|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by WILL FOLKS
***
Those who have been part of FITSNews‘ audience for any extended period of time know I have deep libertarian roots. Government, in my estimation, should confine itself to a handful of core functions – cops, courts, roads, bridges, etc. – while letting the private sector sort out the rest.
Wherever possible, government should stay out of our wallets and our private lives… whether it be preemptively attempting to criminalize bad decisions or retroactively attempting to subsidize the cost of their consequences.
It is not government’s job to save people from themselves…
Unfortunately, too many people in positions of power – including those who have the word “Freedom” emblazoned on their mastheads – see government as an arbiter/enforcer of specific definitions of morality. Namely, their definitions.
Sometimes, in cases involving children, there is a justification for these efforts… but when we are talking about issues involving consenting adults (and in particular issues involving consenting adults which do not involve tax dollars) such impositions are of grave concern to me.
Sometimes – as in the case of decriminalizing cannabis for medical use – the moral imperative in a situation is the precise opposite of what the moralizers would have us believe it is.
***
This month, we saw one of these issues play out in the South Carolina House of Representatives as lawmakers affiliated with the S.C. Freedom Caucus helped stall a proposed casino bill which enjoys broad public support across the Palmetto State.
Slated for construction in rural Santee, S.C., the proposed casino facility would include a 300,000- to 400,000-square-foot casino tethered to a 300- to 600-room luxury hotel and convention center on approximately forty acres near Interstate 95. Located in one of the most economically distressed, commercially neglected regions of the Palmetto State – it would create nearly 4,000 jobs and bring $8 billion in investment over its first decade of operation.
Oh, and its developers are not asking for a dime of taxpayer money…
My media outlet has previously addressed some of the more opportunistic and hypocritical opposition to this project. But it shocks me that I would have to address opposition from a group that literally bills itself as a champion of “freedom.”
According to the most recent polling, 90% of all voters – including 83% of those who attend church weekly – said they believed people should “get to decide for themselves if they want to gamble.” In other words, whether they supported the casino project or not, nine out of ten South Carolinians believe individuals have the right to make that choice themselves.
That is freedom, people… not suppressing such a choice to maintain a mismanaged government-run monopoly on gambling which preys on the poorest South Carolinians.
***
RELATED | SUPPORT FOR CASINO ON THE RISE
***
The Santee project is not targeting poor South Carolinians, by the way – it aims to attract affluent, out-of-state travelers at an optimal location on one of the nation’s busiest thoroughfares. And, as mentioned, it is not looking to take a dime from South Carolina taxpayers – but rather to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in revenues for the state (revenues which could be used to help eliminate the income tax).
Why would lawmakers oppose that? Especially seeing as they have done less-than-nothing for decades to lift this impoverished region of South Carolina – dubbed the “Corridor of Shame?”
Why, specifically, would lawmakers who purport to stand for “freedom” oppose such an endeavor?
My media outlet has consistently applauded members of the S.C. Freedom Caucus for their unwavering commitment to fiscal conservatism – and their staunch support for the principles of limited government and lower taxes. On dozens of occasions, they have stood courageously against the fiscally liberal “Republican” majority in defense of freedom and free markets – and FITSNews has had (and will continue to have) their backs each time.
The Freedom Caucus has been a vital check against legislative tyranny in Columbia, S.C. – which is why my media outlet issued a rare endorsement of its candidate slate in 2024 (and will likely do the same in 2026 as the group seeks to add to its ranks).
But any entity which fashions itself as a champion of liberty invites headwinds when it stands in opposition to its free exercise… especially as it relates to a choice so many South Carolinians agree is the individual’s to make.
***
ABOUT THE AUTHOR…
Will Folks is the founding editor of the news outlet you are currently reading. Prior to founding FITSNews, he served as press secretary to the governor of South Carolina. He lives in the Midlands region of the state with his wife and eight children.
***
WANNA SOUND OFF?
Got something you’d like to say in response to one of our articles? Or an issue you’d like to address proactively? We have an open microphone policy! Submit your letter to the editor (or guest column) via email HERE. Got a tip for a story? CLICK HERE. Got a technical question or a glitch to report? CLICK HERE.
13 comments
How much are the casino nabobs paying for this repetitive coverage?
This is quite the mystery. It is almost like people who form a caucus based on legislating behavior and morality are…not about freedom?
A lot of people want freedom for themselves, but they don’t necessarily want it for others. At the end of the day, probably very few people want true freedom for everyone.
Will what you and so many wacky libertarians fail to see and understand is society and people cannot handle too much freedom. Stupid actions and decisions can many times affect many of us in detrimental ways when we have nothing to do with those making those dumb decisions. Then we have to employ the blood sucking liberal lawyers to gain justice or we take it into our own hands. Keep your weed, you casinos and your hookers you consistently want the freedom for others(of course) to partake in. What you fail to understand is a moral society has need of restraints. Some things are just bad for society as a whole
Spoken like a true authoritarian. You cannot handle casinos, weed, and hookers so nobody gets them?
Spoken like a true blood sucking leech, er I mean liberal lawyer
That was a great response. Well thought out and really right to the point. I have no response for such a great comment.
There are people who would say attacking my profession and calling me names means you could not come up with an actual thought. But not me. I think this is brilliant.
Really, great work. Don’t let anyone tell you that you sounded stupid. And I will not hold this against you when you are crying in my office begging for help.
Perhaps if this caucus is not pro-personal freedom, perhaps it should not call itself Freedom Caucus. In all honesty, this “caucus” is not so much about freedom for citizens and is more about dictating what everybody should think and do and read.
Bo, the Freedom Caucus ain’t never been about Freedom or being conservative. It is about money$$$$$$.
Please share where this $$ to The Freedom Caucus is going.
I understand the libertarian point of view wholly and completely on this. This issue is a good one to weigh freedom versus reality. When (not “if”) this “freedom” causes irreparable harm in a community, its cures ultimately falls back on the taxpayer.
Drug abuse, mental health and alcohol abuse (and soon gambling addiction) programs are funded by the very “tax is theft” freedom first taxpayers. But there’s silence on the back end regarding the effects of gambling and addiction.
The thought that there’s “free money” left on the table to a politician is too big a temptation for the big government RINOs and Dems.
Now if we were pondering legalizing (100% unregulated) a slot machine and poker table in every house and business in S.C., I could get behind that.
But don’t be fooled into thinking a casino is going to fix all your roads and bridges as I’m sure they’ll argue. It’s all about the cash flow to who knows who, without any responsibility for the damage to a community. All “regulated” by a nanny state to keep things clean and transparent through a state funded gambling commission.
Yes, this will GROW government.
Making heroine and methamphetamines legal has the same “freedom” argument. But who dares go there without being called a kook? As a friend to a few gambling addicts, the harm is real.
I can say NO to the money flow to the government funded organizations that transition and transform broken addicted people back into society, but can the libertarians focus on the less sexy effects and costs? The growth of government? The “free money?”
You know Will’s libertarian views include wanting to legalize illicit drugs, prostitution and gambling. Some libertarians are just too wacky.
Mr Kilmartin, “heroines” are already legal; there just aren’t many of us.