Prohibition Party Hopes to be on Pennsylvania Statewide Ballot for First Time Since 1954

 From Ballot Access News

2023 Prohibition Party National Convention

2024 presidential election

Prohibition Party

@ProhibitionUS

We are getting closer to the 2023 Prohibition Party National Convention. The convention will be held on May 8-9, at the Holiday Inn Express and Suites Buffalo-Airport, in the Buffalo, New York area. At the convention, the party will select its 2024 presidential ticket.

9:32 PM · Apr 23, 2023

2024 Prohibition Party candidate for President: Zack Kusnir

From https://zack2024.com/#

About Zack

"Meet Zack, presidential candidate for the United States of America, and a proud member of the Prohibition Party."

"Born and raised in San Diego, California, and now residing in New York City, Zack has always been driven to make a positive impact on the lives of those around him. His parents instilled in him a strong work ethic and a sense of responsibility to serve his community, and those values have guided him throughout his life."

"After graduating from the University of Southern California with both a bachelor's and master's degree, both of which he obtained while playing football for the university, Zack went on to work in finance and technology, and he is a well-known, upstanding member in his community."

"Zack currently serves as the Treasurer of the Prohibition Party, and looks forward to representing the party in the 2024 Presidential Election where he plans to bring awareness to the nation's oldest existing third party, with a vision to improve health and unity across all 50 states."

Photo of the Week: It's okay when we do it.

 Democratic candidate for Senate from the state of Iowa Mike Franken:

Source: https://twitter.com/FrankenforIowa/status/1352221334915452928

Source: https://twitter.com/FrankenforIowa/status/1584957202317873153?cxt=HHwWgsDUxbKL8_4rAAAA

The Alcohol Industry and Their Lies

"The alcohol industry falsely claims that their business helps the nation’s economy, in an attempt to justify the sale of their harmful products. When in reality they harm the economy. Our nation spends more money each year dealing with the social, medical, and economic damages caused by alcohol use than the alcohol industry makes in sales.

The alcohol industry claims that their businesses will bring in tax revenue. In reality, the federal, state, and local governments spend far more money dealing with the problems caused by alcohol than they ever receive in taxes, and most of those costs end up being paid for by higher taxes on the rest of us.

The alcohol industry claims that it brings business to communities. In reality, their business siphons consumer money away from honest businesses, damages workforce productivity, fosters increased violence and crime in neighborhoods, and in many other ways contributes to an environment that is less suitable for most other businesses to operate. Alcohol businesses grow by sucking the life and vitality out of the communities in which they reside.

The alcohol industry promotes habitual alcohol use, increased alcohol use, and addiction, so that it can profit off exploiting users, without regard for how it will negatively affect the users and other people around them. All too often, their profiteering drains away money that could have been spent by people to meet their needs or the needs of their families, that could have been spent on something that would benefit their lives rather than harming them, and that could have been spent on supporting honest businesses and their workers.

On top of that, the damaging mental and physical effects of alcohol damage use productivity and harm the ability of people to make a living. The effects of alcohol use produce a variety of illnesses and injuries, which lead to shortened lives and increased medical costs.

The alcohol industry and its products contribute to increased poverty, to childhood poverty, to the abuse and neglect of children, to increased violence and crime, and so many other things that serve to deprive people of a decent life.

The alcohol industry does not bring the prosperity it claims. It never has and it never will. It will just make our communities sicker, poorer, and more highly taxed. The alcohol industry profits off exploiting and harming others, while the rest of us are forced to pay the costs of the damages.

The alcohol industry peddles lies to try to deceive the public into accepting their practices because they know that when enough of the public understands what’s really going on, they will be put out of business. The alcohol industry thinks that if they repeat their lies enough times that they can continue to deceive the public. But we hold that if the truth is repeated enough times, then public awareness will grow. That one day enough people will be aware of the situation, that the alcohol industry will no longer be able to keep up their charade, and their glass house of deception and excuses will come crashing down."

Source: Prohibition Party

A plank for the Prohibition Party's 2024 platform

A news story came to my attention recently. The state of Tennessee passed a bill that would require drunk drivers to pay child support if they kill the parent of a minor. It would at the least be an interesting experiment in recidivism. I feel a federal version of this bill would make a good plank for the Prohibition Party's 2024 platform.

An alternative to drug prohibition

It's no secret that drug prohibition isn't exactly popular. Recently, though, an alternative has popped up. I came across a news article about a referendum in Switzerland. The referendum took place on February 13th and 57 percent of voters chose to place a near-total ban on tobacco advertising within Switzerland. Predictably the tobacco companies were not happy. But I think this is a fair compromise with the civil libertarians.

As an American I think it would behoove the Prohibition Party to include a similar proposal to their 2024 platform, only expand it to all drugs: tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and prescription drugs. Currently only the United States and New Zealand allow marketing and advertising of pharmaceutical products directly to patients rather than health professionals. It's a process called direct-to-consumer advertising and it would not surprise me if it was at least partly responsible for the opioid crisis.

Alcohol advertising is rampant and lawless. This is a fake commercial from the animated TV show South Park but it is not much different from real world alcohol ads. Several countries such as Norway, Russia, Ukraine, Kenya, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka have varying bans on alcohol advertising in media and I feel that the U.S. should join them.

Uncapping the House of Representatives versus term limits for members of Congress

Back on August 9th of last year I made a post talking about reforming the United States government. I'd like to narrow down the focus to Congress and more specifically the House of Representatives. A lot of ideas have been bandied about on how to "fix" congress, most often the idea of term limits to weaken the power of individual congressmen and the ability of lobbyists to buy votes. I used to be a supporter of term limits since someone sitting in Congress for 40 years seemed contrary to the idea of a representative democracy.

However a comment I once read somewhere long forgotten changed my opinion. Enacting term limits would result in politicians 'waiting out' a rival's term hoping for a more favorable congress. Then newly elected officials would 'wait out' those politicians and the cycle would continue indefinitely.

Now I believe the best way to rein in the power of individual congressmen in to increase the number of congressmen. The line of thinking is that by increasing the number it would require a greater consensus to achieve legislation while simultaneously making it prohibitively more expensive for corporate lobbyists to buy the necessary number of votes to pass favorable legislation.

I propose we start by increasing the number of representatives to 573 using first the Wyoming Rule and after the next census to 695 using the Cube root rule. Of course, this is not such a simple fix and would require Americans to vote for parties outside the Democrat-Republican dichotomy but it would be a start.

Bonus Photo(s) of the Week: Mandates for thee, not for me.

    That seems to be the philosophy of California governor Gavin Newsom, San Francisco mayor London Breed, and Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti. All three have been more than happy to institute lockdowns and mask mandates and all three have been more than happy to routinely violate them. Newsom ignored his own orders in order to vacation in Mexico for Thanksgiving, a full year after ignoring his own orders in order to attend a party at the French Laundry restaurant. Meanwhile the day after Newsom's party, mayor London Breed attended her own party at that same restaurant. Like Newsom, a full year after attending a party at the French Laundry, she was caught clubbing mask-less in defiance of her own mandate. Garcetti does not seem to be as flippant as Newsom or Breed.

    Now our intrepid trio have all been caught, once again, violating their own masking orders while attending the NFC Championship game between the Los Angeles Rams and the San Francisco 49ers. Will they be held accountable? Time will tell.

Added new links to the sidebar

Convention of States 

Convention of States - Twitter

Cube root rule

Congressional Apportionment App

It's for your own good

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.”

    -    C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)

The Iron Law of Oligarchy and Republicanism Part 1

    I was reading a political discussion a few days ago when a commenter posted a link to the Wikipedia page for something called the "Iron Law of Oligarchy". I had never heard about this before so I read into it and the first paragraph of the article states that:

"rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is inevitable as an "iron law" within any democratic organization as part of the "tactical and technical necessities" of organization"

     The article goes on to state that:

"all complex organizations, regardless of how democratic they are when started, eventually develop into oligarchies"

and

"since no sufficiently large and complex organization can function purely as a direct democracy, power within an organization will always get delegated to individuals within that group, elected or otherwise."

    I developed a similar thought to this a few years ago. I came to the conclusion that democracy can not work at a national level, especially in a country as large as the United States, and thus it should not exist beyond the city-level. I guess it goes with the saying the people should care more about local elections than national as they have a more direct effect on their lives.

    The article includes the line:

"Michels stated that the official goal of representative democracy of eliminating elite rule was impossible, that representative democracy is a façade legitimizing the rule of a particular elite, and that elite rule, which he refers to as oligarchy, is inevitable."

    I had a similar thought that mirrored this, that democracy was little more than a way to get people to consent to oligarchy. The fact that political dynasties can exist in a democracy is proof of this, ranging from the Clinton and Bush families of today all the way back to the Washington and Adams families at America's founding in the 18th century.

The Role of Monarchy as a Stabilizing Force

    On August 15, 2021 the nation of Afghanistan fell to Taliban forces unopposed, nearly twenty years after being deposed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. Modern Afghanistan's problems can be traced back to the 1973 coup d'état that saw Mohammed Daoud Khan overthrow his cousin King Mohammed Zahir Shah and the Kingdom of Afghanistan. In five short years Khan himself would be overthrown and killed during the communist Saur Revolution. The following year communist Afghanistan, along with the Soviet Union, would find themselves embroiled in a nine-ear long war against rural, Islamist insurgents that saw the Soviets withdraw by 1989 and the communist Afghan government collapse in 1992. After a civil war throughout the 1990's the Taliban established themselves as the new government before being overthrown by U.S. forces in 2001.

American helicopter evacuating embassy personnel in August 2021

    From the Cromwellian atrocities in Ireland during the Commonwealth period to the Reign of Terror in 1790's France. From the Russian Civil War and the Red Terror of the Soviet Union to the Weimar Republic and Nazi Germany. And finally the fall of the Afghan monarchy was the beginning of 50 years of unending chaos and violence for the country. It's clear that the replacement of monarchy with the inherent instability of republicanism leads to violence and political extremism. I leave you with this quote by Winston Churchill:

"This war would never have come unless, under American and modernizing pressure, we had driven the Habsburgs out of Austria and Hungary and the Hohenzollerns out of Germany. By making these vacuums we gave the opening for the Hitlerite monster to crawl out of its sewer on to the vacant thrones."

Reject republicanism, return to monarchy.

Proposal for a New American Government

    I voted for the first time in 2016 despite being eligible since 2008 and to say I quickly became disillusioned with the whole thing is an understatement. A majority of Americans want a third party yet they refuse to vote for them. In 2016, 2018, and 2020 I voted for third parties whenever possible even though I didn't always agree with their platforms.

    I submit a short list of proposals to fundamentally change the American government. Some are related to voting and some are not (and none are set in stone as written here nor will it be limited to these items).

1. The replacement of the President with an unelected, hereditary monarch, titled as Emperor/Empress of the United States.

2. Puerto Rico becoming a state (with the Virgin Islands merged into it) and Washington D.C. being retroceded to Maryland.

3. Restore the Hawaiian monarchy as a sub-national monarchy.

4. Expansion of the House of Representatives to 695 members using the Cube Root Rule with states gaining seats by the current apportionment method.

5. Parties running for the House must meet a national threshold of .14%=(1/695)*100 to gain at least one seat. Parties meeting the threshold will be apportioned as (vote%/100)*# of seats for state = # of seats for party.

6. Each state becoming one multi-member electoral district (California=82 members, Texas=60 members, etc.)