Whither The LP?

by Rich Shepard

Since the November election a few of us diehard libertarians have been discussing the future of the LPWS on the Internet. Frankly, the evidence is bleak. Harry Browne spent an average of $7.50 per vote. He was overshadowed by Perot at every turn. Everywhere he was up against Ralph Nader he trailed him, even though Nader spent virtually nothing. The upstart Natural Law Party is growing faster than any other third party in the country. I ran for Washington state Attorney General and had to scratch for $3000 and 2.8% of the vote. Meanwhile, a wholly incompetent and unqualified (in my opinion) youngster who called himself a Republican got $60,000 in PAC money and 35% of the vote.

Here in Washington state, we had only two candidates statewide (including myself) who ran minimal campaigns, and none for local offices. Discussion of a possible 1998 US Senate race appears moot, given that we have no available and willing candidate.

Plans to set up an official LPWS web page are at least 4 months old, with little, if any, action taken. Since last year's annual LPWS convention three SEC members have either resigned or simply disappeared. No plans whatsoever have been made for the 1997 annual LPWS convention—not even a location or date set. The person now handling the basic LPWS office responsibilities says that he has to spend 20 hours a week (plus his regular 40 hr per week job, family etc.) just to keep up. There are numerous anecdotal stories of membership requests and services slipping through the cracks.

Last fall I read a newspaper article about Harry Browne wherein the writer was of the opinion that the time for the libertarian movement has come and gone, that the major parties have coopted most of the good ideas the LP has ever had, and that the public simply doesn't want that much freedom. While this proliferation of libertarianism may be good for the country, the writer argued that it also reduces the need for a separate Libertarian Party. The writer suggested that the rise and fall of Ross Perot was the last hurrah of the ''independent'' voter, and that with the decided and obvious move to more conservative politics in the past two elections, the public has reached a new stasis that won't be upset again for another 20 years. If this guy was right, the LPWS, and the libertarian movement in general, is in deep trouble.

Our discussion of these facts has led many to the conclusion that the LPWS suffers from ''all talk-no action'' syndrome. To some of you longtime members, that should not come as a surprise. In the past, I have described the LPWS to acquaintances as ''the party that doesn't want to be a party.'' For example, over the years I've observed that while many Libertarians are great at advocating individual liberty, they don't do very well in organizational settings. Most recent libertarian successes have been by individuals, e.g., Murray, Williams, Isenberg, etc., or by private libertarian organizations such as Cato or Reason. But as far as I can see, few if any successes can be attributed to the Libertarian Party, expecially here in Washington State.

Given that the Reform Party of Washington has now established itself as a ''major party'' under Washington law, and stands to steal the ''independent voter's torch'' from the LPWS, the situation appears critical. I've spent 16 years supporting the libertarian cause, and I'm not ready to let the dream go. Maybe you aren't either.

There are five ideas now floating around on the ''net'':

Create a paid ''office director'' position for the LPWS, whose job would include the basic administrative duties plus raising his own salary through party related fundraising efforts. To be clear, if no funds get raised, there is no salary. Our current state chair, Jim Campton, has volunteered for this position, but has said he will step aside if someone else wants to do it.

Reduce the state executive committee to just the standard 4 officers (chair, vice-chair, secretary, treasurer), and create a state central committee composed of one representative seat from each of the 49 state legislative districts. The current five signature requirement for regional recognition would also be eliminated and each legislative district would elect its representative however it chose to do so. Thus the state central committee will be as strong, or weak, as its own membership (and by extension; so, too, the general membership of the state), and the state executive committee will have as long, or short, a ''leash'' as the state central committee is willing to give.

Form a separate ''Libertarian Leadership Council of Washington State'' whose purpose it would be to ''jump start'' the LPWS without having to negotiate the morass that is the SEC and the current party structure. The only limitation on this group would be that it could undertake only projects that would directly further the constitutional purposes of the LPWS. However, membership in this group would depend, frankly, on putting your money where your mouth is (i.e. membership dues in the LLCWS could be $100 per year or more).

Undertake a survey of the state membership to determine its strengths and resources. This survey might concentrate on members' attitudes about the LP, its leadership and direction, and try to find ways to increase members' participation and volunteerism. Once the survey is completed, devise projects based on those strengths and resources.

Start operating the LPWS as a ''business.''

Of course, I have my own personal preferences, and some concerns about the others. But, I don't want to influence your thinking here. Please consider these suggestions carefully, discuss them in your local organizations, and let your regional rep, and me, know what you think. Please recall that the fundamental problem appears to be the ''all talk-no action'' syndrome. So I would appreciate comments that are action oriented rather than analytical.

Rich Shepard is a Tacoma attorney. He may be contacted at ShepardR@aol.com.