Latest Headlines

The Libertarian Solution To Wisconsin, Unions, And Big Government… Voluntary Markets

– March 10, 2011Posted in: Blog

From LP.org:

WASHINGTON – While Republicans and Democrats battle in Wisconsin over a bill to reduce the collective bargaining power of state employee unions as a means of balancing their budget, Libertarian Party Chair Mark Hinkle points out that the problem lies with government control of activities it has no business running.

Hinkle comments, “Libertarians are neither pro-union nor anti-union. We believe that the right of association and freedom of contract allows any group of people to choose to bargain collectively rather than individually. Naturally, we oppose violence and threats of such, but unions per se can play a major role in a free society. The problem is that the battle between the Wisconsin state government and state employees isn’t even remotely a free market.

“Government monopolizes many services that could and should be provided in the voluntary sector by profit-making and/or non-profit organizations. This also gives them a ‘monopsony’ as virtually the only potential employer for workers in these fields. Once someone has trained to be a teacher or prison guard, they are essentially at the mercy of government for their employment in that field. Blaming them for wanting collective bargaining representation would be comparable to siding with the Polish government against the union Solidarity headed by Lech Walesa that freed Poland in 1989 from Soviet rule. The problem is with the employer: the government.”

Hinkle considers the education budget to be the best example of a solution only Libertarians have offered:

Read more from the LP.org…

Tags: , , ,

The Truth About Republicans Being Offended By USDOJ’s Oversight Of Mississippi Redistricting

– March 8, 2011Posted in: Blog

2006 Vote on the Reauthorization of Voting Rights Act of 1965It’s redistricting time again and Mississippi law-makers are hard at work redrawing district lines while pretending it’s only the other party that’s drawing lines in their favor.

Because of violence and other abuses on minorities by state and local government’s around the country (mostly in the south) the Voting Rights Act of 1965 required these states, including Mississippi, to have their redistricting maps get a final stamp of approval by the US Justice Department, among other provisions.

The federal government’s selective oversight over Mississippi’s redistricting nearly 50 years later “offends” Lt Gov Phil Bryant. From MSBusiness.com:

“We’ve got a Justice Department, we’ve got people in Washington, D.C., saying, ‘We’re going to look over your shoulder and tell you where every line is supposed to be, where every dot is supposed to be,’” Bryant told dozens of Republican women at the Capitol. “So the Obama Justice Department’s going to tell us how we ought to be doing things in Mississippi?”

“That happened in 1965, and I’m offended by the fact that the federal government does not trust members of this Legislature to draw these lines,” Bryant said.

Bryant said people shouldn’t expect the law to be repealed anytime soon.

Lt Gov Phil Bryant has every right to be offended that the federal government picks and chooses how it treats some states and localities over others. I’m offended too. But Bryant cleverly words his speech to infer that the USDOJ’s oversight on Mississippi’s redistricting is a product of the Obama administration – no doubt an attempt to rally support behind his campaign to be Governor.

But who’s really to blame for this federal oversight nearly 50 years later? The fact is, every so often the Voting Rights Act of 1965 comes up for renewal – most recently in 2006 – when George Bush was President and Republicans held a majority in the House and Senate. Seems to me like 2006 would’ve been a pretty good time to rid Mississippi of the federal oversight that supposedly offends Phil Bryant.

Unfortunately, Phil Bryant’s own Republican colleagues in Washington DC don’t “trust members of the MS Legislature to draw these lines” – in Bryant’s own words. The fact is that when the Voting Rights Act of 1965 came up for renewal in 2006, 192 out of 230 House Republicans and 52 out of 54 Senate Republicans voted in favor reauthorizing it before George Bush signed it into law. This include both of Mississippi’s Republican US Senators and both of Mississippi’s Republican US Congressmen:

Senate
Yea – Thad Cochran, MS [R]
Yea – Trent Lott, MS [R]

House
Aye – Roger Wicker, MS [R]
Aye – Bennie Thompson, MS [D]
Aye – Charles Pickering, MS [R]
Aye – Gene Taylor, MS [D]

In fact, the bill to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was sponsored by a Republican and co-sponsored by 27 other Republicans, including Republicans from states and localities that were under the federal government’s oversight.

According to Section 4, the Voting Rights Act of 1965 also extended federal oversight over Mississippi for another 15 years. That would be July 27, 2021 – after the 2020 census and after another round of redistricting:

Extends: (1) the time for reconsideration of federal oversight of jurisdictions which once used suspended voting tests or devices until 15 years after the enactment of this Act; and (2) related requirements for such jurisdictions until 25 years after the enactment of this Act.

If you think Mississippi’s Republican leaders really mean what they say and say what they mean, and if you think they really want to limit the federal government’s intrusion into Mississippi, you’re wrong (see the federally-funded SLDS too). We can’t continue to shovel the federal government out of the state with one hand while shoveling the federal government back in to the state with the other.

Tags: , , , , ,

Tiny Spy Planes Could Mimic Birds & Insects To Spy On You

– March 4, 2011Posted in: Blog

From the AP: The Pentagon has poured millions of dollars into the development of tiny drones inspired by biology, each equipped with video and audio equipment that can record sights and sounds.

They could be used to spy, but also to locate people inside earthquake-crumpled buildings and detect hazardous chemical leaks.

The smaller, the better.

Besides the hummingbird, engineers in the growing unmanned aircraft industry are working on drones that look like insects and the helicopter-like maple leaf seed.

Researchers are even exploring ways to implant surveillance and other equipment into an insect as it is undergoing metamorphosis. They want to be able to control the creature.

“The devices could end up being used by police officers and firefighters.” … “Most of all it can hover and perch on a window ledge while it gathers intelligence, unbeknownst to the enemy.”

Click here for the full article… or comment on this story below.

Tags: , ,

Video: Corey Maye’s Re-Trial Will Be Coming Up Soon

– March 3, 2011Posted in: Blog

UPDATE from Radley Balko (July 1, 2011):

After 10 years of incarceration, and seven years after a jury sentenced him to die, 30-year-old Cory Maye will soon be going home. Mississippi Circuit Court Judge Prentiss Harrell signed a plea agreement Friday morning… read more from Radley.

This video from Corey Maye’s appeal (windows media player) is from 2009, but it’s an interesting case that has drawn national media attention. It involves issues such as person’s right to protect his family, the war on drugs, obtaining & serving warrants, and a person’s constitutional right to be tried in his own community. You can bet the MSLP will be following Corey Maye’s new trial and the updates from the person who first shined a national spotlight on the Corey Maye story, Radley Balko.

If you’re interested in following the case, the appeal video (above) details some of the errors made by the state as well as some of the issues that will be addressed in the new trial. For more background, watch the video below from Reason TV.

Tags: , , , ,

HB 608 & SB 2371: The State Will Track Your Child’s Usefulness From K-12 To Employment

– February 24, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

HB 608 & SB 2371, SLDS MississippiUPDATE 03/02/11: The Senate took up HB 608 today. In less than 30 seconds, after reading the title of the bill and adopting a “strike-all” amendment (which didn’t change the effect of the bill), the Senate voted unanimously to pass HB 608.

HB 608 passed with no questions asked – no debate – not even a peep – from the so-called limited government Republicans. You can hear the discussion of the bill in it’s 1min 30sec entirety below.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

UPDATE 03/14/11: SB 2371 was signed into law by Governor Haley Barbour. SB 2371 was a companion bill to HB 608. The bills are basically identical in scope and purpose.

Every single Senator and Representative voted in favor of this bill, with the exception of only 4 who voted present or didn’t vote at all. Still, no one has asked any questions and no one has volunteered any answers about the state and federal government tracking Mississippi public school children for their usefulness. The law takes effect “and shall be in force” July 1, 2013.

Original Article

HB 603 and SB 2371 both passed their respective chambers almost unanimously. HB 608 passed the House 117-2. The Senate passed SB 2371 by a vote of 48-0. The bills are identical.

Both HB 603 and SB 2371 would create the “State Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)”, which would “provide for development and interagency participation to link education with employment.” Congratulations. The young person you call your child is now one step closer to becoming a well-schooled utility for the State of Mississippi. No, I’m not making this stuff up…

The system will allow stakeholders and policymakers to access data on state residents from birth to the workforce to drive accountability and investment decisions.

The Orwellian language of these Republican/Democrat-backed bills certainly raises a lot of questions – more questions than what I’ve been able to find answers for, but none of which really matter sense it appears to be a done deal with hardly any debate in Jackson. Looks like it’s simply a matter of which version will advance to be signed into law by Governor, Haley Barbour.

For starters, the US Dept of Ed fact sheet states that the participating state (yes, SLDS is another federal bribe to control local school districts) is required to report to them:

“An unique identifier for every student that does not permit a student to be individually identified (except as permitted by federal and state law)“

So personally identifiable information on your child will be shared throughout certain state and federal agencies and it’s restrictions are only limited by the state and federal laws that have already been enacted, or laws they may deem necessary to enact in the future.

It’s not clear which of the current laws contained in the 25,000 pages of the US Code or the 150,000 pages of federal regulations that the US Dept of Ed’s SLDS fact sheet is referring to. If I had to guess I would say that one section of law it would certainly be referring to is the Family Educational Rights And Privacy Act (FERPA). FERPA allows schools to disclose your child’s information, without your consent, to other agencies and organizations including:

  • The Comptroller General of the United States;
  • The Attorney General of the United States;
  • The US Secretary of Education;
  • State and local educational authorities;
  • Other schools to which a student is transferring;
  • Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes;
  • Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student for the purposes of
    • Determine eligibility for the aid;
    • Determine the amount of the aid;
    • Determine the conditions for the aid; or
    • Enforce the terms and conditions of the aid;
  • Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school;
  • Accrediting organizations to carry out their accrediting functions;
  • To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
  • Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and
  • State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific State law.

    • And,

    Schools may disclose, without consent, “directory” information such as a student’s name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance. However, schools must tell parents and eligible students about directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them.

Reading HB 608, I don’t know how Section 1(1)(c), for example, could be implemented without attaching the child’s name to his “birth to workforce” data. Section 1(1)(c) of HB 608 reads:

“Developing an early warning system, which allows the state to intervene early, improving the graduation rates in high school and college”

So a few questions I have are: 1) Will the Mississippi SLDS initially, or will it possibly in the future, in any way attach the child’s name to the data that’s shared across the various state agencies listed in HB 608 and SB 2371; 2) what agencies and individuals could be authorized in the future to access this data on individual children; 3) for what purposes will each agency and individual use the data on individual children; 4) will this effect policymakers desire or decisions in such a way that it could restrict the freedoms or choices of a public school student or give one an unfair advantage over another; and 5) what happens if the security of this incredible amount of personal data is compromised?

Of course, any answer given to these questions would be pure speculation since SLDS is simply a tool. The way this tool is used will be determined by politicians and department heads as the tool progresses. HB 168 and SB 2371 both initially grant the following state agencies access to this data:

(a) The Mississippi Department of Education (MDE);
(b) The State Board for Community and Junior Colleges (SBCJC);
(c) The Board of Trustees of State Institutions of Higher Learning (IHL);
(d) The State Workforce Investment Board (SWIB);
(e) The Mississippi Department of Employment Security (MDES);
(f)  The Mississippi Department of Human Services (MDHS); and
(g) The State Early Childhood Advisory Council (SECAC)

As well as:

Any agencies or entities added to SLDS shall provide a representative to the SLDS Governing Board and be governed in the same manner as the initial agencies and entities.

These bills certainly deserve to be studied more closely than what I’ve given them here. I encourage you to read it for yourself and discuss it with your legislator. The legislators that support the creation of the SLDS ought to be grilled on it’s potential to restrict the choices and freedoms of publicly schooled students in the future.

But it seems to me that HB 608 and SB 2371 creates a grid in which the state’s economic, employment, political, judicial, correctional, health, and welfare agencies are connected for the sole purpose of rearing your child in the most efficient and useful manner possible and directing their usefulness according to where the data says they belong in the workforce.

You know what I have a little bit of a problem with? I have a problem with the government analyzing the differences in individuals, running data on children in this case, because it tends to give our do-good law-makers the desire to manipulate the differences out of individuals until they’re all alike rather than letting folks get along with one another just the way they are.

So What Can You Do?

  1. Call your legislator and get the facts about HB 608 and SB 2371. Each bill has already passed the house it originated in so it’s nearly a done deal. Still, contact your legislator (and other legislators) at (601) 359-3770 and tell them to explain this bill before they vote in favor it. Ask them to answer the questions I listed above. If they can’t explain the bill, or if it sounds as Orwellian to you as it does to me, tell them to vote against it!
  2. Separating School & State is one of the best books written on the origin and nature of Public Schooling and why public schooling should be abolished – or why you should at least stop participating in it. Buy it, read it, and share it with others.
  3. Look into your homeschooling options. Mississippi’s homeschooling laws are pretty relaxed compared to other states. What sacrifices can your family make to give your children a better education and spend more quality time with them? Checkout the community at HomeSchool.com and learn the homeschooling laws in Mississippi at HSLDA.org.
  4. If you aren’t already, consider getting involved with the Mississippi Libertarian Party by making a small contribution and even attending our upcoming state convention on April 16th in Oxford, MS. Libertarians want to put your family back in control of your family’s decisions, but we can’t do it without the generous contributions from concerned parents like you. Every little bit helps.
Tags: , ,

HB 168 Would Specifically Legalize Video-Taping Law Enforcement Officers

– February 23, 2011Posted in: Blog, MSLP Articles

UPDATE: After passing the House, HB 168 died in the Senate Jud A committee on March 1st’s deadline. For the 2nd year in a row, Senator Joey Fillingane (R) killed the bill all by himself by refusing to allow the Jud A committee members to vote on it.

Don’t let Joey Fillingane’s authoritarian move stop you from filming your interactions with law enforcement officers. If you don’t relentlessly assert your rights and ensure your rights aren’t being violated – you don’t have any. See #2 and #3 below.

Some of our legislators get a little confused when a bill comes across their desk that would actually limit the government’s power. These bills usually invoke a “I don’t know why this law is necessary,” response from the authoritarian-leaning legislators. Such is the case with Senator Joey Fillingane (R) when HB 168 landed on his desk.

HB 168 would reaffirm every individual’s right to hold law enforcement personnel accountable for their actions by making it clear that it is, in fact, perfectly legal to video-tape them while on duty. But Joey Fillingane doesn’t see the need for such a law and he hasn’t heard a legitimate claim for it.

From WDAM.com:

Fillingane says he hasn’t seen the bill, and although he doesn’t want to judge it before reading it, he sees no use for it.

…

Fillingane says so far he hasn’t heard a legitimate claim for the need for citizens to record law officers and says police dash cameras do the job.

Maybe Senator Fillingane should re-read the Mississippi Constitution he swore to support. It makes a pretty clear argument in support of HB 168. Section 13 of the Mississippi Constitution clearly states the individual right to free speech and a free press is a sacred right:

The freedom of speech and of the press shall be held sacred

Yes, sacred. Furthermore, an individual’s right to free speech is no more and no less sacred than the freedom of the press. They are equally sacred and the laws, as well as the individual actions of our public officials, ought to reflect this since every law-maker and every public official swore an oath to “…faithfully support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Mississippi”.

The MS Constitution also addresses the relationship between individuals and the government and it’s police powers. Because government originates with the people, the people have the inherent right to regulate the government and it’s police powers. Since the people have the inherent and constitutional right to regulate their government and the government’s police, we ought to be allowed the peaceful tools to do so without fear of being tossed in a cage:

SECTION 5.
All political power is vested in, and derived from, the people; all government of right originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.

SECTION 6.
The people of this state have the inherent, sole, and exclusive right to regulate the internal government and police thereof, and to alter and abolish their constitution and form of government whenever they deem it necessary to their safety and happiness; provided, such change be not repugnant to the constitution of the United States.

The only current language in the MS Legal Code that addresses filming law enforcement officers, public officials, and other people is § 97-29-63, which states:

Any person who with lewd, licentious or indecent intent secretly photographs, films, videotapes, records or otherwise reproduces the image of another person without the permission of such person when such a person is located in a place where a person would intend to be in a state of undress and have a reasonable expectation of privacy, including, but not limited to, private dwellings or any facility, public or private, used as a restroom, bathroom, shower room, tanning booth, locker room, fitting room, dressing room or bedroom shall be guilty of a felony…

So if the Constitution affirms the natural right of “the people” to regulate the government and it’s police powers, and current law allows filming other people in areas where they have no reasonable expectation of privacy – then what’s the problem? Well, the problem is that when the unauthorized power of an armed agent of the government meets the natural, constitutional, and legal rights of an individual – the individual usually finds himself sitting in a cage. Law enforcement officers can, and often do, tell people to turn the camera off and if you don’t do as he says, he has the power to arrest you and toss you into a cage for the usual “disobeying an officer” or “disorderly conduct”. When such a case goes to court (usually without a jury), it’s the word of a uniformed law enforcement officer against yours.

A law, such as HB 168, that reaffirms every person’s natural right to self-preservation, supports Sections 5, 6, and 13 of the Mississippi Constitution, and is perfectly consistent with current Mississippi law, would specifically restrict law enforcement officers from forcing you into shutting off your camera simply because the law enforcement officer threatens you with arrest. If he does force you to turn the camera off, then you would have the language in HB 168 to use as your defense in court.

One legitimate concern of the opponents of video-taping police officers is that a camera or a camera operator could interfere with a police officer doing his job. However, HB 168 clearly states that it’s legal to video-tape an officer “…provided, that any person videotaping, filming or otherwise recording such duties shall not interfere with the performance of such duties.”

I don’t know of any other legitimate reason why anyone would oppose such a bill. Could you imagine the civil rights movement being any movement at all without the brave camera operators catching the abuses by government officials on film and sharing their images with the rest of America? The images of law enforcement officers using high pressure water hoses, cattle prods, and police dogs against peaceful people would have never reached the hearts and minds of others and it’s unlikely that the civil rights movement would have ever gained momentum had there not been cameras around.

Note: Check your volume before you play each videos below.

I’m not saying all cops use their power to violate your rights. Good cops generally don’t mind being recorded and some even see it as a means to improve the way they handle themselves during an interaction with individuals. Most cops are, in fact, good and decent people – no different than you or I. This law would simply protect folks from the handful of law enforcement officers that enjoy their power a little too much and then try to cover-up their actions by forcing a person to shut the camera off. You can dig around youtube or copblock and find plenty of these instances.

HB 168 is currently sitting in Joey Fillingane’s Senate Jud A Committee – the same committee where it died last year without a vote after passing the House. The Jud A committee members are:

  • Joey Fillingane (R), Chairman
  • W. Briggs Hopson III (R), Vice-Chairman
  • Sidney Albritton (R)
  • Terry C. Burton (R)
  • Kelvin E. Butler (D)
  • Tommy Dickerson (D)
  • Hillman Terome Frazier (D)
  • Jack Gordon (D)
  • Dean Kirby (R)
  • Chris McDaniel (R)
  • Walter Michel (R)
  • T. O. Moffatt (R)
  • Michael Watson (R)
  • Lee Yancey (R)

Remember, law enforcement officers and public officials aren’t above the law. One individual has no right to violate another individual’s rights whether he wears a badge or not. If a public official violates a person’s rights he ought to be held accountable for his actions. Often times, the only way to hold a public official accountable for their abusive actions is to capture the abuse on video. Don’t let Joey Fillingane and the members of Jud A ignore this bill again.

What Can You Do?

  1. Contact the committee members, including Joey Fillingane at (601) 359-3770 and let them know you support HB 168. “No one has spoken to me for or against this bill,” said Senator Joey Fillingane in the WDAM interview.
  2. Know your rights and relentlessly assert your rights, including Section 13 of the MS Constitution. Peacefully asserting your rights to an armed agent of the government is only scary the first few times you do it. :) And, you’ll find that some law enforcement officers are receptive to the ideas of liberty so long as you’re respectful and courteous in presenting them.
  3. Arm yourself with a FlipCam or a similar video camera for a round $100. Or, you can sign up for a Qik.com account and download the free camera app for your smartphone. Qik makes it more difficult for law enforcement officials to delete the video footage you’ve recorded by streaming the video, as you record it, to a secure online account. Remember, after you’ve been arrested your cell phone can be searched without a warrant – says the Supreme Court – and anything they find questionable can lead to a warrant issued to search your house and other property.
  4. Connect with other liberty-minded people within the state and throughout the country. Network with others and help spread the libertarian message with friends and family. Networking with other libertarians is also helpful if you ever find yourself arrested for one of the many victimless crimes.
  5. Consider making a contribution to the Libertarian Party of Mississippi. Your generous donations help us educate the public on the ideas of individual liberty and elect principled Libertarians to federal, state, and local office to repeal and block laws that are contrary to the ideas of individual freedom.
Tags: , , , ,

Social Compact Theory, Consent of the Governed, and the Right of Free Association

– February 11, 2011Posted in: Chairman's Corner

Social Compact theory says that we find someone that we like, and we may decide to hang out with them. Let’s call that person a “spouse”.  Anytime the two people in that voluntary association decide that it’s in their best interest to go their separate ways, they may. We shall call that act, “a divorce”. Let’s expand on that system a few degrees. Let’s suppose that those two people decide to hang out with each other, and then those two people find other people that they like, and decide to hang out with them. Let’s call that group of like-minded people “a community”. Anytime someone in that community feels that this voluntary association is no longer in their best interest, they can simply move away and divorce themselves from that community.

Let’s take it up a few notches. Communities find other like minded communities and form a social compact with them. These are called Counties. Anytime one of the Communities in that County feels that the free association with that County is no longer in their best interest, they may dissolve that social compact that binds them, sort of like a divorce. The same social compact theory applies to all of our voluntary associations.

By free association, we choose a spouse, a Community, a County, a State, and even a Federal Government. At anytime we feel that this voluntary association is no longer in our best interest, it is our right to divorce ourselves from it. This is what the Declaration of Independence proved. It’s easy to divorce ourselves from our Spouse, but what about the rest? Sure, we can move away from the Community and divorce ourselves from them, but can we, as individuals, divorce ourselves from the County? If we move out of that County, must we automatically associate with another County? Is there somewhere that is not a County?. Somewhere that is not a State? A Nation?

Anyone that has read history understands the deep thought that went into our Constitution. It took 13 years to write. It was not something that was just scribbled down on a cocktail napkin and then implemented. The founders looked back at systems of governance throughout the history of time and found one common denominator for reasons why those systems failed. What they discovered was that in every single one of the previous systems, the Government failed to respect this right of free association. The founders thought that the right to free association was so important to the continued existence of our nation, that they put it in the 1st Amendment. It is this idea of free association that inspired Thomas Jefferson to use the phrase “consent of the governed”. He understood that the concept of “consent of the governed” was the only mechanism that could allow free association. Since a person could not move to someplace that was not in a County, or a State, or a Nation, and in order to respect the right of free association, “Consent of the Governed” would ensure that tyranny of the majority does not happen.

If the Community all of a sudden, required that Player A and Player B chop firewood for the entire community, the Community would first have to have the consent of Player A and Player B. Just having the consent of Players C through Z is not enough. Consent of the governed said that before Player A and Player B could be compelled to chop firewood for everyone else in the community, Player A and Player B would have to agree to do this. Of course, in a Democracy, Players C through Z could simply vote to make Players A and B chop their firewood for them. But in our system of governance, and within the confines of Consent of the Governed, it is only possible if Player A and Player B agree to do it.

For several decades now, Communities, Counties, State Legislatures, and the Federal Government have been violating the basic human right of free association. They have passed a multitude of ordinances, statutes, and laws that do not have the consent of the governed. We call these “victimless crimes”.

When the Constitution was written, it gave our Judicial Branch jurisdiction in 4 areas of law. They were Common Law, Maritime Law, Laws of Equity, and Admiralty Law. If you do a little research into these jurisdictions, you will discover that none of these jurisdictions allow a court to prosecute you for victimless crimes, such as seatbelt laws, no smoking laws, County Health Department violations, or for failue to chop firewood for others.  Common Law jurisdiction cannot compel you into any type action, such as the requirement to put on a seatbelt, or chop firewood. Maritime law is basically business law, or contract law. Did you sign a contract to do something? Laws of Equity jurisdiction is when there is a dispute over the value of something, such as when you backed out of your driveway and ran over my mailbox. I can take you to court in the Laws of Equity jurisdiction and seek a remedy. Admiralty Law is basically Martial Law. During times of war, the Admiral can send his fleet into a harbor and use his guns to maintain peace and order. The Law is whatever the Admiral says it is.

So,….none of these jurisdictions allow the Judicial Branch of Government to prosecute you for victimless crimes. The Judicial Branch of Government, like the rest authorized in our Constitution was well thought out, and every power that was given to the Judicial Branch was given to them for a reason, and every limitation imposed on them, likewise was for a very good reason. The REASON the Constitution limited the Judicial Branch to the jurisdictions of Common Law, Laws of Equity, Maritime Law and Admiralty law, was because these limitations would ensure that the concepts of Consent of the Governed, and the right to free association be preserved forever. These jurisdictions could not be used to prosecute Player A and Player B for not chopping firewood for everyone. These jurisdictions were put into place to ensure that Democracy does not take a foothold on the Continent. Remember, democracy is nothing more than three wolves and a duck voting on what’s for supper.

Consent of the Governed, the right of free association, our Constitution and the jurisdictions authorized in it, prevented the wolves from voting the duck onto their dinner plate. They prevented a majority of people in the community (or county, or State, or Nation), from voting the others into their servitude. No longer would majority vote be used to make someone chop your firewood, make them give you money, or make you stop doing things they disapprove of (victimless crimes). In general, the right of free association and the concept of Consent of the Governed protected your freedom as an individual.

Help us preserve these rights against those that would vote you into their servitude. Help us preserve the concepts of free association, the consent of the governed, and Constitutional governance. The Libertarian Party is the only political party that holds the principles of Consent of the Governed and Right of Association in such high esteem. As a matter of fact, we’re called the “Party of Principle” for a reason,….and we are unwavering in our defense of those principles.

Join Us At The 2011 Mississippi Libertarian Party Convention

– January 31, 2011Posted in: Events

Consider this your enthusiastic invitation to join fellow libertarians in Oxford, MS for our statewide convention on Saturday, April 16, 12:00pm – 3:00pm. The Mississippi Libertarian Party has made great strides in the defense of liberty against constant attacks from the right and left in the state of Mississippi and at the federal level. This will be Mississippi’s largest gathering of libertarians!

MSLP Event Info
What: 2011 Mississippi Libertarian Party Convention
Where: Butler Auditorium in the Triplett Alumni Center on the Ole Miss campus in Oxford, Ms
When: Saturday, April 16, 12:00pm – 3:00pm

Let others know you’ll be there. RSVP on Facebook and find carpooling info.

We’ll discuss MSLP business and elect MSLP officers to continue growing the party and help defend liberty. Afterward, we’ll be having the first annual Libertarian Banquet. Featured speakers will be MSLP’s Chairman Danny Bedwell and author & Mississippi business leader Jack Criss as Keynote Speaker.

The Libertarian Party is the fastest growing 3rd party in the US and the Mississippi Libertarian Party grew the faster than any other state in the US except for Arkansas! Come help us expand liberty in Mississippi!

Registration Instructions

We have two event packages to choose from as well as the option to sponsor someone. Click the appropriate “buy button” below and proceed to checkout via Paypal’s secure shopping cart. Check your inbox (and junk mail) for a confirmation receipt from Paypal after you checkout.

Or, click here to print (pdf) a simple form and mail the MSLP a check. As always, be sure to contact us if you have any questions.

IMPORTANT: Be sure to update the Quantity, then enter the First and Last name for each paid attendee in the box on the checkout page.
Update Quantity, Then Enter Each Paid Attendee's Name

Choose Your Package

Silver Package – Only $10 per Attendee

The Silver Package gets you the Official 2011 MSLP Convention Packet and allows you into the MSLP Business Portion of the convention.

Gold Package – Only $30 per Attendee

The Gold Package gets you the Official 2011 MSLP Convention Packet, allows you into the MSLP Business Portion of the convention, and into the MSLP Banquet featuring MSLP’s Chairman Danny Bedwell and author & Mississippi business leader Jack Criss as Keynote Speaker.

College Students (Gold) – Only $25 per Attendee

College Students can purchase the Gold Package at the discounted rate of only $25. This gets you the Official 2011 MSLP Convention Packet, allows you into the MSLP Business Portion of the convention, and into the MSLP Banquet featuring MSLP’s Chairman Danny Bedwell and author & Mississippi business leader Jack Criss as Keynote Speaker.

Sponsor Someone

Can’t make it to the MSLP Convention but still want to support the largest liberty movement in Mississippi?

You can help a fellow libertarian attend the convention with a donation of just $30. Your generous donation will purchase 1 Gold Package for 1 person, $60 will sponsor 2 people, and so on. Can you help someone attend?

<form action=”https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr” method=”post”>
<input type=”hidden” name=”cmd” value=”_s-xclick”>
<input type=”hidden” name=”hosted_button_id” value=”YUF2ALCD3LL4L”>
<input type=”image” src=”https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_buynowCC_LG.gif” border=”0″ name=”submit” alt=”PayPal – The safer, easier way to pay online!”>
<img alt=”" border=”0″ src=”https://www.paypal.com/en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif” width=”1″ height=”1″>
</form>

Tags: , ,

Eminent Domain Reform In Mississippi Is A Scam

– January 25, 2011Posted in: MSLP Articles

Haley Barbour, Phil Bryant, Steven Palazzo, and Eminent Domain Abuse in MississippiSince the Kelo decision, Mississippi is 1 of only 7 states who has failed to reform eminent domain and protect a person’s right to keep and own property (See Susette Kelo’s video). However, there has been a tremendous amount of energy spent by a few ambitious politicians (Haley Barbour, Phil Bryant, Steven Palazzo, Bennie Turner) manipulating the language in bills and trying to trick voters into believing that private property rights are being respected in Mississippi.

They are not. In Mississippi your private property can be stripped from you at any time and be given to another private entity.

Here’s how the eminent domain scam works in Mississippi…

Article 3, Section 17 of the MS Constitution states that, whenever property is being taken by eminent domain, the question of whether it is a public use or not is a judicial question – not a legislative question. This was the “Constitutional” argument made by Haley Barbour, Steven Palazzo, and others (both Democrats and Republicans) when they voted down eminent domain reform (HB 803) in 2009.

Yet, every year these same ambitious politicians defy the Constitution, as well as their own argument against eminent domain reform through the legislative process, by using the legislative process to expand the powers of eminent domain for private use.

Mississippi Constitution:

Section 17, Article 3 of the Mississippi Constitution:

Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use, except on due compensation being first made to the owner or owners thereof, in a manner to be prescribed by law; and whenever an attempt is made to take private property for a use alleged to be public, the question whether the contemplated use be public shall be a judicial question, and, as such, determined without regard to legislative assertion that the use is public.

Here’s the most recent history of eminent domain legislation in Mississippi

2007

1/12/2007

HC 18 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional amendment is killed by Hob Bryan, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Republican Lt Gov Amy Tuck.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HC/HC0018.htm

Note about HC 18: Rep Steven Palazzo would not vote in favor of private property rights again until 2010 – one week before he announced he was running against (D) Gene Taylor and (L) Tim Hampton. He voted for the same language in the Constitutional Amendment in 2007 and 2010, that he voted against in 2008 and 2009. Yet, he espoused to be a defender of private property rights on the 2010 campaign trail. A lot of folks were misled or chose to ignore Palazzo’s record.

2/01/2007 and 3/14/2007

HB 1547 – Removed the requirement to obtain:

(a) A determination that the entity qualifies as one to which the Legislature has granted the power of eminent domain;

(b) A determination that the entity has complied with state law in invoking the statutory power of eminent domain; or

(c) A certificate of public convenience and necessity for the particular taking in question.

…from the “applicable state regulatory agency” or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission before eminent domain powers could be used.

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HB/HB1547.htm

2/07/2007

HB 1209 – Would have allowed the state inland port authority to sell land, which was taken by eminent domain, back to the original owner or the children of the owner – even with a written statement by the state inland port authority that the property isn’t being used.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2007/pdf/history/HB/HB1209.htm

4/27/2007

SB 2001 – added “powertrain component manufacturers” to the list of Mississippi Major Economic Impact Authority (MMEIA) projects in which eminent domain could be used to take property from one private owner and given to another private owner for private use. It also expanded “immediate possession” eminent domain powers. MMEIA was already given “immediate possession” powers by our legislature, but SB 2001 added to the list of MMEIA’s private projects in which “immediate possession” could be used and also granted “immediate possession” powers to “any county” for the use of roads, bridges, utilities, right-of-ways, etc to the new private development.

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/20071E/pdf/history/SB/SB2001.htm

“Immediate possession” allows your property to be appraised and the title taken from you and given to another private owner within 5 days. You may still live in your home, or use your office or church, but the new owner can now legally enter your property against your wishes.

MS Immediate Possession Law: http://www.michie.com/mississippi/lpext.dll/mscode/173d/1ec2/1f4a/1f55?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0#JD_11-27-85

2008

Phil Bryant is sworn in as Lt Governor. He has the responsibility of appointing Chairs of Senate Committees. Phil Bryant, Republican, chose Bennie Turner, Democrat, as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee. No Constitutional Amendment to limit eminent domain between 2008 and 2010 has made it past his desk.

2/07/2008

HB 591 – Would have restricted eminent domain powers to only be used for real public use (roads, bridges, utilities, rights-of-way, government buildings)

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HB/HB0591.xml

2/21/2008

HC 24 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HC/HC0024.xml

2/27/2008 and 4/27/2008

HB 342 – Previously, municipalities could only demolish abandoned houses where drugs were being used or sold. This bill allows them to seize the entire property. (The issue is not that drugs are bad for the neighborhood since demolishing the house would solve the drug problem on the property. The issue is that confiscating the house and land goes too far and doesn’t do any more to prevent the use of drugs in an abandoned house than if the house was demolished.)

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2008/pdf/history/HB/HB0342.xml

5/28/2008

HB 12 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to allow the Dept of Homeland Security to build the National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/20081E/pdf/history/HB/HB0012.xml

2009

1/27/2009

SB 2605 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to take private property for existing manufacturing plants

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/SB/SB2605.xml

2/04/2009

HB 803 – Eminent domain reform…

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB0803.xml

A vote in favor of HB 803 would have limited eminent domain powers to be used only for real “public use” (ie – roads, bridges, ports, dams, levees, and utilities). It would have disallowed the use of eminent domain for the purpose of taking property from one person and give it to a corporation or any other non-governmental entity. The bill passed the House. Steven Palazzo voted against it. It passed the Senate, but was vetoed by Gov Haley Barbour. His veto was overriden in the House. Again, Steven Palazzo voted against private property rights when he voted to sustain Governor Barbour’s veto. The Senate voted to sustain Barbour’s veto and HB 803 died.

Ultimately, the purpose of HB 803 was to force the issue to the Supreme Court where they would have to side with the MS Constitution. The Supreme Court would have to rule that when property is taken through eminent domain, whether it will be taken for real public use or not is in fact a judicial question according to the MS Constitution. The MS establishment (both Democrats and Republicans) has defied the MS Constitution by using the legislature to define and redefine “public use” in order to expand eminent domain. Yet, when given the chance to strengthen private property rights by limiting eminent domain powers, Haley Barbour, Steven Palazzo, Billy Hewes (2011 candidate for Lt Governor) and a few other Democrats and Republicans conveniently decide to abide by the Constitution. They are all frauds.

These over-reaching eminent domain laws enacted by the legislature are unConstitutional. Because the laws are unConstitutional – they are illegal. When a property owner is threatened under illegal eminent domain laws – the threat to steal a person’s private property should be considered a criminal act.

2/05/2009

HB 1628 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to confiscate land for “composite component manufacturers in the aerospace industry”

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HB/HB1628.xml

2/06/2009

HC 33 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2009/pdf/history/HC/HC0033.xml

2010

2/03/2010

HC 26 – Constitutional Amendment to add, “but private property shall never be taken for private economic development purposes;”. The Constitutional Amendment is killed by Bennie Turner, Democrat – appointed as Chairman of the Senate Constitution Committee by Lt Gov Phil Bryant. This is the same bill Steven Palazzo voted against in 2008 and 2009 – both non-election seasons. However, he voted in favor of it less than 1 week of announcing his candidacy to replace Gene Taylor.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HC/HC0026.xml

2/09/2010

Rep Steven Palazzo announces his candidacy for US Congress on The Paul Gallo Show. A few months later he would run TV ads claiming, as a MS legislator, he supports private property rights. In fact, no legislator in the State of Mississippi has voted against a person’s right to keep and own property more than Steven Palazzo. Mississippi folks were duped.

2/09/2010

HB 918 as Introduced – Would restrict eminent domain powers to only be used for real public use (roads, bridges, utilities, rights-of-way, government buildings)

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HB/HB0918.xml

2/10/2010

HB 918 Committee Substitute – Would allow MMEIA to retain it’s eminent domain powers and would mandate that all takings for MMEIA projects would be subject to Judicial review. However, since the MS Constitution doesn’t define “public use”, and since the Kelo decision stated that economic development and tax revenue can be considered “public use”, the courts would rule that taking property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner is Constitutional. So again, this bill would not have limited eminent domain abuse.

Failed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/HB/HB0918.xml

3/11/2010

SB 3189 – Expanded MMEIA’s eminent domain powers to confiscate land for solar panel manufacturers

Passed: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/2010/pdf/history/SB/SB3189.xml

9/30/2010 – Initiative 31

David Waide, President of Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation, delivered Initiative 31 to the Secretary of State’s office. The amendment will appear on the ballot in 2011. However, the legislature can decide to provide alternative amendments to go on the ballot and voters (if the language of the bill doesn’t confuse voters into leaving the ballot blank, thus, invalid) will be able to vote for the amendment of their choice. The most popular amendment will be added to the MS Constitution, so long as it gets at least 40% of the vote, but will not replace the eminent domain language in Article 3, Section 17 of the MS Constitution.

The truth is that the language in Initiative 31 is still against private property rights and still favors eminent domain abuse. It does not address the issue of using eminent domain to take property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner for private development.

http://www.sos.ms.gov/elections2_initiative0031.aspx

The amendment reads:

“No property acquired by the exercise of the power of eminent domain under the laws of the State of Mississippi shall, for a period of ten years after its acquisition, be transferred or any interest therein transferred to any person, non-governmental entity, public-private partnership, corporation, or other business entity.”

So, the language of the Constitutional Amendment is adapted to fit the current unConstitutional laws that allow private property to be taken from a private owner and given to another private owner for private development and it doesn’t stop the immoral use of “immediate possession”. The only difference is that once the title to your property is acquired (taken) by the government, the title can’t be transferred (given) to a private developer for 10 years. As for who actually holds the title to your private property from the time it is acquired by the government until the time it is handed over to the new private owner – I’m sure our legislators already have plans to fix this little issue.

Hopefully Mississippi’s legislators can muster the political courage (I doubt it) to add a simple alternative amendment to restrict the use of eminent domain to be used only for true “public use” (roads, bridges, utilities, government buildings, etc) rather than for the benefit of rich out-of-state private developers and for our elected official’s own political paybacks and ambitions.

But Is Initiative 31 Even Constitutional?

The bigger question though, is whether or not Initiative 31 is even Constitutional. I don’t necessarily have a problem with Farm Bureau, but I have to wonder if they’re either acting on behalf of the Barbour/Bryant administration or proposing a solution without considering or understanding the legality of it. (Surely FB has sought legal advice or talked with someone who would know that the initiative will likely be found unconstitutional.)

Initiative 31 will likely be challenged in court and it’ll likely be defeated since, according to Section 273(5)(a) of the Mississippi Constitution, an initiative by the people can not be used “for the proposal, modification or repeal of any portion of the MS Bill of Rights”, including the private property language in Section 17. Even tho the language in Initiative 31 doesn’t repeal and replace Section 17, it clearly modifies it and will surely be found unconstitutional.

For example (from a historical perspective), it would be unconstitutional (and immoral) to give blacks the right to vote in the Bill of Rights, then, 30 years later pass a ballot initiative to add to the end of the Constitution “Blacks can have the right to vote so long as they can recite the Preamble to the Constitution and guess within 10 beans how many beans are in a quart jar.”

Unlike people-driven initiatives, constitutional amendments proposed by the legislature can legally modify the MS Bill of Rights. But to do so would be political suicide under the Haley Barbour and the likely Phil Bryant administration after the 2011 election. So in the end, it looks like Initiative 31 is a cop-out for our legislators and the Republican leadership. It’s a continuance of the same scam to fool Mississippians.

How To Abolish Eminent Domain Abuse In Mississippi Immediately

Senate Rule Section 87

Every year a Constitutional Amendment originates in the House, passes the House almost unanimously and dies in the Senate Constitution Committee without a committee vote and without ever going to the full Senate. As mentioned above, the committee chairman that kills this bill every year is a Democrat, currently Bennie Turner, who is hand-picked by a Republican Lt Governor, currently Phil Bryant. Will our next Lt Governor (R-Tate Reeves or R-Billy Hewes) appoint the same, or a similar anti-property rights Senator to head this committee? Or will he choose someone who actually respects property rights?

Section 87 of the MS Senate rules (PDF) allow the Senate to pull any bill out of committee to be voted on the Senate floor without the Chairman’s consent simply by a majority of the Senators petitioning to do so:

87. No bill, resolution, concurrent resolution or measure having been referred to a committee shall be taken from such committee, or the committee be discharged from the consideration thereof, other than by a motion signed by a majority of all Senators elected; except that during the last six (6) days of a session, a majority of the Senators present and voting may call a bill, resolution or concurrent resolution from a committee by a signed motion.

Currently there are 27 Republicans and 25 Democrats in the Mississippi Senate. If Republicans or Democrats in the Mississippi Senate had any respect for the job we actually send them to Jackson to do (protect private property from theft, for example), and if they had any backbone at all – they could easily petition to pull this bill out of committee and put it to a full Senate vote. Let us see who all gets in the way of real eminent domain reform in favor of individuals. They could easily support the private property rights of us little folk in such a way that’s constitutional, but they don’t.

Article 7, Section 190 of the Mississippi Constitution

I believe the powers of eminent domain assumed by the state for economic development purposes are unConstitutional according to Article 7, Section 190.

Article 7: Corporations

SECTION 190: Eminent Domain; Police Powers
The exercise of the right of eminent domain shall never be abridged, or so construed as to prevent the legislature from taking the property and franchises of incorporated companies, and subjecting them to public use; and the exercise of the police powers of the state shall never be abridged, or so construed as to permit corporations to conduct their business in such manner as to infringe upon the rights of individuals or general well-being of the state.

My understanding is that Article 7 Section 190 protects private individuals from the legislature concocting laws that would allow corporations to benefit from the state’s eminent domain powers. After all, if a corporation wants to expand their business into Mississippi then an agent of that corporation must contact the Mississippi Development Authority in order to benefit from the state’s eminent domain powers. Then, at the corporations directions the MDA will decide on the property to be seized, it’s owner evicted, the buildings bulldozed or repurposed, and the property given to the corporation so that it can conduct it’s business – all at the expense of the private individual. Although Mississippi law allows (even encourages) this underhanded tactic, the Mississippi Constitution reads as if it strictly forbids it since no right is greater than secure ownership of private property.

If this is actually the case (libertarians believe it is), then the eminent domain powers given to the state under the Mississippi Major Economic Impact Act are unconstitutional and ought to be abolished.

Compromises at the expense of individuals are a result of the 2 party system and a majority-take-all approach to governing people. It’s this system that grows government power and pits neighbor against neighbor over public policy. Freedom and liberty unites us and allows every person to live our lives as each of us sees fit without worrying that a majority vote will strip of us of our property or freedom. Only time will tell if Mississippians will remain so gullible each election cycle as to believe in Republican and Democrat words despite their own actions.

Also see Mississippi’s “F” on Eminent Domain Reform by the Castle Coalition.

Feel free to comment below if you agree, disagree, or have any ideas to share. We’re always open to hearing what you have to say.

(back to the top)

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Democrats And Republicans Masquerading As Libertarians

– November 1, 2010Posted in: Chairman's Corner

This is nothing new. For the last several decades during election season, Candidates and Incumbents alike, campaign on fiscal responsibility and the protection of civil liberties. Year after year and election cycle after election cycle, these people are voted into office. But as soon as they’re elected, they take off their libertarian mask and revert back to their true identities, where the Government is the cure-all for most of societies’ woes.

What amazes me most, is not that they wear such cool disguises (I mean, afterall, who wouldn’t want to be called a libertarian?), but rather how many people don’t see it as a disguise. Year after year people are duped by these disguises. This year, the Republicans candidates are promising to be good little libertarians, and a lot of people believe them. The question the voters have to ask is, are they really promising fiscal responsibility and protection of civil liberties,….., or is it just a Halloween disguise?

Fortunately for us, a lot of the Republican incumbents have a voting record we can look at to determine if they’re truly interested in liberty of the individual, or if they just became more libertarian in order to get your vote.

On November 2nd, please vote Libertarian. Do not cast your vote on a disguise. Libertarians are the real deal. They are uncompromising in their defense of liberty. The Libertarian Party is known as the Party of Principle. We are called this because we are unwavering on the principles of liberty, both the economic liberty of the individual, as well as the civil, or social liberty of the individual. Libertarians believe in liberty,….period.

Tags: , ,
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Contribute to the Mississippi Libertarian Party