tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-41734130967211135082024-03-05T03:02:19.218-08:00Los Angeles LibertariansA blog by Los Angeles area libertarians.<b>Thomas M. Sipos</b>...http://www.blogger.com/profile/18219736060681042399noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-37747621392115141412011-09-06T10:03:00.001-07:002011-09-06T10:03:34.503-07:00MidwestAntiwar
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><p>
</p>
<p>
<em>quoted from <a href='http://twitter.com/MidwestAntiwar/status/111113276871544834'>MidwestAntiwar</a></em></p>
<blockquote>
What if <a target='_blank' href='http://www.twitter.com/Antiwar2'>@Antiwar2</a> told you that from now on every #Tuesday is #AfghanistanTuesday? #howboutthat? #wouldyabelieveitthen? #antiwar #nowar</blockquote></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-91782673293729078772011-08-31T21:41:00.000-07:002011-08-31T21:42:02.005-07:00California War against Baby SittersThere are two ways a person can go into business, and that is either providing a good or providing a service. Based on two laws, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA_Food_Safety_Modernization_Act">Food Safety Modernization Act</a> and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Product_Safety_Improvement_Act">Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act,</a> it is potentially impossible for an individual to <a href="http://aynrkey.blogspot.com/2009/04/war-on-home-based-businesses.html">sell a product as a means of earning a living.</a>
<br />
<br />But there is no consistent regulation of providing services instead. The <a href="http://www.ij.org/">Institute for Justice</a> has detailed many instances of local regulation regarding taxi service, interior decorating, or hair cutting. One area that has been ignored until now has been house cleaning or babysitting.
<br />
<br />The state of California is now making an inroad on this means of augmenting a family budget - it has introduced <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=ab_889&sess=CUR&house=B&author=ammiano">Assembly Bill 889</a> that covers "persons who engage in specific types of domestic service." It leaves out those who provide health care through various state programs.
<br />
<br />There are exemptions from those covered in the proposed law. Those under 18 are not covered by it, and family members who provide those services are not covered by it. This will not impact the income bondage of teenagers forbidden from earning a real living since it is unlikely they would ever earn much through babysitting, and so they are exempted. The bill requires extensive record keeping and benefits to accompany domestic employment and the fines are per violation per day so can quickly add up.
<br />
<br />This will not impact the wealthy who hire domestic help, as they are capable of affording the paperwork that the bill demands. But a maid who works for several different middle class clients will find those clients have a hard time keeping up with the paperwork. It also creates a disincentive to do this without paperwork on the grounds that only the employer is liable and the employee is not. Therefore it sets the scene for a domestic employee to be able to turn around and threaten to report the employer unless unreasonable demands are met. Finally those who depend on babysitters will have a harder time having their needs met.
<br />
<br />It is obvious who will be hurt by it; all who make money from babysitting or house cleaning, and those who depend on the services but are not wealthy enough to afford the employee paperwork. Who will benefit from it though? The bill sponsor claims that it is to protect domestic laborers, many of who are poor, minority, and even illegal aliens. That is not a politically powerful group. Who actually benefits from it?
<br />
<br />House cleaning services, babysitting services, and day cares all benefit on the financial side. It will drive out the independent operator as those in the middle class who would hire domestic help will be forced to contract with the agency that handles the paperwork. On the political side the government will definitely benefit from more and more people being employed instead of self-employed and thus easier to track and record in accord with the war on home based businesses.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-76297818682471395382011-07-27T12:10:00.001-07:002011-07-27T12:10:14.851-07:00
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><p><a href='http://images.postling.com/9/934/g_fullxfull.21611.jpg'><img src='http://images.postling.com/9/934/g_400xN.21611.jpg'/></a></p><br/>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-50085110537049665922011-07-08T22:34:00.001-07:002011-07-08T22:34:37.555-07:00California Shoots Self In FootBecause California legislators are unable to control their urge to spend, especially their urge to spend on public employee pensions and salaries, they are always looking for new sources of revenue. There was one major stream of business not taxed, so the inevitable occurred. The government of the state of California decided to force businesses that do business over the internet to collect sales tax.<br /><br />It is already law that residents of the state are supposed to pay the sales tax for all internet purchases. There is a line on the state income tax forms for that purpose - a line ignored by Californians. Frustrated by their inability to force Californians to pay yet another tax in one of the highest taxed states in the country, the idea was to “close a loophole” and force internet businesses to do the same tax collection that stores physically located in the state collect - a service they provide “free” to the state.<br /><br />Already Amazon.com and Overstock.com are reacting to this new law. They are not collecting the sale taxes, though. They are pulling out of the state.<br /><br />Both businesses have affiliate programs whereby people can sell their products through these major corporations. Both partners in the affiliate programs profit. The major corporations profit by getting a portion of the proceeds, and the small affiliates profit by having their products listed through major outlets where they can reach larger audiences.<br /><br />These affiliate programs are all ended. The business connections have been severed. Amazon alone had 10,000 affiliates in California, and has ceased to do business with them unless they leave the state.<br /><br />This law, instead of raising revenue, has created a revenue loss. Instead of increased sales tax, it has resulted in decreased income tax. It may have even resulted in increased unemployment compensation.<br /><br />One would hope that the legislators and the governor would see the results and admit that a mistake has been made. One would hope that they would see the decreased revenue and the increased unemployment. Of course one would also hope that politicians are honest, capable, and intelligent, but the evidence indicates otherwise.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-27210606449198016652011-05-09T08:02:00.001-07:002011-05-09T08:02:57.254-07:00BeatTheChip
<div xmlns='http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml'><p>
War taxes and the draft? Shouldn't the LP be in front?</p>
<p>
<em>quoted from <a href='http://twitter.com/BeatTheChip/status/67250822827876353'>BeatTheChip</a></em></p>
<blockquote>
Cindy Sheehan camping <a target='_blank' href='http://www.twitter.com/Sacramento'>@Sacramento</a> captial protesting war$tax & draft entrapments. MAY 9th <a target='_blank' href='http://www.twitter.com/Antiwarcom'>@Antiwarcom</a> <a target='_blank' href='http://www.twitter.com/Antiwar2'>@Antiwar2</a></blockquote></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-18273215366784131152011-04-30T07:51:00.001-07:002011-04-30T07:51:41.426-07:00Local TyrannyIf a person is unlucky enough to rent an apartment in the cities of Lancaster, California or Palmdale, California, that person no longer has any fourth amendment protections against searches. It is written in to the law of both cities. The setup is convoluted, but the end result is that no renter has rights.<br /><br />It starts with code enforcement, as does many of the evils of local government. In order to ensure that apartment complex managers and owners are not mistreating the tenants, code enforcement officials are authorized to enter any rental unit without the permission of or a warrant against the people dwelling there.<br /><br />So in order to ensure that, for example a fire detector has the batteries installed, agents of the government are allowed in with only the requirement that the property owner, not the renter, be notified. And this only applies to rental properties; homeowners are not subject to these inspections.<br /><br />The problem is that anything that the renter might be doing is reportable to the police, and the word of the safety code inspector is all the police need to get a warrant. That means that apartment owners are subject to criminal searches under building and safety codes.<br /><br />Given the <a href="http://cei.org/10kc">vast number of laws that people are subjected to,</a> and nobody knows all the laws that a person must obey, this means that the one guarantee people have to protect them from malicious prosecution – the fourth amendment prohibition against warrantless searches – is null and void for anyone who rents an apartment in Lancaster or Palmdale.<br /><br />The theory behind the reportability is that since the government agent already has permission to enter the home, anything found is legally reportable. But the search is technically on the property of the lessor, not the dwelling of the lessee. It is a difference without a difference as far as the city governments are concerned.<br /><br />One could make an argument that this is a coincidental byproduct, an unintended consequence. That would be understandable, except for the wording of the ordinances. <a href="http://library.municode.com/HTML/16042/level2/TIT5BULIRE_CH5.40REHOBULIPRINPR.html#TIT5BULIRE_CH5.40REHOBULIPRINPR_5.40.020PU">Lancaster has the more severe wording.</a><br /><br /><blockquote>5.40.020 Purpose<br /><br />The existence of substandard and unsanitary residential rental properties and residential rental units, the physical conditions and characteristics of which violate applicable state housing, county and local codes and render them unfit or unsafe for human occupancy and habitation, threatens the physical, social, and economic stability of sound residential buildings and areas, and their supporting neighborhood facilities and institutions; necessitates disproportionate expenditures of public funds for remedial action; impairs the efficient and economical exercise of governmental power and functions; and destroys the amenity of residential areas and neighborhoods and the community as a whole. It has been statistically demonstrated that areas with rental housing facilities are responsible for a disproportionate share of police calls for service. <br /><br /><b>The disproportionate demand upon police services necessitates a disproportionate expenditure of public funds for such properties and impairs the property value of these properties and the surrounding neighborhoods as well as community as a whole. </b><br /><br />It is the purpose of this chapter to implement a crime free rental housing program ("LANCAP") to provide a stable, more satisfied tenant base; increase demand for rental units with a reputation for active management; lower maintenance and repair costs; increase property values, and improve the personal safety for tenants, landlords, and managers. <br /><br />It is also the purpose of this chapter to identify the existence of substandard and unsanitary residential rental properties and rental units and to cause the owner thereof to cure such defects. <br /><br />For these reasons, it is in the public interest for the protection of the health and safety of the people of Lancaster to protect and promote the existence of sound and wholesome residential rental properties and residential rental units by the adoption of regulations for participants in LANCAP training and the periodic inspection of such structures.</blockquote><br /><br />The second paragraph is a key point. Given that the description of how substandard construction drains resources is <b>already</b> in the first paragraph, the second paragraph as a stand-alone describes apartment dwellers alone as being more prone to uncivil behavior.<br /><br />On the national level, the TSA already has completely dispensed with the fourth amendment, but at least they do so on the refuted claim that they are trying to keep people safe from terrorists. In the case of Lancaster and Palmdale they lack even that much of a justification for eliminating the rights that should belong to every American.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-86111118105655640432010-01-30T22:06:00.001-08:002010-01-30T22:06:47.829-08:00Don't Blame Proposition ThirteenCalifornia is once again facing a budgetary shortfall, after the politicians managed to come up with a "fix" that balanced the state budget for a few more months. This has happened several times over the past year, and each time there is a predictable chorus of people blaming Proposition Thirteen for the inability of politicians to not spend more than is collected in taxes.<br /><br />The first argument is that Proposition Thirteen makes it impossible to raise taxes. Given that in February of 2009 the largest state tax increase in the history of the United States was passed, that is truly an absurd argument to make. If Proposition Thirteen really did make it impossible, instead of merely more difficult, to raise taxes, the tax increase of 2009 would never have happened.<br /><br />The other argument is that Proposition Thirteen somehow leads to minority rule. The problem with that argument should be obvious to everyone - two thirds is not a minority. If two thirds of politicians vote for something, a majority has voted for that something.<br /><br />A more sophisticated version of that false argument is that the majority, in order to pass anything, the majority must convince part of the minority to vote with the majority, and this in a very weak way this results in minority rule. But in truth this once again is still majority rule, and if the minority under persuasion demands something the majority is unwilling to give that minority cannot pass anything - it is a minority.<br /><br />The real reason there is a budget crisis is because those in government are unwilling to control their spending. The situation in California is identical to a person who continuously lives beyond his means and then blames his employer for not giving him enough money once the credit card bill is due. If an individual makes that argument, the absurdity of the claim is readily apparent.<br /><br />But when a government official makes that claim, for some reason people actually take it seriously. Assemblywoman Noreen Evans made exactly that claim: "There is this mantra out there 'living within our means' and while it sound really nice it sounds really simple and it sound really responsible it's meaningless. Our means are completely within our control". It's not her fault that she approves spending far beyond what tax revenues will allow, it's the tax payers for not writing her a blank check.<br /><br />She blames Proposition Thirteen for the lack of a blank check. The real reason there is no blank check is because they don't exist.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-60685319675383216942009-11-17T23:15:00.001-08:002009-11-17T23:15:57.284-08:00Jewish Peaceniks to Address Karl Hess ClubPartially through my efforts, a representative of <a href="http://www.lajewsforpeace.org/">L.A. Jews for Peace</a> will address the libertarian <a href="http://www.karlhessclub.org/">Karl Hess Club</a> on January 18, 2010.<br /><br />That date is tentative, subject to scheduling. Like the Karl Hess Club, L.A. Jews for Peace meets on the third Monday of every month. But we're all trying to make this happen.<b>Thomas M. Sipos</b>...http://www.blogger.com/profile/18219736060681042399noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-7091211038851094072009-07-03T19:45:00.001-07:002009-07-03T19:45:53.294-07:00California issues IOUsFirst the government of California passed the single largest state tax increase in the history of the United States. Then ballot propositions are sent to the voters to extend the tax increases, which the voters reject. The propositions were rejected by all groups in California; they were rejected by blacks, whites, Hispanics, Asians, and "others", they were rejected by men and women, by Republicans and Democrats, by conservatives and moderates, and only broke even among liberals. They were most strongly rejected in Orange County and barely rejected in San Francisco County.<br /><br />The rejection of the propositions threw the budget into unbalance again, and as time went on and the economy worsened (and the tax increases failed to provide a corresponding increase in revenue for reasons Miseans would understand but would confuse Keynesians) the need for a balanced budget grew more urgent as the state Comptroller warned repeatedly that the state was running out of money. In the time between the failures of the propositions to the deadline the deficit rose from a projected $16 billion to a projected $24 billion.<br /><br />The deadline came and went, a budget was not passed, and so on July 2nd the State of California started issuing IOUs. This was largely because although the Republicans were more than willing to aid and abet the last tax increase the voter reaction was so strong that they thought it better to actually follow their election promises this time around.<br /><br />The reaction from the politicians is the most interesting part.<br /><br />In the Assembly Budget Committee, a Democrat on the committee opined that while he supported the new round of tax increases perhaps it was time for the state to start living within its means. Chairperson Noreen Evans disagreed saying "There is this mantra out there 'living within our means' and while it sound really nice it sounds really simple and it sound really responsible it's <b>meaningless.</b> Our means are completely within our control". She opposed any cutting of the budget on the grounds that the state can always raise taxes to cover any needed revenue.<br /><br />In an interview Assemblywoman Karen Bass reacted to the Republican refusal to approve of any tax increases. The recall effort against Assemblyman Anthony Adams (as well as other Republicans who violated even indirectly their no-tax pledges) has scared the rest of the party straight. Assemblywoman Bass opined about those who dare oppose tax increases by saying "The Republicans were essentially threatened and terrorized against voting for revenue. Now [some] are facing recalls. They operate under a <b>terrorist</b> threat: 'You vote for revenue and your career is over.' I don't know why we allow that kind of <b>terrorism</b> to exist. I guess it's about free speech, but it's extremely unfair." Daring to hold politicians accountable is now a form of terrorism? She called the taxpayers of California "terrorists" for being over-taxed already and not wanting to be even more over-taxed.<br /><br />Finally Proposition 13, the favorite scapegoat of all who believe in government instead of the people, is being blamed with any rationale that makes limited sense at the moment. Some say it works too well. Others say that it holds the majority hostage to the minority, as if requiring 2/3 to pass a tax increase means that the remaining 1/3 is actually in charge.<br /><br />So after all of that the state is issuing IOUs instead of payments. There is no information yet on whether or not the banks will accept these interest bearing IOUs, although the likelihood of that increases with the proffered interest rate. If the banks decline to accept the IOUs the willingness of the public to receive them will plummet, as will the credit rating of the state. Where California goes, so does the rest of the nation.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-46450911293899624362009-01-20T12:37:00.000-08:002009-01-20T12:40:24.285-08:00The path aheadNow that the election is over and Obama has beaten McCain, now that the inauguration is over and Obama has replaced Bush, the question for libertarians is "now what?"<br /><br />There are several things that a lover of liberty must do now that the socialist and reluctant warmonger beat the warmongers and reluctant socialists.<br /><br />First, it is important to keep pressure on the Democrats to remember that one of the reasons Obama won their support was because he was allegedly the peace candidate. Granted that compared to McCain in the general election or Clinton in the Democratic primary he does appear to be a peace candidate, but compared to actual peace candidates like Paul or Kucinich he’s very much a hawk.<br /><br />Pressure must be kept on the Democrats to actually work to disengage militarily. During the next year they are going to discover that they do like war after all, because the President leading the war effort is of their party instead of the other party. The appointment of Rahm Emmanuel to Chief of Staff is disturbing because it shows the process is already underway.<br /><br />Second, all libertarians should prepare for when Obama (and a compliant congress) tries to introduce Universal Health Care or some other version of Socialist Medicine. It may even be necessary to work with the underdog Republicans on this. A necessary step for the Democrats to take if they want to implement this will be to <a href="http://www.independent.org/blog/?p=457">change the cloture rules</a> so that the Republicans cannot filibuster the proposal. Loudly and publicly proclaim any tinkering with the cloture rules to be a power grab and vociferously denounce it.<br /><br />Third, be prepared to oppose calls for national service. Obama already wants us to <a href="http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2008/09/national-service-for-children.html">perform national service</a> simply in order to graduate from high school. His Chief of Staff <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/381333">has different plan</a> for forcing everyone to do community service, and it is even less voluntary than the allegedly voluntary plan of Obama.<br /><br />Fourth, many Obama supporters believed he was going to act in <a href= "http://www.counterpunch.com/gonzalez10292008.html">direct contrast to his record</a> on issues other than the war, on issues like the USAPATRIOT Act and FISA Amendment, the Wall Street Crisis, and NAFTA, as well as a few others where (perhaps by accident) Obama was actually right and his supporters still believed he held the opposite view. Every time Obama acts in a manner consistent with Obama's record but inconsistent with how his supporters thought he would act is another moment to say "see I told you so." It will not likely work as on each of those positions his supporters will discover that the position Obama actually supports was what they supported all along, just like Oceana was always at war with EastAsia.<br /><br />Fifth, the Republicans are busy trying to figure out where they went wrong. Be sure to tell them that they had a candidate who could have beaten Obama, and they wouldn’t even count his votes at the convention. Be sure to remind the local Republican organizations about that. Send them the message "don't blame me, I voted Paul in the primary." Even if it isn't true it should be said. Many libertarians didn't switch to the Republicans but instead cast primary votes Ruwart or Kubby or Root or Barr. It should still be said because all Republicans need to hear that.<br /><br />Sixth, work should not stop on trying to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phs6CwnutoY">open up the electoral process,</a> a task that is never finished.<br /><br />Seventh, there will be an effort by Democrats <a href="http://aynrkey.blogspot.com/2008/10/george-w-bush-is-herbert-hoover.html">to blame the depression on a hypothetical laissez faire attitue of Bush</a> that must be countered at every turn. Do not allow anyone to describe the financial meltdown as the result of deregulation as Hoover leaves office and Roosevelt enters office.<br /><br />Finally, never forget to ask the Reform Caucus where are the additional votes Barr was supposed to deliver.Ayn R. Keyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14542012608585134864noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-62057472446045781802008-10-20T04:52:00.001-07:002008-10-20T04:52:54.300-07:00David Larkin, RIP<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-Ft4hpKqdJQ144O16gbIhur83E7cT3eoLvnXf4A_I4stCuAnVCfFTAfKYdm2SIaQqJdIaYsVYaNQfM1z8WYguXIuNNUACf-hBbUprNIOe8aDw4mPRV-Cko5jkAOhrn-gxi7LBK8ln0rM/s1600-h/David+Larkin+in+2007_.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-Ft4hpKqdJQ144O16gbIhur83E7cT3eoLvnXf4A_I4stCuAnVCfFTAfKYdm2SIaQqJdIaYsVYaNQfM1z8WYguXIuNNUACf-hBbUprNIOe8aDw4mPRV-Cko5jkAOhrn-gxi7LBK8ln0rM/s200/David+Larkin+in+2007_.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5259202675656837954" border="0" /></a>On October 19, Kit Maira reported that longtime libertarian and former Los Angeles County LP Chair, David Larkin, died on or around October 8, 2008, apparently of natural causes.<br /><br />I knew David to be one of the good libertarians. Principled, friendly to all, generous, helpful, without ego or malice.<br /><br />He was a Vietnam War veteran who last year <a href="http://www.hollywoodinvestigator.com/2007/larkin.htm">spoke of his war experiences</a> and how he became an antiwar libertarian.<br /><br />David was about 60 years old. He was overweight, led a sedentary lifestyle, and had long suffered from diabetes. I expect those were contributing factors to an all-too-early death.<br /><br />Like the late <a href="http://www.hollywoodinvestigator.com/2004/konkin.htm">Samuel E. Konkin III</a>, David died all too soon. He will be missed by his many friends and compatriots.<br /><br />Details on his memorial services pending.<b>Thomas M. Sipos</b>...http://www.blogger.com/profile/18219736060681042399noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4173413096721113508.post-8349221020046875902008-07-04T04:30:00.000-07:002008-07-04T05:09:32.372-07:00Libertarian Democrat Eric Fine<span style="font-size:130%;">Longtime LP member Eric Fine -- who's held numerous LP officer titles -- has a new plan for spreading libertarianism -- he joined the Democratic Party!</span><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /><br /></span><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6ELTf0DBVBFiuJOgA91khmJLqeY2Lf4hyphenhyphenTeIn7abTY5OB_i9ylWF6IdeQcyCzT5Cf7_UDTd4WEJH0Pi9TBm-AYvH0VZ0YXH5SUpP3IAIuyP2zbtCgPhkHm6INjIQocxgaupJ_ug7i5tI/s1600-h/Eric+Fine+1,+KHC+May+19,+2008.jpg"><img style="margin: 0pt 0pt 10px 10px; float: right; cursor: pointer;" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg6ELTf0DBVBFiuJOgA91khmJLqeY2Lf4hyphenhyphenTeIn7abTY5OB_i9ylWF6IdeQcyCzT5Cf7_UDTd4WEJH0Pi9TBm-AYvH0VZ0YXH5SUpP3IAIuyP2zbtCgPhkHm6INjIQocxgaupJ_ug7i5tI/s400/Eric+Fine+1,+KHC+May+19,+2008.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5219122070871166450" border="0" /></a><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">"I'm still a libertarian," said Fine. "Only now I spread liberty through the Democratic Party rather than the Libertarian Party." </span><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> </p><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />Fine explained his logic at Los Angeles's libertarian <a href="http://www.karlhessclub.org/">Karl Hess Club</a> on May 19, 2008. Armed with a Power Point presentation of recent local election results, Fine observed that most electoral districts -- congressional, assembly, or whatever -- are safely Democratic or Republican. The real contest is the primary election preceding the general.</span><br /><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">Fine advises libertarians who want to win elective office to join the dominant party in their area, and work from within. In most of Los Angeles, that means the Democrats. So in 1999, Fine began re-registering "back and forth" from Libertarian to Democratic.</span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">"I ran for State Assembly in the 42nd District as a Libertarian in 1994 and 1996, and in the 47th District in 1998," said Fine. His highest vote percentage was in 1994, at 5% (5,441 votes). He got fewer votes in 1996 due to a Natural Law candidate on the ballot. In 1998, he only got 2.72% (2,596 votes), despite an endorsement from the Gun Owners of California.</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">In 2006, Fine ran for State Assembly in the Democratic primary and got 6% of the primary votes (2,317 votes).</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">For his ballot job title, Fine put Marijuana Legalization Coordinator. "I wrote a 250-word ballot statement on why marijuana should be legalized. I finished third out of five candidates." Marijuana legalization is Fine's main issue whenever campaigning among Democrats. This issue causes many Democrats to listen, and open their minds to other libertarian positions.</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">Fine not only runs Democratic, he's active in the party. He joined the Culver City Democratic Club in 2005. They elected him treasurer -- unanimously!</span></p> <p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"> <span style="font-size:130%;"><br /></span></p><p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size:130%;">"They know I'm a libertarian," said Fine. "They don't care."</span></p><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />Indeed, Culver City Democrats were so pleased with Fine's work as treasurer, they gave him an award -- and begged him to stay when he suggested he'd like to quit.</span><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />Longtime LP member Eric Fine -- who's held numerous LP officer titles -- has a new plan for spreading libertarianism -- he joined the Democratic Party!<br /><br /></span><span style="font-size:130%;">Fine had previously served as LPC treasurer from 1997 to 1999. A resident of Beverly Hills, he's also variously served as the <a href="http://www.lplac.org/62.htm">L.A./Westside</a> LP Chair and Vice Chair. He joined the LP in 1984, and was tasked with finding speakers for the L.A./Westside LP as early as 1985.</span><b>Thomas M. Sipos</b>...http://www.blogger.com/profile/18219736060681042399noreply@blogger.com1