Why Have the “Right to Try”?

America is called the land of freedom and opportunity. Here terminally ill patients should be at liberty, knowing the potential risks, to try experimental therapies (drugs, biologics, devices) in hopes of saving their own life. These are therapies which have completed Phase 1 testing, but have not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. This is the argument behind the aptly titled “right to try” laws.

Opponents of the bill say that it can open up the patient to harm, but this ignores the painfully obvious fact that they already have a terminal diagnosis. Who better to make decisions affecting the life of a patient than that patient along with the counsel of their doctor? Why should a federal bureaucracy make the decision for them?

Kurt Altman, National Policy Adviser for the Goldwater Institute, has said that right-to-try laws return control of medical decisions “back to a local level”. Victor Riches, President & CEO of the Goldwater Institute said, “There’s no more fundamental freedom than the right to save your own life. Right to try guarantees that freedom by ensuring that patients, along with their doctors, are in control of the treatments they receive when facing a terminal diagnosis. Right to try will open new paths to treatments for many patients who are currently out of options.”

Liberty for All supported Senator Eric Brakey of Maine who was the lead Senate sponsor of “right to try” legislation during his time as Chair of the Health and Human ... continue reading »

Will New Hampshire be the first state in the Northeast to ban compulsory unionism?

At Liberty for All, we believe that freedom of association, as protected by the First Amendment of the constitution, guarantees the right of each American to seek employment without fear of being coerced to pay dues to a union against their wishes.

Right-to-work laws in most cases have the same basic purpose; namely, to prevent companies from firing workers who do not pay union dues and to preserve the liberty of workers. It would save workers – but cost unions – a lot of money. Heritage Foundation calculations using 2010 union financial reports data from the Department of Labor and Office of Labor–Management Standards found that private-sector New Hampshire unions would lose 15 percent of their dues-paying members totaling about $1.9 million a year.

New Hampshire has considered right-to-work legislation each year since 2011. It has never made it into law, either dying in the House, the Senate, or the Governor’s desk. However, the new Governor of New Hampshire, Christopher Sununu, included the right-to-work issue as part of his agenda. This brings hope that New Hampshire may be the twenty-ninth state to pass such legislation.

Right-to-work states are attractive to business investment. Whether a state has such a law is a factor considered by companies looking to relocate or build new plants. Stan Greer of the National Institute for Labor Relations Research said “Once it adopts a right-to-work law, New Hampshire will be the first state in the Northeast to ban compulsory unionism, and will become a magnet ... continue reading »

Rand Paul Wants to End Government Invasion of Privacy

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects Americans from government spying. We are supposed to be safe from “unreasonable searches and seizures” by the government. That means they can’t march into your home and search your property. Only with a warrant–granted by a judge–are they allowed to do so.

But most of us know that our federal government is not obeying this amendment. Federal agencies regularly find ways to circumvent your privacy. If it were up to them, the liberty of all Americans would be trampled underfoot.

One of the biggest problems is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. This law is supposed to equip federal agencies to protect America from foreign threats. But one part of the law allows the government to rifle through Americans’ communications–without a warrant. The loophole allows the government to monitor your emails, phone calls, text, etc.–if you communicate with someone overseas.

But Senator Rand Paul, with the help of Ron Wyden, is seeking to close this loophole. It’s about time.

From The Observer:

Liberal Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Tea Party Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) have introduced bipartisan legislation titled the “USA RIGHTS Act” to protect the 4th Amendment rights of all Americans from an overzealous federal government.

Right now, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) allows for an American’s calls, communications and data to be collected by the federal government and stored in a database, if the American is or is thought to be communicating with a person overseas. The bill ... continue reading »