I’ve got to second Quincy’s assertion that left-libertarians who reject free markets are not libertarians. The economic policies advocated on the principles page for your organization, the Democratic Freedom Caucus, are a recipe for more government intervention in our lives, not less.

http://www.democraticfreedomcaucus.org/principles-of-the-dfc/

From Mike Gravel’s issues page on his website:

Healthcare: Senator Gravel advocates a universal healthcare system that provides equal medical services to all citizens, paid for by a retail sales tax (a portion of the Progressive Fair tax).

This alone is reason enough for me to oppose him. You claim to abhor the police state, but what better way to create a police state than to give the government control over our doctors, our medical decisions, and by extension our bodies? Not to mention that this summary on the end…

Citizens would pay nothing for health benefits.

…is blatantly false as every nation that has ever instituted socialized medicine has found out (since “free” healthcare encourages overuse and eventually leads to more and more taxes). I wrote a post about my own experiences with Britain’s NHS as well

http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2007/08/01/you-like-europes-health-care-so-much-then-go-live-there/

As for his other “plusses”:

He was largely responsbile for ending the draft.

So was Milton Friedman, and Friedman didn’t advocate horrible economic policy. Not enough of a reason to vote for him.

Mike Gravel spent several years in the Alaskan House of Representatives–two years as Speaker of the House. He was elected to 12 years in the United States Senate. That’s more experience than Hillary or Obama…

Neither of whom I’d vote for because they advocate bad policy. “Experienced” does not automatically equate to “good”. And considering that Alaskans are still voting for the long-tenured Don “That’s My Money” Young and Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens, I don’t consider the endorsement of the people of Alaska to be particularly swaying.

I also oppose his positions on federal government involvement in abortion, global warming, NAFTA, and education…all of which will hinder our economic prosperity. Gravel, like many socialists, is on the correct side of a few civil rights issues, but honestly having the government not wiretap us means fuck-all if we’re poor and have no decent healthcare because government decided to get involved and run it into the ground while taxing us into poverty.

Also…

I have a stronger desire for a social safety net than the average LP member–I support a manditory retirement plan, unemployment insurance, more affordable health care.

With all due respect, that economic policy you support indicates that you’re a liberal with socialist leanings, not a libertarian.

Gravel believes in citizen empowerment and economic regulation. Both expressly run contrary to the a limited government that protects the liberty of the people.

The problem I’ve got with left-libertarians is that they don’t acknowledge economic liberty as the root of social liberty. You support economically destructive and repressive policies, and then try to assert you’re a libertarian because you support social liberty. That never works.

Put simply, if I live in a highly regulated economy where I have to interact with the state often, I am not free to do things the state doesn’t like. Sure, they may not be enshrined as laws, but they will affect what I get from the state dependency machine.

Each too much? Too hefty? No health care for you. Produce too much smut? No FCC license for you. Refuse to quit working at age 65? No retirement for you.

For citizens to be free, the economy must be made up of a system of voluntary, non-coercive transactions. Government simply doesn’t do non-coercive. Left-libertarians don’t acknowledge this. In my book, left-libertarians aren’t libertarians. That goes for you, and that goes for Gravel.

With all due respect for your experience…..

What part of Mike Gravel is a socialist who doesn’t believe in the free market don’t you understand ?

Not only wouldn’t I vote for him if the LP nominated him, I’d actively campaign against him.

The very issues that would seperate Sen. Gravel from right-leaning libertarians should be the ones that freedom Democrats would support him on.

As a Libertarian Party member for 21 years, local and state officer, delegate to two presidential nominating conventions, I think I at least have a basic understanding of the LP.

I became a “Libertarian Democrat” four years ago because 1) I was seeing very little electoral success by the LP in partisan races, 2) I was disgusted with our country becoming a police state thanks to Bush’s Patriot Act, the Wars, the War on Terror, the War on Drugs, Real ID etc. and it has been Democrats like Mike Gravel, Jon Tester and Jim Webb fighting back. 3)I have a stronger desire for a social safety net than the average LP member–I support a manditory retirement plan, unemployment insurance, more affordable health care. 4) I see a need for the FCC, FTC, FDC (tho it needs overhauled),and several other agencies the LP doesn’t like.

These are be the issues that would seperate right-Libertarians from so-called left-libertarians.

Those, and tax policy. Most libertarians agree with abolishing the federal income tax. Do we replace it with nothing, as Harry Browne suggested? Do we replace it with a flat sales tax as Mike Gravel and some others advocate? Or do we replace it with a land value tax advocated by the Democratic Freedom Caucus and the Libertarian Democratic Caucus?

Let’s look at qualifications. Mike Gravel spent several years in the Alaskan House of Representatives–two years as Speaker of the House. He was elected to 12 years in the United States Senate. That’s more experience than Hillary or Obama…

It was said that” he would destroy the LP as an advocate of individual liberty.” Mike Gravel has vocally advocated marijuana for medicine and legalizing marijuana for recreational use with regulation. That’s pretty libertarian if you ask me.

He said he believes marriage is a contract between two people who love each other, regardless of sex. That’s pretty libertarian.

He was largely responsbile for ending the draft. Hmmm, no manditory servitude…that’s pretty libertarian the last time I checked.

He is against starting wars and police actions all over the world. He said America should treat other nations as equals instead of trying to dictate policy by force. No initiation of the use of force–I think that is an important LP plank.

It was said that Gravel would “hasten the demise of the LP.” How so? The best vote the LP ever got was with the Clark-Koch ticket and it polled 900,000 plus. I’m pretty politically astute, and I honestly believe Mike Gravel could get a few million votes.

“Despicable..Mike Gravel is no Ron Paul.” I first met Ron Paul in 1987 and followed him into the Libertarian Party that year. I worked hard, circulated petitions, notarized thousands until I had hand cramps, donated strongly, worked door to door and did about every thing you can do in a campaign. When Ron Paul returned to the GOP and ran for Congress, I continued to donate to him because I did and I do strongly belive in him. I donated, worked door to door, worked phone banks, wrote newspaper columns, gave speeches, was on talk radio–all these last two years and I’m not even a Republican. But I consider Ron Paul to be the greatest politician of this century.

It’s true. Mike Gravel is no Ron Paul. There is only one Ron Paul. But despicable? I think not.

I got the opportunity to meet Mike Gravel and spend a couple of days with him while he was in Kansas City April 4-5,2008 attending the Heartland Libertarian Conference. I was a panelist of elected Libertarians. Let me tell you, I was extremely impressed with Mike Gravel. And I wasn’t alone.

Friday night, April 4th, six of the candidates present gave speeches in the Hospitality Room. Senator Gravel took his record in the Senate and law by law, bill by bill, issue by issue and explained how he has been a libertarian all his life. He got a standing ovation. Still not convinced? After the Libertarian presidential debate Saturday morning, and after former Congressman Bob Barr flew in and keynoted the five-state convention, they took a straw poll of the dozen or so LP presidential candidates. Nevada businessman Wayne Allyn Root (who won Missouri LP’s primary on Super Tuesday) narrowly won the poll, with Bob Barr a close second and Mike Gravel a close third. Dr. Ruwart was 4th, and the others trailed.

Still not convinced? Saturday night was the Ohio State LP Convention. Bob Barr won the straw poll there with Mike Gravel a competitive second.

Mike Gravel’s signature issue for the last two years has been a National Initiative. This would allow citizens to become lawmakers. That too has been criticised. But Missouri has had the initiative for many years and it has worked very well here. Many worthwhile laws have been enacted, including a tax and spending lid promoted by former Congressman Mel Hancock(R-MO)–with my help and active support.

Let me add this up. Mike Gravel stands for peace and freedom. He would rather empower us than imprison us. Sounds pretty damn good to me!

Mike A. Bozarth
City Council Member, St. Joseph, MO

Chair, Libertarian Democratic Caucus
http://groups.myspace.com/LDC2006

I’d rather have anarchy.

gravel kucinich paul nader
cynthia mckinney too

dare speak truth
demand peace

I never said there was any use in pretending Mike Gravel is a libertarian. In fact I think he is far from it. But who gets to determine who can become a LP party member. You. Lord help us. We might end up with two members. If the party stays true to what they say they believe in then he wouldn’t have a chance in an election and he shouldn’t even bother running as it would just cost him time and money. However, if the LP party is going down the wrong path then maybe this would be a good way to quicken its demise.

Speaking of the war on drugs, wasn’t Bob Barr against the idea of legalization/decriminalization of drugs? Has he changed his stance since joining the LP?

http://gopcatholics.blogspot.com/2008/03/mccain-helps-outsource-defense-industry.html