Steve Trinward
|
Is Jefferson Smith
Just a Myth? In my inaugural column, I took issue with the idea that electoral politics can be a productive route to Liberty, based mostly on the nature of the people (libertarians) we are trying to get to devote their lives to such a methodology (by current standards, not congruent with a libertarian mindset). But what about those who are already on that path, whether as previously elected public officials, or as current serious campaigners? Many of these folks may have been inspired by the exploits of Jefferson Davis Smith, the Jimmy Stewart character in the wonderful Frank Capra film, "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington." Smith, a Midwestern local Scoutmaster and hero, takes a flier at Congress, wins the office and does indeed go to Washington. After an initial spell of star-struck wonder, he visits a famous Memorial (the wrong one, in my not so humble estimation, but it works for the story), he then spends the rest of the film regaining his soul and exposing the depths of corruption, extending through his own mentor and fellow state office-holder, to the highest and lowest levels of his own state's government. What can be said about these stalwart folks, who are giving up a significant portion of their lives, in the name of bringing Liberty out of the mouth of the Leviathan? And the larger question, is there a way for libertarians to bring about the transformation from career politician to citizen statesman? Or stated more plainly: How can the Libertarian Party find, recruit and train an army of Jeff Smiths, and replace the current powermongers … with them? Over the next few installments, this column will make a wild stab at exploring those questions, focusing mostly on some of the more prominent libertarians who are running for Governor in their home states. It will also consider: Getting Elected There are several theories on how to get elected at a level where one's presence could be considered significant on a larger scale. The most popular holds that, to run for higher office, one must first compete and win (or be appointed) at the local level -- Alderman, City Council, County Commissioner, etc. Only then is there hope for advancement, perhaps by way of a state legislative or senatorial seat, to a point where a run for Congress is more than an exercise in frustration. This method, however, usually involves a dedication to winning and holding office over many years, in order to develop the track record credibility to play at the Big League level. (Note: I'm discounting for this discussion the purist campaign, where actual electability is a low priority, well behind education and "meme" changing.) Another pathway, also requiring some time in public office, is to use small-town (or family?) connections and basic personal charisma to win a higher local position -- perhaps as Mayor of the community. This has more clout than the perhaps more accessible lower offices, but it also requires that one have the networks in place to achieve it. It helps to be well connected in some way with the conventional political machine. (This one can also be very tricky, if one's goal is promote liberty instead of just joining the Uniparty powers.) Another idea has it that if one has been active and well-known in the community, through volunteer work, issue campaigns or similar public visibility, and has sufficient money and other resources to build upon, it may be possible to leapfrog from the private sector directly into a higher level office, or at least cut out a few steps along the way. Again, this can be a delicate process, since the vast majority of people who pull this off have the GOP or Dem party machinery working behind the scenes. The would-be candidate goes after the nomination of whichever party is deemed least offensive or most effective, and then lets the usual sources do the hard work. These are probably the most fruitful and proven roads to travel, for someone seeking to reach the upper levels of electoral politics. There are two more methods which either have been or are being attempted by Libertarian campaigns, whether for Congress, U.S. Senate or a state Governorship: I shall call them the money-driven and the grassroots/precinct paths. The money-driven way attempts to replace campaign organization, local support and precinct workers with fundraising; the other one reverses the roles, relying on the ability of the candidate and his or her core supporters to build a mass movement and bring out the vote without the usual paid-publicity and high-dollar barrage. So let's say there are five possible routes to gaining power in order to destroy it. There may be more, but I can't think of any at this point. Now let's step back a few yards, and handicap the array of libertarians across the nation already announced as candidates for Governor in 2002. Perhaps by assessing both their chances of victory AND their value as role-models for others contemplating the same path, we can find some pattern which future libertarians can follow, to short cut the process. (Note: I'll be including both those individuals specifically seeking endorsement from a state Libertarian Party, and those who are not, but have been identified as libertarians, anyway. I also acknowledge that NONE of these hopefuls have been officially nominated by their respective state parties, which in most cases requires a convention.) Most Likely to Succeed Let's start with the campaign being deemed Most Likely to Succeed by many folks: Ed Thompson in Wisconsin, who is seeking both the LPWI nomination and the Governor's Mansion. Ed begins with some measurable advantages: He has already been elected, and currently serves as Mayor of the town of Tomah. He is also the brother of former Wisconsin Governor, and current Bush Cabinet Secretary of Health & Human Services, Tommy Thompson, who served 14 years in the position Ed now seeks. Thompson has also been a well-known businessman for many years, as well as a rather colorful character, from his "Toughman" competition days to his hobbies (including skydiving, which nearly cost him his life). He was also recently instrumental on the statewide level, battling to deregulate small-time gambling. (He owns a bar and restaurant, the Tee Pee Supper Club, which was raided several years ago when four nickel poker machines were confiscated. Ed Thompson was the only tavern owner -- among dozens nabbed in the Monroe County raid -- who refused to cut a deal and plead guilty. He ended up winning his case when the district attorney, who was later voted out of office over the raid, couldn't find jurors who would convict him.) Thompson then turned to the lobbying arena, until the legislature changed the law so that tavern owners with no more than five video gambling machines now face only misdemeanor, instead of felony, charges. Thompson's bucking of what he says is an unfair disparity between legal forms of gambling in Wisconsin (e.g., Indian casinos) and illegal ones (poker machines) prompted some people to encourage him to run for Tomah mayor last year. He defeated two-term incumbent Bud Johnson. He has now already raised over \\$100,000 (much of it from sources outside Libertarian Party environs), expects to bring another \\$100,000 in through LP contacts, and is aiming for about a half-million total. His campaign is not as concerned with raising large sums, although they would be well spent if they do show up. Thompson's focus is on organization and outreach, not simply on throwing money at the problem. He has also built a campaign committee around a broad cross-section of anti-authoritarian elements: early on, Sue Fisher, past president of Wisconsin Term Limits and a former Republican candidate for state Assembly, was the campaign's spokeswoman; another early adopter was William Pangman, who had headed Alan Keyes' presidential campaign in Wisconsin. Although neither is now active in the core campaign, others have stepped in to take their place: Dane County Libertarian Party activists Tom Ender and Julie Cordry; and Tom Keister, a Baraboo businessman active in the Wisconsin Tavern League. Ed has also received both support and public encouragement from current Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, whose own rise from small-town mayor to state Governor -- while running as an Independent, reform-minded (and basically libertarian) activist candidate -- has given hope to third-party and independent candidacies all over the country. Meanwhile, the fact that Wisconsin, like Minnesota, has same-day voter registration (a major factor in the Ventura victory), has a lot of people making some very rash predictions about Ed's chances. And for those who might worry that, as an already-elected politician who seems to enjoy this stuff, Ed Thompson might be too prone to the lure of the Ring for libertarian tastes, consider this: When he took office as Mayor of Tomah, the first things he did were to schedule weekly meetings with all department heads (to promote accountability), and to eliminate a number of superfluous committees. "I see power as evil," he says, "and those committees are all little power structures." He also started a weekly cable TV public-access show, to keep a channel open to the general public. "It's just to let them know how their tax dollars are being spent, agree or disagree." Meanwhile, in terms of his strategy and focus, Thompson holds strong libertarian positions on a wide variety of issues, from the Drug War ("We have to realize, as free people, that prohibition is evil") to prisons (community service and monitoring ankle bracelets for non-violent criminals) to taxes ("I do plan on lowering taxes … by making everybody accountable at the state level") to government in general ("not so much leading as it is serving…"). He also favors term limits, medical marijuana, local control of schools … and the need for definite limits on the War on Terrorism: "My question is, when do we know we have won? Sometime the hatchet has got to get buried…." He ends that statement with a clear expression of the NAP: "I don't think anybody has the right to instigate force against anybody else." (Source for all quotes: A fascinating article/profile in The Isthmus, Madison, WI, January 4, 2001) All of these assets may give him the best chance of any of the libertarians, large- or small-L, who are seeking Gubernatorial colors. Time will tell, as will his ability to build on his present level of support and create a groundswell grassroots movement for his election. (Contact information: www.EdThompson.com ; Friends for Ed Thompson, P.O. Box 1509, Tomah, WI 545660 (608)374-2537. [As far as our five paradigms are concerned, Ed Thompson seems to be combining the second path -- Mayor to higher office -- with the third one, in that he has bootstrapped his colorful past, family name and high-profile political activism into a platform for a serious go at the Governor's spot. He is also working with the grassroots paradigm, Option five in the list. Fundraising, though important, seems a secondary condition: although he is trying to raise money, he considers that \\$500,000 (a drop in the bucket in most such campaigns) would be sufficient to fuel the engines to election.] Praxis, praxis, praxis … with an eye on the prize Next up, let's look at the campaign of Clyde Cleveland, who is again seeking both to be Governor of Iowa and to secure that state's Libertarian Party nomination. Here we have a respected businessman, with broad support outside the LP; he already has a cross-endorsement from the Natural Law Party, and is seeking similar support from the Greens as well. According to the River Cities' Reader, he calls himself a "socially conscious venture capitalist," and balances his business credentials with his concern for the environment. He's a free market proponent who grows and eats organic food. Though he is personally pro-life, he is also insistent that the government should not be the arbiter over a woman's body. His opposition is fairly soft, compared to some years. The incumbent, Democrat Tom Vilsack, is considered quite vulnerable. Meanwhile, the only Republicans who have announced so far are State Representative Steve Sukup (the mind boggles at the graffiti possibilities there!) and Bob Vanderplaats, executive director of an organization called Opportunities Unlimited. Neither of them has established much of a statewide support base prior to this campaign; If Cleveland can get his name and program across to the voters, he could have a decent chance of slipping past the radar and finding himself in the Governor's Mansion. Like Ed Thompson, Clyde Cleveland is taking his lead from Jesse Ventura's successful campaign of a couple of years ago. He often refers to how Ventura has conquered, including the latter's ability to overcome resistance from both Uniparty wings. He declares that Ventura has "been able to build bridges," largely because he doesn't have an affiliation with either one. He is also following Ventura's highway in who he is trying to reach among the electorate. He's well aware that voter registration by Independents outstrips the number registered with either of the ruling parties, and that the number of unregistered though eligible may exceed all three figures. He also knows that students, environmentalists and pro-freedom groups can be a rich source of both volunteer support and votes. He does expect to need some pretty major fundraising, and to do a lot of it outside of the state: "We're not going to get special-interest money," he notes, "or … corporate [or] union money. Not with our issues." Nevertheless, he does hope to raise a bit of money along the way. So far, he has only brought in a few thousand dollars, but with a full-time campaign ahead until November, he is hoping to attract a lot more. "Our target is \\$1 million," he says, "and I think if we get anywhere close to that, we'll win." This seemingly bold prediction is not without some justification, as he notes that Ventura won his spot with only \\$150,000. His platform won't scare the horses, although it has its radical aspects, combining practical, short-term steps toward Liberty with a long-range view targeting a much freer society. On the Drug War issue, for example, he would de-federalize the situation, then let states and local communities develop their own policy. He does want to eliminate the state income tax, but he proposes to phase it out over a 3-to-5 year period, and would let normal attrition and some salary cuts shrink the state bureaucracy, rather than just throwing them all out on Inauguration Day. He also wants to reform the property tax, to make it a percentage of the property's last purchase price, to allow longstanding homeowners relief from any overall increases due to reassessment. Cleveland also believes that even though government lacks the incentive of the profit motive, it can still operate under performance-based standards and goals, requiring bureaucrats to justify the value, if not the very existence, of their jobs. He realizes this will put him at odds with the public-servant unions, but seems to take that in stride: "The people in the unions are going to realize they need to work with me," he says defiantly. Meanwhile, he endorses the criminal justice plan being advanced by his Libertarian colleague, attorney general hopeful Ed Noyes. This plan is based strongly on the premise that non-violent offenders should not be thrown into prison. Noyes would allow county parole boards and other mentoring agencies to make such decisions, and pay them to do so. Options beyond jail would include drug treatment, paying restitution and other possibilities, each designed to minimize public expense and restore a non-criminal to society. You might say that Clyde Cleveland is a variation on the old joke about the tourist asking the musician how to get to Carnegie Hall: "praxis, praxis, praxis" -- although is it pretty clear that he also has the larger picture in mind, at least in the corner of his eye. [As for our paradigms, Cleveland, who has never run for office before, is clearly working Number Three, the "springboard" approach, with a focus on grassroots and coalition-building, Number Five on the list. He is trying to raise money, but it is clearly not the biggest priority on his agenda.] (In the next two issues, I shall be exploring (though not necessarily in this order): (a) the "independents" -- libertarians who are walking their own paths, without seeking LP endorsement; and (b) the Carla Howell campaign, which is firmly focused on Paradigm Four, the high-dollar fundraising pathway. Stay tuned.) |
