Clair Schwan - Libertarian candidate for Wyoming House
This is Clair Schwan, and in 2008 he ran for Wyoming's House of Representatives here in District 7. He's a member of the Libertarian Party because he believes in individual liberty, limited government, equal rights and justice. We've drifted away from the principles on which this country was founded, and it's time to deliberately make our way back. With special interests, people expecting government to solve their problems, and career politicians longing to stay in charge, the message of liberty is sometimes difficult to hear above the din. Good Public Policy is...School Choice - our traditional government schools have a disappointing record here in Wyoming. We spend lots of money per student and get mediocre results. Our graduation rates aren't high enough, and our drop out rates are much too high. They both have a story to tell about what government has done with education. Parents need a choice. That means home schooling, charter schools, private schools, parochial schools, vocational schools, and other alternatives. Clair Schwan says that vouchers should be issued so parents can spend money for education of their children where they see it best spent. What we really need is competition with the government school system. Competition will raise quality and lower costs - it always does. Once the heat is on, our government school programs will have to improve to match the competition, otherwise they go the way of the dinosaur. Clair Schwan believes that charter schools are a great idea, and they need to have an independent approval process to help them get a better foothold here in Wyoming. School districts are reluctant to approve charter schools because they simply are afraid of being shown up by the competition. Education is too important to be left in the hands of government, so let's get out of the way and give parents a choice for their children. Constitutional Carry - of all of our civil rights, we treat the "right to keep and bear arms" as if it weren't among our Bill of Rights in the first place. Clair Schwan believes that all our rights need to be respected and defended, not just a select few. We have a right to keep and bear arms, but our current law requires a permit process before you can exercise your right. You have to be trained and prove you are worthy of the right before you're issued a permit. This is wrong. Our rights shouldn't be regulated and licensed. If you have a concealed carry permit, your license can be taken away from you if someone sees your not-so-concealed weapon. Does your attorney get taken away if someone sees him or her? Do you lose your right to worship if you don't have proper training? Do you pay a fee to be able to express your political opinions in the newspaper? Do your rights expire if you don't renew them? Of course not, but this is how we treat our right to self-defense. It's time for a change. Our concealed carry law should be optional so we can obtain reciprocity with other states, and a law to implement our right to bear arms should read simply as follows: "An individual 21 years of age or older, not otherwise debarred the use of arms by a court of competent jurisdiction, shall have the right to carry a deadly weapon, open or concealed, anywhere and anytime within the State of Wyoming for lawful purposes." Fiscal Conservatism - in 10 years our state budget has increased 3 if not 4 fold. This just doesn't seem responsible. There is talk now about fiscal discipline as we go into the 2008 election - well it's about time. Clair Schwan believes that fiscal discipline should always be the order of the day. It's other people's money, and we should be way more careful about how we spend it. The state is good at tracking where money comes from and where it goes to, but we don't really understand what our budget will be in the future based on spending we're doing now. In order to foresee this, we need to know whether our spending is for:
If we don't get a handle on our budget, we'll work ourselves right into state income tax. Legislative Intent - our laws need a concise statement of intent right up front and center so we can better understand the objectives of the proposed legislation during review and debate. The statement of intent will also help guide future interpretation by our courts. Clair Schwan believes that a statement of intent will reduce opportunities for hidden agendas and help us avoid useless laws. It will also help eliminate judicial activism that takes the form of re-interpretation of laws we pass. Conventions for Decision-Making - we can sure use a set of guidelines for making laws that will help improve the quality and consistency of legislation. Such conventions for decision-making will serve us well into the future. Clair Schwan suggests that conventions should include:
Wyoming Leading the Way - it is clear that many laws we pass are based on what others are doing elsewhere. Some of that is fine, but we really need to stop following the leaders and be a leader ourselves. Wyoming leads the nation in many mineral resources, including resources that are vital to our energy needs. We should start acting like it. We ship coal out of state, when Clair Schwan thinks it would be far more efficient to generate power here and transmit electricity out of state. Having energy corridors (rights of way) to do this would not only put Wyoming in a leadership position, it would create lots of high paying power plant related jobs that would last for generations. We would still need to ship coal out of state, but we can add to that by encouraging energy corridors for transmission lines so we don't have to rely on rail transport alone to support the nation's energy needs. Bad Public Policy is...Ever Lowering the Permissible Blood Alcohol Content - this simply catches more people, it doesn't catch more drunks on the road. The last few cases of drunk driving that made the front page in Cheyenne involved people that were up to 9 times the legal limit. No matter how low you set the permissible level, that doesn't do anything to address the real problem - drunks on the road. Clair Schwan says if we keep heading in this direction, we won't be able to use mouthwash before driving a car. It's ridiculous. Let's focus our efforts on enforcement of the laws we have instead of continually making new laws that raise the bar ever higher, and really have no effect on what is of most concern - drunks on the road. A glass of wine at a friend's house shouldn't be cause for putting you in the slammer. This whole zero tolerance mentality is just another way of saying "you have to be perfect" and Clair Schwan says that isn't possible. Overall, the lowering of permissible blood alcohol content pays way too much attention to the social drinker, and those people that haven't caused any harm to others while operating a motor vehicle. Instead, let's lock up drunks and repeat offenders, as that's the only way to get them off the road. They don't care if they are at or many times above the legal limit, they're going to drive intoxicated anyway. Open Container Law - another poorly targeted law that makes it illegal to have an empty glass, plastic or aluminum container in the passenger compartment. Clair Schwan notes that it really only makes a crime of carrying containers to the recycling facilities. Is that what we intended? Many don't think so. It's another example of a "preventive" law, and like other preventive laws it doesn't really prevent the thing we should be focused on - drunk drivers. There is nothing intrinsically evil about an open or empty container. Have you ever heard of one that has caused an accident yet? It's the heavy drinker behind the wheel that poses the danger, and so who cares if they are drunk and in possession of an open container? We should just be concerned that they're drunk. Let's repeal this law. It makes no sense. It simply follows what other states have done, and it has no basis in logic and reason. If people are going to drive inebriated, that's what we should be focusing on. State Lottery and Powerball - it seems every legislative session there is an attempt to bring a lottery and powerball to the State of Wyoming. Clair Schwan says it is plain to see that running a gambling organization is not a government function, so we shouldn't consider it for even a moment. Look at the states that have lotteries. Those states also forbid "running numbers". Well, if "running numbers" is illegal, then why is it okay to do it just because you're the state government? Clair Schwan thinks that "hypocrisy" just isn't a strong enough word for this. If a lottery is such a good idea, then let's allow it to be established and run by a private enterprise within the state. In that case, people can earn a good income from it. The reason the legislature doesn't consider this option is because their greed can't let them imagine others raking in all the money. Preventive Laws - the Wyoming Family Coalition sent out a questionnaire and it asked: Would you oppose or support legislation to restrict known pedophiles from entering places frequented by children? Of the candidates in the state races that answered the questionnaire, only Clair Schwan was opposed to such a preventive law. That's 48 in favor, and 1 opposed. Well, that's quite a ratio. Perhaps candidate Clair Schwan isn't thinking very well on this one because he stands alone. Click here to learn why preventive law prevents nothing. Smoking Bans - here is a clear violation of private property rights. People invest many tens of thousands of dollars to purchase private property, and the government wants to tell them how to run the business. It's just not right. Similar to rent control, the government is trying to tell a private party how they must operate a certain aspect of their business. We've mislabeled businesses as public places, and they really aren't. They are private places open to the public. If you don't want to do business in a smoke-filled environment, then do business elsewhere. That's what Clair Schwan does. Smoking should only be banned in places where you can't avoid going there to do business - the power company, the bank, the grocery store, the police station, etc. Everywhere else it ought to be up to the owner to decide on the smoking policy. Even "public place" smoking ban proponents won't ban smoking on the sidewalk or in a public park, and those are truly public places. Clair Schwan says that using this same logic, the government can ban smoking in your home if you ever hold an "open house" in order to try to sell it. After all, its your private property that is open to the public for the purpose of conducting business with the public. How is that any different than a hardware store or a restaurant? We often hear the excuse that smoking is a health hazard and children shouldn't be exposed to it. Okay, let's examine that angle. The children live with parents who smoke. They travel to the restaurant in a smoked filled car. They travel back home in a smoke filled car. And, we're supposed to feel good about ourselves because we saved those kids from 45 minutes of smoke in a restaurant once or twice a week? Clair Schwan says if the "do-gooders" were really serious about children's health, they'd be going after smoking parents for child endangerment. They're not, and why is that? Another excuse, used more often is that government regulates health matters like food processing, so this is just another health matter that deserves more regulation. It's a version of "the government regulates this and that, so it's okay to regulate nearly every aspect of our lives." Clair Schwan says it's not the same. Poison food isn't apparent nor avoidable, so it makes sense to have precautions like health regulations. Smoking is apparent and easily avoidable, so whatever hazard there is can be avoided if desired. The better solution is to pass a law that requires businesses to identify their smoking policy at the entrance to the building. In that way, patrons can avoid places that they think are uncomfortable or hazardous. It's a simple solution that doesn't violate private property rights, yet achieves much the same result. Clair Schwan wants you to know that he is not just a non-smoker, but an anti-smoker. He detests smoking. People who smoke have a foul stench about them and it is offensive. Nevertheless, Clair Schwan believes it is far more important to protect private property rights than it is to have a comfortable environment for non-smokers. New York has banned trans fats, Cheyenne has banned smoking, and what's next? Do we ban sugar, salt, fatty foods, air conditioning, hot sauce, incense or loud music, all in the name of protecting ourselves from ourselves and having a comfortable environment for every man, woman and child? No, absolutely not! Government goes too far, too often. Clair Schwan wants to put the brakes on government intrusion in our lives, stop further development of the nanny state, and throw a wet blanket on the idea that government should be involved in social engineering. We're not on the old TV show "Get Smart". If we were, then we'd only have a choice between Chaos and Control (played by the government). Fortunately, we have the choice of freedom as well, and Clair Schwan thinks that freedom beats control every time. Vote Libertarian and you'll be voting for core American values and consistent application of the principles of freedom, limited government and fairness. I'm done with Clair Schwan, take me back to Libertarian Candidates
|
