Now that former Congressman and House Clinton impeachment manager Bob Barr is the Libertarian Party’s nominee for president, one might ask, will he compromise his principles and take the Federal matching funds to pay for his campaign?
Well, it’s very unlikely he’ll get any Federal money, even if he secretly wants it.
Since 1976 there has been a "check-off" on tax returns to allow taxpayers to designate what is now $3 per return to the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. The Federal Election Commission has devised a formula for candidates and parties to get the money from the U.S. Treasury, but to get it there are strings attached.
Among the strings are you have to agree to abide by the "national spending limit," which for 2008 is $84.1 million; and you can’t put in more than $50,000 of personal funds. The parties also have to limit what they can spend to help out in the campaign. But if you are in a major party (i.e., Republican or Democrat) all you have to do is raise a little more than $42 million in small contributions and the government will give you a check for the same amount.
"Minor party" candidates can also get matching funds. But the amount they get depends upon their vote in the last presidential election. To qualify, a minor party needs to have won 5 to 25% of the national vote in the previous election.
Well, the Libertarian Party has never come near 5% in a national election! Outrage! No public money you say?! Wait, there is a loophole!!!
A new party candidate can qualify for public funds in the same election. That means if the party’s candidates have never received over 5% of the national vote to gain "minor party" status with the FEC (Like the Libertarians, and everyone other than the Reps. and Dems.) it can still qualify for partial public funding if the candidate in the 2008 election gets at least 5% of the vote. It is a retroactive provision. Thus, if Barr gets 5% of the vote nationwide (an impossibility in a sane world) he will be entitled to claim Federal money to reimburse his campaign in the amount of a ratio of: his popular vote, to the average popular vote of the two major parties.
Huh? I think it works like this: if Barr gets 5.000000001% of the national vote, and the Republican and Democrat average is 45% of the vote; he’d be entitled to 1/9th of $84.1 million to be matched if he raised 1/9th of $84.1 million in small donations. I think that’s $9.344444 million.
Simple, really.
The Libertarian Party doesn’t post election results on their national website (a bad sign), although I did note they claimed they were on the ballot in 48 states in the 2004 election. And I noted their candidate for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts in 2000, Carla Howell, won 11.9% of the vote that year. But nationally, in 2004, we are reminded by other sources that George Bush won 51% of the national vote, and John Kerry 48%. Ralph Nader picked up 1%. That is about 100%. I don’t think the Libertarians did so well in the 2004 Presidential election.
In 2000, the Libertarian candidate received .36% of the vote. Said another way, he got just over a third of one percent. That yielded 384,431 total national voters, according to the FEC, and compared to George Bush’s 50,456,002 votes (47.87%) and Al Gore’s 50,999,897 (48.38%). So, if the Republican Bush has received 100% of all the Libertarian votes available, he still would have won the election. (What?!). And if the Libertarian vote in Florida broke 49% for Bush and 51% for Gore, Bush still would have won the election.
What I am trying to say through statistics and word manipulation is this: the Libertarian Party is irrelevant. There may be some billionaire out there affected enough to want to fund Bob Barr’s national ego tour, but the reality is the party has absolutely no relevance in the upcoming national election, and with all respect to my dear libertarian/conservative friends who see that Party as a credible alternative, please get a life, because you are utterly wasting your time on Bob Barr and the Libertarian Party. My friends (to quote another Presidential candidate) we are stuck with the system we have, which remains the best in the world available, and Bob Barr ain’t going to change it for you. The libertarian philosophy on economics is a core aspect of many conservative Republican’s views, including some of my own. Get back into the Republican party and help those of us who want to deal with "rebranding" in a way that does not mean"liberal!" But for sure, please do not begin talking to me about Bob Barr for President! Ech!