- Details
- Written by: Dr Loren Jay Chassels DO MST FAAIM FAWM
|
|
|
Dr. Loren Jay Chassels is a Board member of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. Loren earned his doctorate from A.T. Still University of Health Sciences, followed by an internal medicine residency in 2007. Now board-certified in internal medicine, he has practiced as a hospitalist and emergency physician for nearly two decades. See more at lorenjchassels.com |
For the last 12 years, my company, DR. CHASSELS, LTD.®, paid the health insurance premiums for my daughter and me. We had Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois because I thought it was the most trustworthy of the companies.
Last year, I retired and moved to New Jersey. Being a responsible patient (rare for a doctor), I arranged new-patient visits with a family-practice physician, a cardiologist, and a cardiac electrophysiologist to replace my doctors in Illinois. That expanded to a referral to gastroenterology for a screening colonoscopy. No problem. I’m doing the right things and being responsible.
After it was all performed, I started receiving the bills. The eight medications cost $30–60 each, as they have since my dilated cardiomyopathy diagnosis and three cardiac arrests. I paid full price for each physician visit and assumed it all went toward the $14,000 maximum out-of-pocket.
Then I saw the bill BCBS of Illinois rejected for being out of network: colonoscopy hospital services for $15,000. I was responsible for 100% of that charge. After a few months of phone calls, I switched to New Jersey Medicaid and Virtua ate the entire bill.
- Details
- Written by: Walter Olson
Originally published on Cato.org, republished under Creative Commons agreement.
My colleague Stephen Richer has already weighed in with observations on the New Jersey voter registration fiasco, in which a software error mistakenly registered roughly 6,600 persons to vote between June 12, 2023, and June 25, 2024, even though they had affirmed they were not US citizens. Of these, somewhat fewer than 400 later voted.
So far as I am aware, this is by far the biggest instance of unlawful noncitizen voting in the US unearthed in the past generation, so it may matter that it seems to be widely agreed that the mistaken registration did not result from intentional misconduct by the persons added to the rolls, the state, or its software vendor. Damningly, however, when the error was found and the software fixed, the state “never notified affected residents or removed their names from the rolls,” according to the NYT account. Incoming Gov. Mikie Sherrill at a press conference called this “unacceptable.” That’s for sure.
- Details
- Written by: Dr Loren Jay Chassels DO MST FAAIM FAWM
|
|
|
Dr. Loren Jay Chassels is a Board member of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. Loren earned his doctorate from A.T. Still University of Health Sciences, followed by an internal medicine residency in 2007. Now board-certified in internal medicine, he has practiced as a hospitalist and emergency physician for nearly two decades. See more at lorenjchassels.com |
On July 17, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its landmark en banc decision in "Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs I v. Attorney General New Jersey, No. 24-2415,” holding that New Jersey’s prohibitions on many semiautomatic rifles and its ten-round magazine capacity limit violate the Second Amendment.
The court’s ruling represents an important reaffirmation of the Constitution and the principle that government exists to protect rights, not to diminish them.
For years, the citizens of New Jersey have been subjected to some of the nation’s most restrictive firearm laws. Those laws did not target violent criminals, who routinely ignore firearms regulations. Instead, they imposed sweeping restrictions upon peaceful, law-abiding men and women who sought nothing more than to exercise a constitutional right guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
The Third Circuit reached several significant conclusions:
- The court held that semiautomatic rifles commonly owned by law-abiding Americans, including AR-15-style rifles, are protected “arms” under the Second Amendment.
- Applying the framework established by the United States Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the court concluded that New Jersey failed to demonstrate a historical tradition of analogous firearm restrictions that would justify its prohibitions.
- Details
- Written by: Dr Loren Jay Chassels DO MST FAAIM FAWM
|
|
|
Dr. Loren Jay Chassels is a Board member of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. Loren earned his doctorate from A.T. Still University of Health Sciences, followed by an internal medicine residency in 2007. Now board-certified in internal medicine, he has practiced as a hospitalist and emergency physician for nearly two decades. See more at lorenjchassels.com |
Libertarianism celebrates individual liberty, voluntary cooperation, limited government, property rights, free markets, and the radical idea that people thrive when left free from coercive state power—not when they’re herded into collective dependence. The Declaration of Independence was a thunderous rejection of top-down tyranny in favor of self-governance and unalienable rights. Mamdani’s address, by contrast, reframes July 4th as an occasion for dwelling on systemic flaws, identity-group grievances, and calls for more government intervention—precisely the opposite spirit.
His speech opens with evocative but somber imagery of New York Harbor: tides, explorers, passengers seeing “men waiting at the docks to take them into bondage,” “tenements rife with squalor,” “industry rumbling” amid “steam and smoke,” and a “towering monument to freedom” mixed with hardship. It repeatedly asks “what do we see?” when looking at America and answers with contradictions, hunger amid trillionaires, monopolies, “oligarchs who buy elections,” “masked agents terrorizing our streets,” and historical oppression.
This is not a celebration of independence, resilience, or human achievement under liberty—it’s a somber lecture on perpetual struggle against “power and influence and wealth.” Note the depressing tone: instead of fireworks, innovation, and the pursuit of happiness, it feels like a dirge. Reports and imagery from the event (newly naturalized citizens standing by) suggest the bystanders often wore solemn, almost mournful expressions—more like attendees at a protest or funeral than joyous patriots on the eve of the nation’s 250th birthday. True independence should inspire uplift and pride in what free individuals have built, not guilt and calls for redistribution.
- Details
- Written by: Dr Loren Jay Chassels DO MST FAAIM FAWM
|
|
|
Dr. Loren Jay Chassels is a Board member of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. Loren earned his doctorate from A.T. Still University of Health Sciences, followed by an internal medicine residency in 2007. Now board-certified in internal medicine, he has practiced as a hospitalist and emergency physician for nearly two decades. See more at lorenjchassels.com |
Communism and socialism, in all their variants, are inherently flawed systems that undermine human flourishing, economic prosperity, and individual liberty. They concentrate power in the hands of the state, stifle innovation and productivity, and have repeatedly produced poverty, authoritarianism, and human suffering wherever implemented at scale. Free-market capitalism, grounded in private property, voluntary exchange, and individual rights, remains the superior framework for human progress. This conviction has profoundly shaped my own life decisions, including my choice to retire early with significantly less savings than I had originally planned.
My Decision for Early Retirement
As someone who has worked diligently and saved consistently for many years, I now see limited incentive to continue full-time employment. A substantial portion of my income is diverted through taxation and allocated to expansive government programs rooted in socialist principles—programs often characterized by inefficiency, waste, and corruption. Rather than directing my earnings toward personal savings, investment, or retirement security, a significant share supports bureaucratic expansion and initiatives that yield suboptimal outcomes. The marginal benefit of additional years of labor does not justify the costs when so much of the reward is redirected and mismanaged. Consequently, I have chosen to retire earlier than originally anticipated, accepting more modest lifetime savings in exchange for greater personal time and autonomy. This decision reflects the disincentives created by such policies and illustrates their broader impact on individual motivation and economic behavior.
The Economic Impossibility of Rational Central Planning
At the core of both communism (collective ownership of the means of production) and socialism (heavy state intervention, redistribution, and control) lies the rejection of private property and market prices. Ludwig von Mises demonstrated in the 1920s that economic calculation under socialism is impossible. Without genuine market prices reflecting supply, demand, and scarcity, central planners lack the information needed to allocate resources efficiently.
- Details
- Written by: Mike Guadagnino
|
|
|
Dr. Michael Guadagnino holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology from the NY Institute of Technology and earned his Doctor of Chiropractic degree from NY Chiropractic College. He served as VP of Public Relations for the New Jersey Libertarian Party from 2017 to 2022. Dr. Guadagnino is the author of the best-selling book Fitness Over 50, 60, 70 and Beyond, available on Amazon and other major platforms. He also shares health and wellness insights on Instagram at @Dr._Guadagnino. Dr. Guadagnino writes on health care topics through the lens of personal freedom and individual liberty. |
The “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement, often associated with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has sparked a national conversation about chronic disease, food quality, government regulation, pharmaceutical influence, and personal health responsibility. While supporters and critics often view MAHA through partisan lenses, libertarians tend to evaluate it based on a different set of principles: individual liberty, limited government, free markets, transparency, and personal responsibility.
From a libertarian perspective, MAHA has both appealing strengths and significant concerns.
One of the biggest positives is its focus on individual health and informed decision-making. Libertarians generally believe that people should have the freedom to make their own choices about nutrition, medical care, exercise, and lifestyle. MAHA’s emphasis on educating the public about food ingredients, environmental toxins, and chronic disease aligns with the libertarian belief that individuals should have access to information so they can make decisions without excessive interference from government agencies or corporate interests.
Many libertarians also appreciate MAHA’s skepticism toward the close relationship between government regulators and large industries. Whether discussing pharmaceutical companies, food manufacturers, or agricultural interests, libertarians often worry about “regulatory capture,” where government agencies become overly influenced by the industries they are supposed to regulate. Calls for greater transparency, independent research, and accountability resonate strongly with those who value free and fair markets.
- Details
- Written by: Dr Loren Jay Chassels DO MST FAAIM FAWM
|
|
|
Dr. Loren Jay Chassels is a Board member of the New Jersey Libertarian Party. Loren earned his doctorate from A.T. Still University of Health Sciences, followed by an internal medicine residency in 2007. Now board-certified in internal medicine, he has practiced as a hospitalist and emergency physician for nearly two decades. See more at lorenjchassels.com |
The federal toilet standard is grounded in the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which required new toilets sold in the United States to use no more than 1.6 gallons per flush beginning in 1994, while EPA’s WaterSense label pushes performance toward 1.28 gallons per flush or less. This paper recommends repealing or substantially revising those federal limits and replacing them with flexible, performance-based state or local standards.[1][2]
Executive Position
The current federal approach is too rigid for a product that depends heavily on plumbing design, waste load, and building conditions. A better policy would preserve conservation goals while allowing higher-flush toilets where needed for sanitation, reliability, and public health.[2][3][1]
Regulatory Background
The national baseline of 1.6 gallons per flush stems from the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and took effect in 1994. EPA’s WaterSense program later promoted toilets that use 1.28 gallons per flush or less, framing them as at least 20 percent more water-efficient than the federal standard. EPA has also continued to revise its WaterSense criteria, showing that the market and performance assumptions around these rules are not fixed.[3][4][5][6][1][2]
- Details
- Written by: James Holcomb
Originally published on @Citizen Holcomb, republished with permission. See citizenholcomb.com for more information on the author.
One of the most frustrating things about the Libertarian Party is that our best principle is also one of the easiest to abuse.
We believe in free speech. We believe people should be allowed to say unpopular things. We believe the government should not be in the business of policing opinions, punishing dissent, or deciding which views are acceptable. That is not just some cute slogan we put on a campaign flyer. It is a core part of what makes libertarianism different.
But there is a problem we have to be honest about.
Subcategories
Videos
This is a page of various videos that we have either created or found interesting. Be sure to check out and follow our YouTube page.
Open Government Advocacy Project
The Open Government Advocacy Project is a committee of the NJ Libertarian Party. Its goal is to ensure transparency and accountability at all levels of government. Articles posted here are a subset of the work of the committee. For more information visit the Open Government Advocacy Project blog.
If you would like to demand accountability and ensure that your local governing body or school board adheres to the Open Public Records Act we can help you request information from them. Contact John Paff, the project chair here.
Insight New Jersey
NJ government is huge and complex. Private industry is shrinking while the size and cost of government bureacracy continues to grow. The articles posted here provide a guide of the NJ State Government and can be used by citizens and candidates for office to evaluate what departments can be reduced drastically in size.
We'll start with just some of the departments and provide a breakdown on what they do (or purport to do), how many employees they have and how big their budget is.
Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project
The New Jersey Libertarian Party's Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project (“the Project”) seeks to get New Jersey municipalities to repeal loitering ordinances that should have been -- but were not -- repealed when the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice was enacted in 1979. The Project has successfully had loitering ordinances repealed in over 30 towns. For a summary listing of all the towns see Preempted Ordinance Repeal Project page.
Police Accountability Project
The Police Accountability Project is a committee of the NJ Libertarian Party. Its goal is to search out cases of police misconduct, file former Internal Affairs (IA) complaints when appropriate, and to publicize violations of rules and laws by the police. There may be other stories posted on the NJLP Police Internal Affairs Complaint Blog page.
If you would like to help or know of a case we should be looking at, contact the committee at
Legislative Affairs Committee
The Legislative Affairs Committee was created to allow a select core of Volunteers to take action on legislation and policies which directly affects the people of New Jersey.
[INTRO VIDEO - HOSTED ON NJLP STATE YOUTUBE AND EMBEDED HERE]
Staff
Legislative Director and Committee Chair
Volunteers: