RE: [lpsf-activists] LPSF Recommendations on the State Ballot Measures for the June Election

I don’t think we should support Donnelly. A quick look at my recently arrived state voter guide suggests there are others running for governor who may be worth a deeper look. One or more of them may be more libertarian than he is.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))

Hi Starchild and Marcy! I'll probably vote for Donnelly since there is no Libertarian running this time. I met and spoke with Robert Newman at the gun show in January. He's a neocon, disappointing, and did great on the economic part of the Nolan Quiz but not so good on personal issues. I did not speak with Jonathan Jaech at the convention, but at this point I think we should be safe to endorse him for sure. His statement in the state booklet is pithy and to the point. I like George Yang for Lieutenant Governor, since I met him at several events and he impressed even Phil. I invited him to speak at our next meeting but never heard back from him. At this point, I would say, let's just endorse Jonathan and recommend John Dennis and leave the rest for discussion at our next meeting in a little more than a week.

Thanks!
Aubrey
  

I don't think we should support Donnelly. A quick look at my recently arrived state voter guide suggests there are others running for governor who may be worth a deeper look. One or more of them may be more libertarian than he is.

Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))

From: Marcy Berry
Sent: May 1, 2014 6:21 PM
To: "lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com"
Subject: RE: [lpsf-activists] LPSF Recommendations on the State Ballot Measures for the June Election

Hi Aubrey and All,

As I recall, LPSF voted to support (not endorse) John Dennis. Are we placing something on the LPSF website? Should I write something?

We have only one Libertarian running, Jonathan Jaech for CA Attorney General, who you have spoken to. Are you writing something on him? Do you want me to?

Anybody want to say something supporting (not endorsing) Tim Donnelly?

BTW, CA LP still has 2012 and 2013 recommendations up, but I see nothing on 2014. So we should say something about the state candidates we support.

Marcy

________________________________
To: lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com
From: aubreyfreedman@yahoo.com
Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 07:29:06 -0700
Subject: [lpsf-activists] LPSF Recommendations on the State Ballot Measures for the June Election

Hi All! The state voters handbook was mailed out about a week or so. Please take a look at Props 41 and 42. This is my write-up and take on them. Please review and advise if my recommendations for our web page for this election are OK. Please respond by the week-end to allow enough time for us to post them on our website for voters looking for guidance. Early voting starts next Monday.

Prop 41-Veterans Housing & Homeless Prevention Bond Act

of 2014. What if you created a
government program that hardly anyone used? What would you do? That is the
problem posed by this ballot measure. Few veterans have been taking advantage of the Veterans’ Home Loan
Program, which has been a self-supporting program because the veterans must pay
the money back as they become property owners. So the politicians want to divert $600 million from the self-supporting
program to create another government giveaway program paid for by the taxpayers. This measure will be great for the “nonprofit”
developers that will obtain low-interest loans at taxpayer expense to build government
rental housing that makes the veterans more dependent on government. We prefer the current program that at least encourages
veterans to elevate their standard of living via home ownership and expects
them to repay their debt over this proposed program that will lead to more
dependency on government and will be a boom for crony capitalist
developers. Therefore we recommend a NO
vote.

Prop 42-Public Records. This measure will not increase or decrease the scope of government in

our lives. It merely moves the cost of
compliance with sunshine laws from the state government to local
governments. In keeping with the idea
that more local control is better than control from Sacramento, it makes sense
for local government agencies to pay their own costs of transparency so they
can better manage them. Therefore we
recommend a YES vote.

Hi Aubrey,

Agreed. What is more, I would not even bother to dig for some redeeming quality in candidates that are not Libertarian. I only asked about Donnelly, because I thought at one time some on the list liked him; I don't particularly do. I don't subscribe to the idea of recommending "the least bad" either.

Marcy