(click on ads for more details)

Courting Libertarians, not RINOs
 
Senator James Jeffords of Vermont has bolted the Republican Party and declared himself an independent, giving Democrats control of the U.S. Senate for the first time since 1994. That's good news for Democratic liberals, and a cautionary message (and opportunity)
for the Log Cabin Republicans, the gay
GOPers. Here's why.
 
Jeffords had been widely characterized as a "RINO," meaning Republican in Name Only. He was always a good bet to vote with liberal Democrats on a number of key issues, including Bill and Hillary Clinton's failed effort to federalize U.S. health care. He was critical of the size of the Bush tax cut, and wanted more federal tax dollars to go to the education bureaucracy. And on it went.
 
But Jeffords was also a Log Cabin favorite, based on his support of the federal gay rights bill known as the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). He spoke at many Log Cabin conferences, and was praised at length as a model for other GOP legislators
to follow.
 
Now that he's "come out" as the worst sort of party turncoat, the Log Cabiners will have to do some spin control. But it's worth considering that a good many other Log Cabin stalwarts are also RINOs -- including Rhode Island Sen. Lincoln Chafee and Maryland Rep. Connie Morella. They, too, tend to favor
increased spending over tax cuts, think more regulation is never a bad thing, and are a constant thorn in the side by their party's leadership.
 
Now, admittedly, Republicans on the liberal-left side of the spectrum are also the ones who are likely to support gay rights legislation, but is this really a winning long-term strategy for gays who want a more inclusive GOP? Should the road to gay inclusion be based on expanding the power of the federal government to regulate business hiring decisions or would a more effective
focus of Republican gays be to demand, in the words of gay pundit Andrew
Sullivan, "Equality, period," which means
ending government discrimination against
gays in marriage laws, the military, and
private consensual behavior, without
expanding the intrusive reach of government?
 
Interestingly, there may be a growing
alternative within the GOP that would be
open to this approach, comprised
of "libertarian" -- not liberal -- Republicans. Libertarians, as a rule, want
less government, not more. They favor tax cuts, less onerous regulation, and limited government activism. But unlike "conservatives," they are consistent
in their principles, and don't think the government should be telling people how to conduct their private lives. The more
steadfast libertarians even support the end of drug prohibition (i.e., legalization) and think government should not determine who may or may not get married.
 
To date, of course, the GOP has been far more conservative than libertarian, but there are signs of hope. On May 21 the
Washington Times reported that influential Republicans are preparing an election game plan to re-establish reliable majorities in Congress -- and the key is to attract libertarians, and especially Libertarian Party voters. According to Republican strategist Grover Norquist, if Republicans had won over even a tiny percentage of the vote that instead went to the Libertarian Party, they would today enjoy a Senate majority.
 
In Washington state's Senate race last year, Republican incumbent Slade Gorton lost to Democratic challenger Maria Cantwell by only 2,229 votes.  Libertarian Jeff Jared gathered 64,734 votes in that race. Two years earlier, Republican John Ensign lost to incumbent Democrat Sen. Harry Reid in
Nevada by a mere 428 votes, while
Libertarian Party candidate Michael Cloud
took 8,044 votes.
 
These are not isolated cases. Al Gore's
victory margin in New Mexico was less than the number of votes that the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate received.
     
But whereas Democrats have been mindful of the threat posed to them by the Green Party and tailored their policies and appeals to attract Green voters, Republicans haven't made much effort to modify themselves to appeal to libertarians. One reason has been
the threat of offending the religious right.
But as the Christian Coalition continues its tailspin and the once-powerful bloc of
religious conservatives no longer seems
nearly so ominous, a strategic change may be in order.
 
Indeed, there is a growing libertarian
movement within the GOP, spearheaded by the Republican Liberty Caucus. "The most important thing is to get libertarian-
leaning Republicans to vote Republican,"
said Liberty Caucus National Chairman Chuck Muth, who added, "Government is already too big and intrusive." A newly energized Liberty Caucus will recruit, train and support Republican candidates to go up against other Republicans, he said,
including incumbents who don't
support "maximizing personal freedom."
 
Added GOP strategist Norquist, a caucus goal is to "avoid disasters" like Slade Gorton's loss. Looking for areas of cooperation between libertarians and Republicans, he stressed, "is very important."
 
All this will bode well for the Log Cabin
Republicans, who may soon be able to form alliances with GOP libertarians in high places, rather than depending on liberal RINOs.

- Columnist Stephen Miller, 5/25/01