CONCORD, N.H.—As the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire adds 22 endorsed candidates and four recommended candidates to its list of supported contenders for the Sept. 11 New Hampshire primary, the organization will focus its remaining efforts on identifying the best Republicans for elected office in a final round of endorsements and recommendations prior to releasing its voter guide right before the election.

The RLCNH 26 endorsements and recommendations released today are for new candidates who scored well on the organization’s survey found at www.rlcnh.org/survey and who made it through a reputation-screening process run by the RLCNH Endorsements Committee. Last month, the RLCNH endorsed and recommended 90 incumbents based on how well their voting records reflected the essential principles of limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility and free markets. Earlier this summer, the RLCNH endorsed an initial 20 new candidates who met the same criteria as the current group.

“The RLCNH is happy to offer voters today’s list of ideal Republican candidates who have shown their willingness to stand firm on principle and continue the work of the current Legislature to restore liberty and prosperity in New Hampshire,” said Carolyn McKinney, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “As we get closer to the primary, the RLCNH will start to identify key districts where these true Republicans are running against weak, big government Republicans. Following a final list of candidate endorsements and recommendations, we will release our voter guide to make sure New Hampshire continues to move forward in its effort to restore the ideas that made our state and country great.”

With 107 endorsed candidates winning their elections in 2010, the RLCNH swept 80 percent of its post-primary candidates into office. These endorsed Republicans passed 338 bills, leading the restorative, common sense changes desperately needed after years of wasteful Democratic spending and the resultant taxes and fees that left the New Hampshire economy in shambles.

Endorsed Republicans in the next biennium will have to continue the responsible decision-making that led to this session’s $1 billion budget cut, which allowed the Legislature to reduce taxes, fees and regulations and foster the beginning of economic growth. Further cuts to excessive and burdensome government will be needed to make the changes necessary for sustainable prosperity among New Hampshire’s working families and businesses.

The RLCNH has raised its standards in making endorsements for the 2013-2014 Legislative Session to send a clear message to voters about which candidates will truly support the organization’s Liberty and Prosperity for New Hampshire agenda, and which will simply continue business as usual in Concord.

“The just ending session of the Legislature was one of the most refreshing in modern times because it featured statesmen who truly executed on the mission they promised to voters,” McKinney said. “The RLCNH is interested in making this type of honest politics—focused on reducing the size of government by cutting the budget and reducing taxes, fees and regulations, and letting people live their own lives and raise their own children—a new normal within New Hampshire. We expect endorsed candidates to give deference to their campaign promises and their oaths to the N.H. and U.S. Constitutions above any testimony given by state bureaucrats or lobbyists.

“No longer can New Hampshire afford to accept mediocrity in the Legislature,” McKinney added. “Republican representatives, senators, executive councilors and governors should be spending every day of their elected office driving more power away from government and into our homes, private sector businesses and non-profit organizations.”

Because timing is now short, new candidates—particularly those with a primary—who have not yet filled out the RLCNH survey are encouraged to do so by visiting www.rlcnh.org/survey.

RLCNH THIRD-ROUND CANDIDATE ENDORSEMENTS 

 

Endorsed Executive Councilor Candidate

Robert Burns, Executive Council District 4

 

Endorsed State Senate Candidate

Dennis Acton, Senate District 23 (Brentwood, Chester, Danville, East Kingston, Epping, Exeter, Fremont, Kingston, Sandown)

 

Endorsed State Representative Candidates

Keith Carlsen, Cheshire 6 (Keene Ward 3)

Jacqueline Casey, Hillsborough 34 (Nashua Ward 7)

Donald J. Frye, Hillsborough 16 (Manchester Ward 9)

Bianca Garcia, Rockingham 8 (Salem)

Dan Garthwaite, Hillsborough 12 (Manchester Ward 5)

Shuvom Ghose, Hillsborough 11 (Manchester Ward 4)

Robert D. Goodman, Rockingham 36 (Exeter, Newfields, Newmarket, Stratham)

Donald Gorman, Rockingham 32 (Candia, Deerfield, Northwood, Nottingham)

Brian Griset, Rockingham 18 (Exeter)

Elijah Haykinson, Hillsborough 7 (Bedford)

Kevin J. Kervick, Rockingham 30 (Portsmouth Wards 1, 2, 4 & 5)

Gerard A. LeDuc, Merrimack 21 (Epsom, Pittsfield)

David Murotake, Hillsborough 32 (Nashua Ward 5)

Kelleigh Murphy, Hillsborough 7 (Bedford)

Ron Noyes, Merrimack 27 (Concord Wards 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7)

Eric Rolfs, Hillsborough 37 (Hudson, Pelham)

Emily Sandblade, Hillsborough 18 (Manchester Ward 11)

David Schoneman, Hillsborough 22 (Nashua Ward 3)

Phil Straight, Hillsborough 21 (Merrimack)

Len Turcotte, Strafford 25 (Barrington & Lee)

 

RLCNH THIRD-ROUND CANDIDATE RECOMMENDATIONS 

 

Recommended Executive Councilor Candidate

Jerry Thibodeau, Executive Council District 1

 

Recommended State Representative Candidates

Patrick J. Bick, Rockingham 8 (Salem)

Robert G. Fullerton, Strafford 17 (Dover Wards 5 & 6, Somersworth Ward 2)

Lee Shaikh, Merrimack 9 (Canterbury, Loudon)

If you’re going to the AFP Summit, don’t miss the RLC exhibit booth!

This weekend Americans for Prosperity is holding their annual Defending the American Dream Summit in Washington, DC.  It’s a conservative and libertarian oriented non-partisan event which draws the attention of a lot of major political figures and has a strong lineup of speakers and events, including a lot of activist training.

This year the Republican Liberty Caucus will have a presence at the event, with RLC National Chairman Dave Nalle joining RLC activists from local chapters in hosting an exhibit booth to promote the RLC and our nationwide efforts – taking our message of less government and more liberty right to the belly of the beast.

If you are attending the conference as an activist, a blogger, a speaker or a guest and you’d like to find out more about the RLC or if you’re a member and would just like to stop and chat, come to our booth which will be located in a “heavy traffic area” yet to be determined. We have RLC merchandise and promotional materials and it’s a great chance to meet RLC members and supporters from other parts of the country.

Dave will also be tweeting about the experience if you follow @texliberty.

As conservative Republicans work to eliminate or reduce the amount of money New Hampshire spends on government programs, critics on the political left have emerged from time to time with the idea that these policies are immoral—or as one outspoken critic said, “morally repugnant.” This criticism is predicated on a belief that only government can provide for the basic needs of people who can’t provide for themselves. We agree that people need to take care of one another. It is our moral obligation. But it’s not government’s job to do it. In fact, one of the best things about American history is how well we have taken care of one another, even before the federal government launched its “War on Poverty” or created programs such as Medicaid or Obamacare. Alexis de Tocqueville, a French political thinker and historian who travelled to America in the 1830s, wrote that one of the strengths of 19th Century America was its “robust civil society,” which he defined as the institutions, such as the family, the church and other secular civic organizations, that operated between the individual and the government. He praised these institutions, explaining how they tempered the isolating tendencies of individualism and the “despotic proclivities of centralized [government] administration.” Unfortunately, civil society has significantly declined in the past several decades because government has overwhelmed, and in some cases taken over, these institutions using our tax dollars to fund and direct them. We can observe this in the entitlements given to poorer families, the grants given to our nonprofit organizations, the “compassionate conservatism” that added new public grants to assist church-sponsored charity and all the rules and laws that these institutions must follow to keep the money flowing. It is precisely the absence of that money and those rules and laws that make private charities more effective than government programs. Private charities are run at lower costs with the help of volunteers and private donors who give only to those organizations they believe are the most effective. These charities are comprised of neighbors helping neighbors; not government officials handing out money that doesn’t belong to them to people they don’t know. And because it is neighbors helping neighbors, any fraud or abuse is diminished because the act of giving is a powerful tie that binds, making it much more difficult for those receiving aid to take advantage of the generosity of those who serve them. When centralized government administration is responsible for “service” in society, as it is today, this severs the individual ties of service and charity that have traditionally held us together for our mutual private benefit and the good of society as a whole. Individuals have resultantly become more isolated and selfish as government has moved in to redistribute wealth according to a single, centralized understanding of morality that is demonstratively incorrect. In fact, the liberals and “progressives” who subscribe to the idea that government must provide for others have suffered the greatest impact on their own morality. According to the report, “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism,” Syracuse University Professor Arthur C. Brooks found that conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household, even though liberal households tend to average incomes 6 percent higher than those of conservative families. His study also found that conservatives donate more time and give more blood. A true understanding of practical reality shows that conservative Republicans, who want to reduce the programs run by government, are actually more in tune with civil society and the individual moral strength that develops when people are free to keep what they earn and dispense it how they see fit. It is the conservative understanding that respects the dignity of the human person and values his or her work as well as the products and services derived from it. This is the philosophy that encourages people to be more creative and industrious, which results in innovations that fill real needs in society. It is also the understanding that produces wealth and allows individuals to serve others out of the goodness of their own hearts. There is nothing more moral than this. Conservatism also fosters the organic growth of charitable organizations, which allows society to fill its own needs as they arise. It sustains those privately funded programs that actually make a difference in people’s lives, and it allows ineffective programs to fade away. It encourages people to get back up on their feet and provide for themselves rather than linger in dependency and want. This in turn allows more people, who experienced the love of someone else’s individual charity, to turn around and help others in the same way. There is nothing more moral than this.

The Republican Party establishment has proven itself to be all too willing to compromise the fiscal conservative values that Americans have long maintained. Just as in 2006 and 2008, voters voted against Republicans because of wars and out of control spending; likewise, in 2010 voters voted against Democrats for health care and out of control spending. In this, perhaps both parties have failed to win the confidence of the American people because both parties have largely ignored the real center of American politics: Those who believe that government ought to mind its own business.

First, one should be mindful that the narrative of the debate in Washington won’t change with a Republican “win” in 2012, if it is so fortunate. The narrative of the debate will only change, when the people outside of Washington demand it. If conservatives want to affect that change, it will require the conservative movement to appeal to the ignored center; and to do so, they will need to confront some inconsistencies that have plagued the movement in the past.

To start, those who call themselves conservatives must not only embrace the idea of limited government at home, but also abroad. Just as conservatives oppose federal mandates over health care in their home states, they should also oppose mandates in Afghanistan, Iraq, and all other nations across the globe. Traditionally, conservatism has embraced a non-interventionist foreign policy. It was conservatism that has opposed “nation building” and the doctrine of Wilsonian style “liberal internationalism.” That opposition has faded in recent years and this interventionist foreign policy stands in contrast to the values of limited government promoted by conservatives at home. It’s a contradiction and conservatives must reconcile that contradiction.

They must also embrace the idea of limited government in respect to social issues. Government has no business telling two people they shouldn’t get married or a person he shouldn’t put a particular substance into his own body. That isn’t to say one agrees or disagrees with whatever social issue is being debated. It is simply an acknowledgment that some things just shouldn’t be dictated to 320 million people from one city by a handful of well-connected rulers.

That also doesn’t mean folks have to abandon moral principles or give up on what they think is right at the expense of what others do that they think is wrong. There is still a place in society to debate moral questions — but government is not that place. Perhaps acting through the power of persuasion, one can reason with his neighbor that “this” is right and “that” is wrong. Churches, think tanks, civic institutions, charities and the like are the proper venues for such debates.  But the halls of Congress are not. Corrupt politicians deciding questions of morality is a faulty system and it’s time we move past that.

The Republican Party can unite the country behind a philosophy of limited government if it resolves these contradictions. The idea of limited government is a uniting principle that can bring people of vastly different beliefs and values together around the principle that people don’t have to force everyone else to live just like them, and that the individual can make choices for himself. And when people come together around that principle, and stop trying to force their views through the power of government on everyone else, perhaps they will be more receptive to the persuasive arguments of others. In civil society, outside of politics, the debate over moral issues can become more meaningful and really address the root issues. It would be a more civil discussion among neighbors rather than relying on brute force to impose a form of cultural socialism.

And this was the recipe for success for the GOP two years ago — even if it was accidental. The Republicans won in 2010  being notably quiet about social issues while embracing the idea of limited government in fiscal matters — an idea it had abandoned several years before.  Republicans stumbled on a winning formula of being fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. I’m just not sure they realized it.

What is not an accident is that Americans by instinct embrace those ideas because at heart. Americans still believe, by and large, in the idea of liberty and limited government even if they can’t quite put their finger on it. But that instinct extends to believing in limited government and individual liberty when it comes to social issues.  In that respect, I think Republicans may have stumbled on the real center of American politics — a soft, libertarian-leaning center in the same tradition as our nation’s founders. They may not know the nuances of the policies or the principles of economics that free-market libertarians advocate, but in their hearts people believe that they can make choices for themselves better than several hundred men and women in a far distant capital can — and that’s a great start.

_________________________________________

Daniel Encarnacion is a small business owner in Charleston, SC and is the state secretary of the Republican Liberty Caucus of South Carolina.

You can contact Daniel at daniel@rlcsc.org or on Facebook at www.facebook.com/danencarnacion

CONCORD, N.H.—In an effort to convey transparency about its intentions to restore the liberty-oriented Republican form of government created by the state and nation’s founders, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire is unveiling a list of the 338 bills passed by the 107 legislators it endorsed in 2010 and the 66 bills it actively supported as an organization that are now the law of the land. “As an organization, we serve two important roles that both contribute to the advancement of conservative principles in New Hampshire’s government,” said Carolyn McKinney, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire. “Our first duty is to help elect principled Republicans who understand what it means to have limited government, individual liberty, personal responsibility and free enterprise, and help replace Republicans who don’t understand these essential tenets. Our second responsibility is to provide further education to elected officials and the public about the application of our core values in order to pass or repeal laws and advance our cause, which is to restore liberty and prosperity in New Hampshire.” The 107 Republican lawmakers endorsed by the RLCNH in 2010 passed 338 bills this session that accounted for 60 percent of the total 560 bills passed by the Legislature in 2011 and 2012. These bills, most of which advance the RLCNH agenda, are listed in an attached PDF document. Many of these bills, 66 to be exact, which are also listed in an attached PDF, were core policy goals for the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire during the biennium, including but not limited to:   “The RLCNH applauds its endorsed lawmakers for making restorative progress toward the limited form of representative, constitutional government our founders set up,” McKinney said. “While we do not support all of the bills passed by our endorsed lawmakers and even actively oppose a handful of them, the great majority of the bills listed in this report are bills we are proud to say advance liberty and prosperity in New Hampshire. We’ve also highlighted 66 bills that our organization actively supported as crucial to this noble cause and express our deepest gratitude to the Legislature for making them New Hampshire laws.” When studying the attached files, please note that all 66 RLCNH-supported bills were fully vetted and supported by the organization from their initial public hearings until they became Chaptered Law. These are the only bills that can truly be attributed to the organization’s post-election activities. Many new laws sponsored by RLCNH-endorsed lawmakers were also supported by the organization or its members, but many of these laws were either not followed by the organization through the entire process or they were not included in the RLCNH agenda this term. Thus, an endorsed candidate’s bill that was not supported by the RLCNH may or may not have been a good bill, but chances are that it advanced the RLCNH agenda. Also documented in an attached PDF report, the RLCNH is happy to report that 21 of the 26 bills the organization actively opposed during the session have been killed. These are bills that moved New Hampshire in the wrong direction, not the least of which was CACR 12, an educational funding amendment that would have explicitly centralized control over education at the state level causing near permanent damage to local control over education and to educational freedom in New Hampshire. Unfortunately, a few of the RLCNH endorsed lawmakers were sponsors or cosponsors of some of these bills. “We ask supporters and the public in general to evaluate the full list of bills sponsored or cosponsored by our endorsed candidates and invite e-mails that suggest continuing or discontinuing endorsements of some of these incumbents based on the bills they supported,” McKinney said. “In fact, the RLCNH will be releasing a list of endorsed incumbents next week based on the bills we supported and opposed and we welcome all suggested improvements to our process this week and beyond, which is the very purpose of our transparency. Our ultimate goal, of course, is to fill the Legislature with endorsed candidates who all work to advance the proven founding principles of our state and nation.” By releasing the attached reports about the progress the RLCNH made during the current Legislative session, the organization is also hoping to involve more people in the process of self governance. True progress, after all, means that more people will work for themselves, run their own lives and households, raise and educate their own children and pursue the maximum amount of happiness they can possibly achieve through their own efforts. In order to achieve this progress, more people will need to rise to the occasion and do their civic duty—whether that means running for office themselves or paying attention and holding their elected officials accountable, we leave that up to them. “The trend of human history has been to favor central governments with extensive power to control individuals and economies, and we know from experience that such governments perpetuate human misery by limiting the genius of individuals to reach their fullest potential,” McKinney said. “We also know that human freedom encourages the best results for the most people, and that our system of government once allowed for such liberties and created the most prosperous and advanced civilization that we know of. While we have once again trended toward central government control in both our state and our nation thanks largely to Democrats and Republicans who subscribe to the philosophy of big government, and our state and nation have suffered for it, the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire exists to help reverse that trend and restore an effective limited government philosophy that will restore liberty and prosperity for all hard-working people.”

Pro-Liberty Caucus Announces Candidate Endorsements Candidates will be advocates for sensible, constitutional government FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 15, 2012 CONTACT: Norann Dillon, 763-516-1175 or rlcminn@gmail.com SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA — Today, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota [rlcmn.org] announced endorsements for 13 Legislative candidates who will work for fiscal responsibility, individual liberty, and reduced size in government. "State government spending has averaged a 10% growth rate since the 1960s.  Minnesotans have felt the drain when state government spends money we don't have.  We need fiscal conservatives who will build on the Republican-led legislature's initial work to set the state's spending priorities within the realities of revenue," said state RLC Chair Norann Dillon. The Caucus endorsed nine incumbents: Rep. Mary Franson, House District 8B; Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen, House District 18B; Rep. Steve Drazkowski, House District 21B; Rep. Peggy Scott, House District 35B; Sen. Roger Chamberlain, Senate District 38; Rep. Kathy Lohmer, House District 39B; Rep. Doug Wardlow, House District 51B; Sen. Ted Daley, Senate District 51; and Sen. Dave Thompson, Senate District 58. Non-incumbents endorsed by the Caucus are David FitzSimmons, House District 30B; Dale Helm, House District 41A; Paul Tuschy, House District 52B; and Mark Fotsch, House District 66A. "These candidates know that government grows at the expense of individuals and businesses.  It's not only good fiscal policy to keep state spending in check.  It also protects and preserves our freedoms here in the North Star State," concluded Andrew Noble, Co-Chair of the Candidate Committee. Founded in 1991, the Republican Liberty Caucus works to advance the principles of individual rights, limited government and free enterprise within the Republican Party.  The Minnesota Chapter was chartered in 2003. - 30 -

Jack Hunter has written an excellent article about the same-sex marriage debate where he correctly calls the issue a distraction and highlights the absurdity of focusing on such a thing while the federal government continues to spend trillions of dollars on numerous unconstitutional activities. The bottom line is that marriage is a state issue, not a federal one:

As with most things, simply following the Constitution would solve the gay-marriage dilemma. There is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the power to regulate marriage.

On the national level, this in fact should be the end of the debate. Unfortunately, many Republicans keep this issue in the news, because they campaign on the promise of amending the Constitution to define a marriage as between one man and one woman. This in turn gives Democrats a perfect opportunity to pick up voters they may not otherwise have earned. The single most important thing about Democrats is that they believe the government should run the economy. This is antithetical to America and the success that this country has seen in its short history. Therefore, if this was the only thing Democrats ran on then they would lose miserably in every election. So instead, their strategy is to divide and conquer. They divide voters into blocks and classes, by race, sex, religion, income level, industry type,  and sexual practices. This is also antithetical to America and the spirit of our founding, but unfortunately it has been a very successful strategy. The people in the various demographic groups that the Democrats have targeted have been swayed by their arguments, despite their party’s history, and despite the fact that they want to control your life from the toilet you use to the car you drive to the things you can see on the internet. So how do we combat this as Republicans and win elections by large margins? Well, it is not by giving them more ammunition and more ways to divide Americans. In trying to use the federal government to define marriage, Republicans are trying to solve a societal problem by using a big government solution. This is exactly what the Democrats do. Furthermore, we are alienating an entire “demographic” that contains many members (such as Log Cabin Republicans) who might otherwise be ardent supporters of our cause. On a federal level, the same-sex marriage debate is not only a distraction, but it is also destructive to Republican campaign efforts. But what about the state level? Should we make this a big Republican issue in South Carolina? Jack Hunter makes a great point here as well:

The institution of marriage was under assault long before gay activists got involved. Divorce alone has been far more damaging to the institution of marriage than gay marriage. If I had my druthers, I’d get the state out of the matrimony business altogether and let churches and other social institutions decide what constitutes marriage.

Yet again, mister Hunter is right on. Around the mid-1950s in the U.S. several court rulings and state laws clearly recognized the many instances of no-fault reasons to end marriages. The immediate result was a spike in divorce rates during the 1960s. This same thing happened again with “no fault” divorces in the 70s, followed by another huge spike in divorces. So if the object here is to protect marriage, then we are fighting the wrong battle. Finally, there is a more fundamental, principled aspect to this debate that isn’t often talked about. Why does the government have the authority to control marriage in the first place? It didn’t always have that authority, marriage licenses issued by the government are  a relatively new thing in Christian history. With divorce rates up around 50% after thousands of years  in the single digits, maybe that wasn’t such a good idea? It is something to think about.    

The boisterous Maine Republican Convention finally adjourned late Sunday night with a clean sweep for Liberty Republicans.

The Ron Paul slate won 20 of the 24 national convention delegates and all of the alternates, plus new pro-liberty RNC representatives who also sit as delegates to the national convention, leaving sitting Maine GOP Chairman Webster as the only sure Romney delegate and Maine Governor Paul LePage as an additional delegate who may vote with the liberty faction. Of course, The Establishment raised enough procedural issues to create potential roadblocks and is threatening to challenge the entire delegation.

At one point, the Executive Committee of the current Maine State Committee was seen in a break room around a table on a conference call trying to get the RNC to declare the Maine convention invalid. On Saturday, as the trend was evident, Romney’s top lawyer Benjamin Ginsberg was flown into Augusta Municipal Airport by private plane to advise The Establishment on the convention floor. The Portland Press Herald caught a photo of him in action trying to influence proceedings at the convention.

Youth was brought into the party with the election of young Paul supporters as National Committeeman and National Committeewoman. The National Committeewoman-elect Ashley Ryan will become the youngest member of the RNC and she has expressed interest in Republican Liberty Caucus.

Liberty Republicans, including at least eight RLC members, swept State Committee seats and, unless challenged by The Establishment lawyers, look to have a majority or better for control. The State Chair Charles Webster, who declared war on libertarians, is up for election in December.

Maine Republican Governor Paul LePage has been friendly to libertarians and was supported as a delegate on the liberty slate. He was endorsed by Maine Republican Liberty Caucus in the seven-way primary before his election.

The old guard Establishment remains the Legislative leadership, many of whom led the procedural challenges which caused the convention to run late. Several expressed open hostility to the Paul movement, libertarians and two to the RLC specifically. State Rep. Aaron Libby, who is friendly to RLC, did endorse Paul last February but is the only GOP legislator to be public.

The Maine RLC booth was extremely successful in terms of both new memberships and revenues from sales of my book and the wing-nut teeshirts, which were worn all over the convention floor by the young Paul enthusiaists.

The only drawback was an incomplete Maine RLC State Convention. We were able to convene with a quorum long enough to elect officers. Ken Lindell was reelected Chair, Vic Berardelli was re-elected vice chair, Tim McClure is secretary, Jeffrey Ellis is treasurer. Board members are David Brooks, Ken Anderson and Michelle Anderson. We were about to get into endorsement review when our “courier” said they cut short candidate speeches and were about to conduct voting business on the main convention floor. With the Romney challenges and the late hour, we were unable to muster a quorum to reconvene and will have to conclude our RLC business at a later date.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 4, 2012 CONTACT: Chairman Dave Nalle at 512-656-8011 or chairman@rlc.org Republican Liberty Caucus Endorses 3 More Great Congressional Candidates in Texas GOP Primary These Candidates Are Dedicated to Returning the Republican Party to the Principles of Limited Government and Individual Liberty AUSTIN, TX  – The National Board of the Republican Liberty Caucus is pleased to endorse three more exceptional candidates in the Texas Republican primary.  Eddie Traylor (CD10), Grant Stinchfield (CD24) and Steve Stockman (CD36) stand out among a field of excellent candidates in Texas this year and were chosen for early endorsement because of their dedication to constitutionally limited government, individual liberty and free enterprise.  They are more great assets to add to a growing slate of extraordinary Liberty Republican candidates in Texas this year. “Voters in Texas are starting to realize that our nation cannot survive when both parties allow government to grow out of control at the cost of our liberties,” said RLC National Chairman Dave Nalle.  “These candidates represent the new direction of American politics and the best traditions of the Republican Party.  They have personal integrity, a dedication to the best interests of the people and a firm belief in responsible government.  They are exactly the kind of representatives we need to send to DC to work with our 2010 endorsees like Justin Amash (MI) and Rand Paul (KY) to put our government back on track” Eddie Traylor has an distinguished military background and was selected by the grassroots process developed here in Texas by GOOOH.  Grant Stinchfield has a background in media and business and has a burning desire to bring a platform of real reform to Congress.  Former Congressman Steve Stockman is finally heeding the call to return to politics.  He has been on the RLC board of advisers for many years and now we have great hopes that he’ll return to DC to finish the work which was left undone when he held office back in the 1990s. In 1774 John Adams wrote that the revolution had been completed “in the minds of the people” before conflict ever broke out, and we believe that a similar revolution in attitude is taking place in the United States today. Following on the election of more than two-dozen RLC endorsees to the House and Senate in 2010, the RLC has set a goal of doubling that number in the 2012 election. With a larger core of newly elected, principled representatives in Washington we can move away from the big government status quo and towards putting the rights and interests of the people first. The people of Texas are no longer content to sit idly by and accept the dictates of out of control government in Washington, DC. We are demanding better service and real accountability, and if we do not get it we will keep voting complacent and unresponsive office holders out until they get the message ### These candidates were selected based on their answers to questions on our candidate survey and at the recommendation of the Texas chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus.  Further endorsements in state and federal races in Texas are expected in the coming months. More information on the Eddie Traylor campaign can be found at http://www.traylor.goooh.com More information on the Grant Stinchfield campaign can be found at http://www.grantstinchfield.com/ More information on the Steve Stockman campaign can be found at http://www.friendsofstevestockman.com