Each state maintains a part-time, reserve military force to serve during emergencies such as natural disasters and riots. Known as the National Guard, these troops are also used to augment the active-duty military when the nation is at war.

Although the United States has not declared war since 1942, the US military has become increasingly engaged in overseas combat operations without clear goals or definitions of success. This pattern of ill-conceived intervention has cost millions of lives and trillions of dollars; over 10,000 Californians have died in these conflicts, with many more wounded.

Since the attacks on New York City and the Pentagon in 2001, Congress has authorized several unaccountable military operations absent a formal declaration of war that have resulted in the deployment of state national guard troops to augment combat operations. Guardsmen have served on multiple deployments—often in short time spans—that have disrupted their families, careers, and lives beyond the reasonable burden of part-time service. They have done so in conflicts that have objectively produced more risk than benefit to American interests.

By using National Guard forces outside of a formally declared war, Congress is enabling the Executive Branch to engage in prolonged, unsustainable imperial wars that are further endangering lives by destabilizing entire geographic regions around the world.
In 2025, the federal government deployed the National Guard to Los Angeles and other cities against the wishes of state and local officials. While urban residents have a reasonable expectation of public order, and California cities have often failed to provide it, federal overreach is not the solution.

The Libertarian Party of California supports state-level legislation to:
● Prohibit the deployment of California National Guard forces overseas without a formal declaration of war.
● Prohibit the deployment of California National Guard forces or material to combat operations or theater support missions without a formal declaration of war.
● Reaffirm Californians’ opposition to the President’s use of the National Guard over the wishes of state and local officials.
● Deny the deployment of other states’ Guard forces inside California without the consent of the Governor.

State government continues to plow public funds into the California High-Speed rail project despite its huge cost overruns and construction delays. If the train ever goes into service, it will transport far fewer passengers than planners originally forecast. As such, the project is a waste of money, and it is also a poor use of agricultural land, some of which has been acquired through eminent domain.

The Libertarian Party of California supports:
● An immediate cessation of land acquisition for the bullet train project.
● The speedy end of all operations by the High-Speed Rail Authority.
● State government accepting proposals from private firms on how to further develop and use the existing right-of-way and structures built thus far. Ideally, no further tax money should be spent but Central Valley residents should not be subjected to unused, blighted state infrastructure.

The State Rail plan contains other costly passenger rail projects that will also become boondoggles. These include the High Desert Corridor and Sacramento-Oakland-San Francisco-San Jose Mega Corridor. While advocates portray these initiatives as climate
solutions, they will not significantly reduce global greenhouse gas emissions.

Consequently, the Libertarian Party of California supports:
● Immediate cancellation of all tax funded passenger rail construction projects now in the planning and engineering phases.
● Inviting private companies to propose new transportation solutions that they can build, operate, and maintain without public funding.

Those leaving California often cite the state’s high cost of living as their reason for moving. Many of those who choose to stay nonetheless tell pollsters that this issue is a major concern.
The cost of living is also a factor in California’s homelessness crisis. While there are many factors that cause people to live on the streets, part of the problem is the difficulty in finding affordable housing in the state.

High costs are often a byproduct of taxes and regulations. Politicians often subsidize goods and services to combat high prices, but they can only do this by raising taxes now or in the future. Consequently, they are shifting costs rather than lowering them.

The single largest component of our state’s high cost of living is housing. The Libertarian Party of California recognizes that the answer to the housing crisis is the free market. Government has promised solutions to this problem, but its solutions have only made things worse. Government does not take into consideration the fact that policy decisions involve trade-offs and fails to take responsibility for the negative consequences of its actions. Protecting property rights will help assure that there will be more housing available in the future while keeping green spaces available for communities and wildlife without overtaxing our natural resources.

The Libertarian Party of California supports:
● State and federal representatives working to eliminate tariffs, quotas, and trade sanctions which make consumer goods more expensive and inhibits the ability of California businesses to build relationships with their counterparts across the Pacific.
● Eliminating the so-called cap-and-invest program which raises energy costs.
● Reducing gasoline/mileage taxes to the point at which they are only sufficient to cover the cost of maintaining the roads, and ultimately eliminating such taxes.
● Eliminating prevailing wage requirements and project labor agreements which increase the cost of infrastructure projects.
● Eliminating occupational licensing requirements which trigger shortages of service providers and enable them to raise prices.
● Repeal of all rent control, as this limits the number of housing providers.
● An end to government construction deals with crony contractors.
● An end to such social engineering initiatives as mandatory solar panels on new construction, bans on natural gas appliances, mandatory air conditioners in rental properties, and controls on water collection and storage. These requirements may be well intended, but they cause less housing to be available and they increase the cost of housing that is available.
● Repeal of zoning laws that prevent property owners from developing their property to build needed additions. A repeal of zoning laws would ease the housing crisis by making more housing available and helping stakeholders earn needed income.
● Repeal of zoning laws that prohibit multi-use properties. Such restrictions also have negative effects on residence and business owners. If property owners were allowed to run businesses from their properties, they would no longer have to commute, and this would make housing and other necessities more readily available within neighborhoods.
● Repeal of zoning laws that restrict housing construction in commercial areas so that unused buildings such as empty malls and shopping centers can be converted into housing, revitalizing neighborhoods by getting rid of unused or dilapidated structures.
● Repeal of zoning laws that restrict subdividing apartments, which deny people who cannot afford, or who do not need as much space, the freedom to have more affordable and suitable housing. These restrictions force individuals to live in larger, more expensive apartments than they may need, taking up space that others could use.

The state has enacted multiple regulations against individuals seeking medical freedom. The California Medical Board is unethically entangled with insurance companies and lobbyists. Families have fought against school mandates for childhood vaccines, dying individuals have struggled for right-to-try interventions, and others just want to use alternative therapies to help their quality of life.

Ironically, medical care costs have increased dramatically due to over-regulation and lack of true competition. The costs of healthcare are increasing rapidly, and patients still suffer without adequate or affordable treatment.

There has long been difficulty with access to care for all the people of California, made worse by government meddling. The response to COVID-19 all over California offers a series of terrible examples of how government intervention in health care strips individuals of their rights to decide for themselves.

In 2020, panic drove cities and counties up and down the state to cede their oversight powers to unelected “health officer” bureaucrats who were never meant to hold the levers of political power. Those bureaucrats proceeded, with very little substantive objection from real elected officials, to implement absurdly authoritarian policies with no debate: nonsensical lockdowns, indiscriminate masking, and vaccine mandates. Suggestions of alternative COVID therapy came under particular attack; the State Assembly tried to pass a law, AB 2098, to remove the licenses of physicians who attempted to discuss alternative treatments for COVID illness. In hindsight, we see that these policies had little impact, and increased the suffering.

Collusion between the government and the insurance industry, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies distorts the market for health care. Too often, the government runs cover for unscrupulous corporations, creating legislation riddled with loopholes that benefit cronies and put revenue ahead of services. The free market cannot function effectively without vigorous enforcement of laws against fraud and misrepresentation; the government of California cannot be allowed to abet bad behavior.

The Libertarian Party of California supports:
● The right to try treatments as standard policy between a clinician and their patients, including off label use of medications.
● Patients’ ability to choose how to proceed with all healthcare, without imposing limits on allowable treatments.
● Prohibition of future vaccine mandates, which, during the COVID-19 lockdown era, proved oppressive and tyrannical.
● Self-ownership and bodily autonomy, including an individual’s right to control end-of-life decisions like the right to refuse treatment.
● Deregulation of health care markets, obliging hospitals, insurers, and pharmaceutical firms to compete on a level playing field and without taxpayer subsidies.