You can read the Day Three report here.

Saturday, July 16th, 2022 was the last day of FreedomFest 2022. Most of the talks I attended were longer form. The afternoon had some quite interesting talks on criminal justice reform and freedom in Latin America. But first, the morning talks.

Politicians’ Panel

Matt Kibbe moderated a panel made up of Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH).

Kibbe started the panel on the topic of inflation.

One of the panel members, I don’t have which in my notes, made a joke that we need a model of corporate greed so that we know when prices go down and up. It will probably work as well as the COVID-19 modeling.

Davidson says to solve inflation we need sound money. It has to be something the government just can’t print. He also pointed out that political risk can lead to an increase in prices. Davidson ended his talk on inflation by saying he thought the first Covid stimulus was justified to mitigate the damage from lockdowns. However, he emphasized that the lockdowns were never justified.

Kibbe brought up baby formula shortages. Lee noted that the shortage was only in the United States. It was a government created shortage. The government has imposed import restrictions, imposed tariffs, imposed aggressive regulations, and distorted the marked with WIC. Lee had worked on the Formula Act in attempt to mitigate some of what the government has done. A watered down version of the bill passed the Senate but is stuck in the House..

The panel moved on to Cryptocurrency. Davidson thinks cryptocurrency acts as a hedge.

Lee started talking about how the legislative process has shifted away from the Legislature. The Legislature has delegated too much rule making authority to the executive. This has caused an explosion in rules and regulations. Sen. Rand Paul introduced a bill changing Congressional oversight of agency rule making. Lee is a cosponser.

Lee also said the temporary suspensions of laws are a problem for a certain set because the citizenry might realize that we don’t need those laws.

Putin and gas came up. Davidson talked about the desire of some, I don’t have who in my notes, to engineer a system of control around money. There is a desire among some in the Federal government to track energy usage. Thankfully, the Green New Deal is dead for now. Davidson finished by pointing out that Europe is in far worse shape than we in the USA are. Remember, this took place in July.

Kibbe brought up the upcoming midterm elections and accountability. Lee thinks the midterms will go very badly for Biden and the Democrats. Davidson says that he thinks American citizens are fed up and are sending better legislators to Washington. But, there are too many bad ones who like big government, and not just in the Democrat side.

Andrew Yang and Larry Sharpe

Andrew Yang gave a brief talk, then Larry Sharpe joined him for a brief panel discussion. I’ll summarize both here so I can get to the interesting stuff from Saturday.

Yang’s talk started with him talking about his background. He is descended from Taiwanese emigrants to America. His involvement in politics came later in life. He was a serial entrepreneur, and he noticed that politicians wanted to protect themselves. Yang noticed that incumbents’ reelection rates are much higher than their approval rates. Yang noticed that the two parties are in cahoots. These things led to his founding of the Forward Party.

When Larry Sharpe joined him, the talk centered on Ranked Choice Voting. Both are fans. Yang is also a fan of term limits and open primaries. Both agree that ballot access is very difficult.

I wasn’t impressed with their attempts to sell any of their solutions beyond making ballot access easier. Government should not be involved in primaries. Voters determine term limits when they decide whether or not to reelect an incumbent. When I compare New Hampshire and Maine, I see libertarians infiltrating the Republican party in New Hampshire, getting elected to office, and making change. Across the border in Maine, Ranked Choice Voting has done nothing for libertarians.

Criminal Justice Reform

I attended a panel discussion on Criminal Justice Reform. David Safavian, Peter Ludica, and Andrew Langer were on the panel. Andrew Langer was the moderator. CPAC sponsored the panel. Unfortunately, I arrived a bit late. I missed the panel introduction, so I’m not sure who answered what question.

One of panelists, I think David, is motivated by the waste of human capital caused by jailing people. This panelist also wants the criminal justice system to preserve human dignity and promote safety while being accountable. This panelist pointed out that government regulation has exploded. He claimed there were three Federal crimes in 1789, 100 in 1889, and approximately 450,000 today. Though he points out a caveat on the modern day number: The Federal government has given up counting Federal crimes.

Another panelist, I think Peter, had spent time as both a public defender and a prosecutor. He had also been a probation officer. He claimed that most prisoners he dealt with had been in foster care.

I think it was David that then talked about the history of criminal justice reform. He thinks that a trend of fixing problems started in the 90s. The trend reversed with the “Defund the Police” and BLM movements. Those movements, combined with prosecutors that won’t prosecute, has associated criminal justice reform, in the minds of the general population, with being anti-police and pro-criminal. This panelist thinks a backlash movement he calls “Fry the Litterbug” is building which he thinks will lead to reversing any progress made in criminal justice reform..

Peter said that many prosecutors see overcharging as a good thing. He never overcharged when he was a prosecutor. He thinks overcharging is a due process violation. He also talked about civil asset forfeiture. He thinks civil asset forfeiture is horrible and also a due process violation.

David and Peter talked about trying to get people back into society. They talked about records sealing and expunging. According to one of them, Michigan has laws around this for drug offenses, though treatment is required and a judge has discretion. The mentally ill are tough case. Putting them on the street or into prison is bad. They brought up a program in Miami-Dade County that diverts the mentally ill into getting help. As a side note, one of the panelists said incarcerated people at the State and local level are not on Medicare/Medicaid, their medical care is paid for by State and local taxpayers.

There was talk of classes in prison as a preparation for release. David said the classes are generally useless. And on top of that, state licensing laws generally make things difficult for released prisoners. David had two examples. A prisoner who works as a barber in prison in many states can’t get a barber’s license. California uses prisoners to fight wildfires but until recently ex-prisoners could not be firefighters or EMTs.

There was a little talk of bail reform. Peter thinks judges need more discretion.

One of the panelists talked about Clean Slate laws in Pennsylvania and Oklahoma where, under certain conditions, your record is sealed or expunged.

At the end of the discussion, the panel suggested attendees visit the Conservative Justice Reform page for more information.

Cuba Libre

Daniel di Martino, Martha Bueno, and Jorge Galacia were on a panel about fighting against Socialism in Cuba. The program said Antonella Marty would be the moderator, except the moderator was actually Anna from the Ladies of Liberty Alliance. I don’t remember the moderator’s last name.

Martha started by saying the usual suspects’ attempts to blame the American embargo of Cuba for Cuba’s economic problems is bullshit. Cuba has trading partners. Cuba can’t grow its own food and there are restrictions on fishing. The problem is the regime and its restrictions, not the American embargo.

Daniel talked about Cuba’s interventions abroad. The Cuban government has often interfered in other countries’ affairs. Daniel talked most about Cuban interference in Venezuela. This turned into a side discussion comparing Colombia and Venezuela. Colombia was once poor and had high crime, but now Colombia is turning around. Crime still exists, but it is lower. The country is becoming wealthier. Venezuela under Chavez and Maduro is becoming poor and more dangerous.

Back to Cuba, Martha talked about how wrong-headed American Leftists are about Cuba and Che. Those American leftists that hold up Che as a hero don’t realize Che would probably have them all murdered. She also criticized Black Lives Matter. 30% of Cubans are black, and BLM says nothing about how the Cuban regime crushes them.

Then panel digressed again into Venezuelan matters. Jorge wrapped up this digression with a quip along the lines of, “The Maduro regime is very inclusive. Everyone is included in not having rights.”

Jorge and Daniel then talked about Socialism in US Academia, specifically how so many at American colleges are clueless about socialism in Latin America. Both Jorge and Daniel spent time at American schools. Jorge at the University of North Texas, Daniel in a college in Indiana. According to them, many students think of the Nordic model when they think about Socialism, ignoring that a) the Nordic countries aren’t very Socialistic and b) Cuba and other parts of Latin America are very different. Both agree that it is important to keep pushing against the evils of Socialism and push the good of Capitalism.

Anna asked the panel if there was anything the US could do for Cuba without violating the Non-Aggression Principle? Jorge doesn’t like non-intervention. Other countries won’t abide. He thinks America needs a strong presence, but at the same time, must only help and not do the job. I interpreted “not do the job” as don’t engage in nation-building. Martha thinks the US government just needs to get out of the way. She talked about US government policies, citing one which I did not write down, which makes it hard for Cuban expats to help their family in Cuba. She also thinks Cuba needs guns in private hands.

The panel then took questions from the audience. I only have notes on one question.

The audience member thinks the panel is completely wrong about the corruption in Latin America and rigged elections. I don’t have in my notes what the panel said about elections in Latin America, but I remember they thought elections in some Latin American countries, I don’t remember which, were dirty. I’m not certain this person ever asked a question, and instead criticized the panel. The person claimed to be an election observer that had worked in many Latin American countries. I don’t remember which countries, but I remember overlap between the ones he worked in and the ones whose elections the panelists discussed. The audience member thinks these elections are clean and trustworthy. One of the panelists claimed that Venezuelan government employees are required to vote for Regime approved candidates. Sparks flew. The verbal fight between the panel and this audience member took up just about all of the remaining time.

Angela McArdle

Angela McArdle, the new LNC chair, gave a talk called, “How to Win When You Are in the Minority.” I have very little in my notes that is not already in that page.

McArdle wrapped up with a brief Q&A session. Most of what is in my notes centers around her plans to expand LP outreach and training. She thinks opposition to the war in Yemen (remember, this talk was in July) is a good thing for the LP to do.

The End

Angela McArdle’s talk was the last FreedomFest talk I attended.

Next year’s FreedomFest will be in Memphis, TN. I plan to go.