[21] in libertarians
Good Press Clip
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vernon Imrich)
Sun Jun 26 22:09:36 1994
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 94 22:05:37 -0400
From: vimrich@flying-cloud.mit.edu (Vernon Imrich)
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
This is a fwd from the libernet. GOOD NEWS!!
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 94 04:16:00 +0000
From: dennis.sullivan@datadim.com (Dennis Sullivan)
Subject: LPGa major news article
To: LIBERNET@Dartmouth.EDU
The Atlanta Journal/The Atlanta Constitution June 21,1994
By Tom Baxter, Politics
LIBERTARIAN PARTY SMALL, BUT HAVING AN IMPACT
For a gnat-sized confederation of political renegades who have never
won an election in this state, the Libertarian Party is beginning to have an
impact on Georgia politics.
The Libertarians played a pivotal role in the 1992 Senate race when their
candidate, Jim Hudson, polled 3 percent of the vote, denying Wyche Fowler a
majority and setting up the runoff that Paul Coverdell won.
Whether they improve their voting percentage this year or not, the
Libertarians seem on their way to making some changes this year in how
people get elected.
Georgia's election laws do not make the tidiest body of jurisprudence, and
the Libertarians have attacked it with the zeal of meticulous housekeepers:
= The party has brought suit to change the state requirement that third
parties must get 5 percent of the state's qualified voters to sign a
petition before they get on the ballot - the tallest hurdle set by any
state in the country.
= Federal Judge Orinda Evans should rule soon on the party's challenge to
the state law requiring candidates to take drug tests. That law was passed
in an election year, after the General Assembly voted to require large
numbers of state employees to be tested. Part of the rationale for the law
was that it would look bad for legislators to be exempt from testing if the
state employees had to submit to it.
= Sharon Harris, the party's candidate for agriculture commissioner, is
challenging a state law that says the office can only be filled by a
"practical farmer," without defining what that is.
Her suit will determine whether Tommy Irvin has to break a sweat this fall:
His is the only statewide office that the Republicans didn't find a
candidate to run for. If the existing law keeps Harris off the ballot,
Irvin gets a free pass.
Already, as a result of the trouble they caused in '92, the Libertarians
have caused one big change in state election law: the bill passed in the
last session that eliminates general election runoffs for most state
offices.
Meeting in their convention earlier this year, the Libertarians decided not
to put up a candidate for governor, since without a runoff they couldn't
play the spoiler as they did in 1992. Putting up a candidate, they decided,
would only siphon off votes from Gov. Zell Miller's Republican opponent.
There's a new twist, however: The Justice Department, which has to approve
the law under the Voting Rights Act, has put a 60-day hold on the law to
eliminate the runoff by requesting more information.
For Libertarians, being fundamentally distrustful of government anyway,
this as-yet-unexplained action has raised suspicions among them. Could it
be, asked Walker Chandler, the party's candidate for lieutenant governor,
that Miller threw the Libertarians a curve by getting the law passed,
knowing Bill Clinton's Justice Department would shoot it down?
Established politicians would probably hoot at this as an example of a tiny
party imagining itself to be a bigger threat than it is. And the rationale
for this particular conspiracy theory isn't very clear. But considering the
impact their tiny party has been having, it's understandable that the
Libertarian's are coming to think of themselves as a force to be dealt
with.
[ Two points at this time:
(1) This appears in a liberal newspaper that has not been sympathetic to
libertarian politics.
(2) Judge Evans ruled against the Libertarians' challenge to the drug test.
While I am happy to provide feedback on discussion of this item, in a
couple of days I am going on vacation and will have little, if any, online
access. While the article has some inaccuracies and bugaboos, on balance
local Libertarians are quite pleased.]
* * Discussion to Libernet-D * *
-Dennis Sullivan
Love to get positive news once in a while.
-Vernon
