Root Elected Chairman of Libertarian National Congressional Committee (LNCC)

Email to contact.ipr@gmail.com and posted at LP blog:

Wayne Allyn Root, 2008 Libertarian Party Vice Presidential nominee, best-selling author of “The Conscience of a Libertarian,” and elected member of the Libertarian National Committee (the governing Board of Directors of the Party), has just been elected Chairman of the Libertarian National Congressional Committee (LNCC), the chief national fundraising organization charged with electing Libertarian candidates to federal office.

Root said of his new position, “I am honored to serve as Chairman of an organization that sets as its mission electing candidates from coast to coast. “I see this organization as a start-up with lots of potential. There are only sixteen weeks until the November elections, so our focus needs to be on building toward 2012 and beyond. I have set several long-term goals: First, recruit high-powered individuals to the board who will increase its stature and turbo-charge fund raising; Second, seek out experts to train our candidates on running effective campaigns and putting forth a message that resonates with American voters; Third, establish a more visible media profile for the committee and its activities; and Fourth, schedule speaking engagements at college campuses where we will introduce a younger generation to the Libertarian Party.”

Root added, “I intend to use my national name recognition and frequent national media appearances as chief spokesman for the LNCC to promote Libertarian ideas, principles, and candidates. I also challenge Michael Steele, the Republican National Committee Chair, and Tim Kaine, the Democratic National Committee Chair to a series of debates in the media, at Tea Party events, and at college campuses across the country. I’d like to see whose message truly resonates with citizens and taxpayers across the country. Taxpayers have been fooled, misled and looted by the 2 major parties for decades. The corruption, failures of leadership, and irresponsible spending sprees with taxpayer money of both Republican and Democrat Presidents and Congress have led us to the precipice of insolvency, financial tragedy, and bankruptcy. Their failed game plan has led us to over $100 Trillion in debt and unfunded liabilities that threaten to erode America’s standing in the world, devalue the dollar, destroy millions of jobs, and damage the quality of life for future generations of our children and grandchildren. What a legacy they’ve left behind. It’s time to run away from the disastrous policies of both Bush and Obama. It’s time for responsible leadership. I intend to prove that the Libertarian Party is ready to lead.”

On Monday, Root concluded a week of guest hosting in afternoon drivetime (3 PM to 6 PM) for CBS Radio (KXNT) — the 50,000 watt conservative talk powerhouse in Las Vegas, Nevada. Root’s guests have included former Presidential candidates Steve Forbes and Ron Paul; as well as future Presidential contender and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson; N.Y. Times #1 best-selling author Dick Morris; national political talk show host Larry Elder; Wall Street Journal Editor Steve Moore; and John Mackey, Founder & CEO of Whole Foods Markets.

Root’s book “The Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gold and Tax Cuts” will be released as a paperback this Fall. The hardcover edition has been ranked the #1 “Libertarian book” for 12 consecutive months at Amazon.com.

For more of Wayne’s views, commentaries, or to watch his many national media appearances, please visit his web site at: ROOTforAmerica.com

78 thoughts on “Root Elected Chairman of Libertarian National Congressional Committee (LNCC)

  1. Scott Lieberman

    I look forward to Mr. Root helping the Libertarian National Congressional Committee raise lots of money, and giving the LNCC much more publicity than it currently gets.

  2. Chuck Moulton

    I think this is an ideal role for Root. He can focus on winning elections and on media messaging for candidates, which is his strength. He will also be able to demonstrate his fundraising prowess and have an LP leadership record behind him when running for future LP internal offices.

    I hope he will help the organization focus on actual congressional races instead of just state representative races. I’d like to see the LNCC do some real coordination — a Libertarian contract with America nationalizing congressional races and sharing talking points.

  3. Gene Berkman

    I am hopeful about this. We need to develop more national support – financial & logistical – for our candidates for Congress. Hopefully Wayne Root can raise money for this important project.

    Don’t know how much coordination among campaigns that are essentially local is possible – or even good. Certainly nationalizing the election is not likely to help Libertarian candidates, since we are a small minority nationally.

    Sharing talking points is good, but each candidate for Congress needs to build up local strengths to make up for lack of national strength.

    A Libertarian contract with America would not be taken seriously, since we don’t have the possibility of gaining a majority. Trying to write a contract would lead to more division and factionalism than we already have.

  4. Robert Milnes

    All rightists like Root should be barred from LP party positions & as candidates. Rationale: LP party positions & candidates should actually BE libertarians.
    I believe Root is being supported/infiltrated into the LP as an operative or dupe.
    The biggest THREAT to the dem/rep duopoly is the LP & its large ballot access especially its presidential ticket. If you were of the dem/rep duopoly and/or a government agent, what would you do to/with the LP? Sabotage any which way possible.

  5. Bruce Cohen

    All dupes and operatives say they aren’t.

    So, Robert Milnes obviously is a plant sent to destroy the LP. He’s either a dupe, an operative, or both.

  6. Robert Milnes

    Email from Bruce Cohen: “…I am the secret leader of the Root/Starr cabal.” I did not reply.
    Then I got an email from Mark Hinkle which I did reply to.
    To the best of my knowledge Hinkle & the NJ GP are considering my suggestions about PLAS & hiring Richard Winger & I to try to win.
    “New Strategy for Victory 2010/2012.”
    Green procedure is for a state party to approve something then refer it to national.
    So while we wait…………..
    I’d like to restate how pissed I am at the outcome of the 2008 LP convention. Not only what happened to me. But the Gravel candidacy represented a possible fusion ticket-with runner-up Mary Ruwart. I tried to explain this to as best I could but nobody listened. esp. Gravel’s campaign manager, an admitted democrat Skyler McKinley. Who knows whether he was a democrat/duopoly operative. It could be found out. But the fusion candidacy would have to be campaigned as one. The voters are not goingt to figure it out.
    Now comes another problem. The radicals-purists-rejected running vp with Barr. & this would be a reason they would have rejected a ticket with Gravel had he won the nomination. They don’t get it. A fusion ticket with a progressive wouldn’t be PUUUUUUUURRRRRREEEEEE! Assholes.
    In 2008 anti-war was the big issue. This is what fueled dinosaur fossil Ron Paul’s campaign. & the anti-war progressives supported Obama. For the simple reason that Obama had a reasonable chance to win. McKinney & Barr & Nader did not.
    & this is why PLAS will work. The progressives will see that a fusion ticket & vote coordination with a genuine progressive +++++++++a libertarian has a reasonable chance to win.
    Any ticket involving Root will not get progressive support.

  7. JT

    Milnes: “All rightists like Root should be barred from LP party positions & as candidates. Rationale: LP party positions & candidates should actually BE libertarians.”

    First, it’s not “LP party.” LP stands for Libertarian Party.

    Second, if you actually knew what a libertarian was, you wouldn’t be incessantly harping on an electoral alliance between Libertarian candidates and Green candidates (or between candidates who support a freer economy and candidates of any stripe who support more economic controls and transfers).

    Milnes: “One thing for damned sure is that I am not an operative or dupe of the duopoly or the government.”

    No, really? As incompetent as the government is (VERY), I don’t think government officials hire “operatives” who live in trailers, beg for money, and eat dog food for dinner.

  8. Robert Milnes

    Email from Bruce Cohen, “Are you with the CIA? Which agency are you working for?”
    LOL!
    Right back at cha, Bruce, if that really is your name.

  9. herma royd

    To Robert Milnes, Oh yea! and I just saw a turtle carry the world which is really flat on it’s back.

    LOL ROFLMA stop watching James Bond movies.

  10. or forgot to add

    There is a CIA agent I met, his name is Teddy Ruxpin. He is a real short guy and hangs around the toy store gathering intellegents. He has short brown curly hair. He goes by the alias of Teddy Bear. I get right on that and report that to the police.

  11. JT

    Milnes: “SSI provides well less than poverty level income. What kind of transfer of wealth is that?”

    A very big one overall. And, of course, SSI is just one government transfer program out of many. It might be the only one you receive though.

    Greens want to further rob highly productive people and crush large businesses with more taxes and mandates. That would practically destroy economic growth in the long-term and greatly increase unemployment, which is already high. Libertarians agree with Greens on some important things and can work with them in a very limited capacity, but an electoral alliance is absurd.

  12. Thomas M. Sipos

    Greens want to further rob highly productive people and crush large businesses with more taxes and mandates.

    “Highly productive people”?

    The economy is so mixed, it’s hard to tell who’s transferring wealth to who.

    Businesses are taxed. Is that a burden? But much of that tax goes for food stamps, which allows businesses to hire workers at below market rates.

    Walmart had (has?) a program in which it helps its workers fill out food stamp applications. Without food stamps, Walmart might be under market pressure to pay its workers more.

    Businesses receives tons of such indirect subsidies.

    When all taxes and subsidies are accounted for, some businesses end up with a net loss. But many end up with a net gain.

    To what extent are Las Vegas and Atlantic City subsidized by other state governments’ ban on gambling? If every state legalized gambling, would Las Vegas collapse?

    How many poor people living on “subsidizes” are priced out of the labor and small business market by various laws (licensing and such)?

    Some businesses surely get a “net benefit” by paying taxes to keep their competition priced out of the market.

    Our market is so mixed, you can’t really point at a person on welfare or food stamps, or this or that business, and know offhand if they’re net beneficiaries or net losers. You can’t know how they’d do in a purely free market.

    We can know that war profiteers would have to find another line of business if we shut down the empire.

  13. David Colborne

    Thomas – You do have a point. There is a tangled web of subsidies that flow all over the place. The Green Party, however, has made it quite clear that they have no intention of reducing that; instead, their goal is to manipulate that web and strengthen it to pursue their goal of creating a “greener” economy, using tools like inflation-adjusted VATs on fuel consumption and the like. This, needless to say, does not line up particularly closely to the Libertarian platform.

    I’ll also note that, as states have increasingly liberalized their gambling laws, Las Vegas has held its own by differentiating itself as an adult “Disneyland”. Atlantic City and Reno, on the other hand, have suffered substantially. Of course, with our current economy, Las Vegas has been hit exceptionally hard, but that has more to do with a loss of disposable income than any sort of market pressure caused by the steady liberalization of gambling.

  14. Robert Milnes

    Bruce Cohen, that is a good question.
    I’m not sure, but I think that is very slowly changing. Will it make a difference in time to try for victory November? I do not know.
    JT, I hve worked out a set of circumstances that I could be productive. But I have been unable to set it up & some conflicts with the rules.
    David Colborne, many Green & Libertarian platform positions line up. They could be immediately moved on legislatively e.g. election reform, decriminalization, etc. Some serious disagreements. But PLAS is vote coordination to try for a de facto 3 way race plurality victory. No line up of platform is necessary for that.
    Teddy Roosevelt was not a socialist.

  15. Gene Berkman

    Tom @ #16 – you do have a point about the mixed economy. But Greens are not an ally in opposing the mixed economy.

    Twice in recent years California voters have had a chance to limit eminent domain powers of state & local government. Eminent domain is commonly used for projects where government forcefully takes property and transfers it to corporations. Easy target for Greens, you would think. But both times the Green Party opposed the initiative proposals to limit eminent domain.

    There are plenty of private businesses that try to survive by being productive, and the types of regulations that Greens, socialists, & progressives promote are a burden to all of us who own our own business.

    There are even Greens & Progressives who are worried that if marijuana is legalized, that someone will profit from production and sale of marijuana.

  16. JT

    Thomas, I can’t possibly respond to everything you said in your rambling post @ 16. So I’ll just defend the comment I originally made that you responded to.

    I said, “Greens want to further rob highly productive people and crush large businesses with more taxes and mandates.”

    Greens want much higher taxes on every high-income individual and business, including the majority that earn large incomes because of the great economic value they offer in the marketplace. That’s a fact.

    If you think the majority of high-income economic actors have high incomes because they’re getting “subsidies” from governments, then you’re misinformed (btw, the term “subsidy” means direct monetary payment. Look it up in any dictionary). Some are though, and those subsidies should be eliminated.

    Greens also want to strap businesses with many more mandates that drive up costs for both those businesses and consumers.

    Taxes/mandates reduce business investment, which is what drives the growth of products, jobs, and market wages.

    Meanwhile, the prices consumers pay for many products merely reflects the added burden of onerous and costly government regulations. These non-market prices add up to a sizable portion of most people’s income.

    The bottom line here is that Greens are very ignorant of basic economic principles. They advocate ideas that in effect would greatly harm the U.S. economy and reduce the average standard of living. An electoral alliance between Green candidates and Libertarian candidates is ridiculous.

  17. LibertarianGirl

    nobody freakin subsidizes Las Vegas , LOL , gimme a break , and even if every state had gambling , we would stand alone as the best there is and ever will be…

  18. Robert Milnes

    Gene Berkman, come on. I could start a sentence, “There are even…” libertarians who…are not even libertarians, are pro war, pro life(anti-abortion), pro death penalty etc. I’m sure Greens & Progressives are a wide spectrum of positions.
    But this doesn’t matter much if neither greens or libertarians are not elected. We need a vote coordination coalition to get elected & get rid of the dems & reps. Then go from there.

  19. RWL

    By what defintion is Root’s conservative book, in libertarian drag, a best-seller? Sounds like more Root hype and bs.

  20. Jake Witmer

    I’m a big fan of Wayne Root. I think he’s one of the few people in the LP who has personal integrity, and is actually pursuing things that have a physical possibility of getting Libertarians elected. More power to him, since he’s overcoming such large stumbling blocks, set up by Samuel Konkin, and several assorted unphilosophical Republican sycophants and warmongers.

    I’ve seen nothing but sincerity and effort from Root, which is a lot more than I can say for most of the rest of the LP. Best of luck to them, though.

  21. Carolyn Marbry

    Milnes @5 said “All rightists like Root should be barred from LP party positions & as candidates. Rationale: LP party positions & candidates should actually BE libertarians.”

    No. Let’s face it, if the party members gave a rat’s ass about keeping rightists or leftists or socialists or one-eyed andalusian kangaroos or any other single demographic out of positions of power in the party, they show up in larger numbers than just 500 to freakin VOTE at convention. Apparently it’s not that important to them, so it’s not worth the drama of barring anybody.

    If you don’t bother voting, don’t bother bitching. I know St. Louis was not easy for folks to make. It wasn’t easy for ME to make, but I did. That’s because easy and getting things done the way you want them done don’t always go hand in hand. I didn’t get my way on everything, but by golly my votes got registered and made a difference.

    Milnes, were you at the convention? If you were, I don’t recall seeing you there. So if you weren’t at the convention, that means you didn’t vote for someone-other-than-Root (or Phillies or Hinkle or Hancock or Myers or whoever your personal bogeyman is). So now, after things didn’t go your way, having been too lazy or too busy or too whatever to bother showing up, you’d call for the party of FREEDOM to BAR someone from being allowed to run based on a less than pure enough ideology for your taste — who gets to be the Purity Police, anyway? — to save you from your own ennui and the rest of us from having to make hard choices.

    Wow, thanks, Milnes. But you know, if I wanted a nanny, I’d have voted for Obama.

  22. Used to live in Vegas

    Las Vegas looks like a big garbage can since the Ole hey days. It is overdone, filthy. The strip look’s horrid. I knew and still know a lot of big name whatever. But I don’t discuss that here. If Shtf, wonder what will be done when you can’t get water.

  23. LibertarianGirl

    the strip looks awesome , its like visiting several countries in a day , overdone? ya , thats what Vegas is , we do everything bigger and better and newer.

  24. Robert Milnes

    But, oh well. I’ve been through this with Tom K. also. He doesn’t get it either.
    Let’s take the best example which is in our face. Ron Paul. In 2008 just about everybody was fawning over him. 72% favorable rating among ALL LP members! Draft him. Violate party bylaws-lnc-top level Bob Barr etc.
    Turns out as the campaign wore on, three came out against him actually labeling him a dixiecrat conservative. Me, George & Tom.
    I have further described him as a counterrevolutionary nationalistconstitutionalist/theocrat i.e. THE EXACT OPPOSITE of a progressive/revolutionary.
    Yet Paul has a history of LP membership even being the presidential nominee in 1988. Barring a rightist like Paul would have spared the LP all this grief.
    The other 2 examples are Barr & now Root.
    The problem is the demarcation of libertarian & counterrevolutionary nationalist is they are next to each other on a linear political spectrum. So rightists can say they are libertarians & actually not be & can blend in like a chameleon.

  25. Robert Milnes

    I have suggested a party bylaw or declaration or something to the effect of LP party officials and candidates must actually be libertarians.
    & this could be determined by a Peer Review Board.& procedure. Vetting potential party officials & candidates seems almost mandatory. Yet the radicals continue to refuse to do this to their own detriment. Leading to such distortions as BTP where the passive aggressive self identification procedure is in effect.

  26. Big headache

    If I would compare Vegas to New York, there is no comparison. I hate both of them. Vegas is bigger than before yes. Better, no way, Yuk. It gives me a headache when I’ve been there. It reminds me of a big neon-billboard sardine can, open it up and everyone falls out. I hate to think if Shtf, all those people come running out. I certainly don’t want to be in the way. I will be away as far as possible. You are more than welcome to the place. It is your town as far as I am concerned.

  27. JT

    Milnes: “I have suggested a party bylaw or declaration or something to the effect of LP party officials and candidates must actually be libertarians.
    & this could be determined by a Peer Review Board.& procedure.”

    There’s already a “Peer Review Board” in the LP that vets party officials and candidates–it’s called other Libertarian Party members who choose to vote. If the results of those votes are unsatisfactory to you, oh well. Those results are obviously satisfactory to most other voting Libertarians.

  28. Robert Milnes

    JT, The present LP members voting procedures are not working. it’s not just me. BTP exists because of it. Lackluster LP membership drives, contributions, activism, etc. The LP alienates a lot of people. The Rightists Rule. Like it or leave it. I left.

  29. Robert Milnes

    A requirement that the LP party officials & candidates actually be libertarians would have prevented Barr’s quick rise to LNC & his candidacy. Now also Root’s. Mary Ruwart would probably have won the nomination in 2008.
    Unfortunately Gravel would have been barred also. So some other means of nominating a fusion ticket needs to be in place.
    However, interesting that a leftist anarchist could qualify as a libertarian presidential candidate…..

  30. m(ental)illness milness

    I bet I can post more off topic comments than anyone, get a lot of people to take me seriously and respond to my loonie rantings! It sure beats taking my meds, getting a job and getting a life!

  31. JT

    Milnes: “The present LP members voting procedures are not working. BTP exists because of it.”

    For most of the Libertarians who voted, they’re working fine. If you have a problem with the results, point to most of the voting Libertarians. Don’t try to prevent some LP members from running at all. And BTP barely exists, btw.

    Milnes: “The LP alienates a lot of people. The Rightists Rule.”

    Some people are going to feel alienated regardless. That’s the nature of elections. And there are always people on the LNC who have more sympathy with the Left than the Right.

    Milnes: “Like it or leave it. I left.”

    So why are you still complaining about it constantly?

    Milnes: “A requirement that the LP party officials & candidates actually be libertarians would have prevented Barr’s quick rise to LNC & his candidacy. Now also Root’s.”

    Yes, and it also would have denied most voting Libertarians from choosing who they wanted. Btw, in case you didn’t notice, Root lost the election for national chairman despite campaigning all over the country and raising more $ than all the other candidates.

    Milnes: “Mary Ruwart would probably have won the nomination in 2008.”

    I like Mary, but she had a fair chance to win the nomination in 2008 and failed (though she put up a strong fight). Libertarian delegates wanted someone they perceived could get more media exposure than she could. She was also lousy at the convention candidate debate, which I watched on C-SPAN. That shocked me since she writes “Short Answers to the Tough Questions.” She could have blown the delegates away with her charm and eloquence, and she fell short.

    Also, btw, many Libertarians would say that adults don’t have the right to have sex with children even if the children “consent” to it. Mary did write that, unfortunately.

    Milnes: “Unfortunately Gravel would have been barred also.”

    Good point. Gravel was obviously a liberal and not a Libertarian. Still, he was allowed to run for the nomination and should have been.

    Milnes: “So some other means of nominating a fusion ticket needs to be in place.”

    No, it doesn’t.

  32. Robert Milnes

    Yes it does because it is THAT important & powerful.
    As late as the BTP convention 2008 the libertarians could have won with a pretty full slate esp. if you include Greens.
    Because if I had won BTP, I would have asked Mary to be vp. Failing that Milnes/Ruwart could have continued as Independent ticket. But we also woulld have coordinated the progressive & libertarian vote & Green & Libertarian candidates. The progressives would have elected us instead of Obama.
    But NOOooooooooooooooo.

  33. NewFederalist

    C’mon now Milnes… do you REALLY believe the things you just said? It’s just crazy talk.

  34. JT

    NewFederalist: “C’mon now Milnes… do you REALLY believe the things you just said? It’s just crazy talk.”

    Yes, he does. And yes, it’s crazy.

  35. LP watcher

    PLAS my A–.
    Getting a few candidates to work together is one thing, but trying to get 50 individual state parties is another. And then the county affiliates are independent of the state parties– in some states. Not to mention 50 different versions of ballot access.
    It is indeed delusional.

  36. JT

    I Love: “I think I’ll be like a lot of people here, I’ll go up to a crazy bum talking to himself on the street and try to rationally address his talking points each and every day.

    Yeah, I can’t think of any better use for my time.”

    If that bum interrupted every conversation at the restaurant you frequent with the same inane idea, over and over and over again every day for months, you might eventually say something to him.

  37. Robert Milnes

    IPR=Crazy Losers Club.
    =lab rats in a cage.
    Interesting behavior.
    Most try to get out for a while. repeatedly trying the door.
    After they give up you can open the door & they won’t try to get out.
    They may even look the other way & pretend it is not open.
    Whoever says hey the door is open gets called crazy.

  38. NewFederalist

    *sigh* I really do feel pity for you Robert Milnes. I hope you can get help. Since this IS the internet it is possible you are a 12 year old kid who has created this nutso persona and are having way too much fun with us. If you are that then get a REAL life already. If you are as you say… please get help.

  39. Robert Milnes

    The only problems I see with @45 is Ruwart’s obstinance & whether we’d run out of time to get enough ballot access for the Independent ticket.
    Other than that it is not out of the question & certainly not “crazy”.

  40. Izzy Kronik

    @56 New Federalist

    I think if there were an ignore Milnes button, or better yet an ignore Robert Milnes button, it wouldn’t matter.

  41. Carol Moore

    This article http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2010/07/14/wayne-allyn-rooting-for-debate/ “By challenging the heads of the RNC and DNC to debate, Root is trying to elevate his own position, though he would insist he is simply trying to elevate the LP and its ideas. ” Of course, Root has removed from facebook his rant on the need to support Israel by libertarians, and certain the insanity of ever criticizing it. I’m sure he’ll enforce this by refusing to give any money he raises to any candidate who dares to criticize Israel.

  42. Carol Moore

    Not to mention punishing candidates who don’t support any other of his less than libertarian positions – or support him for president in 2012?

  43. Thomas M. Sipos

    Carol, fortunately, I don’t think Root’s position brings with it any real power, for doing good or ill. It’s not like the LP has a campaign warchest anywhere near the Demopublicans’.

    Of course, Root might imagine otherwise. He may think he’s in charge of telling Congressional candidates what their talking points are. That they must take directives from him.

    I wonder if he’s aware that every candidate is free to ignore him?

  44. Robert Capozzi

    cm: I’m sure he’ll enforce this by refusing to give any money he raises to any candidate who dares to criticize Israel.

    me: Sure? Sounds like wager material. Care to….?

  45. NewFederalist

    “My offer to Carol for vp on Independent fusion ticket is still open. But be advised, first come, first served.”

    I bet the women are just standing in line for the opportunity. Geez Bob, get a life.

  46. JT

    Milnes: “My offer to Carol for vp on Independent fusion ticket is still open. But be advised, first come, first served.”

    You really have nerve, you know that? Anyway, no one is coming, so no one is getting served. Get used to it.

  47. To Jt, question

    What state are you out of. I like both you and New Federalist comments. LOL Are you an active something? Blah Blah Blah, anything else you might add?

  48. constitutionalist

    I’m sure he’ll enforce this by refusing to give any money he raises to any candidate who dares to criticize Israel.

    That’s what Rahm Emmanuel did when he was head of the DNCC…

  49. George Phillies

    And for those of you curious as to what the LNCC has done, here is a fairly complete listing of revenues and expenditures for the past few years, in fact, going back as far as the LNCC does. The six supported candidates are candidates for state legislature.

    2005

    Income
    Two $1000 Donors William Hall; William Redpath

    Expenditures
    None

    Debts
    Warner Norcross and Judd $4132.15 <–William Hall's Law Firm

    2006

    Total Income $9253.87
    Total Disbursements $10960.83

    Large Donors include
    Charles Moulton $1025
    Stephen Dasbach $1000
    Aaron Starr $1000
    George Whitfield $2000
    James Lark $1000
    Harland Machia $1000
    M Carling $1000
    Michael Dixon $1000

    Disbursements include
    Legal Services $4329.20
    FEC Compliance Consulting $1400.00
    National Corporate Research Inc $158.00 for Annual Statutory Representation
    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    The addresses match Hardy Machia and David Atkinson, who were candidates for the State Legislature of Vermont

    2007

    Total Income $5225.21
    Total Disbursements $986.70

    Large Donors include
    M Carling $2500
    Colley $1000
    Mattson $1000
    Charles Moulton $700

    Disbursements include
    FEC Compliance $950+

    2008

    Total Income $8583.90
    Total Disbursements $6782.01

    Large Donors include
    Collins $5000.00
    Hacker $1000.00
    Sink-Burris $400.00
    Starr $500.00

    Disbursements include
    Friends of Brendan Kelly Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Morey Straus for State House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Rich Tomasso for New Hampshire House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Lisa Wilber Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00

    FEC Compliance Consulting $1200+
    LNC Fundraising $505
    Registered Agent Fee 158.00

    2009

    Total Income $10.13
    Total Disbursements $1580.00

    FEC Compliance $1450

  50. George Phillies

    So how has the LNCC money come and gone?

    Through the end of 2009, they’ve supported 6 candidates for non-Federal office, and apparently none for Federal office. From the FEC reports:

    2005

    Income
    Two $1000 Donors William Hall; William Redpath

    Expenditures
    None

    Debts
    Warner Norcross and Judd $4132.15 <–William Hall's Law Firm

    2006

    Total Income $9253.87
    Total Disbursements $10960.83

    Large Donors include
    Charles Moulton $1025
    Stephen Dasbach $1000
    Aaron Starr $1000
    George Whitfield $2000
    James Lark $1000
    Harland Machia $1000
    M Carling $1000
    Michael Dixon $1000

    Disbursements include
    Legal Services $4329.20
    FEC Compliance Consulting $1400.00
    National Corporate Research Inc $158.00 for Annual Statutory Representation
    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    The addresses match Hardy Macia and David Atkinson, who were candidates for the State Legislature of Vermont

    2007

    Total Income $5225.21
    Total Disbursements $986.70

    Large Donors include
    M Carling $2500
    Colley $1000
    Mattson $1000
    Charles Moulton $700

    FEC Compliance $950+

    2008

    Total Income $8583.90
    Total Disbursements $6782.01

    Large Donors include
    Collins $5000.00
    Hacker $1000.00
    Sink-Burris $400.00
    Starr $500.00

    Disbursements include
    Friends of Brendan Kelly Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Morey Straus for State House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Rich Tomasso for New Hampshire House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Lisa Wilber Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00

    FEC Compliance Consulting $1200+
    LNC Fundraising $505
    Registered Agent Fee 158.00

    2009

    Total Income $10.13
    Total Disbursements $1580.00

    FEC Compliance $1450

  51. George Phillies

    LNCC Financial transactions (there are also legal small unitemized donations and unitemized expenditures.)

    2005

    Income
    Two $1000 Donors William Hall; William Redpath

    Expenditures
    None

    Debts
    Warner Norcross and Judd $4132.15 <–William Hall's Law Firm

    2006

    Total Income $9253.87
    Total Disbursements $10960.83

    Large Donors include
    Charles Moulton $1025
    Stephen Dasbach $1000
    Aaron Starr $1000
    George Whitfield $2000
    James Lark $1000
    Harland Machia $1000
    M Carling $1000
    Michael Dixon $1000

    Disbursements include
    Legal Services $4329.20
    FEC Compliance Consulting $1400.00
    National Corporate Research Inc $158.00 for Annual Statutory Representation

    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    Contribution to Non Federal Candidate 2500.00 09/28/2006
    The addresses match Hardy Machia and David Atkinson, who were candidates for the State Legislature of Vermont

    2007

    Total Income $5225.21
    Total Disbursements $986.70

    Large Donors include
    M Carling $2500
    Colley $1000
    Mattson $1000
    Charles Moulton $700

    FEC Compliance $950+

    2008

    Total Income $8583.90
    Total Disbursements $6782.01

    Large Donors include
    Collins $5000.00
    Hacker $1000.00
    Sink-Burris $400.00
    Starr $500.00

    Disbursements include
    Friends of Brendan Kelly Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Morey Straus for State House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Rich Tomasso for New Hampshire House Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00
    Lisa Wilber Contribution to NH State House Candidate $1000.00

    FEC Compliance Consulting $1200+
    LNC Fundraising $505
    Registered Agent Fee 158.00

    2009

    Total Income $10.13
    Total Disbursements $1580.00

    FEC Compliance $1450

  52. George Phillies

    The spam block sat on the above three, it took a while to understand what was happening, and finally all three copies were released thanks to Paulie.

  53. Robert Capozzi

    gp, thanks for dredging this data up. I’m not sure what your takeaway from this information is, but it appears to me that the LNCC has largely been dormant. Very little money raised, some minor expenditures, some minor contributions to a few candidates. It appears to mostly be in startup mode.

    Do you have a different take?

    Is there anything requiring federal intervention?

  54. Chuck Moulton

    The LNCC has been in startup mode, yes.

    The bylaws were setup to support state representative candidates rather than congressional candidates, which I think was a strategic mistake and a misleading misnomer. I hope Root will help change the focus.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *