbians:

· On March 23, the Vermont Senate passed marriage with the support of a majority of the Republican Conference.
· On March 26, twelve Republicans (including two RLC-endorsed legislators) provided the margin of victory for marriage equality in the New Hampshire House.
· On March 30, three Republicans (including the RLC’s Art O’Neill) on the Connecticut legislature’s Joint Committee on Judiciary voted to codify the state’s marriage equality ruling.
· On April 3, six Republicans joined their colleagues in the Vermont House to send marriage equality to the Governor.
· On April 3, the Iowa Supreme Court recognzied the right to marry in an opinion written by Republican-appointed Associate Justice Mark Cady.
· And on April 7, the Vermont House and Senate successfully overrode a governor’s veto to make Vermont the first state to enact marriage equality without the order of a court – and six courageous House Republicans provided the margin of victory.

There may also be a shift among at least some Republicans on the issue of decriminalizing (and taxing) marijuana and medical marijuana. In a New Hampshire vote earlier this week, nearly a dozen RLC-endorsed legislators (including Reps. Coffey, Ingbretson, McGuire, Hopper, Ober, Pratt, Reagan, Renzullo, Soucy, and Vaillancourt) voted for HB 648, which permits medical marijuana use in New Hampshire if prescribed by a physician. The bill, similar to the California law that has been under attack by the federal government for years now, passed the House and now moves on to the Senate.

In a 1997 poll, 57% of Republicans supported marijuana for medicinal purposes.  Is that number on the rise?  There is no recent polling data measuring Republican opinion of decriminalization or medical marijuana and New Hampshire is the only state with RLC legislators that has pending legislation addressing the issue of medical marijuana.  So perhaps it is too soon to tell what the trend among Republicans is, but if New Hampshire is any indication, there has been a shift of opinion on medical marijuana among Republican legislators.

Medical marijuana is currently legal in Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

It seems that there is a positive shift in priorities among Republicans.

Perhaps focusing on critical economic issues instead of hot-button social issues will provide Republicans the leverage they need to once again become the party that advocates limited, Constitutional government and protection of individual rights.

Two members of the Republican Liberty Caucus of North Carolina are representing their districts on the state GOP Platform Committee. The Committee will meet at the North Carolina GOP HQ in Raleigh on March 14.

The Committee includes:
Dist 1: Bob Steinburg
Dist 2: Mark Edwards
Dist 3: Perry White
Dist 4: Jan Pueschel
Dist 5: Buck Golding
Dist 6: David Ruden
Dist 7: Mitchell Mercer
Dist 8: Ron Crawley
Dist 9: Neil Moore
Dist 10: Sandi Walker
Dist 11: Bill Lack*
Dist 12: Pat Armstrong*
Dist 13: Becki Gray
Chairman’s Appointees: Skip Stam, David Black, Ann Sullivan

*RLC members

Congratulations to RLC North Carolina members Bill Lack and Pat Armstrong for being appointed to the Platform Committee.