On the 45th anniversary of the dark day when Dr. Martin Luther King was gunned down in Memphis, I feel the need to write about some political history. I grew up in the Dayton area. Most of my friends back home are black. I have always found it hard to believe that most of them constantly vote Democrat, when the party itself has run many of Ohio’s major cities into the ground economically for many years. But I shouldn’t be surprised. The Ohio Republican Party, often showing little difference between themselves and the Democrats, deserves blame as well. They have allowed Ohio to remain a tax and spend state with failing schools, high crime, union and corporate corruption, and annoying, bigoted nativist sentiments.

Though my family mostly votes Democrat I have always been a Republican. You might call me a recovering neocon turned Rand Paul Republican through a drawn out awakening from the statism I grew up around. Though I wasn’t a huge fan of Bush I believe–and did from my teen years–that historically the Republican Party has had the better track record on economics and foreign policy; even though I’ve never quite been in agreement with them on social issues. In high school I read John Stuart Mill and got my first taste of the importance of individual liberty. The history books I read suggested that the Republican Party, at least prior to George W. Bush, had a better track record on this, through the civil rights support from Calvin Coolidge and Dwight Eisenhower, and the economic policies of Ronald Reagan. When the party was founded as the party of civil rights, its motto was: Free Soil, Free Labor, and Free Men.

Though some northern Democrats such as my late grandfather (who would have turned 86 today) were friendly to the black community in the first half of the 20th century, most of the party — especially in the south — had always been an enemy of civil rights. It had been the party of Jim Crow. Even in the North,  working class Democrats before the 1960s had a tendency to bigotry. The earliest labor unions were founded to protect “white labor.”  After both WWI and WWII, many blacks fled the south to work in the industrial cities of the northeast and midwest, and the white unions would fight hard to keep them out. This would continue until the 50s, when the struggle for racial equality reached new heights.

Prior to the 70s, most blacks were Republicans. They began a mass exodus to the Democratic Party when Johnson signed the civil rights bill, even though it only passed because of the Republicans in congress. Ironically enough, Johnson as a Senator opposed civil rights legislation vehemently.

Unfortunately the Republican Party never did anything to maintain those voters or get them back. The last Republican president to campaign in black neighborhoods and truly speak to issues that affected black communities in televised debates was Ronald Reagan. Had he not been such a drug warrior he might have repaired the frayed relations. Now, historically misguided baby boomers and gen-xers in the African-American community have taught their children the myth that Republicans are racist; some of it as a result of the aggressive anti-drug policies that were kicked up during the Reagan years. Of course, our opposition to Barack Obama makes it easier to keep this myth going even if this opposition is legitimate because the president’s economic and foreign policies have been counterproductive and downright wrong. Perception is everything.

Fact: the only thing the Republican Party ever did to set back black people in its entire history was the War on Drugs. But that was a bipartisan mistake and has been supported over the years by just as many Democrats. Many rising Republican leaders such as Rand Paul and Justin Amash are finally willing to admit prohibition doesn’t work and does nothing but disproportionately incarcerate black and Hispanic men for crimes where no physical or financial harm was wrought by them on another; just as gun laws do (ever heard of the “white and polite” rule?). As they do this, rising Democratic leaders such as Elizabeth Warren mock them as potheads or flip flop on the issue and do nothing to alleviate the problem.

I’m sick and damn tired of ignoramuses accusing the Republican Party of being racist for reasons most of them can’t even explain when the Democrats clearly are part of the problem and won’t admit it. At least Rick Perry, in spite of all his faults, signed the Peaceable Journey act into law to strike down the “white and polite” rule that was locking up minorities in Texas for carrying lawfully owned guns in their car for their own protection. Historically, you could carry a gun in your car in Texas for protection; but if you were ever stopped, there was a de facto “white and polite” rule. If you were white, and nice to the officer, he’d let it slide. If you were black or Tejano, good luck. You were probably going to be arrested. This disgusting remnant of the Jim Crow south was finally repealed when the Texas Republican Party pushed for the peaceable journey act. Now all Texans’ second amendment rights are respected. They are allowed to carry guns in their car without a permit. It keeps me safe when driving at night in Houston, that’s for sure.

Do you ever wonder why minority poverty and minority incarceration are highest in blue states? There are a lot of reasons; and support for prohibition — which I will define as locking someone up for possession or use of an item where no physical or financial harm was done to anyone else — is one such reason. The welfare state and teacher’s unions are to blame too; as well as opposition to school choice programs that allow black students to get out of the ghetto by doing something as simple as: STOP FORCING THEM TO STAY THERE! (I’m very passionate about education reform. You’ll see me write more on it in coming months).

It’s going to take more than a generation to get blacks voting Republican again. It starts with ignoring or even laughing at the Rovian notion that religious-right wedge issues like gay marriage and abortion are the answer. If the black community was really that passionate about social conservatism, they would not be voting overwhelmingly Democrat. Truthfully, young blacks are just as secular as young whites. The generational shift away from social conservatism transcends race. I’ve actually met fewer young blacks who are aggressively anti-abortion or anti-gay than I have young whites, and when you put the two together, the number is inconsequential. It is likely to remain that way. The liberals control the pop culture, and it has secularized the generation. The culture war is effectively over. Fortunately, secularism and capitalism are not mutually exclusive; rather they are highly compatible.

First, the GOP needs a message of economic empowerment in black communities; one that can be brought by a revival of vocational training opportunities and academic improvement that the free market can best provide. We must be able to explain why lower taxes and fewer regulations create jobs, lower the price of everyday goods, and raise local wages. We must aggressively promote upward mobility through school choice and a return of apprenticeships in skilled crafts and STEM fields.

Next, we must become the civil rights party again, by doing as Senator Rand Paul recently said:

“It is important that we always stand up for the Bill of Rights, whether the First Amendment, Fourth or Second. The Constitution is non-negotiable”

The Bill of Rights is like dominoes, knock down one and they all fall. We must become the party of civil liberties again.

Finally, it would help if the first president to pardon a high number of non-violent gun or drug offenders was Republican. Rand Paul could very well be that president. He’s probably not going to campaign on it if he runs in 2016. But I wouldn’t be surprised if he did so after being elected.

In his address to CPAC, he said:

“Ask the Facebook generation whether we should put a kid in jail for the nonviolent crime of drug use, and you’ll hear a resounding no,”

That would be as symbolic a move for the GOP as civil rights legislation was for the Democratic Party under Johnson. Tens of thousands of mostly black and Hispanic men, who have committed no physical or financial harm to anyone other than themselves, suddenly released back into society with their records expunged, so that they can get the help they need, get back on their feet and get back into the workforce. It’s the right thing to do. And the Republican governors (hint hint, Mr. Perry), should start now as congress gears up for this gun control debate.

I urge Republican governors to scour the records of the incarcerated. Find people, of any race, who were incarcerated for possession of a firearm without a permit but committed no violent or financial crimes on top of this possession, and expunge their sentences and/or reimburse their fines. The overwhelming majority of them will be minorities. Show these people the Republican Party is not the party of prohibition, but the party of liberty, by freeing them from the police state.

I also urge you to pardon those who are incarcerated for committing non-violent, non-financial drug crimes, at least for weed–which science has irrefutably proven (to the point where anyone who still denies it is stupid) is safer than alcohol or tobacco. But you might as well start with the non-violent/non-financial gun “offenders.” Think of the taxpayer money you will save! Your voters will thank you!

It’s sad. Most of my generation thinks Dr. Martin Luther King was a pro-gun control liberal and many baby boomers think he’d be a drug warrior. I assure you if he was alive today and saw the prison statistics resulting from gun and drug prohibition, he’d be ashamed. Not that he was a fan of guns or drugs. He was a preacher of non-violent resistance and would not have appreciated self-destructive behavior. However, he would have been against government locking people up for possession of either; especially with those in prison for non-violent offenses being so disproportionately non-white. He would not want self-destructive behavior to be met with police brutality and incarceration. I’m confident he would have seen it as a mission of the church to solve these problems, not the nanny state.

The pro-civil liberties, pro-economic growth Republican Party being [re]invented by fresh young faces like Rand Paul, Justin Amash, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee, as well as the many Gen Y Republicans supporting organizations like Young Americans for Liberty, is the one that will repair the GOP’s frayed relations with the black community, as well as other minority groups; Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, even gays. The Rove/Kristol/Graham/Santorum wings of Dominionism, prohibition, crony capitalism, disrespect for the Bill of Rights, and perpetual warfare is what destroyed the relationship in the first place. The sooner we realize this, and begin taking action, the sooner black Americans will begin coming back to the party they once loved.

———————————————————————————————–
Aaron Alghawi obtained a B.S. in Economics from Texas A&M University in 2012, and is an At-Large Board Member of the Republican Liberty Caucus national committee.

As discussion continues over proposals like the “Marketplace Fairness Act” – which would change the way states can exercise tax collection powers over “remote” sales – several myths have cropped up. Here, NTU dispels them:

Myth # 1: This is a States’ Rights Issue.

FACT: Giving states the power to collect sales taxes across their borders isn’t about states’ rights, it’s about state coercion. Governments would have fewer incentives to keep their own tax rates low, eroding the important federalist principle of tax competition.

Myth #2: We need to enact this bill as soon as possible.

FACT: There’s no good reason to rush into such an enormous and controversial tax policy matter. While some have stated this issue has been on the docket for almost 10 years, the reality is that there is still a lot of work to be done, such as holding hearings on alternatives to the Marketplace Fairness Act.

Myth #3: Online stores enjoy a “special loophole.”

FACT: What Marketplace Fairness Act supporters call a “loophole” is actually the physical presence standard, a firmly grounded constitutional doctrine the Supreme Court has upheld for decades to protect businesses and their customers from predatory tax administrators. The physical presence safeguard helps to protect taxpayers from many types of aggressive policies that could affect income, property and other taxes.

Myth #4: The Marketplace Fairness act will “level the playing field” between online and brick-and-mortar stores.

FACT: While the Marketplace Fairness Act would require remote sellers to collect sales tax on every item, it would force them to do so by a completely different and harsher set of rules than currently exist for brick-and-mortar sales. If the Marketplace Fairness Act were to pass, states could strong-arm remote sellers into complying with more than 9,600 separate sales tax jurisdictions across the country, forcing online retailers to quiz each and every customer about their residency – something no brick-and-mortar retailer is required to do.

Myth #5: Compliance is easy.

FACT: Because they would now answer to 9,600 tax jurisdictions across the country, remote retailers would have to shoulder heavy overhead costs just to meet their new tax collection liabilities. The sponsors even recognize this, however imperfectly, through a paltry exemption in the legislation for businesses with remote sales of less than $500,000/year. However, a 2006 PricewaterhouseCoopers study demonstrated that small businesses with sales between $1 million and $10 million still face enormous costs that would threaten profitability, causing significant harm to interstate commerce and the economy during an especially fragile time.

Myth #6: States need to collect Internet sales taxes to balance their budgets.

FACT: Instead of pursuing one cash grab after another, states need to cut spending to get their budgets in order. Some standout states are actually enjoying relatively good growth compared to their poorer neighbors – they are the states that pursued free market reforms, eliminated waste, and controlled growth of government to create a competitive economic climate that attracts jobs and workers. The Marketplace Fairness Act nullifies an important facet of that competition by doing away with the long-held physical presence standard for taxation.

Myth #7: All the Internet retailers support it.

FACT: There is no consensus among online retailers in favor of destination-based sourcing. As is usually the case when government gets involved in the marketplace, those who would benefit the most from the legislation are lobbying in favor of it, and those who would be harmed are working hard to stop it. Nor is the general public clamoring for it. A December 2012 Mercury poll of 800 likely voters asked the neutral question about whether they supported “allowing states to make online retailers collect and process sales taxes on Internet purchases based where the customer is located, regardless of where the retailer is physically located.” By a 48 percent-41 percent margin, respondents were opposed. When given a more realistic description of the bill, “The proposed legislation would allow tax enforcement agents from one state to collect taxes from online retailers based in a different state,” opposition rose dramatically: 61 percent to 28 percent.

Myth #8: This tax is the only, best fix to the problem.

FACT: Instead of creating schemes that could open-up a Pandora’s box of unstoppable tax-grabs on the part of cash-starved states on unsuspecting citizens, states could move forward with origin-based sourcing sales tax plans, where the business charges all customers one rate of tax, based on the jurisdiction in which that business is located. If Congress takes any action on Internet sales tax collection, it should be in pursuit of uniform origin-based sourcing to preserve proper limits to taxing authority and encourage tax competition.

Myth #9: Retail sales on the Internet are “tax-free.”

FACT: Under existing law, a remote mail-order or Internet sale between a customer and a business located in the same state is subject to sales tax – a not uncommon occurrence in large states. Furthermore, Internet-based businesses pay profit and property taxes the way many other businesses do. Because they rely so heavily on telecommunications to stay connected, some online sellers may have proportionally heavier burdens of taxes associated with these technologies. When customers shop on the Internet, the shippers pay fuel and other types of transportation taxes.

Myth #10: The Internet is “destroying Main Street businesses.”

FACT: The Internet has enabled “Mom and Pop” retailers to advertise their products and services to a whole new world of consumers. It has also provided practical money-saving technologies that have allowed numerous traditional firms to survive and thrive, including online tax preparation services, better inventory management, and ease of ordering various inputs necessary to producing their finished goods. In 2012, research by The Boston Consulting Group found that “small and medium-sized companies that embrace the Internet in their business operations grew by 10 percent annually in the last three years, adding jobs as they did so.”

<i>To take action against the Internet Sales Tax, use our email tool to write your Senators.</i>

The following were prepared remarks by Daniel Encarnacion, South Carolina state secretary of the RLC, for the Lowcountry Conservative Breakfast in Summerville, SC on January 12, 2013. The Republican Liberty Caucus was founded in 1991 to promote limited government, free markets, and personal liberty within the Republican Party. With the help of my colleagues here as well as our national leadership and dedicated members, the RLC has become the leading Republican Party organization that represents liberty Republicans and Constitutional Conservatives. We see things like the fiscal cliff fiasco which just happened in Washington where taxes increased on 77.1% of the American people, spending went up by $330 billion, and the deficit widened by $4 trillion and believe our nation can do better. We see our Congress giving President Obama the power to indefinitely detain American citizens without due process or right to see a judge on simply the allegation by the President that he is a terrorist, doing a way with nearly a millennium of due process guarantees under Magna Carta and we believe our nation can do better. We see our nation printing money at a record pace under the control of a central planning board that has complete control of our monetary system – the Federal Reserve System. If government cannot be trusted to centrally plan our food, electronics, or health care – what makes us think it can centrally plan our monetary system? We believe our nation can do better. We see our government using public works projects in the name of stimulus to try and build a nation’s economic system and centrally plan every aspect of society. But we do not only see this effort of big government central planning here at home – we also see it overseas with this ongoing fascination with nation-building. Nation-building that weakens our national defense by distracting our armed forces from their core mission of protecting the borders of the United States. We believe America can do better. We see an effort to undermine our nation’s health care system through government boards, mandates, and taxes. We see our Supreme Court stand by doing nothing to enforce the plain meaning of the Constitution that would protect us from this egregious federal over-reach. And of course we see the media and the political lefts to block the implementation of ObamaCare through tools that our founders like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison left us like state nullification. We believe our nation can do better. Here in South Carolina, we see a state with one of the highest income and sales tax rates in the southeast, the highest manufacturing tax in the nation, and double-digit growth per year spending that was nearly $23 billion last year alone. We believe our state and our Republican Legislature can do better. We also see the American Legislative Exchange Council ranked South Carolina 50^th in education last year. We need to offer choice to parents, more free market solutions, and give more control to local officials. We believe that our South Carolina can do better. We can do a lot of things better and the Republican Liberty Caucus draws attention to these issues through candidate endorsements, grassroots activism, and online activism – which helps connect to and appeal to our key constituency and what we believe we can help the overall Republican Party with: young voters. It’s because of young voters that I have hope. There are real problems in this country and in this state. Yet we turn on the TV and hear the professional commentators saying we need to be more like the Democrat Party to be relevant.  Well, I’m here to tell you that’s a bunch of nonsense and all we have to do is look at voters under 30. Young people have been voting in higher percentages than they have in a generation. They are engaged and they are demanding real changes. We saw the excitement in our own primaries among young voters for certain candidates like Ron Paul. But they are seeking out a political agenda that is genuine and consistent. Now do we all here agree with Ron Paul on every issue? Sure. Perhaps you disagree with me on some of the positions I mentioned earlier? But the core philosophy that these young voters believe deep inside and that we in the Republican Liberty Caucus embrace is limited government. We want big government out of our lives. And isn’t that what all of us here believe? Some just go further than others when it comes to particular issues. But we are all heading in the same direction, and while we’re on that journey together, let’s embrace the common ground that we share. In 2010, the Republican Party won a majority with the help of young voters because its message of limited government, cutting spending, and reducing taxes was embraced by the country. In 2012, the Republican Party lost because it didn’t stick to those principles. We must stick to those principles going forward. And that is what young voters in the liberty movement want. Because when we see millions of 18 to 30 year olds reading books about free market economics from thinkers like Rothbard, Mises, and Hayek. Isn’t that incredible? That’s not supposed to happen. The statists think that young people are supposed to be manipulated into thinking government has the answers to society’s ills by the state-sponsored diploma mills. But instead millions of young people are studying the truth and know that their government has failed them – because big government doesn’t work. And the Republican Party ought to embrace that. It ought to embrace them. It must not push young activists out of the party or out of Republican groups on Facebook. Our party should welcome their participation and welcome their activism on behalf of limited government, free markets, and personal liberty. And that is where the Republican Liberty Caucus comes in. We are the voice of liberty Republicans, constitutional conservatives, and young voters dedicated to freedom. And we believe that when the Republican Party embraces our members as well as other tea party conservative groups that the political left and the entrenched political powers that rely on big government to perpetuate their own self-interests will wither away as we promote what we all in our hearts believe to be true:  That we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Last week, the Republican Party suffered a major defeat, when despite horrible performance and dismal statistics across the board, the Democrats maintained power in both the Executive branch and in the Senate (even gaining some seats.) The party spent millions of dollars, not to mention the money spent by individuals and PACs, and yet essentially nothing changed. In the wake of this defeat, the intellectuals, party leaders, and public figureheads have been scrambling for answers, looking for some explanation as to how the worst president in American history (by the numbers) could have possibly beaten them. It has been suggested that this result was purely demographic, and that there is no hope going forward. Some have said that America is no longer a country that supports freedom, that the GOP must become more Democratic to succeed. As you might suspect, I believe this is totally false. While I have already written on the subject, today something happened that absolutely crystalized  my reasoning and made me realize exactly what the root cause of this failure was: Ron Paul gave a speech in congress, and in it, he talked about the two fundamental choices available as to the role of government:

Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force.  If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed.  To achieve it, more than lip service is required. Two choices are available.

1. A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective.  The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty.  Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.
2. A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations.  Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer.  This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages.  Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible.  It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously.  Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that:  “power corrupts.”

Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government.  Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression.  There’s no in-between.  Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.

The problem with the Republican Party is very simple: for the entirety of my life, they have been pretending to offer government number 1, but in reality, they have given us a whole load of number 2. As a result, we have seen tumultuous times, with financial booms and busts, a major shift toward government dependency, and never-ending international conflicts. People are not stupid, and they can see through this. Even the people who might not explicitly identify this, still have the natural instinct that something doesn’t add up. It all started with Ronal Reagan, who sounded a lot like Ronald Paul when giving his speeches, espousing the merits of freedom and the libertarian soul of conservatism, yet ended up growing the government dramatically. To his credit, Reagan tried to hold the line as much as possible, and he was a great speaker on the merits of liberty, but the end result is still undeniable. Since then, the party has been slowly but surely abandoning its principles, and it’s liberal governing style has been steadily accelerating. George W Bush campaigned on the merits of the free market and non-interventionism, but claimed to be a “compassionate conservative” who supported government forced charity for certain causes. As it turned out, he governed to the left of Bill Clinton, instituting the largest entitlement program ever, taking over control of education from the states, and launching an Orwellian, perpetual war on terror. Now we find ourselves in a state where the Republicans are raising spending by over 10% per year, and fighting to raise our taxes, while doling out special incentives and favors to certain (well lobbied) businesses. We find ourselves defeated nationally after running a presidential candidate who supposedly supported free markets, but also supported a state-level individual mandate, and made the ridiculous assertion that “a free market requires government regulations,” and supported the tyrannical policies of the Democrat incumbent. (Indefinite detention, Internet snooping, Assassinations, etc) Yet somehow, some people think the problem is that Republicans are “too conservative” and not “big-government enough.” How can any rational person hold such a belief, after simply observing recent history? How can any person who isn’t a Democrat think that it would be a good idea to move even farther to the left at this point? The reality is that people are thirsting for a real choice, a real answer. Even people who aren’t politically interested have the feeling that “they’re all a bunch of crooks” and are looking for someone to tell them the truth. This is the opportunity that the Republican party needs to take advantage of: distinguish yourself from the Democrats once and for all. Adopt the message of liberty and work towards achieving the government outlined in option number 1: the defender of individual rights. Stop sending mixed messages by taking inconsistent and hypocritical stances on things like national defense, taxes, prohibition, subsidies, etc. Start working towards real change and real reform in the direction of liberty. The alternative is to fade away into the history books and become largely irrelevant. The reason for this is simple: nobody wants a cheap imitation. We already get enough of number 2 from the Democrats, and so if that is the solution you offer, you’ll never win again. (Image courtesy: ernstl) Update: Video of Full Speech!    

At a post-election event for members of the Republican Liberty Caucus, National Chairman Dave Nalle made the following remarks on the state of the Republican Party in the aftermath of the Romney defeat.

“If you nominate a candidate who has a position to please every constituency you run the risk that voters will decide that this is the same thing as having a position to alienate every constituency and respond by not turning out to vote. The party has lost its way because of lazy leaders who have ignored the sensible voters who make up the base of the party and have instead given too much influence to outside interest groups who bought their loyalty with the promise of easy votes.”

“It is time for fundamental change at the top of the party. Leaders who basically rigged the nomination process to force Mitt Romney on the party gambled their legitimacy on his success. They put the entire party at risk with a candidate whose failure dragged down other candidates including promising newcomers and incumbents whose seats should have been secure. They lost us seats in the Senate where we could have won a majority and even weakened our position in the House. They must pay the full price for their poor decisions and be stripped of any position of leadership in the party.”

“It is time for the Republican Party to return to the control of the grassroots and to a simple, ethical agenda of limiting the size and power of government and protecting the rights of individual citizens. The practice of giving special influence to outside groups whose first loyalty is to their own interests and issues must stop. Our allies should be drawn to us by our principles, not by our willingness to sell influence and trade favors.”

“The party is aging and becoming isolated from the people. Republicans have forgotten how to be activists and stir up popular enthusiasm for our cause. We have lost touch with the younger generation and we have abandoned minority groups which ought to share our principles. In too many counties and too many states the Republican Party has become an exclusive private club rather than the inclusive political movement it was meant to be. This is the course of extinction for a political party. If we do not grow and embrace new members and new strategies we will continue to stagnate and age into irrelevance.”

“The voters we need to attract to revitalize the party want less government on their backs and more liberty in their lives. They do not want to live in fear of external threats or internal security. They do not want to see the fruits of their labor seized by government or devalued by irresponsible policies. They do not want government in their businesses, their schools, their churches or their bedrooms. The Republican Party of the future should be young, entrepreneurial and inclusive. There is no hope for a party which is not strong enough to preserve its core principles while still embracing change.”

“This is the vision of the Republican Liberty Caucus. It is a challenge to the Republican Party to become a better party, rededicated to its founding principles. This election must be a turning point for the party and if we do not pick up the banner of leadership and embrace the changes which must come, then the GOP will fade away lnto whiggish obscurity.”

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.

Many in the GOP feel like we’ve taken a big blow to the chest after Election Day. However, it’s important to understand why this happened, and how we can pave the road to prosperity in future elections.

First and foremost; we need to run on strong principles, and not cower down every time the establishment media spins our comments, and tries to pick a fight with us. We must fight back. Mitt Romney completely embarrassed himself in the second political debate. He called out Obama for his mismanagement of the Benghazi tragedy, and made a true statement claiming that President Obama didn’t denounce the attackers as terrorists. The moderator, Candy Crowley, stood up for Obama, and said that Obama actually denounced them as terrorists the following day. Romney just stood stood there and said nothing.

Candy Crowley actually admitted that she was wrong the following day. Obama, actually didn’t denounce the Benghazi attackers as terrorists. Obama gave a speech the day after the attacks, in the Rose Garden about the incidents, then talked about 9/11, and denounced the attackers of 9/11 as being terrorists. At that time Obama was still trying to sell the lie that the attacks were based off of a YouTube video.

Another example of this that I’d like to point out goes back a little over a year ago during the primary season. Texas governor Rick Perry was leading in the polls, and was fired up and at his peak. He made comments about Ben Bernanke, and claimed that if Bernanke was printing money in Austin, like he was doing in Washington, he’d be charged with treason. The media immediately went on the attack, and Perry cowered down. He later, during a debate, made the claim that Social Security was a Ponzi scheme, (which it is). The media attacked him, as well as many of his opponents, and he cowered down. After that Perry was trying too hard not to say anything offensive, and his campaign came crashing down.

If we’re going to win elections, we have to be honest, and we must not be afraid to take the gloves off.

The Republican Party is also running into problems dealing with the issue of  major demographic changes in our Country.  We constantly isolate the Latino vote by taking such hardcore stances on immigration. Yes, the rule of law is the rule of law, but sometimes our laws are impractical. Our laws are written under the assumption that we protect our borders, and have a comprehensive immigration policy; neither is true. Our government actually gives money and provides other incentives to illegal immigrants as the result of half-formed policies which were started with good intentions but were never coupled with appropriate controls which you would have in a comprehensive immigration system. Yes, we need a strong and secure border, but we need to end all welfare and safety nets for the illegal population. That alone would do wonders for keeping illegals out of our county.

Next, we need to make work visas more accessible to foreigners who come here looking for a chance to take care of themselves, and their families – not just for highly skilled workers, but also for laborers in low skill jobs where there is high demand. We also need to provide a reasonable path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who are here and have shown a commitment to the nation by  working and providing for their families.  Get them out of the underground and on the books and make sure that all applicable taxes are being paid. That’s a position that I feel many Latino voters would be supportive of. We just drive them away when we make unrealistic and bombastic statements that we are going to launch mass deportation.  It will never happen and just makes us look bigoted and foolish and many in the GOP and in the general population find this sort of posturing offensive and unacceptable in a nation which has been built on immigration.

Abortion and related issues fall into a troublesome area which tends to be given a disproportionate amount of attention and be used as a weapon against the GOP. Nothing looks worse for the party then the comments Todd Akin made regarding abortion. Many Republicans, including Mitt Romney, denounced Akin’s comments, but with the spin in the media and similar comments from Richard Mourdock and John Koster reinforcing the impression Akin created, there is no denying it had a pervasive and lasting influence on the campaign.  It made Republicans look callous and inhumane.  I understand and appreciate pro-life positions, as well as pro-choice positions, but those positions should be the choice of the candidate and not a matter of party policy.  If there wasn’t such an ingrained, anti-abortion platform backing these candidates up, it would make Akin’s comments far less destructive and less likely to produce a negative reaction that spills over onto other candidates.

Another issue that the Republicans need to keep in mind is gay rights. The Republican Party’s position on gay rights isolates a lot of individuals who respect the ideas of limited government, free markets, and individual liberty. In Massachusetts, the Republican Party nominated Richard Tisei, an openly gay former State Senator, to run against incumbent, John Tierney. Tisei received very little support from the party, and lost the election by a very slim margin.  This was a major strategic error in a state where it’s very hard to get any Republicans elected.  Electing the first openly gay Republican congressman is a small price to pay for another seat in the House.  If we were more open and fair towards homosexuals, and homosexual candidates; we would be able to bridge a gap that has long hurt our image as a party. I understand the importance of religious freedom, but it would probably be better for everyone to  just  get government out of the marriage business in the first place. Allow governments to grant civil unions to all, and allow churches and the people to call them whatever they wish.

Another problem is the bad habit among Republicans of falling back on straw man arguments.  When you manufacture bogus claims about a candidate and they are disproven you look like a liar or a fool or both.  One particularly bad example of this was the claim which circulated a few weeks ago that  Obama had passed over 900 executive orders, which is untrue. Obama actually  signed fewer executive orders in his first-term then Bush did in his first-term. The claim even lists a bunch of executive orders that sound really bad, but which easy to find public sources can confirm were not even passed under his administration. Similarly weak and likely to backfire are the many ad hominem attacks which appealed particularly to members of the Tea Party, the classic example being all the increasingly ridiculous claims about Obama’s birth certificate, which did more to marginalize Republicans than they did to harm Obama.  In this same category are all the claims about Obama being a socialist, Muslim, foreigner, former CIA Agent named Barry Soetoro, etc. These cheap shots actually made many feel sympathetic with the President and ultimately, they hurt our cause. We would have won this last election had we stuck to the issues, instead of spewing radical propaganda that was unprovable or easily disproven.

A lot of Republicans won’t like this, but all the emphasis in the campaign on Obamacare was also a mistake, much though it ought to be hated and rejected.  The Affordable-Care Act is a terrible issue to rely on because it is essentially Bob Dole’s plan from the 1990′s filtered through Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts health plan.  That doesn’t mean that it’s not bad policy, and that it’s not essential for us to repeal this legislation, but it makes any Republican argument against it weaker than it could be, because we came up with the bad idea in the first place.

If we get away from our social extremism, and stand firm on Constitutional principles; we will fix what has taken this great nation in the wrong direction. If we do this, I believe that we can save the GOP, reclaim the Constitution, and restore our republic. The problems facing us as Republicans, and as Americans are obvious. It’s time for the Republican Party to make a choice and find better strategies for the future, and I hope they choose wisely.

Liveblog Discussion of Election Results will officially begin at 10pm EST Tuesday night.

Races to Watch

Likely Wins
Ted Cruz (TX-Senate)
Justin Amash (MI-3)
Steve Stockman (TX-36)
Tom McClintock (CA-4)
Chip Cravaack (MN-8)

Key Races
Jessica Puente Bradshaw (TX-34)
Don Volaric (MI-9)
Kerry Bentivolio (MI-11)
Dan Sebring (WI-4)
Jeff Flake (AZ-Senate)
John Koster (WA-1)
Dan Halloran (NY-6)
Lee Byberg (MN-7)

Longshots
Thomas Massie (KY-7)
Barry Hinckley (RI-Senate)
Kurt Bills (MN-Senate)
Delia Lopez (OR-3)
Eric Knowles (MD-3)
John Raese (WV-Senate)
John Dennis (CA-9)
Chris Fields (MN-5)

Early this morning, after a long struggle with cancer, Russell Means went to join his ancestors from his family’s ranch in Porcupine, South Dakota. Russell was an inspirational leader, not just for Native Americans but for those of all races and backgrounds who believe that life demands that we be free. As a writer, an activist and as an performer Russell touched many people and leaves behind a unique legacy in those he inspired to live free. His message that what government has done to his people would one day be the fate of all people if government was not checked was prophetic and must be remembered.

“Increment by increment…you have allowed your country to implement Indian law in the United States of America. American government since the inception of the Bureau of Indian Affairs in 1824 has been busy practicing and perfecting its policies on us and then exporting them to the world and bringing them home to roost ont he backs of the American people.”

Russell Means was born on South Dakota’s Pine Ridge Sioux Reservation in 1939. His family moved to California where he graduated from San Leandro High School. He then attended Oakland City College and Arizona State. Russell became involved with the American Indian Movement after meeting co-founder Dennis Banks while working as the Director of Cleveland’s American Indian Center. During the early 1970s he led AIM to stage many protests, the most prominent of which was the 71 day occupation of Wounded Knee in 1973. He also took part in “The Longest Walk” march in 1978 to protest anti-Indian legislation including the forced sterilization of Indian women. This lead to the passage of a resolution in Congress declaring that Indians had the right “to believe, express and exercise their traditional religions, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to worship through ceremonials and traditional rites.”

Russell went on to write inspirational books, record two collections of protest songs, speak all over the country and appear in a number of movies including Last of the Mohicans and Pocahontas. He was active in the Libertarian Party and served as South Dakota coordinator for the Republican Liberty Caucus. Russell became the face of the Indian rights movement in America and an advocate for liberty for all peoples of all nations. The Los Angeles Times described him as the most famous American Indian since Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse.

His spirit will stalk the land like a giant so long as we remain strong in our belief in liberty and continue to take the fight he championed to the halls of power in every state and in the nation’s capital.

Recently, news came out that Mitt Romney’s effective tax rate was 14%. While that is higher than 97% of the American people, the universal outcry from the left was that Romney didn’t pay enough in taxes. Not so, Romney really ought to have paid no taxes at all. How could I say such a thing? Well, almost all of his income was from investment returns, and there should be no taxes on investments. The capital gains and dividends tax rates should both be 0%. Taxing capital gains and dividends is double taxation. A corporation’s earnings were already taxed — usually at a 35% marginal rate. Profits paid in the form of dividends  paid directly to investors were already taxed. Taxing it again is double-taxation. Profits not paid out as dividends increases a company’s value and is reflected in a company’s stock price.  So, as stock prices go higher, that too is also based on after-tax earnings — so capital gains are also double taxed. Either way, an investor bears the cost of taxes on corporate profits. In Romney’s case, he invested money  into various companies. That money was used to grow those companies and that growth was taxed through corporate taxes. Then, Romney was taxed once again through capital gains and dividend taxes. His 14% effective tax rate ignores the taxes he paid through corporate taxes. Beyond the fundamental unfairness (I love turning that leftist phrase against them) of taxing earnings twice , it’s just bad for economic growth. Economies don’t grow without capital investment, and we should remove every artificial barrier that discourages capital investment. If we want more jobs, we need profitable businesses and new innovation. To get that, we need capital investment to provide the real economic resources to fuel new ventures and expansion. And the higher the capital gains tax rate, the more it discourages risk taking and the less economic growth and innovation we get. Mitt Romney’s investments created jobs and new products and services that benefit consumers. We should cheer his investments instead of taxing it multiple times. We need to encourage more investments like that by eliminating the capital gains and dividends taxes entirely. While it’s tragic that Mitt Romney had to pay so much in taxes, the real loser in this deal is us. We could have enjoyed more new innovative products, more jobs, and a better standard of living had those investments not been taxed twice.