Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Keeping Libertarians Inside the Tent
National Review Online ^ | November 22, 2002 | Randy E. Barnett

Posted on 11/22/2002 9:56:22 AM PST by DaveCooper

Alienation avoidance.

I read with great interest John Miller’s op-ed in The New York Times, “A Third Party on the Right” in which he complains about the close races that have been tipped to the Democrats by those voting for the Libertarian-party candidate. While I am not a libertarian who advises others to vote Libertarian, many of my libertarian friends and relatives feel otherwise. They view the Republican Party as cavalier about individual liberty, supporting big government when it serves their purposes as much as Democrats do when it serves theirs. What conservative Republicans often fail to realize is that libertarians are an important constituency that should not be ignored or taken for granted lest their votes be driven to the Libertarian Party or even to the Democrats. Telling libertarians they should vote Republican despite their serious reservations about Republican policies is futile. These concerns need to be addressed rather than ignored.

What would it take to attract more libertarian votes to the Republicans without alienating other members of the Republican coalition or moderate swing voters? Here are a few suggestions — apart from lowering taxes — that would advance rather than inhibit a Republican political realignment:

Oppose intrusions into privacy as vociferously as you would if it had been proposed by the Clinton administration. There were several useful reforms in the USA Patriot Act enacted along with some threatening expansions of the government’s surveillance powers over the internet that were completely unrelated to terrorism. Republicans lose credibility as defenders of limited government when they go mute on this issue.

Oppose intrusions upon the Bill of Rights more consistently in Congress. Democrats used to have a far bigger edge over Republicans on the issue of free speech than they do now that their left has endorsed restrictions on politically incorrect speech on campuses and elsewhere and pushed for campaign regulations criminalizing political speech. Still, Republicans in Congress should be more principled supporters of the First Amendment than they sometimes are. And this goes as well for the Second Amendment where Republicans in the past have relented to demands for various unreasonable regulations on gun ownership or use, and asset forfeiture laws that some but not enough Republicans have opposed. When libertarians do not trust Republican legislators to respect the Bill of Rights, they will be more likely to vote Libertarian.

Nominate more libertarian-conservative judges like Clarence Thomas to the courts who care about protecting individual liberty, not just traditionalist-conservative judges like Robert Bork who care most about the “liberty” of the majority to enshrine its preferences into law. (His words not mine.) Appoint judges who care about federalism, the Second Amendment, and also about the First Amendment and the unenumerated rights “retained by the people” referred to in the Ninth Amendment. The more Republicans do this, the more trusted they will be by libertarians and I cannot imagine this costing them votes from the middle swing voters. The more they fail to do this, the more votes they will lose to Libertarian-Party candidates.

Care about federalism in the Congress. Republican politicians are well known for raising federalism concerns only when they oppose a particular legislation on other grounds. Try being a little more consistent. Refrain from proposing legislation that exceeds the enumerated powers of Congress in Article I of the Constitution. Though at times they may risk losing swing voters on this issue, the more legislation they support that exceeds the powers delegated to Congress by the Constitution, the more votes they will lose to Libertarian-Party candidates.

Care more about the free market. Republicans pay the political price for being pro-business. Unfortunately, this often does not mean their policies are pro-free market. The Farm Bill comes to mind. When Republicans refuse to cut corporate welfare, they not only act in ways that reduces their appeal to moderates, they lose votes to the Libertarian Party.

Stop making snide gratuitous remarks about libertarians. Nothing turns off libertarians more than the sort of wholly gratuitous snide remarks about libertarians in conservative publications. By gratuitous I mean they show up even in articles about policies with which libertarians and conservatives agree. The more libertarians feel unwelcome in the coalition that is the Republican Party, the more they will vote Libertarian.

Back off Prohibition. OK, I realize this like abortion is a sensitive subject — or should be — and one that has serious political repercussions. The Republican coalition is, after all, a coalition and libertarians if they are inside the tent cannot be expected to call all the shots. But drug prohibition should be an issue about which reasonable Republicans may disagree — like abortion — or libertarians who care about the serious social and personal costs of Prohibition will be driven outside the tent. At minimum, Republicans should support letting states decide this question of crime and punishment when it concerns the wholly intrastate commerce in drugs whether for medical or recreational purposes. Supporting rather than opposing state choice on this issue would make the Republican party far more libertarian than the Drug-War-mongering Democrats without having to support legalization. If Republicans added this to their federalism concerns, they would attract rather than lose votes to the Libertarian Party.

Unless, of course, Republicans don’t really want those extra senators and governors.

— Randy Barnett is the Austin B. Fletcher Professor at Boston University School of Law, and the author of The Structure of Liberty: Justice and the Rule of Law. He is also a senior fellow of the Cato Institute.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: conservative; dopefiends; election; libertarian; proabortion; republican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-280 next last

1 posted on 11/22/2002 9:56:22 AM PST by DaveCooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fporretto
bump
2 posted on 11/22/2002 9:56:49 AM PST by DaveCooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
The author is correct.
3 posted on 11/22/2002 9:58:20 AM PST by Cyber Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Right on the mark.
4 posted on 11/22/2002 10:01:36 AM PST by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Bump as well.
5 posted on 11/22/2002 10:01:46 AM PST by winner45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Stop making snide gratuitous remarks about libertarians. Nothing turns off libertarians more than the sort of wholly gratuitous snide remarks about libertarians in conservative publications. By gratuitous I mean they show up even in articles about policies with which libertarians and conservatives agree. The more libertarians feel unwelcome in the coalition that is the Republican Party, the more they will vote Libertarian.

This bears repeating over and over here. I see people intentionally driving away libertarians for no better apparent reason than their own amusement.

6 posted on 11/22/2002 10:01:48 AM PST by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mudcat
fyi
7 posted on 11/22/2002 10:02:05 AM PST by Fish out of Water
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Interesting find, Dave. The writer, while not speaking for my perspective, does a prudent job of making his point. I think he misses on a point however. Just as the RP is not libertarian, neither is it conservative. If it wants both, it must realize that rather than adding things to its platform, it should actually eliminate them and campaign for a smaller reach for Federal Government in general.
8 posted on 11/22/2002 10:03:15 AM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Back off Prohibition.

Translation: Legalize crack and smack.

9 posted on 11/22/2002 10:03:49 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Amen, brother.
10 posted on 11/22/2002 10:04:20 AM PST by Nephi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty
A constructive approach. If even a few of these suggestions were adopted, LP voters like me would line up behind the GOP...and the LP would wither on the vine as a factor in elections. Unfortunately, a continuation of current attempts to smear the "Losertarians" will only widen the wedge between conservatives and libertarians at election time.
11 posted on 11/22/2002 10:04:36 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
RLC.org is trying to address these concerns. Apparently without much success if election results are used as a measure of success.
12 posted on 11/22/2002 10:04:41 AM PST by donozark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Excellent list of issues the GOP could incorporate to get more votes as well as support from freedom-loving Americans. I've attended lectures by Randy Barnett, one of the best scholar professors in the country on how to bring about a constitutional republic, or even a post-constitutional republic that respects the most liberty with the least required government. Highly, highly recommend his book Structure of Liberty.
13 posted on 11/22/2002 10:04:50 AM PST by CalCoolidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Crack is a creation of the drug laws...laws which you apparently support.
14 posted on 11/22/2002 10:05:27 AM PST by Austin Willard Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty
I can't see libertarians coming back, they have nothing in common with the neocons.
15 posted on 11/22/2002 10:05:37 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Austin Willard Wright
Don't let him bait you.
16 posted on 11/22/2002 10:06:07 AM PST by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DaveCooper
Until it got to the last point, I was in agreement. There is room to manuever on the WoD, but I doubt that will molify most libertarians who want it dead, period.

I also think, as South Dakota illustrated when the Libertarian dropped out of the race and endorsed Thune but still received 3,000 votes that, had they gone to Thune would have given him victory, many Libertarians do not WANT to vote for the Republican.

Some just want to be little "pox-on-both-your-houses" contrarians who feel that voting for the Libertarian is a vote against everyone else. It's a mistake to think they would be lured to the GOP.

The danger for the GOP does not come from shunning libertarians. Rather the danger is, by shifting to the center and acting against the wishes of their conservative base, they risk having constitutionalists and moral conservatives vacate the party if it doesn't stand for the principles they once assumed Republicans stood for.
17 posted on 11/22/2002 10:07:40 AM PST by Tall_Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I see your lack of reading comprehension showing again. He said leave it to the states.
18 posted on 11/22/2002 10:09:34 AM PST by Lysander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
That's the only point I disagree about in the whole memo.

Leave it to voter referendum to legalize Medical Majijuana (which was vote down last time)

19 posted on 11/22/2002 10:10:35 AM PST by ewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
If you bothered to read the whole paragraph, you would find that it said "At minimum, Republicans should support letting states decide this question of crime and punishment when it concerns the wholly intrastate commerce in drugs whether for medical or recreational purposes".

Just why is giving the states the power to decide this issue for themselves a bad thing?
20 posted on 11/22/2002 10:14:18 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 261-280 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson