MdLP Logo
1-800-MLP-1776

This webpage:

Contribute
Contribute!

Join or renew! Click the credit cards above or mail a check + membership form in.

National web site for the Libertarian Party
National Libertarian Party Website

World's Smallest Political Quiz
World's Smallest Political Quiz

 

Comments?

 

Libertarian Party of Maryland

Candidate for U.S. Congress, District 2:
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga

Lorenzo Gaztaņaga






"It's about people!"
Civil liberties is everything.


My fellow citizens (and let's stop this divide between citizens and those in public office who are supposed to represent us), I propose to use what we have left of our republican democratic voting system to pick someone who will admit that we as a country are bankrupt, so that we can start fixing it. The problem is not just pensions that cannot be met at the government level or special health care systems that cannot be maintained, but wars that cannot be sustained (please see details in the web page) and so-called intelligence operations that fail at the expense of billions of dollars, such as Homeland Security.

  • Our country is bankrupt. Our representatives in Congress and the Senate don't want to talk about it, but it's true. This is a greater threat to our national security than any terrorist organization, and it's a threat we have created ourselves. Acknowledging the fact that we're bankrupt will allow us to start fixing it. We need the right person in Congress -- me.
  • The undeclared, unconstitutional wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are bankrupting us. The missions keep changing to justify our going in and staying in. We went into Iraq to disarm Saddam Hussein, who supposedly was developing weapons of mass destruction. When WMD's were not found, the mission changed to removing a bad man who was oppressing his people. Well, there are many tyrants doing that around the world. How many countries are we going to invade? It can't be done. We went into Afghanistan to get Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda for what they did on 9/11. Now the story is that we're fighting the Taliban and nation building. This is policy shape shifting.
  • The "war on drugs" has cost billions of dollars, ruined lives, and made all Americans less free, while doing nothing to help the addicted. It's alcohol prohibition redux, and we bleed the billions. The facts are there, and I'm willing to discuss it with anybody.
  • Instead of bail-outs, how about a holiday from FICA and bringing to justice the fraud makers of the economic meltdown, both in the banks and in the government? That might reinforce America's economic health, restoring trust. Leave the taxes alone for the time being.
  • Address environmental issues using English common law: he who makes the mess pays for the mess. No further caps on damages, ā la BP.

You will find a lot of serious content on this website. Some might call it overly dense. I make no apology for this, considering the dire situation our country is in right now. Every topic was developed in response to questions I was asked. I sincerely want to know what you are thinking -- about the positions I am taking or any matter of concern to you. Please e-mail or call me at 443-414-6539 with your comments or questions.

Lorenzo Gaztaņaga


Biography

I was born in Havana, Cuba in 1949 and received my early education in Christian Brothers schools. I came to the United States with my family on October 21, 1961, locating in Baltimore in June 1963. In 1973, I became a United States citizen. I attended parochial school in Baltimore City, finishing high school in the third graduating class of Cardinal Gibbons School. After high school, I attended Loyola College and Towson State University, majoring in history and political science, returning to college again in the 1980's to study psychology at the University of Baltimore.

I have held jobs ranging from language teacher (during five years in Haiti), car salesman, and director of development for my old high school. I am currently working in the security business to support my activities as a citizen politician. I am fluent in English, Spanish and French, and conversant in Haitian Creole. A Maryland Libertarian Party officer, I worked with the Coalition for a Democratic Maryland and Marylanders for Democracy to ease the stringent ballot access requirements that have effectively kept independent and third party candidates off the ballot for the last 30 years. I am a founding member of the Human Values Network and former member of the Board of Directors of the Environmental Crisis Center, which provides food and shelter to the homeless of Baltimore City. I am active in the Cliftmont Community Wesleyan Church, where I have mentored young people of the Belair-Edison community.

I share my life with my mother, my wife of 35 years, New York City native Susan Jacobson Gaztaņaga, and my black, 20-pound cat, Lord Baltimore.

I am qualified for this office as someone who works for a living, and who has spent his own time and money for 18 years helping to break down the legislated regulatory barriers that have kept alternative parties as well as independents from being offered as viable choices to the citizens and voters of Maryland. It is time that we elect people who are not connected with the monopoly power - people who understand that government service is just that - government service, and not a career opportunity.

The first step is to have people in Congress who are free and unburdened by years of feeding off a system that uses them at the same time that they use it. This first step also requires congressional representatives who are predisposed to being accountable, and who will insist that others be accountable as well.

I am convinced that I am one such individual, and I want to serve you, my fellow citizens of the Second Congressional District, as your Congressman.


2010 MdLP Congressional Candidate Questionnaire
(pdf format)

1. To be elected by the citizens of your district is a great honor. What is the reason that caused you to decide to run for Congress?
In close analysis, congressional office, if one follows the Constitution, is even more important than that of President. For one, Congress contains the direct representatives of the people of the United States. Congress is the body that can approve or disapprove the most serious act that any nation can carry out, and that is war. With the two current wars, that are illegal, and the Patriot Act a violation of the Bill of Rights, Congress has both abdicated its responsibilities and also circumvented its reason for being, in the process betraying the American people, specifically with the Patriot Act which potentially makes anyone a target as an enemy of the country and the state. After everything is said and done, whether taxes, commerce, free markets or the lack thereof, these three things-that is, the two wars and the Patriot Act-could potentially destroy the country and its very reason for being. We need an individual representing the Second District in Maryland who will address this cancer without mincing words or falling prey to the accusations that such an attitude will imperil our national security, someone who will reverse the path taken by the incumbent, Dutch Ruppersberger. Front and center, that's why I'm running for Congress.

2. The work habits and rare appearances of congressmen and congresswomen in their districts seem to peak near election but the rest of the time you rarely hear peep. What type of session schedule for Congress would you like to see? How would you schedule your appearances in your district and what would you focus on?
First of all, it seems that members of Congress spend too much of their time courting the special interests of the military industrial complex and the unions, both public and private, for funds, which pour in in the tens of thousands, if not the millions. Recently, the incumbent, Ruppersberger, has been dodging, for weeks, a citizens' group that has asked to meet with him by offering times and places that were ultimately canceled, insisting on a list of the people who were going to attend the meeting, indicating that questions regarding the recent so-called health care bill were not an agenda item-and these are all concerned constituents of Congressman Ruppersberger with legitimate questions regarding the direction that our country is going in. That is a most objectionable work habit, which is clearly aimed at preserving his position in Congress by currying favor with those of outsized wealth as well as power and who are, in my opinion, co-dependents with our federal government in the unconstitutional and reckless behavior of those who decide what happens to our country. I would try to schedule any appearance of mine at times when most working people can attend. I would take time to walk through the neighborhoods of the district, as disparate as they are because of the gerrymandering that caused the district to have its current bizarre geography. I would focus on telling people the same thing that I tell now-you're not going to like everything that I have to say, but it is what I honestly believe. One of the worst working habits of our current congress is the habit of creating legislation that no one can truly read and understand and that, at its core, reflects favoritism as well as a game of "gotcha." I would never vote for a bill that exceeds 50 pages, and, as it is, I think 50 pages is way too long, but I'm willing to compromise on that.

3. Becoming a congressman is a position where great trust is placed in you. What changes in ethics rules that govern Congress would you work to change?
First of all, when we're talking about ethics rules, let's focus on the fact that rules and regulations that Congress makes regarding itself are aimed at the privilege that they give themselves at the expense of ordinary citizens. When it comes to this question, the first order of the day for Congressman Gaztaņaga would be to strike down via legislation or jawboning anything that gives privilege to a member of Congress, whether it is a special gymnasium in the Capitol, a special health care plan, the outrageous pensions and salaries, or the ability to simply retire and go make a gazillion dollars as lobbyists-this particular one should have a twelve year moratorium. If you want to advise anyone; do it on your own dime. I remember well, during the 1970's when the gasoline shortage hit the nation, people had to schedule gassing up according to odd or even numbers on their license plates, etc. I was living in Washington, DC and I saw with my own eyes how the regular citizens of all social strata had to put up with the enormous inconvenience, but not Congress. They had an ample supply of gasoline that could be pumped at will, right in the garages of congressional buildings. When it comes to campaign financing, I favor donations by individuals only-people who live and talk and eat. In other words, the likes of GE, UAW, etc. need not apply here. Any campaign donation by an individual over $100 needs to be reported. As long as it's reported, there's no limit. Is this a perfect system? No, but it would be a vast improvement over all the systems we've had over the years.

4. One of the toughest decisions Congress must make is whether or not to authorize the President to go to war. The two current military operations, Iraq and Afghanistan, are obviously two different situations. Would you have authorized the President on either of those situations? And why or why not?
I would never have authorized the war in Iraq under any circumstances. All the reasons for going in there were false. Anyone who has followed the history of Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein would have known that the executed tyrant was a secular Muslim with little more than speaking Arabic in common with Osama Bin Laden, and the fact that they both engaged at the time in killing innocent people to fulfill their agendas. I would have authorized Afghanistan along the lines of a letter of mark with the specific purpose of routing out Al Qaeda, which was clearly based there at the time, and any Talibani that might get in the way. No nation building. All of the rhetoric in the world regarding the niceness of bringing democracy and representative government to people who don't even see themselves as a nation is ludicrous, however well meant those words might be. The cost in life and treasure, the so-called "collateral damage" of civilians in-country is, simply put, unaffordable by any decent measure.

5. The size and scope of government is absolutely gigantic and needs to be reduced. What programs, departments, and process would you look to begin eliminating by reducing the funding or just cutting the program all together?
I'd start by getting out of the two foreign wars we're involved in, which for years were not properly accounted for in the federal budget during the Bush administration-and congressmen like Dutch Ruppersberger condoned this. Then I would dismantle the fascistic sounding Homeland Security Department. From 9-11 and before then (let's not forget the first World Trade Center bombing; let's not forget the Mura Building bombing) the bloated intelligence and security apparatus has been no more efficient, no less parochial, no less turf protecting than the current federal Department of Education-which would go next, if possible, all in the same breath. Billions would be saved. The so-called War on Drugs, where evil and stupid come together in a deplorable marriage, is something else that needs to go. Not only is it unconstitutional for the federal government to tell honest, law abiding people what they can or cannot put in their bodies (people who do bad things while under the influence of whatever are responsible for their actions, however), but the so-called War on Drugs actually puts the United States government in the position of telling foreign governments what to do and forcing them to initiate policies detrimental to their countries. Let's not forget the guerrilla wars in Colombia, US customs agents at Colombian international airports, the mayhem and destruction at the US/Mexico border as examples. The Mexican government has already suggested to the big neighbor to the north to ease up on the war on drugs for the sake of their own peace and tranquility. I am certain that there is more garbage that passes for policy and waste and fraud that pass for government programs, but these things would be a very good beginning-billions and trillions saved, and lives saved, too.

6. The Constitution is under attack from beginning to end. What steps when crafting or opposing legislation would you take when executing your oath to protect it?
Not everyone I know is versed (barely or thoroughly) in the Constitution. They prefer to dialogue using different language and images. When I discuss with these friends and acquaintances about what is constitutional or not, or what appears to be constitutional or not, I always point out that, as a rule, any law or regulation or statute that makes the citizens and lawful residents of the United States more dependent on the "largess" of the federal government should be an unwanted law, regulation or statute. The Constitution guarantees the welfare of the people, not people or corporations of any kind on welfare. The welfare of the people means, in my opinion, that the federal government is to guarantee the rights delineated in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: equality under the law, avoiding/negating special privileges. I infer by this understanding that any law, rule or statute that makes people dependent on the US government's power not only violates the Constitution but violates the very concept of the welfare of the people. Short term gain by the federal government leaning on some citizens for the benefit of others is detrimental and destructive to the nation, the fabric of society and the government itself. As a legislator, I propose two things: if a bill before me does not meet the guidelines I just laid down, I'll vote against it, and that would include bills that might claim to adhere to these guidelines but are too long to be read-more that 50 pages, I'll vote, against it, and I'm already being lenient on this. The second thing is that I would do everything within the authority granted to me as a member of the US Congress to review current laws, and if they don't meet the criteria described above, I will do everything within my constitutional powers to get rid of them.

7. Term Limits is an off again on again issue. Do you believe that federal legislation should dictate congressional term limits or should the individual states make that decision?
Term limits is on and off again for both good and bad reasons. We all saw the Republican congress of 1994 promising to limit their terms, and the vast majority stayed on. That's a bad reason. What happens if a legislator is in office, following the Constitution, carrying out his or her duties as he was supposed to, pushing leviathan back, and then, because there's a regulation that says "two terms and you have to get out?" That in my mind is a dangling proposition. With that said, I recently heard a speaker at the Elkton, Maryland Tea Party rally. He suggested something that I thought made a lot of sense: Federal legislators, both in Congress and the Senate-no more than 12 years. I think that that would be a solid two terms for Senate and a considerable six for Congress. If you can't lay down what needs to be done in 12 years, there's either something wrong with you, or your constituents, or your fellow legislators. A term limit of this sort should be decided at the federal level for federal offices. Term limits for state legislators should be decided at the state level, and for county, city or town councils, it should be decided at those levels. That is consistent with the Constitution as I see it. There are two topics that usually get left out of the discussion of term limits: 1) We need to address the shadow government composed of the civil service and appointed positions that may outlast the appointer in some cases. This has to be dealt with-term limits alone won't do. 2) The most important component of all: just because there might be term limits, we cannot have an electorate that goes back to the complacency of old and the political coma that we all allowed ourselves to go under and that has gotten us to where we are now. That has to change above all, and I'm speaking here not as a candidate, but as a citizen who still enjoys his natural, God-given right to vote for the representatives he wants and to speak his mind on topics he considers to be true.

8. The Federal Government and the Supreme Court often ignore the Tenth Amendment when it comes to states rights. The authority of this amendment was severely undermined in the Civil War and the outcome strengthened the power and authority of the Federal Government. What steps do you think can be taken to restore the authority of the Tenth Amendment?
If I were a business as usual politician, I might promise to introduce a bill that would remind Congress and the people of the Tenth Amendment. What would be the value of that? The Tenth Amendment is there. Read the Constitution. It's there, and it's as brief and to the point as all legislation should be. It's easy to blame the federal government for the destruction of the Tenth Amendment. This has happened with the collusion of the feds, the state governments and the local governments. The federal government, with its largess with other people's money, for decades has gone around to state and local governments promising them what amounts to wealth from what it takes elsewhere. It's the kind of greed that's never spoken of, but has to be, as it's the kind of greed politicians have. It's their greed for money and power, usually at the expense of others. So the Tenth Amendment is destroyed by the state and local governments who allow it to be sold for their 30 pieces of silver. Let me give you a present and clear example of how the Tenth Amendment is sold by the state governments at the expense of our national security, our national treasure, and the lives of those who serve in the armed forces. The Iraq and Afghan wars are both unconstitutional and illegal, yet not one word of protest, not a complaint, not an expression of disappointment, nothing, is expressed by those who rule the states when the National Guard is pulled away from its recognized duties to subsidize with lives and materiel two illegal wars. They say nothing because if they do, one of the things they might lose is the unconstitutional revenue stream that goes into things with benign names like "opportunity" and "education"-never mind that they usually have nothing to do with their names. As a congressman, I will speak out on the floor of the congress in support of any state government, not only my own, that stands up to defend its rights under the Tenth Amendment. Let's not forget, the federal government does not go bad just because it goes bad. In too many cases, it is encouraged by the greed and short sightedness of our state and local governments. This problem will not be solved until we face this truth.

9. The United States has one of the highest tax rates on her workforce in the world, especially on businesses and business owners. Abolishing the Internal Revenue Service and the complicated Tax Code has been offered as a solution and to be replaced with a "Fair Tax" system. What do you feel is the best solution for the mess that the tax system has become and what avenue do you believe the government should use to raise revenue?
Recently, I was chatting with our tax preparer as we crossed the final t's and dotted the final i's on our tax return. I asked him, if a flat tax was enacted, would it hurt his business. He said, "Yes." In the next breath he said that the 16 big volumes that are used to refer to the tax code are unnecessary. You don't need that much. So here's a man who makes a good living preparing income tax returns for people saying that there's something wrong with the way this thing is done. In the original constitution, the federal government was supposed to collect taxes from the states through apportionment. Of course, the 16th amendment changed that. Plainly, the 16th amendment should be repealed. The states have the right, by the Tenth Amendment, in fact, to set up their own tax systems. Then through apportionment, some of that money could go to the federal government. So the 16th amendment has to be repealed. The federal government also gave itself the right in the Constitution to collect excise taxes, etc., with the approval of Congress. The late Milton Friedman said that the only just tax was the one collected on land, as in landed property. Of course, anything of that sort would only be applicable at the local level-it's not anything that should be administered at the level of state government, and definitely not at the federal level, because the abuse would be rampant. We cannot have meaningful, permanent, rational change to our tax system as long as we continue the spending spree with money we don't even have. The latest thing--$30 billion to bail out Greece! For goodness sake! I watched in horror during the Bush years when he cut back taxes and ramped up deficit spending like no one else before him. A tax cut or a tax change under those circumstances is almost cynical, and undermines at its very foundation the permanence of such a change. What would a fair tax be? A national sales tax replacing all income taxing? It sounds better than what we have, but let's not forget that sales taxes can hurt production and consumption, much as a VAT would. Would it be a flat tax-X percentage that everyone pays? Yes, it would be fairer than what we have, but I insist that until we turn off the spigot and end the outrageous spending and begin to pay off our national debt, in much the same way as American families are cutting back on spending and seeking to pay off their debts in any way they can, until that happens at the federal level nothing meaningful can be done to fix our tax problem. Nothing. The people in charge, whether you have a national sales tax or a flat tax, so long as they have the power to figure out how to spend more in new ways, will be able to do whatever they want by simply changing the percentages. How many of us remember that at the end of the cold war 20 years ago we were promised a "peace dividend?" We wouldn't have to pay all that money to fight the Soviet Union-and look what happened. Look at what they've done: more wars and bailing out the culprits of the financial disaster-all with taxpayers' money.

10. Illegal Immigration has been a very divisive issue over the last twenty years. The Immigration system is broken. We have over 12 Million people living in our country illegally and undocumented. Where do you see Congress needs to begin to fix this problem?
PEACEFUL people should be able to cross borders PEACEFULLY for PEACEFUL purposes. What's going on along the southern border between the United States and Mexico is not an open border. I am tired of hearing that it's an open border. We don't have an open border any more than Sarajevo had open streets when people had to dodge bullets from snipers on rooftops. What we have on our southern border is chaos, mayhem and horrific crimes. People's property is being invaded, people are being kidnapped and murdered; women trying to cross the border (admittedly illegally) are being raped. The march across the border becomes a death march. Who does this benefit? I guess the people whose only goal is cheap labor. It has some benefit for those who make it in, IF they make it on the death march through the desert, since they can work, etc.

Before I get to my complete answer, let's knock down one myth-that these illegals don't pay taxes. They pay the same sales taxes that we all pay. The ones that are here using forged papers, including social security numbers from dead people, etc., are also paying income tax, which of course, the IRS in its infinite goodness doesn't mind or care about, as long as it gets its cut. What to do about the 12 to 14 million illegals here? Well, you find them. A government that knows everything about everybody living here should be able to find where they're working, go to these work places where illegals have been determined to be found, and fine the employers-but not to the extent of closing the business just to make the enforcers look good. There are many reasons for hiring illegal immigrants besides cheap labor. Some of them are very good workers.

Then, confront the illegal individuals and give them an ultimatum: a one year visa to stay in the country so long as you have work, which can be extended to two years as long as you're gainfully employed. If you do not accept or meet the criterion for that first year visa, you go back. A three year extension can be applied for after the two year extension, as long as you are gainfully employed. As long as you remain gainfully employed, after ten years you can apply for an indefinite period work visa. During this time, after five years of legal residence, you can begin the process of naturalization. There will also be a $50 fine for every year that you were here illegally before you were found out.

This is how to deal with the people who are here illegally now. Much like the Arizona law, for which I don't blame Arizona (my only concern is the possible violations of the fourth amendment), it would be a psychological deterrent to coming here illegally. Now, what do we do about changing the current immigration law? Well, you can come to the border peacefully and get a work visa at the border for $500 and proof that you have a job waiting for you. You can keep this visa until such time as you're no longer gainfully employed. A $500 processing fee is very reasonable, considering that poor people are paying thousands of dollars to criminals to get them across the border-coyotes who murder them in the desert or leave them to die in hot, unventilated trucks. In the United States, employers who are interested in hiring these folks could actually initiate contact with them in their home countries. This would be an easy matter in this age of the internet and cell phones and an entrepreneurial spirit that wants to rise above a calamitous economy. Job banks could easily be created in the countries of origin to match potential employers with potential employees. This should be managed as a private enterprise, not as a government service. The role of government is to ensure that people are not being abused or defrauded. Since they would be here legally, they would be able to report cases of abuse and fraud to the appropriate authorities. Any one of these immigrants will be treated as citizens or legal residents. If convicted of a crime, they will serve out their sentence here. If they have no job waiting for them after serving their time, they will be deported.

No fixed immigration policy can be complete without understanding the need for assimilation, and I know a thing or two about that personally. I am from Cuba. I'm very proud of my ancestry. I speak, read and write Spanish, my first tongue, fluently. My favorite dish is still Cuban black beans with white rice and pork chops. None of that has stopped me from loving my adoptive country, or from learning its language. Of course, I am fortunate, because when I came here, school systems were not trying to balkanize and separate Latin American immigrants and refugees by teaching them courses in Spanish that should have been taught in English, delaying their assimilation. The number of politicians back then who were trying to keep these immigrants as dependents of the government by keeping them apart and separate was not as large as it is today. This needs to change.

Lastly, concerning the virtual war that goes on along the southern border of the United States: we cannot separate the effects of the so-called War on Drugs from the mayhem along the border. To try to do so would be like separating the "H2" from the "O" and still thinking you have water. There's more, of course. I welcome questions and comments on this and all the other issues I've laid out here. Remember:

PEACEFUL PEOPLE SHOULD BE ABLE TO CROSS BORDERS PEACEFULLY FOR PEACEFUL PURPOSES.


Health Care

Often questionnaires on the health care issue sent out to candidates are set up to reply either in favor or against the federal government's running health care, so the statement below should cover them all.

The federal government has messed us up in Iraq. The federal government has messed up the Veteran's Administration. Two friends of mine were grossly misdiagnosed by the VA and only survived by the grace of God. So, what we need to do is get the federal government out of the whole health care thing. After all, the federal government is probably the most incompetent administrator of health care - so why do we want to give it power over our health care?

Let's have America's working people keep the most money possible in their pockets and purses and encourage non profit health coops for the working poor and the middle class so that they can put money aside tax free to get check-ups and health care for themselves. Let's have genuine tax free accounts for catastrophic health situations. Let's look into ways to provide for the truly needy in truly charitable ways that do not make bureaucrats wealthy but actually help those in need.

I find many proposals for health care to be the antithesis of help for the poor, instead promoting wealth for the health care provider.


Iran

Where do I stand on Iran? I happen to think that talks with the government of Iran should have begun 15-20 years ago, so as far as the suggestions from former Secretaries of State regarding unconditional dialogue are concerned, to me it's a no brainer. I find the sabre rattling regarding invading Iran symptomatic of middle aged and old men who willy nilly go for wars that are going to be fought by young people - a centuries old disgusting spectacle.

I'm not a pacifist. If self defense is needed, I believe in self defense. Preemptive action such as attacking Iran is out of the question - obscene, really.

The theme of my campaign is "Civil liberties is everything" (or "everything is civil liberties"). The so-called war on terror is farcical. Terror is an emotion. You fight terrorists who are criminals, who commit criminal acts. You seek them out as you would a serial killer. You don't invade countries. (A caveat: Afghanistan was where the terrorists were residing at the time, but we lost that advantage because we were in Iraq.) Invading Iran would only make matters worse.

The Iranian young people who are sick and tired of the oppression of the corrupt, so-called mullahs need to know that the government and people of the US are their friends, not the ones who are going to bring further misery and pain.


On Marriage

First of all, I reject the notion that government defines marriage. In my view, marriage is defined by faith and the agents of faith, for instance, churches. I happen to think that the entire discussion of so-called homosexual marriage or heterosexual marriage approved by government is a canard hoisted against the ability of consenting adults to enter into legal contracts.

Let churches decide who or what constitutes a marriage. Let secular government uphold contracts between or among consenting adults. The issue is far greater than who marries whom. I think that the reason why we are in this whole ridiculous discussion in the first place is because of things like my own personal situation. My wife Susan (a woman) and I live with my mother. Why cannot my elderly mother be part of the same health care insurance plan that my wife and I share? Instead, she has to be stuck with the phoney-baloney Medicare.

It is absurdities of this sort that fuel the fictitious argument of government approved marriage. Government has no business approving marriage, unless people are forced into marriage or any kind of union, in which case government must defend the rights of the person who is being forced.


War and Peace

First of all, I'm not a pacifist. I believe in self defense. The invasion of Afghanistan had a specific target - the Al Qaeda minions who attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon - and was therefore justifiable self-defense.

On the other hand, the war in Iraq, which was labeled from the beginning as a preemptive action, was wrong at the time and is wrong now on all counts. First of all, you do not do preemptive wars. Preemptive wars are wars of aggression, and that is beneath what this country is supposed to stand for - or common decency, for that matter.

Secondly, the reasons given for the war in Iraq, if not outright lies, were distortions, and Exhibit A of our multi-billion dollar intelligence apparatus' unfathomable ineptitude. The war in Iraq didn't happen only because of an incompetent (to be kind) president and his party, it was also the collusion of members of Congress, who now parade themselves as being anti-war. This is one of the reasons I'm running. The current holder of the Second Congressional District, Dutch Ruppersberger belongs to that group of legislators who colluded with the President in allowing an illegal war and now pretends to be different.

Even the war in Afghanistan, with a legitimate target, Al Qaeda and its host the Taliban, might have been completely unnecessary if our intelligence apparatus had heeded the warnings of competent field operatives who were suspicious of foreign nationals learning how to fly planes but not land them. After all, all Al Qaeda did was to copy the kamikaze pilots of the Second World War, striking buildings instead of ships.

I believe in a foreign policy that aims for peaceful dealings with other nations while maintaining a strong defense that is just that - defense, not preemptive attacks. We need a streamlined, patriotic intelligence operation, which is not what we got. The incumbent, Ruppersberger, has never spoken on this, because he can't.


Economics

The current rise in gasoline and fuel prices is being blamed on supply and demand. Well, there's some truth to that, but the real sticking point is the devaluation of the dollar. If our dollar were today on a par with the Euro, we would be paying, maybe $2.20 per gallon at the pump instead of $3.99 - $4.20. For Euro currency countries, the price of the oil barrel has barely doubled, while, for our dollar based economy, it's working on quadrupling the cost. Why? It's not because we demand necessarily much more than the Europeans. It's because our federal government and all of its parts, including Congress, through the Federal Reserve monopoly, have gone on a printing spree of money as if it were confetti. In fact, what the Fed has done regarding the printing of money is tantamount to the printing of counterfeit money, except that their counterfeit dollars are deemed to be legal. Without a substantial commodity to back it up, our fiat money is being destroyed and so is our economy.

There's more that I would like to say on this, but I'm trying to be brief, so I'm sticking to the central points on the economy right now.


Climate Change

I am not going to pretend that we humans do not affect our environment - our water, our air, etc. Of course we do. Nor am I going to ridicule people who have a concern for global warming, or climate change. I'm no expert on any of this, but unlike Al Gore, I'm not going to pretend that I am. From what I've read and listened to, the planet earth is much like any living organism. It undergoes changes and responds to the environment in which it is.

Back in the tenth and eleventh centuries, our planet underwent a warming period. (And remember, back then, there were no carbon producing engines.) This event allowed Norse colonists to settle in Greenland, where they raised crops, had animal husbandry, and a relatively good and prosperous life for that time period, much like Maryland in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

When this warming trend ended a couple of hundred years later, the Norse settlers failed, died, or had to eventually evacuate, because they failed to adapt. They had a model of adaptation right in front of them - the earlier colonists of Greenland, the so-called Eskimos, who knew how to live in cold weather. They refused to adapt, and they failed. To me, climate change sends this message - we have to adapt, whether it's colder or warmer, we have to adapt, and to be always mindful that if I pollute my neighbor's air, water or soil, I either have to pay to clean it or give my neighbor the money to clean it - and then stop my nasty ways. That is how we should deal with the environment today, by applying English common law - the basis for our legal system.


Trade

I believe in free trade. Free trade does not include corporate welfare, does not include treaties the size of several major cities' phone books (like NAFTA). It can be conducted simply and efficiently, being always mindful of fraud. In spite of all the regulations in banking and lending, we've ended up with the subprime mess which is essentially fraud. Lies were sold and lies were bought, yet we were unable to deal with this fraud with all the myriad regulations requiring armies of lawyers to remain in compliance with them We need an entrepreneurial labor force unfettered by all the oppressive regulations, and only watched closely with the purpose of preventing and punishing fraud.


Liberty and Democracy

Regarding liberty and democracy in the United States, I would like to refer to the oft told tale in which Benjamin Franklin, coming out of the Constitutional Convention, was asked by a woman, "What kind of government have you given us, sir?" He replied, "A republic, if we can keep it." We are a republic, meaning that we elect representatives to whom WE give the right to govern - not the other way around. We use a democratic process to elect those representatives - or we're supposed to - and a majority of voters decides who gets to represent us. I have to admit that I would like to see in our legislative chambers proportional representation based on ideas, rather than race and gender as has been suggested by some over the last decade or so. Ballot access should be virtually unrestricted, and to those who say that you would have too many people on the ballot and it would be confusing, I would simply say that the value of our liberty, our Constitution, our Bill of Rights and certainly our Declaration of Independence does deserve time and effort from citizens to learn who in the heck is running and what they stand for, and to vote for the one they most agree with as their civic duty. Voting for the lesser of two evils is a game of losers. We're supposed to be winners in this country, not losers.

Our liberties are under siege by many things: attacks on the Second Amendment, free speech zones set up so that the politically privileged ears will not be hurt by dissent, and the one most onerous thing of all - the so-called "Patriot Act," insult of insults - a law so vile that I think even John Adams, second president of the United States, who lost his second bid on account of his anti sedition acts, might find repugnant.


Education

The term "education" is a misnomer, by and large. Our young people need to be proficient in reading, writing and arithmetic by the fifth grade, and be encouraged to pursue the things they like from that point on. Education is a life long process, much like gaining wisdom. You don't gain wisdom in a classroom, you can only encourage learning. The government has a role in encouraging parents (through leadership and "jawboning") to take care of their children's education. Rather than taking the educational authority away from parents, devolve the education authority back to the parents, with the understanding that many parents don't know what they're doing. This potential problem can be offset by applying the true concept of village child rearing - a community of individuals working together voluntarily to achieve the best outcome for their children, without government involvement.


Immigration

See questionnaire above.


Capital Punishment

Click for a report with commentary about the Maryland Commission on Capital Punishment, with an interview of Lorenzo Gaztaņaga, by Stephanie J. Henry


WBAL Radio Advertisement

Click to listen (mp3 format)


Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at Rally to Help the Politically Homeless Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at Rally to Help the Politically Homeless Lorenzo Gaztaņaga putting out the Quiz across America door hangers
Lorenzo at Rally to Help the Politically Homeless on September 23, 2010 in Rockville (with Mark Grannis and son); putting out the Quiz across America door hangers.


African Voters' Town Hall at the Silver Spring Civic Center - October 12, 2010
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at African Voters' Town Hall Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at African Voters' Town Hall
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga and other candidates at African Voters' Town Hall
Left to right: Dr. Ignatius Ukpabi, retired epidemiologist with the District of Columbia government, Robert Broadus, Republican candidate for US Congress, 4th District, Jerry McKinley, Libertarian candidate for US Congress, 3rd District, Jeff Robinson, Republican candidate for House of Delegates, District 13, and Lorenzo.


Video
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga Video

Click for YouTube video

Click for wmv format


Fells Point Fun Festival - October 4/5, 2008
Booth Lorenzo Gaztaņaga administers The Quiz
The booth; Lorenzo Gaztaņaga administers The Quiz.


Essex Day Festival - September 21, 2008
Candidate Signs Lorenzo Gaztaņaga
Candidate signs at the booth; Lorenzo Gaztaņaga.


VIP Wine & Cheese Reception and Candidate Forum - September 6, 2008
3 Candidates at VIP Reception
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at VIP Reception Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at VIP Reception
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City.


Black and White Summer Gala - August 2, 2008
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at Vote the Power 2008 Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at Vote the Power 2008

Lorenzo Gaztaņaga at Vote the Power 2008 in Aberdeen. It was organized by the Grassroots Steering Foundation.


Hamilton Fair - July 26, 2008
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga and Bill Barry

Bill Barry, prominent Baltimore City Green, offered Lorenzo Gaztaņaga the use of his space at the 15th Annual Hamilton Street Festival and Car Show. Bill and Lorenzo shake hands for clear, honest, and transparent governance, and ending the Iraq War and the Patriot Act.


My experience at the Dundalk Independence Day Parade: A revelation

Parade Car Richard Matthews Parade Car

Four Libertarians, Darlene Nicholas, Bill Buzzell (a.k.a. McGuyver, basically the man who's ready for anything), my wife Susan, and yours truly, showed up between 7 and 7:30 a.m. on July 4 to march in the Dundalk Independence Day Parade. We decorated Bill's car with as many liberty messages as possible and all kinds of doodahs. Bill drove the car. Darlene Nicholas, candidate for US Congress, Fifth District, helped Susan carry the Maryland LP banner, and I walked behind the car, which had my campaign banners on each side. As it happens, Dundalk is in my congressional district.

Lo and behold, there were people along the parade route that knew me. They happen to live there, and knew me from work. Pretty lucky. But the important thing was the eye contact that I was able to make. A lady said to me, "O'Malley is a sissy; thank you for being here." I said, "You're welcome." Two fine looking, middle aged American women who happened to be black were holding up Obama signs. I looked at them and acknowledged them in a positive way. Why? Because if we can transcend the thing we see - the physical color - then we have a chance of transcending what we cannot see - the ideological discussion. Exactly. There was the man with the sign that said, "Drill here and drill now." I nodded to him. I believe in that nod, not because it's going to solve the whole energy thing, but merely because it's a foot in the door, and, besides, technology has advanced to such a degree that, yeah, drilling in ANWR can be done properly, so long as government stands where it's supposed to be - no force and no fraud. What a concept!

I felt a powerful connection to the people lining the parade route. Whatever their ethnicity, I glimpsed in them the true America - people who deeply want this to be a united country, a peaceful country, a happy and prosperous country. At times I was almost moved to tears. At one point during the parade, four youngsters with T-shirts promoting a barbecue place came to me and asked, "Can we walk with you?" I said, "Sure, you can hang with me." They ranged in age, I guess, between nine and fourteen or fifteen. Suddenly, the four or five people who had said they would be joining our parade unit but didn't show had been unofficially replaced. These kids kept shouting, "Vote for Lorenzo!" and "Happy Fourth of July!" At one point, they even brought me a bottle of water.

Independence and the free market. What an experience for a guy who's run for office so many times and never even gotten close. I am the possessor of a dubious title. At this point, I've run for office more often than any other Maryland Libertarian, and I've never gotten in. People might argue that that is a losing streak, but I'll tell you this, the real losers are the ones who cower.

In liberty, your friend,
Lorenzo Gaztaņaga

Lorenzo Gaztaņaga Parade Banner


Business Card

Business Card





Click to download a business card:

Microsoft Word format
PDF format