Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (2024)

UFPA

Pedro Pereira 20/09/2024

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (2)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (3)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (4)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (5)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (6)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (7)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (14)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (15)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (16)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (17)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (18)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (19)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (20)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (21)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (22)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (23)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (24)

12 meses sem bloqueios!

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (25)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (26)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (27)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (28)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (29)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (30)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (31)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (32)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (33)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (34)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (35)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (36)

12 meses sem bloqueios!

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (37)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (38)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (39)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (40)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (41)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (42)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (43)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (44)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (45)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (46)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (47)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (48)

12 meses sem bloqueios!

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (49)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (50)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (51)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (52)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (53)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (54)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (55)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (56)

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (57)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (58)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (59)Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (60)

12 meses sem bloqueios!

Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (61)Acaba em 30:00

De R$19,90 por
R$ 15,73 / mês

Prévia do material em texto

<p>DEDICATION</p><p>ForTerry,who’salwaysthereforme</p><p>EPIGRAPH</p><p>IntheUnitedStates,whereithasbecomealmostimpossibletouse</p><p>“liberal”inthesenseinwhichIhaveusedit,theterm“libertarian”</p><p>hasbeenusedinstead.Itmaybetheanswer;butformypartIfindit</p><p>singularlyunattractive.Formytasteitcarriestoomuchtheflavorofa</p><p>manufacturedtermandofasubstitute.WhatIshouldwantisaword</p><p>whichdescribesthepartyoflife,thepartythatfavorsfreegrowthand</p><p>spontaneousevolution.ButIhaverackedmybrainunsuccessfullyto</p><p>findadescriptivetermwhichcommendsitself.</p><p>—FRIEDRICHHAYEK,“WHYIAMNOTACONSERVATIVE”</p><p>CONTENTS</p><p>DEDICATION</p><p>EPIGRAPH</p><p>1.RULESFORLIBERTY</p><p>2.YOUCAN’THAVEFREEDOMFORFREE</p><p>3.THEMVERSUSUS</p><p>4.GRAY-SUITEDSOVIETS</p><p>5.SAMEASTHEOLDBOSS</p><p>6.THERIGHTTOKNOW</p><p>7.ASEATATTHETABLE</p><p>8.TWELVESTEPS</p><p>9.NOTAONE-NIGHTSTAND</p><p>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</p><p>NOTES</p><p>INDEX</p><p>ABOUTTHEAUTHOR</p><p>ALSOBYMATTKIBBE</p><p>CREDITS</p><p>COPYRIGHT</p><p>ABOUTTHEPUBLISHER</p><p>CHAPTER1</p><p>RULESFORLIBERTY</p><p>DON’THURTPEOPLE,ANDdon’t taketheirstuff.That’s it, inanutshell.Everyone</p><p>should be free to live their lives as they think best, free from meddling by</p><p>politiciansandgovernmentbureaucrats,aslongastheydon’thurtotherpeople,</p><p>ortakeotherpeople’sstuff.</p><p>I believe in liberty, so the rules are pretty straightforward: simple, blindly</p><p>appliedlikeLadyJusticewould,acrosstheboard.Noassemblyrequired.</p><p>Tome,thevaluesoflibertyjustseemlikeacommonsensewaytothinkabout</p><p>political philosophy. The rules are easily understood, our aspirations for</p><p>governmentaremodestandpractical,andourdesignsonthelivesandbehavior</p><p>ofothersareunpresumptuous,evenhumble.</p><p>ThereisarenewedandheateddebateaboutthefutureofAmericagoingon</p><p>right now. Our government seems broken. What is the best way to get our</p><p>mutuallybelovedcountrybackontrack?Peopleareseekinganswers.Whenyou</p><p>get past all the acrimony and all the name-calling, the question we are all</p><p>debatingisreallyquitesimple:Doyoubelieveinthefreedomofindividualsto</p><p>determinetheirownfuturesandsolveproblemscooperativelyworkingtogether,</p><p>or do you believe that a powerful but benevolent government can and should</p><p>rearrangeoutcomesandmakethingsbetter?</p><p>More and more, the debate about how we live our lives and what the</p><p>government’slegitimateroleisinoverrulingourpersonaldecisionshasbecome</p><p>increasingly polarized, even hostile. The president is fighting with Congress.</p><p>Democrats are fighting with Republicans. Conservatives are fighting with</p><p>liberals. Libertarians are fightingwith “neocons.” Political insiders and career</p><p>bureaucrats arepushingbackagainst thewishesofgrassrootsAmericans.And</p><p>left-wing “progressives” are attacking, with increased vitriol, tea party</p><p>“anarchists.”It’senoughtomakeyourheadspin,oratleastmakeyourationally</p><p>optoutofthewholedebateasitisdefinedbyalloftheexpertsthatcongregate</p><p>inWashington,D.C.,orontheeditorialpagesofthemostveneratednewssheets</p><p>ofrecord.</p><p>Normalpeople—realAmericansoutside theBeltway—havebetter things to</p><p>do. They should focus on their lives and their kids and their careers, their</p><p>passionsandtheirgoalsandtheircommunities.Right?</p><p>Except thatwe just can’t anymore. It seems like the decisionsWashington</p><p>powerbrokersmakeaboutwhat todo forus, or tous, or evenagainstus, are</p><p>having an increasingly adverse impact on our lives. Young people can’t find</p><p>jobs, and can’t afford to pay off their student loans. Parents are having an</p><p>increasinglyhardtimeprovidingfortheirfamilies.Seniorscan’taffordtoretire,</p><p>and their life savingsseem tobeshrinking for reasons thatarenotquiteclear.</p><p>And every one of us is somehow being targeted, monitored, snooped on,</p><p>conscripted, induced, taxed, subsidized, or otherwisemanipulated by someone</p><p>else’sagenda,basedonsomeoneelse’sdecisions,madeinsomesecretmeeting</p><p>orbysomeclosed-doorlegislativedealinWashington,D.C.</p><p>Whatgives,youask?</p><p>It seems like we have reached a tipping point where governance in</p><p>Washington and your unalienable right to dowhat you think best for yourself</p><p>andyourfamilyhavecollided.YouandIwillhavetogetinvolved,tofigureout</p><p>whatexactlytherulesare,andtosetthemrightagain.</p><p>THEREARERULES</p><p>IamnotamoralphilosopherandIdon’tparticularlyaspiretobeone.Thatsaid,</p><p>I have stayed atmore than oneHoliday Inn Express. Thatmakesme at least</p><p>smartenoughtoknowwhatIdon’tknow.Sotherulesthatfollowrepresentmy</p><p>humbleattempttoboildownandmashupallthebestthinkinginallofhuman</p><p>history on individualism and civil society, the entire canon of Judeo-Christian</p><p>teachings, hundreds of years of English Whig, Scottish Enlightenment, and</p><p>classicalliberalpoliticalphilosophy,waytoomuchFriedrichHayekandAdam</p><p>Smith,asmatteringofkarmaandAynRand,and,ifmyeditordoesn’texciseit</p><p>outofthemanuscript,atleastafewsubliminalhattipstoTheBigLebowski.All</p><p>ofthisinsixconvenient“RulesforLiberty.”</p><p>WhatonearthamIthinking?Myinspiration,inanoddway,isSaulAlinsky,</p><p>the famous community organizerwhowas so influential on two of his fellow</p><p>Chicagoans—Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Everybody’s favorite leftist</p><p>famouslywrotethirteenRulesforRadicalsforhisdisciplestofollow.Hisbook</p><p>is“apragmaticprimerforrealisticradicals”seekingtotakeovertheworld.</p><p>AlinskyactuallydedicateshisbooktoLucifer.I’mnotkidding.</p><p>Lestwe forget at least an over the shoulder acknowledgment to the very</p><p>first radical: from all our legends,mythology and history (andwho is to</p><p>knowwheremythology leavesoffandhistorybegins—orwhich iswhich),</p><p>theveryfirstradicalknowntomanwhorebelledagainsttheestablishment</p><p>anddiditsoeffectivelythatheatleastwonhisownkingdom—Lucifer.</p><p>Whatthehellwashethinking?Justforfun,Google“Alinsky”and“Lucifer”</p><p>sometimeand see for yourself the rhetorical knots his admirers tie themselves</p><p>into trying to explain the dedication to their favorite book, penned by their</p><p>cherishedmentor.DidAlinskyreallymeanit?Whoknows,buttongue-in-cheek</p><p>ornot,itseemstoreflecttheby-any-means-necessaryspiritofthebook.</p><p>So,howcouldIfindinspirationhere?It’snosecretthatmanyofusliberty-</p><p>minded “community organizers” have expropriated some of Alinsky’s tactical</p><p>thinking in thedefenseof individual freedom.But I think there’sacategorical</p><p>difference between us and them. Rules for Radicals is not a tome about</p><p>principles; it is a book about winning, sometimes with wickedly cynical and</p><p>manipulative tactics. The principles seem to be missing, or an afterthought,</p><p>somethingtobefiguredoutlater,air-droppedintotheplandependinguponwho</p><p>ends up in charge. This cart-before-the-horse thinking seems to be consistent</p><p>withtheprogressivemind-set.Theruleofmaninsteadoftheruleoflaw,orthe</p><p>writing of a blank check for government agents empowered with great</p><p>discretionaryauthorityoveryourlife.Ifwejustsuspendourdisbeliefandtrust</p><p>them,everythingissupposedtoturnoutfine.Better,infact.</p><p>We, on the other hand, start from first principles.The nice thing about the</p><p>RulesforLibertyisthatourvaluesdefineourtactics,sothere’snoends-justify-</p><p>the-meanshypocrisy.Libertyisright.Libertyisthebasisforsocialcooperation</p><p>andvoluntaryorganizing.Libertyallowseachofustoachievewhatwemightof</p><p>ourlives.</p><p>Libertyisgoodpolicy,and</p><p>general counsel for the Anthem Entertainment</p><p>Group Inc. in Toronto, issued the following statement in response to the</p><p>candidate’smusicalchoicesatevents:“ThepublicperformanceofRush’smusic</p><p>isnotlicensedforpoliticalpurposes:anypublicvenuewhichallowssuchuseis</p><p>in breach of its public performance license and also liable for copyright</p><p>infringement.”</p><p>ThewarningwasissuedafterareporterfromTheAtlanticpressedtheissue.10</p><p>Okay,somaybethebandjustdoesn’tlikepolitics.Maybetheyrespecttheir</p><p>fansenoughnottochoosesides.Maybe,astheirsong“TomSawyer”goes,“His</p><p>mindisnotforrent,toanygodorgovernment.”</p><p>OrmaybeitreallysucksbeingcalledaNazi.Maybethehatecutsdeepwhen</p><p>it’ssopersonal,sounfair,sooffensive.Maybetheyjustwanttodotheirwork.</p><p>Eversincethatridiculous,slanderous,and,yes,hurtfularticlewaspublished</p><p>—justastheirhardworkasmusicianswasstartingtopayoff—itseemsthatthe</p><p>bandmembershavehadtoanswerthesamequestion,overandover:“Areyou</p><p>guysreallyultra-right-winglunatics?”</p><p>In2012,NeilPeartwasgivingarareinterviewtoRollingStonetotalkabout</p><p>the band’s new album, Clockwork Angels. He’s not a talker, and typically</p><p>“doesn’t like all of the hoopla.” But he really wanted to talk about his latest</p><p>work.Ofcourse,thequestioncameupagain.DoyoureallylikeAynRand?</p><p>Hesays:</p><p>For me, it was an affirmation that it’s all right to totally believe in</p><p>somethingandliveforitandnotcompromise.Itwasassimpleasthat....</p><p>Libertarianism as I understood it was very good and pure andwe’re all</p><p>goingtobesuccessfulandgeneroustothelessfortunateanditwas,tome,</p><p>not dark or cynical. But then I soon saw, of course, the way that it gets</p><p>twistedbytheflawsofhumanity.Andthat’swhenIevolvenowinto . . .a</p><p>bleedingheartLibertarian.That’lldo.11</p><p>That’ll do. I’m a bleeding heart libertarian,OK? You can almost hear the</p><p>resignationinhisvoice.Canwetalkaboutmyworknow?</p><p>IfoundsomepersonalinspirationinseeingRushplaylivein2013inAustin,</p><p>Texas.Ihadn’tseentheguysforquitesometime.Workandlifegotintheway.</p><p>Theystillhaveincrediblepassionandtalent,andtheiraudienceisstilloneofthe</p><p>mostconnectedasacommunity,withtheband,inallofliverockmusic.</p><p>I started thinking about them again in themidst of particularly challenging</p><p>timesformeandmyextendedfamilyatFreedomWorks.Thecriticswerecalling</p><p>usnames.Theywere trying to smearus.Wewere“toouncompromising.”We</p><p>were too “pure.” And that was coming from our supposed friends. We were</p><p>willingtoholdbothDemocratsandRepublicanstothesamestandardinsteadof</p><p>just picking sides thatwere artificial.We helped hold a number of politicians</p><p>accountable to their shareholders, the voters. We were in the process of</p><p>repopulating Washington, D.C., with more principled representation, young</p><p>leadersmoreaccountabletotheprinciplesofliberty.</p><p>Somewhere along the way, we apparently pissed off somebody really</p><p>important.Tothisday,I’mnotsurewhoexactlytriedtotakeusout.Butitwasa</p><p>hardtime,andsomeofthepersonalattackscutdeep.</p><p>Yousee, Iwork ina town,Washington,D.C., thatvaluescompromiseover</p><p>principle.Thestreetsthatcrisscrossthenation’scapitalarelinedwithbuildings</p><p>filled with people who make a lot of money getting special favors from the</p><p>political process. A typical meeting with an elected official begins with a</p><p>question:“WhatcanIdoforyou?”Inreality,thequestionreallybeingaskedis</p><p>“What can you do forme?” Compromise is the currency, because that’s how</p><p>everyone gets paid. Everyone wants something from someone. Everyone is</p><p>looking for your “tell,” the Achilles’ heel that makes you wobbly enough,</p><p>wantingthemoneyandthepowerandtheinfluence.Wantingtocutadeal.To</p><p>compromise.</p><p>IrememberdebatingChrisMatthews, theguyonMSNBC’sHardball,once</p><p>at an event inAspen. I wasmaking a (surely profound) point, andMatthews</p><p>abruptlyinterrupted.Hedoesthat.“Iknow,Iknow,”hesaid.“IreadAynRand</p><p>inhighschool.Iusedtobelievethatstuff, too,butthenIgrewup.”Maybehe</p><p>didn’tknowhewasparrotinghisfavoritepresident,BarackObama.</p><p>I’veheard thissomanytimes. I’msureyouhave, too. IsupposeNeilPeart</p><p>heard it more than most when he was trying to live down the youthful</p><p>enthusiasmforlibertyhesharedwithadishonestcriticin1978.Growup.Play</p><p>ball.Getinline.</p><p>Well, I don’t want to “grow up.” I don’t want to if growing up means</p><p>abandoningtheprinciplethatindividualsmatter,thatyoushouldn’thurtpeople</p><p>ortaketheirstuff.Idon’twanttogiveuponvaluesthathavegottenmedown</p><p>the road of life this far. I won’t “grow up,” if thatmeans not seeking ideals,</p><p>taking chances, and taking responsibility formyown failures. I don’twant to</p><p>compromise,atleastnotonthethingsthatreallymatter.Idon’twanttosplitthe</p><p>difference on someone else’s bad idea, and then pat myself on the back for</p><p>“gettingsomethingdone.”</p><p>Ihavenoplanstofallinline.</p><p>I do the best that I can, and I belong to a community ofmanymillions of</p><p>peoplewhoseemtoagreewithmeonthethingsthatreallymatter.Andweare</p><p>going through this test together. Not compromising seems to be the glue that</p><p>holds us as a social movement. Alone you might buckle, but are you really</p><p>willingtoletallofusdown?</p><p>Manypeople inWashington,D.C.,want to stopus.Sometimes theycallus</p><p>names,namesmeanttodamageandhurt.Shouldweletthem?Shouldweback</p><p>down,or take theeasierpath?Icanonly thinkback to thatafternoonin1977,</p><p>lyingonmybackonmyparents’plushredwall-to-wallcarpeting.“Youdon’tget</p><p>somethingfornothing.”Thefinalsongonthesecondsideof2112isplaying.It’s</p><p>called,appropriately,“SomethingforNothing.”I’mlistening,readingthelyrics</p><p>insidetherecordsleeve,theonewiththecool,ominousredstar.“Youcan’thave</p><p>freedomforfree.”</p><p>CHAPTER3</p><p>THEMVERSUSUS</p><p>ONAUGUST28,1963,Dr.MartinLutherKingJr.deliveredthespeechofhislife.</p><p>“I amhappy to joinwithyou today inwhatwillgodown inhistoryas the</p><p>greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation,”1 he began.</p><p>MLKwas,ofcourse,addressingsome250,000peoplewhohadjoinedtogether</p><p>fortheMarchonWashingtonforJobsandFreedom.“Whenthearchitectsofour</p><p>republicwrotethemagnificentwordsoftheConstitutionandtheDeclarationof</p><p>Independence,” he told the crowd, “they were signing a promissory note to</p><p>which everyAmericanwas to fall heir.This notewas a promise that allmen,</p><p>yes,blackmenaswellaswhitemen,wouldbeguaranteedtheunalienablerights</p><p>oflife,liberty,andthepursuitofhappiness.”</p><p>It had been a long journey to the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in</p><p>Washington,D.C.,andmanyblackAmericanshadsuffered,anddied,alongthe</p><p>roadtothatmoment.ButKingeloquentlyrejectedcallstomeetthepolicedogs,</p><p>fire hoses, billy clubs, and tear gas in kind. “Wemust not allow our creative</p><p>protesttodegenerateintophysicalviolence,”heimplored.</p><p>King, who was the president of the Southern Christian Leadership</p><p>Conference(SCLC),anonprofitorganizerofthemarch,eventuallyputasidehis</p><p>prepared remarks and proceeded to deliver the most eloquent call for equal</p><p>treatmentunderthelaweverspoken:“Istillhaveadream.Itisadreamdeeply</p><p>rootedintheAmericandream,”hetoldthecrowd.“Ihaveadreamthatmyfour</p><p>littlechildrenwillonedaylive</p><p>inanationwheretheywillnotbejudgedbythe</p><p>coloroftheirskinbutbythecontentoftheircharacter.”</p><p>The next day, William Sullivan, the chief of the Federal Bureau of</p><p>Investigation’s domestic intelligence division, penned an internal memo:</p><p>“Personally, I believe in the light of King’s powerful demagogic speech</p><p>yesterdayhestandsheadandshouldersoverallotherNegroleadersputtogether</p><p>whenitcomestoinfluencinggreatmassesofNegroes.Wemustmarkhimnow,</p><p>ifwehavenotdonesobefore,asthemostdangerousNegroofthefutureinthis</p><p>Nation.”2</p><p>Itwastheeloquenceofthespeech.MLKhadconnectedwithafundamental</p><p>Americanvalue, thateveryoneshouldbe treatedequallyunder the lawsof the</p><p>land.Becausehespokeout,hebecame“dangerous.”Hewasdeemedathreat,so</p><p>hewouldnotbetreatedequallyunderthelawbyagentsoftheU.S.government.</p><p>He would be singled out, targeted by government bureaucrats. He had to be</p><p>stopped.</p><p>TheFBI’sobsessionwithMLK’srisingstarstartedatthetopoftheFBI,with</p><p>Director J.EdgarHoover. Ina clandestinecampaignagainstKing—against an</p><p>Americancitizenattempting topracticehisFirstAmendment rights topetition</p><p>thegovernmentforaredressofgrievances,topeaceablyassemble,andtospeak</p><p>freely—acabalofpowerful federalgovernmentbureaucratswithextraordinary</p><p>discretionarypowerproceededtostalk,persecute,andsmearamantheyviewed</p><p>asanenemytotheirinterests.“FBIofficialsviewedthespeechassignificantly</p><p>increasingKing’snationalstature,”saysMLKhistorianDavidJ.Garrow.After</p><p>August 28, he became “measurably more ‘dangerous’ in the FBI’s view than</p><p>he’dbeenprior.”3</p><p>OnOctober10,HooverconvincedtheattorneygeneraloftheUnitedStatesto</p><p>authorizewiretapsonMLK’sphoneaswellas theofficephonesof theSCLC.</p><p>The official rationale was their suspicion that MLK was collaborating with</p><p>communist sympathizers. The attorney general at the time, the top law</p><p>enforcement officer in the nation, was Robert F. Kennedy, brother and close</p><p>confidanttoPresidentJohnF.Kennedy.WiretappingKing’sphonewasperhaps</p><p>oneofRFK’smostignominiousacts.</p><p>Ofcourse,byDecember1963,HooverwentwellbeyondwhattheKennedy</p><p>administration had authorized, and began installing microphones in the hotel</p><p>rooms where King was staying. One conversation, taped in May 1965 and</p><p>released in 2002, captured a conversation between King and Bayard Rustin</p><p>regardingadisputebetweentheSCLCandtheStudentNonviolentCoordinating</p><p>Committeeoveraproposedstatementofcoalitionunity.</p><p>“TherearethingsIwantedtosayrenouncingcommunismintheorybutthey</p><p>wouldnotgoalongwithit,”complainsKing.“Wewantedtosaythatitwasan</p><p>alienphilosophycontrarytousbuttheywouldn’tgoalongwithit.”</p><p>TheFBIfailedtodisclosethisinformationtotheWhiteHouse,insteadusing</p><p>itsillicitsnoopingtointimidate,threaten,andblackmailKing.4Informationthat</p><p>theFBIgatheredaboutMLK’spersonalbehaviorwasusedinviciousattemptsto</p><p>controlhim,tosilencehim,tobreakupthecoalitionhewasstrugglingtohold</p><p>together,tostophim.Byanymeansnecessary.</p><p>FREEDOM,ORPOWER?</p><p>Does it ever make sense to give so much unchecked power and authority to</p><p>governmentagents?Canwetrustthemtobebetterthantherestofus?Canwe</p><p>trustthemtoknowbetter?</p><p>Isayno.Thisbookarguesformoreindividualfreedomandforlimitingthe</p><p>discretionarypowerofgovernment.Toomuchpowercorrupts.Absolutely.</p><p>AndJ.EdgarHoover’siniquitousbehaviorprovesmypoint.Thetreatmentof</p><p>MLKcertainlymeetsmydefinitionofgovernmenttyranny.</p><p>IbelievethatthereisagrowingawarenessamongpeopleinAmerica,andall</p><p>over the world, that governments have too much power, and that power is</p><p>abused.Individualfreedom,choice,upwardmobility,andvoluntarycooperation</p><p>among free people is the better approach. In a world that is rapidly</p><p>decentralizing access to information, lowering barriers to entry, barriers to</p><p>knowing,freedomworksevenbettertodaythanitdidin1776.</p><p>Others argue the opposite, that the fear of runaway government power is</p><p>outdated,thatAmericahasoutgrowntheoldmodelbasedonliberty.Itistimeto</p><p>reject an abiding skepticismof toomuch central control, they say, and let the</p><p>benevolentredesignersworktheirmagic.</p><p>They say:More government involvement in our lives is essential to offset</p><p>concentratedmarketpowerandcorruptbusinessmenandanyoneelsewhomight</p><p>takeadvantage.Peoplecan’tbetrustedwithfreedom.Besides,freedomismessy</p><p>andchaotic,andwewon’talwaysmaketherightchoices.Wewon’talwayslike</p><p>thewaythingsturnout,thewaywealthandresourcesareallocated.Government</p><p>can fix these problems.We just need tomake sure that the power rests in the</p><p>handsof therightpeople.Therearegoodguysandbadguys.Therightpublic</p><p>servantscanbetrustedtoreininthegreedyhordes.</p><p>Thiswasthepipedreamof“progressives”goingbacktothelate1800s.Well-</p><p>paidcivilservants,withall the rightpedigrees, fromall the right families,and</p><p>protectedfrompoliticaljudgmentandthepushandpullofdemocracy,wouldbe</p><p>giventhepowerandtheresourcestobettermanagethingsfromthetopdown.</p><p>Thearchitectsofthiscountrywereprettyclearonthesequestions.Theauthor</p><p>ofthat“promissorynote”thatDr.Kingreferredtoin1963whilestandingonthe</p><p>steps of the Lincoln Memorial, Thomas Jefferson, wholly embraced the</p><p>genetically ingrained American skepticism of government power and an</p><p>idealisticbelief indispersingauthorityacrosssociety, fromthebottomup.The</p><p>powershouldbewithindividuals,Jeffersonbelieved,with“WethePeople.”</p><p>The founders were verymuch a product of, as well as advocates for, “the</p><p>Spiritof ’76.”“Government isnot reason,”warnedour firstpresident,George</p><p>Washington.Government“isnoteloquent;itisforce.Likefire,itisadangerous</p><p>servantandafearfulmaster.”</p><p>Thatwasthen,saystheprogressivehistorianJosephJ.Ellis.Today,thereally</p><p>sophisticatedthinkers,theoneswiththerightacademicpedigrees,areshedding</p><p>their fear of big government. The divide is clear, says the Mount Holyoke</p><p>professor, between thosewho view the government as “them” and thosewho</p><p>viewgovernmentas“us.”ThemversusUs.Onthisquestionthereislittledoubt</p><p>wherehestands:“Theexpandingroleofgovernmentinprotectingandassuring</p><p>our‘life,libertyandthepursuitofhappiness’hasbecomeutterlyessential.”</p><p>Thereit isagain.“Life, libertyandthepursuitofhappiness.”ForJefferson,</p><p>this immortal phrase held up the freedom of the individual and self-</p><p>determination, the opportunity to be whatever you can make of yourself.</p><p>Respectingyour libertywasthefirstdutyofgovernment,andin1776itwasa</p><p>radicalconcept.Thesewere“unalienablerights,”rightsthatweAmericanswere</p><p>freetopursueunboundbygovernmentroadblocks.MLKinvokedthephrasein</p><p>1963toredeem“apromissorynote”:freedomfromunequaltreatmentunderthe</p><p>law,fromgovernment-imposeddiscrimination,andthepromiseofa“color-blind</p><p>society.”</p><p>Nowtherealpromiseisaguaranteed“right”tobiggergovernment?Elliswas</p><p>reacting towhathedescribesas the“libertarian”distrustbubblingupfromthe</p><p>grassrootscirca2009.Teapartyactivistswereexpressing,innouncertainterms,</p><p>thatgovernmenthadgottentoobig,thatitwastooinvolvedineverythingfrom</p><p>bigbankbailoutstoredesigningouraccesstohealth-careservices.In2009,this</p><p>protestmovement,justliketheoriginalBostonTeaPartyin1773,seemedtobe</p><p>taking on a life of its own, and progressive</p><p>advocates for more government</p><p>oversightofyourlifedidn’tlikeit.Notonebit.</p><p>Thiswas the samememe of the times coming fromDemocrats (andmany</p><p>establishment Republicans as well): There was something slightly dangerous</p><p>about the new surge of liberty-mindedness emerging through the grass roots.</p><p>Anditwasn’tjustacademicswhowereexpressingconcern.RightafterTaxDay</p><p>in 2009, Senior White House Advisor David Axelrod told CBS’s Face the</p><p>Nationthattheteapartyrepresented“anelementofdisaffectionthatcanmutate</p><p>intosomethingthat’sunhealthy.”5</p><p>Messagereceived.</p><p>This is the “progressive”mind-set:Freedom, as a governing philosophy, is</p><p>just old-fashioned, past its use-by date. Anachronistic. Today, we know better.</p><p>Therightpeople,thesmart,goodpeople,canbetrustedtogetgovernmentright.</p><p>They justneedour trust,ourmoney,andmorepower.Old superstitionsanda</p><p>libertarianskepticismofcentralizedpoweraregettinginthewayofprogress.</p><p>AWESOMEAUTHORITY</p><p>This“shutupandtrustus”narrativewaspickedupbyBarackObamaagainina</p><p>speechonMay5,2013.Hiscommencementaddresstothegraduatingstudents</p><p>ofOhioStateUniversityscoldsthoseofuswhowouldquestionhisgrandvision:</p><p>Unfortunately, you’ve grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of</p><p>governmentasnothingmorethansomeseparate,sinisterentitythat’satthe</p><p>root of all our problems; some of these same voices are also doing their</p><p>besttogumuptheworks.They’llwarnthattyrannyisalwayslurkingjust</p><p>aroundthecorner.Youshouldrejectthesevoices.</p><p>Few dispute the president’s way with words. But sometimes you have to</p><p>breakthingsdowntogetattheirmeaning.Asarule,youalwaysknowtopitch</p><p>allofthewordsthatcomebeforetheinevitable“but.”Justdisregardthem.Erase</p><p>thequalifyingwordsfromyourmindtogetathispoint:“Wehaveneverbeena</p><p>people who place all of our faith in government to solve our problems; we</p><p>shouldn’twant to.Butwe don’t think the government is the source of all our</p><p>problems,either.”</p><p>Wedon’tthinkthegovernmentisthesourceofallourproblems.</p><p>Ifgovernmentisnottheproblem,itmustbepartofthesolution,right?Iam</p><p>remindedof the famous command fromCaptain JamesT.Kirk to the starship</p><p>Enterprise’schiefengineer:“Scotty,Ineedmorepower.”</p><p>It’sallpartofabetter,biggerplan.</p><p>“The founders trusted uswith this awesome authority,” continues themost</p><p>powerfulman in theworld in his commencement address at Ohio State. “We</p><p>shouldtrustourselveswithit,too.”</p><p>Did thefoundersentrustuswithawesomeauthority?Dowe trustoneman,</p><p>anyman, in this case aman namedBarackObama,withawesome authority?</p><p>Shouldwe?WouldwehavewantedtotrustthatmanifhisnamewasGeorgeW.</p><p>Bush?OrRonaldReagan?</p><p>I think the founders entrusted us with awesome responsibility, the</p><p>responsibility of freedom, not awesome authority in someone else’s hands. I</p><p>think people should live their own lives and pursue their own happiness free</p><p>fromtoomuchgovernmentmeddling.</p><p>Since2009, Ihavebeenpartofa rapidlygrowingcommunityof folkswho</p><p>agreewithmethatfreedomworks;theyhavebeensteppingoutfromacrossthe</p><p>ideological spectrum. They are worried that the federal government is out of</p><p>control.Thatitisbecomingallaboutthem,notus.</p><p>AndittookLoisLernertoproveusright,and“Them”wrong.Again.</p><p>YOUARETHETARGET</p><p>Lerner, of course,was the InternalRevenueService director in charge of tax-</p><p>exempt organizations, who would infamously plead the Fifth during her</p><p>testimonybeforetheHouseOversightCommitteeonMay22,2013.</p><p>OnMay10,justfivedaysafterObama’s“awesomeauthority”speech,Lerner</p><p>dropped thebombshell admission thatputher in thehot seatbeforeCongress.</p><p>Speaking at an American Bar Association conference, she used an audience</p><p>question to “apologize” for the inappropriate targeting of conservative and</p><p>libertarian activist groups prior to the presidential election of 2012. Innocent</p><p>mistakesweremade,sheconcedes.Butitwasn’therfault.Shethrew“ourline</p><p>people in Cincinnati” under the bus for their “not so fine” targeting of tea</p><p>partiers.“Insteadofreferringtothecasesasadvocacycases,theyactuallyused</p><p>casenameson this list,”shesaid.“Theyusednames likeTeaPartyorPatriots</p><p>andtheyselectedcasessimplybecausetheapplicationshadthosenamesinthe</p><p>title. That was wrong, that was absolutely incorrect, insensitive, and</p><p>inappropriate.”</p><p>ItwaslaterdiscoveredthatthequestionfromtheABAaudiencewasactually</p><p>planted, virtually word for word, by Lerner.6 The confession was an</p><p>extraordinarily clumsy attempt at damage control. Shewanted to get ahead of</p><p>the news cycle before the inspector general released a scathing report on the</p><p>IRS’s extraordinary practice of singling out and targeting tea party groups</p><p>applying for 501(c)(4) tax status in the two years leading up to the 2012</p><p>elections.</p><p>Activist bureaucrats in an agency of the federal government singling out</p><p>citizens,basedontheirpolitical ideology,andeffectively impingingupontheir</p><p>politicalspeech.Soundsfamiliar,doesn’tit?</p><p>“Theotherthingthathappenedwastheyalso,insomecases,sataroundfora</p><p>while,”LernercontinuedtoherABAaudienceoftaxprofessionals.“Theyalso</p><p>sent some letters out that were far too broad, asking questions of these</p><p>organizations thatweren’t reallynecessaryfor the typeofapplication. Insome</p><p>cases you probably read that they asked for contributor names. That’s not</p><p>appropriate,notusual....”</p><p>Itwasalways“they”whowereinthewrong.Not“we,”or“I.”</p><p>America would soon discover that nonprofit organization applications that</p><p>contained thephrases“teaparty,”“government spending,”“governmentdebt,”</p><p>“taxes,” “patriots,” and “9/12” were isolated from other applications and</p><p>subjectedtoextrapaperworkandinquiries,delayingsomeapprovalsbyasmuch</p><p>as1,138days.7Yourcitizengroup’sapplicationwouldhavebeenflaggedifyou</p><p>hadstatedintheIRSapplicationyourdesireto“makeAmericaabetterplaceto</p><p>live.”Targetedgroupswere instructed todisclosehundredsofpagesofprivate</p><p>information, including the names of volunteers, donors, and even relatives of</p><p>volunteers;résumésforeachgoverninggroupmember;printoutsofwebsitesand</p><p>social media contents; and book reports of the clubs’ suggested reading</p><p>materials.Eventhecontentofmembers’prayerswerescrutinized.8</p><p>According to National Public Radio, of the conservative and libertarian</p><p>groups requesting tax exempt status in 2012–2013, only 46 percent were</p><p>approved,withmanymoreneverreceivingaresponsefromtheIRS.Incontrast,</p><p>100percentofprogressivegroupswereapproved.Additionally, the IRSasked</p><p>conservative groups an average of 14.9 questions about their applications, but</p><p>progressivegroupswereaskedonly4.7questions.9</p><p>KarenKenneyoftheSanFernandoValley(CA)Patriotstestifiedbeforethe</p><p>HouseWaysandMeansCommitteeaboutherexperiencebeingtargetedbythe</p><p>IRS, that her application for 501(c)(4) status was ignored for two years.</p><p>Suddenly the IRS demanded an enormous amount of information, including</p><p>personalinformationaboutemployeesanddonorsandtranscriptionsofmeetings</p><p>andcandidateforums,allowingthemonlytwentydaystocomply.10</p><p>DianneBelsomoftheLaurensCounty(SC)TeaPartytestifiedthatshewas</p><p>told that shewould receive informationonher application for501(c)(4) status</p><p>withinninetydays.Morethan</p><p>ayearlater,shehadstillheardnothing.Oncean</p><p>election year rolled around, they started bombarding her with requests for</p><p>information similar to the kinds listed above. After filing all requested</p><p>information, the IRSasked formore, including repetitionofprevious requests.</p><p>At the time of her testimony, her application had been pending formore than</p><p>threeyearswithnosignofresolution.11</p><p>TobyMarieWalkeroftheWaco(TX)TeaPartysaidthatthetotalnumberof</p><p>documentsrequestedfromtheirgroupbytheIRSwouldhavefilled“aU-Haul</p><p>truckofabout20feet.”12</p><p>POLITICALSUPPRESSION?</p><p>Why so many questions, so many forms? One clue might come from an</p><p>unrelated article regarding the tax treatment of certain nonprofit university</p><p>activities.TheIRSwascrackingdown.How?AccordingtoaBloombergarticle</p><p>fromNovember2011:</p><p>Lois Lerner, the IRS’s director of tax-exempt organizations who is</p><p>overseeing the investigation, says many schools are rethinking how and</p><p>what they report to thegovernment.Receivinga thickquestionnaire from</p><p>theIRS,shesays,isa“behaviorchanger.”13</p><p>Whatbehaviorwas the IRS trying tochangewith regards tocitizengroups</p><p>wantingtomakeAmericaabetterplacetolive?Maybethethickquestionnaires</p><p>andintrusiveinquiriesservedaparticularpurpose?MaybetheIRSintendedto</p><p>changebehavior?StanVeugerof theAmericanEnterprise Institute argues that</p><p>theIRSeffectivelysuppressed“get-out-the-vote”activitybyteapartiersin2012:</p><p>TheTeaPartymovement’shugesuccess [in2010]wasnot theresultofa</p><p>fewdaysofworkbyanelectedofficialortwo,butinvolvedactivistsallover</p><p>the country who spent the year and a half leading up to the midterm</p><p>elections volunteering, organizing, donating, and rallying.Much of these</p><p>grassroots activities were centered around 501(c)4s, which according to</p><p>ourresearchwereanimportantcomponentoftheTeaPartymovementand</p><p>its rise. The bottom line is that the Tea Party movement, when properly</p><p>activated, can generate a huge number of votes—more votes in 2010, in</p><p>fact,thanthevoteadvantageObamaheldoverRomneyin2012.Thedata</p><p>showthat,hadtheTeaPartygroupscontinuedtogrowatthepaceseenin</p><p>2009and2010,andhadtheireffectonthe2012votebeensimilartothat</p><p>seenin2010,theywouldhavebroughttheRepublicanPartyasmanyas5–</p><p>8.5millionvotes,comparedtoObama’svictorymarginof5million.14</p><p>Thetargetingofteapartiersandgroupsthatsoughtto“makeAmericaabetter</p><p>place to live”mattered. Their political activitywas suppressed and their First</p><p>Amendment right to speak and assemble effectively taken from them.</p><p>Bureaucrats buried themundermountains of questions.AttorneyGeneralEric</p><p>Holderhaspromised,inadifferentcontextthathappenedtoaccruetoPresident</p><p>Obama’s political advantage in the 2012 campaign, to “not allow political</p><p>pretextstodisenfranchiseAmericancitizensoftheirmostpreciousright.”</p><p>Incredibly,Lerneroriginallymaintainedthattheseout-of-controllineworkers</p><p>intheagency’sCincinnatioffice,oneoftheagency’slargestandmostsignificant</p><p>branchoffices,“didn’tdothisbecauseofanypoliticalbias.Theydiditbecause</p><p>theywereworkingtogether.Thiswasastreamlinedwayforthemtorefertothe</p><p>cases.Theydidn’thavetheappropriatelevelofsensitivityabouthowthismight</p><p>appeartoothersanditwasjustwrong.”Itwasjustaninnocentmistakemadeby</p><p>low-levelcivilservants—“linestaff”basedinCincinnati,Ohio.</p><p>Exceptthatitwasn’tinnocent.Anditwasn’tlimitedtolow-levelstaffatthe</p><p>Cincinnatioffice.Thetargetingandintimidationofteapartygroupsstartedright</p><p>before the2010 elections and continued, despite knowledgeof thepracticeby</p><p>supervisors,allthewayupthechainofcommand,righttothedeskofIRSchief</p><p>counselWilliamWilkins,anObamapoliticalappointee.</p><p>When summoned to address this issue before the House Oversight</p><p>Committee, Lerner said, “I have done nothing wrong,” before promptly</p><p>clammingupandrefusing toansweranyquestionson thesubject.TheObama</p><p>administration clammed up as well. President Obama’s qualified outrage</p><p>acknowledged even less than Lerner did in her first admission. Obama</p><p>apparatchikDavidAxelrodarguedthatthe“vast”sizeofthefederalgovernment</p><p>makesitimpossibleforthepresidenttoknowwhatisgoingonbeneathhimin</p><p>the executive branch. Democrats quickly went into attack mode, trashing the</p><p>inspectorgeneralandaccusingthechairmanoftheHouseOversightCommittee,</p><p>DarrellIssa,ofa“partisanwitchhunt.”</p><p>InWashington’sparlance,thisiscalled“spinning.”</p><p>Sowhathappenedtothepromiseofabetterworldunderthebenevolenthand</p><p>ofbiggovernment?Ifyoureallydobelieve in the“awesomeauthority”of the</p><p>state,wouldn’tyoubethefirstinlinedemandingaccountabilityfromthosewho</p><p>abusedpower?ThewholespectaclefeltmoreliketheactionsofaThirdWorld</p><p>junta,nottheexecutivebranchoftheUnitedStatesgovernment.</p><p>AHISTORYOFABUSE</p><p>Needlesstosay,thisisnotthefirsttimeagentsattheIRShavepickedwinners</p><p>and losers for thebenefit of a sittingpresident, or for thebenefit of a zealous</p><p>bureaucrat.In1963,havingdeterminedthatMartinLutherKingwas“themost</p><p>dangerousNegro” inAmerica,J.EdgarHooversetout todestroyhim.Oneof</p><p>the more powerful tools at the FBI’s disposal was the IRS, and the agency’s</p><p>accesstoconfidentialdata,particularlythedonorlistofMLK’sorganization,the</p><p>SouthernChristianLeadershipConference.TheFBI“hopedtousetheIRS’slist</p><p>ofSCLCdonorstosendthemphonySCLCletterswarningthattheorganization</p><p>wasbeinginvestigatedfortaxfraud.This,theyhoped,woulddryupthefunding</p><p>of King’s group and thereby neutralize it.”15 King and the SCLS were both</p><p>auditedbytheIRSatHoover’sbehest.16</p><p>During his term as president, John F. Kennedy used the IRS to target</p><p>conservative nonprofits and other political foes, as well as to obtain the</p><p>confidentialtaxinformationofrichconservativesH.L.HuntandJ.PaulGetty.17</p><p>RobertKennedycommissionedareportfromlaborleaderVictorReutheron</p><p>“possibleadministrationpoliciesandprogramstocombattheradicalright.”The</p><p>reportarguedforusingtheIRSasaweapon.“Actiontodamupthesefundsmay</p><p>be the quickestway to turn the tide.”Reuther suggested denial of tax-exempt</p><p>status and investigations of corporations suspected of being right-wingers.</p><p>Reuther said: “[T]here is the big question whether [they] are themselves</p><p>complying with the tax laws,” indicating that he may have supported audits</p><p>againsttheseorganizations.18</p><p>Richard Nixon’s presidency ended abruptly for crimes including his</p><p>willingness to use the IRS to selectively punish his political enemies. Former</p><p>IRS chief Johnnie Mac Walters reports that under Nixon, he was handed an</p><p>enemieslistoftwohundredpeopleandinstructedthattheWhiteHousewanted</p><p>them“investigatedandsomeputinjail.”19Nixon,ofcourse,resignedhisoffice</p><p>when faced with the possibility of impeachment for his crimes, and for</p><p>repeatedlyengaging“inconductviolating theconstitutional rightsofcitizens.”</p><p>AccordingtoArticle2oftheArticlesofImpeachment:</p><p>He has, acting personally and through his subordinates and agents,</p><p>endeavouredtoobtainfromtheInternalRevenueService,inviolationofthe</p><p>constitutional rights of citizens, confidential information contained in</p><p>incometaxreturnsforpurposed[sic]notauthorizedbylaw,andtocause,</p><p>in violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, income</p><p>tax audits or</p><p>other income tax investigations to be initiated or conducted in a</p><p>discriminatorymanner.20</p><p>Historically, IRS abuse seems to follow a pattern. In 2001, the academic</p><p>journalEconomics&Politics published an empirical study of IRS audits and</p><p>concluded that, “Other things being the same, the percentage of tax returns</p><p>auditedby the IRS ismarkedly lower instates thatare important to thesitting</p><p>president’sreelectionaspirations.Wealsofind that theIRSis responsive to its</p><p>oversightcommittees.”21</p><p>ANOFFERYOUCAN’TREFUSE</p><p>So,isabusingthepoweroftheIRSjustpoliticsasusual?JohnF.Kennedyand</p><p>BillClintondidit,butsodidRichardNixonandGeorgeW.Bush.</p><p>Was the IRS just taking orders from President Obama, and from powerful</p><p>Senate Democrats like Dick Durbin and Max Baucus, all of whom publicly,</p><p>loudlytelegraphedtheirdesirefortheIRStogoaftercertainsinister501(c)(4)s?</p><p>Oristheresomethingevenmoreominousgoingon?</p><p>ThereisrealevidencethatLoisLernerisapartisanwithanaxtogrind,andis</p><p>willing touseherpositionsofpower toadvanceherpersonalagenda. In1996</p><p>she used her position as a Federal Elections Commission lawyer to go after</p><p>IllinoisU.S.SenatecandidateAlSalvi,aRepublicanchallengingSenatorDick</p><p>Durbin. Late in the election, Salvi was hit by an FEC complaint filed by the</p><p>DemocraticNationalCommittee,achargethatwoulddominatetheheadlinesfor</p><p>the remainder of the campaign,which Salvi lost toDurbin. The chargeswere</p><p>laterdroppedincourtasfrivolous,butnotbeforeLoisLernerputSalvithrough</p><p>abureaucraticandlegalwoodchipper.</p><p>It startedoffwith anofferSalvi couldn’t refuse: “Promisemeyou’ll never</p><p>runforofficeagain,andwe’lldropthecase,”shetoldhim.</p><p>Salvi said he asked Lerner if she would be willing to put the offer into</p><p>writing.</p><p>“Wedon’tdothingsthatway,”SalvisaidLernerreplied.</p><p>Salvithenaskedhowsuchanagreementcouldbeenforced.</p><p>AccordingtoSalvi,Lernerreplied:“You’llfindout.”</p><p>The aspiring Republican never ran against Durbin again. “It was a</p><p>nightmare,”Salvi saysnow. “Whywould anyone run foroffice again after all</p><p>that?”22</p><p>In September 2013, new emails surfaced that directly contradicted the</p><p>timeline set out in Lerner’s original ABA mea culpa. These emails directly</p><p>rebuttedtheclaimthatthetargetingofteapartierswasnotpoliticallymotivated.</p><p>“Tea Party matter very dangerous,” she emailed her staff in February 2010.</p><p>“Cincy shouldprobablyNOThave these cases.”23 Reacting to anNPR article</p><p>emailed to her by a fellow staffer, titled “Democrats SayAnonymousDonors</p><p>Unfairly Influencing SenateRaces,”Lerner responded, “Perhaps the FECwill</p><p>savetheday.”24</p><p>Data suggest that Lerner isn’t the only IRS employee with an agenda.</p><p>According to Tim Carney at theWashington Examiner, “IRS employees also</p><p>gave$67,000tothePACoftheNationalTreasuryEmployeesUnion,whichin</p><p>turngavemorethan96percentofitscontributionstoDemocrats.AddthePAC</p><p>cashtotheindividualdonationsandIRSemployeesfavorDemocrats2-to-1.”In</p><p>theCincinnatioffice,everypoliticaldonationmadein2012byemployeeswent</p><p>toeitherBarackObama’s reelectioncampaignor to liberalDemocraticsenator</p><p>SherrodBrown.25</p><p>CONCENTRATEDBENEFITSANDDISPERSEDCOSTS</p><p>Public choice economists argue that government decisions on how money is</p><p>spent andwhobenefits from regulationaredriven in largepart by thevarious</p><p>interests that stand towin or lose.The payoff for successfully influencing the</p><p>political decision-making process can be highly motivating. These are the</p><p>“concentrated benefits” that special interests seek when they show up in</p><p>Washingtontolobby.Thosewhodon’tshowup—therestofus—don’ttypically</p><p>evenknow thatourox isabout tobegoredon their table.Even ifwedid, the</p><p>costofshowingupandattemptingtoinfluencetheoutcomeoflegislativehorse-</p><p>tradingwouldbeprohibitive.Soknowinglyornot,weall incur the“dispersed</p><p>costs”ofbiggergovernment.</p><p>It’stypicallylessofagoring,andmoreofaslowbleed.Morelikeafrogina</p><p>pot of water slowly brought to boil. You don’t really know it’s happening.</p><p>Pennies more for the sugar you buy at the grocery store, or the gradual</p><p>devaluationofthedollarsinyourpocketthroughtheFed’sexpansionofmoney</p><p>and credit supplies. These are just a few of the countless otherways that the</p><p>incestuous self-dealing of Washington insiders transfers wealth from you to</p><p>them.</p><p>But sometimes the costs are vivid, and people rise up in protest. It’s</p><p>happeningmoreandmoreasthecostsofgood,real-timeinformationplummet.</p><p>It happened in 2008, when America opposed a $700 billion bailout of Wall</p><p>Street. It is happening again in public opposition to ObamaCare, particularly</p><p>over the unjust transfer of wealth from younger, poorer Americans to older,</p><p>wealthierones.Thepresident’shealth-carerebootgrowsincreasinglyunpopular</p><p>yearsafteritsenactment.Peoplearediscoveringthehardwaythatthepolitical</p><p>promisesmadetobuythevotesneededtopassthemassiveschemeweremostly</p><p>expedient lies. More and more people want out of the new government</p><p>exchanges.</p><p>Acting IRS chief Danny Werfel is one of those people. Testifying at a</p><p>hearing,hetoldtheHouseCommitteeonWaysandMeansthat“Iwouldprefer</p><p>to staywith the current policy that I’m pleasedwith rather than go through a</p><p>changeifIdon’tneedtogothroughthatchange.”26</p><p>His view is echoed by the National Treasury Employees Union—yes, IRS</p><p>employees have union representation—who are aggressively lobbying to keep</p><p>theirmembersoutofObamaCare.Hereistheopeningparagraphoftheletterthe</p><p>unionsaskedmemberstosendtoCapitolHill:</p><p>Iamafederalemployeeandoneofyourconstituents.Iamveryconcerned</p><p>aboutlegislationthathasbeenintroducedbyCongressmanDaveCampto</p><p>push federal employees out of the Federal Employees Health Benefits</p><p>Program(FEHBP)andintotheinsuranceexchangesestablishedunderthe</p><p>AffordableCareAct(ACA).27</p><p>Sotheyarelookingtoexemptthemselvesfromthesameonerouslawthatthe</p><p>IRSisenforcingonus?Areyoukiddingme?Whathappenedtoequaltreatment</p><p>underthelawsoftheland?Asoutrageousasthatsounds,considerthis:TheIRS</p><p>commissionerwhooversawtheexemptorganizationsdivisionof theIRSfrom</p><p>2010to2012,theverytimeframewhentheagencywastargetingconservative</p><p>andlibertariangroups,isnowinchargeofthenewdivisionattheIRSenforcing</p><p>ObamaCare.Hername isSarahHall Ingram,andshedirectly reported toLois</p><p>Lerner.28</p><p>IngramandhernewarmyofIRSenforcementagentswillbeimposingfines</p><p>onyoungpeoplewhochoosenottobeconscriptedintoObamaCare.Butthanks</p><p>to an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) ruling, IRS employees, other</p><p>federalemployees,and thepoliticiansand their staffswhodraftedandenacted</p><p>ObamaCare are all effectively exempt. Through President Obama’s personal</p><p>request,OPMisallowingmembersofCongress toretainbenefitsconferredby</p><p>the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, despite the fact that</p><p>ObamaCarewouldotherwiserequirethemtopurchasethesamehealthinsurance</p><p>programsavailabletothepopulationatlarge.29</p><p>ObamaCare for thee, but not me? Depends on whom you know in</p><p>Washington.</p><p>THEINSIDERSVERSUSAMERICA</p><p>What if we have reached a tipping point in America, where the progressive</p><p>dream of a protected class of civil servants has turned into something</p><p>else</p><p>completely?Whatifthehopeofchangeisreallyjustabig,powerful,selectively</p><p>abusive,andveryexpensivenightmare?Itusedtobewellunderstood,oratleast</p><p>widelybelieved,thattheyworkedforus.Weweretaughtinhighschoolcivics</p><p>thatmembersofCongressandthepresidentandallgovernmentworkerswere,in</p><p>fact,employeesofWethePeople.</p><p>What ifpublicservantsnowrepresentaprivilegedclass, themostpowerful</p><p>special interest group in the world? Consider this: In 2011, the federal</p><p>government had 4,403,000 employees.30 To lend perspective to this number,</p><p>considerthatWal-Marthasfewerthanhalfthisnumberofemployees,comingin</p><p>at2.1million,andMcDonald’shasonly1.9million.31</p><p>Ofcourse,noonebelievesthattheniceladywhogreetsyouwhenyouenter</p><p>yourlocalSupercenterisouttogetyou.Sheistheretohelpyou.Thatnicelady,</p><p>andtheWal-Martsheworksfor,reallyworkforyouandyourreturnpatronage.</p><p>Whenisthelasttimeyoufeltthatwayaboutafederalgovernmentemployee?</p><p>What’s most remarkable about the IRS targeting of conservative and</p><p>libertariangrassrootsorganizations is the lengthandscopeof thepractice.The</p><p>discrimination against the IRS’s self-categorized “tea party cases” was an</p><p>agency-wide practice thatwas discovered, broadly known about, discussed up</p><p>thechainofcommand,andcontinuedforyears.Watergatewastheproductofa</p><p>fewbadactors,andthemalfeasantswerecaught,stopped,andbroughttojustice.</p><p>This is a big deal, a potential tipping point where the self-interests of</p><p>bureaucratslookingtoprotecttheirjobsdovetailednicelywithachiefexecutive,</p><p>inanelectionyear, looking toprotecthis job.Thinkof the implicationsof the</p><p>federalgovernmentasthelargestspecialinterestgroupintheworld.</p><p>Dotheyworkforus,orwethem?</p><p>BeckyGerritson,presidentof theWetumpka(AL)TeaPartyanda targetof</p><p>the IRS, answered this question unequivocally in her unbending testimony</p><p>beforetheHouseWaysandMeansCommittee:</p><p>Iamnothere todayasa serfora vassal. I amnotbeggingmy lords for</p><p>mercy.Iamaborn-free,Americanwoman—wife,motherandcitizen—and</p><p>I’mtellingMYgovernmentthatyouhaveforgottenyourplace.Itisnotyour</p><p>responsibilitytolookoutformywell-beingormonitormyspeech.Itisnot</p><p>your right to assert an agenda. The posts you occupy exist to preserve</p><p>American liberty. You have sworn to perform that duty. And you have</p><p>faltered.32</p><p>Becky’s testimony “went viral” on YouTube, fueled by the simple,</p><p>commonsense values that she personified, values that I believe still define</p><p>America.</p><p>TheAmericanidealisaboutyourliberty,nottheirpower.</p><p>It’sno longerRepublicanversusDemocrat. It’snotaboutgoodgovernment</p><p>or bad government. It’s not even “liberal” versus “conservative.” It’s about</p><p>limitingthegovernment’smonopolyonforceandunleashingourfreedomtotry,</p><p>to choose, to take responsibility, and to make things better. It is about the</p><p>politicalelitesandtheinsiderstheycolludewithversusAmerica.</p><p>It’sThemversusUs,forsure.</p><p>CHAPTER4</p><p>GRAY-SUITEDSOVIETS</p><p>Ifyougivemesixlineswrittenbythehandofthemosthonestofmen,I</p><p>willfindsomethinginthemwhichwillhanghim.</p><p>—CARDINALRICHELIEU1</p><p>IT’SNOTPARANOIAIFtheyreallyareouttogetyou.</p><p>The Internal Revenue Service systematically targets its critics: average</p><p>American citizens simply trying to comply with complex laws, and simply</p><p>exercisingtheirFirstAmendmentvoiceinthepublicdebate.</p><p>The attorney general authorizes wiretaps on the phones of reporters at the</p><p>AssociatedPress.TheNationalSecurityAgencyspiesonyou,presumingyour</p><p>guiltuntilprovenotherwise.</p><p>The Orwellian-named Affordable Care Act (neither affordable nor caring)</p><p>willcollectallofyourpersonaldata,fromanalphabetsoupoffederalagencies</p><p>including the IRS, DHS, and DoD—even your private health insurance</p><p>information.Allofthis“private”informationwillbecentralizedinasweeping</p><p>government “data hub” housed in the Department of Health and Human</p><p>Services.</p><p>The electedmembers ofCongress and their staffswhodrafted and enacted</p><p>theACA—betterknownasObamaCare—and thecareer“civil servants”at the</p><p>IRS, NSA, and HHS—all of them to be trusted with so much discretionary</p><p>power over your life and information about you—are seeking to exempt</p><p>themselvesfromthesamelawstheywillimposeonus.</p><p>PresidentBarackObama,aDemocratseeminglyimpatientthatanyonewould</p><p>questionhisadministration’shandlingofourprivacy, tellsus“it’s important to</p><p>recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100</p><p>percentprivacyandzeroinconvenience.”2</p><p>Republican senatorLindseyGraham,with casual disregard for your Fourth</p><p>Amendmentguaranteetoprivacy,assuresusonallthegovernment’ssnooping:</p><p>Ifyouhavenothingtohide,thenyou“don’thaveanythingtoworryabout.”3</p><p>SUBDUINGALLSPHERES</p><p>In Human Action, Ludwig von Mises reminds us that government is the</p><p>“oppositeofliberty.”Governmentalwaysmeans“coercionandcompulsion.”We</p><p>shouldn’t be surprisedby the arrogantdismissalsofPresidentObama,Senator</p><p>Graham,IRSofficials,ObamaCarebureaucrats,oranyoneelsewhowouldassert</p><p>theirpoweroverourfreedoms.AsMisesnotes,“It is in thenatureof themen</p><p>handling the apparatus of compulsion and coercion to overrate its power to</p><p>work, and to strive at subduing all spheres of human life to its immediate</p><p>influence.”4</p><p>I would suggest two corollaries to Mises’s observed “compulsion and</p><p>coercion”: complexity and control. The reason youwant a simple set of rules</p><p>thatareappliedequallyacrosstheboardispreciselythatthemonopolypowerof</p><p>thestateisdangerous.Combinedwithcomplexandintrusivelaws,agovernment</p><p>monopoly on power puts incredible authority into the hands of faceless, gray-</p><p>suited bureaucratswith ideological axes to grind, self-interests to protect, and</p><p>personal scores to settle. Think J. EdgarHoover, or Lois Lerner. Think gray-</p><p>suitedsovietsimbuedwithanagendaquitecontrarytoyoursthumbingthrough</p><p>your financial and health history records, fishing for some discrepancy to get</p><p>youwith.</p><p>Whatcouldpossiblygowrong?</p><p>If you want to see the corrosive effects of unfettered discretionary power</p><p>imposedfromthetopdown—unfireableemployeesintheexecutivebranchwith</p><p>an ability to target or ignore, choose winners or losers based on ideology or</p><p>personalagendas—youneedlooknofurtherthanWashington,D.C.,today.</p><p>WITH THE PRESIDENT’S DECISION to illegally rewrite ObamaCare in real time,</p><p>arbitrarilydelayingimplementationoftheemployermandateuntilafterthe2014</p><p>elections,5itisclearwhowillreallydecidefuturehealth-caredecisions.Andit’s</p><p>not you. The influential interests in the big business community successfully</p><p>lobbiedfora(nother)delay.Nosuchluckfortherestofus.Weareexpectedto</p><p>comply.</p><p>Ofcourse,thegovernment’sblankcheckbookcomeswithacomplexwebof</p><p>lawsthathavegrownmoreconvolutedovertime,therulesrearrangedbyvarious</p><p>special interests, and then again by the bureaucrats inside the enforcement</p><p>agencies. This political give-and-take has little to do with your interests. The</p><p>growthofgovernmental infrastructure represents apolitical equilibrium that is</p><p>anythingbuteconomicallyefficientfortherestofus.</p><p>IcallittheComplexityIndustrialComplex.Themorecomplicatedthingsget,</p><p>the better off the insiders are. Bureaucrats feed on complexity, a permanent</p><p>rationale forexpanded</p><p>budgetsandhighercompensation,anda fatmeal ticket</p><p>back outside the government as a highly compensated guide to corporations</p><p>looking to navigate the labyrinth of laws and rules.Navigate, or,more likely,</p><p>exploittotheiradvantage.</p><p>Take the authors of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, for</p><p>example.Sincedrafting that legislation,more than thirtyof its architects have</p><p>foundlucrativepositionslobbyingfordeep-pocketedcorporationssuchasDelta</p><p>Air Lines, Coca-Cola, and British Petroleum, charging big bucks to help</p><p>companiesnavigatetheregulatorymazestheyhelpedcreate.6</p><p>Incumbent corporations—“big business”—often lobby for, and get, new</p><p>complexity as a strategy to keep underfunded upstart competitors out of the</p><p>market. In reality,monopolymarket power is typically the by-product of this</p><p>unholy collusion between complexity-mongers in and outside government.</p><p>Marketsharecanonlybeprotectedpermanently inpartnershipwith thepower</p><p>monopolistsinsidegovernment.</p><p>Complexity is also the skirt that power abusers hide behind. One of the</p><p>excuses used by partisanDemocrats in defense of Lois Lerner and other IRS</p><p>employeeswhotargetedactivistgroupsbasedonideologywastheconvolution</p><p>of campaign finance laws. It’s an interesting argument coming from the</p><p>congressionalarchitectsofcampaignfinanceregulations.They,ofcourse,wrote</p><p>theFirstAmendment–gagginglawsthatgivesomuchlatitudetothepermanent</p><p>bureaucracy. Not one of these congressional authors of convoluted campaign</p><p>financelawshasevercalledforscrappingthewholemonstrousstructureinfavor</p><p>ofasimpledefenseofFirstAmendmentrightstopoliticalspeech.</p><p>Inanop-edintheWashingtonPost,ElijahCummings,therankingDemocrat</p><p>ontheHouseOversightCommittee,wrote:“ThesadrealityisthatwhileHouse</p><p>Republicanshavedevotedtimeandtaxpayermoneytoattemptingtosmearthe</p><p>WhiteHouse, they have failed to examine part of the underlying problem the</p><p>IRSfaces:inadequateguidanceonhowtoprocessapplicationsoforganizations</p><p>seekingtax-exemptstatus.”7</p><p>When the IRS can’t understand its own rules or properly follow the law</p><p>because of “inadequate guidance,” that ought to be a warning sign that the</p><p>systemisbrokeninWashington.</p><p>CODERED</p><p>Thereis,ofcourse,amethodtotheirmadness.Considertheremarkablycorrupt</p><p>federaltaxcode.</p><p>In2013, thefederal taxcodewasawhopping73,954pages long,8orabout</p><p>fourmillionwords.9Toputthisinperspective,considerthattheGuinnessworld</p><p>recordholderforthelongestnovel,MarcelProust’sseven-volumeInSearchof</p><p>LostTime,islessthanathirdofthislength.10Anyoneattemptingtoreadthetax</p><p>codehadbetterhaveplentyoftimeontheirhands.Atarateoffiftypagesaday,</p><p>itwouldtakemorethanfouryearstomakeitthroughthewholething.</p><p>Obviously, no one can reasonably be expected to know all the rules and</p><p>regulations buried in this unfathomable tome. And that may be precisely the</p><p>point.Evenpeoplewhoarepaid toenforce these rulesdon’tunderstand them.</p><p>FormerIRScommissionerDouglasShulmanfreelyadmittedinaninterviewon</p><p>C-SPANthathedoesnotfilehisowntaxes,explainingthat,“Ifind[hiringatax</p><p>preparer]convenient,andIfindthetaxcodecomplex.”11</p><p>When the head of an agency is incapable of understanding the rules he is</p><p>chargedwithenforcing, somethingseemsfundamentallywrong. It isestimated</p><p>thatAmericans spend 6.1 billion hours a year simply complyingwith the tax</p><p>code,12 and the accounting costs of compliance total between $67 billion and</p><p>$378billioneveryyear.Imagineallthegoodthatcouldbeaccomplishedifthat</p><p>time were instead spent on productive activity. The Mercatus Center has</p><p>estimatedthatthetotallosstotheeconomyresultingfromourcomplextaxcode</p><p>isasmuchas$609billionayear,andthisdoesnotincludethetimeandmoney</p><p>spentbylobbyiststopetitionforspecialtaxtreatment.13</p><p>This is a far cry from theway the founding fathers initially envisioned the</p><p>systemoftaxationfortheirnewcountry.Formorethanahundredyearsafterits</p><p>founding,theUnitedStatesgovernmentwasfundedpurelywithtariffs,excises,</p><p>and receipts from the sale of federally owned lands.Direct taxes, such as the</p><p>now-familiarincometax,wereoutofthequestion.</p><p>Sadly,thissimplerstateofaffairswasnottolast.TheCivilWarbroughtan</p><p>unprecedented level of expenses, and new taxes were an easy way to collect</p><p>revenueinahurry.TheRevenueActof1861established theInternalRevenue</p><p>Service and created the first incarnation of what we would recognize as the</p><p>modernincometax.</p><p>Thiswasoriginallyintendedtobea“temporary”measuretofinancethewar,</p><p>but history has shown that there are few things more difficult than ending a</p><p>temporary government program. In 1913, Congress ratified the Sixteenth</p><p>AmendmenttotheConstitution,makingtheindividualincometaxapermanent</p><p>featureof law.Then, the toptaxratewas less than1percent,andthe taxcode</p><p>totaledtwenty-sevenpagesinlength.14</p><p>Withinminutesofenactment,moneyed insidersbeganrewriting the income</p><p>taxcodetocarveoutexceptionsthatfavoredtheirinterests.</p><p>In a way, tax code complexity is inevitable. Special interests seeking</p><p>exclusions,deductions,subsidies,andrefundshaveastrong incentive to lobby</p><p>thegovernmenttoadvancetheircause.Iftheyknowsomeone,iftheyhavejuice</p><p>in theCapitol, a newprovision is added and the tax code becomesmore of a</p><p>labyrinth requiring experts, inside and out. I’ve personally heard business</p><p>lobbyists make their case to congressional staffers. Every dollar in “tax</p><p>expenditures” will generate a threefold return for the government, they will</p><p>claim.Theyalwayshavethe“blue-chip”studyundertheirarmtobackitup.</p><p>When IworkedonCapitolHill in the1990s,we tried to repeal the federal</p><p>sugarprogram.BigSugarlobbyistsdescendeduponWashingtonlikeaswarmof</p><p>locusts, distributing backslaps, PAC checks, and free coffee cups that claimed</p><p>thatthesugargrowers’subsidycostthefederalgovernment“Zero.”Stillgotthe</p><p>cup.AndBigSugarstillhasitsspecialdeal.Infiscalyear2013,theprogramthat</p><p>wasnotsupposedtocostyouanythingcosttaxpayers$280milliondollars.The</p><p>tabwillincreasein2014,accordingtotheWallStreetJournal.15</p><p>It’snotsohardtocookupacaseforspecialtreatmentthatsoundspersuasive</p><p>toeagerears.Butthere’salwaysaquoinexchangeforquid.</p><p>Asimplertaxcodebenefitsallofus,buttheincentivesforindividualstoact</p><p>to protect the principle of equal treatment under the law are small by</p><p>comparison.Concentratedbenefits for the insiders, anddispersedcosts for the</p><p>restofus.</p><p>Far more important than all of the wasted time resulting from tax code</p><p>compliance, these complex and difficult-to-understand rules fuel abusive and</p><p>discriminatory practices. No one can manage absolute compliance with this</p><p>Byzantine mountain of tax regulations, meaning that anyone is vulnerable to</p><p>punishmentatthediscretionoftheIRS.Complexitypluscompulsionmeansyou</p><p>—“themosthonestofmen”—arevulnerabletosomeoneelse’sagenda.</p><p>Inthe1960s,theIRStargetedMartinLutherKingJr.becausehewasdeemed</p><p>athreat tovariousgovernment interests.Mostrecently, theIRStargetedmoms</p><p>whowant to “makeAmerica a better place to live.”What assurances do you</p><p>have thatsomedayyouwon’tgetsidewayswithsomegovernmentagent?Will</p><p>someone with power you don’t have target</p><p>you for speaking up against</p><p>“CommonCore,”atop-downsetofeducationstandardsthattakestillmoresay</p><p>awayfromparents?Willyouevenknowwhothatgray-suitedbureaucratiswho</p><p>decidesthatyouare“dangerous”?</p><p>Thisproblemdoesnotendwiththetaxcode.Allareasoflawhavebecome</p><p>so complex that full compliance is impossible. The potential for selective</p><p>persecutionisobvious.TheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency,forinstance,has</p><p>itselfacknowledgedthatcompletecompliancewiththeCleanAirActcreatesan</p><p>administrative burden that is “absurd” and “impossible.” We are literally</p><p>drowning in an ocean of dictates and orders, so much so that it has been</p><p>estimatedthattheaverageAmericanbreaksthreefederallawseverydaywithout</p><p>realizingit.16</p><p>The fact that all of us are continually breaking laws we don’t even know</p><p>exist, combinedwith legal standards that donot consider ignorance an excuse</p><p>for noncompliance, means that any of us could be punished at any moment,</p><p>entirely at the discretion of the enforcers. Obscure, rarely enforced laws can</p><p>easilyturnintotoolsofoppressionwhenselectivelyappliedforpoliticalreasons.</p><p>Thelawismeanttobeaninstrumentofprotectionforthepeople,notatool</p><p>of arbitrary and discriminatory punishment. When even the enforcers cannot</p><p>keep up with the sheer scale of our legal code, there is nothing to stop our</p><p>protectorsfromturningintooppressors.</p><p>FIRSTDONOHARM</p><p>Whichisoneverygoodreasontoopposeagovernment takeoverofourhealth</p><p>care.</p><p>Whatwasonceasimplerelationshipbetweenpatientanddoctorhasbecome</p><p>atangledmorassofregulationsandmiddlemen,equallydamagingtoAmericans’</p><p>healthandwalletsalike.</p><p>ObamaCare promised to fix these problems by creating a government-</p><p>controlled system and a dramatic expansion of government-funded health</p><p>insurance.Despitethepersistentunpopularityoftheproposal,PresidentObama</p><p>devotedthebulkofhisfirstterminofficetopushingthebillthroughCongress.</p><p>Defending the law from grassroots critics has dominated his second term’s</p><p>domesticagenda,asthesystematicproblemswithitcreaterealchaos.</p><p>Imaginewhatwillhappenwhen thenewmiddlemanbetweenyouandyour</p><p>doctorisacareercivilservantwholikelyhasanagendacontrarytoyourown.</p><p>Perhapsthisfacelessdeciderdetermineswhetherornotyoursonoryourwifeor</p><p>yourmomgetstheproceduretheyneedtolive.Itmightbesomeoneelse’s“cost-</p><p>benefit” analysis that deems your needs unaffordable. Maybe a gray-suited</p><p>bureaucratatHHSdecidestopokethroughyourpoliticalactivities in theData</p><p>Hub first. Maybe there just isn’t enough money in the centralized system to</p><p>coverallof thedemandsfromallof thesonsanddaughtersandgrandmasand</p><p>grandpaswhoweredumpedintoitbytheiremployers.Howtochoose?Whoare</p><p>thewinnersandlosers?Willyougetasay,anappealiftheanswerisno?</p><p>Ofcoursenot.ObamaCareislessaboutthequalityandaffordabilityofyour</p><p>health care, andmore aboutwho controls your health-care future.ObamaCare</p><p>seeks to fix a systemcausedby toomuchgovernment, by injecting stillmore</p><p>governmentdiscretionarycontrolintothesystem.</p><p>In theearlypartof the twentiethcentury, therewasno third-partypayment</p><p>systemforhealthcare.Individualswhogotsickwouldpaytheirdoctorsdirectly,</p><p>andthispersonalaccountabilitykeptcostslow;doctorscouldnotmakemoneyif</p><p>noneoftheirpatientscouldaffordtoseethem.</p><p>All of this began to change in the run-up toWorldWar II. In a politically</p><p>motivated,economicallyilliterateefforttoboostemploymentandreduceincome</p><p>inequality, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt imposed wage controls on</p><p>businesses, dictating the amounts they were allowed to pay their workers.17</p><p>Goodeconomicsalways takesabackseat in theorderingofpoliticalpriorities.</p><p>AsJohnMaynardKeynesoncesaid:“Inthelongrun,we’realldead.”Hewas</p><p>speakingtothepoliticalclass,whowouldeventuallyhearinstead:“Inthelong</p><p>run,when thepolitical reckoningfor theconsequencesofshortsightedpolicies</p><p>come,I’llbeoutofoffice,maybelobbyingCongressformorecomplexitythat</p><p>favorsmyclients.”</p><p>So it was with FDR and wage and price controls, and his penchant for</p><p>throwingbadeconomicideasagainstthewalltoseehowlongtheywouldstick.</p><p>Businessownersnaturallywantedtoemploythebest talenttheycouldfind,</p><p>but these wage controls hampered their ability to attract the best workers by</p><p>offering higher salaries than their competitors. In order to get around the law,</p><p>and to appease one of his most important political constituencies, the labor</p><p>unions,FDRauthorizednonwageperks,oneofwhichwasthefirst incarnation</p><p>ofemployer-sponsoredhealthinsurance.</p><p>Whylinkhealthinsurancetoyouremployment?Itdoesn’tmakemuchsense,</p><p>and it gives someone else more control over your health-care decisions. This</p><p>government-drivenmarketdistortionwas thefirstofmanycorruptions thatput</p><p>distance between the patient and the doctor. With deep-pocketed businesses</p><p>pickingupthebillfortheiremployees,doctorshadmuchlessincentivetokeep</p><p>costsdown,forcinginsurancepremiumstoriseandmakinghealthcarelargely</p><p>unaffordableforanyoneoutsidethesystem.Thetaxcodefurthercomplicatesthe</p><p>problemwithitsunequalandconfusingtreatmentofhealth-carecosts.Insidethe</p><p>politicallystructuredsystem,healthinsurancebenefitsweretax-free.</p><p>Butoutsidethesystem,youpayinflatedcostswithafter-taxdollars.This is</p><p>what amounts to political “compassion.” It sounds so good when read</p><p>compellingly from the dais teleprompter, but in practice the little guy gets</p><p>screwed.</p><p>Insteadofaddressing these issuesdirectly,ObamaCaredoublesdownonan</p><p>already corrupted system. Imposing a fiendishly complex new system, against</p><p>thewillof thepeople, isnowaytoresolvethefundamentalproblemswith the</p><p>market for health services. If doctors and insurance companies raised prices</p><p>whenbusinesseswerepaying,theywillonlyraisethemmorewhengovernment,</p><p>withnoprofitmotiveorcompetition to restrain its spending, ispickingup the</p><p>tab. Congress and the administration will, in turn, impose price controls on</p><p>hospitalsanddoctors.BecauseitworkedsowellwhenFDRtriedit.</p><p>Rising costs and rising demand for “free” services can only lead to one</p><p>outcome. It’s called rationing of health-care services. Or “death panels.” Or</p><p>somegray-suitedsoviet,whojustlearnedthatyouoncesent$250toRonPaul’s</p><p>2012presidentialcampaign,choosingwinnersandlosersinaverycomplicated</p><p>systemthatnoonereallyunderstands.</p><p>Oneofthekeyfeaturesofthelawistorequireinsurancecompaniestoaccept</p><p>patientswith pre-existing conditions, a requirement that undermines the entire</p><p>concept of insurance. Insurance exists as a safeguard against a possible future</p><p>disaster,somethingthatisunforeseeablebutpotentiallydevastating.Youcannot</p><p>insure against something that has already happened. You cannot buy</p><p>homeowner’sinsuranceonahousethatisalreadyonfire.Ifyoucould,itwould</p><p>nolongerbeinsurancebutamereshiftingofcostsfromonepersontoanother.</p><p>Sinceinsurancecompaniescannowbecertainthateveryoneoftheirclients</p><p>willbefilingaclaim,theirrateswillhavetorisetocompensatefortheincreased</p><p>costs. Hence, the “individual mandate” targeting, by force, young, healthy</p><p>peoplewhocannotaffordanddon’tneed thegovernment-definedplans.Much</p><p>moreonthe“socialinjustice”ofthislater.</p><p>ThefactthatObamaCarewill</p><p>failinitsaimsofreducingcostsandincreasing</p><p>coverage seems to have become common knowledge, with huge numbers of</p><p>businesses lobbying to get out of the employer mandate. And the federal</p><p>governmenthasbeenhappytocomply.</p><p>The Department of Health and Human Services has announced that about</p><p>1,200businesseshavebeengrantedexemptionsfromtheObamaCareemployer</p><p>mandate.18 Labor unions are not happy with the law, either, and have sought</p><p>waivers en masse for their membership. Thus far, labor unions representing</p><p>543,812workers and private companies employing 69,813workers have been</p><p>grantedwaivers.19IfObamaCareissupposedtobesuchagooddealforworkers,</p><p>whydosomanyofthemwantoutofit?</p><p>Privatecompaniesarescramblingtodealwiththeincreasedcostsofthelaw</p><p>aswell.UPShasannounced that itwillno longerprovidehealthcoverage for</p><p>employeespouses,whileWalgreensandIBMaredumpingemployeesfromtheir</p><p>employer-sponsored plans, asking them to buy private health insurance</p><p>instead.20Asofthiswriting,fivemillionAmericanshavereceivedcancellation</p><p>notices from their insurance companies,21 and some estimates put future</p><p>cancellations as high as a hundred million.22 So much for Obama’s original</p><p>promisethat“ifyoulikeyourhealthinsurance,youcankeepit.”</p><p>Of course, thepolitical class, freshoff a closed-door lobbying campaign to</p><p>protect their generous health insurance plans did get to “keep it.” President</p><p>Obama responded to their demands, personally asking that the Office of</p><p>Personnel Management allow members of Congress to retain the massive</p><p>subsidiesconferredbytheFederalEmployeesHealthBenefitsProgram,despite</p><p>the fact that ObamaCare would otherwise require them to purchase the same</p><p>health insurance programs available to the population at large.23 The OPM,</p><p>controlled by the president, quickly solved the problem for the insiders.</p><p>AccordingtothesympatheticWashingtonPost:</p><p>[L]awmakers and their staffs previously had about 70 percent of their</p><p>insurance premiums underwritten by the federal government through the</p><p>Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. . . . Under pressure from</p><p>Congress,theOfficeofPersonnel[createdanewruling]sayingthefederal</p><p>governmentcouldstillcontributetohealth-carepremiums.</p><p>The final rule would keep the subsidy in place only for members of</p><p>CongressandaffectedstaffwhoenrollinaSmallBusinessHealthOptions</p><p>Program (SHOP) plan available in theDistrict of Columbia. Such plans</p><p>mostcommonlywillbeaimedatemployeesofbusinesseswith fewer than</p><p>50workers, butperhaps the theory is that each lawmakerandhisorher</p><p>staffconstituteasmallbusiness.24</p><p>When Senator David Vitter (R-LA) introduced an amendment to eliminate</p><p>thisde facto exemption forcongressionalemployees,Democratsdescendedon</p><p>him in a rage, calling the effort “mean-spirited,” while Republican staffers</p><p>quietly lobbied against the efforts behind the scenes to preserve their special</p><p>treatment.25Insidersonbothsidesoftheaisleareequallyinvestedinthistwo-</p><p>tiered system, the inequities ofwhichwill surely comeback to haunt themas</p><p>“consumers”intheObamaCareexchangeslookforrelieffromthenewsystem’s</p><p>stickershock.</p><p>Duetodisorganizationandageneralreluctanceforanyonetocomplywithan</p><p>obviouslybadlaw,manyofObamaCare’sdeadlineshavebeendelayed.Nearly</p><p>two-thirds of U.S. states have outright refused to set up the health-care</p><p>exchanges required by the law, forcing the federal government’s hand and</p><p>resulting inmultiple pushbacks of the initial deadline. The employermandate</p><p>hasalsobeendelayeduntil2015,duetopanickingbusinessesrealizingthatthey</p><p>were unprepared to bear the full financial toll of the requirement. Cuts to</p><p>Medicare and numerous eligibility requirements for health insurance subsidies</p><p>have also been put on hold.26 Overall, the rollout of the president’s signature</p><p>legislationhasbeennothingshortofachaoticmess.</p><p>Sowhatwehaveisalarge,cumbersome,unworkable,ineffectivehealth-care</p><p>programthatnobodywants,butwhichisneverthelessthelawoftheland.What</p><p>agencycouldbetrustedtoenforcesuchadisastrouspolicy?Youguessedit:the</p><p>IRS.</p><p>Of all the federal agencies that could possibly be tapped to implement</p><p>ObamaCare,itwouldbehardtocomeupwithaworsechoicethantheIRS.We</p><p>have already established the political corruption to which the agency is</p><p>susceptible,butthereareanumberofotherreasonsthatentrustingthemwithour</p><p>healthcareisauniquelybadidea.</p><p>First, ObamaCare adds a total of forty-seven new duties and enforcement</p><p>powerstotheagency,whichhasadmittedtolackingthenecessaryresourcesto</p><p>fulfill even its existingduties. Inahearingdefending the IRS’sdiscriminatory</p><p>practices,thenIRScommissionerStephenMillertestifiedthat“itwouldbegood</p><p>tohavealittlebudgetthatwouldallowustogetmorethanthenumberofpeople</p><p>wehave.”27Howcanwe expect fair and equal treatment froman agency that</p><p>blamesitsethicalviolationsonlackoffunding?</p><p>Thegray-suitedsovietsattheIRShaveproventimeandagainthattheyhave</p><p>norespectfortheprivacyofindividualsortheirrecords.Apartfromtheprying</p><p>questions askedof tea party groups in thediscrimination scandal, the IRShas</p><p>allegedly violated the law by seizing 60 million medical records from a</p><p>California health-care provider.28 Allowing the agency to manage health-care</p><p>subsidiesand imposepenaltieswillopenthedoor tofurtherabuseandremove</p><p>the control of sensitive personal information from individual patient-doctor</p><p>relationships.</p><p>Finally, the IRShasnoexpertise in the fieldofhealthcare.Theyarebeing</p><p>askedtoregulateanindustrytheyknownothingabout,andgiventhequalityof</p><p>IRS employees we have seen in the public spotlight lately, it seems overly</p><p>optimistictoexpectthemtobeaquickstudy,orunbiasedenforcer.Indeed,the</p><p>sample of officials paraded before congressional committees in recentmonths</p><p>exposesaworkforcethatisseeminglyimmunetopublicoversightorcontrols.In</p><p>amisconducthearing,Millerrespondedtoanalarmingnumberofquestionsby</p><p>claimingthathedidn’tknow,couldn’tremember,orwasn’tsureoftheanswers.</p><p>He expressed no knowledge of his own employees and claimed to lack any</p><p>opiniononwhethertheactionsofhisagencywereappropriate.29</p><p>IftheIRSistrulyasdisorganizedandunknowingasitsleadersclaim,whyon</p><p>earthshouldtheagencybeallowedtohandleyourhealthcare?Theotheroption,</p><p>ofcourse, is that theyareobfuscating,parryingwithpoliticalopponents torun</p><p>outtheclock,knowingthatcareercivilservantswillbearoundlongerthanany</p><p>singlepoliticianorevenapresident.</p><p>This alternative scenario hardly seems reassuring. It raises a fundamental</p><p>question about the legitimacy of theway business is conducted in the federal</p><p>labyrinth.Dotheyworkforus?AretheyaccountabletoWethePeople?Orusto</p><p>them?</p><p>In 2009, then–House Speaker Nancy Pelosi infamously said, “We have to</p><p>pass the bill so that you can find outwhat is in it, away from the fog of the</p><p>controversy”(emphasisadded).</p><p>Well, now we have passed it, and the law is far more unpopular than the</p><p>proposed legislation ever was. When the Healthcare.gov website debuted to</p><p>disastrous malfunction on October 1, 2013, it became evident that this</p><p>unpopularitywasnotsimplyaresultofthe“fogofcontroversy,”butanintuitive</p><p>understandingofgovernmentineptness.</p><p>Evenafterthebotchedlaunch,however,NancyPelosiwasstillcheerleading</p><p>thelaw,oblivioustotherealitythatwasquicklygrippingtherestofthecountry.</p><p>Speakingseveralweeksafterthewebsitelaunch,Pelosiinsistedthatshewanted</p><p>to“sayeverychanceIgethowproudweareof[ObamaCare.]”Shethenwenton</p><p>tomakethetenuousclaimthatthelaw“islife,ahealthierlife,libertytopursue</p><p>yourhappiness,asourfounderspromised.”30</p><p>It is telling that the president who consistently thinks of himself as the</p><p>smartest guy in the room appeared downright baffled by his administration’s</p><p>inability to successfully remake the nation’s entire health-care systemwith an</p><p>unbendingbeliefinsmartergovernment.Redesigningone-sixthoftheAmerican</p><p>economy,henowconcedes,ismorecomplicatedthanheimagined:</p><p>Butevenifwegetthehardwareandsoftwareworkingexactlythewayit’s</p><p>supposed towith relativelyminorglitches,whatwe’realsodiscovering is</p><p>thatinsuranceiscomplicatedtobuy.Andanothermistakethatwemade,I</p><p>think,wasunderestimating thedifficultiesofpeoplepurchasing insurance</p><p>online and shopping for a lot of options with a lot of costs and lot of</p><p>differentbenefitsandplansandsomehowexpectingthatthatwouldbevery</p><p>smooth, and then they’ve also got to try to apply for tax credits on the</p><p>website.31</p><p>An embarrassingly botched website is just the beginning. Friedrich Hayek</p><p>refers to the grandiose pretentions of government redesigners as a “fatal</p><p>conceit,” because of the unforeseen, and often dire, consequences of big</p><p>government designs on private life. Real people are getting hurt by the</p><p>pretensions ofObamaCare, and the only real winners seem to be the insiders</p><p>whowilladministerthenewcomplexstructure.</p><p>ObamaCareseekstosupplantabrokensystemwithmoreofthemeddlingand</p><p>discretionaryreengineeringthatbrokeitinthefirstplace.Increasedcomplexity</p><p>anddifficultyof compliance is precisely theopposite ofwhat is needed to fix</p><p>healthcareinAmerica.Theonlycertaintyisthatmorebureaucratswillbehired,</p><p>and that they will be given extraordinary discretionary power over the health</p><p>careofyourfamily.</p><p>ANEMPIREOFDATABASES</p><p>If turning over your medical records to the IRS sounds scary, it is nothing</p><p>comparedtotheimmenseFederalDataServicesHubtheObamaadministration</p><p>has planned. Wary of the decentralization of information, the president has</p><p>announced his plans to collect a massive amount of personal data on every</p><p>citizen, stored in one place and overseen entirely by the infinite wisdom of</p><p>careerbureaucratswhoarevirtuallyunfirable.</p><p>As part of the Patient Protection andAffordable CareAct, the data hub is</p><p>designed to allow health-care exchanges to access personal information on</p><p>patientsthroughtheIRS,theSocialSecurityAdministration,theDepartmentof</p><p>Homeland Security, the Veterans Health Administration, the Department of</p><p>Defense,theOfficeofPersonnelManagement,andthePeaceCorps.32Whydo</p><p>health-careexchangesneedsomuchinformation?Ithastodowiththecomplex</p><p>eligibilityrequirementsforthevarioushealth-caresubsidiesincludedunderthe</p><p>law. Since these subsidies are determined by how much money you make,</p><p>exchangesneedaccesstoyourtaxrecords,aswellasanyotherinformationthat</p><p>couldqualifyyouforcertainbenefits,orindeedpenalties.</p><p>Oneofthemajorproblemswithhavingallofthissensitiveinformationinone</p><p>place is that any successful attempt to break into theHubby anoutsideparty</p><p>could result in the identity thefts of millions of Americans. Think about it:</p><p>names,emailaddresses, telephonenumbers,SocialSecuritynumbers, taxdata,</p><p>health insurance records, immigration status, and prison records will all be</p><p>availableforoneingenioushackertotakeandusehowhewill.33</p><p>But surely the government would not allow such a thing to happen. The</p><p>safeguardsonsucharepositorymustbeenormous,right?Actually, theObama</p><p>administrationhasalreadymissednumerousdeadlinesinimplementingsecurity</p><p>measures for the Hub. Although the law requires that these safeguards be in</p><p>place,theadministrationhassofarbeenunabletomeetitsownstandards.The</p><p>IdentityTheftResourceCenterreports34.1percentofalldatabreachesin2013</p><p>were related tohealthcare.34This isnotexactlya reassuring thought.Canwe</p><p>really trust all the details of our private lives to an organization that has</p><p>consistentlyfailedtofulfillitspromises?</p><p>The government’s record on keeping its information secure is not exactly</p><p>exemplary. An inspector general’s report found that the IRS accidentally</p><p>disclosed the confidential taxpayer information of thousands of people from</p><p>2009 to 2010.35 The Social Security Administration has mistakenly disclosed</p><p>thousandsofnames,birthdates,andSocialSecuritynumbers.36Andin2012,a</p><p>lonehackermanagedtoobtain3.6millionnamesandSocialSecuritynumbers</p><p>fromaSouthCarolinadatabase.37</p><p>Theproblem is compoundedby the fact that the incentives for information</p><p>theftwillbegreaterthaneverbefore.Thepayoffsforamaliciousidentitythief</p><p>would be exponentially greater thanwhen datawas stored separately across a</p><p>wide variety of individually encrypted databases. Democratic representative</p><p>Jackie Speier of California expressed concern over this, saying that the Hub</p><p>wouldhavea“bull’s-eye”onitforhackers.38</p><p>But the threat that this data could be obtained by someone outside the</p><p>governmentmaywellbeovershadowedbythepotentialforinternalabuseofthe</p><p>databygovernmentemployees.TherecentIRSandNSAscandalsmakeitplain</p><p>thatasimplesecurityclearancedoesnotalleviatethetemptationtoabuseone’s</p><p>authority.Onthecontrary,astheeditorsoftheWallStreetJournalhavepointed</p><p>out,“puttingtheIRSinchargeofapoliticalprograminevitablymakestheIRS</p><p>more political.”39 The more personal information we allow these agencies to</p><p>have, the easier it will be for them to identify, and potentially target, their</p><p>politicalenemies.Inthelightofrecentevents,thisisadangerthatweshouldall</p><p>take very seriously. The simple fact is that the ObamaCare data hub will</p><p>eliminateanysemblanceofprivacywehaveasfarasthefederalgovernmentis</p><p>concerned,andanyoverzealousemployeewillbeabletowreakhavocwiththe</p><p>livesofordinaryAmericans.</p><p>Theregulatorynoticedetailingtheparticularsof theDataHubsaysthat the</p><p>governmentisfreetodiscloseanyoftheinformationithascollectedtoavariety</p><p>of individuals and agencies without the consent of the individual. This</p><p>information sharing isnot limited to securegovernmentagencies,but includes</p><p>“contractors,consultants,orgrantees,”aswellaslawenforcementofficials.40So</p><p>notonlywillyourdatabecollectedandsharedwithingovernmentdepartments;</p><p>itcanpotentiallybedispersedtoanynumberofprivatecontractorswithoutyour</p><p>knowledge. The notice insists that the data will only go to those people who</p><p>need it for their records, but it is not clear at what level the “need to know”</p><p>thresholdwillbeset.Itiseasytoenvisionasituationinwhichtheunscrupulous</p><p>areaffordedeasyaccesstosensitivedocuments.</p><p>Like thebotcheddevelopmentofHealthcare.gov, theObamaadministration</p><p>rushedtohireaslewof“patientnavigators,” individualswhosejobsconsistof</p><p>helpingotherssignupfortheObamaCareexchanges,astepthatwouldinvolve</p><p>thecollectionofagreatdealofpersonal</p><p>goodpolitics.Butgoodpoliticsisaconsequence,</p><p>not the goal. “Liberty is not a means to a higher political end,” wrote Lord</p><p>Acton.“Itisitselfthehighestpoliticalend.Itisnotforthesakeofagoodpublic</p><p>administrationthatitisrequired,butforthesecurityinthepursuitofthehighest</p><p>objectsofcivilsociety,andofprivatelife.”1</p><p>It’scommonsense.TheRulesforLibertyareappliedequally,withoutbiasor</p><p>discrimination,anddon’tallowthemovingofgoalpostsmidgame.Theserules</p><p>don’tpermitgray-suitedmiddlementorearrangethingsforyourspecialbenefit,</p><p>oragainstyourpersonalpreferences,arbitrarily.</p><p>AdamSmith,theScottishmoralphilosopherwidelyconsideredthefatherof</p><p>modern economics, based his economic thinking on the mutually beneficial</p><p>gains achieved fromvoluntary cooperation.But cooperation and exchange are</p><p>basedonmutuallyunderstoodvalues.Hismostimportantwork,afoundationfor</p><p>all classical liberal thinking, isThe Theory ofMoral Sentiments. In my book</p><p>Hostile Takeover, I briefly discuss Smith’s influence on the work of Nobel</p><p>laureate economistVernon Smith, his inquiries into theways that the rules of</p><p>community conduct function in real life. The rules that allow for peaceful</p><p>cooperationemerge,seeminglyspontaneously,fromhumanactions.</p><p>Howdosuchsocialnorms—therules—emerge?Thequestion isone thatF.</p><p>A.Hayek,alsoaNobel laureate,spent the latterhalfofhisprofessionalcareer</p><p>exploring. Both Vernon Smith and Hayek find the basis for their inquiry in</p><p>Smith’sMoralSentiments:</p><p>Themostsacred lawsof justice, therefore, thosewhoseviolationseemsto</p><p>call loudest for vengeanceandpunishment, are the lawswhichguard the</p><p>lifeandpersonofourneighbor;thenextarethosewhichguardhisproperty</p><p>andpossessions;andlastofallcomethosewhichguardwhatarecalledhis</p><p>personalrights,orwhatisduetohimfromthepromisesofothers.</p><p>1.DON’THURTPEOPLE</p><p>This first rule seems simpleenough, andnodecentpersonwouldhurt another</p><p>unlesstheactionwasprovokedorinsomewayjustified.Freepeoplejustwant</p><p>to be left alone, not hassled or harmed by someone else with an agenda or</p><p>designsovertheirlifeandproperty.Wewouldcertainlystrikebackifandwhen</p><p>our physical well-being is threatened—if our family, our community, or our</p><p>countrywere attacked.Butwe shouldn’t hurt other people unless it is in self-</p><p>defenseorinthedefenseofanotheragainstuncheckedaggression.</p><p>LibertarianphilosopherscallthistheNonAggressionPrinciple(NAP).Don’t</p><p>start a fight, but always be prepared, if absolutely necessary, to finish a fight</p><p>unjustlyinstigatedbysomeoneelse.Here’showMurrayRothbardputit:</p><p>Thefundamentalaxiomoflibertariantheoryisthatnoonemaythreatenor</p><p>commit violence (“aggress”) against another man’s person or property.</p><p>Violence may be employed only against the man who commits such</p><p>violence; that is, only defensively against the aggressive violence of</p><p>another. In short, no violencemay be employed against a non-aggressor.</p><p>Hereisthefundamentalrulefromwhichcanbededucedtheentirecorpus</p><p>oflibertariantheory.2</p><p>Justice, saysAdamSmith, isbasedona fundamental respect for individual</p><p>life. “Death is the greatest evil which one man can inflict upon another, and</p><p>excitesthehighestdegreeofresentmentinthosewhoareimmediatelyconnected</p><p>withtheslain,”hewrites.“Murder,therefore,isthemostatrociousofallcrimes</p><p>which affect individuals only, in the sight both ofmankind, andof the person</p><p>whohascommittedit.”3</p><p>Weallagreethatthefirstlegitimateroleofgovernmentforceistoprotectthe</p><p>livesof individualcitizens.But thingsgetmorecomplicatedwhen it comes to</p><p>defendingagainst“enemiesforeignanddomestic.”</p><p>Inhis1796FarewellAddress,GeorgeWashingtonwarnedAmericansnotto</p><p>“entangleourpeaceandprosperity in the toils”of foreignambitions, interests,</p><p>andrivalries.“Itisourtruepolicytosteerclearofpermanentallianceswithany</p><p>portionoftheforeignworld.”</p><p>Our first presidentwas hardly an isolationist, and his foreign policy views</p><p>wereguided, in largepart, by common sense andpragmatism.Oneofhiskey</p><p>considerations was the budgetary implications of overly ambitious foreign</p><p>entanglements. “As a very important source of strength and security, cherish</p><p>publiccredit,”Washingtoncounseled.“Onemethodofpreservingitistouseit</p><p>assparinglyaspossible,avoidingoccasionsofexpensebycultivatingpeace.”</p><p>You might interpret Washington’s skepticism, in a modern context, as</p><p>warningagainstopen-endednation-buildingquagmires.Canwereallyestablish</p><p>a constitutional democracy in Iraq? Can we successfully mediate the violent</p><p>disputesofwarringfactionsincivilwarsliketheonegoingontodayinSyria?</p><p>Betteryet,shouldwe?</p><p>The principle of nonaggressionmeans that we should only declarewar on</p><p>nations demonstrably seeking to do us harm. The men and women who</p><p>volunteerforourmilitaryshouldnotbeputinharm’swaybytheircommander-</p><p>in-chiefwithoutaclearandjustpurpose,withoutaplanorwithoutanendgame.</p><p>Thisisjustcommonsense.</p><p>In an era inwhich our enemies are no longer just confined to nations, the</p><p>otherkeyquestionisthebalancebetweensecurityathomeandtheprotectionof</p><p>ourcivilliberties,particularlyourrighttoprivacyandourrighttodueprocess.</p><p>Massive expansions of the government’s surveillance authorities under the</p><p>PatriotActandrecentamendmentstotheForeignIntelligenceSurveillanceAct</p><p>havecivillibertariansofallideologicalstripesworriedthatthegovernmenthas</p><p>crossedessentialconstitutionallines.</p><p>DefendingAmericaagainsttheuncheckedaggressionofourenemiesisafirst</p><p>responsibilityof thefederalgovernment,butrespectingtherightsof individual</p><p>citizensandcheckingthepowerofunelectedemployeesattheNationalSecurity</p><p>Agencyisanequallyimportantresponsibility.IstandwithBenFranklinonthis</p><p>question.Hesaid:“Thosewhowouldgiveupessentiallibertytopurchasealittle</p><p>temporarysafetydeserveneitherlibertynorsafety.”</p><p>Weshouldalwaysbeskepticaloftoomuchconcentratedpowerinthehands</p><p>of government agents. They will naturally abuse it. Outside government, an</p><p>unnatural concentration of power—such as the extraordinary leveragewielded</p><p>by mega-investment banks or government employees unions—is always in</p><p>partnershipwithgovernmentpowermonopolists.</p><p>2.DON’TTAKEPEOPLE’SSTUFF</p><p>Life. Liberty. Property.While most of us are totally down with the first two</p><p>tenetsofAmerica’soriginalbusinessplan, thebasisofproperty rightsandour</p><p>individualrighttothefruitsofourlaborsseemstobeincreasinglycontroversial.</p><p>Dowehavearighttoourownstuff?</p><p>In our personal lives, taking from one person, by force, to give to another</p><p>person isconsideredstealing.Stealing iswrong.It’s justnotcool to takeother</p><p>people’sstuff,andweallagreethatrippingoffyourneighbor,oryourneighbor’s</p><p>credit informationonline,oryourneighbor’s localbank, isacrimethatshould</p><p>bepunished.</p><p>“Therecanbenopropermotive forhurtingourneighbour, therecanbeno</p><p>incitementtodoeviltoanother,whichmankindwillgoalongwith,exceptjust</p><p>indignationforevilwhichthatotherhasdonetous,”arguesAdamSmith.“To</p><p>disturb his happinessmerely because it stands in theway of our own, to take</p><p>fromhimwhatisofrealusetohimmerelybecauseitmaybeofequalorofmore</p><p>usetous,ortoindulge,inthismanner,attheexpenseofotherpeople,the</p><p>information.Ratherthanrequiringthe</p><p>samekindofsecurityclearancesorbackgroundchecksnecessaryforpositionsin</p><p>sensitive government agencies such as the FBI or the IRS, theDepartment of</p><p>HealthandHumanServiceswaivedanysuch requirement, insteadaskingonly</p><p>foratwenty-tothirty-houronlinetrainingseminar.Ahighschooldiplomaisnot</p><p>even required.41 Among the groups eager to take up positions as “patient</p><p>navigators”arePlannedParenthood,seniorcitizenadvocacyorganizations,and</p><p>churches.42</p><p>Bynow,boththepotentialforabuseandtheseriousnessoftheconsequences</p><p>should be obvious. If the Obama administration is prepared to allow barely</p><p>trained, agenda-drivenworkers fromoff the street access to yourmost private</p><p>data,istherereasontobelievethattherewillbeanyseriousefforttoprotectthe</p><p>rights of enrollees on the exchanges? Enrolling in the ObamaCare exchanges</p><p>means surrendering all of your most private information into the hands of a</p><p>governmentthathasprovenirresponsible,untrustworthy,insecure,andindiscreet</p><p>ateveryturn.</p><p>Butgoaheadandtrustthem;they’refromthegovernment.</p><p>APERFECTSTORM</p><p>The inabilityofcitizens tocomplywith the labyrinthine lawsof their country,</p><p>the imposition of an oppressive and ineffective health-care scheme on an</p><p>unwilling public, and the revelation that we have no privacy from our</p><p>government and little recourse if accusedof a crimehavecoalesced to expose</p><p>theexcessesofagovernmentoutofcontrol.Thisdarkcloudisacalltoaction</p><p>for thosewhowishtopreservetheirfreedomsandliberate themselvesfroman</p><p>increasinglyoppressivefederalbureaucracy.</p><p>The trend toward more power in Washington, D.C., runs headlong into a</p><p>world that is quickly trending in the opposite direction. The Internet and its</p><p>ubiquitous social media mutations are quickly disrupting and mercilessly</p><p>dismantlingmanyoftheoutdated,top-downinstitutionalstructuresthatusedto</p><p>telluswhatourchoiceswerefromapredeterminedsetofoptions.Nowweare</p><p>free to choose, to shop, to gather information, to organize, to vote, and to</p><p>associateaswepleasebasedonourownpreferences.</p><p>Thiscollisionisimminent.Likeanincomingcoldfrontrollingforwardona</p><p>hotsummerday,thisisaperfectstormbetweenthepowerhoardersintheHalls</p><p>ofDiscretionandyourrighttodesign,asbestyouseefit,yourownfuture.</p><p>Onewayoranother,something’sgoingtogive.</p><p>CHAPTER5</p><p>SAMEASTHEOLDBOSS</p><p>INJANUARY1973,RICHARDNixonendedthemilitarydraftinthewakeofaseriesof</p><p>high-profile draft-card-burning protests by antiwar activists. (That’s right, a</p><p>Republicanended themilitarydraft.And itwasNixon.)Hispresidencywould</p><p>soonenoughendignominiously,though,inpartduetohiseagernesstousethe</p><p>IRStoselectivelypunishhispoliticalenemies.TheDemocrats,theRepublicans,</p><p>the left, and thepresswerealloutragedby this remarkableabuseofexecutive</p><p>power.</p><p>The current IRS scandal, where the agency systematically targeted moms</p><p>organizingtheircommunitiestodefendconstitutionalprincipleslikethefreedom</p><p>toassociateandpeaceablyassemble,elicitsnosuchoutragefromDemocratsor</p><p>themany tentacles of leftist activist organizations. Few seemwilling, or even</p><p>interested in, defending everyone’s civil rights and the First Amendment</p><p>protectionofpoliticalspeechforthoseguys.Howsad.</p><p>TheDemocrats’andprogressives’actofomissiononIRSharassmentleading</p><p>uptothe2012electionisbadenough.Don’ttheyrememberWatergate?Arethey</p><p>nolongerrepulsedbywhatfederalagentsattheCIAandtheIRSdidinanall-</p><p>out bureaucratic onslaught to silence Dr. King? But then there is the left’s</p><p>blatantlypartisanactofcommissionasheadcheerleaders foranew individual</p><p>mandate that involuntarily conscripts young people into ObamaCare, whether</p><p>theylikeitornot.Theyareliterallydraftingmillennialsintoasystemdesigned</p><p>by administration technocrats, powerful committee chairmen, and a whoring</p><p>mob of big insurance interests that got to the table first to carve out an</p><p>acceptablereturnontheirpoliticalinvestments.</p><p>Meetthenewboss.Sameastheoldboss,butworse.</p><p>Advocatesof conscriptingouryouth intoObamaCare typicallyhidebehind</p><p>thefactthatvariousadvocatesonthe“right”—notablyMittRomneyandNewt</p><p>Gingrich—advocated on behalf of the individual mandate. It’s a ridiculous</p><p>argumentforthemtomake,becauseyouknowthattheywouldoppose,lockstep,</p><p>this sort of reverse Robin Hood scheme if it were proposed by a President</p><p>RomneyoraPresidentGingrich.</p><p>Whynotapplyaconsistentsetofprinciples,consistentlyapplied,regardless</p><p>ofwhichpartylabelisattached?</p><p>It’s a dirty business, and this oppressive wealth transfer from young</p><p>Americanstospecialinterestsandthemore-wealthyappearstobetheAchilles’</p><p>heel of the new, insanely authoritarian progressive movement. Whatever the</p><p>clarion call of “social justice” was supposed to entail, surely garnishing the</p><p>wages of the young and struggling to bolster the earnings reports of Big</p><p>InsuranceandFortune500dinosaurswasneverpartoftheplan.</p><p>DEADINTHELONGRUN</p><p>While the generational theft inherent inObamaCarewill become increasingly</p><p>obvious as young people sit down and consider their coerced “choices,” the</p><p>relentlessprocessofmakingfinancialcommitmentswecan’taffordtoday,tobe</p><p>foisteduponthebucklingshouldersoffuturetaxpayerstomorrow,isprettymuch</p><p>businessasusualinWashington,D.C.</p><p>Inhis important critiqueofmodernpublic financepractices, the lateNobel</p><p>Prize–winningeconomistJamesBuchananreferredtothedominanceofrob-the-</p><p>cradlefiscalpoliciesasthesadlegacyofJohnMaynardKeynes.Ourdemocracy</p><p>was in deficit, he said, literally and structurally.Keynes,who single-handedly</p><p>severed the cord between Adam Smith and the new “macroeconomics,” was</p><p>culpable.</p><p>Since America’s founding, it was generally understood that governments</p><p>shouldnotspendmoney theydon’thave.“What isprudence in theconductof</p><p>every private family,” Smith argued inTheWealth of Nations, “can scarce be</p><p>folly in that of a great kingdom.” Under the old rules, says Buchanan,</p><p>“governmentshouldnotplacefuturegenerationsinbondagebydeficitfinancing</p><p>ofpublicoutlaysdesigned toprovide temporary and short-livedbenefits.”But</p><p>all that changed with the publication of Keynes’s General Theory of</p><p>Employment,Interest,andMoney.Here’showBuchananputsit:</p><p>With the completion of the Keynesian revolution, these time-tested</p><p>principles of fiscal responsibility were consigned to the heap of</p><p>superstitiousnostrumsthatoncestifledenlightenedpolitical-fiscalactivism.</p><p>Keynesianism stood the Smithian analogy on its head. The stress was</p><p>placedonthedifferencesratherthanthesimilaritiesbetweenafamilyand</p><p>thestate,andnotablywithrespect toprinciplesofprudent fiscalconduct.</p><p>Thestatewasnolongertobeconceivedintheimageofthefamily,andthe</p><p>rules of prudent fiscal conduct differed dramatically as between the two</p><p>institutions.ThemessageofKeynesianismmightbesummarizedas:Whatis</p><p>follyintheconductofaprivatefamilymaybeprudenceintheconductof</p><p>theaffairsofagreatnation.1</p><p>SoKeynesprovidedapretenseof intellectual legitimacy to thenatural,and</p><p>very destructive, instincts of politicians wanting to spend more money than</p><p>publiccoffersheld.“Inthelongrunwearealldead,”2washowKeyneshimself</p><p>rationalized the idea of spending binges that</p><p>were unsustainable. Such</p><p>shortsightedthinkingfitsperfectlyintothepsycheofpoliticiansthinkingintwo-</p><p>year increments, or presidents thinking about a single reelectionbid after four</p><p>yearsinoffice.</p><p>Keynes is, infact,dead,but ifyouareeighteenyearsold today,youareon</p><p>thehookforhisbadeconomics.Theirresponsiblechoicesbeingmadetodaywill</p><p>have to be paid for in the future, by our children and grandchildren.You can</p><p>onlypass thebuck so far.Asof thiswriting, everyman,woman, andchild in</p><p>America owes more than fifty thousand dollars toward the national debt, a</p><p>number that grows largerwith every passing day.3With a declining birth rate</p><p>and a generation of baby boomers starting to enter retirement, Social Security</p><p>hasbecomeneithersocialnorsecure.Itisamassive,cross-generationalwealth</p><p>transfer,withmillennials losing a huge chunk of their paycheck to pay into a</p><p>systemthattheyknowisunlikelytoexistwhentheyseektoretireinfortyyears.</p><p>ThefinancesforMedicarearefarworse,andyoucanonlyexpectthefinancial</p><p>burdenonyoungpeopletogrowasObamaCareraidsMedicarecoffers.</p><p>Itallseemscrazy,andyoungpeoplearerightfullycynicalabouttheirfutures.</p><p>On top of all of this, President Obama’s controversial health-care scheme</p><p>imposesits“individualmandate,”Washington-speakforanincrediblyregressive</p><p>“tax”imposedonyoung,healthypeoplethatforcesthemtobuymandatedhealth</p><p>insuranceplansthattheycan’taffordanddon’tneed,orelsepayafine.Withall</p><p>ofthenewfederaladd-ons,insurancecompanylobbyistsinsistedonacoercive</p><p>meansofmakingyoungpeoplecross-subsidize thebenefitsofolder,wealthier</p><p>patients.Imaginebeingabletoforcenewcustomerstooverpayforyourproduct.</p><p>Whatadeal.</p><p>Andwhy not? If youwere the CEO ofMcDonald’s and theWhite House</p><p>offeredyouachancetomandatetheconsumptionofBigMacsforlunch,would</p><p>youtakethedeal,stringsattached?Foranumberofhealth-careandbigbusiness</p><p>interestslobbyingtheirparochialagendainthebattleoverObamaCarein2009,</p><p>theanswer,apparently,hasbeenahearty“Yes,WeCan.”</p><p>And so it was that ObamaCare would include a mandate, with the full</p><p>coercive forceof the federal government and the IRSbehind it, that eighteen-</p><p>year-olds buy health insurance from a politically prescribed set of plans</p><p>approved by the federal government. Insurance providers just love it when</p><p>healthyyoungpeoplesignupforgold-platedinsuranceplans.It’sbecauseyoung</p><p>peopleseldomusethehealth-caresystem.</p><p>Which is why so many young people choose to go uninsured in today’s</p><p>screwed-uphealth-caremarketplace.It’saquestionofcostsversusbenefitsona</p><p>reallytightbudget.</p><p>Why would progressives flack for such an affront to the cause of social</p><p>justice? Why would they ever support a political shakedown that fattens the</p><p>bottom lines of the federal government and insurance kingpins alike? It just</p><p>doesn’tmakeanysense.</p><p>Nosenseatall,untilyouunderstandthattheindividualmandateistheheart</p><p>of theObamaCare redistribution scheme.Without overcharging young people,</p><p>theObamaCareexchangessimplywon’twork.</p><p>Andthisiswhatthenewleft,Democrats,andprogressivesarefoistingonto</p><p>alreadyoverburdenedyouth.WhendidtheAmericanleftdecidethatitwascool</p><p>tosubsidizetheManonthebacksofmillennialsstrugglingwithunprecedented</p><p>student loandebtanda jobless recession thatneverends? Just thinkabout the</p><p>real burdens foisted upon American youth by the failed experiments in big</p><p>government.</p><p>ITSUCKSTOBEYOUNG</p><p>The most important event in anyone’s personal launch into orbit is finding a</p><p>goodjob.Ifyouaregraduatingfromhighschoolorcollegein2014, this isno</p><p>simple task.Amarket crash in2008enabledbyeasymoney, easycredit, easy</p><p>spending,andanexpandingfederalbureaucraticexpansewasmetwithmoreof</p><p>the same, effectively creating economic refugees of themillennial generation.</p><p>The hits keep coming, and the affront of an individual mandate adds to the</p><p>weightoftwenty-somethingsalreadypig-piledbythesecondaryeffectsofabig,</p><p>intrusive,governmentagendapaidforwithborrowedmoney.</p><p>Theso-calledrecoveryfromtheGreatRecessionhasbeenespeciallyhardon</p><p>the young. Rates of new job creation have not returned to precrash levels, or</p><p>even acceptable average rates. Deceptive decreases in the unemployment rate</p><p>have been driven by ever lower levels of participation in the labor force. By</p><p>September2013thisratehadplummetedtoitslowestlevelinthirty-fiveyears.4</p><p>Inotherwords,morepeoplearegivingup.</p><p>Unemployment has remained a serious problem for everyone, but those</p><p>betweentheagesoftwentyandtwenty-fourhavebeenhitthehardest.Thelack</p><p>ofworkplaceexperienceamongrecentgraduatesmeansthattheyhavetheleast</p><p>leveragewithwhichtonegotiatewithemployers,andwhenjobshavetobecut,</p><p>theirs are the first to go. As of August 2013 the unemployment rate among</p><p>Americans aged twenty to twenty-four was a dismal 13 percent,5 and a Pew</p><p>Research Study found that a record number—36 percent—of millennials are</p><p>forcedtoliveundertheirparents’roofs.6</p><p>Addinginsulttoinjuryistheinsanecostofhighereducation.Moreandmore</p><p>youngpeoplegraduatewithadegreethatiseffectivelyworthlessthanthedebt</p><p>theyaccruedtofinanceit.Thetotalamountofstudentloandebthasballoonedin</p><p>recentyears,now reachinganastonishing$1 trillion, anaverageofmore than</p><p>$24,000perstudent.7Athirdofthisdebthasbeenincurredtosupportadvanced</p><p>degrees,morepaperpursuedbymorestudentsasameanstodelayenteringthe</p><p>uninviting jobmarket.8 Student loan debt tripled between 2004 and 2012 and</p><p>wastheonlykindofhouseholddebtthatcontinuedrisingthroughouttheGreat</p><p>Recession.In2012,nearlyone-thirdofstudentloanborrowersweredelinquent</p><p>intheirloanrepayments.9</p><p>Why are students accruing so much debt? Because the costs of higher</p><p>education, fed by bureaucracy and government subsidies, have skyrocketed to</p><p>thepointwherefewstudentsareabletoaffordthem.Hereagain,noticethebitter</p><p>irony of federal intervention and borrowed dollars: The result is even less</p><p>affordableeducation.From2012to2013,thenetcostofoneyearatapublic,in-</p><p>state university averaged more than $12,000.10 And that’s not counting the</p><p>opportunitycostofmissingoutonfouryearsofreal-worldworkexperience.</p><p>This situation is clearly unsustainable. Like all financial bubbles, this one</p><p>must inevitablyburst, bringingwith it stillmore economicchaos.TheFederal</p><p>AdvisoryCouncil haswarned that the rapidgrowth in student loandebt looks</p><p>eerilysimilar tothehousingbubblethatprecipitatedtheGreatRecession.11As</p><p>theObamaadministrationcontinuestopushtheideathateveryoneshouldgoto</p><p>college,withfinancialhelpfromnewfederalsubsidies,theresultingincreasein</p><p>costsanddebtissuancecouldwellleadtoanothercrashasstudentsareforcedto</p><p>default.</p><p>Students cannot afford the escalating costs of college and graduate school,</p><p>andthedebttheyarerackinguptodaywilldogthemthroughouttheiradultlives.</p><p>Thecushy,cloisteredlivesofcollegeprofessorslooknotunlikethoseofcareer</p><p>federalbureaucrats.Thepermanentadministrativeclassinourpublicuniversity</p><p>systemisbleedingyoungpeopledry,allforanoverpricededucationthatwillnot</p><p>payforitself,evenifyoucanfindajob.</p><p>It sucks to be young today.You have inherited all of the financial burdens</p><p>accruedbyoldergenerationsandbad fiscalmanagement inWashington,D.C.,</p><p>butyouseefewoftheopportunitiesoncevirtuallyguaranteedbytheAmerican</p><p>dream.</p><p>Millennialvoters,ofcourse,swungbigforObamainboth2008and2012.12</p><p>In2008,18-to29-year-oldsbroke forObama66percent, to32percent forhis</p><p>challenger,JohnMcCain.In2012,60percentofvotingyoungpeoplesupported</p><p>the president’s reelection, compared to 37 percent for Mitt Romney. Their</p><p>aversion to the crusty candidates the Republican Party has offered up makes</p><p>somesense,Isuppose.Theresearchsurroundingrecentpresidentialandmidterm</p><p>primariesandcaucusessuggeststhatsupportfortheRepublicanbrandisnearing</p><p>ahistoriclow.Whatisthereasonforthis?</p><p>Here’s thepopularhypothesis:Nationally,America isexperiencinggrowing</p><p>racial and ethnic diversity,which is concentrated among younger voters. This</p><p>benefitsDemocrats.Race,ethnicity,andagearestronglyassociatedwithone’s</p><p>opinionsaboutgovernment.It’sasafebetthatthesefactorsaccountforgreater</p><p>degreesofliberalismwithintheyoungeragegroups.</p><p>Much-hypedautopsiesconfirmtheobvious.The“GrandOldParty”stresses</p><p>neither “Grandness” nor the idea of “Party.” They underscore the “Old.”</p><p>Consensus is, they’re outmoded, out-of-touch, aging white guys. This won’t</p><p>comeasbreakingnews,butDemocratsareperceivedasmoretolerant.</p><p>Nowthingsgetmorecomplicated.</p><p>A2013pollconductedbythepollingcompanyforFreedomWorksfoundthat</p><p>attitudes among young people are shifting toward a preference for smaller</p><p>government.13</p><p>We asked young voters to weigh whether “you would favor a smaller</p><p>government with few services but lower taxes, or a larger government</p><p>which provides more services but has higher taxes?” Asked in this</p><p>reflection-of-realityway,Millennials’viewsontheroleofgovernmentflip.</p><p>Amajorityofyoungvotersfavor“smallergovernmentwithfewerservices</p><p>but lower taxes.” College-age and recent graduates (ages 18–24) favor</p><p>smaller government by 51 to 45 percent. Young voters ages 25–32, who</p><p>have been on the job market for a few years and are more likely to be</p><p>payingtaxes,favorsmallergovernmentby64to24percent.</p><p>Thesenumberssignalareversalofthetrendobservedina2010studybythe</p><p>PewResearchCenter,whichfoundthat53percentofmillennialsagreewiththe</p><p>statement“governmentshoulddomore.”14</p><p>Whyisthisthecase?Well,thePewreportsuggestsethnicandracialdiversity</p><p>doesplayapart.However,theseyoungstersarealsolessreligious,lesslikelyto</p><p>have served in the military, and will probably emerge as the most educated</p><p>generationinAmericanhistory.That’spartlybecausewe’vematuredtomeetthe</p><p>“thedemandsofaknowledge-basedeconomy,”butitalsohassomethingtodo</p><p>withthefactthatyoungpeoplegraspatdegreesbecausetheycan’tfindjobs.</p><p>While they remain largely optimistic, their emergence into adulthood has</p><p>beenstunted.Inthewakeof theGreatRecession,careersarehardtocomeby,</p><p>and young people’s first jobs are often low-paid and unappealing.While they</p><p>remainmoreupbeatabouttheirowneconomicfutures,andtheoverallhealthof</p><p>ournation,thatoptimismhasbeentempered.</p><p>INSANELYAUTHORITARIAN</p><p>Andthenifyoudofindajob,eveninthiseconomy,theIRScomesknockingon</p><p>your door to make sure you “voluntarily” comply with the ObamaCare</p><p>revolution.Theywillmakeyouanofferyoucan’tpossiblyrefuse.</p><p>The payoff for youth’s heightened political allegiance to the Hope and</p><p>ChangeAgenda is a coerced payout to cross-subsidize the government health</p><p>insurance plans of thosewho are older andwealthier. ThewholeObamaCare</p><p>schemewouldcollapseunlesscarriedforwardonthebacksoftheyoung,andthe</p><p>successful implementationof an “individualmandate” that forces them tobuy</p><p>expensivehealthplans.</p><p>Whatwould JerryRubin, theYippiewarprotestor,do?Hewould torchhis</p><p>ObamaCare cardwithout amoment’s hesitation, chanting, “Hell no,wewon’t</p><p>go.”</p><p>Thisisanopportunity.Or,asthepresidentwouldsay,“ateachablemoment.”</p><p>Itseemslikeauniquetimeforpeacefulcivildisobedienceandnoncompliance—</p><p>agrassroots rejectionofWashington’s corruptways,where insiderswinat the</p><p>expenseoftherestofAmerica.Ithoughtitwouldbecooltoskewerprogressives</p><p>for their hypocrisy on the individual mandate by tapping into a bit of 1960s</p><p>hippie zeitgeist. I am after all, a seasonedDeadheadwith nearly one hundred</p><p>liveGratefulDeadshowsundermybelt.SomycolleaguesatFreedomWorksgot</p><p>together with two of the best liberty-minded student groups—Students For</p><p>Liberty and Young Americans For Liberty—and organized a series of “Burn</p><p>YourObamaCareCard”protestschanneling theethosofantiwarprotestors.At</p><p>leastDavidA.GrahamatTheAtlanticgetsthejoke:</p><p>This is an ingenious cultural appropriation. On the one hand,</p><p>FreedomWorks is drawing a pointed link between protests against the</p><p>Vietnam-eradraft—ahatedgovernmentprogramthatdependedonforcing</p><p>thecountry’syoungtosignupforsomethingnotintheirbestinterests—and</p><p>the Affordable Care Act, a hated government program that depends on</p><p>forcingthecountry’syoungtosignupforsomethingthat’s(arguably)notin</p><p>theirbest interests.Thereare, tobe sure, somepretty seriousdifferences.</p><p>. . . But there’s a smirk behind it all too. FreedomWorks is taking a</p><p>treasured image of the antiwar left, the high-water mark of American</p><p>progressivepoliticalaction,andseekingtomakeittheright’sown.15</p><p>Iwouldhavethoughtthattheindividualmandatewouldhaveunitedciviland</p><p>economiclibertarians—left,right,center,andanyonewithasenseoffairness—</p><p>againsttheinsidertradingofthepoliticalclassinWashington,D.C.Instead,the</p><p>progressive standard-bearers atMother Jones went all apoplectic at the very</p><p>notionofdodgingtheObamaCaredraft.“Sonotonly[isFreedomWorks]going</p><p>to be encouraging people to break the law,” froths Mother Jones, “they’re</p><p>literally going to be encouraging people not to buy health insurance. . . . It’s</p><p>times like this that words fail those of us with a few remaining vestiges of</p><p>humandecency.”16</p><p>REALLY?THEVERYFEWlastremainingvestigesofhumandignity?Whatexactlyis</p><p>undignifiedaboutyoungpeoplemakingrationaleconomicchoicesregardlessof</p><p>whattheirWashington,D.C.,overlordsmightdeembestforthem?Maybeyoung</p><p>peoplearefedupwithbeingbleddry,unabletosave,tobuildtheirowndream,</p><p>andwantingtobefreefromsomeoneelse’sgrandplan.</p><p>IreadpanicinMotherJones’sunhingedrant—arealizationthattheAmerican</p><p>leftisnowtheMan,forcingitsauthoritarianplansonanunwillinggenerationat</p><p>thepointofagun.Howironic.</p><p>Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius called</p><p>FreedomWorks’ceremonialcard-burningefforts“dismal.”17Hercommentcame</p><p>beforetheactualrolloutofHealthcare.gov,anembarrassingfailurewhichtruly</p><p>definedtheterm.HHSissoworriedaboutitsabilitytoconscriptenoughyoung,</p><p>ablebodies into themasterplan that it rolledouta$700millioncorporatePR</p><p>campaigntoconvincetwenty-somethingstobuyanoverpricedEdsel.18</p><p>The problem with the Obama administration’s costly propaganda, to</p><p>paraphrase Bill Clinton’smemorable line from the 2012Democratic National</p><p>Convention, is simple “arithmetic.” Hypotheticals and political talking points</p><p>have been replaced with actual price tags based on actual options. And the</p><p>numbersareindeed“dismal.”</p><p>Accordingtoonefront-pageWallStreetJournalarticle,</p><p>“Thesuccessofthe</p><p>newhealth-carelawridesinlargemeasureonwhetheryoung,healthypeople...</p><p>decidetogiveupachunkofdisposableincometopayforinsurance.”19</p><p>JonathanScarboro,whenasked,didthemath.“I’mnotgoingtopayforthat,”</p><p>he says ofmandated coverage.At thirty years old, Scarboromakes $29,000 a</p><p>year and is now required to pay, at minimum, $147 a month, with a $6,350</p><p>deductible.“Itbreaksdownto:CanIaffordit?And,amIgettingmymoney’s</p><p>worth?”</p><p>Allgoodquestions,Jonathan,andtheansweris“no.”Bettertooptoutofthe</p><p>program,burnyour“ObamaCarecard,”andpaythefine.That’stheconclusion</p><p>of eight out of ten young people interviewed by the Journal. Turns out, this</p><p>strategy could save young Americans hundreds of dollars a year. A National</p><p>CenterforPublicPolicyResearchstudyrecentlyrevealed thatsingle,childless</p><p>Americansbetweentheagesofeighteenandthirty-fourcouldsaveatleast$500</p><p>by opting out of ObamaCare and paying the $95 individual mandate penalty</p><p>instead.20</p><p>The Obama administration made its case for the Affordable Care Act by</p><p>insisting that the law would reduce health-care costs and premiums, but this</p><p>claimturnsouttobejustastrueasthepresident’smemorablepromisethatyou</p><p>could keep your current plan, period. Particularly for young people, the very</p><p>purposeoftheAffordableCareActistoincreasecostsandcoverage.Whenthe</p><p>final prices for the plans being offered on health-care exchanges were</p><p>announced,thenewswasfarfromreassuringforagenerationstrugglingtokeep</p><p>their heads above water as it is.While prices vary considerably by state, the</p><p>national average cost to a young, healthy person turned out to be $163 a</p><p>month.21That’sfor thelowest-quality“bronze”plantheyarepermittedtobuy.</p><p>The kind of coverage young people actually might need, insurance against</p><p>catastrophicinjuries,wasnotanoption.Afterall,aplanlikethatwouldnothave</p><p>theredistributiveeffectsodesiredbythearchitectsofObamaCare.Therational</p><p>choiceforyoung,healthypeople isnot tocomply.Astudy from theAmerican</p><p>ActionForumconcluded that,onaverage,premiums formenunder thirtywill</p><p>increaseby260percent.22</p><p>Whateighteen-year-oldcanaffordtopay$163amonth—$2,000ayear—for</p><p>healthinsurancethatcoversservicesmostwillneveruse?Howcanwe,ingood</p><p>conscience, impose this cost on millennials who can barely make ends meet</p><p>now?</p><p>Reasonmagazine’sNickGillespiesumsup thewholesalegenerational theft</p><p>ofObamaCarenicely:</p><p>It’safeatureandnotabugofthePresident’ssignaturehealthcarelawthat</p><p>insurancepremiums for thoseunder30are likely to increasesignificantly</p><p>to allow premiums for older Americans to fall. Indeed, the whole plan</p><p>hinges on getting 2.7millionwhippersnappers out of a total of 7million</p><p>enrollees to sign up in the individual market during the first year. If too</p><p>many older and sicker folks flood themarket, the systemwill crash even</p><p>fasterthantheHealthCare.govwebsite.23</p><p>There is a rational alternative to this government-run health-care hostage</p><p>situation.Abetter, patient-centeredmodelwould cut out all of the gray-suited</p><p>middlemenwhocurrentlycorrupttheeffectiveprovisionofhealthcare.</p><p>Whynot respect youngpeople enough as sovereign individuals to let them</p><p>choose?Whynotletyoungpeoplesavefortheirfuturehealthcareneedstaxfree</p><p>in exchange for voluntarily choosing a catastrophic health insurance policy?</p><p>Noticethat,withoutreallytrying,Ijustsolvedtwoofthemainchallengesinany</p><p>healthreformplan:portabilityandpreexistingconditions.Turnsoutthatchoice,</p><p>individual savings, and personal responsibilityworkwell, even in health care.</p><p>Theonlyproblemwithmyplanisthepoliticalclass’slossofcontroloveryou.It</p><p>turnsout that independentyoungpeople can’t bebought as easilyonElection</p><p>Day.</p><p>In the meantime, young people will do the simple arithmetic and reject</p><p>ObamaCare, perhaps going without. Or they may choose to buy outside the</p><p>government-engineeredsystem.</p><p>TheMansayshehasaplanforyou.Betterforyoungpeopletoturnon,tune</p><p>in,anddropout,andtakebackforthemselvescontrolof theirownhealth-care</p><p>needs,backfromtheinsanelyauthoritariannewleft.</p><p>ALOSTGENERATION</p><p>It has become fashionable to stereotype the new generation of Americans as</p><p>narcissistic, disconnected, and lazy. Last year,Time featured a cover branding</p><p>them“TheMeMeMeGeneration.”24Thisispartiallyamanifestationofevery</p><p>generation’sbelief that“kids today”justaren’tasgoodas theyusedtobe,but</p><p>themainstreamattitudetowardmillennialshasacquiredavitriolaspuzzlingasit</p><p>isunjustified.Nowonderpoliticiansstruggletoconnectwithtoday’syouth.</p><p>InhisbookInvisible:HowMillennialsAreChangingtheWayWeSell,author</p><p>T.ScottGrossconfrontssomeofthesemyths.Hepointsoutthatmillennialsare</p><p>reluctant to buy into tradition for the sake of tradition, that they prefer</p><p>participation to observation, and that they embrace diversity in a way earlier</p><p>generations never have.25 These are not the values of the social parasite who</p><p>prefersgovernmentdependencetoindividualinitiative.</p><p>Millennials are not disconnected, they are just lost, looking for something</p><p>better.They’researchingforapoliticalhome.Theyareagenerationwithouta</p><p>voice,soldoutbytheDemocratstheyhelpedputinoffice,anduninspiredbythe</p><p>limp and disingenuous Republican alternative. The poor performance in</p><p>presidential elections by establishment candidates like JohnMcCain andMitt</p><p>Romneyshowsthatthesameoldideasarenotgoingtowinoveryoungervoters.</p><p>Theyaretiredofendlesswars,tiredofbrokenpromises,andtiredofpoliticsas</p><p>usual.</p><p>BarackObamagotelectedbyclaimingtobeanewkindofpolitician.Hewas</p><p>young.Hewasenergetic.Hewassupercool.Helookeddifferentthanthepasty,</p><p>oldWashingtoninsiderswehadgottensousedto.Hespokewithcharismaand</p><p>enthusiasmforhiscause,andheutilizednewtechnologiestoreachouttoyoung</p><p>peopleinalanguagetheyunderstood.</p><p>ButitallturnedouttobetotalBS.Obamapromisedtheendoflobbyists,but</p><p>he employs an army of them. He promised to run the most transparent</p><p>administration in history, but theCommittee to Protect Journalists reports that</p><p>his administration’s efforts to control themedia are “themost aggressive . . .</p><p>since the Nixon administration.” “This is the most closed, control freak</p><p>administration I’ve ever covered,” said David E. Sanger, veteran chief</p><p>WashingtoncorrespondentoftheNewYorkTimes.26</p><p>Obama’spresidencyhasbeenrockedbyscandalafterscandal.FromFastand</p><p>FurioustoIRSabusesandunprecedentedcyber-snoopingattheNSA,secretive</p><p>insidertacticshavebeenbusinessasusualforthelastfiveyears.</p><p>He campaigned on a platform of peace, but he has conducted military</p><p>operationsinmultiplecountriesatonce,costingAmericanlivesandrackingup</p><p>stillmoredebt.HehasevenordereddronestrikesonAmericancitizenswithout</p><p>grantingthemthedueprocessguaranteedbytheConstitution.</p><p>Thenation’syoutharetiredofhavingtheirhopesdashedbybrokenpromises.</p><p>Theyaresearchingforsomethingnew,somethingdifferent.Publicopinionpolls</p><p>arebeginningtoreflectthisdesireforachange.ApollbyHarvardUniversityof</p><p>18-to 29-year-olds finds that trust for every aspect of government, from the</p><p>SupremeCourt to thepresidency, isdeclining,andagrowingnumberdisagree</p><p>withtheideathatgovernment</p><p>spendingcancausegreatereconomicgrowth.27A</p><p>2013RasmussenReports survey found that 63 percent of respondents think a</p><p>government with too much power is more dangerous than one with too little</p><p>power,thehighestnumbereverrecorded.28</p><p>Thepresident recognizes that he is in troublewith youngpeople.The core</p><p>principle of his health-care law is that the youngwill have to buy plans they</p><p>don’t want or need to subsidize older Americans. How do you convince an</p><p>underemployedeighteen-year-oldthat it is theirsocialresponsibilitytopickup</p><p>thetabfortheirgrandparents?Toaddressthisproblem,thepresidentdidwhathe</p><p>alwaysdoes:Hegaveaspeech.</p><p>Speaking at a so-called “youth summit” at theWhite House in December</p><p>2013, Obama attempted to browbeat a crowd of 160 young activists into</p><p>compliance, urging them to return to the troubledHealthcare.govwebsite and</p><p>signupforObamaCare.</p><p>Look,Idorememberwhatitislikebeingtwenty-sevenortwenty-eight,and</p><p>aside fromtheoccasionalbasketball injury,mostof the timeIkindof felt</p><p>likeIhadnothingtoworryabout.Ofcoursethat’swhatmostpeoplethink</p><p>untiltheyhavesomethingtoworryabout.Butatthatpoint,oftentimes,it’s</p><p>toolate.Andsometimesinthisdebate,whatwe’veheardarepeoplesaying,</p><p>well, I don’t need this, I don’t want this; why are you impinging on my</p><p>freedomtodowhateverIwant.29</p><p>Unable towin themoverwith talk of social responsibility and their shared</p><p>sacrifice, the president instead resorted to using fear to convince people to</p><p>supportaprogramthatmoreandmorewerefindingunpalatable.Look:Youjust</p><p>mightdiewithout“free”preventativecare.</p><p>According toaDecember2013studyreleasedby theInstituteofPoliticsat</p><p>HarvardUniversity (IOP),kids today justaren’tbuyingwhatObamaisselling</p><p>anymore. A majority under 25 would throw Obama out of office given the</p><p>chance.Fifty-sevenpercentofmillennialsnowopposeObamaCare.Amongthe</p><p>mostcovetedpotentialenrolleescurrentlywithouthealth insurance, fewer than</p><p>onethirdof18-to29-year-oldsplantoenlistintheObamaCareexchanges.</p><p>That’saseachangefromthesaladdaysofhopeandchange.</p><p>The survey, part of a unique thirteen-year study of the attitudes of young</p><p>adults, finds that America’s rising generation is worried about its future,</p><p>disillusioned with the U.S. political system, strongly opposed to the</p><p>government’s domestic surveillance apparatus, and drifting away from both</p><p>major parties. “YoungAmericanshold thepresident,Congress and the federal</p><p>governmentinlessesteemalmostbytheday,andthelevelofengagementthey</p><p>arehavinginpoliticsarealsoonthedecline,”readstheIOP’sanalysisofitspoll.</p><p>“Millennials are losing touchwith government and its programs because they</p><p>believegovernmentislosingtouchwiththem.”30</p><p>In2011, aCNNpoll thathasbeenconducted regularly since1993 founda</p><p>record high number of respondents thinking like libertarians, with 63 percent</p><p>sayingthatgovernmentisdoingtoomuchand50percentsayingthegovernment</p><p>shouldnotfavoraparticularsetofvalues.31AnotherCNNpollasked,“Doyou</p><p>thinkthefederalgovernmenthasbecomesolargeandpowerfulthatitposesan</p><p>immediatethreattotherightsandfreedomsofordinarycitizens,ornot?”Sixty-</p><p>two percent of respondents answered yes, it does pose a threat, up from 56</p><p>percentin2010,thelasttimethatquestionwasasked.32</p><p>A polling company survey asking about the role of government found the</p><p>highestlevelsofsupportforlibertarianvaluesinmorethanadecade.33Another</p><p>found growing levels of support for libertarian ideas among the Republican</p><p>Party.34</p><p>Young people are often characterized as economically conservative and</p><p>socially liberal. A better configuration, or at least a challenge of old, broken</p><p>premises,mightbeaclear-eyedskepticismregardingthewisdomofgivingthird</p><p>partiesthepowertomakedecisionsforus.</p><p>Onquestionslikethedefinitionofmarriage,abettersolutionmightbetolet</p><p>individuals and communities and proven religious institutions decide for</p><p>themselves. Social norms are created by people working together, not by</p><p>governments. Governments, and the political process, and the inevitable self-</p><p>interested agendas that define political outcomes, typically corrupt our best</p><p>social traditions.America’s youth have never been defined by conformity and</p><p>submissiveness. You don’t have to agree with the choices of others. You just</p><p>shouldn’tuseforcetomakethemconformtoyourownsetofvalues.</p><p>Aslongasyoudon’thurtpeople,ortaketheirstuff.</p><p>NOTTHEPREFERREDNOMENCLATURE?</p><p>Conservatives, as you might understand the usage of the term, used to be</p><p>“liberal,”asinpro-freedomoftheindividualandpro-limitingthepowerofthe</p><p>state. Now, many of us use the term “classical liberal.” Former socialists in</p><p>Europe,prefer tocallus“neo-liberals.”Today’s liberals in theU.S.used tobe</p><p>“progressives”inthemoldofTeddyRooseveltandthesplinterBullMooseParty</p><p>of 1912, but have chosen to misappropriate our classic “liberal” brand. The</p><p>modern left has so trashed the meaning of “liberal” that they have re-</p><p>appropriated“progressive”astheirpreferrednomenclature.“Neo-conservatives”</p><p>used tobesocialists,anddespite their respect for traditionalsocialvalues they</p><p>stillclingtothesocialistpenchanttorearrangethingsandmanipulatethechoices</p><p>wewouldotherwisemakeforourselves.</p><p>Nobodywants tobebrandedasocialist,ora fascist,oracommunist in the</p><p>UnitedStates anymore, including the president. “I amnot a socialist,”Obama</p><p>pointedlytoldaneditorialboardattheNewYorkTimesin2009.Itappearstobug</p><p>himenough that he reiterated the distinction at theWall Street Journal’s2013</p><p>CEOCounselmeeting:“Peoplecallmeasocialistsometimes,butyou’vegotto</p><p>meetrealsocialists,you’llhavearealsenseofwhatasocialistis.”35</p><p>Isitallclearenoughforyou?</p><p>Skeptics of too much government power—right, left, and center—struggle</p><p>with brands. And maybe that’s natural. Maybe this is the inevitable lot of</p><p>individualists.Wedon’talwayswant tobecategorized,orcollated intooneof</p><p>thetwopreexistingmailslotsthatsay“Republican”or“Democrat.”</p><p>In 1856, the Republican Party replaced a Whig Party that had lost its</p><p>philosophical bearings to the point of being an empty shell. It hadonce stood</p><p>againsttyrannyandatoopowerfulexecutivebranch.Today’sRepublicanParty</p><p>inmanyways is suffering from a political identity crisis of its own, and has</p><p>failed too many times to deliver on its message of limited government and</p><p>individualliberty.Democratsaremorereliablyauthoritarian,nowcontrolledby</p><p>a progressive ideology, always wanting more government involvement in our</p><p>lives.</p><p>Some Republicans, typically incumbents-for-life who have gotten way too</p><p>cozywiththepowerandspecialrelationshipswiththelobbyingclassthatcome</p><p>withit,havelostcredibility,oftensellingouttheirprinciplestospecialinterests</p><p>andthepreservationof theirownpoliticalskins.TheDemocratshave thevery</p><p>same problem, but have done even worse as the party in control, expanding</p><p>militaryinterventioninforeignlands,abandoningtheirpromisedcommitmentto</p><p>civillibertiesinfavorofthecultofpersonalitythatisBarackObama.Andthen</p><p>thereisthereverseRobinHoodschemecalledObamaCare.</p><p>Theoldwayofdoingbusiness isn’tgoing tocut it anymore.Regardlessof</p><p>the brand</p><p>name, it’s pretty clear thatmillennials are up for grabs, looking for</p><p>somethingbetterthanjustanew,hipperbossinWashington.</p><p>CHAPTER6</p><p>THERIGHTTOKNOW</p><p>THEINTERNETCHANGESEVERYTHING.</p><p>Inafreesociety,voluntarycooperationbasedonmutuallybeneficialchoices</p><p>and agreements helps individual people to get along and prosper, to not hurt</p><p>otherpeopleortaketheirstuff.Thisishowitispossibleformillionsofpeople</p><p>with very different goals and personal beliefs and private knowledge to come</p><p>togethertocreatethingssomuchgreaterandmorecomplexthananyoneperson</p><p>couldhavedonealone.</p><p>DonLavoie,myfavoriteprofessoratGeorgeMasonUniversity,arguedthat</p><p>this freedom-basedmodelcreates“agreater social intelligence” thatcannotbe</p><p>replicated or reverse-engineered by the most sophisticated planning by the</p><p>smartest among us. Lavoie got the basis ofmany of his ideas from Friedrich</p><p>Hayek. Hayek’s work on economic coordination was a critique of various</p><p>attempts by governments to plan our activities from the top down. Why did</p><p>governmentplanningtypicallyfail?Becauseknowledgeaboutwhatpeoplewant</p><p>andneed isnotsomething thatcansimplybeaggregatedminus theprocessof</p><p>freepeoplefiguringthingsout.Thisistheprocessthatweallgothrough,sorting</p><p>outtheinfinitepiecesofinformationthatbombardeachofusinourdailylives.</p><p>Throughourchoices,basedonourpersonalknowledge,apatternemerges that</p><p>helpsotherswhodon’tknowanythingaboutusknowwhattheyneedtoknowto</p><p>meetourdemands.Hayek,of course,gotmanyofhis ideas fromLudwigvon</p><p>Mises,whointurndrewfromCarlMengerandScottishEnlightenmentthinkers</p><p>likeAdamSmithandAndrewFerguson.</p><p>Writinginthe1760s,Fergusonanticipatesthewisdomofcrowds:</p><p>Thecrowdofmankind,aredirected in theirestablishmentsandmeasures,</p><p>bythecircumstancesinwhichtheyareplaced;andseldomareturnedfrom</p><p>theirway,tofollowtheplanofanysingleprojector.</p><p>Every step and every movement of the multitude, even in what are</p><p>termedenlightenedages,aremadewithequalblindnesstothefuture;and</p><p>nationsstumbleuponestablishments,whichareindeedtheresultofhuman</p><p>action,butnottheexecutionofanyhumandesign.1</p><p>Advancesinourknowledgeabouthowcivilsocietyworkscomefromatype</p><p>of intellectual cooperation not unlike the process of entrepreneurship—part</p><p>creative thinking and part listening and learning from otherswho knowmore</p><p>thanyoudo.Sometimesyou’re the leader,andsometimesyoufollowthelead.</p><p>Just likeJohnColtranestudyinghismentorMilesDavisand thenbreaking the</p><p>“rules”ofjazz,redefiningthem,makingjazzbetter.JustlikeRushignoringtheir</p><p>recordlabelandgivingtheirfanssomethingdifferent,somethingbetter.</p><p>This push and pull between the creative quest of individuals and the best-</p><p>understood ways of doing things and institutions that we knowwork is what</p><p>Hayekians call the “spontaneous order.” I call it beautiful chaos, the constant</p><p>rearrangingofpreferencesandneeds in real time thatcelebrates thedignityof</p><p>peopleandtheirpotentialtodefine,forthemselves,abetterpathinlife.</p><p>Of course, the Internet changes everything. Everything that worked before</p><p>basedonlocalknowledge,andfreedom,andtheabilityofpeopletofigurethings</p><p>out, learn from others, and build civil societies, is magnified by the Internet,</p><p>becauseitreducesbarrierstoact,andknow,andcooperate.</p><p>The Internet also changes the old rules of politics. Smart mobs and</p><p>crowdsourcing and morphing communities built on social media have all</p><p>democratizedpoliticalactionandbrokendownthetop-downcontrolsofpolitical</p><p>partiesandtheoldequilibriumofinterestgroupsthatcontrolledthem.Likewise,</p><p>the old media cartels have been undermined—some might argue mortally</p><p>wounded—by bloggers and Twitter queens and citizen journalists with</p><p>smartphonevideocameras.Wecitizenscanconnect,findoutwhatWashington</p><p>isuptoinrealtime,andact,allinwaysthatarebecomingeasierandcheaper.</p><p>Concerned moms with tens of thousands of Facebook friends can beat deep-</p><p>pocketedinterestsinwaysthatwouldhavebeeninconceivablejustafewyears</p><p>ago.</p><p>Freedomisallaboutsortinginformationanddistributingknowledge.Politics,</p><p>the distribution of power, is all about controlling the free flow of information</p><p>underapretenseofknowledge.The Internet changes thisdismalcalculus, and</p><p>cuts out middlemen with hidden agendas. No longer are a few people with</p><p>tremendouspoliticalpowerabletocontrolthedistributionofinformationabout</p><p>thedecisionsthataremadeaboutthethingsthatreallymatter,thingsthatimpact</p><p>yourlifeandyourstuff,likethetaxesyoupay,orthehealthcareyouareallowed</p><p>tobuy,oreventhethingsyouareallowedtosayinthepublicsquare.</p><p>Thisisaverygoodthing.</p><p>KEEPINGANEYEONYOU</p><p>Unfortunately, the Internet’s same liberating forces—the ones that are freeing</p><p>people—arebeingleveragedbythegovernmenttoviolateyourpersonalprivacy</p><p>andyourliberties.JohnPerryBarlow,thelyricistformybelovedGratefulDead</p><p>and a founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, puts this dilemma</p><p>succinctly:“Ihaveknown,eversinceIencounteredtheInternet,thatitwasboth</p><p>themost liberating tool I had ever seen for humanity, and the best system for</p><p>extremely granular surveillance that had ever been devised, and that it would</p><p>always be that way. And that there was always going to be, throughout my</p><p>lifetime, a battle between the forcesof openness and connection, and freedom</p><p>fromrepression,andtheforcesofsecrecyandrepression....”2</p><p>TheObamaadministration,beyondanyone’swildestexpectations,hasledthe</p><p>charge in this Brave New World of government cyber-surveillance. Their</p><p>aspiring reach seems to knownobounds. It’s a gameof hide-and-seek,where</p><p>yesterday’s denials are revised and extended to cover up the latest exposed</p><p>executivebranchtyrannywiththefalsepromiseoffuturesecurity.“Thenational</p><p>security operations, generally, have one purpose and that is to make sure the</p><p>AmericanpeoplearesafeandthatI’mmakinggooddecisions,”BarackObama</p><p>explainedtotheAmericanpeopleonOctober28,2013.“I’mthefinaluserofall</p><p>theintelligencethat theygather,”saysthecommanderinchief.“Wegivethem</p><p>policy direction, but what we’ve seen over the last several years is their</p><p>capacitiescontinuetodevelopandexpand,andthat’swhyI’minitiatingnowa</p><p>reviewtomakesurethatwhatthey’reabletodo,doesn’tnecessarilymeanwhat</p><p>theyshouldbedoing.”3</p><p>Inpartbecauseofthepresident’stendencytosay“Ididn’tknow”inresponse</p><p>toanyexecutivebranchabuse-of-powerscandal,morepeoplearewonderingif</p><p>he is in charge of the executive branch at all.He “generally” knowswhat the</p><p>National Security Agency and other intelligence-gathering functions of the</p><p>federalgovernmentareupto,hesays.Buthedidn’tseemtoknowthattheNSA</p><p>waslisteningtoGermanchancellorAngelaMerkel’scellphonecalls.</p><p>Whatifthepowerisnowwithfacelessbureaucrats,notthepresident?Ifthe</p><p>president knows the “general” purposes of federal snooping, do you wonder</p><p>what the extraordinary ones are? Wouldn’t you like to know? Given the</p><p>extraordinarypowerofthefederalgovernmentintheeraofBigData,shouldwe</p><p>trustfaceless,unelectedbureaucratswith theextraordinarydiscretionarypower</p><p>tochooseyouastheirnexttarget?</p><p>Think about the abuses of power big and small, from J. Edgar Hoover, to</p><p>Richard Nixon, to Lois Lerner. Think about the qualified, and ever-evolving,</p><p>promisesmadebyBarackObama.Does the federal government of theUnited</p><p>Stateshavetherighttosnooponyou,trackingyourphonecallsandreadingyour</p><p>emails?DoesWashington,D.C.,havethepowertolimityourspeech,spyonthe</p><p>press, or suppress the opinions of bloggers?Does the president of theUnited</p><p>States have the discretionary authority to assassinate American citizens on</p><p>Americansoilwithoutdueprocess,beforeguiltisdeterminedinacourtoflaw?</p><p>Don’tyouhavearighttoknow?</p><p>Thepresident has continuously claimed, responding to a seemingly endless</p><p>seriesofrevelationsthatdisprovethepreviousassurancesfromtheWhiteHouse</p><p>andvariousfederalagencies,thatlineswerenotcrossed,thatourconstitutional</p><p>rightswerenotbreached,thatyourcivillibertieswerenotviolated.Idon’tknow</p><p>about you, but I am not reassured. In fact, I’m certain that things are out of</p><p>control, and that the balance between our essential liberties and the national</p><p>securityapparatusisfundamentallyoff,infavoroffacelessbureaucratsthatwe</p><p>hopearedoingtherightthingwithallthatpower.</p><p>AsAmericans,ourfreedomsarebroadandourrightsareprotectedunderthe</p><p>Constitution.Thegovernment’spowers,on theotherhand, are supposed tobe</p><p>welldefinedandstrictlylimited.Butyouhavetoknowyourrightsandvigilantly</p><p>defendthemfromthenaturaltendencyofgovernmentstograbpowerandgrow</p><p>capabilities. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer of us are taught in public school</p><p>aboutourguaranteedindividualrights.Fewerstilltakethetimetofindoutand</p><p>understandtherulesforthemselves.</p><p>Thisisaverybadtrend,andit’sourbadifwedon’tknow,orcaretoknow.</p><p>“Thomas Jefferson often insisted that the ultimate guardians of our rights and</p><p>libertiesareWeThePeople,”says thegreatcivil libertiesactivistNatHentoff.</p><p>“ButwhenmanyAmericansarelargelyignorantoftheConstitution,animperial</p><p>president—likeGeorgeW.BushorBarackObama—canincreasinglyinvadeour</p><p>privacy;andnow,withObamaCare,rationourhealthcareand—forsome—our</p><p>verylives.”4</p><p>BACKASSWARDS</p><p>Think he’s exaggerating? Consider some of the more extreme views recently</p><p>expressed by Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. “If I thought censoring the</p><p>mail was necessary,” he told stunned reporters on June 11, 2013, “I would</p><p>suggest it, but I don’t think it is.”5 Graham sits on the Senate Judiciary</p><p>Committee,withitsjurisdictionoverseeing“civilliberties.”Inotherwords,you</p><p>couldargue,hehasauniqueresponsibilitytoprotectyourconstitutionalrights.</p><p>Buthedoesn’tseemtobedoingaverygoodjob.InaninterviewonFoxand</p><p>Friends, Graham defended the NSA’s warrantless surveillance of American</p><p>civilians,tellingtheshow’shosts,“Idon’tthinkyou’retalkingtotheterrorists.I</p><p>knowyou’renot.IknowI’mnot.Sowedon’thaveanythingtoworryabout.”6</p><p>He went on to tell the astonished hosts that he was “glad” the warrantless</p><p>surveillanceactivitywashappeningintheNSA.</p><p>Guiltyuntilproveninnocent?Youdon’tneedtobeaconstitutionallawyerto</p><p>knowthatthisisbackasswards.Graham’sview,thoughnotallthatunique,isa</p><p>fundamentalinversionoftheAmericanconceptofjustice.</p><p>OnJune5,2013,theBritishnewspapertheGuardianbrokeastoryaboutthe</p><p>NSA collecting phone records frommillions ofAmericanswho useVerizon.7</p><p>ThesourceoftheinformationwasEdwardSnowden,ayoungcomputeranalyst</p><p>consultingfortheNSA.Adaylater,theWashingtonPost8andanotherGuardian</p><p>story9 revealed that the surveillance extended to Internet companies as well,</p><p>enabling theNSA to access emails, photos, videos, and prettymuch anything</p><p>elsestoredonsupposedlysecureservers.</p><p>Senators Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) revealed</p><p>during a hearing of the Senate Intelligence Committee that this type of</p><p>surveillancehadbeengoingonunnoticed for sevenyears.10 Feinstein actually</p><p>defendedtheprogrambyclaimingthattheNSAneededaccesstopeople’sphone</p><p>records“incasetheybecameterroristsuspectsinthefuture.”</p><p>TheObamaadministrationjumpedrightoutofthegatewithadefenseofthe</p><p>NSA,claimingthatnopersonalinformationorconversationalcontentwasbeing</p><p>collected,11 but this was in direct contradiction to a statement made several</p><p>months earlier at a congressional hearing byDirector ofNational Intelligence</p><p>JamesClapper.Clapperwentonrecordwiththefollowingexchange:</p><p>SENATORRONWYDEN:“DoestheNSAcollectanytypeofdataatallonmillionsor</p><p>hundredsofmillionsofAmericans?”</p><p>CLAPPER: “No, sir . . . Not wittingly. There are cases where they could</p><p>inadvertentlyperhaps,collect,butnot,notwittingly.”12</p><p>PresidentObamacontinuedtodenytheaccusationsofdomesticspyingwitha</p><p>numberof public statements as the storymadenational headlines. “Nobody is</p><p>listening to your phone calls,” he assured us during a June 10, 2013, press</p><p>conference.13ThiswasfollowedbyanappearanceontheTonightShow,where</p><p>heassuredhostJayLeno,“ThereisnospyingonAmericans.”14</p><p>But itwasn’t true.Thisassurance, like theoftenmadepromiseaboutbeing</p><p>abletokeepyourexistinghealthinsurance—period—wasatorturedexercisein</p><p>political expedience. As the weeks rolled on, more information came out</p><p>revealing the extent of theNSA’s spying onAmerican citizens. In addition to</p><p>morethanthreethousandsupposedlyunintentionalprivacyviolationsinaone-</p><p>yearperiod,itwasalsorevealedthatanumberofNSAemployeeshadadmitted</p><p>tousingthesurveillanceprogramtospyonformerloveinterests.15</p><p>So if a bureaucrat with an almost unlimited surveillance tool kit wants to</p><p>cyber-stalkhis formergirlfriend,whatassurances,besides thepresident’sever-</p><p>evolvingone,doyouhavethatsomeone’snotstalkingyou?</p><p>Allofthiswasjusttoomuchtotake,evenfortheNewYorkTimeseditorial</p><p>board,hardlychartermembersoftheRonPaulRevolution:“Theadministration</p><p>has lostallcredibilityon the issue,”opined theTimes. “Mr.Obama isproving</p><p>the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very</p><p>likelyabuseit.”16</p><p>Critics have rightly pointed out that the passage of the Patriot Act, by a</p><p>bipartisanmajority inaRepublican-controlledCongress,unleashed this torrent</p><p>ofdomesticsnooping.ThenationaltragedyoftheSeptember11,2001,terrorist</p><p>attackshadprovidedtheperfectopportunitytoextendthereachofgovernment</p><p>authority in a way that was both public and popular at the time. Promises of</p><p>safeguardsweremade,althoughfewwhovotedforithadactuallyreadthebill.</p><p>Theadvocatesofbroaderauthoritiesforthesurveillancesawanopportunityto</p><p>do something undoable before, and they took it. Remember the words of</p><p>President Obama’s former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel? “You never let a</p><p>seriouscrisisgotowaste.”17</p><p>KNOWYOURRIGHTS</p><p>TheBillofRightsconstitutesthebedrockofourlegalprotectionsfromtheabuse</p><p>ofgovernmentpower.Butfearandapathyandcarelessnesshavestartedtoerode</p><p>theseprotections.Inthelastyearalonewehaveseenegregiousviolationsofthe</p><p>First,Fourth,andFifthAmendments. It’spast timeyouknewyour rights.You</p><p>andIwillhavetogetinvolvedifwehopetokeepthem.</p><p>TheFirstAmendmentisalmostuniversallyknown.Itguaranteesfreedomof</p><p>speechandofthepress,aswellasfreedomofreligion:</p><p>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or</p><p>prohibitingthefreeexercisethereof;orabridgingthefreedom</p><p>ofspeech,or</p><p>of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to</p><p>petitiontheGovernmentforaredressofgrievances.</p><p>TheFourthAmendmentisalittlelesswellknown,butitisequallyimportant</p><p>toafreesociety.Itstates:</p><p>Therightof thepeople tobesecure in theirpersons,houses,papers,and</p><p>effects,againstunreasonable searchesand seizures, shallnotbe violated,</p><p>andnoWarrantsshall issue,butuponprobablecause,supportedbyOath</p><p>or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and</p><p>thepersonsorthingstobeseized.</p><p>Thesurrealscenesurroundingthe2013BostonMarathonbombingrevealed</p><p>howtenuousourholdontheserightsmightbe.Thecitywasthrownintoapanic</p><p>when,onApril15,2013,twobombsweredetonatedneartherace’sfinishline,</p><p>killing three and injuringmore than two hundred bystanders. Itwas a horrific</p><p>act. After one of the suspects, a nineteen-year-old naturalized citizen, named</p><p>Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, disappeared into a suburban neighborhood inWatertown,</p><p>heavily armed SWAT teams embarked on a massive manhunt, barging into</p><p>privateresidencesandorderingcivilianstoleavetheirhomes.18</p><p>Thetacticofusingfeartochipawayatourcivillibertiesiscertainlynothing</p><p>new. President Obama has adopted the same essential talking points that are</p><p>always invoked by the defenders of amore powerful government: “You can’t</p><p>have 100 percent security and also have 100 percent privacy.”19 In the real</p><p>world, of course, we will never see “100 percent security.” We live in a</p><p>dangerousworld.Thingscanhappenthatareoutsideourcontrol,and thefalse</p><p>promise of perfect safety could easily translate into a blank check for power</p><p>mongersandaguaranteedpathtotyranny.</p><p>RepresentativeJimSensenbrenner(R-WI),oneof thechiefarchitectsof the</p><p>PatriotAct,seemstohavecometo termswith theunintendedconsequencesof</p><p>his good intentions.20 In response to Representative Peter King’s (R-NY)</p><p>assertion that the NSA had acted appropriately 99.99 percent of the time,</p><p>Sensenbrennerwasunequivocal:</p><p>Idon’tthink99.99percentisgoodenoughwhenyouhaveacourtrulinga</p><p>program unconstitutional in violating the Fourth Amendment and that</p><p>programhadbeengoingonformanymonthsandtheNSAviolatingcourt</p><p>orders.It’sthecourtthatissupposedtoprotecttheconstitutionalrightsof</p><p>Americans.I thinkthatJamesMadisondidaprettygoodjobwhenheput</p><p>together theBillofRights. IviewtheBillofRightsasasacreddocument</p><p>andoneofthedocumentsthatmakesAmericasomuchmoredifferentthan</p><p>anyothercountryinthehistoryoftheworld.</p><p>TheFifthAmendmentwillbefamiliartomanyduetotheself-incrimination</p><p>clauseandthephrase“pleadingtheFifth,”buttheactualtextcontainsanumber</p><p>ofotherimportantrightsaswell:</p><p>Noperson shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property,without due</p><p>processoflaw;norshallprivatepropertybetakenforpublicuse,without</p><p>justcompensation.</p><p>Thedueprocessclausehasparticularresonancetoday,afterwelearnedthat</p><p>the Obama administration had ordered the deaths of at least four American</p><p>citizensthroughtheuseofdronestrikeswithoutatrial.</p><p>The use of secret courts to circumvent the due process clause is also</p><p>alarminglycommon,asevidencedbythecourtsystemsetupundertheForeign</p><p>IntelligenceSurveillanceAct,commonlyknownasFISA.TheFISAcourtwas</p><p>createdin1978asaresponsetoRichardNixon’sincreasinglyparanoideffortsto</p><p>breakthelawandspyonhispoliticalopponents.Theideawasthatthefederal</p><p>governmentwouldhavetoobtainaspecialwarrantfromtheFISAcourtbefore</p><p>being permitted to conduct domestic espionage operations targeting its own</p><p>citizens,hopefullyputtingastop to thekindof illegalactivitiesengaged inby</p><p>theNixonadministration.</p><p>“The constitutional standard for all search warrants is probable cause of</p><p>crime,”arguesJudgeAndrewNapolitano.</p><p>FISA, however, established a new, different and lesser standard—thus</p><p>unconstitutionalonitsfacesinceCongressisboundby,andcannotchange,</p><p>the Constitution—of probable cause of status. The status was that of an</p><p>agentofaforeignpower.So,underFISA,thefedsneededtodemonstrateto</p><p>a secret court only that a non-American physically present in the U.S.,</p><p>perhaps under the guise of a student, diplomat or embassy janitor, was</p><p>really an agent of a foreign power, and the demonstration of that agency</p><p>alonewas sufficient toauthorizea searchwarrant to listen to theagent’s</p><p>telephonecallsorreadhismail.Overtime,therequirementofstatusasa</p><p>foreignagentwasmodifiedtostatusasaforeignperson.21</p><p>TheimportantthingtorememberabouttheFISAcourtisthattheopinionsit</p><p>issues are secret, and that means no public oversight or accountability. The</p><p>GuardianreleaseddocumentsshowingthattheFISAcourthadextendedmoreor</p><p>less blanket authority to the NSA to independently determine which citizens</p><p>would be targeted for surveillance.22 The court also gave the NSA broad</p><p>permissions to store and make use of personal data, even when data was</p><p>“inadvertentlyacquired.”</p><p>Asecretcourt issuingsecretpermits toasecretagencytospyonAmerican</p><p>citizens with impunity, effectively operating outside of the law and the</p><p>Constitution.Whatcouldgowrong?</p><p>TAKINGASTAND</p><p>It is always true that, once breached, it is very difficult to restore essential</p><p>liberties and thepromised limitson federal power.Eachnewdollar and every</p><p>expansion of authority creates a political constituency that wants still more</p><p>money and authority. That’s why governments seem to inexorably grow, not</p><p>shrink,andnewpowerscreatedbyaRepublicanCongressarelaterexpandedby</p><p>anewDemocraticpresident.</p><p>ThatispreciselythespeedingtrainthatSenatorRandPaulsteppedinfrontof</p><p>onthemorningofMarch6,2013.DoesthepresidentoftheUnitedStateshave</p><p>the discretionary authority to assassinate American citizens on American soil</p><p>without due process, before guilt is determined in a court of law? It’s a good</p><p>question,onethatdeservesaclearanswer.It’salsoaquestionthatSenatorRand</p><p>Paul had asked of the Obama administration and its chief law enforcement</p><p>officer, Attorney General Eric Holder, a number of times in 2013. But Paul</p><p>couldn’tgetastraightanswer.Holder’sheavily lawyerednonresponsegaveall</p><p>civillibertarians—left,right,andcenter—aseriouscaseoftheheebie-jeebies.</p><p>The first written response the attorney general’s office sent to Paul was</p><p>arrogant, dismissive, and sloppy, seemingly uninterested in fundamental</p><p>constitutionalquestionsandtheconstitutionallydelineatedresponsibilitiesofthe</p><p>legislative branch to check unfettered executive branch power: “The question</p><p>youhaveposedisthereforeentirelyhypothetical,unlikelytooccur,andonewe</p><p>hope noPresidentwill ever have to confront,”wroteHolder. “It is possible, I</p><p>suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be</p><p>necessaryandappropriateforthePresidenttoauthorizethemilitarytouselethal</p><p>forcewithintheterritoryoftheUnitedStates.”23</p><p>“Hypothetical.”“Unlikely.”“Itispossible.”Inotherwords,it’stotallyupto</p><p>thepresident’s discretion, andyou,SenatorPaul, should stop askingquestions</p><p>andmindyourplace.</p><p>Thisshouldhavebeentheendofthisparticulardebate,andtherewasreason</p><p>to believe that theWhite House would once again get away with trespassing</p><p>constitutional</p><p>boundaries with little debate and even less accountability. This,</p><p>afterall,wasapattern.SowhenRandPaultooktothewelloftheSenatefloorto</p><p>filibuster, effectively stopping Senate legislative business in protest to the</p><p>administration’snonanswer,therewaslittlereasontobelievethathecouldmake</p><p>a difference.At least that’swhat the conventionalwisdom inside theBeltway</p><p>believed.</p><p>IwillspeakuntilIcannolongerspeak.Iwillspeakaslongasittakes,until</p><p>thealarmissoundedfromcoasttocoastthatourConstitutionisimportant,</p><p>thatyour rights to trialby juryareprecious, thatnoAmericanshouldbe</p><p>killedbyadroneonAmericansoilwithoutfirstbeingchargedwithacrime,</p><p>withoutfirstbeingfoundtobeguiltybyacourt.24</p><p>TheSenatewaspreparingtovoteontheconfirmationofPresidentObama’s</p><p>nominee for director of theCIA, JohnBrennan. Itwas likely a surprisewhen</p><p>Paul stood up at 11:45 A.M. to address the marble-walled chamber, so few</p><p>Beltwayreporterstookanynotice.“Certainthingsriseabovepartisanship,”Paul</p><p>toldthemostlyemptyroom.“AndIthinkyourrighttobesecureinyourperson,</p><p>therighttobesecureinyourliberty,therighttobetriedbyajuryofyourpeers</p><p>—thesearethingsthataresoimportantandrisetosuchalevelthatweshouldn’t</p><p>giveupon themeasily.And Idon’t see thisbattle asapartisanbattle at all. I</p><p>don’tseethisasRepublicansversusDemocrats.Iwouldbehereiftherewerea</p><p>Republicanpresidentdoingthis.”</p><p>TheD.C. establishment interpretedPaul’s gesturewith its typical cynicism.</p><p>MSNBChostLawrenceO’Donnellwontheprizeformostblindlypartisanand</p><p>hateful reaction, arguing—if you can call it actual argumentation—that</p><p>supportingPaul’sprotestwastheveryworstdecisionyoucouldevermake.“If</p><p>youwantto#StandWithRand,”O’Donnellasked,“doyouwanttostandwithall</p><p>of the vile spewing madness that came out of that crazy person’s mouth?”25</p><p>Afterawhile,itbecameclearthathewasprojecting:</p><p>“Horriblyflawed.”</p><p>“Emptyheaded.”</p><p>“Alittlebitmorethancrazy.”</p><p>“Performanceart.”</p><p>“Spewinginfantilefantasies.”</p><p>“Sleazier.”</p><p>“Starkravingmad.”</p><p>“Psychopath.”</p><p>OK.Thanks,Larry.Ithinkwegotthepoint.Youshouldgethelp.Soon.</p><p>SenatorJohnMcCaincameoffonlyslightlymorebalancedthantheMSNBC</p><p>host, taking to theSenate floor the nextmorning to school the youngSenator</p><p>fromKentuckyonthehow-tosofmillennialoutreach:“IfMr.Paulwantstobe</p><p>takenseriously,”theseventy-seven-year-oldsenatorsaid,“heneedstodomore</p><p>than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their</p><p>college dorms.”26 Senator McCain’s most reliable sidekick, Lindsey Graham,</p><p>sidedsquarelywithBarackObamaandhisstonewallingattorneygeneral.“Ido</p><p>not believe that question deserves an answer,” Graham said. According to a</p><p>WashingtonTimesreport:</p><p>Mr. Graham said he defends Mr. Paul’s right to ask questions and seek</p><p>answers,butsaidthefilibusterhasactuallypushedhimtonowsupportMr.</p><p>Brennan.Mr.Grahamsaidhehadbeeninclinedtoopposethenomination</p><p>becausehe’dfoundBrennantobequalifiedforthejobbutalso“arrogant,</p><p>kind of a bit shifty.”He said hewasn’t going to filibuster himbutwould</p><p>havevotedagainsthimonfinalpassage,butnowhe’llvoteforhim.“Iam</p><p>going to vote for Brennan now because it’s become a referendum on the</p><p>droneprogram,”hesaid.27</p><p>Butwhilethefilibusterwasactuallygoingdown,mostignoredit.Itwasjust</p><p>a stunt, another archaic parliamentary procedure that no one really pays any</p><p>attentionto.EarlyonduringPaul’salmostthirteen-hourtalkathon,thestorywas</p><p>notastoryatall,butasourceof ridiculeamongBeltwaycognoscenti.So few</p><p>rationalpeopleoutsidetheCapitolBubblepayanyattentiontowhathappenson</p><p>the floor of the U.S. Senate on any given day, you could almost forgive the</p><p>denizensofconventionalwisdomformissingthepoint.Whywouldanoutsider</p><p>like Rand Paul, who won his Senate seat in Kentucky in 2010 by beating</p><p>Republican leaderMitchMcConnell’shandpickedcandidate in theRepublican</p><p>primary,usesuchaninsidertactic?</p><p>DEFENDINGTHESTATUSQUO</p><p>The filibuster, a last-ditch attempt by a single member of the Senate to stall</p><p>consideration of legislation, has a storied history in legislative warfare.</p><p>Typically, this roadblock has been used to defend the status quo inside the</p><p>cloisteredwalls of themost closed, insulated institution inAmerica—theU.S.</p><p>Senate. They don’t call it a club for nothing: It’s a privileged cadre</p><p>unaccustomedtothebrightlightofpublicattention.Andthat’sthewaytheylike</p><p>it.</p><p>Themostinfamoususeofthefilibuster,ofcourse,wasbyDemocraticsenator</p><p>StromThurmond,thenasegregationistwhofamouslyfoughtagainsttheefforts</p><p>of Martin Luther King. In 1948, Thurmond had actually left the Democratic</p><p>PartytorunforpresidentasaDixiecrat.Thurmondwouldlaterarguethat“King</p><p>demeanshisraceandretardstheadvancementofhispeople.”28</p><p>In1954, the landmarkSupremeCourtcaseofBrownv.BoardofEducation</p><p>hadended“separatebutequal”andstartedtheprocessofintegratingschoolsall</p><p>over the country. A year after that, Rosa Parks famously refused to sit in the</p><p>“blacks only” section of a bus inMontgomery, Alabama. Her bravery helped</p><p>forceracistgovernmentpoliciesintothepublicpsyche.</p><p>On August 28, 1957, at 8:54 P.M., Thurmond took the Senate floor in</p><p>oppositiontomajorprovisionsofthe1957CivilRightsAct.Hewouldnotstop</p><p>untilmore than twenty-fourhours later.Hedenied that anyblackswerebeing</p><p>denied a right to vote and argued that every state already had sufficient voter</p><p>rightsprotectionsintheirexistinglaws.“IthinkitisindicativethatNegroesare</p><p>votinginlargenumbers.Ofcourse,theyarenotsowellqualifiedtovoteasare</p><p>thewhitepeople.”29</p><p>Tothisday,Thurmond’sremainsthelongestverbalfilibusterinU.S.history.</p><p>Ultimately,theCivilRightsActof1957passedtheSenateandwassignedinto</p><p>law, but not beforeThurmond andhisDemocratic colleagues had stripped the</p><p>legislationofkeyprovisions.30</p><p>Segregationists like Thurmond had thoroughly corrupted the notion of</p><p>“states’ rights” and the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution—a vital and</p><p>legitimate check on federal abuses of power—to obfuscate their real agenda.</p><p>Thurmond and many others used the excuse of federalism to justify the</p><p>oppressionofindividuals—unequaltreatmentunderlaw—butthatwasneverthe</p><p>intention of the federalist system. Yes, the states must not submit to federal</p><p>tyranny,butthatdoesnotgivethemlicensetobetyrannicalthemselves.Itwas</p><p>allabouttherightsoftheindividual.</p><p>Freepeopleshould judgeothersbasedon thecontentof theircharacter,not</p><p>thecoloroftheirskin.Ifyoubelieveinlibertyandthedignityoftheindividual,</p><p>you inherentlybelieve in treatingeveryoneequallyunder the lawsof the land.</p><p>This is a first principle. It’s nonnegotiable. Defending the rights of the</p><p>individual, including equal treatment under the law, is a fundamental</p><p>responsibilityofaconstitutionallylimitedgovernment,asJamesMadisonhadso</p><p>eloquentlyarguedinFederalist51.</p><p>#STANDWITHRAND</p><p>So the filibuster seemed like a strange tactic for a feisty young “tea party”</p><p>senatortoemployagainstpresidentialtyranny,andinsupportofthefundamental</p><p>rightof individualAmericancitizenstodueprocessunderourconstitution.He</p><p>wasflippingoldtraditionsupsidedown,usinganoldtactictodisruptthestatus</p><p>quo,usingthesametool</p><p>thatStromThurmondhadused,butthistimetodefend</p><p>our individual civil liberties from a government that had overstepped its</p><p>constitutionallimits.</p><p>The Internet had changed everything. As Rand Paul spoke, social media,</p><p>especially Twitter, exploded almost instantaneously as people tuned into C-</p><p>SPANbasedonatweetoraFacebookpostfromafriend.Checkthisout:This</p><p>senatorisspeakingtruthtopower.Attheirpeak,creativeTwitterhashtagslike</p><p>#StandWithRand,#filiblizzard,andthemoreprosaic#RandPaulwereseeingtwo</p><p>thousandmentionsaminute.31Areportputtogetherbythemediaanalysisfirm,</p><p>TrendPo, shows that, by the filibuster’s end, #StandWithRandhadbecome the</p><p>number-one trending topic on Twitter with more than 1.1 million associated</p><p>tweets.Duringthefollowingtwenty-fourhours,RandPaulgainedanastonishing</p><p>44,700newfollowers.32</p><p>WhenRandPaulfinallyyieldedthefloor,hoarseandexhausted,itwaspast</p><p>midnightonMarch7.Hehadbeenspeakingforatotaloftwelvehoursandfifty-</p><p>twominutes.33Mockedandignoredjustafewhoursearlier,Paulhadsucceeded</p><p>in changing the conversation globally, transforming the political landscape by</p><p>endrunningtheBeltwayinformationmonopolists.</p><p>That day, aWashington Post headline pronounced: “An Old Tactic Packs</p><p>NewPower inDigitalAge.” Polling of possible 2016Republican presidential</p><p>contendersshowedPauljumpingthequeue“intoTier1status,leapfroggingPaul</p><p>Ryan,JebBush,ChrisChristie,andMikeHuckabeetoplaceaveryrespectable</p><p>2ndina9personfield.”34OnMarch8,oneCNNcommentatorsaidthat,“[a]t</p><p>leastforthetimebeing,TeaPartydarlingSen.RandPaulistheeffectiveleader</p><p>oftheRepublicanParty.Andthat’saprettybigdeal.”35</p><p>Was #StandWithRand a publicity stunt, a waste of time? I don’t think so.</p><p>Public opinion polls conducted in the days andweeks following the filibuster</p><p>showed a marked decline in approval for the Obama administration’s drone</p><p>policies.Whereas a clearmajorityofAmericans favoreddrone strikesprior to</p><p>Paul’s raising of the issue, afterward approval for such policies plummeted to</p><p>just41percent.36OnMarch7,AttorneyGeneralEricHoldersentanotherletter.</p><p>“DearSenator Paul,” it read. “It has come tomy attention that you nowhave</p><p>asked an additional question. ‘Does the president have the authority to use a</p><p>weaponizeddronetokillanAmericannotengagedincombatonU.S.soil?’The</p><p>answertothatisno.”37This,ofcourse,wasthequestionallalong.Opinionswill</p><p>comeandgo,andpollswill riseandfall,butultimately,SenatorPaul’sefforts</p><p>producedrealpolicychange,areininginofexecutivepower,andalegalopinion</p><p>fromthetoplawenforcementofficeroftheland,previouslynotoffered,thatwill</p><p>have legal standing in future debates over our civil liberties and the limits on</p><p>executivepower.</p><p>ARIGHTTOKNOW</p><p>Nearly215millionpeopleuseTwitteronaregularbasis,sendinghalfabillion</p><p>tweetsaday.Facebookhasmorethanabillionactiveusersworldwide.38Twitter</p><p>is scoopingoldmediaonnewsstoriesapproximately20percentof the time.39</p><p>Morethan50percentofpeoplesaytheyhavelearnedaboutbreakingnewsfrom</p><p>socialmediaratherthanfromatraditionalnewssource;27.8percentofpeople</p><p>get their news fromsocialmedia ingeneral.Socialmediawas responsible for</p><p>breakingmajor news stories such as the Egyptian uprising, theHudsonRiver</p><p>planecrash,andOsamabinLaden’sdeath.40 Informationandknowledge itself</p><p>havebeendemocratized,nolongerfilteredbythreetelevisionnetworksoffering</p><p>amonolithicproductcontrolledbyself-anointedexperts.</p><p>The full implications of tremendously responsive and ever-mutating social</p><p>networksareonlybeginningtobeunderstood,buttheirdecentralizingpoweris</p><p>undeniable. Freedom is trending, I believe, because of the “long tail” of the</p><p>Internet.Imagineaworldwhereideasareeasytofind,andlearningisavailable</p><p>toanyonewho’swillingtoworkforit.</p><p>John Perry Barlow, the cyberlibertarian and cofounder of EFF, saw the</p><p>disruptivenatureof the Internetbefore just about anyoneelse, and imaginesa</p><p>worldwhereeveryoneofushas,atourfingertips,a“righttoknow”:</p><p>Forthefirsttime,wehaveitwithinrangetomakeitpossibleforanybody,</p><p>anywhere to know everything that he is intellectually capable of</p><p>assimilatingaboutanytopic.Thatistosay,hecanknowasmuch,whether</p><p>heisintheuplandsofMaliormidtownManhattan,aboutsomenuanceof</p><p>molecular biology as is presently known by anybody. Now, I understand</p><p>thatknowledgealsohasacontext,andthisismuchlikeliertobethecaseif</p><p>it’s not in the uplands of Mali, since you won’t have so many people to</p><p>discuss itwith.But there is, I think, thepossibility thatwecanconvey to</p><p>future generations the right to know. The right to know, asmuch as they</p><p>want to know, and that includes everything that’s presently known and</p><p>generally applicable by anybody. And it also includes everything that is</p><p>known,orcanbeknown,aboutwhatone’sgovernmentisdoing.41</p><p>Several days after Rand Paul’s game-changing talkathon, I happened to be</p><p>speaking to the annual gathering of the European Students for Liberty, in</p><p>Leuven,Belgium.My topic, fortuitously,wasallabout the liberatingnatureof</p><p>socialmediaandthestrategicimplicationsforgrassrootseffortstorestoreliberty</p><p>and the dignity of the individual in an era of encroaching government power.</p><p>What amazed me most about the gathering was the incredible growth in the</p><p>numberandqualityofthestudentsinthegroupfromthepreviousyear’sevent.</p><p>Therewas now a packed auditorium,more than four hundred freedom-loving</p><p>students gathered from all over the world. Given the timeliness of the Paul</p><p>filibuster, I had decided to use it as a real time example of the new political</p><p>disintermediation. How many people knew of it, I asked. Every one of their</p><p>handswentup.HowmanypeopleparticipatedinthePaulfilibusteronTwitter?</p><p>Almosteveryhandwentup.</p><p>How quickly things have changed. Imagine this opportunity before us.We</p><p>have the ability, at least theoretically, to find every single person in theworld</p><p>whobelievesinindividualfreedomandwhohasaccesstotheInternet.Wecan</p><p>connect with them, share ideas, books, and strategies. We can gather and</p><p>coalesce, build a virtual division of labor, and generate a new accountability</p><p>against the many instances of government overreach and tyranny happening</p><p>everyday,allovertheworld.Together,actinginvoluntarycooperation,wecan</p><p>create a “greater social intelligence” and social awareness unlike anything</p><p>possiblebefore.</p><p>Compare theexperienceof these students,manyofwhomhadalready read</p><p>thesamebooksIstruggledtofindwhenIwastheirage.</p><p>I stumbled upon the ideas of liberty by accident when I bought that Rush</p><p>album,2112,theoneIdidn’twant.IhappeneduponanoldusedcopyofAnthem</p><p>at a community garage sale. I accidentally discovered theAustrian economics</p><p>programavailableatGroveCityCollegeandGeorgeMasonUniversityinalate</p><p>nightargumentfueledonlybythewisdom-enhancingpropertiesofcoldbeer.</p><p>Today, I would just Google it. I would “like” Ludwig von Mises on</p><p>Facebook. Iwouldwatcha1976performanceof“2112”onYouTube. Iwould</p><p>follow Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz, or Justin Amash on Twitter. I would almost</p><p>instantaneouslyconnectwithcenturiesofintellectualtraditionthathadallowed</p><p>subsequentgenerationstostand</p><p>natural</p><p>preference which every man has for his own happiness above that of other</p><p>people,iswhatnoimpartialspectatorcangoalongwith.”4</p><p>But what if the stealer in question is the federal government? Is thieving</p><p>wrongunlessthethiefisourdulyelectedrepresentationinWashington,D.C.,or</p><p>some faceless “public servant” working at some alphabet-soup agency in the</p><p>federalcomplex?</p><p>It seems tome that stealing is alwayswrong, and that you can’t outsource</p><p>stealingtoathirdparty,likeacongressman,andexpecttofeelanybetterabout</p><p>youractions.</p><p>Intherealworld,whereabsolutepowercorruptsabsolutely,therearenogood</p><p>government thieves or bad government thieves. There is only limited or</p><p>unlimitedgovernmentthievery.</p><p>Thealternativetooutsourcedgovernmentthieveryisaworldwhereproperty</p><p>rightsaresacrosanct,wherethepromisesyoumaketoothersthroughcontracts</p><p>are strictly enforced, andwhere the rule of law is simple and transparent and</p><p>treatseveryonethesameunderthelawsoftheland.</p><p>Governmentis,bydefinition,amonopolyonforce.5Governmentsoftenhurt</p><p>people and take their stuff. That’s why the political philosophy of liberty is</p><p>focusedontheruleoflaw.Governmentisdangerous,leftunchecked.Consider</p><p>thewaytoomanyexamplesfrommodernhistorytoseethemurderousresultsof</p><p>too much unchecked government power: communists, fascists, Nazis, radical</p><p>Islamisttheocracies,andabroadarrayofThirdWorlddictatorswhohidebehind</p><p>ideologyorreligiontojustifytheoppressionandmurderoftheircountrymenas</p><p>ameanstoretainpower.</p><p>All of these “isms” are really just about the dominance of government</p><p>insiders over individuals, and the arbitrary rule of man over men. Unlimited</p><p>governmentsalwayshurtpeopleandalwaystaketheirstuff,ofteninhorrificand</p><p>absolutely unintended ways. The architects of America’s business plan were</p><p>keenlyawareof thedangersof toomuchgovernmentand thearbitrary ruleof</p><p>man.JamesMadisonstatesitwellinFederalist51:</p><p>Butwhat isgovernment itself,but thegreatestofallreflectionsonhuman</p><p>nature? Ifmenwereangels,nogovernmentwouldbenecessary. Ifangels</p><p>were togovernmen,neitherexternalnor internalcontrolsongovernment</p><p>wouldbenecessary.</p><p>Governmentshouldbelimited,anditshouldneverchoosesidesbasedonthe</p><p>colorofyourskin,whoyourparentsare,howmuchmoneyyoumake,orwhat</p><p>youdo for a living.And it shouldnever, ever choose favorites, because those</p><p>favorites will inevitably be the vested, the powerful, and the ones who know</p><p>somebodyinWashington,D.C.</p><p>That’s why our system is designed to protect individual liberty. “[I]n the</p><p>federalrepublicoftheUnitedStates,”Madisonwrites,“allauthorityinitwillbe</p><p>derivedfromanddependentonthesociety,thesocietyitselfwillbebrokeninto</p><p>somanyparts,interests,andclassesofcitizens,thattherightsofindividuals,or</p><p>of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the</p><p>majority.Inafreegovernmentthesecurityforcivilrightsmustbethesameas</p><p>thatforreligiousrights.”</p><p>3.TAKERESPONSIBILITY</p><p>Shouldyouwaitaroundforsomeoneelsetosolveaproblem,orshouldyouget</p><p>itdoneyourself?Libertyisanindividualresponsibility.Theburdenalwayssits</p><p>uponyourshouldersfirst.Itisthatinescapableaccountabilitythatstaresyouin</p><p>the mirror every morning. If it didn’t get done, sometimes there’s no one to</p><p>blamebutyourself.</p><p>Freepeople stepup tohelpourneighborswhenbad thingshappen;noone</p><p>needstotellustodothat.Wedefend,sometimesatgreatpersonalsacrifice,what</p><p>makesAmerica so special. Freedomworks tomake our communities a better</p><p>place,byworkingtogethervoluntarily,solvingproblemsfromthebottomup.</p><p>This is the“I” incommunity.Communitiesaremadeupof individualsand</p><p>familiesandvolunteersandlocalorganizationsandtime-testedinstitutionsthat</p><p>have been around since long before youwere born. All of these things work</p><p>together to solve problems, build things, and create better opportunities. But</p><p>noticeapatternthatshouldbeself-evident:Familiesaremadeupoffreepeople.</p><p>Soarechurchesandsynagogues, local firehousesandvolunteersoupkitchens,</p><p>andthecountlesscommunityserviceprojectsthathappeneveryweekend.Allof</p><p>these social units, no matter how you parse it, are made up of individuals</p><p>workingtogether,bychoice.Itdoestakeavillage,butvillagesaremadeupof</p><p>peoplechoosingtovoluntarilyassociatewithoneanother.</p><p>IwasintroducedtothephilosophyoflibertybyAynRand.Ifoundherwork</p><p>compellingbecauseitfocusedonindividualresponsibility.Doyouownyourself</p><p>andtheproductofyourwork,sheasked,ordoessomeoneelsehaveafirstclaim</p><p>onyourlife?Ithoughttheanswerwasobvious.</p><p>Rand’scritics love toattackherviews that individualsmatter, and thatyou</p><p>havebothownershipofandaresponsibilityforyourownlife.Theyusuallyset</p><p>upastrawman:thecaricatureof“ruggedindividualism”andthefalseclaimthat</p><p>everyoneisanisland,uncaringofanyoneoranything,willingtodoanythingto</p><p>getahead.</p><p>“AynRandisoneofthosethingsthatalotofus,whenwewere17or18and</p><p>feelingmisunderstood,we’dpickup,”BarackObamatellsRollingStone.“Then,</p><p>as we get older, we realize that a world in which we’re only thinking about</p><p>ourselvesandnot thinkingaboutanybodyelse, inwhichwe’reconsidering the</p><p>entireprojectofdevelopingourselvesasmore important thanourrelationships</p><p>tootherpeopleandmakingsurethateverybodyelsehasopportunity—thatthat’s</p><p>a pretty narrow vision. It’s not one that, I think, describes what’s best in</p><p>America.”6</p><p>Ofcourseitisn’t,Mr.President.InObama’ssimplisticconfiguration,thereis</p><p>onlythe“narrowvision”oftheindividual,andtheseeminglylimitlesswisdom</p><p>of thecollective.Progressivesandadvocatesofmoregovernment involvement</p><p>like tosuggest that there isadichotomy,orat leastadirect trade-off,between</p><p>individuallibertyandarobustsenseofcommunity.</p><p>It’seasytokickdownstrawmen,Isuppose,buttherealquestionstands:Can</p><p>governmentsrequirethatpeoplecare,orforcepeopletovolunteer?Itseemslike</p><p>suchasillyquestion,butsomeseemtothinktheansweris“yes.”</p><p>Some people just don’t see the link between individual initiative and the</p><p>cohesionofacommunity.</p><p>Justicemeanstreatingeveryonejustlikeeveryoneelseunderthelawsofthe</p><p>land.Noexceptions,nofavors.“Socialjustice,”asbestIcantell,meansexactly</p><p>the opposite. It means treating everyone differently, usually by redistributing</p><p>wealthandoutcomesinsocietybyforce.</p><p>The term “social justice” was first coined by the Jesuit philosopher Luigi</p><p>Taparelli d’Azeglio,who argued, “A society cannot existwithout an authority</p><p>that creates harmony in it.” Someone needs to be in charge, he assumed, and</p><p>someone needs to direct things. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt quoted</p><p>Taparelli in a speech in 1932, to help justify the extraordinary, and often</p><p>unconstitutional,actionstakenbyhisadministrationtoconsolidatepowerinthe</p><p>federal government: “[T]he right orderingof economic life cannot be left to a</p><p>freecompetitionofforces.Forfromthissource,asfromapoisonedspring,have</p><p>originatedandspreadalltheerrorsofindividualisteconomicteaching.”7</p><p>Forty years later, John Rawls would expand on this idea in his influential</p><p>bookATheoryofJustice.“Socialandeconomicinequalities,”heasserted,“are</p><p>to be arranged so that they are to be of the greatest</p><p>ontheintellectualshouldersofthebestactivists,</p><p>entrepreneurs,thinkers,rabble-rousers,anddisrupters.</p><p>ImagineaworldwhereLechWalesa,theheroicgrassrootsleaderofPoland’s</p><p>Solidarity movement, could have live-streamed his courageous calls for civil</p><p>disobediencefromtheshipyardsofGdansk.WhatifSamuelAdams,America’s</p><p>firstcommunityorganizer,couldhavelive-tweetedtheBostonTeaPartyinreal</p><p>timeacrossthecolonies?WhatifDr.KingcouldhaveorganizedavirtualMarch</p><p>onWashingtonforallofthosewhocouldnotaffordtogettothenation’scapital</p><p>onAugust28,1963?</p><p>TheInternetisaforcemultiplierforfreepeoplebecausewenaturallyfitwith</p><p>itsethos.Everythingistransparent,andtherearesimplerules.Noonegetstotell</p><p>anyoneelsewhat todo.Butpeopleareconstantlycomingtogether incommon</p><p>purpose, based upon mutually agreed-upon goals, to bigger ends. That is</p><p>preciselyhowfreedomworks.</p><p>That’swhyfreedomistrendingonline.Freedomisbreakingdownbarriersto</p><p>knowing. It also seems to be breaking down the old rules of political</p><p>partisanship. It may no longer be so black and white, Republicans versus</p><p>Democrats.Itmaynotevenbeaboutliberalsversusconservatives.Whatif the</p><p>newpoliticalspectrumhasononesidethosepeoplewhowanttobeleftalone,</p><p>thosewhowanttobefree,thosewhodon’thurtpeopleortaketheirstuff,andon</p><p>theotherextremeofthisnewscalestandsanyonewhowantstousegovernment</p><p>powertotellyouhowtoliveyourlife?</p><p>Don’tbelieveme?ConsiderthisstoryfromtheGuardianaboutagrassroots</p><p>protest in Washington, D.C., organized against the Obama administration’s</p><p>practiceofmasssurveillanceofitsinnocentcitizens:</p><p>Billedbyorganizersas“thelargestrallyyettoprotestmasssurveillance,”</p><p>StopWatchingUswas sponsoredbyanunusuallybroad coalitionof left-</p><p>and right-wing groups, including everything from the American Civil</p><p>LibertiesUnion, theGreenParty,Color ofChange andDailyKos to the</p><p>LibertarianParty,FreedomWorksandYoungAmericansforLiberty.</p><p>William Evans, of Richmond, Virginia, may have best embodied the</p><p>nonpartisanatmosphereandmessageof theevent.Heworea“Richmond</p><p>TeaParty”baseballcap,aswellasaCodePinkstickersaying“MakeOut,</p><p>NotWar.”HeisamemberoftheRichmondTeaPartybutnotofCodePink,</p><p>he said, adding thathe“just loved”what the sticker said.Evans saidhe</p><p>wasattendingtoprotestthe“shreddingoftheconstitution”andaddedthat</p><p>hewashappythat“youguysontheleftarefinallystartingtoseeit.”</p><p>“Wemaynotalwaysagreeonourbeliefsystem,”headded,“butthank</p><p>GodweagreeontheConstitution.”42</p><p>CodePinkandtheteaparty?TheInternetreallydoeschangeeverything.No</p><p>wonderJohnMcCainisfreakingout.</p><p>CHAPTER7</p><p>ASEATATTHETABLE</p><p>THEOLDWAYOF doing things inWashingtonwasbasedonaclosed system,an</p><p>exclusiveclubthatfavoredinsidersandthepoliticallyconnectedoverprincipled</p><p>leaders with big ideas. Follow the leader. Toe the party line. Shake the right</p><p>hands.Thatwastheonlywaytogetelected,theonlywaytoevenhaveashotat</p><p>making a difference. But within the constraints of the system, the rules are</p><p>alwaysstackedagainstfreedom,andaccountability,andfiscalresponsibility.</p><p>TheemergenceoftheInternetandsocialmediahasbeguntochangeallthat.</p><p>Themachineryofgovernmentnolongerfunctionsentirelybehindcloseddoors,</p><p>shieldedfromthelightofpublicattention.Informationonlast-minutefloorvotes</p><p>andarcanecongressional floorprocedure is tweetedout,posted,andotherwise</p><p>instantaneouslydistributedtomillionsofconcernedcitizens.Throughthemagic</p><p>oflivestreaming,wecanwatcheventsunfoldontheHouseandSenatefloorsin</p><p>realtime,fromthecomfortofourownsmartphones.</p><p>Knowledge is power, and the diminishing marginal costs of getting good</p><p>information about Washington’s ways is changing the old, tired political</p><p>calculus.Politicianscannolongerhidefromtheirconstituents,tellingthemone</p><p>thingbackhomewhilevotingforbusinessasusualinthenation’scapital.Asa</p><p>result,wearebeginningtoseerealaccountability,andtheeffects, thoughonly</p><p>justbeginningtobefelt,areamazing.</p><p>Thankstothepowerofpoliticaldisintermediation, theAmericanpeopleare</p><p>makingtheirvoicesheardinWashington.Anewgenerationofcongressmenand</p><p>senators has emerged to give voice to the formerly voiceless, to keep their</p><p>promises,andtostandonprinciple.</p><p>Thisisnothingshortofaparadigmshiftthatgivesshareholdersarealseatat</p><p>thetableinWashington.Ourproxyrepresentationattheboardofdirectors’table</p><p>is a growing bicameral “Liberty Caucus,” the size and quality of which is</p><p>historicallyunprecedentedinAmericanpolitics.</p><p>I was lucky enough to sit down with six of the most exciting figures to</p><p>emergefromthisnewpoliticalenvironment,togettheirtakeonthings.Iasked</p><p>them about their history with the ideas of liberty and their experiences</p><p>confronting thepoliticalestablishment.SenatorsRandPaul (R-KY),MikeLee</p><p>(R-UT),andTedCruz(R-TX),alongwithRepresentativesJustinAmash(R-MI),</p><p>Thomas Massie (R-KY), and David Schweikert (R-AZ), are leading among</p><p>thosewritingthenewrules inpolitics,wherepowerdoesnotgoto thosemost</p><p>entrenchedinabrokensystem,butremainswiththepeople,wherethefounders</p><p>intendedit.*</p><p>These are some smart, fearless guys. Because this is my book, I took the</p><p>libertytomashupsixseparateconversationsintoanimaginarygabfestbetween</p><p>allsixlegislators.Alloftheirquotes,ofcourse,aretherealthing.</p><p>Here’swhatwentdowninmyimaginarylivingroom:</p><p>MK: We’re talking about the ideas of liberty and the way that the world has</p><p>changed somuch in the last coupleof years, but Iwanted toask you first,</p><p>howyougotintotheseideas.Howdidyoudiscoverfreedom?</p><p>TEDCRUZ:AsakidIgotveryinvolvedinagroupinHoustonthatwascalledthe</p><p>FreeEnterprise Institute. It hadaprogramwhere it taughthigh schoolkids</p><p>principles of free market economics, and it would have us read Milton</p><p>Friedman, and Hayek, and Von Mises, and Bastiat, and have us prepare</p><p>speechesonfreemarketeconomics.Inthecourseoffouryearsofhighschool</p><p>IendedupgivingrightabouteightyspeechesacrossthestateofTexasonfree</p><p>marketeconomics,andalsoontheConstitution.Andthatbecamereallythe</p><p>intellectual inspiration and foundation for being involved in the liberty</p><p>movement.</p><p>DAVIDSCHWEIKERT:Itcametomeasateenager.SomehowIgotmyhandsonan</p><p>AynRandbook.Andunlikemostpeople,IstartedwithabookcalledWethe</p><p>Living. In Arizona it’s really hot during the summer, so you’re just inside</p><p>goingthroughthepages.AndIfellinlovewiththeheroineinthat.Andfrom</p><p>thereitjustsortofbuiltintounderstandingthepoweroftheindividual.AndI</p><p>havetoadmit,eveninthehighschoolIwasin,therewereprobablyadozen</p><p>ofuswhobecameRanddevotees.</p><p>THOMASMASSIE:Mygatewayissuewasgunrights.WhenIwaseighteenIwent</p><p>toschoolinMassachusettsfromKentucky.I’dreadaboutpeoplewhowanted</p><p>tobanguns,butI’dnevermetone.AndinstantlyIfoundmyselfsurrounded</p><p>bythesepeoplethatwantedtobanguns.Andthatwasmylibertyissue.</p><p>MIKELEE:Iwasraisedwitharealloveofthecountry.Myparentstaughtmethat</p><p>Americaisaspecialplace,thatAmericaisunlikeothercountries.Andwe’re</p><p>very privileged, we’re very fortunate to live here because of these shared</p><p>values and the heritage that we have inherited from prior generations.My</p><p>parentstaughtmeaboutthestructureandhow</p><p>it’ssetupfromanearlyage.</p><p>OneofthethingsthatI’vebeenfrustratedwithsinceatleasttheageoftenis</p><p>the fact that the federal government is doing too many things. We were</p><p>always supposed to have a limited-purpose national government, a federal</p><p>government with only a few basic responsibilities. It was supposed to</p><p>performthosereallywell,anditwassupposedtotakecareofthosethingsto</p><p>theexclusion,inmanycircumstances,ofstateauthority.Butoutsideofthose</p><p>areas, itwas supposed to stay out and let state and local governments take</p><p>careoftherest,alongwithcivilsociety.</p><p>JUSTINAMASH: Iwasdonewithcollege,donewith lawschool,andnoticed that</p><p>myviewsonpoliticswerea littlebitdifferent thansomeofmyRepublican</p><p>colleagues. It was the [GeorgeW.] Bush era of Republican politics. So, I</p><p>decidedI’ddoaGooglesearchandthrewsomeofthetermsintoGooglethat</p><p>Ithoughtmatchedmyviewpoints.UppoppedF.A.Hayek.</p><p>I likeHayek’s style. It’s an intellectual style. There’s a strong focus on</p><p>spontaneousorder, the idea thatorderpopsoutofourfree interactionswith</p><p>eachother.IfoundthatveryappealingandwhenIreadHayek’sworks,they</p><p>reallystruckachordwithme.</p><p>MK:Hayek talksabouthow individuals come together involuntaryassociation</p><p>and create institutions, and those institutions both inform, and are a</p><p>constraint on our behavior. I always thought that that interplay between</p><p>communityandtheindividualmadealotofsenseandexplainshowtheworld</p><p>holds togetherandworkssowellwithoutsomebenevolentdespot tellingus</p><p>whattodo.</p><p>JUSTIN AMASH: Yeah, that’s absolutely right. He’s very good at making the</p><p>distinction between government and society. There can be societies where</p><p>peopleinteract,wheretheycooperate,wheretheyformgroupstogether.But</p><p>youdon’thavetohaveagovernmentdecidinghowallof thoseinteractions</p><p>work.</p><p>MK:The left loves touse thisatomisticcaricature thatwe’reallAynRandoids,</p><p>selfishindividualswillingtodoabsolutelyanythingtogetwhatwewant.But</p><p>that’s thecompleteoppositeofwhatIgetoutofRand.Herworkwasreally</p><p>focused on individual responsibility.Weneed to take theword“community</p><p>organizer”back,Ithink,andtaketheword“community”back.</p><p>JUSTINAMASH:Right,andalotofwhatlibertariansareaboutthisideathatpeople</p><p>worktogether,thattheycooperate,thattheyformthesesortofsocialgroups.</p><p>That’sperfectlyacceptableaslongasthey’revoluntaryassociations.</p><p>MK:Let’s talkaboutpolitics fora littlebit. I think thatwe’re in themidstofa</p><p>realignment, maybe even a paradigm shift. That same disintermediation,</p><p>decentralization,morepower to the individualdynamic ishappeninginour</p><p>politics.Andpeoplelikeyouarebeatingestablishmentcandidateswithallof</p><p>the traditional advantages: more money, more people jetting in from</p><p>Washington,D.C.,toendorsethem.Tellmethatstory.</p><p>THOMASMASSIE:Ithinktheoldmodelwasthatyouranforstatelegislatureand</p><p>youbecameastaterepresentative,thenyoubecameastatesenator,andyou</p><p>were a good party player, a good team player, and then somebody</p><p>recommended that you get into a congressional race, and you come up the</p><p>ranks.That’sbeenturnedonitshead.</p><p>There are some guys here in Congress that have never held an elective</p><p>office. Ted Yoho, he’s great. He’s a large-animal veterinarian. Jim</p><p>Bridenstine, he’s great.Hewas aNavy fighter pilot.Neither of those guys</p><p>heldanelectiveoffice,andtheybeatanincumbentRepublicaninaprimary</p><p>togetheretoWashington,D.C.That’sonlypossiblewithgrassrootssupport.</p><p>Socialmedia ispartof it.Alternativemedia through talk radio ispartof it.</p><p>It’s enabled a different model of coming to Congress. You have the</p><p>grassroots, these outside organizations like FreedomWorks, which are</p><p>immenselyimportantintheraces,andnotjustintheraces,butaftertherace</p><p>iswonininfluencingthesecongressmenwhentheygethere.</p><p>TEDCRUZ:Ithinkthereisafundamentalparadigmshifthappeninginthepolitical</p><p>worldacrossthiscountry,andthatparadigmshiftistheriseofthegrassroots.</p><p>In theTexasSenaterace,whenwestartedIwas literallyat2percent in the</p><p>polls. Nobody in the state thoughtwe had a prayer.My opponentwas the</p><p>sittinglieutenantgovernor,whowasindependentlywealthy.Heranover$35</p><p>million dollars in nasty attack ads against us. And what we saw was just</p><p>breathtaking.Wesawfirstdozens,andhundredsandthenthousandsandthen</p><p>tens of thousands of men and women all across the state begin rising up,</p><p>beginknockingondoors,beginmakingphonecalls,andgoingonFacebook,</p><p>and going on Twitter, and reaching out and saying, “We can’t keep doing</p><p>whatwe’re doing.We are bankrupting this country.We are threatening the</p><p>futureofthenextgenerationsifwekeepgoingdownthisroad.”</p><p>Itwasbreathtaking,thegrassrootstsunamiwesaw.Despitebeingoutspent</p><p>three to one,wewent from 2 percent to not justwinning, butwinning the</p><p>primarybyfourteenpointsandwinningthegeneralbysixtypoints.Itwasan</p><p>incredible testament to the power of the grass roots, and I think that’s</p><p>happeningalloverthecountry.</p><p>DAVIDSCHWEIKERT: I’ve had a handful of brutal political elections. It feels like</p><p>everytimeIrunIenduphavingtheestablishmentfolksagainstme,because</p><p>I’m not sure that they want some of their little special deals examined or</p><p>takenaway.Andwhatyou’refindingisthattheactivists,thepublic,because</p><p>of thataccessof informationthroughtheInternet,aresortof learning,“Oh,</p><p>thisisreality.Thisismyalternative,andthereareoptionsthatdowork.”</p><p>THOMASMASSIE:Welookatcommunistcountriesandsocialistcountriesandsee</p><p>howtheInternethaschangedthem,orthecountriesthatareledbydespots.</p><p>When they get the Internet, they sort of start coming around and there are</p><p>revolutions there. That is happening here, we just don’t notice it. But it’s</p><p>happeningslower,becausewe’vegotapeacefulprocessfordoingthat.</p><p>RANDPAUL:Our Facebook [following] is now bigger than several of the news</p><p>networks’.I’mnotsayingthattobrag,I’msayingthatbecausethereispower</p><p>in Facebook. There is power in Instagram. There’s power throughout the</p><p>Internet.Itreallyhasledtoanamazingdemocracy.</p><p>MIKELEE:AndIthinkit’simportanttopointout,Matt,thatthatisnotourpower.</p><p>That ispower thatwehave from thepeople. It ispower thatwehaveonly</p><p>becauseweconnecttothepeople,andonlytotheextentthatweconnectto</p><p>the people.What has changed is that, with the power of socialmedia and</p><p>other new channels of communication, theWashington Post, theNew York</p><p>Times,andthesmallhandfulofmediaoutletsthathaveinthepastbeenthe</p><p>exclusiveconduitsofinformationaboutwhat’shappeninginWashingtonno</p><p>longerhaveamonopoly.Thecartelisbroken,andwiththebreakingofthat</p><p>cartel, the people are empowered. And they’re empowered by a new</p><p>generationofelectedofficialswhoare there tostandfor thepeopleandnot</p><p>for their own perpetual reelection, and not for the perpetual expansion of</p><p>government. That’s a game changer. That’s how we bring about the</p><p>restorationofconstitutionalgovernment.</p><p>MK:Doyouthinksomethingdifferentisgoingonintermsoftherelationshipof</p><p>Americanswiththeirfederalgovernment?</p><p>RANDPAUL:Yeah,andIthinkthepeopleareprobablytenyearsinadvanceofthe</p><p>legislature,andprobablyalwaysare.Thegrassrootsandthepublic</p><p>reactina</p><p>way,butittakesawhilefortheirwilltogettransmittedtoWashington.Why?</p><p>Becauseincumbentswinalmosteveryracearoundhere.Sotherearepeople</p><p>whowereelectedin1980.They’restillrepresentingthepeoplein1980who</p><p>firstelected them.Eachsuccessiveelectionbecomeseasier,and they’renot</p><p>listening as carefully to the American people. So, the new people, we’re</p><p>listeningprettycarefully.Wejustgotelected.</p><p>THOMASMASSIE:Mostcongressmencomeherewiththebestofintentions.They</p><p>want to do the right thing. But eventually they’re like zombies. They get</p><p>bittenandtheybecomepartofthezombiemob,andtheyvotewiththeirparty</p><p>regardless ofwhat’s in the bill. Some people canmake it amonthwithout</p><p>gettingbitten,andsomepeoplecanmakeitawholeterm.Buteventually,just</p><p>likeabadzombieseriesonTV...</p><p>DAVIDSCHWEIKERT: Past scandalswereoften about an individual engaging in a</p><p>bad act. Now the public is understanding that there is this collective</p><p>movement of bad acts.And it’s about the preservation of power. The only</p><p>waytobreakthatdownistoradicallychangethoseinstitutionsorcompletely</p><p>eliminatethoseinstitutionsandmovetoaverydifferentmodel.</p><p>RANDPAUL:AndIdisagreewithsomepeoplewhosaywe’retooconservativeor</p><p>toomuchinfavorofbalancedbudgetsortoomuchforlowertaxesandless</p><p>regulation. No, we can be all of those things.We don’t need to losewhat</p><p>we’re for, but we also have to be for a bigger message of liberty. Young</p><p>peopledon’thaveanymoney.Youaskyoungpeopleabout regulationsand</p><p>taxesandthey’relike,“Idon’thaveanymoney.Idon’townabusiness.But</p><p>I’ve got a cell phone and I’m on the computer, and I don’t like the</p><p>governmentsnoopingonwhetherIreadReasonmagazineorwhetherIgoto</p><p>FreedomWorks’ website. I don’t want the government to know that unless</p><p>I’m accused of a crime.” They care about privacy, but they may not care</p><p>about taxes.So,wedon’t give upon taxes, butwe also need to talk about</p><p>issuesthatyoungpeopleareinterestedin.</p><p>DAVIDSCHWEIKERT:There’s incredibleopportunity, particularlywith that under-</p><p>forty, under-thirty-five population. We have data that says they’re brand</p><p>switchers.Whentheywalkintothegrocerystoretheydon’tbuyTidebecause</p><p>theirmomandgrandmaboughtit.Theybuywhattheythinkisthebestvalue,</p><p>orwhattheysawontheirsocialmediaashavingabenefittheywant.AndI</p><p>think,actually,they’reabouttogrowuppolitically.Theyhavetonowrealize</p><p>that they’vebeenliedtobythispresidentaboutprivacy—lookat thethings</p><p>theNSAhasdone—about their individual freedoms.ThisWhiteHousehas</p><p>notcaredabouttheirindividualfreedoms.Asamatteroffactit’sbeenmore</p><p>collectivist. I’mwaiting for that revolutionwithyoungpeople to say, “And</p><p>now you’ve basically made me an indentured servant through the debt,</p><p>throughmyfuturetaxliability,andnowwhatyou’vedonetomehealth-care-</p><p>wise.”It’stimeforouryoungpeopletowakeupandunderstand:Thebattle’s</p><p>on.</p><p>MK: It’san interesting time tobehererightnow,becausewe’re in themidstof</p><p>this gargantuan fight. Not just for the soul of the Republican Party, but</p><p>perhapsforthefutureofthiscountry.Whatdoesthisnewpartylooklike?</p><p>RANDPAUL:ItlooksliketherestofAmericaifwewanttowin.Isay,“Withties</p><p>andwithout ties,with tattoosandwithout tattoos.” Itneeds to look like the</p><p>rest of America, but also in an ethnicway as well.We are a very diverse</p><p>culture.WeneedtoreachouttoAfrican-Americansandsay,“Look,thewar</p><p>on drugs has disproportionately hurt the black community.” One in three</p><p>blackAmericans isaconvicted felon,primarilybecauseofnonviolentdrug</p><p>crimes.Weneedtoreachoutandsay,“Itisn’tfairthatwe’retargetingblack</p><p>Americansforarrest.”Itissaid,bysurveys,thatwhitesandblacksusedrugs</p><p>ataboutthesamerate,andyettheACLUrecentlysaidthatblackswerebeing</p><p>arrestedat five tosix times therate.Prisonstatisticsshowthatseventy-five</p><p>percentofprisonersareAfrican-AmericanorLatino,anditisbecausethewar</p><p>ondrugsisnotequallyapplied.I thinkweneedtotellkidsthatdrugsarea</p><p>badthing.Itellmykidstostayawayfromdrugs.They’reabadthing.Butif</p><p>oneofmykidsgetscaught,Idon’twanttheminjailforever.Isawtheother</p><p>day, Michael Douglas’s kid is in jail for ten years. He’s been in solitary</p><p>confinementfortwoyears.Ishehurtinghimselfbyusingdrugs?Absolutely.</p><p>But I would rather see him in some kind of rehabilitation hospital than</p><p>solitaryconfinement.</p><p>But we have to understand, and as Republicans we need to go to the</p><p>African-American community and say, “Look, they’re losingnot only their</p><p>freedom.They come out and then they’re a convicted felon for the rest of</p><p>their life.” You ever try to get a job? They call it “checking the box.”</p><p>Checkingtheboxofconvictedfelon.Theycannevergetaheadagain.Their</p><p>childsupportpaymentsbuildupwhilethey’reinprison.Theycomeoutand</p><p>theyowefour thousanddollars inchildsupport.Howdotheyeverpay that</p><p>workingminimumwage,ornotworkingat all?One thingaddsupand it’s</p><p>thiscycleofpoverty.IthinkifRepublicanshadamessage,thatmessageisa</p><p>limited-government one. This is: The government should protect us from</p><p>violence against other individuals. The sort of self-inflicted bad things that</p><p>peoplecandotothemselves,weshouldtrytoworkasasocietytominimize</p><p>that,butputtingpeopleinjailfordoingbadthingstothemselvesisjustnot</p><p>goodforsociety.</p><p>JUSTIN AMASH: And when I go back to my district my constituents are very</p><p>supportiveofwhatI’mdoing,RepublicansandDemocrats.Ithinkthingsare</p><p>changing,andItalktomanyofmycolleagueswhoarejustenteringCongress</p><p>thelasttwocycles.TheythinkmorelikeIdoonmanyoftheseissues.Andin</p><p>fact,when you look at theNSA amendment, for example, newermembers</p><p>weremuchmoresupportiveofmyamendmentthanmemberswhohavebeen</p><p>hereforalongtime.Ithinkthere’sagenerationalshiftandit’sshiftinginthe</p><p>directionoflibertarianism.</p><p>TEDCRUZ: I think theRepublicanParty needs to get back to the principleswe</p><p>should have been standing for in the first place. We need to get back to</p><p>defendingfreemarketprinciplesanddefendingtheConstitution.Ithinkwhat</p><p>we’re seeing, the rise of the grass roots, is the American people holding</p><p>electedofficialsaccountableofbothparties.Ithinkthat’sterrific.Ithinkthat</p><p>shouldhappenalotmore.</p><p>MK: But if you were to open to a page in theNew York Times, they would</p><p>describealibertarianassociallymoderateandfiscallyconservative.Inever</p><p>thought thatwasquiteright. Ialways thought itwasaboutourrelationship</p><p>withthegovernmentandwhetherornotwegottocontrolourownlives.</p><p>JUSTINAMASH:That’sright.It’sjustaboutbeingabletomakedecisionsforyour</p><p>own lives.So, there arevery socially conservative libertarians. I’ma fairly</p><p>sociallyconservativelibertarian.Andthereareotherlibertarianswhoarenot</p><p>as socially conservative.But the idea is thatwe should have a government</p><p>thatallowsustomakethosedecisionsforourownlives,andwecandecide</p><p>as a societywhetherwe like thosevalues or not.And if youdisagreewith</p><p>someone,you’re free to tell them.Butwedon’tneedgovernment imposing</p><p>oneviewpointoneveryone.</p><p>THOMASMASSIE: People like to label everybody inWashington,D.C. I’vebeen</p><p>called a libertarian-leaning Republican, a</p><p>constitutional conservative, a tea</p><p>partycongressman,butIthinktheonethatfitsbestiswhentheycallmeone</p><p>ofthetwelvemembersoftheRepublicanconferencewhodidn’tvoteforJohn</p><p>Boehner.</p><p>MK: It strikes me that it’s no longer so much about Republicans versus</p><p>Democrats.ItmaybeaboutD.C.insidersversustherestofAmerica.</p><p>JUSTIN AMASH: Yeah, I don’t think we should ever worry about who we’re</p><p>workingwith in termsofRepublicanversusDemocrat versus libertarianor</p><p>independent.Wehavetoworktogetherhere.</p><p>TEDCRUZ:Thereisadivide,andit’samuchbiggerdividethanadividebetween</p><p>RepublicansandDemocrats.That’sthedividebetweenentrenchedpoliticians</p><p>inWashington and theAmerican people. There are a lot of people in both</p><p>partiesinWashingtonwhojustaren’tlisteningtothepeopleanymore.</p><p>DAVID SCHWEIKERT:Well, think about this. If you’re a bureaucrat, what dowe</p><p>knowaboutbureaucracies,ofeverykindbothprivateandpublic?Ultimately</p><p>the preservation of the bureaucracy becomes the number-one goal. So, if</p><p>you’reLoisLerner,you’reat theIRS,isitasmuchevenideological,asit’s</p><p>thepreservationof thebureaucracy?Andyousee thatalloverWashington,</p><p>because the scandal at the IRS isn’t the only place this type of activity is</p><p>takingplace.It’supanddowngovernment.Becauseareyougoingtosupport</p><p>theparty,themorecollectivistpartythatwantstogrowgovernment,wantsto</p><p>giveyoubonuses,wants togiveyoucertainshinyobjects,or theparty that</p><p>wants to hand power back to the states?You end upwith a very different</p><p>incentivesystem,andit’squiteperverse.</p><p>THOMAS MASSIE: Here’s one thing that people don’t really understand, that I</p><p>didn’t understand. They say that money corrupts the process. I’ve always</p><p>kind of believed that, but I didn’t know how it corrupts the process.</p><p>Congressmenraisea lotofmoney.Someof themraise twoor threemillion</p><p>dollars an election cycle. But what do they do with that money? Their</p><p>reelection is virtually assured. It’s more certain than anything that they’re</p><p>goingtocomeback,becausethey’re incumbentsandthey’vedonetheright</p><p>things.So, theydon’t need themoney to get reelected.They’re not buying</p><p>yachtsandFerrariswiththemoney.Whataretheydoingwiththemoney?It’s</p><p>thecurrencyofpower.</p><p>Here’swhatthey’redoingwiththemoneythattheyraise:They’regiving</p><p>it to other congressmen. And then they become ingratiated. They feel like</p><p>they owe that congressman something. A vote, maybe on an issue, or a</p><p>cosponsorship on a bill. So, it’s the currencyof influencewithinCongress,</p><p>and then you also takemost of that money and you give it to your party,</p><p>whetheryou’reaRepublicanoraDemocrat.</p><p>There’sabigfootballgamethat’sgoingoninCongress.Thepartythathas</p><p>themajority isplayinghard tokeep themajority,and theparty that’s in the</p><p>minorityisplayinghardtogetthemajority.It’safootballgamethat’splayed</p><p>withmoney,andthemoremoneyyouraiseforyourparty,themoreinfluence</p><p>you’regranted.You’llgetabettercommittee.Dotheymeasurecommitteesin</p><p>terms of how much you can do for your constituents? No. All the A-</p><p>committeesinCongressarebasedonhowmuchmoneywilllobbyistsgiveto</p><p>you if you get on one of those committees. So, you raisemoney for your</p><p>party, you’re a good soldier, you get on a higher fund-raising-capable</p><p>committee,youraisemoremoney,butnowyou’vegotaquota.Nowyou’re</p><p>onthetreadmill.Iftheygiveyouaspotonthebigpirateship,you’vegotto</p><p>collectalotoftreasure.That’sthewaytheprocessgetsdistorted.That’show</p><p>moneydistortstheprocessinWashington,D.C.</p><p>RANDPAUL: Imagine how it could be ifHillaryClinton is the nominee for the</p><p>Democrat Party. If she’s the nominee and she wants to be involved in the</p><p>middle of the Syrian civil war, and she doesn’t give a damn about your</p><p>privacy.Imagine if,on theRepublicanside,wehavesomeonewhowantsa</p><p>constitutional foreign policy,who says, “Sure,we defend our country.You</p><p>messwithus,you’regoingtogetwhathappenedafter9/11—overwhelming</p><p>useof force againstyou.Butwe’renotgoing tobe involved in everycivil</p><p>war,andCongresswillvote.Thewillofthepeoplewilldecidewhetherwe’re</p><p>inwar.”Ithinkyoucouldhaveacompletetransformativeelection,whereall</p><p>of a sudden the reactionary, nonthinking individual is going to be Hillary</p><p>Clinton,andtheRepublicanscouldhaveaforward-lookingpersonwhotalks</p><p>about privacy and talks about adding a degree of justice to our criminal</p><p>justicesystem.</p><p>MK: The newly empowered citizenry, with their new tools of accountability,</p><p>makesme an optimist, even though everything in this town and everything</p><p>that President Obama has done to our economy and to our Constitution</p><p>shouldmakeus despair about the future.Are youanoptimist or are youa</p><p>pessimistaboutthefutureofthiscountry?</p><p>THOMASMASSIE: This place iswaymore broken than I realized before I came</p><p>here.NowthatI’mhere,Igiveitafiftypercentchancethatwe’regoingtobe</p><p>abletoturnthisshipbeforewehittheshore.Andafiftypercentchancethat</p><p>it’sgoingtotakesomethingbigtowakepeopleupandtogetthechangeswe</p><p>need.But theonly thing I cando is fight to turn the ship.That’swhat I’m</p><p>workingon.InsteadofbeinghomeinKentuckyandpreparingfortheshipto</p><p>hittheshore,I’mupheretryingtoavoidtheshore.</p><p>MIKE LEE: I’m an optimist in a Churchillian sort ofway.WinstonChurchill is</p><p>reportedtohavesaid,“TheAmericanpeoplecanalwaysbecountedontodo</p><p>the right thing, after they have exhausted every other alternative.” I think</p><p>we’re reaching thatpointwherewehave exhausted everyother alternative,</p><p>and we will be left with doing the right thing. That’s what the American</p><p>peoplearedoing.That’swhat they’resaying.Theywant toreturn toa time</p><p>whenthepeoplearesovereign,andthey’recitizens,notsubjects.</p><p>TED CRUZ: I’m incredibly optimistic. I’m optimistic because I think there is a</p><p>movement that’s sweeping this nation of millions of Americans who are</p><p>wakingup and looking around. If you look at thepast year, the riseof the</p><p>grassroots,infight,afterfight,afterfightinWashington,thegrassrootshave</p><p>turned the fight around.Nothing scares elected officialsmore than hearing</p><p>from their constituents, and in my view, liberty is never safer than when</p><p>politiciansareterrified.</p><p>DAVID SCHWEIKERT: I’m optimistic also, but be careful because sometimes I’m</p><p>pathologically optimistic. How do you get the public, mom and dad, the</p><p>youngperson,thepersonwho’stryingtogrowtheirlifeandtheirbusiness,to</p><p>beabletotakethatlittlebitoftheirtime?Andit’snotaboutwritingacheck,</p><p>thoughthosearehelpful.It’saboutreachingouttoaFreedomWorksorother</p><p>organizationsanddrivingtheirvoice,saying,“We’repayingattention,andwe</p><p>care.”</p><p>CHAPTER8</p><p>TWELVESTEPS</p><p>WHAT,EXACTLY,DOYOUwant?</p><p>I get this question all the time, inside the Capitol Beltway. Sometimes the</p><p>hostility of the inquiry makes me feel like I’m participating in the drug</p><p>intervention of an old friend. You’ve finally got their attention, and they feel</p><p>trapped,busted.Thencomesthedenial,theparanoia,andthehostility.Anaddict</p><p>willshootatanymessengerthatdeliversthebadnews:Youhaveabigproblem,</p><p>andthepathyouhavechosenwillnot—cannot—endwell.</p><p>ThisispreciselythewaythatofficialWashington</p><p>hasreactedtothecitizens</p><p>asking the tough questions of their two party representation.Obviously, those</p><p>who ask this question typically have an agenda. They are trying to deflect</p><p>attention, boldly claiming thatWashington does not have a spending problem.</p><p>Anaddictiontopower?Nothere;atleastnothingthatcan’tbesolvedbygiving</p><p>the fixers another fix, more and more money and control. Without another</p><p>government program, howwill anything get better? The relentless clamor for</p><p>more of yourmoney rattles throughWashington like junkies pleading for just</p><p>onemorehit.</p><p>Oneofthecommoncritiquescomingfromprogressives,themedia,andchin-</p><p>clutching establishmentarians inside the Beltway is that we are just against</p><p>things. President Obama loves this particular straw man. We oppose a</p><p>governmenttakeoverofhealthcare,sowemustbeagainstpeoplegettinghealth</p><p>insurance. We oppose federal meddling in education, so we must be against</p><p>children learning.Weoppose an omnipotent surveillance state, sowemust be</p><p>againstthesafetyofinnocents.</p><p>David Brooks, the resident “conservative” at theNew York Times, doesn’t</p><p>eventrytohidehisdisdainforthenewgenerationoflegislatorswhohavecome</p><p>toWashingtoncommittedtochangingtherulesofthegame:</p><p>Ted Cruz, the senator from Canada through Texas, is basically not a</p><p>legislator in the normal sense, doesn’t have an idea that he’s going to</p><p>Congresstocreatecoalitions,makealliances,andheisgoingtopassalot</p><p>of legislation.He’sgoing inmoreasamediaprotestperson.Anda lotof</p><p>theHouseRepublicansareinthesamemode.They’renotnormalmembers</p><p>of Congress. They’re not legislators. They want to stop things. And so</p><p>they’rejustbeing—theyjustwanttoobstruct.1</p><p>HarryReidwentsofarastocallus“anarchists,”simplybecauseweoppose</p><p>fundinganexpensivefederalhealth-caretakeoverthatthepresidenthimselfhas</p><p>arbitrarily repealed or delayed in part some twenty times so far.2 The senator</p><p>mostresponsiblefordraftingthelegislation,DemocratMaxBaucus,calledit“a</p><p>hugetrainwreckcomingdown”inApril2013.3Butnowwearethe“anarchists”</p><p>forinsistingthatthegovernmentnotfund,withborrowedmoney,somethingthat</p><p>nooneinD.C.seemstothinkwillactuallywork.Theyareactinglikedesperate</p><p>addicts,aren’tthey?</p><p>Howdowegetfromheretothere,tomorefreedomandprosperity?Howdo</p><p>we get from where we are today—with ever more encroaching government</p><p>control,unimaginablefiscalliabilities,andsofewinWashington,D.C.,willing</p><p>todowhatneedstobedone—tothepointwherethefederalgovernmentisback</p><p>toitslimitedandproperrole?</p><p>Publicchoiceeconomistsmighttellusthatit’simpossible,thatgovernments</p><p>naturally, inexorably, march forward—like the White Walkers descending on</p><p>Westeros inGame of Thrones—expanding to the point where they choke off</p><p>productive initiative, and great nations die. Think Rome, and the tragic</p><p>devolution froma republic to an autocratic empire, and then to the dustbin of</p><p>history.</p><p>HowcanwereversecourseandmakesurethatAmericadoesn’tgodownthat</p><p>fatefulpathofno return?Tome, this is themost interesting strategicquestion</p><p>that constitutionalconservativesand small-l libertarians—momsanddadswho</p><p>justwantabetterlifefortheirkids—havetoanswer.</p><p>Thesolutionwillneverbeaquixoticfixofmore“revenue”oranother top-</p><p>down reorganization of your life by some faceless bureaucrat who knows</p><p>nothingofyouandyourfamilyanddoesn’tmuchcare.Weneedabetter,more</p><p>compelling freedom agenda. The burden on us will always be far higher to</p><p>explainhowfreedomworks.</p><p>Weunderstandourprinciples.Wegetfreedom.Weknowthatsimplerulesof</p><p>personal conduct—Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff—create</p><p>tremendous upward potential for all of us, and that opportunity for all creates</p><p>peacefulcooperation.Eventhoughtheinsiderstellustheopposite,weknowthat</p><p>open societies actually spread the wealth, and that closed, top-down systems</p><p>lockinthespoilsoftheHavesattheexpenseofgenerationsofHave-Nots.We</p><p>understand the ethos of liberty that is ingrained in every one of us makes</p><p>Americaanexceptionalplace.</p><p>Sowhat,exactly,shouldwedotorestoreliberty?</p><p>Thischapterlaysoutatwelve-steppolicyagenda:positive,innovativeideas</p><p>thatwould improvepeople’s livesby letting thembe free,by spending lessof</p><p>your hard-earnedmoney on someone else’s favors, by letting you choose, by</p><p>treatingusallequallyunderthelawsoftheland.</p><p>Radicalstuff,Iknow.</p><p>1.COMPLYWITHTHELAWSYOUPASS</p><p>AsSteveForbeslikestosay,theplannersinWashingtonshouldhavetoeattheir</p><p>“owncooking.”Thisseemslikesuchcommonsense,butyouwon’tbesurprised</p><p>to learn just how controversial this idea is behind the closed doors where</p><p>congressional staffers and career bureaucrats congregate. Do as I say, they</p><p>prefer,notasIdo.</p><p>FormerObamaadministrationTreasurysecretaryTimothyGeithner,whowas</p><p>confirmedbytheU.S.Senatetoenforceyourcompliancewithcomplexfederal</p><p>taxlaws,didn’tevenseefittopayhisowntaxes,4apparentlybelievinghimself</p><p>abovesuchprosaicresponsibilities.</p><p>Backin2011,itwasrevealedthatHouseDemocraticleaderNancyPelosiand</p><p>otherkeymembersofCongressandtheircommitteestaffhadplayedthemarket</p><p>with the inside informationofwhat theirproposed lawswoulddo to thestock</p><p>valuationsofcertainindustries.5</p><p>ThissortofbehaviorisemblematicofthecontemptshownbyCongressfor</p><p>thelawstheyimposeontherestofus.WhiletheSTOCKAct6purportedtoput</p><p>anendtocongressionalinsidertrading,thesubstanceofthelegislationwaslater</p><p>rolled back before being implemented, by unanimous voice vote.Members of</p><p>the House were not given time to review the bill that Senate majority leader</p><p>HarryReidhadsentoverinthemiddleofthenight.</p><p>“Rather than craft narrow exemptions, or even delay implementation until</p><p>proper protections could be created, the Senate decided instead to exclude</p><p>legislativeandexecutivestaffersfromtheonlinedisclosurerequirements”ofthe</p><p>STOCK Act, reports the Sunlight Foundation.7 So the bicameral vote that</p><p>insisted thatD.C. insiderscomplywith thesame trading lawsas the restofus</p><p>was public and virtually unanimous, but the gutting of the law carries few</p><p>legislators’namesorfingerprints.</p><p>Moreegregiousstillaretheconstantattemptsbymembers,staff,andfederal</p><p>employees to exempt themselves from ObamaCare. House Ways and Means</p><p>CommitteechairmanDaveCampwantstochangethat,offeringaproposalthat</p><p>would place all federal employees, even the president himself, into the same</p><p>exchangesrequiredbytherestofthecountry.</p><p>“If the ObamaCare exchanges are good enough for the hardworking</p><p>Americansandsmallbusinessesthelawclaimstohelp,thentheyshouldbegood</p><p>enough for the president, vice president, Congress, and federal employees,”</p><p>Camp’sspokeswomanexplained.8</p><p>2.STOPSPENDINGMONEYWEDON’THAVE</p><p>Americanfamilieshavetobalancetheirbudgets.Thegovernmentshoulddothe</p><p>same.Thisisnotrocketscience.</p><p>WhyisitsohardforCongresstobalancethebudget?Thecoreproblem,of</p><p>course, is that theyarenotspendingtheirownmoney.Theyarespendingyour</p><p>money. The ghost of John Maynard Keynes provides them with a pseudo-</p><p>intellectual rationale to “stimulate aggregate demand.”Butwe are on to them</p><p>andknowthattheonlyrealstimulustheyarebuyingwithborrowedmoneyisfor</p><p>their</p><p>ownreelectionprospects.</p><p>Giventhat,asofthiswriting,thenationaldebttops$17trillion,itseemslike</p><p>commonsensewoulddictateafewthings:</p><p>•Stopnewspendingonnewprograms.</p><p>•Prioritizedollarsandgetridofprogramsthatdon’tmakethecutastop</p><p>prioritiesinaworldofscarcity.</p><p>•Nosacredcowsalloweduntilwesolvetheproblem,soputeverythingonthe</p><p>table.</p><p>•Dealhonestlywithentitlementsbyacknowledgingunfundedfuturepromises.</p><p>•Youcan’ttaxyourwaytoabalancedbudgetwithouttankingthejobcreation</p><p>thatactuallygeneratestaxreceipts.</p><p>Iknow,moreradicalism.HarryReidissooffendedbythesebudgetprinciples</p><p>thatifyouagreewiththem,hethinksyouarean“anarchist.”</p><p>So many in both parties have grown comfortable simply kicking the can</p><p>down the roadand rubber-stampinganendless seriesof increases in the“debt</p><p>ceiling,” or short-term “continuing resolutions” that claim deficit reduction in</p><p>futureyearswhilespendingmoretoday.Butit’sreallynotthathardtomapouta</p><p>plan to clean up Washington’s fiscal train wreck. In fact, FreedomWorks</p><p>“crowdsourced”ideasforacitizens’“DebtCommission”thatwouldbalancethe</p><p>budget in just a fewyears. SenatorMikeLee tried to bring those ideas to his</p><p>SenatecolleaguesinNovember2011andwasliterallyevictedfromtheRussell</p><p>Senate Office Building by staffers representing Senators Chuck Schumer (D-</p><p>NY)andLamarAlexander(R-TN).9</p><p>No,thisisn’tanOnionspoof.I’mnotmakingthatup.</p><p>Senator Lee has introduced a constitutional amendment that would require</p><p>Congress to balance the budget each year and limit spending to 18 percent of</p><p>GDP,theforty-yearaverageoffederalreceipts.10Itwasthebasisforaconsensus</p><p>balanced-budgetamendmentthattheentireSenateRepublicancaucuseventually</p><p>signedonto.</p><p>The Congressional Budget Office has released a report suggesting that if</p><p>nothingisdonetocontrolspending,by2038thefederaldebtcouldbeashighas</p><p>190 percent ofGDP.11 At that point we can send congressional emissaries to</p><p>Athens, Greece, to solicit innovative budget savings ideas from the Hellenic</p><p>Parliament.</p><p>3.SCRAPTHETAXCODE</p><p>The federal tax code should only exist to fund the necessary functions of</p><p>government.</p><p>Specialinterestsandcongressionaldealmakinghavecorruptedthetaxcode</p><p>beyond anything imaginable in 1913, when Congress passed the Sixteenth</p><p>Amendment to the Constitution, authorizing a national income tax. This</p><p>incomprehensible complexity favors insiders and the special provisions they</p><p>lobbied for, and the rest of us foot the bill. It’s political classwarfare against</p><p>workingAmericans.Theproblemisn’ttaxcutsfortherich;it’sataxcodethat</p><p>preventsworkingAmericansfromgettingrich.</p><p>Complexity also enriches bureaucratic advantage. Complexity means more</p><p>careerpublicemployees tonavigateambiguous rules.The taxcodebecomesa</p><p>weaponinthehandsofIRSagentswhohaveapartisanorparochialagenda,or</p><p>holdagrudge.</p><p>We need to scrap the code, and abolish the IRS.We need to clean out the</p><p>whole building, hose it out, and start over with a simple, low, flat tax. The</p><p>government function of revenue collection should be limited and</p><p>straightforward.Noagendas,nosocialengineering,nooverbearingdiscretionary</p><p>authorityinthehandsofgray-suitedsoviets.</p><p>Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has proposed doing exactly that. “We ought to</p><p>abolish the IRS and instead move to a simple flat tax, where the average</p><p>Americancanfilloutourtaxesonapostcard,”CruztoldFoxNews.“Itoughtto</p><p>bejustasimple,one-pagepostcardandtaketheagents, thebureaucracyoutof</p><p>Washington.Andlimitthepowerofgovernment.”12</p><p>Themostpowerfulcasefortaxreformisamoralone,thecommoncauseof</p><p>blindjustice.Ifyoudon’ttrustWashington,D.C.,togiveyouafairshake,why</p><p>notjusttreateveryoneequallyunderthelawsoftheland?</p><p>Makingthetaxcodesimple,low,fair,andhonestwouldbeapowerfulmeans</p><p>ofunleashinghumanpotential.Classwarriorsontheleftwouldhowlaboutthe</p><p>injusticeof treatingeveryoneequally,but their realagenda is indefending the</p><p>Beltwayintereststhathavedesignedthecurrentmess.</p><p>Thetruevictimsoffundamentaltaxreformaretheinsiderswhohavecarved</p><p>outtheirfavors,aswellasthelegislatorsandbureaucratswhomaketheirliving</p><p>offsoliciting,creating,andnavigatingnewcomplexity.Thereductioninwasted</p><p>timeandmoneydevotedtocompliancewouldunleashcapital,jobcreation,and</p><p>upwardmobility, while the elimination of complex loopholes would level the</p><p>playing field between Americans and tax compliance enforcers inside</p><p>government.</p><p>4.PUTPATIENTSINCHARGE</p><p>Okay,soweallagreethatObamaCareisexactlythewrongmedicine.Weneed</p><p>torepealthewholethingandstartover.Thatdoesnotmeanthatthereisnothing</p><p>wrong.Buttheanswerisinmorefreedom,notthecoercivehandofgovernment</p><p>bureaucrats.</p><p>The system as it exists today is plagued by a lack of competition and by</p><p>complex labyrinths that prevent patients from taking charge of their own care</p><p>andtreatments.</p><p>Thesingularproblemwithourhealth-caresystemisallofthefaceless,gray-</p><p>suitedmiddlemenstandingbetweenyouandyourdoctor.So-called“thirdparty</p><p>payers” are the direct result of government distortions in health-caremarkets.</p><p>Remember,allowingemployerstoprovidebenefitslikehealthcare,withpretax</p><p>dollars,wasapoliticalfixtoFDR’swageandpricecontrols.</p><p>What if we cut out the bureaucrats, and their take, and let you make the</p><p>choices right foryouandyour family?Wouldprovidersworkharder tosatisfy</p><p>yourneeds?Wouldyougetmorequalityatalowerprice?</p><p>Ofcourseyouwould.</p><p>There is a simple way to free patients and doctors from third parties like</p><p>employers, HMOs, the IRS, or the faceless deciders at HHS. This could be</p><p>accomplishedbyeliminating thepunitivebias in the taxcode that taxeshealth</p><p>insuranceandserviceswhenpurchaseddirectlybyindividuals.Thiswouldbea</p><p>pretty simple fix that empowers patients without some complex, top-down</p><p>redesign by the federal government. If health care is different, and vitally</p><p>important to all of us, let’s provide care for our families with our own hard-</p><p>earneddollars,beforethefederalgovernmenttakesitscut.Inotherwords,treat</p><p>everyonethesame,regardlessofwhereyouworkandwhomyouworkfor.</p><p>Other commonsense reforms include health savings accounts for younger</p><p>workers, stripping all of the “mandated benefits” from gold-plated insurance</p><p>plans that drive up both costs and overconsumption of health services. We</p><p>shouldalsoletfamiliesshopforbetterhealthinsurancepoliciesinallfiftystates,</p><p>justlikeanyotherproductwemightshoparoundfor.</p><p>No mandates, no coercion. Just choice, and providers who work for your</p><p>healthandyourreturnbusiness.Politiciansliketomakeemptypromisesabout</p><p>“universalcoverage,”eventhoughtheycan’tpossiblyprovideforit.Besides,the</p><p>goalshouldbebetterhealthcareatlowercosts,andWashingtonisparticularly</p><p>ill-suitedtoprovidethat.</p><p>Health care is a fundamentally personal issue. The relationship between a</p><p>patient and doctor needs to be based on trust andmutual understanding.Let’s</p><p>stoprobbingpatientsoftheirprivacy,theirdignity,andtheirfreedomtochoose.</p><p>It’sreallynotthatcomplicated,unlesshealth-carereformismoreabouttheir</p><p>controloveryouthanitisaboutyourcontroloveryourhealthcare.</p><p>5.CHOICE,NOTCONSCRIPTION</p><p>One-size-fits-allentitlements</p><p>takesecurityandcontrolawayfromyou,andthat’s</p><p>exactly upside down.You should have a say and a choice in your own future</p><p>plans.</p><p>Of course, it’s hard to talk about health-care reformwithout talking about</p><p>MedicareandMedicaid.Bothprogramsareindirefinancialcondition.Itmakes</p><p>nosensetotake$500billionoutofMedicare,asObamaCaredoes,tospendon</p><p>thecreationofanewprogram. Italsomakesnosense toexpandMedicaid,as</p><p>ObamaCare does, to growMedicaid populations and financial obligations that</p><p>arealreadybankruptingstatebudgets.</p><p>The biggest challenge with the federal budget is the so-called entitlement</p><p>programs like Social Security,Medicare, and nowObamaCare.Already, these</p><p>programsconsumeabigpartofthetotalfederalbudget.Andthisominoustrend</p><p>doesnoteventakeintoaccountwhattheTrusteesReportforSocialSecurityand</p><p>Medicareestimatesareunfundedpromisesinexcessof$100trillion.13Thetotal</p><p>fiscal gap of all our government liabilities is $222 trillion, according to</p><p>economist Laurence Kotlikoff.14 I know, it’s almost impossible to wrap your</p><p>mindaroundthatone.</p><p>Such programswill literally consume the entire budget ifwe don’t rethink</p><p>thisforced,one-size-fits-allapproachtoquestionslikeprovidingseniors’health</p><p>careandretirementbenefits.</p><p>Givingpeople choices is thekey.Today, somuch is forced,mandated, and</p><p>controlledbysomeoneelse.Iftheseprogramsaregoodanddesirable,weshould</p><p>letpeoplechoose.Afterall,choiceandcompetitionarethefundamentalbuilding</p><p>blocksofcustomersatisfaction.</p><p>I don’t thinkwe should change the rules of the game on retirees and near</p><p>retireesalreadylockedintothecurrentsystem.Thatwouldbewrong.Butsois</p><p>forcingyoungpeopleintoone-size-fits-allprogramsthatexpertsdonotbelieve</p><p>will be aroundwhen future retirees arrive. So youngpeople should be free to</p><p>choose. Itwouldbewrong to force them into a system theycan’t counton in</p><p>retirement.</p><p>Besides,wenolongerworkforthesamecompanyourentirelives, likeour</p><p>grandparentsdid.Newsystemsneed tobemobileandstickwithus,underour</p><p>control.</p><p>Senator Rand Paul’s budget proposal for fiscal 2014, “A Clear Vision to</p><p>RevitalizeAmerica,”recognizedthatentitlementprogramsareinsolventandon</p><p>track to bankrupt the nation. He proposed, among other things, replacing</p><p>involuntaryenrollmentwithindividualchoice,allowingyoungpeopletooptout</p><p>ofSocialSecurityiftheythinktheycangetabetterdealelsewhere.15</p><p>Opting out costs the Social Security systemmoney today, but it also takes</p><p>unfundedfutureliabilitiesoffthebooks.Honestaccountingwoulddemonstrate</p><p>thevalueofyoungpeopletakingmorepersonalresponsibility.Peopleworkhard</p><p>fortheirmoney.Itisonlyreasonabletoletthemchoosehowtouseittoinvestin</p><p>theirownfutures,especiallywhenthefiscalhealthoftheentirenationhangsin</p><p>thebalance.</p><p>Andwe knowwhat Congress has done to the Social Security Trust Fund.</p><p>Theyhavealreadyspentalloftheretirementfundsonotherstuff.Really.</p><p>Medicare is also a major source of conscription into the federal benefits</p><p>programs.IfseniorswanttoreceivetheSocialSecuritythattheyhavepaidfor</p><p>theirwholelife,theymustalsoenrollinabloatedgovernmenthealthinsurance</p><p>programthatsuffersfromalackofcompetitionontheopenmarket.Shouldn’t</p><p>seniorsbeallowedtochoosetheirownhealthcare,ratherthanbeingforcedinto</p><p>asystemtheymaynotlike,want,orneed?</p><p>We should make participation in Medicare voluntary. Why not let seniors</p><p>choose for themselves? If you don’t want to participate in Medicare, you</p><p>shouldn’t have to. The system could use the money. We should also let</p><p>participants in Medicare purchase additional health-care services outside the</p><p>government system, and let doctors provide those services without being</p><p>penalized.</p><p>In2012,SenatorPaulintroducedthe“CongressionalHealthCareforSeniors</p><p>Act,” a bill that would have allowed seniors to sign up for the same health</p><p>insurance program enjoyed by members of Congress, the Federal Employees</p><p>Health Benefits Program.16 UnlikeMedicare, this would open up competition</p><p>andallowseniorsmorechoicesovertheirhealthcare.Therearecurrently2,250</p><p>participating plans in the FEHBP, so there would certainly be no shortage of</p><p>options. Furthermore, it’s estimated that this plan would save more than $1</p><p>trillioninthenextdecade.</p><p>As JohnKerry once said in his endorsement of a similar program back in</p><p>2004,“Ifit’sgoodenoughforus,it’sgoodenoughforeveryAmerican.”17</p><p>6.ENDINSIDERBAILOUTS</p><p>The bridesmaid of big government is always some well-heeled interest that</p><p>wantsaspecialdeal.Ifthegovernmentweren’tsoinvolved,insiderswouldhave</p><p>togobacktoservingconsumersandtakingresponsibilityfortheirownactions.</p><p>Some call it crony capitalism, but I think that gives honest entrepreneurs a</p><p>bad name, smeared by the corrupt behavior of beggar CEOs seeking new</p><p>handouts. One of the biggest problems in Washington, D.C., is the unholy</p><p>collusion between favor-seeking “businessmen,” committee chairmen, and</p><p>White House operatives. Can’t meet consumer demand? Can’t compete with</p><p>smaller,moreprudentlyrunbanks?Don’tknowhowtoturnaprofiton“green”</p><p>technology?GetonyourG5andjettoWashington.There,someonewillmake</p><p>youanofferyoucan’trefuse.</p><p>Why is it that powerful Wall Street banks and multinational car</p><p>manufacturersgetbailoutspaidforbytherestofus?</p><p>Well,who’syourmaninD.C.?What’sthenameofthewell-heeledlobbyist</p><p>in charge of getting you special favors and goodies from government? Don’t</p><p>haveone,doyou?And there’s theproblem.The trend inD.C. is towardmore</p><p>consolidation, more “insider trading,” where favored interests—think General</p><p>ElectricorSolyndraorthegovernmentemployees’unionorthecityofDetroit—</p><p>rearrangetherulesandfederalbudgetallocationstotheiradvantage.</p><p>Aslongasthefavorsarebeinghandedout,someoneotherthanyou,someone</p><p>withinsiderpull,isgoingtogetinlinefirst.</p><p>The best weapon against this insider cronyism is transparency, public</p><p>shaming,andmarketaccountability.Buttherearesomeinnovativeideastodeal</p><p>withtoo-big-to-failinvestmentbanksandtheothertrough-feedingintereststhat</p><p>growfatonyourtab.</p><p>Themarketdominanceofunaccountableinvestmentbankshasbeenfedbya</p><p>defactounderstandingthatbadbehaviorwillbebailedout.Youwillneverfind</p><p>thatstatute,butwhenthecrisiscomes,theirresponsiblerisktakerswillholdus</p><p>hostage,andthepoliticalclasswillfallinline.RecallNancyPelosi’sfinalplea</p><p>forvotestopasstheTARPbailout:</p><p>Itjustcomesdowntoonesimplething.Theyhavedescribedaprecipice.We</p><p>are on the brink of doing something that might pull us back from that</p><p>precipice.Ithinkwehavearesponsibility.Wehaveworkedinabipartisan</p><p>way.18</p><p>Don’t doubt that the insiders in D.C. will find common ground withWall</p><p>Street’s bad actorswhen itmatters.Huge special interests are protected at the</p><p>taxpayers’expense,evenwhentheydisplaygrossincompetenceandaninability</p><p>to act responsibly.We saw it with TARP, and againwith theGeneralMotors</p><p>bailout.</p><p>If youbelieve in freedom,youunderstand that future rewards entail risk, a</p><p>willingnesstoputyourmoneywhereyourmouthis.This,tome,isthecoolpart</p><p>of capitalism; it allows everyone to play in the rough-and-tumble scrum of</p><p>servingconsumersbetter.Maybeyouhaveabetter idea,or</p><p>seeefficienciesno</p><p>oneelsedoes.</p><p>But if you get it wrong, freedom holds you to account. No looking to</p><p>someone else to bail you out.The same should be true if the “you” is named</p><p>CitibankorAIGorCountrywideFinancial. Ifbadbehavior isn’tallowedtobe</p><p>correctedbytherelentlessaccountabilitymarkets,badactorswilldoubledown</p><p>onriskybehavior,creatingapoliticallygeneratedboom-and-bustcyclewithno</p><p>end.</p><p>AschairmanoftheHouseCommitteeonFinancialServices,JebHensarling</p><p>(R-TX)seemsliketheoddmanoutinhislonelyfighttounwindFannieMaeand</p><p>FreddieMac. The committee has traditionally protected the cozy—and highly</p><p>profitable—relationship between big banks and these so-called “government</p><p>sponsored enterprises.” That’s Washington-speak for the socialized risk that</p><p>taxpayers bear, and the personalized profits for certain insiders with the right</p><p>politicalpull.</p><p>“The two largest, most influence-exerting, regulation-avoiding, bailed-out</p><p>institutionsweren’tbanksandweren’tlocatedonWallStreet.TheywereFannie</p><p>Mae and FreddieMac, themortgagemarket financial Frankensteins thatwere</p><p>created not in a competitive marketplace, but in a government lab in</p><p>Washington,”Hensarlingsaid.</p><p>In2011,heintroducedthe“GSEBailoutEliminationandTaxpayerProtection</p><p>Act,” a bill designed to stop the ridiculous taxpayer-funded payouts to the</p><p>government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs),FannieMae andFreddieMac, both</p><p>ofwhich contributed in no smallmeasure to the housing crisis of 2007. “The</p><p>GSEsareontracktobethenation’sbiggestbailout,morethanAIGandGMand</p><p>allthebigbankscombined.It’stimetoenactfundamentalreformofFannieand</p><p>Freddiebeforethesecompaniesgofrom‘toobigtofail’to‘toolatetofix.’”19</p><p>Americansshouldgetafairshake,withequaltreatmentunderthelaw,rather</p><p>than being forced to prop up failing enterprises with their tax dollars. Free</p><p>marketsareallaboutaccountability,andthatmeansbothprofitandloss.That’s</p><p>theAmericanway.</p><p>7.LETPARENTSDECIDE</p><p>Parentsknowtheeducationalneedsoftheirchildrenbest.</p><p>EverydaywearetoldthatAmericaisfallingbehindineducationalstandards,</p><p>that we are in danger of being unable to compete on a global scale, that our</p><p>children aren’t learning well enough, fast enough. The proposed solutions</p><p>invariably includeputtingmore goodmoney into a bad system, tightening the</p><p>grip of the federal bureaucracy on education standards, lengthening school</p><p>hours,imposingmorerigoroustesting,andseparatingchildreneverfurtherfrom</p><p>theirparents’control,puttingthemintothehandsofBigBrother.</p><p>These two trendsare the inverseofeachother:Themore top-downcontrol</p><p>fromWashington,theworseourkidsperforminmonopolyschools.Thisseems</p><p>likeanotheroneofthose“teachablemoments,”doesn’tit?</p><p>From “No Child Left Behind” to “Common Core,” all of these top-down,</p><p>one-size-fits-all federalprogramsseek todepriveparentsofoptions in theway</p><p>their childrenare schooled.CommonCore standardseliminatechoiceat every</p><p>level,hobblingstates,localities,teachers,students,andparentsintheirabilityto</p><p>chooseeducationstandardsthatworkforchildren,overthosethatarearbitrarily</p><p>mandatedfromonhigh.</p><p>Allofthisisindirectconflictwiththeempiricalevidencethatchildrenlearn</p><p>bestwhenparentsarefreetochoosefromavarietyofeducationaloptionstosuit</p><p>theindividualneedsoftheirchildren.</p><p>Educationbelongsat the local level.Onlyparents in local communitiesare</p><p>wellequipped todecide thepolicies thatwork for theirkids.The fightagainst</p><p>CommonCorestandardsislargelybeingwagedatthestatelevel,butinorderto</p><p>reformeducation in the long run,weneed togetgray-suitedbureaucrats from</p><p>farawayWashingtonoutofthebusinessofmanagingyourchild’seducation.Do</p><p>theyknowwhatyoursonneeds?Couldtheypossiblycaremorethanyoudo?Do</p><p>theyevenknowyourdaughter’sname?</p><p>The U.S. Department of Education does nothing but stand in the way of</p><p>preserving choice and keeping education local,where it should be. I thinkwe</p><p>shouldshut itdownandput taxdollarsbackinthehandsofparentsandallow</p><p>themtochoosetherightschoolfortheirchildren,beitpublic,private,charter,or</p><p>home.</p><p>Afreedom-basededucationpolicyputsparentsfirst,recognizingthattheyare</p><p>the ones best placed to choose what is right for their own families. This is</p><p>commonsense,knowing thatpersonalknowledgeguides the individual talents</p><p>ofyourkids.</p><p>8.RESPECTMYPRIVACY</p><p>Inourconstitutionalsystem,oneofthesacredlawsofjusticeis“innocentuntil</p><p>provenguilty.”Wearesupposedtobeprotectedagainstunreasonablesearchand</p><p>seizure, and law-abiding citizens should have a reasonable expectation of</p><p>privacyfromtheall-seeingeyesofgovernmentsurveillance.</p><p>TheexploitsoftheNSArevealthatsuchconstitutionalprotectionsareunder</p><p>attack, and that theObama administration has little regard for the Fourth and</p><p>Fifth Amendments to the Constitution. The “guilty until proven innocent”</p><p>philosophy of government-by-surveillance is a fundamental perversion of the</p><p>Americanprinciplesofjustice.</p><p>Americansshouldbe free to live their liveswithout the fearofgovernment</p><p>constantly snooping into their every activity.Wedonotwant a police state in</p><p>whichwearewatchedatall times,withthepowersthatbewaitingeagerlyfor</p><p>anyopportunitytoinflictpunishmenttokeepusinline.</p><p>Freedom is compromisedwhen surveillance is pervasive. Treat people like</p><p>criminals andyouwillmakecriminalsoutof them.Theactivitiesof theNSA</p><p>shouldbe reserved for actual lawbreakers, always conductedunder the ruleof</p><p>lawwithproperlyissuedwarrants.</p><p>Gradually,wehaveallowedourprivacyrightstoslipaway,startingwiththe</p><p>warrantlesswiretapsofthePatriotActandextendingtotheoutrageousdomestic</p><p>spyingprogramof theNSA.A freedom-basedpolicywould restoreprivacy to</p><p>theAmericanpeopleandreasserttheprincipleof“innocentuntilprovenguilty.”</p><p>Justin Amash has taken the lead in attempting to end NSA spying on</p><p>Americans once and for all.Winning the bipartisan support of an impressive</p><p>array of congressmen, his “USA FREEDOM Act” offers bold new ideas to</p><p>respect the privacy of ordinary citizens and check the power of government</p><p>spying.</p><p>“ThedaysofunfetteredspyingontheAmericanpeoplearenumbered,”said</p><p>Amash.“Thisisthebillthepublichasbeenwaitingfor.Wenowhavelegislation</p><p>that ceases the government’s unconstitutional surveillance. I amconfident that</p><p>Americansandtheirrepresentativeswillrallybehindit.”20</p><p>The bill is a multi-pronged attack on the surveillance state. It ends the</p><p>collectionofAmericans’databytheNSAexceptincasesofsuspectedcriminal</p><p>activity;itrequiresFISAcourtdecisionstobemadeavailabletoCongress,and</p><p>summaries of those opinions to be released to the public; it gives</p><p>telecommunications companies more freedom to disclose information on</p><p>governmentsurveillancetothepublic;anditinstallsaspecialadvocatetoargue</p><p>infavorofpreservingAmericans’civillibertiesbeforetheFISAcourt.</p><p>9.ENDTHEFEDMONOPOLY</p><p>Monopoliesdon’tworkverywellwhenitcomestomaintaininghighqualityand</p><p>a low price. It’s the lack of accountability and competition that leads to</p><p>expensive, inferioroutputs.Thisseemslikeagoodanalogytoexplainwhythe</p><p>FederalReservehastrashedthedollar.Alackofaccountabilityandcompetition</p><p>has degraded your purchasing power. A dollar’s just</p><p>not “as good as gold”</p><p>anymore.</p><p>ThisisoneofthemajorproblemswiththeFed.It’sboth“independent,”yet</p><p>systematicallymanipulatedbypoliticalinsiders.Congressmadethingsworsein</p><p>1977 when it amended the Federal Reserve Act to create a so-called dual</p><p>mandate,whichamountedtoablankcheckfortheFedtodojustaboutwhatever</p><p>it wants. “The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the</p><p>FederalOpenMarketCommitteeshallmaintainlongrungrowthofthemonetary</p><p>and credit aggregates commensuratewith the economy’s long run potential to</p><p>increaseproduction,”themandatestates,“soastopromoteeffectivelythegoals</p><p>ofmaximumemployment,stablepricesandmoderatelong-terminterestrates.”</p><p>Ifyouwonderwhatexactlythismeans,you’renotalone.Theonlythingthat</p><p>is certain is that the ambiguity of “maximum employment” gives incredible</p><p>discretion to Fed micromanagers operating in an incredibly secretive fashion.</p><p>Withalackofsupervisionoroversight,thereisnowayofknowingwhatreally</p><p>goesonwithinitsdeifiedwalls.ThefirststepineliminatingtheFed’smonopoly</p><p>is a comprehensive audit to find out exactly in which ways it has been</p><p>mismanaging our currency, and how it is managing the $3.7 trillion in toxic</p><p>assetsfrommortgage-backedsecuritiesithasacquiredinrecentyears.</p><p>To the extent there is a central bank, its only job should be to protect the</p><p>integrityof thecurrency,not tomanipulate thedollarbasedonpressures from</p><p>politiciansandbig investmentbanks.TheFedwouldbemoreaccountableand</p><p>predictableifitoperatedusingrule-basedmonetarypolicyratherthantheblank</p><p>check discretionary power it has today. We should eliminate “maximum</p><p>employment”fromtheFed’scurrentdualmandate.Economistscan’tevenagree</p><p>onwhatfullemploymentactuallyis,letaloneunderstandtheinfinitelycomplex</p><p>price signals that drive market decisions. Giving the Fed a mandate to do</p><p>whatever itwants leads to irresponsible abuses of the currency and drives the</p><p>politicalbusinesscycleofboomandbust.</p><p>Should we end the Fed outright? Should we adopt a gold standard that</p><p>preventstheeasymanipulationandexpansionofa“paper”currency?Ithinkwe</p><p>startby“denationalizing”money,an idea firstproposedbyF.A.Hayek.Let’s</p><p>legalize gold and other electronic payment systems as a means of exchange.</p><p>Let’s allow competition in currency. Choice, transparency, and competition</p><p>would end the Fed monopoly, and stop the destructive boom and bust of</p><p>monetarymanipulation.</p><p>Amonetarypolicyconsistentwithfreedomrestsfirmlyontheideaofsound</p><p>money, free from manipulation by insiders, bureaucrats, and politicians.</p><p>“Freedom of our currency is the fundamental issue,” wrote my college</p><p>economicsprofessorHansSennholz.“Itisthekeystoneofafreesociety.”</p><p>10.AVOIDENTANGLINGALLIANCES</p><p>Congress,morecloselyaccountable to thepeople, shouldapproveactsofwar.</p><p>Wars cost precious American lives, and will always drain our economy of</p><p>resources.</p><p>Remember George Washington’s caution not to “entangle our peace and</p><p>prosperity in the toils” of other nations’ affairs. He was worried about the</p><p>securityofAmericansfirst,andheknewthatthebudgetimplicationsofforeign</p><p>entanglementsmattered in a very realway. It is not isolationist, as someneo-</p><p>conservativesaccuselibertariansofbeing.It’saboutopportunitycosts,economic</p><p>realities, and common sense. “As a very important source of strength and</p><p>security, cherish public credit,” Washington counseled. “One method of</p><p>preservingitistouseitassparinglyaspossible,avoidingoccasionsofexpense</p><p>bycultivatingpeace.”</p><p>InSeptember2013,PresidentObamaseemedreadytogotowarwithSyria.</p><p>The situation was a complex one, with rebel forces no more sympathetic to</p><p>American interests than the incumbent regime. This echoed the situations in</p><p>EgyptandLibyaseveralyearsearlier,whereAmericaninterventionclearlydid</p><p>not improvethingseitherforourowninterests,or thatof thosecountries’own</p><p>citizens.</p><p>Recognizing that both Congress and the American people were</p><p>overwhelminglyagainsttheideaofinterventioninSyria,thepresidentverbally</p><p>toyedwiththeideaofactingwithoutcongressionalapproval,inviolationofthe</p><p>WarPowersAct.</p><p>Fortunately,itdidn’tcometothat,butthiswasnotanisolatedincident.There</p><p>has been a recent string of overseas military operations conducted without a</p><p>formaldeclarationofwarfromCongress,eversincetheWaronTerrorblurred</p><p>thelinesbetweenenemycombatantsandcommoncriminals.</p><p>This is a dangerous precedent. James Madison once wrote in a letter to</p><p>Thomas Jefferson: “The constitution supposes, what the History of all</p><p>Governments demonstrates, that the Executive is the branch of power most</p><p>interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care</p><p>vestedthequestionofwarto theLegislature.”Madisonrightlyrecognizedthat</p><p>the power to send soldiers to their deaths and drop bombs on other nations</p><p>shouldnotbevestedinonemanalone.</p><p>The American people knew better. Our national security depends on our</p><p>economicstrengthandfiscalstability,anditwouldberecklessforCongressto</p><p>bankruptusintheprocessofbecomingtheworld’spolicemaninsomeoneelse’s</p><p>civilwar.</p><p>Accountabilityandanewrestraintonexecutivebranchpowercamefromthe</p><p>people. AsNational Review put it: “The Phone Lines Melt,” referring to an</p><p>unprecedented grass roots onslaught of opposition to the president’s proposed</p><p>war. “And inboxes are inundated, as people urge their congressmen to oppose</p><p>military action in Syria.”21 Pretending thatmilitarymeasureswon’t costmore</p><p>thanD.C.“experts”predictignoreseverythingconservativesalreadyknowabout</p><p>experts’ predictions. It doesn’tmatterwhat government programwe’re talking</p><p>about—whether we’re debating Social Security, Medicaid, or therapeutic air</p><p>strikesintheLevant.Costsalwaysexceedillusorybudgetbaselines.</p><p>Thereisanopportunitycosttowar.Resourcesdirectedtowardbuildingtanks</p><p>and bombs cannot be used formore productive purposes. As every freshman</p><p>economicstextbookonceheld,ifyouwantmoregunsyouhavetogiveupsome</p><p>butter.</p><p>AdmiralMikeMullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under</p><p>PresidentObama,hasargued thatAmerica’sdebt is thesingle largest threat to</p><p>our national security. The economic strength of our nation is the basis of our</p><p>leadershipintheworld.Mullensays:</p><p>[T]hemostsignificantthreattoournationalsecurityisournationaldebt.</p><p>. . . That’s why it’s so important that the economy move in the right</p><p>direction,becausethestrengthandthesupportandtheresourcesthatour</p><p>militaryusesaredirectlyrelatedtothehealthofoureconomyovertime.22</p><p>A foreign policy based on the ideals of freedom would address these</p><p>problems.Theuseofmilitaryforceisaseriousthingnottobeemployedlightly.</p><p>It isamistake, therefore, toget involved inentanglingalliances that forceour</p><p>troopstoactwhendoingsoisnotinthenationalinterest,whenthereisnoclear</p><p>objectiveordefinitionofvictory,andwhenthelivesofinnocentcivilianswould</p><p>beunnecessarilyforfeitasaresult.</p><p>11.DON’TTAKEPEOPLE’SSTUFF</p><p>Therighttobesecureinyourpropertyisthecornerstoneofafreesociety.The</p><p>foundersknewthis,andformostAmericansthisisacommonsenseproposition</p><p>thatkeeps thegovernment fromarbitrarily taking their stuff.Yet todayprivate</p><p>property</p><p>rights are being threatened by an expanding and unresponsive</p><p>government. More and more citizens are finding their property under attack,</p><p>eitherthroughagrowingwebofonerousregulation,oroutrightseizurethrough</p><p>aggressiveuseofeminentdomainandcivilforfeiturelaws.</p><p>Property rights were a core issue for the thirteen colonies chafing under</p><p>Britishrule.ThomasJefferson,JamesMadison,andAlexanderHamiltonwrote</p><p>extensivelyon the importanceofprivateproperty, andasserted thatyoudidn’t</p><p>need the government to grant you rights in your property; property rights</p><p>precedegovernmentandare inherent to therightsofall individuals.Thisview</p><p>helpedframetheU.S.Constitutionanditsconstraintsongovernmentpower.In</p><p>fact, six of the ten amendments in theBill ofRights touchon the questionof</p><p>property.</p><p>ThemostexplicitprotectionofprivatepropertyintheU.S.Constitutionisthe</p><p>Fifth Amendment, including the famous “takings” clause, which states, “No</p><p>personshallbe. . .deprivedoflife,libertyorproperty,withoutdueprocessof</p><p>law;norshallpropertybetakenforpublicusewithoutjustcompensation.”The</p><p>founderssawthegovernment’spotentialtoexpropriatepropertyanddraftedthe</p><p>Constitutiontolimitthispossibility.</p><p>Yetasgovernmentgrew,theprotectionsofprivatepropertyenshrinedinthe</p><p>Constitution were weakened by legal decisions and the growing scope of the</p><p>regulatory state. Today, numerous government actions threaten the private</p><p>property of individuals, whether through excessive regulation, expanding</p><p>governmentcontrolofournation’sresources,orabusesofthelegalsystemthat</p><p>takeourpropertyrights.</p><p>Eminent domain abuse has been on the rise, withmany individuals losing</p><p>their property as local governments seize it in the name of economic</p><p>development.Thedeveloperswin,buthomeownersoftengettheshortendofthe</p><p>stick.Asoflate2013,theInstituteforJusticewassuingsevenU.S.citiesover</p><p>their attempts to seize private property, but the issue first came to popular</p><p>attention when the Supreme Court upheld the Kelo v. City of New London</p><p>decision in2005,whichallowedcityofficials inNewLondon,Connecticut, to</p><p>seizehomesandbusinesseson thepureassertion thatnewdevelopmentwould</p><p>providejobsandnewrevenueforthecity.</p><p>Thedecisionstackedthedeckinfavorofbusinessinterestsattheexpenseof</p><p>smallpropertyowners.AsnotedinJusticeSandraDayO’Connor’sdissenttothe</p><p>court’s opinion, “Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another</p><p>private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The</p><p>beneficiariesare likely tobe thosecitizenswithdisproportionate influenceand</p><p>power in the political process, including large corporations and development</p><p>firms.As for thevictims, thegovernmentnowhas license to transferproperty</p><p>fromthosewithfewerresourcestothosewithmore.TheFounderscannothave</p><p>intendedthisperverseresult.”23</p><p>The release of theKelo decision created a surge of public outcry against</p><p>governments taking private property.Unfortunately, the outrage has dissipated</p><p>withtime,andeminentdomainabusecontinuestocauseproblems.Whilesome</p><p>stateshaveattemptedtoaddresstheissue,strongfederallegislationwouldhelp</p><p>us all sleepmore soundly. Passing the Private PropertyRights ProtectionAct</p><p>wouldbeanimportantstepforward.</p><p>Perhaps more disconcerting is the rise in civil forfeitures, where law</p><p>enforcementandotheragenciesseizepropertyfromcriminalenterprises.More</p><p>andmore innocent people are being caught in an ill-defined dragnet that has</p><p>strippedthemoftheirproperty.ConsidertherecentcaseofagrocerinMichigan.</p><p>DespitereceivingacleanbillofhealthfromtheIRSlessthanayearbefore,the</p><p>local family business had its bank accountwiped out in January 2013 after a</p><p>secret warrant was issued over deposit transactions that allegedly violated</p><p>bankinglaws.Infact,therewerenoviolations,andtheactivityinquestionwas</p><p>due to theneed tocomplywith the store’s insurancepolicy.Yet thatgrocer in</p><p>Michiganisstillwaitingforadayincourttopleadhiscase.24</p><p>Thevastincreaseindatacollectionbythefederalgovernmentandtheriseof</p><p>thegovernment’sBigDatapolicies areputtingmoreandmorepeopleunder a</p><p>spotlight.Unfortunately,theymayneverknow,becausemanyofthesedecisions</p><p>aremadeby facelessbureaucratswithwarrants grantedby secret courts.Civil</p><p>forfeiture laws should bewiped from the books;without being convicted of a</p><p>crime, no individual should have to hand over his private property to the</p><p>government.</p><p>Besidesoutrighttakingsofproperty,thegrowingregulatorystatethatwelive</p><p>in also threatens our property and livelihoods. The federal government has</p><p>stoppedpeople frombuildinghomes in thenameof environmental protection;</p><p>local governments are passing new laws to keep food trucks from competing</p><p>againstlocalrestaurants,alternativestotaxis,suchasUber,arebeingthreatened</p><p>withregulationpromptedbytaxicabs,andtheIRSisnowdecidingtoissuenew</p><p>regulations about who can be a tax preparer. At every turn the growth of</p><p>regulationisathreattoourpropertyandourliberty.Andmoreoftenthannot,it</p><p>is wielded by those with political clout against those without. The regulatory</p><p>stateofferspoliticalinsidersmoreleverstopressandmoreavenuesofaccessin</p><p>order toprotect their interests fromnewbusinesses trying to enter themarket.</p><p>Paringbacktheregulatorystate—whichcoststhenation$1.2trillionayear—is</p><p>asurewaytoenhancethefreedomsweenjoy.</p><p>12.DEFENDYOURRIGHTTOKNOW</p><p>The Internet has changed everything.Creating a digital community that spans</p><p>theglobehas led tounprecedenteddisintermediation as individualsgained the</p><p>freedom to interconnect on their own, no filters, no hierarchy, nomiddleman</p><p>required.EBay,theonlineauctionhouse,hasmadeeveryindividualapotential</p><p>retailer,whileallowingcustomersanunprecedentedscopeofaccesstoretailers</p><p>across theworld.Access to informationand theability tocommunicateacross</p><p>all the corners of the world have empowered individuals in ways that were</p><p>inconceivableevenafewyearsago.</p><p>Whydoyouthinkit is that tyrantsofallstripesnowgoaftercontrolofthe</p><p>Internetandreadilyavailablesocialnetworkingplatformsfirst?Theywantmore</p><p>control,andpoliticaldisintermediationonlineshiftscontrolandfreedom—anda</p><p>realvoice—totheenduser.“Mostoftheworld’sdictatorsshareacommonfear,”</p><p>argues Joel Brinkley, a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist now at Stanford</p><p>University.It’ssocialmedia.“Facebook,Twitter,blogsandtheresthavespread</p><p>aroundtheworldandarenowbeingusedascudgelsagainstauthoritarianleaders</p><p>inplaceslikeVietnam,Russia,BelarusandBahrain.Inthosestatesandsomany</p><p>others, the leaders are attacking tweeters and bloggers as if they were armed</p><p>revolutionaries.”InIran,“bloggersaregivenlongprisontermsorsentencedto</p><p>death,chargedwith‘enmityagainstGod’andsubvertingnationalsecurity.”25</p><p>Theimplicationsareprofound,particularlyintermsofparticipatorypolitics.</p><p>Inthefightforfreedom,theInternetiseverything,andweshouldfighttoprotect</p><p>itfromgovernmentencroachmentandcensorship.</p><p>As more and more of our lives are carried out online, the data cloud is</p><p>growing, and so is the potential for abuse. The government can now readily</p><p>accessprivateinformation,aswhentheIRSillegallyseized60millionpersonal</p><p>medical</p><p>benefit of the least-</p><p>advantagedmembersofsociety.”8</p><p>Can youmandate compassion?Can you outsource charity by insisting that</p><p>thepoliticalprocessexpropriatethewealthofsomeoneyoudon’tknowtosolve</p><p>someone else’s need?Austrian economist F.A.Hayek, ever quick to spot the</p><p>logicalflawsofhisideologicalopponents,saidthatsocialjusticewas“muchthe</p><p>worstuseoftheword‘social’”andthatit“whollydestroys”themeaningofthe</p><p>worditqualifies.9</p><p>The process of getting to the “right” outcomes, the properly reengineered</p><p>socialorder,isneverwelldefined.Butthesocialjusticecrowdisconvincedthat</p><p>some people just know better. They are certain that some people are better</p><p>trustedwiththepowertorearrangethings.AsformerU.S.representativeBarney</p><p>Frankusedtosay:“Governmentiswhatwecallthosethingswedotogether.”10</p><p>If you don’t believe in individual liberty, things get complicated quick.</p><p>“Social justice,” theseemingoppositeofplainoldjustice,requiressomeoneto</p><p>rearrangethingsbyforce.It’sallaboutpower,andwhogetstoasserttheirpower</p><p>over you. The rules are always situational, and your situation is always less</p><p>important than the situations the deciders find themselves in. Someone else,</p><p>definedbysomeoneelse’svalues,getstodecide.</p><p>Of course, if someone else is in charge, we always, conveniently, have</p><p>someoneelsetoblame.Notleftfree,wemightjustwaitaroundforsomeoneelse</p><p>totakecareof it.Wemightnotstepup.Wemightnotget involved.Wemight</p><p>outsourcepersonal responsibility toa thirdparty,paid forwith someoneelse’s</p><p>hardworkandproperty.</p><p>Withoutliberty,anysenseofcommunitythatbindsusmightjustunravel.</p><p>4.WORKFORIT</p><p>Libertyisaweight.</p><p>Ifyouhaveevertriedtodosomethingyou’veneverdonebefore,ortriedto</p><p>start a newbusinessventure, or creatednew jobs andhirednewworkers, you</p><p>knowexactlywhat I’mtalkingabout.Theweight.Thesame is trueforpeople</p><p>whostepuptosolveacommunityproblemorserveotherfolksintrouble.How</p><p>about peacefully petitioning your government for a “redress of grievances,” a</p><p>rightguaranteedbytheFirstAmendment,onlytobemetbyfederalparkpolice</p><p>withpreprinted“shutdown”signsandplasticuffs?</p><p>These are all acts of risk taking, an attempt to serve a need or disrupt the</p><p>statusquo.Theseareactsofentrepreneurship.Andit’sallhardwork.</p><p>Butworkiscool,too,andevensomeHollywoodsuperstarsseemtogetit.“I</p><p>believe that opportunity looks a lot like hardwork,”AshtonKutcher told the</p><p>audienceofscreamingteenagersatthe2013TeenChoiceAwardsinHollywood.</p><p>“I’veneverhadajobinmylifethatIwasbetterthan.Iwasalwaysjustluckyto</p><p>haveajob.AndeveryjobIhadwasastepping-stonetomynextjob,andInever</p><p>quitmyjobuntilIhadmynextjob.Andsoopportunitieslookalotlikework.”11</p><p>Haveyoueverhadtoworkforsomething,pushingagainstthedisinterestand</p><p>apathyofeveryonearoundyou?Maybeyouwerelaughedat,butitdidn’treally</p><p>matter.Youwereout to proveyourself right.To create something.To achieve</p><p>something. Entrepreneurs often fail, take their lumps, and move forward to</p><p>disrupt the status quo.Wedon’t knowwhatwedon’t know,but entrepreneurs</p><p>havetheextraordinaryjudgmenttoseearoundthenextcorner.</p><p>“What distinguishes the successful entrepreneur and promoter from other</p><p>peopleispreciselythefact thathedoesnot lethimselfbeguidedbywhatwas</p><p>and is,but arrangeshis affairson thegroundofhisopinionabout the future,”</p><p>saysthegreatfreemarketeconomistLudwigvonMises.Theentrepreneur“sees</p><p>thepastandthepresentasotherpeopledo;buthejudgesthefutureinadifferent</p><p>way. . . . No dullness and clumsiness on the part of themasses can stop the</p><p>pioneersofimprovement.Thereisnoneedforthemtowintheapprovalofinert</p><p>peoplebeforehand.Theyarefreetoembarkupontheirprojectsevenifeveryone</p><p>elselaughsatthem.”12</p><p>Entrepreneurshipcanbealonelybusiness.It’shardwork.Entrepreneurshipis</p><p>knowingthataparticularproblemwon’tbesolvedunlessyousolveit.</p><p>Partofbeinganentrepreneurisignoringthenaysayers,andstayingfixedona</p><p>singular goal, looking around the corner of history and envisioning a better</p><p>future. Working for it means responding to customer demand or creating</p><p>solutions tostill-unknowndemands, seeingsomething thatotherscan’t seebut</p><p>stillwonderingifyouwillfail.</p><p>Doyou thinkour foundingentrepreneurswereanxiouswhen theyput their</p><p>“John Hancocks” on that parchment? They pledged their lives, fortunes, and</p><p>sacredhonorforaprinciple—thatpeopleshouldbefree—utterlyignoringtheir</p><p>slimoddsofsuccess.</p><p>It’snotsoeasycreatingjobs,hiringnewworkersthatbecomeyourextended</p><p>family, and then lying awake at nightwondering if youwillmake payroll on</p><p>Friday.Butthat’swhatworkingforitisallabout.</p><p>Workishard.</p><p>Buttheupsideofworkissoawesome.It’sallabouttheinfinitepotentialthat</p><p>sits right around the next corner. You can go get it. You are free to work in</p><p>pursuitofyourownhappiness,toassociatewithwhomeveryoulike,totakecare</p><p>oflovedonesasyourfirstpriority,andtojoininvoluntaryassociationwithyour</p><p>neighbors,oryourcountrymen,incommoncause,tomakethingsbetter.Ornot.</p><p>Itisuptoyou.</p><p>Forallofthedebateabout“therich”payingtheirfairshare,therealquestion</p><p>we are arguing about inAmerica is not about the proper redistribution of the</p><p>diminishingspoilsbetweenrichandpoor.Everycountrythroughouthistoryhas</p><p>had its privileged class, usually favored and protected by government cronies.</p><p>Therealquestionismorefundamental:Arewestillacountrywhereanyonecan</p><p>getrich,wheretherearenogovernment-enforcedclassdistinctionsthatprevent</p><p>thepoorfromclimbingtheeconomicladder?</p><p>Jonathan Haidt, a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia,</p><p>suggeststhatthereisagooddoseofkarmainabookIcoauthoredin2010,Give</p><p>UsLiberty.“ItistheSanskritwordfor‘deed’or‘action,’andthelawofkarma</p><p>saysthatforeveryaction,thereisanequalandmorallycommensuratereaction,”</p><p>hewrites in theWall Street Journal.13 “Kindness, honesty and hardworkwill</p><p>(eventually) bring good fortune; cruelty, deceit and laziness will (eventually)</p><p>bringsuffering.”MyoppositiontoWallStreetbailoutsfortheirresponsibleand</p><p>politicallygamedrulesthatpunishhardwork?“Capitalistkarma,inanutshell,”</p><p>Haidtconcludes.</p><p>CALL ITWHATEVERYOU like.Liberty defends “theminority,” theopportunity to</p><p>workforit, the“underclass”withabsolutelynopoliticalpull, theunconnected,</p><p>and the rights of every single individual to make it. Liberty is color-blind.</p><p>Liberty isamerit-basedsystem,and itblindlymeasuresallofusbasedon the</p><p>contentofourcharacter.</p><p>Whywouldanyonewanttolivelifeanyotherwaybutfree?</p><p>5.MINDYOUROWNBUSINESS</p><p>Freepeople live and let live.Freepeople don’t have anygreat designson the</p><p>freedomsofotherpeople,andweexpectthemtoreturnthefavor.IfigureIhave</p><p>enoughonmyplate just keepingmyself straight, protecting thepeople I love,</p><p>gettingmyworkdone.</p><p>How I livemy own life, and how I choose to treat others,matters.How I</p><p>achievemygoalsdefineswhoIamandwhoIwillbeonthedayIdie.AsbestI</p><p>can,thehowsandwhatsinmylifehopefullyreflectmycoreprinciples.</p><p>But is it really any ofmybusiness tomind the business of themillions of</p><p>other peopleworking out their own dreams? I don’t think so. I don’t have to</p><p>accept</p><p>records.26Atthesametime,therulesgoverningfederalaccesstoonline</p><p>information aremurky as towhether a searchwarrant is required. AsDeclan</p><p>McCullagh noted, “An IRS 2009 Search Warrant Handbook obtained by the</p><p>American Civil Liberties Union argues that ‘emails and other transmissions</p><p>generally lose their reasonable expectation of privacy and thus their Fourth</p><p>Amendmentprotectiononcetheyhavebeensentfromanindividual’scomputer.’</p><p>”27</p><p>Itisimportant,then,toensurethatthelibertiesenshrinedintheConstitution</p><p>extend to every sphere of activity—the Constitution does not stop where</p><p>technologybegins.</p><p>Manyofthecurrentlawsgoverningonlineprivacywerewrittenforaworld</p><p>thatnolongerexists.Forexample,theElectronicCommunicationsPrivacyAct</p><p>(ECPA)—which sets the rules for law enforcement agencies accessing private</p><p>dataonline—waswrittenbeforeanyoneheardofFacebookorDropbox.Online</p><p>storagewasexpensive,andnooneenvisionedaworldofcloudcomputing;data</p><p>was only protected from warrantless searches for 180 days, because no one</p><p>could possibly store information any longer than that. Consequently, under</p><p>ECPA, any data older than 180 days are fair game for law enforcement. No</p><p>warrantsarenecessary.</p><p>As is often the case, technology evolved in ways that the lawmakers in</p><p>Washington could not envision. Today, virtually all Internet users engage in</p><p>some form of cloud computing, whether it’s Facebook, an online music</p><p>collection, or simply archiving emails. As a result, much of our lives is</p><p>accessible to law enforcement agencies without ever needing a warrant. The</p><p>lawsmustchangewiththetimes.SenatorsMikeLee(R-UT)andPatLeahy(D-</p><p>VT)haveofferedanamendmenttoECPAtomakeitclearthatgovernmentmust</p><p>obtainawarrantpriortoaccessingprivateonlineinformation.</p><p>In addition to arbitrary incursions into individual privacy, a growing</p><p>governmentpresenceontheInternetposessignificantthreatstofreespeechand</p><p>onlineactivism.</p><p>Both government policy and businesses seeking refuge from the intense</p><p>competitionoftheInternetmayintroducebarriersthatultimatelylimitconsumer</p><p>choiceoraccesstoinformation.</p><p>In2011, thisdramaplayedout inWashington,asBigHollywoodandother</p><p>contentproviderssoughttoughnewlawstostopInternetinfringementsontheir</p><p>material. In the Senate, the debate focused on PIPA—the Protect Intellectual</p><p>PropertyAct. In theHouse thedebate targetedSOPA—theStopOnlinePiracy</p><p>Act.</p><p>Intellectual property has long been the topic of heated debates because the</p><p>definitionsarenotclearandtheexceptionsambiguous.Thefoundersunderstood</p><p>theneedtobalanceinnovationwithintellectualproperty.ArticleI,Section8of</p><p>theConstitution—oftencalledthecopyrightclause—statesthatCongresshasthe</p><p>authority“TopromotetheProgressofScienceandusefulArts,bysecuringfor</p><p>limitedTimes toAuthors and Inventors the exclusiveRight to their respective</p><p>WritingsandDiscoveries.”</p><p>A period of exclusive ownership or copyright provides an incentive to</p><p>produceworks thatmightotherwisenotbeundertaken.At the same time, this</p><p>uniqueclausesuggeststhatthefoundersviewedintellectualpropertydifferently</p><p>fromotherformsofproperty,somuchsothatitisaddressedseparately.</p><p>Since first establishing a copyright of fourteen years in 1790, the span of</p><p>protectionhasincreaseddramatically,thankstopressurefrominterestedparties.</p><p>Today,itstandsatthelifeoftheauthorplusanotherseventyyears,orinthecase</p><p>of corporate authorship, 125years from the creationor ninety-five years from</p><p>the year of publication, whichever comes first.28 These politically defined</p><p>“rights”seemlikeasubversionofthefounders’intent.</p><p>Howmuchmoreinspirationtoinnovatedoesa125-yearcopyrightprovide?</p><p>Thislargessetopowerfulbusinessinterestshasalwaysbeenbalancedbythe</p><p>doctrine of fair use,which, under certain circumstances, allows limited use of</p><p>copyrighted materials without first seeking permission from the owner of the</p><p>copyright.</p><p>The Internet poses a new threat to intellectual property owners, allowing</p><p>individuals to copy and transmit content, often at almost zero cost. SOPAand</p><p>PIPAwerepushedbyHollywoodinterestsinresponse,toclampdownonpiracy.</p><p>But these ill-conceived measures effectively set up the infrastructure for the</p><p>federal government to censor the Internet, grantingunprecedented authority to</p><p>shutdownmillionsofwebsitesthatfailedtomeetthenewstandards.Ineffect,</p><p>these bills would have made the government the official online enforcer,</p><p>mandatingsearchenginesandthirdpartiestoremovelinkstowebsitesdeemed</p><p>unacceptable.</p><p>WhiletheseeffortstocensortheInternetweredefeatedbyabroadcoalition</p><p>of grassroots and civil liberties organizations, new threats loom.A new,more</p><p>sweeping proposal is CISPA,which stands for theCyber Intelligence Sharing</p><p>and Protection Act. This legislation would provide broad new powers to the</p><p>government. It would allow “companies to identify and obtain ‘threat</p><p>information’bylookingatyourprivateinformation,”accordingtotheElectronic</p><p>FrontierFoundation.“It iswrittensobroadly that it allowscompanies tohand</p><p>over large swaths of personal information to the government with no judicial</p><p>oversight—effectivelycreatinga‘cybersecurity’loopholeinallexistingprivacy</p><p>laws.”29</p><p>Restrictionsontheflowofinformationhaveimportantpoliticalimplications.</p><p>Regulation and other formal constraints on the Internet have the potential to</p><p>shapetheinformationavailabletoindividualsandthereforethepoliticaldebate.</p><p>Wecan’tgobacktotheworldofthreenightlynewschannelsandhavethesame</p><p>levelofpoliticaldiscoursethatwedotoday.TheInternethastoremainfreefrom</p><p>government control and unnecessary regulation, free to provide activists a</p><p>platform toeducateandmobilize,and free toanyonewishing toexercise their</p><p>FirstAmendmentrightstofreespeech.</p><p>ALLTHESEISSUESCOULDbeacteduponbyCongressthisyear,ifthepoliticalwill</p><p>werethere.</p><p>If thewillwere there.Howmany timeshaveyouheard that before, all the</p><p>while watching our “representation” in Washington drive headlong over the</p><p>cliff?Thelemmingsseemutterlyunaware,oratleastwhollyunconcerned,thata</p><p>direendquicklyapproaches.Andthat’sthepoint.Theywon’tdotherightthing</p><p>whenleftalone;theywillrunourcountryrightofftheedge,pointingthefinger</p><p>ofblameatoneanotherevenastheyplummettotheirownundoing.</p><p>The fact is that government control has become a narcotic forD.C. power</p><p>mongers. One hit, and most get hooked, scrambling for more, lashing out at</p><p>those who would deny them another. Legislators and executive branch</p><p>kleptocrats lack thewill toactbecause theysimplycan’tmake itwithout their</p><p>next fix.Evenwhen thedesire forchange is there, thecompulsion tospend is</p><p>simply too overpowering to resist. Lawmakers can’t break the habit on their</p><p>own. Theymindlessly consume new tax dollars, and fake printed dollars and</p><p>evendollarsborrowedfromChina,likezombiesonthehuntforfreshbrains.</p><p>Theyneedhelp.It’stimeforyoutointervene.</p><p>Thistwelve-stepprogramisdesignedtoweanthegovernmentofftheempty</p><p>promises of new entitlements, excessive spending, and unchecked executive</p><p>power.Itseemsutterlycrazytokeepdoingwhatwedidbefore,tofollowtheold</p><p>rules of bipartisan collusion, if doing so does not solve problems.Weneed</p><p>to</p><p>scrap the tax code, and balance the budget and restore respect for the simple</p><p>rulesembodiedinourConstitutionthattreateveryonejustlikeeveryoneelse.</p><p>WecandoallthesethingsifandwhenAmericabeatsWashington.That’sthe</p><p>key. The perfectly constructed constitutional amendment or the best patient-</p><p>centered health-care reform goes exactly nowhere ifWashington is left to its</p><p>owndevices.Youwillhavetoact.</p><p>CHAPTER9</p><p>NOTAONE-NIGHTSTAND</p><p>Themostdangerousmantoanygovernmentisthemanwhoisableto</p><p>thinkthingsoutforhimself,withoutregardtotheprevailing</p><p>superstitionsandtaboos.Almostinevitablyhecomestotheconclusion</p><p>thatthegovernmenthelivesunderisdishonest,insaneand</p><p>intolerable,andso,ifheisromantic,hetriestochangeit.Andevenif</p><p>heisnotromanticpersonallyheisveryapttospreaddiscontent</p><p>amongthosewhoare.</p><p>—H.L.MENCKEN1</p><p>DOYOUEVERFEELlikepoliticianswantjustonethingfromyou?Thatmaybe,just</p><p>maybe,theydon’treallycareaboutyou,yourdignity,oryourfreedomsatall?</p><p>To be sure, the political courtship can be awesome. There’s always lots of</p><p>sweet talk. Politicos know all the right buttons to push, always telling you</p><p>exactlywhatyouwanttohear.Theycallyou.Theywritetoyou.Theysendyou</p><p>notesinthemail.They“friend”youonFacebook.Sometimesyougetapersonal</p><p>text message on your cell phone, or even an invite to hang out with George</p><p>Clooney.Howcoolisthat?</p><p>Democratsseemmorecomfortablecourtingyouonline,oratyourfrontdoor.</p><p>Republicanstypicallypreferexpensivegrandgestures,likeanational,thousand-</p><p>point-saturationtelevisionadbuy.TheGOPisold-schoolthatway.</p><p>Theypromiseyouatransparent,honestgovernment.Wouldyouliketoseea</p><p>simpleflattaxthatdoesn’thaveallofthecarve-outsandspecialdealsforothers</p><p>init?Howaboutabalancedbudgetthatstopsstealingfromfuturegenerationsof</p><p>yourfamily?Doyouwantmorechoiceandcontrolforyourownretirement,or</p><p>the freedom to determine your own child’s education, or even to defend your</p><p>right,asapatient,tochooseyourowndoctor?</p><p>Theyevenpledgetokeeptheirpromises,andtostayfaithfulthedayafter.</p><p>Itmightbeworthtakingachance,youthink.</p><p>You know they only want one thing, one time, on the first Tuesday in</p><p>November.Youknowtheyarenotlookingforalong-termrelationship,thattheir</p><p>fidelitytoprinciplewillsuddenlydisappearwhentheygetbacktoWashington,</p><p>D.C. But the charm offensive wears down your defenses. The letters and the</p><p>callsandthepostsandtweetsandthethirty-secondspotsandthebigpromises</p><p>arejusttootempting.Youwanttobelieveit,becausethefutureofyourcountry,</p><p>and your children’s future, is at stake. Sooner or later, you cast aside your</p><p>inhibitions,andyoudoit.</p><p>Youvoteforthesameguysthatletyoudownlasttime.</p><p>Anditneverworksout.</p><p>DUMPED,AGAIN</p><p>I’mnotjudginghere.I’vedoneit,too.Istandinlinetovote(intheDistrictof</p><p>Columbia,noless).Ihavewrittencheckstocandidatesforpublicoffice.Ihave</p><p>hoped for the best. I have even walked precincts, door to door, for someone</p><p>else’s preferred candidate, who’s running on someone else’s bad ideas, all</p><p>becausetheypromisedmetheywoulddotherightthing.</p><p>I always wake up, the day after the election, feeling used. Used again. It</p><p>neverworksout.Theynevercallthenextday.Theydon’twrite.Theydon’ttext.</p><p>Andtheynever,everkeeptheirlong-termcommitments.</p><p>That’stheproblemwithpoliticalparties.Therelationshipalwaysturnsoutto</p><p>beaone-nightstandthatleavesyoufeelingused,ignored,andthendumpedfor</p><p>someoneorsomethingthat’sfarmoreattractive,someoneorsomethingwaiting</p><p>backinWashington,D.C.</p><p>Consider the sorry state of President Obama’s signature health-care</p><p>legislation circa January 2010. It was jammed through Congress using</p><p>parliamentary trickery because the people of the very blue Massachusetts</p><p>decided to senda clearpoliticalmessage in the special electionofRepublican</p><p>ScottBrown.“Wedon’twantthis,”BayStaterssaidattheballotbox.“Wedon’t</p><p>trustWashington to oversee a massively complex redesign of our health-care</p><p>system.”Nomatter thewillof thepeople.NancyPelosiused“deemandpass”</p><p>procedures so that the Senate would not have to provide the sixty votes that</p><p>SenatemajorityleaderHarryReidnolongerhad.</p><p>SenatorArlenSpecterofPennsylvania,whohadswitchedfromRepublicanto</p><p>Democratinhopesofclingingtopoliticalpower,hadprovidedthedecidingvote</p><p>fortheSenatebill.Specter,ofcourse,wouldnothavebeenasenatorexceptfor</p><p>theextraordinaryeffortsofPresidentGeorgeW.Bush,KarlRove,andtheGOP</p><p>establishmenttoprotecthiminhis2004primarychallengefromPatToomey.</p><p>Come hell or high water, the establishment was going to do good for</p><p>themselvesregardlessofearlierpromisestostaytruetoyou.</p><p>And then there were the many “read my lips” promises from President</p><p>Barack Obama, always intended as lies to the American people to provide</p><p>political cover for those Democrats jamming through sweeping, unread</p><p>legislationthatnoonewanted.Hepromisedgreatertransparencyandefficiency.</p><p>Hepromisedanendtothecronyismthatalwaysattendsamajorrewriteofthe</p><p>rulesofthegame.Hepromisedthatyoucouldkeepthehealthinsuranceyouhad</p><p>if you liked it. He promised that his new plan would not ration care. He</p><p>promisedthatyourfamily’shealth-carecostswouldgodown,notup.</p><p>Everyone knew hewould break these promises.He justwanted one thing:</p><p>yourvote,in2012.</p><p>The Obama White House has arbitrarily delayed or repealed various</p><p>provisionsoftheAffordableCareActwithoutconsultingCongress,eventhough</p><p>the legislativebranchofourgovernmenthas thesoleresponsibilityofpassing,</p><p>andrepealingoramending,thelaw.Theexecutivebranchissupposedtoenforce</p><p>thelaw.UnderArticleII,Section3oftheConstitutionoftheUnitedStates,the</p><p>president“shalltakecarethattheLawsbefaithfullyexecuted.”Exceptwhenhe</p><p>doesn’t want to? Only when it’s politically advisable? I’m no constitutional</p><p>lawyer, but I don’t see the wiggle room here. This utterly outrageous and</p><p>arbitraryprocessofapresidentchoosingtoonlyimplementthepartsoflawshe</p><p>likesseemssoun-American,evenautocratic.</p><p>Butnevermind;nooneseemswillingtostanduptohim.He’sthepresident,</p><p>they say. He has the bully pulpit.We will fight, after the next election, they</p><p>promise, hopingwe don’t notice the inconvenient truth that after 2014 comes</p><p>2016—anotherelectionandanotherexcusenottostandup.</p><p>Dumpedagain,youhopelessromantic.</p><p>To be sure, there are a few brave souls who have stood up, the growing</p><p>minority inWashington that can be counted on. I’m referring to members of</p><p>Congresswith a seat at the tablewho ran for office in 2010 and 2012 on the</p><p>solemn promise, if elected, to do everything in their power to replace</p><p>ObamaCare with policies that respect patients, not bureaucrats. True, most</p><p>politiciansrunonpromisestorespectyourcivilliberties,tobeprudentwiththe</p><p>spendingofyourcash,ortobedeferentialtoyourrightstodetermineyourown</p><p>health-carechoices.Butthesenewguysseemtoactuallymeanit.</p><p>And this is a crisis. All of the experts, and political operatives, and the</p><p>octogenarian pooh-bahs who opine from the Senate floor, and “unnamed</p><p>sources”fromcongressionalleadershipstaffand“seniorofficials,”unleasheda</p><p>united brick wall of hate and venom and “expert advice”</p><p>against those that</p><p>would do, in Washington, D.C., what they promised to do back home when</p><p>solicitingyourtrustandyourvote.</p><p>Theyaccuseusof creating falsehopeamongconservativesand libertarians</p><p>andTea Partiers and independentswho justwant to be left alone thatwe can</p><p>actuallywinthisfight.</p><p>Maybetheyjustdon’twantustofightatall?</p><p>THEHOMOGENIZINGPROCESS</p><p>Beltway dinosaurs, Democrats and Republicans, are uniting against a new</p><p>generationofleadershipinWashington,leaderslikeMikeLeeandTedCruzand</p><p>JustinAmashandThomasMassieandRandPaulandDavidSchweikert,allof</p><p>thosewhoseemsowillingtochallengetheoldwayofdoingthings.</p><p>TheNationalJournalaskedsomeoftheoldbullswhattheythinkaboutthis</p><p>new type of legislator. Former RepublicanHouse Speaker DennyHastert, for</p><p>one,pines for thedayswhencampaign finance rulesgavepartybossesall the</p><p>power.“Thepeopleyougotusuallyweren’ttoofartotheleftortotheright.The</p><p>partywassortofahomogenizingprocess,”hesays.2</p><p>AccordingtoMerriam-Webster,tohomogenizeistomakesomethinguniform</p><p>orsimilar.Tostandardize,unite,merge,fuse,integrate,oramalgamate.Makeit</p><p>the sameas all the rest.So thepartybosseswhogotus into the fixweare in</p><p>wanttogobacktothewaythingswerebefore,todothingsthesamewaythat</p><p>theywere done in the past.One ofHastert’s former deputies in theHouse of</p><p>Representativesagrees,arguingthatnewlyempoweredgrassrootsorganizations</p><p>aretoodisruptive.“FreedomWorksisnotservingthelegislativeprocesswellby</p><p>tellingtheseoldguystojustbuzzoff.”Now,Hastertfrets,candidates“haveto</p><p>worryconstantlyaboutprimarychallenges.”</p><p>Whataretheyreallyworriedabout?Alittlecompetition?Accountability?</p><p>According to Peter Schweizer, a research fellow at Stanford University’s</p><p>Hoover Institution, politics was a lucrative profession for the former House</p><p>Speaker:</p><p>When Hastert first went to Congress he was a man of relatively modest</p><p>means. He had a 104-acre farm in Shipman, Illinois, worth between</p><p>$50,000 and $100,000. His other assets amounted to no more than</p><p>$170,000.He remained at a similar level until he becameSpeaker of the</p><p>House. But by the time he set down the Speaker’s gavel, he was</p><p>substantially better off than when he entered office, with a reported net</p><p>worthofupto$11million.3</p><p>AreportfromtheBusinessInsiderelaboratesonthesourceofHastert’snew</p><p>foundwealth:</p><p>In2005,Hastertpurchased(orhadahandinpurchasing)264acresnear</p><p>thesiteoftheproposed“PrairieParkway,”andthesiteofaplannedreal</p><p>estatedevelopment.Monthsafterthepurchasesinearly2005,heplaceda</p><p>$207millionearmarkintothefederalhighwaybilltofundtheparkway.He</p><p>sold69acresmonthslaterfor$4.9million—andnettedbetween$2million</p><p>and$10millioninayear.4</p><p>Whereas Hastert was willing to sell out his ideals for profit, tea party</p><p>conservatives are now being accused of doing just the opposite. The phrase</p><p>“purityforprofit”hascometobeusedtodemonizeconservativeorganizations</p><p>thatwant to elect leaderswhowill actuallykeep theirpromises, and resist the</p><p>BeltwayallureinawaythatHastertcouldnot.5</p><p>Hastert retired in 2007 after handing over control of the House to Nancy</p><p>Pelosi.Grassrootsoutrageover spendingearmarksbyRepublicanshelped fuel</p><p>theshiftinpower.</p><p>Hastert was a cheater. The charms of Beltway power were just too</p><p>compelling. Pelosi similarly used her position of power to the benefit of her</p><p>portfolioofpropertiesandinvestments.Butherinsidertradingandself-dealing</p><p>seems a better fit within the new Democratic Party, a party that has so fully</p><p>embraced an expansive government on all aspects of our lives: in our health</p><p>care,inchoosingwinnersandlosersonWallStreet,inexpandingthepowerof</p><p>theNSAand the IRS, andall thealphabet-soupagencies encroachingonyour</p><p>civilliberties,andeveninexpandingthewarpowersofthechiefexecutive.</p><p>In 2008, this bipartisan collusion of insiders and politicians-for-life and</p><p>special interests were busy driving America off a fiscal cliff. First it was</p><p>Republicans, and thenDemocrats, but the real storywas amutual admiration</p><p>club that sawpoliticsas theend in itself, andpolicyasaby-product. Itwasa</p><p>well-paidgame,butthepolicyoutcomesservedonlytheirinterests,notours.</p><p>So the American people rose up in protest, armed with new tools like</p><p>Facebook,Twitter,Ning(therotaryphoneofsocialnetworking),andRSSfeeds</p><p>that provided real-time information from bloggers and a multitude of</p><p>disintermediatedmedia sources. Previously disenfranchised voterswere newly</p><p>committingtogetinvolved,toenterintoalong-termrelationshipandabinding</p><p>fidelity to first principles.And theywere armedwith freedom: a host of new</p><p>online tools that lowered thebarriersofentry topeople trying toparticipate in</p><p>thePeople’sBusiness.</p><p>So began a permanent paradigm shift in American politics, shifting power</p><p>fromthemtous.</p><p>Andnot amoment too soon.Thebipartisanpurveyorsofbusiness asusual</p><p>seemedutterlyuninterestedintheconsequencesoftheiractions.</p><p>PARTYPOLITICS</p><p>TherewasatimewhenIhadhigheraspirationsforRepublicans.Iworkedasthe</p><p>chiefeconomistforLeeAtwaterattheRepublicanNationalCommittee.Iwasa</p><p>footsoldierinthe“RepublicanRevolution”of1994,workingforaRepublican</p><p>congressmanaswesoughttoreininafederalbudgetthatwasbleedingredink.</p><p>I noticed over the years that the only great political successes enjoyed by</p><p>Republicans were inexorably linked to a party that stood for something, that</p><p>stoodonprinciple.That’swhathadhappened in1994,whenRepublicans took</p><p>controloftheHouseofRepresentativesforthefirsttimeinfortyyears,basedon</p><p>a contractual promise to balance the budget and fix broken entitlements like</p><p>welfare.And,yes,tostopagovernmenttakeoverofourhealthcare.</p><p>OfcoursetheGOPtakeoverin1995wouldeventuallydevolveintobusiness</p><p>as usual, particularly under the Bush administration. Republicans passed the</p><p>PatriotAct,anexpansionofpowersundertheForeignIntelligenceSurveillance</p><p>Act,anunsustainableincreaseinspendingonabankruptMedicareprogram,and</p><p>the practice of earmarking federal spending favors to preferred members of</p><p>Congress, a practice that made a former high school wrestling coach turned</p><p>Speakeraverywealthyman.</p><p>Spending and the size of government exploded under Republicans’ watch,</p><p>propelling the electionof a little-known state legislator,BarackObama, to the</p><p>U.S.Senatein2004,andthePelosiDemocratstocontroloftheHousein2006.</p><p>BothObamaandPelosiranforoffice,againstRepublicans,promisingrenewed</p><p>fiscalresponsibility.</p><p>In2006,ObamaasthenewsenatorfromIllinoisvotedagainstincreasingthe</p><p>debtceiling,arguing:</p><p>Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally.</p><p>Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is</p><p>shiftingtheburdenofbadchoicestodayontothebacksofourchildrenand</p><p>grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.</p><p>Americansdeservebetter.6</p><p>Hehadapoint.Allofthespendingandalloftheborrowingwasmortgaging</p><p>the futuresof futuregenerations. Itwasgenerational theft.Ofcourse thereare</p><p>limits.EvenWashingtoncanonlyspendsomuchmoneyitdoesnothave.You</p><p>can only tax so much before producers revolt and stop generating new</p><p>investment and new income to</p><p>be taxed away at themargin.There is only so</p><p>much thatourgovernmentcanborrowfrom theChinesegovernment.Sowhat</p><p>happened?LotsofeasymoneyandcreditissuedbytheFedmonetizedallofthe</p><p>easymoneybeingspentbyCongress.Thateasymoneyfueledbadbehavioron</p><p>Wall Street, and the mega-banks bet it all knowing that someone would bail</p><p>themout.</p><p>Withtheartificialboomcametheinevitablebustin2008.</p><p>TheDemocratsdoubleddown,providingthevotesforthe$700billionTARP</p><p>bailout(thankyou,SenatorsBarackObama[D-IL]andJohnMcCain[D-DC]).</p><p>PresidentObama,ignoringthepromiseshemadeduringhiscourtshipwithyour</p><p>vote,proceededtospendanother$700billiononcrony-allocated“stimulus”on</p><p>thefailedprojectsofthepoliticallyconnected.Noonewasaffordedachanceto</p><p>read whatWashington was passing into law. Somuch for his concerns about</p><p>“shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and</p><p>grandchildren.”</p><p>HEARTANDSOUL</p><p>ThefirsttimeIsawRonaldReaganspeakwasattheWhiteHousein1986.He</p><p>quotedLudwigvonMises. Iwasstill agraduatestudentat the timeandknew</p><p>verylittleaboutWashingtonpolitics,butIthoughtitwasprettycooltohearthe</p><p>presidentof theUnitedStatesquotemyfavoriteeconomist. I thought,naïvely,</p><p>that itwas normal, representative of theRepublican philosophy based on free</p><p>enterprise, individual liberty, and a nation of boundless opportunity for those</p><p>willingtoworkforit.</p><p>Iwantedtostandwiththoseguys.</p><p>I later learned that Reagan was never “normal,” according to the political</p><p>establishment. In 1965, the GOP establishment viewed Reagan, by then a</p><p>candidate for governor in California, as a real threat. “G.O.P.Moderates Fear</p><p>CoupbyReaganonCoast,”readoneNewYorkTimesheadline.Theformeractor</p><p>was“closelyidentifiedwiththeright-wingoftheRepublicanParty.”</p><p>Reagan’s response? “I think basically that I stand for what the bulk of</p><p>Americansstandfor—dignity,freedomoftheindividual,therighttodetermine</p><p>yourowndestiny.”7</p><p>In 1975, Manny Klausner of Reason magazine asked Reagan about his</p><p>political philosophy. The now former governor of California was equally</p><p>succinct:</p><p>If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is</p><p>libertarianism.Ithinkconservatismisreallyamisnomerjustasliberalism</p><p>is a misnomer for the liberals—if we were back in the days of the</p><p>Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the</p><p>liberalswouldbetheTories.Thebasisofconservatismisadesireforless</p><p>government interference or less centralized authority or more individual</p><p>freedomandthisisaprettygeneraldescriptionalsoofwhatlibertarianism</p><p>is.8</p><p>In 1976,Reagan tookon theGOPestablishment again by challenging, and</p><p>almost topplingPresidentGeraldFordat theRepublicanNationalConvention.</p><p>Can you just imagine John McCain’s indignation, had he been a senior</p><p>Republicansenatorservingatthetime?“Whoisthiswackobird?”</p><p>Like Ronald Reagan in 1976, todaywemay have to beat the Republicans</p><p>beforewecanbeattheDemocrats.</p><p>ALONG-TERMRELATIONSHIP</p><p>AsImovedawayfromanacademiccareerintopublicpolicyandpoliticsinthe</p><p>late 1980s, I started to discover just how unusual it was to hear a politician</p><p>speak,withcredibility,about thesimplevaluesof freedomthat Ihad longago</p><p>discoveredinsidethecoverfoldoftheRushalbumcalled2112.InWashington,</p><p>D.C., there are too few people willing to fight for the dignity of individual</p><p>Americans, to stand unwaveringly by commonsense rules that sayDon’tHurt</p><p>PeopleandDon’tTakeTheirStuff.</p><p>So a little disruption of the status quo inWashington seems like the only</p><p>reasonable thing todo. It seemscrazy todo thesame thingoverandoverand</p><p>expect better results. It seems irrational to believe that the same closed, top-</p><p>downleadershipthatgotAmericaintothismessoffersanyguidanceonhowto</p><p>get America back on track toward more freedom and upward mobility and</p><p>economic prosperity. It seems hopelessly naïve to think that the bipartisan</p><p>collusionthatcontinuestodrivethegrowthofthenationaldebtcannowproduce</p><p>realsolutions.</p><p>So, if theywon’tstandup,weshould.Maybeit’s timetomakealong-term</p><p>commitmenttoeachother,totakeontheserialcheatersinWashington,D.C.A</p><p>devotedrelationshipwouldbesomuchbetter.Alifetimededicationtoasetof</p><p>principlesthatdoesn’tchangebasedonthelatestpublicopinionpollisjustmore</p><p>satisfying,morefulfilling,moremeaningful.</p><p>So, it’s Them versus Us. There is no putting the genie back in the bottle;</p><p>there’s no stopping the newly empowered grass roots from reclaiming their</p><p>propertyrightsintheAmericanenterprise.Whenthedustsettles,historianswill</p><p>writeaboutthispoliticalrealignmentasatippingpointinAmerica,aparadigm</p><p>shiftthatchangedtherules.TheywillwriteaboutthewaysthatAmericafinally</p><p>beatWashington.</p><p>Inmarkets,wenowdefineourownexperienceonline, relentlessly, evenas</p><p>savvy marketers attempt to influence our preferences. But regardless of how</p><p>muchtheymayknowaboutourinterestsandhabits,westillchoosewheretogo,</p><p>whattobuy,andwhomtoignore.Applythatsamebottom-upindependenceto</p><p>Washington insidersand thenewlydemocratizedpoliticalprocessandyoucan</p><p>understand exactly why they are so totally, completely freaked out. They are</p><p>freakingoutbecauseyouknowtheirnumberandthefixedrulesofthegamethey</p><p>areplaying.</p><p>Republicans still uncomfortable outside the protective shell of their navy</p><p>BrooksBrothersblazersare struggling tocatch the technologywave that is so</p><p>ubiquitously returning power, and knowledge, to individual shareholders. I’ve</p><p>struggled toexplain thisdifference,becausesomanythingssoundthesamein</p><p>thewakeofthe2012elections.Withsomuchtalkabouttheneedto“engagethe</p><p>grassroots,”“bridgethetechnologygap,”andbuildtheultimate“BigData”set</p><p>comingfromeachcorneroftheright-of-centercoalition,it’sallgettingjumbled</p><p>together.Fromüber-consultantslikeKarlRove,tothedustiestofpaper-churning</p><p>think tanks, everyone is spouting the same talking points. The Republican</p><p>NationalCommitteeevenhiredachieftechnologyofficer(thoughonlyafterthe</p><p>electoraldrubbingofMittRomney).</p><p>Allofthisisablessing—anapparentrethinkingofthingsthatmarksacritical</p><p>reassessment of strategy and tactics among Republicans, conservatives, and</p><p>libertarians.Butthesebig“rethinks”areoftenone-dimensional.Theygetstuck</p><p>on PR rehabilitation instead of serious self-reflection and a retooling of</p><p>fundamentals. Remember the folks who tried to one-up Windows as a PC</p><p>operating system when they could have been inventing the smartphone? Me</p><p>neither. Itgoes toshow,youcan’t justdowhatsomeoneelsedidbecause they</p><p>diditanditworkedforthem.</p><p>Shouldn’t our strategy do more than ape the Big Data strategy of radical</p><p>progressives?Canwelearnfromtheleft’seffectiveuseofmasspersonalization</p><p>from the top down, and apply their technological savvy to a world that is</p><p>becomingmoredecentralized,moredemocratized,andmorefree-to-choose?</p><p>The difference between them and us is simple:We are always in it for the</p><p>longhaul.Ourproposition,contrathetypicalpoliticalpickuplines,isforalong-</p><p>term relationship—a true fidelity to certain values and an unwavering</p><p>commitmenttoeachother.Why?Becauseone-nightstandsneverworkout,and</p><p>our individual</p><p>liberties cannot be defended by a single act, or better-behaved</p><p>politicians.</p><p>Weknow thatpoliticians respond tovoterdemand.Tangibleexpressionsof</p><p>consumer sentiment can also change the behavior of government bureaucrats,</p><p>Republicanprecinctcaptains,membersofschoolboards,andevenFortune500</p><p>corporateCEOs.So,itisnotenoughtobesteadfasttoideas.Itisclearlynever</p><p>enoughtoshowuponceeverycoupleofyearsonthefirstTuesdayinNovember.</p><p>ThedaysafterElectionDaymattermore,becausesuccessattheballotboxcan’t</p><p>translate into good public policy without the consistent demands of a</p><p>constituencyforeconomicfreedom.ThisisPublicChoice101.One-nightstands</p><p>mayachieveelectoralsuccess,butpoliticianswillcheatonyouwhenlefttotheir</p><p>own devices once they get to Washington, D.C. There are just too many</p><p>temptationsthere,toomanyofferstheycan’trefuse.</p><p>MYNEWTATTOO</p><p>I have a new tattoo. The idea came tome as Iworked on this book, and the</p><p>symbolism seemed important tome. You see, tattoos last forever. Tattoos are</p><p>permanent,andifyouaregoingtogetone,youneedtoknowwhatyou’redoing.</p><p>You have to be committed to it. You had better be in it for the long haul.</p><p>Otherwise,don’tdoit.</p><p>Ihavea friend,Joel,whohasbecomean integralpartof thesamegrowing</p><p>communitythatIbelongto,partofanewgenerationofcitizenfreedomfighters.</p><p>Joelcallsusthe“LibertyMovement.”Wehaveworkedtogetherontheground</p><p>inOhio,organizing,fighting,sometimeswinning.Joelisasmallbusinessguy—</p><p>anentrepreneur—whoownsandoperatesMarv’sPlacewithhiswife,Danielle.</p><p>He’swaytoobusywithhisfirstresponsibilitiestohisjobandhisfamilytobe</p><p>dedicatingsomuchtimetocitizenactivism.Buthemakestime.</p><p>AlthoughJoelwasbornwithcongenitalscoliosis,asidewayscurvatureofthe</p><p>spine, andhas enduredyearsof surgeries and invasivemedicalprocedures, he</p><p>hasneverletitslowhimdown.In2013,Joelfinishedinanastonishinglyclose</p><p>secondplaceforhislocalcitycouncilelection,losingbyjustelevenvotestoa</p><p>formermayorwithfarmoreresourcesandfarbetterpoliticalconnections.He’s</p><p>alreadyplanningforhisnextrun.</p><p>“DanielleandI liveonapretty limited incomeandhave towatchwhatwe</p><p>spend,”Joelonce toldme.“Asmostcouplesdo,wewerediscussingourbills,</p><p>finances,anddiscretionaryspendingtogetherandhowIwasspendingquiteabit</p><p>oftimeandmoneytravelingtomeetingsandevents.Daniellewasworriedabout</p><p>it,andaskedmeifwecouldaffordallthatIputintothefightforfreedom.”</p><p>“Howcanwecanweaffordnotto?”Joelaskedback.</p><p>JOELDECIDEDTOGET theFreedomWorksstar tattooedonhisforearm.It’skinda</p><p>badass.AndittellsmethatJoelDavisisinitforthelonghaul.</p><p>So,asIwaswritingmynewbook,Iworkedonnewink.Stealinginspiration</p><p>frommyfriendJoel,therighttattooseemedlikeaperfectmetaphorforourfight</p><p>tobe free. It’snotaone-time thing. Itwillbe there tomorrow,andnextweek,</p><p>untilthedayIdie.</p><p>Early on in research for this book, I found a great little essay by “An</p><p>American Guesser,” published in 1775. The real author is none other than</p><p>Benjamin Franklin. If Thomas Jefferson was the idealist, and George</p><p>Washington the leader, and James Madison the architect, Samuel Adams the</p><p>communityorganizer,thenFranklinwouldhavebeentheYodaofthefounding</p><p>generation.Buthewasalsoajournalistwhohadawayoftranslatingdeeplyheld</p><p>valuesintoagoodstory.Thisparticularoneisanallegoryabouttherattlesnake.</p><p>Irecollected thathereyeexcelled inbrightness, thatofanyotheranimal,</p><p>andthatshehasnoeye-lids.Shemaythereforebeesteemedanemblemof</p><p>vigilance. She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever</p><p>surrenders:Sheis thereforeanemblemofmagnanimityandtruecourage.</p><p>Asifanxioustopreventallpretensionsofquarrelingwithher,theweapons</p><p>withwhichnaturehasfurnishedher,sheconcealsintheroofofhermouth,</p><p>sothat,tothosewhoareunacquaintedwithher,sheappearstobeamost</p><p>defenselessanimal;andevenwhenthoseweaponsareshownandextended</p><p>for her defense, they appear weak and contemptible; but their wounds</p><p>howeversmall,aredecisiveandfatal.Consciousofthis,sheneverwounds</p><p>’tillshehasgenerouslygivennotice,eventoherenemy,andcautionedhim</p><p>againstthedangeroftreadingonher.9</p><p>Franklinbelievedthattherattlesnakereflected“astrongpictureofthetemper</p><p>and conduct of America.” Mind your own business. Don’t hurt others. If</p><p>attacked,neverbackdown.Fightthepowerwhentreadupon.</p><p>‘Tiscuriousandamazingtoobservehowdistinctandindependentofeach</p><p>other the rattles of this animal are, and yet how firmly they are united</p><p>together,soasnevertobeseparatedbutbybreakingthemtopieces.Oneof</p><p>those rattles singly, is incapable of producing sound, but the ringing of</p><p>thirteentogether,issufficienttoalarmtheboldestmanliving.</p><p>Franklin, speaking to Americans struggling to come together in common</p><p>purpose against a grave external threat, anticipates the profound strength of</p><p>closely knit communities that respect the individual rights of their constituent</p><p>members.Together,involuntaryassociation,wecanaccomplishgreatthings.</p><p>The RattleSnake is solitary, and associates with her kind only when it is</p><p>necessaryfortheirpreservation.Inwinter,thewarmthofanumbertogether</p><p>will preserve their lives, while singly, they would probably perish. The</p><p>poweroffascinationattributedtoher,byagenerousconstruction,maybe</p><p>understood to mean, that those who consider the liberty and blessings</p><p>whichAmericaaffords,andoncecomeovertoher,neverafterwardsleave</p><p>her,butspendtheirliveswithher.</p><p>Asyoumayhaveguessed,mynewtattoo isa rattlesnake. It says“Join,Or</p><p>Die.”</p><p>LikeJoel,andmanymillionsofothernewlyengagedAmericans,I’mallin.</p><p>BenFranklinandhispartnersinlibertywereallintoo.Theybetitallonanidea.</p><p>Anideafew“experts”believedwouldwork.Theysignedtheir“JohnHancock”</p><p>on that parchment in defense of the idea that individuals are free, that free</p><p>individualsdonotservegovernmentends,andthatgovernmentsexistonlytothe</p><p>extentthatwethestakeholderspermititso.</p><p>“Thattosecuretheserights,GovernmentsareinstitutedamongMen,deriving</p><p>theirjustpowersfromtheconsentofthegoverned...”</p><p>George Washington, in his inaugural proposal to each of us, offered that</p><p>“[t]hepreservationofthesacredfireofliberty,andthedestinyoftherepublican</p><p>modelofgovernment,arejustlyconsideredasdeeply,perhapsasfinallystaked,</p><p>ontheexperimententrustedtothehandsoftheAmericanpeople.”</p><p>Hewasseekingyourhandinalong-termrelationship,right?Hewasasking</p><p>usalltochoosetheburdenofcommitment,withfullknowledgethatitwouldn’t</p><p>always be easy, that the weight of responsibility for a successful relationship</p><p>fallsonyourshouldersfirst.</p><p>Thefightfor liberty isaburden that requireseternalvigilance.Youhave to</p><p>workat it.Youwillbe there, for liberty, ingoodtimesandinbad.Evenif the</p><p>IRStargetsyoureffortstogatheryourneighborsinpeacefulprotest,orpunishes</p><p>youforpetitioningyourgovernmentrepresentativesforaredressofgrievances.</p><p>Someextraordinarysoulmighthave tocommit tokeepspeakingout forequal</p><p>treatmentunder the lawevenwhen faceless,gray-suitedbureaucrats imbedded</p><p>deep within the FBI deem you “the most dangerous negro in America.” You</p><p>might be targeted, simply because you stood up and spoke out, calling for all</p><p>Americans to be judged based on the content of their character.You toomay</p><p>havetopledgeeverything,includingyourlife,yourfortune,andyourhonor.</p><p>Ourfight,unlikepolitics,isallaboutthelongterm.Canwecontinuetobuild</p><p>community that will be there for the long haul? Can we come together as a</p><p>beautifulmessofindividualaspirationsbondedbyasharedsetofvalues.</p><p>New technologies and the decentralization of news and information are</p><p>shifting power away fromWashington insiders to citizens, and this paradigm</p><p>shiftisindirectconflictwithBeltwayeffortstoreconsolidatepowerandcontrol</p><p>informationandbehavior,fromthetopdown.Buttryastheymight,Idon’tthink</p><p>theycanstopusfromreclaimingwhatisrightfullyours.</p><p>Isn’tthisexactlytheAmericanway?Bottom-upgovernancebasedontherule</p><p>of law, originating from engaged, ever-vigilant citizens, channeled through an</p><p>accountable legislature, to thechief executive’sdesk.Weare the shareholders.</p><p>Wedon’tbelieveinczars,governancebymidnightorder,ortheexpansivepower</p><p>oftheexecutivebranch.Itdoesn’tmatterwhothepresidentmaybe.Heorshe</p><p>willalwaysreporttous.</p><p>Theweightoflibertyisaburden.It’salifetimecommitment.Buttheupside</p><p>issoawesome.</p><p>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</p><p>ONSEPTEMBER4,2012,Iwasmetinmyofficebyanarmedguard.“Whoareyou?”</p><p>Iasked.“DoyouworkforFreedomWorks?”Herefusedtoidentifyhimself,and</p><p>I refused to hand overmy iPhone.With that, ExecutiveVice PresidentAdam</p><p>BrandonandIwereperp-walkedoutofFreedomWorksheadquarters.</p><p>Thus began the seventy-two-hour occupation of FreedomWorks, a surreal</p><p>hostile takeover bid by three Board members with close ties to the GOP</p><p>establishment.Ididnotseethiscoming—Ishouldhave—andweallpaidaprice</p><p>forthat.</p><p>Aspoliticalintrigue,thisbizarre,HouseofCards–likeepisodewasprobably</p><p>quite typical: itwas all about personal betrayal,money, andpower.Whatwas</p><p>anythingbuttypical,particularlyinWashington,D.C.,wastheironcladunityof</p><p>theFreedomWorks“family,”withoutwhichthisbook,orthecontinuedexistence</p><p>ofourorganization,wouldnothavebeenpossible.</p><p>Itmighthavebeeneasiertobackdown,towalkaway,butIwasbuckedup</p><p>bytheunbendingcommitmentofmycolleaguesandeightsteadfastmembersof</p><p>ourBoardofDirectors.The“family”stoodtogether,evenasmanyofthemwere</p><p>fired,sometimesmultipletimes.Whatanhonoritistoworkwithsuchpeople.</p><p>Othersthatdidnotneedtostandwithusdidsowithouthesitation.Myfriend</p><p>GlennBeckwasone,but thereweremanyotherswhotookastand,andafew</p><p>bullets,inthisfightfortheheartandsoulofFreedomWorks.</p><p>Equally important, of course, is the resolute dedication of the grassroots</p><p>communityweserve.Theysetthebarandrepresentanexistentialthreattothe</p><p>D.C.powerstructure,andtheestablishmentknowsit.Thecommunity’sresolve</p><p>inthefaceofalltheadversity,thelongodds,andwaytoomuch“friendly”fire,</p><p>is inspirational. I thinkwe are all figuring out the rules of the game together.</p><p>Knowingisliberating,evenwhenknowledgecomesatapremium.</p><p>Theattemptedcoupwasthefire that ignitedthewritingof thisbook,based</p><p>onthetheorythatthingsthatdon’tkillyoucanmakeyoustronger.Ithinkthat’s</p><p>true. As I have before, I fed off of the insights of the late, great moral</p><p>philosopherWarrenZevon.“I’llsleepwhenI’mdead,”heoncesang.</p><p>Mostly, and for everything that is important in my life, my Unmoved</p><p>Motivator ismyawesomewifeandpartner in life,Terry.Thisbook,andmost</p><p>things,would not havehappenedwithout her. Shekeepsme straight, focused,</p><p>andusuallyheadedintherightdirection.Despitethisdauntingchallenge,Terry</p><p>stillhasn’tgivenuponmeaftertwenty-sevenyears.Itmaybetoolatetogetout</p><p>now,MamaBear.</p><p>Forthisprojecttherewereanumberofpeopleessentialtoitssuccess.Peter</p><p>Hubbard atHarperCollinswas anunwaveringand reliablehandguidingDon’t</p><p>HurtPeoplefromconcepttopublication.Hewasachampionoftheprojectfrom</p><p>dayone.This is the thirdbookwehaveworkedon together,and it’salwaysa</p><p>greatexperience.</p><p>Mycoauthor,RoarktheCat.</p><p>Senators Mike Lee, Rand Paul, and Ted Cruz all took time out of their</p><p>insanely busy schedules to talk to me. So did Representatives Justin Amash,</p><p>ThomasMassie,andDavidSchweikert. It isgreat,andsomewhatdisorienting,</p><p>tohavesomanyprincipledpoliticians that Imighthave includedin thisbook,</p><p>but these six were the obvious best choices. None of them, of course, are</p><p>responsible for the crazy rantings in this book, exceptwhere they are directly</p><p>quoted.</p><p>JoelDavis,unrelentingfighterforliberty,tooktimetoretellhisstoryforme.</p><p>Wearecurrentlyconspiringoverthenexttattoo.</p><p>Adam Brandon was a key player as well, at least when he wasn’t getting</p><p>fired.Hewouldagreetounreasonabledeadlinesandthenhanditofftome.He</p><p>does that best. We are working on his grasp of the economic concept of</p><p>opportunitycost:Ifyoudothis,youcan’tdothat.</p><p>Logan Albright contributed substantial research during the writing of this</p><p>book,andservedastrafficcopforallofthevariousinputs.WayneBroughand</p><p>ReidSmithalsocontributed.LauraHowdensuredthatthetrainsranontimeand</p><p>deadlinesweremet.Loganorganizedall citationsandmadesure the footnotes</p><p>were in proper form, which was a daunting task. Laura, JoshWithrow, Dean</p><p>Clancy, Emilia Huneke-Bergquist, Jackie Bodnar, Easton Randall, Andrew</p><p>Smith, Parissa Sedghi, Kara Pally, and Christine Domenech all read the final</p><p>manuscript for mistakes, catching many. Any remaining ones are mine, of</p><p>course.</p><p>As he did during the writing marathons for Give Us Liberty and Hostile</p><p>Takeover,Roarkthecatplayedakeyroleasacalmpresence,chooserofmusic,</p><p>and random,but critical, keyboard adjustments.Someofhispreferred settings</p><p>onmy iMac appear to be permanent. Itwas his idea to include somuchAyn</p><p>Rand inDon’tHurt People, although the one Howard Roark quote somehow</p><p>endeduponthecutting-roomfloor.Hemusthavebeennapping.</p><p>Speakingofmusic,alotofRushwasplayedduringthewritingofthebook,</p><p>asyoumayhaveascertainedby the endofChapterTwo. Ifyoudon’t already</p><p>have it, you should get a vinyl copy ofAFarewell to Kings. Liner notes are</p><p>everything. The band members will no doubt be horrified to learn of their</p><p>unwilling role in this process, and I can only assume thatRolling Stone will</p><p>demand a(nother) clarification from the band. There was also plenty of John</p><p>Coltrane, TomWaits,MyMorning Jacket, Sigur Ros, and Father JohnMisty.</p><p>And,ofcourse,theGratefulDead.</p><p>Finally,arandomhattiptoThreeFloydsBrewing’sPermanentFuneral.It’s</p><p>a fine beer that fortified this author at key junctures in the creative writing</p><p>process.</p><p>NOTES</p><p>Thepaginationofthiselectroniceditiondoesnotmatchtheeditionfromwhich</p><p>itwasmade.Tolocateaspecificpassage,pleaseusethesearchfeatureonyour</p><p>ebookreader.</p><p>Chapter1:RulesforLiberty</p><p>1.SirJohnEmerichEdwardDalberg-Acton,Lecture,February26,1877.</p><p>2.MurrayRothbard,“War,Peace,andtheState,”TheStandard(April1963),</p><p>2–5.</p><p>3. Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments (New York: Penguin</p><p>Classics,2010).</p><p>4.Ibid.</p><p>5.MaxWeber,EconomyandSociety(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,</p><p>1978).</p><p>6.WendyMilling,“PresidentObamaJabsatAynRand,KnocksHimselfOut,”</p><p>Forbes, October 30, 2012,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/10/30/president-obama-jabs-at-</p><p>ayn-rand-knocks-himself-out/(accessedOctober23,2013).</p><p>7.ThomasPatrickBurke,“TheOriginsofSocialJustice:Taparellid’Azeglio,”</p><p>First Principles Journal, January 1, 2008,</p><p>http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/articles.aspx?article=1760 (accessed</p><p>August21,2013).</p><p>8.JohnRawls,ATheoryofJustice(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1971).</p><p>9. F.A.Hayek,TheFatalConceit:ErrorsofSocialism (London:Routledge,</p><p>1988),114.</p><p>10. JimGeraghty,“TheThingsWeChoosetoDoTogether,”NationalReview,</p><p>August 27, 2008, http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-</p><p>spot/8984/things-we-choose-do-together(accessedSeptember17,2013).</p><p>11.StephenCruz,“AshtonKutcherRevealstoMillennialsanEnduringSecret</p><p>to Certain Success,” Forbes, August 23, 2013,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/08/23/ashton-kutcher-reveals-to-</p><p>milennials-an-enduring-secret-to-certain-success/ (accessed October 23,</p><p>2013).</p><p>12.LudwigvonMises,HumanAction(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,</p><p>1949),859.</p><p>13. JonathanHaidt,“WhattheTeaPartiersReallyWant,”WallStreetJournal,</p><p>October 16, 2010,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748703673604575550243700895762</p><p>(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>14. BenjaminA.Rogge,CanCapitalismSurvive? (Indianapolis:LibertyFun,</p><p>Inc.,1979).</p><p>15. Sir John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, Letter to Mendell Creighton,</p><p>April5,1887.</p><p>16. F.A.Hayek,TheConstitutionofLiberty (Chicago:UniversityofChicago</p><p>Press,1960).</p><p>17.Ibid.</p><p>Chapter2:YouCan’tHaveFreedomforFree</p><p>1. Ron Wynn, Michael Erlewine, and Vladimir Bogdanov, The All Music</p><p>GuidetoJazz(SanFrancisco:MillerFreemanBooks,1994),197.</p><p>2.Rush:ClassicAlbums:2112&MovingPictures(EagleRockEntertainment,</p><p>2010).</p><p>3. ChrisMatthew Sciabarra and Larry J. Sechrest, “Ayn Rand Among the</p><p>Austrians,”JournalofAynRandStudies6,no.2(Spring2005):241–50.</p><p>4. Pete is now one of the most distinguished professors in a booming</p><p>communityofAustrian-mindedeconomiststeachinginacademia,andisthe</p><p>deputydirectoroftheJamesM.BuchananCenterforPoliticalEconomy,a</p><p>Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center, and a professor in the</p><p>economicsdepartmentatGeorgeMasonUniversity.</p><p>5. H. L. Mencken Quotes, Goodreads,</p><p>http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/7805.H_L_Mencken?page=3</p><p>(accessedAugust29,2013).</p><p>6. BarryMiles,“IsEverybodyFeelin’AllRIGHT?(Geddit?),”NewMusical</p><p>Express,March4,1978,http://cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/books/mojo-</p><p>06.2012/mojo-06.2012-11.pdf(accessedSeptember26,2013).</p><p>7. Scott R. Benarde, “How the Holocaust Rocked Rush FrontManGeddy</p><p>Lee,” JWeekly, June 25, 2004,</p><p>http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/23003/how-the-holocaust-rocked-rush-</p><p>front-man-geddy-lee/(accessedAugust29,2013).</p><p>8. Stephen Cox, “Ayn Rand’s Anthem: An Appreciation,” Atlas Society,</p><p>http://www.atlassociety.org/ayn-rands-anthem-appreciation (accessed</p><p>August29,2013).</p><p>9. “BooksThatMadeaDifference inReaders’Lives,”EnglishCompanion,</p><p>response to Survey of Lifetime Reading Habits taken in 1991,</p><p>http://www.englishcompanion.com/Readings/booklists/loclist.html</p><p>(accessedAugust29,2013).</p><p>10. JoshuaGreen, “AnApology toRandPaul,”The Atlantic, June 11, 2010,</p><p>http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2010/06/an-apology-to-</p><p>rand-paul/57999/(accessedAugust29,2013).</p><p>11.AndyGreene,“Q&A:NeilPeartonRush’sNewLPandBeinga‘Bleeding</p><p>Heart Libertarian,’ ” Rolling Stone, June 12, 2012,</p><p>http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/q-a-neil-peart-on-rushs-new-lp-</p><p>and-being-a-bleeding-heart-libertarian-20120612#ixzz2dIlNJFqD (accessed</p><p>August29,2013).</p><p>Chapter3:ThemVersusUs</p><p>1.MartinLutherKing,“IHaveADream,”speechdeliveredAugust28,1963,</p><p>at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C.,</p><p>http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm (accessed</p><p>September3,2013).</p><p>2. William Sullivan, “Communist Party, USA Negro Question,” U.S.</p><p>Government Memorandum, August 30, 1963,</p><p>http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/king/images/fbifiles/other/full/10.jpg</p><p>(accessedSeptember18,2013).</p><p>3. Tony Capaccio, “King Address That Stirred World Led to FBI</p><p>Surveillance,” BloombergBusinessweek, August 27, 2013,</p><p>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-08-27/king-address-that-stirred-</p><p>world-led-to-fbi-surveillance-program(accessedSeptember3,2013).</p><p>4.DavidJ.Garrow,“TheFBIandMartinLutherKing,”TheAtlantic,July1,</p><p>2002, http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/07/the-fbi-and-</p><p>martin-luther-king/302537/(accessedSeptember3,2013).</p><p>5. Peter Hamby, “Axelrod Suggests Tea PartyMovement Is ‘Unhealthy,’ ”</p><p>CNN, April 19, 2009,</p><p>http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/19/axelrod-suggests-tea-party-</p><p>movement-is-unhealthy/(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>6.AbbyD.Phillip,“IRSPlantedQuestionAboutTaxExemptGroups,”ABC</p><p>News, May 17, 2013, http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/irs-</p><p>planted-question-about-tax-exempt-groups/(accessedSeptember3,2013).</p><p>7. VictorFleischer,“ADickensianDelayat theIRS,”NewYorkTimes,May</p><p>16, 2013, http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/05/16/a-dickensian-delay-at-</p><p>the-i-r-s/(accessedSeptember19,2013).</p><p>8.DavidWeigel,“IRSAskedaPro-LifeGrouptoExplainItsPrayersOutside</p><p>Planned Parenthood, Which Is Now a Scandal,” Slate, May 17, 2013,</p><p>http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/05/17/the_irs_asked_a_pro_life_group_to_explain_its_prayers_outside_planned_parenthood.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember26,2013).</p><p>9.TamaraKeith,“Report:IRSScrutinyWorseforConservatives,”NPR,July</p><p>30, 2013,</p><p>http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/30/207080580/report-irs-</p><p>scrutiny-worse-for-conservatives(accessedAugust26,2013).</p><p>10. “IRSScrutinyofNon-profitOrganizations,”C-SPANvideo,June4,2013,</p><p>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/RSScr(accessedAugust29,2013).</p><p>11.Ibid.</p><p>12.CarolineMay,“TeaPartyGroupsSpeakOutAgainsttheIRS:‘Folks,This</p><p>IsBad,’”DailyCaller,May16,2013,http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/16/tea-</p><p>party-groups-speak-out-against-the-irs-folks-this-is-bad/ (accessed August</p><p>29,2013).</p><p>13. Michael McDonald, “The IRS Takes a Closer Look at Colleges,”</p><p>BloombergBusinessweek, November 17, 2011,</p><p>http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/the-irs-takes-a-closer-look-at-</p><p>colleges-11172011.html(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>14.StanVeuger,“Yes,IRSHarassmentBluntedtheTeaPartyGroundGame,”</p><p>American Enterprise Institute, June 20, 2013,</p><p>http://www.aei.org/article/economics/yes-irs-harassment-blunted-the-tea-</p><p>party-ground-game/(accessedSeptember18,2013).</p><p>15. Douglas M. Charles, “How Did the IRS Get Investigatory Authority</p><p>Anyway?,” History News Network, August 21, 2013,</p><p>http://hnn.us/article/151970#sthash.9RXzbkmd.dpuf (accessed September</p><p>16,2013).</p><p>16. Michael Scherer, “New IRS Scandal Echoes a Long History of Political</p><p>Harassment,” Time, Swampland, May 14, 2013,</p><p>http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/14/anger-over-irs-audits-of-</p><p>conservatives-anchored-in-long-history-of-abuse/#ixzz2eR8AInHE</p><p>(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>17. Alan Farnham, “IRS Has Long History of Political Dirty Tricks,” ABC</p><p>News, May 15, 2013, http://abcnews.go.com/Business/irs-irs-long-history-</p><p>dirty-tricks/story?id=19177178(accessedSeptember3,2013).</p><p>18. Victor Reuther and Walter Reuther, “The Reuther Memorandum: The</p><p>RadicalRightinAmericaToday,”MemorandumtotheAttorneyGeneralof</p><p>the United States, December 19, 1961,</p><p>http://www.scribd.com/doc/31124491/The-Reuther-Memorandum-Precusor-</p><p>to-the-Ideological-Organizations-Audit-Project-Created-by-President-John-</p><p>F-Kennedy-and-Attorney-General-Robert-Kenn</p><p>(accessed September 18,</p><p>2013).</p><p>19.DavidDykes,“FormerIRSChiefRecallsDefyingNixon,”USAToday,May</p><p>26, 2013, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/05/26/irs-chief-</p><p>defied-nixon/2360951/(accessedSeptember3,2013).</p><p>20. House Judiciary Committee, “Articles for Impeachment,”Watergate.info,</p><p>July 27, 1974, http://watergate.info/impeachment/articles-of-impeachment</p><p>(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>21. Scherer, “New IRS Scandal Echoes a Long History of Political</p><p>Harassment.”</p><p>22. “Lois Lerner to 1996US Senate CandidateAl Salvi: ‘We’llGetYou!’ ”</p><p>Illinois Review, June 3, 2013,</p><p>http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2013/06/lerner-asked-salvi-</p><p>for-200000-plus-never-run-again-promise.html (accessed September 16,</p><p>2013).</p><p>23.JoshHicks,“RepublicansSayIRSE-mailsfromLoisLernerShow‘Abuse</p><p>of Power,’ ” Washington Post, September 13, 2013,</p><p>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-</p><p>eye/wp/2013/09/13/republicans-say-irs-e-mails-from-lois-lerner-show-</p><p>abuse-of-power(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>24.Ibid.</p><p>25. Timothy P. Carney, “The IRS IsDeeply Political andVeryDemocratic,”</p><p>Washington Examiner, May 15, 2013, http://washingtonexaminer.com/tim-</p><p>carney-the-irs-is-deeply-political-and-very-democratic/article/2529758</p><p>(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>26.“IRSChiefSaysHe’dRatherNotSwitchtoObamaCarePlan,”FoxNews,</p><p>August 1, 2013, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/01/irs-chief-</p><p>says-hed-rather-not-switch-over-to-obamacare-plan (accessed September 3,</p><p>2013).</p><p>27. National Treasury Employees Union action alert,</p><p>http://capwiz.com/nteu/issues/alert/?</p><p>alertid=62634726&type=CO&utm_source=Illinois+Policy+Institute&utm_campaign=7790111647-</p><p>0613_ecompass&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_0f5a22f52c-</p><p>7790111647-10830129(accessedSeptember19,2013).</p><p>28. Wenton Hall, “IRS Org Chart Puts Ingram, Lerner at Center of Power,”</p><p>Breitbart.com, May 23, 2013, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-</p><p>Government/2013/05/23/EXCLUSIVE-IRS-Org-Chart-Puts-Ingram-and-</p><p>Lerner-At-Center-of-Power(accessedSeptember16,2013).</p><p>29. “Members Only: How the White House Is Weaseling Congress Out of</p><p>ObamaCare,” Wall Street Journal, August 7, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324522504578654193173779414.html</p><p>(accessedAugust27,2013).</p><p>30.HistoricalFederalWorkforceTables,U.S.OfficeofPersonnelManagement:</p><p>Data, Analysis & Documentation, http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-</p><p>oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-</p><p>reports/historical-tables/total-government-employment-since-1962(accessed</p><p>August26,2013).</p><p>31. RuthAlexander, “Which Is theWorld’sBiggestEmployer?,”BBCNews,</p><p>March19,2012,http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17429786(accessed</p><p>August26,2013).</p><p>32.“IRSScrutinyofNon-profitOrganizations,”C-SPAN,June4,2013.</p><p>Chapter4:Gray-SuitedSoviets</p><p>1.JehielKeelerHoyt,TheCyclopediaofPracticalQuotations(1896),763.</p><p>2. “Obama on NSA Surveillance: Can’t Have 100% Security and 100%</p><p>Privacy,” RT.com, June 7, 2013, http://rt.com/usa/obama-surveillance-nsa-</p><p>monitoring-385(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>3.TalKopan,“LindseyGraham‘Glad’NSATrackingPhones,”Politico,June</p><p>6, 2013, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/lindsey-graham-nsa-</p><p>tracking-phones-92330.html(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>4.LudwigvonMises,HumanAction(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,</p><p>1949),283.</p><p>5. SarahKliff, “WhiteHouseDelaysEmployerMandateRequirement until</p><p>2015,” Washington Post, July 2, 2013,</p><p>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/02/white-</p><p>house-delays-employer-mandate-requirement-until-2015 (accessed</p><p>September26,2013).</p><p>6.MeganR.Wilson,“ObamaCare’sArchitectsReapWindfallasWashington</p><p>Lobbyists,” The Hill, August 25, 2013, http://thehill.com/business-a-</p><p>lobbying/318577-architects-of-obamacare-reap-windfall-as-washington-</p><p>lobbyists(accessedSeptember23,2013).</p><p>7. Elijah E.Cummings and SanderM. Levin, “Reform the IRS, but Leave</p><p>Politics out of It,” Washington Post, August 12, 2013,</p><p>http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/reform-the-irs-but-leave-politics-</p><p>out-of-it/2013/08/12/64c5d36c-0362-11e3-9259-e2aafe5a5f84_story.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember23,2013).</p><p>8. Political Calculations, “HowMany Pages Long Is the U.S. Income Tax</p><p>Code in 2013?,” Town Hall, Finance, February 17, 2013,</p><p>http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/politicalcalculations/2013/02/17/how-</p><p>many-pages-long-is-the-us-income-tax-code-in-2013-n1514277 (accessed</p><p>August23,2013).</p><p>9. Kelly Phillips Erb, “Tax Code Hits Nearly 4 Million Words, Taxpayer</p><p>Advocate Calls It Too Complicated,” Forbes, January 10, 2013,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2013/01/10/tax-code-hits-</p><p>nearly-4-million-words-taxpayer-advocate-calls-it-too-complicated/</p><p>(accessedAugust23,2013).</p><p>10. Guinness World Records, http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/records-</p><p>1/longest-novel/(accessedAugust23,2013).</p><p>11. Patricia Murphy, “IRS Commissioner Does Not Do His Own Taxes,”</p><p>Politics Daily, January 8, 2010,</p><p>http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/01/12/irs-commissioner-admits-he-does-</p><p>not-do-his-own-taxes(accessedAugust23,2013).</p><p>12.JanetNovack,“TaxWaste:6.1BillionHoursSpentComplyingwithFederal</p><p>Tax Code,” Forbes, January 5, 2011,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/janetnovack/2011/01/05/tax-waste-6-1-billion-</p><p>hours-spent-complying-with-federal-tax-code(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>13. Jason J. Fichtner and Jacob Feldman, “The Hidden Costs of Tax</p><p>Compliance,” Mercatus Center, May 20, 2013,</p><p>http://mercatus.org/publication/hidden-costs-tax-compliance (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>14. Leslie Bonacum and Eric Scott, “When It Comes To Tax Law, It’s</p><p>Complicated,” CCH, January 2012,</p><p>http://www.cch.com/wbot2012/020TaxCode.asp (accessed September 9,</p><p>2013).</p><p>15. AlexandraWexler, “Sugar Free Trade Sours for Taxpayers,”Wall Street</p><p>Journal, November 19, 2013,</p><p>http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2013/11/19/sugar-free-trade-sours-for-</p><p>taxpayers(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>16. Wendy McElroy, “Decriminalize the Average Man,” Ludwig von Mises</p><p>Institute,October12,2010,http://mises.org/daily/5759(accessedAugust23,</p><p>2013).</p><p>17.AvikRoy,“HowEmployer-SponsoredInsuranceDrivesUpHealthCosts,”</p><p>Forbes, May 12, 2012, http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/05/12/how-</p><p>employer-sponsored-insurance-drives-up-health-costs (accessed September</p><p>9,2013).</p><p>18.CenterforConsumerInformationandInsuranceOversight,“AnnualLimits</p><p>Policy:ProtectingConsumers,MaintainingOptions,andBuildingaBridge</p><p>to 2014,” Centers forMedicare andMedicaid Services, January 6, 2012,</p><p>http://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Files/approved_applications_for_waiver.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember18,2013).</p><p>19. Becket Adams, “How Many Are Exempt? The Final Number of</p><p>‘ObamaCare’ Waivers Is In,” The Blaze, January 6, 2012,</p><p>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/01/06/how-many-businesses-are-</p><p>exempt-the-final-number-of-obamacare-waivers-is-in (accessed September</p><p>3,2013).</p><p>20. Alex Nussbaum, “ObamaCare Unleashes Benefit Changes from</p><p>Companies,” Bloomberg, September 19, 2013,</p><p>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-19/obamacare-unleashes-benefit-</p><p>changes-from-companies.html(accessedSeptember23,2013).</p><p>21.AvikRoy,“TheObamacareExchangeScorecard:Around100,000Enrollees</p><p>and Five Million Cancellations,” Forbes, November 12, 2013,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/11/12/the-obamacare-</p><p>exchange-scorecard-around-100000-enrollees-and-five-million-cancell</p><p>ations(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>22.MikeEmmanuel,“SecondWaveofHealthPlanCancellationsLooms,”Fox</p><p>News, November 20, 2013, http://aei.org/article/health/second-wave-of-</p><p>health-plan-cancellations-looms(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>23. “Members Only: How the White House Is Weaseling Congress Out of</p><p>ObamaCare,” Wall Street Journal, August 7, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324522504578654193173779414.html</p><p>(accessedAugust27,2013).</p><p>24. Glenn Kessler, “Did Obama Exempt 1,200 Groups, Including Congress,</p><p>from Obamacare?” The Washington Post, October 16, 2013,</p><p>http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2013/10/16/did-</p><p>obama-exempt-1200-groups-including-congress-from-obamacare (accessed</p><p>December12,2013).</p><p>25. Jennifer G. Hickey, “Democrats Act to Stop Vitter Amendment, Keep</p><p>ObamaCare Exemptions for Congress,” NewsMax, September 17, 2013,</p><p>http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/vitter-obamacare-congress-</p><p>exemptions/2013/09/17/id/526269(accessedSeptember23,2013).</p><p>26. AvikRoy, “YetAnotherWhiteHouseObamaCareDelay:Out-Of-Pocket</p><p>Caps Waived Until 2015,” Forbes, August 13, 2013,</p><p>http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/13/yet-another-white-</p><p>house-obamacare-delay-out-of-pocket-caps-waived-until-2015 (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>27. Internal Revenue Service Oversight Hearing, C-SPAN, April 9, 2013,</p><p>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/OversightHearing (accessed</p><p>September19,2013).</p><p>28. Robert E. Barnes on behalf of John Doe Company et al., Class Action</p><p>Complaint,SuperiorCourtoftheStateofCaliforniaforSanDiego,March</p><p>11, 2013, http://global.nationalreview.com/pdf/complaint_051513.pdf</p><p>(accessedAugust19,2013).</p><p>29.InternalRevenueServiceOversightHearing,C-SPAN.</p><p>30.JakeSherman,“NancyPelosiSaysShe’s‘Proud’ofObamacare,”Politico,</p><p>October 30, 2013, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/10/nancy-pelosi-</p><p>says-shes-proud-of-obamacare-99102.html(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>31. “Transcript ofObama’sAnnouncement onHealth Insurance,”Wall Street</p><p>Journal, November 14, 2013,</p><p>http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2013/11/14/transcript-of-</p><p>obamas-announcement-on-health-insurance(accessedDecember12,2013).</p><p>32. AvikRoy, “HHS InspectorGeneral:Obamacare Privacy ProtectionsWay</p><p>BehindSchedule;RampantViolationsofLawPossible,”Forbes,August7,</p><p>2013, http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/07/hhs-inspector-</p><p>general-obamacare-privacy-protections-way-behind-schedule-rampant-v</p><p>iolations-of-law-possible(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>33.JohnMerline,“ThinkNSASpyingIsBad?HereComesObamaCareHub,”</p><p>Investor’sBusinessDaily,June25,2013,http://news.investors.com/062513-</p><p>661264-obamacare-database-hub-creates-privacy-nightmare.htm (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>34.IdentityTheftResourceCenter,“2013DataBreachStats,”August9,2013,</p><p>http://www.idtheftcenter.org/images/breach/Breach_Stats_Report_2013.pdf</p><p>(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>35.TreasuryInspectorGeneralforTaxAdministration,“SomeTaxpayersWere</p><p>NotAppropriatelyNotifiedWhenTheirPersonallyIdentifiableInformation</p><p>Was Inadvertently Disclosed,” May 24, 2011,</p><p>http://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2011reports/201140054fr.pdf</p><p>(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>36. Thomas Hargrove, “Social Security Kept Silent About Private Data</p><p>Breach,” Seattle Times, October 13, 2011,</p><p>http://seattletimes.com/html/nationworld/2016498264_socialsecurity14.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>37.Merline,“ThinkNSASpyingIsBad?HereComesObamaCareHub.”</p><p>38. PatrickMeehan and James Lankford, “ACloser Look at theObamaCare</p><p>Data Hub,” The Hill, August 2, 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-</p><p>blog/healthcare/315083-a-closer-look-at-the-obamacare-data-hub (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>39. “Your Next IRS Political Audit,” Wall Street Journal, May 14, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324715704578481461934680982.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>40. Department of Health and Human Services, “Notice to Establish a New</p><p>System of Records,”Federal Register, vol. 78, no. 25, February 6, 2013,</p><p>http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-06/html/2013-02666.htm</p><p>(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>41.AshtonEllis,“ObamaCare’s‘DataHub’ShouldBeItsDeathKnell,”Center</p><p>for Individual Freedom, July 25, 2013,</p><p>http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/56-health-care/1910-obamacares-</p><p>data-hub-should-be-its-death-knell(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>42. JohnFund,“ObamaCare’sBranchoftheNSA,”NationalReview, July22,</p><p>2013, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/354031/obamacares-branch-</p><p>nsa-john-fund(accessedSeptember9,2013).</p><p>Chapter5:SameastheOldBoss</p><p>1. JamesM.Buchanan andRichardE.Wagner,Democracy inDeficit: The</p><p>PoliticalLegacyofLordKeynes(Indianapolis:LibertyFund,Inc.1999).</p><p>2.JohnMaynardKeynes,ATractonMonetaryReform(London:MacMillan&</p><p>Co.1923).</p><p>3. ThomasSchatz,“Putting theNationalDebt inPerspective,”DailyCaller,</p><p>September19,2012,http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/19/putting-the-national-</p><p>debt-in-perspective(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>4. SteveHargreaves,“LaborParticipationLowestSince1978,”CNNMoney,</p><p>September6,2013,http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/06/news/economy/labor-</p><p>force-participation/index.html(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>5. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Table A-10. Selected Unemployment</p><p>Indicators, Seasonally Adjusted,”</p><p>http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t10.htm (accessed September 27,</p><p>2013).</p><p>6. Richard Fry, “A Rising Share of Young Adults Live in Their Parents’</p><p>Home,” Pew Research, August 1, 2013,</p><p>http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/08/01/a-rising-share-of-young-adults-</p><p>live-in-their-parents-home(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>7.HeidiMoore,“U.S.StudentLoanDebtbytheNumbers,”Guardian,April2,</p><p>2013, http://www.theguardian.com/money/2013/apr/03/student-loan-debt-</p><p>america-by-the-numbers(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>8.JoeLight,“ManyGraduatesDelayJobSearches,”WallStreetJournal,June</p><p>3, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303657404576363783070164132.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>9. Donghoon Lee, “Household Debt and Credit: Student Debt,” Federal</p><p>Reserve Bank of New York, February 28, 2013,</p><p>http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/mediaadvisory/2013/Lee022813.pdf</p><p>(accessedAugust26,2013).</p><p>10.“AverageNetPriceforFull-TimeStudentsoverTime—PublicInstitutions,”</p><p>Trends in Higher Education, http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-</p><p>pricing/figures-tables/average-net-price-full-time-students-over-time-public-</p><p>institutions(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>11. Alec Liu, “The Student Loan Bubble Looks Awfully Like the Housing</p><p>Crisis, Top Bankers Say,” Motherboard, May 13, 2013,</p><p>http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-student-loan-bubble-looks-awfully-</p><p>like-the-housing-crisis-bankers-warn-fed(accessedAugust26,2013).</p><p>12. Roper Center, “How Groups Voted in 2008,”</p><p>http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_08.html;</p><p>and “How Groups Voted in 2012,”</p><p>http://www.ropercenter.uconn.edu/elections/how_groups_voted/voted_12.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember26,2013).</p><p>13.FreedomWorks,“TheRoleofGovernment,”September2013,http://online-</p><p>campaigns.s3.amazonaws.com/docs/pollingreport.pdf (accessed September</p><p>12,2013).</p><p>14. “Millennials: Confident. Connected. Open to Change,” Pew Research</p><p>Center, February 24, 2010,</p><p>http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials-confident-</p><p>connected-open-to-change(accessedOctober7,2013).</p><p>15. David A. Graham, “The Surreal Semiotics of Burning Obamacare Draft</p><p>Cars,” The Atlantic, August 2, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/the-surreal-semiotics-</p><p>of-burning-obamacare-draft-cards/278321(accessedDecember12,2013).</p><p>16. KevinDrum, “FreedomWorks Plans Push to Persuade PeopleNot</p><p>toGet</p><p>Health Insurance,” Mother Jones, July 25, 2013,</p><p>http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/07/freedomworks-plans-</p><p>push-persuade-people-not-get-health-insurance (accessed September 27,</p><p>2013).</p><p>17.AmandaTerkel,“KathleenSebeliusCriticizes‘Dismal’ConservativeEffort</p><p>Urging Young People Not to Enroll in ObamaCare,” Huffington Post,</p><p>August 5, 2013, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/05/kathleen-</p><p>sebelius-obamacare_n_3708198.html(accessedAugust27,2013).</p><p>18.CarlaJohnson,“ObamaCareNationalMarketingCampaigntoCostNearly</p><p>$700 Million,” Real Clear Politics, July 25, 2013,</p><p>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/07/25/obamacare_national_marketing_campaign_to_cost_nearly_700_million_119368.html</p><p>(accessedOctober3,2013).</p><p>19. Christopher Weaver and Louise Radnofsky, ‘‘New HealthCare Law’s</p><p>Success Rests on the Young,” Wall Street Journal, July 25, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324263404578613700273320428.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember26,2013).</p><p>20. David Hogberg, “Why the ‘Young Invincibles’ Won’t Participate in the</p><p>ObamaCare Exchanges and Why It Matters,” National Center for Public</p><p>PolicyResearch,August2013,http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA652.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember26,2013).</p><p>21.LouiseRadnofsky,“PricesSetforNewHealthCareExchanges,”WallStreet</p><p>Journal, September 25, 2013,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303983904579095731139251304.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>22. Sam Cappellanti, “Premium Increases for ‘Young Invincibles’ Under the</p><p>ACA and the Impending Premium Spiral,” American Action Forum,</p><p>October 2, 2013, http://americanactionforum.org/research/premium-</p><p>increases-for-young-invincibles-under-the-aca-and-the-impending-premium-</p><p>spiral(accessedOctober3,2013).</p><p>23.NickGillespie,“AdsHideObamacareTruth:It’sGenerationalTheft,”Time,</p><p>November 25, 2013,</p><p>http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2157491,00.html</p><p>(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>24.JoelStein,“Millennials:TheMeMeMeGeneration,”Time,May20,2013,</p><p>http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2143001,00.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember27,2013).</p><p>25. T.ScottGross, Invisible:HowMillennialsareChanging theWayWeSell</p><p>(Bloomington,IN:TripleNickelPress,2012).</p><p>26. Leonard Downie, Jr., “The Obama Administration and the Press,”</p><p>Committee to Protect Journalists, October 10, 2013,</p><p>http://cpj.org/reports/2013/10/obama-and-the-press-us-leaks-surveillance-</p><p>post-911.php(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>27.“SurveyofYoungAmericans’AttitudesTowardPoliticsandPublicService:</p><p>23rdEdition,”InstituteofPolitics,HarvardUniversity,April30,2013,14–</p><p>15,</p><p>http://www.iop.harvard.edu/sites/default/files_new/spring_poll_13_Exec_Summary.pdf</p><p>(accessedAugust26,2013).</p><p>28.“63%ViewToo-PowerfulGovernmentasBiggerThreatthanWeakerOne,”</p><p>Rasmussen Reports, July 3, 2013,</p><p>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/june_2013/63_view_too_powerful_government_as_bigger_threat_than_weaker_one</p><p>(accessedAugust22,2013).</p><p>29. Aamer Madhani, “Obama to Youth: Be Responsible and Sign up for</p><p>Obamacare,” USA Today, December 4, 2013,</p><p>http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/12/04/obama-young-</p><p>people-obligation-obamacare/3871351(accessedDecember6,2013).</p><p>30. Ron Fournier, “Millennials Abandon Obama and Obamacare,” National</p><p>Journal, December 4, 2013,</p><p>http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/millennials-abandon-obama-and-</p><p>obamacare-20131204(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>31.NateSilver,“PollFindsaShiftTowardMoreLibertarianViews,”NewYork</p><p>Times, June 20, 2011,</p><p>http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/poll-finds-a-shift-</p><p>toward-more-libertarian-views/?_r=0(accessedAugust22,2013).</p><p>32. CNN Opinion Research Poll, June 17, 2013,</p><p>http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/06/17/rel7a.pdf (accessed August</p><p>22,2013).</p><p>33.FreedomWorks,“TheRoleofGovernment.”</p><p>34. James Hohmann, “Poll: Republicans Embracing Libertarian Priorities,”</p><p>Politico, September 11, 2013, http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/poll-</p><p>republicans-libertarian-96576.html(accessedSeptember12,2013).</p><p>35. RebekahMetzler, “Obama: IAmNot a Socialist,”U.S. News andWorld</p><p>Report, November 19, 2013,</p><p>http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/11/19/obama-i-am-not-a-</p><p>socialist(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>Chapter6:TheRighttoKnow</p><p>1. Adam Ferguson, “An Essay on the History of Civil Society” (1767),</p><p>http://oll.libertyfund.org/?</p><p>option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1428&chapter=19736&layout=html#a_156617</p><p>(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>2. John Perry Barlow, Closing Keynote Address at the Electronic Frontier</p><p>Foundation,June8,2013.</p><p>3.DebReichman,“Kerry:SomeNSASurveillanceReached‘TooFar,’”U.S.</p><p>News & World Report, November 1, 2013</p><p>http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2013/11/01/kerry-some-nsa-</p><p>surveillance-reached-too-far(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>4.NatHentoff,“OurConstitution:HowManyofUsKnowIt?”Cato,May19,</p><p>2011, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/our-constitution-how-</p><p>many-us-know-it(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>5. ChrisMoody, “LindseyGraham: ‘If I Thought Censoring theMailWas</p><p>Necessary, I Would Suggest It,’ ” Yahoo News, June 11, 2013,</p><p>http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/lindsey-graham-thought-censoring-mail-</p><p>necessary-suggest-182932835.html(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>6. Interview with Lindsey Graham, Fox News, June 6, 2013,</p><p>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzsxsTEk7tc (accessed November 6,</p><p>2013).</p><p>7.GlennGreenwald,“NSACollectingPhoneRecordsofMillionsofVerizon</p><p>Customers Daily,” Guardian, June 5, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/nsa-phone-records-verizon-</p><p>court-order(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>8.BartonGellmanandLauraPoitras,“U.S.,BritishIntelligenceMiningData</p><p>fromNineU.S.InternetCompaniesinBroadSecretProgram,”Washington</p><p>Post, June 6, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-</p><p>intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-</p><p>program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html</p><p>(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>9. GlennGreenwald andEwenMacAskill, “NSAPrismProgramTaps Into</p><p>User Data of Apple, Google and Others,” June 6, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data</p><p>(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>10. TomMcCarthy, “Holder Ducks NSA Phone Record Questions in Senate</p><p>Hearing—As It Happened,” Guardian, June 6, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/holder-phone-records-</p><p>surveillance-live?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter#block-</p><p>51b0af76e4b0cc64243720d3(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>11.MeghashyamMaliandBrandonSasso,“AdministrationDefendsNSAGrab</p><p>of Verizon Customer Phone Calls,” The Hill, June 6, 2013,</p><p>http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/303821-white-house-</p><p>defends-nsa-collecting-verizon-phone-records(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>12. Andrew Rosenthal, “Making Alberto Gonzales Look Good,” New York</p><p>Times, June 11, 2013,</p><p>http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/making-alberto-gonzales-</p><p>look-good/?_r=0(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>13.MichaelPearson,“Obama:NoOneListeningtoYourCalls,”CNN,June10,</p><p>2013, http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/07/politics/nsa-data-mining (accessed</p><p>August28,2013).</p><p>14. MikeDorningandChrisStrohm,“SecretCourtFindingDomesticSpying</p><p>Risks Obama Credibility,” Bloomberg News, August 23, 2013,</p><p>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-08-23/secret-court-finding-</p><p>domestic-spying-risks-obama-credibility(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>15. Siobhan Gorman, “NSA Officers Spy on Love Interests,” Wall</p><p>theirchoicesortheirvalues.Butaslongastheytoleratemine,aslongas</p><p>theydon’ttrytohurtmeortakemystuff,ortrytopetitionthegovernmenttodo</p><p>itforthem,whyshouldIcare?</p><p>Certainlyotherpeoplewilldisagreewithmylive-and-let-liveattitude.Butthe</p><p>real question is about the proper role of government in limiting my personal</p><p>decisions, or dictating my values, or the practice of my religion, or the</p><p>redefinition of cherished social institutions, which have been developed and</p><p>defendedbypeoplecomingtogetherincommoncause.</p><p>Societyshouldneverbeabsorbedordistortedbythestate,arguesBenRogge,</p><p>the late, great libertarian professor at Wabash College. “Society, with its full</p><p>networkofrestraintsonindividualconduct,basedoncustom,tradition,religion,</p><p>personalmorality,asenseofstyle,andwithallofitsindeedpowerfulsanctions,</p><p>iswhatmakesthecivilizedlifepossibleandmeaningful.”Still,heargues,wedo</p><p>“notwishtoseetheseinfluencesonindividualbehaviorinstitutionalizedinthe</p><p>handsofthestate.AsIreadhistory,Iseethateverywherethegenerallyaccepted</p><p>socialprocesseshavebeenmadeintolaw,civilizationhasceasedtoadvance.”</p><p>I,BenRogge,donotusemarijuananordoIapproveof itsuse,but Iam</p><p>afraidthatifIsupportlawsagainstitsuse,somefoolwillinsistaswellon</p><p>denyingmemy noble and useful gin and tonic. I believe that the typical</p><p>EpiscopalChurchissomewhathigheronthescaleofcivilizationthanthe</p><p>snake-handling cults of West Virginia. Frankly I wouldn’t touch even a</p><p>consecratedreptilewithaten-footpole,orevenanine-iron,butasfaras</p><p>the Anglican Church is concerned, I am still an anti-anti-</p><p>disestablishmentarian,ifyouknowwhatImean.14</p><p>Can the political process better arbitrate the definition of time-tested social</p><p>mores?Itseemslikearidiculousquestiontoaskabout535menandwomenwho</p><p>can’tevenbalancethefederalbudget.Whywouldwehopethattheyweighinon</p><p>thethingsthatreallymattertouspersonally?</p><p>IrememberwhentheGeorgeW.Bushadministrationimplementeditsfaith-</p><p>based initiative as part of a campaign of “compassionate conservatism.”</p><p>Whatever its good intentions, this program effectively began the process of</p><p>politicizing faith-based community service. Itwas no longer about individuals</p><p>volunteering their time and money to solve problems. By 2008, this federal</p><p>programbecameacompetitivescrumforfederalgrantstowell-connected“faith-</p><p>based” organizations. Under Barack Obama, the program was renamed and</p><p>repopulated with interests and organizations to better promote his</p><p>administration’spriorities.</p><p>Wouldn’titbebetternottosetupanewprogramthatwillinevitablybecome</p><p>politicized,corruptingeverythingittouches?</p><p>Consider thedefinitionofmarriage.Whydoes thefederalgovernmenthave</p><p>anopinionaboutmymarriage?Whydogovernmentbureaucratsandpoliticians</p><p>have a right to have an opinion about, or control over, the most important</p><p>personal relationship inmy life?Whywouldwewant the federalgovernment,</p><p>withallofitscompetingagendasandinterestsotherthanyourown,involved?I</p><p>thinkit’sareallybadidea,andthefactthatIhadtogetalicensetogetmarried</p><p>totheloveofmylifefeltsomehowdegradingtomymostsacredbond.</p><p>IwasyoungandidealisticwhenTerryandIgotengaged.AtthetimeIhad</p><p>made my carefully researched, impeccably principled arguments about not</p><p>demeaning the sacred bond between us, and how getting the government’s</p><p>approvalwaswrong.I lost,ofcourse.Wegot thegovernment’slicense,onthe</p><p>government’sterms.Andwegotmarried.Let’sjustsaythatIrespectmywife’s</p><p>authority and her grandma’s authority overmy life farmore than I resent the</p><p>federal government’s claimed but illegitimate right to dictate the terms ofmy</p><p>personalrelationships.</p><p>Soyes,evenIcompromiseonprinciple.</p><p>Do to otherswhat youwould have themdo to you.This, of course, is the</p><p>GoldenRule,andyoucanfinditerationsofitthroughouttheNewTestamentof</p><p>the Bible. I would like other people, and the government, to stay out of my</p><p>personalbusiness.Iplantoreturnthefavor.</p><p>6.FIGHTTHEPOWER</p><p>Lord Acton, the great classical liberal political philosopher, famously warned</p><p>that“powertendstocorrupt”and“absolutepowercorruptsabsolutely.”15“The</p><p>chief evil is unlimited government,” argues F. A. Hayek, “and nobody is</p><p>qualifiedtowieldunlimitedpower.”16</p><p>Thistooseemslikecommonsense,andAmericanshaveahealthydistrustof</p><p>big, obtrusive government that seems genetically encoded in our DNA. Our</p><p>system of constitutional checks and balances, and adversarial and separate</p><p>branchesofgovernment,isintendedtolimitmonopolygovernmentpower.</p><p>Noticethatthegoalisnotelectingbetterangelstobenevolentlywieldpower</p><p>fortherightreasons.Thereissomeconfusionaboutthis,adifferencethatHayek</p><p>addresseseloquentlyinhismostimportantessayonpoliticalphilosophy,“WhyI</p><p>AmNotaConservative”:</p><p>[T]heconservativedoesnotobjecttocoercionorarbitrarypowersolong</p><p>asit isusedforwhatheregardsastherightpurposes.Hebelievesthatif</p><p>government is in the hands of decent men, it ought not to be too much</p><p>restricted by rigid rules. Since he is essentially opportunist and lacks</p><p>principles,hismainhopemustbethatthewiseandthegoodwillrule—not</p><p>merelybyexample,asweallmustwish,butbyauthoritygiventothemand</p><p>enforcedbythem.Likethesocialist,heislessconcernedwiththeproblem</p><p>ofhowthepowersofgovernmentshouldbe limited thanwith thatofwho</p><p>wields them;and, like thesocialist,heregardshimselfasentitledto force</p><p>thevalueheholdsonotherpeople.17</p><p>Remember that, in the European context, “liberal” means pro-freedom.</p><p>“Conservative”meanssomethingmorelikewhatwewouldcallprogressive.</p><p>So there are rules. But the architects of thismodel always understood that</p><p>accountabilityrestedinthehandsofthecustomers:Americanshareholderswho</p><p>havearight,andanobligation,tocheckthebadmanagementdecisionsmadein</p><p>Washington,D.C.Ourrepresentativesworkforus,andweshouldhavetheright</p><p>toreviewtheirjobperformanceandfireunderperformers.</p><p>The challenge of knowingwhat it is that our public officials are up to has</p><p>alwaysbeenthebiggestbarriertoaccountability.Quiteoften,busypeoplewith</p><p>jobsandfamiliesandallsortsofpersonaldreamsandpursuitsjustcouldn’tget</p><p>good,timelyinformationaboutwhatourrepresentation—ouremployees—were</p><p>up to behind the cloistered halls of the marble Senate office buildings and</p><p>windowlessfederalagencies.Whatweretheydoinginthere?Wewouldusually</p><p>findoutaboutbaddecisions,made for thebenefitof someoneelse’sparochial</p><p>interests,afterthelegislationwassigned,sealed,anddelivered.</p><p>So normal Americans were too busy, and the barriers of entry into our</p><p>participatory republicwere too high for us to know.But the insiders, and the</p><p>well-heeledintereststhatwantedaspecialdeal,orasubsidy,oracarve-out,or</p><p>an earmark, or an exemption, always showed up inWashington, hat in hand.</p><p>Why?Because the returnon the investmentmadecozyingup toWashingtona</p><p>very profitable “business” proposition. Public choice economists refer to this</p><p>perverseincentivestructureasthe“concentratedbenefits”ofD.C.powerplayers</p><p>versus“dispersedcosts”incurredbyanyonepayingtaxes.</p><p>In otherwords, you get screwed. This isn’t aRepublican versusDemocrat</p><p>thing.It’smoreaboutwhomanagestogetaseatatthe</p><p>Street</p><p>Journal, August 23, 2013, http://realclearscience.com/blog/2013/08/how-</p><p>can-americans-be-both-obese-and-starving.html(accessedAugust27,2013).</p><p>16. “President Obama’s Dragnet,” New York Times, June 6, 2013,</p><p>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/opinion/president-obamas-</p><p>dragnet.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0(accessedAugust28,2013).</p><p>17. Gerald F. Seib, “InCrisis, Opportunity forObama,”Wall Street Journal,</p><p>November 21, 2008,</p><p>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122721278056345271.html (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>18.LizKlimas,“WasWatertown’sDoor-to-DoorSearchforBombingSuspects</p><p>a Violation of the Fourth Amendment?,” The Blaze, April 13, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/23/ready-how-watertown-door-to-</p><p>door-search-for-bombing-suspects-did-not-violate-the-fourth-amendment</p><p>(accessedOctober10,2013.)19.“ObamaonNSASurveillance:Can’tHave</p><p>100% Security and 100% Privacy,” RT.com, June 7, 2013,</p><p>http://rt.com/usa/obama-surveillance-nsa-monitoring-385 (accessed</p><p>September9,2013).</p><p>20. InterviewwithRepresentativeJimSensenbrenner,NPR,August20,2013,</p><p>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=213902177 (accessed</p><p>October10,2013).</p><p>21. Andrew Napolitano, “Government Spying Out of Control,” Reason,</p><p>December 13, 2012, http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/13/government-</p><p>spying-out-of-control(accessedOctober15,2013).</p><p>22.GlennGreenwaldandJamesBall,“TheTopSecretRulesthatAllowNSAto</p><p>Use US Data without a Warrant,” Guardian, June 20, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-</p><p>warrant(accessedOctober10,2013).</p><p>23.OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral,LettertotheHonorableRandPaul,March4,</p><p>2013,</p><p>http://www.paul.senate.gov/files/documents/BrennanHolderResponse.pdf</p><p>(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>24. MorganLittle, “Transcript:RandPaul’sFilibusterof JohnBrennan’sCIA</p><p>Nomination,” Los Angeles Times, March 7, 2013,</p><p>http://articles.latimes.com/2013/mar/07/news/la-pn-transcript-rand-paul-</p><p>filibuster-20130307(accessedOctober29,2013).</p><p>25. Transcriptof“TheLastWordwithLawrenceO’Donnell,”March7,2013,</p><p>http://livedash.ark.com/transcript/the_last_word_with_lawrence_o%27donnell/5304/MSNBC/Thursday_March_07_2013/619583;</p><p>sh(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>26. “McCain Slams Rand Paul for Filibuster: ‘CalmDown, Senator,’ ”Real</p><p>Clear Politics Video, March 7, 2013,</p><p>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/07/mccain_slams_rand_paul_for_filibuster_calm_down_senator.html</p><p>(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>27.StephenDinan,“Graham,McCainBlastPaulFilibuster,”WashingtonTimes,</p><p>March 7, 2013, http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-</p><p>politics/2013/mar/7/graham-mccain-blast-paul-filibuster/#ixzz2nTAqgPDn</p><p>(accessedDecember15,2013).</p><p>28. Timothy Noah, “The Legend of Strom’s Remorse,” Slate, December 16,</p><p>2002,</p><p>http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/2002/12/the_legend_of_stroms_remorse.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember10,2013).</p><p>29. United States Congressional Record, August 28, 1957, 16402,</p><p>http://www.archive.org/stream/congressionalrec103funit#page/n1061/mode/1up</p><p>(accessedSeptember11,2013).</p><p>30.“ThurmondHoldsSenateRecordforFilibustering,”AssociatedPress,June</p><p>27, 2013, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,90552,00.html (accessed</p><p>August21,2013).</p><p>31.PatrickRuffini,“#StandWithRandBlowingUpRightNow,”Twitter,March</p><p>6, 2013,</p><p>https://twitter.com/PatrickRuffini/status/309504645728980995/photo</p><p>(accessedSeptember18,2013).</p><p>32. TrendPo, “StandWithRand,” August 2, 2013,</p><p>http://blog.trendpo.com/2013/08/02/download-trendpos-latest-white-paper-</p><p>standwithrand(accessedSeptember18,2013).</p><p>33.JoshVorhees,“RandPaulEndsEpicMr.Smith–StyleFilibusterAfterMore</p><p>Than 12 Hours,” Slate, March 7, 2013,</p><p>http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/03/06/rand_paul_is_waging_an_epic_mr_smith_style_filibuster_right_</p><p>now.html(accessedAugust21,2013).</p><p>34. Partisan ID, “Rand Paul’s 2016GOP Primary Poll Bounce Has Arrived,</p><p>Courtesy of an Old Fashioned Filibuster,” April 4, 2013,</p><p>http://partisanid.blogspot.com/2013/04/rand-pauls-2016-gop-primary-poll-</p><p>bounce.html(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>35.MoElleithee,“NewLeaderoftheGOP:RandPaul,”CNN,March8,2013,</p><p>http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/08/opinion/elleithee-gop-rand-paul/ (accessed</p><p>November6,2013).</p><p>36. BrettLogiurato,“SinceRandPaul’sHistoricFilibuster,ThereHasBeena</p><p>DramaticShiftinPublicOpiniononDroneStrikes,”BusinessInsider,April</p><p>11, 2013, http://www.businessinsider.com/rand-paul-filibuster-drone-</p><p>polling-polls-2013-4(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>37.OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral,LettertotheHonorableRandPaul,March7,</p><p>2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-</p><p>politics/files/2013/03/Senator-Rand-Paul-Letter.pdf (accessed November 6,</p><p>2013).</p><p>38.BrettMolina,“FiveQuestionsAbouttheBusinessofTwitter,”USAToday,</p><p>October 3, 2013, http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/10/03/five-</p><p>questions-twitter-s1/2918277/(accessedOctober4,2013).</p><p>39.SydneyBrownstone,“Twittervs.MainstreamMedia:ScienceProvesWhich</p><p>Breaks News Faster,” Fastcoexist.com, July 9, 2013,</p><p>http://www.fastcoexist.com/1682521/twitter-vs-mainstream-media-science-</p><p>proves-which-breaks-news-faster(accessedOctober4,2013).</p><p>40.RoyMorejon,“HowSocialMediaisReplacingTraditionalJournalismasa</p><p>News Source,” Social Media Today, June 28, 2012,</p><p>http://socialmediatoday.com/roymorejon/567751/how-social-media-</p><p>replacing-traditional-journalism-news-source(accessedAugust22,2013).</p><p>41. John Perry Barlow, Closing Keynote Address at the Electronic Frontier</p><p>Foundation,June8,2013.</p><p>42.JimNewell,“ThousandGatherinWashingtonforAnti-NSA‘StopWatching</p><p>Us’ Rally,” Guardian, October 26, 2013,</p><p>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/26/nsa-rally-stop-watching-</p><p>washington-snowden(accessedNovember6,2013).</p><p>Chapter8:TwelveSteps</p><p>1. “David BrooksWarns About ‘the Rise of Ted Cruz-ism,’ ”Real Clear</p><p>Politics, video, September 15, 2013,</p><p>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/09/14/david_brooks_warns_about_the_rise_of_ted_cruz-</p><p>ism.html(accessedSeptember30,2013).</p><p>2.DanielPoliti,“HarryReid:‘TheAmericanPeopleWillNotBeExtortedby</p><p>Tea Party Anarchists,’ ” Slate, September 28, 2013,</p><p>http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/09/28/harry_reid_on_shutdown_american_people_will_not_be_extorted_by_tea_party.html</p><p>(accessedSeptember30,2013).</p><p>3. SamBaker, “BaucusWarnsof ‘HugeTrainWreck’EnactingObamaCare</p><p>Provisions,” The Hill, April 17, 2013,</p><p>http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/294501-</p><p>baucus-warns-of-huge-train-wreck-in-obamacare-implementation (accessed</p><p>September30,2013).</p><p>4. Barbara Hagenbaugh and Sue Kirchhoff, “Timothy Geithner Says He</p><p>Regrets Tax Mistakes,” USA Today, January 22, 2009,</p><p>http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-01-21-geithner-</p><p>hearing_N.htm(accessedOctober9,2013).</p><p>5.Newsmax,“60MinutesUncoversPelosi’sInsiderStockTrades,”November</p><p>13, 2011, http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/pelosi-stock-insider-</p><p>60minutes/2011/11/13/id/417848(accessedDecember5,2013).</p><p>6. S. 2038 (112th): STOCK Act,</p><p>http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s2038 (accessed September 23,</p><p>2013).</p><p>7. Stephen Dinan, “Congress Votes to Shield Top Officials’ Financial</p><p>Disclosures,” Washington Times, April 12, 2013,</p><p>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/12/senate-votes-shield-</p><p>top-officials-financial-disclo/?page=1(accessedSeptember30,2013).</p><p>8.EliseViebeck,“GOPBillHitsAllegedObamaCareExemptionTalks,”The</p><p>Hill, April 26, 2013, http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-</p><p>implementation/296489-gop-bill-hits-alleged-obamacare-exemption-</p><p>tablefirst.Typically,you</p><p>won’tfindyourchairavailablewhenthingsreallymatter.</p><p>Thisprocess,more thananythingelse, explains allof thebailouts anddebt</p><p>and seemingly mindless expansion of government into our personal and</p><p>economiclives.</p><p>Theanswer,today,istofightthepower.Governmentgoestothosewhoshow</p><p>up. The old dismal calculus of big government is being undermined by the</p><p>Internet,thedecentralizationofknowledge,thebreakupoftheoldmediacartel,</p><p>socialmediathatletsuseasilyconnectwithotherconcernedandnewlyactivated</p><p>citizen shareholders. The democratization of politics is shifting power away</p><p>frominsiders,backtotheshareholders.</p><p>Butyoustillhavetostepupandtakepersonalresponsibility.Noone’sgoing</p><p>todoitforyou.Youcan’tproxy-voteyoursharesinAmerica’sfuturetosome</p><p>thirdparty.Ifyoudon’tlikethedirectionyourcountryistaking,ifyoudon’tlike</p><p>the dominance ofD.C. insiders, senators-for-life, and super-lobbyists who get</p><p>specialaccesstotheWestWing,it’stimetotakealookinthemirror.</p><p>Theburdenofindividualresponsibilitymeansthatsometimesthere’snoone</p><p>elsetoblamebutyourself.</p><p>Before you convince yourself that it’s impossible to change things, think</p><p>aboutSamuelAdams,orMahatmaGandhi,orLechWalesaoranyotherlonely</p><p>activist that has done the undoable through peaceful resistance to government</p><p>power.</p><p>Beforeyoutellyourself,afteryearsoffighting, that it’s just toohard, think</p><p>aboutthepriceDr.MartinLutherKingJr.paidforhiswillingnesstostepup.</p><p>Thisburden,theweightofliberty,iswhathasdrivenasmallminority,those</p><p>special few freedom fighters over history, to buck the status quo, often at</p><p>extraordinary personal costs. Those who step up, in an act of lonely</p><p>entrepreneurship, and fix “unfixable” problems even as the anointed experts</p><p>“laughatthem.”Wouldyoubewillingtoriskyourlife,yourfortune,andyour</p><p>sacredhonorfortheprinciplethatindividualsshouldbeleftfree,providedthat</p><p>theydon’thurtpeopleanddon’ttaketheirstuff?</p><p>CHAPTER2</p><p>YOUCAN’THAVEFREEDOMFORFREE</p><p>IN 1977, IBOUGHTmyfirstRushalbum.Iwas thirteen.The titleof thediscwas</p><p>2112,andthefoldoutjackethadaverycoolandominousredstaronthecover.</p><p>AssoonasIgotithomefromthestore,Icarefullyplacedthatvinylrecordonto</p><p>the felt-padded turntable of my parents’ old Motorola console stereo. The</p><p>moment I dropped the stylus, and that needle caught the groove, I became</p><p>obsessedwithRush. IgotobsessedwithRush likeonly thirteen-year-oldboys</p><p>cangetobsessed.IturnedupthevolumeasloudasIthoughtIcouldgetaway</p><p>with,andIrocked.</p><p>Momwasnotnearlyaspleasedas Iwaswithmynewdiscovery. Iknowit</p><p>soundscliché,butshewassurelythemostpatientwomanintheworld.Barbara</p><p>Kibbe’s youngest son was what the best peer-reviewed academic journals on</p><p>parentingrefertoas“ahandful.”</p><p>Myhighlyanticipatedjamsessiondidn’tlastverylongthatday.Momshutit</p><p>down.</p><p>SoIturneddownthestereo,satdown,andbegantoreadthelinernotesinside</p><p>the album’s cover jacket. One of the things lost in today’s era of digital</p><p>downloadsistheritualofreadingthelyricsandthecommentarythatusedtobe</p><p>anessentialpartofwhatyouwerebuyingwhenyoupurchasednewmusic.The</p><p>notesgavecontextandunderstandingtothemusicandhelpedyouconnectwith</p><p>themusicianswhocreatedthesongsyoulistenedto.</p><p>“WithacknowledgementtothegeniusofAynRand,”readthetextinsidethe</p><p>coverof2112.Whatanoddname,Ithought.WhoisAynRand?</p><p>“2112” is a song cycle that tells the story of a futuristic, tyrannical society</p><p>where individual choice and initiative have been replaced by the top-down</p><p>control of an autocratic regime, where all decisions are guided by “the</p><p>benevolentwisdom”of thePriestsof theTemplesofSyrinx.ThePriestsboast</p><p>thatthey’ve“takencareofeverything”usingtheawesomepoweroftheir“great</p><p>computers”tobestowequalityonallmankind.Theylordovera“nice,contented</p><p>world.”</p><p>Intheplotof thisdystopiantale,oneof the“commonsons”approacheshis</p><p>controllers with a new discovery: a guitar, an instrument that could change</p><p>things for the better by providing inspiration and music. Could this “strange</p><p>device” be a vehicle for individual expression? He naïvely thinks that his</p><p>controllers will care, will be open to new beauty, new innovation, and more</p><p>creativefreedom.“There’ssomethingherethat’sasstrongaslife,”hetellsthem.</p><p>“Iknowthatitwillreachyou.”Insteadofhearinghimout,thePriestscrushhis</p><p>newly found instrument under their feet, crushing his spirit in the process.</p><p>“Forget about your silly whim,” the troublemaker is told. “It doesn’t fit the</p><p>plan!”</p><p>In the 1970s it was virtually impossible to find out about newmusic and</p><p>different genres that didn’t fit the one-size-fits-all mold of commercial pop.</p><p>Everythingon the radiowasTop40,predetermined tobewhatyouwanted to</p><p>hearbysomenameless,gray-suitedmusicexecutive.Everythingwasverytop-</p><p>down, and choices and information typically flowed just one way, leaving</p><p>alternatives undiscovered, unheard by consumers, crushed by the silence of</p><p>ignorance.Youjustdidn’tknowwhatyoudidn’tknow.Sotheexpertschosefor</p><p>you, and in 1977 they had selected, forme, really awesome songs likeAndy</p><p>Gibb’s “I Just Want to Be Your Everything,” Barbra Streisand’s “A Star Is</p><p>Born,”andCaptain&Tennille’s“MuskratLove.”The insipiddiscoversionof</p><p>theStarWarscantinabarsong,byMeco,satonthetopoftheBillboardcharts</p><p>fortwoweeks,subjectingmeandotherwisediscerningpeopletoitscrueltorture</p><p>onanendlessrotation.</p><p>Until I foundRush, that is. Iactuallydiscovered thebandasIwaswalking</p><p>pasttherecreationcenteratmyhighschool.SomecoolkidwasplayingAllthe</p><p>World’saStage,a livealbumbyRushreleasedsoonafter2112.Ofcourse,the</p><p>recordstoredidn’thavethatalbumwhenIfinallyconvincedmymomtodrive</p><p>methere,soIsettledfortheonewiththecool,ominousredstar,theonlyRush</p><p>albuminstock.Therewereveryfewchoicesinthedaysofbricksandmortar—</p><p>no“longtail”oftheInternetthatgavepeoplethefreedomtobuythemusicthey</p><p>wanted, when they wanted—and vital shelf space that should have held my</p><p>much-wanted record instead offered up Andy Gibb, Barbra Streisand, and</p><p>Captain&Tennille.Idon’thonestlyremember,butIhavelittledoubtthatthere</p><p>werestacksandstacksofStarWarsandOtherGalacticFunkbyMeco.</p><p>AlltheWorld’saStagebyRush?Itdidn’tfittheplan.</p><p>It was as if these faceless record executives entrenched in the Music</p><p>IndustrialComplexweregoadingmetorevolution.Whydidmusichavetosuck</p><p>sobad?Whydideverythinghavetosoundthesame?</p><p>As it turns out, I was hardly alone in feeling this way. In the mid-1970s,</p><p>severalyearsbeforeIwoulddiscover2112,themembersofRushwerebattling</p><p>theirownrecordlabelforcontroloftheirartisticdirection.Whatkindofmusic</p><p>wouldthebandmake?Wouldanyonebuyit?Thebandwantedtopursueitsown</p><p>creative path, even if it didn’t fit with someone else’s conception of “good”</p><p>music.MercuryRecordswanted somethingmore “commercial.” Theywanted</p><p>Rush to sellmore records, or else. “Therewas agreat dealofpressureon the</p><p>bandatthattime,”saysAlexLifeson,theband’sguitarist.</p><p>If you follow any genre of music, how it evolves and mutates, you have</p><p>alreadyheard this storya thousand times. It is theclashbetween</p><p>traditionand</p><p>innovation,andthecreativedestruction thatdrives individuals tochallenge the</p><p>statusquo.Record-labelexecutivesalwaysgetsquirrellywhensomedifficult-to-</p><p>manageartistcreatesnewmusicthatdeviatesfromthenorm.EvenMilesDavis,</p><p>thegreatjazztrumpetinnovatorofthe1950s,eventuallywoulddisavowthenew</p><p>creativedirectionshismost important collaborator, saxophonist JohnColtrane,</p><p>took jazz in the 1960s. Perhaps challenged by his protégé, Davis himself</p><p>redefined the genre again in the late 1960s, after Coltrane had passed at a</p><p>tragicallyyoungage.JazzcriticswouldlaterattackDavisforhisgroundbreaking</p><p>masterpiece Bitches Brew, released in 1970, as “commercial crap that was</p><p>beginningtochokeandbastardize”jazzstandards.1</p><p>The inherent discomfort the established conventional wisdom has with</p><p>musical innovation is captured perfectly, and hysterically, in the 1984 movie</p><p>Amadeus,whenHolyRomanEmperor Joseph II tells ayoungMozart that the</p><p>“Nonpiùandrai”marchfromhis1786operaTheMarriageofFigarohas“too</p><p>manynotes.”</p><p>“Cutafew,”Josephadvises,“anditwillbeperfect.”</p><p>Incredulous,Mozartasks:“Whichfewdidyouhaveinmind,Majesty?”</p><p>Toofar.Tooindividualistic.Tooextreme.Toomanynotes.Youjustknowit’s</p><p>going to happen, the labels and the name-calling, the defensiveness,when the</p><p>protectorsofthestatusquofeelthreatenedbychangeandprincipleddisruption.</p><p>When it comes to innovation, sometimes the customer is always right.But</p><p>other timesaninnovatorshakesupmarketperceptionsandupsellsbuyersona</p><p>betterproduct—anewideathatyoudidn’tevenknowyouneededuntilsomeone</p><p>elsefigureditoutforyou.Thisprocessofcreativedisruption—standingonthe</p><p>shouldersofyourintellectualforefathersallthewhilechallengingthemandtheir</p><p>bestwork—seemstobewherethegoodstuffinlifecomesfrom.Anditcanonly</p><p>happenifpeoplearefree.Freetosucceed.Freetofail.Freetospeaktheirminds</p><p>anddisagreewiththeexperts.Freetochoose.Thinkaboutthehorselesscarriage,</p><p>handheld computers, or the MP3 files on your iPod that replaced CDs, that</p><p>replacedcassettesandeight-tracktapes,andyes,thatevenreplacedvinyl.</p><p>This disruption seems particularly true in music. Music and freedom just</p><p>seem to go together, just like the word “bacon” belongs in any sentence that</p><p>includes thephrase“propermeal.” I can’tprove it,butyou justknow that it’s</p><p>true.</p><p>Back in 1977, such profound insights eludedme. Iwas stillwearing black</p><p>concertteesandwonderingwhotheheckAynRandwas,whenIstumbledupon</p><p>ausedcopyofhernovellaAnthemataneighborhoodgaragesale.Itookithome</p><p>andreaditwithoutputtingitdownonce.Whatanawesomebookitwas,abouta</p><p>dystopian society where the word “I” had been erased by an oppressive,</p><p>collective“We.”</p><p>Itisasintowritethis.Itisasintothinkwordsnoothersthinkandtoput</p><p>themdownuponapapernoothersaretosee.Itisbaseandevil.Itisasif</p><p>wewere speaking alone to no ears but our own. Andwe knowwell that</p><p>thereisnotransgressionblackerthantodoorthinkalone....</p><p>OurnameisEquality7-2521,asitiswrittenontheironbraceletwhich</p><p>allmenwearontheir leftwristswith theirnamesuponit.Weare twenty-</p><p>oneyearsold.Weare six feet tall,and this isaburden, for therearenot</p><p>manymenwho are six feet tall. Ever have the Teachers and the Leaders</p><p>pointedtousandfrownedandsaid:“Thereisevilinyourbones,Equality</p><p>7-2521,foryourbodyhasgrownbeyondthebodiesofyourbrothers.”But</p><p>wecannotchangeourbonesnorourbody.</p><p>Wewerebornwithacurse.Ithasalwaysdrivenustothoughtswhichare</p><p>forbidden.Ithasalwaysgivenuswisheswhichmenmaynotwish.</p><p>Despiteinsurmountableodds,thegoodguys,the“cursed”ones,theoneswho</p><p>begintostarttheirsentenceswiththeword“I,”persevere.Iconnectedwiththe</p><p>struggle to be free—different, independent, responsible formy own successes</p><p>andfailures.</p><p>IimmediatelysetouttofindTheFountainhead,whichwaslistedinthefront</p><p>pagesofmydated, dog-earedpaperback copyofAnthem as one of the “other</p><p>novels” by Rand. No mention of Atlas Shrugged, which hadn’t even been</p><p>conceivedofwhenmynow-cherished copyofAnthemwent to press. Imagine</p><p>howlongittookmetofindacopyofTheFountainhead.Backintheday,you</p><p>couldn’tjustlogintoyouraccountonAmazon.comandfindit,orthemultitude</p><p>ofotherbooks related to it. I looked inanybookstore,at everyopportunity. It</p><p>wasdifficulttofind.ButIwasobsessed.</p><p>NeilPeart, the drummer and lyricist forRush,was alsoobsessedwithAyn</p><p>Randat the timeofhisband’s career-defining strugglewith their record label.</p><p>He started off readingThe Fountainhead because “all the smart kids used to</p><p>carrythataround”inhighschool.2Peart“introducedherwritingtous,”sayslead</p><p>singerandbassguitaristGeddyLee.“WealllikedthebookAnthem,whichisthe</p><p>thingthatkindofinspired2112.”</p><p>The band had toured relentlessly in support of their last album,Caress of</p><p>Steel,buttherecordhadbeentrashedbymusiccritics(atrendthatwouldgoon</p><p>fordecades).</p><p>Without the music industry press on Rush’s side, album sales were</p><p>disappointing. For the next album, company headquarters wanted something</p><p>conventional,somethingthatwouldsell.“Ifeltthisgreatsenseofinjusticethat</p><p>this mass was coming down on us and telling us to compromise, and</p><p>compromisewasthewordIcouldn’tdealwith,”recallsPeart.“Igrewupachild</p><p>ofthe60sandIwasastrongindividualistandbelievedinthesanctityof:‘you</p><p>shouldbeabletodowhatyouwanttodo,youknow,withouthurtinganyone.’”</p><p>Artistic integrity, for Peart and his bandmates, had crashed headlong into the</p><p>expediencyofthemoment.</p><p>Insteadoffollowingtherules,insteadofrecordinganalbumthatconformed</p><p>totheexpected,Rushmade2112.Atatimewhensuccessfulpopsongsranabout</p><p>threeminuteslong,atwenty-minutesongcycleabouttotalitarianoppressionon</p><p>a far-awayplanetwas hardlywhat that sales team atMercuryRecords had in</p><p>mind.“Wegotangryandthought,okay, if this isour lastshotwearegoingto</p><p>giveiteverythingandwe’regonnadoitourway,”recallsPeart.SoRushdidit</p><p>theirway,givingiteverythingtheyhadinthem.</p><p>AfterdiscoveringAnthemandTheFountainhead,bythetimeIturnedfifteen</p><p>IhadreadallofRand’s fictionandmanyofhernonfictionworks,suchasher</p><p>anthology,Capitalism:TheUnknownIdeal,inwhichsherecommendstheworks</p><p>of the Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises.3 I somehow found a copy of</p><p>HumanAction,Mises’scomprehensivetreatiseoneconomics,andbegantoread</p><p>it.Ididn’treallyknowwhatIwasdoing,andmaybeIunderstoodafractionof</p><p>whatIwasreading,butdon’tevertrytotellateenagerwhathecan’tdo.Iwas,</p><p>afterall,obsessed.</p><p>Asyoumightimagine,wearingblackAC/DCconcerttees,listeningtoRush</p><p>andLedZeppelinandtheStones,andquotingAynRandandLudwigvonMises</p><p>to anyone who would listen turned out to be the worst possible strategy for</p><p>meetinggirlsinhighschool.ThankstothestagflationoftheCarterpresidency</p><p>and the minimum wage, I could not find a job in Grove City, Pennsylvania,</p><p>whenIturnedsixteen.Myschedulewasclear!Mylackofsocialskills,ajob—</p><p>anddates—providedplentyoftimetoreadthingsnormalkidsdon’t.</p><p>I graduated from high school not knowing what I wanted to do. I wasn’t</p><p>particularlyinterestedingoingtocollege,butatmyfather’sinsistenceIapplied</p><p>to a numberof schools.SumnerKibbewas</p><p>obsessed—obsessiveness being an</p><p>apparentlyhereditarytrait—andIdidn’t typicallygetawaywithsaying“no.”I</p><p>ultimatelychoseGroveCityCollegeforonesimplereason:Itwasthecheapest.I</p><p>wasabletopaymytuitionbyclearingtreesandwashingdishesforthecollege</p><p>(studentswereexemptfromtheminimumwagethathadbeensuchabarrierto</p><p>myearlierentryintotheworkforce).Isetoutasabiologymajor,butIwasbored</p><p>withit.Iwasbarelyscrapingbywithmyclasswork.IwasnowreadingAdam</p><p>Smith and other “classical liberal” philosophers that I had discovered reading</p><p>Mises,andthatwasfarmoreinteresting.IneverimaginedthatIcouldpursuea</p><p>degree(letaloneacareer)consistentwiththeideasIwaslearningaboutoutside</p><p>theclassroom.Ijustdidn’tknowtherewereotherswhothoughtlikeIdid,had</p><p>readwhatIwasreading.</p><p>Itseemssoridiculoustoadmittoday,butasanincomingfreshmanatGrove</p><p>CityCollege, Iwasutterlyunawareof the fact that theheadof theeconomics</p><p>department,Dr.HansSennholz,wasonlyoneofahandfulofeconomistswho</p><p>hadearnedhisPh.D.fromLudwigvonMises.HumanActionwas therequired</p><p>text forEcon301. Iwalkedpast that department everydayonmyway to the</p><p>scienceclassesIwasnotreallyinterestedin,butIjustdidn’tknow.Talkabouta</p><p>“knowledgeproblem.”</p><p>Ididn’tfigureanyofthisoutuntilalate-nightargumentwithafriend,Peter</p><p>Boettke.4Wewere in thesame fraternity,andwewereofcoursedebating just</p><p>how limited “limited government” should be. I know what you’re thinking.</p><p>Nerd.Reallybignerd.Wikipediadefinesanerdas“aperson,typicallydescribed</p><p>as being overly intellectual, obsessive, or socially impaired. They may spend</p><p>inordinateamountsoftimeonunpopular,obscure,ornon-mainstreamactivities,</p><p>which are generally either highly technical or relating to topics of fiction or</p><p>fantasy,totheexclusionofmoremainstreamactivities.”Therewerefewgirlsat</p><p>theADELhousethatnight,butat least theyweresparedanintensediscussion</p><p>ontheproperroleofgovernment inaconstitutionalrepublic.Asourargument</p><p>wounddown,Petesuddenlystoppedtoaskme,“Whyaren’tyouaneconomics</p><p>major?”</p><p>Ididn’tknow.</p><p>It’sremarkablehowmylifechangedthatnight.Iswitchedtoeconomicsand</p><p>philosophy,andmygradesimmediatelywentfromC’sandD’stoA’sandB’s.</p><p>(Mywife, Terry,whom I started dating around the same time,was given full</p><p>credit for the miraculous turnaround in my academic performance by my</p><p>parents. She was an engineer, like Pops, so she was “smart.” She never</p><p>disabusedthemofthisbelief.LikeIsaid,she’sasmartgirl.)</p><p>Myveilofignorancewaslifted,andIwasquicklyexposedtoabodyofideas</p><p>and community of people united by the values of individual freedom and the</p><p>limitlesspotentialofpeoplewhenofferedachancetostrive,seek,andachieve.</p><p>Itseemedlikethereweredozens,maybehundredsofpeoplewhowerethinking</p><p>aboutliberty,individualism,andthepowerofideas,justlikeme.Dr.Sennholz,</p><p>who by that time had developed a closementoring relationshipwithDr. Ron</p><p>Paul,anewishcongressmanrepresentingthe14thDistrictofTexas,alsobecame</p><p>my intellectual mentor. He introduced me to the Foundation for Economic</p><p>Education, in Irvington-on-Hudson, New York, and the Institute for Humane</p><p>Studies and eventually the Center for the Study ofMarket Processes, both at</p><p>GeorgeMasonUniversity.</p><p>Iwent toGMU for graduate studies in economics, again at PeteBoettke’s</p><p>urging.In1984,CitizensforaSoundEconomywasfoundedoutoftheAustrian</p><p>economics program at George Mason, and Dr. Paul became the founding</p><p>chairman.AsagraduatestudentatMason,Iwas loading trucksatUPStopay</p><p>thetab.Itooka50percentpaycuttojoinCSEin1986,butIwasthrilled.Iwas</p><p>goingtogetpaidtofightforfreedom.Howcoolwasthat?</p><p>I went on to other things, but came back to CSE in 1996. CSE became</p><p>FreedomWorksonJuly22,2004.IbecamepresidentofFreedomWorksthatday.</p><p>Back in 1976,Neil Peart, the drummer and lyricist forRush,was thinking</p><p>about his future and pursuing his dreams. He penned the dystopian lyrics to</p><p>“2112”thinkingabouthis individualfreedom.“IdidnotthinkofpoliticsandI</p><p>did not think of global oppression,” he recalls. No, he was thinking: “These</p><p>peoplearemessingwithme!”Heandtherestofthebandfoundtheirinspiration</p><p>inAnthem,thesamenovellathathadturnedmeon.</p><p>“YoucansaywhatyouwantaboutAynRandandalltheotherimplicationsof</p><p>herwork,butherartisticmanifesto, for lackofabetter term,was theone that</p><p>struckhomewithus,”saysGeddyLee.“It’saboutcreativefreedom.It’sabout</p><p>believinginyourself.”</p><p>Fans agreed. Despite its not-ready-for-pop-radio format, 2112 reached</p><p>number 61 on the Billboard pop album charts, the first time the band had</p><p>crackedtheTop100.WhichistheonlyreasonIwasabletofindacopyinthe</p><p>recordstacksamongthemultitudinouspressingsof“MuskratLove.”</p><p>Creativefreedomaside,thebriefnoteinsidethesleeveof2112,theonehat-</p><p>tipping Ayn Rand, set the world of music experts—the critics—afire with</p><p>ideologicalrage.H.L.Menckenoncedescribedahistorianas“anunsuccessful</p><p>novelist,”5referringtothepropensityofsomehistorianstomakeitupastheygo</p><p>along.Similarly,youmightcharacterizemusicjournalistsasfrustratedmusicians</p><p>that shower their bitterness on youth. That was certainly the case with Barry</p><p>Miles, a music critic writing for England’s New Music Express, who had a</p><p>philosophicalaxtogrindinhistrashingofRushthathadnothingtodowiththe</p><p>qualityofthemusictheymade.</p><p>It was right out of a scene in The Fountainhead, where self-styled</p><p>architectural critic and committed hater of intellectual achievement Ellsworth</p><p>Toohey decides to destroy the young architectHowardRoarkwithwords.On</p><p>page 7 of theMarch 4, 1978, issue ofNME, the headline read “Is Everyone</p><p>Feeling All RIGHT (Geddit?)” As someone who reads the music press, this</p><p>ranks as one of the most hateful hit pieces on a band I have ever seen. The</p><p>problem, it seems, was the source of the band’s ideas. Neil Peart is quoted,</p><p>arguingthathisbandis“certainlydevotedtoindividualismastheonlyconcept</p><p>thatallowsmen tobehappy,without somebody taking fromsomebodyelse.”6</p><p>The article gave short shrift to Rush’s music. No, this was a hit piece and a</p><p>clumsy vehicle for a hack journalist to express uninformed disdain for Neil</p><p>Peart’sdevelopinglibertarianideology:</p><p>So now I understood the freedom they are talking about. Freedom for</p><p>employersandthosewithmoneytodowhat theylikeandfreedomfor the</p><p>workers to quit (and starve) or not.Workmakes free.Didn’t I remember</p><p>thatideafromsomewhere?“WorkMakesFree.”Ohyes,itwaswrittenover</p><p>themaingatewaytoAuschwitzConcentrationCamp.</p><p>“Youhavetohaveprinciples thatfirmlyapplytoeverysituation,” thestory</p><p>quotesPeartagainassaying.“Ithinkacountryhastoberunthatway.Thatyou</p><p>have a guiding set of principles that are absolutely immutable—can never be</p><p>changedbyanything.That’stheonlyway.”</p><p>“Shadesofthe1,000YearReich?”observesaverybitterMiles,darkly.</p><p>“This journalist,” recalls guitarist Alex Lifeson, “wrote it up like we were</p><p>Nazis,ultra-right-wingmaniacs.”</p><p>Really?Auschwitz?ShadesoftheThirdReich?Nobodylikesbeingcalleda</p><p>Nazi—except,Isuppose,Nazis.For therestofus, it isaconversationstopper,</p><p>oneof thedeepest insultsone canhurl, like “racist.”A“Nazi”</p><p>ismore than a</p><p>“national socialist” or even a “fascist.” No, a “Nazi” is a cold-blooded mass</p><p>murderer.</p><p>Ofcourse,“individualism”asdescribedbyAynRandorNeilPeartoranyone</p><p>else for thatmatter is theveryantithesisofnational socialismorany ideology</p><p>thatenablesagovernmentactofmassmurder. I think theaccuserswhosmear</p><p>others with Nazism know that, and the real purpose is to stigmatize their</p><p>philosophical enemies. Saul Alinsky, the radical community organizer from</p><p>Chicago,saiditbestinRulesforRadicals.</p><p>Rulenumber5:“Ridiculeisman’smostpotentweapon.”</p><p>Rulenumber13:“Pickthetarget,freezeit,personalizeit,andpolarizeit.”</p><p>Well,theNewMusicalExpresscertainlypersonalizedit:BothofGeddyLee’s</p><p>parentshadbeenteenageprisonersheldatAuschwitz.“Ionceaskedmymother</p><p>herfirstthoughtsuponbeingliberated,”LeetoldareporterforJWeeklyin2004.</p><p>“Shedidn’tbelieve[liberation]waspossible.Shedidn’tbelievethatiftherewas</p><p>a societyoutside thecamphow theycouldallow this toexist, so shebelieved</p><p>societywasdonein.”7Thearticlegoeson:</p><p>Infact,whenManyaRubensteinlookedoutthewindowofacampbuilding</p><p>she was working in on April 15, 1945, and saw guards with both arms</p><p>raised,shethoughttheyweredoingadoublesalutejusttobearrogant.She</p><p>did not realize British forces had overrun the camp. She and her fellow</p><p>prisoners, says Lee, “were so malnourished, their brains were not</p><p>functioning,andtheycouldn’tconceivethey’dbeliberated.”</p><p>ItiseasytoseewhyManyaRubensteinhadgivenuponcivilization.She</p><p>and futurehusbandMorriswerestill in their teens—andstrangers toone</p><p>another—when theywere interned in a labor camp in their hometown of</p><p>Staracohwice (also known as Starchvitzcha), Poland, in 1941. Prisoners</p><p>therewereforcedtoworkinalumbermill,stonequarry,anduniformand</p><p>ammunitionmanufacturingplants.</p><p>FromStaracohwice,aboutanhoursouthofWarsaw,ManyaandMorris,</p><p>alongwithmanymembers of both their families,were sent toAuschwitz.</p><p>Eventually Morris was shipped to Dachau in southern Germany, and</p><p>ManyatoBergen-BelseninnorthernGermany.Thirty-fivethousandpeople</p><p>died in Bergen-Belsen from starvation, disease, brutality and overwork,</p><p>according to information from the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum.</p><p>Another10,000people,tooillandweaktosave,diedduringthefirstmonth</p><p>afterliberation.</p><p>Hisparents’heroicstruggleagainstNazigenocidereallydefinedGeddyLee’s</p><p>upbringing in Toronto, and their experiences were discussed openly. “These</p><p>were the things thathappened to themduring themost formative time in their</p><p>lives,”hesays.“Somepeoplegotohorsebackridingcamp;myparentswentto</p><p>concentrationcamp.”</p><p>Can you imagine his reaction toBarryMiles’s ad hominem “Nazi” smears</p><p>against the band in 1978? “Just so offensive,” says Lee, in his typical,</p><p>understatedway.</p><p>AynRand, likeGeddyLee,hadfirsthandknowledgeof justhowdeepsuch</p><p>smearscancut.BornAlissaRosenbaum,RandwasgrowingupinSt.Petersburg,</p><p>Russia,whenthecommuniststookpowerin1917.HerJewishfamily“endured</p><p>yearsofsufferinganddanger”afterherfather’ssmallbusinesswasconfiscated.</p><p>Shewanted to be awriter, but sawno hope for that under a newgovernment</p><p>regimewherethefreedomtoexpressopinions,toquestionauthority,tothinkfor</p><p>yourself,wasprohibited.Withthehelpofherfamily,shefledcommunistRussia</p><p>fortheUnitedStates,arrivingwhenshewastwenty-oneyearsold.</p><p>“To free her writing from all traceable associations with her former life,”</p><p>observesStephenCox,“sheinventedforherselfthenameAynRandandsetout,</p><p>liketheheroof[Anthem],tomakeanewlifeforherself,infreedom.”8</p><p>ThecriticsneverreallywarmeduptoRand’swork,justliketheyneverreally</p><p>warmeduptoRush’smusic.Morethantheirart,Isuspectitwastheircombative</p><p>individualism that really irked the critics. As Gore Vidal noted in his</p><p>contemptuous review of Atlas Shrugged, the book was “nearly perfect in its</p><p>immorality.”ForRand—asforRush—therewasapricetobepaidforpursuing</p><p>herchosenpathinlife.Challengingthestatusquo,andthefreedomtodoso,all</p><p>cameataprice.Freedom,forthem,wasnotfree.Therewasadownside,andit</p><p>mighthavebeeneasiertogiveinandcomplywiththeexpectationsofothers.</p><p>But the upside to freedom is so much better. Fans, customers hungry for</p><p>somethingelse,foundRushjustliketheyfoundRand.</p><p>The critics may have resented their work, but fans, customers hungry for</p><p>somethingelse,foundthem.ItissaidthatAtlasShrugged,Rand’smagnumopus,</p><p>is the second-most influential book in history, a distant second to the Bible.9</p><p>According to the Recording Industry Association of America, 2112 has sold</p><p>more than 3 million copies since it was released, a triple-platinum record.</p><p>Overall,Rushhassoldsome40millionrecords,andthebandranksthird,behind</p><p>theBeatles and theRollingStones, for themost consecutivegoldor platinum</p><p>studioalbumsbyarock-and-rollband.</p><p>Anditallstartedwith2112.Itstartedwithawillingnesstostandonprinciple</p><p>when the easier path was compromise. It started, incidentally, “with an</p><p>acknowledgement to the genius of Ayn Rand.” The band took off, fueled by</p><p>music fans looking for something different, something inspired by disruptive</p><p>innovationandcreativefreedom.</p><p>My personal tastes in music, like the books I was reading, eventually</p><p>branchedouttomanydifferentgenres.IgotintotheGratefulDead.Ifyoudon’t</p><p>gettheDead,youlikelyneversawthebandlive.Therewasaprofoundsenseof</p><p>community between the players onstage and their audience. Jerry Garcia, the</p><p>iconic lead guitarist for the Dead, often spoke of his musical influences,</p><p>includingjazz,bluegrass,andblues.Asaplayer,Garciawasveryimmersedin</p><p>Americanmusical traditions,andhisopinions ledme toMilesDavisandJohn</p><p>Coltrane,andevenbluegrass.</p><p>I particularly liked the spontaneous nature of theDead’s jams and theway</p><p>Coltrane’squartetwouldexploretheouterboundsofjazzstructure.Therewere</p><p>very few rules to guide, but plenty of room for individuality and exploration.</p><p>The resulting interplay between musicians, sometimes leading, sometimes</p><p>following, was a perfectmetaphor for the peaceful cooperation of individuals</p><p>workingtogethertowardsacommongoalgreaterthanthesumofitsparts.The</p><p>music seemed analogous to the free association between individuals in a civil</p><p>society, the interplay between institutional rules and creative disruption that</p><p>Hayek and his protégés would dub the “spontaneous order.” My musical</p><p>interests,inasense,trackedmyexpandedunderstandingoftheideasoffreedom.</p><p>I really didn’t revisit my early obsession with Rush until 2010, when an</p><p>insurgentSenatecandidatenamedRandPaulbeganplayingtheband’s“Spiritof</p><p>Radio”atcampaignevents.He’sabigfan,itturnsout.</p><p>“I grew up in a libertarian family,” the now well-known senator from</p><p>KentuckytoldmewhenIhadachancetositdownwithhimin2013.“AynRand</p><p>wasonalotofdifferentbookshelves.IreadAynRandwhenIwasseventeen.I</p><p>wasprobablyaRushfanbeforethat,butIalreadyknewofAynRand.Sotome</p><p>theserendipitywasthatIactuallylikedthisbandthatknewaboutAynRand.I</p><p>rememberreadingthelyricsto2112andthenreadingAnthemandsayingthisis</p><p>basicallyAntheminmusic.”</p><p>Asitturnsout,thelawyerforRush’srecordlabelisnot,apparently,abigfan</p><p>of Rand Paul. Robert Farmer,</p>
  • GEOPOLÍTICA - 6
  • petrobras0111_edital (2)
  • Processo Seletivo Petrobras 2012
  • Migrações e Conflitos Globais
  • Slides de Aula - Unidade II
  • A influência da União Europeia e do Mercosul nas preferências linguísticas dos países membros
  • IDECAN 104 - Técnico De Nível Superior - Enfermeiro Do Trabalho - Tipo B
  • IDECAN 100 - Auditor - Enfermagem - Tipo A
  • banca idecan 124 - Enfermeiro - Esf - Tipo A
  • questionário tele aula 2
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade Iii
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade Ii
  • Diplomacia econômica internacional unidade I
  • Oaçoéumaliga metálica composta de ferro com pequenas quantidades de carbono, o que lhe confere propriedades específicas, sobretudo de resistência ...
  • LICCIVCIATURA CIVI GEOGRAHA Tempo re Que Aino Halford J. Mackinder é um renomado teórico da geopolítica clássica. Sua teoria do Heartland, ou "Cora...
  • 3) As técnicas de inspeção são um tipo de avaliação da interface para verificar sua adequação aos usuários e boa usabilidade, com características e...
  • A rainha Elizabeth da Grã-Bretanha ocupava uma posição que herdou com base nas regras tradicionais de sucessão para a monarquia, uma forma de gover...
  • A globalização é uma característica da atualidade e se fortaleceu no final do século XX. Refere-se à queda da maioria dos regimes socialistas do mu...
  • O sarampo, apesar de sua erradicação em alguns países, voltou a ser uma preocupação global. Qual dos sinais clínicos a seguir é mais característico...
  • Sabendo que moeda funcional é a moeda do ambiente econômico principal no qual a entidade opera, julgue os itens a seguir, sobre os critérios para d...
  • Comunidades tradicionais da zona rural de Manaus, mapeadas em um projeto premiado Temp internacionalmente, enfrentam O risco de desaparecer. O gove...
  • Em uma empresa de consultoria, a alta administração está buscando tornar o setor de recursos humanos um verdadeir8 parceiro na definição e execução...
  • Como parte da evolução do sistema de controle interno, foi criada pela Lei nº 13.502, de 2017, o Ministério da Transparência e Controladoria-Geral ...
  • para se comunicar entre si os bancos correspondentes ao redor do mundo utilizam codigos de mensagens especificas para garantir segurança e agilidad...
  • Ao elaborar uma documentação para um projeto de redes, é importante incluir diversos elementos principais para garantir uma cobertura completa das ...
  • quais são as principais caracteriscas Individualização do Ensino
  • ingles homework 10
  • How to be Heard_ Secrets for Powerful Speaking and Listening ( PDFDrive ) (1)

Perguntas dessa disciplina

Grátis

In the third stanza of the song, what message about change is sent to 'senators, congressman'? a) Politicians must be aware of people’s desires to...

Grátis

The third stanza of the song sends a message about change to “senators, congressman”. That message is best described by the sentence: a) Politicia...
The third stanza of the song sends a message about change to “senators, congressman”. That message is best described by the sentence:a) Politician...
Our duty when sharing content on social media is: a. Share positive content.b. Wait a few minutes before sharing something.c. Take action when p...
14. Andrew Zolli argues that people born in the late 70’s A) may have to take care of their mothers for more years than they were taken care of....
Don't Hurt People and Don't Take Their Stuff  A Libertarian Manifesto ( PDFDrive ) - Relações Internacionais (2024)

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Prof. Nancy Dach

Last Updated:

Views: 5459

Rating: 4.7 / 5 (77 voted)

Reviews: 84% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Prof. Nancy Dach

Birthday: 1993-08-23

Address: 569 Waelchi Ports, South Blainebury, LA 11589

Phone: +9958996486049

Job: Sales Manager

Hobby: Web surfing, Scuba diving, Mountaineering, Writing, Sailing, Dance, Blacksmithing

Introduction: My name is Prof. Nancy Dach, I am a lively, joyous, courageous, lovely, tender, charming, open person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.