A Two-Pronged Strategy for the Libertarian Party

by Bill Woolsey

Posted June 19, 2005

A reasonable time horizon for strategic planning is ten years. The proper goal for the Libertarian Party during that time horizon is to move from being an ultra-minor party to being a serious third party.

A two-pronged strategy is best. The first prong of the strategy is to build up a cadre of Libertarian public officials by convincing Libertarians to run serious races for winnable offices—nonpartisan local offices for the most part. The second prong of the strategy is build up the partisan base of the Libertarian Party by informing the voters who want more personal and economic liberty that they are libertarians and that the Libertarian Party is devoted to helping them achieve their goals.

While the five hundred or so Libertarians serving in public office across the U.S. today are a start, many more are needed. Elected and appointed positions that often go vacant are better than nothing, but positions like city councilman, county councilman, schoolboard member, and planning and zoning board member are more appropriate. The goal for the next decade should be to have at least a handful in every metropolitan area. When the local press thinks “Who are the Libertarians in our area?” they should be able to list four or five local public officials—at least some of whom are elected.

The chief reason for achieving this goal is credibility. Public officials, especially elected public officials, have credibility with the press—at least the local press. Those Libertarians with a record of winning elective office at the local level will have the credibility with the press and the voters needed to break into partisan office such as state representative. And when there are multiple Libertarian state representatives in a state, and better yet, in a particular Congressional district, a Libertarian in the U.S. House will become a realistic possibility. And when there are Libertarian Congressmen, the U.S. Senate or governorship of a state will be in reach. It is only when there have been Libertarian governors and U.S. Senators that the U.S. Presidency is a realistic possibility. But those high level offices are, unfortunately, beyond a reasonable planning horizon for the Libertarian Party. Getting a cadre of local public officials is the step that needs to be achieved now.

Achieving this goal will not be easy. It requires Libertarians who are involved in their community. Churches, civic clubs like Rotary or Kiwanis, Boy Scouts, P.T.A., neighborhood associations, and athletic booster clubs provide the connections needed to be elected or receive an appointment to a local public office. Usually, several such affiliations are necessary. The way to win local elected office is to go door-to-door and meet the voters. The emphasis of a campaign should be the candidate’s personal qualities and record of community service—not the candidate’s platform.

Still, a platform is essential. The platform should be short—no more than two or three planks. Of course, nothing should be said about any policy not directly relevant to the office being sought. Opposition to some anti-libertarian proposal, reversal of some recent anti-libertarian policy, or implementation of some incremental libertarian policy should be proposed.

Perhaps the greatest difficulty is that the current rank-and-file of the Libertarian Party is made up of people especially interested in national issues. The LP was founded by a handful of people disgusted with Richard Nixon’s betrayal of libertarian and conservative principles by leaving the gold standard and imposing wage and price ceilings. While Libertarians have run for office at all levels, the traditional emphasis of the Libertarian Party has been the Presidential campaign. Convincing the current rank-and-file that the only way to actually make change at the national level is to start at the local level is difficult—but it must be done.

The second prong of the strategy is to build a partisan Libertarian base by informing the voters who want more personal and economic liberty that they are libertarians and that the Libertarian Party is devoted to helping them achieve their goals. By far the best way to inform voters about the Libertarian Party is in the context of a partisan political campaign. The best way to communicate to voters that the Libertarian Party shares their values and goals is to have candidates state that they support more personal and economic liberty and then make that view concrete by stating a few positions on issues that expand personal and economic liberty in ways that most libertarian voters support.

Who are these libertarian voters? Gallup polls have shown that about 20% of voters believe that government should do less and shouldn’t try to promote any specific sort of values. Rassmussen polling has shown that about 15% of voters fit within the “libertarian quadrant” as defined by the Advocates’ World’s Smallest Political Quiz. While the Gallup questions and the WSPQ are imperfect, this provides a rough estimate of the sort of voters that should be targeted. What has not been done effectively is to discover which specific expansions of personal and economic liberty that a large majority of those voters would support. More polling and focus group work is essential to craft the message that most appeals to the 20% of voters who want more personal and economic liberty.

The reason for this prong of the strategy is to begin to build a partisan Libertarian base that will support credible Libertarian candidates in the future. The goal isn’t so much that candidates for partisan office will get votes immediately, it is rather that the views expressed by Libertarian candidates should be perceived favorably by large majorities of libertarian voters. Even if they believe that the candidate is not qualified or cannot win (so they don’t vote for the candidate now,) they will recognize that Libertarian candidates favor the sorts of policies they favor. These voters will be primed for the qualified Libertarian candidate who has proven his ability to win office in the past.

Currently about 2% of the voting population self-describes as libertarian and about ½ of one percent has a partisan identification with the Libertarian Party. Simply getting the 15% to 20% of voters who are libertarian to identify as such will have myriad effects on our general culture. Our current “left-right” spectrum results in media that provide “balance” between liberals and conservatives. When it becomes clear that libertarians are about as numerous as the other two alternatives, the market for libertarian columnists, talk show hosts, television commentators and the like, will surely expand. This can only help the cause of freedom in the U.S. It will be these broader avenues of communication that will help build upon the current 15% to 20% of libertarian voters, changing public opinion in a way that will help the LP become a major party one day.

Informing everyone who wants more personal and economic liberty they are libertarian and that the Libertarian party seeks to represent them will not be easy. Political contests in the United States are about who will serve in public office, not about educating voters about alternative political perspectives. Media exposure is focused on the question of who will win—not on educating voters so that they can make an informed choice between candidates. The Libertarian Party can expect only limited free media. Having a presentable candidate visit each voter door-to-door might overcome an absence of free media. Yet reaching a substantial fraction of voters in that manner would require many such candidates for low level partisan office—like state representative—candidates that should be seeking to win local, nonpartisan office in the near term. Higher level offices, like President, governor, Senator, or even U.S. Congress, require vast amounts of money for advertising. For now, the most reasonable approach to build the partisan base is to run the high level candidates needed to get a Libertarian candidate on most voters’ ballots. But the key goal of each campaign must remain that the candidate describes his or her views in a way appealing to most libertarians and takes specific positions on the issues shared by most libertarians.

Perhaps the greatest difficulty in implementing the second prong of this strategy is that the Libertarian Party was founded, for the most part, by followers of Ayn Rand. Disgusted by Nixon’s betrayal of free market principles, they developed a party that would consistently support Ayn Rand’s political philosophy. Rather than understand libertarianism as a direction for change from the status quo, expanding both personal and economic liberty, they instead insisted that it was a view that rationally deduced each position on every issue from Ayn Rand’s principle that the initiation of force is always wrong. A few years after the founding, anarchists came to dominate the small rank-and-file of the Libertarian Party. While they agreed to tolerate those libertarians that advocated a government so limited that it collected no taxes, they also understood libertarianism to be a view that insisted that all positions be deduced from the principle that the initiation of force is always wrong. They just deduced that government itself was inherently an initiation of force and must be abolished.

Convincing the current rank-and-file of the Libertarian Party that there are few people willing to deduce every position from the Noninitiation of Force Principle and that they need to work with the millions of Americans who want more personal and economic liberty is going to be difficult. The reality is that maintaining their grip on the Libertarian Party isn’t really doing “hardcore” libertarians much good. Government continues to grow. The Libertarian Party has a partisan base that is less than one percent. Polling suggests that only tiny minorities of voters accept any one hardcore libertarian stance, much less all of them at once. Worries about hypothetical future scenarios in which the LP has won power, ushered in reductions in government, but then fails to follow through and continue to pursue a radical libertarian agenda until all taxes, or the entire government, is abolished are misplaced—especially when efforts to prevent that remote possibility result in the Libertarian Party never having any impact at all. Having party documents, like the national platform, or candidate platforms, that are aimed at exciting the existing Libertarian Party rank-and-file, is counter-productive.

Letting go is hard. Seeking to draw all Americans who want more personal and economic liberty is the only reasonable approach to creating a Libertarian Party that can move from its current pitiful state to being a serious third party, a party that at least will have a chance to move to the next stage, actually expanding personal and economic liberty by reducing the size and scope of government. Obtaining a significant partisan base will not be enough. There must be credible libertarian candidates willing to support a program of credible libertarian reforms. Both prongs of the strategy are needed. We need to build up a cadre of Libertarian public officials. We need to build up a partisan base of all libertarians: everyone who wants more personal and economic liberty. The time to start is now.

6 Comments

Printer Friendly Version
Top of Page