Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS POSITION STATEMENT
RLC Website ^ | December 8, 2000 | Republican Liberty Caucus

Posted on 07/24/2002 3:47:01 PM PDT by Jim Robinson

REPUBLICAN LIBERTY CAUCUS
POSITION STATEMENT

As adopted by the General Membership of the Republican Liberty Caucus at its Biannual Meeting held December 8, 2000.  

BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Liberty Caucus endorses the following principles:

1.0 FEDERALISM

1.1 The power of the federal government should be limited, as per the tenth amendment to the U. S. Constitution.

2.0 EDUCATION

2.1 The U. S. Department of Education should be abolished, leaving education decision making at the state, local or personal level.
2.2 Parents have the right to spend their money on the school or method of schooling they deem appropriate for their children.

3.0 HEALTH CARE

3.1 Free market health care alternatives, such as medical savings accounts, should be available to everyone, including senior citizens.
3.2 The federal entitlement to Medicare should be abolished, leaving health care decision making regarding the elderly at the state, local, or personal level.

4.0 TAXATION

4.1 The tax system of the United States should be overhauled.
4.2 There should be a national debate discussing various alternative means of taxation including but not limited to a single flat income tax, repealing the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax, and reducing spending to the point where the income tax can be repealed without the need to replace it with a national sales tax or any other form of taxation.
4.3 The capital gains tax should be *eliminated*.
4.4 The inheritance tax should be *eliminated*.
4.5 The new tax system should be implemented *promptly*.

5.0 WELFARE

5.1 The U. S. Department of Health and Human Services should be abolished, leaving decision making on welfare and related matters at the state, local or personal level. All Americans have the right to keep the fruits of their labor to support themselves, their families and whatever charities they so choose, without interference from the federal government.
5.2 All able-bodied Americans have the responsibility to support themselves and their families.

6.0 CRIMINAL JUSTICE

6.1 Every American has the right to keep and bear arms. We affirm our support for the second amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
6.2 All people, regardless of position in the public or private sector, should be held equally accountable under the law.
6.3 The *only* litmus test for Supreme Court or other judges should be their determination to accurately interpret, not amend, the Constitution. Judges have *no* authority to make new law.

7.0 CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM

7.1 Election campaigns should not be subsidized by tax payers.
7.2 No individual should be compelled to support a political candidate he or she does not support. Government should not empower trade unions to collect funds from their members for use as political contributions without their members' expressed consent.
7.3 All limits on campaign contributions should be eliminated.
7.4 There should be full and timely public disclosure of all the sources and amounts of all campaign contributions upon their receipt.

8.0 FEDERAL BUDGET

8.1 There should be an amendment to the U. S. Constitution to require a balanced budget, provided it includes a supermajority requirement to raise taxes and provided it does not empower the judiciary to unilaterally raise taxes.
8.2 Honest accounting dictates that all federal expenditures should be on budget.
8.3 Each budget should be derived based upon the justification for and needs of each program, with no program being either budgeted for or increased automatically.

9.0 GOVERNMENT REFORM

9.1 The U. S. Department of Commerce should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.2 The National Endowment for the Arts should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.3 The National Endowment for the Humanities should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.4 The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development should be abolished, per the tenth amendment of the U. S. Constitution.
9.5 Subsidies to agricultural and other businesses should be eliminated.
9.6 Corporate taxes should be eliminated simultaneously and proportionally with the elimination of subsidies to businesses.
9.7 Recommendations by the Grace Commission and the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) should be reviewed and implemented, where possible, beginning immediately.
9.8 Privatization of government assets, management and services should be implemented for cost-effectiveness wherever applicable.

10.0 TRADE

10.1 The U. S. government should inhibit neither the exportation of U. S. goods and services worldwide, nor the importation of goods and services.
10.2 The United States should not be answerable to any governing body outside the United States for its trade policy.

11.0 DEFENSE

11.1 U. S. military should be deployed only where there is a clear threat to vital U. S. interests and only with the consent of the U. S. Congress.
11.2 It is the duty of the federal government to provide a system to defend against missile attacks.
11.3 No branch of the military should be put in harm's way without a clear entrance and exit strategy and a goal, which when achieved, constitutes victory.
11.4 U. S military personnel should always be under U. S. command.
11.5 U. S. armed forces should be all-volunteer.
11.6 Military draft registration should be eliminated.
11.7 Foreign aid is often more harmful than helpful and should be curtailed.

12.0 PROPERTY RIGHTS

12.1 The government should not take private property without just compensation.
12.2 All unconstitutional regulation of private property should be repealed.

13.0 DRUGS

13.1 While recognizing the harm that drug abuse causes society, we also recognize that government drug policy has been ineffective and has led to frightening abuses of the Bill of Rights which could affect the personal freedom of any American. We, therefore, support alternatives to the War on Drugs.
13.2 Per the tenth amendment to the U. S. Constitution, matters such as drugs should be handled at the state or personal level.
13.3 All laws which give license to violate the Bill of Rights should be repealed.

Entered into the record December 8, 2000


TOPICS: Issues
KEYWORDS: banglist; positionstatement; rlc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-262 next last
To: rwfromkansas
I really dont see the drug war as a morality issue. Their is very little difference than someone smoking a joint in one's home or drinking a beer. There is very little difference in someone doing (many) prescription drugs in their home or cocaine. The problem is not the doing of drugs on private property, it is when you 1) go out in public 2) get behind the wheel of a car 3) operate heavy machinery--but libertarians are in agreement on this. In many ways, alcohol is worse than cocaine. In every single way, alcohol is worse than marijuana. Legalize these 2 drugs and 4/5ths of the drug war goes away immediately. Just marijuana alone makes up for over half. Unless you want to outlaw alcohol also, you are being a hypocrite on the issue. Marijuna was made illegal by the FDR administration, cocaine by woodrow wilson--two pillars of 'conservatism' no doubt. If you can get past the drug war propaganda, you would see that at least letting counties (like you have dry and alcohol counties) or states decide. Most libertarians agree that drug abuse is bad, and that one should limit or eliminate the use of any drugs (including alcohol and nicotine), but we do not think we should put non-violent drug users in prison, especially when it creates a black market with thugs more dangerous than the drugs themselves.

As for abortion, I agree, I wish the RLC was prolife, but they should acknowledge that it (murder) is a state issue and that Roe Vs Wade is an example of judicial activism at its worst. However, I'm not a one issue person, and still support 99% of the RLC platform.

221 posted on 08/15/2002 8:14:11 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: OrthodoxPresbyterian
nice post
222 posted on 08/15/2002 8:16:49 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
bag. You're another fringe wacko extremist

Most people would say our founding father's were fringe extremists. Funny that their government looked far far closer to the RLC's position than yours on almost every issue.

223 posted on 08/15/2002 8:20:22 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
You live in a delusional dream world.

Enjoy it.

224 posted on 08/15/2002 8:26:13 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
How is it delusional? Were drugs a federal issue in the late 1700s? How about income tax? How about military all over the globe? Was prostitution a federal issue? How about abortion? Or 99% of the other things you think I'm 'delusional' about. Please, 'enlighten me'
225 posted on 08/15/2002 8:36:13 PM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
We've been through this many times before and you never seem to learn. The political philosophy and agenda you espouse is archaic and out of touch with the modern world. The federal government that ran early America, a nation of 4 million folks, would never work in todays complicated world environment.

That doesn't mean ideas like tax reform and cutting waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, aren't something to fight for. You just have to realize what you're up against and understand the limitations that todays political world presents.

As far as the RLC goes, I'll repeat my opening remarks.

"The Republican Liberty Caucus makes some excellent points. In fact, many of their political positions, mirror the positions conservatives, like myself, have championed for many years now.
However, there are some downsides to the RLC and they should be discussed openly."

As I've told you before, you can either get involved in the political fight to elect more conservative Republicans to public office, or you can stand on the sidelines and whine and complain. The choice is entirely yours.

226 posted on 08/15/2002 9:03:29 PM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Sorry, I dont feel that the Constitution is at all archaic (although, most of todays liberals do). You want a 'living breathing' constitution which is a completely LIBERAL idea, not conservative. The feds have no business in 80% + of the programs it runs. The only things the fed should be in is 1) defense 2) border patrol 3)money 4) treaties. Things like drugs (both narcotics and prescription), sex, welfare, education, murder (abortion), rape, etc etc constitutionally (ala 10th amendment) should be state issues or not a government issue at all. A conservative and libertarian should have very little differences when it comes to federal government. Where we split is at the state and local level, which I dont have that much of a problem with that much. Anything to get rid of the huge beast that is the federal government and its ever expansive powers.

And at the moment I hardly have time or money to campaign for anyone. I'm 20, I work full time and go to college almost full time and pay for my own way, my own place, car, etc. But I've said it a million times on here. I will vote for any candidate regardless of party affiliation if they have a chance at winning who will decrease the size and scope of the federal government. Bush, etc is not doing that. Therefore, I wont vote for them. I dont expect the US ever to become libertarian-like again but I do expect it to move in the right direction.

227 posted on 08/16/2002 12:44:32 AM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: rb22982
>>>You want a 'living breathing' constitution...

Those are your words, not mine and they won't win you any arguments either. Typical libertarian hogwash.

What you seem to forget, is that the US Constitution isn't holy scripture, carved in granite and handed down to the people by prophets or gods. There is an existing procedure for amending any portion of the Constitution. At the same time, the Congress can legislate and make law in accordance with the specific powers granted to it, as one branch of the federal government. If that wasn't true, the Founding Fathers would never have created a Congress to start with. The fact is, America has changed since the late 1700`s and has grown from a population of 4 million cititzens to over 285 million. This is the 21st century. Things change and man is the most adaptable creature on the planet. This ability to adapt to all manner of change, is what makes our civilized society and our very existence so remarkable and so profound.

As a conservative, I don't agree with many of the laws enacted by past Congresses, especially those passed by Democratic controlled Congresses. Therefore, I will continue to work to elect more conservative Republicans to positions of public trust.

>>>A conservative and libertarian should have very little differences when it comes to federal government.

Libertarians, or libertarians have little in common with the politics of the modern conservative movement. The sooner you understand that, the better off you'll be. The Libertarian Platform is impractical idealism, that blindly advocates adherence to an unrealistic philosophy, which has a miniscule political following and a future that leads down a dead end road.

On matters that involve fiscal responsibility of the federal government, conservatives have always advocated real tax reform. The best way to stop excessive spending and excessive growth of the federal government, is to stop feeding the "beltway bureaucracy" that has funded liberal socialist programs for the last forty years. Politics is a slow process and one must have patience to see real change come about.

228 posted on 08/16/2002 8:59:57 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
When you call our original government archaic, and say times have changed and things change, I call a spade a spade--You are ok with a living breathing Constitution. You can call it anything you like but that is exactly the case. I still for the life of me do not realize you keep bring up the LP. Is that all you can try to do is belittle a party I have cast a total of one vote for and am not registered with? I could give a rats about any political party. The only part of the LP (national) platform that is impractical IMO has to do with borders and defense. If you are talking about state and local gov't then you may have a case.

libertarians may have little in common with the politics of YOUR view of conservatives but I can guarantee that if we were to do a poll of most conservatives saying are you
1)In favor of really reducing government (not just increase it less than the other guy)
2)Are you in favor of real tax reform
3)Should we decrease the size and power of the federal government and let the states decide on issues not mentioned in the Constitution
4)Do you like a nanny state?
Answering yes, yes, yes, no doesn't make you liberatarian of course but it means that there is a lot of common ground.

Vouchers, privatization of SS are both liberatarian ideas. I'm sure there are others.

Politics is a slow process and one must have patience to see real change come about.

I understand this but you seem to be missing the point. I expect it to move in the right direction. Increasing government year after year does not make elected 'conservatives' do any favors for their lip service on smaller government and real tax reform. I have no problem pulling the trigger for a Republican as long as they will vote to decrease our federal government ANY amount. Bush, etc are not doing that, they are just slightly less socialistic than Gore. That is hardly a ringing endorsement. For example just 20 years ago, the RP platform wanted to get rid of the NEA. Bush increased its spending by almost 10% this past year.

229 posted on 08/16/2002 9:17:23 AM PDT by rb22982
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Jim, What is the RLC's position on immigration?
230 posted on 08/17/2002 9:01:13 PM PDT by B4Ranch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
Wow, seems almost subversive when compared to the tripe fed to us from the national Republican Party. The disconnect betweent the elite and the grassroots has rarely been as pronounced as lately. I would dearly love to see these priciples espoused by the entire party.

There is the rub. The RLC says all the right things but they have little or no influence on the national Republican Party. The only party that openly accepts those principles is the Libertarian Party. So what is a good freedom loving patriot to do?

231 posted on 08/18/2002 6:25:40 AM PDT by Mike4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mark Bahner
North and South Korea were both authoritarian when they split. South Korea is now a democracy. G@d only knows when North Korea will be one. (Poor devils.)

Hunger can make people do the unexpected:

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/242/economy/North_Korea_agrees_to_reconnec%3A.shtml

232 posted on 08/30/2002 12:34:15 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: ThomasJefferson
The Republicans still get my vote for one reason, judicial appointments. The parties are not the same in this one, very key area.
233 posted on 08/30/2002 1:29:30 PM PDT by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Thanks Jim, I needed this post.
234 posted on 08/31/2002 7:07:02 AM PDT by M.K. Borders
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HAL9000
- Financial contributions to candidates campaigns should be restricted to registered voters

I would say that the constitution would be better served if the restriction would be for American born or Naturalized Citizens.

Lets face it, contributing is voting.

235 posted on 08/31/2002 7:11:38 AM PDT by M.K. Borders
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
The political philosophy and agenda you espouse is archaic and out of touch with the modern world. The federal government that ran early America, a nation of 4 million folks, would never work in todays complicated world environment.

That archaic political philosophy is personal liberty. If we don't have that, then we have tyranny. Are you really saying that the freedom protected by a strict interpretation of the constitution is no longer possible.

A living/breathing constitution is no constitution at all. We are seeing the results of interpreting it away as current conditions change. We have proceeded down that slippery slope to the point that a nominally conservative Republican President and his chosen Attorney General have decided that it is OK to arrest people, call them illegal combatants and keep them in jail indefinitely without any judicial review or possibility of recourse for error.

Do you understand that is all the tools necessary to "disappear" anyone, any time for no reason at all.

You may trust Bush to not abuse that authority, but he will not be President forever. What if a future Pres. Hillary Clinton gets to decide who is an illegal combatant?

236 posted on 08/31/2002 5:39:22 PM PDT by Mike4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: logos; Jim Robinson; spintreebob
The word "abortion" is not in the Constitution, but the Constitution is dependent upon an affirmation of the "right to life." The right to life is a federal issue and always has been, whatever courts have said. Government that does not grant the People's declared right to life clearly denies all other rights to those killed.

An assertion of rights and liberties, while neglecting the right and liberty for an innocent human being to live, indicates a philosophy that chooses to interpret the Constitution not holistically, but by the filter of personal liberties placed above mutual responsibility to our self-evident truths and to each other; a shift from American liberty toward baseless license.

Placing liberty above mutual responsibility also effectively begins to shift American government's functions away from those of a free republic accountable to Nature's God and in the direction of a tribunal of both personal liberties and personal license, whatever this tribunal's structure.
237 posted on 01/23/2003 1:04:57 PM PST by unspun ("..promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Wow! This one comes back from a long time ago...

The word "abortion" is not in the Constitution, but the Constitution is dependent upon an affirmation of the "right to life." The right to life is a federal issue and always has been, whatever courts have said. Government that does not grant the People's declared right to life clearly denies all other rights to those killed.

We're in total agreement. It was my point, however, that Roe v. Wade turned the Constitution on it's head, and if we're ever to return to government under the Constitution as intended we need to take some affirmative action to correct the error.

As horrendous and immoral and absolutely evil as the deaths attributed to Roe v. Wade are, the assault upon our Constitutional government by that decision is just as horrendous and immoral and absolutely evil.

238 posted on 01/23/2003 1:20:52 PM PST by logos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: logos
It's all from the same filthy cloth, eh?. And about another subject, from what I see in the 14th Amendment, I was defending it from an activist interpretation by a l/Libertarian, yesterday.

One correction of what I just wrote: fm. "grant the People's" to "uphold the People's."
239 posted on 01/23/2003 1:34:23 PM PST by unspun ("..promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
You see, the founding fathers did not shy away from declaring God is the ruler of nations...

Bullfeathers...IMHO, the Founding Fathers intended the Federal Government to be neutral toward religion (with the basic understanding that most of the people in the US are Christian, of course). Otherwise, they would have simply declared Christianity to be the official state religion. Instead, they saw fit to give us this:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

240 posted on 02/07/2003 4:18:27 AM PST by Rafterman1 (All your cheese-eating surrender monkeys are belong to us...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-262 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson