Libertarian Party Vice Chair Throws Cato Institute Under Bus, Outrage Ensues

Libertarian Party Vice Chair Arvin Vohra got into some hot water over the weekend with some Libertarian Party members after comments he made on social media bashing the Cato Institute. The Cato Institute is perhaps the most widely known, respected, and trusted source of libertarian policy analysis.

Arvin stated that “Groups like The Cato Institute have condoned welfare increases through their support of the DREAM act, which expanded educational welfare… Instead of fighting the libertarian fight, they chose to seek a pat on the head from Democrat culture.” Here is the full post:

The DREAM Act is a legislative proposal that has evolved over the years that provides a path for undocumented immigrants to attain citizenship. Included within this framework is the ability for these immigrant children to access in-state education rates.

Some of the Libertarian Party’s most successful candidates this past cycle fired back at Vohra, including Thomas Simmons and Andy Craig.

Simmons, who ran one of the more high-profile campaigns of the year, netted interviews from national media and got nearly 9 percent in his race. When asked about what made him so outraged at Mr. Vohra’s attack on Cato Institute and immigration, Simmons stated:

“We are a massive and diverse nation, and there is room within libertarianism to craft nuanced approaches that resonate in with our constituents. Libertarians must work together to move us towards less regulation and increased liberty – and that happens from the ground-up, not by following an infallible catechism as viewed by a single spokesperson. Such an approach is both destructive and arrogant.”

Andy Craig got an incredible over 11% in his congressional race this year while at the same time working with the Gary Johnson Campaign. This writer asked him what rubbed him the wrong way about Vohra’s comment?

“My objection is simple: the existence of the welfare state does not justify mass deportation, bans on immigration, or all the expenses incurred and human misery inflicted by those things. It isn’t even true that immigrants are a net drain on the welfare state, and it wouldn’t justify banning immigration even if it were true. If your problem is the welfare state, take on the welfare state, not immigrants. “

The Cato Institute itself and David Boaz also responded to Vohra’s bash with comments that simply referenced an article titled “Building a Wall around the Welfare State, Instead of the Country”. The premise of the article is that the welfare state is the imminent issue, not immigration. Increasing immigration can help the economy if the welfare state is brought to heel.

Immigration is a hot-button topic right now, even in libertarian circles. Is this the growth of libertarians crying “false news” on their own outlets?