Some Thoughts on Gary Johnson

Steven Horwitz

Earlier today I participated in a conference call with a handful of bloggers chatting with the libertarian Republican presidential candidate former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson.  I wanted to share some of his comments on economic and other issues as well as a few reflections of my own.

First, the format was really nice as it was just a handful of us and Johnson was almost totally "unhandled." It was not unlike being at a conference table with him as opposed to a more formal context.  It also struck me that he's learning to talk to a libertarian audience as his use of language seemed pretty consciously chosen in places and he's developing a sense of which buttons to press with that audience.  He also comes across as pretty smart and surprisingly intellectually curious, as in an answer to a question on same sex marriage he admitted that he'd like to know more about the constitutional issues involved before he decides for sure what, if any, role the federal government should have in overruling state marriage laws.

On to substance...

I asked him about monetary policy and his summary answer was:  "I would abolish the Fed given the chance to do so. I would propose a balanced budget for 2013 and I would not raise the debt ceiling."  I don't think he called for a balanced budget amendment at any point during the conversation, but it wouldn't surprise me if he supported it, especially being a former governor.

In response to a more general question about regulation and markets, he said "I really am a free market guy" and launched into a decent defense of the importance of markets and the problems of regulations.  What I liked was that he was invoking the idea of unintended consequences quite a bit in talking about how what we think are good ideas usually backfire.  He was strongly opposed to cap and trade and called it an "economy killer."  He also talked about how he applied cost-benefit analysis to a variety of regulations while governor and that he would bring that mindset if he were elected.   

He also mentioned business cycles and noted that the Fed and monetary policy exacerbates whatever smaller fluctuations markets naturally might have.  He also noted that we're better off letting depressions cure themselves.  He said he would not have favored any of the QEs including any more beyond QE2.  He clearly does not have Ron Paul's knowledge of economics or ability to communicate economic ideas, but he said many of the right things though not as concisely and as eloquently as I think he will need to.  In general, he needed more really good one-liners.

On some other issues of interest to CP readers (and these are paraphrases):

• "I favor abolishing all foreign aid, but I think military alliances are still important."
• "If I had been president in 2001, I would have never have established the TSA and I would have left security to the airlines and the airports."
• "I used to support the death penalty until I thought seriously about the ways in which government screws up prosecutions and makes real mistakes. Now I oppose it."
• On illegal immigrants: "There's a difference between 'amnesty' and 'citizenship'. I want to make it easier for them to get a work visa and then get on the path to citizenship. Amnesty means giving them a two year period to get that visa without being kicked out. No one should jump the line, but they're here and let's get them working legally. That's how you secure the border."
• He opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and thinks Libya is unconstitutional.  He was okay with Afghanistan at first but thinks we should have been out after 6 months.  No way we should still be there today.
• He would support Supreme Court justices who support "original intent."
• On abortion:  "I fully support a woman's right to choose up to the point of fetal viability.  I did sign a late-term abortion law in NM and I do support counseling and parental notification laws."
• On same-sex marriage:  "I support gay unions and think they should be legal, though I still think this is a states rights issue.  However, I'm open to the argument that this is like civil rights in the 60s and that there's a constitutional justification for a federal role. I simply don't know enough about the issues involved yet and I'm interested in learning."  He also said "I'd like the federal government to be out of the marriage business altogether."

It was an interesting conversation.  I don't think he or his campaign has thought enough about how to reach what I think is a large group of young "latent libertarians" who would support him if they knew him and his positions.  If they can figure out how to use social media and technology really well, they could reach that group and possibly rally them around him as he's got a youthful image that they would find attractive. 

Is he a perfect candidate from a libertarian perspective?  Nope.  At least not mine.  But he might be as good as one could ever expect from a major party.  I'm going to pass on the comparison to Ron Paul, other than to say again that RP's knowledge of economics and his comfort level in communicating it is a real advantage.  On the other hand, I think GJ is better on social issues and does not have RP's history and the baggage it brings.  I think it's much harder to pin the "kook" label on Johnson. 

As a pro-choice, pro-gay union, pro-immigrant candidate, his odds of winning the GOP nomination are near zero unless he can motivate a whole bunch of young voters to get into the primaries.  Ironically, as he said in the conference call, he won the NM governor's race by persuading people that he would be the strongest Republican in the general election.  That may well be true nationally also.

If you're going to vote in 2012, he's worth a look.  You could do a lot worse.

 

Comments

[Mattheus von Guttenberg]

I really like Gary Johnson. People say he's going to "split the Ron Paul vote," but I figure the more libertarians speaking out and running for president, the better.

[Octahedron]

I recently found out about Johnson earlier this year, but if I had to choose between him or Paul I think I would go with Johnson. When it comes to the economy, the administrations would probably be run almost identically, but I think Johnson comes out much more stronger on the social issues than Paul does. Did he happen to mention how he would want the fed run if he were ever to get elected?

[Mario Rizzo]

I was asked to sign "Academics for Gary Johnson." I don't think I will. I do not know whether the US is reformable right now through politics or whether it will take a large shock to set the stage. But I have always been disappointed by politicians -- either because they lost or because they won and changed. Let others get excited or not. I will watch the "revolution" on tv.

[Russnelson]

He is right. He's the best candidate the GOP could offer to get elected. He's not a good candidate to win the primary, which is another way of saying that the GOP are a bunch of stupid schmucks who deserve to lose.

[Bill]

From someone who knows Gov Johnson a bit, I would say that his problem is not swaying libertarians. I think he's close enough on most issues. I think he's more libertarian than Barr. But I also think he comes at it from more of a consequentialist angle, where Paul is more deontological.

His problem is the neo-cons and religious right. He will never win them over and is a real longshot to get out of the primaries. When he was governor here, and after a spectacular 8 year run with balanced budgets and a state surplus, he still ran afoul of the state GOP machine with his desire to end the drug war. They were really pissed that he would bring up such a topic. I don't think he played much of a part in the campaign to replace himself because the party kept it's distance (Richardson eventually won, and we know where that sordid tale went).

I think the left *should* see virtue in his positions, but here in NM they hated him because he would not bend over and take it from the teacher's union. He wanted real solutions to the education problems, and the NM Democratic political machine is so welded to the union and their political contributions they were unwilling to listen or experiment.

[Jonathan M. F. Catalán]

I wonder how the fact that both Gary Johnson and Ron Paul will be running in the primaries will affect the outcome. They may be taking votes away from each other.

[Jerry O'Driscoll]

Many thanks to Steve for his informative posting. Gary Johnson is an interesting candidate, and I wish him well.

It's difficult to see how he can run the obstacle course of the Republican primaries. They are dominated by religious and social conservatives. Ron Paul appeals to them.

War and foreign policy are going to be divisive. There is a debate devloping that has the potential to tear the right apart.

[Greg Ransom]

Johnson has been reading _REASON_ magazine for years -- his IS the libertarian audience.

And he's actually done something, taken stands from a position of responsibility, and faced voters.

Unless you define "libertarianism" as a Never Never Land of unicorns and squared circles, this is libertarianism in the real world.

[Greg Ransom]

Johnson's biggest problem is in presenting himself -- in the first GOP debate he showed a lack of poise, charisma, humor, and general communications skills of the type that interest an audience and communicate a vision. (He even whined like a child claiming victim status about not getting as much time as the others).

Obama would dominate Johnson in all of those ways in a debate.

And it's a little late in the game to work on all that.

[Roger Koppl]

How many other blogs could have comments comparing the positions of two prominent presidential candidates on consequentialism vs. deontology? Love it.

FWIW, Johnson looks good to me. And I think Steve makes a great point about Pauline baggage.

[kyle8]

This is just a beginning. I see Libertarian ideas gaining in popularity, not only because many more younger people are libertarian oriented, but also because of the obvious bankruptcy of the current ruling zeitgeist.

Also, it helps that there is now a full time news network that is overtly libertarian. Of course I am talking of Fox Business.

[Stephan Kinsella]

Steve, in what way is GJ better than RP on social issues? From what I've seen, overall, RP is more libertarian on most issues, social and economic, than GJ.

I agree he is about the best mainstream-ish candidate we can expect, but he is worse on war and other issues than Ron Paul. Further, realistically, he and RP are both fringe candidates. Romney is gonna get it, so this is all moot, I fear.