LNC Spring Meeting in Chicago: Day 2 Coverage

For coverage of the event from Day 1, go to the comment sections on this post:

https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/03/lnc-spring-national-committee-meeting-starts-tomorrow-in-chicago/

Day 2 coverage (Sunday, March 17th) will be posted here in the comments section. Paulie and Starchild will likely be the main posters. Yours truly will be video recording the event for YouTube, in the spirit of transparency that the LP Sunshine Caucus is working to bring to the LP.

222 thoughts on “LNC Spring Meeting in Chicago: Day 2 Coverage

  1. Steven R Linnabary

    Is there any reason why these events cannot be webcasted?

    There really are a few of us that would take the time to watch the proceedings for ourselves.

    PEACE

  2. paulie

    I’m not sure if we have a webcam on the computer Krzysztof Lesiak brought here, which I think is his friend’s, but he does have a video camera and is taking video which he promises to upload soon.

    Norm Olsen has a better mic set up but because Chris got here late we haven’t had a chance to try to network it with the video yet. We’ll try to do that when we get a break.

    In the meantime ….various reports.

  3. paulie

    I asked for people to help with recording, streaming, text commenting etc well ahead of time, and several times, in various fora including here, yahoo groups, facebook etc. As I always do.

  4. paulie

    Starchild from old thread:

    We’re back in session here in Chicago for the second day of the Libertarian National Committee meeting. Here’s briefly what’s happened so far:

    Aaron Starr gave IT committee report
    Aaron Starr gave LSLA report (Arvin and I asked about Wagner/Reeves on LSLA list)

    Rich Tomaso’s motion regarding filling at-large LNC vacancies is being considered. He has a 13-point procedure in writing.

    A proposed amendment to remove his requirement for publishing notice of vacancy in LP News failed on voice vote

  5. paulie

    Starchild from old thread:

    Michael Cloud objecting to Rich’s point #10 requiring approval voting when there are more than 4 candidates.

  6. Starchild

    Now considering vacancies on Advertising & Publications Review Committee.

    Current members are Arvin Vohra, Dan Wiener, and Lee Wrights.

    Michael Cloud nominates Gary Johnson.
    Arvin Vohra nominates Mark Hinkle.

    Hearing no further nominations, these two are elected by acclamation.

  7. paulie

    Starchild from old thread:

    Roll call vote on Rich Tomaso’s motion:

    Starchild – yes
    Wrights – abstain
    Hagen – yes
    Johnson – yes
    Goldstein – no
    Wiener – no
    Cloud – no
    Hinkle – no
    Lark – no
    Visek – no
    Vohra – yes
    Redpath – no
    Tomaso – yes
    Lieberman – no
    Kirland – no
    Olsen – no
    Blau – no
    Neale – abstain

    Motion fails 11-5 with 2 abstentions

  8. Starchild

    Roll call vote on increasing ballot access

    Wiener – yes
    Cloud – yes
    Hinkle – yes
    Lark – yes
    Visek – yes
    Vohra – no
    Starchild – yes
    Redpath – yes
    Tomaso – yes
    Lieberman – yes
    Kirkland – yes
    Olsen – yes
    Blau – yes
    Neale – yes
    Wrights – no
    Hagen – yes
    Johnson – yes
    Goldstein – yes

    Motion passes 16-2

  9. Starchild

    This vote was to increase line item spending by $1800. I can’t say what the purpose of this is, because it relates to something we discussed in secret meeting yesterday.

  10. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Paulie is now subbing in for his regional rep, Gary E. Johnson. So now it looks like it will be me and Starchild covering this for a little bit.

  11. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Talking about how for the first time in Arkansas they are going to have a governor candidate in 2014 for the first time ever in state party history. Redpath said that Rodger Paxton and other state LP leaders said they think he can get 3% of the vote.

    Also beforehand Redpath said the AR LP had a full slate in 2012 and was very succesful with ballot access. The state party used to be pretty much moribound beforehand according to Redpath.

  12. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Talking about project based fundraising now. Starchild just spoke in favor of it. Dianna Visek says she does a lot of signature collecting on campus and say students are appalled when she tells them how restrictive the ballot access laws are. Students don’t like them.

    AR LP has project based fundrasing, per Paulie. Not many states to do it in due to good retention (I believe 30 states?).

  13. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Montana is one of 4 states that got more than 2% for president. Mike Fellows got 43% in his race for Supreme Court Clerk. Olsen says Western states are good. Alaska got 5% in congressional race. MT defeated GOP initiated top two (applause) top 2 is reinventing itself in AZ. Same number of signatures in order to get on ballot per Olsen disaster for third parties.

    Kansas is achieving great success in county level. Over 100 counties 13 have organized county parties four are on the way.

    Number of signatures is same for all parties in the new AZ proposal per Olsen. New CO convention May 17-19th. Olsen volunteered to be campaign director for CO. Average in monthly budget for state affiliate in Region 10 is only 1,000$. Olsen concludes.

  14. Starchild

    A little earlier we considered vacancies on Advertising & Publications Review Committee.

    Current members are Arvin Vohra, Dan Wiener, and Lee Wrights.

    Michael Cloud nominated Gary Johnson.
    Arvin Vohra nominated Mark Hinkle.

    There being no further nominations, these two were elected by acclamation.

  15. Starchild

    Jillian Mack, by the way, is here this weekend, but has been sick with the flu in her room and has missed the meeting so far.

  16. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Goldstein talking about his region, his region 3. Jillian Mack is unable to be at this meeting. LP KY chair reelected. IN convention is April 19th -21st hotly contested chair and vice chair race, two candidates for each race. Goldstein says wife will endorse his opponent (laughs). Talking about speakers, one about keeping feds out of a sheriffs county. People organizing already. Minimum goal is 2%, secretary of state got 6% last time but the GOP candidate after elected convicted of corruption and thrown out of office. Half of state should be organized by end of this calendar year.

  17. Starchild

    Dan Wiener now giving region 4 report. Mentioning California convention April 5-6. On Friday before the convention there will be advocacy training and rally on the steps of the state capitol building, meeting with legislators. Says apparently the radio talkshow team of Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty (reportedly #1 drive-time show in northern California, though I’ve never personally heard of them) are re-registering Libertarian. Brett Pojunis is not here to report on other states in region. Voter registration continues to grow — California now has about 108,000 registered Libs, enough to keep us on the ballot in 2014 (in response to question from Mark Hinkle).

  18. Starchild

    Jim Lark asks to what Wiener would attribute the registration growth. Wiener mentions Gary Johnson race having an effect, also general movement toward the LP. Says over past few months, the word libertarian and the ideas have become much more prominent on the national stage.

  19. Starchild

    Bill Redpath asks about converting registered voters into LP members, suggests letter from Gary Johnson urging them to join the LP.

  20. Starchild

    Nick @24 – He sort of cherry-picked an answer, focusing on Wes Wagner’s rejection of the offer to let him be on the LSLA list. Arvin’s question was whether Tim Reeves (the non-recognized LP claimant to the position of Oregon state chair) is on the list, and Starr initially did not answer that, then did answer in the affirmative.

  21. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Region 6 Wiener. Talked about CA convention, Judge Jim Gray will be a speaker. Two prominent radio talk show hosts number one hosts in Northern CA half re registered as Libertarians, says they are very influential. Voter registration growing jumped up to 108,000 registered Libs in CA. Depends on how many people vote for governor. Says hopes to add members even though nearly all other parties in CA losing registered voters.

    Wiener opinion is Gary Johnson race helped boost numbers. In the past few months the word libertarian and and ideas have become more popular says Wiener.

    Redpath asks if considered any outreach from Gary Johnson to sign letter to voters urging them to join the LP. Wants to do it soon but doesn’t know if it will be influential.

    Wiener says wants to do more with registered Libertarian lists.

    CA now has fully implemented online voter registration capability. Aaron Star in audience says top 2 system in CA probably has helped with increasing voter registration in that state.

  22. Starchild

    Steve @1 – There is no substantive reason, in my opinion. I believe the opposition is a combination of political and inertia.

  23. Starchild

    Mark Hinkle mentions that Bob Zadek of 910AM KKSF has a weekly radio show that is explicitly libertarian for which he strong hypothesisВ see custom literature review proofreading website gb popular literature review ghostwriting for hire for school click go to site https://scfcs.scf.edu/review/team-assign/22/ http://mechajournal.com/alumni/compare-and-contrast-essays-for-sale/12/ how to write a college essay about yourself examples essay british culture primary homework help roman towns order viagra online in australia https://www.go-gba.org/23092-research-report-essay/ get link where can i buy an essay online http://snowdropfoundation.org/papers/how-to-write-a-legal-contract-template/12/ http://www.conn29th.org/university/english-essay-writing-topics.htm essay zeitform https://goodsamatlanta.org/patients/cheap-viagra-online-a-href-iframe/01/ source https://pacificainexile.org/students/nursing-assignment-examples/10/ brief case study examples go click here https://vaccinateindiana.org/genericos-del-viagra-en-ecuador-15931/ https://www.sojournercenter.org/finals/temy-ielts-essay/85/ how do i change my icloud username on my ipad resume stay at home mom returning to work us census bureau resume sample hotmedline products arcoxia click pays $2500 a month. Mark, Bill Redpath, and Arvin Vohra said they have been guests on the show.

  24. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    CA voter registration database lot of info, how often vote, demographics , etc. People sometime give phone numbers and/or emails when they register.

    Region 4 NY state convention last state in
    April. May will by NYC convention where they pick mayor candidate. Kirkland says Kristin Davis, former madam, is frontrunner.

  25. Starchild

    Voting results from first tabulations now being reported by Dave Blau as follows:

    All ballots were submitted.

    Credentials:
    Bodenhausen – 4
    Bauers – 5
    Duensing – 8
    Jaben – 1
    Johnson – 8
    Kane – 9
    Kirkland – 16
    Lieberman – 6
    Linabary – 11
    Pealer – 4
    Salvette – 16

    Emily Salvette, Vicki Kirkland, Steve Linabary, and Mike Kane selected. Tie for 5th place between Gary Johnson and Beth Duensing.

    Gary Johnson just voluntarily conceded the runoff and will allow Beth Duensing to be selected.

  26. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Emily Salvette
    Steve Linnabary
    Vicky Kirkland
    Mark Cain (sp?)
    Beth Duensing

    was going to be runoff between Gary Johnson and Beth Duensing, but GJ conceded before runoff. Beth Duensing elected.

  27. Starchild

    Emily Salvette nominated as interim chair of the Credentials Committee. Geoff Neale asking that we recognize her by acclamation for various reasons including her tying for highest vote, her reputation, etc. Without objection, this adopted.

  28. Starchild

    Rich Tomaso now giving region 5N report. Says several state affiliates including Mass., New Hampshire, undergoing restructuring. NH state convention probably will be April 27 (Saturday), says will be free event. Rhode Island is a new affiliate (re-started after drop-off?) New Jersey has state-level elections coming up. Trying to focus more activity on that. Talking to Wes Benedict and his super PAC. Says New Jersey is very active state party in his region. Mentioned their activism around “Thanks, but no Tanks” movement to oppose militarization of local police. One NH town cut budget by 10%. Cannabis legislation passed NH statehouse, other good stuff. Brendan Kelly reelected selectman of Seabrook (only 1 of 6 or 7 NHLP candidates running elected). NH Liberty Forum was successful, video available online. Porcupine Freedom Festival happening in late June.

  29. paulie

    Rhode Island newly reorganized affiliate. Tomasso is speaking. NJ has state level election along with VA in November 2013. VA passed NDAA nullifying bill and a one supporting hemp, per Tomasso.

    New Hampshire Liberty Forum recently held several great speakers aid Tomasso. In end of June is Porcupine Freedom Festival hosted by Free State Project. Tomasso concludes.

  30. Starchild

    Results for Bylaws Committee election:

    Hinkle – 9
    Neale – 15
    Starchild – 3
    Tomaso – 11
    Wiener – 13

    Alvin – 1
    Burke – 2
    Burns – 6
    Carling – 5
    Erskine – 1
    Fulner – 1
    Blagow (spelling?) – 1 ?
    Hal – 4
    Johnson – 4
    Katz – 4
    Latham – 8
    Martin – 1
    Mattson – 10
    McDermott – 2
    Monteleone – 7
    Moulton – 14
    Orrok -11
    Sarwark – 9
    Starr – 8
    Walsh – 0
    Whitlief – 8

    LNC members selected: Hinkle, Neale, Tomaso, Wiener

    Non-LNC members Mattson, Moulton, Sarwark, Orrok, and 3-way tie between Rob Latham, Aaron Starr, and Matt Wittlef

    Now voting on runoff between those three.

  31. Starchild

    Moving on to next regional report while runoff is tabulated. Full names of members selected for Bylaws Committee in first-round vote above:

    Mark Hinkle
    Geoff Neale
    Rich Tomaso
    Dan Wiener
    Chuck Moulton
    Nicholas Sarwark
    Jeff Orrok
    Alicia Mattson

  32. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Redpath moves to extend for five minutes no objection.

    Asks “what the hell is going on with PA?” (laughther).

    Lark responds. Residency in NY when he moved to PA has had very serious allegations at him. Two highly polarized camps in PA going after each other. Lark says doesn’t have right to stick his nose in it. Wants to help. LNC nob business get in it according to him.

  33. Starchild

    Lark recounts Tom Stevens coming from NY to PA and being elected chair; says partisans there on both sides, refers to “open warfare” and “highly polarized”. Says he doesn’t want to stick his nose in, but says he’s happy to help if participants want his “good offices”.

  34. Starchild

    Runoff results for Bylaws Committee:

    Latham – 12
    Starr – 9
    Wittlef – 9

    Second runoff between Aaron Starr and Matt Wittlef

  35. Starchild

    Nominations for chair of Bylaws Committee:

    Dianna Visek nominated Dan Wiener.
    I nominated Chuck Moulton.

    Both nominations seconded.

    Wiener withdraws, to save time. (I asked for roll call vote rather than hand vote.) Geoff Neale makes acid remark about “certain people” “fucking with everything.”

    Chuck Moulton accepted as Bylaws Committee chair.

  36. Starchild

    Correction on last comment – Moulton will be interim Bylaws committee chair. The committee will select a permanent chair for the term.

  37. Starchild

    Results from runoff vote for 10th position on Bylaws Committee:

    Aaron Starr – 8
    Matt Wittlef – 10

    Matt Wittlef is the 10th Bylaws Committee member. Now being moved by Sam Goldstein to have next three runners-up on each committee to be selected as alternates.

  38. paulie

    I was counting the ballots with Scott Spencer. Will need to do something else with that soon. Chris and I switching in and out, he may have posted as me a couple of times.

  39. Starchild

    The above motion passed unanimously after an amendment by Dianna Visek to make it top two runners-up instead of top three was voted down by voice vote.

  40. Starchild

    Platform Committee ballot results:

    Barber – 6
    Holtz – 8
    Horne – 6
    Haus – 6
    Licero – 2
    Lippman – 3
    Randall – 4
    Roland 2
    Smith – 8
    Starchild – 7
    VIsek – 8
    Buchmen – 13
    Flener – 1
    Goldstein – 11
    Grannis – 12
    Hapman – 10
    Katz – 6
    Lebedev – 1
    Maden – 5
    Nicks – 10
    Novak – 5
    Shum – 9
    SHarp – 3
    Sink -Burris – 10
    Sarka? – 1

    Apologies for any misspellings.

    4-way tie for 8th place

  41. Starchild

    I did not report names of candidates not getting votes.

    Buchman – 13
    Grannis – 12
    Goldstein – 11
    Hauptman, Nicks, Sink-Burris – 10 (3 way tie)
    Schum – 9
    Holtz, Haus, Smith, Visek – 8 (4 way tie)

  42. Starchild

    Joe Buchman, Mark Grannis, Sam Goldstein, Hauptman (not sure first name), Travis Nicks, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Debbie Schum, are on the Platform Committee.

    Final three committee members are being decided.

  43. paulie

    Oklahoma has no ballot accesss, write ins can’t be cast. Weak state party. Gary Johnson is now reporting about his region.

    FYI this is Krzysztof posting, I tried from my account but it says I’m “posting comments to quickly”. WTF? Paulie is BTW doing tabulations now so I’m taking over until he’s done.

  44. Starchild

    Talking about Oklahoma, and an outreach event there. Geoff Neale suggests not putting “tinfoil hat Libertarians” up on stage for events with new folks.

  45. Starchild

    Krzystof – I got that message a couple times myself. If you just use your browser’s back button an wait a few seconds and try again, you shouldn’t have a problem.

  46. paulie

    Carla Howell on OK. Talk with Richard Winger and other guy. Hopeful ballot access bills in legislature that looked like they might have succeeded but didn’t. Advice says lobby.

    Geoff Neale: in Texas, his home state, now talking about ballot access efforts there.

    Howell: Winger thought some bills had a chance.

    LNC member thanks regional reps for regional reports. BTW, Jillian Mack says she’ll try to make the meeting before it ends.

    Viseck says more needs to be done for OK ballot access situation. CO had great ballot access says Norm Olsen with 1960s court decision. LSLA meeting in Denver in a few days.

  47. Starchild

    Results from Platform Committee runoff:

    Holtz – 11
    Haus – 11
    Smith – 10
    Visek – 10

    Brian Holtz and Lyn Haus have been elected to the 2014 Platform Committee. There will be a 2nd runoff between John Wayne Smith and Dianne Visek for the final spot.

  48. paulie

    Vote count, Krzysztof here:

    Platform ballot 1st ballot:

    Holtz 11
    House 11
    Smith 10
    Viseck 10

    Chair says Holtz and House elected. Runoff between John Wayne Smith and Dianna Viseck. This is for 2014 national convention in Columbus, OH platform committee.

  49. Starchild

    Carla Howell announcing that 30 minutes after we adjourn today, we’ll try out the “Who’s Driving?” outreach game in the meeting room.

  50. paulie

    Howell: Has a game called Who’s Driving wants to try it out on LNC members. Half an hour after adjourning the game will take place. Not sure what the game is about.

    – Krzysztof

  51. Starchild

    The following are the vote results for the runoff for Platform Committee:

    John Wayne Smith – 8
    Dianna Visek – 10

    Dianna Visek is elected to the final spot on the Platform Committee.

    Joe Buchmann selected as interim chair of the committee without objection (he was the highest vote getter).

  52. Starchild

    Now discussing motion from Rich Tomaso to establish an “LP Presidential Campaign Support Fund”.

    He says the party should make it clear to presidential nominees that we can support them financially. Thinks having a fund like this would help us recruit better candidates. Free up resources, allow us to do a lot more work. Wants to make this an “encumbered” fund so it can’t be used for anything else.

  53. paulie

    platcom is Buchman – 13
    Grannis – 12
    Goldstein – 11
    Hauptman, Nicks, Sink-Burris – 10 (3 way tie)
    Schum – 9
    Holtz, House, Visek – 8 each (Smith had 8 also, was eliminated in runoff). There are other members appointed by states.

  54. Starchild

    Lieberman proposes allowing some money to be spent after the election to retire campaign debt (Tomaso’s motion made it only through the election).

  55. Starchild

    I spoke against the motion. I think we as a party have more sway with presidential candidates if we don’t set aside money in advance, so that we can offer them the prospect of more money if they are doing right by us with regard to things like helping with party-building efforts, adhering to our platform, using the words “Libertarian Party” in their messaging, etc.

  56. Wes Wagner

    Regarding the “offer” to have me on the LSLA list as Reeve’s subordinate … anyone with even less than half a brain saw it for what it was.

  57. Starchild

    Michael Cloud says Johnson campaign was not as good as some previous campaigns have been about listening to state affiliates.

  58. Starchild

    Geoff Neale says Rich Tomaso’s motion leaves too big a loophole for spending that “indirectly” benefits a presidential candidate — this could allow the money to be spent on virtually anything.

  59. Starchild

    Roll call vote on motion as amended to change date to December 1 and removing “indirectly” language:

    Visek – yes
    Vohra – yes
    Starchild – no
    Redpath – yes
    Tomaso – yes
    Lieberman – yes
    Kirkland – abstain
    Olsen – no
    Blau – yes
    Wrights – recused himself (abstain)
    Hagen – yes
    Johnson – yes
    Goldstein – yes
    Wiener – yes
    Cloud – yes
    Hinkle – yes
    Lark – yes
    Neale – yes (passed and voted last after others)

    Motion passed.

  60. Starchild

    Geoff Neale’s motion being considered — he’s proposing to remove list of committee members from the Policy Manual and have them listed on LP.org. He says Policy Manual should contain policy on populating the committees, but not the members.

    This makes sense to me.

  61. Starchild

    Scott Lieberman opposes motion, saying it’s convenient for LNC members to have the information as part of the Policy Manual for easy access during meetings. Dave Blau and Geoff Neale disagree.

  62. Jill Pyeatt

    Funny, I was just thinking that Lieberman had been awfully quiet, when he seemed to have woken up this afternoon. It doesn’t look like he’s been voted onto any committees.

  63. Jill Pyeatt

    Hello! I’ve been here, laughing at the appropriate times. It looks like you’re getting things done, and I’m very pleased about that.

  64. Starchild

    Geoff Neale proposes his next motion. Creating two new convention committees, taking power away from Convention Oversight Committee.

  65. Starchild

    I’m opposing this Neale motion. I do support allowing more non-LNC members to serve on the committee(s) working on convention planning, oversight, site selection, etc., and giving the LNC at least some appointments to this or these committees instead of just the chair.

  66. Starchild

    Roll call vote on the motion:

    Neale – yes
    Wrights – yes
    Hagen – yes
    Johnson – yes
    Goldstein – no
    Wiener – no
    Cloud – yes
    Hinkle – yes
    Lark – abstain
    Visek – no
    Vohra – yes
    Starchild – no
    Redpath – yes
    Tomaso – yes
    Lieberman – no
    Kirkland – yes
    Olsen – yes
    Blau – yes

    Motion passes 12-5 with 1 abstention.

  67. Starchild

    Now discussing project-based fundraising. Arvin Vohra, who introduced the agenda item, is asking body to define the concept better.

  68. Michael H. Wilson

    My thanks to Paulie, Starchild and Krzysztof for their work keeping us informed as to the doings of the LNC.

    A BIG THANK YOU! Now off to play Norml.

  69. paulie

    More on now about project based fundraising. Should ballot drives be funded. Michael Cloud now talking.

    Arvin Vohra says speed of response painfully slow to such events like Newtown, anti-gun groups had vigils meetups etc way before LP got to responding to situations that are exceedingly time critical.

    Neal says resources needed to be responsive. We are way under resourced compared to anti-gun lobby. Only solution is more resources. Vohra says some are resources we already have like an email list. Neale reminds LP chair is volunteer unlike NRA president who is full time.

    Dr. Lark: Member has brilliant idea for a project, to what extent does LNC has oversight over that and to what extent do they provide support.

    Vohra: We want to be able to respond within seconds to something like Newtown don’t want anyone to be able to use resources.

    Goldstein: Responsiveness and quickness directly limited to the staff, which is very limited cuz there is no political director etc, need more staff/resources.

    Paul Frankel (subbing in for Gary Johnson) – Equivalent getting restaurant menu vs getting ingredients and just cook – analogy to choice of what members want to invest in project-based resources. Current situation not meeting needs.

    Olsen: pick issues get prepared to do press releases, like hurricane or upcoming debt ceiling. “We don’t have resources to start from scratch.”

    Viseck: Reading something from policy manual. Project must be approved by LNC which will select project manager. Budget has to be in proposal, develop continual funding stream. Already there is stuff in manual about what a project is.

    -Krzysztof

  70. paulie

    Starchild wants update on LibertarianAngels.com that has been purchased…domain name purchased not site itself, as Chair Neale clarifies.

    Any LP member could propose a project so could be quickly sent to ARC and could quickly go up on LibertarianAngels.com. Members could quickly respond with a proposal send to LNC and is approved to be posted on the site.

    Neale: Projects. Something he does all the time. Wants to be more cautious on slow on how to do them and not speedy and sloppy. Says that Starchild’s vision for the site is not same as his, wants to slower release projects.

  71. Starchild

    Convention Oversight Committee vote results:

    Wrights – 9
    Goldstein – 10
    Starchild – 3
    Kirkland – 11

    Vicki Kirkland and Sam Goldstein are appointed to the committee.

  72. Starchild

    Now considering Mark Hinkle’s motion to reduce previous notice requirement for bringing motions with prior notice from 14 day to 10 days before an LNC meeting.

    I support this change.

  73. Starchild

    Dianna Visek arguing against the change. Says people might want sufficient notice to make travel arrangements to attend an LNC meeting.

  74. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Bill Redpath talking, now Viseck speaks. Opposed to motion. Says once something is voted on shouldn’t be brought up again. Says harder to amend things later rather than initially. “Our procedures much more lax than Roberts”. 14 days is neccessary to make travel arraingments, there needs to be notice.

    Neale: Ramification of previous notice requires chair to schedule it on agenda. Please don’t move to make it 7 days, he says.

    Wiener: current restriction isn’t a major problem. Prevents situation where there is long meeting and a lot have left in the end. Now 2/3 adopt something which is not favored by entire LNC, so that a group of people won’t wait until the end to pass something.

  75. Erik Viker

    Paulie @89, now I want my bumper sticker that says “Visit Pennsylvania, the Oregon of the East.”

    True story, the current LPPA e-mail indignation exchange includes Tom Stevens threatening legal action of he thinks his opponents are doing some unspecified manipulation of the state chair election. Bonus fun fact: twice Tom Stevens has mentioned that he might be nominated from the convention floor despite his claim that he’s not running for state chair re-election. The LPPA is better than streaming Netflix these days.

  76. Starchild

    Time expired, no second to extend time. Roll call vote:

    Olsen – no
    Kirkland – yes
    Lieberman – no
    Tomaso – no
    Redpath – pass
    Starchild – yes
    Vohra – yes
    Visek – no
    Lark – no
    Hinkle – yes
    Cloud – yes
    Wiener – no
    GOldstein – no
    Johnson – yes
    Hagen – no
    Wrights – abstain
    Blau – yes
    Redpath – abstain
    Neale – abstain

    7 yes, 8 no, 3 abstentions, the motion failed.

  77. Starchild

    Now considering resolution I wrote in support of Julian Heicklen and Mark Schmidter, juror rights activists, in their Florida courts matter, introduced by Vicki Kirkland.

    This requires unanimous LNC support to be adopted.

  78. paulie

    Kirkland introduces resolution on… now summarizes. Julian Hikeland (sp?) and Mark Schmiter (sp?) handing out literature not getting in your face about it, Judge Perry decided that there was a free speech zone, said they were not standing in proper place. This case is in Florida. They were held in contempt of court. Julian released Schmiter serving a 147 day sentence. Has good lawyer though. Resolution to support these guys and to support that they should be freed.

    Julian asked that Florida state party pass this resolution which it did. Tailored to a motion that Starchild and Julian worked out.

    Viseck: Says will likely support but wants more info. Says 6 million bad things a week that we don’t like, says have to be more picky wants to do less of this. Says why is this important over something else. Neale says resolution published for outside world, if we (LNC) don’t know all facts of the case, shouldn’t have an opinion. Says it’s “half a resolution.”

    Starchild: He wrote the language. Said Julian was supposed to add facts and details, but he didn’t. Julian is a libertarian hero according to Starchild.

    Tomasso: Wants this resolution considered as mail ballot so people can research more into this case.

  79. Jill Pyeatt

    EV @ 116: I also noticed that Stevens warned his opponents they had now entered “international libel territory”. I actually looked back in the email thread to see what the heck he was talking about, but I saw nothibng beyond PA and a few other references out of state.

  80. Jill Pyeatt

    Julian Heicklein IS a libertarian hero, but last I heard, he’d fled the country.

  81. Starchild

    Resolution was tabled because it was felt it does not contain enough detail. Chair said this, and suggested it be reworded and submitted via email ballot.

    I understand this criticism, as I had intended that my language was just an outline, and thought Julian Heicklen was going to be supplying more detailed language to flesh out what I wrote, based on his more detailed knowledge of the cases.

  82. Starchild

    Jill – Yes, I believe he is in Israel now. However this does not in any way affect my support for him and this resolution.

  83. Starchild

    Motion by Mark Hinkle to eliminate last line from EPCC policy section on page 25 of LNC Policy Manual. Roll call vote:

    Hinkle – no
    Vohra – no
    Lark – no
    Hinkle – yes
    Cloud – yes
    Wiener – no
    Goldstein – no
    Johnson – no
    Hagen – no
    Wrights – no
    Neale – no
    Blau – no
    Olsen – no
    Kirkland – abstain
    TOmaso – no
    Redpath – no
    Lieberman – abstain

    14 no, 2 yes, 2 abstentions – motion fails.

  84. paulie

    Neale says no need to talk about what they will talk about during the next LNC meeting in November.

    Point of Information: 117 minutes thanking other people spent during the LNC meeting. lol

    Lark on behalf of LNC thanks LP of IL and LP of Chicago for hosting and also for the audience for being there.

  85. Starchild

    Excuse me, I forgot to record my own vote @131. I voted no. Weakening LNC oversight of staff contracts is not a good change.

  86. Starchild

    Next LNC meeting will be July 14-15 in Las Vegas. Close to (possibly at) Caeser’s Palace where Freedom Fest is being held?

  87. Starchild

    Platform Committee alternates
    ————————-
    John Wayne Smith
    Starchild
    3-way tie between Christopher Barber, ____ Horne, Joshua Katz

  88. paulie

    Blau annoucing alternates for various committees

    Credentials
    Gary Johnson
    Liberman
    Bowers (sp?)

    Bylaws
    Aaron Star
    Montlioni (sp?)
    James Burns

    Platform
    John Wayne Smith
    Starchild
    3 way tie for alternate

    Motion to limit alternates for 2 per platform. No objection so only Smith and Starchild are alternates for platform committee.

  89. Starchild

    Motion made and passed unanimously to only have two alternates for Platform Committee (people seem to be getting impatient to adjourn).

  90. Mark Axinn

    Julian is a great hero. He attended and we honored him at LPNY 2011 Convention. He now lives in Jerusalem in a community full of American ex-pats after FBI broke into his home in NJ at 6:00 am one morning to arrest him.

    Thanks to the great IPR reporting team for all this info.

  91. paulie

    – last comment by Krzysztof. Now some LNC members will stay to play Carla Howell’s game Who’s Driving? Not sure what the game is about though or how it looks like. Will be played in about 30 minutes per earlier announcement this day.

  92. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Apparently the game Who’s Driving? is a role play one where one person is the reporter and another is a Libertarian candidate. Goal of the game is to help LP candidates articulate party message well and to stay on point. Journalist’s job is to grill them and try to stray them off course. Gold card held up when the LP candidate role play person is staying on task while the blue one is held up if he is not. This is my understanding of it, but I was not able to stay longer to watch the game in process. A bunch of people were getting ready to catch their flights back home anyway.

  93. Starchild

    I’m sitting here watching this. While practicing as interviewer/interviewee can be great training, this game tries to “grade” performance in a way that oversimplifies and doesn’t necessarily result in people giving better interviews. I’m kinda disappointed.

  94. Sam Goldstein

    Paulie@134 I think it was 117 seconds spent thanking people, not 117 minutes. We do appreciate good works but that would have been excessive.

  95. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    @151
    Yeah it was seconds of course, I was posting as Paulie because my own account wasn’t letting me, thanks for alerting me to the error 🙂

  96. Starchild

    Sam @151 – According to my recollection, it was definitely more than 117 seconds total that we spent thanking people during meeting time this weekend.

  97. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    Not that it’s important, but perhaps I’ll give my own impression of this event. I was quite impressed with the entire LNC leadership, the openness, intellect, and passion of the members. To be honest, it wasn’t as boring as I thought it was going to be 😉 It was a pleasure meeting so many “Big L” Libertarians and it for sure swayed me into the Libertarian Party camp (as a supporter right now, but who knows, maybe I’ll join when I turn 18?). 🙂

  98. Brian Holtz

    KL, there’s no minimum age for joining the LP. You just need an understanding of what it means when you pledge to “oppose the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals”.

  99. Andy

    “Mark Axinn // Mar 17, 2013 at 2:29 pm

    Julian is a great hero. He attended and we honored him at LPNY 2011 Convention. He now lives in Jerusalem in a community full of American ex-pats after FBI broke into his home in NJ at 6:00 am one morning to arrest him.”

    Yeah, Julian Heiklen was totally on the right trach with his jury rights activism. Jury nullification of victimless crimes is one of the most important issues, and more libertarians should follow Julian Heicklen’s example by informing the public about this ignored right. Julian Heiklen is a hero for the cause of liberty. It’s a damn shame that he had to leave the country or face going to prison.

  100. Andy

    Krzysztof Lesiak // Mar 17, 2013 at 8:22 pm “To be honest, it wasn’t as boring as I thought it was going to be ”

    Wow, you must be very enthusiastic, because I’ve been in the LP for years and even I think that some of these meetings are boring.

  101. Chuck Moulton

    Starchild wrote (@38):

    Results for Bylaws Committee election:

    […]
    Moulton – 14

    Starchild wrote (@39):

    Full names of members selected for Bylaws Committee in first-round vote above:

    Mark Hinkle
    Geoff Neale
    Rich Tomaso
    Dan Wiener
    Chuck Moulton
    Nicholas Sarwark
    Jeff Orrok
    Alicia Mattson

    Starchild wrote (@50):

    Nominations for chair of Bylaws Committee:

    Dianna Visek nominated Dan Wiener.
    I nominated Chuck Moulton.

    […]

    Chuck Moulton accepted as Bylaws Committee [interim] chair.

    Thanks to the LNC for electing me to the Bylaws Committee and as interim chair of the Bylaws Committee! And thanks to Starchild for nominating me for the interim chair position!

  102. Chuck Moulton

    Starchild wrote (@45):

    Bill Redpath reports there will be a candidate Rob Sarbis (spelling?) for governor in Virginia.

    His name is spelled “Rob Sarvis”.

    We have an exciting field of Libertarian Party candidates running in Virginia this year!

  103. paulie

    IPR’s intergenerational Eastern Bloc reporting team covering the high points of the LNC meeting on the ground live St. Patrick’s weekend in Chicago:

  104. paulie

    I teach only the best drinking habits 🙂

    However, rest assured I was the only one consuming alcohol, and I wasn’t drinking much either.

  105. paulie

    According to my recollection, it was definitely more than 117 seconds total that we spent thanking people during meeting time this weekend.

    Geoff was keeping it timed, so I don’t think it was much more.

  106. paulie

    there’s no minimum age for joining the LP. You just need an understanding of what it means when you pledge to “oppose the initiation of force to achieve political or social goals”.

    That is correct. I’m not sure where https://www.lp.org/membership gives someone the option to become a non-sustaining member, but I know you can do it if you print and snail mail the form.

    I can also cover $25.00 for a one year sustaining membership.

  107. Starchild

    Paulie @166 – Do you think Geoff was really managing to effectively keep track of how much time committee members spent giving each other and others congratulatory kudos while simultaneously chairing the meeting? I confess I am skeptical.

    I’m not claiming the predilection for thanking people was a huge time-waster in Chicago, but it does annoy me that people tolerate spending even a couple minutes on such unnecessary stuff while simultaneously complaining about the couple minutes or less it takes to do a roll-call vote.

    My basic standard for judging whether there should be a roll call vote is whether I think people not on the committee would be interested in knowing how their representatives voted on a particular matter. Sometimes even minor procedural votes can provide strong insights into where LNC members stand on more significant matters.

  108. Jill Pyeatt

    It did seem like, in general, less time was wasted this meeting and more was accomplished. Would you agree with that, Starchild and Paulie?

  109. Andy

    Starchild said: “I’m not claiming the predilection for thanking people was a huge time-waster in Chicago, ”

    Did anything relevant happen at the meeting that could not have happened if the meeting had been held via videoconferencing and/or teleconferencing and/or posting on a message board?

  110. paulie

    Do you think Geoff was really managing to effectively keep track of how much time committee members spent giving each other and others congratulatory kudos while simultaneously chairing the meeting? I confess I am skeptical.

    Yes, I watched him do it. Every time someone thanked someone he clocked it. I was sitting closer to him so I could see he really was doing it. Maybe from your end of the table that was harder to see, or keep track of as you were actively participating in discussions and blogging at the same time, which I can’t do – I can do one or the other, not both. I also can’t keep track of and record roll calls in real time like you can. But I did see Geoff doing the timer on the thanks and since it was a running thing I watched out for it.

  111. Thomas L. Knapp

    Starchild @ 169,

    “My basic standard for judging whether there should be a roll call vote is whether I think people not on the committee would be interested in knowing how their representatives voted on a particular matter.”

    Your basic standard for judging whether there should be a roll call vote SHOULD BE that the bylaws require a roll call vote on all substantive motions, period, end of story.

  112. paulie

    I’m not claiming the predilection for thanking people was a huge time-waster in Chicago, but it does annoy me that people tolerate spending even a couple minutes on such unnecessary stuff while simultaneously complaining about the couple minutes or less it takes to do a roll-call vote.

    If it was A roll call vote I don’t think they would complain. When it’s dozens and dozens of roll call votes, yes it adds up.

    Chuck Moulton had the solution for that had he been elected Secretary to fill the vacancy when Ruth Bennett stepped down – a projector that he owns and uses to keep track of roll call votes in real time – and maybe there are other technological solutions, but as it stands Chuck was not elected and roll call votes continue to substantially slow down the meeting – especially when there is a lot of them.

    I agree with your reasons for wanting a lot of roll call votes, and am for it if we can manage to make them not slow down business to a halt.

    As of right now, doing everything by roll call takes way, way, way more time than thanking people.

    Hopefully we can change this with technology and make roll calls as easy and quick as voice votes. They are certainly more accurate and more informative to members who want to keep track and make informed choices when electing future LNCs.

  113. paulie

    My basic standard for judging whether there should be a roll call vote is whether I think people not on the committee would be interested in knowing how their representatives voted on a particular matter. Sometimes even minor procedural votes can provide strong insights into where LNC members stand on more significant matters.

    I fully agree. But I do understand the concerns about time. It doesn’t help to try to exaggerate how much time is used to thank people, or diminish how much time is taken up by roll call votes the way they are being done now, especially when there’s quantitative evidence.

    What we need to do is understand the part of the concern which is legitimate – that is the amount of time that is used on roll call votes – and find a solution to it which we can actually implement.

    Not get dragged off into side issues about time spent on thanking people. That does not help our cause of making roll calls more prevalent. What will help is making them more practical by making them quicker. That’s where we need to focus IMO.

  114. paulie

    It did seem like, in general, less time was wasted this meeting and more was accomplished. Would you agree with that, Starchild and Paulie?

    I’m not sure. I think for the most part Geoff and Starchild are getting along better at each meeting, so time is being managed better because they spend less of it going back and forth arguing.

    It would help if we could put together a concise summary of what all was accomplished at each meeting. Anyone feel up to it?

  115. paulie

    Did anything relevant happen at the meeting that could not have happened if the meeting had been held via videoconferencing and/or teleconferencing and/or posting on a message board?

    As the bylaws currently stand we can’t transact business except in a meeting, other than (e)mail ballot which has a higher threshold to pass stuff if I’m not mistaken.

    The chair is interpreting the bylaws to say that a video conference or teleconference is not a meeting as defined by the bylaws.

    Thus, we’ll need to change the bylaws and/or replace the chair if you want to open up the possibility of such meetings. I’d like to try to have some, but it won’t happen this term.

    The issue has been argued at some length on the LNC list; you can read the arguments on the LNC Discuss public archives.

  116. paulie

    Paulie, I might just take you up on your offer of covering a one year sustaining membership

    I will, if you promise me you will save up enough to pay for at least one more year and renew on your own at the end of that year. Deal?

  117. paulie

    Your basic standard for judging whether there should be a roll call vote SHOULD BE that the bylaws require a roll call vote on all substantive motions, period, end of story.

    Everyone agrees on that, but not everyone agrees on what is substantive.

  118. Stewart Flood

    Ummm…according to the ByLaws, you can’t pay for someone else’s membership. You can pay for a “higher” level of membership for them, but not the first $25.

    This was the basis of the controversy back in ’08 over Mr Wrights’ membership.

    That doesn’t mean that you can’t *give him $25, which he then uses to pay for his membership. But you can’t pay for it directly.

    * The above is not intended to imply any opinion regarding Federal laws regarding gifts and their taxation other than that the laws are EVIL!!!

    🙂

    Stewart

  119. paulie

    I’m not too worried about the technicalities.

    https://www.lp.org/membership allows for a different name on card than name of new member. It’s beyond ridiculous to not allow paying someone else’s sustaining membership fee.

    It does make sense that no one should be allowed to sign the membership pledge for anyone else – but sustaining membership should not be treated differently than any other level of giving.

    If the bylaws actually do say something that stupid, that’s a problem that the new bylaws committee should address. As a practical matter, I don’t think it would be an issue.

    If it is, I don’t care if I have to paypal Chris the 25 bucks as long as I have his word it will be used for its intended purpose, but I won’t do anything any less convenient than that.

  120. Nicholas Sarwark

    @181: The Bylaws define sustaining member as anyone who has given $25 in the past year to the party or is a life member. They also say that higher levels of contribution than $25 by or on behalf of a person counts as a sustaining member. There is a very subtle difference in wording, but the web form allows for a different name on the card as Paulie notes.

  121. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Everyone agrees on that, but not everyone agrees on what is substantive.”

    Technically, yes. Honestly, no. The term has a meaning, and its meaning is clear.

  122. Krzysztof Lesiak Post author

    @179 Paulie

    “I will, if you promise me you will save up enough to pay for at least one more year and renew on your own at the end of that year. Deal?”

    Yes I can agree to those terms. Let me mull it over though, becoming a member of any party is a pretty big decision and I don’t want to make it in haste.

    BTW, is registering as a voter with a party different than joining a party? So let’s say I become an LP member, would that also make me a registered LP voter, and vice versa?

  123. paulie

    Yes I can agree to those terms. Let me mull it over though, becoming a member of any party is a pretty big decision and I don’t want to make it in haste.

    Fair enough. take your time.

    BTW, is registering as a voter with a party different than joining a party? So let’s say I become an LP member, would that also make me a registered LP voter, and vice versa?

    No, they are completely separate.

    Some states have voter registration by party, others do not.

    In some states where you can register by party, the LP is one of the options. In some others it is a write in option. In some it is not an option at all. In some states it depends on the county.

    You can become an LP member, sustaining or otherwise, regardless of how you are registered, or whether you are registered at all.

    Some state LPs make registering Libertarian a condition of membership, or even define membership as registering to vote as a Libertarian with the state. Other state LPs, just like national, base membership on signing the pledge and/or contributing annual dues. Some states require both.

    The national LP could not equate membership with registering LP because that is not an option in all states and because not all LP members are even eligible to register to vote.

    Many LP members are not registered voters or are registered with other parties or no party.

    And the vast majority of registered Libertarians are not LP members.

  124. Andy

    “Stewart Flood // Mar 20, 2013 at 3:58 pm

    Ummm…according to the ByLaws, you can’t pay for someone else’s membership. You can pay for a ‘higher’ level of membership for them, but not the first $25.

    This was the basis of the controversy back in ’08 over Mr Wrights’ membership.”

    The controversy was also about a then employee of the LP national office paying off an LNC member who had lobbied to get him on the payroll and who protected his ass from being fired during his many screw ups and instances of unethical behavior. This was a clear conflict of interest.

  125. Michael H. Wilson

    @ 181 Ummm…according to the ByLaws, you can’t pay for someone else’s membership.

    I’m not going to read the bylaws right now but I did pay for my wife’s membership. Does that mean she is no longer a member?

  126. paulie

    The controversy was also about a then employee of the LP national office paying off an LNC member who had lobbied to get him on the payroll and who protected his ass from being fired during his many screw ups and instances of unethical behavior. This was a clear conflict of interest.

    I don’t think there was any payoff. From what I remember it was a minor matter between friends.

    Like for example say if one of us was on the LNC and the other one was working at LPHQ. Now let’s say the one who is on the LNC in this scenario has a momentary lapse of dues because they are not receiving their snail mail due to a bad breakup with the person they were living with and not getting email or calls about renewing because the national data dump has an old email address and an old phone number on file. And let’s say that person also is unable to access their bank account; maybe it was a joint account with the person they were living with, so funds are not available.

    Now the person at LPHQ just pays the membership – maybe to repay an old debt, or maybe knowing they would get money back from the other one later. Is that a conflict of interest or payoff? 25 bucks….really? Or is it just a clerical entry?

    Given that Lee and Sean were close friends for many years, you really think it took a 25 dollar payoff for Lee to lobby to get him on the payroll or keep him on? Or would he have done it anyway? I say he would have done it with or without 25 bucks, which may have actually come from him anyway.

    That’s not to defend Sean.

    Or even Lee…apparently he has something against me and I’ve been told he did not want me knowing where he lives at, which is pretty silly….A) what in the world does he think I would have done to or at his house, B) Why and C) Mary and Lee have both run for office, so it’s public record, and I’m on the LNC and have received a file with everyone’s contact info including addresses that is on the LNC. I don’t know what he has against me, and I would address it if he came to me with it….but oh well, not everyone is going to like me. I’ll just have to live with it I guess.

  127. paulie

    I did pay for my wife’s membership. Does that mean she is no longer a member?

    It means you are both banished forever!

    LOL, how silly.

    Seriously, we have a bylaw like that? WTF?

  128. Andy

    “Seebeck // Mar 20, 2013 at 11:26 pm

    @189: Sean owed Lee some cash so Sean and Lee agreed to have Sean cover it by paying for the membership.”

    This is a cover story. It is clearly apparent that the two were in working together, and that it was a conflict of interest considering that one was a paid staffer.

  129. Andy

    Paulie said: “I don’t think there was any payoff. From what I remember it was a minor matter between friends.”

    It doesn’t matter what the amount was, or anythig else, the fact of the matter is that an officer staffer has got no business paying membership dues for anyone who is a candidate or member of the LNC. It is also apparent that Wrights was cover for Haugh one the LNC. I even had an LNC member admit to me that they feared a backlash from Wrights if Haugh was fired. Also, Wrights hand shot up at that meeting in San Diego (conveniently after I was unable to make a rebuttal since the LNC was session had readjourned) to add to the record that none of the ballot access petition signatures that Sean Haugh had ordered to be burned were actually burned (only because nobody in the LP of Massachusetts was as derranged as Sean Haugh), even though I had already gone over this point during my previous presentation during the open comments session. Why did Wrights feel compelled to add this to the record? Once again, I HAD ALREADY SAID THAT THE NOBODY IN MASSACH– USETTS WAS DERRANGED ENOUGH TO CARRY OUT SEAN HAUGH’S ILLEGAL AND IRRATIONAL ORDER, so there was no need for Wrights to butt in with this comment. It is also telling that he was the only LNC member to add any statement about this. Why? Because he was COVERING SEAN HAUGH’S ASS, THAT’S WHY.

    It is blatantly obvious that the actions of Haugh and Wrights was highly inappropriate on more than one occasion, and that both of them should have been REMOVED from their positions.

    It sure is funny how easily dupes have drank the Lee Wrights Kool Aide. Just because the guy spouts some Libertarian rhetoric and is hooked up with Mary Ruwart, a lot of people think that he’s some kind of great guy. I know for a fact that the guy is a phony.

    He even LIED on stage during the Presidential debate at the National Convention. Remember he told everyone that he’d been a life long libertarian. This is a LIE. When I was in North Carolina back in 2001 he told me that he had been a Democrat for years, and that he in fact had voted for Jimmy Carter. Now I understand that a lot of people come around on issues later in life, so I’m not saying that there is necesssarily anything wrong with him having previously been a Democrat and having voted for Jimmy Carter, but why get up on stage and LIE about it? Why not says something like, “Hey, I was a Democrat at one time and I voted for Jimmy Carter. I woke up later in life and I joined the Libertarian Party in 1998.” This would be something that I’d have more respect for instead of misleading everyone into believing that he’d been a life long libertarian. He could have held some libertarian views even as a Democrat, but by his own admission to me he did not wake up to a lot of libertarian issues until later in life.

    He also covered up his views on abortion. When I was in North Carolina he identified himself to me as a pro-life Christian Libertarian. He obviously kept the pro-life Christian stuff quite so people like George Phillies would vote for him at the convention.

    A lot of people are afraid to speak the truth, but I call a spade a spade when I encounter one.

  130. Thomas L. Knapp

    Still pretending that Haugh gave an “illegal order,” huh?

    Fact check: Haugh was in no position of authority in Massachusetts, nor was he even IN Massachusetts.

    His “illegal order” was the equivalent of a lieutenant in the Canadian Army calling up a colonel in the Mexican army and “ordering” him to invade Honduras.

    The “crime” that Andy keeps referring to is that Sean Haugh said something Andy didn’t like.

  131. paulie

    Sean owed Lee some cash so Sean and Lee agreed to have Sean cover it by paying for the membership.

    Yep. I mentioned that @189:

    Now the person at LPHQ just pays the membership – maybe to repay an old debt, or maybe knowing they would get money back from the other one later. Is that a conflict of interest or payoff? 25 bucks….really? Or is it just a clerical entry?

    Andy says:

    This is a cover story.

    I don’t know it not to be true. Do you?

    It is clearly apparent that the two were in working together, and that it was a conflict of interest considering that one was a paid staffer.

    I still don’t see in what sense it was a conflict of interest. If, for example, you got a job with LPHQ and I am still on the LNC, or vice versa, we would still be friends. In what way did they work together that constituted a conflict of interest?

    It’s pretty obvious that whatever ways they were working together would have been happening with or without 25 bucks that one may have owed the other.

    It’s also pretty obvious that Aaron Starr and perhaps some of his close friends came up with the idea that the way to remove a member of an opposing faction off the LNC was to immediately kick him off when his dues lapsed inadvertently, rather than picking up the phone before or right after it happened and calling him about it, or emailing him at the address he used for LNC emails.

  132. paulie

    It doesn’t matter what the amount was, or anythig else, the fact of the matter is that an officer staffer has got no business paying membership dues for anyone who is a candidate or member of the LNC.

    Why? Because the 25 bucks bought some favor from Lee that Sean would not otherwise have received? I don’t think it did.

    Knapp:

    Haugh was in no position of authority in Massachusetts, nor was he even IN Massachusetts.

    His “illegal order” was the equivalent of a lieutenant in the Canadian Army calling up a colonel in the Mexican army and “ordering” him to invade Honduras.

    The “crime” that Andy keeps referring to is that Sean Haugh said something Andy didn’t like.

    It’s true that Sean was not in Massachusetts, and had no authority over George and Carol.

    However, he was the national political director, national was paying for a large portion of the petition drive, and the drive was in large part to get the national ticket on the Mass ballot (although iirc Robert Underwood for Senate was on the same petition). I would hardly be surprised if less astute state party officers would have considered Sean to be someone in a position to give them orders about something like this and carried them out. Fortunately, George and Carol knew better.

    Having been within ear shot of that phone call, and on it at several points, I can certainly attest that he issued it as if it was an order. And, he defended the idea that signatures collected by Gary, as well as those collected by me, should be burned – months later.

    Keep in mind that I want nothing to do with Gary, and was already at the point of wanting nothing to do with him even then – and Andy has eventually come around to this position as well – but I did see Gary work in the field many times, and earlier was in a position of validating his signatures as a state party officer in Alabama in 1999-2000, and there was nothing wrong with his work.

    I also readily admit that I had a relapse with hard drug addiction in Oregon in 2001, and turned in bad work which had nothing to do with the LP, and that I was convicted of that crime. However, this had absolutely nothing to do with the hundreds of campaigns for the LP and many other clients I have worked all over the country before and since; Sean’s implication that I would get any campaign that hired me in trouble was total bullshit.

    Regardless of whether Gary and I should be banned for life from working on petitions, what Sean attempted to order the Mass LP to do, and defended in writing months latter, was destroy thousands of valid signatures from duly registered voters to get the LP on the ballot.

    Those voters did not sign those petitions so Gary or I could get paid, or so Sean could stroke and pad his ego, or so George and Carol could add to the economy by burning the midnight oil counting, sorting and validating signatures and putting gas in their cars to drive them all over the commonwealth. They signed them so that Libertarian candidates would appear on the ballot in November of that year in Mass. Plain and simple.

    I view anyone in the chain of custody between the voter who signs that petition and the town and commonwealth clerks who make it count for the record as a delivery person. It isn’t our role to treat these signatures as our personal property to demand or extort payment, settle our personal grudges, or anything else like that.

    If we are being paid, it is simply to deliver them to the next step of that chain of custody, and if we volunteer for that task it is equally our duty to do so. It’s not OK for us to destroy the package, any more than it is OK for a striking postal worker to destroy the mail, or for one postal employee to destroy the mail that’s being handled by another postal employee they don’t like. It’s not OK for a delivery van driver to steal or destroy their delivery load because they are not being paid on time.

    And it’s not OK to try to order a house that’s being built to be burned because it turns out that the general contractor had a sordid past.

    The fact that Sean believed he was in a position of authority to issue such orders indicates that he should never have been allowed to be, or remain, in such a position, even if he never actually had the authority to issue them and even if no one actually followed his orders. It indicates serious problems with his approach which manifested themselves in many other ways as well.

    However, I don’t think that Lee defending his friend had anything to do with 25 bucks that one owed the other. That’s just silly.

  133. Marc Montoni

    Stewart Flood said:

    …according to the ByLaws, you can’t pay for someone else’s membership. You can pay for a “higher” level of membership for them, but not the first $25… This was the basis of the controversy back in ’08 over Mr Wrights’ membership… That doesn’t mean that you can’t *give him $25, which he then uses to pay for his membership. But you can’t pay for it directly.

    Actually that whole bylaw needs revision. If it is to be taken literally, state parties cannot send in membership dues for national members either. Virginia sends in dozens — sometimes a couple of hundred — over the course of a year. Most of the other state parties transmit money for memberships also.

    Are we going to refuse to recognize them also?

    I think we should recognize those who have dues paid up, regardless of the source. The FEC cares about the source, but we don’t have to.

  134. Michael H. Wilson

    Looks like I have been exiled to the planet Fargone for paying my wife’s dues. Well so be it.

  135. paulie

    Looks like I have been exiled to the planet Fargone for paying my wife’s dues. Well so be it.

    Do they have an LP there? Or is it unnecessary because we have already achieved liberty on that planet?

  136. Chuck Moulton

    Paulie wrote (@199):

    I agree with Marc.

    Chuck and others on the bylaws committee, please take this up.

    I’ll make sure a proposal on that gets submitted to the bylaws committee.

  137. Michael H. Wilson

    Is there something weird with the PDF of the LP bylaws? I have little or no trouble cutting and pasting other pdfs but am not able to do so with this one. I don’t claim to be very in the know when it comes to computers so I guess it could be me. If any of you wizards have a clue please fill me in. Thanks.

  138. Andy

    “However, I don’t think that Lee defending his friend had anything to do with 25 bucks that one owed the other. That’s just silly.”

    Look, there is a thing called principle, and as a general principle, employees of the LP national office should NOT show biases toward any member of the LNC or toward any candidates. Sean Haugh showed a BIAS toward Lee Wrights by paying his dues for him. Lee Wrights showed a BIAS toward Sean Haugh by lobbying to get him on the payroll and to keep him on the payroll in spite of unethical behavior and screw ups. This is nothing short of reprehensible.

    Anyone who blindly supports anyone else is eitehr a fool or is highly unethical. I do not blindly support anyone. Case in point: a situation happened within the last couple of years where one indivdual that I’d known for a long time had a minor dispute with another individual that I did not know for nearly as long. Now did I react like Lee Wrights, who MINDLESSLY backed Sean Haugh, or did I fairly analyze the situation and do what was right rather than mindlessly backing the person whom I’d known longer? I did the latter, in that I analyzed the situation, found that the person that I’d known longer was in the wrong, I told the person that I had not known as long that they were in the right and that I was disappointed in the behavior of the person who I’d known longer, and I told them if they did what they did again to start the indcident to let me know and I’d take care of it. I then told the person whom I’d known longer that they were in the wrong and to not do it again. You see, this is a fair minded, rational approach to doing things, unlike the MINDLESS IDIOT approach taken by Lee Wrights. The fact that Lee Wrights took the MINDLESS IDIOT approch when it came to Sean Haugh tells me that he is unfit to be a member of the LNC or to be a candidate for any office. If this was a party that actually had its act together and was getting ahead, Haugh would have been fired long before he was, and Wrights would have been impeached and removed from the LNC.

    Only a moron or a person with ethical problems themselves mindlessly backs somebody because, “Duh, this person is my friend.”

    I go by facts and reason, if somebody is a friend and they screw up I’ll probably be the first to let them know that they screwed up.

  139. Marc Montoni

    Michael H. Wilson said:

    Is there something weird with the PDF of the LP bylaws? I have little or no trouble cutting and pasting other pdfs but am not able to do so with this one.

    Yes, for some reason whoever created the document did so with the Adobe security setting that doesn’t allow text search. I just noticed that today, myself.

    I sent a message to Robert Kraus about that, requesting it be replaced with one with no security.

  140. Andy

    Furthermore, why couldn’t somebody who was an LNC member or a candidate for the LNC pay their own damn dues? It’s only $25. If a person can’t come up with $25, or can’t send it in on time, then maybe they aren’t responsible enough to be on the LNC. A person who can’t do that obviously doesn’t have their shit together and should work on running their own life rather than trying to run a political party.

  141. George Phillies

    There is an extensive history of LNC documents being posted by staff in non-searchable forms. However, this is better than early minutes, which have gone completely missing.

  142. Andy

    “Only a moron or a person with ethical problems themselves mindlessly backs somebody because, ‘Duh, this person is my friend.'”

    Also, why would anyone want to be friends with Sean Haugh? The guy is probably the biggest douche bag that I’ve ever met in the Libertarian Party. I have a hard time seeing why anyone would want to associate with him. I’ve heard several other people make similar comments, and a few of them even post here sometimes (although I don’t know if any of them will step forward).

    Haugh went on to get FIRED from Free and Equal, and before he got FIRED he pissed off a bunch of people in the petitioning world, and I’m not talking about just Libertarians, I’m talking about a bunch of people from the mercenary petitioning circuit. A bunch of people were really angry at him after the shit he pulled in Texas and Georgia back in 2010 that lead to him getting canned from Free and Equal.

  143. Marc Montoni

    The national office replied to my question about the unsearchable bylaws. They said that was the only version they received from Ruth Bennett.

    If you’re interested in a better version, contact LNC Secretary David Blau.

  144. Marc Montoni

    There is a setting in pdf creators that makes them create the document as an “image”. In that case, there is no underlying text at all. I can tell by the document that it is an image — thus all the haze in it.

    If someone sends you a non-searchable pdf, there is no way to change it but to create a fresh document.

    If that pdf is all they got from Ruth, there’s nothing they can do.

    Ruth did some very strange and inexplicable things. I’m not sure what she was thinking.

  145. Michael H. Wilson

    I seem to recall the bylaws being like that for some time before Ruth was secretary. I wanted to do some work with them prior to the last convention and was stymied by the problem then. At that time I wasn’t too concerned and figured the problem might have been me.

  146. George Phillies

    @218 If someone has the software, the solution can be completed in time more or less certain and not long at all. If you ask someone the schedule of the outcome becomes unpredictable.

  147. Waylon T. Freebird

    Either way would be great, just get it done.

    Any progress from either direction?

Leave a Reply

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