Author: Matt Waters

Statement: Stop Funding International War and Crimes Against Humanity

Waters calls for 600 ship Navy as primary means to defend USA


Alexandria, VA – Libertarian candidate for Senate in Virginia, Matt Waters, said on Friday, “In August, ‘Made in the USA’ bombs killed 40 little boys in Yemen aged from six to 11 in a school bus on a field trip. ‘Made in the USA’ bombs killed 155 people attending a funeral in October 2016.  According to the most recent report by the UN high commission for human rights, there have been 17,062 civilian casualties since 2015, including 6,592 dead and 10,470 injured.  The majority of these casualties are the result of “Made in the USA” weapons – 10,471.

“What have we become?  It is sickening that the President’s first reaction to murdered Virginia resident and journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi Arabia officials is to make sure a $110 billion deal to sell more weapons of mass destruction to the corrupt Saudi Arabia government is not jeopardized.  Who are we?  What does America stand for?  Is this the new face of ‘conservatism?’ Where are the civil libertarians?”

Waters said, “I will call for an immediate end to U.S. weapons sales to rogue nations.  Both political parties are partly to blame for the civilian bloodshed in Yemen, as they are in near full agreement to continue arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

“I believe in a strong national defense. But the international sales of U.S. weapons to rogue nation states by President Trump and Congress must be called out, and it must stop.  None of what we’re doing is in the U.S. strategic national interest.  U.S. weapons sales are making ordinary Americans more vulnerable to terrorism because ‘Made in the USA’ bombs are killing thousands of innocent civilians overseas. The survivors will never forget who armed the Saudis.”

Waters said he will introduce legislation to end highly expensive forward-facing military bases in favor of a military that respects the borders and sovereignty of other nations, and that relies upon ships, subs, missiles, and aircraft as the primary means to defend the USA.

“I will call for a renewal of Reagan’s plan to build a 600-ship Navy as the primary means to defend our national strategic interests globally.  Reviving John Lehman’s (First Secretary of the Navy under Reagan) strategy to have a ‘combat-credible forward naval presence’ as our primary means of counter-force is critical in the face of rising communist China and other global threats.”


For more information, visit or email

Waters op/ed: Religion & Public Life, BearingDrift, 10-22-18

By Matt Waters

Virginia Libertarian Nominee for U.S. Senate

As the Libertarian Senate nominee, I have called the Libertarian Party home since 2008. I arrived at the Libertarian Party because of my Christian faith. This may be counter intuitive to many of my fellow congregants, who see the Libertarian creed as one that promotes a live-and-let-live libertinism — yet I believe that is a flawed understanding.

As the only “evangelical” running in the U.S. Senate race in Virginia in 2018, and perhaps the only seminary student to have sought the office here in the Old Dominion, I have a unique perspective on the role religion has played in my public life.

David Boaz, executive vice president of the libertarian Cato Institute, defines Libertarianism in his classic work, “Libertarianism, A Primer,” as a set of ideas that include rule of law, free markets and capitalism, small limited government, and peace. Boaz also points out that Libertarianism is not libertinism, the philosophy that is devoid of most moral or sexual restraints.

I agree. While Libertarianism may initially sound a lot like Republicanism, it differs on several very important points.

First, the Libertarian philosophy starts with the idea that the individual is sovereign. Republicans emphasize the family as the fundamental building block of society. And while I agree that healthy nuclear families are the bedrock of any free society, only the individual is subject to a government.  Families don’t stand trial together or get put into jail together. Democrats, on the other hand, have an overly inflated view of the state. That is a broad assessment based on my 25 years of experience and interaction with the various political parties.

But the idea of starting with the individual is exactly where Jesus started. Jesus dealt with people as individuals, not as a collective, and often did so at his peril. Jesus was famous for his direct dealings with tax-collectors, prostitutes, Pharisees, and the like — all outcasts; yet for Jesus, they were unique people, all of whom had a shot at redemption. Jesus dealt with individuals. So do Libertarians. And we believe government must as well.

Jesus was never coercive, nor is the Libertarian philosophy. Christians know well the story of the Rich Young Ruler who was given a choice to sell all he had to follow Jesus, or not. The Rich Young Ruler chose to walk away freely from the offer of eternal life. Individuals in the Scriptures are allowed to choose their destiny. The “non-coercion” principle is uniquely Christian, and Libertarian.

The Libertarian promotes peace over war. Republicans and Democrats share an unusual affection for warfare. One of Jesus’ most beloved titles is “the Prince of Peace” and the Scriptures regularly admonish believers to, “If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Romans 12:18).

This uniquely Christian idea is also uniquely Libertarian. And this is why I believe a recovery of President Washington’s admonition to “avoid foreign entanglements,” carefully filtering our engagements overseas through the lens of the Constitution and what is best for America and her citizens, is not only Libertarian, but Christian at its core.

David Boaz, in his collection of Libertarian writings, begins with 1 Samuel: 8, the very same passage cited by Thomas Paine in “Common Sense” – the book that stoked the fire of the American Revolution.

In the biblical narrative the Israelites, who up to this point only had human judges and no king, asked the prophet Samuel to ask Almighty God to give them a King. The character of God on this point is quite revealing.  Here is the exchange:

Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah and said to him, “Behold, you are old and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations.”

So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots.

He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. 

He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men and your donkeys, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day. –1 Samuel 8:4-5, 10-18

The ideas of Liberty, the uniqueness of the individual and humanity, the power and corruption of the state, the non-aggression principle, the philosophy of choosing peace over war, among others, come straight out of the Old and New Testaments.

Ultimately the Bible is not a prescription for political government. It does tell us about the basic disposition of man and the character of God; it warns us of abuse of power, and serves as a reliable guide for anyone interested in governing with wisdom, justice, and virtue.

I could go on, and will in future writings. But for now, suffice it to say, of all the political philosophies, Libertarianism is the best expression of Christianity.

Waters: Religion & Public Life

Libertarian US Senate Candidate Matt Waters Decries $779 Billion Federal Budget Deficit; Calls for Social Security Reform to Address Entitlement Crisis  

Libertarian US Senate Candidate Matt Waters Decries $779 Billion Federal Budget Deficit; Calls for Social Security Reform to Address Entitlement Crisis


Libertarian US Senate Candidate Matt Waters Decries $779 Billion Federal Budget Deficit; Calls for Social Security Reform to Address Entitlement Crisis

Matt Waters for US Senate

This week, the federal government announced that the federal deficit for the fiscal year ended on September 30 was $779 billion, an increase from $666 billion the year before.  The federal budget deficit will substantially increase in the current and future fiscal years, hitting $1 trillion this year or next.

“Even though I support cutting federal spending by abolishing the Departments of Education and Housing and Urban Development, immediately ending all corporate welfare and farm subsidies and reducing defense spending by ending our never ending military involvement in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen and other places around the globe, that won’t be enough to tackle the long-term fiscal problems of the federal government.  We have got to reform entitlements (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) before federal overspending triggers a debt crisis with dire consequences for the US economy.

“I support a plan to allow younger workers to contribute their portion of Social Security taxes–and that is what they are, not “contributions” to anything–to personal accounts that they own, in exchange for them waiving their right to future Social Security benefits.  If structured properly, a plan like this can ease the forthcoming entitlement crisis and provide greater long-term financial security for today’s younger workers.

“The always undiscussed dirty little secret of Social Security is that people have no personal property rights in their future Social Security benefits.  Congress decides who gets what with Social Security, and they have taken it away from some unpopular recipients in the past, which might happen again.  Regardless, if Social Security doesn’t change, all Social Security recipients will have their benefits cut about 25% in 2034.  It is well past time for the future of Social Security to be forthrightly addressed, which Republicans and Democrats appear totally unwilling to do.”