Compilation of Candidate Statements for Open At-Large Position on the LNC

–This article was originally published October 1, 2012. I am re-posting it now because the meeting during which the Libertarian National Committee will make their selection is this weekend, in Washington DC.

There have been nine candidate statements sent to the Libertarian National Committee’s Chairman and Secretary to fill an open At-Large Representative position. The opening became available when Wayne Allyn Root resigned from the Libertarian Party this month to return to the Republican Party. At this writing, it appears the decision will be made by the other members of the LNC at their meeting in Washington DC, November 17 and 18. There was a motion made by Ruth Bennett to make the selection via e-mail prior to the meeting, however, the measure appears to have failed.

A message to LP members interested in applying for the position can be found here .

One Libertarian party member from Delaware wrote up what he wanted to see in the replacement, which was posted as an article here on IPR: Dr. Steve Newton on LNC At-Large Opening.

Here are the candidates and their statements, in alphabetical order:

David Blau

Gigi Bowman

Jim Duensing

Paul Frankel

Mark Hinkle

Larry Hutchison

Gary E. Johnson

Guy McClendon

Carl Person

IPR will continue to monitor this race, and will add any new candidates or information as we receive it.

62 thoughts on “Compilation of Candidate Statements for Open At-Large Position on the LNC

  1. Executive Detractor

    Now that Root has departed, it’s far less important who is elected to the LNC. While Root was around, there was a severe risk that his faction would turn the LP into another Root promotion vehicle, similar to the way the L.N. Congressional Committee was primarily a Root promotion vehicle. Many of the Root supporters make good Libertarians with Root gone.

  2. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I think the best way to handle letters of recommendation for individual candidates at this time would be to add them as a comment to the respective candidate statement, as Paulie has done with a couple letters today.

  3. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    If anyone has letters of recomendation for the candidates, after you’ve sent them to the LNC, you’re welcome to either post them to the respective candidate staement in “Comments”, or send them to me and I’ll post them:

  4. paulie

    To contact all of LNC:

    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,
    “” ,

  5. Kevin Knedler

    Again. Mr. David Blau is ready for prime time as an At-Large Representative to the LNC. He has the skill set, professionalism, demeanor, and dedication to get the job done. He represents the future of the Libertarian Party and has a lot of years ahead of him. Kevin Knedler, State Chair of the Ohio Libertarian Party.

  6. paulie


    I forwarded that to LNC, along with a recommendation for myself from Mark Hilgenberg, one for Gigi Bowman from Ken Moellman, and one for Mark Hinkle from Wes Benedict. I seem to recall that Marx Axinn also endorsed Mark Hinkle, but I’m not sure if that was sent to the LNC.

    I’ve seen other endorsements in facebook and IPR comments, but I don’t remember if any others were ever sent to LNC in email.

  7. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Paulie, I haven’t seen the one from Wes Benedict. Any idea where I can find it?

  8. paulie

    From the text dumps on LNCDiscussPublic

    On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Wes Benedict wrote:

    > Greetings,
    > I just wanted to let you know that I support putting Mark Hinkle on the
    > LNC to fill the vacancy being left by Wayne Allyn Root’s resignation.
    > Mark Hinkle was the immediate past national chair, has served on the LNC
    > in the past, and was a very successful state chair of the LP California. He
    > has personally raised a lot of funds for the national Libertarian Party,
    > particularly for the building fund that should save the LP quite a bit on
    > rent.
    > Below are the vote counts at the recent convention for At-Large
    > representatives.
    > LNC At-Large CandidateVotes
    >> Bill Redpath 230 (elected)
    >> Michael Cloud 174 (elected)
    >> Starchild 172 (elected)
    >> Arvin Vohra 153 (elected)
    >> Wayne Root 143 (elected)
    >> Brett Pojunis 131
    >> Mark Hinkle 126
    >> Chris Thrasher 123
    >> Rebecca Sink-Burris 111
    >> Joe Buchman 109
    >> Kevin Knedler 105
    >> Robert Murphy 77
    >> Roger Roots 62
    >> BetteRose Ryan 61
    >> Stewart Flood 40
    >> Joshua Katz 36
    >> Wes Wagner 23
    >> Sam Sloan 13
    >> Mike Fellows 7
    >> Eric Olsen 2
    >> NOTA 1
    >> Mary Ruwart (write-in) 1
    >> Emily Salvette (write-in) 1
    >> Boomer Shannon 1
    >> Betty Rosenberg 2
    > Brett Pojunis, with 131 votes, is already serving on the LNC as a regional
    > rep. But even if he weren’t, I would not support Mr. Pojunis because he is
    > so new and due to his close association with Wayne Root. (Wayne has now
    > left the LP and endorsed Republican Mitt Romney for President).
    > Mark Hinkle was the next highest vote getter at the national convention
    > with 126.
    > Other names I’ve heard mentioned that I think would be fine are the
    > current alternate, Paul Frankel , Gary
    > Johnson (the candidate for President), and Ron Nielson (Gary Johnson’s
    > campaign manager).
    > However, I think Mark Hinkle is the best pick. He has run for office
    > multiple times. He has supported people who want to make things happen. For
    > example, he has supported candidates running for winnable races as well as
    > races that are not likely to be one but that help build the party and get
    > our message out.
    > The Libertarian Party of California had more funds and members with Mr.
    > Hinkle as chair of the LP CA than with any other California Chair (I’m
    > pretty sure).
    > Feel free to call or write if you have any questions or to discuss further.
    > Thanks,
    > –Wes Benedict
    > 512-659-8896

  9. paulie

    On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Mark wrote:

    > Here is the letter I sent to some LNC reps. Please forward it to the LNClist.
    > ________________________________________________________________________________________
    > I am writing because of the upcoming LNC At Large Rep vacancy vote. I
    > hope you will give Paul ?Paulie? Frankel your consideration. Paulie has a
    > unique set of skills and experience that would benefit the LNC and the Libertarian
    > Party greatly.
    > We need someone who has spent over a decade dealing with average voters
    > from every cross section of the political spectrum; this is something rare
    > in the liberty movement.
    > Thank you for your consideration,
    > Mark Hilgenberg
    > Vice Chair
    > Libertarian Party of Utah

  10. paulie

    > To the members of the LNC:
    > As a fellow liberty activist, an almost-15-year member of the Libertarian
    > Party, a leader in a state affiliate, and an architect of the rebirth of
    > Kentucky’s LP, we all have the same goals. Our goal is to grow liberty in
    > America; a liberty that protects all people from a tyrannical state that,
    > with each passing day, attempts to take, and all-too-often succeeds at
    > taking, control of some other part of our lives, and to return the
    > liberties lost in the past to the aforementioned state.
    > At times, the various factions of the Liberty movement have different
    > approaches. At times, these approaches even seem to conflict with one
    > another. Those of us who have been involved in the Libertarian Party for
    > any length of time have seen the unfortunate internal conflicts within the
    > LNC. Anyone involved in the liberty movement for any amount of time have
    > seen the even more unfortunate external conflicts between liberty groups,
    > that serve only to divide our movement.
    > But there’s also hope. Moments in history, upon which we can seize, come
    > in many forms. Sometimes it’s cyclical; sometimes not. Today, it’s a
    > little of both.
    > The Democrats have hooked their wagons to Obama, who has broken every
    > promise made in 2008 on issues with which we’d agree with him. I have
    > finally started to have some hope; I am finally starting to see that the
    > “regular” anti-war Democrats have just about had it.
    > The Republicans are in even worse shape, changing their party bylaws and
    > robbing Ron Paul of duly-earned delegates and a floor nomination. They
    > have sent a clear signal that Ron Paulers (and for that matter, Tea
    > Partiers) need not apply. They even appear to be gearing up for a new
    > purge, a la 1969.
    > The stupidity of the other parties, as you all surely know, provide us
    > with the best opportunities for ours. These opportunities are not ones we
    > can create. We aren’t big enough to create these moment in history, but we
    > must be smart enough to take advantage of them. It is important, now more
    > than ever, to come together as a movement. We must reach out to those who
    > have been disaffected. I have never seen this much interest in the LP —
    > not in Kentucky, anyway — and it would be foolish to let this opportunity
    > go.
    > And that opportunity is why I write to you to encourage you to select Gigi
    > Bowman to fill the vacancy in the position of At-Large on the LNC.
    > Gigi has worked on non-partisan liberty projects. I personally connected
    > with Gigi through her work on, and promotion of, LibertyCandidates; an
    > organization that promotes candidates who believe in liberty, regardless of
    > party. Her work in that regard helps bring people together, across the
    > country, to promote liberty.
    > Gigi Bowman has, in good faith, worked to try to promote liberty within
    > the GOP. She has found, as we in the LP have learned previously, that the
    > supposed avenue to liberty through the GOP is a dead-end. But through that
    > work, Gigi Bowman is also very well known in the Ron Paul circles.
    > The general purpose of an At-Large Representative is to represent a
    > segment of the party that is not already represented on a committee; to
    > give voice to the disaffected, under-represented, or unrepresented. Those
    > who have a bit of a lean to the paleo-conservative would be able to work
    > with Gigi; she’s proven that already.
    > Meanwhile, based on my conversations with Gigi over the past
    > year-and-a-half, Gigi is much more libertarian than paleo-conservative, so
    > she can help continue to educate the paleo-cons and move them toward the
    > true libertarian position on most issues. (And I know that this method
    > works; I have used it myself on a number of people).
    > The addition of Gigi Bowman to the LNC would have both short-term and
    > long-term benefits. In the short-term, it would help bring more Ron Paul
    > supporters to Gary Johnson, for this year’s election. In the long-term, it
    > would send a signal that the LNC is reaching out those those beyond the 2%
    > of the hardcore Libertarians. It would help the LNC help properly
    > represent the entire liberty movement, by reaching out to an angry base of
    > libertarians and paleo-conservatives who need a home in the wake of Ron
    > Paul.
    > I do not endorse Gigi Bowman because the other candidates are bad people.
    > I am sure they are all qualified to represent the Liberty movement in their
    > way. I endorse Gigi Bownman because, to my knowledge, no other candidate
    > for LNC At-Large has a higher profile in the Liberty movement than Gigi
    > Bowman. None have engaged in more grassroots communication within the
    > Liberty movement, than Gigi has done. And none would be as beneficial to
    > the Libertarian Party than Gigi Bowman.
    > Gigi is a tireless freedom-fighter and I hope that you select her for the
    > next LNC At-Large Representative.
    > Thank you,
    > Ken Moellman
    > 4th District Chairman, Libertarian Party of Kentucky; 2006-2007,
    > 2011-present
    > Libertarian Candidate for Kentucky State Treasurer; 2011
    > Chairman, Libertarian Party of Kentucky; 2007 – 2011
    > Campaign Manager, Brian Houillion for Congress; 2006
    > ken.moellman at
    > (859) OK-BE-LPK

  11. ATBAFT

    Maybe At-Large members ought to be the committee chairs of Finance, Membership Growth, Public Relations, etc. The newcomer should have the experience to hit the ground running in one of these capacities (based on objective results of his/her previous experience) and be able to layout a concrete and specific plan of action to advance the LP in the chosen capacity.

  12. paulie

    My LNC Agenda. I wonder to what extent others running agree/disagree?

    50 state plus ballot access
    Project based fundraising
    Field organizers
    New and improved outreach materials and strategies
    More cooperation and training with local and state affiliates
    More emphasis on outreach to young people
    Improving diversity in LP membership
    Membership growth
    More interactivity and transparency in LP governance
    Single check out for national, state and local membership
    Maintaining left-right balance and a strongly libertarian platform
    Taking greater advantage of volunteer resources
    Improving database and data sharing standards
    Running more candidates at all levels
    Improving and expanding social media use by the LP
    Learning and sharing past and ongoing successes and failures
    Speakers Bureau

  13. Kevin Knedler

    Ballot Access
    Field Organizers– paid to help train !
    yes to more cooperation with state affiliates–utilize the LSLA more.
    Single check out for state and national, but not all states consider members as one that contributes. Ohio would be prime example.
    IMPROVE the database and join the 21st century.
    Off site strategy meetings by invitation only, and include some not on the LNC.
    Have a “recommended” list of speakers for state chairs to use. The chairs come and go so fast and they need help.

  14. Q2Q

    As the Treasurer for the Libertarian Party of Hillsborough County (FL), I strongly endorse Carl Person’s candidacy for the At-large LNC position. He spent $40000 of his own money running for the LP Presidential nomination. He spends his own money on seminars for people so they can learn more about being their own boss instead of being sucked into wage slavery. He has worked tirelessly as a lawyer to help people in need of legal help. Carl Person is a good man, and the LNC needs good men (in the classical sense meaning people). Does he have some ideas that are out there? Yes, but if we look at previous LNC members such as Mary Ruwart, Carl’s ideas aren’t too wacky. Carl will be a great addition to the LNC.

  15. paulie

    @17 You may want to sign that with your real name, as well as send it to LNC (if you already have I don’t remember seeing it).

    Granted someone could probably look you up from your description of your LP position but it’s not very likely.

    I would not expect anonymous endorsements to hold much weight, nor would I assume voting LNC members are necessarily reading this thread, although some may be.

    Since it’s your endorsement statement and I’m a candidate myself I won’t try to argue with what you said about Mary Ruwart (if anyone else wants to do so I would prefer that to be in another thread).

  16. Q2Q

    I have e-mailed an similar endorsement under my real name to most of the LNC, excluding the other candidates.

  17. paulie

    @20 I have to? Not really, but at the same time I’m not interested into being dragged into that argument on this thread. There are quite a few still open where it was pursued; feel free to reopen that discussion on one of those if you feel you must.

  18. Jill Pyeatt

    One of the candidates for the At-Large position has posted this letter to Facebook. I assume other people besides him will receive it. Math-wise, I figure the decision has already been made, and 8 of the 9 candidates will receive this letter.

    “Dear —.

    First, let me thank you for your interest in the vacant seat on the Libertarian National Committee. The large number of people who have announced their candidacies is evidence of the importance which they attach to guiding and promoting the Libertarian Party, to help us achieve future success.

    The unfortunate downside is that only one of the nine candidates who have so far entered the race can be elected to that position at our November 17th LNC meeting. Even though many of the other eight may be well qualified and highly motivated, they will nonetheless have to walk away frustrated.

    But in addition to that frustration, the losing candidates who attend the LNC meeting will have spent a great deal of time and money on an unsuccessful effort. (I know that my own cost for air fare, hotel room, meals, etc. to attend the meeting will be over $800, plus two vacation days taken from my job.) It’s one thing to spend all that time and money if you have a good chance of being elected and then participating in the meeting, but it can be quite wasteful if you don’t.

    In an attempt to ameliorate this problem, I have conducted an unofficial poll among LNC members, asking who they are “unlikely” to vote for among the nine candidates. Let me emphasize that this is not meant to denigrate any candidate. It simply means that there are too many choices, and consequently there are a number of candidates who will end up with either very few votes or no votes at all. That’s just math, and there’s no way around that hard reality.

    Again, the purpose of this poll was NOT to embarrass any candidate. Accordingly, those LNC members who have participated in the poll have agreed to keep the statistical results confidential, and I will only be communicating the results individually to specific candidates. The results will not be published.

    At this point I have to tell you that the probability of your being elected to the vacant LNC position appears to be slim. Over three-quarters of the LNC members responded to this unofficial poll, and 93% indicated that they were unlikely to support your election. I understand that this must be disappointing to hear.

    How you utilize this information is now up to you. You are of course still welcome to attend the LNC meeting, to give a brief presentation on your behalf and otherwise attempt to persuade LNC members to vote for you. But if that is your decision, you will at least be doing so without unrealistic expectations.

    Being an LNC representative is only one way out of many to promote a freer, more libertarian society. We need thousands of activists throughout the country engaged in a great variety of projects and campaigns to achieve our goals. I hope you will continue your own efforts along those lines.

    Yours in liberty,
    Daniel Wiener”

  19. Jill Pyeatt

    I’m done with posting on this topic. Apparently, the decision has been made. I certainly hope there’s a roll call vote, and this isn’t just some big secret thing.

    I’m sure whoever won will be excellent because all nine candidates were well-qualified and have plenty to offer. I am disappointed that some of the newer candidates weren’t given much of a chance, however.

  20. Jill Pyeatt

    Daniel Wiener, Rep from California, sent this letter. Everyone from CA, please remember this next time you vote for a rep.

  21. paulie

    I’m done with posting on this topic. Apparently, the decision has been made. I demand a roll-call vote of who voted for the winner.

    I’d like a roll call vote as well, but the informal poll was only to establish which candidates would be unlikely to win, so no one voted FOR anyone.

    As a result, there was no winner; the person who got the fewest “unlikely” votes may be the winner, but not necessarily.

    If we get more candidates applying that could also change the dynamics of the race.

  22. paulie

    It was billed as a way to let people know nicely that they should not waste the money to go to the meeting to apply in person if they have very little chance of winning.

    In my case that makes no difference since I would like to go to the meeting anyway and since I had no expectation of winning.

  23. Jill Pyeatt

    Am I crazy, or was the motion for a vote before the meeting voted down? I just now received, in my email, an email from the LP telling everyone how to apply for the replacement position on the LNC. Has it finally happened–have I finally slipped into madness?

  24. paulie

    That motion was in fact defeated, which the Secretary formally acknowledged.

    This wasn’t a vote – it was an informal poll to let people know if they don’t have much of a chance that perhaps they shouldn’t waste time and money going to the meeting.

    I think that email may well cause more people to apply which has at least the potential to shake things up depending on who else applies (if anyone).

  25. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    If there are new candidates, someone else needs to post them here. I’m done with this topic.

  26. Daniel Wiener

    Jill, Paulie is exactly correct in his description, and the letter itself is self-explanatory. No vote has been taken and no decision has been made on who will fill the LNC vacancy. It’s anybody’s guess how the final vote will go at the November 17th meeting, and I would not be at all surprised if additional candidates surfaced between now and then.

  27. Marc Allan Feldman

    I received email on Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:30 pm. I believe this communication was sent in good faith that there is a desire to solicit additional candidates. I submitted my name at that time.

    I reviewed Dr. Steve Newton’s criteria (I summarize)
    1. Build the state affiliates.
    2. Build on the Gary Johnson 2012 organization.
    3. Prioritize issues and campaigns over LP HQ.
    4. Get Libertarians elected
    5. Organize issue advocacy.

    I reviewed the letters of the first nine candidates in the light of these criteria, and I think it is reasonable to consider other candidates.

    Any candidate who would be frustrated and disappointed to put in time and expense without a significant possibility of being chosen, probably should not consider Libertarian leadership.

  28. paulie

    Thanks for applying. Are you willing to share your application letter as the rest of us (at least the ones I know about) have done? This is the first I have heard of you or anyone else new applying, although I had a hunch there would be.

  29. Marc Allan Feldman

    My application letter:

    I would like to submit my name for nomination as candidate for the LNC at-large position and to affirm my willingness to serve.

    Name: Dr. Marc Allan Feldman
    Email address:

    I am seeking the open LNC at-large position and will commit to attending the meetings at my own expense
    I joined the National Libertarian Party in 2010 and I am a Life Member

    I have never been a member of any other political party. I found that the major parties lacked principles and could not move the US in the right direction. I served as a candidate for Ohio Attorney General in 2010, enabling the LP to run a full slate of statewide candidates.

    I am a practicing physician. I have been on the physician staff of the Cleveland Clinic for 14 years. Previously, I was on the faculty at Johns Hopkins for 11 years.

    I have an MD degree and a Masters in Health Policy and Management from Johns Hopkins. I hope to represent and attract new LP members from the large segment of the voting public dissatisfied with the current major parties. I have the resources of funds and flexibility of time to fulfil the requirement of LNC participation. I try to be effective and brief in my communications.

    I have no known potential conflicts of interest.

  30. Pingback: Dr. Marc Allan Feldman Running for LNC At Large | Independent Political Report

  31. Daniel Wiener

    Dr. Feldman, thank you for your application. I gather from the last sentence of your comment @ 37 that you fully understand the probabilities involved in a crowded field of at least ten candidates for the LNC vacancy, and that you are willing to proceed irrespective of any risk that entails. For my part I do not anticipate that I will do any further informal polling of LNC members on this topic.

  32. Marc Allan Feldman

    It is not that I understand the probabilities, it is that they are not of concern to me. If there was a better candidate running, I would support them. If anyone should understand that it is important to vote for best candidate, not the one most likely to win, it is the members of the LNC.

  33. paulie

    If there was a better candidate running, I would support them.

    Not that either of us is likely to win, but is there anything I can say to be a better candidate? I’m open to suggestions.

  34. paulie

    Reply to Dr. Phillies in the thread linked @40

    “crowd funding of party building projects?”


    Absolutely critical.

    “constructing or buying a building in the DC area?
    moving the HQ well outside DC.
    constructing or buying a building, not in the DC area?”

    I think buying makes sense, since the money on rent is going down a hole and creating no equity nor putting us any closer to the day when we can stop making payments.

    I think DC makes sense because media and donors take us less seriously when we are not HQed in DC. Long time party activists have told me that when the HQ was moved to Houston the party went downhill and we had to limp back to DC with our tail between our legs a couple of years later.

    This should be based on project based funding. If donors agree, it will happen.

    The possibility exists that we could outgrow the building. If so, we may want to consider additional HQs outside the DC area. How about say Austin, Denver and Los Angeles to start with? One in each major timezone.

    The possibility also exists that we could shrink,
    making the building a liability. If it is legal to do so (I’m no expert), we should get a space which can be subdivided with portions rented out to other organizations in case we have to do that.

    “LNC paying for 50-state Presidential ballot access”

    Yes, absolutely critical as well.

    I had a recent exchange on this subject on the LNC and LNC Discuss Public reflector lists.


    Giving every American who has a vote a Libertarian candidate to vote for should be our duty and having a Libertarian candidate to vote for should be a human right for everyone with the right to vote.

    “the current dispute in Oregon?”

    The LP Judicial Committee agrees with the Secretary of State. We have an affiliate with ballot access, a good sized slate of candidates, a website, and in-person meetings. The other side has none of those things.
    Recognize the active affiliate with ballot access and other hallmarks of being a party and move on.

    “Should the LNC have the task of telling staff what to do, or should they do volunteer national party-building work?”

    Is that an either-or question? LNC should exercise some oversight of staff, although we also have to be careful that we don’t get in their way too much when we do so. It can be a tough judgment call at times. We should absolutely do volunteer national party building work.

    “Relative importance of outreach to young people, antiwar activists, small businessmen, Republicans Democrats?”

    We need more outreach to all kinds of people, including but not limited to those categories.

    I have been a long time advocate of increasing our outreach most especially to the youth and those coming from the left.

    My own extensive personal research shows young people scoring about 80% libertarian on social issues, 50% libertarian on economic issues and strongly antiwar. Furthermore they know and care more about the issues on which they are most libertarian. If Ron Paul can energize these folks DESPITE being more conservative than us on several key social issues, we should be able to as well.

    Polls show we bring in about as many votes from the left as from the right.

    Yet, our organization seems imbalanced. Running conservative leaning candidates such as Barr-Root hasn’t helped. Gary Johnson has been doing a good job emphasizing left-friendly issues, but he too was very recently a Republican, which unfortunately plays into the common popular and media misleading narrative that we are a far right party.

    The media also frequently calls various right wing politicians and talk radio personalities libertarian, which does not help our cause.

    In order to come in to our own and start making real waves we need to connect better with our natural youth support demographic and get them excited about us as they have been about Ron Paul. Then and only then do we start really shaking things up.

    We need a major push at colleges, as happened during the Ed Clark campaign 1979-80.

    That doesn’t mean we should stop reaching out to small business owners and ex-Republicans, but we should tailor our emphasis more to young people and ex-Democrats/progressives than we have been.

    “Should the LNC be stressing our social freedom issues (gay marriage, abortion on demand if you can pay for it) and our foreign policy issues (nonintervention), or our tax and government size issues?”

    All of the above, but we should stress social freedom and nonintervention more than we have before for reasons I touched on in answering the prior

  35. Marc Allan Feldman


    I see the process of selecting the at-large member of the LNC as an appointment by the committee, and not as an election. It is not a contest, but a choice by the committee determined by their preferences and values. So, I do not see it in terms of winning and losing.

    All of the candidates have given important service to the cause of liberty, and will continue do to so regardless of the outcome of the selection.

    If I were making the decision, the question I would ask is “Which candidate, if appointed, would be of greatest benefit in moving the LP forward?”

  36. paulie

    I meant in terms of your statement

    If there was a better candidate running, I would support them.

    Supposing you were already on the LNC, what should I do or propose to do to increase your support?

    I’ve laid out my agenda (see @14). To what extent do you agree or disagree? What other priorities would you add?

  37. paulie

    I also don’t see this in terms of “winning” and “losing” per se. I see this as my opportunity to move the agenda I believe in forward. I can still do so in my current position as an alternate, somewhat less since I don’t usually get a vote, but nevertheless. What I would like to do is see if I can improve that agenda. Dialogue may help me do so, perhaps.

  38. Marc Allan Feldman

    Supposing I was already on the LNC??
    Okay, I would want to know specifically and convincingly what you could do to move the LP forward as a member of the LNC that you cannot do now.

    As far as my agenda, my three goals would be:
    1. Keep and protect the mission of the LP.
    2. Keep the LP financially solvent.
    3. Maintain and build the LP with people who will grow with the LP in the coming decades.
    These three general goals mesh well with Dr. Newtons more specific proposals.

    As to your agenda items:
    50 state plus ballot access
    Great and important, but I would not mortgage the farm for it.

    Project based fundraising
    Sounds very good, if it is effective. If it is not effective, reassess.

    Field organizers – very important.

    New and improved outreach materials and strategies – agree if there are measurable goals.

    More cooperation and training with local and state affiliates. – agree if there are measurable goals.

    More emphasis on outreach to young people
    I would need to hear more specifics here, but I think I would disagree. We need all kinds of people, young, as well as mature.

    Improving diversity in LP membership
    The LP is very diverse. But I think you mean that women and members of minority groups should feel more attracted and included. I agree with that.

    Membership growth. Growth for the sake of growth may not work. If the membership stayed the same size, but became even more active, more committed, got more votes and more people elected, that would be great. If we grew in numbers but decreased in other factors, that could be bad.

    More interactivity and transparency in LP governance – always good.

    Single check out for national, state and local membership – sounds good to me.

    Maintaining left-right balance and a strongly libertarian platform – As long as we remain strongly libertarian, it doesn’t matter to me how left or right people are.

    Taking greater advantage of volunteer resources
    Improving database and data sharing standards
    Running more candidates at all levels
    Improving and expanding social media use by the LP
    Learning and sharing past and ongoing successes and failures
    Speakers Bureau
    all good.

  39. George Phillies

    A set of takes on the people, from the current Liberty for America. These are my opinions:

    Our Libertarian National Committee has a vacancy for an At-Large position, created when Wayne Root fled the Libertarian National Committee and our Party for the Republicans.

    There are a variety of candidates. Your mileage may vary.

    Paulie (Paul Frankel) – Highly endorsed. If you read the Starchild LNC Reflector list you will soon notice that most of the sound political thinking is being done by one person, Paul Frankel. Paulie is also the person who was giving the LNC coherent updates on ballot access, something that the LNC Executive Director and ballot access committee seem not to be doing.

    Mark Hinkle—Unfit to serve. Hinkle has already been rejected by the membership, by vote of the National Convention. He lost to a candidate who lost to NOTA. Under his leadership, national party membership fell, and at the end fund raising collapsed. Hinkle spent thousands of dollars of LNC funds on legal research on the Oregon issue, research that was then turned over to the people suing our party affiliate. That may yet create legal issues for the LNC. He accused Rachel Hawkridge of being our source on the LNC, but I am told refused to provide her with evidence of his accusations so that she might defend her.

    David Blau—Dave is a good guy and a personal friend. He has been a respectable state chair. He has not been active in our party for very long, so he is less involved in (good) or aware of (less good) some of our more contentious issues. However, he is so far as I can tell supportive of buying a building in or near DC, which I view as a disqualifying position.

    Mark Rutherford, Emily Salvette, Aaron Starr, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Wayne Root, Alicia Mattson, Kevin Knedler, Scott Lieberman, Dan Wiener, Gary Johnson of New Mexico, Joe Buchman, and Ron Nielson—Do Not Elect. You have seen their records in this newsletter, including the Johnson campaign team. We can surely do better.

    Gigi Bowman—has actually done a number of activist deeds.

    Jim Duensing—A dedicated champion for his beliefs as to what is important. Unfortunately, these beliefs include a number of conspiracy theories that would distract from his role on the LNC.

    Carl Person – Many good practical political ideas. A record of getting things done.

  40. Erik Viker

    I will encourage the LNC to choose somebody who has not publicly campaigned for a Republican Party politican in the past year.

  41. Wes Wagner

    I personally endorse Paulie Cannoli for LNC at-large.

    The reasons for my endorsement are as follows:

    Mr. Cannoli possesses a fundamental understanding that the primary value the LNC Inc. can have is as a service organization is to ensure, first and foremost, that we are capable of placing libertarians on the ballot in every state and territory. He has invested a great deal of his limited time on this planet personally attempting to accomplish that goal. His deeds match his rhetoric — and among other observations — I trust his motivations.

    Further, Mr. Cannoli has, in the time I have known him, exhibited the desire to investigate the truth of issues affecting this organization instead of aligning with any particular faction. This gives him the intellectual integrity to be able to objectively discern the interests of the LNC without prejudice. Independence is a hallmark of ethical governance. In this area, I believe he is also the best qualified.

    If the LNC wishes to save itself from the issues it has faced in the past decade, it will take a conscious effort.

    It is rare that change can come from within an organization, but I challenge the existing members of the LNC recognize the need for it and that the paths that have so far been chosen lead to a destination no one truly desires.

    A good first step in that process would be to appoint Mr. Cannoli to the current at-large vacancy on the LNC.

    Wes Wagner
    Chairperson, Libertarian Party of Oregon

  42. ATBAFT

    #44 Paulie. At large Natcomers should be committee chairmen tasked with doing something within their area of experience/skill set. For instance, no one has the experience that Dr. Lark has in starting and maintaining college clubs. He’s on the board of the very successful and growing SFL.
    Neale and LNC should pick the next member based
    on “filling a hole” (like sports teams do during off season or draft). Not knowing exactly where the holes are, nonetheless I’d say the LNC needs someone(s) specifically responsible for the creation and support of grass roots LP chapters.

  43. Starchild

    I’ve mentioned my preference before elsewhere, but having just spotted this thread here, wanted to let IPR readers know for the record that I am supporting Paulie Frankel for the vacant LNC at-large seat.

    I know Paulie fairly well as my long-distance Libertarian Party acquaintances go. As fellow members of the Grassroots Libertarians and Radical caucuses, we not only hold similar views on what I believe are many of the most important issues facing our party, but he is very knowledgeable and a tireless worker and communicator for freedom who has been a definite asset to the LNC in his capacity as regional alternate.

    From a more practical standpoint, his region has a good track record of selecting good, solidly libertarian representatives to the LNC, so if Paulie were elevated to a full at-large seat, I believe he would be likely to have a good replacement.

    Sadly, I have much less confidence that my LNC colleagues as a body will see the matter as I do or make what I believe to be the wisest choice. But I will always vote my conscience regardless of what I expect the outcome to be.

    If Paulie were not running I would likely support Jim Duensing, also a good radical libertarian who has the revolutionary activist spirit we need more of, and Gary E. Johnson also seems worthy of consideration, although I’d probably need to make further inquiries as some of the candidates I know very little about. But I would be quite surprised to discover that any of them possess the qualities and advantages (from my p.o.v.) that Paulie brings to the table, and so am comfortable in my admittedly somewhat less than fully informed choice, which I blame in part on having been involuntarily offline for a few weeks recently and having a lot of email and such to catch up with.

    Regardless, I am sure that any of the candidates would be an improvement over the recently departed Wayne Allyn Root.

    To everyone who has put their name forward to serve on the LNC, I thank each of you for your willingness to serve in this demanding volunteer capacity and your dedication to the Libertarian Party and the cause of freedom for which it stands. I believe there may be one or two of you who contacted LNC members en masse to whom I have not responded personally, and if I neglected to do so, please accept my apology.

    As always, I welcome correspondence or phone calls from anyone with concerns/ideas/complaints/feedback, etc., on this or any other Libertarian Party matter, and do endeavor to respond to all such contacts.

    Love & Liberty,

    ((( starchild )))
    At-Large Representative,
    Libertarian National Committee
    (415) 625-FREE

    P.S. – The LNC, sadly, is not mandated to hold open votes in elections such as this, although it should be. I hope the election will be held openly, and that whoever is elected will join Paulie, myself, and the others on the LNC who are fighting for greater transparency in our leadership, as I will certainly attempt to do this weekend if there is an attempt to conceal how representatives vote on this important choice.

  44. Jeremy C. Young

    Honestly, I’d vote for Paulie for any third party executive committee. He’d bring the same organizing and petitioning strengths to any party, and I’d trust him to keep his personal political views separate from his organizational ones. He’d make a fine addition to the Green Party leadership, for instance.

    In a party where he actually shares the views of the party platform, he’s an obvious choice, and you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone better.

  45. Kevin Knedler

    So tell me about my “record”. Jezz.
    Ohio LP is one of the most organized affiliates in the country. It was damn near in the dumper when I came into the state chair role. # of candidates are UP; vote counts for candidates are UP; county affiliates are UP; money in bank is UP; volunteers and participants are UP. I have forgotten more about leadership than some of the naysayers will ever learn. Let the spit ball rhetoric begin. Tired of seeing my name dragged thru mud, when I have busted my ass to make Ohio one of the best damn affiliates in the country.

Leave a Reply

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