Fw: 2024 Proposal Discussion

[Keith Thompson]

Just forwarding this discussion of the 2024 proposals.

Keith Thompson

Region 3 South Rep

---

From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2026 9:27 AM
To: Platform Committee <plat...@lp.org>
Subject: 2024 Proposal Discussion

 

Good morning,

I'd like to start a distinct email thread for discussing the previous committee's proposals, so it doesn't get lost among the introductions. 

I've attached the report for ease of review and will also outline the items below with my thoughts. I'd love to hear from others on the existing unheard proposals. 

Proposal 1: Update Preamble 

This would simply change "In the following pages" to "In this platform".

I would support this as-is, but I suggest one minor change:  "In our platform." The reason I prefer "Our" to "This" is that it makes more sense when quoting the preamble on its own, and it signals unity among Libertarians as to our shared ideals.

Proposal 2: Government Debt

This would replace the existing plank s that, rather than saying governments should not incur debt and that the budget should be balanced, it says that we should simply not honor debts.

I agree, in principle, that government has no authority to incur debt on behalf of someone who has not agreed to it. However, I also think this would be economically ruinous and I think it runs afoul of the viewpoint of many in the Party regarding contractual obligations.  In essence, if someone bought a treasury bond, the LP would say "sucks to be you, the government is taking your money." In a sense, this would be similar to a massive tax.

Proposal 3: Health Care

This would amend the following text to 2.13: "Individuals have a presumption of health and should not be subjected to forced quarantine, isolation, or other restrictions of their rights and freedoms."

I would support this if the committee sees fit to leave it as-is, but I do have a minor issue: the presumption of health. If I have a presumption of health, I feel that implies a positive liberty.  Of course, I don't think that's the intent - I believe the intent here is that the state should leave us the F alone.

Would something like this work?  "Governments shall not quarantine, isolate, or otherwise restrict the freedoms of individuals to travel and labor based on a presumption of illness."

I'm just kind of spitballing that, and others may see no issue with the existing text.

Proposal 4: Agorism

This proposal would insert the following plank in section 2: 

"We affirm the right of individuals and businesses to peacefully subvert government regulation, taxation, and restrictions through black and gray market activity."

We could add a sex work style disclaimer here: "so long as they do not initiate force or fraud against individuals," but I don't think that's really necessary. My only reason for bringing it up as that many in the public view black markets as innately predatory, whereas many Libertarians have a far more positive view. Since the plank is public-facing, we may want to preempt the argument, but that's probably not truly necessary.

That said, I do like this addition.

Proposal 5: Amend Government Finance and Spending

Amend the plank as follows, additions underlined and in bold:

Since all persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor, we oppose all government activity that consists of the forcible collection of money or goods from individuals in violation of their individual rights. We contend that a tax by any other name is still a tax and strive for the eventual repeal of all taxation. To further that end, we call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution. We oppose the use of taxation as a punitive measure against certain goods or services, such as “vice” taxes, and oppose forcing employers to serve as tax collectors. We support any initiative to reduce or abolish any tax, and oppose any increase on any tax or creation of any new tax for any reason. To the extent possible, we advocate that all public services be funded or allowed to be provided in a voluntary manner.

I think these are all good additions. 

Proposal 6: Amend Self Defense

It would insert the following sentence into the self-defense plank: "We support stand-your-ground and castle doctrines." 

I'm okay with this.

Proposal 7: add a Space Exploration plank

This would add the following plank: "We oppose all government restrictions upon voluntary, peaceful use of outer space."

This is probably just me being too particular, but I would prefer simply using the term "space" rather than "outer space." Saying "outer," to me, has a more fictional sci-fi feel to the term, whereas simply saying "space" is more scientific and grounded. 

I also think there's room here to add something like ", and oppose the weaponization of space by governments."

Proposal 8: Intellectual Property

This would add the following plank:

"As we believe that ideas are not property, we favor the repeal of intellectual property laws but oppose fraudulent misrepresentation about goods and services. Disputes between inventors, creators, authors, artists, businesses and other such entities should be resolved according to principles of any contractual obligations between the parties involved."

I realize Mr. Brown has already expressed reservations on this plank, and I realize this one is somewhat controversial, but I love it. 

I'd be open to wordsmithing the plank, but I do not trust the state with IP law, and I think it's routinely weaponized against people who are not engaged in any force or fraud.

Proposal 9: War, Invasion, and Occupation

Amend 3.3 as follows: "We would end the current U.S. government policies of foreign intervention including military and economic aid; tariffs; economic sanctions; aggressive war, invasion, and occupation; and regime change."

Zero issues here - I think this is great.

Proposal 10: Amend National Defense

Strike and replace the first sentence, as follows:

"We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. We oppose the existence of a standing government military as a threat to peace and security. In the meantime, we support a policy of armed neutrality and oppose the stationing of military assets inside foreign territory. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service."

Dang, that's pretty spicy. As a delegate, I'd vote for this. But I also don't think it would pass as-is. 

I'd be open to trying it, but I think it should be moved toward the end of the report if we do as it would be a debate-heavy proposal. More likely, I think we may wish to wordsmith this one to make it more palatable for the 2/3 it would take.

Proposal 11: Parental Rights

Amend 1.5 as follows: Add to the beginning "We support the separation of family and state." and to the end, "We reject state ownership or guardianship of children and we support families choosing to support each other regardless of their composition. Permanent separation of family members must be adjudicated by true due process, not in administrative hearings."

I especially like the last sentence, but I also wonder what this would mean for an abusive household where courts may take too long. I like the idea, because the state is evil and should not act as a parent - but I'm not sure how I feel about it as-written.  I do like the idea, though, and would probably support this as written.

Proposal 12: National Defense

Append the following: "We believe in honoring our veterans by crafting and implementing policies to end aggression, undeclared wars, invasions, and occupations, while recognizing the difference between veterans and the policies they are sent out to implement."

Absolutely love it.

Proposal 13: New Plank - "Separation of Federal, State, and Local Governments"

Add the following as a new plank in section 3:

"We support the untangling of the layers of government from each other, including removal of mandates, subsidies, and commandeering, such that federal, state, county, municipal, and district governments are separate and independent from each other, in both function and funding, in order to facilitate their reduction or repeal. We support the nullification of unjust laws."

I like it.

Proposal 14: Personal Relationships

Amend the plank:
"Individuals have the sole authority to determine and express their own gender identities. Government does not have the authority to define, promote, license, or restrict self-expression or personal relationships..."

Love it. People own themselves.

Proposal 15:  Delete Sex Work Plank

This proposal would remove 2.10, Sex Work.

I get the idea that this is an issue covered by other areas, however: I think this one merits a distinct plank. I strongly oppose deleting this, and I think it would send a signal that we no longer support sex work even if we argue otherwise. This is especially important now, as many states are increasingly cracking down on pornography between consenting adults and ramping up arrests of adult sex workers. 

If anything, I think we should strengthen the plank to oppose government-forced ID checks for websites and voice specific opposition to "sin taxes."

----

Thanks,

Keith Thompson

Region 3 South Rep

[josh....@aklp.org]

Made sure to get the event added to my calendar sorry for missing the
first meeting. Any updates? Glad were planning on taking up the work we
did in last term. Hopefully we don't relitigate a lot of previous
arguments. Maybe the rationale languages might need some adjusment I'm
assuming or certain planks that aren't as timely but as we know history
always repeats.

Joshua McHoes

On 2026-03-09 17:04, 'Keith Thompson' via LNC Platform Committee wrote:
> Just forwarding this discussion of the 2024 proposals.
>
> Keith Thompson
> Region 3 South Rep
>

> -------------------------

>
> From: Keith Thompson <keith.t...@lp.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2026 9:27 AM
> To: Platform Committee <plat...@lp.org>
> Subject: 2024 Proposal Discussion
>
> Good morning,
>
> I'd like to start a distinct email thread for discussing the previous
> committee's proposals, so it doesn't get lost among the introductions.
>
>
> I've attached the report for ease of review and will also outline the
> items below with my thoughts. I'd love to hear from others on the
> existing unheard proposals.
>
> Proposal 1: Update Preamble
> This would simply change "In the following pages" to "In this
> platform".

> I would support this as-is, but I suggest one minor change: "In _our
> _platform." The reason I prefer "Our" to "This" is that it makes more

> "_We affirm the right of individuals and businesses to peacefully

> subvert government regulation, taxation, and restrictions through

> black and gray market activity._"

> and I realize this one is somewhat controversial, but _I love it_.
> I'd be open to wordsmithing the plank, but I do _not_ trust the state

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "LNC Platform Committee" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to lnc-platform-comm...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-platform-committee/DM6PR13MB26049859046B177B25039541FB46A%40DM6PR13MB2604.namprd13.prod.outlook.com
> [1].
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1]
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-platform-committee/DM6PR13MB26049859046B177B25039541FB46A%40DM6PR13MB2604.namprd13.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer