A letter from America
by Ben McConville • 10/11/03
"LIVE free or die" is the motto of New Hampshire. Its reputation as a truly
conservative state is based not only on its ability to make or break a
presidential candidate, but also its low tax regime. Such is its lack of state
intervention that New Hampshire has become a beacon for libertarians who hope
to transform it into a utopian ideal of limited government, few laws and
individual liberty.
More than 5,000 libertarians have pledged to move into the state (population
1,235,786) after conducting a national poll to see which part of the US best
fits their free-wheeling ideals. Ultimately, they aim to increase their numbers
to 20,000 within two years and turn the state into a national model.
In other words, to restore their version of the American Dream.
The Jeffersonian philosophy that animates the group's work combines an
appreciation for entrepreneurship, the market process and lower taxes, with
strict respect for civil liberties and scepticism about the benefits of both
the welfare state and foreign military adventurism.
New Hampshire beat nine other finalists for the Free State Project. Wyoming was
runner-up, but ten percentage points behind New Hampshire in balloting
conducted by about 5,000 members of the project around the US.
Elizabeth McKinstry, of Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Project vice-president, said
New Hampshire won because it boasts the lowest state and local tax burden in
the continental US and the leanest state government in the country. It has a
citizen legislature, a healthy job market and, perhaps most important, local
support for the movement.
Project members also like the state's constitution, which protects the rights
to revolution and secession from the United States. Some free-staters want to
roll back restrictions on gambling and legalise medicinal cannabis. As a
result, the prospective new neighbours worry some New Hampshire residents.
Kathy Sullivan, state Democratic Party chairwoman, said project members can
best be described as anarchists.
New Hampshire does not have a general sales tax, which is 6 per cent in most
states, or an income tax on an individual's reported wages, up to 22 per cent
in some states. New Hampshire, long a haven for Wall Street's super-rich and
Washington's finest, is one of the wealthiest in the US. Consumption is high
and business is booming, due to the low taxes: there are taxes on an
individual's interest and dividends income, inheritance at 18 per cent
(compared with 40 per cent in the UK), and business taxes at 8.5 per cent
(compared with 19 per cent corporation tax in the UK).
But is New Hampshire the libertarian paradise it is cracked up to be? In 1996,
welfare reform came into place. Among the tightening of the rules was the
limiting of family welfare benefits to five years.
Nevertheless, according to the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank, New
Hampshire is still in the top 12 states for paying welfare benefits per capita.
It works out at $10.96 per non-working hour, compared with $17.50 in Hawaii,
the highest, and $5.53 in Mississippi, the lowest.
In other words, New Hampshire still has a bit of Scandinavian social democracy
about it.
In the land of low taxes, who is paying for welfare benefit? According to a
study by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-profit
independent policy body, low and middle-income families in New Hampshire pay a
higher proportionate share of their income in state and local taxes than do the
richest.
When all New Hampshire taxes are totalled up (including local property taxes),
the study found the tax rate on the wealthiest 1 per cent of families, with
average incomes of more than $1 million, is 1.9 per cent. But the relative tax
rate (income and property) on the poorest families, those earning less than
$20,000, is higher. At 8.1 per cent, it is more than four times the effective
rate of the wealthiest taxpayers (though, at the equivalent of ?20 a week,
still small by UK standards). Besides, since there is no New Hampshire VAT,
poorer families pay much less in consumer taxes than in Britain.
No wonder New Hampshire attracts people. When the libertarians get there, they
will find others had the same idea: the population grew 11 per cent in the past
decade. How long before New Hampshire demands a seat at the UN?
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).
Libertarians call Granite State home
New Hampshire chosen as site for 20,000-person project
by Daniel Barrick • Monitor staff • 10/02/03
NEW YORK - For the past two years, the members of the Free State Project
were like the Israelites of the Old Testament - a people united by a common
belief, in search of a homeland.
Yesterday, the project's leaders announced that they have finally seen the
promised land: New Hampshire.
The Free Staters, a group of libertarians who want to apply their ideas of
small government, low taxes and unfettered civil liberties on a wider scale,
have decided to make the Granite State their laboratory. The project's leaders
said they can't wait to migrate to New Hampshire, a place they believe is
already well on its way to becoming a libertarian paradise.
"New Hampshire is now the luckiest state in the history of the United States,"
said Tim Condon, a member of the project's board of directors. "They're about
to get an influx of hard-working, dedicated individuals. . . . We come as good
citizens to work with you to make New Hampshire an even greater place of
freedom than it already is."
It will be a slow migration. Since its founding two years ago, the project's
leaders have recruited only a quarter of the 20,000 members they're aiming for.
And they have ruled out the option of forming a political party, adopting
communal living or requiring dues from their members. But the Free Staters say
naming a destination state, after months of deliberation, represents a major
step forward. Whether their future neighbors are ready to accept them, however,
is another question.
"This is a group that doesn't represent this state's values," said Pam Walsh, a
spokeswoman for the state Democratic Party who questioned the group's professed
hopes to eliminate public education and decriminalize drugs.
What happens next is still unclear. Once membership reaches 20,000 (which could
happen within two or three years, one board member said) members must move to
New Hampshire within five years. Once here, they hope to run for elected office
and add a more Libertarian flavor to mainstream state politics. Several Free
State advocates said they already planned to move up in the next few months.
Others said it would take longer to untangle themselves from the net of
authoritarianism (and a regular income) back home.
"I have to see how the job market is," said Jason Sorens, the project's founder
and a political science lecturer at Yale.
After yesterday's announcement, made in a hotel a few blocks from Times Square,
several Free Staters whooped it up in the hotel bar. Two enthusiastically
pro-New Hampshire members, Keith Murphy and Francis White, split a bottle of
champagne and began plotting their moves north. Dressed in tailored blue suits,
the two men lingered for hours, savoring the first day in what one member
called a second American Revolution.
"This is the next logical step in efforts toward freedom," White, an artist
from upstate New York, said. "It might actually be the last resort."
The announcement also ignited jubilation back in New Hampshire, where the state
Libertarian Party threw an impromptu party at the Barley House pub in Concord.
But the day of celebration was not without a few hitches. A British newspaper
published a story that morning, leaking New Hampshire's victory before the
official announcement. That, in turn, set off a flurry of phone calls from
reporters eager for more of the story.
Johannes Wiebus, a German filmmaker working on a documentary about the project,
sees in it distinctly American themes: the "pioneer" spirit and a deep
suspicion of authority. He plans to spend the next year chronicling the lives
of several project members as they migrate to New Hampshire. Under the glow of
Wiebus's spotlights yesterday, several Free Staters described the motivation
behind their visions of liberty in the White Mountains.
"These are people who are convinced to follow their dream and give up their
life to try something completely new," said Wiebus. "It's the passion of people
who are willing to change."
If the Free State Project's goals of smaller government and lower taxes remind
you of Gov. Craig Benson's platform, you're onto something. The governor met
with several of the group's members last June during a week-long tour of the
state. Many members yesterday cited Benson's warm welcome, in which he invited
the Free Staters to "come on up," as a deciding factor in New Hampshire's
victory.
"He's one of us," said Tony Stelik, a toolmaker from Connecticut who plans to
move with his wife to New Hampshire and open a gun smithy. "He's the best kind
of politician - a self-made politician."
In a statement yesterday, Benson offered an enthusiastic greeting to the Free
Staters.
"Since colonial times, people have come to New Hampshire seeking individual
liberty and limited government," Benson said. "In my previous meetings with
leaders of the Free State Project, they said they were small-business owners
and entrepreneurs who believe in low taxes and limited government. . . . As
with all new citizens, I expect they will positively contribute to New
Hampshire, and I welcome them."
The project's charter calls for effecting change - including shrinking the size
of government by two-thirds, repealing most gun and drug laws and doing away
with public education - through electoral results. But Free State leaders, as
if anticipating backlash from suspicious New Hampshire residents, were quick to
dismiss talk of a "takeover."
"We want to reinforce the existing culture of liberty and help make the state's
government less extensive, less intrusive and less costly," said Sorens.
Elizabeth McKinstry, the project's vice president, said more traditional forms
of civic life, like volunteerism and school scholarships, would be a critical
part of the movement.
"To those of you in New Hampshire, we're really excited to be a part of your
volunteer networks," she said.
The project's members are a fairly well-educated, prosperous lot: More than 90
percent have at least some college experience, and 40 percent earn more than
$60,000 a year. They are also overwhelmingly male and single.
Evan and Beverly Nappen of Eatontown, N.J., admitted they wished there were
more families among the movement. But the couple said they were ready to move
with their three preteen children to New Hampshire within two years. They spoke
of the state in terms deserving of a tourism brochure.
"We just love New Hampshire," Evan Nappen said. "The attitude there is just
about as opposite of New Jersey as you can find."
"It's an attitude of personal responsibility," Beverly Nappen added.
The voting process behind yesterday's result was a drawn-out, carefully
researched affair. The project's leaders narrowed the choices to 10 states,
graded on a list of qualifications such as small population, traditions of
small government and low taxes and relaxed gun-control laws. Many members took
tours of the states in contention.
For months, New Hampshire and Wyoming were pegged as front-runners. New
Hampshire scored well for its small size, low crime rate, modest tax burden and
citizen legislature. And, of course, there's that state motto - "Live Free or
Die" - which warms the heart of every libertarian.
The final voting results were a closely guarded secret; even the project's
board of directors were in the dark until Monday.
But anyone who envisions New Hampshire turning into a libertarian wonderland
anytime soon should heed the words of Miriam Luce, former state liquor
commissioner and one of the few libertarians to hold public office in recent
years.
"I wish them well, but if they think a few thousand people are going to bring
New Hampshire back from the brink of socialism, they have their work cut out
for them," said Luce. "We're too far gone already."
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).
'Monitor' statists endorse slavery
by Jason Sorens • 10/07/03
Letter to the editor 'Free from Reality" was an excellent title for
your Oct. 6 editorial on the Free State Project, for my close analysis of it
failed to yield a single statement bearing any relationship to reality.
"Abolishing Social Security would lead to the isolation, suffering, and
premature death of many elderly people. . . . The plight of the aged before and
during the Depression years is party of history." The Monitor apparently
believes that before Social Security, the elderly were isolated, suffering, and
dying in droves. You need to brush up on your history - or at the very least
talk to some people who actually lived through the Depression. Americans were
poorer then, of course, simply because it was an earlier stage of economic
development, but family and communal ties were tight then, and people really
didn't starve in the streets. "If anything, families today are less - not more
- willing and able than families before Social Security to care for aging
parents and grandparents." Exactly! And what has caused this cultural shift? It
couldn't be that people no longer take responsibility for each other because
they think it's "the government's job." Right? "Philosophically, Libertarians
would be prone to support slavery and reject government intervention to prevent
it." This is the most egregious falsehood of them all. The libertarian movement
was founded in the twin movements for free trade and free men in the 19th
century, boasting such forebears as William Lloyd Garrison, William Wilberforce
and Frederick Douglass. Slavery is the very antithesis of the philosophy of the
Free State Project. It is the statists of the Monitor who endorse a system of
slavery, a system in which all are enslaved to distant, centralized,
bureaucratic, monopolistic structures of government. As for the claim that "the
promised Libertarian invasion will yield little change," it is apparently
belied by the histrionics of your newspaper. JASON P. SORENS New Haven,
Conn.
(The writer is president of the Free State Project.)
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).
The Libertarians Are Coming
by Kate Duffy • Channel 3 News • 10/07/03
Claremont, New Hampshire - October 7, 2003
Claremont. Population 13,000. But that number could soon swell with
Libertarians eyeing a Free State. The chairman of the Libertarian Party of New
Hampshire says Claremont may be where the Free State Project takes root.
"I believe Claremont is poised for a rebirth, if you will," says John Babiarz,
Chairman of the New Hampshire Libertarian Party.
As many as 20,000 Libertarians may move to New Hampshire to build support for
limited government and stronger personal liberties.
"Claremont has the infrastructure necessary. It's been neglected for many years
by poor local policies, but that has been changing. With the influx of people
with a can-do spirit, I think we can revitalize Claremont and the surrounding
area."
And Claremont is laying out the welcome mat. Economic development director Mark
Aldrich says he's not surprised the Libertarians have their eyes on Claremont.
Like much of New Hampshire -- it has relatively low taxes and a favorable
business climate that appeals to the Libertarians.
"There's a general recognition that we need to grow the community. We would be
happy to accommodate some of that growth here in Claremont," says Aldrich.
"There's a lot of corporate expansion, new jobs being created. Quite frankly,
with the low unemployment rate of 2.6 percent, we're not quite sure where we're
going to get those new workers," says Aldrich.
Of course, not everybody in New Hampshire is welcoming the Free State Project
with such open arms. The head of the state Democratic party has described the
Libertarian agenda as radical and anti-family.
They say the Libertarians would eliminate fire departments and cut back public
schools and funding for health care, while legalizing drug use and
prostitution.
John Babiarz says that's an unfair overstatement.
"What happens is people characterize us on the extreme side, and that is not
fair," says Babiarz.
But Claremont officials say tolerance is what matters.
"If these people are, as john Babiarz and others have said are entrepreneurial
class, small business people, who will come here and bring their companies and
create jobs in the area, I think we can tolerate different views in the
community," says Aldrich.
Claremont doesn't need to pull out the Welcome Wagon just yet. The Free State
Project has not yet started moving its members and its leaders say they are
also considering settling in Coos and Grafton counties.
Kate Duffy - Channel 3 News
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).
Celebrate a milestone in the quest for liberty
by Mary Lou Seymour • 10/07/03
Last week we in the freedom movement celebrated a milestone, the
long-awaited announcement of the chosen state for the Free State Project. I say
"we in the freedom movement," even though some of my own friends and cohorts
have not signed up for the FSP, for varying reasons,because even for those in
our movement who are NOT members, Oct. 1, the day of the announcement of the
winning state, marked an important first step in our quest for "liberty in our
lifetime".
A group of "no name" libertarians got together around 2 years ago, and, within
2 years had put together a nationwide organization of libertarians, anarchists,
constitutionalists, Christians, atheists, pagans, gun lovers, homeschoolers and
yes, even Republicans and Democrats who had one goal in common: to move 20,000
liberty lovers to a single state, a small state where 20,000 would have an
impact, to realistically affect the electoral process, win state office, and
actually be able to "prove" government can be drastically reduced by peaceful
means.
I was an "early adopter" (member #36, to be exact). As I explained in my
column earlier this year (Taking a new look at the Free State Project), I
"joined up" because, after 20 years of trying to change the culture one person
at a time and 15 years of trying to get libertarians elected to office, while
the police state grew every year and the dependent mentality of the citizens
grew even faster, I wanted to give it one last try, to see if it was even
possible to stop the descent into tyranny by peaceful means, by targeting one
small state and using the tools of cultural change and the electoral system.
Maybe this time, we could "get it right," we could peel back the state a layer
at a time, back to bare bones constitutionalism ... and then, perhaps, keep on
going. Maybe it's impossible, maybe incrementalism only works in expanding the
state rather than reducing it, but this project gives us the chance to try.
Most folks laughed at us, to begin with. We didn't have any "big names"
spearheading the movement, we didn't have any "big donors," we didn't have the
backing of any big think tank or organization. We were called naive dreamers,
we were told over and over and over again the old saw "organizing libertarians
is like herding cats," we were told we'd never even get 1,000 members, much
less the 5,000 needed to vote on a state, much less the 20,000 to move.
Well, we got our 1,000, and, we got our 5,000. Jason Sorens, the young grad
student at the time who dreamed up the FSP is now a "household name" in the
freedom movement ... and we've proved that libertarians CAN work together
toward a common goal. So, Oct.1 was a huge milestone for us, for "grass roots
organizing," and for the entire freedom movement.
As a by-product, the Free State Project has gotten more media attention and
more publicity for the libertarian philosophy than any of our candidates,
projects, successes (or failures) in the last 30 years. Take a look at the
media page at the FSP website, or do a Google for "Free State Project." It has
been astounding. Even the "negative" articles from our (um) socialist friends
in the media have been what I consider "positive," in that they lay out the
libertarian agenda and philosophy for all to see.
The state we picked ... was New Hampshire. NH beat the socks off the other 9
states being considered. (Detailed results of the voting are available in the
October Quill.) My
first choice wasn't NH, but, all the states had good potential for this great
"political experiment." All of them were, to a deep Southerner like myself,
freezing cold, but I figured well, if I just "can't take it" in mid-Winter,
I'll head South until the spring thaw. I'd have been satisfied with any of the
states; I had "bought into" the idea of the project, no matter where it was
located.
There are those who "opted out" of NH (and it was, I believe, the 3rd lowest
opt out state), there are those who are really really upset that their
"favorite state" wasn't picked, there are those who absolutely refuse to move
"East," there are those who say they're going to set up "competing projects."
If you are one of those who just can't bear the thought of living east of the
Misisippi, please take the time to read my friend Claire Wolfe's blog entry "I STILL support
the one and only FSP!" No one on this planet is a more devout freedom
fighter than Claire, and no one is a more devout "Westerner" ... but Claire is
biting the bullet and embarking on the great adventure with the FSP.
If you're still saying "it's naive" ... well, hardly as naive as thinking that
reading enough ISIL brochures or Reason articles or Cato white papers will
magically transform the culture; if you're still carping "even if you do 'free'
one state, that'll be 1 state surrounded by 49 police states" ... well, better
one free state than NO free states; also the synergy should be "expandable;" if
you're still hiding behind "the Feds will never let you get away with it" ...
well, but what is the alternative? Slavery? Revolution? Death?
The state motto for New Hampshire is "Live free or die." And the "porcupines"
(as FSP members call themselves) have pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred
honors to the cause of bringing "liberty in our lifetimes." Even if we "fail"
in the end, even if the power structure is TOO powerful, the election system
TOO corrupt, the majority of people too dependent and docile, even if we can't
restore freedom to one tiny state, well, there is one thing much worse than
failure -- not trying in the first place. Not "seizing the day," as Richard
Boddie is fond of saying.
For this week's action, I urge you to celebrate the Oct.1 milestone with us,
and, to join us as we embark on the great adventure. If personal problems or
family ties keep you from participating in the move, you can still be useful as
a "friend" of the project, and, who knows, perhaps your situation will change
by the time for the move. If you simply can NOT move, well, you can still help
out as a "friend." We've reached our first milestone, but we need every friend
of freedom in the country ... and abroad ... to help us reach the next. Carpe
diem!
Til next week
For freedom .....
next year, in the free state
Mary Lou
PS: Every week, between columns, I "blog" any updates I receive on this week's
action or other items of interest in the Liberty Activist Blog. Check it
out! And even though I always run three new "alternate actions" in the left
column on the website each week, I usually add several other actions and
resources to the Liberty
Activist Resource Directory each week ... and a $15.00 donation gives you
access, as well as helping me pay my ISP bill and keeping this column online.
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 Picks New Hampshire
by Pete Camp • 10/08/03
| Founded in 2001, the Free State Project's goal is to concentrate
20,000 liberty-oriented voters in one state.
|
Aiming to preserve one bastion of freedom in the age of intrusive government,
members of the rapidly growing Free State Project have made a crucial decision.
Voting via mail-in ballot after months of feisty debate, Free Staters chose New
Hampshire as their future home.
Founded in 2001, the FSP's goal is to concentrate 20,000 liberty-oriented
voters in one state. There, it is hoped, they will work to enhance and extend
its existing culture of liberty. But until this week, it was anyone's guess
whether that state would be Montana, Wyoming, Delaware, New Hampshire, Vermont,
Maine, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, or Alaska.
The membership election took place through the innovative Condorcet's Method,
which allowed voters to rank all states and selected the state that received a
higher ranking than each other state from a majority of voters. The runner-up
state was Wyoming, which defeated every other state but fell to New Hampshire
by the decisive margin of 55 to 45 percent. The vote was counted and certified
by EEMBC Certification Laboratory, who also published a white paper on the
results.
"New Hampshire is clearly the consensus choice of Free Staters," commented FSP
President and Yale political science professor Jason Sorens. "New Hampshire won
a plurality of first-preference votes from every region of the country except
the West." The Free State Project is not connected to the Libertarian Party.
"It's not difficult to see the reasons for New Hampshire's victory," adds
Vice-President Elizabeth McKinstry, who's originally from New England.
"The state boasts the lowest state and local tax burden in the continental
U.S., the leanest state government in the country in terms of government
spending and employment, a citizen legislature, a healthy job market, and
perhaps most important, local support for our movement."
Over 100 New Hampshire residents have signed up for the Free State Project
already, willing to move elsewhere but hoping to bring the movement to their
home state. Governor Craig Benson even pledged to support the aims of the FSP,
and several members of the legislature have signed up as members.
According to FSP Director of Member Services and Florida attorney Tim Condon,
Free Staters should also be a boon for the economy of New Hampshire.
"According to a member survey conducted concomitantly with the vote, 50 percent
of our members have at least a bachelor's degree, with 18 percent having done
postgraduate work. Seventy-five percent are under age 50, with 38 percent
between the ages of 18 and 34. Those earning $60,000 or more per year
constitute 44 percent of all members. The clear picture that emerges is one of
a largely young, well educated, upwardly mobile group."
Several hurdles still face the movement, which currently has about 4,500
members pledged to migrate to New Hampshire. These challenges include
recruiting another 15,500 members and continuing to build support for their
cause within New Hampshire. If current recruitment trends continue, the group
expects to reach 20,000 commitments by 2006, after which point members have
five years in which to move.
But as Condon notes, "The member survey shows that 53 percent of members plan
to move within three years, not waiting for the 20,000-member benchmark. Early
movers should help recruitment by building a record of success."
For more information, check out the Free State Project web site at
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' New Hampshire: Could it sway country?
Editorial • 10/07/03
It is difficult to know whether New Hampshire should be pitied or envied.
Every four years, presidential hopefuls tromp through the state, courting its
voters and hoping for a big win in the nation's first primary election.
The presidential primary position gives New Hampshire power and influence out
of proportion to its population of 1.2 million (just as the Electoral College
gives New Hampshire and other small states a disproportionate impact on the
presidential election).
Perhaps New Hampshire deserves the notoriety in exchange for enduring the
onslaught of politicians -- and the reporters who follow them -- and providing
a public service by helping to whittle the field to a more manageable size.
But do its residents deserve an invasion by libertarians?
The libertarians who are part of the Free State Project aren't planning a
quadrennial visit; they intend to stay and transform New Hampshire in their own
image -- smaller government, lower taxes, less regulation, more freedom.
The group is not affiliated with the Libertarian Party, but both have similar
views and many members in common.
One reason New Hampshire was targeted is that its residents already embrace
many libertarian ideals. After all, the state's motto is "Live Free or Die."
Of course another reason for New Hampshire's selection is its relatively small
population, which will make it easier for a small, but determined, group to
have influence. In seeking a place to develop its "free state," the project
only considered states with a population of 1.5 million or less.
The Free State Project hopes to have 20,000 supporters move to New Hampshire by
2011, at the latest. They expect these activists to recruit like-minded,
long-time residents to join their transformation efforts.
It will be an interesting sociological and political experiment to see if the
Free State Project can (1) get its supporters to move to New Hampshire and (2)
influence significant changes in state government.
If the project succeeds and if New Hampshire continues to play a pre-eminent
role in the early stages of picking a president, the Free State Project could
have implications for the entire nation.
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).
Live Free or Die Trying
by Jonathan David Morris • 10/07/03
A few months ago, I wrote about the Free State Project -- a plan whereby
thousands of libertarians and constitutional purists would move en masse to a
single state in hopes of winning public office and dismantling cumbersome Big
Gov't rule. Now, an update: The ballots are in, the votes have been counted,
and New Hampshire's been chosen as the official destination of freedom-loving
people all over the world.
Info posted at FreeStateNH.com shows
the Granite State to be ideal. It was "the first state to declare its
independence from England in 1774," for example, and maintains "the only
constitution in the world that protects its citizens' right to revolution."
What's more, it has "no general income tax and no sales tax," and it's "second
only to Alaska for lowest poverty rates" -- a fork in the eye of entitlement
programs everywhere.
Oh, and just in case those checks and balances aren't enough to put career
politicians in their place, New Hampshire legislators earn a paltry hundred
bucks a year for their troubles.
Best of all, though, is the "long-held tradition of local control through town
meetings." Let me tell you something: Where I live, such long-held traditions
have long since gone the way of commonsense in this country. You know the
Freedom of Speech painting by Norman Rockwell? Yeah, well, where I live, it
isn't like that. We don't have town meetings in New Jersey. We have local
access television. You can speak your mind, all right, but no one's listening.
The TV's on mute, the auditorium's empty, and even the janitor's gone home.
Now, I don't know about you, but I yearn for a simpler time in America -- what
Team Reagan might've called "morning again" -- when girls were girls, men were
men, and "power to the people" was more than a cutesy catchphrase for the young
and pointlessly restless. I'm talking about a time when your family raised you
instead of your school, a time when dad worked for one company for 30 or 40
years and got a gold pocket watch when he retired. Indeed, I'm talking about a
time when every American respected Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness,
and a time when every American was self-made because of it.
From where I stand, the Free State Project represents our best shot at a
genuine American revolution. Not the violent kind, mind you, but the kind that
grabs hard-working, clear-thinking people by the heart -- the kind that shakes,
not stirs, them to their senses. I'm tired of stupid laws and pointless fines,
high taxes, and state-run morality. But if there's something Free Staters must
understand, it's that, in the battle against Big Gov't, their enemy's in it to
win it -- and so they must be in it to win it, too.
While NH Gov. Craig Benson welcomes the FSP and claims to have "more in common
with Libertarians than with my own Republican colleagues," state Democrats are
already crying wolf. Yes, the supposed party of civil liberties is aghast at
the libertarian concept of decriminalizing victimless crimes. Democratic Party
Chairwoman Kathy Sullivan, for example, as quoted by Kate McCann of the
Associated Press, called the Free State Project "a group that wants to legalize
prostitution, legalize drugs, and eliminate public schools." She went on to say
that they have "a radical, antifamily agenda."
And meantime, the Guardian suggests New Hampshire's new look will amount to "a
green light for casinos, brothels, cocaine farms, and gun supermarkets." And
sure it sounds filthy when you run off a list like that, but therein lies the
key to making this thing work: Free Staters must prove that people don't need
Big Gov't to make them behave.
I'm sure it seems like a frivolous choice for citation, but I can't help but
think last summer's Spider-Man movie said it best when Uncle Ben said, "With
great power comes great responsibility." It's crucial that Free Staters keep
this in mind. From driving a car and owning a gun to something as seemingly
simple as having kids -- wherever there's power, responsibility must be shown.
Whenever the latter is lacking, the former is there for the taking by
politicians and their ill-conceived concept of the public good.
If the principle of self-government is paramount amongst the FSP's objectives,
then so, too, should they demonstrate a noticeable level of self-control.
Perhaps that sounds a bit too collectivist for some libertarians, but I'm
talking about something pretty simple here. Proactive etiquette. Good manners
the likes of which most men, women, and children haven't seen since they
stopped showing Donna Reed on Nick at Nite. Why? Because, in this era of
high-speed Web connections, auto car starters, and microwave ovens, people
aren't used to self-reliance. They need to see why it's better. They need to
have the illusion of nanny-state superiority shattered once and for all.
Now, obviously, the Free State Project isn't all about sex, drugs, and rock n'
roll, but not everyone knows that. Opposing politicians are going to play on
misconceptions, and the media's going to let them. Leading by example, however,
Free Staters can take their reputation into their own hands.
And if, and when, the day comes that an old woman in New Hampshire is heard to
say of a crack addict, "Yes, he's a junkie, but he helped me across the street
last week -- he's really a very nice boy," victory will be near. That's when
we'll know that Americans are living in perfect harmony, content to do their
own thing without butting into someone else's business and/or businesses. This
is the kind of future that freedom deserves in our country, and with the FSP it
isn't out of reach.
You know, it was only two years ago that people said New York looked like a war
zone. Yet today it's a battleground, a theater in which the forces of big and
small government are entrenched in endless war. New York's mayor, King
Bloomberg, has made tax slaves out of everyday smokers, happily segregating
them from the city's restaurants while stopping just shy of calling them a
subspecies. But will anyone hijack the cigarette shipments and toss 'em into
New York Harbor? Of course not, no. We'd "get in trouble." But such is the case
in America these days, where we'd sooner make war on our libraries than close
our wide-open borders.
Members of the Free State Project want big, bumbling bureaucracies to leave
them alone -- to let them pass or fail life's little tests on merits completely
their own. A state like New Hampshire, with its lack of seatbelt and bike
helmet laws, is a perfect place to start. As long as the self-governing power
bestowed upon these liberty-loving carpetbaggers is met with a level of
responsibility befitting its magnitude, this might well be the fairest shake
for freedom in 227 years.
And it couldn't've come at a better time.
Jonathan David Morris
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).
New Hampshire: Where freedom is growing!
by Kathryn A Dillon • 10/07/03
Cheryl Hall's May 16 smoking ban article stated, "In the first 40 days of
the ordinance, Dallas hotels have lost at least $1.5 million ... as a result of
the ban."
Dallas businesses lose money because of this ban, and I pay more when I
patronize them. This ban is unnecessary: I don't like cigarette smoke, so I
don't patronize places where I must breathe it. This ban is harmful to the
already beleaguered economy.
If you, like myself, are fed up with government intrusion into our lives,
oppressive taxation, please consider the Free State Project. The project is a
plan where 20,000 liberty-oriented people will move to New Hampshire to work
within the political system to reduce the size and scope of government. The
success of the project would likely entail reductions in burdensome taxation
and regulation, reforms in state and local law, an end to federal mandates, and
a restoration of constitutional federalism, demonstrating the benefits of
liberty to the rest of the nation. See www.freestateproject.org/ for more
information.
Kathryn A Dillon, Frost, Texas
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).
An ignorant view of Libertarians
by Keith Murphy • 10/07/03
Letter to the editor It was with a great deal of amusement that I
read your Oct. 6 editorial "Free from reality," which attempted to portray the
incoming Free State Project members as crackpots who wish the elderly to be
thrown into the streets and have children go uneducated. You even accused us of
defending slavery!
The writer is either completely ignorant of libertarian principles or intent on
misrepresenting them to the public in order to further his own goals. Of
course, we oppose slavery; the ownership of one man by another is abhorrent to
our entire philosophy. We care about the elderly enough to support them as
individuals, without voting en masse to force everyone to submit their
hard-earned money to Washington, D.C., where it is inevitably spent on other
things anyway. Or haven't the editors of the Monitor been made aware that
Social Security is at the edge of bankruptcy? As for education, we believe
decisions regarding education are better left with parents. That's why we would
support a property tax break for those that choose to home-school or send their
children to private schools. Libertarians simply believe people should be free
to live their own lives as they see fit and government should stick to
protecting the individual rights of citizens from force and fraud. This
small-government, classically liberal philosophy was endorsed by Thomas
Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, George Washington and Thomas Paine, but
perhaps the Monitor thinks them nutty as well. This editorial was an excellent
example of what happens when a million-dollar press is operated by a group of
five-cent minds. Not to worry, editors. Libertarians believe in the freedom of
the press. Of course, we also believe in the free market, and when I arrive in
New Hampshire in six months, I will choose to support your competitor to the
south. KEITH MURPHY Baltimore
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).
Participants
Facebook
YouTube
Twitter
LinkedIn