2006

Now, with the 2006 Liberty Index, it is clear that the House Republicans have devolved into little more than an assortment of corrupt, pork-barreling, social conservatives. House Republicans are today substantially inferior to House Democrats on personal liberties, the difference ballooning to 25 points; again, while being better than House Democrats on economic liberties.

The number of Congressmen who could be described as "Libertarian" or as "Enterprisers" has dwindled to a mere handful, from numbers that had, prior to the invasion of Iraq, dominated the House Republican caucus. Only four members of the House of Representatives warrant the title of Libertarian, these being Jeff Flake of Arizona, our four-time repeat #1 Congressman; Ron Paul, who has finished #1 or #2 every year since returning to Congress; Jim Kolbe of Arizona, now retired; and, Dana Rohrabacher of California; who has always done well in our index.

Our decision, back in 2003, to oppose the authorization of the use of force in Iraq, and our call every year since for an exit strategy, has been proven correct. Bush risked the future of freedom in our country in pursuing "Operation Iraqi Freedom," and we have now lost the coalition of mainstream libertarians and conservatives that we had forged, along with our majorities in the U.S. Congress and the state legislatures of the country. At one level of analysis, a protracted war is death at the polls, as voters become increasingly soured on the party in power. At another level of analysis, a protracted war affects the psyche of the electorate, turning it inward, defensive and pessimistic, all of which are antithetical to the openness and optimism characteristic of a free society.

Constructing the Liberty Index
     As in all prior editions of the Liberty Index, the 2006 index is based on eighty roll-call votes, twenty in each chamber in the area of economic liberties and twenty in each chamber in the area of personal liberties. In the economic liberties component of the index, the votes cover taxing, spending and regulation, as well as agricultural, trade, labor, energy and environmental policies. The twenty votes are selected to span the entire range of economic issues, not over-represent any particular area, and to include a mix of easy, difficult and middling votes. I make the final decisions as to the exact list of votes, following a process that involves circulating an initial, proposed list of votes among a small and evolving group of persons each of which either is currently or was formerly associated with the Republican Liberty Caucus. In this process, I try to accommodate all the concerns expressed, which I am often able to do. But, sometimes, an element of compromise is required. I have never had a major problem with assembling the list of economic votes. This year, for the second time, I had a minor problem; this one being an unexciting list of votes in the Senate.

In the personal liberties component of the index, votes cover freedom of speech and of religion, the right to keep and bear arms, equal rights, due process, transparency in government, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and respect for privacy and for the family and local government. Some of these concerns align with the liberal perspective, and some with the conservative perspective. Yet other concerns are embraced by neither liberals nor conservatives. Because of the uniqueness of the Republican Liberty viewpoint, assembling a representative and balanced list of personal liberties votes has often been challenging. Sometimes we have attempted to construct a "synthetic" Republican Liberty position by including off-setting liberal and conservative votes, e.g., one vote in which access to abortion by adults is supported and another in which parental notification regarding access to abortion of non-emancipated minors is supported (note: the RLC takes no position on abortion other than opposing funding, but given that abortion is legal, the index has opposed making access more burdensome than comparable medical procedures).

Some Interesting Votes
     Some of the more interesting votes in this year’s Liberty Index include House votes on horse meat and on emergency evacuation of pets. As libertarians, we tend to believe that the government should not regulate what people put into their bodies. House vote #433 making human consumption of horse meat illegal passed overwhelmingly, reflecting that few people have any qualms about using the government to force their prejudices onto other people. Perhaps we should take a vote on skirt lengths, whether men should have beards, and which paint colors should be used in people’s homes.

House vote #178 was to direct FEMA to develop plans for the evacuation of pets during emergencies. It passed 349 to 24. It is naïve to think the purpose of taxing and redistributing wealth will long be to benefit the poor. In the end, the purpose of taxing and redistributing wealth will be to benefit the middle class, as that’s where the votes are. Over time, the welfare state in the United States will increasingly pursue the inane idea that everybody can live at the expense of somebody else.

Also among the House votes are two trade measures, one dealing with Oman (#392) and the other with Vietnam (#519). Some might think it curious that the vote to free up trade with Vietnam passed with a larger majority than the vote to free up trade with Oman. The simple explanation for this outcome is that Democrats are o.k. with free trade with countries like Cuba and Vietnam, but not with countries like Colombia and Oman. That should tell you something.

Over in the Senate, vote #136 concerned setting a legal minimum wage for aliens in agriculture equal to "prevailing wages." The Democrats voted against this bill, because they knew it would not be in the interest of aliens to be prohibited by such a legal minimum wage from competing in the marketplace. Conversely, the Republicans who opposed comprehensive immigration reform all voted for this legal minimum wage bill because they wanted to take away the ability of aliens to compete in the marketplace. So, it turns out politicians really do understand that legal minimum wage laws hurt the very people they supposedly benefit, and aren’t as stupid as they appear to be.

Best and Worst Scores
     In the House, there were three perfect scores of 100 in the economics component of the index: Flake, Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia and Brian Bilbray of California. Four others got only one vote wrong, Chris Cannon of Utah, Jeb Hensarling of Texas, Randy Neugebauer of Texas, and John Shadegg of Arizona, one because of the pet evacuation vote, another because of a FEMA vote, and two because of a vote to establish a federal program to benefit the wine and grape industry. Fifty-three Democrats got exactly zero in the economics component of the index, and another 44 got only one vote correct. There can be no doubt as to what these people are going to do, if and when they consolidate power. 3

In the House, there were no perfect scores in the personal liberties component of the index. Nor were there any zeros. Paul again finished tops in this category, followed closely by Flake and Kolbe. David Obey of Wisconsin, a Democrat, was fourth, followed by 38 other Democrats and an independent who caucuses with the Democrats. The bottom 44 scores were all registered by Republicans.

As in several recent years, I am reluctant to draw any conclusions based on the Senate votes. Nominally, eight Senators, all Republicans, are described as Libertarian: Martinez (FL), Craig (ID), Hagel (NE), Lugar (IN), Brownback (KS), Enzi (WY), Sununu (NH) and McCain (AZ). But, results in the Senate seem this year as in other recent years to be inordinately affected by partisanship. Differences among Senators may, therefore, be exaggerated and should probably be viewed with caution.

Clifford F. Thies e-mail

Past Chairman, Republican Liberty Caucus
Professor of Economics and Finance,  Shenandoah University