This website is devoutly dedicated to all of Larry's friends and associates, both early and late, who have influenced and mentored him. However, it also should be noted that, being who they are, a majority of them have been late most of the time.

Saturday, December 28, 2013

New Year's Opportunities (Please share this message with others)

Dear Friends & Fellow Citizens,


 Dieter F. Uchtdorf recently reminded me that the best time to plant a tree was twenty years ago, but the second best time is now.


 Moreover, Thomas Paine previously pointed out in "The American Crisis" that, "These are the times that tries men's souls",  and this remains ever so true here and now.


 Centuries ago, Janus was the ancient Roman God of beginnings, and what time is better for new beginnings than here and now?  After all, the month of January is named after him, because the beginning of the year is a time for refelection and also for planning and doing.


 We continue that tradition today, making personal action resolutions in January for the rest of the year. 


  Accordingly, with the forthcoming start of the new year and the 2014 West Virginia Legislative Session, this personal plea again comes to you, asking you to also pass this message along to others, simply because everyone's involvement is needed to help us make a difference together in the pursuit of the principles of good governance.


 (By the way, thank you ever so much to those of you who already have made contributions to my 2014 re-election efforts.)

 And so again and simply put: After earlier being persuaded to be a candidate for re-election as a Delegate in the West Virginia Legislature in 2014, a Primary election opponent since then has pre-filed to oppose my re-election nomination.


 My decision to be a candidate for re-election was made because of my firm conviction and personal passion to do my best to be an independent voice on behalf of our personal liberties and responsibilities.


 Especially dear to my heart are those God given rights and responsibilities promised to us by the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 10th Amendments of our Constitution, including our personal property rights.


 These principles, along with the necessity for personal integrity in our elected officials, are the very keys to our individual and family prosperity.


 To that end, we need and must continue to work together for a reduction in senseless spending, improvident programs, and counterproductive taxes and regulations.


 Accordingly, donations to my re-election campaign are needed now from you and other like-minded fellow citizens; who believe in these same principles of individual liberty as well as in our  own personal accountability and empowerment.


 Simply put once more: Will you help?


 Please join our Mountaineer League of Extraordinary Citizens, by sending a personal check of $250 or more (or anything else that you can afford) to :

Friends of Larry D. Kump
P.O. Box 1131
Falling Waters, West Virginia 25419-1131

Working together to stay Independent,


Postscriptum: Please remember to help by sharing this plea with all of your family and other associates. Add your personal encouragement for each of them to make their own contributions. AND ask them also to pass along this call to action to even more others.

Notice: Cash contributions will not be accepted. West Virginia law does not allow contributions from West Virginia public employees (but this prohibition does not include members of their families). This law also requires that all contributions over $250 must include your postal mailing address, occupation, and the name of your employer. No Primary election contributions over $1,000 per person may be accepted.

Monday, December 23, 2013

A Christmas Greeting & Reminder

None of us would have a fullness of liberties and blessings without the "American Excellence" we especially enjoy as citizens of the United States of America.

However, as our world changes all around us, there are fewer and fewer folks who believe in faith based justice, compassion, and respect for human dignity.

Further, the continued erosion of family and faith has prompted some lost souls even to join street gangs for the counterfeit feeling of belonging to something that will give them purpose, security, and a sense of belonging.

Far too many of us do not understand or even believe that our founding fathers knew that religion always should be a foundational principle of our beliefs and behavior.

These fathers of our liberty knew that morality does not exist without faith.

They testified that faith was and is an essential ingredient of good governance and human happiness.

George Washington, in his "Farewell Address", warned us that,

"...Reason and experience both forbids us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle...It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring to popular government."

Regarding our individual rights and liberty, Harold B. Lee, former President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), taught that,

"...we seek to build the individual and we must not mistake the scaffolding of the soul."

All of us should and must seek out and be true to the principles of our individual faiths.

We should and must dare to be different from those who lack faith (and hope).

During this Christmas holiday season, let us all strive to be more humbly dedicated to the testimony of our personal faith, from which stems our and our families' sacred national legacy and patrimony.

Merry Christmas!

Sudafed & Prescription Drugs

Dear Delegate Kump;
 Thank you for the email outlining current legislative thoughts toward more restrictions on pharmaceutical purchases.  Please vote against any pharmaceutical  restrictions on Sudafed or anything else.
 Previously, when we got sick with common wintertime  ailments (cold, flu, bronchitis, coughing, etc.) we could call the family doctor and he would do a phone interview and promptly call in an antibiotic prescription, to be coupled with over the counter recommended pharmaceuticals (i.e. Sudafed).  Then the government thought they knew better what was good for us, so they prohibited prescriptions without an office visit and made the Sudafed and other OTC drugs hard to get and limited.  This destroyed a system that allowed us to quickly eliminate the disease, stay healthy and productive

 Now the procedure is that we call the doctor for an appointment, but he can't see us because there are a limited number of doctors and everybody gets sick at the same time (cold and flu season).  The doctor says go to the emergency room but that is an $ 800 out of pocket expense, so that is not going to happen unless we are dying, or you are on welfare where you never really have to pay the hospital.  Since we can't get antibiotics, the cold goes down into the chest and sets up an infection, so we develop a terrible cough, fever, and feel lousy.  This goes on for two to three weeks, instead of the previous few days.  We also get to stand in line for 20 minutes down at the rite aid because the druggist is very busy and filling out forms to buy Sudafed is not his first priority.  Those that have poor resistance continue to decline until they have to go to the emergency room for hospitalization or they die. 

 Legislatures are doing a magnificent job of taking a wonderful private health care system and pushing it backwards 100+  years.  Now we all sit around and shove warm salt water up our nose to kill infection like the ancient Romans used to do and try to figure out what homeopathic medicine we can take that will work best.  Those that work have to take off or make everybody else in the office sick (which doesn't work well when you are self employed, like my wife is), because you can't eliminate the fever quickly and you're infectious as long as you have one. 

 The elitist legislators that come up with such moron type ideas as restricting pharmaceutical treatment have no common sense and are nothing but a burden to the working class of people.  Unfortunately, they will never come to appreciate our problems because they have enough connections to get themselves and their family medically treated promptly. 

 Anyway, please vote against these Legislative "good idea fairies" and their stupid proposals.


Jim Slough
Berkeley Springs, West Virginia

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Telephone Town Hall Survey Results

Here are the results of last Saturday's telephone issues survey of most likely 2014 Primary election voters in West Virginia House of Delegates District #59 (Berkeley & Morgan Counties):

*90% were for protecting our Constitutional (2nd Amendment) rights.

*85% were for requiring a court warrant before forcing anyone (when stopped by a law enforcement officer) to have their blood tested.

*95% were for protecting the property rights of current residential septic system owners and not forcing hook ups with the public sewer districts.

*85% were against requiring a doctor's prescription in order to purchase "Sudafed" cold medication.

*93% were against "Common Core" and for more local control of our schools.

*93% were for stopping the "Unaffordable Health Care Act" (Obamacare).

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

Still Sudafed Up?

 When  over-the-counter Sudafed is outlawed, will only outlaws have head colds?


 The evidence now is in- drug Kingpins prefer Mexico as their source of Sudafed. Click on the link below to read more about the legislative folly on Sudafed, in a recent Forbes magazine article:


Friday, December 13, 2013

Pay Raises for Politicians?

While I serve on the West Virginia Legislature's Government Organization Interim Study Committee and this committee currently is reviewing a proposal to increase the salaries of county elected officials (see Martinsburg Journal newspaper article below), my previous position has not changed.
I adamantly oppose and will vote against any legislative committee recommendation to increase the salaries of elected officials.
The West Virginia Constitution requires the State Legislature to determine the salaries of county elected officials, but my preference is for "Home Rule" on these local issues.
Accordingly I will introduce Home Rule legislation in 2014.
My proposal will seek to amend the West Virginia Constitution, allowing county commissioners and councils to determine the salaries of elected official positions, but ONLY as long as these salary determinations are subject to a local voter referendum.
Delegate Larry D. Kump

MARTINSBURG - When asked for a group consensus, the Berkeley County Council members reiterated their consensus against supporting a pay increase for elected officials and council and commission members.

In Thursday's council meeting, members needed to provide a council representation to Vivian Parsons, executive director for the County Commissioners' Association of West Virginia, on supporting legislation for a salary increase for the 2014 legislative session.

All five council members opposed an increase in 2014.

"It's a budgetary issue for me. We're talking an increase for the council people plus the other electeds, it's a right healthy addition to our budget. Since I've been here, for the past five years, we've taken the approach to cut as much as we can; we haven't been able to give our employees raises because of that," said President Anthony Petrucci.

Most council members expressed the opinion to maintain the current pay level, $36,900, since members knew it was the salary when running for the council.

"We knew what we were getting into when we signed on. I'm perfectly content with my salary," said Jim Barnhart.

"We're still asking people to watch their budget. We're still not out of the tough economic times that we're in. When I decided to run for office, I knew what the pay was. Therefore, I feel that the pay that we get is what we committed to," Copenhaver said. "I feel everyone is entitled to more money, but at the present time, we just don't have the funds."

Both Sen. Don Cookman, D-Hampshire and Delegate Larry Kump, R-Berkeley, will be part of proposals meant to change the legislation concerning a counties' constitutional officials' salaries, although proposals do not mean it will be introduced during the 2014 legislative session.

Kump will propose a constitutional amendment to allow county commissions and councils to determine the salaries of county elected officials subject to a voter referendum approved at the next general election.

Through the Government Organization subcommittee, of which Cookman is a member, the legislation will include a 12 percent increase to elected officials' salaries and a statutory increase of three percent on July 1, 2016, and every two years afterwards.

Tuesday, December 10, 2013

From My Neighbor & Friend

To my fellow voters,

I'd like to encourage you to vote. It still is one of the great freedoms we're allowed in this country.

And, I'd like to encourage you to vote for Mr. Larry D. Kump.

There is a lot of things going on this country that just doesn't make sense. Voting for someone who sells lies and then goes rogue once elected into office is one of them. If a man isn't good for his word, he ain't much good for anything.

I encouraged Mr. Kump to run the first time because I've been his neighbor and have known him for a long time. His character is spot on. I knew he could & would make a difference.

Big government is slowing sucking the life out of our once great country. We're seen as a laughing stock now amongst our creditors. This country was founded on Biblical principles, designed to make us free. Now, as they are being stripped away, we the people are becoming slaves.

We need a good man who is rooted and grounded in the principles of moral conscience and liberty.

It's time to take back this land from the thieves and robbers pillaging us taxpayers.

So as an encouragement to vote - vote Mr. Larry D. Kump for the West Virginia House of Delegates...

For Freedom! ...For Liberty!... For Good Governance!

Greg Dash,
Falling Waters, West Virginia

Friday, December 6, 2013

Beep Beep!

Although there are some Mountaineer lawmakers who are advocating the use of speed cameras in West Virginia, here are just a few of the reasons recently shared with me that points out why this is a really bad idea:
• The right to face your accuser in court and cross examine witnesses is guaranteed by the our Constitution's "Bill of Rights". Speed cameras deny you this right, because the accuser is a machine.
• Speed cameras are a form of mass surveillance over ordinary drivers. The government is forbidden from engaging in sweeping surveillance systems without warrants.Only DRIVERS, rather than career criminals, are currently considered bad enough by some lawmakers to justify such a system. It is possible that the cameras, or the data they collect, could one day be used for purposes other than speed enforcement, which may already be happening in some jurisdictions.
• The lack of human oversight means that no one person will be held accountable if there are widespread errors or misconduct by officials.
• Since tickets are received weeks later, the accused has a very limited ability to gather evidence in their defense. This is particularly true of mobile cameras, which may no longer be in the same location, or "workzone" cameras, where the location may have been substantially changed by the time the defendant becomes aware of the alleged offense.
• Tickets are issued to the owner of the vehicle, even if they are not the driver. Fully a third of speed camera tickets go to people who did not commit the offense, because someone else was driving. This is of even more concern now that courts in Maryland have declared paying a citation to be an "admission of speeding".
• Ticket Recipients who challenge citations commonly have their cases heard in an unfair court proceeding, that is commonly known as the Court's "Speed Camera Day", where dozens of defendants have their cases heard in an assembly line manner. Because the burden of proof for speed camera tickets has been lowered below that of a criminal case, and below that for even ordinary traffic violations, defendants essentially are "guilty until proven innocent". Judges have in some cases made statements to the effect that the only acceptable "not guilty" plea is that someone else was driving their car at the time the ticket was issued, and to present "that driver". At Speed Camera Day hearings, the government is free to present evidence without supporting witnesses, something which would normally be a violation of the standard court rules of evidence. In some cases, defendants have been found guilty, even when they have proven that required operating procedures were not followed. In many cases, even when a defendant requests the "operator" of the camera to appear, in the manner described on the citations, judges have instructed that those operators need not testify, something which goes against several Supreme Court rulings regarding our Constitutional right to confront our accuser. Not only does this set a horrible legal precedent and risk finding innocent people guilty, but it gives a disincentive for the government agencies, which are enforcing the law, to obey the law.
• The safety benefits of automated traffic enforcement systems have been mixed. Red light cameras have actually been proven to INCREASE accidents. One study in Great Britain has shown that other forms of speed control, such as speed bumps and speed indicator signs are much more effective at reducing accidents. Another British study demonstrated that speed cameras did not reduce accident rates in highway work zones, concluding "No significant difference was observed in the PIA [Personal Injury Accident] rate for sites with and without cameras". In one case in Maryland, a Montgomery County town was found to have made claims about reductions in accidents which were found to be false, when compared to their own monthly police reports. In another Maryland County (Baltimore County), the police reported no reduction in accidents near speed camera sites. Baltimore City saw accidents rise from 2009 to 2012 while they were adding speed cameras.
• There are other ways to reduce speeds, such as the use of radar speed signs, that are every bit as effective, if not more so, than speed cameras. Sadly, the citizen pocket emptying profit motive of speed cameras encourages the government to ignore reasonable alternatives.
• Speed cameras do not remove the worst drivers from the roads the way a police officer can. Drunk drivers or a reckless criminal in a stolen vehicle, who might pose an immediate risk to pedestrians and other motorists, could ignore a speed camera completely. Also, since the current system issues no points for citations, a wealthy but extremely bad driver can receive dozens of speed camera tickets without losing their license, if they simply pay the fines.
• Speed cameras encourage erratic driving behavior. Drivers slow down as they approach the camera sites, then accelerate after they pass them. Cameras make some already safe drivers nervous. And enforcement which is too strict could have unintended consequences such as causing drivers to spend too much time looking at their speedometers rather than at the road.
• The platitude,"If you don't speed, you won't get a ticket from a speed camera!" is manifestly UNTRUE because there have been many proven cases of speed cameras issuing tickets in error. Recent events in the City of Baltimore proved that systematic errors by that city's cameras were only the latest. There have been many other instances of proven errors elsewhere in the State of Maryland. Even if driver believes they are innocent, they need to spend days fighting one $40 ticket in court, and would probably not find it worthwhile to do so, except as a matter of principle. In some extremely sad cases, even a well prepared defendant might find themselves before the judge who has decided in advance that he will not allow any defense challenging the accuracy of the cameras: a scenario which is a total perversion of the principals of our justice system. A commercial driver could potentially be fired over an erroneous camera ticket issued to an employer-owned vehicle.
• The speed cameras are NOT operated by sworn police officers. Instead this is outsourced to a private company. For example, under Maryland's Montgomery County camera program, their contractor receives a $16.25 per ticket commission from these cameras, despite the fact that this violates a provision of state law intended to forbid paying contractors based on the number of citations issued or paid. This practice is now common throughout Maryland, despite past promises that it would not be done. Essentially, the contractor which generates the evidence used in court cases gets paid only if the defendant is found guilty, a clear conflict of interest. Moreover, the fact that local governments have circumvented this part of the law simply to guarantee a revenue stream brings into question whether ANY limitations on cameras will be respected. The US Public Interest Research Group issued a study, cautioning on numerous dangers of privatizing law enforcement, including contingent fees and other contract arrangements that give contractors a motive to ticket safe drivers. Maryland has become a perfect example of this worry.
• These cameras are about REVENUE. Some local governments see them as a way to make big money off of passing motorists who do not know the camera locations the way local drivers do. Speed cameras are now a $77 million industry in Maryland. Washington D.C.'s speed and red light camera systems have issued 2,952,333 tickets worth $224 million as of July 31 2007. Most of that money has come from Maryland residents. Another prime example: the town of Forest Heights budgeted to bring in more gross revenue from speed camera tickets in FY2011 than the town's entire pre-speed camera budget in FY2010. At least one county executive openly admitted that the cameras are "a tax", and one Chevy Chase Village council member once referred to speed camera money as "the crack cocaine of local government", as the town was searching for creative bookkeeping techniques to circumvent restrictions on speed camera money.
• Speed Cameras are magnets for political corruption. Speed Camera Contractors in Maryland lobbied heavily for statewide speed cameras, even buying lawmakers lavish steak dinners. In Prince George's County, the county's speed camera contract was awarded to a company with questionable technology, which had made substantial contributions to the county executive. Local governments have written funds into their budgets before camera locations were even selected. One town was found to have written their contract in such a way as to require the contractor to generate a profit. Other localities have bypassed restrictions on the use of funds. Many towns and cities in Maryland have even started creating new school zones solely for the purpose of deploying speed cameras, in one case even trying to lower speed limits just so they could issue more tickets. The desire for more public funds at any cost ignores the fact that using law enforcement for revenue generation is harmful to our justice system, creating a conflict of interest by the state against the accused. Some jurisdictions may be tempted to use overbearing tactics to increase revenues -- such as concealed cameras, deliberately lowering speed limits, deceptive or inadequate signs, or cameras placed immediately after the sign reducing the speed limit.
• Because of their revenue potential, speed cameras are used as a heavy handed substitute for sound engineering approaches which can be more effective than speed cameras at reducing driver's speeds.
• Speed cameras tend to encourage local governments to set speed limits artificially low to increase revenues INSTEAD OF basing them on the standard traffic engineering practices. Setting them too low turns law abiding citizens into lawbreakers and does not benefit safety.
• Speed cameras can contribute to traffic congestion. Cameras are typically placed without first performing a traffic study intended to confirm the speed limit and determine the effect on traffic patterns. The only study performed typically is done by camera vendors, who get a cut of each ticket, to determine whether or not the site will make money. The fact that cameras are used to enforce speed limits much lower than standard traffic engineering practices would dictate creates a situation where drivers to slow down to well below the speed limit for the 100 yards near speed camera sites before speeding up again, a fact which is easily observable at many camera sites.
• Speed Camera Companies who profit from cameras are continuously lobbying to raise fines, remove restrictions, and introduce new types cameras for common "technical violations", which have little or nothing to do with safety. There seems to be no limit as to how far some would go to restrict your driving freedom and your legal rights in order to more easily steal money form your already empty pockets.
Just sayin'.