Not exactly.

First, stop looking at the minimum wage as a regulation on companies. Instead, look at it as a prohibition on contracting labor on the employee. The employee cannot sell his service to the employer unless the contract meets certain requirements. Well, if the employee is going to have to sell themselves as much as their non-disabled colleagues, then they have to produce as much. Otherwise, the marginal utility of hiring the disabled colleague taken with the marginal cost says it’s much better to just hire someone that isn’t disabled.

This is difficult to do for disabled individuals. They are, as the name says, disabled in some aspects which will limit their ability to work and produce. This doesn’t mean that they’re incompetent or unable to produce, it just means that they can’t produce at the same speed or efficiency as would a non-disabled person. Holding them to the same pay and standard as someone that is not disabled, like this newly-enacted law requires, is cruel. Ask any able-bodied person that has worked a fast-food job, it’s hard even with no disabilities. 

Now what about those that are disabled who, sometimes, need an able-bodied person alongside them to complete certain tasks. It’s difficult to ask them to now put in the same work as someone who doesn’t need guidance from another person to complete work.

In the age of automation, the minimum wage is an especially bad policy when it comes to low-skilled workers. In 2023, a U.S. Congressional Budget Office report said that employers will likely “respond to a higher minimum wage by shifting their means of production toward using more machines and technology and reducing their employment of low-wage workers.” If that holds true for able-bodied individuals, it is even more so for disabled individuals who rely on lower wages to even find employment. Their replacements don’t come as machines; they come as able-bodied people.

The current slashing of social programs by the Trump administration is causing panic far and wide. While the rapid changes taking place can be unsettling for some, there is no need to create a class of victims in response. Action is not only possible, it is preferable.

Those who possess a mindset of freedom have a horrible reputation with social progressives when it comes to matters of compassion. “A voluntary society would never work!” they exclaim. “What about the poor, the weak, the sick, the disadvantaged?”

They then proceed to describe a dystopian society where all but the smartest and strongest languish in abject poverty, misery, and enslavement–think, Dickens, meets Lord of the Flies, meets Pinocchio’s Paradise Island. This wasteland of a society is where we would certainly all find ourselves if not for the “benevolent” hand of government—which reaches out to pamper and protect our most vulnerable.

This melodramatic way of looking at liberty is uninformed, to say the least. I would go as far as to suggest that not only could a voluntary society care for its needy, but that it would, in fact, do a much better job than the current government-run system.

A Track-Record of Government Failure

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, over $2.5 billion was donated to the Red Cross by private donors. It was a record-breaking relief response, but not the only notable example of humanity to take place.

Along with all of the people who wrote a check or made an online donation, there were countless others who helped on a more human level. People opened their homes to complete strangers who now found themselves homeless. Others loaded up trucks with water and groceries and drove to the outskirts of the devastation to directly contribute to those in need.

These spontaneous outpourings of goodness were a bright spot in the darkness of the time, particularly so when compared to the grim results provided by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other government agencies.

Almost a decade later, North Carolina experienced a similar situation in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. Not only did the government again put forward an inadequate response, they also thwarted the attempts of individuals who were effectively providing relief.

In both of these disasters, government programs not only failed to help, but harmed.

Community vs. Bureaucracy

In a community, a person in need is an individual; in a bureaucracy, a person in need is a number.

A community recognizes the needs of its members without investigation. There is no need to fill out forms or sign paperwork that threatens incarceration should any of the facts not fall within the rigid parameters required for eligibility.

The rules within a community are flexible and take into account the changing circumstances of those in need. Everyone knows when Mr. Jones is back on his feet again and no longer needs his grass cut or when Mrs. Smith has gone back to work and no longer needs casseroles.

The current system, good intentions or not, has done nothing but create a caste system of societal outcasts and relieved individuals of any feeling of responsibility for their fellow human beings.

Families are ripped out of what should be economically diverse communities and herded into “housing projects.” The residents of these “projects” then tend to view themselves as disadvantaged, rather than as an essential part of a broader community. This creates an atmosphere of “us” versus “them,” rather than an atmosphere of community and mutual cooperation.

Any efforts to improve oneself through meaningful work or by building a more stable family structure are punished by losing the housing upon which one has now come to depend, making the situation worse. Lack of meaningful work can lead to frustration, anger, and depression which, in turn, can lead to violence. Lack of a stable family structure deprives those individuals of much-needed support.

Giving Benefits the Giver

The current system damages those outside of the “projects” as well. These individuals no longer feel a responsibility to personally reach out to the needy as now there are “programs for that.”

In the same way that the residents have lives empty of meaningful work, the non-residents have lives empty of meaningful altruism. Most people want to give and need to give. The very people who advocate for this type of system in the name of humanity are robbing our society of humanity.

When elderly school bus monitor Karen Klein was bullied by four middle school boys, the viral video which captured it inspired gifts of over $700,000.00 to send her on vacation. She, in turn, used a portion of that money to start an anti-bullying foundation.

There are so many examples of this kind of generosity. Animal shelters are left entire estates by generous benefactors. Certainly, people would come through for their fellow human beings as well were there not the perception that government was already meeting those needs.

“But this is so random and spontaneous!” the nay-sayers cry. “Wouldn’t people fall through the cracks?” Of course they would, just as they do now. One need only walk down a downtown sidewalk or peek under an interstate bridge to find countless examples of those who have “fallen through the cracks.” Such is the quality of life—bad things will always happen and there will always be suffering in the world. No amount of government intervention will solve that.

A Path Forward

Perhaps if we did not have this bureaucracy, churches would get back to the business of caring for the poor and downtrodden, rather than building mega-churches. There was a time when there was an extensive network of Catholic hospitals that turned no one away regardless of their religious affiliation, or lack of one. Mutual aid societies created a safety net within communities and a traveler who belonged to an organization could find assistance among members in other towns and cities, should they find themselves in need.

Last, but most important, was that building block of society known as “the neighborhood” where neighbors looked out for one another and worked out problems among themselves. A helping hand from a neighbor was not considered charity but part of a cycle of caring for others or being cared for.

The beauty of the community is that one does not have to change anything politically to make it viable. Anyone can go knock on the doors of their neighbors and get to know them. No one needs government permission to mentor a student that needs help but can’t afford it. A group of citizens can start a community garden to provide fresh produce in the midst of a food desert without relying upon a government intervention to solve the problem.

Do you have rental property? Any rental property owner who is concerned with fair and affordable housing can offer fair and affordable rent. Any physician who is concerned with equal access to quality health care can opt out of bureaucratic insurance plans and start charging a simple, reasonable fee. The money saved in paperwork filing would certainly help to make up the difference.

If we want to change the culture of our society to one which truly cares for all of its members, we can all start doing it today. There is no need to tear down the cold and uncaring bureaucracy that currently holds sway. A bureaucracy cannot remain if there is no one there to use it. By strengthening the village (the true village, not the government-constructed one) the bureaucracy might crumble and cease to exist.

Whereas on February 12, 2024, the Executive Committee of the Libertarian Party of Georgia adopted A Resolution to Support the Defend the Guard Act; and,

Whereas on March 28, 2024, the Georgia General Assembly adjourned sine die without passing the Defend the Guard Act; and,

Whereas on July 31, 2024, two Georgia Army National Guard soldiers were killed while deployed overseas in Iraq; and,

Whereas on September 24, 2024, Governor Brian Kemp issued Executive Order 09.24.24.01 declaring a State of Emergency due to Tropical Storm Helene in which five hundred Georgia National Guard troops were called up to State Active Duty; and,

Whereas on September 27, 2024, Governor Brian Kemp issued Executive Order 09.27.24.01 in which an additional one thousand Georgia National Guard troops were called up to State Active Duty in response to Tropical Storm Helene; and,

Whereas on September 30, 2024, Governor Brian Kemp issued Executive Order 09.30.24.01 in which an additional one thousand Georgia National Guard troops were called up to State Active Duty in response to Tropical Storm Helene; and,

Whereas these two thousand five hundred Georgia National Guard troops cleared roads, delivered supplies, operated distribution sites, facilitated communications, and provided other assistance during the State of Emergency; and,

Whereas Georgia National Guard troops who are in Georgia are able to offer assistance to their communities during emergencies while Georgia National Guard troops stationed overseas are not; and,

Whereas on January 30, 2025, Senate Bill 62, also known as the Defend the Guard Act, was introduced for the 2025 – 2026 biennium of the Georgia General Assembly; and,

Whereas the Defend the Guard Act as introduced would amend Title 38, Chapter 2 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated to state that the Georgia National Guard and any member thereof shall not be released from the state into active duty combat or combat support operations unless the United States Congress has passed an official declaration of war or has taken an official action pursuant to Article I, Section 8, Clause 15 of the United States Constitution to explicitly call forth the Georgia National Guard and any member thereof for the enumerated purposes to expressly execute the laws of the union, repel an invasion, or suppress an insurrection;

Therefore, be it resolved, that the Libertarian Party of Georgia supports the passage of the Defend the Guard Act during the 2025 – 2026 biennium of the Georgia General Assembly.

The devastation of hurricanes like Helene and the absolutely incredible response of voluntary organizations and individuals to help their fellow Georgians and even those impacted in other states has helped to demonstrate just what people are capable of achieving when they aren’t being held back. Mutual aid and charity are alive and well and have shown that they can thrive when they aren’t being stifled. The people of Georgia want to help one another and do not need the government to force them to do so. This emergency also demonstrated the importance of having the Georgia National Guard here at home to help deal with the disaster rather than being off overseas in undeclared wars. Georgia should pass Defend the Guard legislation to make sure our capable Guardsmen are where they should be.

Our physical safety isn’t the only thing that’s important, and Governor Kemp is correct when he says that the money taken from Georgians through taxation is their money, not the government’s. The people of Georgia know how to spend or save their own money better than the government ever could. While an additional 0.2% reduction is better than nothing, the General Assembly should adopt legislation that would eliminate state income tax altogether with more aggressive rate reductions instead of handing out rebates each year. At the very least, capital gains taxes on precious metals should be eliminated to give Georgians a way to protect themselves from the endless inflation caused by the federal government. Combine the tax cuts with cutting government spending and allow private citizens to decide where their own money should go.

Of course, just cutting taxes and spending is not enough for Georgia to truly be the best state for organic, sustainable economic growth. We must also cut through all the red tape of regulations that hinder new businesses from opening and citizens from entering the workforce. The Governor and General Assembly should be well aware of the problems with Georgia’s occupational licensing system after having studied it during the break between legislative sessions. Rather than merely trying to improve the efficiency of the bureaucracy managing these licenses, the licensing requirements should be reduced and eliminated so that Georgians can get to work.

The Governor did not give many details on what tort reforms he is looking for, but one idea that he should avoid is trying to impose some arbitrary cap on settlements. It is vital that those who actually have engaged in malpractice be held fully accountable for their actions. For the state to intervene and prevent this from happening would transfer the costs of malpractice onto innocent citizens and ultimately reduce the quality of medical care. A better solution for addressing healthcare challenges in Georgia is to continue moving forward from last year’s reforms to Certificate of Need. These Certificate of Need requirements should be completely eliminated along with all the other anti-competitive regulations in the healthcare and insurance fields to increase availability and reduce prices for the people of Georgia.

I am glad that Governor Kemp has resisted the call to violate the rights of Georgians with gun control measures in the wake of a tragedy. However, like with everything else it does, the government is inefficient at providing security. Instead of focusing only on trying to make schools safer, parents should have a greater opportunity to take their children out of public schools altogether. The people of Georgia deserve choice in education and the watered down school voucher law from last year is not nearly good enough. Parents should be free to send their children to private school or to homeschool them, whatever they believe is best for their own children, without facing regulatory hurdles or being forced to pay for public schools that they aren’t using which makes it more difficult for low-income families to afford alternatives.

As he has resisted the call for gun control, I ask the Governor to resist the call to violate the right to privacy of Georgians in the name of security. The efforts to protect children from killers and traffickers are laudable, but Georgia must not be transformed into a police state where citizens are constantly being monitored in the process. The right to privacy must be defended as vigorously as any other, with warrantless surveillance being inconsistent with both the Georgia Constitution and the principles of liberty we hold dear. The proliferation of cameras that law enforcement can access at will must be reversed and what monitoring does occur must be made transparent to citizens.

I welcome members of the legislature to work with me and the rest of the Libertarian Party of Georgia in our efforts to secure sound money, protect the privacy of Georgians, and remove unnecessary regulatory hurdles in health care. I look forward to working with Republicans and Democrats in both chambers of the General Assembly along with Governor Kemp to help the people of Georgia by protecting their rights and getting the government out of their lives so they can grow and prosper.