Gubernatorial third-party candidates shake up race

 

By Teri H.P. Nguyen
Daily Bruin Contributor

Most people remember Ralph Nader’s effect on the 2001
presidential elections and even Ross Perot’s influence in the
1992 elections.

While many feel that third parties are spoiling the Democratic
and Republican festivities, others say they actually do have
something to buzz about.

Soon, California will experience another wave of third-party
idealism that will either ripple the political mainstream or simply
drift away like wood.

This March, California welcomes four third-party candidates to
join the gubernatorial race: Peter Camejo of the Green Party, a
financial investment advisor whom Ronald Reagan once referred to as
one of the “10 most dangerous people in California” in
1968 for his powerful anti-war movements; Gary Copeland, a
Libertarian and current chief executive officer of Epicenter
Research, a computer-consulting firm; Iris Adam from the Natural
Law party, a business analyst and manager of the economics
department at UC Irvine; and Reinhold “Ron” Gulke of
American Independent, an electrical contractor and farmer who got
California the biggest tax cut in state history by advocating for
massive reduction of vehicle registration fees.

These four parties are fundamentally different from one another,
but the candidates share the difficulties and optimism of being
third-party contenders.

“Our role as a third-party is to educate the
public,” said Iris Adam, who advocates for the labeling of
genetically engineered foods from the Natural Law party. “We
are not beholden to special interest groups as the major parties
are.”

Green Party representative and campaign manager to Camejo, Tyler
Snortum-Phelps, agrees with Adam’s view regarding interest
groups and said that money speaks louder than people when it comes
to political investments from private corporations.

“The two major-party candidates are fund-raisers,”
he said.

For the most part, third parties face financial difficulties
after refusing funds from the government, corporations, and most
interest groups ““ an approach consistent with their
independent views.

The American Independent party, for example, receives a
substantial part of their budget from private individuals instead
of large corporations and lobbyists, said Winifred Laymon, American
Independent state treasurer.

Claiming to be the only one of the seven gubernatorial parties
who adheres to the original tenets of the Constitution, the
American Independent party doesn’t believe that tax money
should be given to finance party campaigns, especially to parties
that tax payers don’t support, Laymon said.

“This of course puts us down in the poor house as to
financing campaigns,” he said.

The Libertarian party is also experiencing difficulties, and so
understands Laymon when it comes to financial support from interest
groups.

“Interest groups want winners,” said Ted Brown,
former Libertarian state chairman, referring to the party’s
limited budget. But as a third party, Brown added, Libertarians
remain independent of special interest agendas.

Another concern for third parties is their lack of media
coverage.

Third parties are usually neglected when it comes to televised
debates, which cover primarily the Democratic and Republican
candidates.

Snortum-Phelps refers to their constant battle for media
coverage as a “catch-22 where the media won’t cover us
because we’re a third party, but we won’t win without
media access.”

Media access in the form of general debates does not look very
likely, said Roger Salazar, press secretary for Gov. Gray
Davis.

“I don’t see how third parties would be involved in
the general debates in California because there’s not much
support for them,” Salazar said.

According to Saskia Mills, executive director with the
California Voters Association, the mechanics of general debates
usually involve a mutual agreement between leading candidates.

This arbitrary standard could be different in every election,
Salazar said.

Candidate eligibility for the presidential debates, sponsored by
the Presidential Debates Commission, requires 15 percent of public
support at the polls, Mills said.

Though the national standard raises some concern, negotiations
behind state debates appear even more troublesome.

“If viable third-party candidates are present, then they
will be considered,” Salazar said.

“It’s an intensive process that occurs between the
Democrats and Republicans.”

But the two major parties “don’t want third parties
there asking all the tough questions,” Snortum-Phelps
said.

Questions are not asked by fellow candidates, but the absence of
alternative voices still raises issues of unfairness.

“We negotiate debates the best we can,” Salazar
said. “But our goal is for our candidate to win.”

Despite this seemingly unchanging reality, third-party
candidates continue to show optimism in their collective
voices.

“We are aware of legislations when it comes to some very
basic issues,” Adam said. “Many important issues have
come from third parties and we need to increase the public
knowledge of our role.”

According to UCLA political science professor Joel Aberbach,
third parties provide alternative ideas for the public. But they
focus on smaller and narrower constituencies rather than big and
broad issues like the two major parties, he said.

The role of a third party has been typecast by the media as a
watchdog or critic of the government, Aberbach said.

Though the role of watchdog has been a traditional one,
Snortum-Phelps said, third parties “are visionaries putting
forth very positive ideas” like decriminalizing
marijuana.

“We don’t have radical positions, nor do we have
wild and crazy ideas,” Snortum-Phelps said. “We want to
give a voice to people who have different views.”

Brown, a Libertarian, agrees with Snortum-Phelps’ views
regarding the role of a third party as well as
“people’s right to take drugs.” Third parties
present new views that aren’t expressed by neither Democrats
nor Republicans ““ ideas that are later adopted, he said.

Third parties address issues that resonate with the public, and
by gaining substantial support of these issues, a major party may
in fact take on these issues, Aberbach said.

Increasing public access to third-party positions may influence
a major party to undertake the issues. When this happens, Adam
said, the third party has already won.