What secret sauce could be used to entice San Francisco voters to try libertarianism? Libertarians consider this a challenging recipe, since the City is a bastion of progressive politics. However, as a third party, forever battling the Twin Goliaths, we are no stranger to challenge.
Walking into Adobe Books, an old-fashioned neighborhood bookseller located down the street from me in the Mission at 3166 16th Street, feels like walking into a time warp. It's one of a dwindling number of stores in the area with a real bohemian look and feel to it.
What are Unelected Folks Serving YOU Here!?
With no Libertarians seeking local office this year, the LPSF is not formally endorsing any candidates. However, we have made a few recommendations in races where one or more candidates appear to be significantly more pro-freedom (or in some cases perhaps less anti-freedom!) than their opponents.
First and foremost, we proudly recommend a vote for John Dennis, the Ron Paul Republican opposing Nancy Pelosi for Congress. Pelosi's longstanding statism and anti-democratic behavior in refusing to debate any of her challengers since first being elected in 1987 aside, John has shown himself to be a solid, principled advocate of both civil liberties and limited government, Libertarian in all but name.
Prop 30-Temporary Taxes to Fund Education-NO. California is already the sixth highest state in taxes. By taxing everyone with a ¼ cent sales tax increase and also the wealthy with higher personal income tax rates, California will encourage consumers and companies to move to other lower-tax states. Instead, the state should balance its budget by enacting pension reform and reducing bureaucracy.
DECLARATION OF POLICY OPPOSING CORPORATE PERSONHOOD.
Opposes artificial corporate rights and giving corporations the same rights entitled to human beings. Maintains that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are intended to protect the rights of individual human beings("natural persons"). Maintains that United States Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United vs the Federal Elections Commission (January 21, 2010) presents a threat to democracy by allowing unlimited corporate spending to influence elections. NO.
WATER AND ENVIRONMENT PLAN: This voter initiative was placed on the ballot by the “Restore Hetch Hetchy” group. It calls for development of a long-term plan for creating a “more sustainable water system,” which would include development of local, as opposed to Hetch Hetchy, water sources. It also calls for a plan of water recycling, reclamation, conservation, improved storm water capture, replacing hydropower with wind and solar energy, increasing salmon population on the Tuolumne River. This plan must provide for sufficient water resources to “allow for the Hetch Hetchy Valley to be returned to the National Park Service and restored as part of Yosemite National Park.” NO
GROSS RECEIPTS TAX: This amendment to the Business Tax Regulations Code creates a new business tax based on gross receipts, and replaces the current business payroll tax gradually over 5 years, beginning in 2014. Businesses with gross receipts of less than $1 million annually will be exempt from the gross receipts tax. Rates will vary depending on the type of business and its annual gross receipts. NO.
Proponents argue that a payroll tax is a tax on hiring and reduces employment in San Francisco. By the same logic, a gross receipts tax is a tax on selling goods or services, and reduces the economic activity from which wages are paid.
Who benefits from Proposition E:
CONSOLIDATING ODD-YEAR MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. We have no recommendation.
HOUSING TRUST CHARTER AMENDMENT: Creates a Housing Trust Fund by setting aside general fund revenues to create, acquire and rehabilitate affordable housing and promote affordable home ownership programs. $20 million would be set aside in 2013. An additional $2.8 million would be set aside each year after that, for the next 11 years. NO.
With this measure City government is attempting to subsidize a much greater portion of residents. As always, the gains of those who receive subsidies are made at the expense of those who do not.
What changed: