Author: LPChesco

The Pennsylvania LP party was recently informed that the Democratic Party will be joining our state government’s efforts to keep the Libertarian Party and others off the November ballot. We expect the Republican Party to pile in against us as well. The LPPA has filed a lawsuit with Pennsylvania, and the major parties have lined up against us.

Ballot access has always been unfair to Pennsylvania Libertarians, and with the current crisis, providing choices to voters has become even more difficult. Below is a description of the lawsuit that we filed. There is also a link to support the costs of fighting for freedom in our state. Please contribute to this cause if you are in a position to do so.

“By now, you’ve seen firsthand the economic sabotage that Governor Tom Wolf has unleashed on Pennsylvania under the pretense of public health.  He is picking winners and losers by allowing large corporations, like Walmart, to stay open while forcing small businesses to close.

“Unsurprisingly, Wolf is doing the same thing in politics.  He has allowed the Republican and Democrat Parties to participate in this November’s election, but he has blocked smaller third-parties like ours from appearing on your ballot.

“To gain ballot access, a smaller political party has to petition the state for it.  Per state law, the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania needs to collect a minimum of 5,000 signatures to place our candidates on the ballot in a general election.  However, Wolf’s executive orders have made petitioning a prohibited activity in Pennsylvania.  Essentially, the governor has removed our only legal route to ballot access – and he did it after the two major parties had already secured their ballot access.

“The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania doesn’t think this is right, and we have filed suit against Tom Wolf in federal court.

“You can read about our lawsuit here: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/third-parties-mount-covid-challenge-to-pennsylvania-ballot-rules?context=search&index=1

“The Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania has hired an all-star legal team and we are confident that we will prevail in court.  However, lawsuits are expensive and we need your financial help.  Please join us in this fight by contributing atLPPA.org/donate.  We understand personal budgets vary, and we are grateful for anything you can give.

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf was out of line, way out of line, when he referred to state legislators as deserters because they want an end to his mini martial law decree. The governor said they had deserted in the face of the enemy.

To quote Wolf: “We Pennsylvanians are in a fight for our lives. The enemy is a deadly virus set on destroying us…Over this past weekend, some have decided to surrender to this enemy … these folks are choosing to desert in the face of the enemy…To those politicians who decide to cave in to this coronavirus, they need to understand the consequences of their cowardly act.”

That’s a pretty disgusting thing to say because, by extension, Wolf is also calling business people deserters and cowards for wanting to work and provide employment so that they and their employees can be productive and feed their families.

The governor decided in March whose work is essential and prevented others from working and earning a living. That is dictatorial. What has the governor offered in exchange? Welfare and threats. It’s welfare for the people who he has put out of work; welfare to be paid for by others. And he’s threatened business owners with the loss of their business licenses and occupancy permits. He’s basically saying, “Do what I say, or I will punish you.” That’s tyranny.

When people have solid, factual information at their disposal, information that’s honestly gathered and disseminated, they can make the best choices possible for themselves and their families. Will some choose poorly? Of course, some will, and they risk being hurt. But when a governor or any governing body makes a one-size-fits-all decision, then everyone is at risk for suffering, except those who make the hurtful decisions. Politicians still get a paycheck by feeding at the public trough while they throw others onto the unemployment line.

And when a governor has the power — by decree — to prevent people from working, the governor also has the power to force people to work.

It gets worse. Some Pennsylvania counties are pushing to reopen, and their county commissioners have written letters to the governor saying not only that they want to reopen, but that they will open in defiance of the governor. In response, Wolf has called people cowards and threatened to withhold dispensing a billion dollars’ worth of federal money earmarked for local relief.

Gov. Wolf doesn’t trust people to make their own best decisions. He wants people to obey. He claims it’s for the people’s own good. Such is the claim of despots. As H.L. Mencken said, “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-front for the urge to rule it.”

To be fair, Tom Wolf is not the worst of the gubernatorial lot. Other governors are worse, but Wolf is pretty high up on the list.

Yes, there is a virus out there. A new one, and it has and continues to kill people. It will continue to do so, just like the other illnesses. Guess what. It’s not the first and likely won’t be the last. But ordering people about and threatening them if they don’t obey is not the way to handle it. Those who order and threaten are the enemy.

A Chester County business was threatened by authorities that their business license could be suspended. The criminal action cited involved a plate of eggs over easy, side of hash browns and coffee, or similar short-order fare.

The Chester County Health Department had investigated the restaurant and discovered patrons seated at the counter and at tables, enjoying their meals. The customers were ordered to leave, and the diner received a citation to cease and desist serving food within the dining room.

There was no evidence of public advertisements that the diner was serving food at tables and counters. The windows of the establishment were covered in brown paper. We do not know if the tables were carefully disinfected, servers wore masks, and diners sat apart from each other. Probably this all was done. The diners were likely long-term customers who trusted the management to cook and serve orders as safely as possible within the confines of a privately-owned business. None of this matters to the Chester County authorities. They referenced Governor Wolf’s unconstitutional order to forbid such assembly for business undertakings, no matter how small the gathering or safe the environment. Private citizens are not allowed to take responsibility for their own actions, and a sit-down lunch in a favorite dining spot remains an illegal act.

The most disturbing part of this story is the fact that the authorities would never have known about this small group of people enjoying a meal had they not been called by locals complaining about a situation that could not possibly have affected them personally. Twice, someone called Chester County to demand that this diner stop serving customers behind those brown paper windows.

Why would someone unaffected in any way with a small violation of a questionable government order be so incensed as to complain to authorities to halt operations of a private establishment? The answer is a dangerous motivation to control the lives of others, and to restrict their freedom according to arbitrary rules. The same motivation that impels a person to call the authorities about a local business also drives politicians to create unjust laws and forms the basis of all authoritarian power. Tyrants love snitches. It is this attack on freedoms that creates the need for Libertarian movements. Respect for the right of adults in any society to make decisions for themselves without interference is at the very core of being Libertarian.

The need to suppress the freedom of others is common and dangerous. In his book, Man In The Trap (1967), psychiatrist Elsworth Baker describes these authoritarians as part of an ‘emotional plague.’ People who “make the rules for children’s behavior, put the taboo on sex, write the divorce laws, and make people conform to laws they can tolerate. They are the ones who report nude bathing to police…occasionally the plague breaks out into a pandemic form, such as the Catholic Inquisition of the Middle Ages, or the fascism – red or black – of this century” (pp 159-160)

Libertarians are concerned about the residual government authoritarian effects from the Covid crisis. Once a government takes power at the expense of liberty, it rarely gives it back. We are still living with freedom restrictions created by ‘temporary’ violations of law that resulted from 9/11, such as the Patriot Act.  (See our previous post, “Our Microbial 9/11” for more on that subject). We need to do all we can to avoid similar effects from the current situation. The rise of neighborhood tyrants eager to report inconsequential neighborhood infractions is also insidious. This eagerness supports the restriction of personal freedom at the local community level and needs to be resisted by Libertarians and freedom-minded people everywhere.

Our last blog post, ‘Our Microbial 9/11’ concerned the possibilities that our government would use the excuse of the current pandemic to seize greater control over our lives, with little public objection. Sadly, there are many examples that these fears have been realized.

Yet there are signs of daylight in our pandemic tunnel. A crisis can bring forward new ideas and perspectives that may improve our freedom in the long run. The financial collapse of 2008 put a large number of people out of work. Many of those people started new businesses, innovating out of necessity. The wake of that financial crises brought us hundreds of startups including Uber, Air BNB, Slack, Instagram, What’sApp and Square. This time we are likely to see new ways of protecting supply chains and protecting our health systems. In 2012, the Journal of Financial Economics wrote, “progress and crisis are intimately related”.

The current crisis has affected where and how we work and learn. The situation has opened our eyes to new possibilities. Companies who have resisted allowing employees to work from home are now realizing that people can be even more productive with flexible hours and generate savings as well.

Home Schoolers have long insisted that the idea not only works but can be better than public school educations. Millions of Americans are learning this firsthand now, and many may choose to keep doing this even after the current crisis.

The myth of reusable cups and shopping bags being safer and more environmentally friendly has suddenly been dispelled as Starbucks and others move to a sensible and safe use of disposables. People are beginning to realize that reusing dirty bags and cups is a bad idea, as is the ability of governments to mandate use.

The embarrassing monopoly held by the Pennsylvania State Stores is suddenly at the forefront of social media posts in the state. People see their neighbors enjoying the freedom to have a cocktail while they are unable to even pay the inflated prices (and reduced selections) of the government-controlled stores with no convenient on-line shopping. It is time to end this ridiculous system. More Pennsylvanians than ever will be ready to support this move towards economic freedom.

There are reports in every major paper of how American businesses are speeding innovation to make devices they were not geared to build, and at lightening speeds. New drugs are being tested, medical companies are collaborating with foreign competitors, research is in higher gear than we have experienced in decades.

For every hoarder of paper product there seem to be dozens of citizens going out of their way to volunteer to bring food and medications to elderly neighbors, stock food banks, and support local businesses with take out purchases. People all over the country are sewing face masks at home to donate to hospitals in their area. This positive thinking and the spirit of volunteerism is at the very core of what Libertarians stand for. Times like these can change how we all think and act for a long time to come.

As Libertarians, we are naturally concerned about the virtual impossibility of gaining ballot access across the country without the ability to collect petition signatures. But the rules for gaining access to the ballot has always been controlled by the major parties and has long been grossly unfair to parties like ours. This may be our best opportunity to push for fair access on ballots and in debates. We may well be seeing the end of old-school in-person primaries and elections, giving way to more open and innovative ways of choosing candidates. Now is the time to push for fairer rules that will improve everyone’s freedom.

Perhaps most importantly are the headlines appearing everywhere, even in very traditional news outlets, expressing concern over the negative impact that political power grabs may have. Freedom of movement, personal tracking, the ability to be safe without following universal curfews are all things that have been brought to the forefront. Social media is buzzing with debates about government overreach – many people who never understood what Libertarians stood for are finding themselves in sympathy with our views.

 Perhaps we will look back on these dark days as the beginning glimmer of the bright light of freedom – in schools, businesses, and government. This may be the best opportunities Libertarians have ever had to improve our prospects for individual freedom. Let’s hope we make the most of it.

No one knows how long it will take to recover from the virus emergency that we are experiencing, but history indicates that there may be long-lasting effects to our freedom. Shortly after the 9/11 attacks President Bush signed into law a sweeping set of laws designed to increase the power of the US government and reduce the freedom of the citizens. To disguise the negative effects of these laws and discourage opposition by those concerned about violations of the constitution, the government decided to call this set of laws The Patriot Act.

Politicians brushed aside concerns by citizens and liberty organizations by explaining that these were temporary measures designed to address an emergency. The Patriot Act, after all, was only a four-year reduction in freedoms, and would expire at the end of 2005.

The temporary Patriot Act allowed the Federal Bureau of Investigation to search our communication and financial records without court order. It also allowed immigrants under suspicion to be detained indefinitely. Law enforcement could now search a home or business without consent of the owner or even knowledge. While some provisions of the Patriot Act were ruled unconstitutional by the federal courts, most of these laws remained intact.

2005 came and went without the expiration of the ‘temporary, emergency’ laws. The Patriot Act was reauthorized by Presidents, Senators, and Congressional Representative of both major parties. Even when parts of the act expired automatically, they were restored with minor changes. Long after the ‘emergency’ ended, the restriction of our freedoms lives on.

Now California Governor Newson has issued an executive order empowering the state to ‘take over private assets” such as hotels, motels, and private medical facilities, according to Executive Order N-25-20. In Champaign, Illinois, Mayor Deborah Frank empowered herself to ban the sale of guns and alcohol. She may also control the sale of gasoline, take possession of private property, and cut off individual’s access to gas, water and electricity, according to The New York Post and other papers. The mayor is quoted as saying, “So many of those powers, I have had from the beginning”. Gainesville Florida can arrest retail and restaurant owners who remain open during curfew.

While Mayor Frank may be viewed as a radical authoritarian in this situation, the seriousness of this medical emergency will undoubtedly prompt more in government positions to seek to control the situation though emergency orders. The voluntary actions of many businesses and organizations in Pennsylvania and across the nation to follow CDC guidelines have been impressive, as employees are encouraged to work from home and non-essential operations are shuttered.

It is not surprising to see major party politicians viewing this emergency as an opportunity to override constitutional protections and seize power over their constituents. This is par for the course for elected Democrats and Republicans. Some of these politicians may really believe they are protecting us, while giving in to their natural inclinations to control others.

The real question is how the Patriot Act received little widespread public opposition, and how the constant reauthorizations seems to pass by unnoticed. This lack of opposition may happen again during the current emergency. Fear of terrorism and pandemics may cause citizens to eagerly approve these drastic ‘emergency’ measures. The ongoing loss of personal freedom since the Patriot Act began is the real legacy of 9/11. People have repeatedly traded their liberty for security when they are scared. History shows us that, each time, the infringement of freedom is not temporary. Government never relinquishes 100% of the control they gain during the emergency and liberty is never allowed to snap back to its original shape.

As we work together to mitigate the very serious medical situation that now faces us, let’s be sure we do not lose our freedoms as a byproduct of the virus.

When a Chester County public school teacher felt threatened by one of her students, she knew just what to do. She notified the school principle who responded by convening a Threat Assessment Team. This team determined that a ‘Transient Threat” was made, according to a report in the Daily Local News. The term Transient Threat indicates that the threat was made in frustration with no intent of harm to the classmates or teacher. The parent of the student was notified by the principal, who also notified the local police force. The police dutifully filed a report. This was all in accordance of School District Policy and Regulation 5401 that specifies that threat assessment teams must consult with local police.

The student is in kindergarten. She is six years old. She has Down Syndrome. The child was unhappy with an order by the teacher, and responded by pointing her finger and saying, “I shoot you.”

The child’s mother is understandably upset with this costly and time-wasting over-reaction on the part of the school authorities. A state Representative expressed dismay at “…a lack of judgment and accountability in interpreting state law…”. The school maintains that it was just district policy

When Libertarians describe concerns about government overreach, they are talking about things like this. The teacher involved knows that the child is very young and very vulnerable. How could anyone with intelligence or sensitivity would have perceived a threat by a six-year old’s finger being pointed at them?

But instead of attempting to understand the child and helping her through a difficult moment, school authorities and the police department became involved. Their defense? Following “Regulation 5401”. In this case, over regulation gave the teacher and administrators an excuse to avoid taking personal responsibility instead of turning a small problem into a comforting growth experience for both student and teacher. This is not how we should be running schools. This is not how we should be running anything.

Libertarians believe in taking personal responsibility instead of relying on rules that either do not apply to a situation or should not even exist in the first place. It is situations like this, both small and large, that we want to change. No one involved benefited from Regulation 5401 or the manner in which it was followed. Instead, a foolish rule made people act foolishly.

Chester County needs fewer, and more sensible laws. People should have latitude to use these rules in ways that promote personal freedoms and well-being. When we say it is time for change, these are the kind of changes we seek to promote.

The Libertarian philosophy is sometimes summed up in two simple rules: 1) Don’t Hurt others. 2) Don’t take what is rightfully theirs. The second part means, simply, that theft is wrong. But what can we do when the thief is our local government?

For example, residents of Kennett Township in Chester County, Pa. are up in arms over the apparent theft of 3.2 million dollars in taxpayer monies. The township has accused a longtime manager and has spent over $350,000 trying to track down what happened to their money. The Daily Local reported that the current supervisors do not even know how much money was embezzled, or for how long. The theft took place over two administrations going back at least six and a half years.

So far, the total loss amounts to nearly $550 for every man, woman, and child in the township of 6200. The residents of Kennett want to know how their administrations could have been so incompetent as to allow this theft to have occurred, and over such a long period. Their new township manager does not know if taxes will need to be raised to cover the loss.

Meanwhile, most Chester County residents are probably unaware that 27 cents out of every tax dollar collected in the county does not go towards road repairs, health care, or public safety. It goes to servicing the huge 50-million-dollar debt accrued by township managers. The county’s own controller has questioned this lack of fiscal restraint. The wealthiest county in Pennsylvania should not be using almost 30% of tax collected to pay off debt instead of being used for the services the voters believe to be worthwhile.

While the embezzler in Kennett has been accused of breaking the law, the other supervisors, along with the managers of Chester County are acting legally, if not in the best interests of their community.

An even clearer example of legal government theft is taking place in Downingtown and Tredyffrin/Easttown. Here, the school boards have decided to seize private property that had already been sold to developers. In the latter case, a 5-million-dollar sale was nullified – the school board is attempting to force the landowner to accept almost 3 million dollars less – a theft of over half of the value of the property.

In Downingtown, TV channel 29 reported that the school district will be seizing homes from residents. A family has stopped accepting foster children because their home will be taken by the district. At the same time, the Downingtown School district admits that it has no immediate plans for the seized land and may not ever build on it. Instead, they are stealing homes and businesses in the event that they will ever need the land.

Section 10 of the Pennsylvania Constitution states that “…nor shall private property be taken or applied to public use, without authority of law and without just compensation being first made or secured.”. In this case, ‘just compensation’ should mean honoring the value of land that is already established by prior contract. Instead, the government s simply seizing property, homes and businesses and paying whatever they want, with little or no justification. In other words, legal theft.

Chester County attracts residents for many reasons. Quality of life, great schools, wonderful communities, and a relatively low crime rate. But while Chester County residents may not have much to fear from ordinary forms of theft, they should be increasingly worried about the theft of their tax dollars, land, and homes by government bodies that increasingly demonstrate a lack of competence and an excess of greed.

It was the best of times; it was the worst of times. Two Chester County school districts each needed land.  One has chosen to enter into a consensual agreement with the owner to buy the land it wants.  The other has chosen to resort to theft.  Phoenixville schools have been negotiating with a landowner to buy a property on Hare Hill road and has reached an agreed price with an owner that, according to the Daily Local, is “motivated to sell.” [1]  

Downingtown Area School District is also eying a parcel of land.  Except, unlike the Hare Hill property, at least some of these owners do not want to sell.  According to the news, after the School District voted to use eminent domain to steal their homes, several owners left in tears.  The district does not even plan to build a school immediately but feels the need to use force to obtain the land for future use.[2]

The 5th Amendment guarantees that private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation.  Unfortunately, the founders incorporated the immoral and tyrannical concept of eminent domain into US law.  It is a concept that is rooted in the idea that a sovereign monarch owns you and your property, and it is inherently incompatible with the idea that you own yourself and your property and have first claim on each.  It’s hard to imagine a more unjust use of government force than to take somebody’s property by force while salving the collective conscience by means of a payment amount determined by the very government using the force.  If I have a cupcake and do not want to sell it, and you offer me a dollar for it and I say no, and you point a gun at me and force me to give you my cupcake, the fact that you give me the dollar does not change the immorality of what you did. It is theft, plain and simple.  Lack of consent makes it so.    

This drama has played out over and over again in Chester County as local governments have become increasingly bold in their theft of private property for whatever trail, shopping center, school, or other use they deem currently essential.  There is no “just compensation” without consent.  Consent, not fair market price, makes it just.  If you cannot offer enough to gain consent, and use force instead, you are a thief.  Even if you voted on it first and the person with the gun is only your hireling.  Government’s only just role, per the Declaration of Independence, is the protection of the inalienable rights of the people.  The immoral loophole of eminent domain, increasingly abused in Chester County, should be closed.  Whether somebody is attempting to violate your bodily rights or your property rights, no means no.  Or, at least, it ought to.

[1] https://www.dailylocal.com/news/public-hearing-set-on-land-purchase-for-new-phoenixville-school/article_2beffa27-8c59-5612-8f25-d2de7a3ff316.html

[2]  https://www.fox29.com/news/downingtown-area-school-district-votes-to-start-eminent-domain-process-of-buying-up-acres-of-private-property

It has been widely reported that the Pennsylvania legislature is among the least effective group of state governance. That’s why it was surprising to see Governor Wolf sign onto law a sweeping group of changes that actually benefit voters and their freedom to choose in elections.

Among the changes will be easy access to absentee ballots and longer windows for registration and mail-in ballot applications. But the most important change is the elimination of Straight-Ticket voting. 42 out of 50 states do not have single-party selection for the obvious reasons that it allows voters to consider each candidate, the full range of parties, and can encourage write-in votes.

But one newspaper, the Daily Local of Chester County has published an editorial bemoaning this move towards democracy. Why would this be? On November 7^th, 2019 the paper complained that eliminating Straight-Ticket voting was somehow “a regressive measure”. 

How is this possible? Well, the paper claims that having people vote for individual candidates “will reduce the vote count in down-ballot races”. Also, the paper claims that this change will somehow harm the Democratic Party the most. Since that party essentially controls the major cities of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, the subtext seems to be that inner-city dwellers are too stupid and uneducated to be able to cast votes the way the rest of the population can.

The bottom line appears to be that voters in general cannot make ballot choices without a major party telling them how to do so using a single circle to fill in. Or perhaps they are too stupid to know that the ballot should be turned over to see all the races and questions. Heaven forbid that voters decide to learn about range of candidates, parties and opinions available to them.

Instead, Pennsylvania should avoid what over 80% of the United States does – have people actually consider and vote for one candidate at a time.

Local newspapers depend upon subscribers that want to be informed about local events and politicians. Without readers that want to be informed, the Daily Local will continue on its spiral towards oblivion.

As Libertarians, we support anything that encourages the freedom of choice and reduces the power of crony politics. Personal responsibility is important- each one of us needs to educate ourselves on our local politics and events so that we can make intelligent voting decisions. We do not need anyone to take our hand and help us fill in a ballot. We decry the view expressed in this editorial, as should every free-thinking voter in Chester County and Pennsylvania.