Platform – Art Olivier for President

WE ARE THE ONLY PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN CURRENTLY OFFERING A LP PRINCIPLES AND PLATFORM-BASED, SPECIFIC AND TRANSITIONAL APPROACH TO ACHIEVING FREE MARKETS

FREE MARKETS ARE THE KEY TO SECURING SOLUTIONS TO THE NATION’S ECONOMIC PROBLEMS, ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL, PRESERVATION OF THE MOST THREATENED INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS, ESPECIALLY SPEECH AND PRIVACY, AND WORLD PEACE

The Libertarian Party (LP) has lost its way since my run as its Vice-Presidential nominee in the 2000 Presidential Election. Although LP principles still demand support for free markets, the current LP platform is brief, vague, doesn’t address the nation’s major economic problems, and fails to connect the dots to libertarian solutions, especially through the elimination of specific government policies favoring monopolies and other special interests. Since the LP offers little detail and “the devil is in the detail,” the party has allowed the major parties to control the narrative. It is no wonder Americans blame free markets for private-sector monopolies and wealth disparity.

In this 2024 Presidential election campaign, most candidates support the elimination of even fewer specific government policies favoring special interests, and often, not even for those policies that have been supported in the platforms. Most of their proposals are relatively minor, vague and/or “non-libertarian” reforms. Yet, most candidates oppose adding specificity to the platform and some say those proposals should be left to them. It’s like the LP is ashamed of, or disagrees with, support for free markets. Like our campaign, one other candidate has noted the limited reforms proposed by the other candidates, and seeks to abolish all government policies violating free market principles. However, our campaign also offers detailed preliminary plans for a more thoughtful transition that can avoid chaos, pain and derailment of future LP efforts. Our campaign focuses on first eliminating policies favoring special interests that do not benefit the American people rather than eliminating programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid should be voluntary, and the shortfall in revenues created by those who opt out would be funded by selling off government assets such as western lands.

LP PLATFORMS

The current LP platform offers opposition to a few specific government policies favoring special interests in four particular markets, and even these policies are not very specific and clear:

Parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children’s education (i.e., eliminate taxpayer funding of education). We support ending federal student loan guarantees, and abolishing the Department of Education.
Medical facilities, medical providers, and medical products (including drugs) must be freely available in the marketplace, without government restrictions or licenses. (i.e., eliminate certificate of need, medical occupational licensing and FDA approval of drugs).
Government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy, we oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production mandates.
Eliminate eminent domain.
There needs to be unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types (i.e., bank charters), Those who enjoy the possibility of profits must not impose risks of losses upon others, such as through government guarantees or bailouts. (i.e., FDIC)

The LP has decreased the length of its platforms from 30 pages in both 1992 and 2000 to 10 pages today, which compares to 92 and 66 pages used for the latest platforms of the Democratic and Republican parties. The economic sections have been purged down to 20 percent of what was in there, including dropping entire planks for agriculture, transportation and public utilities, and also those related to housing. Since the 1992 LP platform, the LP has removed most of the platforms that called for the elimination of specific government policies favoring private-sector special interests, and while these deleted planks are more specific, they should have had even more specificity and better explanations, including:

Taxes on the income or property of private schools should be the same for profit or non-profit schools. (i.e., tax advantages favor non-profit schools over for-profit schools).
Eliminate subsidies to, or restrictions of, medical education. (i.e., medical school accreditation)
Oppose FDA restrictions that make it difficult for individuals to secure treatment. (i.e., Food and Drug Administration does preferential enforcement of regulations, which should be eliminated for all drugs, and not just those for AIDs as mentioned in the platform)
The federal government should not have the power to nationalize energy companies. Trade policies that allow OPEC cartel governments to nationalize oil companies and manipulate and destabilize global oil prices should be eliminated.
Institute full rights to property owners for their underground oil. (policies now favoring Big Oil & Gas include laws allowing pumping from under other people’s land)
All government-owned energy resources should be turned over to private ownership
End government participation in the nuclear energy industry, including subsidies, research and development funds, guaranteed loans, waste disposal subsidies, and federal uranium enrichment facilities. The Price-Anderson Act limiting liability for nuclear accidents should be eliminated.
End government-created franchise privileges for private companies offering garbage collection, fire protection, electricity, natural gas, cable television, telephone, or water supplies. (e.g., state laws prohibit electricity microgrids)
End the National Banking System and state banking systems, (i.e., limiting the numbers and types of banks by charters) and the Federal Home Loan Bank System.
Oppose government control of resource use (i.e., especially housing) through eminent domain, zoning laws, building codes, rent control, regional planning, urban renewal, or purchase of development rights with tax money.
End government farm programs, including price supports, direct subsidies, and all regulation on agricultural production. (i.e., these favor traditional crops and junk food processors),
Stop the Securities and Exchange Commission from blocking ventures. (e.g., especially auto startups)

We believe the current LP platform should also be updated to oppose even more major and specific government policies favoring private-sector special interests than the 1992 platform including:

Eliminate monopoly protections on drugs, including long patent lifetimes and extensions, the discriminatory awarding of patents favoring synthetic drugs, non-patent protections, and research grants.
Eliminate all policies favoring Big Oil & Gas, including preferential environmental exemptions. (e.g., especially compared to coal)
Eliminate the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and Fannie and Freddie mortgage duopoly. Privatize forest lands that are used for wood products

In what appears to be inconsistent, LP platforms and/or candidates still tend to call for the elimination of specific public-sector monopolies like the Federal Reserve Bank, public health care financing like Medicare and Medicaid, public schools, and public (government) utilities. Libertarians also rightly seek to eliminate government agencies. But they need to make better cases.

TRANSITION PLAN

Our goal is to create free markets in all industries by starting with a targeted transition plan for deregulating specific government policies that favor special interests in the six major markets comprising most of the economy that have blocked competition, and gouged consumers with excessive prices and profits. From 1965 through 2023, prices have increased by an incredible 30 times as much for education, 23 times for oil, 22 for health care, and 17 for homes (compared to only nine for food, and under four for cars and apparel which benefit from global competition). Although the cost problems associated with banking and tech prices can’t be explained well by the consumer price index, private-sector special interests in these markets have also enjoyed excessive monopoly profits.

EDUCATION

PROBLEM. Since the 1960s, the costs of both K-12 and higher education have been skyrocketing, while quality has deteriorated, due to government restricting supply while demand was increasing from both increased opportunities for educated students and government subsidies. Public and non-profit schools lack the profit motive and competitive pressures to expand supply to educate enough students, compete on price and quality, and innovate with new educational technology. Moreover, these schools, who are supposed to serve society to justify receiving special benefits, have used the subsidy advantages to gain oligopolies, (i.e., limited numbers of sellers) and restrict competition from for-profit companies. Meanwhile, the government is giving taxpayer-funded grants and loans to students that are driving them into debt.

SOLUTIONS. We support free markets and seek to eliminate all government interventions, including those that limit supply and/or increase demand, as well as regulation. We oppose the use of taxpayer money for public schools and tax breaks for non-profit private schools. We oppose teacher certification and licensing laws. We oppose government support of students, including grants, tax credits and government-backed loans.

TRANSITION. All direct taxpayer funding of schools should be eliminated immediately. We recognize the potential need for alternative financing for students if families and charity prove insufficient, but any government funding must follow the students. We oppose state K-12 competition programs that produce higher test scores from students attending public schools by regulating and providing less funding to non-profit and especially for-profit schools. As increased competition reduces prices, we seek to phase out government support of students.

HEALTH CARE

PROBLEM. The U.S. health care cost “crises” started in 1965 when the government increased demand with the passage of Medicare and Medicaid, while also restricting supply. Moreover, quality deteriorated as evidenced by physician malpractice costs. The cost of prescription drugs has been increasing with development costs, most of which are from clinical trials whose costs are increasing with the cost of the health care system. So that the pharmaceutical companies can recover development costs, the government grants protections from competition that have limited supply. Health is the largest component of deficit spending at $1.7 trillion, roughly equal to the national deficit.

SOLUTION. We support free markets and seek to eliminate all government interventions, including those that increase demand and/or limit supply, as well as regulation. We seek to eliminate state regulation of medical education that accredits and limits enrollments at schools and training programs. We seek to eliminate state medical licensing. We oppose state certificate-of-need and similar laws that restrict the supply of medical facilities. We oppose tax-supported insurance plans, including Medicare and Medicaid. We oppose the regulation of insurance, including compulsory plans that force the healthy to subsidize the sick like the Affordable Care Act and restrictions on pre-existing conditions. We oppose monopoly protections on drugs, including long patent lifetimes and extensions, the discriminatory awarding of patents favoring synthetic drugs, non-patent protections, research grants, and preferential enforcement of regulations by the Food and Drug Administration.

TRANSITION. We seek immediate elimination of medical school accreditation and certificate-of-need. We support phasing out medical licensing in states, including lifting more restrictions on nurses and other mid-level practitioners. As competition from increased supply reduces prices, we support phasing out Medicare, Medicaid and tax support for private insurance plans. We seek immediate elimination of drug patent extensions, non-patent protections, and research grants. As increased competition from decreased demand and increased supply decreases the cost of health care and clinical trials, we seek to phase out the remaining monopoly protections on drugs.

ENERGY

PROBLEM. Oil and gas account for about two-thirds of total U.S. energy use. Energy crises have been caused by government favoritism for oil and by-product natural gas over other energy sources and the restriction of supply while global demand has been increasing. By preventing fuel diversification, innovation and competition, politicians are risking economic and environmental crises, and even war. High oil prices have led to 10 of last 12 recessions. OPEC, which has the world’s lowest-cost oil reserves, destabilizes global oil markets by not allowing their citizens to produce oil and manipulating supply. Moreover, the U.S. government has favored Big Oil & Gas companies holding fracking patents. Even those claiming to favor wind and solar are actually favoring oil and gas, since a recent Norway study has determined that wind and solar reduce natural gas used for backup by only 10 to 20 percent.

SOLUTION. We support free markets and seek to eliminate all government interventions, including those that limit supply, increase demand, pick winners and losers, and regulate production. We oppose trade policies that allow OPEC cartel governments to manipulate global oil prices. We oppose policies favoring Big Oil & Gas, including environmental exemptions (especially compared to coal), below-market government land leases, laws allowing pumping from under other people’s land, numerous tax breaks, and the use of eminent domain for pipelines. The problems caused by environmental exemptions are compounded by the states that make it difficult to sue polluters. We oppose government interventions supporting nuclear energy, including subsidies and loan guarantees, research and development grants, waste disposal subsidies, uranium enrichment facilities, and the Price Anderson Act, which limits liability for nuclear accidents. We oppose policies favoring intermittent wind and solar energy including mandates, subsidies, and regulations that don’t account for, and thus overvalue, unreliable generation. such as bidding and wholesale markets. We oppose non-refundable tax credits that allow development only by those with high incomes, especially the banks. We oppose the granting of monopolies to public and private electricity and natural gas utilities, including laws that block the use of alternative distribution networks such as microgrids. We oppose government favoritism for electric vehicles with preferential mandates and subsidies.

TRANSITION. We concede that the nation and world must continue some current government policies favoring oil and gas to avoid another energy crisis. While regulations restricting the use of oil and natural gas, and especially coal and nuclear should be lifted, liability laws in the courts should be progressively strengthened. The development of alternative energy sources must be extended beyond wind and solar. Although mandates and grants should be eliminated, all alternative energy sources should receive equivalent government benefits so they can enter and compete in the marketplace. Current subsidies for renewable energy would be acceptable if refundable tax credits were extended to everyone. Alternative distribution networks and especially microgrids should be legalized.

HOMES

PROBLEM. Rising home prices have been caused by government increasing demand, restricting supply, and manipulation of interest rates. Government financing of homes has preferentially increased the purchase of homes and often by those that cannot afford them. Regulations have increased the cost of materials. Local government regulations have blocked the building of new homes. The Fed’s cycling of interest rates has alternatively raised interest rates to make home mortgages less affordable, and then decreased interest rates to make home prices less affordable. Home builders have been unable to increase new supply rapidly at lower interest rates, because they knew the Fed would raise interest rates again. By stimulating the economy with deficit spending while the Fed has raised interest rates, Biden has prevented the lowering of both home mortgage rates and home prices at the same time!

SOLUTION. We support free markets and seek to eliminate all government interventions. We would eliminate the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and privatize or eliminate the Fannie and Freddie mortgage duopoly. They and the banks would no longer receive government support for providing home financing. We oppose local government regulations, such as zoning and permitting, and infrastructure improvements that preferentially limit the supply of new construction and increase rents and home prices. We oppose the mismanagement of forest lands and preferential sales of trees to wood product companies by the U.S. Forest Service and state forestry agencies. We oppose preferential environmental regulations that favor incumbents producing building materials, such as grandfather exemptions. We would eliminate the Fed’s manipulation of interest rates.

TRANSITION. We would eliminate the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), and privatize Fannie and Freddie. We would eliminate zoning and routinely grant permits and infrastructure improvements, except when opposed by community election. The government should privatize forest land used for wood products and tax the extraction of natural resources. We would eliminate preferential environmental regulations. We would transparently control the Fed’s cycling of interest rates until a relatively free market economy can be established.

BANKING

PROBLEM. The banking sector is an oligopoly consisting of a few large banks that control significant market shares and realize huge profits. Regulators have used charters to restrict entry and competition in the industry in favor of cartels of nationally-chartered banks, of which some have been considered to be “too big to fail.” States have also chartered banks. Fixed federal deposit insurance allows state regulators to permit local banks to engage in excess risk taking and impose the costs on banks in other jurisdictions. The promise of bailouts has allowed national banks to continue to loan to unregulated shadow banking firms like Blackrock that are buying up homes, creating a housing bubble and setting up the country for more bailouts.

SOLUTION. We support free markets and seek to eliminate all government interventions. We favor free banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. We oppose federal and state regulations requiring privately-owned banks to secure charters. We advocate for repeal of the Federal Reserve central bank system, legal tender laws, and banking, monetary and securities regulations. Those who enjoy the possibility of profits must not impose risks of losses upon others, such as through government guarantees or bailouts. In order to achieve rapid and sustainable economic growth with competitive and stable prices, we support a free-market economy.

TRANSITION. We would eliminate all bank charters. We would prevent the manipulation of interest rates by requiring the Fed to operate transparently. After a free-market economy has been sufficiently established, the Fed should be eliminated.

TECH

PROBLEM. Throughout the history of the U.S. technology industry, tech giants from AT&T to IBM to Microsoft and later the rest of the Magnificent Seven have created monopolies and squashed competitors. The Magnificent Seven now dominate major U.S. tech markets, valuations, and profits. Microsoft was ruled by the courts to have a monopoly over operating systems software for IBM-compatible personal computers. Apple dominates over high-quality smartphones, Amazon over e-commerce, Google (Alphabet) over Internet search engines, Facebook (Meta) over online social media, Nvidia over graphics processing units, and Tesla over electric vehicles. Their seven stocks account for almost 30% of the S&P 500 market cap. Antitrust actions against AT&T, IBM and Microsoft just led to the next monopolies. Tech giants often use monopoly power and profits to expand into related markets. Tech giants violate privacy, censor information, computerize discrimination, favor political interests, facilitate authoritarianism and cause other societal problems. Competition is needed to incentivize tech companies to produce what consumers want at a reasonable price.

Tech has dominated patents and copyright compared to other industries. Tech monopolies have been created by excessive intellectual property (IP) protections from competition, even when basic and some practical technologies were developed by the U.S. government, including the CIA and NSA. Patents, granted for 20 years, are often general and trivial, and block even largely unrelated inventions. Copyright, which is awarded for the life of the author plus 70 years, blocks even obvious solutions by others. Big Tech hires large legal staffs to accumulate broad IP protections and sue competitors for violating them. They also take technology from smaller businesses that can’t afford to defend patents by invalidating them in court and administrative hearings, pressuring sale of their company or technology, and copying them if they won’t sell. Obama promised patent reform, but he just made it worse by creating an administrative patent review process that employ politically-appointed judges who favor Big Tech.

SOLUTION. We seek to eliminate the monopoly power of tech giants to provide economic and technological benefits, and increase competition to reduce the ability to abuse the rights of customers. We support free markets, and we seek to eliminate all government interventions. Intellectual property (IP) protections from competition that government awards to the tech industry are excessive, especially considering that the technology is advancing so rapidly. We would eliminate government grants.

TRANSITION. The lifetimes of patents and copyright should be progressively shortened, including within trade agreements, unless the benefits of competition are outweighed by problems that may develop such as inadequate investment. We would also phase out government grants.

ECONOMY

America is now in big economic trouble. Monopolies and other special interests have slowed sustainable economic growth and caused wealth disparity. Instead, the government has created unsustainable growth by expanding the money supply and lowering interest rates through the Federal Reserve Bank, along with deficit spending. Now that inflating the money supply has created higher prices, the Fed has responded by raising interest rates, while the government has irresponsibly continued to increase deficit spending. These policies appear to be causing stagflation, if not a recession, along with dangerous debt levels.

FREEDOM AND PEACE

Free markets would preserve the most threatened individual freedoms and even world peace. Americans appear to be most concerned about rising threats to free speech and privacy. The problems are mostly due to government involvement in education and tech. Our solution is to eliminate government policies favoring monopolies in these industries, so those that attack free speech can be driven from the marketplace. In 1944, Ludwig von Mises concluded “What is needed to make a lasting peace is much more than new offices and a new court for the League of Nations in Geneva, or even a new international police force. What is needed is a change in political ideologies, and a return to a sound free-market economic system.”