<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Vermont Libertarian Party Blog &#187; Taxes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vtlp.org/blog/tag/taxes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog</link>
	<description>Official Blog of the Libertarian Party of Vermont</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 22:05:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Seven Myths about Taxes</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/37/seven-myths-about-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/37/seven-myths-about-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=37</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seven Myths about Taxes for April 15th


1.) ?I didn?t pay any taxes this year!? This irritating myth, often uttered around in early April, stems from a confusion between one?s tax burden throughout the year?and any additional taxes one must pay by April 15th if they didn?t pay enough earlier in the year. ?I didn?t pay? usually means ?I didn?t have to pay any more to Uncle Sam on Tax Day?.


2.) ?No, I really didn?t have a tax burden this year!? That?s certainly possible. Many lower-income and lower-middle class folk don?t pay federal income taxes?especially if they have children. Federal income taxes are paid almost exclusively by those in the upper half of earned income. But that?s at the Federal level. What about state and local income taxes? In Indiana and Kentucky, many hard-working people in the lower income brackets have to cough up money to support state government?including many below the poverty line.


3.) ?No, I didn?t pay any state or local income taxes either.? Well, you don?t make much money then! In any case, you still paid a significant tax on your income?through the payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. No wage income is exempted and there are no deductions, so the 15.3% flat tax is applied to every dollar you earn (up to a cap of nearly $94,200 in 2006). About 80% of wage earners lose more to this tax on income than its far more famous cousin, ?the income tax?.


4.) ?OK, but the employer pays half of that tax, right?? Not quite. Firms are often able to shift the burden of taxation. Who do you think pays the tax on gasoline? The tax is imposed on firms and they cut a check to the government, but they easily pass on that burden to consumers through higher prices. In a similar manner, firms pass on the cost of the Social Security tax to workers through lower wages.


5.) ?Well, at least the corporations are paying their share.? Yes and no. Again, companies will pass the burden to consumers as much as the market allows. Beyond that, a corporation is made up of people?so the extent to which the burden remains with the firm, it will be shared by workers and owners/shareholders. Many taxes start with corporations but are transmitted to consumers, workers, and shareholders: sales taxes on most items and special taxes on everything from cigarettes to liquor, from telephones to recreational vehicles. And don?t forget about tariffs?taxes on all sorts of foreign-produced goods.


6.) ?Well, taxes could be worse.? Yes?and they probably will be. Whatever one thinks of current taxes, things are actually worse because of government debt and unfunded mandates. Debt must be repaid?and government debt must be repaid through higher future taxes. Unfunded mandates like Social Security and Medicare (tens of trillions of dollars in promised payments) must be paid through future taxes?or defaulted upon. So, save up now?and support politicians who courageously address these difficult topics!


7.) ?Of all tax reforms, the flat income tax would be the worst since it?s regressive.? Nope. The flat income tax has a number of merits, including the elimination of ?loopholes? and greatly reducing the amount of time spent filling out forms. Beyond that, a flat tax is at least proportional?the same marginal tax rate is applied above some exempted income level. Or using the common definition, a flat tax is progressive; the average tax rate would rise as income increases.


Assume a tax system with a 20% marginal tax rate applied to all income earned above $30,000. Someone earning $30,000 would pay no taxes?a 0% average tax rate. Someone earning $40,000 would have $10,000 in taxable income (above the $30,000 of exempted income), pay $2,000 in taxes, and face a 5% average tax rate. Someone earning $100,000 would have $70,000 in taxable income, pay $14,000 in taxes, and face a 14% average tax rate.


Imagine how much easier life could be with a less complex and burdensome tax system. Or maybe you should let your imagination roam after you finish filling out your 1040s this year. It might be too frustrating to think about until your task is done.


D. Eric Schansberg

Professor of Economics, Indiana University (New Albany)

Adjunct Scholar, Indiana Policy Review

Author, Turn Neither to the Right nor to the Left: A Thinking Christian?s Guide to Politics and Public Policy]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seven Myths about Taxes for April 15th</p>
<p>1.) I didn&#8217;t pay any taxes this year! This irritating myth, often uttered around in early April, stems from a confusion between one?s tax burden throughout the year and any additional taxes one must pay by April 15th if they didn&#8217;t pay enough earlier in the year. I didn&#8217;t pay usually means I didn&#8217;t have to pay any more to Uncle Sam on Tax Day.</p>
<p>2.) No, I really didn&#8217;t have a tax burden this year! That&#8217;s certainly possible. Many lower-income and lower-middle class folk don&#8217;t pay federal income taxes especially if they have children. Federal income taxes are paid almost exclusively by those in the upper half of earned income. But that&#8217;s at the Federal level. What about state and local income taxes? In Indiana and Kentucky, many hard-working people in the lower income brackets have to cough up money to support state government including many below the poverty line.</p>
<p>3.) No, I didn&#8217;t pay any state or local income taxes either. Well, you don&#8217;t make much money then! In any case, you still paid a significant tax on your income?through the payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare. No wage income is exempted and there are no deductions, so the 15.3% flat tax is applied to every dollar you earn (up to a cap of nearly $94,200 in 2006). About 80% of wage earners lose more to this tax on income than its far more famous cousin, the income tax.</p>
<p>4.) OK, but the employer pays half of that tax, right? Not quite. Firms are often able to shift the burden of taxation. Who do you think pays the tax on gasoline? The tax is imposed on firms and they cut a check to the government, but they easily pass on that burden to consumers through higher prices. In a similar manner, firms pass on the cost of the Social Security tax to workers through lower wages.</p>
<p>5.) Well, at least the corporations are paying their share. Yes and no. Again, companies will pass the burden to consumers as much as the market allows. Beyond that, a corporation is made up of people so the extent to which the burden remains with the firm, it will be shared by workers and owners/shareholders. Many taxes start with corporations but are transmitted to consumers, workers, and shareholders: sales taxes on most items and special taxes on everything from cigarettes to liquor, from telephones to recreational vehicles. And don&#8217;t forget about tariffs taxes on all sorts of foreign-produced goods.</p>
<p>6.) Well, taxes could be worse. Yes and they probably will be. Whatever one thinks of current taxes, things are actually worse because of government debt and unfunded mandates. Debt must be repaid?and government debt must be repaid through higher future taxes. Unfunded mandates like Social Security and Medicare (tens of trillions of dollars in promised payments) must be paid through future taxes or defaulted upon. So, save up now and support politicians who courageously address these difficult topics!</p>
<p>7.) Of all tax reforms, the flat income tax would be the worst since it&#8217;s regressive. Nope. The flat income tax has a number of merits, including the elimination of loopholes and greatly reducing the amount of time spent filling out forms. Beyond that, a flat tax is at least proportional the same marginal tax rate is applied above some exempted income level. Or using the common definition, a flat tax is progressive; the average tax rate would rise as income increases.</p>
<p>Assume a tax system with a 20% marginal tax rate applied to all income earned above $30,000. Someone earning $30,000 would pay no taxes a 0% average tax rate. Someone earning $40,000 would have $10,000 in taxable income (above the $30,000 of exempted income), pay $2,000 in taxes, and face a 5% average tax rate. Someone earning $100,000 would have $70,000 in taxable income, pay $14,000 in taxes, and face a 14% average tax rate.</p>
<p>Imagine how much easier life could be with a less complex and burdensome tax system. Or maybe you should let your imagination roam after you finish filling out your 1040s this year. It might be too frustrating to think about until your task is done.</p>
<p>D. Eric Schansberg<br />
Professor of Economics, Indiana University (New Albany)</p>
<p>Adjunct Scholar, Indiana Policy Review</p>
<p>Author, Turn Neither to the Right nor to the Left: A Thinking Christian?s Guide to Politics and Public Policy</p>
<p>Reposted from our friend&#8217;s blog at <a href="http://lpinscr.blogspot.com/2007/04/schansberg-on-seven-myths-about-taxes.html">http://lpinscr.blogspot.com/2007/04/schansberg-on-seven-myths-about-taxes.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/37/seven-myths-about-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can&#039;t afford these taxes?</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/127/cant-afford-these-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/127/cant-afford-these-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Nov 2006 22:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ira trombley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mitzi johnson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national animal id]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nonais]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small famers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state representative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hardy Machia goes on the offensive by pointing out the incumbents ads of wanting to work for lower taxes are just not true. This <a href="http://s168852771.onlinehome.us/endorsements/HardyMachiaTaxes.pdf">PDF of Can't Afford These Taxes postcard</a> shows how much new spending the incumbents approved last session.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hardy Machia goes on the offensive by pointing out the incumbents ads of wanting to work for lower taxes are just not true. This <a href="http://s168852771.onlinehome.us/endorsements/HardyMachiaTaxes.pdf" class="broken_link">PDF of Can&#8217;t Afford These Taxes postcard</a> shows how much new spending the incumbents approved last session, and highlights how the Vermont state budget has doubled in the last eight years, but what we are getting in services hasn&#8217;t.</p>
<p>
Andrew Thomas sent out a similar mailing for his race, but the incumbent in his race voted for budgets in excess of 15 billion dollars in new spending since she took office&#8230;.<a href="http://s168852771.onlinehome.us/staterep/andrew/Check-Andrew.pdf" class="broken_link">Andrew&#8217;s mailing</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/127/cant-afford-these-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Livin &#8211; Vermont&#039;s Tax Nightmare</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/15/livin-vermonts-tax-nightmare/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/15/livin-vermonts-tax-nightmare/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 22:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Livin the Vermont Way]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=15</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The cover story of <a href="http://www.livinmagazine.com/">Livin - The Vermont Way</a> was "Vermont's Tax Nightmare -- What it means to the working people."
<p>
They highlighted a quote from me..."Vermont's spending has doubled in the last eight years from $2.2 billion to $4.4 billion. Vermont's population hasn't. Vermont is the third highest taxes state in the nation. New Hampshire doesn't have a sales or income tax, and is the lowest taxed state in the nation. When Vermonters can't afford to stay, the folks in Montpelier have to go." -- Hardy Machia, Chairman, Vermont Libertarian Party.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>
The cover story of <a href="http://www.livinmagazine.com/" class="broken_link">Livin &#8211; The Vermont Way</a> was &#8220;Vermont&#8217;s Tax Nightmare &#8212; What it means to the working people.&#8221;</p>
<p>
They highlighted a quote from me&#8230;&#8221;Vermont&#8217;s spending has doubled in the last eight years from $2.2 billion to $4.4 billion. Vermont&#8217;s population hasn&#8217;t. Vermont is the third highest taxes state in the nation. New Hampshire doesn&#8217;t have a sales or income tax, and is the lowest taxed state in the nation. When Vermonters can&#8217;t afford to stay, the folks in Montpelier have to go.&#8221; &#8212; Hardy Machia, Chairman, Vermont Libertarian Party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/15/livin-vermonts-tax-nightmare/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lowering the voting age gives teens a voice</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/42/lowering-the-voting-age-gives-teens-a-voice/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/42/lowering-the-voting-age-gives-teens-a-voice/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 23:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death with dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eminent domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local offiicials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lowering the voting age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[robert sand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[school funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=42</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lower voting age to give teens a voice
<p>
August 10, 2006
<p>
At "alcohol summits" held this past spring in Windsor County and throughout the state, teens complained that adults did not listen seriously to their concerns. As a result, the young people argued, community leaders and police developed unrealistic and excessively harsh approaches to teen substance abuse. As we enter this most political time of the year, it is worth considering whether young people have been given the "voice" they deserve in helping to shape local and statewide policies.
<p>
In my judgment they have not, and the time has come to allow teens to participate directly in our democracy by giving them the right to vote. I propose amending Vermont law to give 16- and 17-year-olds to right to vote in state and local elections.
<p>
Giving 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote would serve many laudable goals. It would help instill civic awareness, encourage meaningful dialogue between adults and teenagers, and develop, perhaps, a lifetime pattern of voter participation. It would also change the nature of the political process. Currently, some candidates make an effort to address the concerns of young people. Matt Dunne's candidacy for lieutenant governor comes immediately to mind. This proposed reform would obligate all candidates to speak to issues affecting young people and, more importantly, to speak to young people directly. Politicians would ignore youth at their peril.
<p>
One can fairly ask if 16- and 17-year-olds are mature enough to vote. We have already decided they are ready (or at least permitted) to drive, hunt, drop out of school, consent to sexual relations, become emancipated, join the work force, and be charged as adults for criminal behavior. Certainly all of these activities pose greater public risks than affording teens the right to vote. Granting the right to vote to 16- and 17-year-olds in state and local elections would be commensurate with and complementary to the existing responsibilities and privileges given to these teens.
<p>
Additional criticisms that could be levied against the teen vote are the likelihood that teens will simply parrot their parents and/or be heavily influenced by teachers. As to the first criticism, it is true that our home environment influences all of us and may affect how we vote. However, one rarely hears parents complaining about teens following their directives too closely. Most teens are far too independent simply to mirror the views of their parents. Regarding undue influence by teachers, one would hope that ethical educators would not overstep appropriate bounds. But even if they did, the societal benefit of a more active citizenry outweighs the risks of undue influence.
<p>
Here it is worth noting that this proposal only extends to state and local elections. The 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution extends voting privileges in federal elections to those 18 years old and older. Federal reform can only occur with a constitutional amendment. For information on efforts to address federal voting issues, a group called youthrights.org maintains an interesting Web site.
<p>
State reform, however, is readily accomplishable with a statutory change and logistical coordination. With tiered state and federal voting ages we create graduated voting privileges, akin to a graduated driver's license. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds could vote first in state and local elections and then at 18 in all elections.
<p>
What party would gain an edge by this reform? It is almost impossible to say. Polls show that on certain issues such as gay marriage teens are more tolerant than adults. On the issue of substance use and abuse, the teen vote might help move us toward more intelligent drug policies based on a public health rather than a criminal justice model. Regarding fiscal, environmental, religious, and myriad other social and political issues, no one can accurately predict the impact of teen participation in the electoral process.
<p>
Teens and adults routinely complain about inadequate understanding and communication. Politicians pass laws and shape social policy in ways that affect young people profoundly. The time has come to give young people a greater voice in helping to shape those policies. And in the process, young people and adults just might start talking to each other more.
<p>
Robert L. Sand is Windsor County state's attorney.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><b>The answer is easy as to what party supports youth rights &#8212; the Libertarian Party</b></p>
<p>
Lower voting age to give teens a voice</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060810/NEWS/608100370/1039/OPINION03">Rutland Herald</a>, August 10, 2006</p>
<p>
At &#8220;alcohol summits&#8221; held this past spring in Windsor County and throughout the state, teens complained that adults did not listen seriously to their concerns. As a result, the young people argued, community leaders and police developed unrealistic and excessively harsh approaches to teen substance abuse. As we enter this most political time of the year, it is worth considering whether young people have been given the &#8220;voice&#8221; they deserve in helping to shape local and statewide policies.</p>
<p>
In my judgment they have not, and the time has come to allow teens to participate directly in our democracy by giving them the right to vote. I propose amending Vermont law to give 16- and 17-year-olds to right to vote in state and local elections.</p>
<p>
Giving 16- and 17-year-olds the right to vote would serve many laudable goals. It would help instill civic awareness, encourage meaningful dialogue between adults and teenagers, and develop, perhaps, a lifetime pattern of voter participation. It would also change the nature of the political process. Currently, some candidates make an effort to address the concerns of young people. Matt Dunne&#8217;s candidacy for lieutenant governor comes immediately to mind. This proposed reform would obligate all candidates to speak to issues affecting young people and, more importantly, to speak to young people directly. Politicians would ignore youth at their peril.</p>
<p>
One can fairly ask if 16- and 17-year-olds are mature enough to vote. We have already decided they are ready (or at least permitted) to drive, hunt, drop out of school, consent to sexual relations, become emancipated, join the work force, and be charged as adults for criminal behavior. Certainly all of these activities pose greater public risks than affording teens the right to vote. Granting the right to vote to 16- and 17-year-olds in state and local elections would be commensurate with and complementary to the existing responsibilities and privileges given to these teens.</p>
<p>
Additional criticisms that could be levied against the teen vote are the likelihood that teens will simply parrot their parents and/or be heavily influenced by teachers. As to the first criticism, it is true that our home environment influences all of us and may affect how we vote. However, one rarely hears parents complaining about teens following their directives too closely. Most teens are far too independent simply to mirror the views of their parents. Regarding undue influence by teachers, one would hope that ethical educators would not overstep appropriate bounds. But even if they did, the societal benefit of a more active citizenry outweighs the risks of undue influence.</p>
<p>
Here it is worth noting that this proposal only extends to state and local elections. The 26th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution extends voting privileges in federal elections to those 18 years old and older. Federal reform can only occur with a constitutional amendment. For information on efforts to address federal voting issues, a group called youthrights.org maintains an interesting Web site.</p>
<p>
State reform, however, is readily accomplishable with a statutory change and logistical coordination. With tiered state and federal voting ages we create graduated voting privileges, akin to a graduated driver&#8217;s license. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds could vote first in state and local elections and then at 18 in all elections.</p>
<p>
What party would gain an edge by this reform? It is almost impossible to say. Polls show that on certain issues such as gay marriage teens are more tolerant than adults. On the issue of substance use and abuse, the teen vote might help move us toward more intelligent drug policies based on a public health rather than a criminal justice model. Regarding fiscal, environmental, religious, and myriad other social and political issues, no one can accurately predict the impact of teen participation in the electoral process.</p>
<p>
Teens and adults routinely complain about inadequate understanding and communication. Politicians pass laws and shape social policy in ways that affect young people profoundly. The time has come to give young people a greater voice in helping to shape those policies. And in the process, young people and adults just might start talking to each other more.</p>
<p>
Robert L. Sand is Windsor County state&#8217;s attorney.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/42/lowering-the-voting-age-gives-teens-a-voice/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>VTLP Releases Local Official Survey Results</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/23/vtlp-releases-local-official-survey-results/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/23/vtlp-releases-local-official-survey-results/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jun 2006 06:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Releases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death with dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eminent domain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[local offiicials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marijuana]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[school funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[survey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=23</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Montpelier: The Vermont Libertarian Party announced the survey results of local officials for 2006. There were 12 questions ranging from eminent domain to death with dignity. Responses were received from 31 towns across Vermont.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>VERMONT LIBERTARIAN PARTY RELEASES LOCAL OFFICIAL SURVEY RESULTS</p>
<p>
Montpelier: The Vermont Libertarian Party announced the survey results of local officials for 2006. There were 12 questions ranging from eminent domain to death with dignity. Responses were received from 31 towns across Vermont.</p>
<p>
Hardy Machia, Chairman of the Vermont Libertarian Party, stated, &#8220;The survey responses highlight the need for a state government and party that better represents the respondents&#8217; views.</p>
<p>
Nearly all survey respondents wanted much tougher eminent domain restrictions. Only one respondent agreed with the weak bill passed by the Vermont Legislature this year.</p>
<p>
Seven out of ten respondents thought spending should be reduced instead of raising gas taxes. A backlash of protest and some moderate leadership in the Senate removed the gas tax increase passed by the Vermont House.</p>
<p>
Nearly all survey respondents thought we needed major reforms in health care, but were split 40-60 on whether a single payer system or free market system was the better way to accomplish those goals.</p>
<p>
Support for Death with Dignity and treating marijuana like alcohol both had strong support, with over 80 percent supporting both these reforms.</p>
<p>
Zero respondents thought our school system was working great. Getting out of No Child Left Behind received majority support, as did, public and private school choice, limiting spending to the rate of inflation, and shifting funding to an income tax instead of the controversial Act 68 &#038; 68 property tax distribution.</p>
<p>
Seven out of ten respondents thought Vermont&#8217;s state budget should be 4 billion dollars or less, with a quarter of respondents believing spending should be rolled back to 2002 levels, 3.3 billion. The Governor and Legislature passed a budget that was a 400 million in excess of 2005&#8242;s budget of four billion.</p>
<p>
The open-ended question on the biggest issue facing their town revealed that education funding is still a top priority for many towns, followed by roads.</p>
<p>
The Vermont Libertarian Party has been active in Vermont politics for over 30 years. Vermont Libertarians have served in local office throughout the state.  The National Libertarian Party was founded in 1971 and is the third largest political party in the United States. Millions of Americans have voted for Libertarian Party candidates in past elections throughout the country. Libertarians believe the answer to America&#8217;s political problems is the same commitment to freedom that earned America its greatness: a free-market economy and the abundance and prosperity it brings, a dedication to individual liberties and personal freedom, and a foreign policy of non-intervention, peace, and free trade.</p>
<p>
-30-</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/23/vtlp-releases-local-official-survey-results/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>John McClaughry Commentary on VTLP Platform</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/20/john-mcclaughry-commentary-on-vtlp-platform/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/20/john-mcclaughry-commentary-on-vtlp-platform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2006 07:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john mcclaughry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michael bandler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nsa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phone tap]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[public service board]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[republican]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wdev]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=20</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John McClaughry had a 90 second radio commentary on the VTLP Platform that played on WDEV.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://ethanallen.org/images/john_pic_new.gif" align="right"  width="87" height="123"><br />
John McClaughry had a 90 second radio commentary on the <a href="http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf">new VTLP Platform</a> and it aired on WDEV yesterday.</p>
<p>
<a href="http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/audio/WDEV406%20052406.mp3" class="broken_link">http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/ audio/WDEV406%20052406.mp3</a></p>
<p>
WDEV406  052406</p>
<p>
Libertarian Platform</p>
<p>
	Most people don?t pay much attention to Vermont?s tiny Libertarian Party, but they really ought to read the new Libertarian Platform. Her are a few juicy quotations from it.</p>
<p>
	?We believe, ? it starts out, ?in competitive free enterprise as the source of wealth for our people, jobs for our labor force, and the tax base necessary to support the legitimate demands of government. Confusing regulations and prolonged and often arbitrary enforcement has weakened the economic competitiveness of Vermont businesses. We will identify regulations that are outdated and unnecessary, and secure their repeal. We will identify regulations that ought to be rewritten, and we will rewrite them so they are strict in protecting consumers, business, our communities, and our environment, but certain in their requirements, reasonable in their demands, and swift and fair in their application. ?</p>
<p>
	On taxation, the platform says,  ?We will stop the growth of state government and permanently cap the income tax rate at 2006 levels, rollback the sales tax rate to 5 percent, and cap rooms and meals tax at 9 percent. We will adopt a Taxpayer&#8217;s Bill of Rights to limit the growth of government to the rate of inflation, and to require a voter referendum to raise any tax.</p>
<p>
	The platform concludes with the section on Liberty. It concludes ?We will pass up every opportunity to tell peaceable, independent Vermonters how to live their lives.?</p>
<p>
	Now is that a great platform, or what?</p>
<p>
	This is John McClaughry ? thanks for listening.</p>
<p><i>John McClaughry has been President of the <a href="http://www.ethanallen.org/">Ethan Allen Institute</a> since its founding in 1993. He was Legislative Aide to Vermont Senator Winston Prouty, 1965-67; a Fellow of the Institute of Politics, JFK School, Harvard University, 1967-68; a member of the Vermont House, 1969-72; Senior Policy Advisor in President Reagan&#8217;s White House Office of Policy Development, 1981-82; member of the Vermont Senate 1989-92; and Republican candidate for Governor of Vermont, 1992. He has served on four Presidential Commissions by appointment of Presidents Nixon, Carter, and Reagan, and has been Kirby Town Moderator for the past 34 years. </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/20/john-mcclaughry-commentary-on-vtlp-platform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/audio/WDEV406%20052406.mp3" length="520202" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/56/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/56/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2006 16:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont libertarian party platform]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=56</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform. Hardy Machia stated, "We taken another step into the realm of practical politics with our new platform. It lays out a sensible middle ground toward more freedom, lower taxes, and smaller government-which a majority of Vermonters support."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>May 25, 2006<br />
Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform</p>
<p>
(Montpelier) The Vermont Libertarian Party (VTLP) adopted a new platform at their state convention in Montpelier. Their single-page platform covers the specifics of fifteen areas libertarian legislators will work on over the course of the next few legislative sessions.</p>
<p>
Hardy Machia, chairman of the Vermont Libertarian Party, stated, &#8220;We taken another step into the realm of practical politics with our new platform. It lays out a sensible middle ground toward more freedom, lower taxes, and smaller government-which a majority of Vermonters support.&#8221;</p>
<p>
A few highlights of the Libertarian platform are:</p>
<p>
1. ECONOMY: We believe in competitive free enterprise as the source of wealth for our people, jobs for our labor force, and the tax base necessary to support the legitimate demands of government.</p>
<p>
2. TAXATION: We will adopt a Taxpayer&#8217;s Bill of Rights to limit the growth of government to the rate of inflation, and to require a voter referendum to raise any tax.</p>
<p>
4. PROPERTY RIGHTS: We will protect the human right of private property ownership against government regulation, confiscation and eminent domain.</p>
<p>
8. HEALTH CARE: We believe health care should be affordable and available to all Vermonters. We believe health care decisions are between patient and doctor, not patient, doctor and legislature.</p>
<p>
15. LIBERTY: We will pass up every opportunity to tell peaceable, independent Vermonters how to live their lives.</p>
<p>
The VTLP&#8217;s 2006 platform is available online at<br />
<a href="http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf">http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/56/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/49/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/49/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 May 2006 16:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Releases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john mccardell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lower drinking age]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[middlebury college]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[property rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont libertarian party platform]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=49</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform. Hardy Machia stated, "We taken another step into the realm of practical politics with our new platform. It lays out a sensible middle ground toward more freedom, lower taxes, and smaller government-which a majority of Vermonters support."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>LIBERTARIAN PARTY?NEWS RELEASE:</p>
<p>
May 25, 2006</p>
<p>
Vermont Libertarian Party Adopts New Platform</p>
<p>
(Montpelier) The Vermont Libertarian Party (VTLP) adopted a new platform at their state convention in Montpelier. Their single-page platform covers the specifics of fifteen areas libertarian legislators will work on over the course of the next few legislative sessions.</p>
<p>
Hardy Machia, chairman of the Vermont Libertarian Party, stated, &#8220;We taken another step into the realm of practical politics with our new platform. It lays out a sensible middle ground toward more freedom, lower taxes, and smaller government-which a majority of Vermonters support.&#8221;</p>
<p>
A few highlights of the Libertarian platform are:</p>
<p>
1. ECONOMY: We believe in competitive free enterprise as the source of wealth for our people, jobs for our labor force, and the tax base necessary to support the legitimate demands of government.</p>
<p>
2. TAXATION: We will adopt a Taxpayer&#8217;s Bill of Rights to limit the growth of government to the rate of inflation, and to require a voter referendum to raise any tax.</p>
<p>
4. PROPERTY RIGHTS: We will protect the human right of private property ownership against government regulation, confiscation and eminent domain.</p>
<p>
8. HEALTH CARE: We believe health care should be affordable and available to all Vermonters. We believe health care decisions are between patient and doctor, not patient, doctor and legislature.</p>
<p>
15. LIBERTY: We will pass up every opportunity to tell peaceable, independent Vermonters how to live their lives.</p>
<p>
The VTLP&#8217;s 2006 platform is available online at<br />
<a href="http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf">http://www.vtlp.org/main/media/papers/VTLPPlatform.pdf</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/49/vermont-libertarian-party-adopts-new-platform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hunter Melville appointed Town Grand Juror in Woodstock</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/146/hunter-melville-appointed-town-grand-juror-in-woodstock/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/146/hunter-melville-appointed-town-grand-juror-in-woodstock/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2006 16:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Press Releases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[campaign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ira trombley]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[libertarian]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mitzi johnson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[state representative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[woodstock vermont town grand juror hunter melville]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=146</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Congratulations to Hunter Melville for his appointment to Town Grand Juror in Woodstock.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Congratulations to Hunter Melville for his appointment to Town Grand Juror in Woodstock. </p>
<p>
Just before town meeting in Woodstock Hunter noticed no one was running for Grand Juror. He mounted a quick write-in campaign and got 29 votes. He needed 30 votes to win a write-in election, so he had to be appointed by the Selectmen for the position, which they did last week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/146/hunter-melville-appointed-town-grand-juror-in-woodstock/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>April 2006 Newsletter</title>
		<link>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/134/april-2006-newsletter/</link>
		<comments>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/134/april-2006-newsletter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2006 09:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Newsletter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ben todd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bob Wolffe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cal thomas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[convention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david atkinson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death with dignity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hardy Machia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jeff Manney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kevin volz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strong third party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vermont libertarian party candidates]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://vtlp2.org/?p=134</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[April 2006 Newsletter]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>******************************************************</p>
<p>
<center><br />
            VERMONT LIBERTARIAN NEWS<br />
                April 3, 2006</p>
<p>
     Sponsored by The Vermont Libertarian Party</p>
<p>http://www.vtlp.org</p>
<p></center></p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
TABLE OF CONTENTS</p>
<p>
1. From the Chair<br />
	$73, Blog, Convention Speakers<br />
2. Convention Schedule <br />
3. Libertarians call on the Legislature to act on Death with Dignity bill<br />
4. Vermont has Highest State Tax Burden in Country <br />
5. Columnist Cal Thomas says &#8220;it&#8217;s time strong third party&#8221;<br />
6. Calendar of Events<br />
       Apr 22, 10 M: State Committee Mtg, City Hall, Montpelier<br />
       Apr 29, 9:30AM-4PM: State Convention, Montpelier<br />
7. Donate, Volunteer, Run for Office<br />
8. Unsubscribe</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
1. FROM THE CHAIR</p>
<p>
Thanks to many generous supporters our 10/10/10 fund raiser is wrapping<br />
up on April 15th. We raised another $1000 last month &#8211; putting us within<br />
$73 of reaching our goal of $10,000. If all our readers could donate a<br />
dollar, it would put us easily over the top. You can use PayPal to donate -<br />
in the right hand column at http://www.vtlp.org/ </p>
<p>
When you visit http://www.vtlp.org, you will notice that we now have a<br />
blog. Just under Upcoming Events is the Recent News section. Here you<br />
will find something new just about every day. (If you know about RSS<br />
feeds, then you can watch our blog at feed://www.vtlp.org/feeds/.)</p>
<p>
Later this month:</p>
<p>
Come celebrate with like minded Vermonters on April 29 at the Capital<br />
Plaza in Montpelier at the Vermont Libertarian Party state convention.<br />
We have a great line up of speakers. </p>
<ul>
<li> Ethan Allen travels through time to add some revolutionary gusto to<br />
the party.</p>
<li>Rob Williams, editor of &#8220;Vermont Commons&#8221;, a monthly newspaper<br />
and multimedia forum championing Vermont independence ? political, economic,<br />
social, and spiritual.</p>
<li>Martin Harris of Vermont Citizens for Property Rights
<li>James Dwinell, publisher of the weekly e-mail Dwinell Report.
<li>Professor Frank Bryan is one of Vermont best known political writers<br />
and humorists. Author of Real Democracy, The Vermont Papers, Real Vermonters<br />
Don&#8217;t Milk Goats, Vermont Quiz Book, and many others.
</ul>
<p>
Register for the convention online at</p>
<p>http://www.vtlp.org/main/vtlp-convention.asp</p>
<p>
		Hardy Machia</p>
<p>
		Chair, Vermont Libertarian Party</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
2. CONVENTION SCHEDULE</p>
<p>
        Vermont Libertarian Party Convention 2006</p>
<p>
         Capitol Plaza Hotel &#038; Conference Center</p>
<p>
          100 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont</p>
<p>
         Saturday, April 29, 8:30 a.m. ? 4 p.m.</p>
<p>
FOR RESERVATIONS OR MORE CONVENTION INFORMATION CONTACT:<br />
SCOTT BERKEY AT 802-728-6211 OR BERKEYSCOTT@HOTMAIL.COM<br />
                Online Reservation Form<br />
     (http://www.vtlp.org/main/vtlp-convention.asp)</p>
<p>
MORNING SESSION<br />
	8:30 a.m. Registration Opens<br />
	9:30 a.m. Chair?s Welcome, Recognition of VIP?s<br />
	10:00 a.m. Introduction of Attending Vendors<br />
	10:15 a.m. Nomination of Delegates to the National Convention<br />
	10:30 a.m. Adoption of Campaign 2006 Platform<br />
	12:00 p.m. Break</p>
<p>
AFTERNOON SESSION<br />
	12:30 p.m. Luncheon (Reservations Required)<br />
		Ethan Allen travels through time to speak<br />
	2:00 p.m. Guest Speakers (Tickets Required $10)<br />
	Rob Williams, Vermont Commons/Second Vermont Republic<br />
	Martin Harris, Citizens for Property Rights<br />
	James Dwinell, Dwinell Political Report<br />
	3:00 p.m. Keynote Speaker: ?Frank Bryan<br />
	4:00 p.m. Social Hour</p>
<p>
Lunch: Seating for lunch is by reservation only. Reservation may be<br />
placed with Scott Berkey by calling (802) 728-6211, emailing<br />
berkeyscott@hotmail.com?or through our online reservation form<br />
(http://www.vtlp.org/main/vtlp-convention.asp). The price is $25 per<br />
person if paid in advance and $30 if paid on the day of the convention.<br />
The ticket for the speakers is included in the cost of lunch.<br />
A vegetarian option is available. </p>
<p>
Directions: The Capitol Plaza is located at 100 State Street in<br />
Montpelier. Exit 8 off I-89, merge onto Memorial Drive. At second stop<br />
light take a left onto Bailey Avenue. At intersection take right onto<br />
State Street. Vermont State House is on your left, 1/2 block on the<br />
Right is Capitol Plaza Hotel. The phone number is (802) 223-5252.</p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
3. Libertarians call on the Legislature to act on Death with Dignity<br />
bill</p>
<p>
March 13, Libertarian Party chair Hardy Machia spoke out in support of<br />
death with dignity legislation that would allow people to retain the<br />
right to make their end-of-life decisions themselves.</p>
<p>
Libertarian Party State Chair Hardy Machia said, &#8220;Freedom starts with<br />
the individual, and each individual is the owner of his own mind, body,<br />
and spirit. The Death with Dignity bill respects this fundamental right<br />
by allowing individuals to make decisions about how they want to live<br />
their lives, and how they want to end their lives. We call on the<br />
legislature to act on the death with dignity bill [H.168] this session.&#8221;</p>
<p>
The Libertarian Party looks with approval on Oregon&#8217;s eight-year-old<br />
assisted-suicide law that allows doctors to help terminally ill patients<br />
who wish to end their lives. The Party disagrees with the Bush<br />
administration&#8217;s argument against the Oregon law, that that hastening<br />
death with medication violates federal drug provisions. Libertarians<br />
believe that no federal or state provisions should truncate the<br />
fundamental right of human beings over their own lives and bodies.</p>
<p>
Libertarians agree with the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision rendered<br />
in Gonzales v. Oregon that upheld Oregon&#8217;s Death with Dignity Act by a<br />
vote of 6-3. &#8220;It is time for Vermont to pass similar legislation to take<br />
a more libertarian approach to matters that are so intimate and personal<br />
to our people,&#8221; Machia said.</p>
<p>
The Death with Dignity bill [H.168] is currently in the House Human<br />
Services Committee.</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************<br />
4. Vermont has Highest State Tax Burden in Country</p>
<p>
Burlington, Vermont &#8212; March 31, 2006</p>
<p>
A new report says Vermonters pay more state taxes than people from any<br />
other state.</p>
<p>
According to the federal report released Friday, overall state taxation<br />
rose from $1.8 billion to $2.4 billion in one year. That&#8217;s an increase<br />
of 33%.</p>
<p>
That pushes the per capita tax burden to $3,600, the highest state tax<br />
burden in the country, but the numbers do not paint an entirely accurate<br />
picture.</p>
<p>
The new federal report is misleading. It turns out that Vermonters state<br />
tax burden is not as bad as reported, but then again, as one expert made<br />
very clear, Vermonters are still among the highest taxed in the country.</p>
<p>
&#8220;One of the things that the Census Bureau did was this year was change<br />
its methodology,&#8221; said Art Woolf, University of Vermont Professor of<br />
Economics.</p>
<p>
Woolf says it is the Census Bureau decision to include Vermont property<br />
tax payments that accounts for the misleading impression that Vermonters<br />
are paying the highest state taxes per person.</p>
<p>
&#8220;So Vermont&#8217;s zoomed up in the rankings because it used to be that a lot<br />
of property taxes were seen as a local tax, part of it was a state tax<br />
and now they&#8217;ve just taken the entire property tax and put it in the<br />
state tax which is why we&#8217;re number one in the nation in total state<br />
taxes per capita,&#8221; explained Woolf.</p>
<p>
Woolf points out that while state taxes may not be as burdensome as<br />
indicated in the new report, Vermonters nevertheless remain among the<br />
highest taxed citizens in the nation, especially individuals and<br />
families that make income over 60-thousand dollars.</p>
<p>
&#8220;Well we are highly taxed. We&#8217;re one of the top ten states in the<br />
country in terms of our total taxes as a percent of the income we earn,&#8221;<br />
said Woolf.</p>
<p>
Maine residents pay the highest overall taxes in the nation, while New<br />
Hampshire residents, by far, according to Art Woolf, have the lightest<br />
overall tax burden per person.</p>
<p>
Brian Joyce &#8211; Channel 3 News</p>
<p>http://www.wcax.com/global/story.asp?s=4710624</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
5. Columnist Cal Thomas says &#8220;it&#8217;s time strong third party, or failing<br />
that, another revolution&#8221;</p>
<p>
The following editorial appeared in the Burlington Freepress. Cal Thomas<br />
joins Alan Greenspan and others in calling for a strong third party.</p>
<p>
Spending obscenities</p>
<p>
By Cal Thomas</p>
<p>
Mar 21, 2006</p>
<p>
Not so long ago, in a country that now seems far, far away, Ronald<br />
Reagan told the nation: &#8220;we don&#8217;t have deficits because people are taxed<br />
too little. We have deficits because big government spends too much.&#8221;</p>
<p>
He uttered those words in a year when Democrats controlled the House<br />
(the body in which spending legislation originates) and the national<br />
debt, according to the Bureau of Public Debt, was $2.3 trillion.</p>
<p>
Last week, a Republican Senate voted to raise the debt ceiling to nearly<br />
$9 trillion. Senators quickly passed a record $2.8 trillion budget. What<br />
would Reagan say now? He said then, &#8220;the federal deficit is outrageous.<br />
For years I&#8217;ve asked that we stop pushing onto our children the excesses<br />
of our government.&#8221; He called for a balanced budget amendment to the<br />
Constitution and labeled the budget process a &#8220;sorry spectacle.&#8221; That<br />
Republicans are outspending the most reckless 1980s Democrat (and 1960s<br />
Great Society Democrats and 1940s FDR Democrats) is the sorriest<br />
spectacle of all.</p>
<p>
The Senate vote increased the debt ceiling for the fourth time in five<br />
years. The statutory debt limit has now risen by more than $3 trillion<br />
since President Bush took office. That any Republican majority could<br />
preside over such fiscally irresponsible spending ought to be grounds<br />
for revoking their party membership.</p>
<p>
This is mostly about politics, not terrorism. Republicans fear that only<br />
gobs of money will endear them to voters in sufficient numbers to<br />
re-elect their increasingly precarious majority. Why should Republicans<br />
be re-elected when one of the major reasons the GOP exists is to reduce<br />
the size and cost of government and free more people to do for<br />
themselves instead of restricting their liberties through costly and<br />
overreaching big government?</p>
<p>
Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, rightly blamed<br />
out-of-control spending on his colleagues&#8217; political nervousness: &#8220;They<br />
want to go and say they are helping people, but we are not helping<br />
people when we are selling out their future.&#8221;</p>
<p>
DeMint might have added that it doesn&#8217;t help people to cause them to<br />
rely on and pay for ever-expanding government. Such a policy stifles<br />
initiative and personal responsibility and discourages incentive. It<br />
goes against the &#8220;Puritan ethic&#8221; that was one of America&#8217;s foundational<br />
principles.</p>
<p>
Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican, observed, &#8220;This budget<br />
could be the final nail in our coffin if we don&#8217;t watch it.&#8221; Graham said<br />
Republican spending habits are demoralizing voters: &#8220;I don&#8217;t think we<br />
properly understand the keys to our electoral success.&#8221;</p>
<p>
Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Republican, defended spending an<br />
additional $7 billion for health and education programs, claiming those<br />
areas have lacked money in recent years. Is he kidding? The Bush<br />
administration has sired the biggest new entitlement program in history<br />
- a prescription drug benefit for the elderly. And let&#8217;s not forget &#8220;No<br />
Child Left Behind,&#8221; which massively increased federal education spending<br />
when there is no evidence of a connection between money and academic<br />
achievement.</p>
<p>
Perhaps the real culprit is not Congress, but us. The Pew Research<br />
Center poll of March 14 found that only 55 percent of Americans rate the<br />
deficit as a &#8220;top priority.&#8221; That contrasts with the 1990s when the<br />
deficit resonated more strongly with voters. As long as we are willing<br />
to take the money in exchange for our votes, politicians will give it to<br />
us. This must change, not only because we are in debt up to our<br />
eyeballs, but also because many of the note holders are, or might<br />
become, our enemies.</p>
<p>
Means testing for all government programs and term limits for Congress<br />
are the answer to never-ending debt, but neither is likely to happen.</p>
<p>
Reagan said his favorite president was Calvin Coolidge. In 1923, when<br />
Coolidge was vice president, he said, &#8220;After order and liberty, economy<br />
is one of the highest essentials of a free government.&#8221;</p>
<p>
Coolidge left the presidency with a surplus. So did Bill Clinton. That a<br />
Republican Congress and administration are engaging in such promiscuous<br />
spending is obscene. If voting in Democrats -who in the past engaged in<br />
deficit spending &#8211; punishes Republicans, little will change. What to do?</p>
<p>
Maybe it&#8217;s time for a strong third party, or failing that, another<br />
revolution.</p>
<p>
Cal Thomas is the co-author of Blinded By Might.</p>
<p>
Copyright ? 2006 Townhall.com</p>
<p>
Find this story at: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/column/calthomas/2006/03/21/190629.html</p>
<p><p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
6. CALENDAR OF EVENTS</p>
<p>
April 22 (10AM &#8211; Saturday): VTLP State Committee Meeting at City Hall in<br />
           Montpelier. Use the back door, go up stairs, Memorial Room<br />
           is on right.</p>
<p>
April 29 (9:30AM-4PM): VTLP State Convention. Capital Plaza Hotel, Montpelier.</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
7. DONATE, VOLUNTEER, RUN FOR OFFICE</p>
<p>
To make a contribution to the Vermont Libertarian Party or to sign</p>
<p>
your friends up for the newsletter, visit us on the web at</p>
<p>http://www.vtlp.org.</p>
<p>
If you are interested in volunteering or running for office, then</p>
<p>
contact Hardy Machia at chair@vtlp.org.</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
8. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR / SUBMIT AN ARTICLE</p>
<p>
For information or to submit news, letters, or articles, contact</p>
<p>
Hardy Machia, Chair, Vermont Libertarian Party, chair@vtlp.org,</p>
<p>
(802) 372-9512.</p>
<p>
<p>
******************************************************</p>
<p>
The VERMONT LIBERTARIAN NEWS is a publication of the Vermont Libertarian</p>
<p>
Party, PO Box 5475, Burlington, VT 05402.  All Rights Reserved.</p>
<p>
Copyright ? 2006.</p>
<p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.vtlp.org/blog/134/april-2006-newsletter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

