Showing posts with label candidates. Show all posts
Showing posts with label candidates. Show all posts

Saturday, October 22, 2016

Why I Oppose the New Mexico Denial of Bail Measure, by Freddie Joe Nichols III

Why I Oppose the New Mexico Denial of Bail Measure

Coming up on the ballot on November 8th is a ballot measure called, New Mexico Denial of Bail Measure, Constitutional Amendment 1. The measure's goal is to allow police time to investigate dangerous crimes while keeping the defendant locked up by denying them bail. It definitely sounds good at face value, "to protect community safety."

To be fair, the measure attempts to fix a few issues that we have currently like removing the portion that requires people who were previously convicted of 2 or more felonies to automatically be denied bail of 60 days after incarceration if they are accused of another crime, and also ensuring that non-violent offenders can be released even if they don't have the financial means to post bail. These changes would definitely be great wins in terms of due process, but there's more.

The measure removes the limit on how long the state can deny an individual bail. So, if a judge deems someone who has been accused of a crime to be a "danger" they can deny them bail indefinitely. Let me say that a different way. If someone is accused of a crime and hasn't had a trial to prove their innocence or guilt, a judge can still decide that they are dangerous and keep them locked up forever. The idea that a judge, or any state agent for that matter, can decide to keep an individual imprisoned forever just because they think that individual is dangerous is a major violation of due process. I'm sure during the American Revolution, King George III would have claimed all of our Founding Fathers were dangerous and imprisoned them forever if he were given the chance.

This measure, as with most measures, has some good and some bad. In my opinion the bad outweighs the good, and we will have better opportunities to address these issues going forward. Anytime I see "to protect community safety" at the beginning of a bill I start looking for the rights they are trying to infringe on this time. I can't in good conscience vote for something that has the potential to allow the state to indefinitely detain a person who has not been tried by a jury of his / her peers and convicted of a crime. I will be opposing New Mexico Denial of Bail Measure, and I encourage each of you to do the same.

In Liberty,
Freddie "Joe" Nichols III
Candidate for NM State Representative District 54


FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

  1. Nichols' campaign site

  2. Nichols' candidate Facebook page

NOTES

  1. Approximate reading level – 14.2


Copyright © 2016 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Chaves County, New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Eddy County, New Mexico, Libertarian Party of Otero County, New Mexico, and Freddie Joe Nichols III. All rights reserved.

Monday, January 28, 2013

OUR America Initiative Rally with Gary Johnson and Judge Jim Gray

Date – Monday, 8 April 2013
Time – 6:00 PM
Location – UNM Student Union Building (1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM 87131)

2012 Libertarian Presidential Candidate (and former two-time New Mexico Governor) Gary Johnson and 2012 Libertarian Vice Presidential Candidate Judge Jim Gray will kick off their 2013 OUR America Initiative Nationwide Campus Tour at the University of New Mexico Student Union Building on Monday April 8th at 6:00 PM.

The OUR America Initiative seeks to broaden the parameters of the public policy debate of current topics in the national arena. We look to enlighten the population about civil liberties, free enterprise, limited government, and traditional American values. It is our aim to increase the amount of discussion and involvement regarding all-important issues.

Hosted by Governor Johnson's UNM fraternity (Sigma Alpha Epsilon), this event will feature Governor Johnson and Judge Gray addressing the audience about issues facing America in 2013, followed up by an open question and answer session.

Attendance is open (and complimentary) to the UNM student body as well as the general public.

As part of the policy of the OUR America Initiative, information booths (complimentary) will be made available to all social and political groups interested in participating.

If your organization would like to reserve a booth (space is limited – first come, first serve), contact the Our America Initiative by leaving a comment below.

For more information about the OUR America Initiative (donations accepted), go to: http://ouramericainitiative.com/

Afterwards, some of us will get together at the Frontier Restaurant (2400 Central Ave SE) for an informal no-host meet-and-greet.


All rights reserved.



Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, August 17, 2012

Carla Howell: Mitt Romney = Big Government

Dear Friend of Liberty,

I ran for governor against Mitt Romney in 2002 in Massachusetts. I read his every press release, read every major newspaper article about him, and followed his every move throughout his governor campaign – and in each of the four years he served as governor.

Mitt Romney IS Big Government – to the core.

Which is why I nearly fell off my chair one day when I was asked by a libertarian, "Aren't you glad to have Mitt Romney as your governor? He's pretty libertarian, isn't he?"

It is critical that voters know the truth about Big Government Mitt Romney. Please forward the below column to every voter you know who would consider voting for him.

Thank you for helping to set the record straight.

In liberty,

Carla Howell

Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee

# # #

Mitt Romney: Champion of Big Government
By Carla Howell

Is Mitt Romney the "economic conservative" he claims to be? Especially when it comes to tax and spend policies?

Now that he's running for president, let's compare his words with his deeds.

Taxes

Romney claims to be anti-tax. He even "took" a "no new taxes" pledge when he ran for Governor of Massachusetts in 2002. "Took" is in quotes because he refused to sign that pledge. His signature wasn't necessary, he claimed. He assured us that he's a man of his word.

But Mitt Romney has been a champion of new taxes.

Mitt Romney proposed three new taxes while campaigning for governor: a new tax on vehicles, a new tax on campaign donations, and a new tax on building construction. They didn't get much fanfare in the media and were quickly forgotten.

Right before the 2002 election, he ran millions of dollars in ads portraying himself as a "no new taxes" governor. The media refused to set the record straight.

But that was only the beginning.

Each of the four years Romney served as governor, he raised taxes – while pretending he didn't. He claims he only raised mandatory government "fees." But government mandatory fees are nothing but taxes, and taxes are nothing but mandatory government fees. Romney's new tax-fees raised hundreds of millions of dollars in new tax revenue for the state government every year.

In addition to:

  • scores of new tax-fees,

Mitt Romney also increased several other taxes by:

  • "closing loopholes" to enable collection of a new Internet sales tax
  • passing legislation that enables local governments to raise Business Property Taxes
  • enacting a new tax penalty that raises Income Taxes on both individuals and small businesses.

This, he claims, is not raising taxes.

I suppose you could say Romney merely enacted bills that force taxpayers to hand over billions of dollars – which end up in the coffers of the government.

Quacks like a tax increase?

In 2008, Romney boasted that he was the first presidential candidate to sign a "taxpayer protection pledge," in which he promised to oppose "any and all efforts" to increase income taxes on people or businesses.

So he’ll call his tax increases "government fees" or "closing loopholes" or "penalties" or something else. But if Romney is president, the IRS will collect this money from you, your family, your friends, and millions of Americans just like you.

Government Spending

Mitt Romney claims to have cut the Massachusetts budget by "$2 billion." Sometimes he claims he cut it "$3 billion." The media gives him free advertising by parroting this myth repeatedly. They repeat it so often that even many fiscal conservatives and libertarians assume it must be true.

But these "cuts" were merely budget games. Spending cuts in one area were simply moved into another area of the budget.

In fact, not only did Mitt Romney refuse to cut the overall Massachusetts budget, he expanded it. Dramatically.

The Massachusetts state budget was $22.7 billion a year when he took office in January of 2003.

When he left office four years later, it was over $25.7 billion – plus another $2.2 billion in spending that the legislature took "off budget." (Romney never reminds us of this fact.)

The net effect of budgets proposed and signed into law by Mitt Romney? An additional $5.2 billion in state spending – and a similar increase in new taxes. Every year.

He claims to have done a good job as governor of liberal Massachusetts in light of the fact that it's a "tough state" for poor "conservatives" like him. He infers his hands were tied by the predominantly Democratic legislature.

But when it comes to tax and spend policies, he's not only in lockstep with the Democrats. He leads the way.

Each of the four years Romney served as governor, he started budget negotiations by proposing an increase of about $1 billion in new government spending. Before the legislature even named a budget figure.

Romney initiated massive new spending – without any prodding.

The legislature responded with a handful of line item budget increases. Romney agreed to some of them and vetoed others. The media helped him out again by making fanfare of his vetoes and portraying him as tough on spending – after he had already given away the store!

The Romney-Kennedy Alliance

But his grande finale was the worst of all: RomneyCare, Mitt Romney's version of socialized medicine.

By his own admission, he didn't plan his socialized medicine scheme until after the 2002 election.

During Romney’s governor campaign, he convinced voters that his Democrat rival would be worse – because she would saddle us with socialist tax-and-spend policies, he said.

But soon after he was elected, Romney started the drumbeat for socialized medicine. Three years later, he signed RomneyCare into law.

Voters of Massachusetts did not vote for RomneyCare. Mitt Romney foisted the granddaddy of Big Government expansions upon them without warning. He championed it from the beginning. Again, without any prodding from his Democrat rivals.

When Romney ran for U.S. Senate in 1994, his campaign popularized the derogatory term "Kennedy country" to describe the devastating effects of Ted Kennedy's "liberal social programs" on poor neighborhoods in Massachusetts.

Yet Mitt Romney stood proudly with Ted Kennedy while he signed RomneyCare into law.

Ted Kennedy has pushed for socialized medicine for decades. Romney fulfilled his dream. Kennedy lobbied the legislature hard to get Romney's bill passed. It was a Romney-Kennedy alliance.

Welcome to Massachusetts: Romney-Kennedy country.

Romney's socialized medicine law mandates everyone who doesn’t have insurance to buy it – or suffer income tax penalties. Both individuals and small businesses face steep fines if they refuse to give up their freedom to make their own health care choices. There's yet another "off budget" Mitt Romney tax increase.

Romney's mandate will cost individual taxpayers many thousands of dollars every year in health insurance premiums for unwanted policies – or force them to pay sizable tax penalties.

The total cost of RomneyCare in mandates and new spending? At least several billion dollars every year – to start. It will rise from there, as socialized medicine programs are wont to do.

Romney's law went into full effect in 2009. Its harmful effects were not felt until after the 2008 presidential election was over. Romney's time-release tax increase.

Romney's Words Versus Romney's Deeds

Smart moms tell their kids, "Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see."

That advice saved me a lot of heartache. And it will do the same for anyone who is leaning towards voting for Mitt Romney.

Candidate Romney campaigns for president with the words we're aching to hear. Words we want to believe. Candidate Romney tells us that he is a:

  • "fiscal conservative"
  • "friend of small business"
  • "tax cutter"
  • "waste fighter"
  • "opponent of runaway spending"
  • "tough leader who vetoes new taxes and needless government spending"

Let's follow Mom's advice: ignore candidate Romney’s words. Look at elected Governor Romney's deeds.

What does he do when he’s elected?

Mitt Romney hits up taxpayers with a variety of new taxes – while pretending he doesn't.

Mitt Romney jacks up government spending as much as any Big Government Democrat would.

Mitt Romney champions massive Big Government Programs – that made Ted Kennedy proud.


NOTES

  1. Original article

  2. Reposted —

    1. NMPolitics.org


Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Gary Johnson 2012 -- Peace is Cheaper

Current mood: excited

Gary Johnson 2012Peace is Cheaper



From the page of the embedded YouTube clip —

Republicans are Thelma. The Democrats are Louise. Together they are taking our nation over a cliff. We have a President and a majority in Congress who insist on endless war. But a majority of Americans are insisting on Peace. As our President, Gary Johnson will end the wars and bring our men and women home -- where we will rebuild and renew our broken nation together. We the People will have PEACE. Demand it. Donate to it. Elect it. Protect it. The fight for our liberty never ends.

Media coverage of this clip — KOB-TV (Ch.4) – Libertarian Party releases first ad featuring Gary Johnson


Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.


Tuesday, February 7, 2012

2012 Special Delegate Nominating Convention


Delegate Nominating Convention
66 Diner (1405 Central NE in Albuquerque) – Thursday, 1 March 2012, 6–8 PM

The Libertarian Party of New Mexico will be having a special convention on Thursday, 1 March 2012 for the specific purpose of nominating delegates from the LPNM to the Libertarian Party's National Convention, which will take place in Las Vegas, Nevada on 2–6 May 2012.

This event will occur concurrently with our monthly Liberty Forum.

To be eligible as an LPNM delegate to the LP's National Convention, you must
  • be registered to vote as "Libertarian" with the State of New Mexico.
  • have signed the Non-Aggression Pledge.
  • have paid $25 to the State Party as membership dues.
  • have paid $25 to the National Party as membership dues.

NOTES
  1. Links to this post

Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Freedom of Choice? What a Concept!

Freedom of Choice? What a Concept!
by Ron Bjornstad, LPNM Secretary and Sandoval County LP Chair
Letter to the editor to the Albuquerque Journal – Tuesday, 7 February 2012, p.A7
7th letter down from top on web version

Political parties exist for the purpose of endorsing and supporting candidates for political office. It should be up to the individuals who have chosen to belong to that organization to determine to whom they will give their endorsement and support. Why, as a nonmember, should I get to decide who you and your party will support?

No voter is prevented from joining a political party if he or she desires, thus having input into that party's candidate selection. No individual is required to belong to a party in order to run for office, although the state election code does put up sizable road blocks to anyone wishing to run without a party endorsement.

The whole problem of voter disenfranchisement exists because the government sanctions and, in fact actually helps finance, some political parties with taxpayer money. Any party wishing to hold a primary election to determine to whom it will give its endorsement and support, should do at its own expense, not that of the taxpayer.

Any individual or group should be able endorse or support any candidate they choose, without government sanction or financial support, and that individual or the members of that organization should have the sole right to determine the recipient of that support.


NOTES

  1. Original article – 7th letter down from top

  2. Links to this post


Copyright © 2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico, Ron Bjornstad. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Mike Blessing
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Follow-up with Steve Terrell (28 Dec 2011)

This posting follows up on previous comments to Steve Terrell.

On 12/28/2011 2:56 PM, Steve Terrell wrote:
>
> Thanks Mike. I was there this morning but didn't get a chance to meet you.

Glad to be of assistance!

> I have a technical question:
>
> I know the LP has a convention in May. I assume the state party will send a delegation. Will you be having a state
> convention before then to chose delegates and who to back among the 10 or so candidates? If so, when will that
> take place?

The LPNM's 2012 annual State Convention will take place on Saturday, 21 April 2012 at the Quarters BBQ at 3700 Ellison NW (see here for a map and directions – http://tinyurl.com/27rhyrn). Most likely we'll have a no-host meet-and-greet the night before, probably at the same location.

Details (speakers' list, agenda, etc.) will be posted here –
http://lpofnm.blogspot.com/2011/11/2012-annual-state-convention.html

> And if some reader of my story tomorrow wants to get involved with this process, what would they have to do?

In order to vote to nominate candidates for public office, they would have to make sure that they're registered to vote as "Libertarian" or "LIB" as the Secretary of State prints on the voter registration cards before they show up for the Convention.

For them to vote in internal party business (changes in the bylaws, party officer nominations, etc.), they need to :

  1. Register to vote as "Libertarian."

  2. Sign up as what the LPNM refers to as a "Caucus Member." Basically, this means that they've signed the Non-Aggression Pledge and paid $25 in dues.

> I assume only registered Libertarians would be allowed to take part in this process (if you do have a state
> convention or whatever). If they weren't already party members, when would they have to change their
> registrations?

If they just want voting rights at the State Convention, all they need to is show up at that Convention with "LIB" printed on their voter registration card, and sign up as a Caucus Member to take part in internal business.

If they want to be candidates for public office on the LPNM's ballot line, they need to :

  1. Register to vote as "Libertarian" before the Governor's Election Proclamation for 2012 comes out. Usually this Proclamation is put out on the last Tuesday of January.

  2. Sign up with the LPNM as a Caucus Member (see above).

  3. Get nominated by their peers at the State Convention (or a County Convention for offices contained entirely in one county).

  4. Download and thoroughly read the candidate guides available from the Secretary of State's office, as they contain all of the details required by the State of New Mexico – filing dates, signature requirements, etc.

    http://www.sos.state.nm.us/2012CandidateGuideInfo.html

______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing / 505-515-7015
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should — you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer — what's the question?


Copyright © 2011–2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Comments to Steve Terrell About Gary Johnson (27 Dec 2011)

On 12/27/2011 2:56 PM, Steve Terrell wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> I’m a reporter with the Santa Fe New Mexican. >
> I’m doing a story on Gary Johnson’s expected announcement that he’ll seek the Libertarian Party nomination for
> president.
>
> As state chairman of the NM Libertarian Party, how do you feel about that? I realize there are several other
> candidates, but how would you expect the former governor to do, both in getting the nomination and in the
> general election here in the state?

Sorry I haven't responded earlier.

I'm OK with Gary Johnson seeking the LP presidential nomination. Can't say I blame him if that's what he decides to do, considering that the GOP consistently solicits support in the form of time, effort, and money from its libertarian wing, then tells the people comprising that part of their organization to "Shut up and do as you're told." Those that don't – well, look at how the GOP machine treated Adam Kokesh in the 2010 primary for New Mexico's 3rd Congressional District.

I left the GOP and joined the Libertarian Party back in January, 1994 because of this sort of thing.

I guess that Johnson kept New Mexico in the black for eight years doesn't really matter to most Republicans. So much for their "support" for fiscal responsibility. So the GOP is going with the guy who created the precursor to ObamaCare in Massachusetts instead? So much for their "support" for free-market economics and health-care choice.

Same goes for the Second Amendment – Johnson has never treated gun owners as political footballs like quite a few Republicans (Romney, McCain, Giuliani, Dole, both Bushes) have. Yet the gun vote always seems to deliver for the GOP, and the GOP returns the favor with more abuse. Classic abused-voter syndrome – kind of like how the Democrats treat the gay vote (remember Patsy Madrid's efforts against any sort of same-sex marriages or civil unions back in 2004?).

But the Republicans sure are hot to stomp on Johnson for Gary's stance that the current version of Prohibition against marijuana needs to be rethought, if not scrapped outright. Never mind the fact that over fifty billion bucks are blown every year on it, and it only stops five percent of the drug traffic from producers to end users. Disregard the fourteen states that have set up some form of medical marijuana program through ballot initiatives and referenda. Didn't Obama promise to end the federal crackdown against medical marijuana dispensaries?

Both Republicans and Democrats also seem to be in love with dropping bombs on foreigners, too – especially when it's their guy in the White House giving the orders. That's something else where Johnson differs from both Obama and the "eventual Republican nominee," whether it's Romney or Gingrich.

What about Gary's chances? I think that he's got a good chance of winning the LP's nomination. As for the general election, that depends also on who wins the GOP's nomination to be his opponent. If it's Romney or Gingrich, I think that Gary will get some good numbers.

I hope to see you in Santa Fe tomorrow morning!

______________________________________________________________________
Mike Blessing / 505-515-7015
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico

Who owns you? Who runs your life? Who should — you or someone else?
Freedom is the answer — what's the question?


Copyright © 2011–2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Sunday, January 1, 2012

Comments to David Weigel about Gary Johnson (21 December 2011)

Current mood: excited

On 12/20/2011 6:11 PM, David Weigel wrote:

> Are you led to believe he's announcing as a Libertarian next week?
>
> thanks
> Dave Weigel
>
> David Weigel
> Slate political reporter

Well, he's been talking about the possibility of running on our ticket for a month or two now.

http://politico.com/news/stories/1211/70727.html
http://tinyurl.com/7m4pzza
http://tinyurl.com/8y29758

Before this, it seems like most of the media wouldn't give him the time of day.

Can't say as I blame him — he's been in the GOP's doghouse since 2001.

I've been seeing this sort of behavior towards libertarians from the GOP's insiders for years now — they solicit our time, effort and cash but they think that we're willing to pitch in without getting anything in exchange, i.e. candidates who express libertarian policy stances.

Then when we withhold that support, they call us "losertarians" and such.

The most asinine part of this is how a lot of GOP candidates pitch themselves as having "business experience." What sort of businessman offers an inferior product, then insults the potential customer for refusing to buy in?

Mike Blessing
State Chair, Libertarian Party of New Mexico
505-515-7015


Copyright © 2011-2012 Libertarian Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises, Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

The 2010 Candidates

The Libertarian Party of New Mexico's candidates for the 2010 general election are as follows:

State Representative, District 11Eric Pino

State Representative, District 16Mike Blessing

State Representative, District 19Mark Curtis

State Representative, District 22Elisheva Levin