Jasper Debate: Eric Schansberg Panel Q&A Liveblog

Energy? Sodrel leaned forward in the seat, Schansberg is sitting on the edge of his seat. Supports drilling, but the big problem is the value of the dollar. Alternative energy is great, but it should not be subsidized. If you want a congressman that will take your money and give it to alternative energy, vote for Baron Hill. If you want a congressman that will take your money and give it to alternative energy and oil companies, vote for Mike Sodrel. If you want to keep your money, vote for me.

Lobbyists? Baron has received $800,000 from the financial sector (Sodrel $400,000). A subtle slam on Baron. A smaller government with a reduced scope would see less lobbying and special interest involvement.

Trade policy? Free trade is great. Trade agreements are not free trade and are not great. Restrictions on trade that involves slave labor or non-voluntary trade or work would be prudent.

Health Care? Interesting that Schansberg was the only candidate to be asked about health care. He talks about libertarian theory. Implies that he supports socialized medicine (experiment in all fifty states with universally-available health care). He doesn’t seem to care what states do with regard to health care; just that the Federal government stays out of it. I suspect that Andy Horning would disagree; perhaps I misheard or misunderstood some nuance of Schansberg’s position on this.

How would you change the Constitution or get us back to the Constitution? Big fan of just returning to the Constitution. Schansberg suddenly transitioned this to a discussion of change. We need true change, he says.

Wild forests again? A dissertation on pollution and libertarian theory.

This debate has now officially become worse than the Brokaw presidential town hall. It is boring and the format makes it lifeless and vapid.

Education? Schansberg sees no formal Federal role in education. No Child Left Behind (shot; first mention of the night) is not helping things. Why should people in Indiana pay for education in Wyoming? Why should people in Vermont pay for a program in Indiana?

Term limits? He has done academic studies on this, and term limits change nothing. Goes back to the earlier question about campaign financing. It goes back to the sort of things we want Congress and government to do. The type of people we are currently sending are just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic. Supports term limits, but sees them as window-dressing and a secondary issue.

Bailout? Would have voted against it. Banking systems require faith and trust, and that faith and trust has been grossly violated. There are things we could have done, but giving $700 billion to the people that caused the problem is not one of them.

Immigration? We have to do two things. 1) Enforce borders, and 2) enforce things against business. We must do both things. Easier said than done. Not as easy as mass deportation or putting up fences.

Back to the bailout; should we have seen it coming? Absolutely. We should not expect that the government should have handled this well. The government should not be in the business of bailing businesses out. Example of a car speeding toward a cliff.

Wrap-up: Check his website. Consider his candidacy. Vote for him.

Professorial and thoughtful, but ultimately probably not that convincing on the broader electorate. Libertarians, by their nature, incur free earned media benefits from these debates out of all proportion to their normal influence.