<div dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-2016-campaign-the-lament-of-the-not-quite-rich-enough/2015/03/24/f0a38b18-cdb4-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html">http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-2016-campaign-the-lament-of-the-not-quite-rich-enough/2015/03/24/f0a38b18-cdb4-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html</a><div><br></div><div>Among the 'not rich enough' I wonder if there are any who care about ideas and who lean libertarian. I also wonder if there are any who would want influence in a municipality or state.</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, we can't sell influence. But we can sell freedom - in particular, we can sell the freedom to compete through cutting back regulations. Many municipalities and states have granted special privileges to certain businesses - competitors in those industries may well desire a relaxation of those privileges, and it seems to me that such an understanding would be perfectly acceptable to a Libertarian, so long as it is understood by all that all the candidate will do is roll back regulations - not create an opening for "Left Out Business B to Compete with Established Firm A Without Worrying About Left Out Business C." So long as the Libertarian will open the market so that B can compete with A and C, on an equal footing and without government privilege, that may well be of interest to these donors and to Libertarians.</div><div><br></div><div>I would suggest that this board make it a priority to look into these left-out bundlers, identify any who may be of interest, and have trained board members or staff approach them.</div><div><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr">Joshua A. Katz<div>Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)</div></div></div></div>
</div></div>