June 2015 - Lnc-business - Moellman Enterprises Email

advance wording of v2 of the Oklahoma motion
by Alicia Mattson 20 Jun '15

20 Jun '15

Since there has been quite a bit of chatter on this motion, I'll give you at least a little heads up. Below is the wording of the second version that has been submitted. Unless a delay is requested by the Chair, I'll send it out before midnight tonight (Pacific) to get it started, but in case you need to ask the maker for any additional tweaks, you'll have a little window of time to do so before I launch it: Increase the Ballot Access Expense line item by $65,000, from $57,500to $122,500, contingent on the LNC receiving cash receipts, that areearmarked for a 2015 Libertarian Party of Oklahoma petition drive, ofat least $60,000, and cash receipts (net of associated fundraising costs) of at least $55,000. -Alicia

2 3

Notifications to the LNC - new contract with Political Director and new lawsuit
by Nicholas Sarwark 20 Jun '15

20 Jun '15

All, I have negotiated and executed a new contract with Carla Howell through 2017 that contains modifications based on feedback received from members of the LNC, the Executive Committee, and EPCC. Pursuant to the policy manual, that contract is available for any LNC member who would like to review it, with the understanding that it remains confidential. If you would like a copy to review, please contact Wes Benedict. The Libertarian Party has joined as a plaintiff a lawsuit and FEC complaint challenging the Commission on Presidential Debates and being spearheaded by Level the Playing Field. Expect to see news stories on the lawsuit starting Monday. In the interim, there is a joint statement of all the plaintiffs I have attached to this email. Also, if it hasn't yet been mentioned on the list, the Libertarian Party of Arkansas has successfully secured ballot access for 2016. 31 down, 19 to go (and DC). Yours in liberty, Nick

1 0

Oklahoma petition drive
by Daniel Wiener 20 Jun '15

20 Jun '15

I'm concerned about the proposed Oklahoma petition drive and how it fits into our overall efforts for ballot access next year. The LNC's finances are very fragile right now, and we will be facing the usual huge expenses in 2016 to get our Presidential candidate on the ballot in a number of different states. We're not starting out with a surplus to draw on, as we did in 2012. So it will be a big challenge. While I'd love to include Oklahoma and be successful in all fifty states, I'm also trying to be realistic. $65,000 for Oklahoma is a lot of money. The way this motion is phrased, we'd have to get $60,000 in contributions dedicated specifically to Oklahoma before proceeding, which is all well and good. But that seems likely to cannibalize contributions for our other ballot access efforts. Raising money is not a zero-sum game, and different donors may be willing to contribute to different projects. I can see how "ballot access" will appeal to some people who aren't interested in the building fund or general LNC operations or whatever. But will "ballot access" type donors be interested in Oklahoma in contrast to other states? If there's only a limited amount of money we can raise for all our ballot access efforts next year, will the $65,000 for Oklahoma drained from that pool prevent us from getting on several other states? So before I'm willing to vote Yes on this motion, I'll need to hear some convincing arguments that it won't damage our other ballot access requirements. Dan Wiener -- *"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”* -- Richard Feynman (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)

8 10

Oklahoma petition drive
by William Redpath 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

In case it is not known, the $30,000 donor is Richard Winger. I will start the other $30,000 match by pledging $1,000 as a special donation above my monthly pledge. That's $29,000 to go. Yes, we will offer to return the money if it is not fully raised. Oklahoma had only the R&D presidential candidates in 2004, 2008 & 2012. No other state was that bad. And, OK is one of six states that bans write-in voting. So, it was vote R, or vote D, or shut up. Someone has got to stand up to the two party system there, and if we don't do it, I don't think anyone will. Such is the curse of being the top third party in the US. We sometimes should act for causes that are bigger than just the LP alone. Richard Winger thinks that if we succeed in this petition drive, it will make it easier to lobby for further ballot access relief in Oklahoma in the future. Please vote "Yes" on the Oklahoma petition drive motion. Bill Redpath

1 0

Re: [Lnc-business] Oklahoma petition drive
by doug＠vikingmetals.com 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

2 1

draft minutes from 6/17/15 EC meeting
by Alicia Mattson 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

Attached are the draft minutes from Wednesday's EC meeting regarding joining another CPD lawsuit and a potential Oklahoma ballot access drive. Absent objection from an EC member who attended, these minutes will auto-approve on 7/3/15. Alicia Mattson LNC Secretary

1 0

Dollars per vote - which elections should we recruit for?
by Scott L. 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

Also in the June 2015 issue of LP News: The candidate survey that Carla Howell sent out showed that 2014 candidates raised about $6807 for their campaigns. I am going to be generous and assume that the candidates for local office on average raised that amount, when the actual figure is probably lower than that. A seat of the pants, rough estimate is that votes in local elections, if you win, cost $7 each. Obviously that number varies all over the place, and I welcome someone to find a recent article that refutes that assumption. Using that figure, that means that the average Libertarian running for local office raised about enough money to get 1000 votes. My question is - how many of those local candidates needed 1000 votes or fewer to win? My guess is that most of our candidates for local office needed greater than 1000 votes to win. So why am I even mentioning this? If we are to follow our Bylaws and motivate and help our affiliates to recruit candidates who win elections, then we need to encourage as many of our members as possible to run for the smallest possible offices that are up for election in their area. At this point in the LP's development, most of our candidates just don't have the fundraising moxie needed to raise enough money to win an election that requires more than 1000 votes to win. Scott Lieberman

1 0

ISLC Conference - free memberships - were they worth giving out?
by Scott L. 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

>From page 3 of the June 2015 issue of LP News, in an article about the International Students for Liberty Conference in Washington, DC in Feb. 2015: "In all, 317 attendees took advantage of a promotion to join the LP for one year for free.many thanks to everyone who donated to pay for this event." I assume this means that these attendees were given free sustaining memberships for one year, and that all of them signed the membership certification. If it is true that these memberships are being 100% subsidized by donors who specifically donated for this purpose, and there is no way that these donors would have given money to the General Fund or to any other LP Project in 2015, then I suppose these members can be considered to have cost the LP "nothing." However, if those donors would have given to some other LP Project, or if one of my other assumptions above is wrong, then these members came at a cost to the LP. My question is - will LPHQ staff track these members to see how many of them are still members in December 2016? If their renewal rate is much lower than our average first-year renewal rate, then I would hope that staff would carefully review the economics of giving out "free memberships" before they attempt this project again. OTOH, if the renewal rate of these students is comparable to our usual first-year renewal rate, then I would assume the economics of these types of giveaways yield a positive ROI for the LP, and in that case I hope that staff can raise the money to repeat this project in other venues. Scott Lieberman

1 0

Someone made a coloring book about us?
by Scott L. 19 Jun '15

19 Jun '15

I bet very few of you knew there was an LP Coloring Activity Book: http://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Party-Coloring-Activity-Book/dp/1619530945 Scott Lieberman

1 0

Executive Committee teleconference - Wednesday at 9 p.m. Eastern
by Alicia Mattson 16 Jun '15

16 Jun '15

There will be an Executive Committee teleconference Wednesday night on the subjects of: (a) joining another lawsuit against the Commission on Presidential Debates, and (b) supporting the Oklahoma Libertarian Party ballot access petition drive Date: Wednesday, June 17 Time: 9:00 p.m. Eastern / 6:00 p.m. Pacific Dial-in: 1 (217) 258-5588 Guest Pin Code: 207730 1. At conference time, dial the Conference Dial-In number above. 2. At the prompt, enter the Access Code followed by the # key. 3. You will hear music until the Moderator enters the call. To mute your individual phone line, press * 6. To un-mute your individual phone line, press * 7. Alicia Mattson LNC Secretary

1 0