“The less government we have the better”                          

Ralph Waldo Emerson

Governor Merrill demonstrated political astuteness in nominating Miriam Luce to fill the Liquor Commission seat vacated by Roger Boisvert.  In picking the two-time Libertarian candidate for governor, Steve Merrill has effectively shut the Democrats out of one of the state’s most controversial agencies.

Concurrently, he may have, perhaps with premeditation, dealt the state’s Libertarian Party a severe blow if it is unable to field a viable gubernatorial candidate to head the party’s ticket in 1994. 

Historically, this century’s “third party” movements have been created as vehicles to enhance the power and/or electability of individuals.  This was true of Teddy Roosevelt’s Progressive (Bull Moose) Party; Strom Thurmond’s Dixiecrats; George Wallace’s American Independent Party; John Anderson’s Independent (later National Unity) Party; and most recently Ross Perot’s United We Stand America. 

While the jury remains out on how the Texas billionaire’s disciples will fare, other third parties have faded quickly after the leader, around whom they were formed, withdrew from the political scene.  The same fate has also befallen dozens of third-parties spawned to promote the parochial interests of single-issue groups.

The Libertarian Party, in contrast, founded in 1971 and based on the same principals which guided the authors of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, has endured and slowly becoming a respected voice on the American political landscape.  In spite considerable roadblocks to ballot access, institutionalized by a Republican-Democratic cabal,

Libertarian candidates have appeared in all fifty states in recent years, with more of its aspirants elected each year.

In early 1990, New Hampshire’s Libertarian Party was split over its future.  One faction, comprised of many of the party’s most dedicated operatives, argued for a policy of continued grass-roots growth … letting interested individuals run for town offices and even the state legislature.  They felt entering highly visible, statewide campaigns ran too many risks, perhaps jeopardizing hard fought gains.

Others, however, pushed for an activist strategy of recruiting candidates for not only local, but statewide office.  Miriam Luce was one of those originally undecided Libertarians who eventually stepped forward and agreed to seek the party’s gubernatorial nomination.

Unlike her Republican and Democratic opposition she faced the unenviable task of garnering sufficient signatures just to place her name on the ballot.  Even when that hurdle was crossed,  Ms. Luce found herself all but ignored and often shut out by an irresponsible and often shallow electronic and print media. 

But, a surprising thing happened.  Despite the combined political and media forces working against her, she tallied more than 3% of the vote and thereby guaranteed Libertarians a place on the ballot in 1992.  Two years later, while given marginally more coverage, she again tallied a sufficient vote total to retain her party’s ballot status … in spite of the three-way presidential campaign in which Ross Perot’s candidacy clearly diluted her Libertarian message.

When confirmed, Miriam Luce will bring sound business acumen and many refreshing ideas to her new post, rather than the political baggage accompanying every appointee to the Liquor Commission since its inception after the end of Prohibition.  Among her interests may be entertaining the privatization of an enterprise which, although extremely profitable, is not a function of government.

Meanwhile, her party must look beyond its best known Libertarian and identify a slate of new and credible candidates for 1994.  As their choice for governor will likely face one of the most popular incumbents in recent history and will need to attract at least 1,100 more votes than Ms. Luce did in 1992 to protect the party’s ballot

status … its selection process must begin in earnest!

Another major challenge Libertarian candidates will again face is communicating their philosophy, differentiating themselves from their Republican an Democratic counterparts … without being labeled as anarchists or tainted by a few radical ideas espoused by the party’s most extremist elements. 

Libertarians are as diverse as are members of every other political party.  However, what sets them apart from Democrats and Republicans is a fundamental belief people in a free society must be permitted to live their lives as they see fit, free of governmental interference, and to make free choices, so long as their actions do not interfere with the rights of others … and then must be responsible and held accountable for the consequences of their actions.  They understand the Constitution and Bill of Rights intentionally limited the role of government and are concerned their underlying philosophy of individual liberty has been badly prostituted by generations of politicians. 

Their political agenda is relatively simple … governments, at all levels, are too big, too costly and too intrusive … a belief held my a majority of Granite staters.  If that kindred spirit can be again translated into votes, the Libertarian Party will remain an important force in New Hampshire politics.