Libertarian National Committee meeting liveblog Alexandria, VA, Dec. 1-2, 2018

This thread will be for the purpose of liveblogging this weekend’s LNC meeting in the comments.

One Notebook has additional information.

Here’s what’s at https://www.lp.org/event/lnc-meeting-in-alexandria-va/ now; check back at the original for additional reports still to be added.

Libertarian National Committee (LNC) quarterly business meeting

Who: LNC and some staff. All Libertarian Party members welcome to observe the business meeting.

Live Broadcast: The LNC will attempt to stream the meeting live on the Internet. Be advised that broadcast quality has sometimes been low and intermittent.

Main Broadcast — Channel 1: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/libertarian-party1

Possible Backup Broadcast — Channel 2: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/QhDdfs2AXHZ

Where: Residence Inn Alexandria Old Town/Duke Street – 1456 Duke Street, Alexandria VA 22314 (right by LPHQ)

Proposed Agenda and Reports:

2018_12_01 LNC Meeting GIANT PRINTED HANDOUT

2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Proposed_Agenda
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Chairs_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Vice_Chair_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Secretary_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Membership_Oct_2019
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Budget_2019_AcctDetail
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Budget_2019_Office_Admin
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Budget_2019_Operating_Budget
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Staff_End_of_Month_Reports
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Staff_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Agenda_Item_Amend_Weiner_Rule
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Resolution_on_Voting_Methods
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_First_Blockchain_Committee_Meeting
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Region_1_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Region_3_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Region_4_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Region_6_Report
2018_12_01_LNC_Meeting_Region_8_Report
Oct. 31, 2018, LNC Executive Committee Meeting Minutes

163 thoughts on “Libertarian National Committee meeting liveblog Alexandria, VA, Dec. 1-2, 2018

  1. paulie Post author

    All full LNC members are there

    Nick Sarwark (Chair)
    Alex Merced (Vice-Chair)
    Caryn Ann Harlos (Secretary)
    Tim Hagan (Treasurer)
    Joe Bishop-Henchman (At-Large)
    Sam Goldstein (At-Large)
    Alicia Mattson (At-Large)
    Bill Redpath (At-Large)
    Joshua Smith (At-Large)
    Richard Longstreth (R1)
    Stephen Nekhaila (R2)
    Elizabeth Van Horn (R3)
    Jeff Hewitt (R4)
    Jim Lark (R5)
    John Phillips (R6)
    Whitney Bilyeu (R7)
    Justin O’Donnell (R8)

    Some of the alternates are there. Didn’t hear the whole list but Susan Hogarth is there, Dustin Nanna is in the vicinity but was not yet in the room at the time attendance was announced, I think they said Victoria Paige-Lee is there and I missed the rest,

  2. Chuck Moulton

    I’m in the audience.

    Sarwark gave a brief report saying many people who aren’t libertarians voted for him for mayor.

    Merced gave a report about his travels and speeches.

    Now Hagan is talking about the financials. He has a motion to amend the “Weiner rule” to drop odd numbered years mortgage prepayments from $60k to $20k because we are in a cash crunch. With $20k we still won’t owe a balloon payment because we’ve already over-prepaid, but we would have to pay an extra $9k in interest with that change,

  3. Chuck Moulton

    Redpath moves to amend getting rid of any off year pre-payment requirement, then he withdraws his amendment without objection.

    Bishop-Henchman says staff doesn’t think it can raise $60k anyway, It thinks it can raise $20k.

    Mattson thinks without the Weiner rule we’ll just keep punting, and points out it wouldn’t help balance the budget because there is an accompanying revenue line of equal value.

    Bilyeu doesn’t think $60k of fundraising for the building fund is realistic.

    Redpath thinks the goal should be avoiding the balloon payment, not paying everything off early.

    Everyone except Mattson votes yes. Sarwark abstains. It passes.

  4. Chuck Moulton

    Redpath is now engaged to Julie Fox, who is on the audit committee. He serves as assistant treasurer and wondered whether he should resign from that position. The LNC will see if anyone else would serve as assistant treasurer. It will be noted in the list of potential conflicts of interest,

    Alternate Victoria Paige Lee also got engaged recently.

  5. paulie Post author

    Joe Bishop-Henchman “Harlos motion to change our voting method for the Convention Voting Process Committee and Membership Support Committee to ranked-choice voting.”

  6. Chuck Moulton

    Harlos sends thank you notes to meeting attendees. She asked Bob Johnston about state by state presidential paperwork requirements and Mattson about a state bylaws archive.

    Harlos offers September minutes for approval. Lark asks that the minutes approval vote be postponed until Sunday, and it is without objection.

    Harlos moves to fill several committees by rank choiced vote (Scottish STV) on the opa voting website. It passes 7-5 (I did not note the roll call).

    Staff reports are next.

  7. Chuck Moulton

    Daugherty stepped in as acting ED a week and a half ago. There is a big cash crunch and they almost weren’t able to make payroll… but this has been a record fundraising year for a midterm. She wants to rebuild the reserve and pay down the convention hotel bill.

    Kraus says we spent a lot on ballot access and didn’t raise that much. He encourages the LNC not to make new expensive projects because they’re not sure how they’re going to fund the existing projects.

    Johnston calls lapsed members and helps candidates. He created a state by state document with campaign finance regulations. He keeps track of elected libertarians and helps with ballot access questions.

    Apollo works with candidate support. Schultz does candidate recruitment and support. She sent a survey out to past candidates and prospective candidates to figure out how we can do better.

    Mears previously did local organizing, was a candidate, and served on the Ohio and Florida state boards. She worked with high donor giving, but shifted to working to increase membership and handling social media. She wants to focus more on smaller dollar donations ($3, $5, etc.). Instagram page went from 15,000 to 40,000 followers in a year.

    A field organizer (Tom ?) talked about the field teams sent out to help get targeted candidates elected. Got people to “actually work” instead of just typing at a keyboard. (As someone currently typing at a keyboard right at this very minute, I feel judged…)

    Apollo says the teams were amateurs… they traveled long distances to cold places and slept on air mattresses or floors. They made a big difference.

  8. paulie Post author

    Joe Bishop-Henchman: “Apollo reports on his door knocking operation. 5 volunteers knocked on 52,000 doors in competitive districts. Some near-wins and significant vote increases. Knocking on doors once didn’t work, ideal is 3-5.”

  9. Chuck Moulton

    Bishop-Henchman asked how LPHQ was saving money. Daugherty said they cut contractor hours and cut out-sourced cleaning from twice a week to once a week saving $3,000.

    Lark asked Schultz if lack of a campaign treasurer or not understanding campaign finance leads to less candidates. She says no… because they file not realizing it’s important, then figure out it’s necessary later. Also she gave everyone Bob Johnston’s number. She suggests every state political director should have at least 1 go-to treasurer for candidates.

    Bilyeu asks Apollo about candidates and state committees with unrealistic expectations about what races are truly winnable — or rather what races should be better targeted with resources. She wants research and date to answer the “only run candidates in winnable municipal races” vs. “find a candidate for every race”. Apollo likes to call them “competitive races” rather than “winnable races”.

    Longstreth says Colorado ran a full slate in 2012, which resulted in increased vote totals and registrations. Sarwark says they recruited 100 candidates, which would have been a full slate. 80 ended up running, 20 had paperwork problems. The floor for minimum commitment candidates (paper candidates) went up. They also came within 10 points of winning a race vs. a corrupt cop with fishy pay sheets. Lark asked more about Colorado. Sarwark says 70% were minimum commitment. Colorado offered to take care of all candidate paperwork.

    Bishop-Henchman asked Apollo about lessons learned and how many doors were knocked. Apollo says 50,000 doors total, about 10,000 doors per candidate. They started late, which was too late to vet candidates in some states.

    Harlos says Dan Weiner helps research winnable races. She suggests talking to Joe Johnson about the Colorado full slate experiment. She says in Colorado they offered to help candidates fill out questionnaires. Apollo says he advises candidates to be strategic about questionnaires (e.g., do not answer pro-life questionnaire if you’re trying to target Democrat votes.

    Mattson asks if the data shows that door knocking is effective. Apollo says no impact where we only knocked once. 54% better when we knocked twice. The 2nd door knock can be tailored to the issues identified in the 1st door knock.

    Redpath asks how we can stimulate training of campaign managers. He says 4 weekdays is a big commitment for the Leadership Institute’s campaign leadership school. Apollo says the best way to train campaign managers is not LI, but rather exposing them to an effective campaign by working on a field team. He also suggests several books on how to run an effective campaign. He says a bad campaign manager can be a net negative.

    Bishop-Henchman pitches the new membership card. Mears says they are moving away from writing the year on the card because lifetime members don’t get a new card every year. 2,000 people responded to a survey about how to improve the membership card.

    Hewitt says we’ve had a shortage of candidates, but we’ve had a bigger shortage of campaign managers. He complimented Boomer Shannon and (YAL’s) Cliff Maloney for bringing in a lot of volunteers, who in turn are now trained to run effective campaigns.

    Tom ? says that people on his field team said they feel well trained to run campaigns after 2 months working on a LP field team.

    Daughterty says staff is making it a priority now to collect and analyze data when we do things so that we can make better informed decisions (e.g., A/B testing, segmentation, etc.).

    Lark asked how many of the candidates who ran this year chronicled what they did while they did it (because it’s hard to go back after the fact). Apollo says the software e-chronicaler (spelling) was used, which includes door knocking results.

    Out of time. Redpath moves that they recess for 10 minutes, then counsel’s report, then back to staff report. The agenda is amended without objection. Recessed.

  10. Chuck Moulton

    Special counsel’s report by Oliver Hall. His last report was only 2 months ago, so he just has a few updates. The main thing he did was help candidates who were illegally excluded from debates. Usually a demand letter works, but when it doesn’t work he filed 7 complaints with the FEC against stations that didn’t reverse themselves. Unfortunately, this past election most of the requests for help came at the last minute. He suggests setting up an online form with the 10 main questions he needs answered in order to streamline the process. State affiliates should be informed about these resources — and that time is of the essence.

    Lark asks if Hall has a compendium of relevant laws. Hall says yes, he has something like that and he can try to make more of that available.

    Sarwark re-emphasizes that the process is pretty much the same every time, so we need to communicate to campaigns what information we need to evaluate lawsuits against debate organizers and that they should be getting things in writing.

    Lark mentioned there is a gun rights case LP of Erie County NY vs. (someone) pending in the court of appeals. He asked if Hall was familiar with it. He was not.

    Fishman asks if there can be an angle for a lawsuit against public television (e.g., PBS), which takes taxpayer funding, when they stage debates. Hall is already looking at that angle.

    Johnston asked about the Ohio ballot access situation: the law clearly says we should be on the ballot another election cycle since the petitioning was less than 1 year from the recent election, but the Ohio secretary of state wants to take the LP off the ballot anyway. Hall said LPOH is looking into a legal challenge there. Hall says there may also be an equal protection claim because other parties in OH get 2 election cycles to retain. Johnston then asked about MD, which has 23,000 registered voters, but then didn’t get a much lower retention vote requirement. Hall thinks the MD case is winnable too. Redpath says Maine has retained Paul Rossi of PA to handle its voter registration party retention requirement lawsuit (5,000 voter reg. to qualify a new party, 10,000 reg voters participating to retain), but he still needs local counsel.

    Lark asks if there are campaign finance law requirements implications when attorneys provide below market rate legal services. Sarwark says the Institute for Justice litigated that case in Colorado as a free speech issue and won.

    There was a hearing yesterday at the DC circuit en banc for a lawsuit about contribution limits for inheritance donations to the LP. Bishop-Henchman says it’s hard to read a bench at oral argument. Sarwark said it was positive that the LP got more time for its oral argument and also that the judges were asking engaged questions appearing to fully understand the arguments in our brief. He expects at least a solid defense if we lose, which could have a good appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Lark asked if Trump’s judicial appointments are affecting any issues in particular. Hall says he hopes for fair, impartial judges.

    There was some discussion about whether we maintained major party status in New Mexico. No one is sure.

    Bishop-Henchman asks what the LNC can do to make Hall’s job easier. Hall wonders whether he should be giving the LNC his perspective on the merit of amicus briefs, or instead he should remain more impartial. Sarwark says the LNC likes strategic advice, but the LNC should make judgment calls on principles.

    Next item is 15 minutes for staff reports.

  11. Chuck Moulton

    Daugherty says that major donor Chastain is very interested in gathering data from campaigns to determine what works and what doesn’t.

    Van Horn points out the Leadership Institute is willing to travel to train activists in other states.

    Goldstein asks Apollo how many people worked on the 2018 operation and how much was spent. Also he wants to know what will be required for 2019 and 2020. Apollo says $25,000 per candidate [I think he said per candidate] (not counting his own salary). Daugherty pointed out 2 months of Tyler’s time wasn’t counted either. There were 5 candidates involved in 2018. Apollo does not anticipate much in 2019 — perhaps candidate recruitment at the county level. He hopes to repeat what happened in 2018 again in 2020.

    Fishman asks Mears if 36% revenue from membership is good. She said that number goes up and down. A lot of people donate who do not sign the non-aggression principle. She donated $10 to the DNC as opposition research. It took weeks and several phone calls to get a Democratic membership card. Membership card selfies help bring in younger members. She wants to segment membership pitches better to do testing. Daugherty says our materials look better than the D’s and R’s and we are more prompt and efficient — in part thanks to Matt Thexton at LPHQ who deals with the mail. Kraus says membership often collapses in off-years, so it’s important that Mears work to keep membership numbers up.

    Schultz says Chastain is doing narrative interviews with past candidates. Also there are password protected areas of the website with an information repository for candidates. She has been working on criteria for competitive races and how to best target them. Schultz is concerned that some states change political directors frequently, which means they need to be trained frequently. Therefore she is trying to put together a handbook for state political directors. States wonder if the LNC will fund campaign worker training.

    Smith wonders whether we can get people together who have won, and train others. He thinks the Leadership Institute is really good at training R’s and D’s, but not necessarily L campaigns. Daugherty says she thinks the LNC should focus on paying down their bills before launching other projects.

    Lark suggests after campaigns are over, past candidates should act as a “shadow-legislator”, keeping the winner’s feet to the fire afterward, talking to the media, and setting up a future campaign. Apollo says he counsels candidates to have a secondary win in mind if they are not elected. Sometimes it is taking their data and running for a lower level race like city counsel. Other times it is taking the data and organizing LP affiliates in surrounding counties.

    Nakalia asks whether staff has ever considered setting up an online training portal. Daugherty says Schultz has setup some written documents, which hopefully will be updated each campaign cycle. She expects the candidate support section of the website to get much more populated over time. Should candidate support staff be part time or full time? This budget meeting will decide that. Schultz says every 2 weeks she held a conference call with an expert of some aspect of campaigning to talk and answer questions. They were all archived. Any candidate running as a LP member gets full access to these materials. She sees it as a library that should grow.

    Adams wonders why we aren’t sending Apollo around for week long campaign training seminars, charging money, and raising money while training people. O’Donnell points out LSLA did that 2 years ago: a 1 day seminar for $150 and 120 people showed up.

    There will now be a break for people to go obtain lunch, which they will then eat while watching a voting software presentation.

  12. paulie Post author

    I’m commenting. Didn’t get much sleep and having a few technical issues with the new laptop but trying to keep up. You’re covering more than I could keep up with. I’ll try to do more after lunch. I had one or two people who said they would help but they haven’t shown up, at least not so far.

  13. paulie Post author

    Adopted agenda

    Opening Ceremony

    Call to Order 9:00 am

    Opportunity for Public Comment 10 minutes

    Housekeeping

    Attendance, Credentials Report and Paperwork Check 3 minutes

    Adoption of Agenda 10 minutes

    Report of Potential Conflicts of Interest (Harlos) 2 minutes

    Officer Reports

    Chair’s Report (Sarwark) 15 minutes

    Vice Chair’s Report (Merced) 15 minutes

    Treasurer’s Report (Hagan) 15 minutes

    Secretary’s Report (Harlos) 15 minutes

    Recess 10 minutes

    Staff Reports 45 minutes

    Special Counsel’s Report 30 minutes

    (portions may be in Executive Session)

    Vistacom Presentation (during Lunch) 12:00pm – 1:30pm

    Reports of Standing Committees

    Audit Committee 15 minutes

    Affiliate Support Committee 15 minutes

    Convention Oversight Committee 15 minutes

    Employment Policy & Compensation Committee 15 minutes

    Historical Preservation Committee 15 minutes

    IT Committee 15 minutes

    Ballot Access Committee 20 minutes

    Recess 10 minutes

    New Business with Previous Notice

    Adoption of 2019 Budget 90 minutes

    Evening Adjournment

    Sunday Morning Session 9:00 am

    Opportunity for Public Comment 10 minutes

    Officer Reports

    September LNC Minutes (Harlos – no time limit noted)

    Reports of Special Committees

    Blockchain Committee 15 minutes

    Youth Engagement Committee 15 minutes

    Convention Voting Process Committee 5 minutes

    Membership Support Committee 5 minutes

    New Business with Previous Notice (cont.)

    Adoption of 2019 Budget (cont.) 30 minutes

    Scheduling the next LNC Meeting 10 minutes

    New Business without Previous Notice

    Discussion of 2018 Election Results (Bishop-Henchman) 20 minutes

    2019 Goals Discussion (Harlos) 30 minutes

    FASB Functional Reporting Requirements (Bishop-Henchman) 10 minutes

    Resolution to Support Liberland (Harlos/Van Horn) 5 minutes

    Amendments to Policy Manual re: Alternates 15 minutes

    Style Clean-up Policy Manual 15 minutes

    Regional Reports (supplements to printed reports)

    Region 1 5 minutes

    Region 2 5 minutes

    Region 3 5 minutes

    Region 4 5 minutes

    Region 5 5 minutes

    Region 6 5 minutes

    Region 7 5 minutes

    Region 8 5 minutes

    Announcements 10 minutes

    TOTAL: 615 minutes

  14. paulie

    It worked fine before lunch so I am assuming they have not come back. If anyone is there and knows otherwise please let us know.

  15. Chuck Moulton

    VistaCom is giving a presentation on their electronic voting system, which includes keypads (they look like bulky old style phones or remote controls) and/or laptop, tablet, and smartphone software. He handed out keypads for a later demo. LNC members are interrupting with questions. I’m not going to follow this as closely as the meeting business.

  16. paulie

    Joe Bishop-Henchman Convention “theme update:

    The COC has agreed to turn complaints into fundraising opportunity.

    This starts with the theme contest (and the trolling critics) and call it the “Pay To Play $20 for ‘20” Theme Contest. The proposed structure is as follows:

    Rules published (costs, no names, no anti-L messages)

    Minimum $20 to submit a theme

    COC publishes “approved” list of submitted themes

    Themes are “bought-in” from the list — auction/highest bids

    All donations for any particular theme carry forward and count for every round

    Playoff Bracket 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, etc. based on amount donated week of March.

    Championship “game”

  17. Chuck Moulton

    I was out in the hallway and might have missed some stuff.

    Hayes is giving a convention committee report about preparing for the Austin convention and ways Austin can improve on New Orleans’ success. They are already soliciting “welcoming committee” donors for the convention. Because they don’t yet have A/V prices, they can’t yet set ticket (gold, silver, bronze package) prices. They hope to have a preliminary budget and ticket prices by the next LNC meeting.

    Lark gave his Employment Policy and Compensation Committee (EPCC) report by asking if there were any questions. Goldstein pointed out the EPCC was tasked with helping find and select the new executive director and asked how long the process would take. Sarwark said he met with the EPCC last week and hoped to have a final job description to them by the end of this week. Then he anticipates a new ED would be hired by mid-March. O’Donnell asked that the agenda be amended to amend the policy manual taking the hiring of the ED out of the hands of the chair (which the EPCC — or is it the LNC? — could veto, but never does) and putting it in the hands of the LNC because it is a very important decision. The agenda was amended adding 15 minutes tomorrow for that purpose. Sarwark said he chose to task the EPCC with helping him because it consists of 2 former national chairs and an executive director of a similarly sized organization — all of whom live near Washington, D.C.

    The historical committee report is next.

  18. paulie

    Joshua Smith offers to reach out to people in ND and MN. Cara Schulz would rather discuss MN confidentially.

  19. Chuck Moulton

    Harlos says the historical committee runs across lots of interesting things, including training booklets about door to door campaigning. She suggests the institutional knowledge Shultz and Apollo talked about be put on LPedia. O’Donnell said a hit piece was sent around targeting his campaign based entirely on information from LPedia.

    Van Horn is giving the IT Committee report. She wants to populate the non-LNC positions to preserve some continuity. She wants better communication about how to solve problems… get to a person who can fix it, not just angry Facebook posts.

    Redpath is giving the ballot access report. We have presidential ballot access in 34 states (including DC) and lack it in 17 states. He asked for $50,000 for ballot access drives in 2019. Alaska needs 2,000-3,000 voter registrations, which would cost the LNC $15,000. Arkansas came very close to retaining with governor, but fell short. He suggests $30,000 for an Arkansas petition drive of 10,000 valid signatures. The remaining $5,000 would be a buffer in case things cost more than anticipated. Unfortunately, we lost party status in North Dakota. O’Donnell wondered if New Hampshire should do a party petition or an independent petition. Redpath says Richard Winger suggests that the LP approach the legalize marijuana party in Minnesota (which is ballot qualified) to see if they will change their name to the Libertarian Party. But Mattson is concerned that the re-branded ballot party would be stepping on the toes of our actual affiliate. And Harlos is concerned that we may soft sell libertarianism to get a ballot line… when in reality they all want free ponies. Redpath thinks this is the best ballot access position we’ve ever been after the a midterm election (e.g., lost Arkansas, but gained New York).

    10 minute recess, then the budget.

  20. paulie

    Redpath thinks this is the best ballot access position we’ve ever been after the a midterm election (e.g., lost Arkansas, but gained New York).

    Best for any third party ever.

    http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2018/11/comparing-qualified-party-status-for-libertarian-green-and-constitution-parties-relative-to-four-years-ago/

    Ballot Access News reports:

    “Libertarian Party: compared to the day after the November 2014 election, has gained qualified status in D.C., Kentucky, Massachusetts, New York, and Oklahoma. Compared to November 2014, it has lost status in Alaska, Maryland, North Dakota, and Wisconsin. In Alaska, it only got 1.84% for Governor, and 3% was required. In Maryland, it only got .57% for Governor, and 1% was required. In North Dakota it didn’t have any statewide candidates on the ballot. UPDATE: it appears the Ohio Libertarian Party is still ballot-qualified, even though it did not receive as much as 3% for Governor in November 2018. The law says when a party petitions, it remains on the ballot until the first election that is at least a year later than the date the petition was approved.”

    Subsequently, Ballot Access News also clarified that the party is now on the ballot in South Dakota as well, contrary to what Richard Winger believed when analyzing results immediately after the election. The post-election November 2014 status is in the December 2014 Ballot Access News.

    http://ballot-access.org/2014/12/26/december-2014-ballot-access-news-print-edition/

    Based on this and subsequent email discussions the states which the LP will need to petition or add voter registration to be on the next presidential ballot in are:

    AK (several hundred voter regs will be needed), AL, AR, IA, IL, OH – maybe, maybe not; informally it has been reported that SOS will not side with us but Richard Winger believes we have a good legal case, MD – may be won thru a lawsuit, ME – may be won thru a lawsuit, MN, ND, NH, NJ, RI, PA, TN, VA, WA and WI. CT ballot access is on a race by race basis and presidential ballot access was retained by the last presidential ticket.

    The improvement in the number of signatures needed is more dramatic than the number of states, because two of the hardest states (OK and NY) have LP ballot access retention for the first time and the number of signatures in PA has been substantially reduced. The most difficult state remaining using the easiest method to get presidential ballot access for the LP is Illinois with 25,000 valid signatures, with the next most difficult numbers being 10,000 valid signatures each in Arkansas and Maryland.

  21. paulie

    In the in-person meeting: discussion of candidate support vs ballot access

    Point is made by more than one person that candidate funding goes directly to campaigns and does not have to pass thru LNC. Also that in real life as opposed to generic survey questions donors show that they contribute to ballot access.

  22. paulie

    Most max donors in history at least as far as the records go back last year. Looking to do more major donor cultivation.

    Expecting to raise money with 2020 convention theme contest, welcoming committee in 2019.

  23. paulie Post author

    Alabama-Georgia game starts in a few minutes here so my attention will be divided. Hopefully Chuck is still liveblogging 🙂 And/or someone joins us.

  24. paulie

    Sorry, I was up pretty much all night too but coffee is not helping at this point and I get a mid-afternoon hard crash even when I don’t sit up all night, even worse when I do, plus the SEC championship is on and there’s no way to concentrate on budgets and stuff which tends to make me glaze anyway. Hopefully JBH has it covered better, will go check FB.

  25. paulie

    JBH did not cover budget details either yet. We’ll have to wait for more details on that.

    Thanks for coverage Chuck and all readers for your attention.

    Coverage will resume in the morning. If anyone wants to discuss any of this in the meantime the comments are open.

  26. Michael Wilson

    When it comes to ballot access in Washington State we need only 1000 registered voter’s names. It is easy to get if people start on time. I would not worry too much about that one. I think we have a team that will be on the watch this time around.

  27. paulie

    Washington State wasn’t one anyone on the ballot committee was worried about and in any case it’s not a 2019 matter anyway.

  28. paulie Post author

    Thanks Chuck Moulton and Pauli for covering the meeting. Much appreciated.

    Thanks to you and everyone else who is reading and especially commenting. Comments make it feel less like I’m talking to myself. If anyone has time to help us with the coverage tomorrow that would be great. Don’t worry if it’s redundant, I’d rather have redundancy than miss stuff, and I can’t pay attention or hear everything all the time.

  29. paulie

    Not just the number of states but number of voters impacted and number of signatures that need to be gathered. See above, and thanks for the graphic.

    Meanwhile, meeting has started this morning. Lark thanks LP candidates.

  30. paulie

    Victoria Paige Lee – youth engagement committee 450 responses so far to survey
    Aeris Stewart elected chair

  31. paulie

    Joe Bishop-Henchman Starting with a discussion of the minutes of the last meeting. We got our fifth version of the minutes at 5:57 am this morning.

    Joe Bishop-Henchman Minutes adopted 10-1. I was the one, voting no. I received this 273 page document, which is the fifth draft sent to us, three hours ago at 5:57 am and have no idea what has changed in it, so I didn’t feel comfortable adopting it as our official record.

    Special committee reports.

    Joe Bishop-Henchman The Blockchain Committee is meeting monthly on Saturdays. Preston Smith is the Chair.

    Joe Bishop-Henchman Nice pun from Alicia to Victoria Paige Lee of the Youth Engagement Committee who got engaged yesterday.

    Joe Bishop-Henchman Apply to the Convention Voting Process Committee or the Membership Support Committee at https://www.lp.org/lnc-subcommittee-positions-now-open/

  32. Chuck Moulton

    The meeting has started. There were a few public comments. At the party last night a lot of LNC members were concerned about deficit budgets and unrealistic revenue numbers. I think it’s likely that there will be support for a balanced budget.

    There was a vote on adopting the September minutes, which passed after a few questions from Lark and Mattson. These minutes were not auto-approved (needed to be voted on instead) because Harlos had some medical issues which prevented her from preparing minute by the normal deadline.

    The blockchain committee selected Preston Smith as its chair. The youth engagement committee selected Aris Stewart as its chair. Lark was concerned about targeting high schools rather than colleges because it is much harder to get our foot into the door.

    Applications are being accepted for the convention voting process committee. Applications are being accepted for the membership support committee.

    Because of problems with the computer that will be shown on the screen during the budget votes (a windows update), they will go to regional reports while that is sorted out.

  33. paulie

    Mar in DC or Baltimore area again to save money; Jul in Austin TX to tour convention hotel.

  34. Chuck Moulton

    As usual, I don’t understand why people waste time with oral regional reports rather than referring people to their written reports.

    After a long series of state by state speeches, the LNC is now scheduling its next few meetings. It is difficult because there are a lot of possible conflicts with state conventions. The next LNC meeting will be March 9-10, 2019 in Alexandria, VA. The meeting after that will be July 27-28, 2019 in Austin, TX (location of the 2020 national convention). Montana wants to host an LNC meeting, but many LNC members were concerned about airfares.

  35. Chuck Moulton

    Lark wants to do other things before executive session. Redpath wants to spend a time certain (30 minutes) in executive session to be nicer to the gallary. Mattson wants to do the budget before her other motions. They are going into executive session for 30 minutes.

  36. paulie

    Back from ES and on the budget. I’m not up to speed on this discussion so will leave it to others.

  37. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    March in DC? Oh, boy.

    I should have recovered from fucking chemo by then (quitting a second time this week). And still be alive.

    And chemo-addled brain again working enough to figure out what that voting proposal was about and if there’s some insidious hidden agenda behind it. ha ha ha

    YAY! A little more fun before I go!!

  38. Chuck Moulton

    We are out of executive session. There were several amendments that changed amounts based on the confidential spreadsheet from executive session. They were adopted without objection.

    Bishop-Henchman and Longstreth have a number of amendments to increase revenue or decrease costs:
    a) prioritized wish list of spending items if we get more revenue
    b) adjust branding to average of 2017 and 2018
    c) postpone arkansas ballot access – wait until 2020
    d) increase revenue and have the board fundraise more
    e) make campus support a self-funded project instead of a core budget item
    f) affiliate support – CRM: require more state contributions
    g) reduce LP News from 5 issues to 4 issues
    h) eliminate direct candidate grants
    i) reduce salary, benefits, etc. consistent with the earlier motion coming out of executive session
    j) increased board contributions by $5,500

    I didn’t catch them all. I think the basic gist is they are trying to balance the budget by some strategic cuts. Since Bishop-Henchman is also blogging, I hope Paulie will copy his list more precisely.

    Redpath wants to divide the question. Mattson says an individual committee member can divide on demand (without needing a vote) because they are different subjects. Henchman objects to division by demand. Sarwark rules that an individual member can divide on demand. Bishop-Henchman appeals from the ruling of the chair. The ruling of the chair was sustained.

    There will be a discussion and vote on the package excluding the Redpath things (Arkansas ballot access and the CRM project). The big package passed by roll call vote.

    They are now discussing item F (CRM project). Redpath is worried only FEC filing states can pay $100/month for the CRM project. Moellman is concerned that states will not cough up $100/month. It was pointed out that there are more states on the CRM than understood (19, not 9); therefore, it should be $50/month instead of $100/month. Nakalia proposed menu pricing (different based on the size of the state) rather than the same for each state. Merced moves that the $100/month be amended to $50/month because there are double as many states on the CRM as originally understood. The Merced amendment passes. The CRM amendment passes by a roll call vote of 9-8.

    They are discussing item C (no Arkansas ballot access in 2019 + no $5k excess). Bishop-Henchman pointed out there has been a party petition in Arkansas 3 times before and all three times they have not retained. It is also possible to do a presidential only Arkansas petition for $1,000 in 2020. Redpath says signatures will just be more expensive in 2020, so we should get them in 2019. He also says Arkansas is very important and donors like donating for ballot access. O’Donnell proposes that the motion be amended to get rid of the $5k slush + half of Arkansas (offering them the same deal as Connecticut — the state pays for half of the drive). Redpath moves to substitute a reduction from $50k to $40k. Mattson points out that if we are reducing the ballot access expenses then we should be reducing the ballot access revenues because it’s hard to fundraise when there are no current ballot drives to show for it. The O’Donnell amendment fails. The Redpath amendment fails. The ballot access expense reduction passes by a roll call vote of 12-4.

    Goldstein moves to reduce the number of LP News from 4 to 3. Lark and Harlos say 3 issues isn’t touching members and donors enough and will hurt fundraising. Phillips wonders whether this would be paired with removing CRM fees… Goldstein says no. Daugherty thinks cutting LP News is better than cutting salary. Sarwark thinks cutting LP News more would be insane: cutting LP News would be cutting muscle instead of fat. It fails by a roll call vote of 6-7.

    Bishop-Henchman moves that the CRM fees be reconsidered and replaced with having 3 LNC meetings in 2019 instead of 4 LNC meetings (reducing administrative expenses). That was ruled out of order, so instead he just moved the last part: reducing the number of LNC meetings. Goldstein, Sarwark, and Harlos say we need more than 3 LNC meetings to do the list of the party. Sarwark points out if we have less meetings, then we have less fundraising parties in conjunction with meetings. It passes by roll call 11-4.

    Bishop-Henchman moves that the CRM fees be reconsidered. The reconsideration passes 13-3. Bishop-Henchman moves to amend by striking the changes to states and the change to the budget. Hagan points out even though we are balanced on an accrual basis still have a cash basis crisis because we owe the Hyatt $40,000. Longstreth points out in the last hour many states have pulled out of the project because of the fees (4-5 out of 19 already), so they won’t actually generate the intended revenues and the states are pissed. The amendment passes by roll call unanimously, then the underlying motion passes without objection.

    The budget is adopted by a roll call vote (the vote total was not announced).

  39. paulie Post author

    Budget is adopted with $100 surplus.

    Sorry I’ve been glazed, at least 2 nights with virtually no sleep …maybe more.

  40. paulie Post author

    Ballot access cut from 50k to 22k, basically eliminating Arkansas even though they got 2nd best in the nation for gov (2.9% vs 3%) and set new national records for state treasurer and state auditor this year.

  41. paulie Post author

    postpone arkansas ballot access – wait until 2020

    They actually said do presidential only, but even doing it as full party in 2020 would be dumb and just cost more. Too many other states need to be done in 2020 and Arkansas and ND should be knocked out in 2019. Everyone else will be hiring petitioners in 2020, not just multiple LP states but lots of initiatives, vanity wealthy presidential candidates, etc etc etc.

  42. paulie Post author

    If anything Alaska should be able to do it on their own. Kohlhaas still knows how to fundraise and is seeking contracts with other state parties so why not his own?

  43. paulie Post author

    Since Bishop-Henchman is also blogging, I hope Paulie will copy his list more precisely.

    The rest of his list so far other than what I already posted:

    Joe Bishop-Henchman I am debating budget matters. Apologies for the lack of updates. Will update what we decide!

    Scott Lieberman Joe – I hope you are a reserve fund hawk.

    Joe Bishop-Henchman I believe I will be the most hated man in the party after today.

    Duke Van Horn No longer the most hated man in the party?

    Joe Bishop-Henchman The LNC has adopted a 2019 budget with a surplus of $100. The proposed fee for states to use the CRM project was rescinded.

    Daniel Fishman Joe, imho the states would be be very unwise to adopt using the CRM if their data could be held ransom at some point in the future. I would like to see a longer term commitment in the futre from the LNC to keep the CRM free.

    Aeris Stewart CRM?

    Daniel Fishman
    Aeris StewartCustomer Relationship Management software. In specific we are using a version of CivicCRM

    Aeris Stewart Thanks.

    How can we figure out what’s in the budget?

  44. paulie Post author

    Mattson points out that if we are reducing the ballot access expenses then we should be reducing the ballot access revenues because it’s hard to fundraise when there are no current ballot drives to show for it.

    I agree with Alicia. It’s dishonest and unrealistic to expect $133k of ballot access fundraising to be spent on other projects in 2019 with $22k being the only ballot access spending in 2019, mostly up in Alaska. If I was in a position to make a major contribution and cared about ballot access right now I’d deal with state parties directly and cut the LNC and its three card monte shell games out of the process.

  45. paulie Post author

    Sarwark thinks cutting LP News more would be insane: cutting LP News would be cutting muscle instead of fat.

    Nick is correct here as well.

  46. paulie Post author

    reducing the number of LNC meetings. Goldstein, Sarwark, and Harlos say we need more than 3 LNC meetings to do the list of the party. Sarwark points out if we have less meetings, then we have less fundraising parties in conjunction with meetings. It passes by roll call 11-4.

    Nick was right. The meetings have been more than paying for themselves lately.

    They should make up for the loss of meeting with increased electronic meetings, but I highly doubt they will do enough of those to make up the lack.

  47. Chuck Moulton

    Many LNC members need to leave soon. Therefore, Harlos moves that everything remaining on the agenda which wasn’t taken up before adjournment be put on the agenda of an electronic meeting to be called soon by the chair. That motion passed without objection.

    O’Donnell moved that the agenda be amended to consider the LiberLand resolution now because LiberLand representatives have traveled to this meeting to speak to it. Harlos read the resolution. Mattson points out that as a public policy resolution without previous notice, it requires unanimity (3/4 with previous notice). By a show of hands it passes unanimously.

    Goldstein moves that the Kerner marketing proposal be taken up now. The proposal is that the LNC pays Kerner $10,000 per quarter plus crazy hourly fees for a website and one sentence of branding. Harlos moves to postpone to the e-meeting so that more deliberation can be given. Phillips moves all previous questions. The postponement fails. The motion fails by a roll call vote of 0-13.

    We are now in public comment from the gallery immediately before adjournment.

  48. paulie Post author

    You too Chuck! You got a lot of details we didn’t get.

    And thanks to the readers. For anyone who doesn’t know these comments don’t close so feel free to jump in to comment on any of this whether or not you have commented at IPR in the past. Even if you see this months or years later.

    And the ustream recording remains available as well if anyone wants to go to tape to add to and correct what we have here.

  49. paulie Post author

    Joe Bishop-Henchman
    2 mins

    Greetings from the most unpopular man in the Libertarian Party!

    In 2016, the LNC got a windfall. In the excitement of the presidential nomination, a lot of people signed up for memberships and gave money. Many (but not all!) chose not to renew when their year was up. The LNC at that time couldn’t know then it was a windfall but it turned out to be one in retrospect. The money could have been saved or spent, and it was spent on launching a bunch of new projects with ongoing annual expenses.

    So in 2016 we spent down our accumulated surplus, and in 2017 we spent down more. This year, we had nothing left to spend down so we went into the red. We’ll end 2018 with $48,000 in unpaid bills, credit card bills with no cash to pay them, and the prospect of $200,000 more in red ink in the year ahead unless something changed.

    Region 1 Representative Richard Longstreth and I probably vote together just about the least of any two people on the LNC. He’s a radical, I’m a pragmatist. We have different visions for where the party goes, who runs in 2020, and how we win elections. But we share a determination that the LNC balance its budget. So we stayed up until the wee hours last night, hacking the budget and coming up with realistic revenue options to get us to balance.

    The LNC just adopted much of our handiwork, and we are now projected to end 2019 with a cash surplus of $100. Everyone had to give: media relations, direct candidate grants, affiliate development, one ballot access drive, added resources for more fundraising, added conditions to new projects to raise money before spending, and created a wish list for restoring items if we come in better than we expect. A proposal by several states to charge a $100 a month fee to use the CRM project was briefly adopted, then rescinded, but better oversight of this very large project was included. The LNC cut our own meetings budget by a third. No one was spared.

    We now have a baseline where we aren’t chasing making payroll every month, racking up credit card fees, and uncertain whether we’ll make it through the year. Campaign support is able to grow, we will be on 50+DC in 2020, the CRM project will proceed, convention planning is beginning, and staff is energized to make things happen. We can now add stuff as we raise money for it. We have set ourselves up for a surplus in 2020, and extra resources for our hard-pressed fundraising staff will now enable more growth.

    I pissed off every interest and faction in the party in the process but there was no other way. We on the LNC were handed an unbalanced budget and a cash crisis and other than vague hopes and dreams, there were no other solutions. We needed a balanced budget.

    I’ve already heard from a dozen people who are motivated to help. Several Board members gave four figure gifts today and yesterday, including myself. We’re all making fundraising calls. We’re figuring out how to be impactful and efficient. Re-election is obviously not in the cards for me but I did what I promised I would do when I ran.

    Thank you to everyone!

  50. paulie Post author

    lnc-votes@hq.lp.org via googlegroups.com

    2:55 PM (1 minute ago)

    to lnc-business, Alex
    Hello Everyone,

    I apologize for leaving so briskly when the meeting ended. I did want to say it was pleasure seeing you all again and working through all the challenges we faced this weekend.

    Have safe trips home, I look forward to seeing you all in March!

    Alex Merced
    Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
    _______________________________________________
    Lnc-votes mailing list

  51. paulie Post author

    John Phillips -The Unlabeled Libertarian
    1 hr

    LNC Update.

    1. We passed a balanced budget after much wrangling. Pretty well every section of the budget had to take a big hit. Hence my recent push for membership and donations.
    1A) We all argued and wrangled, but special thanks to Joe Bishop-Henchman and Richard Longstreth for their efforts in making it happen. I had a basic idea of just cutting across the board, but they stayed up all night hashing out details, then fightimg through making it work
    1B) We all really had to take hits to our pet projects. It sucks, but if people don’t like it I suggest digging deep and putting your money where your mouth is. I did. To the tune of pledging $2500 in 2019 (tho to be fair that does include my gold package for the 2020 convention as part of the Welcoming Committee package). I am a mechanic, that is a metric crap ton percentage of my yearly income, I say this not to brag, but to solidify how little whining I will listen to about being asked to donate.

    2. We saved the CRM project WITHOUT having to resort to charging state affiliates. So I heartily recommend your states sign up for this no charge tool provided by the National party.

    3. We passed the resolution in support of Lieberland.

    4. We did not accept Robin Koerner’s proposal, we did however leave it open for further negotiations.

    5. We did not finish the agenda, but Ms. Harlos rightfully badgered us into agreeing to an online meeting to finish it. Love ya Caryn Ann.

    Those are the major points. If you have questions I work very hard to respond to questions so feel free to reach out.

    John

  52. William T. Forrest

    “I agree with Alicia. It’s dishonest and unrealistic to expect $133k of ballot access fundraising to be spent on other projects in 2019 with $22k being the only ballot access spending in 2019, mostly up in Alaska. ”

    Seems rather fraudulent. I understand this has been common practice but is such an extreme ratio unprecedented?

  53. William T. Forrest

    Agreed, more budget sleight of hand nonsense to claim a balanced budget instead of actually considering what makes sense.

  54. William T. Forrest

    Doesn’t sound like something we should hope to repeat.

    Do you know how normal or abnormal in historical terms a 6:1 ratio between ballot access fundraising and ballot access spending is? This reminds of the fictitious “social security reserve” of the federal government.

  55. JBH

    Donors on that project are giving for 2020 ballot access. We will raise some in 2019 and more in 2020, and spend most of it in 2020. There’s neither a requirement nor an expectation that we spend all the money we raise in 2019.

    I believe we should reform our budget process to categorize revenue as member revenue, major gift revenue, event revenue, etc., instead of frankly made up numbers categorized by project. That’s how fundraisers think about it – by who is giving – and we will pitch whatever we do that the donor wants to support. Every revenue line item should data, names, or both backing up the estimate. It is not the case that spending creates donations – it’s the vision, the goal, the impact, the activity, the results that creates donations.

    The total fundraising goal is the main thing that matters
    All told the total revenue goal is a modest increase over this year, and doable based on past metrics and our fundraising resources. We could have spent more time moving around what lines the revenue were in but that was unimportant compared to cutting expenses to get to a balanced foundational budget.

  56. William T. Forrest

    “Donors on that project are giving for 2020 ballot access. We will raise some in 2019 and more in 2020, and spend most of it in 2020. There’s neither a requirement nor an expectation that we spend all the money we raise in 2019.”

    There’s no lock box or trust fund. If you raise the planned 133k telling donors it’s for ballot access in 2019, you will spend 100% of it in 2019 with approximately 15% being for ballot access and 85% for other projects if everything goes according to the budget plan. You will then need to raise other money to fund ballot access in 2020. Again, I realize this is not unprecedented, I’m just wondering if the 6:1 ration in the pre-presidential year is more lopsided than what was done in the past.

  57. paulie Post author

    Justin O’Donnell shared a link.
    8 mins

    The LNC had to make some hard choices regarding budget cuts this weekend in order to make aure we had a balanced budget for 2019.

    One of our missions moving forward is to increase membership and increase fundraising to help bring back some of the things we had to cut, and to make sure that we move into 2020 fully prepared to achieve 50 state ballot access.

    Join now, or renew your membership at https://www.lp.org/wethepeople/?f=jod to help us out today!

  58. paulie Post author

    https://www.lp.org/doubled-donation/

    https://www.lp.org/moneybomb/

    We must invest early if we want results on Election Day!

    Want to help us have a blockbuster year in 2019?

    A generous donor has pledged a $15,000 matching gift, to help make that happen.

    So, if you give right now to our 2019 Money Bomb, your donation will be DOUBLED and thus will go TWICE as far!

    Critical and strategic work funded by this money bomb includes but is not limited to:
    candidate recruitment and support, ballot access work, and targeted outreach.

    Thank you for your support!

    Raised so far
    $9,064.32
    Fundraising goal
    $15,000.00

  59. Jim

    JBH “All told the total revenue goal is a modest increase over this year, and doable based on past metrics and our fundraising resources.”

    What past metrics? 2018 set a mid term revenue record, at least in the non-UMP years. No odd year has had more revenue than the preceding even year since 2006/2007.

  60. William T. Forrest

    Thanks for the rah rah but I like people who spend money they ask for on what they say they will spend it on. If Arkansas does a full party petition drive I will consider a donation to them directly through the state party, if finances allow. And I’ll keep an eye out to see if North Dakota or any other states fund their own state party ballot drives in 2019. I’ll consider possibly donating to the LNC more seriously when their budget revenue categories look more like their budget spending categories.

  61. Chuck Moulton

    Joe Bishop-Henchman seems to think balancing the budget will make him unpopular because it cuts a lot of people’s pet projects. I disagree: I think most LP members will respect the fiscally responsible quest for a balanced budget.

  62. Pingback: John Phillips: LNC Update | Independent Political Report

  63. Gina

    Balancing the budget is probably a good thing, or it may be an overreaction to the massively imbalanced budget last year. It’s probably smart to be cautious though, what with the transition to new office staff management and the donor disappointment/exhaustion with election results. Revenue categories should match spending categories more realistically though, or perhaps as Mr. Bishop-Henchman suggested do away with subject-matter categories on the revenue side and substitute method-of-solicitation categories. But whatever you do, don’t raise money under one pretext such as ballot access, spend it on other things in 2019, then have to raise the same money to actually get ballot access in 2020. That’s not a way to encourage people to trust you with their money.

  64. Caryn Ann Harlos

    You guys did fantastic at live-blogging. I regret I can no longer do that but I hope you are taking advantage of the One Note and Live Vote tallies – you do not need to keep track of those things but can see my live minutes and roll call votes. Get with me if you are not sure where to find this. I want people to be able to follow everything in real time as much as possible. All roll call vote tally sheets are live. My minutes are useful to a point since I use my own personal shorthand but they are understandable. I also keep FB messenger up for any member who wishes to shoot me a note.

    There were interesting “alliances” this meeting. I agreed more with Mattson than I ever have and agreed with Redpath on most critical things and got a bit trucculent when his rights were being bulldozed.

    Funniest moment (and it was in good humour – no one take this any other way)

    We were getting into the RONR weeds and Nick says, and this is why I was elected Chair and across the table Joshua says ouch!

  65. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I was not going to vote for a deficit budget but there are several things that were done in the wrong way here (inadvertantly)- if ballot access were to be cut it should be done as a budget line and not targeting any particular state. I was a bit miffed that Arkansas was targeted. If that was a Region 1 state I would have been out of my mind. We can’t do that as the LNC. We need to remember we are the tail and not the dog. I had suggested structuring it as putting off to 2020 rather than 2019 just because we can’t afford it.

    Also another thing I am not very happy about and for the first time ever in this Party I answer “present” to a vote rather than yes/no/abstain and it was on the Koerner proposal. We have no money – obviously we could not approve anything – out of the question but I believe we have treated this man in an unprofessional, flippant, and rude way and I am utterly embarassed about it. We as a professional board should not call people liars – it is obvious that there were some very serious miscommunication issues and the fault lies largely with us IMHO. I believe we owe him a large apology and he will be receiving one from me personally.

    Very thrilled that the Liberland resolution passed unanimously (kinda wish I could go move there eventually)

  66. Caryn Ann Harlos

    From JBH

    ==There’s neither a requirement nor an expectation that we spend all the money we raise in 2019===

    Absolutely correct. It would be crazy land otherwise.

  67. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ===Redpath wants to divide the question. Mattson says an individual committee member can divide on demand (without needing a vote) because they are different subjects. Henchman objects to division by demand. Sarwark rules that an individual member can divide on demand. Bishop-Henchman appeals from the ruling of the chair. The ruling of the chair was sustained.===

    An important point was missed here – and that was one of member rights. Redpath’s rights were almost trampled over, and that was my main reason for sustaining the ruling.

    There is something I see happening again and again. On Platform Committee many times folks opposed a change because they personally did not agree with that ideological point. That isn’t their job. Their job is to weight whether or not that ideological point is LIBERTARIAN and if it is, is it weighty enough to be in the Platform. Similarly, when the appeal of the Chair’s ruling came up it was mentioned that we should overturn it – not because it was wrong – but because we didn’t like the result. That is completely bass ackwards. This is one area I disagree with Nick on because he encourages that sort of thing by basically doing the nudge nudge wink wink and tells people they could very well find him incorrect and puts that in air quotes knowing full well he wasn’t. That was done at convention and that is how we got screwed on the JC. If the ruling is correct, it is correct – period – and treating it any other way tramples on minority member rights, in this instance, Redpath’s.

    Going back to the Platform committee this sort of thing happened in another way where Starr’s rights were being trampled because he wanted to go over the abortion plank and was fillibustered. I personally would rather have eaten my own foot out of a bear trap than go over that plank (and I know his advocacy of any change would be voted down anyway) but he had every right to be heard.

  68. Caryn Ann Harlos

    JBH,

    ==I believe we should reform our budget process to categorize revenue as member revenue, major gift revenue, event revenue, etc., instead of frankly made up numbers categorized by project.==

    Not sure I agree here – it doesn’t help us balance between in and out. For instance, in smaller projects, such as the history project ALL of that funding is earmarked from donations particularly for that project, and should not merely be member revenue. Many if not most of the history donors are folks who have refused to give to the party for years and are only giving for this project (which also refutes the stubborn – should die in a fire – idea that giving is a fixed pie.)

    I don’t see where it was mentioned here but Lauren brought up something very very important – she did a targeted solicitation from people who formerly regularly gave and have not for more than a decade with the news of the sex worker plank. And got a great response. This tells us something – we keep acting like a seeker sensitive church (to use an analogy) and more seasoned Libertarians are tired of all watered down milk and no meat.

  69. paulie Post author

    For instance, in smaller projects, such as the history project ALL of that funding is earmarked from donations particularly for that project, and should not merely be member revenue.

    Would you favor treating money raised under the pretext of ballot access the same way?

  70. William T. Forrest

    Good question. And thank you for standing up for members rights and your general dedication to fair and open process Caryn Ann.

  71. paulie Post author

    And thank you for standing up for members rights and your general dedication to fair and open process Caryn Ann.

    +1

  72. Chuck Moulton

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    An important point was missed here – and that was one of member rights. Redpath’s rights were almost trampled over, and that was my main reason for sustaining the ruling.

    There may be an is / ought difference here.

    I won’t comment on whether the Robert’s Rules interpretation was correct (because I serve on the JC (or the sort-of-JC fpr putposes of appeals) and such a question could conveivably come before us. Is Caryn Ann saying this is a “member right” because it is in Robert’s Rules or because it ought to be in Robert’s Rules?

    On the ought to question, I happen to think it is a stupid, ill-conceived, counterproductive rule as applied to budget matters. It amounts to a sort of line item veto — or rather a line item “let’s talk about this thing separately”. Such a use clearly hurts the compromises inherent in budget negotiations. In the “ought” view, no member rights whatsoever would be trampled by a majority vote on budget amendments. Anyone who want to sever a particular line item or topic can move to divide the question and seek majority support for that motion. I fail to see any rationalization for why one member unilaterally ought to be able to do that.

    The LNC ought to pass a rule of order to supercede Robert’s on that (assuming the Robert’s interpretation which was sustained in the chair’s ruling). It would nake future budget negotiations much more sensible and waste less time catering to minorities which can’t even muster enough support to divide the question.

  73. Chuck Moulton

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    Very thrilled that the Liberland resolution passed unanimously (kinda wish I could go move there eventually)

    I am not thrilled. The resolution was batshit crazy.

    The notion that just because two countries contest an area, that area may be legally homesteaded by a third entity is legally absurd. LiberLand is an area that multiple countries will periodically come in and bulldoze because the “LiberLand” government lacks any conventional legal legitimacy.

    Do I want to see a libertarian utopia country where libertarians can live in peace with a small or non-existant government? Of course! This isn’t it. LiberLand is a scam to bilk money from libertarians for “cotizenship” in a “country” in which they cannot actually safely live.

    Additionally, even if LiberLand were actually a legally sound and well-implemented plan where people could freely move and live, the resolution was still absurd. It is a waste of the LNC’s time to proclaim toothless “public policy” resolutions instead of doing the business of organizing the party. The Libertarian Party is not actually going to contact Congress and the President urging them to recognize LiberLand, as the resolution says it will. And even if the LP did contact Congress and the President, they would be ignored or laughed at.

    The LiberLand resolution was worse than a waste of time. It was a joke, and its consideration made the LNC more of a joke by association. If I were on the LNC, I would have voted a resounding “no”. It am shocked that no one on the LNC had the balls to vote a sensible “no”. They all were probably too worried about pissing off some loud constituency (hurting their re-election chances) than exercising common sense. I know for a fact that several LNC members made a point of abstaining or leaving the room — or voted yes even though they thought this was crazy — to help their re-election chances.

    But then again I’m not really a political animal. I call them like I see then rather than trying to please people for political gain.

  74. paulie Post author

    […]

    4:07 PM (5 hours ago)

    to Ken, me, mpakko
    Michael Pakko called me and we talked.

    I have pledged $5,000 for the Arkansas ballot drive, subject to:
    (1) This is a matching pledge; y’all have to raise another $5,000 first (and not counting LNC money as part of that).
    (2) Michael Pakko will be working on or leading the drive again.

    […]
    (+) Arkansas ran 32 candidates in 2018.
    (+) Arkansas is one of the few states where we can petition in 2019.
    (+) Arkansas has already raised $10,000 which they can use for this drive.
    (+) Lee and Ashley live in Arkansas so that’s two good circulators right there.
    (+) Paulie and Darryl also already want to work on this drive. Two more good circulators.
    (+) Michael Pakko has managed this drive before and is willing to do it again.
    (+) In my view, chances of persuading legislature to lower requirements are better when we meet existing requirements vs when we don’t.

    […]

  75. Jim

    Chuck Moulton “The notion that just because two countries contest an area, that area may be legally homesteaded by a third entity is legally absurd.”

    According to wikipedia Croatia says the territory is part of Serbia. but Serbia says it isn’t theirs. No country is actually claiming the land. But both of them are saying that no one else can claim it, for some reason.

    There are 3 other, smaller pockets of land on the Croatian-Serbian border that neither country is claiming.

  76. William T. Forrest

    If anyone tries to move to Liberland they are going to be treated as trespassers and criminals for the foreseeable future. If anyone is buying Liberland citizenships that’s fine if they understand it’s a gag display thing but if anyone is buying it thinking they can move there and live a more free life they are getting scammed.

    There have been a bunch of these libertarian country, libertarian seasteading or Galt’s gulch projects over the years. Sometimes they are billed as a new nation or stateless territory, sometimes just as libertarians taking over a town or county or planned community of some sort. Every single one I can think of has always been a scam or shit show of some sort except the Free State Project, which doesn’t cost a big investment to join, isn’t claiming to be free of nation-state jurisdictions, and is dispersed enough among the million-plus population of NH to be somewhat viable. Jury may still be out on that one.

  77. Seebeck

    I don’t see where it was mentioned here but Lauren brought up something very very important – she did a targeted solicitation from people who formerly regularly gave and have not for more than a decade with the news of the sex worker plank. And got a great response. This tells us something – we keep acting like a seeker sensitive church (to use an analogy) and more seasoned Libertarians are tired of all watered down milk and no meat.

    Would something similar for the new licensing plank be productive?

  78. Anthony Dlugos

    Chuck M is 110% correct and articulate in his post of December 4, 2018 at 20:08.

    That resolution is idiotic with no upside.

    In fact, as Chuck and WTF point out, there are so many grifters involved in these Galt’s Gulch type movements, attaching our good name to one of them is brain dead dumb and myopic in the extreme.

    I don’t understand why there isn’t more concern with protecting the brand image of this party.

  79. Anthony Dlugos

    As an aside, I AM a political animal who tries to please people for political gain, (the LP is a political party, after all) and I reached the same conclusion as Chuck.

    The number of people in the larger populace who would be reached by such a resolution would be outnumbered by those who think its “batshit crazy” (succinctly correct descriptor) probably on the order of 50,000 to 1.

  80. Pingback: LNC 2019 Budget | Independent Political Report

  81. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Chuck, he would have gotten enough support to divide – it never got that far because under RONR (and it is clear – no one really thought Nick”s ruling was wrong) says that is not necessary, so the absurdity you posit was not an issue here. RONR is what it is, and everyone has a right to rely on that until the LNC passes a special rule of order superseding that, which it can always do. What we can’t do is ignore current member rights. That is an IS and an OUGHT. We can change the is if we wish.

  82. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ===Would something similar for the new licensing plank be productive?==

    Yes absolutely.

  83. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ===If anyone tries to move to Liberland they are going to be treated as trespassers and criminals for the foreseeable future. If anyone is buying Liberland citizenships that’s fine if they understand it’s a gag display thing but if anyone is buying it thinking they can move there and live a more free life they are getting scammed.===

    The representatives were very open about all of that. It is an interesting experiment that we should support and obviously my opinion was shared by the entire LNC as it had to pass unanimously and it did.

  84. Caryn Ann Harlos

    ==Would you favor treating money raised under the pretext of ballot access the same way?==

    HIstory fund money is raised through a specific link and is a very small line item. I am not sure how that would work for projects that are multi-year big ticket items.

  85. Caryn Ann Harlos

    As for an assertion that some LNC members did not vote no on a resolution because of re-election issues, that makes no sense. No one will care about this vote even next week nevermind in two years in the midst of the typical presidential drama which will include Gov Weld. There were maybe two that always abstain on public policy resolutions that likely would have – and no one left the room to avoid a vote. If that could be proven those people should be called out publicly. There was a lot of up and down activity because the meeting ran late and many people were getting ready to leave. I was up and down from my seat gathering luggage but was always in the room and I don’t recall anyone leaving the room (will need to review the video).

    The Libertarian Party of the UK followed our lead and passed the same resolution. I spent a good deal of time talking with the representatives both there and in the week leading up to the meeting and remain very happy with our decision – and yes a release will be going out calling on the US government to take that action. Just because we are small and it is not likely we will influence that is no reason not to do something that costs us absolutely nothing. Sometimes I swear Libertarians like to be grumpypants for the sake of it. Get off my lawn.

  86. Starchild

    Chuck Moulton writes (December 1, 2018 at 10:41):

    “Bishop-Henchman asked how LPHQ was saving money. Daugherty said they cut contractor hours and cut out-sourced cleaning from twice a week to once a week saving $3,000.”

    Money spent on hiring outsiders to come in and clean the office is one of the kind of line-item expenses that we rarely saw or talked about during my two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, despite my repeatedly pressing for a budget that plainly disclosed them. I never recall hearing about this particular expense.

    Such details shouldn’t only come out when revealed in passing by staff – they should be plainly listed in the party’s budget, so that LNC members can evaluate whether particular spending items are a wise use of members’ money or not.

  87. Starchild

    paulie reports (December 2, 2018 at 15:18) that Joe Bishop-Henchman writes,

    “The LNC cut our own meetings budget by a third.”

    About time! I repeatedly sought to cut the LNC meeting budget, to mostly deaf ears. If this had been done in 2016 as I suggested, the LP would be in better fiscal shape now.

    Upon further reading however, it sadly appears that they chose to accomplish this by cutting the number of meetings, rather than cutting the amount spent on flying staffers to meetings and paying for their accommodations, paying for hotel meeting rooms, and ordering catered food. (In other words, cutting muscle instead of fat, to borrow Nick Sarwark’s description of what it would mean to cut back on publishing LP News – which I agree should not be cut).

  88. Starchild

    Caryn Ann Harlos writes (December 4, 2018 at 04:03),

    “Lauren brought up something very very important – she did a targeted solicitation from people who formerly regularly gave and have not for more than a decade with the news of the sex worker plank. And got a great response. This tells us something – we keep acting like a seeker sensitive church (to use an analogy) and more seasoned Libertarians are tired of all watered down milk and no meat.”

    This is an important point, and encouraging to hear.

    On another matter, Chuck Moulton writes (December 4, 2018 at 20:08),

    “The notion that just because two countries contest an area, that area may be legally homesteaded by a third entity is legally absurd.”

    That’s misstating the situation. The area that has been homesteaded as Liberland is not contested by the governments of Croatia and Serbia – neither of them want it. Given the extreme barriers to entry facing startup countries, we should welcome the opportunity offered by this unusual circumstance. I agree with Caryn Ann in being glad the LNC unanimously passed a resolution in support.

    Finally, Carol Moore writes (December 2, 2018 at 12:28),

    “March in DC? Oh, boy. I should have recovered from fucking chemo by then (quitting a second time this week). And still be alive.”

    I certainly hope so, Carol! Sorry to hear you are ailing. I strongly encourage abstaining from the carcinogens meat, dairy, coffee, and alcohol, and trying to get enough exercise (even if that won’t be easy when feeling like crap from the chemo).

  89. Carol Moore/Secession.net

    Starchild wrote: ” I strongly encourage abstaining from the carcinogens meat, dairy, coffee, and alcohol, and trying to get enough exercise (even if that won’t be easy when feeling like crap from the chemo).”

    Thanks for sentiment. To me cancer is a political issue since so much of it is cause by pollution, including the natural and mostly man-made pollutants in food. Cut all 95% of the above last June and keeping the body alkalai. I was a total chemo skeptic, but fear drove me into. Fear of wicked side-effects made me quit after third session of one drug combo and after second of another. Pre-existing infections of lyme, shingles and cytomegalovirus made me particularly susceptible.

    So instead of spending this year updating my websites I am AGAIN side-tracked by B.S. – researching how to survive at least long enough to update my websites and keep them up at least until the nuke war gets us!!!! Lots of garlic and broccoli is key!

    At least I’m not wasiting my time this year on narcissistic enablers of statist pigs. Sigh…

    By the way, if LP really wants to make an impact, why not become the POST nuke war party? Put together a whole survivalist and post-nuke war reconstruction plan (radical decentralist of course) that candidates can use as they choose. That would get the Deep State REALLY crazy… ha ha ha

    But LP Survivalists will have to wait a while before it gets going… Unless someone else wants to start it. 🙂

  90. dL

    I don’t see where it was mentioned here but Lauren brought up something very very important – she did a targeted solicitation from people who formerly regularly gave and have not for more than a decade with the news of the sex worker plank. And got a great response. This tells us something – we keep acting like a seeker sensitive church (to use an analogy) and more seasoned Libertarians are tired of all watered down milk and no meat.

    +1

  91. dL

    That’s misstating the situation. The area that has been homesteaded as Liberland is not contested by the governments of Croatia and Serbia – neither of them want it.

    I believe the land in question is considered part of Serbia by Croatia, but Serbia does not consider it part of Serbia. However, it is under administrative control of Croatia. There are no current residents, so it has not been homesteaded. Attempts to homestead the land have been thwarted by detention by the Croatians.

  92. Chuck Moulton

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    As for an assertion that some LNC members did not vote no on a resolution because of re-election issues, that makes no sense.

    It may make no sense to you; however, it is a fact. Clearly, some people (including a few on this very thread) care a lot about this resolution, while others who see it as batshit crazy have decided opposing it is not the hill they want to die on.

Leave a Reply

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