Press "Enter" to skip to content

Lee Wrights: Ballot access critical to Libertarian Party

Lee Wrights has pledged that 10 percent of donations to his campaign for the Libertarian nomination for president will be dedicated to ballot access. “Americans cannot vote for liberty and freedom if Libertarians are not on the ballot,” Wrights believes.

15 Comments

  1. Steven Wilson April 26, 2011

    Ballot access is a tax on voters. It wastes raw materials and labor.

    Ballot access means nothing if you have no one that you believe in.

  2. Curt Boyd April 26, 2011

    Wasn’t David Koch being a multi-millionaire a reason he was chosen to run with Clark? That way, there were nearly unlimited coffers to get on the ballot in most states.

  3. Jose C April 26, 2011

    Ballot Access is very important. The goal should always be to get on the ballot in all 50 states, Washington DC, and Guam. If for example Lee Wright’s Presidential campaign decides their goal for ballot access is 40 states what are the odds they (we) will make the ballot in 50 states, Washington DC, and Guam? None.

    If Jim Libertarian Burns’ Presidential campaign decided their goal for ballot access is 45 states what are the odds they (we) will make the ballot in 50 states, Washington DC, and Guam? None.

    The author Nora Roberts has a great saying which is, “If you don’t go after what you want, you’ll never have it.” She also says, “If you don’t step forward, you’re always in the same place.” And she finishes by saying, “If you don’t ask, the answer will always be no.”

    There are many who say we should not try for 50 state ballot access because . . . it is too hard, it takes to much effort, it costs too much, we will not always make it, it will subject us to state regulation, . . .

    Some also say Democrats and Republicans make it too hard to get on the ballot. You know what of course they do! So what should we do give up ballot access as unattainable? No! The harder they make it for us the harder we should push back, the harder we should try the more effort we should give . . .

    When Dr. Jonah Salk began his research on finding a cure for Polio there were some who said his ideas were wrong. They said his vaccine would not work. They ridiculed his research. Did he give up because others held those views about him and his research? No he did not. He kept at it and one day the Salk vaccine was found to be potent, safe, and effective and mothers, fathers, and children rejoiced because a cure for Polio had been found

    In the report on the 1980 Libertarian Presidential campaign authors Ed Crane and Chris Hocker wrote:

    The Clark Steering Committee approved an all-out effort for total nationwide ballot status in January, after the campaign had gotten a strong indication that ballot status could be achieved in Maryland, which had been previously considered to be in the “impossible” category.

    The decision was reached on the following bases:
    l. The conviction that, given enough time and money, no state was truly “impossible”
    2. The belief that nationwide ballot status would be an essential element in future credibility both within the party and with the news media and other outside observers;
    3. The belief that ballot status was essential to the building of party organizations in states with little or no prior organization, and that to forego this opportunity would be detrimental to the party as a whole.

    And later on they add . . .

    The argument that you shouldn’t bother trying to get party ballot status until your party is strong enough to keep it is a crock. That argument virtually guarantees that your party will remain too small ever to get ballot status. It’s much better to get party status, lose it, and get it again than never to get it in the first place. The argument that party ballot status should be avoided because it subjects the party to state regulation is likewise a crock. It does, but so what? So does driving a car, sending mail, or buying meat. At this point there are still 11 states (Arkansas, D.C., Florida, Kentucky, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Vermont)which have never fielded a Libertarian candidate for partisan office below President, and there were 15 states which didn’t do so in 1980 (the additional four were Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, and Rhode Island). It should be a definite minimum goal to have a Libertarian candidate in every state in 1982, and it’s a goal that should have been pushed more strongly in 1980.

    I could not agree more.
    .

  4. Michael H. Wilson April 25, 2011

    re Mr. Winger’s comments at 9. I believe that the Libertarian Party can take a lot of credit for improving the ballot access laws, or at least individual libertarians can.

  5. Jeremy C. Young April 25, 2011

    Oh, interesting — didn’t know that. Cool. Who usually wins, Dems or GOP?

  6. Richard Winger April 25, 2011

    Guam is the only U.S. overseas possession that has even a “beauty contest” vote for president in November. The Puerto Rico legislature had created such a vote, but then the Puerto Rico Supreme Court invalidated the law.

    The ballot access burden is considerably lighter now than it was in 1980. States in which it is far easier to get on the ballot in 2012, than in 1980, are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

  7. Darryl W. Perry April 25, 2011

    @7 – though Guam does hold a Presidential “straw poll” on election day

  8. Jeremy C. Young April 25, 2011

    @2, sorry to burst your bubble, but Guam doesn’t have any electoral votes.

  9. NewFederalist April 25, 2011

    Just so we don’t all fall into the trap… in 2010 dollars the Clark campaign would have spent $725,347 and the national party would have spent $315,441. It’s called inflation, folks. Since I don’t know what the inflation rate will be for 2011 and 2012 I can only assume it will cost even more FRNs.

  10. Robert Capozzi April 25, 2011

    2 JC, failure? Seems overstated. If, say, Wrights get on 49 and gets 2MM votes, that’d be a home run in my book.

  11. David Colborne April 25, 2011

    Lee Wrights is absolutely right. Ballot access is the only path to viability for any political party, Libertarian or otherwise.

  12. Jose C April 25, 2011

    PS – Ed Clark’s campaign spend $277,794 on ballot access (this exludes the amount spend by National which was $120,808).

  13. Jose C April 25, 2011

    In 1980 Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Ed Clark was on the ballot on all 50 states, Washington DC, and Guam. That is the standard we should achieve. Anything else (unless we do better – 50 states, DC, Guam, and other territories) is failure and should be considered as such.

  14. Jeremy C. Young April 25, 2011

    Whether you agree with him or not, whether you support him or not, you have to acknowledge that Lee Wrights is a class act.

Comments are closed.