The current U.S. electoral system does not accommodate third-party candidates, former Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., the 2008 Libertarian presidential candidate, claimed during a public address on Tuesday afternoon at the Beta Alpha Omega fraternity, formerly Beta Theta Pi.
Barr stated that he does not share similar views to the two major=party presidential candidates, and hopes to appeal to supporters of Republican nominee Senator McCain and Democratic nominee Senator Barack Obama.
"There are a lot of votes up for grabs among the young people who are not wedded to the two-party system the way their parents and grandparents are," Barr said.
Barr emphasized the importance of opening the current two-party political system to a wider variety of candidates. While he acknowledged that not every single person who declares candidacy deserves national attention, Barr described the current system as "constraining," and suggested opening the system to political parties that have a "mathematical possibility of winning the majority."
Barr is on the ballot in most states, he said, which would make him eligible for candidacy in his ideal plans for a more open electoral system. Getting his name on the ballots, he said, has been a "hurdle."
"For a third-party candidate to get on a ballot, it's a lot of work," Barr said.
Barr currently has a lawsuit pending in Oklahoma over ballot access, but said the suit will not be resolved until after the election.
Two-party presidential debates provide another obstacle for third-party candidates, Barr said. A candidate must have 15 percent of the votes of the national electorate in order to take part in the presidential debates. He added that the polls used to gauge interest do not ask about third parties, which makes the process unnecessarily difficult to break into.
"These are not debates in any meaningful sense of the word," Barr said.
Barr criticized Obama and McCain's reliance on "soundbytes" and "talking points" in the debates, and wished to question the candidates further. Barr referred specifically to Obama's claim that Americans have a "right to health care."
"Sooner or later, if something is a right, we are going to pay for it," Barr said. Though people may believe that health care is a right, "it would be interesting to probe a little bit," he added.
Barr also criticized McCain's discussion of childhood obesity during the debates.
"Is it the responsibility of the national government to worry about that?" Barr asked.
Barr was also critical of the $700 billion economic bailout package recently approved by Congress.
Feeding the government more money in the face of its significant debt is illogical, Barr said.
"We should not put the fox back in charge of the hen house," he said.
The economy had already begun to bounce back on its own accord, Barr said. Several weeks ago, Wells Fargo offered to purchase Wachovia Bank and Warren Buffet invested a large amount of money in Goldman Sachs. Both offers were made without government intervention, Barr said. Barr also criticized the lack of checks on the economic stimulus package.
In responses to audience questions, Barr emphasized the libertarian platform of limiting government while maximizing individual liberties.
Barr, a former Anti-Drug Coordinator for the Department of Justice, described the national "war on drugs" as a disaster, and claimed that current drug laws are ineffective. Federal government interference with states' decisions to move towards legalization of drugs "offends me as a conservative," Barr added.
In marriage too, Barr said, states can and should tailor their own policies.
Barr cited privacy as his primary concern, leading audience members to question his vote in favor of the Patriot Act. Barr said in response that George W. Bush's administration did not implement the act as it had promised it would.
"The Patriot Act was never something I felt comfortable with," Barr said. "The administration went back on its word."
The Bush administration immediately sought to expand the Patriot Act's powers, used it for cases that had nothing to do with terrorism and never reported its uses fully and openly to Congress, Barr explained.
Students in the audience interviewed by The Dartmouth responded positively to Barr's speech.
"He explained things in a way the average voter could understand," David Kopec '09 said.
Jon Lohse '10, who disagrees with Barr's politics, also responded favorably to the politician's speech.
"I wouldn't vote for him, but I was impressed," he said.
