Many libertarians have theorized that Bob Barr may be able to pick up the delegates of Wayne Allyn Root and Mike Gravel on subsequent ballots — Root, because of their shared Republican backgrounds; and Gravel due to their shared “celebrity” status. Barr and Root delegates may yet combine, but Gravel supporters are among the most vehemently anti-Barr people at the convention.
“Bob Barr’s voting record goes against everything that Mike Gravel stands for,” one senior staff member of the Gravel campaign said. “I’m not an anarchist, but I can stomach an anarchist. I cannot stomach a neocon.”
There are anti-Barr buttons circulating and many of the delegates wearing them are also wearing Gravel buttons.
My problem with Gravel’s NI4D is not the idea of a national initiative itself. Living in an initiative state, it’s easy to see the results are about as hit and miss as any other form of legislation, though recent memory has given me more confidence in the masses to avoid new taxes.
My real gripe lies with the specifics – a reliance on Article 7 as a legal precedent, constitutional amendments passed by multiple rounds of voting, and a legitimizing a privately-held referendum after the fact. If Gravel was pushing a simple constitutional amendment to establish an easy-access initiative process and promised to use the bully pulpit (“oooooooo”) of the presidency to shame the sitting government into devolving some of their power directly into the hands of citizens, I think not only would it be more practically feasible but also serve as a better hook. As it stands, his plan can be very easily dismissed as nonsensical by anyone that knows what the term “transitory clause” means.
Is Badnarik there this time around? Maybe he should throw his hat back into the ring as well.
You’re not the first person I’ve heard say “Gee, George Phillies would be an okay compromise candidate.”
I wonder…
I like Mike Gravel, and have made no secret of it. He’s one of my heroes. Of course, I was alive during Vietnam, so I remember what he did to end that war (yes, I was a political newshound even as a child, LOL).
If it comes down to Barr vs Gravel, Gravel would certainly be my favorite. I agree with Steve, some of his not-exactly-libertarian ideas would be much easier to shake off than Barr’s ever will.
I also like George Phillies as a compromise candidate.
From what I am hearing about Gravel’s performance thus far at the convention, I’m impressed. Looks like he may be making more of an impact than I initially thought.
NI4D is an interesting idea. And not inherently unlibertarian. But knowing people’s nature, probably unworkable.
IMHO, NI4D should be considered just a “hook†to get voters interested in libertarian ideals. Many of our candidates use “hooksâ€, such as Dave Hollists plan for government “contract insuranceâ€.
Also IMHO, Senator Gravel’s non Libertarian planks, such as the “fairy tax†or nationalized health care would be easier to shake off in coming years than Root’s and Barr’s anti-immigrant ideas or Roots pro war stance or Barr’s homophobic past.
The Senator’s long time antiwar stance and antiPatriot Act stance does dovetail quite nicely with Libertarian principles.
PEACE
Steve