Forwarded by an anonymous source. These have not been approved by the committee, and there are likely to be revisions.

They were made available in two formats: 1. Word document:

lnc-2008-12-06-san-diego

2: HTML file.

LNC Meeting Minutes, December
6-7, 2008, San Diego, CA

To: Libertarian
National Committee

From: Bob
Sullentrup

CC: Robert
Kraus

Date: 12/7/2008

Current Status: Draft

Version last updated December
7, 2008

These
minutes due out in 30 days: January 6, 2008

Dates
below may be superseded by mail ballot:

LNC
comments due in 45 days: January 21, 2008

Revision
released (latest) 14 days prior: February 14, 2009

Barring
objection, minutes official 10 days prior: February 18, 2009

* Automatic approval dates
relative to February 28 Charleston meeting

The meeting commenced at 8:12am on
December 6, 2008.

Intervening Mail Ballots

LNC mail ballots since the last meeting
in DC included:

• Sent 9/10/2008. Moved, that
  the tape of any and all recordings of the LNC meeting of Sept 6 &
  7, 2008 be preserved until such time as we determine, by a majority
  vote of the Committee, that they are no longer necessary. Co-Sponsors
  Rachel Hawkridge, Dan Karlan, Stewart Flood, Lee Wrights, Julie Fox,
  Mary Ruwart. Passed 13-1, 3 abstentions.
• Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
  Bob Sullentrup, Michael Colley, Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart, Tony Ryan,
  Mark Hinkle Rebecca Sink-Burris, Stewart Flood, Dan Karlan, James Lark,
  Julie Fox, Rachel Hawkridge
• Opposed: Aaron Starr
• Abstaining: Bill Redpath,
  Pat Dixon, Angela Keaton

Moment of Reflection

Chair Bill Redpath called for a moment
of reflection, a practice at LNC meetings.

Opportunity for Public Comment

Kevin Takenaga (CA) welcomed the
LNC to San Diego.

Andy Jacobs (CA) asked why 2000 ballot
access signatures were directed to be burned by the LP Political Director
in violation of election law? Mr. Jacobs claimed this action and associated
misallocation of petitioners caused collateral damage to ballot access
efforts in other states. Lee Wrights noted later that no petition
signatures had been destroyed.

Richard Newhouse noted he has discovered
some college-level books on libertarianism entitled American Government
by Holmes, Englehardt, Elder Zoetewey and Ryden
and The Challenge of Democracy by Janda, Berry and Goldman.

Rob Power (CA) encouraged the LP
to reach out to the political left as much as it does to the political
right.

Andy Jacobs (CA) also praised Paul
Frankel and others for their volunteer work collecting LP candidates
for publication on the LP website.

David Nolan (AZ) wanted to know if
he would be allowed to speak during the deliberations of the Bob Barr
Resolution. The Chair said that the matter was on the agenda and that
his speaking was up to the discretion of the body.

Dr. Lark noted that in as much as
the LNC was in California, he wanted to make a special recognition of
the late Marshall Fritz who received a round of applause.

Paperwork Check

Chair Bill Redpath asked the Secretary
to confirm the binder’s contents.

Pat Dixon, Dan Karlan and Stewart
Flood provided additional materials.

Attendance and Credentials

Secretary Bob Sullentrup confirmed
the attendance of the members and alternates.

Attending the September 6-7, 2008
LNC meeting in Arlington were:

Officers: Chair Bill Redpath,
Vice-Chair Michael Jingozian, Treasurer Aaron Starr, Secretary Bob Sullentrup.

At-Large Representatives: Admiral
Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Angela Keaton, Lee Wrights, Dr. Mary Ruwart.

Regional Representatives: Tony
Ryan(1), Mark Hinkle (2), Rebecca Sink-Burris (3), Stewart Flood(4),
Dr. James Lark (5-S), Dan Karlan (5-N), Julie Fox (6), Rachel Hawkridge
(7).

Regional Alternates: Scott Lieberman
(2)

Alternates not attending were
George Squyres (1), Bob Jackson (3), Heather Scott(4), Berlie Etzel
(5-S), Jake Porter (6) and Steve LaBianca (7).

Hardy Macia (5-N) has resigned
as an alternate and has not been replaced.

LNC Counsel Bill Hall did not
attend but was available by telephone.

Staff included Acting Executive Director
Robert Kraus, and Political Director Sean Haugh,

Others in the gallery consisted of
Gene Trosper (CA), Mike Seebeck (CA), BetteRose Ryan (SD), Andy Jacobs
(CA), David and Elizabeth Nolan (AZ), Rob Power (CA), Kevin Takanaga
(CA), Ruth Bennett (WA), M Carling (CA), Brian Holtz (CA), Brian Dougherty
(CA), Don Patterson (CA), George Phillies (MA), Wayne Allyn Root (NV),
Alan Hacker (TX), Alicia Mattson (TN), Jim Duensing (NV) , Debra
Dedmond (NV), Viki Kirkland (FL), Bo Cain (CA), Matthew Barnes (CA),
Kelly Barnes (CA), Ken Gilespie, Mike McMahon, Carlony Marbry (CA).
Christina Ohalan (TX), Zander Collier (CA), Jesse Thomas (CA), Starchild
(CA).

The following table lists the composition
of the current LNC as accepted at the May 26, 2008 meeting. Hardy Macia
resigned in November 2008 as Region 5 North alternate.

Report of Potential Conflicts
of Interest

Rachel Hawkridge reported she is
involved with and may raise money for LPWashington and NorthWest Legal
Foundation.

Approval of the Agenda

The group amended the agenda by adding,
removing and reordering items. The resulting agenda is given below with
changes in italics or strikethrough.

Libertarian National
Committee, Inc.

December
6-7, 2008 Meeting Agenda

San Diego, CA

The agenda was amended, and attempted
to be amended, as follows:

• Dan Karlan wanted his item
  ‘Mail Ballot Reporting’ to read ‘Mail Ballot Reporting and Strategic
  Plan’
• Aaron Starr moved to remove
  the ‘Barr Resolution’. The motion failed 4-12.
• Lee Wrights moved to remove
  the ‘Discipline of Angela Keaton’. The motion failed.
• Dr. Lark moved the place the
  ‘Discipline of Angela Keaton’ after the budget. Aaron Starr moved
  a substitute to take up the matter right after the Saturday lunch. The
  motion to substitute passed and the motion to move the matter to after
  lunch was approved.
• Lee Wrights moved to extend
  the counsel’s report to 30 minutes – approved without objection.

Without objection the resulting agenda
given above was approved.

Officer Reports

Chair’s Report

Chair Bill Redpath provided an oral
report noting he had done the following since the September meeting
in Arlington, VA:

• Campaigned for US Senate in
  Virginia
• Since the election has been
  conducting more interviews such as one in Baton Rouge and an upcoming
  interview out of Salt Lake City
• The chairman has received
  a response from Russ Verney regarding list sharing. The response indicated
  ‘first things first’ – the campaign will pay down its debts and
  then would address data sharing
• The chairman plans to proceed
  with Alan Gura on the FEC lawsuit that seeks to allow contributions
  received from estates to not be subject to limits.

Treasurer’s Report

Aaron Starr presented a treasurer’s
report and noted these highlights:

• A graph of revenues by year
  since 1992 indicated receipts drop after presidential elections. A tough
  year for the LP is coming up.
• Though assets trail liabilities
  by about $40k, we anticipate a receipt from the Berrington Estate in
  January which will bring the financials to a net of about 0.

Aaron fielded questions regarding
current financials and his report is attached as Appendix A.

Ruth Bennett noted there is no provision
in the upcoming budget for Judicial Committee expenses that may be required.
Candidates ran for their positions not expecting to have to incur travel.
She recommended the LNC plan for such eventualities.

Secretary’s Report

Bob Sullentrup stated he is pleased
to welcome the 2010 conventioneers to St. Louis and listed some of the
amenities within walking distance of the Renaissance Grand hotel which
includes:

• The Arch and Museum of Westward
  Expansion,
• The Mississippi riverfront,
• Busch Stadium,
• Ballpark Village,
• The City Museum for kids,
• A renovated Union Station
  with food court, otel and shops,
• Anheuser Busch brewery tours
  and Clydesdales,
• Laclede’s Landing for music,
  dancing and dining, and
• Lumiere Place Casino and hotel.

Metrolink and public transportation
are free downtown.

Dan Karlan noted the Bylaws specify:

• The National Committee
  shall use roll call voting on all substantive motions (Article 8,
  section 11), and
• The National Committee
  may, without meeting together, transact business by mail. (Article
  8, section 9)

Accordingly,
the minutes should include roll call ballots on mail ballots.

Bob agreed to provide that information
for the September minutes and to include the roll calls on mail ballots
in the future.

Roll Calls for Mail Ballots Reported
in September:

• Approval of 5-26 minutes,
  passed 11-4, 2 abstentions
• Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
  Bob Sullentrup, Aaron Starr, Michael Colley, Mark Hinkle, Stewart Flood,
  Dan Karlan, James Lark, Rachel Hawkridge, Bill Redpath, Pat Dixon
• Opposed: Lee Wrights,
  Mary Ruwart, Tony Ryan, Angela Keaton
• Abstaining: Rebecca Sink-Burris,
  Julie Fox

• Approval of 5-22 minutes,
  passed 12-1, 4 abstentions
• Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
  Bob Sullentrup, Aaron Starr, Michael Colley, Mark Hinkle, Stewart Flood,
  Dan Karlan, James Lark, Pat Dixon, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Julie Fox, Tony
  Ryan
• Opposed: Angela Keaton
• Abstaining: Lee Wrights, Mary
  Ruwart, Bill Redpath, Rachel Hawkridge

• APRC Resolution, passed 13-3,
  one abstention
• Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
  Aaron Starr, Michael Colley, Mark Hinkle, Stewart Flood, Pat Dixon,
  Rebecca Sink-Burris, Julie Fox, Tony Ryan, Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart,
  Rachel Hawkridge, Angela Keaton
• Opposed: Bob Sullentrup,
  Dan Karlan, James Lark
• Abstaining: Bill Redpath

• Remove Give-or-Get amounts
  from the website, fails 8-9
• Voting in favor: Bob Sullentrup,
  Angela Keaton, Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart, Tony Ryan, Mark Hinkle, Julie
  Fox, Rachel Hawkridge
• Opposed: Aaron Starr,
  Michael Colley, Stewart Flood, Pat Dixon, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Dan Karlan,
  James Lark, Bill Redpath, Michael Jingozian,

Wayne Allyn Root

Wayne Allyn Root, LP 2008 Vice Presidential
nominee, addressed the LNC.

Wayne noted ‘we are friends’,
meaning he started as a libertarian-Republica. He is now is solidly
Libertarian and not going back. . He noted Obama, the most liberal president
ever, campaigned as a centrist and won. He encouraged Libertarians to
remain as fervently Libertarian as ever, but to campaign in a way that
lets Americans hear the message. “You be as radical as you want, and
I’ll spread the message”. His job as LP candidate was to win over
converts.

In so doing, Wayne worked with many
Libertarians and groups, including shaking hands and campaigning at
the Gay Pride parade in San Francisco. He listed Aaron Starr, Alan Hacker,
Kevin Takenaga, Bob Sullentrup and others as some of the many with whom
he had worked during the campaign.

In addition, Wayne had 1000 media
experiences including interviews and appearances. This has led to him
becoming an established ‘Libertarian face’ in the US. Since the
Election he has been invited to be on Fox nine times, KABC in LA and
other major media sources. This number of appearances has allowed him
to experiment with various messages and approaches to hone those that
resonate with the public.

Some of the winning messages include
school choice. Wayne said he termed it ‘school choice’, rather than
‘eliminate government schools’ as a means of portraying the issue
in a manner that better resonates with the public. Wayne even said in
an interview that ‘school choice is the civil rights issue of the
21^st Century’, a phrase co-opted by the McCain camp.

Another winning message is to oppose
‘government unions’. About 1500 Americans e-mailed Wayne to express
their affinity for his message and to vent their displeasure and distress
with what government and its policies have been doing to them.

Wayne has a book coming out in May
that includes a 25-city book tour.

Wayne noted the campaign failed to
attract Ron Paul supporters in numbers he would have liked. The main
lesson he took from the campaign was the role of money. Obama did not
win because of the attractiveness of his message. He won because he
raised more money. And it did not come from small donors. 60% of his
donors contributed $2300. This translated into a 10-1 TV ad advantage
in Nevada and for Nevada friends of Wayne reporting a several-to-zero
phone calls to support Obama over McCain. That caused NV, a red state,
to turn blue.

In that vein, Wayne noted his appearances
attracted 20 people in a location while Obama garnered 70,000. “We
won’t make it with 20 people contributing $10 checks who then say
they have supported the campaign’.

While Wayne was proud of all of his
interviews, he did complain about an interview that appeared in Reason
Magazine that made him out to be a racist. This interview was based
on comments at a cocktail party during which Wayne did not know the
interview was underway. He felt ambushed.

A question from the gallery asked
if a lawsuit initiated now against the Commission on Presidential Debates
would help gain entry into the 2012. Bob Sullentrup, founder of Rock-The-Debates,
noted that the CPD has been sued since its inception in 1987, and that
the litigation resulted in the CPD having to produce ‘objective standards’,
which essentially consists of a candidate polling at 15%. “Of course,
the polls they use don’t always include all candidates”, Bob noted
“effectively eliminating them at the outset.”

Wayne sacrificed his time and money
– he has yet to be reimbursed $20k or so by the campaign – and is
proud of the inroads he was able to make. Rachel Hawkridge saluted Wayne
for his efforts and expressed on behalf of the LNC its appreciation
for his dedication and service.

Barr Resolution

Tony Ryan introduced the following
resolution as written by David Nolan, one of the Party’s founders.

Tony Ryan asked David Nolan if we
might absolve Wayne Allyn Root from the resolution based on the
comments we had just heard. The resolution addressed only the management
of the campaign and not Wayne Allyn Root.

The Chair, after passing the gavel
to Vice Chair Michael Jingozian, entered into the discussion noting
what he believed to be incorrect statements contained in the resolution:

Often, Bob Barr was described
only as a “former Congressman,” with no mention of his party affiliation.
Campaign Manager Russ Verney has admitted that this was a deliberate
strategy, stating that his goal was to build awareness of Bob Barr only,
with no concern for building the Libertarian Party brand.

The Chair said Russ Verney had never
said that. Instead, the campaign was one that tried to ‘appeal
to Independents’.

This (ballot access) failure
is due largely to ineptitude and arrogance on the part of Shane Cory,
who began ballot drives late and refused the services of experienced
petitioners.

The chair, whose involvement in ballot
access surpassed that of anyone on the board, said this statement was
false.

Some petitioners were not
paid for services rendered, leaving the LNC in the embarrassing position
of being dunned by those petitioners.

The chair said this never happened.

The Chair then read the following
e-mail from Russ Verney.

Aaron Starr asked for an opinion
from the Chair: Was this resolution tantamount to a condemnation? The
Chair decided that it was not.

Stewart Flood noted that some of
Angela’s comments may have been libelous and thus put the LNC at risk.

After further discussion, Aaron Starr
again asked if this resolution were essentially ‘a slap in the face’.
The Chair again ruled that it was not.

The motion failed 3-12

Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
Angela Keaton, Tony Ryan

Voting against: Aaron Starr, Bob
Sullentrup. Admiral Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Dr. Mary Ruwart, Mark
Hinkle, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Stewart Flood, Dr. James Lark, Dan Karlan,
Julie Fox, Rachel Hawkridge

Staff Report

Before turning the report over to
Sean Haugh, Robert Kraus noted the Barr Resolution, if passed, would
have a ‘hugely detrimental effect on Staff’.

Sean Haugh noted the LP has gained
ballot status in Maryland through 2010.

Sean wants to start the petitioning
in Nebraska before April, 2009. In so doing, Nebraska will recognize
Libertarian voters as Libertarians rather than reclassifying them as
Independent. Scott Kohlhaus will begin ballot access fundraising January
1.

Sean wants to start petitioning early
in Nebraska, Alaska and South Dakota. SD has the advantage of us being
able to reuse signatures already collected. As time goes on, the validity
rate of the signatures will erode as people move or otherwise become
invalid (e.g, deaths, incarcerations)

Staff reports are provided in Appendix
C.

Responding to an objection to the
Give-or-Get totals included in the staff report, Dr. Lark moved to allow
those who did not wish to participate in the program to be able to do
so with their names not included in staff reports.

Aaron Starr moved to postpone consideration
until after the budget. The motion to postpone failed.

The main motion passed 14-2. Bill
Redpath did not vote

Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
Bob Sullentrup,, Admiral Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Lee Wrights, Dr. Mary
Ruwart. Tony Ryan, Mark Hinkle, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Stewart Flood,
Dr. James Lark, Dan Karlan (5-N), Julie Fox, Rachel Hawkridge.

Voting
against: Aaron Starr, Angela Keaton,

Counsel’s Report

Bill Hall participated in the Counsel’s
Report by teleconference.

As a point of personal privilege,
Bill noted the Staff Report failed to note two elected Libertarians
in partisan elections in Michigan. (who?)

Lee Wrights moved to enter executive
session for the purpose of discussing the counsel’s report. Dr. Lark
seconded. There was no objection.

Before entering executive session
Mark Hinkle noted that Kevin Takenaga had to catch a flight. With the
indulgence of the body Mark Hinkle asked to hear from Kevin Takenaga
to right after lunch. Without a vote the request was so obliged.

SATURDAY PM

California Report

With the indulgence of the body Kevin
Takenaga, California Chair who had to catch a plane, addressed the LNC
at this time. Kevin praised the several elected Libertarians from the
Golden State that includes:

• Brian Holtz
• Norm Westwell
• Kate O’Brien
• Frank Manske
• Eric Henrickson
• Johnathan Hall
• Tom Tryon
• John Inks

Other LP work in California included
the LP’s support for Proposition 8, the measure that made same-sex
marriages illegal.

Steven Greenhut of the Orange
County Register, is a newly minted Libertarian who defected from
the ranks of the Republicans.

California, following a recommendation
of the Barr campaign has formed many meet-up groups that continue to
attract new members.

Discipline of Angela Keaton

Stewart Flood read the following
resolution:

Aaron Starr seconded the resolution.

Stewart then proceeded to present
a 23-page document of evidence.

Bob Sullentrup moved to extend discussion
for 30 minutes. With no objection, the LNC proceeded.

Dan Karlan moved to divide the issue
and Aaron Starr seconded.

Before dividing the question, Pat
Dixon requested we allow Angela Keaton to respond to the material Stewart
had presented.

Angela Keaton noted:

• Her ongoing opposition to
  the Barr campaign was widely known
• Her thanks to her detractors
  for taking the time to compile her ‘greatest hits’
• Her right to spew invective
  across the Internet
• That she had a lot of supporters
  whose interests she was promoting
• That she was promoting the
  real issues of ‘the movement’ in an exemplary way that others on
  the board were falling short of doing
• That her words represented
  her honest opinions and as such were not breaches of any fiduciary obligations
  on the board
• That she harbored disdain
  for the Party’s leadership.

The motion to divide failed 6-8.

Pat Dixon raised three key items
that he wished Ms. Keaton would address. Angela responded in due time.
The issues were:

• Breaching the confidentiality
  of executive session. Ms. Keaton noted the executive session was improperly
  called because she claimed it reduced to a means of putting her on trial.
  Moreover, Ms. Keaton threatened to divulge executive session material
  should a bait-and-switch tactic be used against her again.
• Respect for staff (sexual
  harassment charges involving Casey Hansen). Ms. Keaton said she had
  offered a ‘half-hearted apology’ who at the time did not know about
  the statements.
• Threatening of Stewart Flood..
  Ms. Keaton said she has always regarded Mr. Flood as dangerous and was
  afraid he ‘will fall on me’.

Someone (Dan
Karlan?) also noted Ms. Keaton’s
failure to disclose her involvement with the Boston Tea Party as a conflict
of interest earlier in the meeting was another breach. The LNC removed
Steven Burden from the 2008 Platform Committee by virtue of his involvement
with another Party.

Rebecca Sink-Burris moved to extend
time for another 10 minutes.

Julie Fox acknowledged some of the
concerns harbored by Ms. Keaton. At the same time ‘you brought a lot
of this on yourself’ by lack of respect for decorum and dereliction
of responsibilities.

Bob Sullentrup noted that even if
in executive session matters seem to turn into a witch hunt, there still
is a responsibility on the part of LNC members to not broadcast it.
Moreover, the pattern of sexual harassment, even if not perceived as
harassment by the target, can be construed as tacit endorsement of such
practices if the LNC were to take no remedial action and would face
the potential for a huge financial liability.

After a five-minute extension by
Dr. Lark, Michael Jingozian offered a substitute motion:

The
LNC shall form a dispute resolution committee to address this issue.

Mary Ruwart seconded. The motion
to substitute passed.

This newly minted main motion passed
with no objection.

The LNC plans on populating the dispute
resolution committee first thing Sunday.

Reports Previously Submitted
in Writing

Campus Organizing

Dr. Lark indicated that his report
several weeks ago and is attached as Appendix D. He stated he
would entertain questions about it; there were no questions.

Regional Reports

Stewart Flood read a letter from
Barbara Howe, the NC Chair. Ms. Howe noted Michael Munger received 125k
votes – 2.85% – thus securing NC ballot access for four years. This
is a significant development considering the expense incurred in securing
ballot access in NC.

(who?) reported Eric Sundwald is recommending the
LNC not investigate the Tom Stevens matter any further. Tom Stevens
regrettably has suffered a stroke and is incapacitated. The issue involved
Mr. Stevens being both an LP Judicial Committee member and was a presidential
candidate on the Objectivist Party ticket in Florida and Colorado.

Mission Statement

Aaron Starr moved to change the agenda
by moving the mission statement to a different spot. The motion failed
for lack of a second.

Rachel Hawkridge introduced David
Nolan who advocated a broad- based mission statement for the Party.

The current mission statement²
of the Libertarian is:

The mission of the LP is to
move public policy in a libertarian direction by building a
political party that elects Libertarians to public office.

Rachel Hawkridge moved and Dr. Ruwart
seconded the following:

The mission of the LP is to
move public policy in a libertarian direction by building a network
of pro-freedom activists who can effectively support public policy changes
and oppose negative changes by working within the political process
on an issue-by-issue basis.

Without objection, the words ‘on
an issue-by-issue basis’ were struck (who
moved?)

The mission of the LP is to
move public policy in a libertarian direction by building a network
of pro-freedom activists who can effectively support public policy changes
and oppose negative changes by working within the political process.

Dan Karlan moved to amend by deleting
‘can effectively’. With no objection, the main motion read:

The mission of the LP is to
move public policy in a libertarian direction by building a network
of pro-freedom activists who support public policy changes and oppose
negative changes by working within the political process.

Aaron Starr moved to postpone discussion
until next meeting in Charleston. The postponement failed 6-9.

Michael Jingozian called the question
which failed.

Mark Hinkle offered a substitute:

The mission of the LP should
be to unite voters who want more personal liberty and more economic
liberty behind electoral choices that will most move public policy in
a libertarian direction.

Without
objection, the words ‘should be’ were changed to ‘is’.

A
request to allow Starchild to address the body passed.

Lee Wrights moved to table the issue
until Charleston. Wrights was on the prevailing side of the issue and
the motion had changed. The motion to postpone now passed.

Goals

Pat Dixon introduced the following
e-mail that he had sent to the LNC:

To start, Pat Dixon moved the following
to address the procedure.

Mary Ruwart moved to change ‘3
goals per category’ to ‘5 goals per category’. Mary Ruwart’s
motion passed.

Pat Dixon’s motion as amended passed.

Pat Dixon then moved

Aaron Starr moved to divide the issue

into the four questions preceded by numbers. The motion to divide passed.

Accordingly we next addressed the
first goal:

Aaron Starr moved to substitute:

The substitution failed for lack
of a second.

Mary Ruwart moved to amend to say
that we ‘Raise one third of the necessary funds this term in order
to achieve 48 state ballot access in 2012’. The amendment failed.

Mark Hinkle moved Bill Redpath craft
language for this goal and defer the matter to a mail ballot (i.e.,
to essentially commit the issue to a committee). There was no objection
to this motion.

Next we considered:

Lee Wrights moved to suspend the
rules for the purpose of having Pat Dixon and champions of the various
goals craft language for the remainder of the items and present in (no
later than) the Charleston meeting.

The suspension of the rules passed
with no objection.

The motion passed on a voice vote
after Mary Ruwart had called the question.

Policy Manual Addition for Mail
Ballots

With Admiral Colley temporarily stepping
out the room, Dan Karlan presented his change to the Policy Manual:

Article
III, Section 2, Sub-Section A (page 15), append a new third paragraph:

The Secretary shall report
the results of mail ballots at each LNC meeting immediately following
those ballots. The minutes of each meeting of the LNC shall include
the following aspects of each mail ballot conducted since the prior
meeting and reported by the Secretary at that meeting: the complete
text of the motion, the names of the co-sponsors, the dates of the initiation
and completion of the balloting, and the roll of those voting on the
motion.

With no objection and the Secretary
affirming his support the motion passed.

Executive
Director Search

Admiral Colley noted the search continues
for an executive director with interviews ongoing, including some conduced
in San Diego.

Meeting Dates
for 2009

The LNC settled on the following
dates:

Charleston, LSLA Conference Feb 28,
Saturday PM

March 1, Sunday all day

July 18-19 Likely St. Louis or Boise,
ID³

December 5-6

Adjournment / Recess

Lee Wrights moved to adjourn. Motion
passed.

Sunday AM

The Sunday session commenced at 8:03.

Population of Conflict Resolution
Committee

Bill Redpath recognized Michael Jingozian
who recommended the following members to populate the Conflict
Resolution committee:

Rachel
Hawkridge, Tony Ryan, Mary Ruwart, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Admiral Michael
Colley,

Michael Jingozian

Angela Keaton objected to the formation
of the committee. Her objection was ruled out of order.

The committee membership was established
without objection.

2009
Budget

Bob Sullentrup moved to reduce the
amount of time for the 2009 Budget from 120 to 30 minutes. The motion
failed.

Aaron Starr presented the proposed
2009 budget, pegged at $1.3M as an order of magnitude. Aaron covered
budget items line by line answering questions and providing explanations.

The LNC entered executive session
for the purpose of discussing salaries and compensation.

The 2009 proposed budget is attached
as Appendix B.

Washington
“Top Two” Litigation

Coming out of executive session from
the budget discussion, Pat Dixon moved to suspend the rules to consider
for 10 minutes appropriating $15k previously authorized for challenging
the FEC limits on bequests to support the Washington State “top two”
litigation. The “top two” refers to the primary system that we wish
to throw out in order to preserve trademark protection for the Libertarian
Party name. The fear is D’s and R’s would use this procedure to
eliminate ‘spoilers’.

The suspension of the rules passed
and Mr. Dixon introduced the motion.

The motion passed 15-1.

Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
Bob Sullentrup, Admiral Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Angela Keaton, Lee
Wrights, Dr. Mary Ruwart, Tony Ryan(1), Mark Hinkle (2), Rebecca Sink-Burris
(3), Stewart Flood(4), Dr. James Lark (5-S), Dan Karlan (5-N),
Julie Fox (6), Rachel Hawkridge (7)

Voting against: Aaron Starr

Bill Redpath did not vote.

2009
Budget, continued

Mary Ruwart called the question on
the 2009 budget as proposed. The motion passed 10-6.

Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian,
Aaron Starr, Bob Sullentrup. Admiral Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Tony
Ryan, Mark Hinkle, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Stewart Flood, Dan Karlan.

Opposed: Angela Keaton, Lee Wrights,
Dr. Mary Ruwart, Dr. James Lark, Julie Fox, Rachel Hawkridge

Bill Redpath did not vote

Lee Wrights challenged that the budget
had not been previously submitted in writing. The chair ruled the budget
had been submitted in writing.

Rachel Hawkridge moved Michael Jingozian
provide his ‘quick and dirty’ marketing proposal regarding ways
to enhance 2009 revenue to the LNC, and that the Executive Committee
meet before the end of the year to make corresponding budget adjustments.
There was no objection to Rachel’s motion.

Agenda

Pat Dixon moved to strike Alicia
Mattson’s E-voting demo from the agenda. There was no objection

Platform
Committee Nominations and Selection

No candidates other than those nominated
previously via e-mail were added to the list of candidates for the Platform
Committee. Ballot results were as follows.

Receiving majority support and selected
for the Platform Committee were

Adam Mayer 13

Rebecca Sink-Burris 13

Richard Randall 12

Brian Holtz 11

Alicia Mattson 11

Stephen Gordon 10

John Roland 10

Rob Power 9

Joe Hauptman 9

Not receiving a majority were

Chris Barber 8

Susan Hogarth 8

Stephen Green 6

John Howell 5

Starchild 5

James Oakson 3

Michael Carmany 2

Corey Carpenter 2

Scott Stewart 1

John Jacob –

Richard Stewart –

Aaron Starr moved, then later
withdrew, a motion to fill the tenth person on the Committee in Charleston.

Mary Ruwart proposed a voice
vote to choose between Chris Barber and Susan Hogarth who had fallen
one vote short. Mary’s motion passed.

Susan Hogarth was selected 9-5.
Chris Barber is the alternate.

Rebecca Sink-Burris moved Alicia
Mattson be the interim chair of the Platform committee. The motion passed.

Bob Sullentrup commended Alicia
Mattson for her ‘masterful’ job Alicia as 2008 Platform Committee
chair, suffering the slings and arrows from many sources yet maintaining
her composure, refusing to be bullied and letting the Convention’s
will to ultimately prevail.

Convention 2010

Admiral Colley said the LP will hold
its convention at the Renaissance Grand hotel in downtown St. Louis
Memorial Day weekend in 2010. The Convention will be Saturday, Sunday
and a half day Monday.

This property offered the best prices,
had a central location, offered MetroLink light rail transportation
from the airport and additional amenities. Room rate is $109, locked
in at the 2008 price. Room commitments: 41 Thu, 341 Fri, 341 Sat, 316
Sun, 31 Mon for a total of 1165. The LNC would be responsible for room
attrition penalties of 70% of that number.

Pat Dixon moved to accept the recommendation
of St. Louis. There was no objection.

Convention
Electronic Voting Demonstration (Mattson)

Pat Dixon had moved to defer Alicia
Mattson’s demo to Charleston.

Bylaws
Committee Report (Karlan)

Bill Redpath at this point had to
leave for the airport to catch a flight United had changed and was unwilling
to let him change.

Vice-Chair
Michael Jingozian took over running the meeting.

Before leaving, Bill noted that he
had appointed M Carling as LNC parliamentarian, a prerogative within
his authority.

Dan Karlan noted the Bylaws Committee
has started its work. The plan includes meeting face-to-face in Charleston
and to conduct much business by e-mail. There is likely to be no pre-convention
meeting.

Dan noted that some of the committee
members will be unable to come to Charleston. In order to secure a quorum,
Dan needed to have the LNC approve alternates,

Dan
moved to appoint Vicki Kirkland as Bylaws Committee alternate. There
were no objections

Dan
moved to apponit M Carling as an alternate. M’s appointement passed
10-5.

Julie
Fox nominated Starchild. Starchild was selected as an alternate. 8-6,

LNCC
Report (Hawkridge)

Rachel
Hawkridge quizzed Alicia Mattson and Aaron Starr on the LNCC and its
decisions and practices.

Bob
Sullentrup moved to end discussion. The motion passed 8-4.

LNC Meeting Video Recording &
Archiving (Keaton)

Angela Keaton moved to upgrade the
video recording capabilities to digital and create a permanent archive
of all meeting recordings, accessible to any member on request, and
no destruction of recordings.

This
motion was one to reconsider a matter previously adopted.

With
no objection, the word ‘digital’ was changed to ‘high quality’.
(who?)

Aaron
Starr noted individual initiative could easily provide this service.

Lee Wrights moves to postpone the
matter to Charleston. There were no objections to the postponement.

Policy
Manual Amendment—Authorization of Lawsuits (Lark)

Dr. Jim Lark sent the following e-mail
to the LNC on November 21:

Aaron Starr moved to amend changing
‘named plaintiff’ to ‘a participant’. This provides for the
times when the LNC is footing the bill but not named as a plaintiff.

Mark Hinkle and Mary Ruwart offered
suggestions. In the end, there was unanimous consent to withdraw the
matter to run the changes past counsel before adoption.

Aaron Starr Personal Privilege

Aaron Starr rose to a point of personal
privilege, noting someone ordered food for the room that had been charged
to LNC. Aaron would not name the individual.

Starchild said he had inquired of
the hotel if there were any more snacks coming, but that he did not
order any. If he were involved, the matter was a misunderstanding.

Policy Manual Amendment—Mail
Ballot Reporting and Strategic Plan (Karlan)

The LNC had managed to shoe-horn
the mail ballot reporting issue in on Saturday. At that time, Dan Karlan
withdrew the strategic planning portion. Accordingly, the strategic
plan matter was not broached.

Volunteer Confidentiality Form
(Redpath)

Jim Lark noted the Volunteer Confidentiality
form found in tab 4 of the binder.

The idea was for LNC members to sign
the form certifying the proper treatment and handling of confidential
information.

Aaron Starr moved to postpone. There
was an objection. Several members including Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart,
Angela Keaton and others were reluctant to sign the form.

Nevertheless, the body postponed
the matter for Charleston.

LP News Content (Keaton)

Angela Keaton asked to postpone this
item. With no objection, the request was granted.

Opportunity for Public Comment

Since the LNC had to discuss the
legal services contract in executive session and with Rachel Hawkridge
having stepped away, the body moved to hearing from the public.

David Nolan objected to the selection
of Alicia Mattson as Platform Committee chair, noting the many complaints
directed at her as 2008 Platform Committee chair.

Ruth Bennett thanked the LNC for
the financial support for the Top Two litigation.

Starchild recommended the LNC eliminate
the branding budget item. He was reminded the LNC already had. He recommended
the LNC not pay for meeting rooms. The restaurant of the prior evening
had space and the LNC could have met there for free. Starchild complained
the blog had changed on the LP website and was unable to post anymore.
He recommended we make the daily poll on the website daily and provide
questions that are substantial. He stated it was crass to post quantities
of amounts raised. He was reminded the monetary amounts had not been
there for two months. Finally, he recommended we focus on LNC transparency,
videotape everything and offer the tapes to members.m

George Phillies, 2008 LP presidential
candidate, recommended we sponsor effective projects and spend money
wisely.

Rob Power noted the LP in San Francisco
is being killed by its being perceived as conservative. Accordingly,
Rob recommended the LP show up at left wing progressive events.

Mike Seebeck said it his intention
to videotape LNC meetings. Videotapes, he said, offer the best evidence
in court.

Other Resolution(s) (Hawkridge)

Rachel Hawkridge moved the following
resolution that she wrote and Dr. Ruwart revised.

At the same time, Andrew Davis had
provided the following

After
some discussion, Rachel moved to substitute the Davis version for the
Ruwart version. The

substitution
passed without objection.

Aaron
Starr moved to change the word ‘protest’ to ‘ oppose’. The amendment
passed without objection

Dan Karlan corrected the grammar
of the third ‘whereas’, using ‘has led, and will lead,’. There
was no objection.

The
resolution now read:

Michael Jingozian asked if there
were any objection. Angela Keaton objected.

Upon a roll call, the measure passed
unanimously.

Voting in favor:

Michael Jingozian, Aaron Starr,
Bob Sullentrup, Admiral Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Angela Keaton, Lee
Wrights, Dr. Mary Ruwart, Tony Ryan(1), Mark Hinkle (2), Rebecca Sink-Burris
(3), Stewart Flood(4), Dr. James Lark (5-S), Dan Karlan (5-N), Julie
Fox (6), Rachel Hawkridge (7)

Opposed:

No one

Bill
Redpath had left for the airport.

Executive
Session

Mary
Ruwart moved to enter executive session for the purpose of discussing
the legal counsel contract.

At 2:42 pm the LNC meeting came to
a close.

Next Meetings

The schedule for subsequent LNC meetings
is as follows:

2009 LSLA Joint meeting February 28-March 1 Charleston,
SC

2009 TBD July 18-19

2009 TBD December 5-6

LPHQ Update

12/6/2008

Operation’s Director
Report (Acting ED)

by Robert Kraus

Overview

Since the last LNC meeting, LPHQ
has focused mainly on 2009 budget planning and the presidential campaign.

Please feel free to address any
issues not covered in the staff reports at the upcoming LNC meeting
and we will do our best to address or answer any concerns.

Staff Update

Our staff levels remain at appropriate
levels and includes a smaller than usual assemble of college students.
We have recently cut back on our student’s hours to an “as needed”
basis to help curtail costs and Austin and Louise will be actively looking
for unpaid college interns next semester.

Below are our current staffers
and summary of their current job responsibilities/overview of what they
do on a weekly/daily basis:

• Robert Kraus, Acting ED
  / Operations Director:
• Fiscal Management (a/p,
  a/r, general bookkeeping in QuickBooks)
• Working with Aaron Starr
  and the EC on the 2009 Budget
• Maintaining compliance with
  government policies including FEC filing
• Management of LP Staff (human
  resources including payroll and benefits administration)
• Oversight of database management
  & cleanup (Raiser’s Edge)
• General purchasing and procurement
• Customer service (internal
  and external communications with board members, affiliates, donors,
  etc.)
• Working with the Chair,
  Andrew Davis and others to get out a cohesive Libertarian message across
  to the public
• Facilities and equipment
  planning and maintenance
• Preparation of financial
  and membership reports
• Administrator of lp.org
  & hq.lp.org email and group list servers
• Management of our higher
  donor direct solicitation endeavors (such as our telemarketing program
  with John Swallow)
• Creating and overseeing
  various initiatives to establish a “cause célèbre” for our donors
  (such as Operation Elect-US to expand our political stature by increasing
  the number of elected Libertarians in office)

• Andrew Davis, Communications
  Director:
• Scan national media for
  topics for press releases, blog entries, and Email messages
• Draft press releases, blogs,
  email solicitations, email messages to members
• Answer press inquiries and
  book media appearances for party officials
• Write content for Web site,
  when needed Design graphics for Web site, emails, blogs, advertisements
  and newsletters
• Develop content for monthly
  newsletter and newspaper layout and design monthly newsletter (and soon,
  perhaps, LP News)
• Administrate and monitor
  the LP's Facebook and MySpace accounts, adding content and updating
  information
• Function as the intermediary
  between the Party and the public
• Essentially, responsible
  for any in-house communication with the outside world

• Sean Haugh, Political Director
• Follow up with people who
  have expressed a desire to run for office, starting by introducing them
  to their state party Chair or their designee
• Track candidates' activities
  and offer them one-on-one support for their campaigns
• Research, and dissemination
  of what I've found, on the what offices are available and how to file
  for them
• Working with state parties
  and local activists to get ballot access reform bills introduced in
  state legislatures, and developing lobbying strategies for them
• Managing our ballot access
  lawsuits and getting them ready for the next phase of declaratory relief
• Write articles for LP News,
  Pledge News and lp.org on ballot access and candidates
• Maintain and update the
  list of elected Libertarians
• Customer service to state
  and local affiliates in all areas, right now concentrating on recruiting
  and placing candidates for 2009 and 2010
• Report on my activities
  to the LNC, always keeping the Chair and ED aware of what I've found
  so they can inform the board and other relevant people
• Answering email questions
  about the Party and its positions
• Working with allies (e.g.,
  Ballot Access News, FairVote, freeandequal.org, other third parties)
  to build coalitions for ballot access reform at the state level and
  share information to the benefit of all concerned
• Preparing for petitioning
  efforts to begin in 2009 and 2010
• Working with Austin and
  interns for follow up phone calls to candidate leads

• Louise Calise, Direct Marketing
  Manager
• Maintain accuracy of monthly
  giving program (donor calls and email changes; contact donors for updated
  information)
• Process monthly gifts for
  members of monthly giving program and evaluate transactions that do
  not go through to find out why including contacting the donor for updated
  information
• Oversee Member Service Specialists
  in the sorting incoming mail, updating membership information and caging
  of donations
• Re-checking of daily deposits
  and cash audits
• Work with vendors for house
  and acquisition appeals (copy, art, print, mailshop)
• Analyze results on all mail
  appeals and select segments from house file for each house mail appeal,
  and order lists for each acquisition appeal
• Data pulls from donor database
  for house mail appeal and for omission in acquisition appeal
• Data pulls for membership
  cards, acknowledgments and cultivation
• Oversee printing and mailing
  of membership cards; print and mail acknowledgments; search for creative
  ideas to cultivate high dollar and loyal donors
• Work with Aaron Starr on
  the Board Member Solicitation program

• Austin Petersen, Volunteer
  Coordinator
• Respond to letters and email
  requests from volunteers
• Recruit volunteers from
  advertisements
• Work on operation “Elect
  Us” with Sean Haugh (calling candidates, etc.)
• Produce, shoot, edit original
  videos for the LP. Continue creating infrastructure of permanent online
  web 2.0 material resources for training, education, inspiration, and
  recruitment
• Work with state affiliates,
  and volunteers on event ideas, and creating opportunities for locals
  to be active
• Edit LP.org website events
  and volunteer receipt lists
• Write blogs for LP.org
• Write articles for LP NEWS
  and Pledge news
• Network with other high
  level organizations, and politicians in DC to increase the stature and
  reputation of the party
• Manage supply of work for
  1-3 rotating interns
• Research current affairs
  and provide creative material for advertisements to be posted
• Provide education and training
  to the Libertarian community (Leadership Institute knowledge)
• Staff booths at LP events,
  direct recruitment of volunteers for affiliate events
• Study opposition party tactics,
  emulate successes, learn from their failures

• Susan Dixon, Member Services
  Specialist
• Process and cage all checks,
  credit cards and cash received via mail into RE
• Photocopy checks before
  deposit
• Process and cage all web
  transactions into RE
• Process refunds and contribution
  returns
• Update and maintain records
  in RE
• Import new inquiry and volunteers
  from web and send prepare data for information packets
• Prepare data for new memberships
  and renewals and print letters for membership cards
• Prepare daily reports and
  do daily cash audits
• Create new records for people
  who ask for information packets
• Properly sort and file all
  source material to comply with FEC rules

• Casey Hansen, Member Services
  Specialist
• Answers and directs incoming
  phone calls
• Accepts, opens and sorts
  mail/packages/couriers and supplies
• Greets visitors
• Produces and mails out LP
  Membership Cards
• Produces and mails out LP
  Information Packets
• Sorts and tags physical
  monetary contributions sent to the office (checks/money orders/cash)
• Deposits checks at PCN bank
  after Louise has verified deposit and cash audits
• Updates member’s address
  and contact information
• Assists in general office
  upkeep, organization and maintaining office supplies
• Any other extra tasks as
  assigned by other LNC staff such as general filing, research, and responding
  to member correspondence

• We have cut back down to
  two college students working part time 1-2 days per week: Erin Taylor
  (a GW student) & Mark Meranta (a GMU student)

• We also have a contractor,
  John Swallow, to help us with tele-fundraising of mid range ($250-500)
  donors part time. Since late Aug, he has raised over $12,000.00

Operations

As mentioned above, Robert has
been focused on budget prep, the campaign, preparation of pre-election
and post election FEC reports, reducing expenses and raising money.

Affiliates

Sean Haugh provides a full report
on campaigns and ballot access. Austin and Andrew have also been
in frequent contact with our affiliates. Data dumps continue to go out
regularly. We added a few extra dumps during the fall so the states
can keep up and mail to all the new members and inquires.

We have seen some major improvements
on the information flow from states to LPHQ, especially from newer state
chairs that appear to be more responsive in getting us data updates,
events and news items. We encourage the regional reps to please
continue to help us receive information from your states. Receiving
news and event updates from our affiliates is an ongoing battle. Again,
news worthy items (especially when accompanied by high quality color
photos) can be sent to [email protected] while events simply can be sent to [email protected]

Finance and Fundraising

Internet Fundraising
– Web Site

Internet based fundraising continues
to be a growth area for us. Since the launch of the new web site, we
have raised a total of $272,227.00.

Working closely with Andrew, Austin,
Louise, Sean and Susan, Terra Eclipse is completely finished with the
back end of our web and Andrew has taken the lead for most of our web
site management needs. This should save us some considerable programming
expenses. We are now able to export data such as inquiries and volunteers
in batches, which is imported weekly into RE. This saves staff, and
Susan especially, considerable time. We are working with Blakbaud to
find a way to import the gift batch records into RE as well. TE has
finished creating the back end for exporting gift batches which still
must be manually entered by Susan into RE. We are currently working
with TE on finishing the creation of the widgets (the linkable graphics
which direct people to our web site and donation page) which we’ve
delayed in order to save money.

Phone-based Fundraising

We had hired a new telemarketing
vendor to do a renewal call series in late Oct and early Nov. Last year
this resulted in over $30,000 in revenue for Nov 07 alone. Unfortunately
we were unhappy with the results ($8,500 for Oct/Nov combined) and will
be returning to our previous vendor. We made the switch mainly for financial
reasons (the new vendor was half the price of the old one) but obviously,
you get what you pay for. Thus we will use the new vendors pricing proposal
to re-negotiate our terms with the old vendor.

Finance

Accounts payable remained higher
than we would like for most of the last few months, yet we stay current
on our bills. As mentioned in the last meeting, we had a high of $47,000
in Aug which had been reduced to $18,100 for Oct and $22,200 for Nov.
I do not anticipate getting back to our previous normal levels of $10-15,000
if the economy continues to do poorly.

Speaking of the reduced economic
situation, in terms of profitability, we have somehow managed to have
three months with small surpluses which brought our total loss for the
year down to -$124,800 as of end of Nov from -$152,900 at the end of
Aug. I do not expect this to improve for Dec. The only reason we had
a surplus in November was due to an adjustment of $19,700 in our bequest
from the estate which finally sold off their coin collection.

We have seen a significant reduction
in both on line and direct mail contributions over the last few weeks.
For the 1^st half of Nov (11-1-11/15) we received $68,000
in donations, for the 2^nd half only $11,241 was received.
November has not traditionally been a great month for us with the exception
of last year and 2003. The main reason last year was better was due
in part to our tele-marketing efforts as previously mentioned. Here
is a comparison of this Nov vs. prior ones:

I think the 24% drop in the 08
vs. 04 comparisons is the direct result of the economy. Many of
the messages we have been receiving from donors say “I wish we could
give you more but can not at this time.” For example, our average
gift has gone from $44.59 in Oct down to $38.44 for Nov. People are
still giving, but they are unable to give as much.

The conclusion one might draw from
this is that Aaron’s conservative projections of revenue for 2009
are justified and that we really will need each and every board members
help in directly soliciting donations to avoid the financial hardships
that we experienced several years ago. Please do let Aaron know if you
wish to participate so Louise can start researching possible donors
for you to visit and John Swallow can start to arrange the appointments.

Membership

The membership report for 11/30/08
previously submitted to the LNC is also attached. As with the last few
months, I've included a comparison of 04 vs. 08 numbers on the first
page.

Highlights:

Total active donors from 04/04-11/04
increased by 3.57% (total of 752 net) Total active donors from 04/08-11/08
increased by 17.56% (total of 2564 net)

New donors Apr-Nov 04 = 2786 vs.
Apr-Nov 08 = 5314 (90.74% increase) Renewals Apr-Nov 04 = 2436 vs. Apr-Nov
08 = 4615 (89.45% increase)

Presidential Campaign

LPHQ would like to thank all the
staff and volunteers of the Barr/Root campaign and especially the candidates
themselves for their help in promoting the LP and our down ballot candidates.
We all had a mostly enjoyable, positive experience working with the
campaign and felt that we had made a real collaborative effort to expand
our brand.

We want to especially thank the
campaign for encouraging their supporters, through their email blasts,
letters and “60 Seconds” promotions, to join the LP, volunteer or
request info from us. In addition, we appreciate their help in financing
some of our ballot access efforts and encouraging their donors to aid
us as well. We really could not have done it without you.

We agree that, as Chairman Redpath
said, we “did not win as many votes as most of us thought they would
get, there is much that we gained in 2008 and a lot to be proud of for
the Libertarian Party.”

Without the record amount of media
Barr/Root generated, their help in promoting our brand and candidates,
our over all vote totals would never have eclipsed the record 13 million
plus obtained. Nor would we have had the growth in membership, volunteers
and inquires at both the state and national level.

Communications
Directors Report – Andrew Davis

After the 2008 election year, 2009
is sure to be challenging year for the Libertarian Party for media exposure.
However, one benefit from the 2008 presidential election is that the
Libertarian Party established itself as a credible expert on fiscal
and pro-liberty issues. Building on the media successes of the
Barr/Root presidential campaign, I believe 2009 can be a good year for
the Libertarian Party in the off-season.

My main goal for 2009 is to simply
maintain a media presence for the Libertarian Party.

We have recently invested in a media-tracking
tool called Meltwater News. Meltwater works very much like Lexis
Nexis in tracking media, except better and cheaper. Meltwater
will allow us to effectively track our media hits, to find out which
press releases are working, in which markets, running in what papers.
Google News alerts miss many of our news hits that run in smaller papers,
and Meltwater will be able to better track and count these hits.

We can also pass these hits along
to our state chairs in helping them identify sympathetic newspapers,
and help development the media presence of our state affiliates in their
areas.

This is a very important component
of the long-term media strategy of the Libertarian Party. One
mistake we continue to repeat is having a large-scale media presence
every four years with our presidential candidates. While our presidential
campaigns should of course be the climax of any four-year cycle, it
will help tremendously in our local presence if media is aware of our
party, views and candidates.

To do this, our state chairs must
be trained in media strategy, which can easily be done by developing
a training package that can be given to state chairs, and then passed
to local leaders too.

Another goal I'd like to set is booking
a Libertarian Party official or representative on at least one major
media hit a month. I wish I could be more aggressive in this goal
(such as one a week), but I'd like to set a realistic goal instead of
an unattainable one. I think once a month will set a solid foundation
for the next four years, and one that we can always increase.

You may have noticed a recent change
to LP News and Pledge News. I have fully redesigned Pledge News
to a more modern look, which makes it easier to read, more pleasant
at which to look and also contain reoccurring features that readers
enjoy. In each issue, there is one article about recent events,
as well as a monthly column by our volunteer coordinator and political
director. The back cover features snippets from recent news releases
by the Party.

LP News has also undergone a drastic
redesign, and we have attempted to outsource it as had been tried for
years. The quality has not been as high as we would have liked
with our contractor, and we plan to bring it back in-house, which I
strongly recommend. This will increase the speed at which the
paper is completed, but more importantly, reduce the costs of production.

Since the launch of the Web site,
I have gained more control over it and can now use it to advertise programs,
such as recently with the "Operation Elect-Us" drive.
If you visit LP.org, you can see the graphic I designed on the front
page to advertise the program, and also the landing page for the drive
that features a (temporary) banner and a description of the drive written
by Sean Haugh. A day after launching the new page, Haugh already
reported candidates signing up.

To engage our email subscribers,
and to keep them donating and active in the party, we have started two,
new weekly features called "Heroes of Capitalism" and "Monday
Message." In the "HC" feature, we praise pro-capitalism
individuals that have made unique and significant contributions to free
market advocacy—not just inside the Libertarian Party.

"The Monday Message" offers
the Libertarian perspective on the hot issue of the week. They
usually have been informal, light-hearted and a great read for the average
constituent. It helps our members argue our positions better by
providing the knowledge and information they need on these issues.

The responses to both of these have
been extremely positive:

This kind of communication is greatly
appreciated. In these difficult times we libertarians need all the good
news and encouragement we can get. And who better to receive it from
that the national political organization that represents us. This kind
of daily/weekly editorial commentary is long overdue. Keep up the good
work!

Ron Paris

Santa Rosa, CA

Getting our party officials on big
media hits, training our state affiliates to become better media strategists,
keeping our members informed and engaged, are all important and necessary
projects for the Libertarian Party in 2009. We've already made
a strong start, and I plan to build on our gains from 2008.

Direct
Marketing Manager’s Report

By Louise Calise

Overview

In
2007 I revitalized the direct mail and telemarketing programs.
The best result of the revitalizing is that now procedures are in place
and schedules maintained. This allowed 2008 to be good for our
direct mail and telemarketing programs.

Since
national elections are over we now need to write about and raise funds
based on campaigns won, local and state campaigns that will happen in
2009 and the costs of our legal battles with some states over ballot
access. I am ready for the challenge.

House Appeals

So
far this year (as of 11/6/08) we netted almost $250,000 from house solicitations
alone. Going forward I am going to test a segment of our house
file of 0-3 month donors. In other words, when doing the file
pull for house mailings I am going to pull donors who have contributed
within the last 3 months out separately from the other donors so we
can get a true picture of how many (if any) of our donors give to direct
mail appeals within a three month time. If our donors do not contribute
more than once within three months, then when doing a file pull for
house appeals I will omit donors of the past three months. This
will save money and be more cost-effective. However, these donors
will still be receiving LP News with a wallet BRE inserted.

Speaking
of LP News with the wallet BRE inserted – this is proving to be effective
for fundraising. I began this in September 2008 and so far to
date we have received a total of almost $10,000.00. Although this
does not put the newsletter in the black at this time, I believe it
will continue to be successful and be more cost-effective as we move
forward and continue to insert the BRE.

In
analyzing the results of our 2008 house appeals, I can see that our
members respond best to petitions enclosed in the package, or some kind
of interactive reply device. Because of this I will be constantly
looking for issues to have petitions signed for (i.e. petition regarding
economy and/or another regarding Afghanistan).

I
recognized that members, who have expired 2 months before mailing a
renewal notice to them, do not rejoin at a response rate for the mailing
to be cost-effective; yet, members respond better to mail than telephone
calls. Therefore, I am presently working on a new package for
members who have expired 1 month before a renewal mailing so that I
can bring up the number of these respondents and not have to mail to
those who have expired 2 months before.

Prospecting

In
2007 we mailed six prospect appeals. While the percent of return
(0.33%) for these were very poor the average gift ($51.64) was good.
In reviewing gifts that followed from the members who first responded
to any one of our prospecting appeals, we have an additional 117 gifts,
representing $15,466 (in addition to the contributions for the first
gift). So in the long run our prospecting appeals for 2007 have
grossed $30,084, with an average gift of $41.97. More importantly
we have added additional members to the file.

So
far in 2008 we mailed thirteen prospect appeals. Only three appeals
were to donors of other organizations. While the percent of return
(1.40%) is higher than 2007 and the average gift is down ($38.85 from
$51.64), the last appeal is still coming back. So I believe the
average gift will rise. Additional gifts from these new members
are 175, representing an additional $3,295. So in the long run
our 2008 prospecting appeals to date have grossed $12,778, with an average
gift of $30.28. Again, please remember that the average gift will
rise as more money comes in from the last appeal. Also, a new
prospect package is going to mail on or about January 14, 2009.

For
2009 I anticipate mailing at least a total quantity of 180,000 names
with an estimate return of just under 1%. This will give us an
estimated 1,400 new members.

Telemarketing

In
2007 we used telemarketing efforts for renewals, ballot access and tested
it for prospecting. We realized that doing telemarketing for prospecting
does not work.

Therefore,
in 2008 we used telemarketing only for renewals and “additional gift”
(ballot access). For 2009 we will continue doing the same in a
limited way plus try two trials on getting current members to join our
pledge club.

Internet Fundraising

So
far this year we have raised a total of $385,812 over the internet ($272,227
since the launch of the new site in June); whereas, in 2007 we raised
a total of $186,570. Andrew Davis has been putting out internet
blasts that give people information and updates on issues and within
the blast always asks for a donation. So this process of doing
email blasts is working well – thanks to Andrew for writing and thanks
to Robert for pressing Andrew to write. When I speak with a member
and when I mail appeals I always ask for an email address so they can
be updated and added as we move forward.

LNC
“Give or Get Program”

As of November 20, 2008 the Give
or Get Program numbers are:

2009 Proposed Mail Schedule

Please
see attached. (where
is it?)

Conclusion

Without
at least the $500,000 for the 2009 direct mail marketing budget Aaron
has proposed, I cannot promise to make all of the above happen.
I do wish to achieve all that I have put forward, but need the help
of the board in approving the budget and raising funds themselves through
the Give or Get program.

Thank
you all, Louise

Political Director’s Report – Sean
Haugh

Contents:

Ballot Access Lawsuit
Updates

Lessons of 2008 Ballot Access

Current State-by-State Ballot Status

Candidate Results 2008

Operation ELECT-US

BALLOT ACCESS LAWSUIT UPDATES

All of the lawsuits which we filed
during the election season are still active, except for Ohio.
Each one has two phases, injunctive relief and declaratory relief.
None of these lawsuits should incur any significant future costs beyond
the minor expenses of filing papers and possibly some travel for our
attorney in each case if a personal appearance in court is required.
There are no significant developments in these ongoing cases since the
election. Below is a brief summation of where each case stands.

Added to this list is our involvement
in the Washington state “Top Two” litigation.

Washington: The Libertarian
Party of Washington’s lawsuit against I-872, aka “Top Two,” is
at a critical juncture. I have been helping in the search for
a new attorney and am recommending the LNC pick up the cost of this
new attorney, not to exceed $15,000 over the remaining course of the
lawsuit. The LNC would not become a named party in this case.

The LPWa has been represented until
now by Richard Shepard. Shepard has been wanting to be released
from the case since April. The state party has essentially expended
and burnt out all the resources they have to continue this case.

The case currently is back in US
District Court after having been heard by the US Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court ruled in favor of I-872 early in the year, but kept
the case open for various issues and said they may hear the case again
once the Top Two system has had a chance to work and an “as applied”
challenge could be developed.

The Democratic and Republican parties
in Washington are co-plaintiffs. The Washington Grange Association,
which has joined the defendant’s side in favor of I-872, has filed
to have the case dismissed. This is easily overcome, but a response
is required by Monday 12/8/08. Shepard has agreed to file both
a formal request to be removed from the case and a motion to delay further
proceedings pending new counsel. This is probably a foregone conclusion
as the original judge in the case very recently recused himself because
his wife now represents the state in other legal matters, which creates
a conflict of interest.

LPWa Chair Scott Lindsley and Krist
Novolselic, the new Chair of FairVote and a resident of Washington,
are working to raise money to pay Shepard’s remaining expenses.

While this is not yet fully confirmed,
I have been in contact with Oregon attorney Orrin Grover to take over
from Shepard. Grover was the attorney for the Barr campaign in
our Texas case. By the time of the meeting I hope to have an agreement
between Shepard and Grover about the transfer of the case. If
this doesn’t work out I will continue to search for a new attorney
to replace Shepard.

This case, and the LP’s involvement
in it, is vitally important for three significant reasons. The
LP is the only plaintiff who can bring the trademark issue, as we are
the only party to have trademarked our name and logo, and the rights
to keep and defend our trademark are obliterated by I-872, which invests
the sole power of party identification with the candidates. Clearly,
the Top Two system discriminates against us and other third parties
by eliminating most of our candidates from the general election ballot.
This leads to the reason why it is in the LNC’s interests to continue
the case to the end, because if this system is allowed to survive in
Washington it could very easily spread to Oregon and California, and
from there across the country. It has to be killed now before
it becomes a national problem.

The estimate of no more than $15,000
over the remaining course of the lawsuit comes from discussions with
Grover and several others involved in ballot access litigation, and
is in line with fee structures from previous cases. These funds
would only pay for new representation. Any costs generated by
Shepard would be covered by Lindsley’s and Noveselic’s efforts.

Massachusetts: The
state has appealed our victory over substitution of our stand-in candidate
on the petition with the candidate nominated in convention. While
the main issue is now moot as Barr/Root was on the Massachusetts ballot,
the Secretary of State desires guidance from the court on the details
of substitution going forward. Our attorneys in this case and
all plaintiffs (LNC, LPMa, Barr/Root) all agree that while we need to
keep defending ourselves and preserve this victory, the state is in
the wrong venue and really needs to take this question to the legislature.

We continue to be very ably represented
by the firm of Foley Hoag in Boston, who were recruited by the Massachusetts
ACLU. The LNC is only responsible for minor filing fees.

Louisiana, Connecticut, Maine,
and New Hampshire: In Louisiana we are represented by Mark
Brown, while in the three New England cases we continue to be represented
by Gary Sinawski. They will be filing motions to begin the declaratory
relief phase of each lawsuit this month. We lost on injunctive
relief in all four states.

As previously reported, the issues
in Maine and Connecticut are over the legal responsibilities of the
Secretary of State and the town clerks in receiving and processing our
petition signatures, while in New Hampshire the issue is substitution
and in Louisiana, the filing of elector paperwork during a period of
natural disaster. The relevant state party is a co-plaintiff in
each case.

In all four cases, we are seeking
the relevant state laws be struck down. (This is a rather extensive
request in Maine and Connecticut.) In Connecticut and Maine we
will also be requesting the court place us on the ballot for the rest
of the current election cycle. In these two states and Louisiana,
we will also be asking for significant financial compensation reflecting
the costs and ongoing value of ballot access in each state.

Oklahoma: Mentioned
here although the LNC is not directly involved in this case, but may
wish to be in the future. The Barr/Root campaign’s lawsuit is
still alive for declaratory relief and will continue into 2009.
Our side is represented here by Jim Linger. This case merits continued
monitoring in case, like Washington state, someone needs to step in
to ensure the case continues.

Besides these cases, state parties
are waging some of their own cases, including Tennessee and North Carolina.
Overall, I am cautiously optimistic that most of these cases will eventually
be successful, if not all of them. They are all strong cases but
you never know what the judges will say.

We have been able to engage in
all this legal activity at very little cost. As with our list
of petitioners, we have been able to develop a list of good, experienced
election law attorneys who will work for reasonable rates plus expenses.

Richard Winger has been an invaluable
resource in every aspect of this. He is always ready to offer
expert testimony and excellent ideas on how to structure and execute
a lawsuit. He is now sending me his notes on laws that deserve
a challenge. (I am not without my own ideas on this, as I can
think of some ballot access law in every state I would want to strike
down.)

One reason to pursue such an aggressive
legal strategy is to create openings for our lobbying efforts.
State legislators often remain blissfully ignorant of ballot access
laws until they have a compelling reason to pay attention to them.
Having their laws struck down in court is obviously quite compelling,
but even filing a lawsuit will help to get their attention.

I am currently working with several
state parties to line up legislators who will introduce positive reform
bills for us, as well as identifying bills which we may wish to support
or oppose. Once these legislatures begin in January, that work
will shift to helping the states maximize their lobbying efforts to
get the bills we want passed.

*

LESSONS OF 2008 BALLOT ACCESS

The current LNC approach to ballot
access uncovered several vulnerabilities which cost us access in some
states and nearly did in others in 2008. I would like to change
the paradigm so that ballot access is an ongoing concern of the LNC,
and not only addressed during the Presidential election.

The main areas which need to be
addressed to eliminate these vulnerabilities are:

1) Our commitment to 50 state ballot
access so we can take advantage of every opportunity;

2) Spreading out the work over
the course of the whole election cycle until waiting until the end of
the cycle;

3) Spreading out the costs of ballot
access so they don’t cripple our resources during the height of the
election cycle;

4) Taking over as much responsibility
as possible for ballot access and the filing of state-level paperwork
to secure it;

5) Ensuring the vitality of each
state party so it can be an effective partner in ballot access; and,

6) The use of stand-in candidates
on petitions begun pre-nomination.

We also made some very positive
advancements in how we hire and manage petitioners, which will also
be mentioned briefly at the end of this section.

Commitment to 50 state ballot
access

The term “50 state ballot access”
is a bit of a misnomer since it includes DC and Guam as well.
For 2008, we adopted a strategy of 48 state ballot access, deferring
the three most difficult drives in OK, WV and DC to a later decision.
We found that once we had nominated a candidate who was nationally known,
we desired ballot access in these states after all. The Barr/Root
campaign took responsibility for all three, but unfortunately we started
on each so late that the attempts to get on the ballot via meeting signature
requirements and then filing a lawsuit when unsuccessful all failed
(although the Oklahoma case is still ongoing, see the Lawsuit Update
elsewhere in this report).

Ballot access remains job #1 for
the Libertarian Party. Without it, we cannot run candidates and
give voters a Libertarian choice, which is the essence of our existence
as a political party.

We need to recognize that it is
likely once we have nominated our ticket in convention and know who
our candidate will be, we will be more motivated to get those people
on every ballot. By starting early enough in every state we can
meet the signature requirements, no matter how onerous. In the
most difficult states, an effective petitioning strategy can be the
foundation for any legal or legislative efforts to change the laws and
lower the requirements going forward.

Past experiences prove that ballot
access even in Oklahoma and West Virginia is achievable with an early
start, but out of reach if we only decide to try after the national
convention. The Barr/Root campaign’s decision to tackle these
most difficult states post-convention eventually only resulted in spending
vast resources which could have gone into direct campaigning.
While these were not LNC resources, we found this year that expecting
the Presidential campaign to take responsibility for any ballot access
results in an overwhelming obstacle to the campaign.

Spreading out the work of ballot
access

Our habit has been to defer most
of the effort for ballot access to the end of the cycle, work frantically
to meet deadlines, and then ignore it until it becomes critical again
towards the end of the next cycle.

This resulted in an incredibly
intense 4-5 month period where all of our attention had to be on ballot
access exclusively, to the detriment of any support we might give to
our other candidates. By the end of that period in September,
we are not in much of a position to effectively assist these campaigns.
It also meant that we had no margin for error in these ballot drives,
and were not in a position to recover if any major obstacles arise.

During this time I came to the
conclusion that I would not wish these ballot access requirements on
anyone, not even the people who wrote these laws. It was a very
miserable period of time which could be avoided by not leaving all the
signature gathering to the end.

There are two separate components
to this perspective, staff resources and financial costs. Staff
resources includes the ability to hire and manage contractors to meet
all the deadlines.

The first week of August is the
most critical deadline week. In that time we had to turn in our
signatures in Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire and South Dakota.
All of these are substantial ballot drives, and as we found this year,
having difficulties in one of these states can have a cascading effect
on the rest, as well as those which have later deadlines. In 2008,
this dynamic resulted in us failing to gain ballot access in Maine and
Connecticut and just barely making it in South Dakota.

By spreading out the work over
the whole cycle, we can pace ourselves and get everything done in a
timely manner. We can also manage our efforts far more effectively
by being able to hire fewer petitioners overall, concentrating on hiring
those who have a better track record of productivity and avoiding hiring
ones who are unproductive and/or cause us other problems. This
will in turn allow us to have the resources available to handle any
last minute ballot access crisis, as well as resources to continue to
assist our candidates during this critical stage of their campaigns.

Spreading out the cost of ballot
access

This turns out to be even more
critical than the staff resources. The encumbrance system employed
in 2008 was a reaction to how ballot access was conducted in 2004, and
yet had the same failures as the previous system. Spreading out
the costs of ballot access over the course of the four year cycle instead
of saving them all to the end will allow us to establish realistic budgets
for these efforts with an appropriate level of LNC oversight.

The major problem under the current
system was that I was given a choice in every state to either spend
beyond what was encumbered and probably succeed, or stay within encumbrances
and probably fail. This resulted in the worst of both worlds.
We ended up spending our reserves (although that was foreseen by our
previous Executive Director) and whatever other money we could raise
on ballot access, while being prevented by limited resources and an
attempt to honor the will of the Executive Committee to put in all the
resources necessary to ensure success.

By starting as soon as possible
and by committing to 50 state ballot access in advance, it becomes far
easier to plan and manage ballot access funding. Whether it is
in the core budget or considered a separate project, or some combination
of the two, the first positive result of starting early is that we can
afford to stop if the money is not there.

When the deadlines are two or four
years away, it is far easier to live within our means. We would
know how much will be available for upcoming work and if the money runs
out, we can afford to slow down or even suspend our efforts until we
have put enough back in the bank to resume at full speed. When
the deadlines are two or four weeks away, we do not have that luxury.

By spreading out the costs, we
will also save a very large portion of these funds through travel and
lodging expenses for our petitioners. Instead of flying in a larger
group of people for a short amount of time, we can hire fewer people
who can stay in one place for an extended period. We also gain
the ability to lodge petitioners in longer term accommodations instead
of paying daily or weekly hotel rates during peak vacation times of
the summer. Finally, by working during slower times in the petitioning
industry, we take advantage of supply and demand factors in pricing
and can more easily resist demands for an increase in per signature
rates at critical times.

Taking greater responsibility
for state-level paperwork

In most states, the State Chair
and/or Executive Committee is the only legal authority able to submit
all the necessary papers to ensure our nominees are placed on the ballot.
For the first time since 1988, we had a state fail in these duties which
cost us ballot access in that state (Louisiana). We also had a
near miss in Mississippi, which was only averted thanks to a courtesy
call from that state’s Secretary of State’s office informing us
of missing elector paperwork on the morning of the deadline.

We thought we had done our due
diligence as a national party on this, but clearly we had not done enough.
Mark, an intern in our office made two passes of phone calls to all
the states to ensure they had all the paperwork they required, and Jennifer
with the Barr/Root campaign also made her own set of calls to every
state. We also contacted every State Chair (or their designee)
at least once to make sure they were aware of their responsibilities
and intended to carry them out. Despite all these communications,
these two states still become last minute problems.

The first solution, which goes
beyond ballot access and will be addressed below, is to work with the
state party organizations to build them up and make them vital enough
to be effective partners in ballot access and able to carry out their
own responsibilities.

One other measure we can take is
to prepare and bring to the national convention as much of this paperwork
as possible so that it can be completed on site and filed immediately
thereafter. In the case of Presidential electors, we can encourage
states to name them in their state conventions, or failing that choose
the electors from the delegates in attendance so they will be present
to complete the necessary forms.

Instead of simply trusting our
state Chairs to understand and carry out these duties, we need to get
receipts whenever possible from states confirming all necessary paperwork
is filed.

In any case, we need to do what
we can to take care of this bureaucracy before we are at a critical
juncture in ballot access petitioning so that none of these become problems
that must be handled at the last minute.

Ensuring the vitality of state
parties

As mentioned, this has much broader
implications than just ballot access. Since we are a grassroots
party and our authority to determine to composition of our state parties
organizations is appropriately limited by our bylaws, there is only
so far we can go with this. However those strictures still allow
us a lot of ability we are not currently exercising to shore up our
affiliates when necessary.

The first step is simply to work
with the State Chairs directly and through the LSLA (the current State
Chairs’ association) to support them as much as we can in matters
of national importance such as ballot access. This includes impressing
upon them that the title comes with responsibilities, and making it
as easy as possible for them to carry them out. The paperwork
issues described above are a great example of how we can step up or
support of them without encroaching upon their own authority under state
and national bylaws. I hope to discuss these matters in greater
detail with the State Chairs at he Charleston conference in February,
and am working with Steve Gordon (the current Chair of the LSLA) towards
that end.

Another step we should consider
is to take a direct hand in organizing state parties which are not functioning.
Obviously, if a state party is in compliance with its own bylaws then
we cannot make any changes short of disaffiliating the entire state
organization, which is a very extreme measure that should be avoided
in almost any set of circumstances.

But there are instances when a
state party fails to follow its own bylaws, or falls into that condition
through lack of people to carry them out. In such cases we should
be willing to declare that state party as no longer existing and take
direct action to form a new one.

That’s one extreme with clear
lines of authority. There are more examples of states which have
properly followed their own procedures and continue to legally exist,
and yet for whatever reason do not have people in place who are able
to fulfill all the responsibilities of the state party. In these
cases, we should be willing to tactically support the people we have
to make sure these responsibilities are carried out.

In any case, any action taken on
behalf of the LNC in these matters must be carried out with a deference
to the state party leadership where it exists, and with an awareness
of state laws, which generally give all authority to a state party and
consider the national party pretty much a figment of the state party’s
imagination with no legal standing.

The use of stand-in candidates

If there is just one thing I could
change about how we conduct ballot access, it is who we use as stand-ins
on petitions which begin before we know who will be our nominee.
These people must be neutral and committed to stepping aside when it
is time to submit the names of the real nominees.

In three states (New Hampshire,
Connecticut and Massachusetts), the name of George Phillies was used
as the stand-in for President, with various people chosen by Phillies
as the stand in for Vice President. Meanwhile, in other states
we used either native sons or daughters, or past national party figures,
with little incident and no negative repercussions.

The use of the Phillies name resulted
a critical delay in starting petitioning in Connecticut, which is one
of the main reasons why both the Connecticut and Maine drives failed.
The Barr/Root campaign was adamant in their insistence that work not
begin on a petition bearing the Phillies name until we had all legal
assurances that we could substitute the Barr name without complications.
While that on the surface was a reasonable request, and we honored it
in all cases, if we had been able to resolve this earlier we would not
have spent so many resources in a frantic attempt to finish Connecticut.
Frankly, if we had been able to start work in Connecticut just two or
three days earlier, we would have been able to pull enough people from
that state to complete Maine on time.

The use of the Phillies name is
also the reason why we had two candidates on the ballot for President
in New Hampshire and has undermined our lawsuit there. Phillies
persisted in his desire to actively campaign, citing the LPNH’s use
of his name as the stand-in candidate as his justification for doing
so. If we had used someone who was not actively seeking the nomination,
we would have had a far more cooperative person in that position who
would most likely now be a co-plaintiff in our lawsuit over substitution,
instead of someone who is actively attempting to thwart our effort for
substitution rights in New Hampshire in order to advance his own personal
goals which run counter to the party’s.

Again, this is an issue where the
states have all the legal authority and the national party cannot take
a heavy handed approach. However after this experience, we have
the ability to work with state parties from the very beginning of the
petitioning process and help them avoid the problems which arose this
year.

Ability to hire and manage petitioners

One way we vastly improved our
ballot access operations this year was developing and retaining a long
list of top quality petitioners (both independent contractors and petitioning
companies). This has already been addressed in previous reports,
but the highlights merit being included in this document.

Our fundamental problem is that
we cannot afford to match the rates offered to petitioners by initiative
groups, which often reach $3 per signature or more. We were able
to compete in the marketplace for petitioners through offering superior
customer service. The Libertarian Party has developed a reputation
among petitioners by our recent conduct that while we may not pay the
most, we do pay on time and without hassles, and are able to offer more
steady employment. Because of this, when our petitioners received
offers to go to California or Nevada for a brief stint at double what
we were paying or more, far more of them chose to stick with us.

Through this process we have been
able to develop a list of petitioners who have proven their reliability
and with whom we have excellent relationships. Expanding this
list and maintaining our current relationships will allow us far greater
ability to choose who we want to work for us now and in the future.

I am also near completion of a
document which goes into greater detail of the successes and problems
of each state’s petitioning efforts in 2008. It contains a lot
of sensitive information and is intended more as an historical record
to capture and preserve institutional knowledge. While it will
not be a part of this report and will not be intended for broader publication,
I will be happy to send a copy to individual LNC members upon request.

*

CURRENT STATE-BY-STATE BALLOT
STATUS

In hopes that the LNC agrees to
change the paradigm to spread out ballot access work over the entire
election cycle until saving it to the end, this report begins with the
states which merit our attention in the next two years. In some
of these states we are already on the ballot but must take some action
to maintain that status.

This is also written with the assumption
that ballot access will continue to be outside the core budget, meaning
dedicated funds will need to be raised for these projects. To
that end I would like to have Scott Kohlhaas working for us on ballot
access telemarketing. It will also require working closely with
other fundraising operations of the national party to ensure they all
aren’t getting in each other’s way. The prime example of this
is the ability to use email blasts dedicated to ballot access which
fit in with the schedule of other email-based fundraising.

I will have a more detailed funding
plan for these states where our action is required in time for the February
LNC meeting.

OFF THE BALLOT (or close
to it)

LNC action recommended in 2009

Alaska – Full party status
with 9,752 registrations (est) as of 6/5/10.

We currently have 6,972 registrations,
meaning we need to collect another 2,800 (est). The threshold
represents 3% of total votes cast for US Senate. The numbers are
estimated because the vote has yet to be certified. There is the
possibility of legislative reform that would change this number to a
flat 5,000 registrations, but we can’t count on that.

Maryland – Full party
status with 10,000 valid signatures by 8/2/10.

We can maintain ballot access with
1% of the vote for Governor. We can start now and should knock
this out of the way as soon as possible.

Nebraska – Full party
status with 5,921 valid signatures by 8/1/10.

We can maintain ballot access with
5% of the vote for any statewide office. There are six such offices
available in 2010. Note that the signatures must meet a strict
distribution requirement of at least 1% of the number of votes for Governor
in each of the three Congressional districts. There is also a
residency requirement for circulators. The Secretary of State
has suggested legislative relief and continues to do so, but we can’t
count on the legislature following his advice.

New Hampshire – Statewide
candidate with 3,000 valid signatures by 8/4/10.

Full party status can be gained
with 4% of the vote for US Senate, which is on the ballot in 2010.
We should run a strong candidate and attempt to gain full party status
in New Hampshire. The alternative is a full party petition, which
would require an estimated 21,590 valid signatures.

New Mexico – Full party
status with 4,151 valid signatures by 4/1/10.

Ballot status is retained with
5% of the vote for President or Governor. This petition would
be good for the following four years.

North Dakota – Full party
status with 7,000 valid signatures by 4/9/10.

We can maintain ballot access with
5% of the vote for any statewide office. There are two available
in 2010, Attorney General and Secretary of State.

Oklahoma – Full party
status with 73,134 valid signatures by 5/1/10.

We should wait until the resolution
of lawsuit currently in the US Court of Appeals over the legality of
using out of state petitioners, which should be decided in the first
half of 2009. If that ruling is favorable, we should start petitioning
immediately. The number of signatures is based on the gubernatorial
vote and will almost certainly rise after the 2010 elections.
The petition would keep us on the ballot for 2012 if completed in time
for 2010.

South Dakota – Full party
status with 8,389 valid signatures by 3/23/10.

We already have 1,392 raw signatures
in hand from our efforts in 2007-08. These are still good although
they are getting stale. South Dakota has a residency requirement
for petitioners, but it does not apply to party petitions due to a defect
in the law. However, quite a number of professional petitioners
happen to be South Dakota residents.

LNC action may be recommended
sometime in 2009

Alabama – Full party status
with 37,513 valid signatures by 6/1/10.

The state party has a plan to raise
the funds and conduct this drive on their own. Unfortunately,
they have entered into a contract with at least one petitioner we would
not hire. This contract has performance metrics which may allow
the state party to eventually get out of it. That would allow
for national support of this drive.

Arizona – Full party status
with 0.67% of voter registrations (20,015 est.) by 11/1/09.

The number is estimated because
voter registration counts will change by November. This is also
the threshold for ballot access on a county by county basis. (In
other words, we need to meet the threshold statewide to run statewide
candidates, and in a county to run local candidates.) We have
18,153 registered voters in Arizona as of 11/4/08.

The county and state parties generally
take care of this and have funds to do so. I am helping them with
leads on petitioners and will continue to monitor their progress.

District of Columbia –
Full party ballot access with 7,500 votes for Mayor or City Council
at-large.

This is conceivable considering
parties may only run one candidate in the general election but you can
vote for two. In 2006, that translated to 4.1% of the vote, which
all balloted candidates received. This is a 2010 election.
If a good candidate could start soon, they would be worth supporting.

Maine – Full party status
with 27,544 valid signatures by 12/11/09.

There are several restrictions
on who can sign this petition, most notably that only registered independents
and Libertarians are eligible to sign, which makes it much more difficult.
If the state party were organized to the point where it could run a
full slate, this option might be worthwhile. Otherwise we can
continue to place our Presidential ticket on the ballot as an independent
with 4,000 valid signatures in 2012. One significant advantage
of simply notifying the state that we intend to conduct the full party
petition is we would then be able to register to vote as Libertarians
in Maine, ostensibly so that we could increase the pool of eligible
petition signers.

Virginia – Statewide candidate
with 10,000 valid signatures by 8/21/09.

Elections for Governor and state
legislature are in 2009, with separate petitioning requirements for
each office. If the LPVa can be induced to run a larger slate
then it may be in our interest to assist them.

LNC action not recommended in
2009

Arkansas – Full party
status with 10,000 valid signatures by 6/1/10.

Retention can be had with 3% of
the vote for Governor. This is only worth doing if we have a strong
candidate for Governor and/or an organized state party. Until
either happens, our other option is a petition of 1,000 valid signatures
for our Presidential ticket.

Connecticut – No full
party status available, petitioning per candidate only.

Retention for each office can be
maintained with 1% of the vote in the previous election. Otherwise
each candidate must petition separately. We can start petitioning
for Governor on 4/28/10. Our current court case may have great
bearing on these procedures, as we are asking the whole petitioning
process be struck down.

Illinois – Statewide slate
with 25,000 valid signatures by 6/21/10.

Illinois has a 90 day window to
collect signatures, which in 2010 will begin on 3/23/10. Full
party ballot access can be won with 5% of the vote for any statewide
office. In 2010 there will be seven statewide offices, including
US Senate. We need to run a full slate in 2010 and attempt to
avoid a petition drive in 2012.

Iowa – Candidate for Governor
with 1,500 valid signatures by 8/13/10.

We can gain full party status with
a 2% vote for President or Governor. We will need to run a strong
candidate for Governor in 2010 who can get us 2%. In 2006, Kevin
Litton received 0.5% for Governor.

Kentucky – Statewide slate
with 5,000 valid signatures in 2011.

The next gubernatorial election
is in 2011. Full party status can only be gained by 2% of the
vote for President.

Minnesota – Each statewide
candidate needs 2,000 valid signatures by 9/7/10.

Full party status can be gained
with 5% of the vote for any statewide office, of which there are five
available in 2010. A petition for full party ballot access is
a ridiculous number of signatures (110,150 valid in 2008). We
should run a full slate and attempt to gain ballot access in 2010 for
2012.

New York – Each statewide
candidate needs 15,000 valid signatures by 8/17/10.

Full party status can be gained
with 50,000 votes for Governor. Although that is a taller order
in New York than most states, we should try to run a strong candidate
and meet that threshold. Petitioning only takes place in a six
week period which will begin on 7/6/10.

Pennsylvania – Statewide
slate with 24,666 valid signatures (estimated) by 8/1/10.

In 2010, the statewide offices
are Governor, Lt. Governor and US Senate. The number is from 2008.
The new signature requirement will be calculated in December 2009.
Full party status requires 15% of the registered voters.

Rhode Island – Full party
status with 23,489 valid signatures by 5/28/10.

Retention can be had with 5% of
the vote for Governor. This is only worth doing if we have a strong
candidate for Governor and/or a stronger state party. Until either
happens, our other option is a petition of 1,000 valid signatures for
our Presidential ticket.

Tennessee – Full party
status with 45,254 valid signatures (estimated).

The deadline is currently up in
the air due to an ongoing lawsuit, with plaintiffs including the LP
of Tennessee and represented by Jim Linger. Considering how high
the petitioning barrier is and the strength of our case there, this
is one instance where I would recommend we simply wait to see what we
can get from the courts.

Washington – Each statewide
candidate needs 1000 valid signatures by 8/17/10.

Full party status can be gained
with 5% in any statewide election. The only statewide office on
the ballot in 2010 is US Senate.

West Virginia – Statewide
candidate with 15,118 valid signatures (estimated) by 8/1/12.

Retention is won with 1% of the
vote for Governor. The next gubernatorial election is in 2012.

ON THE BALLOT

California – Full party
status with 1% of last vote or 2% in any statewide election.

We had several candidates who received
over 2% of the vote in statewide races in 2006, and this is achievable
again with a full slate. If we somehow fail to meet the vote test
in 2010, to maintain ballot status via party registration requires 88,991
registrations (est) by 1/27/12. We currently have 83,574.
The state party generally takes care of registrations although I would
be willing to offer them assistance if needed.

Colorado – Full party
status with 1% in any statewide election or 1,000 vote registrations.

There are five statewide offices
in 2010. In 2006, we ran in three of these and won 1.5% for Governor/Lt.
Governor, 4.2% in a three way race for Attorney General, and 3.5% for
University of Colorado Regent at-large. We have 10,950 registered
Libertarians in Colorado as of 10/22/08.

Delaware – Full party
status with 0.05% of registered voters.

The current number needed to maintain
ballot access is 310 registered Libertarian voters. As of 11/4/08
we had 756.

Florida – Full party status
by remaining organized.

They make up for it by having high
filing fees.

Georgia – Can run statewide
candidates if one received 1% in the previous election.

Allen Buckley got 3.4% in this
election. There are nine statewide races in Georgia in 2010, including
Governor and US Senate. District candidates have to complete a
petition equal to 5% of the registered voters in the district as of
the last election. The only way to gain full party ballot access
in Georgia is to get 20% of the vote for President or Governor.

Hawaii – Full party status
for 10 years by completing the petition three times in a row.

The petition requirement is 0.1%
of registered voters, which currently would be an estimated 692 signatures.
There are a number of ways to meet thresholds for retention, which would
require either a strong statewide candidate or a full slate for state
legislature. Hawaii law allows for a 10 year grace period after
a party has completed the petition requirements for three elections
and continues to run candidates. Our current grace period runs
through 2012.

Idaho – Full party status
is maintained by running at least three candidates for state or federal
office every election.

We ran five candidates in 2008.

Indiana – Full party status
with 2% of the vote for Secretary of State.

The state party will be concentrating
heavily on this race in 2010, as they did with Mike Kole in 2006.

Kansas – Full party status
with 1% in any statewide election.

There are six statewide offices,
including US Senate, on the ballot in 2010. The state party regularly
runs a full slate and meets this threshold.

Louisiana – Full party
status with 1,000 registered voters.

As of 11/4/08 we had 2669 registered
Libertarians.

Massachusetts – Full party
status with 3% in any statewide election.

Robert Underwood received 3.2%
for US Senate in 2008. There are six statewide offices on the
ballot in 2010. With major party status comes new signature requirements
to get individual candidates on the ballot. I am working with
new Massachusetts LP Chair David Blau on a lobbying strategy to change
this law. Our successful lawsuit over substitution in Massachusetts
is helpful to start the conversation about ballot access reform, as
the legislature will most likely have to act on that matter to comply
with the court ruling.

Michigan – Full party
status with votes equal to 1% of the Secretary of State winner’s vote
by any statewide candidate.

The state party regularly runs
a full slate and easily achieves this threshold.

Missouri – Full party
status with 2% in any statewide election in either of the last two elections.

The state party did not achieve
this in 2008 so it is critical we do so in 2010. There are two
statewide offices available in 2010, US Senate and State Auditor.
Candidates for both offices in 2006 exceeded the 2% threshold.

Mississippi – Full party
status by remaining organized.

We do need to make sure we stay
organized in this state, although the state’s rules on this are extremely
flexible.

Montana – Full party status
with votes equal to 5% of the Governor winner’s vote by any statewide
candidate in either of the last two elections.

Stan Jones kept us on through 2012
with 3% of the vote for Governor in 2008.

North Carolina – Full
party status with 2% for President or Governor.

Mike Munger kept us on the ballot
through 2012 with 2.9% for Governor in 2008.

Nevada – Full party status
with votes equal to 1% of the total votes for US House.

Nathan Santucci kept us on the
ballot with 22.3% in a two-way State Assembly race. That’s a
pretty strong incentive to run a full slate in Nevada.

Ohio – There is no law.

We have ballot status in Ohio thanks
to our legal victory in 2008. The state legislature must replace
ballot access laws which were previously struck down in court.
The impact of our win in court is that the Secretary of State may not
make up new rules to replace these laws. The LPO is very active
in lobbying and will be working with state legislators to replace the
laws, but until they do all we need to do is nominate our candidates
in convention.

Oregon – Full party status
with votes equal to 1% of the total votes for US House in any statewide
office.

There are four statewide offices
available in 2010, including US Senate. This is a bit of a concern
because we had no statewide candidates in Oregon in 2008. We will
need to make sure we run a full statewide slate in 2010.

South Carolina – Full
party status by remaining organized.

There are very specific laws in
SC mandating how to organize the state party, which the LPSC follows.

Texas – Full party status
with 5% in any statewide election or 2% for Governor.

There are many statewide offices
available in Texas and our state party there is renowned for filling
the slate to take advantage of it. There is already one very active
candidate for Governor, Jeff Daiell.

Utah – Full party status
with votes equal to 2% of the total votes for US House in any statewide
office.

Mike Stoddard kept us on the ballot
with 6.1% for State Auditor in 2008.

Vermont – Full party status
by remaining organized.

We need to remain organized in
10 towns to stay on the ballot.

Wisconsin – Full party
status with 1% for any statewide office in either of the last two elections.

There are seven statewide offices
available in 2010, including US Senate. There were no statewide
offices available in 2008, so it is imperative we run a full slate in
2010.

Wyoming – Full party status
with 2% for US House, Governor or Secretary of State.

David Herbert kept us on the ballot
with 5% for US House in 2008.

*

CANDIDATE RESULTS 2008

These are quite extensively covered
in the most recent LP News, but I did want to highlight a few of these
results.

We had 21 winners on November 4,
bringing our total for the year to 29 election victories:

NOVEMBER WINNERS

Arizona

Peter Schmerl, Green Valley Continental
School Board

John Buttrick, Maricopa County
Superior Court Judge

California

Tom Tryon, Calaveras County Supervisor,
District 4

Frank Manske, Mount Diablo Healthcare
District

John Inks, Mountain View City Council

Norm Westwell, Ocean View School
District Board of Trustees

Brian Holtz, Purissima Hills Water
District

Kate O'Brien, Simi Valley Recreation
and Parks District Supervisor

Jonathan Hall, Tehachapi Cummings
County Water District Supervisor

Florida

Bruce Reichert, Collier County
Soil & Water Board, Seat 1

J Adam Mitchell, Collier County
Soil & Water Board, Seat 4

Jeff Hunt, Duval County Soil &
Water Board, Group 2

Jack Tanner, Lee County Soil &
Water Board, Seat 4

Scott McPherson, New Port Richey
Mayor

Howard Horowitz, Palm Beach County
Soil & Water Board, Group 4

Tracy Lundquist, West Volusia County
Hospital Authority, Group A, Seat 1

Kansas

Frederick Campbell, Anderson County
Attorney (partisan)

Maine

Bob Mills, Biddeford City Council,
at-large

North Carolina

Mike Helms, Cabarrus County Board
of Education

This brings our total number of
elected Libertarians in office to 207. That number will slightly
decrease in January as some terms end and the list undergoes an annual
audit. With Operation ELECT-US, we hope to increase this number
significantly.

We also had candidates in 10 states
who secured statewide ballot access with their results:

BALLOT ACCESS WINNERS

Georgia
– Allen Buckley, US Senate

Kansas
– Randall Hodgkinson, US Senate

Massachusetts
– Robert Underwood, US Senate

Michigan
– Scotty Boman, US Senate

Montana
– Stan Jones, Governor

North Carolina
– Mike Munger, Governor

Nevada
– Nathan Santucci, State Assembly, District 22

Texas
– William Bryan Strange, Judge, Court of Criminal Appeals, Place
9

Utah
– Mike Stoddard, State Auditor

Wyoming
– David Herbert, US House

It sure is nice to see North Carolina
on that list. Mike Munger’s example is one I hope to follow
in a number of other states where we can gain statewide ballot access
with 2% of the gubernatorial vote.

Overall we know of 679 Libertarian
candidates on the ballot in 2008, not including those who ran write-in
campaigns or lost in primaries.

OPERATION ELECT-US

We are already starting to recruit
candidates for 2009 and 2010. Beyond this pool of 679 candidates
in 2008, as well as people who have run in prior elections, we have
been running web ads which ask people to run for office. As of
11/30/08, this has generated 734 good leads (after weeding out the jokes
and the candidates for President).

Every person who has filled out
this form or contacted us some other way with an interest in running
for office has received a personal reply from me, with a copy to the
relevant state Chair or designee. This response is designed to
make introductions and get the prospective candidate to become active
in their local party as a way to get started running for office.

Elections in 2009 are much more
of a moving target. Filing has already begun in Maryland for local
offices, and starts on Monday, December 8th, in Illinois. We already
have a number of candidates who have started running, including a few
incumbents in Illinois.

Most filing periods however take
place in the early spring with elections later in the year. There
are also partisan state level races in a few states in 2009. I’ll
be spending the vast majority of my time for the next few months working
these leads, matching prospective candidates with races and getting
them started, working with state parties to vet these candidates and
get them active in state and local party building, and developing candidate
support materials for local and district elections.

I will also be sending out this
month Thank You letters to our candidates as well as our Presidential
electors.

It continues to be an honor to
serve the Libertarian Party in this role.

Current
State-by-State Ballot Status

OFF THE BALLOT (or close to
it)

LNC action recommended in 2009:

Alaska – Full party status
with 9,752 registrations (est) as of 6/5/09.

We currently have 6,972 registrations,
meaning we need to collect another 2,800 (est). Thr threshold
represents 3% of total cotes cast for US Senate. The numbers are
estimated because the vote has yet to be certified.

Hawaii – Full party status
with 692 valid signatures (est) by 4/2/10.

The petition requirement is 0.1%
of registered voters. The estimate is based on the number as of
11/4/08. There are a number of ways to meet thresholds for retention,
which would require either a strong statewide candidate or a full slate
for state legislature.

****Maine – Full party status
with 27,544 valid signatures (est) by 12/14/09.

This is under the old statute which
has been repealed.

Maryland – Full party status
with 10,000 valid signatures by 8/2/10.

We can maintain ballot access with
1% of the vote for Governor. We can start now and should knock
this out of the way as soon as possible.

Nebraska – Full party status
with 5,921 valid signatures by 8/1/10.

We can mainatin ballot access with
5% of the vote for any statewide office. There are six such offices
available in 2010. Note that the signatures must meet a strict
distribution requirement of at least 1% of the number of votes for Governor
in each of the three Congressional districts. There is also a
residency requirement for circulators.

New Hampshire – Statewide
candidate with 3,000 valid signatures by 8/4/10.

Full party status can be gained with
4% of the vote for US Senate, which is on the ballot in 2010.
We should run a strong candidate and attempt to gain full party status
in New Hampshire. The alternative is a full party petition, which
would require an estimated 21,590 valid signatures.

New Mexico – Full party
status with 2,794 valid signatures by 4/1/10.

Ballot status is retained with 5%
of the vote for President or Governor. This petition would be
good for the following four years.

North Dakota – Full party
status with 7,000 valid sigantures by 4/9/10.

We can mainatin ballot access with
5% of the vote for any statewide office. There are two available
in 2010, Attorney General and Secretary of State.

Oklahoma – Full party status
with 46,324 valid signatures by 5/1/10.

We should wait until the resolution
of lawsuit currently in the US Court of Appeals over the legality of
using out of state petitioners, which should be decided in the first
half of 2009. If that ruling is favorable, we should start petitioning
immediately. The number of signatures is based on the gubernatorial
vote and will almost certainly rise after the 2010 elections.
The petition would keep us on the ballot for 2012 if completed in time
for 2010.

South Dakota – Full party
status with 8,389 valid signatures by 3/23/10.

We already have 1,392 raw signatures
in hand from our efforts in 2007-08. These are still good although
they are getting stale. South Dakota has a residency requirement
for petitioners, but it does not apply to party petitions due to a defect
in the law. However, quite a number of professional petitioners
happen to be South Dakota residents.

LNC action may be recommended
sometime in 2009:

Alabama – Full party status
with 37,513 valid signatures by 6/1/10.

The state party has a plan to raise
the funds and conduct this drive on their own. Unfortunately,
they have enetered into a contract with at least one petitioner we would
not hire. This contract has performance metrics which may allow
the state party to eventually get out of it. That would allow
for national support of this drive.

Arizona – Full party status
with 0.67% of voter registrations (20,015 est.) by 11/1/09.

The number is estimated because voter
registration counts will change by November. This is also the
threshold for ballot access on a county by county basis. (In other
words, we need to meet the threshold statewide to run statewide candidates,
and in a county to run local candidates.) We have 18,153 registered
voters in Arizona as of 11/4/08.

The county and state parties generally
take care of this and have funds to do so. I am helping them with
leads on petitioners and will continue to monitor their progress.

District of Columbia – Full
party ballot access with 7,500 votes for Mayor or City Council at-large.

This is conceivable considering parties
may only run one candidate in the general election but you can vote
for two. In 2006, that translated to 4.1% of the vote, which all
balloted candidates received. This is a 2010 election. If
a good candidate could start soon, they would be worth supporting.

Virginia – Statewide candidate
with 10,000 valid signatures by 8/21/09.

Elections for Governor and state
legislature are in 2009, with separate petitioning requirements for
each office. If the LPVa can be induced to run a larger slate
then it may be in our interest to assist them.

LNC action not recommended in
2009:

Arkansas – Full party status
with 10,000 valid signatures by 6/1/10.

Retention can be had with 3% of the
vote for Governor. This is only worth doing if we have a strong
candidate for Governor and/or an organized state party. Until
either happens, our other option is a petition of 1,000 valid signatures
for our Presidential ticket.

Connecticut – No full party
status available, petitioning per candidate only.

Retention for each office can be
maintained with 1% of the vote in the previous election. Otherwise
each candidate must petition separately. We can start petitioning
for Governor on 4/28/10. Our current court case may have great
bearing on these procedures, as we are asking the whole petitioning
process be struck down.

Illinois – Statewide slate
with 25,000 valid signatures by 6/21/10.

Illinois has a 90 day window to collect
signatures, which in 2010 will begin on 3/23/10. Full party ballot
access can be won with 5% of the vote for any statewide office.
In 2010 there will be seven statewide offices, including US Senate.
We need to run a full slate in 2010 and attempt to avoid a petition
drive in 2012.

Iowa – Candidate for Governor
with 1,500 valid signatures by 8/13/10.

We can gain full party status with
a 2% vote for President or Governor. We will need to run a strong
candidate for Governor in 2010 who can get us 2%. In 2006, Kevin
Litton received 0.5% for Governor.

Kentucky – Statewide slate
with 5,000 valid signatures in 2011.

The next gubernatorial election is
in 2011. Full party status can only be gained by 2% of the vote
for President.

Minnesota – Each statewide
candidate needs 2,000 valid signatures by 9/7/10.

Full party status can be gained with
5% of the vote for any statewide office, of which there are five avialable
in 2010. A petition for full party ballot access is a ridiculous
number of signatures (110,150 valid in 2008). We should run a
full slate and attempt to gain ballot access in 2010 for 2012.

New York – Each statewide
candidate needs 15,000 valid signatures by 8/17/10.

Full party status can be gained with
50,000 votes for Governor. Although that is a taller order in
New York than most states, we should try to run a strong candidate and
meet that threshold. Petitioning only takes place in a six week
period which will begin on 7/6/10.

Pennsylvania – Statewide
slate with 24,666 valid signatures (estimated) by 8/1/10.

In 2010, the statewide offices are
Governor, Lt. Governor and US Senate. The number is from 2008.
The new signature requirement will be calculated in Decmeber 2009.
Full party status requires 15% of the regsitered voters.

Rhode Island – Full party
status with 18,557 valid signatures (estimated) by 5/28/10.

Retention can be had with 5% of the
vote for Governor. This is only worth doing if we have a strong
candidate for Governor and/or a stronger state party. Until either
happens, our other option is a petition of 1,000 valid signatures for
our Presidential ticket.

****Tennessee – Full party
status with 45,254 valid signatures (estimated).

The deadline is currently up in the
air due to an ongoing lawsuit, with plaintiffs including the LP of Tennessee.

Washington – Each statewide
candidate needs 1000 valid signatures by 8/17/10.

Full party status can be gained with
5% in any statewide election. The only statewide office on the
ballot in 2010 is US Senate.

West Virginia – Statewide
candidate with 15,118 valid signatures (estimated) by 8/1/12.

Retention is won with 1% of the vote
for Governor. The next gubernatorial election is in 2012.

ON THE BALLOT

California – Full party
status with 1% of last vote or 2% in any statewide election.

We had several candidates who received
over 2% of the vote in statewide races in 2006, and this is achievable
again with a full slate. To maintain ballot status via party registration
requires 88,991 registrations (est) by 1/22/10. We currently have
83,574. The state party generally takes care of registrations
although I will be willing to offer them assistance if needed.

Colorado – Full party status
with 1% in any statewide election or 1,000 vote registrations.

There are five statewide offices
in 2010. In 2006, we ran in three of these and won 1.5% for Governor/Lt.
Governor, 4.2% in a three way race for Attorney General, and 3.5% for
University fo Colorado Regent at-large. We have 10,950 regsitered
Libertarians in Colorado as of 10/22/08.

Delaware – Full party status
with 0.05% of registered voters.

The current number needed to maintain
ballot access is 302 registered Libertarian voters. As of 3/1/08
we had 792. New numbers should be available in December.

Florida – Full party status
by remaining organized

They make up for it by having high
filing fees.

Georgia – Can run statewide
candidates if one received 1% in the previous election.

Allen Buckley got 3.4% in this election.
There are nine statewide races in Georgia in 2010, including Governor
and US Senate. District candidates have to complete a petition
equal to 5% of the registered voters in the district as of the last
election. The only way to gain full party ballot access in Georgia
is to get 20% of the vote for President or Governor.

Idaho – Full party status
is maintained by running at least three candidates for state or federal
office every election.

We ran five candidates in 2008.

Indiana – Full party status
with 2% of the vote for Secretary of State.

The state party will be concentrating
heavily on this race in 2010, as they did with Mike Kole in 2006.

Kansas – Full party status
with 1% in any statewide election.

There are six statewide offices,
including US Senate, on the ballot in 2010. The state party regularly
runs a full slate and meets this threshold.

Louisiana – Full party status
with 1,000 registered voters.

As of 3/1/08 we had 1975 registered
Libertarians. New numbers should be made pblic in early December.

Massachusetts – Full party
status with 3% in any statewide election.

Robert Underwood received 3.2% for
US Senate in 2008. There are six statewide offices on the ballot
in 2010. With major party status comes new signature requirements
to get individual candidates on the ballot. I am working with
new Massachusetts LP Chair David Blau on a lobbying strategy to chainge
this law. Our successful lawsuit over substitution in Massachusetts
is helpful to start the conversation about ballot access reform, as
the legislature will most likely have to act on that matter to comply
with the court ruling.

Michigan – Full party status
with votes equal to 1% of the Secretary of State winner’s vote by
any statewide candidate.

The state party regularly runs a
full slate and easily achieves this threshold.

Missouri – Full party status
with 2% in any statewide election in either of the last two elections.

The state party did not achieve this
in 2008 so it is critical we do so in 2010. There are two statewide
offices available in 2010, US Senate and State Auditor. Candidates
for both offices in 2006 exceeded the 2% threshold.

****Mississippi – Full party
status by remaining organized.

We do need to make sure we stay organized
in this state.

Montana – Full party status
with votes equal to 5% of the Governor winner’s vote by any statewide
candidate in either of the last two elections.

Stan Jones kept us on through 2012
with 3% of the vote for Governor in 2008.

North Carolina – Full party
status with 2% for President or Governor.

Mike Munger kept us on the ballot
through 2012 with 2.9% for Governor in 2008.

Nevada – Full party status
with votes equal to 1% of the total votes for US House.

Nathan Santucci kept us on the ballot
with 22.3% in a two-way State Assembly race. That’s a pretty
strong incentive to run a full slate in Nevada.

Ohio – There is no law.

We have ballot status in Ohio thanks
to our legal victory in 2008. The state legislature must replace
ballot access laws which were previously struck down in court.
The impact of our win in court is that the Secretary of State may not
make up new rules to replace these laws. The LPO is very active
in lobbying and will be working with state legislators to replace the
laws, but until they do all we need to do is nominate our candidates
in convention.

Oregon – Full party status
with votes equal to 1% of the total votes for US House in any statewide
office.

There are four statewide offices
available in 2010, including US Senate. This is a bit of a concern
because we had no statewide candidates in Oregon in 2008. We will
need to make sure we run a full slatewide slate in 2010.

South Carolina – Full party
status by remaining organized.

There are very specific laws in SC
mandating how to organize the state party, which the LPSC follows.

Texas – Full party status
with 5% in any statewde election or 2% for Governor.

There are many statewide offfices
available in Texas and our state party there is renowed for filling
the slate to take advantage of it. There is already one very active
candidate for Governor, Jeff Daiell.