The Libertarian Party Platform Committee's job is to recommend changes to the platform, to be voted on by the delegates to our national convention.
Two years ago, based on survey feedback by thousands of you, the 2008 Platform Committee learned what type of platform you wanted. This critically important feedback helped us construct proposals to successfully rebuild our party platform in a new style – short, bold and outwardly focused, yet still in keeping with our core values.
Thanks to your input, the 2008 convention delegates were able to accomplish an amazing feat, getting the 2/3rds agreement necessary to rebuild a complete platform in a single convention day.
With the 2010 convention just around the corner, our convention delegates will soon be voting on improvements to the platform. This time the Platform Committee is focused more on polishing existing language, rather than venturing into new territory.
The 2010 Platform Committee met last month and adopted a series of 24 recommendations. By completing this new survey you will be able to share with us your thoughts on our recommendations, many of which were inspired by written comments received on the 2008 survey.
Your responses will be very helpful. If you identify important factors we overlooked, or if you can think of improvements for the proposals, the Committee will have an opportunity to modify our report when we meet again in St. Louis just before the convention in May.
Thank you for taking a few minutes to participate in the process by completing this survey which allows you to show support/opposition for each recommendation as well as an opportunity to provide comments on each.
Alicia Mattson
Platform Committee Chair
-------------------------------------------------
NOTES ABOUT THE SURVEY SOFTWARE: As a measure to prevent abuse of the online survey, at the end you will be asked provide a valid email address to which we can send a confirmation code. For reasons not always evident to us, sometimes due to spam filters, sometimes not, some people are not receiving the confirmation codes. If you do receive it, please use it to confirm your valid email address for us. If you do not receive it, don't worry...your survey answers ARE still saved, and your time was not wasted. The software merely files your record in a category for manual review to make sure the system isn't being abused before those records are added to the survey results.
-------------------------------------------------
LEGEND: Unchanged existing language - language to be added - language to be deleted
Recommendation 1 of 24
Plank 1.0 - Personal LibertyPurpose:
This amendment improves readability, protects our candidates from accusations on many subjects where we make no distinction between young children and adults, and removes the discussion of foreign affairs policy from a plank regarding Personal Liberty. Note that the non-initiation-of-force concept is already addressed in the 3.0 Securing Liberty plank.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.0 Personal Liberty
Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government. Our support of an individual's right to make choices in life does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices.
Libertarians recognize individual self-ownership and the right to make personal choices. Our support of an individual's right to make choices does not mean that we necessarily approve or disapprove of those choices. With rights come responsibilities, and individuals must accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make. Unlike adults, children realize certain rights as they mature and develop the ability to understand and accept responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Government exists to protect the rights of every individual.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 2 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of two proposed changes to the 1.1 Expression and Communication plank.
The existing language focuses on only some aspects of the First Amendment. This amendment incorporates other First Amendment issues.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.1 Expression and Communication
We support full freedom of expression and assembly, and to petition for redress of grievances. We oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religion.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 3 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of two proposed changes to the 1.1 Expression and Communication plank.
This edit improves the readability of the plank, without changing its basic meaning. Also, some of the existing language (e.g. “aid” and “attack”) comes across as either vague or strident.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.1 Expression and Communication
We support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology. We favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others. We oppose government actions which either aid supporting, subsidizing, or attack impeding any religion and favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 4 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of three proposed changes to the 1.2 Personal Privacy plank.
This proposal arose from concerns that the existing language implies our rights aren’t inherent, but rather exist because of their enumeration in the Bill of Rights.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.2 Personal Privacy
We support the protections provided rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL------------------------------- Recommendation 5 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of three proposed changes to the 1.2 Personal Privacy plank.
This proposal would add more direct coverage of some contemporary concerns, such as the Patriot Act. Recently we have also seen government require third parties, such as banks and retailers, to report certain personal information about us. If the government succeeds in creating single-payer healthcare, all of our medical records will belong to the government.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.2 Personal Privacy
We Libertarians support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 6 of 24
Purpose:
This is the third of three proposed changes to the 1.2 Personal Privacy plank.
There are many victimless crimes, but this plank highlights only the most controversial one. The next proposal below adds this exact phrase to the 1.5 Crime and Justice plank, where more readers are likely to look for our stance on the War on Drugs.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.2 Personal Privacy
We support the protections provided by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes. We favor the repeal of all laws creating "crimes" without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 7 of 24
Purpose:
This proposal completes the move of this language from the 1.2 Personal Privacy plank to the 1.5 Crime and Justice Plank, where more readers are likely to look for our stance on the War on Drugs.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.5 Crime and Justice
Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes. We support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. We oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 8 of 24
Purpose:
This proposal improves the readability of the first sentence, and it makes a change to refer to government’s treatment of individuals, since the government does not grant our rights. The opportunity was also taken to reorder the sentences to conclude the plank with a positive statement.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment rights of individuals by government, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 9 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of two proposed changes to the 1.6 Self-Defense plank.
The committee believes that the strength of the language is improved by making reference to the constitutional recognition of this individual right.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.6 Self-Defense
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 10 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of two proposed changes to the 1.6 Self-Defense plank.
The existing plank already deals with infringements on our rights to own firearms, but many states are also experiencing controversies over laws that tell certain business owners (e.g. privately-owned sports stadiums) they either must permit firearms on their property, or in other cases (e.g. restaurants serving alcohol) that they must prohibit firearms on their property.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
1.6 Self-Defense
The only legitimate use of force is in defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression. This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. We Libertarians affirm the right to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense. We oppose all laws at any level of government requiring registration of, or restricting, the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition. Private property owners should be free to establish their own conditions regarding the possession or use of personal defense weapons on their own property.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 11 of 24
Purpose:
The existing plank language describes the desired policies, but this proposal would add focus on the benefits derived from the policies, emphasizing that our solutions will improve people’s lives.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.0 Economic Liberty
Libertarians want all members of society to have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. A free and competitive market allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 12 of 24
Purpose:
The existing plank language dedicates too much space to stating platitudes rather than recommending policy.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.2 Environment
We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocacytes and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 13 of 24
Purpose:
The 2008 Platform Committee proposed this existing language “recycled” from older platforms as a placeholder, but knew it was inadequate and expected a future committee would revisit it. This proposal would add language for a free-market policy and show that we share the reader’s concerns.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.3 Energy and Resources
While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. We oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production.
Energy is needed to fuel a modern capitalistic society. Government should not be subsidizing any form of energy. Energy sources need to compete in an open and free market, which rewards new technological advances. Our current dependence on carbon-based fuel has led to our involvement in wars throughout the globe, threatened our national security, increased pollution, and diverted money that could be spent on finding new clean alternative energy options.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 14 of 24
Purpose:
The existing language bred confusion and concern among readers, as stated in some previous survey comments (e.g. “Does this mean we could pay our taxes in chickens?”). This proposal extracts some confusing language and clarifies the remnant.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.5 Money and Financial Markets
We favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money any mutually agreeable commodity or item. We support a halt to inflationary monetary policies, the repeal of legal tender laws and compulsory governmental units of account. and unconstitutional legal tender laws.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 15 of 24
Purpose:
This proposal improves the readability of the plank, which is somewhat stilted.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.8 Education
Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, therefore we would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, w. Without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children's education.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 16 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of two proposed changes to the 2.9 Health Care plank.
This proposal addresses a significant problem created by government interference in the health care markets. Under the tax code, there are advantages conferred to companies in providing tax-free health insurance benefit to employees, while it is not tax-free to individuals paying for their own health insurance. The consequence of this policy is people having non-portable insurance policies that terminate with their employment, leaving many individuals unable to obtain new insurance due to pre-existing conditions.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.9 Health Care
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. Individuals should not be penalized by health insurance related tax code inequities.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 17 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of two proposed changes to the 2.9 Health Care plank.
This proposal addresses a significant factor in the high cost and availability of health insurance. Many states create regulatory regimes for insurance that prevent carriers from competing across state lines. Not only does the lack of competition increase the cost of insurance to policy holders, but because some states mandate coverage for what otherwise would not be an insurable event (e.g. drug treatment programs), policyholders in those states are forced to underwrite the cost of others’ bad choices, rather than having the option to pay only for the risk of catastrophic loss (e.g. cancer).
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.9 Health Care
We favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. We recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions. People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 18 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of two proposed changes to the 2.10 Retirement and Income Security plank.
The existing language scares some readers who fear an immediate end to Social Security would cruelly leave elderly and disabled people in dire circumstances after it was too late for them to make alternate plans for their future welfare. This proposal offers more flexible language to give our candidates the option of advocating a more incremental approach, making our message more palatable to older voters.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.10 Retirement and Income Security
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians favor replacing would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to with a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 19 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of two proposed changes to the 2.10 Retirement and Income Security plank.
The existing language implies that our opposition to the welfare state is purely ideological. This proposal would clarify that our opposition to the welfare state is also because we care about helping those unable to help themselves.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
2.10 Retirement and Income Security
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. We Libertarians favor replacing the current government-sponsored Social Security system with a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 20 of 24
Purpose:
The existing language is arguably ambiguous because it can be read: The United States should both abandon its attempts to… avoid entangling alliances. This proposal would reorder the sentence to improve readability.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
3.1 National Defense
We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world and avoid entangling alliances. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 21 of 24
Purpose:
The existing language is not strictly true, in that both the Third Amendment and Fifth Amendment make exceptions for time of war. This proposal would correct the factual error.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
3.2 Internal Security and Individual Rights
The defense of the country requires that we have adequate intelligence to detect and to counter threats to domestic security. This requirement must not take priority over maintaining the civil liberties of our citizens. The Constitution and Bill of Rights shall not be suspended even during provides no exceptions for a time of war. Intelligence agencies that legitimately seek to preserve the security of the nation must be subject to oversight and transparency. We oppose the government's use of secret classifications to keep from the public information that it should have, especially that which shows that the government has violated the law.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 22 of 24
Purpose:
This is the first of two proposed changes to the 3.4 Free Trade and Migration plank.
This proposal merely clarifies that only credible threats should be considered for immigration restrictions.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 23 of 24
Purpose:
This is the second of two proposed changes to the 3.4 Free Trade and Migration plank.
Many libertarians responding to a previous platform survey stated they could better support our existing immigration plank if the welfare state were first abolished. This proposal would better address this issue by stating we welcome immigrants who are seeking a better life, but not those doing so at taxpayer expense. It also removes an internal contradiction in the existing language, in that one sentence appears to advocate no restriction, while a later sentence does impose conditions on entry.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
3.4 Free Trade and Migration
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial goods and capital across national borders. However, wWe support control over the prohibiting entry into our country of those foreign nationals who pose posing a credible threat to security, health or property. We invite those not requiring public assistance to come to our country to embrace the American dream.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
Recommendation 24 of 24
Purpose:
The 2008 Platform Committee proposed this existing language “recycled” from older platforms to fill a gap in the platform, but it includes too many issues having little to do with Rights and Discrimination (private thoughts about bigotry, parenting decisions), and could even be read to mean that parents have a right to abuse their children. This proposed rewrite of the plank would focus on the stated subjects of the plank.
------------------------------START OF PROPOSAL------------------------------
3.5 Rights and Discrimination
We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should not deny or abridge any individual's rights based on sex, wealth, race, color, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs.
Libertarians embrace the concept that humans are born with inherent rights. We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that "right." Government should neither deny or abridge any individual's right, nor create or enhance individual privileges, based upon sex, wealth, race, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation.
-------------------------------END OF PROPOSAL-------------------------------
