Hawaii Liberty Chronicles

What is a political party? Are there any differences between political parties?  What purposes do political parties serve?  Is a two party system all we have?  This month’s Li Zhao’s Intellectual Salon, Idea Exchange topic is “Party Schisms”.

Ken Schoolland will moderate this forum with Q&A to follow with Arvid Youngquist a Hawaii Democrat, Dan Douglass a Hawaii Republican and Larry Bartley a Hawaii Libertarian.

Please bring a friend and your favorite drink.

Pupus will be served. $5 donation per person.

Reason.tv’s Michael C. Moynihan talks about the long history of corruption in Chicago politics and the current troubles of Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich with Terry Michael, former press spokesman for the Illinois House Democrats and former press secretary for Sen. Paul Simon, and Mike Flynn, Director of Government Affairs at the Reason Foundation.

.

By Garry P. Smith

Most Hawaii Republicans knew we would do poorly in the 2008 elections. Many were hopeful that we would at least keep the incumbents and maybe pick up one more seat. Many more, myself included, had called on Chair Willes Lee soon after he became party chair to make changes to the party brand to prepare for the elections. Our calls were not only unanswered but rebuffed by an arrogant Lee who chanted over and over again “get good candidates, raise money and win”. Not only was this a naïve strategic move it proved disastrous for our party.

If all it took was for Lee to get his good candidates who had sufficient money to win there was none better than Quentin Kawananakoa. He had previously been the minority leader in the House, had started a run for U.S. Congress (he quit over medical issues), former Hawaii GOP Chair Sam Aiona was his campaign manager and Quentin personally had all the money it would take to win a House Seat. He lost miserably by over 2,500 votes to a first time Democrat candidate who had no prior name recognition.

Lee opined in interviews with the Star Bulletin Nov. 6, just two days after the elections, to say that “we need to run more and better candidates”. He still doesn’t get it, it’s not the candidates who caused this loss, it’s the party leadership. Both the Chair and the minority leadership in the State House of Representatives who are to blame. It’s an insult to all Republican Party candidates who did choose to run and spent hundreds of hours campaigning; only to lose because the Republican Party didn’t do its part through party building, party branding and party organizing to show voters that we had something different to offer.

Despite Lee’s additional excuse of blaming the Obama wave, less people in Hawaii actually voted in 2008 than in 2004 when Bush ran successfully for re-election against Kerry. This wasn’t a matter of being overrun at the polls by a surge of new Obama voters, this was a problem of failing to persuade the same people who voted incumbents like Trimble and Meyer into office four years ago. Even TV commentators on election night had to remark that a few hundred votes could have been swayed or encouraged to show up to protect incumbents Meyer and Trimble, let alone put challenger Tom Berg over the top, if Lingle, Aiona and the party run by Willes Lee had really made and effort and done things right going into the 2008 season.

During the 2008 legislative session, Republicans continued to believe that the best course of action was to “go along to get along”. House Minority Leader Finnegan even went so far as to write an editorial letter praising her Democrat colleagues for proposing to fix the way grants were being handed out, even though the chair of the committee had exposed himself politically by receiving tens of thousands of campaign contributions from charities and groups hoping to receive funding. Rep. Michael Magaoay, the chair of that committee, did not even receive a slap on the wrist by the majority party and easily won re-election over a strong Republican opponent three days ago. Minority Leader Finnegan seems to have been rewarded by the Democrats by not even having a challenger to contend with, perhaps in exchange for not asking for an investigation into pay-for-play campaign contributions. I guess going along to get along does pay off.

The November 6th Honolulu Star-Bulletin editorial “GOP needs to lure more moderates to it’s almost empty tent” calls for the Hawaii GOP to become more like Hawaii Democrats if it hopes to get more Republicans elected. Since when does the Star Bulletin or for that matter the Honolulu Advertiser want Republicans to get elected? The Honolulu Advertiser did not endorse one non-incumbent Republican for election. If the Hawaii GOP becomes ideologically any closer to the Hawaii Democrats then it might be better to just change party affiliation for the remaining 8 elected officials and form a Democrat faction within their party. Sen. Mike Gabbard and Rep. Karen Awana beat the rush already and, although elected as Republicans, astutely saw what was happening to the Republican Party when they jumped ship as newly-registered Democrats in 2007 in order to make sure they weren’t defeated just because of their party affiliation.

The basic reason for Tuesday’s election turndown of Hawaii Republicans is that voters have no idea what the difference is between the two parties in Hawaii. There is good reason for them to be confused; there is hardly any real difference on the issues of importance to the people. The Republican Party convention refused to oppose the so-called Akaka Bill and also would not take a stand either way on the controversial Rail Project. At least with the Democrat Party, they took a stand on both these issues . . . both of which I disagree with, but at least I knew where they stood.

As a candidate for Honolulu City Council in 2008 and a long time Republican, I didn’t expect any financial support from the Republican Party, since the City Council is technically non-partisan. I must say that I wasn’t disappointed. I did not receive one email, one phone call or even an offer of support from Chair Lee. The party’s website listed candidates only after pictures of Party elite at the various Republican social functions. To find out just who the candidates were, you had to click on a link at the bottom of the ‘links’ page that just showed names and addresses not even pictures or the bios that were in the general election guide. Are candidates really a priority for the Hawaii GOP? Nah, just a burden to much more important, self-serving party activities. Sure, I lost like all the other Republicans who ran against incumbents but I got more votes than any of the other new candidates. Hmm, maybe it was the missing (R) next to my name that enabled me to do so well.

The biggest loser to the abysmal situation of the Republican Party is of course Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona, who has already been campaigning for the 2010 Governor race. When Aiona runs against a well funded Mayor Mufi Hannemann for Governor, Mufi will have a well-oiled Democrat Party machine that will provide not only the manpower needed for a major race but also party organization, majority of elected officials and a brand loyalty that has created an almost cult following. As Mufi said during the 2008 Primary, “you are just delaying the inevitable”. Gov. Lingle knew she would be up against more than Lt. Gov. Mazie Hirono in 2002, so she became Chair of the Republican Party in 1999, revamped it, rebranded the Hawaii Republican persona and not only won election herself but also carried along the most Republicans in 20 years. Lt. Gov. Aiona, who should have been the most vocal and persistent ‘agent of change’ this year for a Republican Party on life support, was strangely absent and will pay the penalty in 2010 for allowing the plug to be pulled and the party die while he watched.

Is it too late for the Hawaii Republican Party to come back from the dead? Maybe, but certainly unless drastic changes are made that shows the voters that “yes, we can” or “we are the party of change” we will not only continue to be irrelevant but also an enigma of itself. The best immediate hope for the party is for Chair Lee to demonstrate whatever integrity he still has and immediately resign as party Chair. Don’t worry, he will be quickly rewarded with a high-paying state job just as each of the previous chairs under Lingle have received for similarly fine showings.

By Jeff Flake

Well, we Republicans have just made history. Not the type of history we wanted to make, mind you, but history nonetheless. Not only did we lose the White House but, after losing our House and Senate majorities in 2006, we followed it up last night with even steeper losses in Congress.

In January, Democrats will enjoy lopsided congressional ratios not seen since the 1970s. Let’s face it: We Republicans are now, by any reasonable measurement, deep in the political wilderness.

The temptation for Republican members of Congress today will be to assume the role of the post-Watergate Republicans of 1974 and accept minority status as a permanent condition. Indeed, the terrain is more difficult for us now than it was in 1992. Then, Republicanism was still largely defined by the Reagan years. Today the party is defined in the public mind by the Bush presidency. We’ve got a steep hill to climb.

Much of the backroom maneuvering and media speculation in the coming weeks will focus on identifying new standard-bearers for the party. This is important, and after a second straight drubbing, the House Republican leadership should be replaced. But the far more critical task is determining what standard these new leaders will bear.

I suggest that we return to first principles. At the top of that list has to be a recommitment to limited government. After eight years of profligate spending and soaring deficits, voters can be forgiven for not knowing that limited government has long been the first article of faith for Republicans.

Of course, it’s not the level of spending that gets the most attention; it’s the manner in which the spending is allocated. The proliferation of earmarks is largely a product of the Gingrich-DeLay years, and it’s no surprise that some of the most ardent practitioners were earmarked by the voters for retirement yesterday. Few Americans will take seriously Republican speeches on limited government if we Republicans can’t wean ourselves from this insidious practice. But if we can go clean, it will offer a stark contrast to the Democrats, who, after two years in training, already have their own earmark favor factory running at full tilt.

Second, we need to recommit to our belief in economic freedom. Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations” may be on the discount rack this year, but the free market is still the most efficient means to allocate capital and human resources in an economy, and Americans know it. Now that we’ve inserted government deeply into the private sector by bailing out banks and businesses, the temptation will be for government to overstay its welcome and force the distribution of resources to serve political ends. Substituting political for economic incentives is not the recipe for economic recovery.

Most House Republicans opposed the recent bailout and will be in a strong position to promote economic freedom over central planning as the Obama administration stumbles from industry to industry trying to determine which is small enough to be allowed to fail and which is not. Since timetables will be in vogue, perhaps Republicans could even insist on a timetable for getting the government out of the private sector.

There are, of course, other pillars of the Republican standard — strong national defense, support for traditional values and the Second Amendment — but these are not areas where voters question Republican bona fides. In any event, as we have seen over the past several months, economic woes tend to subsume other concerns. We shouldn’t complain. We can now play our strongest hand.

In some respects, raising a new standard was made easier by yesterday’s rout. The Republican Party is not bound by election-year promises made by its presidential nominee. More important, the party is finally untethered from the ill-fitting and unworkable big-government conservatism that defined the Bush administration.

This is not to say that it will be an easy transition. Congressional Republicans picked up some unattractive habits over the years in an effort to hold on to power. Whether it was relying on the redistricting process to help us choose our constituents, using the appropriations process as an ATM or passing legislation — such as a generous prescription drug benefit and a bloated farm bill — to pacify individual constituencies, these habits and voting patterns will be hard to break.

But there is reason for Republicans to feel optimism. Politically, America remains a center-right country, and America loves a chastened and repentant sinner. As surely as the sun rises in the east, the Democrats will overreach.

As long as we Republicans are willing to admit our folly, get back to first principles and work like there’s no tomorrow, we’ve got ‘em just where we want ‘em.

The writer, a Republican, represents Arizona’s 6th District in the U.S. House.

By Ken Schoolland

Following the McCain/Obama Presidential debates, Hawaii Pacific University hosted students who wanted to watch. Afterward, “both” presidential candidates had been heard and journalists wanted to know which of the two were favored by the students.

No one seemed even the slightest bit curious why there were only two candidates on the platform. Perhaps there were only two candidates because alternative parties have been roughed up so badly. Take the 2004 election for instance.

BOTH OTHER PARTIES

Michael Badnarik and David Cobb, respective presidential candidates for the Libertarian Party and the Green Party, were both arrested, handcuffed, fingerprinted, and jailed on October 8, 2004 while the presidential debate of the Democrat and Republican was being broadcast nationally from St. Louis.

These arrests took place when Badnarik attempted to serve the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) with a court order from an Arizona Superior Court judge. The Arizona judge had ordered the CPD to prove that a debate scheduled in Arizona for October 13 did not constitute special treatment for Democrats and Republicans.

Despite legal action, the debate in Arizona proceeded without interruption. Badnarik protested the expenditure of $2.5 million of tax funds for this event by public institutions, Arizona State University and the City of Tempe.

Badnarik’s lawyer argued that these expenditures constituted an illegal, partisan campaign contribution of taxpayer funds because they excluded officially recognized candidates who appear on the Arizona ballot, as they did on ballots all across the country.

http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/2004/10/08/michael-badnarik-arrested/ and http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0411/arrest.html

CAN’T STAND UP TO WHOM?

The irony couldn’t be more crisp. We had George Bush and John Kerry boldly claiming that they were the ones to stand up to terrorists and Al Qaeda in order to bring democracy to the Middle East. But these same guys were unwilling to stand up to legitimate challengers in a public debate.

Bush and Kerry even signed a pact with the CPD that they would not be on the same platform with any other party during the election season. McCain and Obama did the same thing this year to freeze out “confusing competition.”

Was it too confusing to have more than two candidates? Democrats and Republicans didn’t think so during the primary season when they had as many as nine Democratic or nine Republican candidates on the same platform last year.

Thus, Democrats and Republicans have engineered a system of control over public debate in America that is so thorough that their opponents are arrested, the media doesn’t even report it, and few, if any, in the audience question it. How many people even know there are alternative parties, much less the names of their candidates until they walk into the voter’s booth on election day?

Is this a model of democracy for other nations?

WHERE HAVE ALL THE VOTERS GONE?

With 80% voter turnout in Afghanistan, it is somewhat embarrassing to US officials that voter turnout in America is so low. Only half the population registers to vote and only half of the registered voters show up at the polls on election day.

Non-voters are accused of being apathetic. But this misses the point. Among these non-voters are highly concerned, patriotic, and intellectual citizens who have become cynical about the rigging of the American political system.

Every year I survey hundreds of university students asking:
1)    Do you believe the campaign promises of politicians? Amidst laughter, the overwhelming answer is, “No.”
2)    Who is more likely to be elected, an honest politician or a dishonest politician? Still chuckling, the overwhelming answer is, “The dishonest politician.”
3)    Do politicians have higher, lower, or the same moral standards as you have? Solemnly, the overwhelming answer is, “Lower.”

Try it sometime. It’s scary.

The problem of low voter turnout in America is that people don’t trust politicians. If the public doesn’t trust the messenger, they won’t buy the product. “Why should I bother to vote?” people say. “Politicians will do whatever they want to do after the election anyway.”

A CURE?

A cure for distrust in the political arena is the same as it is in the commercial arena—competition and choice.

Suppose that General Motors and Ford were able to outlaw all of their competitors and have joint advertising campaigns. Would we expect GM and Ford to make better cars and to have greater integrity in their advertising and in their service agreements? Hardly!

Likewise, competition and choice are essential to all the things we dream for in our political system: innovation, integrity, accountability, and involvement. This will never happen so long as competition is muzzled and jailed.

By Geoffrey Pike

We just had a $700 billion bailout bill that was signed into law and done in defiance of the American people at large. This money is on top of many more billions that have already been spent bailing out Wall Street. We have a runaway government and we will likely experience economic depression or very high inflation, or possibly both, in the near future. Yet, I am smiling about the whole thing.

It is hard times for many people and I certainly sympathize with them. Our own government is raping us and it is a shame that we have to go through this. But there is certainly a lot to be positive about. Last year, Ron Paul triggered a small but significant revolution in this country. Although the results were somewhat disappointing, we can’t ignore that he received 1.2 million votes and seemed to awaken many people.

Perhaps I am smiling because the Austro-libertarians have been vindicated with this whole mess. Ron Paul has been warning people for years about the Federal Reserve and the distortions in the market. Anyone paying attention can see that he knew what he was talking about. We should not feel that we can’t point out that the Austro-libertarians were warning of this years ago.

Perhaps a bigger reason for my smile is being vindicated amongst other libertarians. Now many other libertarians will not see it this way at this time. I often get down on the future prospects for liberty and how seemingly irrational many people are. But it often amazes me just how negative other libertarians are about the future. Many libertarians think of the general population as the “dumb masses.” Sometimes it’s hard to disagree, but I have had a sense over the years that people, and the American people in particular, are more rational than many of us give them credit for.

This last week, Americans awoke from a deep sleep. Or maybe they were already awake, but we didn’t know it yet. Congress got flooded with calls opposing the bailout. One Congressman said that the calls to his office were running 50–50; 50% no and 50% hell no. Although the majority of Americans still don’t understand inflation and the boom/bust cycle very well, they instinctively understood that Americans were being ripped off with this bailout and that the government officials were simply rewarding their friends on Wall Street who had failed. Even as far as rising prices, many more Americans are realizing that the cause is monetary inflation, although we probably don’t have a majority that understand this yet.

We have a lot to be positive about. Now you may think that is crazy because Congress still passed the bailout bill, despite strong opposition from constituents. Now don’t expect all of these people to be voted out of office next month who voted “yes” on the bill, but this cannot go on forever. First of all, the empire is coming crashing down. Even if this weren’t the case, it won’t matter over time. Americans are becoming far more well informed than in the past. The internet allows us to communicate to each other quickly and effectively and expose many of the lies of the politicians. When a large number of Americans finally withdraw their consent, the government will no longer function as it does. It will come crashing down, much like the Soviet empire did.

Americans are realizing in large numbers that the government is not their friend. With Congress defying the will of the people, it made people angrier. It basically shows the whole system as a sham and that we don’t have representative government.

It has also been fun watching the news the last few weeks. I heard one commentator after another saying that they have to pass this bill, despite strong opposition by the people. Some were more direct than others in saying that “the people just don’t understand.” But this time, the people understood all too clearly. No matter which way it was spun, the people understood that their own government was taking advantage of them. And on top of that, it exposed the elitist and out-of-touch mentality in the mainstream media (both Republican and Democrat).

It has all been fun to watch. Speaking of fun, if you really want to have a good time next weekend, get together a big group of friends and line up outside a bank in your neighborhood. Call the local news station. You can cause a bank run and expose how fragile our fraudulent banking system is. Okay, I’m really just kidding about this. In fact, it is probably illegal, so don’t even consider it.

Libertarians can take advantage of this time in history. It could be a tipping point. For once, we have a large majority of the people on our side. Let’s continue to expose the Federal Reserve and the government as a whole as the corrupt and evil organizations that they are. People may be more open to radical libertarian ideas now more than ever.

Let’s continue the revolution that Ron Paul triggered last year and let’s also have some fun doing it. I continue to see hope for the future as the American empire is quickly crashing down.