Liberty for America is a monthly newsletter concerning the Libertarian Party that is published by longtime Libertarian activist George Phillies. It is available below:
http://libertyforamerica.com/201405.pdf
Articles
Help Alabama Ballot Access!
Wonderful libertarian News
Fund IPR Reporters!
Packing the Convention
An Amusing Coincidence
The LNC Talks…We Summarize
Electronic Supplement
More LNC Discussion
The Amusing Coincidence…The Loan that Comes and Goes
Root called himself a conservative interchangeably or in conjunction with libertarian all along.
And my estimate of the growing popularity of libertarianism isn’t just based on self-description.
Root’s Teeth Are Awesome May 28, 2014 at 11:14 am: “I’ve heard media pundits Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Al Rantel, and Montgomery Kennedy all describe themselves as libertarian”
The only one out of that group that I’m sure I’ve heard describe themselves as a libertarian is Montgomery Kennedy, certainly not O’Reilly or Hannity.
>> In last month’s Reason poll, what percentage of people called themselves “libertarian”?
The answer is 4%. … I do think Libertarians have an unfortunate tendency to overstate our popularity. <<
I think many Republicans and conservatives PUBLICLY identify as libertarian because the terms "Republican" and "conservative" imply racism, homophobia, or intolerance to many people
I've heard media pundits Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Al Rantel, and Montgomery Kennedy all describe themselves as libertarian. Usually it's as a qualifier for their conservatism, as in "I'm really a libertarian. I don't believe government should ever interfere with our lives except in…"
Just as liberals now call themselves progressive, conservatives are increasingly calling themselves libertarian.
But here's a flip: I heard WAYNE ALLYN ROOT plugging something on the radio a few weeks ago. I forget what. But he was described as "best-selling conservative author Wayne Allyn Root."
So happily, Root has gone back to calling himself a conservative.
“paulie May 26, 2014 at 4:51 pm
I don’t see a cite for the 2% self-identifying figure in that last link, but I have seen it before. So if it has gone up to 4% in the last few years that is good progress.”
Thanks for the replies. I think I’ve located that one, it’s a CAP poll from 2009.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/03/pdf/political_ideology.pdf
It’s actually posted at LP.org. I probably posted it a few years ago, but forgot about it.
It’s amazing how hard it is to find “libertarian” included in the ideology question. Hopefully Reason will continue doing that.
You were right the first time 🙂
“posted as flies”
Should read, “posted as files…”
Yep. Agreed! Good ideas.
Paul said: “What little outreach material exists often as not comes from national. I know we need to do a better job with that.”:
How about having contests to see who can design the best outreach material? Libertarians around the country could vote for what they think are the best designs and these could be posted as flies for download at the www/LP.org website.
I’ve been saying for years that the Libertarian Party needs to update and improve its outreach material. I’d have done some of this now myself if not for the fact that I lack the design skills necessary to do it.
This has been a problem for a long time, I’m talking at least since the 1990’s.
Outreach material should be continually improved and updated, especially as new issues become “hot” among the public, like the revelations about just how pervasive NSA domestic spying is. I think that a majority of the public agrees with Libertarians about stopping NSA domestic spying, yet I have not seen any LP outreach material on this subject.
I don’t see a cite for the 2% self-identifying figure in that last link, but I have seen it before. So if it has gone up to 4% in the last few years that is good progress.
http://libertarianmajority.net/libertarian-polling cites numerous studies and estimating the percentage/number of libertarians variously defined.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/poll-finds-a-shift-toward-more-libertarian-views/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
http://www.cato.org/blog/how-many-libertarian-voters-are-there
How Many Libertarian Voters Are There?
By David Boaz
Share
In our new study, David Kirby and I round up various estimates on the number of libertarian-leaning voters. Our own calculation, 14 percent, is actually the lowest estimate.
We use three questions on political values from the generally acknowledged gold standard of public opinion data, the surveys of the American National Election Studies, and find that 14 percent of respondents gave libertarian answers to all three questions. But other researchers have used somewhat looser criteria and found larger numbers of libertarians:
For more than a dozen years now, the Gallup poll has been using two broad questions to categorize respondents by ideology about economic and social freedom… Combining the responses to these two questions, Gallup consistently finds about 20 percent of respondents to be libertarian. In 2009 they found 23 percent libertarians, along with 18 percent liberals, 19 percent populists, and 31 percent conservatives (9 percent were unclassifiable).
In a 2008–2009 panel study, ANES asked [two] questions… If we define “libertarian” as those who believe that the federal government should have less effect on Americans’ lives and do less to influence businesses, we get 25 percent of voters—slightly higher than Gallup’s 23 percent…
Finally, we commissioned Zogby International to ask our three ANES questions to 1,012 actual (reported) voters in the 2006 election… We asked half the sample, “Would you describe yourself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal?” We asked the other half of the respondents, “Would you describe yourself as fiscally conservative and socially liberal, also known as libertarian?”
The results surprised us. Fully 59 percent of the respondents said “yes” to the first question. That is, by 59 to 27 percent, poll respondents said they would describe themselves as “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.”
The addition of the word “libertarian” clearly made the question more challenging. What surprised us was how small the drop-off was. A healthy 44 percent of respondents answered “yes” to that question, accepting a self-description as “libertarian.”
Take the database for example. Without the database from national, many states would simply not maintain a membership list worth anything.
Many of the inquiries and people showing up that state and local parties get are due to national party social media/advertising, interviews and media appearances, or those of the national presidential ticket. We would get a much lower-attention-getting presidential ticket if national was not helping states with ballot access.
What little outreach material exists often as not comes from national. I know we need to do a better job with that.
Many of the local candidates and activists are recruited due to these national races.
Many states do not have newsletters so the national newsletter is often the only one that many members get.
The national conventions being on CSPAN are how some people discover the LP. Andy found the LP that way, for example. That is something the national party does.
So I would not agree that ? Somehow people ARE getting the message that the LNC DOES NOT offer enough value to them.to join.? …unless it’s that they are getting a wrong message.
“The LNC (1) does Presidential ballot access every four years, worth being generous 2/3 of a million dollars;”
This depends on what you mean by “worth”. A candidate starting from scratch would need a lot more money than that to get equivalent ballot access. There’s also funds spent by state parties and candidates to help secure and maintain ballot access; but if it were not for various forms of support (only some of which I have listed here) that states get from national, many of them would fold up or do a lot less.
This assumes that if we had the national office in Bismarck we could have fundraising and staff that is in the same ballpark as now. I don’t believe that is even close to being true. We would convince donors and media that we are not among the national political parties, because those have offices in or near DC, and get into a severe downward spiral. I’m not sure what staff we would get that are willing to live in Bismarck and how well they would do at running the office. There would certainly be a major disruption if we wanted to move there and it would be likely to be repeated every few years as the city in which we locate the national office becomes an internal political football with different states and regions vying for it.
Yes, raising money is not free, whether snail mail, phone, online, in person etc.
Exactly.
I can provide an exact one.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/12/lnc-2014-final-approved-budget/
“I think that a lot the libertarian leaning people out there”
Should read, “I think that a lot of the libertarian leaning people out there…”
George Phillies said: “Add that up, and over four years it is well under half what the LNC raises and spends.”
Can you provide an approximate breakdown of where else the LNC is spending its money (as in office rent, staff salaries, etc…)?
“Mark Axinn May 26, 2014 at 2:54 pm
We have to be careful, as people love to identify with groups and then vote another way.
One day, one of my law partners tells me he is a Libertarian, and the next day he faults Obama for not holding out for single-payer medical insurance.”
Yes, this is true, however, the survey results include people who lean libertarian, as in people who hold a lot of libertarian views, but are not consistently libertarian.
I think that a lot the libertarian leaning people out there are people who could end up becoming Libertarian Party members, or at least becoming people who vote for Libertarian Party candidates more consistently, if the Libertarian Party ever does a better job of getting its act together.
We have to be careful, as people love to identify with groups and then vote another way.
One day, one of my law partners tells me he is a Libertarian, and the next day he faults Obama for not holding out for single-payer medical insurance.
Here is an article about a study conducted by David Boaz and David Kirby of the Cato Institute, where they found that at least 14% of Americans are libertarian:
http://www.cato.org/blog/how-many-libertarian-voters-are-there
George, I believe you greatly underestimate many of the benefits that state and local LPs and candidates derive from national, as well as apparently assume a relatively fixed amount of money to spend, which I do not see as even close to being the case. Many state and local parties would simply fold up if not from the help they get from various things national does, directly and indirectly.
“I’m not sure if there are another other libertarian clubs on college campuses”
Should read, “I’m not sure if there are any other libertarian clubs on college campuses…”
“Arthur DiBianca May 26, 2014 at 9:20 am
‘4%, btw, is an improvement from 1 or 2% which was what the self-identify number was a few years ago.’
I hope that’s true! If anyone is aware of any other polls that have an ideology question (like “How would you describe your political ideology”) that includes “libertarian” as an option, please email links to me.
arthur dot dibianca at gmail
I’m interested in any reasonably scientific polls, even very old ones.”
The link from the Washington Post that I posted above contains a poll from the Public Research Institute which says that 7% of Americans are consistent libertarians, and another 15% are people who mostly lean libertarian.
Here are some other things to consider:
Ron Paul raised over $40 million in his 2012 campaign for the Republican Party’s nomination for President.
Ron Paul received over 1 million votes in the 2012 Republican primaries (I think that he would have received a lot more than this had he been on the ballot in the general election as a the Libertarian Party candidate or as an independent), and the Republican Party establishment had to resort to cheating him out of winning at least 5 states.
Gary Johnson received over 1.2 million votes in the 2012 presidential election.
The Libertarian Party has had candidates for state wide offices in Georgia and in Texas that have received over 1 million votes in recent years.
Libertarian clubs on college campuses have grown dramatically over the last few years. I read that Young Americans for Liberty has over 162,000 members. Students for Liberty has also grown a lot, although I don’t know how many members they have. I’m not sure if there are another other libertarian clubs on college campuses (and I’m not counting single issue clubs that align with any libertarian principles, such as Students for a Sensible Drug Policy), but the growth of Young Americans for Liberty and Students for Liberty shows that libertarianism is on the rise.
The number of people registered to vote under the Libertarian Party banner has been on the rise all over the country in the states that have partisan voter registration.
There are lots of people out there who are philosophical libertarians, but who are not registered to vote, some because they oppose voting in government elections on principle, others are not registered for other reasons. There are also lots of people who are small “l” libertarians who are registered to vote as independents (also known as Un-enrolled, Decline to State a Political Party, or Non-Partisan, depending on which state), and a lot are also registered as Republicans (mostly due to Ron Paul), and a few are registered under other party banners.
Anecdotal evidence from Paul and I is that we have both noticed an increase in the number of people who know what a libertarian is, and who have a positive or mostly positive view of the word, and who self identify as being libertarians, while gathering petition signatures in multiple places in multiple states around the country, and this phenomenon has happened both while gathering signatures for Libertarian Party ballot access, and also while gathering signatures for things that were not Libertarian Party ballot access. My petitioning experience goes back to the year 2000, and Paul’s petitioning experience goes back to 1998, and while it is true that there are still people out there who do not know what a libertarian is, we have both notice an increase in the number of people who do know what a libertarian is since 2007.
“4%, btw, is an improvement from 1 or 2% which was what the self-identify number was a few years ago.”
I hope that’s true! If anyone is aware of any other polls that have an ideology question (like “How would you describe your political ideology”) that includes “libertarian” as an option, please email links to me.
arthur dot dibianca at gmail
I’m interested in any reasonably scientific polls, even very old ones.
Yes, more people lean libertarian than self-identify that way.
4%, btw, is an improvement from 1 or 2% which was what the self-identify number was a few years ago.
According to this survey from the Washington Post, 22% of Americans are libertarian, or lean libertarian.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/10/29/poll-22-percent-of-americans-lean-libertarian/
The number is not surprising. 4% is huge, Art. And 4% is just the percentage that self-identify as libertarians. There are a lot more who agree with us but don’t use the label – 15 to 20% are the numbers I have seen for those who test in the libertarian ballpark on the issues.
If that 4% was well organized we would be competitive, or ahead of, Democrats and Republicans. And, BTW, we would be changing opinions too.
4% is millions of people. If the LP had millions, or even hundreds of thousands, of active members, you don’t think we woud be making major changes in this country and world? We would be changing the whole game.
It is not even a question of getting people to realize they already agree with us, although it is that too. The biggest question is getting those who already realize it to be active and organized and do something, or do more, about it.
We need to be somewhat more organized than we are to get to the level that the Socialist and Prohibition parties got to a century ago before they made real changes in policy. We don’t have to get anywhere near the whole 4% to get to that level, thankfully.
Arthur DiBianca May 24, 2014 at 9:00 am
“…given that a larger percentage of the public is self identifying as being libertarian than ever before…”
Pop quiz: In last month’s Reason poll, what percentage of people called themselves “libertarian”?
——————–
The answer is 4%. You can check reason.com about the methodology, but I think it’s pretty solid.
I’m certainly not trying to give Andy or Paulie a hard time, but I do think Libertarians have an unfortunate tendency to overstate our popularity. I certainly wish more Americans were libertarians, but I believe the “real percentage” is not much higher than that. I have a more Menckenesque view of the American public.
I hope we can do things to increase that percentage, but I think it’s definitely not a question of getting people to realize they already agree with us. It’s a question of getting them to change their opinions.
Of course, some members are a bit more reasonable, and will allow credit for direct mail operations.
Andy writes: ” Somehow people aren’t getting the message that the LNC offers enough value to them.to join.I”
I believe that is closer to ” Somehow people ARE getting the message that the LNC DOES NOT offer enough value to them.to join.”
The LNC (1) does Presidential ballot access every four years, worth being generous 2/3 of a million dollars;
(2) runs a national convention every two years worth a sixth or so of a million dollars, not counting all the banquets and speakers that should be self-funding.
That’s about a million dollars, being somewhat optimistic.There is also a web site, occasional emails sent out, tiny amounts on facebook ads. To operate this, there is a staff (yes, you actually need four people, given FEC regulations, to handle the money operations), enough space for them and some volunteers (say, 2000 square feet at [I get these documents from one of my retirement funds that builds and rents office space] $15/square foot/year in appropriate back-office locations (for one major credit card firm, this is Bismarck, North Dakota) and that is a quarter or a third of a million a year.
Add that up, and over four years it is well under half what the LNC raises and spends.
“Shane May 24, 2014 at 8:04 pm
The reason national membership isn’t growing is simple — people are not being asked to join.
With no prospecting program you’ll see no growth.”
BINGO!
I think that one of the reasons that the Libertarian Party grew between 1994 and 2000 was because there were active programs to ask people to join. I remember during one or more national conventions during that time period (which for me, was 1996-2000) that the 800 phone number for the national Libertarian Party was prominently displayed on the podium, and/or behind the podium, so that everyone watching on TV could see the 800 number.
I also remember 1996 and 2000 Libertarian Party Presidential candidate, Harry Browne, frequently plugging the national Libertarian Party 800 number and http://www.LP.org website.
Harry Browne had a strong libertarian message, and given that he consistently plugged the party’s 800 number and website, he brought in lots of new members, many of whom are still active today, such as myself.
The Libertarian Party could be a lot bigger than it is today if more Libertarian simply just asked people to join the party. Instead of just putting the information out there on the internet, or in TV or radio interviews, you’ve got to ask people to sign up as dues paying members.
“I should also add that in recent years when I’ve been on the ground in multiple states gathering signatures on petitions for things that were no LP ballot access,”
Should read, “I should also add that in recent years when I’ve been on the ground in multiple states gathering signatures on petitions for things that were not LP ballot access…”
Correct on both counts.
I have asked that many times. Although I’m sure Geoff and many other people have wondered the same thing.
Yep.
I’d have to look, and it’s probably not a very high percentage, but I can attest that Andy is correct that the percentage of the general public that I run into all over the country who self-identify as libertarians is much higher than it was, say, ten or fifteen years ago. Even though the observation is anecdotal, it is at least somewhat scientific given how many differet kinds of people in how many different places Andy and I talk to.
I do believe both UMP and active prospecting played a role in the 1990s growth. In many states, like here in Alabama, the “welfare” from national gave us the basic operating budget to run a halfway functional operation, which made it possible for the party to do things like put out a regular newsletter, hold meetings all over the state, and have a database maintained by national (much better than we could have ourselves) which we used regularly to inform people of regular and special meetings. The presence of an active and not completely dysfunctional party at the state and local level in turn led to some people joining or not lapsing with the national party. They did not have to remember to rejoin two or more separate organizations every year, and the organizations did not have to pull teeth and nails separately to remind them to rejoin. They received both state and national newsletter in the mail every month, plus regular fundraising letters, meeting reminders, and so on.
All of that collapsed post-UMP, the party stopped prospecting around that time, games got played with national dues (zero, double, halved) and platform (most planks stricken), there was the disastrous Badnarik for Congress campaign and the Barr-Root campaign which some people believed represented the LP selling out to the Republicans, the state and national newsletters came out less frequently and had less content (and eventually the state newsletter disappeared completely….while national’s was removed from the web), the local meetings dwindled and disappeared, we hadn’t been on the ballot in years other than presidential tickets without party label, and so on. I saw similar things to various extents in other states.
In Alabama we have had a relative upswing again in the last two years, and I am seeing more people at state conventions in other states than in other recent years. But in many ways we are still not back to where I saw the LP in the mid to late 1990s and early 2000s.
The reason national membership isn’t growing is simple — people are not being asked to join.
With no prospecting program you’ll see no growth.
Gains in membership at the state level is great but it’s not hard to move those numbers (because they are so small) with a bit of grassroots momentum.
On the national level, just enough new members are joining to sometimes cover the churn rate (lapsed members). Stagnation will remain unless prospecting resumes — and good prospecting at that.
Wasting time and money on almost any other non-candidate activity is just that . . . a waste.
“I do know that Libertarian Party voter registration has been on the rise all over the country, and I also know that when I’ve been in the field in multiple states gathering petition signatures for LP ballot access, I’ve encountered a lot more people than I used to encounter who know what a libertarian is, and who have a favorable opinion of the word, and who self identify as being libertarians.”
I should also add that in recent years when I’ve been on the ground in multiple states gathering signatures on petitions for things that were no LP ballot access, I’ve still run into more people than I used to who have brought up the word libertarian to me, without me prompting them. Most of these occasions the word is brought up in a positive way.
I think that with an aggressive marketing/recruitment campaign, that the Libertarian Party could be much larger than it is now, and much of this could come from bringing in people who already know what a libertarian is and already agree with libertarians, they just are not members of the party.
“Jill Pyeatt May 24, 2014 at 1:29 pm
George, that’s really the $10,000,000 questions, isn’t it?
The LNC isn’t growing as quickly as many state parties are for a few reasons, most likely. Somehow people aren’t getting the message that the LNC offers enough value to them.to join.It should be getting better now that more and better announcements re: current events are coming out, and the increased presence on Facebook should be helping.Will the office location in Washington DC help?”
You probably already know this, but the LNC has already had an office in Washington DC for a long time, which is rented in the Watergate building. The new building which was purchased by the LNC is actually in Arlington, Virginia, which is in the DC metro area, but not in DC itself.
I do not expect the new building to do anything to increase membership itself, however, if it does end up saving the party money as opposed to spending money on rent in the Watergate building, it could free up money that could be spent on other things that can build the party, such as ballot access, outreach, etc…
George, that’s really the $10,000,000 question, isn’t it?
The LNC isn’t growing as quickly as many state parties are for a few reasons, most likely. Somehow people aren’t getting the message that the LNC offers enough value to them to join. It should be getting better now that more and better announcements re: current events are coming out, and the increased presence on Facebook should be helping. Will the office location in Washington DC help? It’s hard for me to think it will, but many people do think so. I’m tempted to think much of the inner squabbling is part of it, but only those of us involved enough with the LNC know enough about that to care. This lack of growth will hopefully be a focus and priority for the new LNC memebers.
IIRC it was Geoff Neale who posed to me the question…All these state parties are seeing great increases in candidate count and state convention attendance; what is the issue that the national party is not doing so?
“Arthur DiBianca May 24, 2014 at 9:00 am
“…given that a larger percentage of the public is self identifying as being libertarian than ever before…”
‘Pop quiz: In last month’s Reason poll, what percentage of people called themselves ‘libertarian’?”
I don’t know what their survey results were, nor do I know who they surveyed to come up with said result.
I do know that Libertarian Party voter registration has been on the rise all over the country, and I also know that when I’ve been in the field in multiple states gathering petition signatures for LP ballot access, I’ve encountered a lot more people than I used to encounter who know what a libertarian is, and who have a favorable opinion of the word, and who self identify as being libertarians.
“…given that a larger percentage of the public is self identifying as being libertarian than ever before…”
Pop quiz: In last month’s Reason poll, what percentage of people called themselves “libertarian”?
“Shane May 24, 2014 at 4:01 am
Back to the issue, I’m surprised to see UMP being discussed again. Hinkle’s comments tying UMP to membership growth are idiotic. The growth was tied to Dasbach’s prospecting program which George points out (and most prospecting losses money).
UMP was a welfare program. Even worse was the majority of states did nothing with the funds sent each month. Many didn’t even bother to cash the checks — I had $20k in uncashed UMP checks in 2005 creating accounting problems.”
I disagree with the notion that UMP was a welfare program. The national Libertarians Party is nothing more than a fund raising apparatus, as are the state affiliates, but unlike the national party, most of the state affiliates do not have any paid office staff, and some of them don’t even have offices. The majority of people who encounter the Libertarian Party hear about the national party, and most people do not even think that they need to cut a check to the state party where they live, and in fact, most people who are new to politics, or are casual observers, do not even know that there is a difference between the national party and the state party.
“When UMP was eliminated, the LNC tied that to zero-dues creating a financial crisis as the majority of revenue for the LP comes from the membership program.
The current LNC discussing UMP tells me that they have no more understanding of the party than the LNC of 2006 — which makes sense because it’s mainly the same people on the LNC year after year.
If you bring back UMP, with the current lack of fundraising expertise at LPHQ, you might as well shut the doors and go home. It would bankrupt the national party.”
You could be right about this under the present situation, but given that the word libertarian is more popular now than it has ever been, and given that a larger percentage of the public is self identifying as being libertarian than ever before, why is the Libertarian Party not seeing a big increase in dues paying membership?
I’ve been saying for a long time that the Libertarian Party has a great product, but the marketing for it sucks.
Thanks to George Phillies for the plugs for my travel fund and Alabama ballot access in the issue:
What’s new since I sent that in:
In Alabama we have been certified for the Ballot in Bibb and Chilton counties, probably have more than enough in Shelby (but plan to get about a hundred more) and are maybe a hundred signatures each away from being on the ballot in Blount and Coosa. We have 16 candidates nominated and hope to nominate more on Tuesday and perhaps other meetings between now and June 1. The national party potion of the money for this is now 100% spent.
Andy writes:
Correct.
Back to the issue, I’m surprised to see UMP being discussed again. Hinkle’s comments tying UMP to membership growth are idiotic. The growth was tied to Dasbach’s prospecting program which George points out (and most prospecting losses money).
UMP was a welfare program. Even worse was the majority of states did nothing with the funds sent each month. Many didn’t even bother to cash the checks — I had $20k in uncashed UMP checks in 2005 creating accounting problems.
When UMP was eliminated, the LNC tied that to zero-dues creating a financial crisis as the majority of revenue for the LP comes from the membership program.
The current LNC discussing UMP tells me that they have no more understanding of the party than the LNC of 2006 — which makes sense because it’s mainly the same people on the LNC year after year.
If you bring back UMP, with the current lack of fundraising expertise at LPHQ, you might as well shut the doors and go home. It would bankrupt the national party.
Seems silly to argue about the meaning of a relative term. There is no wrong or right answer here.
I carefully said “recent” to exclude items of past decades. For example, 2002 is far enough ago that there is very little overlap between the 2002 and 2014 activist pool, though our 1998 candidate for Governor has recently returned to activism.
I have to agree with William Saturn.
Exactly. I don’t think it’s fair for Mr. Phillies to say Mr. Winger was erroneous when the article used the term in such an ambiguous fashion.
All depends on what you mean by recent.
2002 isn’t recent?
Richard WInger’s comments on Massachusetts are,well, erroneous. The actual article said
“Massachusetts set a recent record for candidates for the state legislature, with seven candidates for the State Legislature and a candidate for Suffolk County (Boston) Sheriff. Ballot access in Massachusetts requires petitioning: 150 valid signatures for State Representative, 300 for State Senate, and 1000 for Sheriff. The signature requirements are identical for all candidates of all parties; any registered voter can sign a Libertarian nominating paper, but Democrats and Republicans cannot sign each other’s papers,”
That word “recent” that Winger ignored is significant. Nothing like this has happened in more than a decade.
Also, the report did not say Massachusetts “LP” We are the Libertarian *Association* of Massachusetts, and our candidates run as “Libertarian” not “Libertarian Party”, just as Republicans run as “Republican” not “Republican Party”.
Is there some distinction here that those earlier records were actually set by a different libertarian organization? I seem to recall that Massachusetts has some weird laws that cause political associations to accidentally become political parties, which then cause them to fail to meet the requirements to remain a party and you have to start a new association, or weird things like that.
Liberty for America is an excellent publication, full of original and interesting news. But this issue is wrong when it says that the Massachusetts LP set a record this year with 7 candidates for the legislature. In 2000 the party had 18 nominees on the November ballot for legislature, and in 2002 it had 14 nominees on.
“Alabama Asks Your Support
Alabama does petitioning by political district. Petition success-fully for political status in a district, and get ballot access for multiple elected offices within the district.”
Just to clarify here, in Alabama a party can get ballot access in a county or a district, or a party can do a general petition for the entire state. The petition to gain ballot access in the entire state currently requires 44,829 valid petition signatures, which is a pretty difficult requirement. The LP of Alabama does not have the resources available at this time to gain ballot access in the entire state, so they are exercising the option of doing party ballot access petitions in a few counties. If they gain ballot access in a county, they can file candidates for any office that are up in said county, and if they gain ballot access in counties that are next to each other, they can file candidates for any offices where the districts overlap said counties.
I’m pretty sure that if any candidates for county or district offices get at least 20% of the vote, that the LP will retain ballot access, but only in that county or district.
Alabama has a 20% ballot retention vote test which is the highest in the nation for states that have a vote test for parties to remain ballot qualified. The 20% ballot retention vote test applies to all offices, and the LP of Alabama was only able to achieve this one time, and this was back in the 2000 election after they successfully completed the state wide full party status petition, they had a candidate running for some kind of state wide judges office who was in a race where he was just running against a Republican, as in there was no Democrat in the race, and no other minor party or independent candidates. He was a “paper” candidate, as in he did not have anything resembling a real campaign, and the LP of AL apparently did not even have a picture of him, and he did not regularly attended LP meetings, so most people in the party did not even know him. Even so, this candidate was able to pick up enough of the protest vote to gain ballot access for the LP of Alabama in the 2002 election, however, in 2002 the Democrats and Republicans were both sure to field candidates for all state wide offices, so the LP of Alabama was not able to get at least 20% of the vote for anything, so they lost ballot status and have not had very many candidates on the ballot since then. Since 2002, they’ve only had one candidate on the ballot that had the Libertarian Party label next to their name on the ballot, and that was a candidate for State Assembly in 2006 who took the initiative to get themselves on the ballot under the Libertarian Party label in the district where they ran (around the Auburn area). The LP Presidential tickets have been on the ballot in Alabama in 2004, 2008, and 2012 as independents, as you can place an independent Presidential ticket on the ballot in Alabama with 5,000 valid petition signatures.
Several years ago, I suggested that the LP of Alabama ought to take the petition by county or district route if the state wide ballot access petition was too difficult to finish, as having some candidates somewhere in the state is better than nothing (I made this suggestion to a few other states that are in a similar situation). I’m glad to see that they are finally implementing it.
The LP of Alabama went downhill after they lost ballot status in 2002, but now they have an upswing in LP activity. If this keeps up they could end up being another success story like the LP of Arkansas, as in a state LP affiliate that goes from being one of the least active to one of the most active.