A State-Party Divorce: News Miner 42

Also: The attack on freedom of contract, Republican craziness, gun laws, and more.

File the Party-State Divorce Papers

Complete Colorado published my article, “Time for divorce between government and political parties,” partly about Senate Bill 101, which died in committee. But the proposals are larger than one bill. I reiterate my call for a separation of party and state:

* Government has no proper business tracking voters or candidates by party affiliation. That’s just as crazy as, say, tracking us by religious affiliation. Government should track only whether someone is properly registered to vote or qualified to run.

* Government should set equal ballot access rules for all comers, regardless of party, presumably involving the submission of a certain number of signatures.

* Government should institute approval voting—vote for as many candidates as you want—or (less good) ranked-choice voting. This would eliminate problems of candidates splitting votes and voters “wasting” votes on candidates without a serious shot. Approval voting can ably handle any number of candidates on the ballot.

* Government need not run primary elections at all. But, if people prefer to winnow the field to two or just a few candidates, government could run a primary election to determine the more-popular candidates, irrespective of party affiliation.

* Political parties should be purely private organizations with no government privileges and and no direct power over any aspect of government. If parties want to set internal rules for endorsing candidates and restricting their members from petitioning onto the ballot, let them. Their only enforcement mechanisms would be kicking people out of the party and withholding endorsements, which, big whoop.

Read the entire piece.

The Legislative Attack on Freedom of Contract

Recent Complete Colorado published my article, “Bad bills intrude on freedom of contract.” In it, I review three bills: 1118 “to force businesses to pay employees to not work, if the work schedule is not sufficiently ‘predictable’”; 1146 to forbid employers to disallow tipping; and 1011 to force producers of farm equipment to share parts and information with third parties.

What do this bills have in common? They all seek to violate people’s freedom of contract. Following are some excerpts:

Among our fundamental human rights are those to produce and trade free from others’ arbitrary restrictions. Our right to freedom of association entails our right to freedom of contract. Generally, when people are free to associate and contract voluntarily, they choose to enter mutually beneficial arrangements.

But such freedom—unless it entails abortion, gender-affirming care, or non-tobacco drug purchases—is precisely what the so-called progressives in the legislature cannot and will not tolerate. . . .

Progressives typically will reply to such criticisms with the claim that contract negotiations often are imbalanced in some way. I agree they can be, which is why I favor things like voluntary unions, media attention, and public-relations campaigns by concerned groups. But the progressive presumption that politicians and bureaucrats can intelligently fix such market imbalances is crazy. Usually, blinded to unintended consequences, they make things worse. . . . But, without any substantial liberty-oriented checks in the legislature, I fear in many cases we will suffer the consequences of progressive hubris.

Read the entire piece.

Republican Craziness

At this point I am probably going to leave the Republican Party and join . . . the Democrats. If a free-market advocate joining the Democrats seems odd to you, read my November article on the matter. Why a reasonable Coloradan would leave the Republican Party is obvious: Its leaders are stubbornly, proactively, proudly, irredeemably crazy.

The AP has out this article: “Tina Peters lost the Colorado Secretary of State race but joined a wave of election deniers angling for state GOP chairs.” As I Tweeted, “The [Colorado GOP] has one last chance to turn back from insanity and start to rebuilt a party based on reality and sensible policies. Or it can elect a nutjob as chair and relegate itself to long-term irrelevance.”

Eric Sondermann opines:

The likes of Tina Peters, Dave Williams and Kevin Lundberg are battling it out to lead the Colorado Republican Party. In their world, the formula for a GOP resurgence lies not in acknowledging election results and pulling back from the sensational but in more of all of it.

The Colorado Sun headlines a new article, “The next Colorado GOP chair will either be an election denier or an election skeptic.”

Quentin Young reviews:

By far the starkest sign of the GOP’s slide into madness is the race for state party chair.

The slate of candidates comprises fringe figures, top to bottom, guaranteeing that no matter who wins the March 11 election, an extremist will lead the party for at least the next two years. The candidate with arguably the best chance of winning is former Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters, a national symbol of big-lie lunacy who is facing felony charges over her role in a security breach in her own election office. Given Peters’ popularity among grassroots Republican members, it is not a stretch to imagine a GOP leader conducting state party business from behind bars.

The other candidate considered a frontrunner is former state Sen. Kevin Lundberg, who has long exemplified the far-right impulses of the party. Climate denial and anti-abortion zeal marked his tenure as a lawmaker, and in recent years, he has aligned himself with the state’s most extreme election deniers.

I guess a reality-based Republican could try to stick it out inside the party and try to fight for a party oriented to reality and sensible policies. But at this point most (or at least the most vocal) activist Republicans oppose that.

One thing the continuing Republican implosion means is that Colorado probably will continue to go hard-left in its policies. This is not good news for people who care about things like free markets, economic vibrancy, quality education, the right to self-defense, and sensible use of public spaces.

Quick Takes

Guns: Dave Kopel discusses a bill to impose waiting periods on gun purchases.

Housing Restrictions: As I have argued, we need more freedom in housing, not more government controls. But the “progressives” in the legislature don’t care what I think. A committee passed a bill making evictions harder and in effect imposing rent control.

Taxes: Jon Caldara wants to further reduce the state income tax.

Business: “Are Colorado legislators trying to drive businesses out?” Krista Kafer asks. For additional background, see my articles on bills attacking freedom of contract and freedom in the housing market.

Thefts: I tend to agree that the legal system should treat thefts of automobiles very seriously. A new bill increases penalties to felonies for all autos.

Image: Jennifer Pahlka