The Unified Libertarians of Massachusetts, the state affiliate of the Libertarian National Committee in Massachusetts, has requested that the Federal Election Commission formally designate it as a “state party committee” under federal regulations.
In a letter dated last week, Unified Libertarians of Massachusetts (ULM) Treasurer Thomas Eddlem wrote to the FEC that he is seeking an advisory opinion from the Commission, as he believes ULM meets the criteria necessary for recognition. Eddlem explained in his letter that the ULM is responsible for managing day-to-day operations on behalf of the Libertarian Party in Massachusetts and that the organization has consistently placed federal candidates on the ballot, fulfilling FEC requirements for state party committee status.
Eddlem wrote that it is the party’s view that ULM is the legitimate successor to the Libertarian Association of Massachusetts (LAMA)—the name of the state’s singular Libertarian organization prior to a split following internal disagreements in 2022—and that ULM continued to operate under the LAMA name until members formally rebranded as ULM in 2023. Those disagreements and the resulting split ultimately resulted in competing conventions, leadership disputes, and distinct delegations at the 2022 Libertarian National Convention.
Notably, those other members not involved with ULM still operate under the LAMA name, except the organization is no longer associated with the national party. In 2022, this specific LAMA, along with several other state parties, formed the Association of Liberty State Parties, which later rebranded itself as the Liberal Party USA. This Libertarian Association of Massachusetts is still affiliated with the Liberal Party USA as of this article.
Eddlem also argued in his letter that the party has fielded candidates for federal office, writing that ULM successfully placed the Libertarian presidential ticket of Chase Oliver and Mike ter Maat on the Massachusetts ballot and noting Oliver’s presence is a result of “ULM member efforts.” He also mentioned that a Libertarian candidate had initially intended to challenge U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren but passed away before the campaign launched.
Editorial note: The following paragraph has been updated to clarify that the oversight of the ballot line as described in it pertains specifically to the presidential ticket and its associated electors.
Again, notably, neither ULM nor LAMA controls the Massachusetts Libertarian Party’s (MALP) presidential ballot line. Instead, this ballot access is managed by the MALP State Committee, a body elected by voters on the presidential primary ballot. It is currently comprised of members from both organizations. Two members of the MALP State Committee met in August and filed paperwork to place the Oliver–ter Maat ticket on the ballot under its designation.
Eddlem provided further context on the particular electoral structure surrounding Massachusetts political parties in his letter, which designates parties have a State Committee of at least 80 members, consisting of 40 men and 40 women elected from each of the state’s Senate districts. He indicated that the Libertarian Party has historically managed its affairs independently of this statutory structure, choosing instead to form a separate committee to oversee both state and national Libertarian business in coordination with the State Committee.
To further his argument, Eddlem pointed to ULM’s delegate slates being sat at the 2022 and 2024 Libertarian National Conventions, adding that these delegates were responsible for selecting the national party’s leadership and presidential nominee. He also cited official documentation the party received from the Libertarian National Committee following the convention as evidence that they are responsible for regular national party activity in Massachusetts, noting that it was sent to the ULM address on file and neither LAMA nor MALP.
Eddlem closed his letter by referencing a 2017 FEC ruling that recognized LAMA as a state party committee under the Federal Election Campaign Act, even while MALP continued to exist at the time, suggesting that similar recognition could be extended to ULM under the current framework.
As of this Friday afternoon, the ULM remains listed as a nonqualified and unauthorized committee with the FEC.
Editorial Disclosure: The author was elected as a delegate to the 2022 Libertarian National Convention by the Libertarian Association of Massachusetts but did not attend.
Then clearly ULM should have no problem with gaining ballot access by collecting new signatures, while leaving the current ballot line from past signatures collection to LAMA …Unless they are admitting that they don’t have nearly enough popular support to get on the ballot without LAMA’s help…
In Massachusetts, except for the Presidential candidate, Vice Presidential candidate, and electors, political parties DO NOT control ballot lines. In Massachusetts, ballot lines are controlled by the people, the people who have affiliated with (in most states “registered as a member of”) a political party. To get on the ballot, you collect signatures of voters, have them validated by town clerks and city boards of election, and present them to the Secretary of the Commonwealth. For major parties, this puts you on the September Primary ballot. For minor parties, this puts you on the November general election ballot.
ULMA is not LAMA’s equal. ULMA is the only one affiliated with the National Libertarian Party. LAMA has no affiliation at all with Libertarians, they are a member of Ass.of Liberty State Parties.
“Again, notably, neither ULM nor LAMA controls the Massachusetts Libertarian Party’s (MALP) ballot line. Instead, ballot access is managed by the MALP State Committee, a body elected by voters on the presidential primary ballot. It is currently comprised of members from both organizations.”
What a delightfully convoluted construction.
But it sounds like ULM isn’t satisfied with being LAMA’s equal, and wants total control of MALP’s ballot line for itself, despite already consistently getting its choice of federal candidates under the current construction.