The Unified Libertarians of Massachusetts is asking the Libertarian National Committee to shift its Massachusetts ballot access effort to Al Ozonoff’s campaign for state auditor, following a state committee vote that backed Ozonoff over fellow Libertarian Charlie Larkin.
In a report shared to the LNC’s public Business List by Alfa Shaw, the newly seated Region 6 representative, ULMA Chair Sean Kennedy said the affiliate’s State Committee voted on May 28 to provide organizational support to Ozonoff by a vote of 8 in favor with one abstention. The committee also voted against providing the same support to Larkin, a former state chair, with eight opposed and one abstention. Ozonoff, who sits on the ULMA board as membership director, was the sole abstention in both votes.
The report distinguishes between organizational support from the ULMA State Committee and a formal endorsement by the affiliate’s members at convention, noting that while Ozonoff has the former, he does not yet have the latter. It added that ULMA may pursue a special State Convention this summer to allow members to consider such an endorsement.
The development follows an earlier report from the LNC Ballot Access Committee prior to the national convention, where committee members sought up to $115,000 for state petition drives this election cycle, including a $45,000 ask for a Massachusetts auditor campaign. That report named Larkin in connection with the effort and referred to placing “our Auditor candidate” on the ballot. In its recent document, ULMA contends Larkin was being treated as the candidate at the national level before the state affiliate had an opportunity to endorse or support anyone.
“From ULMA’s perspective, the candidate appears to have been defined at the national ballot access level before being defined through the recognized Massachusetts affiliate’s process,” the report stated.
Despite its concerns, the affiliate agrees with the initial premise that the auditor race could present an opportunity to restore recognized status for the Libertarian Party in Massachusetts, which in turn would benefit its 2028 presidential ballot access efforts.
To become a recognized party, a Libertarian candidate for auditor, or any other statewide office, would first need to receive at least 3 percent of the vote. That result would trigger the process for organizing a statutory state committee responsible for future party organization and presidential ballot access. To qualify for the ballot as an auditor candidate, Ozonoff would need 5,000 certified signatures, half of the 10,000 signatures required if the party instead pursued a presidential petition drive in 2028.
The race is also unique because the Massachusetts Republican Party held its state convention without any candidate securing the 15 percent delegate support needed to appear on the primary ballot. Unless Republicans organize a successful primary write-in campaign, similar to the one Jim McKenna used to win the party’s 2010 attorney general nomination, the GOP could lack a general election nominee for auditor, significantly benefiting a Libertarian in the race.
However, ULMA’s concerns go beyond the immediate ballot access opportunity. The report argues that a successful statewide campaign, as well as those individuals involved with it, would shape the future statutory committee, candidate placement, public party representation, and overall coordination with the Libertarian National Committee.
ULMA warned that national support for a candidate not aligned with the recognized state affiliate could create confusion over who speaks for the Libertarian Party in Massachusetts and who controls future ballot access decisions. The report further notes that Larkin had been in contact with several individuals ULMA expressed concern over, including members of the Liberty Association of Massachusetts, the current state affiliate of the Liberal Party USA, about assisting his campaign.
The report also briefly alludes to a tradeoff to recognized party status, saying that while having that status would make presidential ballot access easier for the party, it would create “a new procedural hurdle” for future candidates by changing how they interact with state voters.
In practical terms, if the Libertarian Party regained recognized status in Massachusetts, future candidates seeking its nomination would generally face a narrower signature pool, drawing from party members and unenrolled voters. By contrast, candidates petitioning under a political designation may collect signatures from all registered voters.
Be First to Comment