Jobs
Governments do not create jobs, only people do. To cure the unemployment problem, all that must be done is to stop the government interventions that discourage employment with harmful tax, labor, and regulatory laws in the first place. The only barrier preventing our society from succeeding in fixing the unemployment problem is the separation of the state’s harmful interventions from the economy.
The typical, dime-a-dozen schemes by career politicians primarily consist of resorting to the printing press or market interventions such as “jobs programs.” We must always remember that GOVERNMENT HAS NOTHING – it must create the dollars out of thin air or tax someone else to be able to distribute out funds in the first place!
Bailouts & Corporatism
The government should not be issuing special favors to any corporation for any reason, as to do so the government must first steal from someone else. When government hands out taxpayer money to select groups, they have the advantage of using it first – paying higher wages, creating jobs that have less economic benefit to society, and investing or leveraging money to the detriment of their competition.
The bailouts and stimulus plans served to benefit the government’s favorite corporations at the expense of every individual in America. By creating more future debt, the government has worsened the present imbalances and placed our next generations into bondage. Whether it is the military-industrial complex, Big Oil, Big Pharm, Big Ag, or the financial firms who bankroll their Establishment politicians into power, the crony corporatism and revolving door between the Treasury Department, the FED and Wall Street must end.
We must realize that much of the government-sponsored regulations put in place for “safety” or “fair trade” merely serve to increase bureaucracy, which increases the end cost to the consumer, prevents competition from smaller firms, and creates a higher barrier of entry for new businesses.
Free enterprise – never to be confused with government-sponsored corporatism – is the most just, most humane, and most prosperous economic system the world has ever known. As Congressman, I will never award special favors or bailouts to corporations and bankers.
Congressional Accountability
Perhaps the most important responsibility of a congress is accountability which is why I present a novel-yet-simple idea called “Our Open Office.” Offering you the ability to have a public voice in the government, to debate, comment, and criticize on every House floor bill. You can submit new bills, summon me to an “On-Demand” town hall, and read my monthly reports where I will be accountable to you and inform you not only HOW I voted but more importantly WHY I voted.
This idea is described here:
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/our-open-office-plank
Besides this, I am offering what is most sorely needed in Congress – an independent voice that is not subject to the whims and commands of the Republican & Democrat parties with their special interests. As a true independent with no party, I do not accept corporate PAC or lobbyist money.
Veterans
It is the duty of Congress to provide care for any physical or psychological damage veterans have suffered while defending our country. Service members shoulder a heavy burden when they volunteer to risk their lives for our country. They perform a necessary function in our society and for their service veterans receive deserved benefits and gratitude. However, the greatest way to honor them is to keep them out of unnecessary conflict. The only just war is one carried out in self-defense, as a non-aggressor, and as a last resort.
It’s important that we have a strong military to deter attacks against the our country and protect it when attacked. However, asking our young men and women to participate in unjust war is a moral abyss that we as a country should never leap into. If we aspire to be a just nation ruled by laws we must resolve to never ask our military men and women to engage in unconstitutional warfare and nation-building missions.
Foreign Policy
Iraq – Without a declaration of war, the Iraq War is an unconstitutional and illegal war as it conflicts with the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. In dereliction of their duty and oaths of office, the House voted down by unanimous vote a motion in committee to follow the Constitution and declare war in H.R.J. 114, the bill that authorized President Bush to invade in March 2003.
Afghanistan – I will not approve spending to extend this unconstitutional war of aggression against Afghanistan and Pakistan. As Congressman, I will drive for a rapid immediate and orderly withdrawal from Afghanistan and redeployment to protect America’s sieve-like borders. I support increasing the reward for the capture of Osama Bin Laden forty times from $27 million to over $1 billion. I favor the use of constitutional Letters of Marque and Reprisal to address the threat of rogue enemies by granting special warrants and bounties for marked terrorists to be brought to justice.
Terrorism – Addressing the threat of suicide terrorism by the use of occupational, conventional armies has only worsened the situation at the extreme cost of hundreds of billions of dollars and thousands of lives. To defeat suicide terrorists one must capture the current generation and prevent the next generation from being created from collateral damage and blowback. Our armies in Iraq and Afghanistan are creating more future terrorists and aggression against our country. Letters of Marque and Reprisal would be extremely cost-effective – or we can choose to let the “War on Terror” grind on for another 9 years as our economy crashes. The annual $1+ trillion military spending is not economically sustainable.
Sound Money
Sound money is the hallmark of a prosperous society, yet the US dollar is not backed by anything. Sound money not only imposes fiscal discipline upon government, impeding reckless federal spending and imprudent warfare, but it also provides a stable unit of account, store of value, and medium of exchange for entrepreneurs, businesses, and individuals.
When the Federal Reserve inflates or deflates the money supply, there is no net benefit to society whatsoever. Obviously, the key to prosperity does not lie in running a printing press endlessly, like Zimbabwe, and it defies logic that America’s prosperity would increase if every American helped deflate the money supply by burning a $100 bill.
Inflation and deflation are simply methods to redistribute wealth. It is easy to see that inflation benefits debtors and hurts savers on fixed incomes, like many retirees. Conversely, deflation benefits savers and hurts debtors. However, there is no net gain. In large part due to the burden of the $13 trillion dollar debt, the American government chooses inflation to avoid insolvency. We must return the money power from the central bankers to the people.
Income Tax
The federal income tax is an unnecessary and immoral tax. I am in favor of abolishing the federal income tax and eventually the entire IRS. YOUR income from YOUR labor belongs to you and no one else, especially the government, has the right to steal it from you. If we cut federal spending back to the size it was in 2005, we would eliminate the need for the income tax altogether.
The federal income tax code is time-consuming, confusing and baffling for many Americans. The code itself now consists of 3.4 million words and if printed would fill 7,500 pages and regulations together were 66,498 pages long in 2006. The taxpayer’s 1040 instructions are 161 pages long. Americans spent 6.4 Billion hours filing their taxes in 2006.
America’s “Tax Army” employs more people (1.2 million) than we have armed forces stationed in the United States (0.9 million). Collecting taxes is a completely non-value added task, adding nothing to our economy. Some of our brightest minds – lawyers, accountants, and computer experts – pound away at keyboards trying to figure out either how to plunder more money from others or find loops in the tax code to “save costs” for their clients. The total cost of collecting taxes is estimated at $63 billion, ironically just $4 Billion short of funding general government and law enforcement! The IRS employs 91,000 and will spend $11.6 Billion in 2009 collecting taxes.
Jake, I’m checking out your new website for the first time. As usual, your platforms are sterling! I’ll play with the other links this evening and will report in. Maria
Jake,
I like almost all of what you say above. However I completely disagree with your wish to increase the bounty on Bin Laden to $1 Billion. First, and most importantly, if it should ever be claimed the money is coming from the taxpayers. Regardless of the actual cost per citizen/taxpayer, that’s a $1 Billion burdern that could be removed from the people or spent on a legitimate service. Secondly, bin Laden is dead, so the bounty is moot anyway.
While I agree that our military actions in the mid-east are doing nothing but cultivating more hatred of the US, and breeding future terrorists, I think it is important to realize that the entire War on Terro is based on lies. Now I’m no fool, and I understand it would be political suicide to come out and state that the official story of 9/11 is a lie and coverup, but the facts are there and I would just be more comfortable knowing that you would not have supported going to war in Afghanistan, even if the delcaration had been offered Constitutionally. Regardless, I do appreciate your position against nation building.
Anyway, good luck. I can’t vote for you as I’m not in your district but I will be keeping my fingers crossed for you.
Right on Jake, take the fight to ‘em !
Dear Steve -
If you read my full plank on Afghanistan I think you will understand my position better. I would not have supported a declaration of war as the war was not just. An appropriate letter of reprisal – which is an act of war – I would have supported.
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/afghanistan-war/
Go Jake!
ok… so I’m checking out your site for the first time and I’m impressed with most of what I see… I would like to know a little more about where you stand on environmental issues and policies. I am involved in some sustainable living projects and I would be saddened to find out that you subscribed to a “drill baby drill” philosophy…
Dear Jim -
I am working on a piece on the BP spill – not a complaint article, but a discussion on what to learn from it, but to answer the question, no not “drill baby drill.” A short summary is the local people should have the power to decide since they are the ones most affected — just ask a Louisiana shrimp farmer.
My personal take on the environment is that of a conservationist (literally to conserve natural resources) not a preservationist – though this is fine for parks and the like.
You can email at jaketowne AT gmail.com if you like
Jake
Jake, I see your support on the Daily Paul. Living in Florida and knowing no one in your state, I had not ventured onto your website today to see what all the buzz was about. A very solid platform! I wish you much success. I am working on the campaign down here for U.S.Senate-Alex Snitker (L) another constitutional man with an extremely similar platform. Cheers for Liberty in 2010! The people shall prevail
Like Jim, I’d like to see an environmental position statement. The BP disaster is a striking example of the need to think of these issues globally.
Dear Kent/Jim -
Here is a statement on hydraulic fracturing. Near the end I do talk about my overall stance on the environment.
http://towneforcongress.com/economy/solutions-with-hydraulic-fracturing/
In liberty,
Jake
Jake what is your stand on the tax cuts for middle income class that from the Bush Era? Also will you support the end of tax cuts for those making over $250,000 or shall they continue?
“Jake what is your stand on the tax cuts for middle income class that from the Bush Era?”
I support continuing them. I think you may want to read my income tax plank. It’s the people’s money, and remember it’s a tax INCREASE right now.
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/income-tax/
“Also will you support the end of tax cuts for those making over $250,000 or shall they continue?”
If it’s the Bush tax cuts, still support continuing them. If not, I’d want to take a look at the specifics before commenting. If you are referring to a specific part let me know. Not many are aware that 50% of all Americans pay just 3% of the total individual income taxes as of 2009. It’s very possible to have 50% of all Americans pay no income tax yet again. I would work to increase the exemption limit dramatically so the poorest get to keep their income as they could use it the most, however the change will apply to all income brackets.
I can’t vote for you because I live in Michigan, but you look like an outstanding candidate. We need more people like you running for congress and the senate. Good luck with your campaign.
I’m registered in the 15th district, and I always try to vote a none party ticket, but I don’t see how we could both make our money sound again and cut our federal revenue by 45% (removing the federal income tax).
I realize that the argument could be made that the extra purchasing power could help boost the economy, thus increasing the tax revenue as a result, but that would only apply to people who would immediately spend the extra money that would have been paid as income tax. What about the huge revenue whole that would remain from the highest tax brackets?
Jake,
I am in the 15th Congressional District. Within your plank you state that eliminating the overseas military bases would eliminate the need for an Income Tax. My questions are specific to how would you work your way around the need for ready deployable troops, treaties that require us to provide military support for countries like Japan,and having Qualified Experts to conduct our national defense?
I served in the Navy for 8 years, until a previous president decided to cut the military with the argument that reservist would be adequate. Asking a dentist, truck driver or production operator to drop their family commitments and march off to a war is a sure way to defeat. The Reserve Troop concept was tested in the first couple of years in the latest Iraq war…No Armor, Untrained Troops, Troops/Commanders who think demoralizing a captured enemy is appropriate, etc. The military and America received a black eye due to Civilians being activated and poor training. I am in favor of your campaign and believe in the elimination of the Income Tax but not at the cost of our Nation’s security or the lives of our service members. I ask you to support a true full time active duty force fully equipped and capable of defending our nation and our pledges to our friends/allies.
Thanks,
Ed
Jake, I agree with your stance on overseas millitary bases. The cost is extraordinary and the benefit is dismal. In response to Ed, the black eye was recived for the pre-emptive illegal invasion to begin with. There is no “right” way to do such a thing. Everyone seems to think that National security is at risk. It is not. Terrosim is not capable of removing our freedom, only isolate incidents of violence. Only an invading army that can take over Washington and institute martial law can remove our security/liberty/freedom. Our nuclear arsenal will more than make such an event virtually impossible. Quite simply its time to cut the Millitary budget. Too much spending. You have my vote.
Dear Ed Taylor -
Thanks for writing! You have a great point about ready deployable troops, and my response is that to defend the country this is a necessity. However, they should be kept either on US soil or with the Navy off-shore.
The federal income tax is simply not necessary, as is highlighted in this plank – though cutting military expenditures at the same time needs to be done to both balance the budget and to size our national defense to sustainable levels.
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/income-tax/
Dear Tim –
Thanks for writing!!
“I don’t see how we could both make our money sound again and cut our federal revenue by 45% (removing the federal income tax)… What about the huge revenue whole that would remain from the highest tax brackets?”
One of the items I point out in my income tax plank is a phase-out is the only possible solution right now. The first step I would like to do is abolish the income tax for 50% of all Americans — which only accounts for 3% of the total taxes the income tax brings in. This could be done by moving the income exempt from income tax from 10-20K (depending on household status) to around 40K.
In terms of making our money sound again — besides the first obvious steps of balancing the budget and contain all new spending and taxation, this is a difficult issue, but I have some ideas which I wrote about here.
http://towneforcongress.com/economy/end-the-fed-then-what-the-transition-to-sound-money-1
Hi Jake – 2 more areas you need to cover – what is your stance on gun ownership and the right to carry concealed weapons, and what is your stance on abortion?
Dear Colleen -
A full list of platform planks are here, too many for just this summary page
http://towneforcongress.com/category/platform-issues/
My stance on the 2nd amendment is here
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/right-to-bear-arms/
My stance on abortion is here
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/your-personal-liberties/
In liberty,
Jake
I am surprised at your views on removing the IRS. By your own description of how “[s]ome of our brightest minds – lawyers, accountants, and computer experts – pound away at keyboards trying to figure out either how to plunder more money from others or find loops in the tax code to “save costs” for their clients”, I would expect you would also be against Wall Street, investment banking or any other occupation where lawyers, accountants, and computer experts look for ways to plunder money from others.
Though I agree with you that no one likes to pay money when the benefits seems so abstract, the bottom line is the private market is not designed to protect the rights or interests of disenfranchised Americans (which ironically enough is beginning to include more and more of what used to be the middle class) or to provide services for the entire country. When the government collects taxes and redistributes them, it pays for the medical research occurring at hospitals all over the country, it covers the free education our children receive (or the grants and low interest loans our college students need to finance their education), the mail service we rely on to send notes and presents, the military we use to protect and defend us, and the roads we commute on everyday, to name a few. The vilification of taxes surprises me to no end. I understand protesting what the government spends our tax money on, but thinking that the federal government takes and takes and takes and never gives back is simplistic. I would like to vote for a candidate that understands these issues are complex and treats them that way. Not someone who makes broad simplistic statements that sound nice, but which would ultimately have more negative consequences than good.
Dear Meredith -
Thanks for writing!!
“I am surprised at your views on removing the IRS. By your own description of how “[s]ome of our brightest minds – lawyers, accountants, and computer experts – pound away at keyboards trying to figure out either how to plunder more money from others or find loops in the tax code to “save costs” for their clients”, I would expect you would also be against Wall Street, investment banking or any other occupation where lawyers, accountants, and computer experts look for ways to plunder money from others. ”
No, speculators and investors – as long as they are not committing fraud – play a vital role in our society, and this is certainly value-added. Same with accountants at companies helping figure out whether a profit or loss is being made. However, paying people to fill out tax forms is not value-added.
“When the government collects taxes and redistributes them, it pays for the medical research occurring at hospitals all over the country, it covers the free education our children receive (or the grants and low interest loans our college students need to finance their education), the mail service we rely on to send notes and presents, the military we use to protect and defend us, and the roads we commute on everyday, to name a few.”
If only what you wrote was true. Roads are paid for by state taxes, not federal. The mail service should be paid for by its users, though you have a valid point since the USPS loses money every year. Elementary and secondary schools are paid for by state and local taxes, not federal. Ask any parent how “free” their child’s education is – there is no such thing as a free lunch, and many of those same college students are now saddled with unmanageable debt after graduation due to the bloated cost of college education due to federal subsidies.
Medical research would still take place, and likely would be more highly productive, with the private sector, instead of having the inevitable corruption of gov’t deciding where to dole out funds.
Defense, you have a valid point! However we are spending over $1 trillion a year on our foreign policy — which is about the same size as the income tax. We spend more on the military than the rest of the world COMBINED. However, we do not bother with securing our own borders, which is the constitutional duty of the military. This won’t cost >$1 trillion however.
The only true purpose of the income tax is to instill socioeconomic changes, feel free to read the list of items.
http://towneforcongress.com/platform-issues/income-tax/
While I have been campaigning, I still call for an income tax holiday or at least eliminating the tax for 50% of all Americans making the median household income or lower as they pay just 3% of the tax.
Thanks for your note!!
Jake,
Thank you for your response. I appreciate the dialogue. I should have been more specific. As a commuter who makes use of the highways, the federal government is paying for many of our nation’s roads.
Furthermore, the federal government uses our taxes to give aid to states (in 2009, the federal government assisted PA with aid marked for agriculture, education, health and human services, transportation, and housing, to name a few you can find online in public records). So it is not as simple as you make it sound–the federal government is sometimes charged with filling in the gaps that our local and state taxes don’t cover. I agree with you that the postal service is now paying for itself, but it is another example of how federal dollars can be used to create services that the private market has not seen fit to provide (and if the organization branches off and starts paying for itself, so much the better).
As someone who is involved in publicly funded research, I have found that the private sector is looking to publicly funded research to provide them with the innovative leads that are too expensive and risky for profit enterprises to try. High risk and innovative research can be both expensive and uncertain. Federal money provides the tools to engage in research that is not easy to make a profit off of but that has significant public health impacts.
I am one of those students who financed my education with loans, both public and private, and I can tell you that while my loans are a burden, I am grateful for my access to federal loans because the payment plans are more flexible and the interest rates are more moderate than my private loans. The answer to the issue of student debt is not to lessen federal money (and put students and parents in the hands of private loans with high interest rates).
I definitely do not disagree with the concerns you raise about military spending; I think the war in Iraq was not the best decision for our country or the world. I also agree that there should be more real help to veterans and their families. And I certainly agree with your stance on more transparency in the government. However, in terms of economics, I am hesitant to put my faith in a private market answer for everything (research, job creation, strengthening the economy, education)– especially since it was private market logic that helped create many of the problems leading to the current recession.
But I do thank you for bringing these issue to the forefront for discussion. I respect your opinion on the topics we have discussed, and I wish you the best of luck in November. I think it is so important to get independent ideas and candidates out there in the midst of mainstream politics, so I thank you for running and taking the time to share your ideas.
Dear Meredith -
Thanks for writing back!! I can tell you have put a lot of thought into this, so let me try to expand on my point of view, and offer a couple of links at the end.
“As a commuter who makes use of the highways, the federal government is paying for many of our nation’s roads.”
Factually this is incorrect. The taxpayer – whether through taxes or inflation/money-printing – is paying for the same roads. Most of the funding comes from the state coffers, and one has to question that when federal money is used, why doesn’t it just stay at the state in the first place? There is no such thing as a federal road crew (yet).
“Furthermore, the federal government uses our taxes to give aid to states (in 2009, the federal government assisted PA with aid marked for agriculture, education, health and human services, transportation, and housing, to name a few you can find online in public records). So it is not as simple as you make it sound–the federal government is sometimes charged with filling in the gaps that our local and state taxes don’t cover.”
Again, not to sound simplistic, but why not keep all this funding at the state level? Localization of funds will serve the public a lot better. However, the bottom line is gov’t has NOTHING – everything it has it takes from the people, and it’s a zero-sum game.
“I agree with you that the postal service is now paying for itself, but it is another example of how federal dollars can be used to create services that the private market has not seen fit to provide (and if the organization branches off and starts paying for itself, so much the better).”
In the Constitution, way back in the days of the horse, post roads/offices were left to the federal gov’t, and for many people this WAS their only interaction with the federal gov’t all the way up to 1910 or so. What about UPS or FEDEX? They are private companies making profits from delivering packages – they cannot by law deliver “letters.” The USPS takes a loss every year, so instead of a profitable company, we have a unprofitable bureaucracy. Now, I am not saying to privatize the USPS as soon as possible – it’s a lower priority all things considered.
Also take a look at AMTRAK – the federal gov’t operates at a loss every year and as a result we do not have a viable passenger rail service in most of the country.
Gov’ts do not have profit/loss mechanisms, which frankly makes it impossible for them to make economics, and makes it all too susceptible to corruption, like lobbyist campaign dollars.
“High risk and innovative research can be both expensive and uncertain.”
Agree.
“Federal money provides the tools to engage in research that is not easy to make a profit off of but that has significant public health impacts.”
This is a nirvana fallacy. Since there is scarcity, it is not economically feasible for governments to decide what’s best. Is research on hot lava flows better than leaving money in someone’s pocket to buy food? This is also known as the “seen” vs. the “unseen” consequences which I describe in more detail here.
http://towneforcongress.com/economy/the-governments-war-on-main-street-1/
Private R&D and philanthropy are better alternatives than bureaucrats.
“I am grateful for my access to federal loans because the payment plans are more flexible and the interest rates are more moderate than my private loans. The answer to the issue of student debt is not to lessen federal money (and put students and parents in the hands of private loans with high interest rates).”
I have no objections to anyone taking advantage of the current system, but please understand — the fact that the feds pump more money into college tuition (and expand the money supply by inflation) is DIRECTLY responsible for the rising costs and inefficiencies in colleges.
This makes attending college all but impossible for folks who cannot access the federal money (subject to the whims of a bureaucrat). Obviously, phasing out gradually would likely be a better way of achieving less pain on all sides. I’ll also add that due to the students debt and lack of jobs, many are staying in college for longer time periods to defer the interest accrual – and racking up more debt. It is unsustainable in the long term, and bankruptcy is not exactly supposed to be part of starting a career.
“However, in terms of economics, I am hesitant to put my faith in a private market answer for everything (research, job creation, strengthening the economy, education)– especially since it was private market logic that helped create many of the problems leading to the current recession.”
I will have to strongly disagree that private market logic lead to this depression. It was the currency and credit expansion of the Federal Reserve ultimately, and this is really the antithesis of free markets. (“private” meaning corporatism/crony capitalism, you have a point).
As a student of the Austrian school, in this article there is a slide that highlights its differences with Keynesianism
http://towneforcongress.com/economy/the-governments-war-on-main-street-1/
On economic interventions, see also my note on political economic suppression. http://towneforcongress.com/economy/political-economic-suppression/
Just got back from the debate at the State Theater. While I don’t agree with you on every issue, I was thrilled to see a candidate actually answer the questions. Dent and Callahan spent the night criticizing each other, I don’t have have a clue where they stand on the issues discussed. I normally lean towards favoring the green party platform but I think we share enough common ground, namely the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, more responsible spending and less government intrusion (the patriot act), to get you my vote. Your honesty and dedication is very much needed in Washington.
I like what i’m reading on this site. Plain and simple answers, to the real problems facing the country.
Jake, Unfortunately, I’m not from your district. I’m from the 5th district in CT, represented by Chris Murphy. I came across your website because I was looking for candidates who believe in both sound money and stopping war since the two go hand in hand. I worked hard to get Chris Murphy elected back in 2006. He was the anti-war candidate at the time. Sadly, he appears to be as pro-war now as Bush was back then and he’s going along with Mr. Obama who should return his Nobel Peace Prize and turn himself in as a war criminal. Funny, before the invasion of Afghanistan, I suggested a one billion dollar reward for Bin Ladin. And if another government were to turn him over, perhaps much more to make it worth while for them. How simple it would have been. We had the sympathy of the world. Anyway, keep up the good work. Your ideas are simple, truthful and obvious. Too bad there are not hundreds more like you running for office.
Brooke Stevens
I am all for eliminating the IRS and the Income Tax. I hope you are for all the Bill of Rights.
I like your stand on the issues man. It’s nice to see a potential politician who sees things as they really are.
You got my vote, in fact you are the reason I am going out tomorrow.
Best of luck!
I am doing a quick last overview of the candidates before I vote today, and I knew about Dent & Callahan (politically) but had only heard Towne’s name. After reading through this, I think my vote may have been changed from Dent to Towne. Hopefully if elected he does not turn into a career politician.
Hi Jake, I have to say I really admire your stances on every single issue, especially regarding foreign policy. I feel that WAY too many politicians do not realize the very real dangers of continuing the wars, as you mentioned on this page. I wish you luck! I am unfortunately not old enough to vote, but I tried to spread the word about your campaign as best as I could.
A lot of people have already expressed what I feel on these issues. I am encouraged that there are other people out there who are interested in liberty.