Libertarians Win in New Hampshire

An increase in heroin overdoses in New Hampshire has been an issue for the area. Free State Project participant Amanda Bouldin introduced legislation to make it legal to have a prescription overdose fighting pill available in any household, which can certainly work to save lives, and previously one would have to wait until the ambulance came to access. (www.concordmonitor.com...
). Another bill that was introduced and has now passed by Free State Project members was a bill to grant immunity to those either helping with a drug overdose or having a drug overdose (www.vnews.com...). So, people involved in an overdose will now avoid criminal trouble in New Hampshire.

This trend could mean that New Hampshire may be on track to become the first state to emulate Portugul's drug policies which remove all criminal penalties for users. While the state was the first legislative body to pass legislation to legalize marijuana, it was vetoed the Democrat governor who continues to be re-elected, and she continues to block New Hampshire from adopting more libertarian drug policies proven effective in Portugul.

The Free State Project has been among the few ideas successful at giving libertarians a political influence. Libertarians are a small minority of the population, perhaps 11% (www.pewresearch.org...). To deal with this, a large group of libertarians decided to concentrate their numbers and efforts in New Hampshire by moving 20,000 people there and participate in the political process or otherwise participate in their community as an out-of-the-system participant. While 20,000 seems like a lot, its a negligible fraction of the millions of libertarians in the USA alone. Almost 17,000 have signed up so far.

While the project does not formally start until 20,000 people have signed up, about 1,500 have moved ahead of schedule, and one to three dozen of them are now office holders. At least 12 are members of the state house representatives. They have been highly influential in preventing out-of-control budgeting typical of most states, and have a number of victories including expanding of the US 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

Libertarians basically never win, so I am very happy to see the project is succeeding in New Hampshire, and certainly I've got to share that on ATS. I missed their main annual event last week called Porcfest, but I may be at the next Liberty Forum 2016, which is now the biggest convention of libertarians in the United States. I really questioned whether it could work because 20,000 is a lot of people it is something like 1 in 75 people for the entire state, which only grows the libertarian population by a percentage point or two. I think the reason for its success despite the "small numbers" is that the good ideas spread and one person really can make a difference even if not the whole difference. The ideas are practical, down to Earth, and they work. Its not a utopia, but an improved reality.

a reply to: wayforward


Interesting.

I think the win is for Public Health and the people of New Hampshire not the Libertrians per se.

I agree with them on certain issues but don't on many more and find this idea of 'moving to New Hamphire' rather creepy actually. Rather like the Shee Bagwhan Rasnesh (known as OSO now) taking over that town in Eastern Oregon.

I understand the impluse but with a single point of view ruling any constituiency there is a real danger of loosing fundamental freedoms and check and balances and any opportunity for growth.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
a reply to: wayforward


Interesting.

I think the win is for Public Health and the people of New Hampshire not the Libertrians per se.

I agree with them on certain issues but don't on many more and find this idea of 'moving to New Hamphire' rather creepy actually. Rather like the Shee Bagwhan Rasnesh (known as OSO now) taking over that town in Eastern Oregon.

I understand the impluse but with a single point of view ruling any constituiency there is a real danger of loosing fundamental freedoms and check and balances and any opportunity for growth.

I'm not quite following on the creepy aspect. Is it more or less creepy to you than a hippie commune?

People die in wars fighting for the freedom of speech. Wouldn't moving to New Hampshire to "fight for our freedoms" actually be much less dramatic and extreme than joining the military to "fight for our freedoms"? The way I see it, if hundreds of thousands of people are willing to fight and die for freedoms in gunfights by joining the military, then hundreds of thousands of people should also be willing to simply move for the same purpose.

Do you feel like you are well represented by your governments at one of the local, state, or federal level? If yes, then you are not a libertarian. If no, then wouldn't moving somewhere else be something to consider?