ILNews

Lawyer elected U.S. Libertarian Party officer

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Mark Rutherford wants America’s third-largest political party to make inroads by showing competence at the grassroots level of government.

An Indianapolis business attorney has been elected second-in-command of the U.S. Libertarian Party. His ambition is to move America’s third-largest political movement from the margins to the mainstream by focusing on competence at the local office level.

“You don’t apply to be a CEO of a Fortune 500 company straight out of college. You start in the mailroom,” said Mark Rutherford, a partner with Thrasher Buschmann & Voelkel. “Why should people think we should lead national office until we’ve proved it at the City-County Council or county commissioner level?”

Libertarians elected Rutherford their vice chairman at their national convention in May. Rutherford, 50, is a New Albany native who grew up in Carmel, spent his teen years in Columbus, earned his undergraduate degree from Wabash College, and his law degree from Valparaiso University School of Law.

The son of Republican parents, Rutherford said he knew he wanted to be an attorney at age 8. His first law job was to serve for three years as a deputy prosecutor under Stephen Goldsmith. He then moved to private practice, where he focused on commercial and bankruptcy law, often serving as defense counsel for clients accused of white-collar crimes.
 

Rutherford Mark Rutherford

“The prosecution has lots of resources and an awful lot of power. It’s easy to be misused,” Rutherford said. “I feel much more satisfaction keeping government at bay and making sure it does things fairly.”

As you’d expect from a Libertarian, Rutherford’s views align with conservatives on many business issues. He bemoans the encroachment of regulation and criminal penalties in a wide number of areas, from fishing licenses to waste disposal to nursing home management. But on social issues like ballot access, civil rights and personal freedoms, he sides with liberals.

He wants government to keep an eye on the country’s borders, not its citizens’ bedrooms. Bottom line, he embraces the Libertarian view to abridge the rules for everyone, then live and let live.

“Congress would be better off if they tried to approach everything as simply as the 10 Commandments,” said Rutherford, who is married with no kids. “When you start adding all these regulations, you give a lot of control to the prosecution, because who knows what’s a crime anymore?”

Rutherford’s election to the Libertarian Party’s National Committee didn’t come out of the blue. He spent most of the last decade as chairman of the Indiana Libertarian Party with a strategy then, as now, of focusing on grassroots victories. Today six Libertarians hold Hoosier elected office.

“Building a party is a slow business, unless you get lucky or are a media darling,” he said.

Libertarians face a substantial foe for the top third-party bragging rights. Rutherford doesn’t like the term “fringe” for parties besides the Republicans and Democrats, but he acknowledges that the Tea Party currently has the most momentum among them.

Rutherford likes their enthusiasm, but finds Tea Party supporters inconsistent in their aim to reduce taxes without an equal emphasis on cutting spending. Tea Partiers share Libertarians’ dislike of the political dominance of Democrats and Republicans, but Rutherford said the Tea Party “picks and chooses when big government is OK,” and has too many members who still want their Medicare.

“Libertarians say you can’t have it both ways,” Rutherford said.

If history is any guide, neither the Libertarian Party nor the Tea Party is likely to compete with the Democratic or Republican parties in mainstream politics anytime soon, said Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis political science professor Brian Vargus. The United States actually has more than 50 active parties. The most successful in recent years was Ross Perot’s Reform Party, which not only had a well-known leader at the top of the ticket, but made significant inroads at the grassroots level in the 1990s.

The Reform Party’s fortunes have faded, Vargus said. That’s largely because sustaining a bottom-up political strategy in the long-term is incredibly difficult. Most people pay little attention to politics, Vargus said, and when polled, about a third of voters in any congressional district can’t name any candidate running. So they fall back on socialization and vote for the party their parents favored – or vote the opposite way for the same reason.

Grassroots efforts can have a big impact on local races, where investments in shoe leather could literally introduce a candidate to every voter. But bottom line, Vargus said, it’s tough for a political party to build sustainable support quickly.

“This would be equivalent to turning the Queen Mary around in the White River,” Vargus said.

Rutherford understands the challenge. But he said Libertarians are here for the long haul, and he’s committed to helping them gain ground.

“When I first got involved, one of the hardest, biggest things we had to overcome was no one had heard the word ‘Libertarian.’ Now the biggest problem is people misunderstand the term,” he said. “We’ve made the hurdle. It’s made the vernacular. Now we can educate people what it means.”•

__________

This story was originally published by the Indianapolis Business Journal July 6, 2010.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I like the concept. Seems like a good idea and really inexpensive to manage.

  2. I don't agree that this is an extreme case. There are more of these people than you realize - people that are vindictive and/or with psychological issues have clogged the system with baseless suits that are costly to the defendant and to taxpayers. Restricting repeat offenders from further abusing the system is not akin to restricting their freedon, but to protecting their victims, and the court system, from allowing them unfettered access. From the Supreme Court opinion "he has burdened the opposing party and the courts of this state at every level with massive, confusing, disorganized, defective, repetitive, and often meritless filings."

  3. So, if you cry wolf one too many times courts may "restrict" your ability to pursue legal action? Also, why is document production equated with wealth? Anyone can "produce probably tens of thousands of pages of filings" if they have a public library card. I understand this is an extreme case, but our Supreme Court really got this one wrong.

  4. He called our nation a nation of cowards because we didn't want to talk about race. That was a cheap shot coming from the top cop. The man who decides who gets the federal government indicts. Wow. Not a gentleman if that is the measure. More importantly, this insult delivered as we all understand, to white people-- without him or anybody needing to explain that is precisely what he meant-- but this is an insult to timid white persons who fear the government and don't want to say anything about race for fear of being accused a racist. With all the legal heat that can come down on somebody if they say something which can be construed by a prosecutor like Mr Holder as racist, is it any wonder white people-- that's who he meant obviously-- is there any surprise that white people don't want to talk about race? And as lawyers we have even less freedom lest our remarks be considered violations of the rules. Mr Holder also demonstrated his bias by publically visiting with the family of the young man who was killed by a police offering in the line of duty, which was a very strong indicator of bias agains the offer who is under investigation, and was a failure to lead properly by letting his investigators do their job without him predetermining the proper outcome. He also has potentially biased the jury pool. All in all this worsens race relations by feeding into the perception shared by whites as well as blacks that justice will not be impartial. I will say this much, I do not blame Obama for all of HOlder's missteps. Obama has done a lot of things to stay above the fray and try and be a leader for all Americans. Maybe he should have reigned Holder in some but Obama's got his hands full with other problelms. Oh did I mention HOlder is a bank crony who will probably get a job in a silkstocking law firm working for millions of bucks a year defending bankers whom he didn't have the integrity or courage to hold to account for their acts of fraud on the United States, other financial institutions, and the people. His tenure will be regarded by history as a failure of leadership at one of the most important jobs in our nation. Finally and most importantly besides him insulting the public and letting off the big financial cheats, he has been at the forefront of over-prosecuting the secrecy laws to punish whistleblowers and chill free speech. What has Holder done to vindicate the rights of privacy of the American public against the illegal snooping of the NSA? He could have charged NSA personnel with violations of law for their warrantless wiretapping which has been done millions of times and instead he did not persecute a single soul. That is a defalcation of historical proportions and it signals to the public that the government DOJ under him was not willing to do a damn thing to protect the public against the rapid growth of the illegal surveillance state. Who else could have done this? Nobody. And for that omission Obama deserves the blame too. Here were are sliding into a police state and Eric Holder made it go all the faster.

  5. JOE CLAYPOOL candidate for Superior Court in Harrison County - Indiana This candidate is misleading voters to think he is a Judge by putting Elect Judge Joe Claypool on his campaign literature. paragraphs 2 and 9 below clearly indicate this injustice to voting public to gain employment. What can we do? Indiana Code - Section 35-43-5-3: Deception (a) A person who: (1) being an officer, manager, or other person participating in the direction of a credit institution, knowingly or intentionally receives or permits the receipt of a deposit or other investment, knowing that the institution is insolvent; (2) knowingly or intentionally makes a false or misleading written statement with intent to obtain property, employment, or an educational opportunity; (3) misapplies entrusted property, property of a governmental entity, or property of a credit institution in a manner that the person knows is unlawful or that the person knows involves substantial risk of loss or detriment to either the owner of the property or to a person for whose benefit the property was entrusted; (4) knowingly or intentionally, in the regular course of business, either: (A) uses or possesses for use a false weight or measure or other device for falsely determining or recording the quality or quantity of any commodity; or (B) sells, offers, or displays for sale or delivers less than the represented quality or quantity of any commodity; (5) with intent to defraud another person furnishing electricity, gas, water, telecommunication, or any other utility service, avoids a lawful charge for that service by scheme or device or by tampering with facilities or equipment of the person furnishing the service; (6) with intent to defraud, misrepresents the identity of the person or another person or the identity or quality of property; (7) with intent to defraud an owner of a coin machine, deposits a slug in that machine; (8) with intent to enable the person or another person to deposit a slug in a coin machine, makes, possesses, or disposes of a slug; (9) disseminates to the public an advertisement that the person knows is false, misleading, or deceptive, with intent to promote the purchase or sale of property or the acceptance of employment;

ADVERTISEMENT