Also, I agree with Chris, in that the Libertarian Party needs to run viable, electable and qualified candidates. That is also one of my pet peeves.

That said, ballot access is a huge problem in this state. especially compared to other states. The requirement for intrastate partisan offices is too burdensome and the barrier should be lowered. We know this to be true by all the non-challenges we see… way too many elections are unopposed and that is not good for Georgia or our citizens. I would gladly trade our state wide ballot access for access to these lower offices. The D and R leadership knows that if they did this, they take the chance of allowing the Libertarian Party to get a grass root foothold and only the more principled members of these parties would ever willingly “give” Georgians this option. Got to run… more later… stay tuned.

However, if I were a state legislator, I would be OK with requiring all parties to have copies of their rules on file with the county, along with a list of party officers, signatures of 5% of the active registered voters, and registration by party. No cross voting in the primary. That also means that voters would have to pick between R’s, D’s, and L’s on signature petitions. Now you’d have to sell it to the Gov and a majority of the legislators in both houses. Good luck with that.

However, if you think about it, it is a level playing field. You get the signatures to get statewide access, but you fail to get 20% as the R’s and D’s do. The failure to achieve 20% is yours. Enjoy your 5% next fall. See you then.

BTW, I’m not a fan of tax breaks. I like the fair tax even though John Konop can’t stand it.

You could achieve equal ballot access and leave the 5% requirement in place. Simply require ALL candidates of ALL parties to get 5% of the registered voters in their districts to sign a petition allowing them to run.

It wouldn’t be a problem at all for Republicans in some districts, Democrats in others, or some combination of Democrats and Republicans in still others.

It may still be extremely tough for the LP to compete in such environments – but at least it would be equal. That’s all I’m asking for.

A level playing field for all.

Why should we be put at a competitive disadvantage when the whole philosophy of our system is a level playing field for all?

But hey, I am talking to a man who represents a Party who believes the “free market” means giving special tax breaks to your friends.

DO I have to live in the district to run for the seat?

MD

The LP’s problem is they run losers who can’t raise money, blame ballot access laws rather than the crappy campaigns and candidates they run. They are only slightly more politically engaged than the person who doesn’t even bother to register to vote. But they can engage in the mutual-masterbation of believing they are pure and would fix everything if only they could get elected.

Again, ballot access. We can’t run Libertarians “as Libertarians” in races other than statewide races without having to jump through hoops specifically designed to keep everyone other than Ds and Rs OUT!

Level the playing field, and you’ll see quite a bit of Libertarians running and winning.

Of course, it all comes back to the GOP (and Dems) caring more about their own power than doing the right thing, as always.

I might have abstained just to keep everyone guessing.

Dede would be kicked out of the GOP if she were from Georgia. I expect Hoffman will run as GOP, win the nomination and win in Novemeber of 2010. Any Republicans in Georgia endorsing Dems? If so, they are probably less than 1%.

Again, Karen Richardson, Johns Creek City Council. I know she’s outside the 9th and therefore probably off your radar (heck, I do GOOD when I keep 2 counties in the 2nd on my radar, not really blaming you there), but she is an elected Libertarian in GA.

In PA, LP-Pa picked up 14 municipal seats across the State last week.

But even the candidates we run stick to LP principles. Candidates the GOP runs endorse Democrats.