Press "Enter" to skip to content

Libertarians Should Push to Reclaim Party Status, Float Ballot Measure, Challenge GOP

Libertarian Kurt Evans got 20.05% of the vote Tuesday against incumbent State Auditor Steve Barnett (who, among possible successors to Governor Dennis Daugaard in 2018, was the second-most popular Republican on the ballot, behind only Marty Jackley). If Evans had been running for Governor, that percentage would have earned his party another four years of official recognition.

But Evans didn't run for Governor, and neither did any other Libertarian, so, per SDCL 12-1-3, the South Dakota Libertarian Party now disappears in the eyes of the Secretary of State. Libertarians similarly lost official status in Ohio and the District of Columbia and gained it in North Dakota.

In good news for Libertarians, reclaiming that official party status in South Dakota will require a thousand fewer signatures, thanks to low voter turnout. I'm not happy about lower voter turnout, but I am happy that the SDLP has an easier path to ballot access. (I could say the same about the similarly defunct Constitution Party, but their persistent whackdoodlery has yet to add value to our electoral process.)

I encourage Evans, Ken Santema, John English, and his fellow Libertarians to start pounding the pavement (when the weather gets warm, because who wants to sign petitions in winter?) to reëstablish their party for several reasons:

  1. The Libertarian philosophy, properly articulated, offers voters a much more interesting and consistent political worldview than the South Dakota Republican Party's sloppy mix of authoritarianism, corporate welfare, and personal opportunism.
  2. An active Libertarian Party peels votes away from Republicans, making my job of rebuilding the Democratic Party that much easier.
  3. The Libertarian philosophy provides more useful clash with Democratic ideology and thus offers voters a clearer choice of ideals and policies. A debate between Kurt Evans and Rick Weiland or between Ken Santema and me would be much more honest, informative, and fun than a debate between any decent Democrat and a Republican dodger like Mike Rounds.
  4. Put points 1, 2, and 3 together: while Democrats and Libertarians differ starkly in their view of the proper role of government, we share the goal of ousting Republican corruption and opening government to more citizen participation. I believe the Democratic Party could form a useful partnership with an active and serious Libertarian Party to achieve common goals. (I'm serious, Kurt: win back recognition for the SDLP, purge the folks who hijacked the 2014 convention, and let's talk.)
  5. Libertarians have a chance for some real organizing fun: they can combine their petition drive for party ballot access with an initiative push to abolish the Office of School and Public Lands. Placing that initiative on the ballot would require just about 28,000 signatures (that's a constitutional amendment, not just a statutory change), but that effort would raise even more awareness of the Libertarian brand and give Libertarians a chance to advocate a policy consistent with their philosophy of reducing government.
  6. Along with their now experienced crew of candidates from 2014, the Libertarians have two marquee candidates whom they can try to recruit for the 2016 House and Senate races: Gordon Howie and Stace Nelson. Add those two disaffected Republicans and their statewide network of supporters (think but bigger than the SDLP's!) to your team, and you have the makings of a coordinated campaign that could make a real difference in the outcome of the 2016 election.

(Wow—my life would be so boring if I were a Republican. I wouldn't have the time or motivation to think of ways to help the underdogs in South Dakota.)

Kurt! Ken! Libertarians! Your future looks bright; ready those petitions, break in some new shoes, and when spring comes, let's see a big Libertarian Party push to get back on the ballot!

15 Comments

  1. Lynn 2014.11.08

    Given the political climate here in SD where simply having an R next your name will practically get you elected I do believe that if the South Dakota Democratic Party can't get it's act together and be competitive that there is a great opportunity for the founding of a 3rd party. That new 3rd party could be a mixture of what is offered from the Democratic, Republican and other parties. It could be an alternative that may finally work and offer a serious challenge to the SDGOP.

    Until the SDLP puts measures in place to re-establish credibility from what happened at it's convention/circus I don't see it growing beyond being a fringe party.

  2. Kurt Evans 2014.11.08

    Cory Heidelberger wrote:
    >"Libertarian Kurt Evans got 20.05% of the vote Tuesday against incumbent State Auditor Steve Barnett ..."

    Best lede ever (ha ha). Really drew me in.

    >"... I am happy that the SDLP has an easier path to ballot access. (I could say the same about the similarly defunct Constitution Party, but their persistent whackdoodlery has yet to add value to our electoral process.)"

    I know you're not a big believer in symbolic victories, Cory, but the Constitution Party did push the Republican nominee to third place in the Colorado governor's race in 2010. :)

    By the way, the Oxford English Dictionary recognized "wackadoodle" (no H, two A's) in March of this year. Bill Safire wrote an interesting commentary on the word's etymology the year before he died:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/magazine/11wwln-safire-t.html?_r=0

    >"A debate between Kurt Evans and Rick Weiland or between Ken Santema and me would be much more honest, informative, and fun than a debate between any decent Democrat and a Republican dodger like Mike Rounds."

    Rick and I were in three four-way debates on live statewide television during the 1996 U.S. House race, and they were indeed honest, informative and fun.

    Lynn wrote:
    >>"Until the SDLP puts measures in place to re-establish credibility from what happened at it's convention/circus I don't see it growing beyond being a fringe party."

    Our 2014 state convention was a well-run, serious event. I challenged Chad Haber's campaign for attorney general, and I was disappointed when he won the nomination, but if there was a "circus" that day, I missed it.

  3. Tim 2014.11.08

    Kurt, for what its worth, I voted for you. Cory might be on to something here, would be worth exploring.

  4. Kurt Evans 2014.11.08

    >"Kurt, for what its worth, I voted for you."

    Thanks, Tim.

    >"Cory might be on to something here, would be worth exploring."

    Definitely, but one of our biggest obstacles is that most of South Dakota's political journalists only report on Libertarians when doing so makes us look bad. We issued a major press release this week, and absolutely no one touched it:

    The South Dakota Libertarian Party is celebrating a historic showing at the ballot box in 2014. Capitalizing on several two-way races, Libertarian candidates earned an unofficial total of approximately 170,000 votes on Tuesday, shattering the party's previous record of 38,998 votes received in 1994.

    State treasurer candidate Ken Santema of Aberdeen had impressive individual numbers, becoming only the third South Dakota Libertarian to earn more than 13,000 votes in a three-way race contested by both major parties.

    As expected, candidates in the party's first-ever statewide two-way races had even greater totals, highlighted by John English of Sioux Falls. Running for commissioner of school and public lands, English won three counties and became the first South Dakota Libertarian to receive more than 50,000 votes.

    The 23.5 percent earned by English is just shy of the 25.4 percent received by the Democrat in the South Dakota governor's race.

  5. Tim 2014.11.08

    "Definitely, but one of our biggest obstacles is that most of South Dakota's political journalists only report on Libertarians when doing so makes us look bad"

    Kurt, in a lot of ways, they do that to democrats as well. The media is part of the problem here. Whatever is going to happen, it has to start by the time the next state legislative session begins, and has to keep going all the way through 2016.

  6. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.11.08

    Kurt, good spelling point... but since we're trading in fantastical words, I like the rhythm of whackdoodlery better; I like skipping that flat second syllable, hopping straight from the sharp Saxon whack to the sharpest stress on the funny dood.

  7. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.11.08

    I will resist the English–Wismer comparison for two purely objective mathematical reasons and one political reason:

    (1) Wismer was in a three-person race; English was in a two-person race. Wismer faced more competition for her percentage. Where Libertarians contended against more than one opponent, they scored no better than one-sixth of the Democrat in the race.

    (2) The race in which English scored his points had the lowest turnout of any on the ballot, 17.6% fewer participants than the Governor's race. Each of his percentage points represents significantly fewer people than each of Wismer's.

    (3) English scored his party-high count in a race for an obscure office against a non-incumbent Republican. Wismer scored her percentage against a handsome and universally recognized incumbent.

    True, Libertarians did notably better than they ever have in any previous South Dakota election. However, they still did notably worse than their nearest competitors. Most importantly, they won nothing and now no longer have a recognized party.

    How's that for a pep talk? Now get up and fight, you losers! ;-)

  8. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.11.08

    (That's me, building bridges with the guys I just called losers. Ah, intra-party comity....)

    Actually, Lynn, that's kinda why I hesitate to suggest we just form a fusion opposition party. I can see points where we Dems and the Libertarians share common cause, not just in the goal of toppling Republicans but on some policies, like civil rights, free speech, corporate welfare, abortion restrictions (still with me, Kurt?)....

    But ultimately, we're opponents. Ultimately, Libertarians unleashed would dismantle much of the ship of state we Democrats have built. We can work together in electoral and legislative tension, but I don't think we can form a sustainable and unified party. We need to argue our case, and they need to argue theirs. If they can field candidates who can win in places where we can't, perhaps we can stand aside and let them fight it out, or maybe even offer some help. Similarly, if the Libs can rise to serious party status, if they can marshal the resources to win some elections, maybe they can also see fit to help us in districts where we can topple Republicans.

  9. Kurt Evans 2014.11.08

    I'd written:
    >"The 23.5 percent earned by English is just shy of the 25.4 percent received by the Democrat in the South Dakota governor's race."

    Cory wrote:
    >"I will resist the English–Wismer comparison for two purely objective mathematical reasons and one political reason..."

    And I'll stand by it for one purely political reason:
    (1) It plays well. :)

    >"Each of [John's] percentage points represents significantly fewer people than each of Wismer's."

    Yes, but that's also true of their opponents' percentage points. Only about 175,000 people voted against John, while nearly 207,000 voted against Representative Wismer—a difference of more than 15 percent.

    #ImNotSerious :)

    >"Wismer scored her percentage against a handsome and universally recognized incumbent."

    Are you suggesting Ryan Brunner is ugly? :)

    >"... [Libertarians] still did notably worse than their nearest competitors."

    Wouldn't our nearest competitors technically be the Constitution Party candidates? :)

    >"Most importantly, they won nothing ..."

    We won respect, at least from each other. :)

    >"How's that for a pep talk?"

    About a thousand times better than Smear College. :)

    >"I can see points where we Dems and the Libertarians share common cause, not just in the goal of toppling Republicans but on some policies, like civil rights, free speech, corporate welfare, abortion restrictions (still with me, Kurt?)..."

    Maybe we'd better go through those point-by-point. :)

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.11.09

    On the English–Wismer gap, Kurt says, "It plays well." Holy cow! A Libertarian just demonstrated PR savvy! Evans for Senate 2016 (or campaign omni-manager for every SDLP nominee)!

    Is Brunner ugly? Ryan is an SDSU grad, which makes every man 30% handsomer. Both Daugaard and Brunner offer opportunities for aesthetic critique, but Daugaard seems to fill out a checked shirt better.

    nearest competitors Always look ahead, Kurt.

    The pep talk thousand times better: Kurt also shows a thick hide. Libertarians like him might well be ready to bring bigger game next time.

    Common cause, point-by-point: We could probably start with my July calculation of my 52% alignment with the Libertarian platform. I can't speak for the entire Democratic Party, but I think whoever is in charge of the Dems and whoever is in charge of the Libertarians (in charge? of Libertarians? Oh, that tickles!) could use that calculation as a framework for identifying common ground on whatever ballot measures surface for 2016.

  11. Emmett 2014.11.09

    I believe we made incredible progress this year as Libertarians!! And I can't wait to see what we get away with next year!
    Thanks for the friendly and thought provoking post Cory!
    Best,
    Emmett

  12. Kurt Evans 2014.12.14

    On the morning of November 20, less than two weeks after posting my comments above, I emailed the executive committee and terminated my voting membership in the South Dakota Libertarian Party. That afternoon I went to the courthouse and registered with no party affiliation.

    The primary reason was a lack of honest communication by the members of the executive committee.

  13. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.12.14

    Kurt! You're back! Where are the members of the executive committee? Is there anyone left to organize the petitioning? (Don't make me come over there....)

  14. Kurt Evans 2014.12.14

    Cory Heidelberger asks:
    >"Where are the members of the executive committee? Is there anyone left to organize the petitioning?"

    I honestly don't know, Cory. They kept me out of the loop when I was one of their statewide candidates. I'm WAY out of the loop now.

  15. caheidelberger Post author | 2014.12.15

    Well, jeepers, Kurt, where are you going to go to scratch your political activism itch? Are you just going to run Independent from now on?

Comments are closed.