On October 13th Spike Cohen, the Libertarian Party Vice President candidate, visited James Weldon Johnson (formerly Hemming) Park here in Jacksonville.
Did you miss out? Maybe forgot something he said? We’ve put together a few timestamps to help you find that memorable moment.
Question 1 [25:07 – 27:22] What do we do about the media blackout regarding the Jorgensen campaign?
Question 2 [22:26 – 29:28] How do we continue the momentum we’re getting now for the next election cycle?
Question 3 [26:32 – 34:25] (a) How do we combat the fear culture (regarding voting for third parties)? (b) How do libertarians create a united front within the party?
Question 4 [34:34 – 35:56] What will you and Jo do on your first day in office?
Question 5 [36:00 – 40:23] For those new to the party, what is the best way to get involved, to support the party, help it grow and help others understand more of what we are about?
Final Words, Spike Cohen [40:29 – 42:20]
Make sure they walk away with a positive experience.
As we are an official affiliate of the Libertarian Party, we will not be recommending, or reviewing any candidate not running as a member of the Libertarian Party. The only Libertarian candidate on the local ballot will be the President and Vice President candidates who were elected by Libertarian delegates earlier this year.
The 2020 Presidential Election is not Jo Jorgensen’s first run. She was selected by the Libertarian Party delegates in 1996 as the running mate for Harry Browne, and has a long history with the Libertarian Party. Her platform highlights are:
End involvement in foreign wars, and bring over 200,000 troops back home
Remove red tape and regulations that prevent Americans from best tackling COVID-19
Work to end the war on drugs, civil asset forfeiture and pardon non-violent, victimless “criminals”
Work to eliminate trade barriers and tariffs, and remove immigration quotas
Use her presidential power to prevent new spending
A key feature within the libertarian community is that even Libertarian candidates must earn our votes. An alternative option for libertarian voters, or any voters, is to write in a candidate which may include their preferred candidate, NOTA (None Of The Above), or to simply abstain.
“This amendment provides that only United States Citizens who are at least eighteen years of age, a permanent resident of Florida, and registered to vote, as provided by law, shall be qualified to vote in a Florida election.”
Reason: Amendments to our state Constitution should serve an explicit purpose and provide an expected outcome. Absent either, the risk of unintended consequences dramatically rises. This amendment does not appear to have any explicit purpose (improvement, problem to solve) and no expected outcome. We deem this change as unnecessary.
“Raises minimum wage to $10.00 per hour effective September 30th, 2021. Each September 30th thereafter, minimum wage shall increase by $1.00 per hour until the minimum wage reaches $15.00 per hour on September 30th, 2026. From that point forward, future minimum wage increases shall revert to being adjusted annually for inflation starting September 30th, 2027.”
Reason: Any legislated constraint on prices or wages are threats of aggression against people entering voluntary contracts. Such constraints punish one party while limiting the other party’s negotiating power. When the minimum wage is increased by force of law it motivates employers to hire fewer low skilled workers. Therefore, some skilled workers will be left unemployed. As labor often represents the biggest cost, many businesses are incentivized to consider alternatives such as kiosks at McDonalds or raising prices, which also lowers sales and employment. This is one of the cruelest types of government regulation as it denies employment to people with the lowest skills.
All Voters Vote in Primary Elections for State Legislature, Governor, and Cabinet
“Allows all registered voters to vote in primaries for state legislature, governor, and cabinet regardless of political party affiliation. All candidates for an office, including party nominated candidates, appear on the same primary ballot. Two highest vote getters advance to general election. If only two candidates qualify, no primary is held and winner is determined in general election. Candidate’s party affiliation may appear on ballot as provided by law. Effective January 1, 2024.”
Reason: At the state level, the Libertarian, Green, Republican and Democratic Parties all oppose. This amendment is particularly bad for third parties because it allows only the top two vote getters to be placed on the ballot in the general election. This means you might see two Republican candidates, two Democratic candidates, or one of each. So long as at least two candidates, in any variation, are on the primary ballot third parties would lose access in the general election. In the most simple of terms, more parties on the ballot ensure candidates continue to work and earn your vote.
“Requires all proposed amendments or revisions to the state constitution to be approved by the voters in two elections, instead of one, in order to take effect. The proposal applies the current thresholds for passage to each of the two elections.”
No. 5 Constitutional Amendment Article VI, Section 4 and Article XII
Limitations on Homestead Property Tax Assessments; increased portability period to transfer accrued benefit
“Proposing an amendment to the State Constitution, effective January 1, 2021, to increase, from 2 years to 3 years, the period of time during which accrued Save-Our-Homes benefits may be transferred from a prior homestead to a new homestead.”
Reason: Because amendments to the state constitution are the highest legal authority within the state, and because increasing exemptions complicate property taxes unnecessarily, we oppose this amendment. It appears to be a useful amendment, deferring taxes an additional year–fewer taxes paid is always good. However, one must always consider the cost of any amendment to the state constitution. The cost here is that we increase the complicated nature of taxes within the state constitution, making it difficult to undo. Because constitutions–be they state or national level–should be hard, but not to hard, to amend, we oppose increasing complexity at this level.
Ad Valorem Tax Discount For Spouses Of Certain Deceased Veterans Who Had Permanent, Combat-Related Disabilities.
“Provides that the homestead property tax discount for certain veterans with permanent combat-related disabilities carries over to such veteran’s surviving spouse who holds legal or beneficial title to, and who permanently resides on, the homestead property, until he or she remarries or sells or otherwise disposes of the property. The discount may be transferred to a new homestead property of the surviving spouse under certain conditions. The amendment takes effect January 1, 2021.”
Reason: Though we recognize the sacrifice that many veterans have made we oppose discrimination through taxation, or relief from taxation–preferring, if we must, only taxes that are applied to individuals equally. We recognize this may be upsetting to some as our country has a long history of recognizing its veterans and holding them in high regard. Our goal is not in any way to diminish the harsh experiences many veterans have endured. Similar to No. 5, we oppose complexity and especially when legal authority carries a broader impact. Our goal is and always will be to fight to lower taxes for everyone.
Amending Jacksonville Charter, Granting City Council Authority to Appoint and Remove Four JEA Board Members
“Shall the Jacksonville Charter be amended to create a new Section 4.03 and amend Section 21.03 which will (1) grant to City Council the executive power to appoint and remove four members of the JEA Board and (2) amend the qualifications of Board members?”
School District of Duval County, Florida Surtax Referendum
School Capital Outlay Sales Surtax to Improve Safety and the Learning Environment
“To upgrade aging schools through repairs and modernization, to keep schools safe and to continue to promote a conducive learning environment, to improve technology, and to replace existing or build new schools, and share with charter schools for their allowable uses, shall the Duval County School Board be authorized to levy a 15-year half-cent sales surtax, with expenditures based upon the Surtax Capital Outlay Plan, and monitored by an independent citizens committee?”
Reason: As the Libertarian Party sees taxation as theft, we strongly oppose any increase in taxes. We additionally oppose on the grounds that most increases–if not all–should come at the expense of government spending elsewhere and not from the American people. This referendum does not identify specific costs, how the money will be spent, what happens in the case of cost overruns or if costs are under the annual increase. It also fails to identify any weight or authority of an independent citizens committee (do they have veto power, etc.).
Most importantly, the Libertarian Party of Duval County opposes government education. We instead find all schools should be private and voluntary. Though imperfect like many institutions, we believe privatization offers the highest value to the most students, and our students and community are best served by eliminating the failed public education system provided to American students.
Organized by the Liberetarian National Committeeand hosted in Jacksonville, FL by Kevin Ethridge
Saturday, August 8, 2020 at 12:30 PM – 2:30 PM at 4906 Town Center Parkway.
The main goal of this coordinated effort was to get Jo Jorgensen on the debate stage. Attendees will be decorating their cars, talking to the press, blasting music and passing out flyers. We came together to be noticed and demand fair representation of Jo Jorgensen and third parties in the debates.
At exactly 12:30 pm EST/ 9:30 am PST all the attendees throughout the nation went LIVE on social media to tell their friends and family about what we are doing and why. All the videos and photos were compiled for a short film after the event.Watch our promotional video and our interactive map showing all the convoys happening around the country.
Kevin Ethridge said on his Facebbok page “I’m going to order some Jorgensen merchandise to give away” We can use that to show from our cars as we drive on the caravan.
Presidential Debates Should Include All Candidates that a Majority Wants
But the criteria that matters is whether a majority of voters want a candidate on the debate, not what percent would vote for them. The purpose of the debate is to help voters decide who to vote for, not to give more exposure to the top two they currently prefer. And the additional candidates will bring up a wider range of issues for the public to consider.
The Presidential Election Commission, created by the Democrat and Republican party chairs, uses a biased criteria to exclude the third party candidates. Particularly since polls typically do not include third party candidates during the period (after Labor Day) when the candidates for the debates are selected. And it is suspiciously inconsistent that Democrats and Republicans had over ten candidates in their primary debates but they limit the general election debate to only the two from their parties.
Therefore, we petition the Presidential Debate Commission that the candidate preference criteria for selection to the Presidential Debates be changed:
From
Candidates must have a level of support of at least 15% of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.
To:
Candidates must have over 50% of the national electorate favoring their appearance in the debates, as determined by up to five selected national public opinion polling organizations (identified in the polls by candidate name, party, or as meeting the other two criteria), using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results of the 180 days previous to the time of the determination.
Take Action
On Change.org
Click on the link below to sign your support to this petition:
Write an email to one or more of these polling organizations asking them to:
Include in their presidential election opinion polls all parties or candidates that (a) constitutionally qualify and (b) appear in enough state ballots to have a mathematical chance to win.
Ask a poll question about whether or not these candidates should be included in the Presidential Debates.
With Sponsors of The Commission on Presidential Debates
The Commission on Presidential Debates does not publish an email address or have a Contact Us page on its website. But most of its sponsors do.
Write an email to these sponsors of the Commission on Presidential Debate.
Ask that funding to the Presidential Debated Commission be removed unless they change their criteria for inclusion
From
Candidates must have a level of support of at least 15% of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination.
To:
Candidates must have over 50% of the national electorate favoring their appearance in the debates, as determined by up to five selected national public opinion polling organizations (identified in the polls by candidate name, party, or as meeting the other two criteria), using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results of the 180 days previous to the time of the determination.
https://duval.lpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/logo-300x108.png00Ricardo Mejiashttps://duval.lpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/logo-300x108.pngRicardo Mejias2020-07-28 13:25:002022-03-09 22:11:15Get Jo Jorgensen to Presidential Debates
The U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1871 allows people to sue state or local officials for violations of civil rights in the US Constitution or laws. But, in 1967, the Supreme Court gave these officials “qualified immunity” from being sued, with no basis in law or the Constitution. It made suing state or local officials invalid unless there is a precedent of a successful suit with the exact same facts, which is very rare. This is an example of one of hundreds of these cases:
In 1999 the 9th US Court of appeals ruled that two Fresno, California police officers, who stole $225,000 in assets while conducting a search warrant, could not be sued because their actions did not violate the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution against unreasonable searches. The reason was that there was no precedent of a court award ruling against anyone engaging in a robbery while searching a home.
The Court stated that the officers “did not have clear notice” that stealing the property violated the Constitution. By “did not have clear notice” they meant that there was no precedent of a successful suit for the exact same action.
Officers did not know that stealing while conducting a search approved by a judge’s warrant was not an “unreasonable search” according to the fourth amendment of the US Constitution! What were the judges in the 9th US Court of Appeals smoking? This is an outrageous violation of our constitutional rights.
On June 1, 2020 the Supreme court turned down for consideration seven cases related to qualified immunity, essentially confirming the present court interpretations. But Justices Clarence Thomas and Ruth Bader Ginsberg have publicly stated their opposition to the qualified immunity doctrine.
We must restore the original meaning of this Civil Rights Act to prevent abuses by state and local officials, including police. Since states cover their employees with liability insurance to pay for damage awards, ending the immunity gives the state agencies an incentive to prevent abuses by its employees through improved discipline and training, since their insurance company premiums would go up more the more insurance claims the state agency makes.
What
to Do
Click the images below to contact your Senators and Representative to vote for bills to end Qualified Immunity for state and local government officials.
Be sure to let them know to support the Ending Qualified Immunity Act introduced by Libertarian congressman Justin Amash. A similar bill was introduced by Republican Senator Mike Braun.
Senator Rubio
Senator Scott
Rep. Rutherford, 4th Dist.
Rep. Lawson, 5th Dist.
https://duval.lpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/logo-300x108.png00Ricardo Mejiashttps://duval.lpf.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/logo-300x108.pngRicardo Mejias2020-06-22 16:59:002022-03-09 22:09:04Stop Abuses: End State Officials’ Immunity from Being Sued
