Libertarian National Committee Meeting November 14-15, 2015 Agenda, Oregon May Be Discussed

u2eitThe Libertarian National Committee meets in Orlando, FL, Saturday, November 14 and Sunday, November 15.

Location and hotel details: http://www.lp.org/lnc-budget-meeting-1115

Preliminary schedule (subject to change):

Saturday, November 14, 2015: 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (Eastern Time)
Sunday, November 15, 2015: 9:00 a.m. till finished.

Agendas are usually modified after the start of the meeting. The meetings usually end earlier than 6:00 p.m. Sunday, and often around noon.

The LNC will attempt to stream the meeting live on the Internet.

Broadcast channel #1 – video and audio:http://www.ustream.tv/channel/libertarian-party1

The audio-only channel, normally provided by LNC member Gary Johnson, will not be provided at this meeting, due to his absence. It’s expected to return at future meetings.

The proposed agenda and drafts of reports to be presented at the meeting can be viewed by clicking the file links below. More files will be posted as they become available.

Please see here for links to various reports to be discussed.

This evening, the following was posted to the LNC votes email discussion list as a possible agenda addition.

Nick,

I am requesting that an item be placed on the agenda for this weekend’s LNC meeting to discuss the topic of the “Judicial Committee Decision”. I will probably be introducing a resolution at that time. My estimate would be to allow 30 minutes.

Thanks,
Dan Wiener

This entry was posted in Libertarian Party and tagged on by .

About Caryn Ann Harlos

Caryn Ann Harlos is a paralegal residing in Castle Rock, Colorado and presently serving as the Region 1 Representative on the Libertarian National Committee and is a candidate for LNC Secretary at the 2018 Libertarian Party Convention. Articles posted should NOT be considered the opinions of the LNC nor always those of Caryn Ann Harlos personally. Caryn Ann's goal is to provide information on items of interest and (sometimes) controversy about the Libertarian Party and minor parties in general not to necessarily endorse the contents.

516 thoughts on “Libertarian National Committee Meeting November 14-15, 2015 Agenda, Oregon May Be Discussed

  1. Marc Montoni

    Here we go again.

    The proper way to handle Weiner and his motion is to let it die for lack of a second, but I know there are people on the LNC who just can’t resist.

    Weiner’s motion is a distraction from the real business of the Party.

    It would be much more productive for Weiner to spend his time calling or visiting the expired or expiring members near him to invite them to renew, but no.

    How much more effective an environment LNC meetings could be if every one started with the submission of checks and membership forms for new and renewal members.

  2. Wang Tang-Fu

    Marc Montoni and Grumpy Cat have a good point there. There is a saying in the village of my ancestors that if you don’t let sleeping dogs lay they might get up to give you fleas.

  3. Jill Pyeatt

    We have to travel to Tx for a funeral this weekend and early next week, so I won’t be online much. Maybe that’s a good thing.

  4. Andy

    “Marc Montoni

    November 12, 2015 at 11:11 pm How much more effective an environment LNC meetings could be if every one started with the submission of checks and membership forms for new and renewal members.”

    I totally agree.

  5. Thomas L. Knapp

    I was hoping to make it to the meeting in Orlando this weekend, but our car just got totaled tonight so it’s unlikely.

    As far as “dying for lack of a second,” isn’t the agenda formation a “consent” thing where anyone can add stuff and then the body just votes to approve or modify it? I could be wrong on that, but that’s how I recall it.

    Then again, there’s no Judicial Committee decision to add to the agenda. Since the Judicial Committee had no jurisdiction in the matter it took up, there was no “decision” — merely a discussion that was about as consequential as ordering pizza.

  6. Jill Pyeatt

    Mr. Wiener is the representative from CA. Why is he getting involved in the Oregon nonsense?

    (That’s a rhetorical question, of course. No one needs to answer it).

  7. Chuck Moulton

    I won’t be available to watch or liveblog the meeting on Saturday, as it conflicts with the Federalist Society national lawyers convention in DC I attend every year to satisfy my CLE requirement. However, I should be able to liveblog the Sunday session on site, as I’ll be flying down for the bylaws committee meeting that day.

  8. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Jill, your question is apropos. Why is one regional rep sticking his nose in another region?

  9. Thomas L. Knapp

    1) Being a “regional representative” doesn’t entail involvement only in matters directly and solely concerning one’s region. A regional representative is supposed to represent his or her region AND function as a full member of the LNC.

    2) Presumably the disposition of the LNC toward ANY affiliate has implications for ALL affiliates, and that disposition would therefore be of interest to regional representatives.

    So, while my best guess is that Mr. Wiener intends to advocate for the illegitimate Judicial Committee action and in favor of the Oregon impostor organization versus the real affiliate, both issues he seems to have consistently been on the wrong side of, his interest/involvement is not in and of itself worthy of criticism.

  10. georgephillies

    As used to be taught in school, Oregon and California share a common border. I have traveled there and confirm that this is true. Of more significance, at one time Oregon was part of a Region that included California and let the Californians appoint two Regional Representatives.

  11. Jill Pyeatt

    “Jill “Mr. Wiener is the representative from CA.” Why?”

    Sadly, no one else steps forward. The same with Lieberman. Many people aren’t happy with them (especially Lieberman), but no one else offers to run.

  12. Wang Tang-Fu

    “Also, cannibalism.”

    Perhaps, if there is an Oregon-related motion introduced at the national convention, an amendment could be introduced to simultaneously change the name from Libertarian Party to Donner Party?

  13. paulie

    Meanwhile also on the agenda:

    Preliminary schedule (subject to change):

    Saturday, November 14, 2015: 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (Eastern Time)
    Sunday, November 15, 2015: 9:00 a.m. till finished.

    Agendas are usually modified after the start of the meeting. The meetings usually end earlier than 6:00 p.m. Sunday, and often around noon.

    The LNC will attempt to stream the meeting live on the Internet.

    Broadcast channel #1 – video and audio:
    http://www.ustream.tv/channel/libertarian-party1

    The audio-only channel, normally provided by LNC member Gary Johnson, will not be provided at this meeting, due to his absence. It’s expected to return at future meetings.

    The proposed agenda and drafts of reports to be presented at the meeting can be viewed by clicking the file links below. More files will be posted as they become available.

    Chair’s Proposed Agenda

    Policy Manual (the date of this document will not match the current meeting date)

    Region 1 Report
    Region 2 Report
    Region 3 Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Region 4 Report CA
    Region 4 Report NM and NV
    Region 5 Report
    Region 6 Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Region 7 Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Region 8 Report

    Auditor 2014 Financial Report Draft
    Affiliate Support Committee Report
    Awards Committee Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Ballot Access Report
    Ballot Access Illinois
    Budget 2016 Draft
    Campus Report
    Chair’s Report
    Conflicts of Interest Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Convention Oversight Committee Report
    EPCC Report
    EPCC Employment Contracts Report
    Financial Report
    International Representative Report
    IT Committee Report NOT YET AVAILABLE
    Membership Report
    Secretary’s Report
    Special Counsel Report
    Staff Report

    Motion – Mattson – Employment Contract Bonus Restrictions

  14. paulie

    The audio-only channel, normally provided by LNC member Gary Johnson, will not be provided at this meeting, due to his absence.

    For some reason I thought that was Joshua Katz.

  15. Wes Wagner

    Dysentery is the heritage of the great state of Oregon 🙂 It is our equivalent of the confederate flag.

  16. Wes Wagner

    To be entirely fair that incident took place on the path through California by people destined for California… which entire explains Wiener given his heritage.

  17. paulie

    I always wondered why paulie filed his teeth to sharp points…

    Sadly, I’m not constitutionally qualified due to my birth in Siberia as a citizen of the USSR.

  18. paulie

    Meeting should be starting fairly soon if it hasn’t already. Is anyone else available to liveblog? Several people have already said no, and I am not feeling good and have bunch of other stuff piling up that I need to get to.

  19. paulie

    Staff report (Benedict). Started implementing logo change. Benedict models new LP T-shirt they are pushing. Says they are selling pretty well and being promoted as a premium for some letters.

  20. paulie

    Yep, the other one is not working yet, I have been going off the ustream.

    Logo was $750 not $5000 – 5k was just a ceiling.. Wes says they do not have large amounts of inventory with old logo.

  21. georgephillies

    The Raisers Edge codes were changed to make clear whether people should be sent fundraisers or whatever.
    We have an email list on IContact. We had 140,000 email addresses, of which 30,000 were bouncing. 40% of the 30,000 were perhaps valid. Troubleshooting technical issues is sometimes challenging.

  22. paulie

    If you guys have questions…please ask..I am here in the meeting..

    I don’t want to distract you from the meeting, but if you manage to find someone who is not at the table to help liveblog for times when the video goes down that would be good.

  23. Matt Hasty

    In regards to the GREAT question “How do we get CONTENT to let the graphic designers to create materials?” the answer was to let the LNC come up with content. Great. Art by committee. If they want to spur innovation and creativity, then REMOVE THE REGULATION! Too many bickering bitter bitchy bad-asses get involved and a good idea gets shot down by a committee before it can ever get off the ground.

    HOW TO GET CONTENT? Have a beer, joke around, get creative! Try ideas in a test market, find minor success and clone them! But keep the bureaucracy out of the process!

  24. georgephillies

    We had perhaps 30 paid attendees last time. Wants several next year, earlier in next year is better plus one after election for debriefing.

    Do one before convention.

    no I cannot tell who is speaking.

  25. georgephillies

    Suggestion is tow of four should be in DC, because DC is alaso a good place to visit.

    Lark praises success 97 and success 99.

    ?: Our training materials are out dated.

  26. Matt Hasty

    Paulie, I know they were talking about the writing part of it. SO AM I!!! That is also called CONTENT [creation]. 😉 And the committee needs to stay the hell away from it!

  27. Matt Hasty

    Dang, this strict/hard-forced linear comment thread format is difficult to follow. Is there any way to reply directly to a comment?

  28. paulie

    2015/11/14 at 10:07 am

    Dang, this strict/hard-forced linear comment thread format is difficult to follow. Is there any way to reply directly to a comment?

    Like that. Personally I find this format easier to follow than the new nested comment thing facebook has introduced, which I hate. It’s not an option here.

  29. georgephillies

    Sarwark says current committee has been more polite to staff, and some others have been abusive.

    tomasso, something about a spreadsheet.

    There is data on why people do not renew.

    Someone notes that students are in the “Students for Liberty” and fails to work out that we need a Young Libertarians group.

  30. georgephillies

    LarK: cf at green Party. they have no paid staff and almost no money. They are in much shape worse that us. We are much better off than other third parties.

    ? It is amazing that we have survvied this long.

  31. paulie

    And Sarwark at LNC Votes Discuss on FB:

    Who says a man can’t be a lawyer, a used car dealer, and a politician?

    It’s the iron triangle of integrity.

  32. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Someone notes that students are in the ‘Students for Liberty’ and fails to work out that we need a Young Libertarians group.”

    A Young Libertarians group would be a failed attempt to bring coals to Newcastle. The student libertarian movement is better-organized and probably larger and more well-funded than the LP. We need them more than they need us. Instead of creating an analogous party group that would accomplish nothing, the thing to do is try to earn LP interest within the existing organizations, especially SFL.

  33. georgephillies

    Sarwark discusses MA targeted facebook pages. Get people who like us on one issue and interest them in other issues.

    olsen need to be unified collectively. Need to be party of niceness.

  34. georgephillies

    Affiliate support committee. States are happier with the LNC. List of needs. voter member recruitment, fundraising, candidate recruitment, organization building did well.

  35. georgephillies

    Wants to avoid claim that we have 51 operational affiliates. Proposes to strengthen definition. Criteria: web page, contact between between state party, and LNC and state, have copy of bylaws and state election laws.

  36. georgephillies

    Someone questions LNC calling state parties operational or not. When this was discussed by the LSLA my question was: What are you going to do with this information?

    The original LNC goal was “have 51 operational affiliates”.

  37. paulie

    Populated awards committee. Lark, Knedler, I missed the rest. Redpath withdrew so they would not have to vote (6 nominated for 5 positions) and because he has too many commitments as it is.

  38. paulie

    Hall is much louder than the people asking him questions. Lark asks about getting media attention. Oliver Hall wants to wait on ACLU feedback. Says we may antagonize their behind the scenes work to resolve things amicable. However he says time is running down for that.

  39. paulie

    Tomasso suggests printing out state law and showing that to the people doing the harassment. The problem is that they have been refusing to look at any laws. We already have them printed out.

  40. paulie

    Redpath asks about suing over the early deadline here.

    [P: Didn’t we already lose that lawsuit here?]

    Hall: Alabama (bad) precedent would not apply because it was due to technicalities that would not apply here.

    Hall suggests that due to the harassment it is possible we could get deadline extension because we would have more signatures otherwise.

  41. Chuck Moulton

    I’m not following the audio / video, but I am following the IPR comments and I’ve read all the reports.

    The website RFP seems sensible.

    The database proposal from NationBuilder is not. In fact, it looks like a clusterfuck.

    What problem are they trying to
    solve with this database? I thought it was state affiliates frustrated with lack of integration with national. The proposal presented doesn’t do that.

    Perhaps the problem they’re trying to solve is website integration. That may work better… remains to be seen. I’m skeptical.

    I don’t think it’s a good idea to put all our eggs in a proprietary basket, then be at their mercy for cost, features, and migration at the end of its life cycle.

    I would hope that the many technologists in the party have been consulted (the IT committee contains some such people; however, their knowledge and experience is dwarfed by dispersed knowledge of many others). I would hope that state affiliate database managers and other affiliate officers have been consulted. I would hope that staff has been consulted. I’ve seen no evidence of that in these reports. Before voting on any such proposal, LNC members should see feedback from all of these people. Perhaps the IT committee has received such feedback, but they certainly haven’t shared it.

    I would hope the LNC would consider the many costs and benefits of switching databases, exhaustively listed so an informed decision can be reached. I see no evidence of that. Perhaps the IT committee will make an oral report of such benefits and costs. That is no substitute for a written report, as it is harder to follow and makes accountability to the promises made impossible.

    As far as I can tell this proposal was shared with the LNC only a few hours before the meeting. That is insufficient time for LNC members to solicit feedback from constituents.

    I strongly suspect this proposal will be steamrolled through this LNC meeting, voted on without the deliberation it deserves. I strongly suspect there will be significant transition costs — monetary, re-training, and downtime of some features. I strongly suspect that the new database will not live up to the hype — in part because staff and others will not be immediately able to take advantage of all of the advanced features, as it understandably takes significant time to learn a new system and we don’t really have a super-tech-saavy staff member like Eric Dixon anymore. I strongly suspect the new database won’t be much better than the old database, but it will burn significant party resources and staff / volunteer time.

    LNC members may want to look like they’re doing something; however, it is far more important to pick the right database and make a very careful transition. This could be a repeat of the Raiser’s Edge transition debacle.

  42. paulie

    Not clear whether the petition requirement is valid in PA but Hall has recommended to Redpath we should petition anyway. Gap in PA laws as the statute has been struck down but SOS is enforcing it anyway because it was not struck down in every particular. Suggests that we may qualify for ballot access even if we fall short on signatures.

  43. paulie

    Stein vs Alabama, state was very aggressive legally and ran up a lot of costs which were assessed against Alabama LP, Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, etc. State is insisting on collecting. A big chunk of the money still needs to be paid. LNC has not contributed. Hall has been negotiating the costs down but has not been successful.

  44. paulie

    Coordinated with Kasich campaign to intentionally target LP to selectively enforce requirement, which has never been enforced before. However he does not believe even if we win that will put us on the ballot. Convention oversight committee is next.

  45. Stewart Flood

    “The database proposal from NationBuilder is not. In fact, it looks like a clusterfuck.” I used a few more words, but I had the same sentiment.

    I did not support the report submitted by the IT committee. I was asked to writeup my concerns, which I did. They were not included, and there is no mention in the report at all about the committee being far from unanimous in their recommendation. I was not the only committee member with concerns. We were ignored.

    My name is on that report fraudulently. I have informed the secretary and the chair of the LNC of that fact. I hope that the LNC does not fall for this.

  46. Chuck Moulton

    Stewart Flood wrote:

    I did not support the report submitted by the IT committee. I was asked to writeup my concerns, which I did. They were not included

    Stewart,

    Could you please post the concerns you wrote up as a comment here and/or email any document you sent to IPR so it can be hosted here as an attachment and linked?

  47. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Very interested in any Nationbuilder criticisms. CO is right now trying it out for our needs. We have explored many database options and this is one of the few we narrowed down to.

    I would like to link our Board to any comments here

    Did Feldman give any thoughts? He is certified in Natiinbuilder.

  48. Chuck Moulton

    Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

    Very interested in any Nationbuilder criticisms. CO is right now trying it out for our needs. We have explored many database options and this is one of the few we narrowed down to.

    I would like to link our Board to any comments here

    My criticisms may not necessarily apply to a state implementation.

    At the national level, the question is whether to transition from Raiser’s Edge to Nation Builder (before that from FoxPro to Raiser’s Edge). We have several employees who are proficient in Raiser’s Edge and have received training to that end. National sends monthly dumps to states in a consistent format. Many states rely on that data for their needs, and some states rely on the consistent format to import the data into their database programs in an automated way. Changing databases would cause a severe disruption. Because Raiser’s Edge already has an advanced feature set, benefits of changing may be small. Transition costs such as downtime, retraining, money, and time may be large.

    At the state level, the question often is whether to transition from no database at all — or from Access or Excel with a small feature set — to an advanced database with many new useful features. States may provide dumps to counties, but it is not very disruptive to change those dumps because they are rarely imported into other programs in an automated way. Transition costs are much lower and the relative benefits are much higher.

    Further, the whole reason most people have been complaining about needing a better database at the national level is many want an integrated database that serves national, all states, counties, and candidates without the need for manually swapping data all over the place and duplicating effort. That was the problem Nation Builder was originally asserted to solve. Instead, the proposal presented by the IT committee negotiated with Nation Builder quotes a price for all states included, then casts it aside as too expensive, baiting & switching to a national only database. No mention of counties or candidates is made in the report or quoted in the price from Nation Builder.

  49. paulie

    On the database conversion, one big problem with the prior conversion was that a lot of useful data from foxpro was never imported into raisers edge. So if there is another conversion hopefully that will not happen again.

  50. paulie

    NV and I think they said TX LPs are using nationbuilder. Labor Party in UK used it also. Pojunis says he likes it a lot (second hand, I don’t know if he’s in Orlando, someone else said it for him in the meeting).

  51. Beth

    IN has recently moved to CiviCRM. The integration is not yet complete. We are lucky to have several great IT guys by trade in state and our Vice Chair has done all the needed programming work to customize the system.

  52. paulie

    Please tell Robert, Wes or whoever is running the livestream if there is a way to get that a bit further from the phone/speaker that would be good.

  53. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Chuck,

    ==That was the problem Nation Builder was originally asserted to solve. Instead, the proposal presented by the IT committee negotiated with Nation Builder quotes a price for all states included, then casts it aside as too expensive, baiting & switching to a national only database. No mention of counties or candidates is made in the report or quoted in the price from Nation Builder.==

    Yes that is what we were hoping for… that National would get something from NB that would integrate with the states. We are going from minimal scattered no featured database to NB so right now it seems right for us. We are still in testing phase with NB. I am not sure how it will integrate with our data dumps as I am not involved in that portion.

  54. houselynn2

    Florida is using CiviCRM. We have about 60,000 names and hours put into that program. I hope the transition is easy.

  55. Thomas L. Knapp

    Back when Raiser’s Edge was proposed — 2004 or 2005? — I suggested that it would be better to go with something open source rather than spend (IIRC) $34k on a proprietary software package. But noooooooo … “we don’t know what it would cost to properly customize something open source” was one of the big excuses for blowing “only” $34k on software.

    Then the cost of Raiser’s Edge, IIRC, ended up ballooning to six figures.

    So yeah, let’s do THAT bullshit all over again. It appears to be an entrenched habit.

  56. Stewart Flood

    “Stewart Flood…the Chair brought up some of your issues..and let folks know you had issues”

    Yes, but only after I sent a message to the party chair and secretary stating that I did not knowingly have my name on that report as a supporter of it. He said that he’d put my concerns, which I gave him (and which I was not the only one on the committee voicing), but he did not put them in the report and then he put my name on it, implying I approved of it. I do not.

    I wasn’t listening (working today), so I don’t know what he said, or if he expressed my concerns accurately.

    Most of my concerns are obvious. Some have been voiced above. One of my most serious concern is related to physical possession of data. With Raiser’s Edge — as with the Foxpro database before it — the party has physical possession. With this platform, we are at their mercy. I am very fearful, with good reason, of databases where they host it and you don’t really “own” your data. If we are every really broke, we can stop paying RE and we still have the software. That is an annual support license. I know people who have RE and don’t pay for support. The software does not stop working.

    That is one concern.

    Another is the timing. We talked in 2011/2012 about upgrading systems. Back then we were at least considering the affect on the party of migrating to a platform during the presidential year. You do this stuff in the off year, preferably right after the election and then have two to three years to learn and improve your procedures. Changing right now, before the national convention, is like lighting a match in a room full of open containers of gas. A fire is not guaranteed, but it is very likely.

    As noted by others, quite a few rather important data fields in the previous database were never migrated into RE. Data was lost — forever. I believe the same will happen if we go to Nation Builder. It is NOT a real fundraising system.

    That’s another one.

    Features? Raisers Edge is a FUNDRAISING system. While I don’t like the company (Blackbaud), which is about 2 miles line of site from where I’m sitting right now, their product is a very good fundraising tool. I do not see this new system as being an improvement, but rather a shift into a more expensive and more risky platform. I consider it a risk. The members of the IT committee who have NO IT EXPERIENCE believe it is safe. We can debate that, but you know I’d win. That’s why disagreement with the proposal was ignored and actually suppressed until I formally complained this morning about my name being on a document I disagreed with.

    The IT committee is a farce. We had only one or two meetings in the first 9-12 months, then we had a few more scheduled recently. I made some, but certainly not all of the meetings. They tend to be scheduled 2-3 days in advance, and usually for 9pm eastern time. And the first few meetings that I attended had only one or two others present. Random scheduling makes it difficult for me to attend every one since a network emergency or a system upgrade that runs past 9pm makes it impossible to attend. I missed several because of client issues I was dealing with. Sorry folks, but a network outage comes first. And of course about half of the committee has already resigned or disappeared this term and not been replaced. The initial selection of the committee took almost three months, so I guess replacing them will take the rest of the term.

    Sorry, but I’m rather jaded about an IT committee chaired by a non-IT-professional. There are people in the industry on the committee, but we are not all of it. No one with zero (that’s 0.00000) experience in the field should be on an IT committee.

  57. paulie

    There’s also a big yearly maintenance fee with Raiser’s Edge and from what I have been told, we are not actually using the vast majority of the features it provides.

  58. Thomas L. Knapp

    Side note: I meant to type “free and open source,” not just “open source.” I’m aware that “free software” and “open source” software are not the same thing — but there’s a lot of overlap, and that overlap is where to look for good stuff. Yes, customization and development cost something, but tend to be cheaper since anyone can get into the business of doing it.

  59. paulie

    As noted by others, quite a few rather important data fields in the previous database were never migrated into RE. Data was lost — forever.

    Not forever. I have been told the old database is still sitting there, just not being used.

    Of course, since it’s been well over a decade, it may as well be forever for most people.

  60. paulie

    Hayes, Redpath, Ludlow: Audit committee doing things that audit firm is supposed to do (Starr disputes). Problem that they can basically write their own billing fee with no control from LNC is raised.

  61. Stewart Flood

    This is a witch hunt. I agree that there were problems a few years ago that the audit committee uncovered, but this is clearly just an attempt to disrupt staff in order to find something — anything — that can be used in a campaign next May to run for office within the LNC. Treasurer perhaps?

  62. Stewart Flood

    I have been volunteering my time today to help with a high school computer competition, so I haven’t been able to watch. Based on the relatively small number of comments from others, the meeting is either boring everyone to death or they have been spending a lot of time in executive session. I’ve skimmed, but not read all the comments, so I may have missed references to it. 🙂

  63. paulie

    Stewart,

    No executive session yet. Coming up soon, I think. It hasn’t been super boring by the standards of these things, but I think the fireworks for this meeting are mostly yet to come.

  64. paulie

    Mattson moves to move bequests to 2014 and have Wes pay back bonus. She got a second, I did not catch from whom. Now being debated.

  65. Chuck Moulton

    I think the audit committee report uncovered some real problems. Its tone was inappropriate though and many things were blown way out of proportion. The staff time wasted responding to Starr and accounting like the LP is a large corporation rather than a small office were enormous.

  66. paulie

    2014 vs. 2015 can still affect bonuses for the rest of 2015.

    You’re right, I had not thought of that. But I think the main bone of contention was paying back bonuses that were already paid.

  67. Joe

    The audit committee has been beyond its bylaws domain for a couple of terms at least. Some see this as a good thing (more or less a free second parallel audit) others as a violation of the bylaws. It’s fair to say that second free parallel audit is only possible when someone of Aaron Starr’s abilities and dedication serves on the committee. I think he would be bored with serving on the committee only to vette, hire and then help interpret the results of an outside firm.

    IMO that should, however, be the role, at least until the bylaws are changed to grant more authority/responsibility to the committee.

  68. paulie

    Redpath wants to know what time tomorrow quorum will be lost. If there was an answer I missed it.

    Lieberman wants to know whether this session will set the time and place of the next one. Sarwark apologizes for not including that in the agenda.

  69. paulie

    BTW this is just Bill’s regular report that he always gave before the Ballot Access Committee was formed. The Committee had a completely different purpose and has not met. I asked for a meeting a couple of times.

  70. paulie

    Ohio wants to do a full party petition and may ask LNC for help. Redpath told them LNC is more likely to go for independent presidential.

  71. paulie

    Oklahoma is behind schedule. Started later than we had hoped. Competition for petitioners so we have not been able to get petitioners in here and the ones who were here have left. About 14,500 raw in hand. About 25k valid needed.

  72. paulie

    Validation is behind schedule also, but Redpath thanks Tina Kelly for running the drive here. Also all 4 officers of OKLP agreed to be responsible for 500 signatures or $1,000 each and Tina is the only one coming through.

  73. paulie

    Redpath is recommending that I be paid 700 a week to manage the drive here. I should have also explained that would be net cash.

  74. paulie

    Redpath suggests hiring a company to do everything for 2.50 a sig. I believe they may find someone to promise this but will try to jack it up later because they are not getting it done.

  75. paulie

    I am interested in how long the LNC will go on Sunday.

    The bylaws committee is supposedly meeting after the LNC and I am flying in for that purpose.

    Probably will run til they lose quorum. I heard earlier they have 25 different proposals on the agenda for tomorrow.

  76. Chuck Moulton

    paulie wrote (4:44 pm):

    Redpath wants to know what time tomorrow quorum will be lost. If there was an answer I missed it.

    Chuck Moulton wrote:

    I am interested in how long the LNC will go on Sunday.

    The bylaws committee is supposedly meeting after the LNC and I am flying in for that purpose.

    paulie wrote:

    Probably will run til they lose quorum. I heard earlier they have 25 different proposals on the agenda for tomorrow.

    Right, I am interested in what time they said they would lose quorom.

  77. Andy

    The LP does not need a “petition company” for Oklahoma or anywhere else. Total bullshit.

    Also, given that there are more lucrative petition drives going on in other states, I am skeptical that the LP drive in Oklahoma can be completed for $2.50 per sig.

  78. paulie

    The LNC Agenda is fairly well focused and may complete business before quorum is lost.

    Well, there’s the budget. Hasn’t even been touched today. And Oregon, that’s still on the agenda, right?

  79. Andy

    If completing the LP drive in Oklahoma for $2.50 was realistically feasible, then couldn’t Paul (who is still in OK), or the LP of OK just hire petition circulators themselves for $2.50 a sig?

    Why hire a non-libertarian mercenary middle man to pocket a cut of the money? Irrational and unnecessary.

  80. Andy

    If the LNC had done something to alleviate the access to locations for signature gathering problem in Oklahoma, the drive would be much closer to being completed right now.

  81. georgephillies

    Ballot access committee report appears to be a fake. It says

    “LIBERTARIAN PARTY BALLOT ACCESS
    COMMITTEE REPORT
    Libertarian National Committee meeting
    Orlando, Florida November 14-15, 2015”

    and

    “The Ballot Access Committee has not met since the July 2015 LNC meeting.”

    We we have a committee report, and the committee has not met to write or approve the report?

    On Massachusetts: We will need to do a 10,000 valid sig petition drive for President after Memorial day 2016. Deadline: August 1, 2016. Budget: $25,000. I am working with Christina (No, that is not how her name is spelled) Crawford of the LPMA, who is working diligently to maximize the number of volunteer signatures and financial donations from LPMA members.

    But note

    “Please note that if we had party status in MA, we would not have to petition at all to get
    our Presidential ticket on the ballot there.” Whoever wrote this sentence is out of touch with how ballot access works here.

  82. Wang Tang-Fu

    georgephillies

    This was posted above

    paulie
    November 14, 2015 at 5:09 pm
    BTW this is just Bill’s regular report that he always gave before the Ballot Access Committee was formed. The Committee had a completely different purpose and has not met. I asked for a meeting a couple of times.

  83. Andy

    I agree with George Phillies about the Ballot Access Committee. I am pretty sure that they only had one meeting, and it was back in March or April.

    It appears to be a do nothing committee.

  84. Chuck Moulton

    NIck: Let’s get a sense of the body. Who would be willing to stay until 7?
    [counts hands]
    Nick: Okay. Who would not?
    [video feed goes out]

    Apparently uStream is not willing to stay until 7 pm.

  85. paulie

    Actually just before it went out he said something like y’all are a bunch of troopers, so I think that they did decide to stay til 7, but I don’t know what they are doing now.

  86. paulie

    I agree with George Phillies about the Ballot Access Committee. I am pretty sure that they only had one meeting, and it was back in March or April.

    Correct.

  87. paulie

    BTW re Oklahoma….I have lost money every week that I have been here. Right now I am guessing I am about $10,000 in the hole for having been here since August. Plus I owe interest on it. And I have passed up lucrative petition drives to be here where a lot of people are telling me they are making $4,000-5,000 a week or in some cases even more. At this point I have health issues and no transportation and still location problems and now weather, so I can’t keep hanging out here.

  88. paulie

    So in other words, the Ballot Access Committee is a farce.

    Right now it’s not really doing what it was created to do. Bill is still doing what he was doing by himself before the committee was created. Richard Winger gave the big matching check to Oklahoma, plus what he has been doing all these years. I’ve done what I have done here. But as far as the committee per se, all it did was give Bill a title of committee chair that he was able to slap on the fundraising letter for Oklahoma, so far.

  89. georgephillies

    Perhaps as a member of the ballot access committee you would be prepared to explain why Massachusetts is singled out with the party status statement, which by the way is totally wrong.

  90. paulie

    evelop procedures and policies as reasonably appropriate to spread institutional
    knowledge of ballot access issues within the committee, LNC staff, officers of LNC
    affiliates, and future holders of these positions.

    That’s not really being done.

    Ballot Access Committee
    travellingcircus@gmail.com

    Jul 18

    to Gary, William, Ed, Richard, Bob, Nicholas

    Welcome Gary!

    Should we have another phone meeting some time soon, especially with the new member? As far as I know we only had one introductory phone meeting since the committee was created.

    Anything else we should be doing as a committee? Goals? Timetables?

    travellingcircus@gmail.com

    Aug 11

    to Gary, William, Ed, Richard, Bob, Nicholas

    Sent this on jul 16, haven’t heard from anyone,

    -p

    travellingcircus@gmail.com

    Oct 21

    to Gary, William, Ed, Richard, Bob, Nicholas

    I did get a call back from Bill shortly after my last reminder in August, but if there has been an actual meeting I missed it.

    William Redpath

    Oct 22

    to Gary, Ed, Richard, me, Bob, Nicholas

    There has not been an actual meeting. If there is a subject that needs to be addressed, let’s meet. if there is not, let’s not. The draft 2016 LNC budget will have $299,000 for Ballot Access Expense. Bill Redpath

  91. paulie

    Perhaps as a member of the ballot access committee you would be prepared to explain why Massachusetts is singled out with the party status statement, which by the way is totally wrong.

    Ask Bill. This was solely his report. Other than adding the word committee it was not prepared any differently than the ballot access reports he has been giving at LNC meetings for many years. If you look at the resulting reports and compare them that should be pretty obvious.

  92. Stewart Flood

    I missed the part about the bonuses. How is a bequest, given to the LP before either person who is receiving bonuses, part of the calculation? And paying bonuses for fundraising sort of makes me cringe a little anyway…

  93. georgephillies

    Paulie,

    No, it is a committee report. That means that the members of the committee all of them are responsible for the contents of the report.

    The members are
    Bill Redpath
    Paul Frankel
    Ed Marsh
    Richard Winger

    If you do not want to be blamed for the report’s contents, you should repudiate or correct the report.

  94. paulie

    Also Gary Johnson of TX. I don’t know any mechanism to correct anything. Myself, nor as far a I know anyone else, was consulted or shown the report before it was completed and published.

  95. georgephillies

    ” I don’t know any mechanism to correct anything. ”

    The mechanism is called a “minority report”. It can be as simple as “Mr. Chairman, I ask that the records show that as a member of the Ballot Access Committee I was not consulted by the Committee Chair about the contents of this report.”

  96. Marc Montoni

    Chuck said:

    I would hope that the many technologists in the party have been consulted (the IT committee contains some such people; however, their knowledge and experience is dwarfed by dispersed knowledge of many others). I would hope that state affiliate database managers and other affiliate officers have been consulted. I would hope that staff has been consulted. I’ve seen no evidence of that in these reports. Before voting on any such proposal, LNC members should see feedback from all of these people. Perhaps the IT committee has received such feedback, but they certainly haven’t shared it.

    I have been the database guy in Virginia off-and-on since the mid-90’s. In addition, I am one of the few people who have direct working knowledge of all 3 of the database backbones LPHQ has used since 1989.

    The IT committee did not reach out to me.

    They did contact my state chair and asked him about the database.

  97. Andy

    Good call here from George Phillies. This “committee” is clearly a one man farce, so let the record state that.

  98. Stewart Flood

    The IT committee is organized completely wrong. We should be talking with you and others in the party and getting together a strategy that works. Instead, a few (a FEW) members of the IT committee are tasked with specific things to “do”. I really can’t even remember what I was given. It was a year ago, and the few meetings (and even LESS email) we had from then until they got their teeth into this Nation Builder idea were poorly attended.

    So everything is completely backwards. When they formed the committee, I volunteered and recommended that you, Chuck and five or six others that I know from around the country be asked to be on it as well. Instead, I had to submit a RESUME to be selected — which took until September.

    Between systems you’ve created, I’ve created, and others around the country have created, we could fix database problems for everyone. Why aren’t we putting together a group of teleconferences (hangouts, whatever the heck you want to call them) and talking about real solutions?

    Because that isn’t how it works. They want to spend money, lots and lots of money. And the system would cost a BOAT LOAD of money if we really wanted to put the data in that we need to have.

    I don’t know what they voted on, but I’m still opposed to Nation Builder. It has some nice features, but it isn’t a “one solution fits all” that would work.

    Did they vote? Is the party database to be destroyed once again?

  99. Stewart Flood

    George, that is what I tried. But this all happened within 24 HOURS OF THE MEETING, so there wasn’t even an opportunity. I thought, after our WEDNESDAY EVENING CALL, that the report would be somewhat different. When I saw it…I believe on Friday morning…I responded. I was asked to give my concerns, which I did. I believed that would be presented as a minority report, but I then found my name on a revised report that contained nothing negative about the product.

    Choosing a major platform change with proposals that are still changing and still clearly missing fees the party would likely be subjected to is insane. But the LNC has done it before, so who knows.

    My guess is that they’ll kick me off the committee for publicly voicing my disagreement.

  100. Stewart Flood

    Oh yeah…and other really neat stuff we could be doing that has nothing to do with this database is being left to rot.

  101. georgephillies

    Stewart,

    I am entirely on your side on this issue. I am reminded of remarks by that great libertarian and IT expert Bonnie Scott criticizing the path used to select Raisers Edge. From your remarks we sound to be recycling the decision path from last time. To avoid claiming credit I do not deserve, my remark at 8:22 was directed to Paulie at 7:59 on the ballot access committee “report”

  102. georgephillies

    As a modest aside, my state committee looked at the Nevada estimate of the operating cost of Nation Builder, and our own separate estimate, and have no interest in the change.

  103. paulie

    LOL. You have been living in that area for years and flown out of those airports how many times? Sorry, I didn’t mean to laugh, but…. that doesn’t rise to pro tip level. Even I knew that, and I hardly ever fly; I think 3 times total since 2008, and before that the last time was 2001.

  104. Wes Wagner

    Although ideally the LNC should realize how much damage they did in their efforts to support one side of this conflict … but having at least a little sense to not keep digging would be a welcome change.

  105. Chuck Moulton

    It was meant for a laugh Paulie; I knew there were two airports. I had purchased my ticket 2 months ago though… the airport slipped my mind today — especially since I fly from Reagan 90% of the time. I didn’t look closely enough at my itinerary I had printed out until I was at the wrong airport with 1 hour before takeoff and the check-in kiosk said I had no flight reservation.

    Recently I was at a conference where the following quote by an economist was brought up:

    If you never miss a flight, you’re spending too much time at airports.

    The context was overregulation of banks could conceivably tip the balance too far towards stability at the expense of wealth creation / economic growth (there are tradeoffs). Apparently I took it literally instead.

  106. Matt Cholko

    So, Paulie, what needs to be done to make the petition drive likely to succeed?

    On a related note, if the LNC gives up the drive at any point before it is virtually certain to fail, they should refund Winger his $30k, plus interest. They should also refund all other donors. Are we at a point where it is virtually certain to fail?

  107. paulie

    It’s not virtually certain to fail, but it’s in trouble.

    What needs to be done to save it:

    1) The lawyers need to get with an aggressive strategy of opening up ballot access NOW. That needed to be done a long time ago but it certainly should not wait any longer.

    2) The pay rate should go up if at all possible. Given the LNC decision making process that may not be possible through the LNC so we may need to try to find donors who can give to OKLP directly so they can bump it up. Can Hinkle ask Rufer, for example?

    3) Bob Johnston has already tried calling stores for permission and not had any success. Is it possible that someone else would be better at it? Maybe he hasn’t called enough gas station/convenience stores? I don’t know. It’s hard to believe zero stores in the whole state would allow us to petition, although that has been the reported answer so far.

    4) I have a list of OK based circulators from past campaigns I just got from Bill and Tina which I will be calling through.

    5) It would help if they hire me to help coordinate. Tina just doesn’t have the time to deal with a whole bunch of petitioners if we manage to find them. I do.

    6) We should put out a craigslist ad for *experienced petitioners only*

    7) Andy, Darryl and I all gave Tina a list of a bunch of petitioners and would be petitioners names and numbers. I don’t think she has called most of them. Give me the list and I will call them.

    8) LPHQ should put out an email blast asking people on our list from Oklahoma to try paid petitioning.

    9) They could put out another one nationwide seeing if anyone wants to go to Oklahoma and try being a paid petitioner. They haven’t done that since 2000 or so. Yes, lots of people try petitioning and fail at it, but it would be at their own risk, and some do succeed…that’s how Andy became a petitioner, for example.

    10) Wes mentioned having family and friends in Oklahoma. Would any of them be able to go around to stores to see if we can get some to let us petition? In person is easier to get a yes than on the phone on average.

    These steps do need to be taken quickly or it will become harder and harder to save the drive.

  108. paulie

    On a related note, if the LNC gives up the drive at any point before it is virtually certain to fail, they should refund Winger his $30k, plus interest. They should also refund all other donors.

    Well, some of the money has been spent. We do have 15k or so sigs so it’s a pretty big chunk.

  109. Andy

    Postponing the LP petition drive until late August was pure foolishness, especially when the consequences of doing this was clearly explained by Paul and myself to multiple LNC members well in advance of this.

    The LNC was made aware of the fact that we were entering the busy season in the petition business, and that it would be hard to get petition circulators to work in Oklahoma due to competition from multiple states with ballot drives happening. I offered to go to Oklahoma in May, June, and July, yet I was ignored.

    I also suggested multiple times BEFORE the drive started in Oklahoma that the “authorities” in Oklahoma should have been contacted to clarify where petition circulators can gather signatures, and if said “authorities” try to prevent us from gathering signatures in places that are open to the public, that we immediately file a law suit in federal court.

    The Libertarian Party has been running ballot access drives since the early 1970’s, yet here we are in 2015, and the LNC is still operating as in it is amateur hour, and the party is still back in the 1970’s trying to figure out.

  110. paulie

    If all, or almost all of those 10 steps are taken, how likely do you think it is that the drive will succeed?

    Pretty likely. I think it’s too early to throw in the towel.

  111. Andy

    A bunch of petition curculators were told about the LP petition drive in Oklahoma. I know of at least 18 people who were told about it and who turned it down. Why? Because they had higher paying work options elsewhere.

    Libertarian petitioners Bob, Roger, Jake, and Trent all offered to go to Oklahoma if the party would pay for their travel and motel. The party never offered this, so they never went to OK, and now they are all working higher paying gigs elsewhere.

    The amount of money budgeted for Oklahoma was not enough, and this should have been blatantly obvious to anyone who knows anything about ballot access.

    The signature requirements in Oklahoma and Illinois are about the same, and the LP spent over $100,000 to get on the ballot last year in Illinois. It is easier to collect the signatures in Illinois than in Oklahoma, and the late summer and fall season going into a presidential election year is one of the most competitive times to hire petition circulators, so given these facts, why. dud the LNC postpone the Oklahoma petition drive until the beginning of the busiest petition season, and why did they think they could get on the ballot in Oklahoma for $40,000 less than was spent in Illinois last year?

    Completely irrational.

    The LNC had money back in June. I offered to go to Oklahoma then, but I was ignored. If the party. had taken me up on this offer the drive would be as lot closer to being finished now. Summer has the most festivals. No paid petitioners in Oklahoma in July meant that thousands of signatures were missed at Fourth of July festivals and other events.

  112. paulie

    I saw the junior Senator from Kentucky in the hallway when I stepped out to use the facilities.

    Now that is an interesting tidbit (way above from Nick Sarwark) that no one has commented on yet.

    Does Nick or anyone else reading know more about why RP2 would be there that they can tell me? 205-534-1622 if you want to keep it just between you, me and the NSA.

    Or, is there something else going on at the hotel and this was just a cosmic coincidence?

  113. paulie

    Andy,

    It would be more helpful if you focused on ways to save this thing instead of on pointing out how everyone fucked up. Right now they are strongly considering pulling the plug. They don’t need any more push from you in that direction,

  114. Andy

    I also offered to go door-to-door canvassing in neighborhoods in Oklahoma back in September, and multiple times after that, due to the lack of access to locations with public foot traffic in Oklahoma, and due to the lower than average validity rate in Oklahoma. I just needed two things to do this:

    1) A walking list of registered voters,

    and,

    2) A higher rate per signature for door-to-door canvassed signatures off of a walking list of registered voters (which can net 99-100% valid signatures.

    I made this request multiple times, yet my request was ignored.

    I was recently offered higher paying work in another state, and I finally said, “Screw it!” to Oklahoma and I left for greener pastures.

  115. Andy

    I probably should have left OK sooner than I did.

    I had a few good days in Oklahoma, like that day where I got 520 signatures, which was a super monster day, but I likely would have made more money if I had been in South Dakota, Massachusetts, or Florida.

  116. Andy

    Blame is a part of the solution. LP delegates need to know who to blame before they vote in Orlando next year. Hold who contribute to 40 plus years of political failure responsible for their actions.

    If the Libertarian Party was a football or basketball team, how many games would they win if the same losing coaches were brought back season after season?

    Are we in it to win it, or are we in it to lose?

    What is at stake here?

    Hey, it is only our freedom at stake folks.

    If you are not in it to win it then get out of the way for those of us who are in it to win it.

  117. paulie

    Chaz thinks LP petitions will speed up as initiatives end.

    (Paulie:) I don’t think so. I will explain why later.

    Here’s why.

    While the initiatives were going the petitioners had a lot of money on the board, which means there were lots of petitioners out there working lots of hours. As the initiatives end, staying in SD if you travel around to petition, or staying in petitioning if you are a SD resident, becomes a lot less lucrative. So there will be a lot fewer petitioners working and the ones who are there will not work as much, as they will probably have to get other jobs and maybe petition part time since they won’t be making enough for food and shelter just by petitioning. Chaz is offering them a dollar a signature so most of them will go to other states or go back to other jobs. Plus it’s getting cold. Winter in the Dakotas is no joke.

  118. paulie

    Blame is a part of the solution. LP delegates need to know who to blame before they vote in Orlando next year. Hold who contribute to 40 plus years of political failure responsible for their actions.

    If the Libertarian Party was a football or basketball team, how many games would they win if the same losing coaches were brought back season after season?

    This assumes that those who would replace them would do better as opposed to worse. Different does not automatically mean better. As bad as you may think they are it is very easy to do worse. Just look at any other alt party in the US today if you don’t believe me.

  119. Andy

    I am tired of excuses. The LP has lost 2/3 of its membership in the last 15 years. The number of elected Libertarians has gone down by around 2/3. The party has not won a meaningful election in 15 years. The party has not been on the ballot in all 50 states plus DC in 15 or 19 years, depending how you count it. It looks like we may not make all 50 states plus DC next year either. Fundraising is down.

    When do you stop making excuses?

  120. georgephillies

    Andy, Who are you proposing to replace? Blaming people who just got on the LNC for failures ten years ago shows a certain faith in time machines.

    Having said that, some of these tasks are assigned to committees. I think that there isa collision between the national party principle on fraud and the presence of multiple “committee” reports that have not been seen by their committees or that claim the support of committee members who opposed the report contents.

  121. paulie

    When do you stop making excuses?

    When you convince me someone is running who knows how to turn it around and can elect enough people to the LNC to get it done. Simply voting in new people does not mean they will do better. They may do the same or they could very easily do worse.

  122. paulie

    From Joshua Katz:

    I have provided an audio feed during meetings where I had the necessary equipment, in cooperation with Norm Olsen. However, I no longer own that equipment (well, I loaned it out). Even if I still had it, I would not be able to provide a feed during this meeting since I never owned an aircard-type device and high speed internet is extremely limited in the meeting area. Gary Johnson has been more consistent in providing it. We get 2mbs (down) in my hotel room, which wouldn’t be sufficient. In the meeting room, I get no signal at all, and staff is using a wired connection.

  123. Chuck Moulton

    I’m at the meeting.

    The LNC is currently discussing whether projected membership revenues are realistic. Nrom Olsen pointed out that in 2012 members gave an average of $30/member. Given our current number of members, we overestimate membership revenue by $100,000.

  124. paulie

    Lynn House at LPF:

    The LP Platform Committee is in a holding pattern, waiting for 6 States to make their appointments. The deadline is December 31st. No meetings have been scheduled. If anyone has a platform proposal that they’d like to present to the committee, please contact Lynn House. houselynn@verizon.net

  125. Chuck Moulton

    They are currently talking about Facebook advertising to raise money through membership, donations, shirt sales, etc. Wes Benedict pointed out that ramping up advertising doesn’t make sense. Just because you might make a good return on investment from an $8,000 buy (e.g., $10,000), doesn’t mean you’d get a similar ROI from a $16,000 buy… you may even get back $12,000 and take a loss. Doug Craig (who has done extensive Facebook work) agreed that the Facebook ROI is hard to predict. Brett Bittner said the Advocates for Self-Government doesn’t do Facebook advertising… it’s all organic. Others are talking about their Facebook advertising / promotion experience.

  126. Ken Moellman

    Good Morning.

    I was tied up all day yesterday, so I didn’t get to watch to proceedings. I plan to watch today’s portion of the meeting. I had a few comments.

    (1) We should not cut-and-run from the OK drive. Based on the validity numbers I was hearing, we’re probably almost 1/3rd complete. We need to get aggressive with the state. If the ACLU is sending love-letters, that’s fine. I would suggest the LNC send C&D letters a day or two after. And strategically it may be wise to have another outside group like F&E chime in with letter somewhere in-between the ACLU and the LNC.

    (2) LP Ohio is going to be a big drive for full party access. I support LP Ohio’s desire to get full access, but we need to start getting fundraising commitments lined up immediately if that’s going to happen. We can even put them into an escrow account while the litigation is on-going, and offer to refund to the donors (if they want it back) if LP Ohio is ultimately successful with their legal case.

    In 2014, an LPKY donor developed new software to help us validate signatures. It sped up our validation process in LPKY from about 90 seconds per signature to about 25 seconds per signature. This software could be adapted pretty easily for LP Ohio at a very minimal cost. It takes some volunteer hours to validate everything, but it’s great for ensuring minimum validity and for knowing when you’re safe and can stop the drive (no cost overruns, and no risk of being a few signatures short).

  127. Chuck Moulton

    Norm Olsen moved to increase the allocation to affiliate support from $45,000 to $65,000 (to give affiliate development associate staff member Andy Burns some more money to work with) and correspondingly reduce ballot access expenditures by $20,000. Alicia Mattson moves to substitute increasing the affiliate support line without reducing the ballot access line (increasing expenses, which then will have to come from decreased expenditures or increased revenues later in the process) — she pointed out that it doesn’t paint a realistic picture to remove money from ballot access because we’re going to end up spending that money anyway.

  128. Chuck Moulton

    Oh, I should have mentioned that the Mattson substitute failed. They are now discussing the main Olsen motion to move money from ballot access to affiliate support.

  129. Chuck Moulton

    Nick Sarwark handed the gavel to Arvin Vohra, then moved to substitute that ballot access be reduced by $20,000 and affiliate support be increased by $15,000 (thus on net reducing overall spending to help balance the revenue shortfall).

  130. Chuck Moulton

    Mattson calls the questions (the Olsen amendment and the Sarwark substitute, not the budget itself).

    In favor:
    Sarwark
    Olsen
    Kirkland
    Ludlow
    Goldstein
    Redpath
    Hagan
    … (more)

    Opposed:
    Lark
    Feldman

    Substitution passed 10-2.

    Sarwark version is now the main motion. Olsen asks for a roll call.

    Feldman – N
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – A
    Wiener – N
    Ludlow – Y
    Lark – N
    Reimers – A
    Tomasso – N
    Redpath – N
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – N
    Mattson – N
    Sarwark – Y

    It fails by a vote of 6-7-2.

    Mattson moves to amend the budget by adding a proviso: Ballot access expenditures may only be authorized by 2/3 of the executive committee and the total cannot exceed the ballot access allocation in the budget. (may not be exact words, but that’s the gist of it).

    The proviso passes without objection.

  131. houselynn2

    Name them to shame them. The States that haven’t appointed members to the Platform Committee are Nevada, Alabama, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Georgia

  132. Chuck Moulton

    Mattson asked Sarwark how the bonus targets would be determined.

    Tomasso moved to decrease net membership dues to $415,000 (from $474,500) and increase the board solicitation item to $20,000 (from $0).

    Ludlow asks if Tomasso is just proposing a give-or-get from the board. Tomasso says yes, but he doesn’t like that term because it has some bad history on the LNC. Ludlow says that’s the term that is routinely used for board solicitations.

  133. Chuck Moulton

    houselynne2 wrote:

    Name them to shame them. The States that haven’t appointed members to the Platform Committee are Nevada, Alabama, Virginia, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Georgia

    Virginia has considered a platform appointment at several meetings. We haven’t found someone yet. We will meet again on December 5.

  134. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Olsen asks for a roll call”

    Olsen shouldn’t have had to ask for a roll call. The bylaws (article 8, section 14) explicitly require a roll call on all substantive motions.

  135. georgephillies

    They are now proposing to use the board for fundraising, a proposal that has not always raised well. The give or get proposal is that board members should either raise money or give it. The board is letting Starr and if I heard correctly Carling participate in the discussion, rather than doing the job for which they were sent.

    There is a move to extend for an hour. The motion seems to have been ignored. They are cutting the dues estimate I think, 10-3,

  136. georgephillies

    THey are voting on whether or not to extend debate on the budget. They extended by 15 minutes.

    Mindful that this is their most important task, why was this not done yesterday.

  137. georgephillies

    The budget at this point has a deficit. They are now trying to get the board to commit more per month “Do I here $15 a month? How about a hundred?” They are wasting time on a bidding practice that might raise a few thousand namely driving the promise up to $15 a month.

    Complete waste of time.

  138. Chuck Moulton

    Aaron Starr suggested the board only do give-or-get if there is a plan — i.e., in 2016 don’t punt it to the next board (post convention).

    M Carling said he makes a monthly pledge of 10x whatever the lowest donation is that an LNC member gives to the national party.

    Give-or-get vote:

    [The following roll call I’m not sure of. I put ? next to the votes I didn’t quite hear as I was catching up putting together a table to track roll call votes. I won’t miss in the future.]

    Feldman – N
    Olsen – N
    Kirkland – N
    Wiener – Y ?
    Ludlow – Y ?
    Lark – Y ?
    Reimers – A ?
    Tomasso – Y ?
    Redpath – Y
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – A
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – A

    Passes 10-3-2

    Time was extended on the budget discussion by 15 minutes (a motion to extend by 45 minutes failed).

    They are trying to find out if members (not alternates) will all give a monthly pledge, so that M Carling will give 10x that. The lowest monthly pledge people were willing to make is $15/month (Norm Olsen, who is on a fixed income).

  139. georgephillies

    They are discussing asking the staff to send out more fundraising emails to raise more money. Opposition sends an email a day in some cases. Wiener proposes sending out more emails and saying they will raise enough money.

  140. Chuck Moulton

    Thomas L. Knapp wrote:

    “Olsen asks for a roll call”

    Olsen shouldn’t have had to ask for a roll call. The bylaws (article 8, section 14) explicitly require a roll call on all substantive motions.

    That is true of main motions, not amendments — but any one member may demand a roll call. In this case the main motion is the budget itself. The Olsen motion was an amendment to the budget motion.

  141. georgephillies

    The staff is suggesting that raising much more money via email may be challenging. Sarwark proposes to cut ballot access funds, knowing that we will not have the money to cover ballot access, and then raise money by blackmailing the members.

  142. Thomas L. Knapp

    Doh — Moulton is correct. Since there were attempts to amend Olsen’s motion, I incorrectly treated his motion as substantive when in fact it was also an amendment. Sorry about that.

  143. Thomas L. Knapp

    Quoth George:

    “Sarwark proposes to cut ballot access funds, knowing that we will not have the money to cover ballot access, and then raise money by blackmailing the members.”

    That’s kind of an odd take from you, George. At least at one time, your attitude concerning ballot access seemed to be that state parties not strong enough to handle their own ballot access weren’t a good investment of national funds anyway. Has that position changed, or were just noting tactical significance within an approach you still disagree with?

    I’m off to church. Kind of hope that Oregon isn’t taken up until I get back.

  144. georgephillies

    to restate thanks to Vohra, original cut in ballot access is 32,000, Redpath amendment is 26,500, and motion to extend debate lacks 2/3. Redpath amendment passes. Motion passes.

  145. paulie

    The ballot access budget is not realistic. The projections of what various states would cost was overly optimistic and now they cut it by another 26.5k.

  146. paulie

    Next they are proposing reducing LP News by an issue. From what I was told when I was on LNC, LP News brings in more money than it costs. If that’s true, why is it rational to cut LP News?

  147. Chuck Moulton

    Sarwark moves that $32,000 be cut from ballot access to balance the budget. He says it is easier to do emergency fundraising for ballot access than other things.

    Redpath moves to substitute that ballot access be reduced by $26,500 (leaving $275,000 left in ballot access).

    Motion to extend time fails to reach 2/3.

    Redpath substitute passes by a show of hands.

    Redpath motion (now the main amendment) passes by a roll call vote.

    Feldman – N
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – N
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – Y
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – Y (regretably)
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – N
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – Y

    Passed 12-3-0.

    Wiener moves that the LPNews budget be reduced by 1 issue to balance the budget. Numbers were given, but I missed them. They did 4 issues this year. They planned to do 6 issues next year. This motion would reduce it to 5 issues (still more than this year).

    They are now making sure people have late check-out at the hotel who needs it.

  148. georgephillies

    Someone is saying we did 4 issues a year in some past years. these were years where membership fell I think.

    Some people propose that the newsletter is antiquated.

  149. georgephillies

    “At least at one time, your attitude concerning ballot access seemed to be that state parties not strong enough to handle their own ballot access weren’t a good investment of national funds anyway. ” Where did that come from?

    There are people advocating the racist position that the paper newsletter is out of date. We have a mostly white party and the notion that computers replace, given internet use by race, is racist.

  150. Chuck Moulton

    Ludlow moves a substitute to reduce issues from 6 to 4 instead of from 6 to 5. He says a paper newsletter is completely antiquated. I heard a number around $18,000 (I think $18,200) for a 2 issue reduction, so I assume a 1 issue reduction (the Wiener motion) would reduce expenses by about $9,000.

    Wiener moves all previous questions (Ludlow, Wiener, and the budget itself). It passes.

    Ludlow motion to reduce LP News by 2 issues:

    Yes:
    Redpath
    Mattson
    Olsen
    Ludlow
    1 other (don’t know who)

    No:
    a bunch of people

    It fails.

    Wiener motion to reduce LP News by 1 issue.

    Feldman – Y
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – N
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – Y
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – Y
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – N
    Vohra – Y
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – A

    It passes 12-2-1.

    Budget (as amended).

    Feldman – Y
    Olsen – N
    Kirkland – Y
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – Y
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – Y
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – Y
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – Y

    It passes 14-1-0.

    Daniel Hayes was recognized for a $150/month pledge and a $2,000 give-or-get.

    The LNC then took a break.

  151. paulie

    They passed the budget. Wow, that was a lot faster than the massive clusterfucks I participated in last term. Or maybe it just seemed that way because I was part of the process rather than a half awake observer. But I think they are a lot faster now, too.

  152. georgephillies

    What I actually said about 50 state ballot access. That;’s in the book “Libertarian Renaissance.”

    “3) Support our candidates. 50-state ballot access for the Presidential candidate. Fifty-state ballot access is an Important Activity. The Presidential candidate is the nominee of the national party. It’s expensive. Only by focusing the resources of the entire National Party can our Presidential nominee be on the ballot everywhere. The LNC should set aside in each year’s budgets the funds needed to carry out this objective in a timely way. However, we shouldn’t focus so tightly on the Presidential candidate that we ignore all our other candidates.”

  153. paulie

    paper newsletter is out of date.

    Last term we were told that there are major donors who specifically want a paper issue and nothing else, and that we raise more money the more issues we put out. The party managed to keep it monthly for decades, including times when we had this much money or less, did we not? Just to be clear I am very glad that the electronic version is now available again after years of absence that made it very hard for someone like me who travels full time to see the thing (sometimes until a year later or more, or at all, if whoever gets my snail mail threw it out)..but I am glad it is still available in paper and it should remain available in both formats.

  154. Chuck Moulton

    Unfortunately the LNC seems to be looking at what is easily measurable and ignoring what is not. The value of LP News is not immediate contributions, but rather that it is one of the few tangible things members see showing we are doing something, which motivates donations and memberships through other vectors (e.g., online when their membership is about to expire). I strongly oppose reducing LP News issues.

    On ballot access I agree with Paulie that the budget was already unrealistically low and is now even more so. Pennsylvania will cost a lot because the LNC and staff are not doing any of the sensible things I suggested to do it right — namely a lot of candidate recruitment.

    I support give-or-get. The other thing that is needed is actual prospecting. If we don’t prospect it is inevitable that members will be lost due to attrition and membership will continue to decline.

  155. Daniel Hayes

    Lynn,

    I just asked Alicia and she said that Alabama was NOT one of the states that has a member on the Platform committee. Leigh Lachine(Alabama State Chair) was siting right next to me and said he knew nothing about it. SO I think Alabama isnt one of the “offenders”.

  156. Chuck Moulton

    The LNC is talking about Oregon for 30 minutes now.

    Dan Wiener is making a motion that basically says the LNC recognizes the Burke group and staff be instructed to recognize that group.

    Redpath seconds Wiener’s motion.

  157. Chuck Moulton

    Wiener says he was trying to mediate. He got the Burke group to agree to mediation with a mediator of the Wager’s group’s choosing with no preconditions. He tried emailing Lars Hedbor (Wagner group), but there was no response. He got Nick Sarwark to call Lars Hedbor, but Lars would not agree to mediation.

    Craig is now speaking up for the Wagner group. He says the Wagner group is recognized by Oregon and put our presidential candidate on the ballot. He says the Burke folks could have run for elections in the Wagner group. He says Carling had a conflict of interest on the JC.

    Carling says he abstained from voting on all substantive and procedural questions relating to Oregon this JC term.

  158. Chuck Moulton

    Bittner wants consistency addressing people so the LNC doesn’t get confused. Just pick one.

    Hedbor vs. Epstein
    Libertarian Party of Oregon vs. Misc PAC 16869
    etc.

    Sarwark proposes the shorthand of Party vs. PAC.

  159. georgephillies

    Chair says calling Wagner Reeves is bad and party and pac is good. Redpath wants Wganer and Reeves as the name of the faction, there is an appeal of the ruling of the chair. Mattson wants to speak to appeal of rule of chair.

  160. Chuck Moulton

    Mattson: You can’t tell people what words they can use under Roberts.
    Sarwark: You can under rules of decorum.
    Mattson: Alright, then I’m definitely appealing. Your terms are biased.

    [Not exact quotes, but the gist.]

    Sarwark: We as a body don’t affiliate with people. We affiliate with organizations. Use the organization names.

  161. georgephillies

    Apparently Bittner asked for a ruling as to what the groups should be called during teh debate. This is a request foir a ruling on a pooint of decorum. Sarwark ruled that the references should be to the groups by name. The chair’s ruling is upheld. The vote was 7-6 to uphold the chair’s ruling that the groups should not be named as the Wagner and Reeves group.

  162. Chuck Moulton

    Wiener: The effect of this motion is that the faction whose name shall not be mentioned would no longer be our affiliate and the faction whose name also shall not be mentioned would now be recognized as our affiliate.

  163. georgephillies

    Wiener is now reading the 2011 LNC Excomm motions which the JudComm has now restored. WIener motion says that the motions of the LNC ExComm of 2011 are in effect and there fore the faction whose name shall also not be mentioned (Reeves) shall be recognized as the LPOR affiliate officers.

  164. Chuck Moulton

    Goldstein asked whether LNC recognition would affect which faction is recognized by the state of Oregon. Wiener said there is dispute about that… Sarwark says no, some others have said yes… it’s an unknown. Wiener continues that we have to do what is right from our point of view.

  165. Mike Shipley

    It’s great to hear it acknowledged by libertarians that language choice can carry inherent bias that reinforces power imbalance. Typical for people who’ve benefited from prior, emotionally loaded constructs to accuse people using more precise language of “bias” when they lose that advantage.

  166. paulie

    Domino theory applies here, folks.

    Especially in the context of the reduced ballot access budget.

    Right now this is likely to be a vote whether the LP wants the LP presidential candidate in 2016 to be on fewer states than Barr.

  167. georgephillies

    Kat: pr is that we know the personalities and people. We should follow our rules. Katz goes on at great length and neglects to say specifically that he is suporting the Reeves group.

    Move to extend to postpone indefinitely. 9-6. Fails. 2/3 needed.

    Move to extend for 5 minutes. 11-4 carried

  168. georgephillies

    hayes: Wagner will still control ballot access line. They do not say what they will do. This mtion picks the scab off the wound. Leave this to the delegates. We could rescind the action of ExComm.

  169. Chuck Moulton

    Craig says no one has been turned away from Libertarian Party of Oregon meetings. Also the Libertarian Party of Oregon put our presidential candidate on the ballot.

    Katz says the issue is should we or should we not abide by our rules and the highest body short of the convention (the judicial committee). He’s now making a [terrible and inapplicable] analogy about 5 people claiming to be the officers of Google. He urges the LNC to recognize “the Google as it exists” [the PAC].

    Craig moves to extend time for 1 minute to make a motion to postpone indefinitely. The motion to extend fails for lack of 2/3. Redpath moves to extend for 5 minutes. It passes 11-4, so time is extended.

    Daniel Hayes says this is in litigation and appeal… that litigation is clearly favoring the Party, not the PAC. Therefore, we will lose presidential ballot access in Oregon if we pick the PAC over the Party. We could rescind the EC motions.

    Mattson says this has not been adjudicated — there has been no decision on the merits. The secretary of state punted to the courts. The courts said they can’t interfere in political parties (non justiciable or can use discretion not to intrude).

    Doug Craig moves to postpone indefinitely.

    Ludlow asks why this motion does anything… the chair already ruled that the JC is the highest body short of the delegates.

    Sarwark clarifies that we are already abiding by the JC decision through inaction, whereas Wiener’s motion is abiding by the JC decision with action from staff.

  170. paulie

    He urges the LNC to recognize “the Google as it exists” [the PAC].

    Ah, so that was Katz, not Starr. He is confused as to which faction is the “Google as it exists” and which one is five folks in a garage.

  171. paulie

    Daniel Hayes says this is in litigation and appeal… that litigation is clearly favoring the Party, not the PAC. Therefore, we will lose presidential ballot access in Oregon if we pick the PAC over the Party. We could rescind the EC motions.

    Thank you Daniel. The only person besides Nick and Doug I heard make good arguments here.

  172. georgephillies

    There is a motion to postpone indefinitely. That is debatable, but there is no time left. Coudl goto mail ballot. We will move to postpone indefinitely.
    Vote is 8-6 to postpone indefinitely.

  173. Chuck Moulton

    Lark asks for clarification on what a motion to postpone indefinitely does. Sarwark says that it will mean this can’t be brought up again this session.

    Postpone Oregon vote indefinitely:

    Bittner – Y
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – Y
    Wiener – N
    Ludlow – N
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – N
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – N
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – N
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – Y
    Mattson – N
    Sarwark – A

    It passes by a vote of 8-6-1.

    So no action on Oregon and they are moving on.

    The current agenda item is Mattson motions to amend the employment manual.

  174. Daniel Hayes

    Its postponed indefinitely…but that means we will likely see this in Emal votes. PI kills it for the session. Email is a separate session effectively…so…expect the LNC Business list to be actve soon.

  175. paulie

    Lark asks for clarification on what a motion to postpone indefinitely does. Sarwark says that it will mean this can’t be brought up again this session.

    Anyone disputing this?

  176. Chuck Moulton

    Sorry, Mattson motions are to amend the policy manual, not the employment manual.

    Some want to divide the question.

    I’m not following this as closely because it’s not as interesting and I’m taking a break. I’ll try to get roll call votes, but not all discussion and amendments in this case.

  177. Chuck Moulton

    I left for a few minutes and missed the debate. Apparently everyone voted in favor.

    Without objection time is extended by 5 minutes. Bittner speaks against because it handcuffs future boards, who may choose to hire someone to specifically work on the convention or to travel nursing home to nursing home soliciting bequests. [laughter]

  178. paulie

    future boards, who may choose to hire someone to specifically work on the convention or to travel nursing home to nursing home soliciting bequests. [laughter]

    Actually not a bad idea at all.

  179. Chuck Moulton

    Benedict suggests it be clarified whether convention banquet fundraising be convention revenue, ballot access revenue, etc. Also, he put a story on the front page of LP News soliciting requests and 3 days later we got the Shafer request. It may have been a coincidence or it may have been related.

  180. Chuck Moulton

    Vohra suggests measuring results, not effort. Just because raising a lot of money for bequests takes little effort doesn’t mean it isn’t effective or a good thing to do and incentivize.

  181. paulie

    Paulie is volunteering..

    I’d rather that someone be hired who is good at fundraising as well as as working with the elderly and dying. I bet there are people out there with experience doing this very thing for other organizations.

    Bequests, like monthly pledges, could be mentioned much, more often in party communications.

  182. Chuck Moulton

    Mattson second paragraph:

    Bittner – N
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – N
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – Y
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – N
    Redpath – Y
    Craig – N
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – N
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – A

    It passes 8-5-2

    One of my yes votes should be an abstention. Not sure which. Sorry about that.

    Bonuses require that employees be employed all days that time period:

    Bittner – N
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – Y
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – A
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – A
    Craig – N
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – N
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – A

    It passes 10-3-2 according to Mattson. In this case I am pretty sure she is wrong… there were 3 abstentions.

  183. paulie

    Bittner – N
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – Y
    Wiener – Y
    Ludlow – A
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – Y
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – A
    Craig – N
    Goldstein – Y
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – N
    Mattson – Y
    Sarwark – A

    It passes 10-3-2 according to Mattson. In this case I am pretty sure she is wrong… there were 3 abstentions.

    I’m counting 3: Ludlow, Redpath, Sarwark. Did she say otherwise?

  184. paulie

    I emailed my recommendations on Oklahoma to all LNC members.

    My week at the motel here ends Monday morning so please let me know whether I should stay. I can’t keep borrowing money to keep staying here and I can’t go out to petition, so let me know if there is any money available for me to coordinate.

  185. Chuck Moulton

    Paulie wrote:

    I’m counting 3: Ludlow, Redpath, Sarwark. Did she say otherwise?

    Mattson said 10-3-2.

    I thought it’s 9-3-3. I asked all 3 abstentions, so at this point I am certain.

  186. Chuck Moulton

    The LNC is talking about goals. After that will be regional reports. Then public comments. Hopefully no surprises.

    I left the room to get lunch before the bylaws committee meeting.

  187. Joe

    Chuck Moulton @ November 15, 2015 at 11:07 am wrote:

    “Unfortunately the LNC seems to be looking at what is easily measurable and ignoring what is not. The value of LP News is not immediate contributions, but rather that it is one of the few tangible things members see showing we are doing something,”

    Only if it has content value. Most of the time when I get a copy of the LP News it is out-of-date/promoting events that have already happened. I’m left with the impression that they aren’t doing anything useful.

    Perhaps a emailed PDF would arrive earlier with the same content that the paper copy offers much later?

    Regardless for many other newsletters/journals which I read, I am now routinely offered the option to receive a paperless copy — that satisfies my desire to feel like I am doing something positive for both the environment (reducing paper use/transportation and delivery costs) and doing something for the organization (making it less expensive for them to communicate with me/in effect donating).

    If the staff could keep track of two different distribution options and preferences of members, then I’d suggest we offer an emailed/PDF/Kindle/whatever version of LP news as an option.

    Otherwise, at least for me, especially when it arrives as an out-of-date pile of paper, it occurs more as garbage than something of value.

  188. Andy

    There is money for Paul to act as a coordinator, he’d just have to pay people less than $2.50 a signature.

  189. Joe

    Chuck Moulton @ November 15, 2015 at 11:14 am wrote:

    “Dan Wiener is making a motion that basically says the LNC recognizes the Burke group and staff be instructed to recognize that group. Redpath seconds Wiener’s motion.”

    I’m disappointed in my friend of 35+ years (Redpath) both on principle (this is the equivalent of not noticing that your youngest child hit the older one before the older one hit back, and then trying to compensate the younger one as victim) and on practice (goodbye Oregon for ballot access, and other states who decide to send a message to the LNC about bottom up v top down authority — how many LP members are currently aligned with the Oregon Party (Wagner) verses the Oregon Pac (Carling/Starr)? (Using the names of where the money is.)

    Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

    When the issue of the LP news arrives that headlines the LNC choosing to affiliate with a PAC over a Party, I will BURN IT — even if it arrives as a PDF or Kindle.

    So anti-LIBERTY, pro-process, authoritarian, unenlightened, focused only on the response to aggression as if the initiator of the aggression in Oregon is the “victim in need of restitution” here — and yet ALSO choosing which process to follow and which to ignore (namely creating a precedent for more recent Judicial Committees to review ALL past Judicial Committee decisions!) Well, at least it will keep them busy.

    REELECT NO ONE TO THE LNC (at least NO ONE who isn’t willing to APOLOGIZE to the Oregon LP PARTY and members and start by asking what they need to make this right). So that means, IMO, REELECT NO ONE to the LNC (at least I still have my sign from Vegas)

  190. Joe

    paulie @ November 15, 2015 at 1:20 pm wrote:

    “CPD Lawsuit discussed at this meeting? Haven’t heard one. What would you like to know?”

    Anything that was shared/what they expect to happen next/if they have any money ready to fund additional appeals for legal fees/anything that might be useful for the interview with Alicia Dearn that I hope to publish here later this month).

    Also a bit surprised that it was not discussed given the amount of time, energy and resources that have gone into it, and the extremely high value of the payoff if there is a win coming before the first debate. . .

  191. paulie

    When the issue of the LP news arrives that headlines the LNC choosing to affiliate with a PAC over a Party, I will BURN IT — even if it arrives as a PDF or Kindle.

    It was punted to e-mail vote.

  192. paulie

    There is money for Paul to act as a coordinator, he’d just have to pay people less than $2.50 a signature.

    2.50 is already low, as you well know, and I can’t pay people less than the rate Tina already told the Green the Votes people. I was talking about getting 3.00 and paying 2.50, and Redpath said 700/week flat, so I will take either of those.

  193. paulie

    Only if it has content value. Most of the time when I get a copy of the LP News it is out-of-date/promoting events that have already happened. I’m left with the impression that they aren’t doing anything useful.

    Perhaps a emailed PDF would arrive earlier with the same content that the paper copy offers much later?

    How about both? While we are at it, make individual articles available online so they can be shared again.

  194. Thomas L. Knapp

    Quoth George:

    “Where did that come from?”

    From my memory, which was apparently incorrect.

    “There are people advocating the racist position that the paper newsletter is out of date. We have a mostly white party and the notion that computers replace, given internet use by race, is racist.”

    Interesting. It’s your notion — the notion that non-white people can’t or don’t use the Internet — that I consider racist. And my position seems to be validated by the numbers. Internet use by race/ethnicity was measured as follows by the Pew Research Center for 2014:

    White — 85%
    African — American — 81%
    Hispanic — 83%

    No margin of error is listed for the surveys these numbers were calculated from, but they’re close enough to be fairly trivial, especially given that print Internet use IN GENERAL is pushing toward 100% (it’s over 90% for the under-50 age group, nearly 90% for 50-65; the only real lag in adoption is among senior citizens), while consumption of print publications IN GENERAL continues to fall.

  195. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I probably wouldn’t read a digital copy if I wasn’t posting here, but I always read the paper copy.

  196. Wes Wagner

    When I bring the paper copy that is sent grattis to the LPO to our board meeting to see who wants it, people tend to scoot away from the table as if I had dropped a giant pile of excrement on it.

  197. paulie

    Joe: re fair debates lawsuit…here are my notes from the last update I received

    Paulie Cannoli Judge Jim Gray is now on the call
    Like · Reply · November 5 at 7:18pm

    Paulie Cannoli Sued parties being served, responses and motion to dismiss expected by December
    Like · Reply · November 5 at 7:24pm

    Paulie Cannoli Judge has been drawn. Lawsuit is getting some media attention but not yet as much as hoped.
    Like · Reply · November 5 at 7:25pm

    Paulie Cannoli Complaint includes items aimed at the media
    Like · Reply · November 5 at 7:29pm

    Paulie Cannoli Judge Gray personally donated 50k to the lawsuit and is at a conference trying to get funding from the Kochs
    Like · Reply · November 5 at 7:30pm

  198. paulie

    I probably wouldn’t read a digital copy if I wasn’t posting here, but I always read the paper copy.

    Both can be useful whenever I can get them.

  199. Thomas L. Knapp

    I think the motion to postpone indefinitely is an imperfect, but not unreasonable, proxy for determining which LNC members support the real LPO/the LNC bylaws versus which LNC members support the impostor organization in Oregon and a lawless LNC and Judicial Committee. People voting no on the motion to postpone indefinitely should not be re-elected or re-appointed to any position of responsibility within the LP next year. The roll call, once again:

    Bittner – Y
    Olsen – Y
    Kirkland – Y
    Wiener – N
    Ludlow – N
    Lark – Y
    Reimers – N
    Tomasso – Y
    Redpath – N
    Craig – Y
    Goldstein – N
    Hagan – Y
    Vohra – Y
    Mattson – N
    Sarwark – A

  200. paulie

    If anyone reading is on site I am wondering what if anything happened after the presidential candidates discussion, which if I am not mistaken resulted in no actions. Goals was supposed to be up next, then I got a phone call and while I was on the call the feed died, so I don’t even know if the meeting is over or if anything else was done after that point.

  201. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Thomas,

    Wouldn’t that depend on “why” they voted no?

    And this definitely is the issue here:

    which LNC members support …the LNC bylaws versus which LNC members support …. a lawless LNC and Judicial Committee.

  202. Thomas L. Knapp

    Caryn,

    That’s why I referred to it as an imperfect proxy. It’s POSSIBLE that one or more of them voted no for some other reason. I’d rather have seen a vote that actually addressed the issue rather than just postponing it. But this is the best proxy I’ve seen so far. I will continue watching for indicators between now and the Orlando convention; THIS proxy just sets my TENTATIVE “will not support candidate X” list for that convention.

  203. paulie

    That’s why I referred to it as an imperfect proxy. It’s POSSIBLE that one or more of them voted no for some other reason. I’d rather have seen a vote that actually addressed the issue rather than just postponing it

    Then you would have voted no.

  204. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Gotcha.

    Though I think you are probably right on this being a good indicator. One of the votes surprised me though (and perhaps I just don’t knkw the players well enough yet)

  205. Andy

    Petitioners in Oklahoma would be more motivated to work if they got paid $3 per signature, and one of the problems in OK is that Green the Vote (a volunteer medical marijuana organization), wants to keep 100% of the money that comes from signatures that are being collected by people from Green the Vote, which is a big reason as to why Green the Vote petition circulators are not bringing in big numbers on the LP petition.

  206. paulie

    Bequests, like monthly pledges, could be mentioned much, more often in party communications.

    Say, a quarter-page in each LP news and an occasional email blast, etc?

  207. paulie

    I now have confirmation the meeting ended, but not yet what if anything happened in terms of any actions taken after the presidential discussion.

  208. Joe

    Thomas L. Knapp @ November 15, 2015 at 1:48 pm wrote:

    “I think the motion to postpone indefinitely is an imperfect, but not unreasonable, proxy”

    Agreed with the clarification that TWO of the six NOs are WIENER (made the motion) and REDPATH (seconded the motion). I think we can also add MATTSON to the list of those not needing clarification about motivations.

    I think we might also want to write to each of the six asking for a reconsideration of the facts (particularly the facts what would justify a group of liberty-lovers kicking out the prior leadership — oh, IDK, kinda like what our founders did here in the 1776s) and ask them to reconsider. I’ve started that process but do not have high hopes for it.

  209. paulie

    Some people wanted to get it over with sooner rather than later. Some people want to recognize the Burke faction. There is some overlap between the two, but there may also be people who wanted to get it over with and reject the findings of the kangaroo court in favor of the PAC, as well as some who may want to accept the findings of the kangaroo court in favor of the PAC but preferred to have more discussion of it on the email list first or just have not made up their minds yet.

  210. paulie

    I am so grateful you guys are doing these updates… thank you

    Thank you to everyone who helped blog, read, comment, and all those who traveled to the meeting.

    Any additions and corrections to the reporting would be appreciated. The streams, though no longer live, are still available if anyone wants to watch them after the fact.

  211. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Then you would have voted no.”

    No. A continued discussion and a vote on a different question would have been better from the perspective of gathering information about LNC members’ positions.. That doesn’t change the fact that the vote to postpone indefinitely was a policy win insofar as it at least temporary forestalled further LNC lawlessness.

  212. Chuck Moulton

    The bylaws committee got through all the proposals (~25) being considered so far before adjourning. There will probably be a survey in January. New proposals will be considered by email ballot or electronic meeting.

  213. paulie

    Highlights summary

    *Budget passed, with cuts to ballot access and LP News
    *Oregon punted to email vote

    What else should we note for those who don’t get a chance to read hundreds of comments or watch hours of video?

  214. Steve Scheetz

    “That doesn’t change the fact that the vote to postpone indefinitely was a policy win insofar as it at least temporary forestalled further LNC lawlessness.”

    Policy win? I am disturbed that “the party of principle” is reduced to citing a ” policy win.” To be honest, if they voted to recognize Burke et al, it would have been better than this. At leas then a large number of people would know exactly where to shove their membership cards after a vote like that.

    Instead we have a non-destruction of the party vote, which amounts to a non-loss. I disagree with this being a win on any level. If the membership wishes to save the party, then it will show up in Orlando. YET, there are many who will view a vote like this and cease to care about the party in favor of more important things, like making things happen in each of our own states.

    Sincerely,

    Steve Scheetz

  215. Thomas L. Knapp

    Steve,

    To be clear, it wasn’t “the party of principle” which cited a “policy win.” It was me.

    From an informational standpoint, the vote tended to clarify who the evildoers, and/or the useful idiots of the evildoers, are. Which means that next year in Orlando, we can remove them from positions of power in the party. THAT will be the “principle win.”

  216. paulie

    Highlights summary

    *Budget passed, with cuts to ballot access and LP News
    *Oregon punted to email vote

    What else should we note for those who don’t get a chance to read hundreds of comments or watch hours of video?

    Nick cited one other highlight at LNC Votes Discuss

    *Audit Committee report mostly deferred to the Executive Committee to handle.

    He cited two others which were the same ones I mentioned, but phrased it more positively.

  217. Motherhood; Apple Pie, Fireworks on 4th of July

    If the membership wishes to save the party, then it will show up in Orlando.

    I agree with Steve on this.

    That said, I don’t give much of a shit about the Oregon mess; it’s another sad example of the Libertarian Party not being able to protect its base organization from infiltration.

    That said, I don’t want the same mess in all 50 States.

    SOLUTION:
    Every State gets an OPEN SOURCE; and FREE SOFTWARE (CC attributable works + free BSD software license) webpage that makes it possible for State Legislative candidates and Sheriff’s to declare themselves as candidates. On those well-designed and well-organized “facebook-style” informational webpages (that indicate the candidate’s information much like a WIKIpedia webpage, but are created purely by the campaigns, and are thus able to be biased in favor of the candidate and exclude negative information), there’s an automatic link at the bottom of the page to a “personal page” that can be made with a “drag and drop” interface, but which is able to be made 100% customizable by any very sophisticated campaign.

    This could shift the focus in all 50 States toward winning local elections, and stop the hemorrhaging of money from the vital processes of the LP.

    In many States, gaining statewide ballot access makes it far easier to run Libertarians in local races.

    For several years, the National LP has been “working” National ballot access the way slaves worked plows South, …slowly, inefficiently, and with the intention of breaking the equipment.

    They can continue to do this, or they can be routed out and replaced by Andy Jacobs or Bob Lynch, or others who will do the job right.

    Either way, my solution runs parallel to the existing problems, and compatible with their solutions. It can be implemented as a “Hey, look what we’re doing over here!” solution, instead of a “You have to do this my way, and I’m going to get enough votes to force it upon you” solution. (A voluntary solution.)

    In fact, it will be implemented eventually, whether or not anyone likes it, because it’s the natural next evolutionary step for the LP. Likely, it will be implemented several times before someone gets it right.

  218. Rod Stern

    Good catch, Chuck! Obviously we would not expect the confidential report to be there. Why they would not publish their own public response is less clear. It’s linked in the comments somewhere above for anyone who wants to read it.

  219. paulie

    In the interest of fairness, Nick’s more positive characterization of the main events of the weekend:

    *Audit Committee report mostly deferred to the Executive Committee to handle.
    *Budget passed with more conservative revenue numbers and cuts to make it balance.
    *Oregon resolution postponed indefinitely.

  220. paulie

    Brett C. Bittner You may not wish to use the words “cut.” LP News had 4 issues this year and was increased to 5 next.

    Paulie Cannoli Cut from the budget proposal. Ballot access spending in 2016 is also going to be higher than in 2015.

    Brett C. Bittner Ah yes… The whole “cut” because the increase was reduced wordplay.

    Paulie Cannoli Since we are talking about a budget cuts and increases are related to the budget proposal. Election years generally require more member communication as well as more ballot access funding, etc.

  221. Marc Montoni

    When I bring the paper copy that is sent grattis to the LPO to our board meeting to see who wants it, people tend to scoot away from the table as if I had dropped a giant pile of excrement on it.

    This is an example of why everyone — and I do mean everyone — on both sides of the idiotic Oregon fight needs to resign from the LP and never come back.

  222. Wes Wagner

    Marc

    The national party has done things actively against us that if every member of the national party fully underdstood they would mail their cut up membership cards back to the national office. … that is if they had any principles.

  223. Wes Wagner

    Marc,

    Additionally random people who show up who have no history of the matter badmouth national.. the barr campaign and a bunch of other grievances not even related to this mess and often say that the national party is their largest inhibitor to deciding to get involved. That is without even knowing a thing about this other unfortunate business.

    You need to get your head around the real problen and stop being a cultist.

  224. Wes Wagner

    Let’s face simple facts here. The National Party attacked the libertarian faction of the Oregon party, used its financial resources to hire the son of the Republican Party Vice Chair (who is now actually the vice chair) to provide official opinions on how it should proceed in the matter, signed a conflict of interest waiver so that he could file suit against us, all to support trying to put a group of people into power in this state who have been characterized by leadership of the republican party here as “easier to work with”

    The national party attempted to facilitate vassalage of an affiliate to the GOP .. and no one has been held accountable for this.

    You have very very severe structural and cultural issues with this party. It is a house rotten to the core and a tear down job — sorry, but that is just the reality.

  225. Andy Craig

    “””@Nick: I saw the junior Senator from Kentucky in the hallway when I stepped out to use the facilities.

    @paulie: Now that is an interesting tidbit (way above from Nick Sarwark) that no one has commented on yet.

    Does Nick or anyone else reading know more about why RP2 would be there that they can tell me? 205-534-1622 if you want to keep it just between you, me and the NSA.

    Or, is there something else going on at the hotel and this was just a cosmic coincidence?”””

    I assumed it was just a joke, but since you asked I checked and it does appear FL-GOP was having their big confab in town over the same weekend, with Rand and many others in attendance.

    http://www.sunshinesummit.gop/

  226. Thomas L. Knapp

    There’s no such thing as “the national party” except in a virtual sense.

    There’s a national committee, which happens to be the mutual affiliation mechanism used by the state parties at this time to select the same presidential candidate and to mutually assist each other with ballot access and so forth, but that mechanism can be discarded at any time, in favor of another such mechanism or of no mechanism at all, by any or all of the actual Libertarian Parties.

    Please quit helping keep the myth of a “national party” alive. That myth provides aid, comfort and an aura of false legitimacy to LPO’s tormentors.

  227. Andy Craig

    “The Senator was in town for an event for the Florida GOP and had a lunch fundraiser scheduled in the hotel that had the LNC meeting”.

    Coincidence?

    Or…. super-secret LNC conspiracy to hand the nomination to Rand Paul?!?!

    😉

  228. Rod Stern

    Something strange is happening with the comments here. Comments left on current articles are popping up on an old thread from 2008 instead. Let’s see if it happens with this comment too.

  229. paulie

    It seems to have been related to a technical glitch with comment registration. We are now holding off on implementing that until we get that figured out. The only substantive comment that should have been in this thread but is not was from Marc Montoni:

    Wes, your self-righteousness knows no limits. Ms Harlos has recorded a pretty fair assessment of how illegitimate both factions are.

    While I agree with her assessment, I’d add one thing: Both factions deserve each other. Both of you are playing in traffic. I am 100% in favor of you guys taking that to its logical conclusion, so that the rest of us don’t have to deal with you.

    If there is anything about recognizing Oregonian delegates at the national convention, I will propose a substitute motion to not recognize either faction.

    The only thing the Party will get from paying extortionists, is more extortionists. To hell with the ballot access. The only solution is to bite the bullet, walk away from the playground, and build a new playground — and make the previous actors absolutely ineligible to participate.

    Knapp, your logic fails you.

  230. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Knapp, your logic fails you.”

    Hardly. And at least I’ve got some logic that goes beyond “but I waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant it to be that way reeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllll baddddddd.”

  231. Marc Montoni

    “Knapp, your logic fails you.”

    Hardly. And at least I’ve got some logic that goes beyond “but I waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant it to be that way reeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllll baddddddd.”

    One statement is calm and rational.

    The other is childish.

    Grow up.

  232. Wes Wagner

    Between Knapp and Montoni if both were required to take a formal logic exam and post the scores, I would lay 100:1 odds in favor of Knapp prevailing.

  233. Wes Wagner

    Knapp

    There is a national party, insomuch as there are figuratively robe-wearing cultists of the like for both Starr and Montoni who believe such an institution exists and are willing to fight each other for control of it, on group of which have hijacked the LNC, operate it like a top down franchise that treats state parties like vassals and have even gone so far to protect their vision of it and their dreams of control to actively attacking a state affiliate for having the gall to reject their system of dues and patronage — and are so wrapped up in their fetishes that one would ally with the GOP just to not lose a mote of power/control and the other would victim blame to protect the institutions they pathologically worship and hope to be able to control someday.

    To a degree “groups” or “institutions” are non-corporeal ideas shared among corporeal people. There are very real people engaged in very unlibertarian group think and nationalism that have made it real … and people like Montoni and Ms Harlos are from the perspective of people not engaged in the cult, rather sick individuals who have allowed their worship of institutionalism and nationalism to cloud their reason to the point where they are more concerned about rules rather than rights. That is perversion of the highest form for people who dream of being libertarians/anarchists.

    This false idol needs to be destroyed as a matter of self-defense.

  234. Marc Montoni

    Wes, you need some quality time with a professional therapist.

    You insist on making people who were on your side into enemies. You, Burke, Carling, Starr, and everyone else who is in your pissing-contest ant colony are exactly the same.

    Enjoy each other.

  235. Caryn Ann Harlos

    I love you too Wes:) That is much nicer than the last time you got mad at me, though I haven’t even been around right now, so that was kinda random.

    But yes, I do care about voluntary rules in a voluntary organization. And as far as I am concerned, if the LNC messes with OR, they are violating their rules (and thus mine, since I am a member of the National Party… I am not a member of LPO). I am not interested in the rest of this emotive drama-mongering.

  236. Doug Craig

    I was happy with the meeting. .hate kicking the Oregon thing down the road but I thought that was best for Oregon and the party…I would love some folks to learn a little more about how to pay sales people and management people before voting on their pay..it amazing how little many Libertarians understand economics. .I was happy with the hotel and cheap place to eat were very close by…

  237. paulie

    I would love some folks to learn a little more about how to pay sales people and management people before voting on their pay..it amazing how little many Libertarians understand economics.

    Certainly true in general, but what specifically at this meeting are you referring to?

  238. Doug Craig

    Reducing the chance to get a bonus on bringing in bequest for the office…it actually takes some efforts to make these to happ3n..it does not happ3n by accident. .

  239. Steve Scheetz

    Mr. Montoni,

    It is obvious from your comments that you really do not care to understand what happened between the LNC and the LPO for the past 5 years. Since this is the case, your commenting on something that you obviously do not understand make you look foolish.

    My suggestion is to suggest that you refrain from making comments in threads about topics about which you are ignorant.

    Sincerely,

    Steve Scheetz

  240. paulie

    Doug,

    I agree!

    The idea of clawing back bonuses seems penny wise and pound foolish.

    It would be better to create incentives to promote bequests and monthly pledges a lot more. These types of things should be pushed often!

  241. paulie

    But yes, I do care about voluntary rules in a voluntary organization. And as far as I am concerned, if the LNC messes with OR, they are violating their rules (and thus mine, since I am a member of the National Party…

    Agreed on both counts.

  242. Rod Stern

    Nothing new about Oregon on the LNC list yet. Maybe votes are being lined up behind the scenes first?

  243. Stewart Flood

    Yes, but NONE of the people getting bonuses EVERY YEAR on that bequest had anything to do with it. The bequest comes in every year, and has been in place since I was on the LNC, and I left it in 2012. This is a bogus bonus. Paying bonuses based on donations — which are NOT SALES — is insane!

  244. Stewart Flood

    That is one of the reasons why I no longer make regular monthly contributions. I don’t believe in the bonus system we have for staff.

  245. Chuck Moulton

    Stewart Flood wrote:

    Yes, but NONE of the people getting bonuses EVERY YEAR on that bequest had anything to do with it. The bequest comes in every year, and has been in place since I was on the LNC, and I left it in 2012. This is a bogus bonus. Paying bonuses based on donations — which are NOT SALES — is insane!

    There is more than one bequest. The one discussed recently was a new one.

    I still have a monthly pledge. But I agree with you that bonuses ought to be calculated better — both to not receive bonuses over income they had nothing to do with and to reward them for income they had something to do with.

  246. Wes Wagner

    I find it odd the item was added to the agenda without the votes being already counted.

    Starr has lost the power he once had.

    I recommend cleaning up his exposed pawns fast and his last remaining capital piece if you want to save the party.

  247. Pingback: Chairman Sarwark summarizes highlights of this past weekend’s Libertarian National Committee meeting in Orlando | Independent Political Report

  248. Joe

    OLD OLD OREGON

    I’ve been trying to document the pre-2011 issues in Oregon based on a bit of Googling, taking to Wes and others in Oregon, and on comments in earlier IPR articles (although this mess predates IPR by at least a decade or two, going back according to one comment (in 2009) to 1993!)

    Hopefully some IPR reader with a long memory or better Google skills, or someone who lived through this in Oregon and has an interest in history can flesh this out. Or maybe Wes and Richard will get in some sort of exchange here about these things and bring some light on all of this (in addition to the smoke and heat).

    All that said, I think an analysis of who fired the first shot, or shots, or what started this mess might prove useful.

    It seems to me that one of the issues here is WHEN to start looking at the initiation of fraud or aggression. Those on the LNC who see Wes as the aggressor remind me of the parent who disciplines a child for attacking one of his younger siblings without having noticed (or apparently caring) that it was the younger sibling who started the fight. That kind of double punishment of the true victim does tend to, in my experience, make them crazy.

    So if one were to start with only the reaction of Wes And his Merry Band O’ Liberty Lovers (WAHMBOLLs) as if it was the initiating event, sure there seems to be cause for correction/compensation of the disenfranchised — but were one to look at the precipitating events then the reaction of WAHMBOLLs might be seen as overplayed, or excessive, but also fully justified.

    So maybe the group metabrain of IPR Oregon trivia lovers can help flesh out this history. Where to start? — 20 years ago??

    1995. There was a similar fight in Oregon with some of the same players. The LNC was asked to choose sides. They chose Burke. That apparently meant “nothing” until the SOS of Oregon also chose Burke.

    (Anyone on the LNC at that time remember this? Do we have minutes somewhere??)

    Wes joins the LPO around 2006.

    2004 to 2009 claims (not yet established, documented facts, IMO – also there was a 2006 national convention in Oregon) — see the 2009 IPR article —

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/12/wes-wagner-my-open-apology-to-the-libertarian-party-of-oregon-for-destroying-it

    According to Wes’s claims in that article, Richard Burke in his role as executive director:

    A) Removed members from newsletter lists so they would be less likely to show up for meetings

    B) Changed members dues dates to disenfranchise them.

    C) Added a requirement for ?good standing? to be judged by the executive director for participation.

    D) Slandered board member Phil Schmidt into resigning

    E) Slandered the treasurer by falsely claiming she had herpes. “We had a treasurer at that time that was complaining about the party spiraling down into a quagmire of debt and the financial abuses of the executive director and how the board wouldn’t listen to her or do anything about it. Heck, at one point the executive director (Burke), clearly a qualified medical professional, even told me (Wagner) she had herpes and it affected her brain! What the hell was I thinking? Listening to the crazy ramblings of a herpes-addled embittered treasurer.”

    F) Used the party debit card to buy groceries for his apartment and to eat at McDonald’s on multiple occasions. (The party was behind on its payments to Burke in his role as ED, but this was fraud and a violation of campaign finance laws, nonetheless.)

    G) Falsified financial reports to the SOS.

    H) Misrepresented hotel size, layout, etc to the LNC to get the convention, which convention was ill served by slow elevators and distant food choices, etc.

    Wes then (2007 or so) sued the LPO “to seek a writ of mandamus to compel the party officials to obey corporate and state election finance law, and their own bylaws.” Aaron Starr donated $10,000 of his personal funds, to fight the suit filed against the party by Wes.

    Richard Burke writes in a comment to that article back in 2009:

    “Mr. Wagner?s associates filed another civil suit, seeking redress for what they felt was an improperly executed recall election, which they were on the losing side of. This would also have effectively involved the government in a party?s internal governance. This suit was also dismissed.”

    (what irony)

    “Mr. Wagner and his associates filed a number of complaints with the state, alleging errors in financial reporting by various LPO Treasurers. While various treasurers made a number of errors in reporting finances (Oregon has reporting laws that are sometimes difficult for volunteers to comply with), no significant fines were levied.

    (but some “insignificant” fines were levied??!?!)

    The Secretary of State proved to be very helpful, and work (sic) hard to help non-professionals comply with the law.”

    (what irony again!)

    “Mr. Wagner and his associates used civil litigation and attempted to co-opt the force of the state to win political battles they could not win within the LPO . . . involving the state to resolve such conflicts does not seem particularly ?libertarian? to me.”

    (Really, you cannot make this stuff up, see: Richard P. Burke @ December 27, 2009 in the article above)

    But there is more from 2009:

    “I do not take any of this personally. I actually wish Mr. Wagner and his associates well and earnestly hope they can find more productive roles within the LPO in the future.”

    (yeah, right.)

    Eventually Burke left as ED, as the position of ED was no longer funded and office space was no longer rented.

    Wes was elected LPO Chairperson.

    In other comments to the 2009 IPR article linked above:

    “After Wagner was selected as Chair of the party, when the supports (sic) of Burke one by one resigned from the Party officer positions, I can attest that the party membership did increase, the donations increased and the financial accounting as well as the membership rosters where accurate for the first time in years.”

    Another commentor –

    “As a former LPO Chairperson, Secretary, Judicial Committee member, congressional candidate, and statewide campaign treasurer, I have known Richard P. Burke since he got involved in the Oregon party in the early 1990?s. My advice is to believe nothing he says without independent and trustworthy corroboration. Burke is good at making himself look good to those who don?t look too closely. Look closer, please, before crediting his words.”

    Burke et al tried to stack a convention with Republicans and/or members of Americans for Prosperity. The officers at the time refused to seat/recognize them in keeping with the bylaws regarding paid membership, etc.

    Wes et al created new bylaws, filed same with the SOS and got the SOS to support their group over objections by Burke et. al.

    Burke et. al held a separate convention. SOS refused to accept their documents.

    They appealed to the LNC. LNC supported Burke et al, but then they lost in the Judicial Committee (which at that time included Judge Grey, later to be the 2012 LP VPOTUS nominee).

    They then sued in state court; Aaron Starr has funded those legal proceedings again (this time in excess of $100,000). Others from outside Oregon also funded that suit. They lost. They have appealed. Costs to Wes et al of defending against these suits also exceed $100k. The court of appeals is taking their sweet time issuing a ruling. Meanwhile the new JC has overruled a prior JC and the LNC has gotten involved, again.

    For what? The THIRD or FOURTH or FIFTH time in Oregon? And who imagines this will be the LNC decision to end all LNC decisions.

    Maybe I’m a simple guy. It seems to me Oregon was a mess of in-fighting for a decade or two before one individual emerged to powerfully put a stop to it (fair or not) and has now turned it over to others. Oregon has a stable party with substantial support, good candidates and loyal supporters. The Burke et al faction (of what? 8 people??) could run for election in that organization, could offer bylaws changes, etc but has chosen instead the courts and the LNC to (try to) regain power/authority.

    Should we respect the choice of those closest to the situation who have voted with their feet regarding who to support, or do we claim some superior outside-of-the-state-of-Oregon ability from afar to discern what happened in this murky internal fight and then ALSO the power to do something to “make it all right again” without doing long-term collateral damage both inside and outside of Oregon?

    Sound familiar?

    We now have a precedent for any future Judicial Committee to review and undo the decisions of all prior Judicial Committees because of this mess. Anyone imagine THAT would be a result of messing with Iraq . . . I mean Oregon?

  249. Wang Tang-Fu

    Joe,

    “this mess predates IPR by at least a decade or two, going back according to one comment (in 2009) to 1993!”

    Or possibly even earlier. Richard Burke writes (excerpt)

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/12/project-groundswell-press-release-from-oregon-pac-16869-dba-the-libertarian-party-of-oregon/#comment-1025739

    “The Libertarian Party in Oregon, like the national party, has always had a factional divide. The conflict pre-dates both Wes and I, though there have been periods of calm and associated productivity. I witnessed the riff myself when I joined the party in 1990. Dr. Fred Oerther (who recruited me into the party) and some of his friends would frequently clash with Dr. Paul Smith and some of his friends. I heard complaints from both sides that are familiar today. But I think this is as bad as it has ever been.”

  250. Caryn Ann Harlos

    Such is the nature of having autonomous affiliates. This may happen. And not the LNC’s job to play parent.

  251. Wes Wagner

    Correct. The constant interference of outside parties always in support of a regime hostile to liberty does have a tendency to create blowback.

  252. paulie

    As is being discussed in other unrelated threads, colonialist imperialism explains terrorism but does not justify it.

    Or we could stop overdramatizing and escalating to the nth degree endlessly, although we know that won’t happen.

  253. Wes Wagner

    From a game theory perspective, terrorism is justified if you lack the means to deal with a foe either politically or conventionally and otherwise have legitimate grievances. It is not the job of people in the third world to just lay down and accept their fates of suffering abuse because of our misguided sense of moral code that favors ourselves to their detriment.

    Western civilization is reaping what it has sown. The sooner we recognize that, the sooner we can correct the issues that are causing the terrorism.

  254. paulie

    It’s an operationally logical response, and tactically smart if you are immoral or amoral. I disagree with any suggestion that it is morally justified.

  255. Wes Wagner

    paulie

    The perception of morality is often based on perspective and clouded information. To the people in the middle east, they are already the victims of aggression and they were not the initiators. They have a right to retaliate from their perspective and try to protect their version and vision of autonomy and there is only one method they have available to them.

    You can’t kill your way out of this situation … more imperialism will not be effective and result in more blowback.

    This is only solved through better fundamental understanding of egalitarianism and for us to set aside our nationalistic brainwashing.

    When you have done that the solutions start to emerge — but until you have rid yourself of those mental and cultural roadblocks, you are unable to conceive of a reality that encompasses a viable solution.

  256. paulie

    The perception of morality is often based on perspective and clouded information. To the people in the middle east, they are already the victims of aggression and they were not the initiators. They have a right to retaliate from their perspective and try to protect their version and vision of autonomy and there is only one method they have available to them.

    I know this and made the same point to Capozzi on the open thread. The key words however are “from their perspective.”

    You can’t kill your way out of this situation … more imperialism will not be effective and result in more blowback.

    Yes, and the flipside is that more terrorism invites more bombing, invasion and occupation. Daesh knows this, and is consciously and openly seeking this reaction. In fact it’s in their public strategy documents. I assume you won’t pretend that your response strategy is aimed for any other kind of feedback loop.

    This is only solved through better fundamental understanding of egalitarianism and for us to set aside our nationalistic brainwashing.

    Or letting go of the overdramatization. But that could never happen here.

    When you have done that the solutions start to emerge — but until you have rid yourself of those mental and cultural roadblocks, you are unable to conceive of a reality that encompasses a viable solution.

    Justifying either terrorism or imperialism doesn’t lead to solutions, it only leads to more problems.

  257. Wes Wagner

    Justifying either terrorism or imperialism doesn’t lead to solutions, it only leads to more problems.

    So .. perhaps let’s stop the imperialism first and then have the moral high ground to negotiate?

  258. paulie

    The other side is as likely to stop the imperialism first as you are to stop the terrorism first.

    From their perspective (again the key words being their perspective) your terrorism justifies their reprisals. If you’re going to compare yourself to Daesh, own the whole analogy, including the strategy of escalating responses and counter-responses they are openly and consciously seeking.

  259. georgephillies

    The claim that you can shoot back at the voters who elected a government is precisely the same as the notion that you should be able to pierce the corporate veil and sue the stockholders.

    Of course, this is not the American way. The American way of retaliation is to send over fleets of heavy bombers and turn your enemy’s cities to pillars of fire.

    Warfare is not about being nice to the other side.

  260. paulie

    Of course, this is not the American way. The American way of retaliation is to send over fleets of heavy bombers and turn your enemy’s cities to pillars of fire.

    Which, again, is exactly what groups such as Al-Qaida and Daesh openly seek, because the more retaliation they get the more money, recruits and approval from average Muslims on the sideline they get, in an ever escalating cycle. Wagner seems less ready to admit that he is consciously seeking a similar cycle of escalating responses from both sides.

    Warfare is not about being nice to the other side.

    Correct. Peacemaking, however, is.

  261. Wes Wagner

    “Wagner seems less ready to admit that he is consciously seeking a similar cycle of escalating responses from both sides. ”

    No… that is not true… I believe I have already said that the LNC is powerful enough to kill itself and that is the most effective strategy of dealing with larger foes who are engaged in improper behavior.

  262. Wes Wagner

    “the notion that you should be able to pierce the corporate veil and sue the stockholders.”

    I agree… corporations, like nations, are immoral, and putting a veneer of immoral “law” overlaid on top of it to insulate the perpetrators is entirely inappropriate.

  263. Joseph Buchman

    Morality regarding terrorists who are created by a State to implement false flag operations, justifying the creation of a Grand Army of defense, which then threatens the terrorist group (who do not know they were a creation of the State) into expanding, which was the intent of the State to justify an expansion of the Grand Army . . . thus causing the simultaneous expansion of both sides of a non-existent initial conflict.

    Was that the plot of the PHANTOM MENACE, or is that US history, or is it just what’s happening between the LNC and LPO, or is this the ONLY story ever told?

    I have a bad feeling about this . . .

  264. paulie

    William Saturn, regarding the argument from the open thread on morality of terrorism, see the last few comments above. Granted this is just by way of analogy and no one is as far as I know being physically killed, bombed, or mutilated (yet?), but it illustrates the same morality problem you were discussing on the open thread and that Phillies is discussing on the GJ Sharia thread. Argue away.

  265. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    Mi Mark, your comments should go straight through now. They got held up in the moderation list due to the links.

  266. paulie

    Herd, are you ripping the videos so that they will be preserved when the LNC ustream replaces them? Generally that has been done at the time of the next LNC meeting, but it could be done sooner if they ustream anything else in the meantime. As far as I could tell when I looked at it your channel was just rebroadcasting the LP’s official ustream, not providing its own separate feed.

  267. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    On Facebook, George Phillies made the following statement with regard to me:

    == I’ve seen her at work doing this, confusing a discussion of the Libertarian party of Oregon in defense of the folks who were trying to make their private empire.==

    Wut?

    I have consistently stated that no sides’ hands are clean here, but that the SoS and the Courts (and the Oregon Libertarians) recognize the current LPO (Wagner faction) thus they are the LPO as far as I am concerned as Oregon is not my business, but that of Oregonians. I do not think what Wagner did was legitimate (such as disenfranchising life members and summarily replacing the bylaws) and equally do not think the Burke elections were legitimate (nor do I think any of the Republican funny business that went on before was appropriate). I have never said any differently, and that resolving that is Oregon’s business.

    I have consistently stated that the LNC had absolutely no business here. It is not their job to tell an affiliate who their officers are or what their bylaws are. If the LNC felt that an affiliate violated their bylaws to such an extent that it greviously wounded their consciences, they only had the nuclear option of disaffiliation.

    George is certainly free to have any non-reciprocated hostilities he wishes, but this is blatantly counter-factual. Believing that Wagner went beyond their bylaws is not the same as defending Burke (in their elections or in their prior behaviour). The Oregon Libertarians could change it if they wish. I have defended neither. My interest is the LNC/JC actions.

  268. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    No George, I did not. I in fact mentioned it above. And your statement that I “defended” the Burke group is entirely untrue. I did not. But the fact is that the Oregon internal issues are just that… Oregon internal issues. I am not an Oregonian, and the affiliate belongs to Oregonians. Not Coloradans. Not National. My ultimate focus is, and has always been, National. Because I am a member of that voluntary organization and not a member of Oregon.

    Whatever beef you have with me to inspire this latest round is entirely off-base and barking up the wrong tree here. And I repeat once again, entirely unreciprocated on my part.

  269. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    Thank you Marc and Paulie. 🙂 I have to confess I was entirely blindsided by that statement of what I allegedly did.

  270. Caryn Ann Harlos Post author

    One thing I have defended quite vigourously, are the voluntary rules of voluntary organizations. On ideological issues (on nearly everything– I disagreed about the removal of the NAP pledge and the desire to torch National) and what is moving the Libertarian Party of Oregon forward in reaching political goals and staying out of the hands of the Republicans, I have always and solidly been on the side of the Wagner faction while not agreeing with Wagner’s methods. And not agreeing with Wagner does not mean I agree with Burke. I took the liberty of asking some other observers of my various comments if by any stretch of the imagination I could be interpreted as supporting the Burke faction and met with incredulity that I could be charged with that. The answer has been routinely been, “You have said each side has dirty hands but that the current LPO is the LPO”

    PS: On the issue of the quorum difficulties, I specifically did say I thought RONR was used as a weapon and that this quorum difficulty was not anticipated by those that changed the bylaws and could not be interpreted IMHO by any issue of fairness by them agreeing to such a change, and thus, I would have found exigent action to cure the quorum issue justifiable. I have not ignored that issue while National remained my focus.

  271. Wang Tang-Fu

    “Quick update on the stats: This post has now entered top ten in comment count in IPR history.”

    We can get to #9 faster if we have more highly substantive comments about the number of comments on the thread.

  272. wolfefan

    Hi Caryn – as a complete outsider who is merely observing, you and Paulie are entirely correct. I admire a lot of Dr. Phillies’s work and wish that he had more influence in the party at large. Perhaps his blind spot here is evidence of why he does not that others have noticed before.

  273. Fun K. Chicken

    What percentage of a thread’s comments do you think can be about the number of comments in said thread before it becomes cheating?

  274. Stewart Flood

    1%. But to the issue we were discussing and of course bump up the comment count:

    As some of you will recall, I have been saying pretty much the same thing for several years that Caryn Ann has noted above. Neither side’s hands were clean. And by sides I mean LPOR. I still stick to my opinion, speaking as a member of the LNC at the time, that Wagner intentionally chose to not give us complete information. The outcome may have been different if he had given us more than just a “finger” and vague and confrontational answers. I think he wanted it to go ballistic.

    That said, what happened years ago is water under the bridge, down the river, into the ocean and washed up onto the shore on the other side. Wagner’s group has the “legitimate” claim as far as the state is concerned, and they hold the ballot access. This re-opening of the issue by the JC is wrong and really should have no affect. Overturning what they ruled back then changes nothing, since nothing the LNC actually voted to do (which was, in effect nothing!) would have any affect on the current situation.

    I really hope that this is settled before the national convention. If it is brought up again, I may grab a microphone and threaten to have my delegation walk in protest and ask others to do the same. We should not be voting on who to seat in ANY state’s delegation UNLESS it is a request by their delegation to approve adding a delegate after the convention starts — the same as we would for any other state. That is a formality, not another coup — as 2014 was. The request in 2014 was not from the state delegation, but from outside and it was improper to even allow it to be voted on.

    Whether or not anyone dislikes what members of Wagner’s or Reeve’s groups did, no one should be in favor of meddling with their delegation from outside at the convention. Your state may be next!

  275. paulie

    Whether or not anyone dislikes what members of Wagner’s or Reeve’s groups did, no one should be in favor of meddling with their delegation from outside at the convention. Your state may be next!

    Exactly.

  276. paulie

    http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2015/003723.html

    The period for comments on the 11/14/15 draft minutes ended yesterday.

    Attached is the updated draft, sans Waldo and with the Region 1 report
    updated to reflect the corrections reported by Mr. Olsen at the meeting.

    Without objection, this draft will be auto-approved on December 13, 2015.

    Alicia Mattson
    LNC Secretary

    http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/attachments/20151206/aa9ff043/attachment-0001.pdf

Leave a Reply

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