Vortex of Freedom
Vol. 1 No. 1 August 2004
A Need for Change
George W. Bush has brought us into an inhumane and unjust war, violated our freedoms with the Patriot Act, and lied about making government smaller. These are among the reasons why Bush should not be re-elected under any circumstance.
John F. Kerry voted for the war and does not intend to make smaller or less intrusive. One should feel as safe with Kerry as president as with a Chihuahua guarding a person while walking the streets of South Philly.
The rhetoric of Democrats and Republicans are different, but their actions are often the same, especially the office of President. The President is often a centrist, often because of attempting to convert voters on the opposing party.
It is time for a genuine change in who we vote for in elections. Democrats and Republicans have spent like kids in a candy store and shown no regard for the Constitution. It is time for a fundamental change.
Vortex of Freedom endorses Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik for President. Critics say that minor parties have no chance to win so they end up voting for the lesser of “two evils.” We cannot afford to give Democrats and Republicans another chance to fix the things they have broken.
The legacy of the two-party system is a $2.4 trillion budget, a disregard for the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, and a prohibitive taxing system. It is time to vote for people who are fiscally responsible, who will restore our rights and freedoms, and who realizes that the money sent to Washington is ours. Michael Badnarik is uniquely qualified amongst all candidates for presidents. These principles are the mantra of the Libertarian Party.
We encourage all voters to vote for Libertarians in local, state, and federal elections.
Overhead – Government’s Favorite Social Program
The federal government offers its’ employees a chance to donate to a wide variety of non-profit charities and organizations. One of the guidelines for a non-profit group to become a recipient of these funds is that the group cannot spend more than 30 percent of funds on overhead. The irony of this is that social spending by the federal government in the fiscal year 2004 budget is over 80 percent!
The percentage increases in federal spending always surpasses the rate of inflation. And in spite of cuts in benefits, the cost of many of these programs almost always increases (sometimes at a substantial rate.) Federal spending on welfare has increased in spite of the fact that fewer people are on the payroll.
Welfare fraud is a crime. Collecting money for welfare and keeping the monies allocated in the hands of bureaucrats instead of in the hands of the intended recipients is an outrage.
Everywhere a Moo-Moo
The farming industry is burdened with excessive regulations which increase the price of dairy products in spite of government capping the prices. Virtually every aspect of farming is regulated. Corporate farms lobby in Washington to pass laws which will favor them and hurt the small farmer.
The regulation of prices on dairy products has made it very difficult for small farmers to keep their farms. Corporate farms can live with the prices because they’re able to buy materials in larger quantities, thus saving them money.
Some farmers are forced to sell their farms while others are given subsides not to grow crops. The argument is that if too many of a certain crop is grown, then the price of crops would drop to the point where farms couldn’t profit. But the farming industry shouldn’t be different than other industries in a free-market economy.
If government had not meddled in the affairs of farming, then prices would be more affordable and more farms would still be in operation.
Is it a Coincidence?
Two hot topics which the government intervenes the most are education and health care. Every year, education and health care costs rise at a much higher rate than inflation. Government’s response is to spend more money.
Before we spend another dime on education or medical care, (neither of which is constitutionally essential) we need to find out where the money is going. We need to be more insistent that money towards education, health care, or any other government expense is actually needed.
One of the problems with the system as it is currently run is the more these institutions get, the more we want. They then find more things to spend money on and then they need more money, which the government gives, which raises the price of services and our taxes.
Once the line is held on how much money is given out, then these (and other) institutions will be forced to spend their money more responsibly.
Why is it that the more taxes we pay, the fewer rights we have?
Why does Bush’s “smaller government” cost significantly more than Clinton’s “massive bureaucracy” did?
Polls that include minor party candidates often have a three-way race.
The largest building in many school districts is the administration building.
The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) gets to approve cell phones. Are cell phones food or a drug?
Feel free to send any comments or concerns to the email address above.