The recent
discussion over Dean's visits to Montana, Idaho, and Utah highlighted the fact that many aren't sold on Dean's agenda of appealing to libertarian voters. I believe that it would be a big mistake for Democrats to ignore libertarian voters, which in many ways would mean ignoring the West. I have been a life long Democrat and active as a pro-freedom, pro-liberty Democrat for several years now through the
Democratic Freedom Caucus. First as a member of a Libertarians for Dean blog, and later as an advocate for Kerry among libertarians, I've worked to reach out to libertarians. Today I'm a member of the recently established
Freedom Democrats web-community, and I feel like I have an obligation to speak up about why Democrats need libertarian voters, and why libertarian voters need Democrats.
When reaching out to libertarian voters it's important for Democrats to remember the context of our political situation. We are out of power in Washington, it is only natural that we should adopt an anti-establishment, pro-reform message. Given the level of corruption in the GOP, ranging from Karl Rove to Tom DeLay to George Bush himself, we would be idiots not to highlight the 'Potomac Fever' that the Republican Congress has fallen ill with.
But we also need to remember the major issues that will separate voters out and establish how receptive they will be to our message.
It should be obvious from the rise of Dean in the Democratic Party (eventual defeat regardless) that foreign policy has become very important in American politics once again. Much of the 2004 election revolved around Iraq and the War on Terror, and today the President's poll numbers sink as the situation continues to produce endless violence.
The recent Pew Survey indicated strongly that the major divide between the parties is based on foreign policy. Ask yourself, where do you think libertarians stand when it comes to Iraq and the War on Terror? Many libertarian voters are exceptions to the rule that foreign policy tends to dictate partisan identification. Democrats should have an inherent advantage in appealing to libertarian voters given the shared common ground on foreign policy. We loose the advantage by giving up on them and not winning them over on other issues.
Part of the problem has been a very aggressive campaign by 'neo-libertarians' in defense of Bush and the Iraq War. Such pro-war libertarians argue that the Iraq War and preemptive war in general is justified to make America and the world safe for freedom and democracy. I've received several nasty e-mails from such neo-libertarians attacking my attempts to convince libertarians to vote Democrat as absurd and they'd do everything possible to spread the message that I was telling lies when talking about politics. Imagine my frustration when my fellow Democrats decide to attack all libertarians as pro-war corporate whores, instead of specifically going after the bad apples.
On top of the shared ground on foreign policy is a shared ground on social issues. How do you think a libertarian feels about Tom Delay's involvement in the Terri Schiavo case? Who do you think a libertarian wants making reproductive decisions, the woman or Bill Frist? Do you think libertarians like tearing down the separation of church and state? Do you think libertarians, who often employ the Statue of Liberty as their mascot, are cheering on the xenophobic crusade of Tom Tancredo? Libertarians offer a very effective attack on the current War on Drugs, a war that is mainly waged against the base of the Democratic Party: African-Americans. Yet some liberals, perhaps worried about being out of power, are quick to praise Supreme Court rulings like the Raisch decision because they apparently uphold the power of the federal government. The problem we face is that government is a tool, neither good nor evil, but today is a tool against us. We shouldn't applaud rulings that increase the power of a national government that is turned against liberal America.
Perhaps you will concede that libertarians and the Democratic Party have common ground on foreign policy and social issues. But, you're holding out on supporting an agenda of reaching out to libertarians because you think that economics keeps the two fundamentally at odds. I'll be willing to concede that although there's common ground on those two areas, there maybe specific issues that cause disagreements. But let's address economic issues.
To balance out the pro-CAFTA Cato Institute, there's the former Libertarian Presidential Candidate Ron Paul, who opposes CAFTA because it's a threat to US sovereignty. We should focus on the pro-corporate bureaucracy created by trade agreements, but insist that trade is fundamentally good for the economy when done right. So don't act like trade is the barrier.
And you can remind libertarians that Democrats can balance the budget while Republican's can't. Maybe they'll talk about the Bush Tax Cuts, but certainly they are smart enough to understand one of the key principles of their ideology, There's No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. We're going to have to pay for Bush's debt eventually, aren't we? But Democrats need to focus on the fact that the deficit and the debt isn't entirely due to the Tax Cuts. A large part of it is also due to Bush's spending orgy. No, not military and homeland security. He's gone off on a spending spree across the board. Dean, among others, talked about spending restraints to solve the deficit.
Part of the problem in using this message is that many Democrats are unwilling to attack any government program. Many times I've faced off with fellow Democrats who refuse to admit that there's any area of the government that could be cut. You know as well as I do, or should know, that there are countless pork barrel projects that go through Congress. Democrats like Russ Feingold realize this and want to go after them to create money for more important matters. Certainly the Democratic Party can be against corporate welfare? Certainly we can oppose money that goes to big agribusiness instead of the family farm? Perhaps we could even argue for a cut in the federal gas tax. After all, the highway system has become a tool for elder politicians like Stevens to help their own supporters, not a national project to help America.
Are we getting somewhere? Anywhere?
Perhaps the issue of health care is of concern. We could point out that Americans pay the most per capita for health care, 53% more than second-place Switzerland. If it's not because of lawsuits, what is to blame? If prices are the problem, perhaps a good first step would be to allow for buying drugs from Canada. That's something that would appeal to libertarians, no? What about health insurance in general. If part of the problem is the fact that I can't take my insurance job to job, why not encourage a system of personal health insurance that is portable job to job? Let me pick my doctor, and I'll be happy.
I'm running out of areas to cover, but it seems to me that Democrats could easily reach out to libertarian voters. I'm trying, and others are too. If you're interested you're invoted to join us at Freedom Democrats.