Yesterday, we were introduced to Jake Towne. Now we can get a bit more into his policies.
Thumbnail Themes
LIBERTY: Jake stands for the liberty of the individual and views freedom as an indivisible whole that includes both economic and personal liberty.
SOUND MONEY: “The monetary unit must be incorruptible, not based on fraud.” Towne would be an enemy of the Federal Reserve, bailouts and stimulus.
ACCOUNTABILITY: Towne pledges a novel “Open Office” concept.
RULE OF LAW: Towne says he is “a Champion of the Constitution.”
The hallmark of the Towne candidacy is economic theory. For a chemical engineer, Towne has a great understanding of economic theory.
“The political establishment is driving us along the path of economic ruin,” Towne told me. He is critical of the rampant spending of government and blames both parties for “passing the buck to future generations.”
“Both parties are to blame for the mess we are in,” Towne told me. He recounted the past several years where we saw a Republican president and congress, a Republican president and Democratic congress and a Democratic president and congress. The one common thread has been increased spending, increased debt and increased pressure on the future of America and its currency.
To be sure, the GOP in congress are in favor of less spending right now than the Democrats, but Towne would say both are spending far too much. Both parties have expanded the federal government well beyond its constitutional boundaries.
“It would be healthy to have a third party out there,” Towne told me.
Towne said that in this environment “It would not make sense to run for either of those parties.”
He hopes that voters will vote on the issues and not along party line. I hope voters will at least realize that there are issues. I hope that a Towne candidacy will at least get voters asking “How can congress mandate health insurance?” Or, “Why do we need a federal Department of Education?” Or, several other questions as to how our federal system of a national government of limited powers morphed into the centralized state we have today and did so without any amendment to the United States Constitution allowing it.
As Towne said, “economic unrest leads to political change.” We are likely to see it in 2010 in the form of GOP victories but will the Republicans actually offer an alternative or just be a lesser version of the same evil? That is the question that Towne and his followers would pose.
“A lot of people out there are hurting, looking for answers,” Towne told me. These answers, he claims, are not coming from either party. He doesn’t see Callahan as a change agent, that is for sure. He points out that Callahan supported TARP and the stimulus plans are part of the national mayors’ association. “Dent,” Towne says, “was for stimulus,” just a smaller version in the infrastructure bill.
He claims that Dent, despite talking like a fiscal conservative, “is one of the biggest spenders out there.” He says “It’s the voting record you need to look at,” not just their intentions.
“People need to wake up,” he says, “both [Dent and Callahan] are career politicians, though they may disagree at times.”
Towne adopts that economic theory that says that Keynes was wrong! Government spending does not lead to growth. He would argue that cuts in government spending improve the economy—as private spending increases when less is taken in taxes. He points to 1920 and 1946, when war spending ended, as examples that prove the theory. Like many of his economic school, Towne believes that FDR’s New Deal “elongated the depression.” The lesson, they would say is clear, don’t have the government stimulate the economy. Instead, have the government step back and get out of the economy.
He terms the bailouts and stimulus plans “of the Republican-Democratic Establishment” as unconstitutional. “Government’s responsibilities should be limited to establishing a framework of laws to protect individuals from fraud, coercion, and aggression against the rights of individuals.”
He says “Too big to fail is an outright lie.” He would have let the troubled financial firms undergo “an orderly bankruptcy process of debt liquidation and asset revaluation.” He calls Charlie Dent “a turncoat” for voting for TARP after opposing it.
He takes aim at corporate America. “The government should not be issuing special favors to any corporation for any reason,” he says, “as to do so the government must first steal from someone else.” He asserts that corporations have no rights. Only individuals do in Towne’s view.
He says the regulations for fair trade and safety “merely serve to increase the size of government bureaucracy, which increases the end cost to the consumer, prevents competition from smaller firms, and creates a higher barrier of entry for new businesses.” He says these regulators are “doomed to inefficiency and failures.” “The free market is the most just, most humane, and most prosperous economic system the world has ever known,” according to Towne, therefore “I will never award special favors of bailouts to corporations and bankers.”
Tomorrow, we will finish this initial profile.
Comments
It really gags me to point this out, but the only surpluses in recent history were under the Clinton administration. Then war happy financially conservation Republican Bush went to war with the world whether they needed it or not. Of course, during all this time, the politicians haven't done a whole lot about the ticking time bomb of Medicare and Social Security.
I'm hoping that your article was economics light because the arguments as presented don't all hold up. Using 1920 and 1946 as examples of prosperity after government spending stops is misleading. During the wars a great deal of money from the government spending ended up in the people's hands, but they couldn't buy consumer goods because of rationing and lack of production. Look at automobile sales after 1946. Detroit could sell everything they could make, get a premium, and even took a little grease money from people who wanted to move up in the queue. Look at what happened in 1937 when FDR tried to wean the economy off the federal teat, clunko.
Read a biography of Keyes if you need some sleep, but Keyes' theories are heading into a revival in economic circles. His work saved the British economy during WW II and helped tremendously after the war. Yes, the British economy went down after the war, but that was a result of lots of causes not economic theory.
Just so you know, I share Mr. Towne's disdain for much of what both parties are doing and really would like to be able to have a real choice that might change the way the current system is slanted. However, I've been a cynic too long to blindly hook up to the lasted group offering change. Obama made that a telling campaign move and seems to be acting more like Bush everyday. Still not as bad as Chaney though.
Jake Towne for Congress!
RS--as I said in my intro yesterday, I try to present the profiles with as little commentary as possible. My personal belief is that certain government spending does in fact do wonders for the economy--such as roads and bridges--while other not so much. I am far less a critic of TARP than Mr. Towne. Every bank I invest in has now gone TARP-free. The "surpluses" under Clinton of course arose because of the very tax system Towne would dismantle--one which taxed these bubble profits that have long since evaoprated but, of course, did not give the money back when profits turned to loss. Give us another sock bubble and we'll have surpluses--well, not after Pelosi.
Dear RS -
"Using 1920 and 1946 as examples of prosperity after government spending stops is misleading." Ken did not misquote me here, but I believe you have. These were NOT examples of prosperity, but are instead examples of recovery. The net economic loss after the destruction of war sent the country into recession and chaos - it's what wars do.
Check out the 1929-1946 unemployment data in this article I wrote. FDR lengthened the Great Depression and in some respects, we are repeating history.
towneforcongress.com/economy/bernankes-great-lie-the-gold-standard-and-the-great-depression
Nice interview. Jake Towne has the courage to speak truth to power. He is clearly the best choice for the people of the 15th district.
Ken, To have so much confidence in these big banks is a mistake. As Towne says "too big to fail is a lie." Anything that makes both profits inevitable and socialized losses inevitable is terrible. Remember that the big banks are "too big to fail" and the average American is "too small to matter."
If you think that government involvement in trying to maintain full employment is a bad idea, look at the unemployment rates for 1948 to present: bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm/. None come close to the rates in the Great Depression when the feds were only learning how to manage the economy. I would agree that they're now over the line and have been for some time.
If you want a view of true laissez-faire look at the business cycles in the 1800s. Depressions/recessions were rampant during that time. The period around 1883 was known as the Great Depression until 1929 came along. It is now referred to as the Panic of 1883 (see Wikipedia). Unemployment rates were in the teens for years. In addition, there was no unemployment compensation or much of any support net. Labor pay rates were low to start with, so most people had no savings either. While it has always hurt to be unemployed, it was much worse in the "good old days" before government set up programs to help.
Another great article Ken. I really enjoy reading them, even if I don't always agree with them.
RS, our government has great intentions when it involves itself with trying to maintain full employment. But reality has show that it doesn't work. The only reason that people think that the government has been successful is that they changed they way they report unemployment numbers. (briansullivan.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2009/11/06/is-the-real-unemployment-rate-17-5/)
I wouldn't label the 1800s as laissez-faire(more free than today-yes). I would say that the fractional rexerve banking system caused most of the problems in the 1800s. So much so that the Congress created the first and second national banks of the united States to bail the banks out. Though I fail to see the logic of solving the problems of fractional reserve banking by making it bigger.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!