|
Daniel Lewis On The Issues
 The Libertarian Approach As a Libertarian, Daniel Lewis believes that it is more desirable to use the freedom of competing choices to solve the problems faced by society, than only having a “one size fits all” solution offered by the government. The founders of our country recognized this when they started it based on the basic concept that all men receive rights from their creator. With every right we receive from our creator, we also inherit a responsibility. Whenever we ask government to assume one of our responsibilities, we loose the rights that accompany that responsibility. As government grows we eventually loose much more than rights and responsibilities. Read 1 Samuel 8:10 – 22 for an explanation of the problems caused by big government. Most of the problems we face in Tennessee are linked directly to the current political situation in the United States of America. If you want to help Daniel Lewis solve Tennessee’s problems, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. My political philosophy is:You shouldn't spend money you don't have. Which leads to: Compassion at another's expense is not compassion. If you want to help Daniel Lewis take this political philosophy to Nashville, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Abortion As a fundamental right we all should be able to enjoy life and liberty. The right to life, is the most basic and fundamental of all liberties. The purpose of government is to provide for the common defense, and defend the defenseless. These rights extend to the born and the unborn alike. The 5th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States enumerates that no “…person… [shall] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law….” Abortion deprives the unborn child of life and liberty without due process of law. Government at all levels should work to ensure all equal protection under the law. The center of the abortion debate revolves around when a child becomes alive. If a fetus is alive, then clearly it should receive equal protection under the law from being deprived of its life. If the fetus is not alive then it has no life of which to be deprived. Currently a women choice is limited to bringing a child to full term or aborting it. In a Libertarian society, with its prosperity and competing alternative healthcare, abortion could be made obsolete by developing the technology to transfer an unwanted fetus to a natural or artificial womb. This technology would be particularly helpful when the life of the mother might become threatened if the child was brought to full term or if the child was conceived due to rape. It might well be possible that if the pro-life and pro-choice groups had put their time, money, and effort into this research instead of lobbying, that abortion might already be a thing of the past. It is time to give women a real choice. Under our laws, murder like any other crime, should be tried by a jury according to the rules of the Common Law. Under the rules of the common law, an incitement for any crime must arise from a grand jury composed of the people. This means that the people, sitting as a grand jury, in each community and upon considering the facts of each specific case may determine if they consider a particular abortion murder. Then a jury would have to decide if a mother is guilty of murder or not. The tenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States says, “The Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or the people.” Since the United States has no power establish rules on abortion, this duty clearly falls upon the people. As a Tennessee legislator I will assume my full responsibility to fulfill my Constitutional duties. The Tennessee Legislature must condemn state-funded and state-mandated abortions. It is particularly immoral to force someone who believes that abortion is murder to pay for another’s abortion. If you want to help Daniel Lewis save the lives of unborn children , then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Crime The amount of our population that has served time in prison is growing more rapidly than ever before. Many of our population have had their lives ruined by being prosecuted and imprisoned by committing victimless crimes. A state legislature that is acting responsible in fulfilling their Constitutional duty, must stop this dangerous trend. The tenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States says, “The Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or the people.” The United States has no Constitutional power for their “War on Drugs” or “War on Terrorism”. A majority of prisoners being held in our state are Political Prisoners and victims of these wars. The Tennessee General Assembly must resolve to enforce the tenth amendment, within the bounds of Tennessee. This is the only way Tennessee can reduce crime. This is the only way we can stop the insane growth in our prison population. |
|
|
The famous Libertarian philosopher Ayn Rand explains how governments can make almost everyone a criminal, “One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” Often laws of this kind arise because of deeply held moral convictions held by a majority of society. In his 1875 essay “Vices Are Not Crimes”, abolitionist Lysander Spooner explains the problems with attempts at legislating morality. The Tennessee Legislature must remember that its primary function is to protect the rights of individuals. The establishment of moral standards rightly belongs to the religious leaders in our state. Government must create laws based upon the fundamental premise of a free society that individuals can do what ever they want as long as they do not harm others. The use of government to force people to comply with certain moral standards is immoral. Even God gives man a free will to choose to obey or disobey his moral standards. God simply holds man responsible for the consequences of his choices. Why should the finite governments of man presume to exercise more authority than God? The Tennessee Legislature must resolve to repeal all laws that create victimless crimes. In 1996 Tennessee taxpayers paid an average of $22,904/ year to house each state prisoners. Tennessee is among the states that have privatized its prison system. No state in the union has privatized the management of its entire correctional system. In fact, one state, Tennessee, came close to being the first but was thwarted by political pressure to retreat from outsourcing in 1998. Tennessee expected to save more than 22 percent annually. Of those arrested under our current criminal prosecution system, 70% will be arrested again. Tennessee can do three main things to lower crime rates in this state. First the Tennessee legislature must continue the move toward a total privatization of all correction facilities in the state. Secondly the Tennessee legislature system must work to make our prisons self supporting, by having inmates work to pay for their expenses. The prison system should not be a burden to the state’s taxpayers. Finally the legislature can reduce the number of inmates in custody by instituting a restitution program similar to the one being used in Japan. In such a program convicts would be required to negotiate a settlement with their victim through a mediator. If settlement cannot be reached the judge would decide how best to settle the dispute. Offenders who do not agree to settlements would face harsh sentences. This system encourages victims to report crimes while encouraging offenders to seek settlement. When criminals reap what they sow they are more likely to abandon a life of crime. In Japan, often restitution takes the form of some sort of compensation in money or services. For very severe crimes such as rape or murder the offender might still be required to serve a long sentence while also providing the victim or the victims family some sort of monetary compensation. The process of negotiating for restitution has both beneficial benefits for the victim and the offender. Requiring criminals to fully right their wrongs will d9iscourage further criminal activity. In Japan, which uses alternative sentencing systems like restitution, only about 46% of prisoners are repeat offenders. The best way to prevent real crime is to arm the public. This is also the surest way to insure their liberty. As a legislator I would work to remove all laws that restrict the right of the people of Tennessee to bare arms. Under the Second Amendment to the Constitution for the United States, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” As a legislator I would ask the General Assembly to resolve that the right of the people of Tennessee to bear arms shall no longer be infringed. If you want to help Daniel Lewis reduce crime in your neighborhood, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Education Compulsory government psychotherapy is not education. As a former Public School Teacher in Tennessee, I know first hand what a disaster our schools have become. The tenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States says, “The Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or the people.” Nowhere in the Constitution is there any mention of Education, yet the Federal Government has created the monster of the Department of Education. This department only burdens our schools with regulations that hinder true learning. Our State Constitution requires, “The General Assembly provide for the maintenance, support and eligibility standards of a system of free public school.” The General Assembly should, as a matter of conscience, see to it that our children get the best education in the world. As a legislator I will ensure that our schools do not just function as administration sites of compulsory government psychotherapy. We need schools that educate, not indoctrinate. We must instill in our students a urgency for being responsible for their learning and life choices. From the founding of our great nation we have recognized the importance of keeping the government out of religion. It is time to recognize that the entire idea of a government monopoly of education is flawed. Groups such as the Alliance for the Separation of School & State recognize that the only way for our children to receive the quality of education they need is by separating schools from the control of any level of government. From the mid-1600s to the mid-1800s, public schools as we know them today were virtually non-existent, and the free market met the educational needs of America. In these two centuries, America produced several generations of highly skilled and literate men and women who laid the foundation for a nation dedicated to the principles of freedom and self-government. The voluntary system of education in which our forefathers were educated included home, school, church, voluntary associations such as library companies and philosophical societies, circulating libraries, apprenticeships, and individual study. It was a system supported primarily by those who used the services of education, and by gracious benefactors. All was done without compulsion. Although there was a veneer of government involvement in some colonies, such as in Puritan Massachusetts, early American education was essentially based on the principle of voluntarism. The General assembly must encourage parents to seek out alternative ways of educating their children. We must develop a system in which parents can become responsible for what their children are learning and how they are learning it. The key to a successful education is parent support. The General assembly must do all it can to promote learning in our state. Research from all across America shows that our tax subsidized schools are failing. Individually owned and operated schools produce better results at about one-half the cost per student compared to government sector schools. The national average spent on each student in a school owned and operated by the government is $8383. The average spent on each government sector school student in Tennessee $6,648. Hamilton County spends an average of $7,200 for each student in our schools owned and operated by the government. Over 33 years, average per-pupil expenditures for schools owned and operated by the government have nearly doubled, rising from $3931 in 1971 - 1972 to $8383 in 2003-2004, in constant dollars. The largest contribution to the increased costs of government education has come from the growth in the administrative sector of government run schools. Between 1960 and 1984, the number of non-classroom personnel in America grew almost 600%, nearly ten times the growth rate of classroom teachers. The number of non-teaching, administrative employees, (46 percent of total) is now almost equal to the number of classroom teachers (54 percent of total) and continues to grow. The most prestigious schools (McCallie and Baylor) in Chattanooga, Tennessee charge $18,700 in tuition for each day student. These prices are actually high above the average cost of sending a child to a market sector school. On average individually operated school in America charge $3267 a year for tuition. In America, parents may choose from well over 27,000 competing schools that charge less than $2,500 a year. Less than 21% of free market schools in America charge more than $5000. Market sector schools have a proven track record of producing better results than their government owned and operated counterparts. The average cost of a market sector school in America, $3267 is less than half of what Hamilton County is spending on each of its students, $7,200, in schools owned and operated by the government. According to Education Week in 2003 417 schools owned and operated by the government across America are now individually owned and operated. Since 1999 the number of government schools to be returned to the free market had tripled. In short, our government owned and operated schools have no obligation to produce success. As a matter of fact, the worst our government schools perform the more money they get. Salary differences prevent them from going to teach at the most effective schools. Your tax dollars are used to keep failing public schools in operation. Because of tax subsidize, which allow government controlled schools to pay teachers more, market sector schools are unable to compete for the best teachers. The good teachers that work in the failing government run schools cannot perform to their full potential because of bureaucratic red tape. The government education system restricts them from reaching their full potential. Government regulations restrict their teaching methods. Once all education is moved to the free market, competition for good teachers will dramatically increase the pay for all teachers. The bottom line is that an educational system operating in the free market will provide our children with the best education possible, and this is ultimately what we all want. The first thing the Tennessee Legislature should do to improve our schools is amend the state constitution and remove its mandate for government owned and operated schools. Then the Legislature should move to move all education in the state from kindergarten through our universities into the free market. The legislature should make education totally competitive in Tennessee and allow it to operate in the free-market economy. Schools that show results will stay in business, those that fail to teach basic skills will be closed soon because all the students will leave them. Schools that produce results will be self-sustaining and require no government subsidies. This was how American school operated before the 1930s, and these schools produced some of the greatest minds in history. Research has shown that areas with schools with the least amount of government control produce the best results. Parents must have total choice over their child’s education. The privatization of our schools would not have to mean the end of free education. Those members of the community that think it is important to provide free education would be able to establish their own private school that was funded through voluntary contributions. Those supporting free education could donate as much money as they wanted to the free schools. Perhaps corporations might even set up free schools to teach students the skills they need to work for that corporation. If you want to help Daniel Lewis improve our children’s education, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. The Environment If government regulation of industry and the environment were the solution to solving environmental problems then the former Soviet Union and Eastern Block should have had the most pristine environments on earth. The best answer is to allow the free-market to help the environment. For example, when a trucking company or production facility pollutes it is also working inefficiently. This means that polluting costs companies money. Below are just a few examples of how the free market can be used to improve the environment. The first thing we must do to help improve the environment is deal with the largest polluters. The United States Federal Government is the largest polluter in the country. Additionally, the court system in Tennessee has shown that it is more than willing to cover up serious pollution problems. Obviously the Democrats and Republicans methods of trying to fix our environmental problems through more government regulation are a miserable failure. The best answer is to adopted an environmental policy that stresses individual responsibility over governmental regulations when seeking to solve environmental problems. Research has indicated that a reduction in the speed of trucks increases fuel economy while decreasing the required maintenance and emission of green house gases. A long-haul truck with 90 percent highway operation that reduces its top speed from 70 to 65 miles per hour could cut its annual fuel bill by $1,450 while eliminating nearly ten metric tons of greenhouse gas reductions. The most effective speed management programs combine technology with driver training and incentive programs. Clearly a reduction in speed would be a great idea. However, the National Road Authority reports that only one in five truckers obey posted speed limits. This means that the aggression of reducing speed limits would probably not produce the desired environmental impact. A much better solution would be for voluntary environmental groups in Tennessee to educate trucking companies about the positive economic impact that speed reduction could have on their bottom line. Most trucks are already equipped with speed regulating devices. Companies could adjust the maximum speeds on these devices at very little cost. Most companies already are using GPS to monitor the location of their trucks at any time. GPS data can easily be used to track the actual average speed of trucks. With this technology trucking companies can keep track of how fast their trucks are moving. This would make it very easy for them to provide incentive programs tot heir drivers to reduce their speed. Companies that adopted this policy would have lower operating costs and larger profit margins. This would mean they could offer to transport goods at lower costs to their customers. The free-market would eventually require that all trucking companies reduce their speeds to stay competitive. Interestingly, recent increases in fuel costs have caused the airline to reduce their speeds to increase fuel efficiency. This happened as a result of demands of the market place, not government sanctions. The problem could be solved without any government intervention. Clearly the emissions of trucks must be considered when we look at the overall air quality of Tennessee. Simply limiting the number of hours trucks operate in Tennessee will not accomplish this task. Most trucks will idle (keep their engine running) when they are not moving. In reaction to this many states have enacted anti-idling laws. The problem with this type of regulation as with any other oppressive regulation is enforcement. With millions of trucks passing through Tennessee each year, enforcement of such restrictions on trucking would become impossible and cost prohibitive. A better solution would be to set up a voluntary partnership similar to SmartWay Transport. Private environmentalist groups in Tennessee and Tennessee’s trucking companies could head up this partnership, without any interference from government. SmartWay is working on programs encouraging idle reduction, improved aerodynamics, improved logistics management, automatic tire inflation systems, wide-base tires, driver training, low-viscosity lubricants, reduced highway speed and/or lightweight vehicle components. All of these elements have the potential to increase profit margins for trucking companies while reducing the negative impact on the environment. Pollution, it turns out, is not profitable. Preliminary findings indicate the positive environmental steps taken by a trucking company can also be used as a marketing tool to attract new clients. Apparently, the free-market will require all trucking companies in America to adopt environmentally positive policies if they want to be able to compete with those companies that implement such pollicies. Obviously the free-market can do more to improve the environment than oppressive government regulations ever could. Government regulations on off-road equipment would even be more impossible to enforce than regulations on trucks on Tennessee’s highways. A better answer is to establish a private voluntary partnership between producers and users of off-road equipment and environmentalists. The development of more efficient off-road equipment will reduce pollution while saving the users of such equipment money. Once the users of off-road equipment discover they can get equipment that saves them money, the demand for its production will increase almost overnight. Construction companies and framers will be able to cut costs. This will mean savings for their customers. This will mean they will get more customers. Some construction companies and farmers may want to advertise that they use the new environmentally friendly equipment. This fact will attract environmentally conscious consumers. Again this means more profits. The free-market economy could probably do a much better job at restricting the use of inefficient / highly polluting off-road than oppressive government regulations ever could. These measures would produce both a positive economic and environmental impact for Tennessee. Open burning produces undesirable pollutants. The problem with prohibiting open burning at certain times of the year is with enforcement. The Center for Progressive Regulation reports that Currently as many as twenty to forty percent of firms regulated by federal environmental statutes regularly violate the law. More environmental laws will not do the trick. On average American produces about 236 million tons of trash a year. Each ton of garbage has the potential of producing the amount of electrical energy produced by a quarter ton of coal. Unlike coal, we will more than likely never run out of garbage. If companies and individuals could sell their trash to energy plants that use garbage as fuel, they could be making a profit from what they would otherwise just throw away. This would mean that individuals and corporations would now have an economic incentive to stop open burning of trash and sell their trash to a garbage energy plant. Each plant would want to minimize emissions from the plant because doing so will increase the efficiency of producing energy. Currently it costs more to use garbage as an energy source than coal or nuclear energy. However, in a free-market where substantial profits could be made from finding better ways of turning garbage to energy, surely a more efficient method would be developed. The current oppressive system of government environmental regulation gives companies no real economic benefits for finding a better way of making trash into energy. A waste to energy program can often also be combined with a recycling program. As recycling programs would become more common they would also become more cost effective and produce larger profit margins. With an emphasis on making trash into energy, open burning may become an obsolete practice in Tennessee. EPA regulations are already being ignored. Stricter regulations from the state of Tennessee would more than likely also be ignored. The Tennessee legislature should use the free-market to encourage environmentally friendly behavior in Tennessee. Tennessee should require all polluters to clean up the messes they create. If would be polluters knew that they would have to provide restitution for environmental damage they cause they would become less likely to cause pollution. The Tennessee legislature should turn all state owned land over to private individuals. When people have ownership of land they are more likely to take care of it. In England, people with waterfront property enjoy ownership of the fishing rights to the water touching their land. If the water adjoining their land is polluted, they may seek damages and restitution from the polluters. Private property ownership is the surest way to protect the environment. Private property ownership protects the environment much better than oppressive government regulations ever could. If you want to help Daniel Lewis cleanup and improve the environment, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Employment and Affirmative Action Issues Workers must have the skill they need to perform various tasks in the work force. The best experience any worker can gain is on the job training. Minimum wage laws and union demands restrict the access of unskilled labors to employment that could give them the important skills they need to enter and advance in the work force. When minimum wage laws are repealed, workers will be able to get the skills they need to function properly in the work force. In today’s work fore it is important that workers can learn how to use ever-changing technology. The repeal of minimum wage laws and reestablishment of a free-market work force will make the necessity of tax-payer funded job training program obsolete. Regulations on the private sector should at the very least be greatly reduced, if not all together eliminated. A company will reap increased productivity and lower cost when it treats its employee’s right. In the free-market companies that offer the best incentives will acquire the best employees and become most productive. Workers should be rewarded for the work they do and not because some government regulation says they should. Nations that have the least regulated economies are the most productive. The most important place to remove regulation on businesses is on small businesses. Regulations on small businesses hurt minorities and the poor that could easily escape poverty and welfare if they could take the skills they have (such as auto repair, child-care or hair braiding) and turn it into a home based profitable business. The need for licenses and permits makes this an impossible task for the needy. All these government regulations stop the poor form making a decent living. Those that manage to start a small business must often close it in the first year because of all the expensive fees, taxes, and insurance requirements associated with operating small businesses. Minimum wage laws prevent employers from hiring unskilled labors to give them important experience. The laborers in turn are unable to become employed at all. Furthermore, minimum wage laws restrict the number of people a company can hire. Each company only has a limited amount that they can pay their employees. When minimum wage is increased the number of employees that can be hired is decreased. The first people to be let go or not hired are those who lack skills (the skills they will never get in the first place due to minimum wage laws). Many service-oriented businesses only pay their employees minimum wage. They only give raises when minimum wage is increased. These jobs are important because they often provide a first job for young workers. The creation of minimum wage laws removes competition for jobs within this important sector of employment. In this way the minimum wage laws actually create lower average pay rates for entry-level jobs. With all the economic harm caused by minimum wage laws, the best thing to do would be to repeal all minimum wage laws. Governments have long recognized how attractive “tax credits” are to individuals and companies. When government is returned to its proper and limited function most, if not all taxes should be able to be greatly reduced if not totally eliminated (see taxes below). When this is done every company and individual in Tennessee will get a “complete tax credit”. When Tennessee becomes tax free, it will see unprecedented economic and employment growth. This would have a far greater economic impact than giving only a few companies or individuals a “partial tax credit.” Affirmative action creates quotas for the number of certain employees and promotions at each company. While doing this affirmative action send a negative message about minorities. Affirmative action essentially conveys the message that the minorities being “protected” by affirmative action are incapable of achieving employment or promotion on their own merits. A free society that advocates the equality of all must stop supporting racist and sexist policies such as affirmative action. It is an outright insult to minorities to say that they need a government regulation to help them make it in the business world. The number of single parents is on the increase. Often in two parent homes, both parents must work to just make ends meet. For these reason childcare is becoming an important issue for Tennessee’s workers. Many of the working poor cannot afford to put their children in childcare, and so are prevented from entering the work force. This delimia may be solved in just a few simple steps without using any taxpayer money. First the state legislature must cut taxes and deregulate Tennessee’s companies to encourage economic growth. This vast creation of employment opportunities will mean that companies will have to compete for employees. When companies begin to compete for employees they must meet the needs of perspective employees. With today’s changing family structure will mean that companies will have to provide childcare. When companies begin providing childcare tot heir employees, the childcare industry will also experience phenomenal growth. People who are currently unemployed, that have child care skills, will be able to enter the childcare workforce. If you want to help Daniel Lewis improve working conditions in Tennessee, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Healthcare As a legislator, I would fight my hardest to end the debacle known as TennCare. TennCare is a proven failure and finical burden upon the fine people of the 26th District. Tennessee must lead the nation in reforming healthcare, by getting the government out of it in all ways possible. The process of removing government form healthcare will be long and difficult, but it must be done. The idea of government in healthcare is antiquated and must be abandoned. We need healthcare that allows you to choose which health provider you use. Patients must have a choice of treatments, not just those recommended by the medical establishment. Patients should be able to use the drugs they need without fear of criminal prosecution. The States only role in healthcare should be to provide a legal arena to protect those harmed by incompetent healthcare providers. The Tennessee state legislature must work to encourage open competition in healthcare. The legislature should encourage research, through our state universities, in herbal remedies. Of paramount importance should be exploring the healing potential of cannabis. For many centuries cannabis has been known to have a large number of medical benefits. The state legislature should do everything in its power to allow industries in Tennessee to explore the medical benefits of cannabis. Since the Federal Government has no authority to regulate the pharmaceutical industry, the General assembly of Tennessee must lead the way in deregulating the development of new drugs and treatments. The Tennessee Legislature should urge congress to replace the FDA with a private approval process for pharmaceuticals. Medical professionals currently doing research on the effectiveness of medications can operate this private approval process of pharmaceuticals. Their research could be funded through small fees paid by the pharmaceutical companies for having their new medications tested. This would allow the system to operate without any support from taxpayers. The integrity of the approval system would rest upon it approving only safe and effective medications. Free-market competition among a number of companies approving pharmaceuticals will insure that the highest standards are maintained while costs are kept to a minimum. The privatization of the pharmaceutical process will allow new drugs to become available much more quickly and at a lower cost. Scientific research shows overwhelming evidence for the benefits of medical marijuana. We can no longer afford to allow the sick to suffer because they cannot get access medical to marijuana. The Tennessee Legislature must move immediately to pass a medical marijuana law. It would be best if Tennessee adopted legislation similar to the model legislation being proposed by the Marijuana Policy Project. If you want to help Daniel Lewis improve healthcare while significantly reducing its cost, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Marriage and Family Historically the family served as the most fundamental unit of government. The family in turn is based upon the sacred covenant relationship of marriage. Originally, marriage was a sacred covenant relationship entered into between a man and a woman in the presence of God. A covenant is based upon trust an can never be broken. In the late 1800s, governments began to sanction interracial marriages by issuing marriage licenses. When marriage became sanctioned by the state through marriage licenses, it was cheapened from a covenant relationship to a legal contract. Contracts are based on distrust among the parties and can be broken when either party becomes dissatisfied with the fulfillment of the contract. Eventually everyone was required to obtain a license for marriage. The licensing of marriage gave the state the privilege to grant divorces, and ultimately caused the disintegration of the family. The state has no more right to license or regulate marriage than it dose to license or regulate any other religious activity. Marriage should once more be strictly a religious affair. The state should have nothing to do with marriage. Just as a church may decide who they baptize and a synagogue may decide who they bar mizva or bat mizva, religious leaders should be the ones to decide who gets married and who does not get married. It would be considered a direct violation of the First Amendment if the state started requiring a license for each bat mizva, bar mizva, or baptism. The only way we can truly save the family, and ultimately our society, from further damage is to remove the state from the business of licensing or sanctioning marriage. Only when we have a separation of marriage and the state will we have strong families once again. If you want to help Daniel Lewis strengthen the family, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. Poverty According to the U.S. Census Bureau About 14.8% of Tennessee’s population is considered to be in poverty. While the typical late 20th Century response to poverty has been government subsidies, the evidence indicates that it is time for a new approach to addressing the poverty issue. First of all it must recognized that poverty is not caused by low wages. People not being able to get full time employment causes poverty. Minimum wage laws limit the number of people employers can hire. Secondly minimum wage laws prohibit an employer from hiring someone with very few skills at a low pay rate so that they can get experience. Workers with low skills cannot get work due to minimum wage laws. This means that these same workers cannot get necessary work experience to move on to better paying jobs. In short, minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Evidence indicates that as the number of jobs subject to minimum wage laws increased, so did unemployment. Secondly the State causes unemployment with strict business licensing laws and other regulation of businesses. These requirements make it very costly for the poor to start their own business. The government creates a whole level of bureaucracies to administer all these business regulations. Taxpayers must foot the bill for bureaucrats who only regulate and produce no wealth and government subsidies for the poor. Ultimately the poor suffer also. For example when a landlord must pay for business licenses and high taxes (to support bureaucrats and subsidize the poor) he will have to raise the rent he charges his tenants. A full deregulation of all business will allow the poor to get the experience they need to advance in existing companies or even start their own business. Apple computers is just one example of a company started as a home business. Between 1991 and 1995 3.4 million jobs were lost by the largest U.S. companies, 3.8 million jobs were created by the smallest ones. 90% of jobs created during this period came from companies with less than 100 employees. Statistics show that the poor who can get practical experience in a part-time job can rise up from poverty. Unfortunately statistics also show that the urban environment in which many poor find themselves combined with our current welfare system entrap the poor in perpetual poverty. If you want to help Daniel Lewis reduce poverty, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men. The State Budget The first thing the General Assembly must to fix our budget is control spending. Currently the Federal Government controls a majority of our state budget. The tenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States says, “The Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or the people.” If the States, cannot control their own budgets what can they do? As a legislator, I would ask the general assembly to resolve to take control of the State budget from the Federal Government. This is the responsible thing for the legislature to do. Along with gaining control of State spending, it is time for the state Legislature to start using the assets of this state wisely and tot heir full potential. For example, the state of Tennessee currently has $4.23 billion of taxpayer money that it is not even using. This does not include all the additional surpluses that exist in the school districts, cities, or counties in Tennessee. Currently Tennessee and the Federal government are contributing more than $7 billion to TennCare. It has been estimated that by 2008 the cost of TennCare will rise to 12.2 billion, with $3.8 billion of that amount coming from state tax dollars. It took 196 years (1796 – 1992) for the Tennessee budget to reach $10 billion. State officials managed to double that amount in 10 years (19992 – 2002). The FY 2004-2005 Tennessee State budget consists of over 23.8 billion dollars. The best way for us to curb the rate at which our state budget is growing is through a Taxpayer bill of rights or TABOR. If you like what Daniel has to say about the important issues, then please join Lewis’ Minute Men or make a contribution today. Daniel cannot win the fight for freedom and prosperity without your help. Your contribution and help are very important in getting out the great Libertarian message to the voters of the 26th district. Even if you do not live in the 26th district you may still contribute and help Daniel Lewis with his campaign. Taxes George Santayana once said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." This is especially true when it comes to the history of taxes in America. Before 1763, American colonist were taxed an average of twelve pence ($7.50 in today’s currency) per head per year. The average wage for an urban laborer was around 5 shillings (equivalent to about $40) per day or $13,000 per year. This means the colonist were paying about 0.06% of their annual income in taxes. In Britain on the other hand, the tax amount worked out to about 26 shillings per year (equivalent to about $200). The British were paying about 1.54% of their annual income in taxes. Taxes in the colonies were indeed substantially lower than in England. By 1764, Britain had accumulated large amounts of debt. The British ignored the basic principle that “You shouldn't spend money you don't have.” Like any other government, the British decided to raise taxes to cover the debt they had accumulated. A number of measures were passed by Parliament to increase revenues for Britain. The Revenue Act of 1764 (now usually termed the Sugar Act) was actually a tax cut on a tax that was not being collected. Attempts to collect the sugar tax were largely a failure. The Stamp Act of 1765 imposed duties on just about every piece of printed material in the colonies. British officials never collected a penny through the Stamp Act. The Townshend Acts of 1767 were enacted to combat hostility to the Stamp Act. The Townshend acts applied rather small duties to items America had to import from elsewhere in the Empire. By 1769, the fear in Parliament that the Townshend Acts would hurt British merchants of these goods by encouraging Americans to develop their own manufacturing caused duties to be removed on all items except tea, an item which could not be produced in America. The duty from tea was three pence (say $2) per pound of tea. The Tea Act of 1773 subsequently decreased tea prices sharply by allowing the British East India Company to export tea directly to America. American tea merchants were harmed by the virtual monopoly held by the British East India Company. This means that at the time of the American Revolution tax rates in the colony were still around 0.06% of the average persons annual income and the steep taxes in England were around 1.54%. Historians point out that the American Revolution was not so much about the amount of taxes, but the right of the government to levy taxes in the first place. According to the Tax Foundation, Tennesseeans paid on average 25.8% of their income in federal, state, and local taxes in 2003. Compare this percentage with what the colonists or heavily taxed Englishmen were paying in 1776. Above we have outlined how a number of functions currently being performed by government could be performed better and at less expense by the private sector. Taxation equals slavery. As a legislator I would work to first reduce and then eliminate any and all taxes that I could. I would never advocate an income tax in any form. Government should not be a burden upon the governed. Spending must be reduced. As a legislator I would advocate implementing user fees instead of taxes. In this way people pay for the services they directly use from the government. If you or your family do not use our public schools, why should you pay for them. The notion of robbing the general public of their wealth and using it for the common good is pure Communism, a system which no elected official should ever advocate. Taxation actually hurts the poor more than the wealthy. High property taxes make the cost of rental housing for the poor increase. High business taxes mean employers have less wealth to pay their employees. It also means that manufactures must charge more for their products. Whenever the government spends money on doing something that could be done by a private company, it will cost twice as much and be about half as efficient. The best plan is to allow people to keep their earnings and decide for themselves how they want to spend it. Private charity has a historical record of being more effective then charity at the point of the gun of a tax collector. Once government, at all levels, is returned to its proper function, huge tax cuts will be possible. Taxation is morally wrong. Taxation violates God’s law. Exodus 20:17 commands us not to covet our neighbors possessions. When we want our neighbors money or property so that our children can have better schools, we can have better healthcare, and we can have better roads we are coveting our neighbor’s possessions. This is morally wrong. We should know the difference between our wants and our needs. Exodus 20:15 command us not to steel. When we take our neighbors money or property so that our children can have better schools, we can have better healthcare, and we can have better roads we are steeling our neighbor’s possessions. Taking property, for the benefit of another, against its owner’s will is theft. Theft is morally wrong. Romans 13:3 tells us, “… rulers are not a terror to good, but to the evil….” Indeed a government should do that which is good and that which is evil. Government has a moral obligation to work to eliminate all taxes possible. If you want to help Daniel Lewis bring huge tax cuts to District 26, then please contribute to his campaign and join the Lewis Minute Men.
In the interest of educating the voters of District 26, Daniel Lewis is offering a link to the web sites of his competitors. Please compare what they have to say about the issues with what he has to say. Then vote for the candidate that makes the most sense to you.
|
