News


WASHINGTON DC – In a late session last night, just one day before the 220th anniversary of the day the Bill of Rights were officially added to the Constitution, the U.S. House approved the Conference Report version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  The NDAA includes provisions, contained in sections 1021 and 1022,  that would allow the President to use US Military forces to operate inside the United States, in violation of Posse Comitatus, to arrest US civilians and hold them in military detention without charges for an indefinite period of time; an act that will take away the right of Habeas Corpus, a fundamental legal protection guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.

According to the Roll Call Vote, which concluded with a 283-163 vote in favor of the conference report, the RLC-WI learned that Rep. Reid Ribble was the only Republican Congressional member from the State of Wisconsin to vote against HR 1540: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.  All other Republican Congressman (Ryan, Sensenbrenner, Petri, and Duffy) voted in favor of this Bill of Rights killing legislation.

RLC-WI Chair, Michael S. Murphy, commented:

“I am literaly shocked to learn that only one lone Republican Congressman from Wisconsin had the courage to uphold and defend the US Constitution, a solemn oath he swore to keep upon taking office, while his colleagues simply negated the very same document that allows them to serve this great Nation.”

Murphy continued:

“I want to sincerely thank Congressman Reid Ribble for standing against his collegues and performing his Constitutional duties to uphold our civil liberties;  not only for his constituents, but for all American People. Rep. Ribble has shown that he can stand out on his own and do the job he was voted in to do for the people he serves.”

Sections 1021 and 1022 have been in heated debate during the course of this bill in Congress. Law enforcement -including the FBI, national security agencies and the military itself, all oppose this aspect of the NDAA. The RLC-WI believes if citizens commit crimes that they should not be held without being charged and should be prosecuted in civilian courts with their rights appropriately protected so that they receive a fair trial as defined in Amendments 4, 5, and 6 of the US Constitution.

The Senate is set to vote on this bill around 4 pm eastern today.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Wisconsin was founded in 2009 to promote individual liberty, limited government, and free enterprise within the Republican Party.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

There was something opportunistic about the Herman Cain presidential campaign from the get-go. No state campaign organizations, lots of emphasis on selling his recently released book, and issue positions which seemed to be made-up on the spot to entertain an audience. It worked for a while. It took him to the top of the polls in a number of states about a month ago in a surge generated by strong debate performances, but it couldn’t last and maybe it was never intended to.

Most of us who were waiting for a crash to follow his surge expected it to be on the basis of the illogic of his 9-9-9 plan which would have raised taxes on 80% of the population and subjected many in the middle class to forms of taxation from which they had previously been exempt. Once the novelty wore off it was clear that it was a recipe for disaster if it faced any serious examination.

Most probably didn’t anticipate the flurry of “bimbo erruptions” which filled the past month, a bulging handful of shaky accusations of sexual harassment and finally a full-fledged mistress with phone records and bank deposits which were hard to dismiss. It all raised the question once again of the seriousness of Cain’s campaign, because he is clearly no fool and has to have gone into this endeavor knowing that there was a strict time limit on his viability and a certainty that his rise to prominence would drag the skeletons of his past to the surface.

As he suspends his campaign we end with a sad commentary on the Republican Party which is so eager for someone to dislodge the mendacious mediocrities of the party establishment like Romney and Gingrich that they will turn to any charlatan with a good patter and the right brand of snake-oil in his hand.

With Cain proving to be just as corrupt in his own way as Perry and Gingrich and Romney, perhaps it’s time for the GOP constituency to try something different – a candidate with integrity. At the rate things are going they may be forced to this appealing last resort because the field of grifters and yes-men is narrowing and that leaves room for candidates with some integrity.

I’m not talking about Bachmann or Santorum here. I’ll grant they have a certain sort of fanatical integrity, but crazy trumps integrity every time and explains why they’re stuck in single digits and are never going to get out of them.

What the grassroots members who make up the backbone of the Republican Party are desperate for is a candidate with qualities which make them exceptional. Not exceptionally good at pandering and exceptionally good looking, but exceptional in the quality of their ideas and their character.

The irony of the race thus far is that they have had candidates of exceptional quality available to them all along and they have let the media minimize them and the party leadership marginalize them and they’ve gone for the flashier but far less substantial candidates who have let them down time and again as Perry and Cain have and as Gingrich and Romney are sure to do.

The three candidates who stand out as truly worthy of the support which Republican voters are Ron Paul, John Huntsman and Gary Johnson. They represent the highest ideals of the Republican Party, have histories of personal integrity and they have actual ideas which might solve the nations problems and put us back on the path to prosperity. They’re also far more likely to beat Obama in November than most of the other candidates if they’re given that chance.

Ron Paul stands out for having the strongest combination of integrity and proven ability to pull votes. Paul is already polling in the top three in almost every poll and has a powerful base of support which isn’t going to break and run and could easily push him over the top. Herman Cain supporters are already flocking to Paul, realizing that he’s the genuine version of what Cain was peddling in a watered down form.. Paul offers real reform, real fiscal conservatism and a record which suggests an absolute unwillingness to compromise with the leaders of both parties who have led us so far astray. His personal social conservatism gives him an edge in the primary and his libertarian principles could win over independents in the general election.

Jon Huntsman has a proven track record as a governor, an appealing personal charisma and a combination of fiscal conservatism and moderation on social issues which would win key independents and crossover Democrats in droves. He also has more personal money to throw into the campaign than most of the other candidates. Huntsman has some libertarian ideas and some original ideas and a streak of integrity a mile wide. His absolute refusal to pander to the religious right is endearing. He won’t go on Huckabee, he won’t have anything to do with events sponsored by the religious fringe and he won’t even campaign in Iowa with the compromises that seems to entail. And much to everyone’s surprise, before Cain had even bowed out, he hit 11% in the latest poll in New Hampsire, suggesting that he’s a real contender.

Of course, the best of the neglected candidates waiting in the wings is former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson. He has an outstanding record in office and some of the best ideas, including being the only advocate for the FairTax. He’s also been the whipping boy for the media and the party establishment. He’s been overlooked and excluded from debates and press coverage and left out of the polls, and he’s sufficiently disgruntled he’s even considered jumping ship to the Libertarian party. But despite all that he’s still in the race and if Cain’s departure opens a spot in the primary field then Johnson is the one who ought to be brought in to fill it. There’s no one more deserving and no one who could do more with another opportunity.

While the partisan press continues to prattle on about Romney and Gingrich, two candidates who no one really wants, one a replay of 2008 and the other a replay of 1994, there’s a real field of candidates out there that Republicans could truly be proud of. After all the disappointments and missteps of party leaders, a primary field led by Paul, Huntsman and Johnson might restore confidence in a party which is on the brink of failure and has broken faith with its own base too many times.

My Republican Party isn’t represented by the Newts and Mitts of the world. It’s not a party of tired old hacks and used care salesman smiles. It’s a party of smart ideas and responsible government and refreshing honesty. It’s a party which can celebrate candidates like Paul, Huntsman and Johnson, embrace them and let them show us what a real election with serious candidates can be like. They are the tonic for the disease which grips the party. They are the serious contenders to counter the damage done by flirtation with faux candidates like Cain.

Abraham Lincoln won the Republican Party its first national victory with a “team of rivals” bringing the best his party had to offer to Washington. Paul, Huntsman and Johnson could be that winning team for a new era of Republican politics if we can discard the baggage of our old mistakes and believe in the brighter future which they represent.

This article appeared in slightly different form in Blogcritics Magazine.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

CONCORD, N.H.—Because the right to freely associate is fundamental to liberty in a free market economy, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire has decided to use the Right to Work override vote as a litmus test for candidates running for reelection in 2012.

To be clear: any representative or senator who votes to sustain the governor’s veto of the Right to Work bill, HB 474, will not receive an endorsement or assistance of any kind from the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire during the 2012 election cycle. In some cases, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire will actively support these incumbents’ opponents in their primary elections, especially if those opponents pledge to support a Right to Work law. (UPDATE 11/30/11: A full list of the Republicans who voted against Right to Work, the Republican Platform and the People of New Hampshire on Nov. 30, 2011 follows this article).

“Right to Work is a watershed issue when it comes to a legislator’s commitment to limited government and individual liberty,” said Carolyn McKinney, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “People have a natural freedom to associate with whom they please, and in this country, the freedom of association is even protected by the constitution, but this right is being regularly denied by unions in the workplace.

“Especially in these hard economic times when so many families are struggling, people should never be forced to hand over their hard-earned money to a third party just so they can hold a job and provide for their families,” McKinney added. “Clearly, people will voluntarily choose to join a union if they believe the costs are worth the benefits. But unions given unchecked power—as they have had for so many decades—have shown they will not always support the best long-term interests of their members. Right to Work would fix this by ensuring that unions will have to compete for members by actually serving them.”

The Right to Work veto override vote may come up as soon as tomorrow, but the Speaker of the House has the authority to call the vote at any time prior to the beginning of the 2012 House Session. The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire supports any effort by the Speaker to call the vote when he knows it will be successful.

UPDATE 11/30/11: The following Republicans voted against Right to Work, the Republican Platform and the People of New Hampshire on Nov. 30, 2011, and will NOT receive an RLCNH endorsement. In addition, the RLCNH advises activists to do everything they can to recruit liberty-minded Republican candidates to defeat these Republicans in the primary election of 2012:

Bolster, Peter Belknap 5
Brown, Julie Strafford 1
Buxton, Michael Hillsborough 24
Chirichiello, Brian Rockingham 5
Copeland, Timothy Rockingham 13
Day, Russell Hillsborough 7
Devine, James Rockingham 7
Dowling, Patricia Rockingham 5
Dwinell, Richard Cheshire 5
Emerson, Susan Cheshire 7
Hopper, Gary Hillsborough 7
Janvrin, Kevin Rockingham 14
Katsakiores, Phyllis Rockingham 5
Kidder, David Merrimack 1
Knox, J. David Carroll 4
Ladd, Rick Grafton 5
Laware, Thomas Sullivan 5
Lockwood, Priscilla Merrimack 6
McCarthy, Michael Hillsborough 21
McKinney, Betsy Rockingham 3
Messier, Irene Hillsborough 17
Millham, Alida Belknap 5
Pepino, Leo Hillsborough 11
Perkins, Amy Rockingham 14
Perkins, Lawrence Rockingham 14
Pilliod, James Belknap 5
Proulx, Mark Hillsborough 15
Quandt, Marshall Rockingham 13
Quandt, Matt Rockingham 13
Remick, William Coos 2
Richardson, Herbert Coos 2
Robbins, David Hillsborough 26
Sapareto, Frank Rockingham 5
St. Cyr, Jeffrey Belknap 5
Stroud, Kathleen Hillsborough 19
Terrio, Ross Hillsborough 14
Tholl, John Coos 2
Tremblay, Marc Coos 4
Waddell, James Rockingham 15
Webb, James Rockingham 5
Welch, David Rockingham 8
The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

Students for Liberty is hosting a whole series of conferences at colleges around the country this fall. Local RLC chapters will be attending many of them and doing outreach to friendly libertarian student groups like SFL and Young Americans for Liberty. If you’re a student who believes in small government and individual liberty, these events are a great opportunity to hear interesting speakers and find out about groups like the RLC.

In fact, as I write this, I’m at the Students for Liberty conference in Austin with local RLC student member Aaron Alghawi and RLC National Secretary Corie Whalen. I’m listening to former Libertarian Party presidential candidate Mary Ruwart who is talking about the Institute for Justice. I’m also making use of the lovely new RLC pop-up banner (shown to the right) and debuting some new outreach materials which will be available in PDF format for download here on the site in the next few days.

The focus of this SFL conference is entrepreneurship and I’m talking later on about marketing ideas – political and commercial – through the internet, hitting on the “Three Cs” – Content, Community and Controversy. It’s a good topic which combines my business experience as an internet entrepreneur with my experience in online activism. It’s all about selling something, whether it’s a product or an idea.

For more information on the schedule of SFL conferences and to find one in your area, go here. Visit one near you this fall.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

CONCORD, N.H.—Carolyn McKinney will serve as acting chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire and strengthen the organization’s focus on a common sense State House agenda as RLCNH Chairman Andrew Hemingway leaves his post to work on a presidential political campaign.

“While we wish Andrew Hemingway the best in his new job opportunity, it is important to note that the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire will not endorse a candidate for president,” said Carolyn McKinney, acting chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “His decision to join a particular presidential campaign was his own and does not reflect the opinion of the organization. We at the RLCNH will remain highly focused on the issues affecting the citizens of New Hampshire as well as the important goal of advancing Common Sense within New Hampshire state government.

“The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire will continue to support the positive changes the Republican majority has made in the State Legislature to reduce spending, reduce taxes, reduce business regulations and foster a job-creating environment by restoring individual liberty, personal responsibility and the state constitution,” McKinney added. “Right now, our main focus is on making sure the Legislature overrides the governor’s several vetoes and then continues to advance a responsible, liberty agenda in Concord. Next, we will turn to candidate recruitment and preparation for the 2012 state primary elections.”

McKinney, a resident of Amherst, has been intricately involved with the behind-the-scenes work of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire for several years as the organization’s executive secretary. Her promotion to acting chairman will be second nature to her. For instance, McKinney was instrumental in the organization’s success in getting 107 endorsed candidates elected to state offices in November 2010; that’s 70 percent of the candidates originally endorsed by the organization.

“The courage of these liberty-minded elected officials under the leadership of House Speaker Bill O’Brien advanced a 10 percent state budget reduction, a fiscally responsible move during hard economic times,” McKinney said. “And now we are seeing the fruits of principled Republican leadership as Moody’s Investors Service, Fitch Ratings and Standard & Poor’s recently decided to maintain the state’s high AA+ bond rating. Surely, the jobs will follow, particularly if these Republicans continue to push for strong regulatory reform and tax cuts.”

Before joining the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, McKinney worked for the Heritage Foundation as an outreach coordinator motivating groups of activists nationwide. She also served as a Witherspoon Fellow at the Family Research Council working in government affairs.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

Today the Republican Party is at a crossroads. It faces the choice of continuing down a path of failed leadership and forgotten principles, or taking the hard and rutted road back to its beginnings. The party was established to restore the values of our founding fathers in a time much like today, when those values had been forgotten.

Today as in 1854, the political system has fallen into the hands of greedy and ambitious leaders who disregard the rights of the people and promote ideas which are fundamentally un-American because they see them as a route to greater political power and control. The forces of special interests, sectionalism, bureaucratic indifference and institutionalized oppression are stronger than ever before. They will not be stopped unless the Republican Party remembers its purpose and stands up against them.

From its very first platform, the Republican Party has been dedicated to the ideals of the Founding Fathers as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the enlightenment belief that all men have an inalienable right to life, liberty, and property. Although it has occasionally lost sight of those ideals, eventually core values reassert themselves and new leaders of vision set the party back on the right course.

The party was formed in 1854 in an era when the existing parties had strayed too far from the original republican values on which the nation was formed. The new party embraced the ideals of the founding fathers with the goal of securing liberty for those held in slavery and obtaining equality for all members of society.

Through the years the Republican Party has taken the lead on the great moral issues of the times:

* In the Platform of 1860 the party made opposition to slavery a national issue for the first time and expressed clear support for the rights of workers and industry.
* In the Platform of 1876 the Republican Party became the first US political party to endorse equal rights and universal suffrage for women.
* In the Platform of 1892 the Republicans became the first US political party to endorse universal suffrage and access to the polls to Americans of all races.
* In the Platform of 1896 the Republican Party first declared its dedication to fiscally responsible government.
* In the Platform of 1900 the Republicans were the first US political party to take a clear stand in opposition to racial discrimination.

During the early 1900s the Republican party also led the way in opposition to monopolies, in passing child labor laws, workplace safety regulation, and establishing reasonable working hours. The Republican party was also the first party to propose national policies for resource management and conservation. And almost from the moment the 16th Amendment made an income tax legal, the Republican party worked to minimize the tax burden, hold down federal spending, and institute fairer and more limited taxes. By the 1950s the Republican Party had taken the lead in applying federal pressure to implement desegregation and equality in the southern states.

The differences between the Republican and Democratic parties of the modern era were clear as early as 1908 when the Republican Party platform clearly delineated the differences between the two parties, which are still strikingly apparent today:

The present tendencies of the two parties are even more marked by inherent differences. The trend of Democracy is toward socialism, while the Republican party stands for a wise and regulated individualism. Socialism would destroy wealth, Republicanism would prevent its abuse. Socialism would give to each an equal right to take; Republicanism would give to each an equal right to earn. Socialism would offer an equality of possession which would soon leave no one anything to possess, Republicanism would give equality of opportunity which would assure to each his share of a constantly increasing sum of possessions. In line with this tendency the Democratic party of to-day believes in Government ownership, while the Republican party believes in Government regulation. Ultimately Democracy would have the nation own the people, while Republicanism would have the people own the nation.

That description of the Democrats is as accurate today as it was 100 years ago, and the same Republican principles are just as valid today as they were then. Some may have forgotten the history of the party, but defending individual liberty by standing firm in the face of socialism and statism remain at the core of what makes the GOP unique.

The Republican party was born in liberty, and even in the darkest days of racial strife, that dedication to liberty and equality for all Americans regardless of race, creed, religion or lifestyle remained central to the beliefs of the GOP. The party has always dedicated itself to the ideal of the responsible individual citizen being allowed to live life in his own way without unnecessary interference from government. This principle was expressed clearly in the Republican platform of 1964:

Every person has the right to govern himself, to fix his own goals, and to make his own way with a minimum of governmental interference.

This idea of the sovereign individual goes hand in hand with an understanding that government has a legitimate, but limited, role to protect the rights and welfare of the people and to be answerable to the people for its actions. This was expressed clearly in the 1964 Platform:

It is for government to foster and maintain an environment of freedom encouraging every individual to develop to the fullest his God-given powers of mind, heart and body; and, beyond this, government should undertake only needful things, rightly of public concern, which the citizen cannot himself accomplish.

This platform from 40 years ago, written in a time of great national challenge and under the clear-eyed guidance of Senator Barry Goldwater, expresses better than almost any other document the fundamental beliefs of the party, including the principles of individual liberty, but also the importance of the Constitution in protecting that liberty:

Within our Republic the Federal Government should act only in areas where it has Constitutional authority to act, and then only in respect to proven needs where individuals and local or state governments will not or cannot adequately perform. Great power, whether governmental or private, political or economic, must be so checked, balanced and restrained and, where necessary, so dispersed as to prevent it from becoming a threat to freedom any place in the land.

Perhaps most unique in that document was an awareness which seems to be forgotten today, that not only do individuals have responsibility for their actions, but that there is a greater responsibility invested in the government through the social contract to do right by its citizens:

It is a high mission of government to help assure equal opportunity for all, affording every citizen an equal chance at the starting line but never determining who is to win or lose. But government must also reflect the nation’s compassionate concern for those who are unable, through no fault of their own, to provide adequately for themselves.

The high ideals of Republicanism also extend to the behavior of politicians and how they use the sacred trust invested in them by the people:

Government must be restrained in its demands upon and its use of the resources of the people, remembering that it is not the creator but the steward of the wealth it uses; that its goals must ever discipline its means; and that service to all the people, never to selfish or partisan ends, must be the abiding purpose of men entrusted with public power.

Today it seems as if the Republican party and many of its leaders have lost their way. Yet the basic values of the party have not changed, though some seem to only pay lip service and to have forgotten what it has meant to be a Republican for the last 150 years. In the generation since Goldwater reasserted the core values of the party, the lure of power and greed and opportunism has been stronger than ever. This isn’t the first time that this has happened. In the late 19th century the party suffered a similar identity crisis, turning away from core values of liberty towards corporatism and arrogant complacency. Leaders like Teddy Roosevelt set the party back on track, and though the leadership foundered in the aftermath of the Depression, Eisenhower and Goldwater were there to set the party on what should have been an ideal course by the 1960s. Yet Goldwater’s defeat and the rise of socialism in the 1960s followed by the failures of the Nixon era produced a generation of leaders who have been willing to sacrifice principle for votes no matter what unsavory compromises that required. Leaders like Roosevelt and Goldwater understood that it was better to be right and lose an election than to win at any cost, because the price of such a corrupt victory is invariably too high.

This problem has been compounded by an invasion of the GOP by disaffected southern Democrats who were driven away from their party when its northern wing embraced civil rights under Kennedy and Johnson and the policies of the party became increasingly socially progressive and dominated by northern issues. As the Republicans struggled to retain their identity, this influx of angry bigots and religious zealots gave power at the polls at the cost of compromises on fundamental principles which had sustained the party for a hundred years. They were followed by strong-defense Democrats whose imperialist ambitions didn’t fit with the post-Vietnam pacifism of the Democratic Party. Both of these groups brought with them beliefs which were alien to the Republican tradition, including a belief in a strong federal government, an expansionist foreign policy, a bizarre moralistic agenda, a big dose of intolerance and a willingness to sacrifice the rights of individuals in pursuit of their political objectives. Accepting these outsiders was an act of desperation which put the integrity of the party at risk in order to hold on to political power.

Now we are paying the price for compromises which have left the party fractured with no ideological center, our history forgotten and our future uncertain. The weakness of our current generation of leaders and the harm they have done to the party with foolish alliances and venal servility to every bulging purse has to end in this new millenium. We must commit ourselves to lead where our leaders have failed and to retrieve the party from the cesspit of corruption. The GOP must reaffirm an absolute commitment to the idea of true Republican government which serves the people and does not rule over the people, and of restoring a nation dedicated to preserving the liberty of every individual equally and absolutely.

This may mean purging the party of corrupt leaders and unsound ideas so that we can restore fundamental values. We need to remember that big government, corruption, and trying to run people’s lives are the politics of the socialist left and we should not tolerate leaders who are seduced by the power socialism gives to the political class. If this means giving up some power for a few years then we should accept that. We are not worthy to lead the country until we are Republicans again and can earn back the trust and respect of the people. It would be better to be a minority party and the conscience of the nation as we were when the party was born in 1854 than to carry on as an insult to the memories of the idealists who founded the party and led it as a party of principles in past eras. We must restore the party or we will lose the party. We must demand adherence to principles from our leaders or eliminate those leaders for leading the party in the wrong direction.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

The Minnesota Chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus is proud to host a Welcome Social for the Midwest Leadership Conference. Guests from near and far are invited to join us, regardless of attendance at the conference. We look forward to seeing you for fellowship and networking on the eve on the Leadership Conference.

When: Thursday October 6, 2011, 6:00pm - 9:00pm
Where: Poor Richard's Commonhouse, 8301 Normandale Boulevard, Bloomington
Hors d'oeuvres and cash bar.  $10 suggested donation ($5 RLC members)

RSVP on Facebook.

Enjoy the entertainment from Chris Lomheim, Jason Peterson Delair, and Jana Anderson, who has toured extensively as a backing vocalist for some of the music industry's biggest names, including Stevie Nicks, Don Henley, Fleetwood Mac, and Jewel. Jana has also performed on almost every major television variety show, such as the Tonight Show and Late Night with Conan O'Brien. She has sung on recordings by Prince, Don Henley and the “Live in Boston” DVD/CD by Fleetwood Mac.

Shuttle service is available for out-of-town guests staying at the Double Tree.
Email info[at]rlcmn.org to arrange transportation.

 

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

MILWAUKEE – RLC-WI Chairman, Michael S. Murphy, publicly announced today that he will not seek another term as RLC-WI Chairman when his current term expires in January 2012.  In a statement issued by Murphy, he explains:

“Although I have had an exciting and knowledgeable experience acting as Chairman of the RLC-WI, I have made a personal decision not to seek re-election as the RLC-WI Chairman, come January 2012.  This is a decision that took quite sometime for me to consider, but now I must stand firm with my choice.”

Murphy further stated,

“Let it be known that my decision to step down as Chair has nothing to do with the RLC or its mission.  I shall always stand by the efforts of the RLC in trying to help foster the Liberty message within the Republican Party.”

Murphy did not elaborate extensively on why he is choosing to step down, but only briefly mentioned that he arrived at the decision because of “personal reasons”

Murphy, who held the office of Vice Chair at the time the Wisconsin Chapter was created in December 2009, assumed command of the RLC-WI when former State Chair, Ted Story, abruptly resigned from the organization in February 2010.  Since then, Murphy proceeded in growing the chapter, while also getting the RLC-WI active in the 2010 elections.

In the start of his term, Murphy assisted in making the first public appearance of the RLC-WI at the Republican Party of Wisconsin’s State Convention on May 22, 2010 in Milwaukee, WI. At the convention, Murphy and other RLC-WI board members conducted candidate outreach, promoted the RLC-WI chapter, and conducted general recruitment for the RLC-WI. 

For several months after the convention and leading up to the November 2010 elections, Murphy helped facilitate the endorsements of twenty Liberty-Minded Candidates for offices ranging from Senate to Sheriff in 2010, and an additional two in 2011 thus far.  From those endorsements, seven RLC-WI endorsed candidates went on to the Wisconsin State Assembly.

During the 2010 campaigns, with the help of the Dan Sebring For Congress Campaign, Murphy was instrumental in helping to publically expose the WI Congressional Delegation’s “Unwritten Rule” on endorsements.  The “Unwritten Rule” is a Ruling Class protectionist agreement between current WI Congressional Members, not to endorse any challenger who campaigns against another sitting Congressional incumbent regardless of partisanship. This agreement has been ongoing for several years amongst the entire Wisconsin Congressional Delegation. From the time the “Unwritten Rule” was publicly exposed, Murphy also saw to it that a resolution was crafted at his own County Republican Party in Milwaukee denouncing the “Unwritten Rule”, and ensured that the resolution made it all the way to a vote on the floor at the 2011 Republican Party of Wisconsin State Convention in Wisconsin Dells, WI., on May 21, 2011.

When not focusing on endorsements and helping to be the “Conscience of the Republican Party”, Murphy assisted in efforts to help champion legislation regarding the legalization of raw milk, the passage of Constitutional Carry in Wisconsin, and promoting WI Governor Scott Walker’s Budget Reform Bill.  On a couple occasions, Murphy also gave statements on behalf of the RLC-WI to national news sources such as “Politico” and the “Wall Street Journal” relating to Wisconsin politics.

With all the activism Murphy helped create and assist with, his efforts led him to receive the award for “Outstanding Activist for 2010” presented by the Republican Liberty Caucus at their National Convention, which was held in Arlington, VA., on February 12, 2011.

Murphy’s term, as well as all other RLC-WI Board Member terms, will soon expire at the RLC-WI’s Regular Convention in January 2012.  The exact date, time and location have not been set as of yet. According to RLC-WI bylaws, candidates for Officer shall have been Regular members of the Charter for at least one year prior to their nomination. Candidates for Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall have been Regular members for at least two years and members of the Board of Directors for at least six months prior to their nomination.

-30-

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

CONCORD, N.H.–To bolster Republicans’ progress toward responsible government in the House of Representatives, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire is endorsing David Simpson for state representative in a Hillsborough District 3 special election on Tuesday, Sept. 20.

Simpson, who is running for a vacant House seat representing the towns of Peterborough, New Ipswich, Sharon and Greenville, would bring important experience to reinforce the already impressive efforts of the Republican majority in restoring the common sense principles of limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility, free enterprise and adherence to the state and federal constitutions.

The Republican majority has demonstrated that they are dedicated to bringing prosperity back to New Hampshire, and David Simpson will be a valuable addition to that effort,” said Andrew Hemingway, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “David’s experience, primarily in the areas of finance, budgets and small businesses, will be important as we continue to undo the economic damage wrought by years of Democrat control and public mismanagement.”

On his Web site, www.davidlsimpson.org, Simpson makes clear his commitment to improving the business climate in New Hampshire, which will lead to economic and job growth. He says he wants to work to protect the New Hampshire Advantage by maintaining a reasonable regulatory balance, making business tax rates more competitive and protecting individuals right to work free from union coercion.

David Simpson will strengthen Republican efforts to restore common sense government in Concord,” said Hemingway. “He is unwavering in his commitment to the welfare and prosperity of our state, and he understands that the only way to get the state back on the path to prosperity is by returning to our legacy of responsible, honest and limited government.”

In general, endorsed RLCNH candidates are strong proponents of limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility and free enterprise. They have shown their dedication to these ideals with their score on RLCNH’s 20-question candidate survey and their reputation among liberty activists. Endorsed candidates must score 80 percent or higher on the survey and they must have a strong character recognized by their peers.

For more information about David Simpson’s candidacy, please visit www.davidlsimpson.org.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

by Rebekah Sharp

The FHFA (Federal Housing Financial Authority) has instituted seventeen separate law suits in the state of New York on behalf of Fraudie Mac and Phoney Mae (that’s us, as both of these institutions are in receivership) against the seventeen major banks (trusts/securities) for the massive fraud that perpetrated the biggest ponzi scheme in the history of our nation that has flat lined our economy. Since the filing of these suits, the fifty attorney general investigations and settlements (ooops I mean forty-nine now, they ousted Sniederman from New York because he was too tough on the banks) has been halted with the major banks walking out of the settlement meetings. That has me very busy and quite frustrated on two counts. First, didn’t like the settlement terms as it would let the banks off the hook for their criminal and civil liability, leaving homeowners without legal recourse to pursue a remedy and a collective settlement amount of only twenty billion to be divided up among the fifty states leaving a mere four hundred million for each state in the hands of, in our case Pam Bondi. Once the fees and cost for this investigation, which has already taken over one year, are paid back, that doesn’t leave much for the folks and there is no specifics in the plan of how much or who will be the recipient of what is left. So maybe it’s a good thing the banks walked out of the settlement meetings. But is it? No, it is not because there have been no penalties imposed for their walking out and that clearly tells us all just exactly who is in charge, the banks and not the attorney generals. Pam Bondi either doesn’t have a clear understanding of the problem or she too is in bed with the banks as throughout this year-long investigation she has lead the disruption (along with four of her contemporaries) of the settlement stating boldly and loudly that the deadbeat homeowners should not be rewarded for their irresponsibility by not paying their mortgages. Part of the original deal was the majority of the attorney generals wanted to make the banks reduce the principal amount of the loans to current market value and reduce the interest rate to a fixed four percent on homesteaded property. Ms. Bondi was against that too and fired the two assistant attorneys’ general, June Clarkston and Teresa Edwards, because they were too aggressive when pursuing the banks and the companies aiding the fraud. This has lead to an investigation into their wrongful termination. More of your tax dollars at work.

You may remember HB1191 the Fair Foreclosure Bill that it was subsequently killed in the 2011 Florida legislative session. That’s the bill that would make the State of Florida a non-judical state leading to the abolition of our homestead exemption and leave homeowners without legal recourse to pursue the massive fraud and the threat of eviction in twenty-four hours, rather than the current seventy-two hour requirement. Passidomo (R), of Tampa, has reintroduced The Fair Foreclosure Act of 2012 to be taken up in January’s session. This is the third year she has presented this bill. We must stop it once again, however this time will be the most difficult as the bank lobbyists have been very busy bees stuffing our representative’s coffers with career bonuses and promises of more for their 2012 re-election campaigns . This is a non-partisan problem…surely you see if this bill passes it will strip Floridians of so many of their liberties. The elderly are already having a very difficult time making their property tax payments, as with the rest of the state with their unemployment rate is so high.

We, at RLCNEF are committed “restore” the peoples liberties, and take our country back. Conservatives stand for the rule of law, and as such we hold the position that no citizen shall be deprived of property except by that same rule of law. Accordingly, we also hold that sufficient laws already exist in the state of Florida. We must stay on careful watch and not allow any more of our liberties to be taken and I sincerely feel that is role is to combat the Unfair Foreclosure Act of 2012. I am working day and night on this ONE project. Please help me.

The seventeen lawsuits filed in New York on behalf of the people, is yet another smoke and mirrors game to allow the folks to think that finally something serious is being done to make the banks pay back the money they stole from this country. Surely it will end in yet another settlement with most of the language written in such legalese as to exonerate the banks of all their civil and criminal liabilities at a huge cost to taxpayers. Let’s consider the expense to file, maintain and bring to a conclusion seventeen lawsuits in New York. The J.P. Morgan complaint filed is two hundred, seventy-seven pages long. I know because I read it. Imagine how much that document alone cost us to prepare and file. It’s nice to see so many attorneys employed in this country while the remainders of the folks eke out a living day by day. Let’s not forget that Fraudie Mac and Phoney Mae engaged in the exact same illegal and fraudulent behavior as the folks they are suing (and continue to engage in as I write this) and that will certainly be raised during the course of these suits. There is already talk of banks filing suit against them. So it goes that Wall Street has begun the in-fighting between themselves, all pointing the finger at each other.

Now the trillion dollar question is: How is any of this helping the economy, the homeowners or the rest of the American people? This is just another attempt to divert the public from the simple and plain solution put all the bankers in handcuffs. All these suits filed to avoid the obvious conclusion that what they have done is immoral, illegal both criminally and civilly and arresting each and every one and freezing their assets, both on shore and off shore, would solve the problem. Then, require the principal reduction to all homestead property to five percent below the Net Market Value (NMV), leaving a five percent equity position in the home. This very simple solution would get the economy back on track as homeowners can make their payments, plus fix up the homes they are allowing to deteriorate due to fear of foreclosure. Lowes, Home Depot, all kinds of businesses would improve and so would the real estate sector. Home values would go up, or at least stop going down and would serve to get this country back on track again.

I am committed wholeheartedly to this cause and will stand with the millions of others who have been and continue to be affected by this tragedy. If you agree please sign the petition to kill this bill: http://signon.org/sign/do-not-support-the-florida?source=s.tw&r_by=26214

Rebekah Sharp is a member of the Executive Board of the Republican Liberty Caucus of Northeast Florida.

The views expressed here are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect official positions of the RLC.

« Previous PageNext Page »