I don't know about you, but the last few months have been especially sobering for me and almost turned me off to the point of apathy of the national political stage. Healthcare, Afghanistan, the off-year elections - none are good news for us freedom-loving individuals. All, in some way, promise more of the status quo. Of more pressing attention to me have been the affairs of my homestate, California, whose plutocratic leadership by hyper-partisan liberals and a "progressive" conservative has run afoul for far too long is only finally about to rear its ugly head.
Nationally, the U.S. has problems of its own. But no one's writing articles in the mainstream media about the U.S. becoming a "failed state" or succumbing to its labyrinthine codes and regulations, which have produced deep-set political schizophrenia and dysfunctional governance.
The elderly are being deserted, children are going hungry, and young adults are being turned away from an education in great numbers. Hollywood's film and music industries are both on the decline, as they both stubbornly fight digital business models. The state stalls more horrific, though still necessary cuts to its safety net and recently, the most "generous" public pension fund in the country, CalPERS, faces the knife.
The solutions are overflowing from well-meaning politicos on each and every side of the aisle. No less than 76 propositions, either pending in the AG's office or now circulating, are under way, many redundant, some parodies. Good government groups have called for a constitutional convention. (Disclosure: I am in favor of such an idea.) California's last major constitutional revision was in 1968. The last wholesale convention was 1879. Even the legislature, which faces approval ratings in the low teens, has formed commissions to recommend new reforms. Yes, it's looking ugly outside, but does it make for some great political theater or what?
Never waste a good crisis, they say. Though this once-Golden state faces myriad problems, it is also brimming with possibilities. And while many of you may not live or have any interest in California, it only bears repeating the oft-used refrain "as California goes, so goes the nation".
So let's get right down to what this means: California is a bell-weather state. If the most ethnically diverse, most populous, and most socially stratified of all 50 states has a hard time managing its affairs, what does this bode for the country over all? Sure, one could make the argument that there are unique preconditions attached to California's situation. But just try weighing the impact the 8th largest economy in the world might have on a country already struggling to recover from a corporate meltdown of nearly catastrophic proportions.
Next year, Arnie, the good Governator, will be termed out of office. The leading contenders include, ironically enough, a former Governor from the 70's and the former CEO of eBay. Gavin Newsom, who made headlines nationwide as Mayor of San Fracisco, and almost singlehandedly rekindled the gay rights debate, dropped out in October citing poor fundraising and worse polling. Barbara Boxer's seat is definitely in play; she chairs two important Senate committees.
While the off-year elections have shown independents slowly falling back in line with the GOP after disastrous losses in '06 and '08, what is peculiar about California is that we are poised to stay blue, even after suffering hard at the hands of flaming Liberals like State Senate President Darrell Steinberg and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass, and RINOs like Governor Schwarzenegger.
And, once again, where has the state LP been through all of this? It hasn't capitalized at all on this critical moment in state history! No endorsement for a constitutional convention, electoral reform, no targeted policy planks. The official website receives sparse updates every few months, with time-lagged statements announcing the LP's hardline opposition to tax increases that passed months ago or drug legalization initiatives that have been disqualified.
California is an excellent example at the ineffectual LP and all the tricks in the book some poofertarians will use to defend its low rate of success. How is it, that at this historic juncture, we have not even begun to get the ball rolling for a third party regional insurgency? Surely, it's occurred to someone that a success in a state like California would almost instantly lend credibility to similar platforms and affiliated parties nationwide in a very short timespan!?
Others might decry any sort of base-building as impossible, or in fact, in their bullheaded insistence, counterproductive. If we look at the polls, and Californian's general outlooks, we see a strong preference for decentralized control, freeing the grip Sacramento has on their lives, approval for local taxes only, an environmental movement that's actually willing to cross aisles, and rising disgust with public employee unions. How often does libertarianism ever align with populist values?
As public momentum grows for "radical" moves like reforming electoral processes and culling swathes of bureaucracy in the form of citizen conventions, it is imperative libertarians jump on the bandwagon while the movements are still young so that they may have the credibility later.
As I suspect, all this is happening too fast for a distant, out-of-touch state LP that is as radical as the state Democratic and Republican parties are. With any luck though, and if action is taken fast, a new, local freedom party could finally start reaping results, maybe reaching success as soon as the 2012 elections. Public mood is fickle, but with 5 more years of projected budget deficits, the window for success is as large as it could ever be for a new libertarian brand to emerge and actually.. do something.
What makes it particularly interesting to test this theory is the cross-over potential from the left. Too many on sites like Nolan Chart, discount liberals as being more alien to libertarians when nothing is further from the truth. A progressive-Libertarian alliance, would be effective in catering to the hunger for socially tolerant and fiscally conservative politicians.
When I say progressive-Libertarian alliance, there are no doubt many of you who balk, even if you have no interest in the affairs of California, or reject the possibility that success here would mean success anywhere else. The truth is California's environment provides two excellent examples. The state wants to be fiscally conservative, but still have high benefits to show for it. This is manifested in local, rather than statewide taxes. Libertarians could capitalize on this by shifting taxes to those favored by environmentalists, such as those on carbon-based pollution, and also eliminating private ground-rents, starting with a tweak of California's infamous Prop 13.
Prop 13 is by and large the third-rail that Democrats and Republicans in the State have a hard time even dancing around, but imagine what would happen if a third party actually built its support ON this issue and grew momentum outward? The other two parties wouldn't have a chance.
The U.S.'s 31st state definitely is at a crossroads and chances for real political gain are ripe on all sides. The only question is: do libertarians feel like winning for a change? Or would this be too much a repudiation of defeatist rhetoric that has poisoned the LP and freedom movement for decades?
