[EM] Action

[hager2002 at lsh107.siteprotect.com]

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Narins, Josh wrote:

> RE: "HAGER in 2002"
> 
> It's not a job. It's politics. I'm, for most practical purposes, the
> anti-Libertarian. Gosh, 'those people' really get my goat. Privatizing the
> Post Office indeed! Hmmph. Grumble. ANYTHING the Government can do the
> Private Sector can do better? It's malarkey! I exaggerate. I'd rather have
> Ron Paul (R-TX) on the opposite side of the aisle than most Republicans, but
> only because I'd consider him the rational counter-argument, not because,
> for the most part, I agree with him about anything.
> Sorry if I've offended anyone. :)
> 

Hi -- Paul Hager here.  Since I'm the person in question, perhaps I can 
offer you some assurances that may make me more palatable despite my 
libertarianism.  I am a member of the Libertarian Party, but let me draw 
your attention to a couple of things in my campaign logo.  The word 
"Libertarian" appears nowhere, nor does the lady liberty Libertarian Party 
symbol.  There are 3 parties with ballot access in Indiana, the two majors 
and the Libertarian Party.  Despite that, the "I approve" is followed by 4 
boxes, not 3.  All of this is quite deliberate and is a way of signaling 
that I'm running a strictly non-partisan campaign.  You may also note in 
the "Why I'm running..." piece that I say I would run my campaign the same 
way whether I was "... a Republican, Democrat, Green, or a Pink Kangaroo."
I have been criticized by some members of my party for not participating 
in typical Libertarian activities -- for example, I will NOT be 
participating in the traditional April 15 Tax Protest.  Basically, if it 
doesn't have anything to do with AV and voting reform, I don't have 
anything to do with it.  I've been very disciplined about this.

In my view AV is objectively beneficial, and I'm willing to make common
cause with anyone in order to bring it about.  It's probably safe to say
that I'm at least as anti-Green Party as you are anti-Libertarian, but
I've made some efforts to reach out to them and signal that I'm open to
cooperation (the four boxes again).  I've converted at least one prominent
Green Party member to AV, although others I haven't had a chance to talk
to like IRV.  I've stated that if elected I intend to assemble a task
force that will look at alternatives to the plurality method and make a
recommendation to the Indiana General Assembly.  The task force would be
composed of academics along with a representative from each of the
organized parties in Indiana.  I've indicated that, even though the Greens
don't have ballot access, I want to include them.

This is not a partisan issue and I've never treated it as such.

Beyond that, the Secretary of State is strictly an administrative office.  
It deals with election laws, the U.C.C. and licensing.  Now if the office
were Governor, which has considerable power and can shape policy across
the board, helping a Libertarian might well be problematic.  The powers of
the Secretary of State are very circumscribed, however.

I hope the above answers some of your concerns.

Regards,

-- 
paul hager		hager2002 at hager2002.org

"The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is reason."
			-- Thomas Paine, THE AGE OF REASON