By Brad Tipper
Staff Columnist
With Mitt Romney’s recent selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, the former governor has given himself a boost in the eyes of conservatives across the nation and added more depth to a campaign season that thus far has been based almost solely on mudslinging. With Ryan’s huge hand in the making of the Republican’s “Path to Prosperity”budget plan, one can only hope that the light will start shining more towards actual policy issues instead of the personal low blows between candidates that have been abundant this summer. However, Ryan is not the only person in this election with the ability to add more substance to discussions in the upcoming months.
Gary Johnson, former two-term Republican governor of New Mexico and current Libertarian presidential candidate, has proven himself a tough opponent against big government spending and waste. His plan to dissolve the national deficit by cutting 43 percent of the federal spending is simple in its approach and follows his anti-big government stance.
Such a large cut in spending obviously comes with big changes within the structure and activities of our federal government. One example is Mr. Johnson’s plan to cut the Department of Education altogether and transfer its power to state governments. And though such actions may seem a bit extreme to some, the former governor has a proven track record of successfully and effectively slashing government spending. During Mr. Johnson’s time in office, New Mexico state taxes were not increased for the longest span of time in the state’s history. He also had a whopping 750 vetoes throughout his time in office, further proving both his position against excessive and unneeded legislation, as well as showing partisan impartiality with one-third of the laws he struck down being written by fellow Republicans.
With such success, it’s easy to see the former governor as a viable candidate for the presidency, especially once you consider his resume on fighting for extending liberties in areas such as gun control, drug policy reform and other prominent social issues. Unfortunately for Mr. Johnson, as a third party candidate, he faces an uphill battle in fighting to garner nationwide support, campaign donations, and probably the most important aspect of any successful political campaign, name recognition.
In choosing to run as the Libertarian Party candidate, it’s obvious that Mr. Johnson would be facing a tough road ahead in garnering even a fraction of the attention and support needed to have a fighting chance come November. Such a challenge is made even more difficult when you consider that Mr. Johnson has consistently not received the chance to take part in debates with fellow candidates since before the primaries. While Johnson was a candidate in the GOP primary last year, he was forced to watch unqualified candidates, such as Herman Cain, given opportunities to partake in the CNN-hosted debate, while the news network refused appeals from the experienced Johnson to be a part of the debate or even to be included in the polls that determine eligibility.
Mr. Johnson is currently facing the same battle now as November approaches, only this time it’s The Commission on Presidential Debates who do not feel the former governor deserves the chance to participate in upcoming debates with Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. While it’s understood that there are many different factors going into the decision of the major news networks and political organizations, it seems especially crucial in this election that a 3rd party candidate be given the chance to be a part of upcoming debates.
And though it is not very realistic to believe that Johnson has a truly viable shot of winning come November, his presence in these next few months should prove to be very crucial in challenging President Obama and Romney. Allowing a candidate to discuss and debate these ideas on national television will force the two major party candidates to answer tough questions and offer real solutions for our countries current dilemmas, which seems to have been on the bottom of their discussion lists so far. For the sake of open, transparent discussion about the future of our nation and making sure the American people truly understand what each candidate stands for, Mr. Johnson should be given the chance to state his claim in future presidential debates.
