Thank you for all the kind and gracious comments regarding my testimony before the Congressional Judiciary Committee Tuesday.  As you could tell, each of the 14 members of congress attending had 5 minutes.  Unfortunately, most of them spent the bulk of their allotment pontificating with prepared statements rather than asking the four of us testifying questions.           

            The most frustrating part for me was the constant refrain by the Democrat side that people would get sick and die if our country ever reduced meat inspection requirements.  I’m going to start calling inspected meat “government food” and  uninspected “liberty food.”  The notion that people will become more unhealthy on government food than liberty food is completely unproven.  We haven’t tried liberty food for many decades; perhaps an experiment would show that liberty food produces more health than government food.  

            The other frustration was the constant harping from the Democrats that the key to competition was going after “the big four” for antitrust violations.  The most asinine comment of the day came from Congressman Johnson who said the only way to preserve competition was to have more aggressive federal government intervention.  Folks, you can’t have flourishing small business in the same country as big government.

            I wish I could have said much more, but there’s never enough time.  Yesterday, I had a visit from a Virginia U.S. Senatorial candidate, Kimberly Lowe, who is one of 7 contending for the Republican mantle to run against incumbent Virginia Senator Tim Kaine (D).  This morning I sent her some talking bullets.  Add these to my Tuesday testimony and see what you think.

Here you go:

1.  We need to Uberize the food system.  Due to democratized self-auditing through

the internet, a completely unregulated chauffer system developed—we gladly hop into

cars with strangers in foreign places but know the feedback loops self-police.  The 

internet has created on a global scale the village vetting that policed the butcher, baker,

and candlestick maker of yesteryear.  Uberizing creates its own safeguards and it’s time

for food to join the 21st techno-century.

2.  The above argument works the same for AirBnb

 

3.  Our food system needs an opt out option equivalent to home schooling for government

schools and medical sharing for Obamacare.  What if I don’t want government food?  We 

need a way for folks to exercise their most fundamental, intimate right of choosing the fuel

for their own personal microbiome.

 

4.  The only way to create accountability in the government food system is to subject it

to circumvention, otherwise known as free market access.  Right now a farmer—even 

a neighbor-- can’t legally sell you a steak or pork chop without going through an antagonistic

bureaucratic process.  That’s unfair to choice, price, and access.

 

5.  Big government and flourishing small business don’t thrive in the same habitat.  Government

oversight always, always, always is prejudicial to smaller entities and concessionary toward

large ones.  Monopolies cannot occur without special treatment from government.  The surest

way to break up monopolies is through market freedom.

 

6.  When folks say neighbor-to-neighbor unregulated food commerce will cause illness due

to tainted food, they have no scientific basis for the claim because we haven’t allowed it since

stainless steel, indoor plumbing, microscopes, refrigeration, and internet rating systems.  With

all this informational and technological advancement, we should at least experiment with liberty;

perhaps it would make people healthier to not eat government food; perhaps it would drive down

food costs to not have to buy government food; perhaps it would stabilize the food system if it

weren’t limited to government systems.

 

What’s your soundbite?