To the editor:
Ellen Goodman's column in the Aug. 10 Deseret News was a laugh. She refers to the League of Women Voters as a "nonpartisan organization" whose main concern is "informing the voters." In fact, the League is a bipartisan front for the two big money parties.Across the United States, League-sponsored television debates exclude Libertarian Party candidates.
Throughout the 19th century, the American political system was characterized by "ease of entry" for new political parties. As late as 1912, the average congressional election had 4.1 candidates.
In 1986, however, one ninth of all congressional races had only one candidate, and 41 percent of all state legislative races featured only one candidate. The difference? Throughout this century, the Democrats and Republicans have convinced the American public that the "two party system" is the constitutional system devised by the Founding fathers and that the big money parties, by virtue of their money, have the right to exclude other political parties from participation in the process.
It is ironic that as the number of people allowed to vote has increased, the number of choices they are allowed to vote for has been steadily restricted.
For example, last May Skyline High School held a political assembly, to which Republican, Democratic, and League of Women Voters representatives were invited. Libertarians and Independents were deliberately not invited.
KSL-TV did a news story about presidential candidates visiting Utah that ignored Libertarian candidate Ron Paul's visits to the state . . . and not too long ago a feature story in the Deseret News about a County Commission race didn't even mention the Libertarian candidate.
Libertarian candidates must gather over 700,000 signatures to simply get our candidates on the ballot nationwide. Of course, the Democrats and Republicans are exempt from such requirements - which says a lot about their commitment to fair play and equal treatment.
Bob Waldrop, Chairman
Libertarian Party of Utah