Ben Koyl, Libertarian for Illinois Attorney General 2014 – Ad 3 – Video

Posted on by


Ben Koyl, Libertarian for Illinois Attorney General 2014 - Ad 3
Vote for Ben Koyl, the Libertarian Party Candidate for Illinois Attorney General. As a small business owner and attorney, Ben knows that public corruption wastes tax payer money and erodes...

By: DuPage Libertarians

See more here:

Ben Koyl, Libertarian for Illinois Attorney General 2014 - Ad 3 - Video

Volokh Conspiracy: Why arent there more libertarian land use scholars?

Posted on by

In this interesting recent post at Concurring Opinions, liberal land use scholar Kenneth Stahl asks why there arent more libertarians in his field:

Many professors who study land use and local government law, myself included, consider ourselves leftists rather than libertarians. That is, we have some confidence in the ability of government to solve social problems. Nevertheless, were you to pick up a randomly selected piece of left-leaning land use or local government scholarship (including my own) you would likely witness a searing indictment of the way local governments operate. You would read that the land use decisionmaking process is usually a conflict between deep-pocketed developers who use campaign contributions to elect pro-growth politicians and affluent homeowners who use their ample resources to resist change that might negatively affect their property values.

The organization of local governments, on the surface a merely technical matter, has fallen victim to a similar pattern of what public choice scholars call rent-seeking.

It hardly paints a pretty picture of local government. Yet, most leftists prescription is more government.

So why would left-leaning scholars, who have seen so clearly the failures of local government, place so much faith in a largely untested restructuring of governmental institutions, rather than looking to less government as the solution? Libertarians often point out that Houston, the lone American metropolis without single-use zoning, has far lower housing prices than comparable cities elsewhere, and has become a magnet for young families and immigrants. What is holding leftists back from embracing Houstons (sort of) free-market solution?

Its a good question! In attempting to answer it, I would start by pointing out that there are in fact a good many libertarian land use scholars. I am one of them myself. For years, I have argued that cities should adopt the Houston approach to zoning (or go even further in a free market direction), strengthen protection for property rights, and severely limit the use of eminent domain. I even wrote an entire article devoted to explaining why state and local governments are likely to be particularly dysfunctional when it comes to regulating property rights in land and other immobile assets.

Obviously, the vast majority of land use scholars are far more left-wing than I am, and far less willing to impose tight constraints on government power. But thats largely because academia in general is dominated by the political left, as is legal academia in particular. Relative to the general distribution of opinion among legal scholars, land use and property law specialists are probably more libertarian than the average. Admittedly, I dont have systematic survey data to prove it. But that is my strong impression based on over a decade of experience in the field. Certainly, the percentage of libertarian scholars in the land use/property law fields is much higher than in my other field, constitutional law. Some of the most famous libertarian legal scholars of the last several decades have been property law specialists, most notably Richard Epstein and the late Bernard Siegan.

Even left-wing property and land use scholars are often more skeptical of government than liberal legal scholars in other fields. For example, many of them advocate tighter constraints on zoning authority that leads to exclusionary zoning that fences out the poor. As compared to several decades ago, few scholars still support the Progressive/New Deal era vision of systematic comprehensive land use planning. The backlash against the Supreme Courts decision in Kelo v. City of New London has even led many on the left to look favorably on reinvigorating public use constraints on takings, though this trend is much stronger outside of academia than within it.

That said, I agree with Stahls suggestion that most left of center land use scholars are much more supportive of government intervention than its track record can justify. Most still reject the imposition of tight constraints on zoning and the aggressive use of eminent domain, despite extensive evidence that zoning and blight and economic development takings inflict great harm on the poor and racial minorities.

There are a variety of reasons for that trend. But one important one is that what Stahl calls confidence in the ability of government to solve social problems is almost a defining feature of modern left-liberalism. To give up on that idea is almost to reject more left-wing ideology generally. Like adherents of other ideologies (including libertarians), left-wing land use scholars are very reluctant to give up on their core commitments. As a result, even when they see an extensive pattern of government failure, they instinctively prefer to look for ways to address the issue without giving up on government intervention more generally. We often make marginal adjustments in our views on specific policy issues. But it is psychologically difficult to reject long-held basic precepts of your world-view.

Link:

Volokh Conspiracy: Why arent there more libertarian land use scholars?

GOP consultant Terry Casey denies plotting with Kasich against Libertarian challenger

Posted on by

The Daily Briefing Buckeye Forum Podcast

The Dispatchpublic affairs team talks politics and tackles state and federal government issues in the Buckeye Forum podcast.

From wire reports Tuesday September 30, 2014 6:11 AM

The Republican who spearheaded a challenge that bumped a Libertarian gubernatorial candidate off Ohios November ballot testified yesterday to extensive communications with Gov. John Kasichs re-election campaign ahead of the protest, but he rejected suggestions that Kasichs campaign orchestrated the effort.

Terry Casey, a former elections official who is now a GOP consultant, testified in federal court that he discussed his petition challenge against Libertarian Charlie Earl with top Kasich campaign advisers and exchanged many emails and calls with them seeking help with research, paperwork and mechanics.

The Libertarian Party of Ohio is suing to have Earl and Libertarian attorney general candidate Steven Linnabary restored to the Nov. 4 ballot. Yesterday, Judge Michael Watson gave each side a day and a half to present its case.

Libertarians say that Republican Secretary of State Jon Husteds decision to disqualify Earl and Linnabary is unconstitutional because it was based on partisan reasons. Husted has said politics did not play a role in his decision.

Read more:

GOP consultant Terry Casey denies plotting with Kasich against Libertarian challenger

Channel Islands Beach Bathroom Specialists call Shafran 805 421 4333 – Video

Posted on by


Channel Islands Beach Bathroom Specialists call Shafran 805 421 4333
Bathroom Professionals Call Shafran 805-421-4333 Shafran Construction FREE Estimates! 805-421-4333 Corporate office: 21550 Oxnard St Third Floor, Suite 46 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 (818) 855-9330...

By: Paul Hernandez

Read the original:

Channel Islands Beach Bathroom Specialists call Shafran 805 421 4333 - Video

Cruises to disputed islands offer bland food, gray views and a chance to press China's claims

Posted on by

In this Sept. 14, 2014 photo, Zhang Jing, a police officer poses with a Chinese national flag on the Quanfu island, a Paracels of Sansha prefecture of China's Hainan province. This is the southern frontier of China, Zhang said when he had reached one of the islands. As a Chinese, I feel proud to come here and declare sovereignty. (AP Photo/Peng Peng)(The Associated Press)

In this Sept. 14, 2014 photo, Chinese tourists take souvenir photos with Chinese national flag as they visit to Quanfu island, a Paracels of Sansha prefecture of China's Hainan province. A cheer erupted on board at the sight of the distant land, and passengers scurried to take pictures of each other at the railing holding Chinas bright red flag. (AP Photo/Peng Peng)(The Associated Press)

In this Sept. 14, 2014 photo, Chinese tourists disembark from an inflatable boat upon arrival in Quanfu island, a Paracels of Sansha prefecture of China's Hainan province. They had each waited months for permission to join the tour and then spent from $1,200 to about $2,000 to visit these barren patches of sand in the South China Sea, making do with the bland cabbage and noodles on board and blackouts of cellphone service. (AP Photo/Peng Peng)(The Associated Press)

In this Sept. 14, 2014 photo, Chinese fisherman Fan Qiusheng chats with a woman outside his wood-and-tarp shack on the Yingyu island, a Paracels of Sansha prefecture of China's Hainan province. Fan was waiting for tourists on the beach of Yingyu island outside the wood-and-tarp shack where he lives nine months of the year. He said the central government pays him 1,350 yuan, or about $220, a month to stay put while providing him with food, water, electricity and other supplies. (AP Photo/Peng Peng)(The Associated Press)

In this Sept. 14, 2014 photo, a Chinese navy frigate cruise near the paracel islands of Sansha prefecture of China's Hainan province. A cheer erupted on board at the sight of the distant land, and the other passengers scurried to take pictures of each other at the railing holding Chinas bright red flag. A few miles away, a Chinese navy frigate cruised by silently, part of the countrys continuing watch over the tiny islands it has long claimed as part of its territory. (AP Photo/Peng Peng)(The Associated Press)

ABOARD THE COCONUT PRINCESS Zhang Jing watched the gray shells of the Paracel Islands emerge from the purple, pre-dawn South China Sea. Here was the focal point of a cruise more about politics than pleasure.

Cheers erupted on board at the sight of the distant land, and Zhang and the other passengers scurried to take pictures of each other at the railing holding China's bright red flag. A few miles away, a Chinese navy frigate cruised by silently, part of the country's continuing watch over the tiny islands it has long claimed as part of its territory.

"This is the southern frontier of China," Zhang, a policeman, said when he had reached one of the islands. "As a Chinese, I feel proud to come here and declare sovereignty."

With the Tangshan resident and 167 other Chinese tourists on board, the ship had traveled more than 200 miles south of Hainan Island off China's southern coast to what they said was an indisputable outpost of their country.

Each had waited months for permission to join the five-day tour, and spent from $1,200 to about $2,000 to visit these barren patches of sand, making do with the bland cabbage and noodles on board and blackouts of cellphone service.

Link:

Cruises to disputed islands offer bland food, gray views and a chance to press China's claims

Christmas and Cocos Islands Australian colonies in all but name

Posted on by

Jon Stanhope: the outgoing administrator of Christmas Island. Photo: Tony McDonoough

As administrator of Christmas and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands I have confronted human rights and other issues that render those that Australians dwell on in Canberra and elsewhere on the mainland as mere frippery.

Christmas and the Cocos Islands are very different to the rest of Australia. Not only are they geographically part of Asia, their history culture and people are mainly Asian. People of Chinese and Malaysian heritage constitute about 70percent of the population. The main religions are Islam, Buddhism and Taoism. There areone Christian church, three mosques and 16 Chinese temples. Up to a third of the resident population do not speak English either at all or with fluency. The most common language on Christmas Island is Mandarin, and on Cocos Island, Malay. On Cocos Island, English is rarely spoken by people of Malay heritage (about80 percent of the Cocos population) in the home.

The territories are incorporated into the Northern Territory for federal electoral purposes but federal members play no part in the administration of the territories and rarely, if ever, visit. Most residents regard their incorporation into the Northern Territory as tokenistic.

There are no democratic arrangements in place for state type purposes. Most services are delivered by Western Australian agencies under contracts with the Commonwealth. There is no input into the content of the contracts by residents of the territories, nor are the service delivery agreements under which the services are made publicly available. There are no annual reports, , on any services delivered or monies spent in the territories.

Advertisement

All policy and budget decisions are made by federal public servants based in Canberra and Perth. Residents are not consulted about expenditure priorities. No draft budget is prepared and there is noestimates process.

There are no effective consultative mechanisms in place engagement of the local communities in policy development or resource allocation. There are massive gaps in services in areas like aged care, mental health and public health. Land management, economic development, waste disposal, environmental protection and community and social infrastructure is poor.

Despite having lived on Christmas Island for two years, it still comes as a surprise to me that in the 21st century, there are still Australian citizens who are denied the most fundamental right the right to be involved in the civil and political life of their community.

The territories were administered from the colony of Singapore prior to its independence. At that time, the two territories were hived off from Singapore and accepted by Australia.Before1958, Christmas Island, along with the Cocos Islands,reported on by Britain to the United Nations. It was consistent with article 73 (e) of the United Nations Charter, on the basis that Britain accepted that the territories were non-self-governing territories (otherwise known as colonies) within the terms of chapter XI of the charter.

See the original post:

Christmas and Cocos Islands Australian colonies in all but name