Posted by Richard Burke in response to Wes Wagner’s ‘My open apology to the Libertarian Party of Oregon for destroying it’. As promised, IPR is letting both sides have equal space to have their say without endorsing either version of events. We realize that there will be further replies – indeed, Wes Wagner has already disputed one statement of fact in this account in the comments on the original post – but at this point, IPR has no plans to publish any more articles on this subject; if you are interested, further discussion will be in the comments on this post and the original post.
As the former Executive Director of the LPO, I thought I should offer a brief response to Mr. Wagner. What follows constitutes my opinion and my perspective. Your mileage may vary.
In short, Mr. Wagner and his associates attempted to coopt the state after failing to win votes in support of their agendas in the LPO State Committee or at LPO business conventions.
Mr Wagner filed a lawsuit asking for a “Writ of Mandemas,” through which the state would involve itself in the internal affairs and daily processes of the LPO. Specifically, Wagner wanted the court to correct what he saw as a failure of LPO officers to perform their office. The suit was dismissed.
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.
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. The Secretary of State proved to be very helpful, and work hard to help non-professionals comply with the law.
Mr. Wagner’s associates filed and supported a number of criminal allegations against me personally, including forgery and the diversion of campaign funds for personal use. After the Secretary of State investigated these matters in consultation with Oregon’s Attorney General, the complaints were dismissed.
Everyone who knows anything about the situation has their own opinion to which they are entitled, but my perception is that 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.
It is my opinion that lawsuits, the threat of lawsuits, and civil and criminal complaints were used as instruments of intimidation intended to drive out people which whom Mr. Wagner and his associates disagreed.
While it is certainly the legal right of Mr. Wagner and his associates to use such tactics, involving the state to resolve such conflicts does not seem particularly “libertarian” to me.
As for me, during my six years as Executive Director, I am willing to admit that I made a number of mistakes. In this field, it is hard not to make any mistakes. The State Committee supported me throughout my entire tenure.
From the perspective of political relevance, this was arguably the most productive time the LPO had ever seen. During 2001-2007, Libertarians won over two-thirds of the races they ran for non-partisan office. We had a partisan county commissioner defect to our party. We had the largest candidate slates we ever had, and impacted more partisan races than ever before, including the race for governor in 2002. This lent us a degree of lobbying clout in the legislature. We ran statewide campaigns on ballot measures with political relevance such that, in three consecutive elections, all four local TV news organizations set-up camp in our office on Election Night. Largely because of our success, the Libertarian National Committee chose Portland as the site for their 2006 national convention. We had a paid internship program for students. We had an arrangement with the World Affairs Council where members of foreign parliaments came to our office and were exposed to our party’s agenda. There is more.
It’s all gone now.
When the lawsuits began, donors stopped opening their checkbooks. We had to raise money for a legal defense. Although previously posed to break the curve on finances (growth is expensive), debts began to mount with rapidity. Intimidated volunteers resigned.
When Mr. Wagner and his associates took over leadership positions as LPO officers, not one of them finished their term of office. More reasonable people bravely took leadership positions after that, and the LPO has been able to secure pro bono representation in the event that it faces a storm of litigation in the future.
The beautiful thing, and the horrible thing, about politics is that nothing is ever completely over. With this in mind, the LPO is now trying to rebuild. I hope it is successful. Despite all, 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. Thanks.
Richard P. Burke, Fmr. Executive Director
Libertarian Party of Oregon
As side note to my comment above where I mentioned accessibility. I think the location of St. Louis for the upcoming convention is one of the best given that the city is in the middle of the country. That should make it fairly easy for people on both coasts to get there. Certainly better than Miami or Seattle imho. After all press coverage looks better when we have a big turnout. Hopefully we’ll get that in St Louie. Nice Choice!
Not a bad idea to reward outstanding state organizations — but the criteria would have to be objective: growth in membership date over date,
growth in number of candidates from last election where same positions were open, etc.
Subjective ratings will just cause more bad feelings, charges of favoritism and toadyism, and more internal feuding.
There are something that I think would change things that can be done but they require some efforts by fair minded people. One thing is to rate the state organizations much in the same way that movies are rated. Example: Conventions would be rated 1 to 5 stars. How much did it cost to participate? What was the turn out? Access to the location?
Someone might want to rate the state websites and news letters. How about rating the membership growth? And retention? Then at the national convention those states that do the best get significant notice and maybe financial rewards.
Just something to think about.
One more reason why the top officers of the state parties need to work their way up through the ranks so they can determine the competency of those in subordinate positions – Treasurer, etc. – when they arrive at the top. Having rank amateur officers is eventually going to lead to big mistakes, demoralization, in-fighting, and all manner of things that don’t advance the Libertarian agenda one iota.
Well there was a current officer accusing me of destroying the party… so I felt the need to apologize 😉
I killed my mother and father. The police caught me and put me in jail. I appeared in court and thru my self on the mercy of the bench. After all, I was an orphan!
Because apparently Wes Wagner wants to run as Libertarian for governor of Oregon.
Because you and Wes W emailed it to us?
You know, if you ask anyone in the LPO what the heck had gone on, and is still going on, you will get very different answers depending on who you ask. However, being one of Wagner’s associates I will put in my two cents:
Yes, Wagner and Burke have very different views of what happened and they both presented it to the party membership though newsletters, personal letters, DVD’s, and personal phone calls. All I know is that the LPO membership did stop supporting Burke, who was then Executive Director of the LPO , and did start supporting Wagner.
After Wagner was selected as Chair of the party, when the supports 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.
At the end of the term, Wagner choose not to seek a second term as chair, suggesting that Libertarians should “govern themselves”. The idea that someone can be “King of the Libertarians” sort of smacks against what a Libertarian stands for, so Wagner and his associates choose to be Libertarians and advocated to abolish the offices, as is always a choice for all Libertarian members, and free themselves from the dependence of a central committee, to make choices for themselves and to engage politically as they themselves see fit.
However, why Burke says that Wagner and his associates did not finish the term is puzzling, they did finish their appointed term and simply choose to not run for election for a second term. Given that Burke was at the this annual Party business Convention where Wagner and his associates choose to not run for a second term, but instead choose recant a different story than what happened only brings to mind what other issues and occurrences Burke is choosing to recant differently than what actually happened.
What is also odd is that all of this is old history, nearly over two years ago. Why has it all come up now?