FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:
Jason Sorens, President
Free State Project, Inc.
Phone: (828) 225-1951
Email: info@freestateproject.org
Website: www.freestateproject.org
Free State Project President Speaking in Delaware
March 7, 2003 - Jason Sorens, founder and president of the Free State
Project, will address the Libertarian Party of Delaware state convention
tomorrow. The Free State Project is an effort to identify the best state for
libertarians and other advocates of strictly limited government to move to and
live in, and to obtain commitments from those willing to move. Delaware is one
of the ten states being considered by the Project, and once 5,000 commitments
have been obtained, the state will be chosen by a membership vote. The Free
State Project currently counts over 2,800 members committed to moving.
The Free State Project (FSP) was recently featured in stories in the
Wilmington News-Journal and Baltimore Sun. "The Libertarian movement has
existed for decades and produced leading intellectuals and Nobel Prize winners,
but despite all that it hasn't had much influence on a national level," said
Sorens for the Sun story. "I think it's time we concentrate our resources in a
place where we have a shot at actually winning."
Delaware is known for its pro-business environment, but has been trending
leftward in recent years, with its statewide ban on indoor smoking,
Wilmington's "pre-crime" profiling database, and new gun registration proposals
in Wilmington. Many Free State Project members believe that Delaware retains
its heritage of economic liberty but is increasingly trampling on its citizens'
personal rights. On the other hand, two reports on Delaware on the FSP
website, freestateproject.org, are mostly positive, noting the favorable job
climate and compact area.
The Libertarian Party of Delaware will be holding its convention on Saturday
February 8th from 10 AM to 5 PM at the Smyrna Fire House Social Hall, 103 W.
Commerce St., Smyrna (opposite First Presbyterian Church).
END
So long, libertarians, and lots of luck in NH
by Al Mascitti • OPINION • 10/05/03
For the second time this year, Delaware lost out to New Hampshire.
First, state Democrats knuckled under to pressure and delayed Delaware's
presidential primary a few days, so it follows New Hampshire's by a full week.
Then last week the 5,000 people who have signed up for the Free State Project -
a plan to move 20,000 libertarian-leaning activists to one small state - chose
New Hampshire as their destination over nine other finalists, including
Delaware.
The project isn't officially linked to the Libertarian Party, but shares many
of its goals, including ideas for reducing government. Project members intend
to use their combined voting power to put their philosophy into action.
It's tempting to dismiss the project as a crackpot scheme for delusional naifs
and single-issue wingnuts - a view its Web site (www.freestateproject.org) bolsters
as much as dispels. But even the project's most modest aims would require big
changes in paternalistic Delaware.
That, apparently, was part of the problem. Though several activists in the
two-year-old movement wrote essays citing Delaware's strong points - including
low taxes, low dependence on the federal government and a strong pro-business
climate - the First State finished a pathetic eighth in the voting, ahead of
only the Dakotas.
According to Keith Murphy, a project organizer from Maryland, infringements of
personal liberty such as Delaware's indoor smoking ban and gun control efforts
by the city of Wilmington gave members pause.
If that's all it took to make them turn elsewhere, it's probably just as well.
Some of the pie-in-the-sky aims espoused by supporters will never come to pass,
but you don't need to puff your cigarette outdoors to see Delaware lawmakers
are antagonistic toward many basic libertarian goals.
For example, libertarians think it's foolish to prosecute crimes with willing
"victims," like gambling and prostitution. Delaware, of course, allows gambling
only when run by the state or the handful of racetrack owners who qualified by
running their initial gambling operations into the ground. Sex businesses are
even more tightly regulated - strip clubs, for instance, are subject to onerous
laws aimed at making them economically unfeasible.
The "war on drugs" particularly vexes libertarians because it consumes vast
resources and infringes on civil liberties. They wouldn't find much support for
their views among Delaware lawmakers, whose love of mandatory sentences for
drug offenses has helped swell state prisons to the bursting point.
Libertarians who rail against government infringement of property rights would
have a field day in New Castle County. Not only did the Unified Development
Code summarily change zoning for hundreds of properties, zealous officials now
are going after that scourge of society, cars with "for sale" signs in their
windows.
In the end, what seems to have most influenced many project members was the
warm welcome extended by many New Hampshire lawmakers, including the state's
Republican governor, Craig Benson, who told project organizers, "Come on up,
we'd love to have you."
If members are naﶥ enough to change their lives over some encouraging words
from a politician, they have a lot to learn before they change New Hampshire,
let alone the world.
Al Mascitti's opinion column appears Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday. Reach Al at
324-2866 or
amascitti@delawareonline.com.
More media articles about the FSP
These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by
The Free State Project,
a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship,
and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see
US Code Title 17,
Chapter 1, Section 107).
Del. not libertarians' promised land
Free State Project opts for N.H.
by Sean O'Sullivan • Staff reporter • 10/02/03
The First State was no match for the Live Free or Die state among a group
of revolution-minded libertarians.
On Wednesday, The Free State Project, whose goal is to move 20,000 "freedom
loving" people to a single state and use their political clout to create a
libertarian utopia, selected New Hampshire over Delaware as the target for its
coup.
Delaware was one of 10 states being considered for takeover and was an early
leader among project organizers. But in a poll of the nearly 5,000 group
members, Delaware finished a distant eighth in the selection process.
The group announced its selection Wednesday in New York City and its Web site,
freestateproject.org.
Keith Murphy, a Free State Project organizer from Maryland, said what really
hurt Delaware was the state's "absurd" smoking ban and gun control efforts in
Wilmington.
"We see that as an invasion of personal liberty, and that turned off a lot of
people," he said.
Murphy said there also did not seem to be strong support for The Free State
Project among residents in Delaware, but a variety of groups in New Hampshire
welcomed them with open arms.
Project organizers hope that over the next few years their membership of 5,400
will grow to 20,000, triggering the mass move to New Hampshire perhaps as soon
as 2005.
The runner-up to New Hampshire was Wyoming, followed by Montana, Idaho, Alaska,
Maine, Vermont, Delaware, South Dakota and North Dakota.
Project Vice President Elizabeth McKinstry of Ann Arbor, Mich., said New
Hampshire won because it "boasts the lowest state and local tax burden in the
continental U.S., the leanest state government in the country ... a citizen
legislature, a healthy job market and, perhaps most important, local support
for our movement," she said.
Project members also have noted the state's constitution, which protects
citizens' rights to revolution and secession.
But the prospect of 20,000 libertarian-minded neighbors worries Democratic
leaders and others who view them as a fringe group that wants to overthrow the
government.
Kathy Sullivan, New Hampshire Democratic Party chairwoman, said project members
"can best be described as anarchists."
Project members say critics have the wrong idea.
"We're not here to invade or take over. We're here to restore the American
dream," said New Hampshire Libertarian Party Chair John Babiarz.
Half the project members have college degrees. Seventy-five percent are younger
than 50 and nearly half make $60,000 or more annually.
The state already has more than 100 project members, who plan to ease the
transition for the others with an "Explore New Hampshire" tour and by pointing
free-staters to real estate offices.
The project has been resisted by those who oppose easing gambling restrictions,
legalizing medicinal marijuana and strengthening gun rights, issues for which
some project members plan to lobby.
But McKinstry says New Hampshire should not view them as trigger-happy
pot-smoking gamblers. She says the project will promote charitable work and
scholarship programs, and help citizens take back their government.
Doug Hillman, 39, is looking forward to leaving Graham, Ala., and moving his
wife and four young children to New Hampshire.
Hillman was most impressed with Republican Gov. Craig Benson's attitude toward
the project - "Come on up, we'd love to have you," he said last summer.
"That led me to believe that libertarian thought and libertarianism is more
accepted in New Hampshire," he said.
Lisa Busch, New Castle County chairwoman of the Delaware Libertarian Party,
said she was disappointed but not surprised Delaware was not selected.
She said New Hampshire lobbied organizers hard.
"Delaware didn't cater to any of that at all," she said, adding perhaps if the
state had marketed itself more to the group, it would have fared better.
Associated Press contributed to this article. Reach Sean O'Sullivan at
324-2777 or
sosullivan@delawareonline.com.
More media articles about the FSP
These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by
The Free State Project,
a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship,
and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see
US Code Title 17,
Chapter 1, Section 107).
Free State Project vote set for August
by Nadia White • Star-Tribune staff writer • 07/08/03
Liberty-minded activists will choose which sparsely-populated state will be the
focus of their collective political might in a vote beginning in August.
Members of the Free State Project will have until Sept. 8 to vote on which of
10 states they would like to move to in order to advocate for limited
government. Wyoming and New Hampshire are top contenders in the effort.
The Free State Project is an effort to sign up 20,000 advocates of limited
government to move to a single state in which they can incrementally reduce the
reach of government. That effort passed the 4,000-member mark earlier in June,
prompting organizers to set a vote date.
The deadline to sign up to participate in the vote is Aug. 15, by which time
the FSP should have more than 5,000 members, according to the group's
projections. The deadline for members to return their ballots is Sept. 8, and
the selected state will be announced on Sept. 15, according to a press release
from Jason Sorens, the Yale University doctoral student who founded and leads
the effort.
Tom Parker, a Louisville, Colo., resident who serves as the group's liaison to
Wyoming, said the movement is a reaction to the current government climate.
"In terms of liberty, we see things drifting away with the latest moves like
the USA Patriot Act, and the various wars, now Liberia, we feel our government
is not playing by the rules of the Constitution so we're hoping to change
things," Parker said. "By concentrating our numbers in one state we're hoping
to have more influence and move things more toward liberty."
Eligible voters will be able to choose from among Alaska, Delaware, Idaho,
Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and
Wyoming. Once the group reaches 20,000 commitments, members have five years in
which to move to the chosen state. Some members have already indicated that
they will move as soon as the state is chosen, Parker said.
Dennis Brossman, a Wyoming Libertarian, said the project is very appealing.
" I am tempted by the project even if Alaska or Vermont were to try it. I
prefer Wyoming, the climate and terrain and being in the heart of the 48
states, but the freedom experiment is very alluring to me," Brossman said. "
I'd be willing to move to Alaska."
Brossman said the idea of newcomers changing the way things are done in Wyoming
is nothing new.
"I think it's done in other realms, but not so openly and honestly," he said.
"For example, in Lander and Jackson in the last 10, 15 years, we've had a large
number of environmentalists move in and they heavily affect the policy in these
areas."
He said he thinks the plan has a shot: "I think it's something that would be
workable and doable. I don't think it's a pipe dream."
The Free State Project posts additional information on its Web site, (http://www.freestateproject.org).
More media articles about the FSP
These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by
The Free State Project,
a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship,
and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see
US Code Title 17,
Chapter 1, Section 107).
Free State Project may target Delaware
By Sean O'Sullivan • Staff Reporter • 02/03/03
A bloodless coup to take control of the Delaware state government is being planned.
If successful, by 2010 an army of 20,000 will move in, ascend to power and
eliminate virtually all taxes - along with nearly all government programs and
regulations. No public schools, no health, welfare or social services, no
liquor laws, no gun control or land use laws. Smoking would be allowed nearly
everywhere, as would almost all forms of gambling and prostitution.
The free market would run riot.
Those are the goals of the Free State Project, an Internet-driven group that
wants to organize 20,000 like-minded activists to move to a small state and
create a libertarian utopia.
Delaware is considered to be one of the most promising states.
Political experts say the chance of success is remote. But Jason Sorens, a
26-year-old Yale political science graduate student, said he has 2,400 people
signed up so far and committed to achieve "Liberty in our Lifetime."
Photo courtesy of the Free State Project
| Free State Project founder Jason Sorens
attends a December meeting in College Park, Md. Sorens and his group list
Delaware as among the most promising states.
|
The movement is not officially affiliated with the Libertarian Party, but it
has the support of national and Delaware Libertarian leaders.
The group does not want to secede from the union, Sorens said. Members want
to work within the political system to nearly eliminate government and show the
nation and the world "the benefits of liberty." Only the police and courts
would be retained to protect residents from "force and fraud."
According to the plan, detailed at www.freestate project.org, once the membership reaches 5,000, a state will
be chosen. When 20,000 are enrolled - enough to organize, influence and control
a small state - they will begin to move.
"We expect to have an impact [on the target state] by 2010," said Sorens,
adding that changes should be "evolutionary, not revolutionary."
The target "free state" has to have fewer than 1.5 million residents, a
decent job market, a culture that is "pro-liberty," a slight reliance on
federal aid and, if possible, coastal access for free trade. Sorens' analyses
put Delaware near the top of the list. Other states that rank well include
Wyoming, New Hampshire, Vermont, Alaska and Idaho.
The Delaware Libertarian Party has invited Sorens to speak at the party's
state convention in March.
The Libertarian Party has about 760 registered voters in Delaware. If the
project moves to Delaware, it could mean a 2,600 percent increase for the
party. However, it would still trail the 225,000 registered Democrats, the
176,000 registered Republicans and the 118,000 registered independents.
In the 2000 election, Democrat Ruth Ann Minner won the governor's race with
more than 191,000 votes, defeating Republican John Burris by more than 63,000.
Joseph Pika, a University of Delaware political science professor, said the
idea is novel, but doomed.
"I think they are misreading Delaware politics," he said. Delaware voters
are moderate as a group and shun extremists, he said.
One member of the Delaware Libertarian Party conceded the plan is a long
shot.
"I don't know if it will happen," said Jim Holliday, the chairman of the New
Castle County Libertarian Party. "I personally am not putting much effort into
it."
This kind of takeover has been tried once before in Delaware.
In 1895 and 1896, a group of "single taxers" moved to Delaware from
Pennsylvania with the idea of persuading the state to adopt a plan where only
land, not buildings on it, would be taxed. What was done on the land was not
anyone's concern, according to the group.
The effort failed, but the invaders remained, founding the village of Arden,
where that principle lives on.
Reach Sean O'Sullivan at 302-324-2777 or at
sosullivan@delawareonline.com.
More media articles about the FSP
These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by
The Free State Project,
a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship,
and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see
US Code Title 17,
Chapter 1, Section 107).
Get ready Delaware, the Libertarians are Coming
By William A. Shields • 10/20/02
If some Americans have their way, the slogan on Delaware license plates may
soon read "The Free State" rather than "The First State".
Libertarians, constitutionalists and small government conservatives are
organizing nationally, and are planning to move into and remake the political
landscape of one state.
The organization is The Free State Project and their mascot is the porcupine,
an animal that is cute and generally minds its own business. It is a creature
that is harmless -as long as it is left alone.
The Free State Project will select a state where their numbers, (20,000
initially) will afford them the most political power. This means they need
a state with a small population and therefore, a small number of voters.
Among other criteria being considered, as they select a state to invade,
are a moderate climate, a good job market and a coastline with ports to
facilitate world trade and possible autonomy at some point in the future.
By these requirements Delaware is floating to the top of the list of potential
take over targets. Some other states being considered are Alaska, Maine,
Wyoming and New Hampshire. By my estimation, Delaware will win this contest
easily. In fact, I believe it is the ONLY state that should be considered,
because it is the only state that is suitable for this purpose. So stand
by Delaware, a new kind of immigrant is coming that's bound to turn the
democrats and socialists downright xenophobic.
The Delaware libertarian party could soon become a strong political force,
losing their "also ran" label and taking on all of the legitimacy and relevance
they can handle. This is why the libertarians should drop whatever they are
doing and throw all of their effort and support behind this project. The Free
State Project is the answer to a libertarian's party building prayers.
And what do the citizens of the First State have to lose in a libertarian
Delaware? Well for one thing we lose that expensive, ineffective and fraudulent
drug war. Our police will have the time and resources to fight real crime,
and our prisons will have plenty of space for violent criminals. Law abiding
citizens will not have to live in fear of the police confiscating their cash
until they can prove it is not drug money. The police state will wither on
the vine as it loses its lifeblood - federal tax dollars.
First State citizens will lose most taxes including property taxes. In a
libertarian Delaware, personal responsibility will rule. If you spawn kids,
you will feed, clothe and EDUCATE them without demanding payment (at the point
of a government gun) for these things from your neighbor. Citizens can take
the money they save on taxes and enroll their children in the private school
of their own choosing, such as a school that teaches the values that are
cherished by parents, instead of the socialist, collectivist indoctrination
of government schools.
Gone will be high auto insurance costs. In a free state no one will
be forced by government to purchase unwanted items or services such as
insurance. Insurance companies will have to lower their rates dramatically
to entice persons to buy their product.
In a libertarian free state the role of government will be limited to
protecting individuals from fraud and the initiation of force, as intended
by the founders, and guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. In a free state the
Constitution will be revered, respected, protected and defended, and the
Bill of Rights will be ENFORCED. This means prosecuting any person within
the state who infringes on anyone's right to keep and bear arms, including
(and especially) federal officers.
If Delaware wins this contest among the Free State Project members, we may
see large billboards at entrance points along the state line that read:
Welcome to Delaware - The FREE State. Freedom loving people will flock to
this special jewel on the mid-eastern seaboard. Strategically located and
uniquely suited for liberty, Delaware will be that shining example of freedom
envisioned by the Free State Project.
***
William A. Shields is a "once and always" U.S. Marine with 19 years experience
as an air traffic controller. The former chairman of the Delaware Reform Party,
and a past president of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, EWR
Local, he has held positions in the rail, aviation and marine transportation
industries. A freelance writer, Mr. Shields owns and operates a small business
in Wilmington, Delaware. He is a contributor to the American Reformation
Project and a regular columnist for Ether Zone.
William A, Shields can be reached at: wshields@comcast.net
More media articles about the FSP
These media articles are maintained on a non-commercial basis by
The Free State Project,
a non-profit organization, for historical, educational, scholarship,
and research purposes. (For information regarding "Fair Use", see
US Code Title 17,
Chapter 1, Section 107).
FSP Mid-Atlantic Local Group
Welcome to the Mid-Atlantic Group page!
Please join us at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mid-atlantic_fsp/ for up-to-the-minute updates on Mid-Atlantic happenings! Here you can access the monthly meeting calendar, join our discussions, and learn how you can help us in local activism opportunities and projects, large and small, that will help us get to the 20,000 mark.
For those of you who cannot make it to our meetings, please let us know to help you start a meeting in your local area. Please feel free to contact us for help or questions. Thanks!
Phil Denisch pdenisch@freestateproject.org
Lynn Pina nhjobs@freestateproject.org
Rich Goldman rich1@umbc.edu
Local Groups
• To find your Local Group, click on your location in the map below!
• Want to learn how help your Local Group become better?
Analysis of Presidential Elections
in the 10 Candidate States
In Tennyson's report Analyzing the Freedom
Orientation of Existing State Populations, he analysed the results of the
2000 presidential election and what it means to the FSP and its members. The
gist of that report is in this table:
Voter Predisposition to Vote for Small-government Candidates
(2000 Presidential Election)
| Rank |
State |
Percentage |
| 1 |
Wyoming |
151% |
| 2 |
Idaho |
141% |
| 3 |
North Dakota |
73% |
| 4 |
Alaska |
70% |
| 5 |
South Dakota |
66% |
| 6 |
Montana |
53% |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
-3% |
| 8 |
Delaware |
-35% |
| 9 |
Maine |
-21% |
| 10 |
Vermont |
-37% |
Source: Analyzing the Freedom Orientation of
Existing State Populations
By looking at the 2000 election, we see that Wyoming and
Idaho come out far above all of the other candidate states. However, one
election is just that – one election, and cannot be considered the whole
picture.
Nine most recent presidential elections
Here is the data from the nine most recent presidential elections: 2000 –
1968. This data presents a more complete picture of all recent Presidential
elections.
|
2000 |
1996 |
1992 |
1988 |
1984 |
1980 |
1976 |
1972 |
1968 |
| State |
Candidate |
% |
Candidate |
% |
Candidate |
% |
Cand. |
Cand. |
Cand. |
Candidate |
% |
Cand. |
Candidate |
% |
| AK |
Bush (R) |
58.6 |
Dole (R) |
50.8 |
Bush (R) |
39.5 |
Bush
(R) |
Reagan
(R) |
Reagan
(R) |
Ford (R) |
|
Nixon
(R) |
Nixon (R) |
|
| DE |
Gore (D) |
55.0 |
Clinton (D) |
51.8 |
Clinton (D) |
43.5 |
Carter (D) |
52.0 |
| ID |
Bush (R) |
61.2 |
Dole (R) |
52.2 |
Bush (R) |
42.0 |
Ford (R) |
|
| ND |
Bush (R) |
60.7 |
Dole (R) |
46.9 |
Bush (R) |
44.2 |
| NH |
Bush (R) |
48.1 |
Clinton (D) |
49.3 |
Clinton (D) |
38.9 |
| ME |
Gore (D) |
49.1 |
Clinton (D) |
51.6 |
Clinton (D) |
38.81 |
Humphrey (D) |
55.3 |
| MT |
Bush (R) |
58.4 |
Dole (R) |
44.1 |
Clinton (D) |
37.6 |
Nixon (R) |
|
| SD |
Bush (R) |
60.3 |
Dole (R) |
46.5 |
Bush (R) |
40.7 |
| VT |
Gore (D) |
50.6 |
Clinton (D) |
53.3 |
Clinton (D) |
46.1 |
| WY |
Bush (R) |
67.8 |
Dole (R) |
49.8 |
Bush (R) |
39.5 |
1 Ross Perot beat George Bush in Maine with 30.44% to 30.39% of the
popular vote.
Sources:
www.multied.com/elections and
www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/frametextj.html
(Note: I stopped doing research at the 1968 election because in the
1964, 1960, and 1956 elections, most of the candidate states voted for the same
candidate and because the farther back you go, the less representative the data
is to the reality of today. Even in the 1970s and 1980s most of the candidate
states voted for the same candidate. Before 1956, well, most current Americans
were not even alive or at the very least, not even voting back then.)
Republican Totals
The Republican presidential candidates from 1968 to 2000 generally sold
themselves as, or were perceived as, or pretended to be, more pro-small
government than the Democratic Party presidential candidates. Generally
this is the case and is clearly evident by the specific campaign literature and
ads of the above presidential candidates.
So we can rank the states by the
number of Republican presidential candidates that won their state elections:
Amount for Republicans from 1968 to 2000
| Rank |
State |
GOPs
Won |
| 1 |
Alaska |
9 |
| Wyoming |
9 |
| North Dakota |
9 |
| South Dakota |
9 |
| Idaho |
9 |
| 6 |
Montana |
8 |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
7 |
| 8 |
Vermont |
6 |
| 9 |
Delaware |
5 |
| Maine |
5 |
Reagan and Goldwater
What about races where a candidate from a major party ran on downsizing
the federal government?
This has occured twice in somewhat recent times. In 1980 Ronald Reagan (R) ran
for president and in 1964 Barry Goldwater (R) ran for president. Both times,
their major issue was Downsizing DC. Reagan communicated the message better and
won the 1980 election while Goldwater lost his election.
According to Harry Browne and many others, the media even tried to portray
Reagan as more libertarian than he was. Ronald Reagan did not act as a
libertarian once in office, but that is how he ran for his first
election.
(Note: Votes for the LP candidate, Ed Clark, are included with Reagan's,
because Reagan used many of Clark's ideas and this is the best election ever
for an LP candidate.)
1980 Election - Vote for Ronald Reagan
| Rank |
State |
Percentage |
| 1 |
Idaho |
68.4% |
| 2 |
Alaska |
66.0%2 |
| 3 |
North Dakota |
65.5% |
| 4 |
Wyoming |
65.2% |
| 5 |
South Dakota |
61.7% |
| 6 |
Montana |
59.5% |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
58.2% |
| Entire U.S. |
51.8% |
| 8 |
Delaware |
48.0% |
| 9 |
Maine |
46.6% |
| 10 |
Vermont |
45.3% |
2 Ed Clark got 11.7% of the 66.0% total.
(He got < 3% in all the other FSP candidate states)
Source:
www.presidentelect.org/e1980.html
Barry Goldwater only had the opportunity to run for office because the
paleo-conservative and the libertarian Republicans were able to take over the
Republican Party primary and hand the nomination to Barry Goldwater. The
national GOP did not even support his bid for president after he was nominated.
All records show that Barry Goldwater was set on dramatically reducing the size
of government and those in change of the GOP wanted nothing to do with him or
such ideas.
1964 Election - Vote for Barry Goldwater
| Rank |
State |
Percentage |
| 1 |
Idaho |
49.1% |
| 2 |
South Dakota |
44.4% |
| 3 |
Wyoming |
43.4% |
| 4 |
North Dakota |
41.9% |
| 5 |
Montana |
40.6% |
| 6 |
Delaware |
38.8% |
| Entire U.S. |
38.5% |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
36.1% |
| 8 |
Alaska |
34.1% |
| 9 |
Vermont |
33.7% |
| 10 |
Maine |
31.2% |
Source:
www.multied.com/elections/1964state.html
Average of Reagan and Goldwater elections
| Rank |
State |
Percentage |
| 1 |
Idaho |
58.7% |
| 2 |
Wyoming |
54.3% |
| 3 |
North Dakota |
53.6% |
| 4 |
South Dakota |
53.1% |
| 5 |
Alaska |
50.1% |
| 5 |
Montana |
50.1% |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
47.2% |
| Entire U.S. |
45.1% |
| 8 |
Delaware |
43.4% |
| 9 |
Vermont |
39.5% |
| 10 |
Maine |
38.9% |
Conclusions
I computed this table by averaging the "Amount of Republicans from 1968 to
2000" and "Average of Reagan and Goldwater elections" rankings:
Total Average Ranking According to this Report
| 1 |
Idaho |
| 2 |
Wyoming |
| 3 |
North Dakota |
| 4 |
South Dakota |
| 5 |
Alaska |
| 6 |
Montana |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
| 8 |
Delaware |
| Vermont |
| 10 |
Maine |
Now that we have the whole picture, let's compare it to just the 2000
presidential election:
State Rankings
| Rank |
Tennyson 2000
Report |
This Report |
| 1 |
Wyoming |
Idaho |
| 2 |
Idaho |
Wyoming |
| 3 |
North Dakota |
| 4 |
Alaska |
South Dakota |
| 5 |
South Dakota |
Alaska |
| 6 |
Montana |
| 7 |
New Hampshire |
| 8 |
Delaware |
| 9 |
Maine |
Vermont |
| 10 |
Vermont |
Maine |
Amazingly, they are very similar, almost eerily similar. Maybe I was wrong.
Maybe, just maybe, the 2000 presidential election really does provide us with a
very good look at the ideology of the candidate states. None of the candidate
states move more than ONE position in the state ranking.
Whatever the conclusion, one thing is for sure: Time and time again, both
Idaho and Wyoming stand out in the above rankings.
Delaware Report
by Jan Helfeld
Jan Helfeld lives in Falls Church, VA in the Washington, DC metro area. He
is an attorney and TV interviewer.
(See also Delaware Report #2.)
The rational conclusion from Jason Sorens' brilliant state comparison analysis is that Delaware is the
best free state candidate. There is a reason why an objective analysis puts
Delaware at the top of the heap. What is the point of studying, collecting and
integrating all the relevant data necessary to make a determination on which is
the best free state candidate, if the conclusion of this analysis is to be
ignored? I therefore urge you to examine the state comparisons and all the
relevant data that they integrate, so you can see for yourself.
Some of the highlights that make Delaware come up as the best free state
candidate in the state comparison analysis are the following.
Voting Population
The most important factor to consider when trying to implement the free
state project strategy is the voting population. The reason for this is
obvious: the fewer the voters, the more impact the 20,000 liberators will have
on the elections. If you look at the numbers carefully you will see that the
states fall in the following voting population categories: Wyoming has the
least amount of voters with 213,000, the next category includes Alaska, North
Dakota, Vermont, South Dakota and Delaware with voting populations of between
288,000 and 328,000, the next category his Montana and Idaho with voting
populations of between 411,000 and 488,000 and finally New Hampshire, New
Mexico and Nevada with voting populations of between 567,000 and 606,000.
The main conclusion that can be derived from this voting population
analysis is that Wyoming is definitely a candidate that should be examined
carefully. Secondly, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Nevada simply have too many
voters to be impacted decisively by a move of 20,000 liberators. Finally, if
Wyoming is not ideal, then we should look carefully at the second category of
Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont, South Dakota and Delaware. Of this second
category, I think Delaware is the best for the reasons I will put forth in this
report.
Geography
Delaware is ideal geographically, with ports and plenty of coastlines. It
is the antithesis of a land locked state. There's no obstacle for trade with
the rest of United States and or the world. This situation facilitates the
potential for autonomy.
Importantly, Delaware is close and accessible to major population centers.
It is a population hub. This is an often overlooked factor that would
facilitate the movement to the state by the liberators and make the move more
attractive because of the possibility of maintaining close contact with the
people from where the liberators originally came. Furthermore, this proximity
to major population centers (Philadelphia, Baltimore, southern New Jersey)
would make it easier for other activists that do not move to help in the
liberation of the free state - and helps us to get jobs in the early transition
period.
Highest Income per Capita
Additionally, Delaware has the highest income per capita of any of the
candidates, indeed of any state in the U.S. This is an important factor in many
ways. First, the more money people make, the more money available for
investment and therefore the more economic opportunities for the 20,000
liberators. Secondly, the more money people make, the more they are harmed by
the redistribution of wealth policies of the federal and state government.
Thus, it is logically in their self-interest to have lower taxes because taxes
take disproportionately high amounts from wealthy people. Consequently, they
are more likely to support tax reductions.
Dependence on the Federal Government
Of the current candidate states, only New Hampshire and Nevada are less
dependent on the federal government than Delaware. As Sorens mentions in the data analysis, "Federal dependence is very
important. Research indicates that regions that receive more from the central
government in expenditures than they pay in taxes are less likely to seek
fiscal autonomy or sovereignty. Regions that pay more than they get back are
more likely to seek autonomy, because they have a genuine grievance against the
central government. Having a state that is on net exploited by the central
government would be a very important issue for us and would create a popular
demand for real federalism. (It will also make it easier for us to reject
federal funds when necessary.)"
Federal state and local spending as a percentage of state gross
product
Only New Hampshire has less federal, state, and local spending as a
percentage of gross state product than Delaware. Delaware's state and local
spending is 6.3% compared to New Hampshire's 6.8%. These percentages are both
far below the rest of the states and reflect a fundamental conclusion of the
citizens, namely that the government should not take a high percentage of the
citizen's income. This conclusion is instrumental for economic freedom and will
make our job much easier.
If that is not enough to persuade you that Delaware is the ideal candidate
here are a few other considerations that will help you reach the same
conclusion.
Climate
A factor that was not included in the state comparison analysis was climate
even though this factor will clearly impact on people's decision to move to and
live in the free state candidate. If you look at the weather and climate report you'll see that Delaware has
the best weather and climate of the states with under 330,000 voting
populations.
For many people a key factor in determining whether a state is livable or
not is the weather. The reason for this is obvious; the weather affects us
constantly and can be an important hindrance to our enjoyment of life and the
pursuit of our goals. Thus, rational people will take climate into
consideration when deciding whether or not to move to a free state.
Land Area
Delaware is relatively small. This makes proselytizing and activism in
general easier than would be the case in a large state. 20,000 activists would
have a great impact and would be able to canvass the entire state easily.
Electoral Laws
There's no problem with ballot access in Delaware. The Libertarian Party is
a recognized party, and it is not necessary to waste time petitioning to put
candidates on the ballot. This is a great time saver, permitting us to spend
more time persuading Delaware citizens of the benefits of freedom.
The Political Situation
The state is more or less evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans,
the Democrats having the present edge. This even division makes it easier for a
third party to prevail.
Business Environment
The state is pro-business. There are more corporations incorporated in
Delaware than any other state in the union because Delaware has the most
favorable corporate laws. This is one example of its pro-business political
structure.
The favorable business environment has created a solid manufacturing
industry that assures the economy a good foundation. The unemployment is low,
and the prospects for jobs are good.
Favorable Tax Legislation
The state does not tax social security or pension benefits. Also there are
rebates on real estate and sewer taxes for senior citizens. This makes the
state very attractive to retired people, a very good source of activists and
prospective liberators.
One would expect that it is easier for retirees to move to a new state than
it is for people in the middle of their careers. Along with the people that are
just beginning their careers, retirees are a very good source that we should
try to tap in our efforts to meet the critical mass of 20,000. Delaware is
especially attractive to this group because of the favorable tax legislation,
the climate and the easy access.
Federal Land Ownership
Only Maine has less federal land ownership than Delaware. This is one more
obstacle that is absent in Delaware, but present in many other states.
Conclusion
When you take all the relevant information into consideration Delaware is
the best choice. If you do not believe that Delaware is the best choice for the
F.S.P., please feel free to debate me by email at janhelfeld@aol.com.
August 28, 2002
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent those
of the Free State Project, its Officers, or Directors.
Participants
Facebook
YouTube
Twitter
MySpace
LinkedIn
Fr33 Agents