Neal Boortz, talk-radio host, devout libertarian and author of Somebody’s Gotta Say It was kind enough to answer a few questions for us.

PLAYBOY: You advocate more private schools (using a voucher system) and fewer government schools. If this were implemented, do you think the inevitable closings of bad government schools would mean extreme classroom overcrowding? Would the ensuing decades be one step back before taking two steps forward? (If so, what would you say to these students and parents?)
BOORTZ: While I was researching for my book I was amazed to learn that some of the people who helped design our government school system actually spoke openly of their belief that care had to be taken to make sure that Americans were not over-educated. Their goal was to create a system whereby most Americans would be educated just to the point that they would be good government subjects. To restore liberty and self-reliance it is essential that our reliance of government schools be addressed. To specifically respond to your question; if we were to implement a voucher system the law of supply and demand, if left unmolested by government, would ensure adequate classroom space for all students who find their way into private education. Let me add that if we had a system right now where government provides shoes to all citizens, and if someone were to suggest issuing shoe vouchers so that consumers could buy their shoes from a private source, there would be government shoe supporters who would insist that the private marketplace would be unable to produce the shoes necessary to meet the need.

PLAYBOY: Without going into too much detail on each subject (we’ll let people read the book for that), tell us a few ideas you have that are absolutely feasible, and a few that even you consider to be pipe dreams.
BOORTZ: Really, I don’t think that any of the ideas, particularly those I presented in the “No Way In Hell” chapter are not feasible.  Some, of course, would be easier than others.  Getting rid of the income tax and replacing it with the FairTax is absolutely doable, and there are hundreds of thousands of volunteers around the country pushing that idea right now.  Repealing the 17th Amendment … doable.  Zell Miller introduced a resolution in the Senate calling for just that before he retired.  The 10th Amendment Commission would be the easiest to do.  Just make your appointments and let ‘em rip.

Not doable?  Well, I don’t think these power hungry politicos inside the beltway would ever go for term limits, and putting limits on who can vote, though good for the Republican, is probably a non-starter.  

PLAYBOY: It’s been said that today’s America is as divided as its ever been, including the 1960s. Do you think that’s true? If so, is it a terrible thing? Is the chasm ever likely to close very much, or are we all just yelling at one another?

BOORTZ: I was doing talk radio during the Vietnam War. This is nothing. The one problem is that the stakes are higher now.  The Viet Cong weren’t hiding in the jungles of Montana or the streets of New York.  Islamic radicals are already here … and ready to strike.

PLAYBOY: Your views on liberals are well documented. Why do you think they profess to love freedom, yet they want more and more government control?
BOORTZ: Liberals are, at their very core, not friendly with the idea of individualism. No less than liberal icon Ted Kennedy has spoken about our “war against individualism.” Liberals are collectivists who believe in collectivist action. They speak only in terms of groups. “The blacks,” “the poor,” “the children.” Never in terms of individuals. Liberals have a problem with individuality because from individuality you get irritating things such as individual rights … like property rights. 

As for freedom: if they’re so fired up about freedom how about giving us the freedom to send our children to whatever school, public or private, we wish, and have our tax money follow our children there. How about the freedom to provide for our own retirement without having to fund this hideous Social Security system.

One more thing:  Liberals believe that America is great because of government. Pardon me for this, but I happen to believe that America is great because of the dynamic of a free people living and working together under a system that guarantees economic liberty and individual freedom.

PLAYBOY: There’s a great quote on the dust-jacket of your book that reads: “Democrats love to point out that it’s all but impossible to raise a family on the minimum wage in the United States. Well, guess what? It’s all but impossible to own and maintain a 150-foot yacht on a middle-class salary. So what’s the answer? Don’t buy a yacht if you can’t produce the income to support it. DON’T HAVE A FAMILY IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD DIAPERS.” …  It sounds so simple, but studies show that people who can least afford it have more children than those who do. Why do you think this is? Is this one area where you might advocate more government intervention, as in even cheaper birth control for the poor?

BOORTZ: People continue to have children that they cannot afford to raise for precisely the same reason that alcoholics continue to drink; because they have enablers.  Our entire system of government and our social welfare structure is designed to enable the production of unaffordable children.  People are actually rewarded for this behavior, rather than punished. Solution? Simple. If a child is born into a family that is unable to care for it, declare that child to be neglected and take it away. Place it in a foster home or an orphanage. Raise that child were there are resources to provide for its needs without financially rewarding the irresponsible people who uploaded and then downloaded him or her. Take away the incentives and watch the problem start to go away. Damn … that sounds pretty insensitive, doesn’t it? Well, sometimes the truth is insensitive, and hiding from it doesn’t solve any problems.

PLAYBOY: Do you think our current system of electing the president is still the best one or should we simply use the popular vote?
BOORTZ: First, as I set forth in my book, there is absolutely no constitutional right at the federal level to vote for the office of president. Let’s get that idea out of the way right now. Let’s either stick with the electoral vote system, thus ensuring that even sparsely populated states have a hand to play in presidential elections; or go to a parliamentary system whereby the Senate nominates someone to serve six years as president, subject to the approval of the House. One six-year term. That’s it.

The real tragedy here is that the office is far too important, as is our federal government. Our founding fathers felt that in times of peace about 95% of all governance should come from the local level. I think we can honestly say that well more than 80% of governance now comes from inside the DC beltway. The consequences are tragic for the preservation of liberty. That’s why I refer to our federal government as The Imperial Federal Government of the United States. We need to send most of those clowns to their retirement homes.