Harry Browne on CompuServe

The following is a transcript of a live conference with Harry Browne, libertarian candidate for the Presidency of the United States. It took place in the CompuServe Convention Center on November 14, 1995, and was co-sponsored by the Book Preview Forum and the Political Debate Forum.

Harry Browne: Good evening, everyone.  This is Harry 
Browne. Thank you for coming this evening.  I look forward
to discussing with you questions of how we can reduce the 
fed. gov. to a fraction of its present size and repeal the
federal income tax -- among other topics.   May we have the 
first question?

Alex/Preview: Let me ask one while we're waiting for folks 
to use their buttons.  How does your platform differ from the 
standard ones?  

Harry Browne: Standard Republican and Democratic 

Alex/Preview: Yes--the Demopublican platform we all know 
so well. 

Harry Browne: The Rep. and Dem. proposals are all 
"futuristic."  They propose great changes someday in the 
future. What they lack is the word "now".  They need to 
learn to "just say now." We want huge spending cuts now, 
huge tax cuts now, a balanced budget now.
Lofty asks: Harry, do you think the late 19th century was a 
good time? It seems the U.S. was pretty much libertarian 
then, and the result was mass exploitation, child labour, 
inhumane working conditions, starvation, extreme levels of 
poverty which the welfare state can reliably prevent.

Harry Browne: The US was more libertarian then, but 
technology had not advanced to today's rate.  Consequently, 
it is a mistake to compare today with then. What is important 
is comparing today's gov enterprises with private companies 
like Microsoft and Fedex that deliver on their promises, 
unlike gov which always fails to deliver.

Marz Marleau asks: How do you expect to achieve a balance 
between satisfying the most principled libertarians and the 
mostly moderate "mainstream" Americans in your campaign 

Harry Browne: Polls show that 3 out of 4 Americans want 
"much less gov" than they have now.  The problem with the 
GOP is that they aren't following through with that, 
consequently people are disenchanted.  If the Reps offered to 
repeal the income tax in return of reducing the gov to a 
fraction of today's size, they would provide an incentive for 
people to support them. The tepid approach they're following 
leaves no one happy.

Jim Jensen asks: Mark Twain once said that the government 
should be used for regulating interstate commerce and 
defending the nation from foreign invaders. (not a direct 
quote) What do you think the responsibilities should be?

Harry Browne: The Constitution asks the fed gov to defend 
our borders, guarantee a republican form of gov to all states, 
and regulate commerce among (not within) the states and 
with foreign nations.   There is no provision for welfare, 
education, housing, transportation, crime control, regulation 
of individuals or companies, etc.  The fed gov should be 
about 1/15 its present size.  If we cut it back, we can afford 
to repeal the income tax with NO replacement tax. 

Judy D. Matter asks: If you were in the White House right 
now, how many days would it be before this current budget 
problem would be resolved?

Harry Browne: I can't say.  But I would need only one third 
of one house to support my vetoes.  And I WOULD veto plenty
-- unlike previous presidents who talked a good game 
but never stood up for what they had run on.

Michael Campbell asks: Based on the current charade being staged
by Dems and Repubs over the shutting down of the 
govt over minor budget cuts, how do you see yourself 
getting the Congress to approve the repeal of the Income 
Thank you.

Harry Browne: We need to offer the Amer. people 
something in return for the budget cuts.  The offer is to 
repeal the income tax.  That way everyone has a stake in the 
outcome. No one cares whether the Corp for Pub. 
Broadcasting is abolished; it won't change anyone's life 
substantially.  Only when the American people have 
something to rally around will we pressure Congress to do 
what's right. Imagine the power of the income tax as an 
issue. In a TV debate, I look into the camera and say, "This 
week look at your pay check, see how much is being taken." 
"What will you do with that money when the tax is repealed?  
Put your child in a private school, move into a better home, a 
better neighborhood?  Save up for a biz of your own? 
Support your favorite cause, charity, or church?  What will 
you do with that money?  I won't rest until it's no longer 
taken from you.  

John Reuscher asks: How can a "third party candidate" avoid 
the "unanticipated results" of electing a more liberal 
candidate as was Perot's contribution to the Clinton 

Harry Browne: We have to quit electing bad Republicans as 
a way of keeping Democrats out of the White House. Bill 
Clinton is little different from George Bush. If Bill Clinton is 
reelected, at least the anti-gov revolution will continue intact. 
If I'm elected, the revolution will be won. If a Rep is elected, 
the revolution will go to sleep. We need to get the American 
people to see that the differences  among the 2 old parties are 
trivial, and that the different between them and the LP are 
monumental.  Only then will they take the plunge and vote 
for a third party candidate.   And I intend to highlight those 

Michael Stoddard asks: In How I Found Freedom in an 
Unfree World you talked about the direct vs the indirect 
approach to achieving freedom.  Running for president seems 
to be a reversal of philosophy.  Has your approach to life 
gone through a metamorphosis?  If so, please explain.

Harry Browne: I think the world has changed mightily in the 
past 20 years. Today I think it's possible to turn things 
around politically.  There was no chance of that in 1973.
In effect, we've already won the educational battle. The 
American people realize that gov doesn't work.   But the 
political battle is still being lost -- gov continues to get larger. 
What's needed is someone to go in and clean out the stables, 
and I'm volunteering to do it. 

Tom Ender asks: Considering the CityVote debate debacle, 
do you think you will get in the TV debates?

Harry Browne: That remains to be seen.  We need to achieve 
a lot before then. I have to acquire much more name 
recognition by next Spring.  I need to raise many millions of 
dollars for TV ads and other forms of impact.   When we do 
those things, and if I show up in the polls at 10% or so, it 
will be impossible to keep me out of the debates.  They will 
have to include me or not have them.   To achieve these 
intermediate goals, I need a lot of help.  I need your money, 
your support, your attention, your energy, your talking up 
the candidacy in letters to the editor, on the computer 
networks, everywhere possible. 

Keith Smith asks: Many of us who have supported the 
Libertarian Party for two decades now feel you should 
accept matching funds and use them to buy air time on 
Sunday talk shows to spread the Libertarian Party's message 
and explain your positions.  

Harry Browne: I appreciate your position.  There's a case to 
be made for accepting the funds.  But my positions are 100% 
for smaller gov.  It will require too much explanation to point 
out that there's nothing hypocritical about wanting to cut gov 
and taking matching funds at the same time.   And by not 
taking the funds, we have a publicity weapon that I hope 
we'll be able to use effectively. 

Marz Marleau asks: Aren't you perhaps asking for trouble by 
promising a NST, when the President has no power to 
implement such a tax?

Harry Browne: I'm not promising any tax.  My new book 
"Why Government Doesn't Work" will be in the stores within 
a week.  It contains all my proposals. I'm not proposing the
replace the income tax with anything.  The sales tax and a 
flat tax are  backup measures, in case my plan to retire the 
fed debt won't work because of a shortage of gov assets to 
sell. Perhaps I should explain: I want to sell off all assets the 
gov has acquired w/o constitutional authority, and use the 
proceeds to buy private annuities for people who have 
become dependent on Social Security.  Then we continue 
selling assets and using the proceeds to pay off the fed debt. 
If the proceeds amount to $12 trillion, we can do it all.  If 
not, some backup plan will be needed. I discuss two such 
plans in my book.  But I don't like either of them.  I want to 
get rid of the income tax and replace it with..............
John Reuscher asks: 
1.) Do you really expect to be elected?
2.) Do you  believe that you serve a real purpose even if 
you're not elected?
3.) Are you and your party satisfied with # 2?

Harry Browne: 1) It is a long shot.  But I would not have 
undertaken this if I had thought there was no chance to win. 
I'm not interested in becoming a professional candidate.  I 
just want to restore America to a free country and live my 
remaining years in peace and freedom.   2) If I don't win, I 
hope to change the terms of political debate in America -- 
away from how fast gov should grow, to how little we can 
make it. 

Gary Bortosky asks: have you ever held elective office?

Harry Browne: No. 

Michael Campbell asks: I visited your Web site & I read 
through your intentions when elected to office.  I liked what I 
saw, esp. the section relating to your running for selfish 
reasons.  however, how you are going to PR statements like 
the one above (the selfish reasons) into a publicly 
"acceptable" statement?

Harry Browne: It's about time people spoke honestly to the 
voters. I've never had to pay a price for honesty.  I've found 
that people appreciate hearing what they know intuitively to 
be true.  We have everything on our side and we need to 
realize that.  We have a message of hope, honesty, and 
realism to offer the American people.  We have nothing to be 
defensive about, nothing to hold back on, nothing to be 
embarrassed about.   We offer something valuable to 
everyone -- the young, old, black, white, rich, poor, 

Alex/Preview: We're running low on questions, folks--please 
put your question into the  queue!

Lofty asks: Microsoft and Fedex don't prevent starvation. 
Nor does private charity, as the 19th century proved. There 
were enough rich people who could have prevented it but 
didn't. You rather let people starve than "forcing" people to 
show some social responsibility?

Harry Browne: No one is "letting" anyone starve.  Gov 
doesn't work.  It doesn't deliver the mail on time, it doesn't 
keep the cities safe, it doesn't educate our children properly.  
If we want to take care of poor people, the last place we 
should look for help is to the gov that has failed at everything 

Judy D. Matter asks: What have been your previous 
occupations, leading you up to Presidential candidate?

Harry Browne: I have been an author and financial advisor 
for the past 28 years. I've written 8 books, 4 of which were 
best-sellers. I've written a newsletter, Harry Browne's Special 
Reports, for the past 20 years. My greatest qualification for 
office is that I have the will and determination to do 
something to turn this country around.  I recognize that gov 
doesn't work.   I'm not going to look under the hood.  I'm 
going to take the engine out. 

Michael Stoddard asks: In marketing it's critical to OWN one 
position/category in the customer's mind (the principle of 
focus).  Which issue do you feel will become synonymous 
with the Harry Browne for President campaign?

Harry Browne: Government doesn't work.
Repeal the income tax.
Reduce crime by ending the War on Drugs.
Is that one or two? 

Jeffrey C. Brown asks: Who would you like to have for a 
running mate?  How about Walter Williams for instance?

Harry Browne: Very good man. It's too early to pick a 
running mate.  And I want the advice and counsel of the LP 
members.   But I like Walter Williams. 

ALFRED WEBRE, JD asks: what are your positions on 
NAFTA, and on undocumented immigration from Mexico?

Harry Browne: Nafta isn't necessary for free trade.  Treaties 
are unnecessary.  We need only tear the barriers placed by 
our own gov and open the markets so that the American 
people are free to buy whatever they want from whomever 
they want.   As to immigration, we first must get rid of all 
the welfare incentives are attracting the wrong kind of people
to this country.  When that's been accomplished, we can look 
at immigration again. But you don't solve problems caused 
by gov by adding more gov on top of the problem.  

Tom Ender asks: As the Chief executive, what would you do 
to extricate the BATF, FBI, DEA and the other federal 
minions from our lives? 

Harry Browne: I would tell all the bureaucrats they can get 
paid time-and-a-half if they'll stay away from work. The 
president can virtually shut down those agencies, many of 
which were created or organized by presidential order.  
There is no reason for the fed gov to be involved in crime 
control at all. All crime is local.  It takes place in the 
jurisdiction of a police dept or sheriff's dept somewhere. 
There's not reason for the feds to be involved.  There's no 
reason -- constitutional or otherwise -- to have fed laws 
against carjacking, gun ownership, discrimination, or anything
else.  These are local matters to be settled in local 
ways.  The founding fathers were adamant about not letting 
the fed gov get involved in crime control.  And I agree.   The 
value of getting the gov out of these areas isn't just in 
enhancing our freedom.  It's also economic, in making it 
possible to reduce our taxes to a fraction of what they are 
today.  Now gov at all levels takes 47% of the national 
income in taxes.  I want to cut that in half the first year. 

John Reuscher asks: How do you feel about nationalizing 
ownership of property in the U.S. (not allowing foreign 
citizens to own property)?

Harry Browne: In a free country, anyone should be free to 
buy whatever someone wants to sell him.  Why should
Harry Browne: Americans be limited in whom they can sell 
their property to? That is a form of price control -- 
preventing you from getting the best price for your asset 
when you want to sell it.  

Jeffrey C. Brown asks: We are witnessing the layoff of 
thousands "unessential" government employees because of 
the budget showdown?  If they are "unessential", why are 
they employed by the government?  Any comments?

Harry Browne: The free market has room for all of them.  
And I want to see them in happier jobs, where they can make 
more money, do something satisfying, please customers, and 
go home proud of what they do.  

Michael Stoddard asks: Do you feel government has any 
legitimate purpose?
If so, what legitimizes them?

Harry Browne: I'm sorry I see I didn't really answer Jeffrey 
Brown's question.  Yes, they are unessential. As to government's
purpose, gov is force. It isn't a question of what 
we think gov should do, but what it's capable of doing. Force 
is the least efficient and least fair way to handle social 
problems.   I want to see force reduced in America to the 
absolute minimum possible.   Gov doesn't succeed at 
anything it tries.  Even the functions that are usually 
undisputed as gov functions -- such as crime control or 
judiciary -- are being handled terribly. There have to be better 
answers.  The president can do a great deal to show how 
better approaches are possible and to fight to implement 

Michael Campbell asks: I handled the 1992 Libertarian 
media for Ohio as State Media Coordinator.  Have you been 
contacted by major media (NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX) yet, and 
how do you plan to make yourself known to them?

Harry Browne: The first year of my campaign was spent in 
organizing and in sewing up LP support. We now are ready 
to approach the general public and are taking steps to do so. 
Only when we have created sufficient name recognition for 
me will the networks come to me. You can help in this by 
mentioning my candidacy everywhere possible.  Call (800) 
314-8611 and arrange to get bumper stickers, lapel buttons, 
and the like.  Write letters to editors, arrange speaking 
engagements, talk up the campaign everywhere. By early 
next year, I hope to recognized as THE third candidate in the 

John Reuscher asks: What about countries that don't allow 
U.S. citizens to market certain products, such as Japan.  
What can be done to get our foot in the door, so to speak?

Harry Browne: Japan is the loser when they keep their 
citizens from buying US products.  We should make their 
problem our problem by duplicating their mistakes and 
preventing our citizens from buying from wherever they 
want.   Free trade brings its own blessings, and gov can't do 
anything to improve on it.   Gov will only make things worse 
if it tries to force other countries to open their doors to us.  
Government doesn't work, and we have to quit looking to 
gov for our salvation -- whatever the problem may be. 

Michael Stoddard asks: What is the "minimum" government? 
Do you plan to sunset the whole operation?
Name one function you would keep?

Harry Browne: I want to reduce the fed gov to only those 
functions specified in the Constitution.  Those are defense, 
guaranteeing a republican form of gov to all states, and 
regulating trade with foreign nations.  Once we've achieved 
that, we should then look for ways to reduce gov further. 
Even within the Constitution, there is much that can be done 
to minimize gov.  For example, by  privatizing many defense 
functions, a great deal of money can be saved -- and we 
minimize the possibility that gov employees (military or 
civilian) can drag us into war.  If we're going to build a 
missile defense, for example,  which is probably the only
thing the gov needs to defend us from foreign dictators, we 
should put up a reward to be given to the first company that 
can produce a working system (not a prototype or plan), but 
an actual working system.   This would be more efficient 
than having the Dept of Defense do it, or in taking bids from 
companies that may or may not deliver.   In many other 
ways, we should investigate non-governmental alternatives to 
functions traditionally associated with gov.  

Tom Ender asks: What do you plan to do as regards US 
membership in the UN?

Harry Browne: I will do everything possible to induce 
Congress to repeal the UN treaty.   There is nothing to be 
gained by the US being in the UN, NATO, GATT, Nafta, 
etc.  And there is everything to lose -- as such treaties
make us vulnerable to the decisions and crises of other countries.  

Jeffrey C. Brown asks: Do have any plans to visit North 
Carolina in the near future?

Harry Browne: I have been there for the NC LP convention 
in 1995.  I'm sure I'll be back.  What do you have in mind? 

Lofty asks: How do you explain that while the U.S. has 
lower taxes, less welfare, less government than most 
European countries, it has the worst crime rate and the 
biggest gap between rich and poor (the richest 1% owning 
40% of the wealth)?

Harry Browne: The biggest gap exists in welfare-state 
countries where the bureaucrats live like Kings while the 
common folk pay ungodly taxes. The crime rate in the US is 
mostly the result of the War on Drugs.  The homicide rate 
dropped steadily from the end of Prohibition in 1933 until the 
War on Drugs started in the early 1960s.  Then the homicide 
(and general crime) rate began to rise rapidly.   We can 
reduce crime by emptying the prisons and court systems of 
non-violent offenders, people involved in "victimless" crimes. 
Then there will be adequate law-enforcement resources, 
prison space, and court time for the thugs who are terrorizing 
  Who would you rather have taking up a prison cell: a 
marijuana smoker or a child molester? A prostitute or a 
rapist? A tax-evader or a serial killer?  Only when we 
redirect the priorities of crime control away from enforcing 
morality to controlling violence  will we reduce crime in 
America.   And only when we get it out of the hands of 
Wash DC will we make progress.  

Michael Stoddard asks: Why has our system broken down 
into government of the special interests, by the special 
interests, and for the special interests?

Harry Browne: Because gov is too big of people to ignore.
When gov is smaller, there will be no problem with lobbyists 
or special interests because there will be nothing for these 
people to fight over.  The problem isn't too much lobbying, 
it's too much to lobby over.  As PJ O'Rourke said, "When the 
legislature decides the rules of buying and selling, the first 
thing to be bought will be the legislators." In the same way, 
America doesn't have too many  lawyers.  It has too many laws.

Larry O'Connor asks: Harry, the cause is not making a dent 
outside of intellectual conservative circles. How do we break 
through the bread and circus culture? "Government doesn't 
work" won't catch.. Saying that you will end taxation is read 
as mere absurd rhetoric.

Harry Browne: I don't promise to end taxation -- only the 
oppressive taxation of the income tax and the Social Security 
tax.   Bread and circuses have to be countered with bread and 
circuses.  Most people know they would be better off if they 
didn't pay income tax -- better off than getting a check from 
the gov. All politics is personal.  The problem in the past is 
that libertarians have been trying to sell people a better 
world, when what we need to sell them is a better life -- a 
better life for themselves.   Everything we offer has to relate
to how it will change the voter's personal life.  Only then will 
they be inspired to give up the 2 old parties and take a 
chance on us.  The Republicans aren't doing this; they aren't 
offering anything in return for their fictitious "cuts" -- and so 
the average person has no reason to rally to support them.  

Jeffrey C. Brown asks: How about a speaking engagement at 
Wake Forest University if I can arrange it?

Harry Browne: I'd love to.  That's my brother-in-law's alma 
mater. Please -- everyone -- contact our campaign office by
calling (800) 314-8611 if you can arrange a speaking 
engagement or help make contact with a large organization 
or in some other way further the campaign.   I've already 
campaigned in 32 states, and there's a lot more to come. 
When my book gets on the best-seller list, the speaking 
engagements will come more easily, and name recognition 
will be higher.  But now we have to work for everything we 
get.  So any help you can provide will be greatly 

Gary Bortosky asks: You implied exceptions in which gov 
"force" would be necessary.
Can you elaborate?

Harry Browne: No exceptions.  Force is an unacceptable 
way of solving social problems.  However, there are also
political realities.  And I doubt that I'll see in my lifetime a 
society in which force is no longer considered a legitimate 
way to solve problems.  So I want to go to Washington and do
everything I can to minimize force (government) to the 
smallest amount possible.   Government is force.  Most 
people don't stop to realize that.  If nothing else, my 
campaign is going to make most everyone aware of that -- so 
that the next time someone suggests a gov solution, he'll
realize he's asking the police to use their guns to give him 
what he wants.  

Tom Ender asks: Do you believe the LP will make inroads in 
state legislatures and congress, or do you think we will move 
the Ds and Rs more indirectly?

Harry Browne: I think that, whatever happens in the prez 
campaign,  the LP will elect more people in 1996 than ever 
before -- by a wide margin. We will have a national 
campaign unlike any before. This will be of enormous 
benefit to local candidates.  It will lay the foundation -- gov 
doesn't work -- upon which each candidate can run his own 
campaign, without having to acquaint the voters with the LP 
from scratch.   I urge you to consider running next year.  We 
need first-class candidates all up and down the ticket.   If we 
want to be taken seriously, we have to take ourselves 
seriously.   We need candidates who are presentable, 
articulate, unafraid, and willing to work hard to get elected.  
We don't need candidates who are doing it on a lark.   The 
American people have come to realize that gov doesn't work, 
and now it's our job to exploit this. If we let this opportunity 
slip by, we have only ourselves to blame.  

Marz Marleau asks: How do you reassure all the federal and 
government-related industries employees that they will 
continue to prosper when their jobs are eliminated?

Harry Browne: No one can guarantee anyone a job, and 
untold misery has resulted from such attempted guarantees. 
But if we try to have a retraining program or a transition, by 
phasing in freedom over a number of years, we are virtually 
guaranteeing that nothing will ever change -- because the
moment we turn out backs gov will revert back to the 
oppressive monster it is today.   The change must be quick, 
sudden, decisive, and deep.  When the income tax is 
repealed, there will be trillions of dollars in buying power 
available to the American people that is going down ratholes 
today.  There are bound to be jobs for anyone who wants 
one.  The demand for new products and services will be 
overwhelming.  There will be most likely a big shortage of 
labor --which will inspire further automation and computer-
oriented progress.  

Cliff G. Swiger asks: Do you favor government created 
money and credit?

Harry Browne: I don't favor government-created anything.  I 
want to get rid of the Federal Reserve as fast as I can 
pressure Congress to do so. I want to get the gov back on the 
gold standard as an important first step.  And then move
toward a more efficient system eventually in which gov 
doesn't tinker with the nation's money in any way.

Gary Bortosky asks: what is the address of your web site?

Harry Browne: http://www.HarryBrowne96.org

Alex/Preview: And I'd like to invite Mr. Browne to continue 
to upload campaign info to Political Debate Forum's 
Libertarian section throughout the campaign, too!

Harry Browne: There is a wealth of material on the Web site.

Judy D. Matter asks: Do you feel the Federal Gov't should 
run the National Park Service?

Harry Browne: I appreciate the offer to upload material here.
National Park Service: No. I want to see the Parks in the 
hands of agencies that would care about their future.  
Which would be more likely to care -- federal bureaucrats or 
the Wilderness Society?   Most environmental damage in this 
country occurs on government-owned property -- rivers, 
parks, etc.  Which has more litter per square feet -- your 
front lawn or the local gov park?   We need to get these 
assets into the hands of people who have a vested interest in 
their future. 

Gary Bortosky asks: please list a few of the $12 trillion 
worth of gov assets to divest.

Harry Browne: The fed gov owns 52% of the land in the 13 
western states.   The fed gov owns pipelines, mineral rights,
oil rights, a petroleum reserve, platinum reserve, power 
companies, printing plants, dry cleaning establishments, 
unneeded military  bases, unneeded military hardware,
insurance companies, and on and on and on.  

Jeffrey C. Brown asks: Ron Paul's Farewell Address to 
congress was instrumental is moving me from the Republican 
party to the LP.  Any comments on Ron Paul seeking the 
Republican nomination for his old seat in Congress? 

Harry Browne: I'm sorry to see him leave the LP, but I 
understand his feeling that he has a better chance running as a 
Republican.  Maybe if I'm elected president, he'll switch 
parties -- as I would expect some other Congressmen to do.  

John Reuscher asks: Back to privatizing defense: Who 
should be in charge of operating the missile system 
developed under your proposal?

Harry Browne: The gov should contract with a private 
company to manage it, with the contract renewable every 2 
years -- to assure that the company has an incentive to do it 
correctly.  Everything would be under the supervision of gov 
agents -- to reassure those who believe that gov employees 
are somehow born without a self-interest gene.   The 
important issue isn't so much how any particular thing will be 
handled, but that we stop thinking that only gov can do all 
these things.  We have to reorient the whole concept of 
national defense.  The government's job isn't to win wars, but 
to keep us out of wars.  This can be done best by disengaging
from all treaties that make us vulnerable to other 
countries' problems, by renouncing the bombing of innocent 
foreign civilians as an acceptable way of defending the 
country, by not trying to be the world's policeman, by 
constructing a missile defense that will protect us from 
attack, so that we don't have to threaten retaliation (and thus 
need hundreds of billions of dollars worth of military 
hardware to attack other countries).  

Alex/Preview: We've been going for 80 minutes.  Would you 
like to continue? 

Harry Browne: Sure, if there are any questions left.

Cliff G. Swiger asks: You opt to dissolve the Fed but the 
FRBs themselves are private corporations. Who do you think 
should have the power to create our money?

Harry Browne: The Federal Reserve Banks are about as 
"private" as the IRS.  Their profits all revert to the Treasury, 
their Board is appointed mostly by the president, and they 
have the power of law to force banks to do their bidding. 
Money shouldn't be "created" by fiat.  It should evolve
naturally -- as it does on a gold standard.  Paper money should
be nothing more than a receipt for real money -- gold.  
All paper money should be convertible into gold at a fixed 
rate, so that money can't be expanded at the whim of gov employees. 

Lofty asks: While you're right on the crime-increasing effects 
of the war on drugs, it doesn't explain the difference to 
Europe as drugs are illegal in most European countries just 
as well. Legalizing them both in the U.S. and Europe would still
leave the U.S. with the higher crime rates.

Harry Browne: I don't care what the European countries do.  
I want to reduce crime in the US.  If you're still trying to 
make a case that free markets in the US are the cause of crime,
you've got a tough job ahead of you.  There is much 
that can be done to reduce crime in the US: end the War on 
Drugs, end the prosecution of victimless crimes, end the
gun-control laws that put honest citizens at a disadvantage with 
criminals, end the asset-forfeiture laws that divert the 
motivations of law-enforcement agencies from fighting crime 
to acquiring assets, get the fed gov out of crime control so 
that laws and law-enforcement reflect local needs and not
 compromises worked out between Sen. Dole and Sen. 

Alex/Preview: Mr. Browne, I'd like to ask you for some 
closing comments, if I may...and then I'd like to open to floor 
so everyone can say goodnight and thank you for coming

Harry Browne: I appreciate all the provocative questions.  
I'm sorry that I can skirt the surface in my brief answers. 
Details of all my proposals, as well as my philosophy of gov, 
are covered in "Why Government Doesn't Work" which will 
be in the bookstores this week.  Also, check out the Web site 
for articles.  Let me close by saying that we have an 
extraordinary opportunity today --  one that many of us have 
fantasized about for decades.  If we let it slip by because we 
argued incessantly about the final destination, rather than the 
direction we want to move, we will deserve what we get -- a 
lifetime of more and more government.   The American 
people have come to realize that government doesn't work.  
Now it's up to us to show them that freedom does.  We have
to present a credible plan for getting rid of the social 
problems that have plagued this country the past 30 years. We
do have answers.  We have to present them in terms that 
make sense to people, and that show them that their lives will 
be improved substantially by turning away from the old 
parties and to the LP. I hope you will join me in this effort.  
This is going to be the most exciting year in this century. 
Let's make this a free country again.  

Marz Marleau: Bravo, Harry! Have you ever thought about 
personal "stumping" in the debate forums on the commercial 
on-line services?  

Harry Browne: Sounds good.  Specifically what do you have 
in mind?

Alex/Preview: I'd like to thank you once again for coming--
it's been a pleasure to be your host!   I'm sure that Marz is 
thinking at least partly of Political Debate Forum--he leads 
the Libertarian section there!

Harry Browne: Alex and Marz, thanks for having me here 
this evening.  

Tom Ender: Thank you Harry

Michael Campbell: Thank you for answering my questions 
Mr. Browne.  Much appreciated  :-)

John Reuscher: It was interesting hearing your views.

Florence: Thanks Harry.  It's been a very informative 

Dr. Michl Edelstein: Thank you Harry!

Lofty: We have seen how a libertarian brushes away all 
critical questions with "Gov doesn't work!"

Mike: Thanks for having solid principles!

Marz Marleau: Harry: Great having you! Thought you might 
consider stopping in from time to time to "show your face"
and offer an opinion or two, in the Political Debate Forum 

Laura J. Gleason: Thanks for your time.  I look forward to 
hearing you tomorrow morning on Knoxville's AM 990.  

Cedric L. Stines: You've certainly given all of us a lot to 
think about.  Thank you, Mr. Brown.