LP of Michigan November Election Highlights

Libertarian Party of Michigan general election candidates ran their strongest races in many years. We contested all statewide races (Supreme Court, educational boards, US Senate) and Congressional races (15), plus about one third of the state representative races (32) and many county-level races, for a total of 85 candidates. Here are the highlights (unofficial vote totals):

Barr/Root received 23,740 votes, 0.4% and slightly more than would have been needed to preserve ballot access if Barr were the only statewide candidate, and third best historically, behind Clark (1980) and Browne (1996), with no state advertising and only one state visit.

Nonpartisan Supreme Court candidate (nominated in convention by the LPM) Bob Roddis received 421,091 votes, 11% and greater than the difference between the winning Democrat and defeated (a surprise!) Republican Chief Justice (never before has a Michigan Supreme Court Chief Justice been defeated in a re-election bid).

US Senate candidate Scotty Boman received 76,379 votes, 1.6% and the best showing since Jon Coon's race in 1994, and many more votes than the other 3 third party candidates. He focused considerable effort to draw the votes of Ron Paul supporters.

Our Congressional candidates drew from 0.8% to 4.4% of the vote, eclipsing the previous high water mark in 1996.
Statewide educational board races (8) ranged from a high of 147,736 votes received (Nicole Michalak – Wayne State Univ. Bd. Of Governors) to a low of 91,765 votes received, comparable to the last high water mark, in 1996.

Candidates in the 32 State Representative races drew percentages 50% to 100% higher than in recent elections, ranging from 1.3% to 4.5% in three-way races. On average, they did slightly better on a percentage basis than the most recent high water mark in 1996, if you don’t count Jon Coon’s 1996 State Representative showing of 15%.

Two candidates in County level two-way races took between 20% and 30% of the vote, while three took between 10% and 20% of the vote. John Stedman took the highest percentage, with 24.7% and 55,628 votes in a two-way race for Kent County Sheriff. Macomb County Commission candidate Erin Stahl drew 10.4% in a three-way race.

Two candidates (Tom Bagwell and Larry Johnson) were elected Ypsilanti Township Park Commissioners in uncontested races (except by write-in challengers).

Congratulations to all our candidates for a job well done!

Michigan Libertarian Presidential Straw Poll

Yesterday, March 8, 45 candidates and activists packed a meeting room at the Best Western in Livonia for the Libertarian Party of Michigan's 2008 Campaign Training Conference. The program included a Libertarian Presidential straw poll. None of the Presidential candidates attended (all were invited, but many begged off to attend one or more of four state LP conventions across the country). However, the Wayne Allyn Root and Bob Jackson campaigns recognized the importance of the Michigan LP's block of 34 delegates, and sent campaign personnel to speak on behalf of their candidates. Mark Schreiber of Indiana spoke and fielded questions for Wayne Allyn Root, as did David Yardley of Michigan for Bob Jackson.

The results of the balloting were: Wayne Allyn Root 11 (37%); Bob Jackson 8 (27%); Ron Paul 2 (7%); Steve Kubby 2 (7%); Christine Smith 2 (7%); Mary Ruwart 1 (3%); Walter Williams 1 (3%); George Phillies 1 (3%); Daniel Imperato 1 (3%); None of the Above 1 (3%). As noted, 45 people attended, but only 30 cast votes in the straw poll. Some attendees looked at the long ballot, decided they had no idea who to vote for, and chose not to vote.

Redistricting the Right Way

Recently there's been a lot of press about changing the way Michigan redraws legislative districts every 10 years. Currently, they are gerrymandered by the (Republican or Democratic) party in power, in an effort to skew the votes in their favor and disenfranchise as many voters as possible. The latest proposal is to create a committee of 4 Democratic Party leaders/legislators, 4 Republican leaders/legislators and a 9th person appointed by a majority of the other 8.

Excuse me, but are Libertarians the only ones who see electoral fraud in the making?

The redistricting process should be fair. However, turning the keys to the process over to incumbent Republican and Democratic legislators and their cronies is a recipe for unfairness. Currently, due to Republican gerrymandering, only a handful of legislative districts are competitive, and only a handful of Michigan voters can cast votes that potentially could decide an election. Given the opportunity, the old party incumbents in Lansing will gerrymander districts to guaranatee their re-eelction. Instead, I propose a solution that won't favor the incumbents. Create a re-districting commission that includes one representative from each of the 6 ballot-qualified political parties -- Libertarian, Green, US Taxpayers, Natural Law, Democratic and Republican. And give the many independent Michigan voters a voice by requiring the 6 party representatives to appoint 3 more members to the commission who aren't affiliated with any political party. Now that's fair!

Bringing "libertarians" to the Libertarian Party

In their intriguing study, The Libertarian Vote, David Boaz and David Kirby use existing polling data to demonstrate something no self-respecting mainstream political journalist would ever admit -- that there is more to politics than liberal and conservative, Democrat and Republican, blue state and red state. They conclude that in the 2004 election approximately 13 percent of the electorate could only be characterized as small "l" libertarian, i.e., socially tolerant and economically conservative. Interestingly, they found that these libertarians are true "swing" voters, with very little loyalty to the older parties, and thus exercised a disproportionate effect on elections because they might switch their votes from one old party to the other.

What does this mean for the Libertarian Party? That our candidates can target not only single issue Libertarian voters, like gun rights activists, medical marijuana proponents and supporters of family rights, but also this large group of libertarians who support not just one, but a variety of Libertarian positions on the issues. In future posts, I plan to address ideas for identifying, approaching, welcoming, and involving these libertarian idealogues into the Libertarian Party.

Building Libertarian Constituencies - Family Rights

Several strategies are necessary to a successful campaign for public office. One of the most important is to identify one or more Libertarian constituencies who are ignored by the major party candidates, and then use your campaign as a vehicle to advance their thoughts and concerns. IMHO, while you can motivate some voters to cast a vote for you due to your generalized commitment to libertarian principle (e.g., freedom, personal responsibility, social tolerance and fiscal responsibility), that number is very small. In my recent campaign for Michigan Attorney General, I attempted to articulate the thoughts and concerns of a number of groups with little support from major party candidates. One of those was the family rights activists concerned about the unfair treatment (read "violation of individual rights") they and their children are receiving from a Michigan divorce, child support and child protective services system run amok. This is a Libertarian issue -- a perfect example of Big Government and a bloated bureacracy that routinely violates individual rights, and hurts families and children. It does so in the name of the public welfare, and because of that, the major party candidates, Republican and Democrat alike, publicly jump on board in support of the system, because they think it is in their political interest to be seen as supporting the welfare of families and children. Unfortunately, the system DOES NOT help individuals, families or children. It has morphed into a bureaucratic monster single-mindedly devoted to perpetuating and expanding its own size and power. Witness the many recent revelations that state-approved foster parents and agencies have tortured, abused and killed children that the state's child protective services had taken from their natural parents "for the children's safety." Unfortunately, we can already see the system's response to these abuses. A campaign to blame this torture, abuse and neglect not on the incompetence and criminal neglect of child protective services personnel, but instead on a lack of sufficient funds to staff and oversee the system. The state family "services" bureaucracy will use its own wrong-doing to justify an expansion of the system and its own power. This presents an opportunity for the Libertarian Party, its candidates and family rights activists to work together in their mutual self-interest to fight the system. IMHO, this should be an important focus of Libertarian activism, and an opportunity for Libertarian electoral success, in the next few years.

Campaign's Over

This is one of my favorite photos. While on a campout with my Boy Scout Troop, another Scout leader snapped this shot of me precariously walking a log across a wide creek at Bertha Brock Park, just west of Ionia, Michigan.
Normally, I'm not one to take risks. But it seemed like an experience I'd regret not taking, if I didn't go for it. . . . I have similar feelings about my campaign for Michigan Attorney General. I could have done the easy thing and not stuck my neck out in support of my politics and principles. Run a paper candidacy, with no real effort to inject the Libertarian message of freedom and individual responsibility into the campaign. Pursued an active, but strictly "feel-good" campaign with no impact, instead of a campaign that talked about real issues, and told the unvarnished truth about what a poor Attorney General Mike Cox has been. Instead, I chose to take a risk, go out on a limb and tell the truth, in spite of the inevitable upset and potential consequences. And I'm glad I did it. . . . Not only did I receive an unprecedented total of almost 62,000 votes for Michigan Attorney General. I believe I fostered greater respect for and acceptance of the Libertarian alternative. And gave a voice to many people who are being abused by our government and had no other candidate to express their hopes and concerns. I hope they continue to find a home in the Libertarian Party.

Is the State Seizing Kids for Profit?

This past Wednesday I dropped by the office of Parents for Children in Dearborn. We had a nice chat regarding their mission -- fighting Michigan's Children's Protective Services tooth and nail, in order to stop CPS from destroying families. It seems that Mike Cox, being the Big Government advocate he is, doesn't limit his activities to chasing unemployed Moms and Dads who owe child support, so he can collect the cash bounties the Federal government offers for those activities. He also takes advantage of the opportunity to seize children from their parents, because the Feds offer even richer bounties for seizing kids, placing them in foster care, and making sure they stay there. In fact, Mike Cox and CPS are so good at this, that Michigan is far ahead of most of the nation in seizing children, and terminating their rights to live with Mom and Dad. Melanie John of Parents for Children reports the national average for the termination of parental rights for alleged child abuse/neglect is 26%. She says statistics show that in Michigan, if CPS removes your child from your home, you have a 79% chance you've lost your child for good. Now, I find it hard to believe that Michigan has a monopoly on child abuse and neglect. I find it much easier to believe that when Mike Cox uses the overwhelming power of government to destroy families -- mostly the poor who cannot defend themselves, that the parents of Michigan find themselves with fewer rights to preserve their families than in the rest of the country. Once again, Mike Cox is fostering the perception he is helping the children, when he is actually hurting them. And funneling millions of taxpayer dollars into his budget, effectively increasing his personal political power.