Archive for the ‘Libertarian’ Category

Councilman Terrance Freeman wins re-election to Jacksonville City … – The Tributary

City Council President Terrance Freeman. [The Tributary]

Jacksonville City Council President Terrance Freeman won re-election as the At-Large Group 1 councilman, fending off a challenge from Libertarian Eric Parker.

Freeman, a Republican, was first appointed to the council by then-Gov. Rick Scott in 2018. He was initially appointed to represent a heavily Democratic district, but in 2019, Freeman switched to the countywide At-Large seat.

The Jacksonville City Council comprises 14 neighborhood-based districts and five at-large council members who are voted on countywide.

Freeman has overseen the City Council while it has faced a racial-gerrymandering lawsuit. Under his leadership, the council decided to fight the lawsuit aggressively and has lost repeatedly in federal court. The city is still appealing the courts decision to order new districts drawn by civil-rights plaintiffs, including the Jacksonville Branch of the NAACP.

Parker, an electronics technician, was one of three Libertarians running for City Council. Parker earned the largest share of the vote for a Libertarian in the citys history.

Related

Visit link:
Councilman Terrance Freeman wins re-election to Jacksonville City ... - The Tributary

Whos Behind the Judicial Overhaul Now Dividing Israel? Two Americans. – The New York Times

As part of a recent national day of resistance, a group of army reservists wearing masks converged at the Jerusalem office of a think tank and blocked its front door with sandbags and coils of barbed wire. Outside, protesters led a noisy rally on the street, waving dozens of placards and sharing a microphone for a series of furious speeches.

The Kohelet Policy Forum has been hiding in the shadows, shouted one speaker, standing atop a car. But we are onto them and we will not let them win!

For years, Kohelet quietly churned out position papers, trying to nudge government policy in a more libertarian direction. Then, starting in January, it became more widely known as one of the principal architects of the judicial overhaul proposalthat has plunged Israel into a crisis over the future of its democracy.

If the plan succeeds, it would be a stunning victory not only for the think tank, but also for the people behind it: two guys from Queens.

The first is Moshe Koppel, a 66-year-old mathematics Ph.D. who grew up in New York City and moved to Israel in 1980. He founded Kohelet in 2012 and has been drafting laws and producing conservative and libertarian policy papers with a roster of full- and part-time scholars that now numbers 160.

I dont want to sound arrogant, he told Ami, the Orthodox Jewish magazine, in 2019, but in some sense were the brains of the Israeli right wing.

Kohelet is not required to disclose the names of individual donors, and for years Mr. Koppel has artfully deflected questions aboutfunding.

But one source of money is a second New Yorker: Arthur Dantchik, a 65-year-old multibillionaire who has donated millions to Kohelet, according to people familiar with his philanthropic giving. Mr. Dantchik did not return a call for comment.

American money and ideas, from the left and the right, have played a perennial role in Israeli politics. Today, American consultants are a regular feature of election campaigns, and the American-backed Israel Hayom, a free daily, is the countrys most widely read newspaper.

Until recently, though, few knew that the nation-rattling judicial proposals were largely an American production.

Whatchanges are being proposed? Israels right-wing government wants to change the makeup of a committee that selects judgesto give representatives and appointees of the government a majority. The legislation would also restrict the Supreme Courts ability to strike down laws passed by Parliament and weaken the authority of the attorney general, who is independent of the government.

What do opponents of the plan say? The front opposing the legislation, which includes Israelis largely from the center and left,argues that the overhaul would deal a mortal blow to the independence of the judiciary, which they view as the only check on government power. They say that the legislation would change the Israeli system from a liberal democracy with protections for minorities to a tyranny of majority rule.

Where does Benjamin Netanyahu stand? In the past, Netanyahu, Israels current prime minister, was a staunch defender of the independence of the courts. His recent appointment of Yariv Levin, a leader of the judicial overhaul, to the role of justice minister signaled a turnaround, even though Netanyahu publicly promised that any changes would be measured and handled responsibly.

Is there room for compromise? The politicians driving the plan said they were prepared to talk and a group of academics and lawmakers, in the meantime, met behind the scenes for weeks to find a compromise. On March 15, the government rejected a compromise by Issac Herzog, the president of Israel, that was dismissed by Netanyahu soon after it was published.

The plan, which has spurred hundreds of thousands of Israelis to weekly protests, would give the government far greater control over the selection of judges and would make it harder for the Supreme Court to strike down laws passed by legislators.

Negotiations which included Kohelet for a scaled-back version of the judicial overhaul that would satisfy a broader swath of the Israeli public appear to be on hold for now. The government is determined to push at least some of its proposals through Parliament by early April.

Opponents of the overhaul say the courts are all that prevent Israel from devolving into a country with no checks on government power and no protection for minorities. Mr. Koppel and his allies believe that the real threat to Israeli democracy is activist judges, who, he says, now operate virtually without constraint.

While prominent in Israels conservative political circles for years, Mr. Koppel has long worked to maintain the lowest possible profile.

I discovered that you get an awful lot more done, he said during a rare interview at Kohelets headquarters, if you let others get the credit than if you insist on announcing your contribution.

Mr. Dantchik has for decades remained about as invisible as a man with his fortune can be. (With an estimated net worth of $7.2 billion, he ranks higher on the Forbes 400 list than marquee tycoons like Mark Cuban and George Soros.) He is a co-founder of Susquehanna International Group, a privately held financial powerhouse based in a sprawling campus in a suburb of Philadelphia, with offices around the world. The company has never taken outside investors, limiting what it is required to publicly disclose about the markets in which it operates options, equities, cryptocurrency and sports betting.

They are as quiet as a church mouse, said Paul Rowady of Alphacution, a research group that specializes in proprietary trading firms. These guys dont like to talk, and they dont want anyone in their business.

Mr. Dantchiks connection to Kohelet was first published in an article in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, based on reporting by the Democratic Bloc, a nonprofit in Israel that largelymonitorsright-winggroups.

We spent months searching for a clue that would lead us back to the origins of the money, said Ran Cohen, the Democratic Blocs director. It was a maze of nontransparent U.S. companies and charities.

The groups research found that funds to Kohelet came through a 501(c)(3) called the American Friends of Kohelet Policy Forum, which was originally based in Bala Cynwyd, the same suburb as Susquehanna. Two of the nonprofits directors are siblings of Mr. Koppels wife. The third, Amir Goldman, works at Susquehanna Growth Equity, a private equity arm of Susquehanna International.

After Haaretz published its feature in March 2021, the Democratic Bloc found that the primary conduit for funds to Kohelet changed.

A financial disclosure report filed in Israel by the think tank in April of that year showed that more than 90 percent of its $7.2 million in income came from the Central Fund of Israel, a family-run nonprofit that gave $55 million to more than 500 Israel-related causes in 2021, according to its website.

In previous reporting on Kohelets funding, Mr. Dantchik was cited as a key donor along with Jeff Yass. Mr. Yass is a fellow co-founder of Susquehanna and a prolific conservative political donor in the United States, whose net worth has been estimated by Forbes at $28.5 billion.

But people familiar with giving by both men say that Mr. Yass has never been a Kohelet donor. He declined to comment for this article.

Should some form of the Kohelet-backed overhaul go through, Mr. Koppel would become an improbable godfather of a refashioned Israeli judiciary.

He is not a jurist, nor did he attend law school. Before he turned to politics, his expertise was in machine learning. A lean man with a graying beard and the faint remnants of a New York City accent, Mr. Koppel lives in a relatively upscale settlement in the southern West Bank, one filled with plenty of transplanted Americans.

Even many of his detractors like him personally, and most open with this assessment: Hes brilliant. One of his gifts is describing policy positions and himself in ways that make both sound eminently reasonable.

You see Im wearing a kippah on my head, but Im not in favor of religious coercion in any form whatsoever, he said in a recent interview on the podcast Two Nice Jewish Boys.

He would not say how he connected with Mr. Dantchik, who grew up in Queens and graduated from the State University of New York at Binghamton with a degree in biology.

Mr. Dantchiks roommate there was Mr. Yass, a friend from high school, and the men bonded over a shared love of poker. The two moved to Las Vegas after graduation to become professional players, with modest success. They later lugged briefcases filled with cash from a consortium of like-minded gamblers to make thousands of small bets on long-shot combinations at horse tracks. In 1985, at Sportsmans Park in Cicero, Ill., they won $764,284, then one of the largest payouts in U.S. racing history.

The pair started Susquehanna in 1987 with a handful of friends. Poker, with its emphasis on probabilities and decision making under pressure, remains so central to Susquehannas culture that its monthslong training program includes weeks of Texas hold em.

Former Susquehanna employees say Mr. Dantchik is a much-admired character at the company quiet, warm and exceptionally generous.

He ran the training program when I started, said Francis Wisniewski, who joined Susquehanna in 1993 and stayed for a decade. My grandfather died during it, and he offered me his Audi so I could immediately drive four hours home. He said, Ill get a cab. You take my car. Thats just the way he was.

If money talks, it is apparently the only way Mr. Dantchik does so in public. What is revealed through his public philanthropy is a man interested in supporting mostly moderate Republican politicians; he has given approximately $850,000 to political candidates and groups that disclose their donors, according to data provided by OpenSecrets.org.

Far more of his giving is channeled through the Claws Foundation, which is based in Reston, Va., and lists Mr. Dantchik and Mr. Yass as two of its directors. The latest Claws Foundation filing with the I.R.S., which appears on ProPublicas site, reported that the organization gave $36 million to more than 30 recipients, including theaters, hospitals, synagogues, universities and libertarian think tanks, such as the Cato Institute and the Ayn Rand Institute.

On paper, Mr. Dantchik and Mr. Koppel have a lot in common, most notably a shared passion for Israel and libertarian ideas. Mr. Koppel became interested in politics 20 years ago, when he began attending hearings of the Knessets Constitution, Law and Justice Committee. In the interview, Mr. Koppel said he quickly learned that busy and short-staffed politicians are grateful to anyone willing to help draft legislation.

That person has a lot of power, the person with the pen, Mr. Koppel said.

After a couple of failed attempts to write a formal constitution for Israel, he formed Kohelet the word is Hebrew for Ecclesiastes, a book of the Bible more than a decade ago.

From the start, Kohelet targeted the ideological pillars erected by Israels socialist founders. The group promotes the familiar libertarian menu of small government, free markets and privatized education. In recent decades, Israel has tiptoed away from regulation and emphasized its hospitality to entrepreneurs. But Kohelets libertarianism feels to many Israelis like a foreign intrusion.

Describing Kohelets policies as an American import, Gilad Kariv, a Labor Party lawmaker and former chairman of the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee, said, They are not only getting their financial contribution from the United States, but they are bringing in an ultra-right-wing, neocon philosophy.

One of Kohelets triumphs came in 2019, when the Trump administration announced that the United States did not consider Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank a violation of international law, reversing four decades of American policy. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a video message at a Kohelet conference, thanking the group for supporting the new doctrine.

But the proposed judicial overhaul represents the height of Kohelets influence. When Yariv Levin, the minister of justice, unveiled the plan in January, he publicly thanked the director of Kohelets legal department for his assistance. Mr. Koppel would only say that Kohelets judicial proposals were similar to the governments.

We cant tell them what to do, only give advice, Mr. Koppel said. Theyve taken some of the advice and rejected some of the advice.

Soon after this interview,tensions in Israel went from a simmer to a boil, and the president recently warned of the real possibility of civil war.

A speaker at the protest outside Kohelet this month denounced rich Americans who export ideas to Israel straight from the delusional fringes of the Republican Party.

Onlookers tossed fake $100 bills in the air.

Alain Delaqurire contributed reporting.

See the rest here:
Whos Behind the Judicial Overhaul Now Dividing Israel? Two Americans. - The New York Times

Town elections to take place this year – Madison Courier

Harrison County will have up to 10 town elections this year. Towns that could see elections are Corydon, Crandall, Elizabeth, Laconia, Lanesville, Mauckport, Milltown, New Amsterdam, New Middletown and Palmyra. Positions available are town council members and clerk-treasurers.

Candidate filing began the first week of January; however, deadlines are dependent on the party.

For Democrat, Republican and Libertarian parties, the deadline will be noon on Aug. 1.

For write-ins (names not listed on the ballot), the deadline will be noon on July 3.

For independents, the deadline will be noon on July 17, along with petitions signed by 2% of the registered voters of their town who voted in the 2022 General Election (deadline for petition is noon on June 30).

The qualifications to meet for potential candidates running for town office include:

Candidate must be registered to vote within town limits.

Candidate must reside within the town where they are seeking office.

Candidate must never have been convicted of a felony.

Candidate is not a member of the United States armed forces on active duty.

Candidate must file a declaration of candidacy before the deadline.

To run for a town office as a Democrat, Libertarian or Republican, a voter must contact his/her respective county chair and tell them about their desire to be nominated. Those party chairs are Katie Forte (Democrat) and Scott Fluhr (Republican).

For Independent candidates, petitions will can be filed at the Circuit Court Clerks office any time from now until June 30.

If there are no major party candidates, the first Independent candidate will have their name at the top of the ballot. Otherwise, the Independents name will be listed below the Repbulican, Democrat or Libertarian party candidates and will be listed in the order of petition filing, respectively.

Perspective candidates can also write their own names in as a write-in candidate if they do not like the other options, but they must file with county clerks office before noon on July 3.

For more information, contact the Harrison County Clerks office at 812-738-4289 or email SherryBrown@harrisoncounty.in.gov. for more information.

Read more:
Town elections to take place this year - Madison Courier

Dont believe the pundits who conflate middle-class entrepreneurs and Big Tech. Startups are todays mom-and-pop businesses – Fortune

In the wake of Silicon Valley Banks collapse, followed by the FDICs decision to make good on all SVB deposits (even if they were uninsured), Ive seen one pundit after another describe the situation as nothing more than a bailout for the rich. Follow certain accounts on Twitter and you might think that SVBs client list consisted exclusively of libertarian billionaires.

Now if their criticism was aimed solely at rich investors, I might not say anything publicly. No ones going to shed a tear for the venture capital firmsand no one should. If someone wants to talk about how our industrys herd mentalitycontributed to SVBs fate, thats only fair.

What isnt fair, however, is acting as if everyone with an SVB account is the samefailing to distinguish between creditors and depositors, or between large and small businesses.Its easy to paint situations like this with a broad brush if you believe they only affect the richbut why should we lose empathy for hardworking people just because of where they bank?

Yes, when Eniac invests in a startup, we believe it could become the next unicorn or decacorn, and that it should make its founders wealthy in the process. But even as we hope our portfolio is full of future Jobses and Zuckerbergs (but better!), the key word isfuture.

While SVB hasnt released a detailed breakdown, Ive been told that the bank had thousands of depositors with fewer than 20 employees. The current reality for those depositors involves scrappily leading small teams to pursue their vision of building something transformative when they could probably be working less and making more money if they were at one of the big incumbents.Today, Americas mom-and-pop businesses are led by these entrepreneurs who are building companies in climate, healthcare, fintech, and more.

These are the founders our team has been talking to, listening as they strategized about how to ensure their small businesss survival beyond the coming weeks, and as they agonized over what this would mean for their teams. Their employees were suddenly left wondering if theyd actually receive their next paychecks, or if they might lose their jobs.

These are stories for the founders, not me, to tell. Most of them, of course, have been more focused on keeping their company afloat than on external communication. So Ive been grateful to those few who have been willing to publicly share their experiences:

Criticize the billionaires and the VCs all you wantbut remember that theyre not the majority of depositors affected by the news. Many future American innovators breathed a sigh of relief when they realized that their companies would live to fight another day and they could continue to employ the hard-working team members who depend on that paycheck to put food on the table.

Nihal Mehta is a co-founder and general partner at Eniac Ventures.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs ofFortune.

Go here to see the original:
Dont believe the pundits who conflate middle-class entrepreneurs and Big Tech. Startups are todays mom-and-pop businesses - Fortune

How government casually violates letter and spirit of First Amendment – NUjournal

As long as the awful law exists, concerning which the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on Monday, be careful what you say to, or write about, unauthorized immigrants.

Congress, in one of the federal governments increasingly frequent offenses against the First Amendment, makes it a crime if one encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in this nation in violation of federal law. Let the formulation of hypotheticals begin in order to illustrate the laws unconstitutional vagueness and overbreadth.

Suppose a pediatrician says an unauthorized immigrants child needs medical care that is available here but not in the country from which the immigrant came.

Has a crime been committed?

According to the Migration Policy Institute, approximately 11 million unauthorized immigrants have been here for almost two decades. They are a declining portion of the growing U.S. population 30 percent in 2007, 23 percent in 2018. And there is no reason to believe that Americans in their decency would tolerate the police measures that would be necessary to substantially reduce that number. Now, suppose you factually tell an unauthorized immigrant that his or her chance of being deported is small.

Did you criminally induce that immigrant to reside here?

Seventy-eight percent of unauthorized immigrants have resided here for more than five years, the institute says; 19 percent for 10 to 14 years, 21 percent for 15 to 19 years, 22 percent for 20 or more years. Twenty-four percent have high school diplomas or equivalents; 18 percent have bachelors, graduate, or professional degrees. Sixty-five percent are employed and 28 percent are homeowners.

How many U.S. citizens, in their many interactions with these people over many years, could be said to have encouraged or induced any of them to reside here knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that this is illegal?

The law in question provides enhanced penalties for people who encourage or induce illegal immigration for financial gain. Damon Root, who writes about legal matters for Reason magazine, published by the libertarian Reason Foundation, posits: Suppose an advocate of open borders writes a book arguing that restrictions on immigration are unjust and calling for unauthorized immigrants to remain, hopes for better policies, and fights for their rights. Selling such a book, Root writes, would seem to violate the plain text of the law at issue in Mondays oral arguments in the case concerning Helaman Hansen.

He was convicted, and given an enhanced sentence (240 months), for a fraudulent and lucrative plan that purported to enable undocumented immigrants to pay to become U.S. citizens. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit vacated his conviction last year, endorsing his argument that the law is unconstitutionally overbroad and vague. The law at issue is ominously symptomatic of casual violations of the letter and spirit of the First Amendment.

In the years since the 2002 enactment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, speech restrictions imposed or encouraged sometimes that is a distinction without much difference by government have become more common. McCain-Feingolds purpose was to regulate the quantity of political speech: All campaign spending is, directly or indirectly, for the dissemination of political advocacy. Since then, and especially recently, government has become promiscuous and audacious in attempting to regulate speech.

The Department of Homeland Security failed to embed in American life a Disinformation Governance Board. But other government agencies have practiced what George Washington University Law Schools Jonathan Turley calls censorship by surrogate by, for example, numerous moderation requests to Twitter, and perhaps Facebook and other social media. Government, says Turley, cannot use private agents to do indirectly what it cannot do directly.

In the name of public health, government has encouraged the suppression of certain views about vaccines, masks and the origins of the coronavirus. In the name of national security, government sought to discredit critics of the false theory that the surfacing of Hunter Bidens laptop was a Russian intervention in the 2020 election.

After Silicon Valley Bank capsized, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) participated in a Zoom call with other members of Congress and Federal Reserve, Treasury and other officials. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) says Kelly asked whether there was a program that could censor social media posts that, by sowing doubts about the banking systems health, might cause bank runs. Kelly denies suggesting censorship. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding.

Given, however, the governments recent attempts to shape the information ecosystem, and given the governments slapdash criminalization of speech by means of the law the court will consider come Monday, wariness is prudent.

George Will is an American libertarian-conservative political commentator and author.

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

Here is the original post:
How government casually violates letter and spirit of First Amendment - NUjournal