Bradley in DC
05-22-2008, 05:58 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121141302518112431.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Does the Libertarian Party Matter?
By BRUCE BARTLETT
May 22, 2008
Ron Paul's unexpected success raising money and gaining votes in the Republican primaries – running on an explicitly libertarian platform – has made the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination something worth vying for this year.
Although Rep. Paul could probably have had the nomination for the asking, he's running instead for re-election in his Texas district. Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia and former Democratic Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska are among those actively seeking the nomination at the LP convention, which begins today in Denver.
The fact that such well-known, former establishment figures would seek a fringe party's presidential nomination demonstrates to many libertarians that their party has come of age. It's also created fear in Republican ranks that a viable LP candidate could throw a close election to the Democrats.
Libertarians respond that their message of an immediate end to the Iraq war, legalization of drugs, and opposition to the Bush administration's undermining of civil liberties appeals as much to Democrats as their advocacy of free-market economics appeals to Republicans.
Nevertheless, Republicans view Libertarian votes as coming out of their total. They have, for example, blamed U.S. Senate losses in Nevada in 1998, Washington in 2000, and Montana in 2006 on LP candidates.
Whoever gains the LP nomination can expect strenuous attacks from the GOP, and such attacks are already surfacing on conservative Web sites. But it is not clear that a strong Libertarian candidate necessarily hurts the Republican Party as a whole.
Polls have shown a sharp erosion in support for the GOP over the last four years; voters identifying themselves as Republicans have fallen from 33% to 27%, according to Pew Research. This is largely due to declining support for George W. Bush's policies among Republicans. Only 60% of them now approve of his performance, according to Gallup. Gallup research also shows that 10% of Republicans now believe John McCain's close association with Mr. Bush makes them less likely to vote for him in November.
It's hard to know whether these anti-Bush, anti-McCain Republicans will vote for the Democrat this fall, hold their noses and vote for Sen. McCain, or just stay home on Election Day. While the apparent Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, has genuine support among a few conservatives – a friend of mine calls herself an "Obamacon" – the stay-at-home option would seem to be more likely.
To the extent that the Libertarian Party candidate gives such voters someone to vote for at the top of the ticket, they may still vote Republican for Congress and other offices. Thus while a strong LP candidate may hurt Mr. McCain, he may nevertheless aid Republicans in getting sympathetic voters to the polls who would otherwise not vote at all.
Although this may turn out to be a banner year for the Libertarian Party, the LP is not a real alternative to the Republicans and Democrats. Because of the Electoral College, restrictions on ballot access and onerous campaign finance laws, third parties simply aren't viable for actually electing candidates. Nor do they pull the major parties toward their position: Ron Paul's success did not encourage other Republican presidential candidates to even pay lip service to his ideas.
I believe that libertarian ideas would be better promoted by an interest group such as the National Rifle Association than through the Libertarian Party. Such a group could use the limited resources available for libertarian ideas far more effectively by establishing a political action committee, lobbying and advertising than by a political party running futile campaigns for public office. Nevertheless, the Libertarian Party may be an interesting force this year.
Mr. Bartlett worked on Ron Paul's congressional staff in 1976. He later worked for former Rep. Jack Kemp, and in the Reagan White House.
Does the Libertarian Party Matter?
By BRUCE BARTLETT
May 22, 2008
Ron Paul's unexpected success raising money and gaining votes in the Republican primaries – running on an explicitly libertarian platform – has made the Libertarian Party's presidential nomination something worth vying for this year.
Although Rep. Paul could probably have had the nomination for the asking, he's running instead for re-election in his Texas district. Former Republican Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia and former Democratic Sen. Mike Gravel of Alaska are among those actively seeking the nomination at the LP convention, which begins today in Denver.
The fact that such well-known, former establishment figures would seek a fringe party's presidential nomination demonstrates to many libertarians that their party has come of age. It's also created fear in Republican ranks that a viable LP candidate could throw a close election to the Democrats.
Libertarians respond that their message of an immediate end to the Iraq war, legalization of drugs, and opposition to the Bush administration's undermining of civil liberties appeals as much to Democrats as their advocacy of free-market economics appeals to Republicans.
Nevertheless, Republicans view Libertarian votes as coming out of their total. They have, for example, blamed U.S. Senate losses in Nevada in 1998, Washington in 2000, and Montana in 2006 on LP candidates.
Whoever gains the LP nomination can expect strenuous attacks from the GOP, and such attacks are already surfacing on conservative Web sites. But it is not clear that a strong Libertarian candidate necessarily hurts the Republican Party as a whole.
Polls have shown a sharp erosion in support for the GOP over the last four years; voters identifying themselves as Republicans have fallen from 33% to 27%, according to Pew Research. This is largely due to declining support for George W. Bush's policies among Republicans. Only 60% of them now approve of his performance, according to Gallup. Gallup research also shows that 10% of Republicans now believe John McCain's close association with Mr. Bush makes them less likely to vote for him in November.
It's hard to know whether these anti-Bush, anti-McCain Republicans will vote for the Democrat this fall, hold their noses and vote for Sen. McCain, or just stay home on Election Day. While the apparent Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, has genuine support among a few conservatives – a friend of mine calls herself an "Obamacon" – the stay-at-home option would seem to be more likely.
To the extent that the Libertarian Party candidate gives such voters someone to vote for at the top of the ticket, they may still vote Republican for Congress and other offices. Thus while a strong LP candidate may hurt Mr. McCain, he may nevertheless aid Republicans in getting sympathetic voters to the polls who would otherwise not vote at all.
Although this may turn out to be a banner year for the Libertarian Party, the LP is not a real alternative to the Republicans and Democrats. Because of the Electoral College, restrictions on ballot access and onerous campaign finance laws, third parties simply aren't viable for actually electing candidates. Nor do they pull the major parties toward their position: Ron Paul's success did not encourage other Republican presidential candidates to even pay lip service to his ideas.
I believe that libertarian ideas would be better promoted by an interest group such as the National Rifle Association than through the Libertarian Party. Such a group could use the limited resources available for libertarian ideas far more effectively by establishing a political action committee, lobbying and advertising than by a political party running futile campaigns for public office. Nevertheless, the Libertarian Party may be an interesting force this year.
Mr. Bartlett worked on Ron Paul's congressional staff in 1976. He later worked for former Rep. Jack Kemp, and in the Reagan White House.