Anonymous Source: LNC will now vote by mail ballot on disaffiliating Oregon LP

An anonymous source has informed me (Paulie) that the LNC will now have a mail ballot vote to disaffiliate the Oregon LP, which has been mired in in-fighting with two different groups claiming to be the state party, one recognized by the state government and one by the Libertarian National Committee.

For its part, the Wes Wagner faction of the Oregon LP is filing a second appeal to the Judiciary Committee, alleging that the LNC’s interpretation of the Judicial Committee’s prior ruling is in error, according to George Phillies. For more on that, and links to prior IPR stories for background, see here.

30 thoughts on “Anonymous Source: LNC will now vote by mail ballot on disaffiliating Oregon LP

  1. George Phillies

    The group recognized by the Secretary of State is the group recognized by the LNC. LNC ExComm votes to the contrary were voided by the Judicial Committee.

    To my knowledge, LNC discussion thus far on the topic has been limited to *one* LNC member saying she he or it was considering crafting a disaffiliation motion, and another saying this might be a good idea.

    No discussion of causes, merits, or potential blowback has yet taken place.

  2. paulie Post author

    The group recognized by the Secretary of State is the group recognized by the LNC. LNC ExComm votes to the contrary were voided by the Judicial Committee.

    The link to LPO has not been restored by LPHQ, and and they are not planning on sending them membership data. Thus I would say that the LNC is not recognizing the Wagner group, regardless of what the JC ruled.

    To my knowledge, LNC discussion thus far on the topic has been limited to *one* LNC member saying she he or it was considering crafting a disaffiliation motion, and another saying this might be a good idea.

    No discussion of causes, merits, or potential blowback has yet taken place.

    I had one anonymous source, so take that for whatever it’s worth. Quite possibly not much at all.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp

    Regardless of one’s position on which (if either) Oregon faction is the “good guys,” a disaffiliation vote is an entirely legitimate approach.

    Hinkle’s “I’ll address this by just pretending the Judicial Committee meant the opposite of what it said” approach, on the other hand, is entirely illegitimate, and raises the question of whether he’s experienced some kind of psychotic break with reality, or is just attempting an internal coup d’etat — either one of which is strong grounds for removal from his office.

  4. Michael H. Wilson

    This is just another chapter in a story that is at least 15 years old. The LNC needs to butt out and tell the people in Oregon, that is those who live there, “solve your own problems”.

  5. George Phillies

    @6 If the LNC wants to get rid of the Wagner group and install the Reeves group as its affiliate, the bylaws allow them to proceed through disaffiliation, assuming they can find a cause. The Judicial Committee said so. If they vote to disaffiliate the Wagner group, they will almost certainly be taken to the Judicial Committee again. If there is no sane cause, the Judicial Committee may void the disaffiliation vote.

    If the LNC does find a cause that they can sell to the Judicial Committee, there is then the question of what Oregon will do. There is a historical record here.

  6. paulie Post author

    I was wondering what MHW thought about whether disaffiliation is a good idea or not. It seems to fit the literal definition of what he said – butt out and tell the people in Oregon, that is those who live there, “solve your own problems”.

  7. Pingback: LNC Loses Judicial Committee Appeal about Oregon | Independent Political Report

  8. LibertarianGirl

    yeah , lets posture and throw around power and control so we can substitute the absolute powerlessness and insignificance we truly feel with a feeling of , duh , WINNING

  9. Pingback: LNC reportedly voting by email whether to follow Judicial Committee decision on Oregon | Independent Political Report

  10. Liveblogging the LNC Vote

    @0 It is possible that the disaffiliation motion maker decided to wait until the current motion or 2 (the Ruwart motion, and the Wiener motion) have been voted on, and will then make his motion.

  11. paulie Post author

    Actually, my current information is that the reason that it was not introduced was that they do not have enough votes.

    Mind you, that is from only one anonymous source who is not personally on the LNC, so take it with a grain of salt.

  12. George Phillies

    @20 Good interpretation. It is extremely clear that there are four votes that are certainly against disaffiliation, in which case the remaining members, every one including the chair, would have to vote for disaffiliation.

    On the other hand, it may be now or never, in that it would certainly not be surviving if Oregon lined up enough state chairs to remove Karlan, and the people further south lined up enough state chairs to remove Flood.

  13. paulie Post author

    it would certainly not be surviving if Oregon lined up enough state chairs to remove Karlan, and the people further south lined up enough state chairs to remove Flood.

    How do you rate the likelihood of either or both happening?

  14. George Phillies

    I believe I am aware of three state committees in Flood’s subregion that already insist that he go.

    The Oregon NJ NY CT RI ME region has six states. You therefore need four state chairs to agree. OR probably agrees. I am not clear what the others are thinking.

  15. paulie Post author

    Region 1 chairs (to the best of my knowledge):

    Alabama – Mark Bodenhausen – I do not believe Mark would vote to remove Stewart.

    Arkansas – Rodger Paxton
    California – Kevin Takenaga
    Mississippi – Danny Bedwell
    Texas – Pat Dixon
    Tennessee – Jay Polk; however, I did not see them in the listing….did they leave the region? Same question for NC (Still Barbara Howe?)
    Louisiana – I’ll have to look at their site
    Georgia – ditto
    Oklahoma – Angelia O’Dell
    South Carolina – I’ll have to look at their site, but without even looking I would bet he or she would not call for ousting Stewart.

    I don’t know on the rest how they would vote.

    Who do you think would lean which way and why?

    Also: I think someone – it may have been Stewart himself, or someone else – told me that the chairs actually can’t remove a rep in between conventions. At least, I believe someone told me that.

    I’m not sure who the chairs are in the other region and which way they would be likely to vote, assuming such a vote is in fact permitted. Your input (or anyone’s) on this would be of some interest.

    I am willing to bet that the LNC would not acknowledge that Wes Wagner has a vote that counts on this matter, should it come to that.

  16. Wes Wagner

    Paulie @24
    I am willing to bet that the LNC would not acknowledge that Wes Wagner has a vote that counts on this matter, should it come to that.

    Except that the judicial committee already said that I did. You are pointing out the symptoms of a failed government.

    We resolved that issue in Oregon recently, to the detriment of the faction that created the problem.

  17. George Phillies

    The Chairs can indeed vote to remove a representative. The details are in the bylaws.

    I believe it is the case, but have not seen the details, that the Region is divided into subregions in the regional agreement, so that each rep corresponds to a group of states in the region. However, I have not seen the regioanl agreement in question, and my source may ahve been misinformed.

    Tennessee is in my region.

    An LNC that refused to accept a regional director vote would be very well advised to check the details of the D&O insurance.

  18. paulie Post author

    WW,

    I am willing to bet that the LNC would not acknowledge that Wes Wagner has a vote that counts on this matter, should it come to that.

    Except that the judicial committee already said that I did.

    If the LNC did whatever the JC said, we would not be having this conversation.

  19. Pingback: Updates in conflict over the Libertarian Party of Oregon | ThirdPartyPolitics.us

  20. Pingback: Oregon Update: Plaintiff’s Response to Motion to Dismiss | Independent Political Report

Leave a Reply

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