Well now that we have discussed this idea for a week or so, I think it's time to move it forward or set it aside for a while.
It seems there is a moderate level of interest, and a fairly low level of discontent with the tentative parameters I've presented for what would be the world's first liberty insurance business. I think the most appropriate thing for me to do now is present to you an updated outline, which incorporates some of your suggestions and answers some of your questions. Then I would like to leave the immediate fate of this endeavor in your hands.
If, between now and October 15, eight or more of you come forward and present certain tentative commitments, I will take this project through the next step. Essentially what I'm asking for is eight of you to publicly say, yes Dave, if you do this I'm on board and will likely purchase a $180 six month policy within one month of your startup.
It would also be okay if one person were to indicate that they will underwrite policies for two or three others; I am counting only the number of policies spoken for not the number of people paying.
If we can hit the Lucky Eight mark on time, I will move us through Step Two. If I can't get eight policies spoken for within such a reasonable deadline, that is no big deal but is an indicator the time has not yet come. I would tend to back-burner this and concentrate on other things for a while, waiting for a day when there are more liberty lovers in state or other improvements in the "liberty business climate."
Whether this flies now or get put on hold, I'm of the opinion that it will be doable within four years. Over time, as the numbers here grow, so too will the viability of this hopeful and important concept.
Couple caveats: This is still a tentative outline subject to many changes before it goes live, if in fact it does go live! Also "Freedom Insurance" is not going to be the company's real name, I'm just using that as an example. As before, I'm chomping at the bit to articulate what all the benefits would be for customers...but we'll save the best for last.
Changes from the original outline are in bold. Outline for a Freedom Insurance business,
version 9.3.06 ?Freedom Insurance? is a proposed business which, if born, would insure people in New Hampshire against certain types of persecution by the government. These are outlined below, as are the methods by which a policyholder could be defended. This is how the company would look at first:
- Small start: No seed money, no office, no center.
- No employees. Just me and whoever I hire out freelance, perhaps including a ?backup me? to take the helm if I became unavailable.
One of the first types of work I'd hire out would probably be ad creation and purchase. Jim Maynard, you listening? - Limited, achievable objectives, limited complexity, limited overhead.
- Simple, flat policy premium: A dollar a day. Policy lasts six months, then you ditch or renew.
- High risk folks rejected (reluctantly) from coverage at this stage.
Currently defining this as anyone who's been arrested more than once in the two years preceding policy startup, or successfully fined more than $2000 in that time. Most people I don't know also rejected at this stage, as well as anyone I feel we might have difficulty defending. - If endeavor were to reach certain size and complexity I'd probably hire a lieutenant with accounting/business/insurance experience to complement my activist skills.
-
My "salary:" For now, I'm thinking it should be 12% of company revenue. This means we would have to have about 275 policyholders before this job would duplicate for me the yearly earnings of a full time burger flipper. Claims could be made
if you were imprisoned, or facing prison time, or government-inflicted property seizures/
fines totaling over $1000.
However there are important caveats listed in the "not covered" section below.Things covered
would include: - Running an unlicensed business
- Harmless zoning violations
- Eminent domain cases
- Tax resistance/evasion
- Harmless violations of gun law
- Use or possession of Marijuana/Cannabis (no quantity limit) - Driving without ID
...And most other harmless illegal activates.
Not covered:
- Crimes or charges of crimes that hurt or endanger others without their consent,
with the possible exception of self defense. SD related claims would be accepted or rejected at company discretion. - Charges involving persons under 18, animal abuse and most (but not all) illegal drugs
- Getting arrested on purpose (example: Outlaw Manicure arrest, Freedom to Travel arrest)
(removed reference to civil disobedience) - Persecution which occurs outside NH
But the company would reserve the right to defend claimants from time to time whose situation is technically not covered.
Ultimately we?d ask you to have some faith in our ability to be selfish. It is in our best interest to meet claims whenever we can, within the boundaries of our resources and circumstance.If there were a mix of charges, some covered, some not, we would still be willing to come to your defense. For instance, if you were charged with DUI and having an ounce of weed in the trunk, and you had not done anything else to disqualify yourself, you would still have a valid claim. The DUI would not be covered, but any pot possession charges would. We would fulfill it if asked to, but doing so would tend to draw attention to your DUI. Much better for everyone if you stick to "crimes" that do not endanger others!!
Your premium would rise 20% if you had a claim and we fulfilled it. The premiums would presumably create a fund, and motivation, big enough to enable more effective defenses than those we've mounted to date. These could include the types of things we've already has success with, as well as some fun new activities.
Claimants would be encouraged to aim us toward or away from any of these: Social support
Ads
Fully Informed Jury activity
PR stunts
Defensive occupation of threatened propertyPeaceful "raids" on perpetrator offices
Demonstrations
Polite calls to perps
Moral persuasion
LTEs
Civil disobedience
Support for political rivals of perps
Legislation to repeal the law that triggered the claim
The company would be contractually obligated to complete certain such actions within a given timeframe.
For instance, the first "tyranny response" would need to come within 48 hours of claim approval and would probably be in the form of polite phone calls to perps. Policyholder defense would *not* involve:
Attorneys (not yet anyway)
Harassment/Rudeness/Intimidation
Backing the perps into a corner
Violence of any kind
Reimbursement for fines (That would be indirectly paying off the authorities)
The idea would be to make a
respectful, moral case to the perps first, then - if necessary - to their bosses and the public shortly thereafter. The goal would be one of two outcomes:
- Get authorities to drop charges, return property and end threats to the same or
- Arrive at an agreement acceptable to the claimant
If the claimant were jailed, the goal would be to get them out and then determine whether they still are facing jail or fines sufficient to justify continuation of their defense. The most likely outcome of a claim is probably a moderately publicized stalemate, like the one we had at Hampton. But unlike the stalemate in Barbara Burbank's fight with Hampton's building inspector our customers wouldn't be saddled with big legal bills - at least not from us. Regarding the balance between paid help and volunteers: Despite the free market potential of this idea, and the ability to hire out some work, the project would only really rock if NHfree.com volunteers get as excited about claims as they do about current abuses. We wouldn't be able to hire a bunch of demonstrators, for instance, nor would that necessarily be wise. Hopefully various folks would see their own dreams for freedom safeguarded by coming to the aid of claimants and would attend FI events.
Regarding brief imprisonments: There are likely to be situations where policyholders were arrested for ultra minor "infractions" like refusing to stop demonstrating in a public area. If the person arrested goes to jail as Lauren did, that would be a valid claim, and we would be in action fulfilling the claim until the person was released from jail. Once they are out, assuming they do not face further prison time or fines/property seizures over $1000, we would consider the claim fulfilled. Hopefully this approach, coupled with the rise in premiums whenever you have a claim, sufficiently addresses the issue of civil disobedience. But I am still tweaking this gray area and need your input.
ANONYMOUS POLICIES
I have come up with a protocol for allowing people to purchase policies without me or anyone else knowing who they are. Your identity would however become known if you had a claim. More on this if we hit the "8 mark" on time. BENEFITS
Starting with the big picture and working our way up to the most important part (the policyholder):
A viable freedom insurance company, extending its umbrella over liberty lovers in New Hampshire, would be the only institution of its kind in the known universe. It could, to a limited extent, provide a vital service here and deliver a product that is in heavy demand but currently unavailable: Freedom!
It could have a delayed but electric effect on libertarian immigration, as people around the country start to realize there's only one place they can live if they want their freedoms insured. It should generate media coverage before a claim is even processed - it's the very definition of a "new" thing. It would, as Tilsen points out, provide focus. If it did suffer lots of claims, the process of meeting them should generate more publicity and business. If it came under attack by authorities, that should generate the same.
The process of meeting claims would also give courage to people who currently think their harmless violations of law are something to be ashamed of. They would see others standing tall on their peaceful acts of defiance rather than submitting. It would make "harmless disobedience" more mainstream and common. It could help funnel authorities toward more legitimate prosecutions and arrests, for which the company would voice support.
Now: As for policyholders, they should see key benefits, even if they never have a claim. First among these would be an increased ability to defy nanny laws. Folks otherwise deterred from starting businesses or building things, might now feel the freedom to go for it (hello economic growth)! Depending on how things play out there might be a deterrent effect in owning the policy. Perhaps there is also a potential "peace of mind" benefit, and a feeling that your premium money is going toward a vital pro-liberty cause rather than to lawyers or fines.
You would know that, even if you are persecuted, you won't be alone and *will* get public attention if you want it. If you were a business owner with a claim, the publicity surrounding it could generate new customers. And, a small but important thing...you'd get various deterrence-oriented paraphernalia, perhaps a bumper sticker that says:
My Freedom is Insured
www.FreedomInsurance.com Now: Having evolved this idea a bit, incorporated some of your ideas and hopefully answered some questions, it's time to turn it over to you guys. Informal commitments to purchase eight policies will open Stage Two. Stage Two will involve further refining the outline, setting up a more formal "pledgebank" style statement of intent, naming the company, preparing text for a website and other steps.
In the meantime, I have some questions:
Do you think I should rule myself ineligible for policy? I might not be high risk under above guidelines, but have concerns it could be perceived as potential conflict of interest for me to hold a policy.
Do you think the policy should cover illegal possession of prescription drugs such as Oxycontin and Codeine? That question is not really addressed in the outline above. Are there any prescription drugs that really qualify as hard drugs or pose a huge threat in and of themselves?
Does my proposed salary seem to high? Too low?
What are your other thoughts on this outline? Where does it need improvement? What other ideas do you have to add? What is it missing? What does it have that it shouldn't?
"A dollar a day
Keeps the government at bay"