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

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>