A response to the discussions on libertarian Democrats at Cato Unbound. I am concerned that no one, not even Markos, offers an authentic claim to being a libertarian Democrat.

I am a libertarian Democrat. The combination of being both a libertarian and a Democrat is a product of our current political times. I did not grow up with the New Deal or with the Great Society; I grew up with the culture war and I was coming of age when 9/11 occurred. There is no denying the historical alliance between libertarians and conservatives. However, the reasons for this alliance have faded away and changing times are creating new challenges.

Others have glossed over making a case against the Republican Party. I believe that Ryan Sager in “The Elephant in the Room” illustrates the problems libertarians have with the Republican Party better than I, but I can quickly summarize. Control of the modern Republican Party rests largely in the hands of the Religious Right, which has grown to dominate the party since the late 1970s. Today, the social conservatives control the Republican Party and the Republican Party controls the national government, for now. Overthrowing federalism, they use the national government as a weapon in a cultural war against their enemies: feminists, gays, non-Christians, and even fellow Christians that do not embrace their extremist beliefs. Their goals include imposing a top-down policy of mandating school prayer and radical abstinence only sex education and intervening in personal medical decisions ranging from a woman's right to choose or the right to die with dignity.

The divide between libertarians and the Republican Party runs even deeper. Since 9/11, we have seen that the rhetoric of PNAC was far closer to the truth than Bush’s own promises during the 2000 campaign to avoid nation-building. The terrorist attacks have provided justification for a never-ending War on Terror, which in turn has been used to justify unprecedented executive secrecy, an upset of our system of checks and balances, preemptive war with no probable cause, and the use of torture. Questioning the President has become off-limits during this War on Terror; the rhetoric of this War on Terror extends to all enemies of the Republican Party as even pro-choice activists have been compared to our terrorist foes. The concentration of power in the hands of the Republican leadership in the House has accelerated in the past few years and is spreading to the Senate, with plans to use the 'nuclear option' to end the long standing practice of filibustering in the chamber.

The Republicans offer extreme social conservatism and the destruction of our venerable system of democratic government. I don’t believe that this is supported by the majority of Americans. In order to buy off enough Americans to maintain a majority they’ve become fiscally reckless and irresponsible. The list of offenses includes agricultural subsidies that move in the opposite direction of the Gingrich era Freedom to Farm Act, the passage of an energy bill written by corporate executives, the budget busting Medicare prescription drug package, Bush's flip-flops on steel tariffs, and the record-breaking rise of earmarks. Republicans have abandoned any claim to the title of “small government conservatism.”

Given this new Republican Party of authoritarianism and big government conservatism, I cannot see how there can be any case made for libertarians to vote for the Republican Party. I will not rule out the possibility of exceptions to this rule, of reasonable Republicans who can appeal to libertarians with traditional small government conservatism. I would offer examples like Ron Paul of Texas, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Butch Otter of Idaho, and perhaps a few others. They are a few good apples in a rotten bunch. But on the whole, a libertarian voter supporting an authoritarian candidate makes no sense at all. Nor do I believe that the Republican Party, largely dominated at the grassroots by social conservatives and at the intellectual elite by neoconservatives, can be saved through libertarian activism in the primaries—for now at least.

What is a libertarian to do when faced with the marginal status of the Libertarian Party and the collapse of a small government tradition in the Republican Party? I get the sense from many libertarians that if the Democratic Party doesn’t reach out to them, they will either give up on political activism or support the Libertarian Party out of a desire to at least be right, even if they won’t win. I don’t believe that libertarians should just sit around and wait for the Democratic Party to make the first move. We live in a democracy, at least it still pretends to be one, and participation in the political parties is open to all. It is time to crash the Democratic gates.

The recent study by David Boaz and David Kirby has illustrated that there are libertarian-leaning voters that are shifting to the Democratic Party. It’s disingenuous to ignore the role that these socially liberal, fiscally conservative voters played in giving Kerry a fighting chance of winning states like Nevada, Colorado, and New Mexico. Given the untapped potential of the libertarian voting block, far larger than those who self-identify as libertarian, it would be folly for libertarian activists to act like we are weak simply because our attempts at a third party have failed. Operating within the Democratic Party, I believe we can exert as much influence, if not more, as the religious right in the Republican Party. With our help, perhaps next time the Democrats will nominate someone who’s not afraid to run an unapologetically socially liberal campaign while focusing on the tough economic realities of our current budgetary mess. I know I for one will be doing my best to support such a candidate, or one that comes as close to that vision as possible.

Our first step is to find common cause with these so-called “libertarian Democrats” like Jim Webb and Jon Tester. Markos and his crowd want to support Democratic candidates who are not afraid to stand up to protect civil liberties and social rights. I want the same thing as a libertarian. As a Virginia resident, I proudly cast my vote for Jim Webb instead of Harris Miller in the Democratic primary. Without a doubt, Jim Webb was a better candidate from my libertarian perspective. I will gladly continue support this version of “libertarian Democrats” as a move in the right direction. Although they are not libertarians, they are better than both the current crop of socially conservative, economically liberal Republicans, and the liberal establishment of warmongering nanny-statists like Hillary Clinton.

Markos would like to draw the line at introducing economic libertarianism into the Democratic Party. There seems to be a knee-jerk fear of the economic agenda of libertarians. Given the explosion of spending during this Bush Administration, I cannot understand why every opponent of wasteful spending would not be welcomed into the Democratic Party—assuming that they actually hold an opposition to the billions wasted on handouts to the supporters of this regime. I oppose subsidies that go to big agribusiness, I oppose a prescription drug plan based on handouts to drug companies, I oppose an energy bill with subsidies written by the CEOs of the oil industry, and I oppose a military budget that puts pork before our national security. This should not be a point of disagreement between liberals and libertarians. I’m not going to pretend that there aren’t differences, but in our current political environment there is more than enough to focus on doing together. A political alliance should not be ruled out simply because we don’t agree on everything.

The problem, as I see it, is that political allegiance typically develops out of an activist’s focus on one or two major issues. Over time, they flesh out their political ideology by conforming to whatever is the platform of their favored party. For the formative years of many activists, the Republican Party campaigned on promises of an economic agenda that was appealing to libertarians. Once in power this was largely thrown away, but it has an impact today. Democratic activists distrust any proposal that seems to have a whiff of Reaganism to it. The economic platform of the Reagan coalition, however, is not the only way to appeal to libertarians. Reagan started by cutting government spending from the bottom up; social programs were first on the chopping block. Taxes were cut from the top down, favoring the wealthy, in order to stimulate a trickle-down effect. This is but one option for libertarians and may not be the best for operating within the Democratic Party.

So our second goal is economic; charting a new vision of how to bring a free market into reality. A “libertarian Democrat” would start by cutting government spending from the top down. Given the spending spree of the last six years, this should not be difficult to imagine. I would be so bold as to suggest putting an entire department, such as Agriculture, Energy, or Commerce, on the block with only a few vital agencies left untouched and moved elsewhere. A symbolic victory, yes, but what part of politics doesn’t contain some symbolism? As for taxes, take the Democratic concern for the working class and start at the bottom. Raising the personal exemption would be a good first step; a bolder move would be to find a way to do away with the regressive payroll tax.

These are not just suggestions, this is an agenda. I am not going to wait for the Democratic Party to reach out to libertarians. Organized libertarians could play a key role both in the general elections and the primaries. We can move the Democratic Party in our direction by supporting the “libertarian Democrats” of Markos that will uphold our civil liberties and stand up for social tolerance, but we can be even more demanding. We can support candidates that rail against wasteful spending, demand fiscal restraint and a balanced budget, and want to leave more money in the pockets of working Americans. This time, we’ll be crashing the gates.