The Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota’s Greg O’Connor testified before the State House in support of legislation from RLC-endorsed legislator Mary Kiffmeyer to implement VOTER ID for Minnesota.

View a brief excerpt from his presentation before the House and read this article about the legislation: Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer’s voting bill advances in the House.

Additionally, Republican Liberty Caucus of Minnesota Chair Norann Dillon addressed the Young Americans for Liberty in Minnesota at their first annual convention in early April.

Students gathered to hear from pro-liberty speakers.

Norann addresses the YAL-MN students.

To the chagrin of some, the belt tightening numerous state governments are being forced to engage in is bringing some tough questions to light. When budget cuts are being made, institutions of learning often become collateral damage. Although no one finds this situation desirable, our current state of affairs and system demands it must be done.

Ugly situations such as the tussle between Governor Scott Walker and the teacher’s unions in Wisconsin are providing a small glimpse of what lies ahead, as keeping promises made through the years turns out to be an impossible task. When this discussion comes up, one of the oldest refrains we hear repeated religiously is that our public school teachers are underpaid. This has been said so many times and with such vigor that the wisdom of it has become all but conventional; questioning some things approaches futility once they become irreversibly ingrained.

Since good teachers are one of the most valuable assets a country can have, disputing their important contributions is unwise and unproductive. Any nation hoping to remain ahead of the pack will always have a need for qualified, competent teachers in order to truly stay great. But the debate has been framed to such a degree where anyone who even raises the idea of so much as tampering with collective bargaining arrangements is written off as an enemy of education who “has it in” for teachers.

Like many conservatives who dutifully denounce anyone who suggest military budget cuts as “weak on national defense” or “sympathetic to the Enemy”,  so many on the Left do the same for education: an opponent of bloated education budgets must of course be a “knuckle dragger who hates math, science, and the arts.” (With such free and open debate in the United States, one must wonder why we are unable to get our fiscal house in order.)

Both of these claims are specious and demonstrate how both sides of the political aisle shield from criticism the parts of government they would fight tooth and nail to prevent cuts from occurring in. But Department of Education funding is a subject whose discussion alone could be voluminous; all this drama over state and local school budgets in and of itself brings up an important answer to the “Are teachers underpaid” question/declarative statement.

The truth is, we will never truly know whether teachers are being overpaid or underpaid as long as public money is being used to provide their salaries.

Complaining that teachers are underpaid or shouting about too much pay (which I am not sure I have actually heard) misses the point: there is no way to know the answer. If education was truly a private marketplace, as many libertarians and some conservatives hope to establish, we would then know the true market price for sharp, committed teachers. Although it is not a government monopoly as some claim, state (and to some degree, federal) governments are so heavily involved that establishing a true market value for teacher pay is impossible.

This same concept holds true for military personnel, sanitation workers, and border patrol; all the elements of work funded by government lack the same discipline brought about by floating prices and voluntary exchange.

Do they perform a crucial service? Of course; that is not the question. Do we have a shortage of teachers that are actually teaching for the right reasons, motivated by a servant’s heart alone? Many think so, but that again is not relevant to the argument. Legislators, unions, and school boards can fight ceaselessly over salaries and benefits, but that is just it: the salaries and benefits are being arbitrarily determined, not allowed to coordinate in the way capitalist-centric competition would require. This is the reason people are often so unhappy with government services, particularly those at the federal even more than the state or local level: compensation is being determined not by voluntary competition, but by harnessing the force of law to divide up resources. When egos come into play, salaries and benefits are no longer being determined by impersonal means.

Americans at one point understood this, desiring privatization in most elements of daily life and reserving government power for things few and far between; it is no longer clear that this same spirit is alive.

Add to this mix the presence of teachers’ unions willing to fight scorched earth battles over the slightest of reforms calibrated to make education more competitive; this muddies the waters even more when it comes to determining teacher salaries and benefit packages. Suggestions like school vouchers and merit pay; you know, the types of ideas that might pop up during any free market-oriented brainstorming session, are fought tooth and nail by entrenched bureaucracy that has caused much of the  inefficiency we see in America’s school systems. Opening up education to more competition and less suffocating regulation will move us toward a marketplace in learning, one that is bound to once again produce the most informed and problem-solving minds in the world.

Only then will we be able to truly know whether our teachers are being underpaid, overpaid, or being compensated sufficiently; until that time, the battle needs to be over returning freedom of choice to all levels of American education.

Before releasing his budget publicly, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) gave Senate Republicans a private briefing about the plan in early April. During that meeting, RLC Advisory Board member Rand Paul, a Tea Party-backed freshman from Kentucky, challenged Ryan in front of the rest of their party, according to two GOP aides briefed on the meeting.

Sen. Paul said Rep. Ryan’s plan did not do enough to cut spending and relied on too much deficit spending for too long, according to the aides.

Ryan gave it right back to him. The budget committee chairman went directly after Sen. Paul’s five-year budget plan, which he had clearly studied closely. Ryan’s criticism went roughly like this: yes, he said, you slash the Department of Education and make fast, dramatic cuts, but you don’t deal with entitlement spending. In the out years the deficit would sky-rocket, he said, making an air chart with his hand moving through the air and pointing sharply upward.

A GOP aide sympathetic to Sen. Paul said that Rep. Ryan’s criticism unfairly isolated a single part of his plan and treated as if it represented Paul’s global approach to deficit reduction. Paul does plan to announce a proposal for cutting entitlement spending, the aide said, but wanted to put the domestic spending plan out first.

The private challenge from Sen. Paul reflects criticisms of Rep. Ryan’s plan Paul also made to HuffPost. Paul thinks that Ryan’s approach doesn’t go nearly far enough.

“Here’s how bad it is: The president’s proposal, his ten year plan, is 46 trillion in spending. Paul Ryan’s alternative, which everybody is going crazy over, is still 40 trillion dollars in spending,” Paul told HuffPost. “My problem with the whole thing is that all of the proposals basically increase spending.”

Rand Paul said that Paul Ryan’s plan relies too heavily on deficit spending. “The president adds, I think, 11 trillion to the gross debt and Ryan’s plan adds eight trillion. I don’t think anybody up here realizes that we can’t withstand trillion dollar annual deficits,” he said.

A Ryan spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The House recently approved Ryan’s spending plan, but it was rejected by the Senate. A compromise budget expires at the end of September.

(Source: Ryan Grim at Huffington Post)

A Republican Liberty Caucus of Florida-supported bill to repeal the red light cameras enacted last year will be considered by the Florida House of Representatives. The legislation, HB 4087, will be considered by the House, while its companion version in the Senate, SB 672, is stalled.

Melissa Wandall, whose husband, Mark, from Bradenton, was killed by a red-light camera runner in 2003. At the time, Wandall was nine months pregnant. Wandall vowed after her husband’s death to do something about drivers who run red lights. She pushed for the law former Gov. Charlie Crist signed last year, known as the “Mark Wandall Traffic Safety Act.”

However, Rep. Richard Corcoran, R-Trinity, cited a slew of examples from cities and states across the country where he said the cameras were not preventing accidents.

Courts have thrown out many red-light camera tickets, he added, saying the problems with implementing last year’s bill are “overwhelming.” Corcoran argued intersections could be made safer using other measures, such as changing the timing of traffic lights and improving signage and road painting. “Let’s step back and figure out a way from scratch where we can make these intersections safer for our families.”

A portion of the $158 fine issued to drivers caught by the cameras goes to the state. Since July, the state has received the most money from Orlando ($1.1 million), Miami Gardens ($928,000), Aventura ($911,000) and Hillsborough County ($907,000).

The bill now heads to the House floor.

One of the pieces of the Florida RLC’s 2011 Agenda includes “banning red light cameras” because, “Our Constitution says citizens have a right to face their accuser, yet their accuser in this case is a machine.”

Last week, Tea Party and libertarian groups including the RLC held protests throughout the state to support Richard Corcoran’s bill to repeal the red light cameras.

What the heck is going on in Montana?

Montana Republicans have a huge majority in the State House and a small majority in the State Senate, so they should be moving productive legislation along without trouble. Unfortunately, two recent examples show that they are not committed to common sense government at all, but are instead beholden to special interests, corporate socialism, and the nanny state.

You’re not even going to believe the legislation being courted by Montana Republicans! Check it out:

Montana Republicans Try to Gut Medical Marijuana Law

With the exception of Republican Liberty Caucus-endorsed State Representatives Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller and several moderate Republicans, the rest of the Republican elected officials in Montana voted to gut the voter-approved medical marijuana law last week.

Because Governor Brian Schweitzer (Democrat) vetoed the Republican attempts to kill the law, BusinessWeek reports that “Many lawmakers from both parties say something needs to be done to rein in medical marijuana in Montana now that it has reached beyond those with severe illnesses for whom voters in 2004 meant the law to apply.”

According to the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services, there are 29,948 registered users in the state. As we reported earlier, last month the federal government decided they needed to step in by raiding medical marijuana businesses in the state under the guise of investigating “drug trafficking and tax evasion.” This despite a promise from the Obama Administration claimed it would not override state law.

According to BusinessWeek,

“Three lawmakers from each chamber will begin meeting this week in a conference committee to figure out the final form of the overhaul measure, Senate Bill 423, before it lands on the governor’s desk. Since the beginning of the session House Bill 161, a repeal of the voter-approved marijuana law, has been the favored measure of Republican leadership. House Speaker Mike Milburn, R-Cascade, carried the bill through the Legislature but the possibility of a governor veto forced Republicans to work up a contingency plan.

Last month, Republican lawmakers made a last-minute introduction of a bill to overhaul of Montana’s medical marijuana industry. After Republican fears of a governor veto became a reality Wednesday, the overhaul measure carried by Senate Majority Leader Jeff Essmann, R-Billings, has become what is likely the last chance the Legislature has to restrict medical marijuana. But the measure has not had an easy passage and it still has key hurdles left to clear with just a few days left in the session to do it.”

The only common sense on this issue, aside from Governor Brian Schweitzer, is from RLC-endorsed legislators like Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller. According to Representative Miller, “If the federal laws (related to the Montana state medical marijuana law) were gone, it could be just another prescription filled by a pharmacist. The bottom line is that the legislature did not do its job and put the appropriate rules/laws in place once the initiative passed in 2004. I believe it is up to the legislature to fix the mess it created. And it is a huge mess and it is being grossly abused by some,” Miller said.

Miller took what apparently is an unpopular position, concluding at his website, “While many people disagree with my vote to not repeal, I hope this helps them to understand it a little better.”

RLC-endorsed Reps. Jerry O’Neill and Mike Miller voted to protect the Montana medical marijuana law.

Renewable Energy, Curbing Property Rights via “Corporate Socialism”

According to LibertarianRepublican.net, “Sounding like something straight out of an Ayn Rand novel, a renewable energy corporation out of Canada is pushing legislation to allow for seizure of private property rights in Eastern Montana. The Bill pits small landowners such as ranchers in Eastern Montana, against government-backed corporate interests and many environmental groups in support of renewable energy.”

From the Great Falls Tribune, “Montana Senate revives eminent domain bill”:

“HB 198 would grant private developers — including Canadian developer Tonbridge Power — the ability to use eminent domain authority to condemn private property so that transmission lines can be built.

The company wants to build a 214-mile international Tie Line through Montana and Alberta. The bill would [give] Tonbridge the authority it needs to condemn private property along the proposed MATL route in Montana.”

After nearly three hours of debate, 16 Democrats sided with 12 Republicans to pass the measure.

Republican proponents of the measure said if the legislature failed to enact HB 198, it could doom the state’s economy.

“We need an export economy in this state,” Senator Alan Olson said. “We make money to fund our education system, and we make money to fund our senior services on an export economy. If a minority interest is going to shut down an export economy, if we continue to circulate that same stale dollar around the state, we’re done.”

Opponents of the measure, including Sen. Art Wittich, R-Bozeman, said the bill would give private corporations unprecedented power, while sacrificing the rights of private property owners.

“It’s corporate socialism at its best,” Wittich said.

“To me, good government is limited government that respects everyone’s rights and properties,” Wittich says. “I support accountability in government spending and promoting private sector prosperity by adding value to our resources.”

The bill goes for a final vote on Thursday. Then, it heads to Democrat Governor Brian Schweitzer for his signature.

It is not known if Schweizter would sign the legislation, but it appears likely that he would.

RLC member Eric Dondero worked to get a property rights initiative on the ballot in Montana in 2006. Here, he is collecting a signature from a resident.

Illinois School Bans Homemade Lunches

A westside Chicago school, Little Village Academy, has banned schoolchildren from bringing their own lunches from home. They now require all students to purchase their meals from the school cafeteria. An age-old American tradition has fallen by the wayside in Illinois.

Libertarian Republican radio talk show host Neal Boortz comments,

“So there you go folks … government knows best. If you surrender your child to the government to be educated, they you surrender your right to determine what type of lunch that child will eat. While the government has physical possession of your child in their indoctrination centers your rights are essentially terminated.

“There are two messages at work here. One is that parents have to come to the understand that parents don’t know nearly as much about how to raise their children as the government does. The second message is delivered to the children — and that message is that now is as good a time as any for you to learn that the government is going to be involved in virtually every aspect of your life — even down to what you are allowed to eat for lunch.”

Michigan State Police Extracting Data from Driver Cell Phones

The Michigan State Police have a high-tech mobile forensics device that can be used to extract information from cell phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations, according to TheNewspaper.com, a journal of the politics of driving.

If you’re pulled over by the Michigan State Police for anything — an improper turn, a partially obscured license plate, or an officer’s whim — they can search your cell phone using a device called the CelleBrite UFED. That means text messages, photos, videos, contacts, who you’ve called, what apps you’ve downloaded, GPS data that reveals where you’ve been, even deleted data.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) learned that the police had acquired the cell phone scanning devices and in August 2008 filed an official request for records on the program, including logs of how the devices were used. The state police responded by saying they would provide the information only in return for a payment of $544,680.

“The Michigan State Police should be willing to assuage concerns that these powerful extraction devices are being used illegally by honoring our requests for cooperation and disclosure,” said ACLU attorney Mark P. Fancher. The ACLU is concerned that these powerful capabilities are being quietly used to bypass Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches. We have that same concern.

A U.S. Department of Justice test of the CelleBrite UFED used by Michigan police found the device could grab all of the photos and video off of an iPhone within one-and-a-half minutes. The device works with 3000 different phone models and can even defeat password protections.

Nevada’s Libertarian Streak on Seatbelts and Helmet Laws

According to our friends at LibertarianRepublican.net:

“Two big victories against the Nanny-State in Nevada this week. The State Senate Transportation committee voted against tougher enforcement for seat belt non-usage, and for legalizing motorcycle use without a helmet. Predictably, all Republicans sided with the pro-freedom side. And virtually all Democrats voted against freedom.

From the Las Vegas Sun, “Senate committee says no to helmets, tougher seat belt law,” April 14:

“The seat belt bill would allow police to stop a motorist and issue a citation solely for not wearing a seat belt. The present law allows officers to issue a citation only if the driver is stopped for another traffic infraction. Sen. Elizabeth Halseth, R-Las Vegas, who opposed the bill, SB 235, said Nevadans use safety belts at a higher rate than neighboring states.

Sen. Mike Schneider, D-Las Vegas, in arguing for the bill, said the buckle-up rate is only 30 percent at night. The 93 percent figure cited is falsified to get federal funds, he charged. He said opponents of the bill argue not wearing a seat belt is a personal choice, but everyone ends up paying to treat those injured because they aren’t buckled up. Voting against the bill were Halseth, Dean Rhoads, R-Elko, Mike McGinness, R-Fallon, and John Lee, D-North Las Vegas.

On the helmet law:

“The helmet bill, SB 177, removes the helmet requirement for motorcycle drivers and passengers if they are at least 21 years old and the driver has held a license for a year or more and completed a safety course. Halseth said whether to wear a helmet should be a personal choice. She said figures from University Medical Center show riders injured while not wearing a helmet actually cost less to treat than those hurt while wearing helmets.

Schneider, however, said everyone bears the cost. “This is costing society millions of dollars. No way does this benefit the state of Nevada,” he said. Manendo, Schneider and committee Chairwoman Shirley Breeden, D-Las Vegas, voted against the bill.

Illinois Moves to Ban Trans Fats

The Pat Quinn/Rahm Emanuel/Dick Durbin/Rod Blagojevich/Barack Obama State strikes again.

Note the blatant editorializing in this “news report” by the Gate House New Service out of Springfield, Illinois (via GalvaNews.com): “Illinois House moves to ban trans fat in foods”:

“Illinois is poised to become the second state in the country (after California) to ban artery-clogging artificial trans fats. The Illinois House last week approved a bill to eliminate artificial trans fats from restaurant and bakery food and food sold in school vending machines by January 2013. Cafeterias operated by state and local governments and schools would not be included in the ban until January 2016.

“Trans fats are like bacon grease pouring down your sink clogging your pipes,” said Rep. La Shawn Ford, D-Chicago, sponsor of House Bill 1600. “That’s exactly what trans fats do to your arteries. You can still have fried foods and baked goods without trans fats.”

Republicans and one brave rural Democrat are the only ones standing against this nanny-state imposition on individual liberties: “It’s yet another nanny-state mandate on the public when the businesses and communities are perfectly capable of making these decisions themselves,” said Rep. David Leitch, R-Peoria.

“We don’t have to be a watchdog for everyone,” argued Rep. Frank Mautino, D-Spring Valley. “We tell people to do a lot of things, and it would probably be good if they did them, but maybe at some point they’d like to decide on their own if they should do them or not.”

The New Hampshire RLC is playing kingmaker in state politics.

In addition to having a tremendous say on specific legislative measures — such as the Right to Work and the House-approved budget — they’ve also advanced the RLC’s mission by helping elect a Speaker of the House, Majority Leader, and State GOP Chair who are each friendly to the liberty message.

Recently, the New Hampshire RLC aired radio advertisements on AM stations WGIR, WNTK and WKXL urging citizens and legislators to support the $700 million in cuts passed by the House being maintained by the State Senate. The RLCNH says that citizens should urge legislators to “support the House budget” and directs listeners to a new caucus website, NHBudgetFacts.org.

Conservatives view the state Senate as more moderate than the House, whose budget is about $700 million less than the current two-year budget. Senate President Peter Bragdon, R-Milford, has said the Senate budget will probably be the same size as the House-passed budget — but with different priorities. Bragdon also said the Senate appears to be opposed to the House-passed provision to remove collective bargaining protections for public workers when their contracts expire. The Senate Finance Committee on Wednesday removed that provision from the House-passed budget.

Earlier today, with the support of the New Hampshire RLC, the New Hampshire legislature approved Right to Work for the Granite State.

“This veto-proof vote is a clear sign that the Senate is listening to the voters who sent them to Concord to attract jobs to New Hampshire,” said Andrew Hemingway, chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire.

“A Right to Work law will make New Hampshire the only employee and business friendly environment in the Northeast. Everyone knows that a law that attracts new and growing businesses will attract good paying jobs.” States with similar Right to Work laws include Iowa, Virginia, and 20 other states.

If New Hampshire passes this law, it will create a magnet for businesses that will further enhance the New Hampshire Advantage, concluded the New Hampshire RLC.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire and its members have been following the Right to Work bill and consider it a high priority for job creation and protection of New Hampshire’s working families. The caucus will continue to follow this effort as it heads to a committee of conference between the Senate and the House and urges veto-proof House adoption of the compromise language.

According to the New Hampshire Union-Leader, “(Andrew) Hemingway’s profile continues to rise as the influence of the Tea Party and liberty groups also continue to rise in the state. Hemingway says he has been invited to speak at Harvard’s Institute of Politics on April 26 in a forum on the “impact of the Tea Party on the 2012 elections,” along with Jennifer Beth Martin, national coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots.

Please get involved in the New Hampshire RLC today!

New Hampshire RLC Chairman Andrew Hemingway.

The Republican Liberty Caucus of Michigan is honored to host two distinguished guests at its 2011 State RLC Convention:

1) Congressman Justin Amash
2) State Representative Bob Genetski

This event will occur on Saturday, May 14 at Tommy Brann’s Steakhouse & Grille (4157 Division Avenue South) in Wyoming, Michigan. Festivities will kick off at 12noon and will culminate at 3pm. Please RSVP to our Facebook event invite.

The atmosphere will be a working lunch and registration is FREE, but you will be responsible for your own meal. And, we all know that liberty isn’t free — so please bring some cash because the Michigan RLC will be passing the Liberty Bucket to help defray costs and promote liberty in Michigan in 2011 and 2012.

Congressman Amash spoke at the 2011 RLC National Convention and had this to say about the RLC: “In 2005, I wasn’t involved in politics in any substantive way. I had never really thought about running for office. I began looking for organizations that shared the beliefs I had — and that’s when I came across the Republican Liberty Caucus. And, really, it’s what’s started my move toward running for office.”

He is now recognized as one of the most principled members of Congress, passionately defending the principles he and his constituents share while working to reduce the burdens that decades of Big Government has had on us all.

State Representative Bob Genetski represents District 88 in the State House. While Congressman Amash served in the House, Rep. Genetski, Congressman Amash, and a small group of other principled Representatives often voted together to reduce the influence of the special interests and restore liberty to Michigan.

We hope you can join the Republican Liberty Caucus of Michigan, Congressman Amash, and Representative Geneteski for the 2011 Michigan RLC Convention on May 14.

Congressman Amash at the RLC National Convention in February. He was a super star among those who attended!

Following up on the RLC’s strong support for Rand Paul — which initially looked to be an uphill fight that resulted in victory — the Republican Liberty Caucus today announced that it has endorsed Tea Party favorite Phil Moffett for Governor in Kentucky.

Moffett faces Jefferson County Clerk Bobbie Holsclaw and state Senate President David Williams in the May 17 GOP primary.

The RLC endorsed Moffett because of his issue position statements and support for individual liberty and limited government.  Moffett has some very creative ideas about reducing the tax burden on Kentuckians as well as plans to stop the overreach of the FDA and other federal agencies which are violating state sovereignty and placing unnecessary barriers in the way of business in Kentucky.

You can learn more about Mr. Moffett and get involved in his campaign at his website.

Plus he has a catchy campaign song:

For Immediate Release: April 13th, 2011
Contact: Dave Nalle, National Chair: (512) 656-8011 or chairman@rlc.org

Republican Liberty Caucus Endorses Phil Moffett for Governor of Kentucky
Kentucky Voters Have a Strong Candidate Who Will Get Government off their Backs

On Tuesday the national board of the Republican Liberty Caucus voted unanimously to endorse Phil Moffett in the Republican primary for Governor of Kentucky.

In this off-year election season Phil Moffett stands out as one of the most promising candidates. His background in business, his support for limited government and his mission of protecting the people of Kentucky from an overreaching federal government make him the kind of strong champion of liberty the RLC wants to see elected.

“Kentucky already scored a major victory for liberty last year with the election of Rand Paul, and I’m confident that Phil Moffett will bring the same kind of integrity and dedication to better government at the state level which Rand Paul is promoting in Washington,” said RLC Chairman Dave Nalle. “We need Republicans like Moffett who will stand up for the best interests of the people and for Constitutionally limited government on the state level just as much as we need them on the national level.”

RLC Vice Chairman Aaron Biterman observed, “Moffett’s ideas for cutting taxes and his stand against the intrusive policies of the FDA and other federal agencies show creative thinking and a dedication to small and responsive government. Our members in Kentucky are very enthusiastic about Moffett and are rallying around his campaign.”

The Republican Liberty Caucus wishes Mr. Moffett every success in his campaign, and will be working hard this year to promote him and Republican candidates like him in order to bring the GOP back to its founding principles of limited government, free enterprise and individual liberty.

– 30 –

More information on the Phil Moffett campaign is at http://www.philmoffett.com
Information on current and past RLC endorsees and office holders can be found at http://www.rlc.org/