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

Skip to comments.

Attack of the Dean-Leaners The Libertarian Case for the Democrats
Reason ^ | October 14, 2003 | Julian Sanchez

Posted on 10/14/2003 5:07:32 PM PDT by RJCogburn

I think I must have been ill that day. At some point, no one can say precisely when, libertarians apparently swore a feudal oath of fealty to the Republican Party. In response to an American Prospect article on libertarian disenchantment with the Bush administration, Reason's own former editor in chief Virginia Postrel explained that "real Dean voters don't like Jeff Flake. (I do.)"

On the Crossfire view of politics, this makes sense: You pick your team and root for it, come hell or high water. The Platonic Real Dean Voter can't possibly hold any affection for a member of the opposing tribe.

I'll confess I take a somewhat different view. I don't much care whether it's Terry McAuliffe or Ed Gillespie throwing the bigger celebratory shindig come November 2004. I don't even really care whether George W. Bush is, in his heart of hearts, a convinced Rothbardian while Howard Dean sleeps with the Communist Manifesto under his pillow. Because libertarians shouldn't be distracted by what policies the president, deep down, really wants. They should care about what he can get.

As Cato Institute economist William Niskanen observes, government tends to grow more slowly during periods when the executive and legislative branches are controlled by different parties. The mono-party regime of George W. Bush, who delivered a touching encomium to Milton Friedman mere weeks before signing new steel tariffs and a bloated farm bill into law, has increased domestic spending faster than conservative bete noire Bill Clinton. Bush has even beaten the "big government" Clinton's record when it comes to the growth of the regulatory state.

At present, the alliance (such as it is) between libertarians and the GOP seems to consist of the following compromise: we hold our noses and vote for Republican presidential candidates in close elections, while they agree to pay lip service to our cherished ideals of limited government. This seems like a fair enough trade on its face, but as "no new taxes" taught us, the lips of Republican elected officials are typically disconnected from their arms when it comes time to sign legislation. Perhaps it's time for libertarians to stop getting starry-eyed over the candidates who write us the prettiest love poems and begin comparing policy outcomes.

When we look at those outcomes, we find that, as Harvard's Jeffrey Frankel wrote in late 2002, there is a dramatic disconnect between rhetoric and reality: "The pattern is so well established that the generalisation can no longer be denied: The Republicans have become the party of fiscal irresponsibility, trade restriction, big government and bad microeconomics. Surprisingly, Democrat presidents have, relatively speaking, become the proponents of fiscal responsibility, free trade, competitive markets and neoclassical microeconomics."

Howard Dean, like Bill Clinton, may say he wants to dramatically increase government's role in health care. But with fewer vulnerable candidates than in the 2002 midterm elections, it's Republicans who are likely to have the final say on how and whether that happens. And while they've shown they'll happily roll over for Bush, who seems hell bent on delivering a prescription drug benefit, they'll be just as happy to deny President Dean a talking point when he goes stumping at AARP meetings in 2008.

In short Dean (or another Democratic nominee) has vices which are unlikely to translate into real policy. His virtues—opposition to an imperial foreign policy, greater support for gay rights, and even a qualified federalism, evidenced by his stance on gun rights—are more likely to be points on which bipartisan coalition building is possible.

This might be balanced by Bush's tax cutting zeal, if his cuts corresponded to cuts in domestic spending. But as Alex Tabarrok of the Independent Institute has observed, those "cuts" amount to little more than a "tax shift." From a principled libertarian perspective, it's not clear why saddling the next generation with debt (and higher taxes) is any better than facing higher taxes now. One theory, sometimes referred to as the "starve leviathan" model, posits that high deficits now will act as a constraint on future spending. But that kind of fiscal restraint requires presidential leadership—leadership that a president in the Bush mold seems manifestly unwilling to provide.

Of course, it might be objected that the natural candidate for a libertarian to support is, well, the Libertarian. And if one is voting largely for personal satisfaction, that may make a certain amount of sense. Yet people's actual voting behavior indicates that our actual motives in the ballot box are more complex. If you were really going to vote on pure principle, you probably wouldn't vote for any party's candidate, since those candidates are always represent some amount of compromise. Instead, you'd just write in the name of the person you'd most like to see hold the office.

If, on the other hand, you were following a strict Kantian categorical imperative, voting because you believe one ought to act as you would have everyone act... well, you'd do exactly the same thing. In reality, we usually act as quasi-Kantians, imagining ourselves as representatives, not of rational humanity as a whole, but of a cohort of somewhat like-minded folks who aren't going to agree on everything. The individual libertarian voter, then, ought to act according to the maxim that he would have the set of American libertarians obey.

If we take a sufficiently long view, it could be argued that voting Libertarian "sends a message" about the electorate's policy preferences. And that may be. But the message we send is proportioned to the threat we pose. Because of our first-past-the-post, winner-take-all voting system, the reality is that Ds and Rs are going to be the only live contenders for the foreseeable future. When libertarians as a group defect from the GOP to the Democrats (or vice-versa), our threat power is effectively doubled: each of us counts both as a vote lost to one candidate and a vote gained for the other. In close elections, a willingness to coalition jump may make the libertarian swing vote enough of a prize that candidates become, at the least, afraid of alienating us too severely.

One dismissive characterization of libertarians has it that we're merely "Republicans who smoke pot." How long before our erstwhile allies on the right begin to sneer that we're nothing but "Democrats who've taken an econ class"? How long before partisans of both side realize that we're none of the above? We're our own distinct species, and our political power depends on making it clear to both major parties that our support can be taken for granted by neither, can be won, not with pretty speeches, but with sound policies.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; US: Arizona; US: California; US: Massachusetts; US: Vermont
KEYWORDS: 2004; alextabarrok; arizona; california; catoinstitute; communistmanifesto; dean; edgillespie; electionpresident; ethanol; globalwarminghoax; harvard; homosexualagenda; howarddean; immanuelkant; independentinstitute; jeffflake; jeffreyfrankel; juliansanchez; libertarian; libertarians; manufacturedconsent; massachusetts; medicalmarijuana; miltonfriedman; nevertrump; nevertrumper; nevertrumpers; nevertrumpertrolls; niskanencenter; reasononline; snowflake; steel; tariffs; terrymcauliffe; vermont; virginiapostrel; williamniskanen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 10/14/2003 5:07:33 PM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Attack of the Dean-Leaners The Libertarian Case for the Democrats

They got us eight years of Clinton, too. Thanks for nothing.
I'm beginning to think they're Democrats in sheeps clothing anyway. Their track record really sucks!

2 posted on 10/14/2003 5:14:12 PM PDT by concerned about politics (Have you donated to the Salvation Army this week? How have you helped a lost soul today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

GOD BLESS OUR MILITARY
AND
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Keep Our Republic Free

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com


STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER and say THANKS to Jim Robinson!
IT'S IN THE BREAKING NEWS SIDEBAR
THANKS!



3 posted on 10/14/2003 5:15:16 PM PDT by Support Free Republic (Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Click Here for the RadioFR website!

Tonight on Radio FreeRepublic!

8pm/5pm - Chuck Muth Interviews Lori Waters from the Eagle Forum!

10pm/7pm - Tom Adkins is ON FIRE! If you have never listened to Tom, don't miss his show tonight and watch Tom slice and dice liberals! Tom has been called a cross between Rush Limbaugh and Mike Savage and his shows are always intertaining and informative!

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep! HIFI broadband feed HERE! (when available)

Would you like to receive a note when RadioFR is on the air? Send an email to radiofreerepublic-subscribe@radioactive.kicks-ass.net!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room!


4 posted on 10/14/2003 5:15:28 PM PDT by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
If the Libertarians side with Dean, their journey to irrelevance will increase to warp speed
5 posted on 10/14/2003 5:16:58 PM PDT by MJY1288 (This is your tagline "Bush/Cheney04", this is your tagline on drugs "AnyOtherChoice/04")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
They got us eight years of Clinton, too.

You give the libertarians waaaay too much credit.

George HW Bush got us eight years of Clinton.

6 posted on 10/14/2003 5:18:30 PM PDT by RJCogburn ("I want a man with grit."..................Mattie Ross of near Dardenelle in Yell County)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
If the Libertarians side with Dean, their journey to irrelevance will increase to warp speed

I believe that you confuse Libertarians with libertarians. I agree with you that the 'L' libertarians are on that road.

7 posted on 10/14/2003 5:20:35 PM PDT by RJCogburn ("I want a man with grit."..................Mattie Ross of near Dardenelle in Yell County)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
The bid "L" is for Losers
8 posted on 10/14/2003 5:23:54 PM PDT by MJY1288 (This is your tagline "Bush/Cheney04", this is your tagline on drugs "AnyOtherChoice/04")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MJY1288
bid = big
9 posted on 10/14/2003 5:24:13 PM PDT by MJY1288 (This is your tagline "Bush/Cheney04", this is your tagline on drugs "AnyOtherChoice/04")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
George HW Bush got us eight years of Clinton.

Nah. The vote was close, and Clinton barely slipped in. Had we had more Libertarians on out team, it never would have happened.
Same happended for Clintons re-election. Does Perot ring a bell?

Right now, I think most people, being basically conservative at heart, will get Bush through the next one.

10 posted on 10/14/2003 5:24:25 PM PDT by concerned about politics (Have you donated to the Salvation Army this week? How have you helped a lost soul today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
They don't get off square one in convincing me Howard Dean is libertarian in any way.

I want the government to protect individuals against predation by other individuals, to protect the nation against foreign enemies, and to otherwise keep the hell away from me.

As I see it, Dean goes 0-for-3.

11 posted on 10/14/2003 5:31:10 PM PDT by Monti Cello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Instead, you'd just write in the name of the person you'd most like to see hold the office.

Bingo!
12 posted on 10/14/2003 5:40:29 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (Americans First - the rest of the world is on their own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiteGuy
Instead, you'd just write in the name of the person you'd most like to see hold the office.

Bingo!

Nah. That wouldn't work. If someone forgot to dot an "i", it would be countred as a vote for Al Gore.

13 posted on 10/14/2003 5:43:41 PM PDT by concerned about politics (Have you donated to the Salvation Army this week? How have you helped a lost soul today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Nah. That wouldn't work. If someone forgot to dot an "i", it would be countred as a vote for Al Gore.


Yeah you're right.

Next time instead of bothering to drive to the polls.........

I'll just check the Diebold website to see who's going to "win"
14 posted on 10/14/2003 5:49:30 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (Americans First - the rest of the world is on their own)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
What a load of crap! I am just about as far from a democrat as you can get. The only one farther away is God. Quit generalizing!
15 posted on 10/14/2003 5:53:55 PM PDT by vpintheak (Our Liberties we prize, and our rights we will maintain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Libertarians are schmucks.

They pine for a utopian system that is at odds with where the center of the country is. In return, Democrats get to rule.

Prats.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

16 posted on 10/14/2003 5:58:50 PM PDT by section9 (Major Motoko Kusanagi says, "Drop the sushi, clic on my pic, and visit my blog. Or else!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
What a load of crap! I am just about as far from a democrat as you can get. The only one farther away is God. Quit generalizing!

I was refering to your tendancy to help get Democrats elected. Your motives may be good, but your method needs work.

17 posted on 10/14/2003 5:59:39 PM PDT by concerned about politics (Have you donated to the Salvation Army this week? How have you helped a lost soul today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics
Bill Niskanen is correct, mixed government does slow the growth of government. But, I would hope - having consolidated the Republican Revolution of 1994 - that we would be speaking of reducing the size of government. In the present era, the problem is Democrats slowing down the pace of change. This, indeed, was Clinton's boast. Regarding socialized medicine, the issue isn't when we will get it (i.e., the slowing down perspective), but when we will get liberalization of the health care industry. Same thing with social security privatization and education vouchers/tax credits. The answer isn't bein for Howard Dean for president, who has no chance of election anyway, it's getting a few more Jeff Flakes into Congress.
18 posted on 10/14/2003 6:07:03 PM PDT by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
The only thing wrong with the Libertarians, is there open border/unsecured border policy. I cant vote for any party who wont protect our borders, and who see nothing wrong with letting in hundreds of millions/billions of foreigners coming into this country if they want to. Why even call it a country if you dont have borders?
19 posted on 10/14/2003 6:11:09 PM PDT by waterstraat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: waterstraat
Wow....it's amazing how folks here tend to generalize thematically on "what" Libertarians may or may not believe. Please refrain from quoting from the so-called Libertarian platform...that's the same as believing every Republican supports their parties platform 100% of the time.

Most Libertarians vote pragmatically and for whatever party they more strongly associate with...

20 posted on 10/14/2003 7:13:02 PM PDT by Katya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 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