Of course, the sociopathic parasites exempt themselves from the law they use as a cudgel against "the little people." (We, the People)
Then again: imagine that the sociopaths use the drug testing policy against people like Ron Paul. He might pass, but would someone like Assange or Barry Cooper for Attorney General? A lawmaker that was duly-elected by a people who had finally woken up could be targeted by this change to the law.
A good rule of thumb is: Whoever the people want should be elected, and then targeted for SPECIFIC hypocrisy once elected. Barry Cooper wouldn't be a hypocrite, so, if he were elected, those demanding he be drug tested would be "in the wrong."
The problem, as it turns out, is less access to the ballot, not "too much access." The sociopaths already have ways of getting around every single harsh ballot access requirement they impose on "minor parties" and "independents." (As I believe you already know.)
Additionally, even when the sociopaths fail to meet their own ballot access requirements (Jeff Brown for TX Supreme Court; Barack Obama and McCain for President in Texas in 2008) the courts of lies simply allow them on the ballot anyway. The ballot access restrictions are LITERALLY only applied to minor parties and independents! When tyrants fail to comply, they are treated as "above the law" and included on the ballots anyway! (And the American public, sheeplike and servile as they are, sleeps through the entire process...)
Contrary to "anarchist" belief, well-organized libertarians can and do get elected to elections where fewer than 30,000 votes are contested. Those offices include Sheriff and State Legislature: Two offices capable of "State Nullification." This should happen way more than it does, but often fails to happen due to delusional belief structures about running for office.
For more on this:
https://www.libertyclassroom.com/nullification/
For example, I could get anyone elected to any office that the incumbent won with < 30,000 votes for a price of $50,000, as long as the candidate cleared everything he said and did with me, first (under penalty of repayment of a larger campaign debt). This is how Greg Dirasian elected several city councilmen in the suburbs of Detroit. It wasn't easy, but it wasn't rocket science, either. Though this is true, it's not really an offer now: the freedom movement has had people capable of this for a long time, and they don't care to pay. This sounds like "political careerism" or "being part of the problem" to you, then you should consider that the sociopath establishment values their ability to steal at vastly greater dollar amounts, and that far more money than is necessary to make libertarianism "a household name" is wasted on "SuperPACs" and "The Libertarian Party," which both are typically comprised of sociopaths who promptly burn the money.
Libertarians typically are born without a strategy gene. They literally have no natural sense of "what will work" and "what will not work." They cannot decide between a good idea, and political death. This is simply the nature of people who prioritize philosophy over "victory in war." They typically don't spend enough time on the battle field to learn what works(door-to-door campaigning) and what doesn't(printing a newsletter; etc.).
Libertarian candidates naturally want to "go their own way." This is OK, but rarely gets them elected, unless they're like Dick Randolph and have a keen understanding of the demographics of their district. (They typically do not, or else they'd simply run as Ds or Rs, which may be essential since that's what Randolph did, before switching to L. ...This is because the default of conformist voters is to be registered in a party that has won an election within the past 20 years. If you're going to sell people on "being a part of a new thing" they need to see that it has a chance of winning. ...Much like convincing people to board an experimental aircraft: Most won't do it until they see the same model flying, or until Elon Musk is strapping himself into the same one.)