The Deep Question Behind Rand Paul's 'Trivial' Dispute - Bloomberg

The Deep Question Behind Rand Paul's 'Trivial' Dispute - Bloomberg: "If Skaggs is accurately representing the senator’s views (not to mention the cause of the dispute), Paul has a highly selective idea of property rights. His get-out-of-my-face version of libertarianism doesn’t seem to respect the crucially important freedom to make, and responsibility to respect, contracts.


Your property rights don’t give you the freedom to violate your homeowners association contract specifying how to maintain your lawn any more than my free-expression rights give me the freedom to violate the Bloomberg contract saying I can’t write for The Wall Street Journal. If you can’t live with the restrictions, you don’t sign the contract. And if your neighbor isn’t sticking to the rules, you don’t go after him with your fists. You take it up with the homeowners association -- that most local version of politics."

-------------------

The problem with this argument is that in most cases HOA and condo association buyers don't "sign" any contract to join the association. They just buy the home, and membership is automatic, so these associations are mandatory-membership organizations, not voluntary associations. It is increasingly common for buyers to find that all the good options are in private communities.The law uses a legal fiction to classify them as voluntary, but in fact that isn't completely true for many people.

Rand Paul may be one of those people who believes that he has the full bundle of property rights and can do whatever he chooses. But is it because he didn't know what he was getting into?  I doubt it. Rand Paul may be one of the few people who really did know and bargain for what he got, but who wants to act as he chooses. He isn't the average person. He is very rich and well educated and powerful. He can live wherever he chooses, and he built his own house in a gated community, where everybody is restricted. So if he wants his neighbors to be restricted, but doesn't want to be restricted himself, then there is a problem.

Then there is the supreme irony that he's a libertarian. Libertarians have been raving about how great HOAs are for the last fifty years. They love the idea that there is a "private" substitute for local governments. They think private, contract-based local government is utopia. 

So, even though I don't normally find that "freedom of choice" argument very persuasive, for somebody like Rand Paul, maybe it carries more weight.