The Californian elections for governor are coming up! The primaries will be on 8 June 2010, while the general elections will be on 2 November. Dale F. Ogden is running on a libertarian platform, promising a number of very attractive objectives. The following is an email I would love to write him, but can’t because he doesn’t have a personal email address listed on his campaign site (he does have an email you can reach if you want more information, but I rather he personally receive my email as it covers a lot of points which I think are important). Hopefully, he or some of his secretaries (or whomever helps him during his campaign) Google his name and read this.
Dear Mr. Ogden,
As a fellow libertarian, I can attest to the fact that the platform you are running on towards the race for governor of California is very attractive. I think that your basic objectives are noble and morally correct. These objectives include, amongst others, your plan to cut spending, including salaries of public employees and deregulate important sectors of the state’s economy. The fiscal future of California, and the citizens of California who will eventually pay for the fiscal mismanagement of the government, depends on the kind of decisions only a libertarian is prepared to make. Your campaign is definitely one worth supporting. I, however, wonder how you plan to deal with the most dangerous opposition which you will face, assuming you are voted in as governor. This threat is the union between public sector and private sector. What we can term the “public-private sector” has been one of the most harmful to the state: economically and socially. In this case, I am referring specifically to the prison-industrial complex.
Punitive laws, such as the 3-strikes law, have cost the people of California billions upon billions of dollars. Yet, despite the expenses they have brought no benefits. The majority of newly incarcerated prisoners were condemned for non-violent crimes. It is difficult to understand what impediments have been installed in order to guarantee this corrupt power to the private companies which actively collude with the state government in order to incarcerate the criminals and the taxpayer. I sincerely believe that without direct action against the prison-industrial complex any attempt to cut state spending will end in an absurd failure. In the 2009–10 budget, “corrections and rehabilitation” will make up nearly $10 billion worth of the ~$135 billion state budget. Cutting much of this, alone, would relieve a massive amount of pressure on the state’s fiscal situation.
How do you plan to tackle this problem? How do you plan to wrestle the powerful public-private complex and end a period of severe and disastrous mercantilism in California? How do you plan to relieve the Californian tax-payer from one of the greatest strains of his or her pocket?
Unfortunately, there are many voters who still support these punitive laws. They have simply not been educated on the disaster which they have invited upon themselves. One of the major problems any administration will run into is persuading the voter that more laws is not the answer to California’s crime. To libertarians with some background in economics, it is clear that the true solution is to increase the standards of living in California through capital accumulation and increased production. With a suicidal Federal government and Federal legal tender laws, however, such a rise in the standard of living of the average Californian is not very probable. I believe that you will somehow have to sell the fact that the opportunity cost of laws such as the 3-strikes law is higher than the benefits. The true financial burden on the taxpayer will have to be revealed. Otherwise, I fear that the vast majority of Californian residents will throw themselves against any plans to liberalize the prison system (and, judging by the amount of Californians which voted for the illegalization of gay marriages, I think that I am justified in assuming “the majority).
Rather than continuing my rant, I will end with a short summary of my point. Deregulation must come not only through the repealing of damaging state laws, but also through the reduction of corruption and collusion between the agents of the state and the agents of big business. Reagan-style “deregulation” (which was laughable not just because of his corruption in regards to big business, but because of the fact that there was no real liberalization of the U.S. economy) will only further hurt California, and just-as-importantly, may damage the libertarian intellectual movement indefinitely. I throw myself behind you, marching until the end, hoping that you are here to truly establish a government which endorses life, liberty and property.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Finegold
First, you can rest assured that any e-mail sent to my campaign will come to me directly. I have no one filtering my e-mail. I will make this clear on my web site. As I have posted on FaceBook, in response to Steve Kubby’s endorsement:
“One of the first things I would do in office is pardon everyone in prison for possession of marijuana and other illegal drugs. (A Federal Judge said we need to cut our prison population by 40,000; I’ll try). Next I’d pardon anyone with a criminal record for those crimes, then for all other victimless crimes.”
I agree that California’s three strikes law has been abused by prosecutors (as have many other laws) and that something needs to be done. The law needs to change and apply only to people who commit violent crimes.
One cannot commit a crime against the state (other than treason); rather, one commits crimes against persons. These are the only types of crimes for which incarceration should ever occur. I will use the power of pardon to dramatically reduce the prison population and the obscene salaries and benefits that the prison guard union has obtained through extortion of and collusion with politicians.