Mediaboss Marketing

Public DomainWhen President Ronald Reagan nominated Robert Bork to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1987, he praised his nominee for being "widely regarded as the most prominent and intellectually powerful advocate of judicial restraint."

It was no exaggeration. During his decades-long career as a law professor, federal judge, and legal commentator, Bork routinely preached the virtues of a deferential judiciary, arguing that in the vast majority of cases "the only course for a principled Court is to let the majority have its way."

Where Bork led, most legal conservatives were ready to follow. Judicial deference, or restraint, became a rallying cry on the legal right.

Borkean deference still holds sway today in many quarters. But it is also increasingly under fire from libertarian-minded legal thinkers who want the courts to play a more aggressive role in defense of individual liberty and against overreaching majorities.

Case in point: The new issue of Governing magazine profiles Don Willett, the Texas Supreme Court justice who recently appeared on Donald Trump's shortlist of potential U.S. Supreme Court candidates. Willett "is witty and approachable, and he's huge on Twitter," writes journalist Alan Greenblatt. "He's also one of the most influential jurists in the country right now."

Willett's rising influence signals Bork's declining favor. It shows that libertarian legal ideas are gaining ground.

To be sure, Bork and Willett are both "conservative" and both have ties to the Republican Party. But they differ in important ways. Bork wanted judicial minimalism; Willett wants judicial engagement. "The State would have us wield a rubber stamp rather than a gavel," Willett complained in the 2015 case of Patel v. Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, "but a written constitution is mere meringue if courts rotely exalt majoritarianism over constitutionalism."

Texas Supreme CourtAs Greenblatt notes in his profile, "Willett is pretty blunt about his overall intent. He's a champion of individual rights, claiming a central role for the judiciary in protecting those rights against state encroachment." Bork, by contrast, was obsessed with limiting the judiciary's role. If Bork's great enemy was judicial activism, Willett's great enemy is judicial pacifism.

The differences don't stop there. According to Bork's interpretation, the 14th Amendment offers zero constitutional protection for economic liberty, which means that the courts have no business striking down government regulations on 14th Amendment grounds. Since the amendment does not explicitly refer to economic liberty, Bork reasoned, it does not protect it. When "the Constitution does not speak," he insisted, we are "all at the mercy of legislative majorities."

Willett takes a different view. "The Fourteenth Amendment's legislative record," he has pointed out, "is replete with indications that 'privileges or immunities' encompassed the right to earn a living free from unreasonable government intrusion."

Willett has even thrown shade in Bork's direction: "A conservative luminary, Bork is heir to a Progressive luminary, Justice Holmes, who also espoused judicial minimalism. Both men believed the foremost principle of American government was not individual liberty but majoritarianism." Willett clearly ranks individual liberty first.

Thirty years ago, when Borkian judicial deference was in its heyday, the conservative legal mainstream was largely hostile to libertarian legal ideas. That Don Willett is now championing those same ideas and is at the same time under possible consideration for a Supreme Court seat demonstrates just how far the dial has moved in a libertarian direction.

Read more here:
From Bork to Willett: Is the Conservative Legal Movement Going Libertarian? - Reason (blog)

Getting into writing can be quite daunting for people, but it is easier than ever before to be a writer. The internet has placed virtually all the information of consequence known to anyone at our fingertips. So it is vitally important for all those libertarian writers who feel so inclined, to be active.

With this article I hope to get some hesitant aspiring libertarian writers, or writers who have already started but are still unsure about some things, to put pen to paper.

This is simply a collection of those things which have helped me throughout my writing career and which I have told people when they asked me for advice. I am not a journalist or a literary scholar, so everything you will read here comes from my personal experience in writing. I have also had the privilege of being the editor in chief of two publications: The Rational Standard, South Africas only libertarian publication, and, of course, Being Libertarian. But dont see these tips as the only set of valid tips, as many different things work for many different people.

This list is also not comprehensive. These tips are merely some of my thoughts, and if pressed, I might be able to share many others.

This is the most important tip I hope aspiring libertarian writers take to heart.

While research and fact-checking are by default important for any type of writer, overthinking your endeavor can at best lead to significant delay, and at worst to abandonment. If you are unable to verify something dont worry, writing op-eds is not academic writing. Tell your readers that you were unable to verify it, but explain why you believe it to be true regardless. Make an argument; dont get hung up on the numbers, especially if you are writing from the perspective of Austrian economics. Dont, however, be dishonest or try to hide the fact that you couldnt find empirical evidence from your readers.

Also try to set limits on the scope of your article. I will address brevity below, but here it is important that you not consider your article to be the final word on a given topic. You do not need to explain everything you say at length. Assume your readers have a hunger to do some reading on the topic elsewhere!

The most important thing you should do, however, is to just start writing. Put your ideas on paper, and see what happens.

Remember, you are not writing an academic paper where you are investigating something. You already have a message you want to get across.

Start your article by writing down your core thought usually your conclusion and build it around that. For example, if you think minimum wage laws would hurt unskilled workers, start your article by writing exactly that. Your lead-up and introduction will come later, but you need to ensure the core message you want to convey appears in the text of the article in a similar way it came to your mind; usually brief and in understandable language.

We are ordinarily taught that conclusions need to be at the end of the text, but when writing articles, its important to get your message across in the very first paragraph, to ensure even those people who dont read the entire text have at least seen the most important information. This is known as the lede or lead of the article, and is essentially like a preface in a book.

The next paragraph, whether it has a heading or not, will usually be your introduction.

Many other editors will disagree with me on this point, but I must re-emphasise, again, that you are not writing an academic paper which requires extensive justification for your assertions. In ordinary articles, this is not necessary, depending on your audience. If you are writing to a libertarian audience, you usually do not need to explain at length why the State is a violent institution, for example.

The best length of an article has been said to be 500 to 800 words. Any longer than this might cause ordinary readers to bookmark your article to read later something which doesnt always happen. Longer articles, however, certainly have their place, and this will usually depend on what you intend your article to be a summary, a comprehensive analysis, a manifesto and whether or not you are commenting on something timely or timeless.

Many writers are very concerned about the responses they get to their articles. This is good, as this is how a market ordinarily functions. However, just like a company should be free to determine for itself how to do things, should a writer not submit himself entirely to the whims of his readers.

Be conscious of what your readers think about your work, but dont let that get in the way of continuing to do what youre doing. After all, you have an idea youre trying to sell, and just because others are not willing to buy it doesnt mean you have to stop. Otherwise, libertarians would be in big trouble!

Dont be afraid of preaching your message to the converted.

Libertarians often need to have our core principles put to us in different ways, or simply reminded of our core principles in the first place, which sometimes get lost in the academization of libertarianism. By reading others interpretations or conveyances of our principles, we can also learn how to more effective market our ideas.

Another common concern libertarian writers often have is that they have already written an article on a given topic, or that one of their colleagues wrote one, and thus they feel they shouldnt do so again or as well.

Repackage your previous article. Write it in a different way. Look at the topic from another angle. Or dont; write it from the same angle, but in response to a different event. But never think that it is not necessary to write something just because it has already been written about, by you or someone else. Libertarian ideas are not winning or widely known, so it is fair to say that most people probably have not read about that topic you think has been exhausted.

I left this one for last, as it tends to upset quite a number of new and even experienced writers.

It takes years for columnists to get paid a significant amount or any amount of money for writing. You should not set out to write because you want to get paid there is an oversupply of people who want to give their opinions for money. As an up and coming libertarian writer, you should always humble yourself, as you are part of an era where sharing your ideas with virtually everyone else in the world is easier than it has ever been. Imagine: Your ideas can reach further than the dictates of kings and dictators just a few hundred years ago.

We are all capitalists, and that means we believe that one shouldnt expect time and effort from someone else with some kind of reciprocity. However, being capitalists, we also accept the principle of value subjectivity and reject the labor theory of value. This means, principally, that other people must value being able to see your opinion more than they value the amount the paywall charges. But it also means that you have to value your time and effort more than you value writing for the libertarian cause and spreading our ideas. And this, for an up and coming writer, is not recommended. You should want to write because you have something meaningful to say and you want to share it with others.

Too many writers have argued that non-monetary payment does not qualify as payment. To up and coming libertarian writers, the payment offered by a platform is often the platform itself, with a potentially massive audience just waiting to be exposed to your brand and ideas. It is, unfortunately, quite one-dimensional to perceive payment in currency as the only valid type of payment. If your problem is putting food on the table, writing opinion articles might not be the best way to ensure that happens.

Keep at it consistently and develop yourself, and the money will come eventually.

* Disclosure: At the time of writing I was ill with a cold and sinusitis. Please excuse me if some of my writing here seems more abrupt than usual.

This post was written by Martin van Staden.

The views expressed here belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect our views and opinions.

Martin van Staden is the Editor in Chief of Being Libertarian, the Legal Researcher at the Free Market Foundation, a co-founder of the RationalStandard.com, and the Southern African Academic Programs Director at Students For Liberty. The views expressed in his articles are his own and do not represent any of the aforementioned organizations.

Like Loading...

Link:
8 Tips for New and Aspiring Libertarian Writers The Chief's Thoughts - Being Libertarian

Young Americans are usually thought of as decidedly liberal. This is an oversimplified picture. A sizeable minority of Millennials identify as conservative. Despite some evidence that Millennial conservatives lean left on social issues, it would be wrong to write all of them off as libertarians. Some young conservatives, in fact, hold anti-libertarian attitudes, and their numbers may be increasing.

Plainly speaking, these young conservatives hold socially and culturally conservative views. On the other hand, they are wary of individualism and free markets. They are not necessarily anti-capitalist, but fear that laissez-faire economic systems can be excessively cutthroat, prizing individual material gain above the wellbeing of the community.

This strain of conservative thought is closely related to the traditionalism of Russell Kirk, the 20th-century conservative political theorist who authored The Conservative Mind. Kirk identified ten foundational conservative principles. The first principle states that conservatives believe in an enduring moral order. Moral truths do not change with the times, and neither does human nature. Conservatives are champions, he continues, of custom, convention, and continuity because they prefer the devil they know to the devil they dont know.

Conservatives value private property because it is closely linked to freedom, but argue that getting and spending are not the chief aims of human existence. Decisions directly affecting members of a community should be made locally and voluntarily. Regarding governance, conservatives recognize that human passions must be restrained: Order and liberty must be balanced. Moreover, a conservative favors reasoned and temperate progress, but does not worship Progress as some type of magical force.

Young, anti-libertarian conservatives represent a new generation of traditionalists. And they are increasingly prominent on some college campuses.

Christian McGuire, a student at Virginias Patrick Henry College and editor-in-chief of the George Wythe Review, spoke to National Review about the schools conservative climate, saying the whole campus is fairly conservative. Patrick Henry College is a Christian school, so faith strongly influences students political views. McGuire says most students come from a background of religious conservatism, and feel as ifthey have been left out of the national discussion. More bluntly, he claims most of Patrick Henry College realizes we lost the culture war.

In response, McGuire and his fellow conservative classmates have started to turn to traditionalist thinkers such as Kirk. McGuire mentioned other increasingly popular thinkers among campus conservatives: Edmund Burke and G. K. Chesterton. Even Catholic social teaching is influencing some students. They are finding that these are rich sources of conservative thought.

When asked whether monarchist sentiments could be found on campus, McGuire responded firmly: Yes, absolutely. Though still very much a minority view at Patrick Henry College, some traditionalist-minded students are open to the idea of a king.

Traditionalist sentiments can also be found almost 600 miles northwest of Patrick Henry College, at the University of Notre Dame. Mimi Teixeira, a student at Notre Dame and vice president of the schools Young Americans for Freedom chapter, told National Review there is a sizeable group of students inclined to traditionalism. They are more interested in, and connected to, the Catholic faith and Catholic social teaching, she says. Besides Burke and Kirk, Pope Saint John Paul II is a powerful influence on this group.

The Notre Dame traditionalists are skeptical of classical liberalism. We do have a group of conservatives, she says, who dont agree with the Enlightenment. They contend classical liberalism is missing a piece.

Notre Dame isnt the only Catholic university with a sizeable number of young traditionalists. The Catholic University of America, in Washington, D.C., is home to many students who could be understood as profoundly traditional, according to Friar Israel-Sebastian N. Arauz-Rosiles,O.F.M. Conv., a seminarian at the university. The schools Catholic identity deeply influences how students think. He describes Saint Thomas Aquinas as probably the single most influential thinker on the university campus, in terms of his impact onstudents theological and political outlook.

Friar Israel has noticed that some students attend a yearly Mass in honor of Blessed Karl of Austria celebrated at Saint Mary Mother of God Church in Washington, D.C. A member of the House of Habsburg-Lorraine, Blessed Karl of Austria was the last emperor of Austria and king of Hungary. Friar Israel acknowledges this mightmerely represent a superficial interest in Catholic monarchy. Nevertheless, he has encountered a number of students who reject classical liberalism and such political theorists asThomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

At Hillsdale College in Michigan, traditionalist conservatism has many adherents. Michael Lucchese, a senior at Hillsdale, says lots of people come in libertarian, and come out hardcore traditionalist. They reject, he continues, the sort of free-markets-will-solve-everything mentality of libertarianism in favor of a more traditional conservatism. Hillsdale students are exposed to the Great Books of the Western canon, including texts by Plato and Aristotle. Russell Kirk, Alasdair MacIntyre, and Leo Strauss also influence Hillsdale students. Lucchese added that C. S. Lewis is the most uncontroversial figureon campus, beloved by everybody.

Like McGuire, Lucchese reports that some students are sympathetic to monarchism, especially in the history department. Pointedly, he says many students are dissatisfied with the modern world. They recoil at the prevalence of sexual immorality and the atomism at the heart of liberal capitalism. Traditionalism looks to higher, permanent things such astruth, goodness, and beauty. Students see that as more fulfilling than what the modern world has to offer.

Traditionalist conservatism is not establishing deep roots on all campuses. Marlo Safi, a student at the University of Pittsburgh and editor-in-chief of The Pitt Maverick, told National Review that most conservatives there are of a libertarian bent. I have only met maybe five people, she says, whom I would call traditionalists in the vein of Russell Kirk. Most conservative students prefer to talk about Milo Yiannopoulos and people who are currently on the scene, says Safi.

Similarly, Anthony Palumbo, editor-in-chief of the Wake Forest Review, told National Review theres not much traditionalist conservatism at Wake Forest. Most conservatives at Wake Forest care little about social and cultural issues, preferring to promote free-market economics.

Among students, traditionalist conservatism seems to be especially common at Catholic universities and smaller Christian colleges. These young traditionalists question the idea of Progress, and express discontent with the modern world. They find value in community, and their views are usually rooted in faith. The Left may be winning the culture wars, but these students keep the flame of traditional morality ablaze. They reject libertarianism, especially what they see as its excessive faith in free markets and individual material gain. They often look to similar thinkers for inspiration: political theorists such as Russell Kirk, statesmen such as Edmund Burke, philosophers such as Plato, numerous Catholic intellectuals, and others.

They are not quite a monolithic group. Not all of them are monarchists, for example. The degree to which they are skeptical of classical liberalism also differs. Some are very much opposed to Locke and Rousseau; others are more cautious in their criticism.

The presence of traditionalist conservatism among college students reveals that some young Americans reject the vocal liberalism and libertarianism of their peers. More than that, however, these young traditionalists fear that the modern world has gone astray. They are the vanguard of a new generation standing athwart history, trying to reorient Americans toward ideas and ideals thatnourish the whole person: community, truth, goodness, and beauty.

READ MORE: The Strange Traditionalism of the LiberalElite Did William F. Buckleys Conservative Project End in Failure? The End of Reaganism

Jeff Cimmino is a student of history at Georgetown University and an editorial intern at National Review.

View post:
Traditionally conservative college students reject the vocal liberalism and libertarianism of their peers. - National Review

Dennis Fusaro, a libertarian activist, and Steve Waters were found not guilty by a jury of their own peers for illegal free speech. The men had sent a robocall back in 2014 to 5,000 people in Anne Arundel County, Maryland on the weekend before an important election. The robocall congratulated Democratic County Council candidate Patrick Armstrong for his bravery in coming out of the closet after he supported a transgender bathroom mandate.

Transgenders can now openly and freely go into any bathroom of their choice based on their confused gender identity, the obviously satirical script for the robocall read. Tell Patrick to continue to stand loud and proud in support for transgenders equal rights. While our opponent argued that children could be at risk by sexual predators with this new law, we celebrate the rights of transgenders and what this does for equality for transgenders in Maryland.

Armstrongs Republican opponent, Michael Anthony Peroutka, employed Fusaro but denied any knowledge of the robocall. He won the election, but Fusaros tactics were deemed illegal by the state and he was brought up on charges.

The call in question failed to identify Fusaro and Waters as the persons responsible for the call, and failed to state whether it was authorized by any candidate, prosecutors said in a statement. Instead, the call falsely stated that it was Paid for and authorized by Marylanders for Transgenders.' Additionally, the men used burner phones for the robocall which was said to be an underhanded attempt to conceal their identity.

Fusaro and Waters were charged with violating and conspiring to violate the authority line requirements of Maryland election laws. Each charge carried up to one year in prison and a maximum fine of $5,000. Despite the facts of the case being rather clear, the jury made the decision to acquit both men. It is believed that the jury nullified the Draconian restrictions against political free speech on the books in the state of Maryland.

The Office of the Maryland Special Prosecutor decides which procedural mistakes are hammered and which are not. That gives them substative message control by using their procedural power, Fusaro said in a statement released to Target Liberty. Taxpayers in Maryland who are concerned with their first amendment rights should rise up and have that office shut down by petitioning their legislature for redress of grievances.

Fusaro, always the libertarian rabble-rouser, is best known for releasing embarrassing audio of former Ron Paul campaign manager Jesse Benton talking about holding his nose to support Sen. Mitch McConnell after joining his campaign. Because of the concept of jury nullification, Fusaro will be unabated in his activist work stirring up trouble for politicians.

Enjoyed the article? Make a contribution to support our work via Patreon!

Read more:
Jury Nullification Used To Free Libertarian Activist In Maryland - The Liberty Conservative

Our guest bill read path the Izzy former national libertarian national party immediate past treasurer currently the at large representative on the national committee to make it electric bill. He gets but I'm one of five that large reps not the only one but I. A connect so. Again a unit to space and we talked about the old. I'll come off its I got a text here. A bill that says the Libertarian Party is but he plan is basically every man for himself is is that which you guys are saying. No I don't think so it'll I think that. I mean do you do if its people are free do they sit by themselves alone all the time now. That is that is not decay but it is the voluntary system there's definitely going to be charity and voluntary system. I think that that you bite that we would increase the supply of healthcare I'd like to know why people who are up. Shall we say competent and not Smart enough to go to medical school. Why are they going to medical school in other there shouldn't be that we we ought to have more medical school in more training. Because we've got a shortage is my understanding in the future healthcare professionals. And and in the past there have been limits you know basically on the proper medical schools in and the number positions in medical school that ought not to be the case. I happen to note someone. Who scored in the ninth percentile. On the impact exam medical college admission test and is having trouble getting in the medical school now I don't know the full story behind. But but I know of instances where people finding it difficult to get into medical school would truly be regulated. System I think. Pick the anybody who is it is. Potentially competent enough to be a healthcare professional. Shouldn't have an opportunity to it to be trying to as we we certainly need. More positions and other medical personal going forward. So essentially would which are saying it is. All of this would be left up to the insurance companies to decide on pre existing conditions returning the etc. it's that are turning eight. Again I think that they're intact but I said earlier there were insurance development. That were happening in the private sector to proper people. In the future so depicted on insurance that the condition develop it could buy insurance at standard rates. And this sort of Spain was absolutely want. By the passage of the Affordable Care Act. In twenty tent and there are all sorts of development that could occur and I think would occur in a more cried it. Privately oriented medical marketplace that are not going to Kirk. Win again everything is being order from Washington according cup which is. And things of that nature. Millman asking this because some people are asking is well what exactly and and I know you guys are trying to get your message out to for the last election. Woods a Libertarian Party stand for or represent. It's a combination of conservative positions on economic issues and liberal positions on social issues but there is they were being. And that is we want to reduce the use of government co worker in society consequently we want to reduce government spending. Reduce taxation and have a real respect for civil liberties and that's. Big picture that's what we stand for. So that's basically along the lines we do show earlier this week that said. Most people most voters identified themselves as fiscally conservative and socially liberal. So that's kind of along the lines of which are saying I. It yet I would say though it doesn't seem to manifest itself that way ultimately end. Election results but I do you think that there is pretty significant. Percentage of the population Andy growing percentage of the population. That would agree with that. All right sold. Do you seize the Libertarian Party gaining ground now especially is what's happening in Washington with health care isn't that a good thing for you guys that we're having arguments. Well I think that it's. It's not just that I think it's a number of things right now including dissatisfaction with Donald Trump. As president dissatisfaction with Hillary Clinton as the other all party nominee for president. I think it's a number of things right now that the libertarian parties that number of registered voters across the United States people are registered as libertarians. Is growing. While it's absolutely shrieking for the Democrats and Republicans they'll certainly our voting system. Single member plurality voting single member legislative districts Corson with the most votes wins. Sabres two party system I mean that's that's our voting system but essentially propped up the Republican and democratic parties that we are making headway. And more and more people are. Calling themselves libertarians. I used to get a twenty point like yours ago I would beat the question all Ole hole like what's the libertarian. But I think that less and less these days because. The word is getting now as to what libertarians stand pork. And more and more people are are coming to think of themselves as libertarians registering to vote libertarian and getting people with the military and party. Bill read. Path is our guest from the libertarian national party and world go take a good tickle your mark on a cell phones got a question about healthcare it mark thanks for calling WL. Right. Court should era it is. And congress work out here why is that they don't include them fail. And and and health care beat out. If they that they cannot ruler word about it together I'll grow because there are. Bill you wanna take that you want me to answer them. Well. Well that it's not just health care I mean day excluded themselves. From many pieces of legislation. I don't know how many probably thousands of pieces of legislation over the years it has been common. Congress to exempt itself. From that law. And the Republicans have put something into the obamacare bill that would put them all along obamacare and we we talked about this earlier this week too when they got around that. So that's why they're not on there because the president had threatened to put the ball there and it's that's a whole another topic to give him two more but yeah they they basically exempted themselves with it. All right thanks for the call mark Skoda love Matty and Baton Rouge hey Matt thanks for collender VW. And dark our our Western Europe and Panama by the year. Why do we. Incher dropped me feel like it in on though and now they're human or given a money. But no reason. When you add up all the money there and that your market leader eliminate there and they're but it. Have more money on what went money come out torture goes directly or are there any Q curve where I mean we got a lot more popular than higher. There are new out there and Mario are. Well I I think. What has happened slowly but surely is that. Help keep your insurance. Has become less and less. Insurance as it is typically bought I mean if if we had insurance for catastrophic. Occurrences. Then. You concede the point. You know I current account your paying money to health insurance company and then they're turning around and get to the doctor well the thing is that people should be paying. And on trivial amount out of their own pockets I mean the third party payers are huge part of the financial system yet that medical financial system in the United States and in 1960. It was roughly 60%. Of medical care payments to seeing from into the will now that sounds something like 11%. Third party payment is gone from about 50%. To 90%. Over the last fifty to sixty years and I can see your point I think that we ought to get back to a situation. We're people are paying for their small healthcare needs and take on insurance for. Bigger. Payments situations catastrophic. Medical within its and and get back to a more traditional. Meaning the insurance in our medical system. All right locker you don't. All right thank. Thank thank you Matt thanks for intranet WWL 504260187. New York and Texas that 87870. Anderson Tex coming saying ditched the insurance middleman. Locker last caller saying. Here's that's his libertarian is and gave us things like child labored reversal polluted they actually caught on fire no thanks would use say if that bill. No IE that note I certainly libertarians. Forcible think we. Need to have a clean environment bat that he is simply not the case cost benefit analyses need to be applied but I can assure you that libertarians. Do not think that. We should you know abusing and fired at. But and with respect child labor laws libertarians are not proposing to do away with child. Late August so that a city and think man distinction of the past and I I don't know anybody associated to libertarians. Party whose boats back. Another Texas what's your screen classic liberal and libertarians and I think you you probably get that question a lot right. Opting not much tried and I carry lip. Well I mean you can digitally classical music classic between liberal and the retirees 00 okay that the term liberal used to mean libertarian yours ago you know. Our book for two today media classical liberals I'd say the difference between. Modern day liberals and libertarians. Really is in the economic world that libertarians are. Conservative on economic issues between paper free market and light and government spending and regulation. While liberals tend to. One. More regulation and not be so much and paper economic freedom. All right bill read had anything else you wanted to let us know about. Libertarian party's plans for the future. Well we're we got the best ballot access coming out of the Johnson will campaign last year we've now got ballot status and 37 states. Including Louisiana and people can but urged people find out more about the party enjoyed incumbent ball to our web site is guilty dot org. All right. Bill read path former national chairman of libertarian national party immediate past treasurer and currently one of the Allard represented on the national committee. Thanks much for taking time with us here on WW Olin talking about these issues. Todd thank you for having me thank you very much.

See original here:
What is the Libertarian plan for healthcare? Segment 2 | WWL - WWL First News