December 2016 - Lnc-business - Moellman Enterprises Email

Motion for LNC meetings
by Sam Goldstein 29 Dec '16

29 Dec '16

I am seeking co-sponsors for the following motion: The LNC will meet at Indianapolis, IN the weekend of April 15-16, 2017. Assuming staff can locate a reasonable meeting place, the LNC will meet at Oklahoma City, OK the weekend of August 20-21, 2017. Thanks for your support and LIve Free, Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee Member at Large 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101 Indianapolis IN 46260 317-850-0726 Phone 317-582-1773 Fax

7 8

Re: [Lnc-business] Suggestion/Request from Region 7 Member
by Starchild 29 Dec '16

29 Dec '16

When it comes to welcoming people to the Libertarian Party, the analogy I like to use is that we should be like a church: Have a "big tent" in terms of welcoming everyone into the congregation (in our case the party), but not to be a pastor, deacon, nun, etc. (in our case a candidate, party office-holder, or convention delegate) unless/until a person has demonstrated they are on the same page theologically speaking (or ideologically in our case, e.g. scoring over 80/80 on the Nolan Chart for instance). The idea from the Region 7 member proposing a body capable of reacting quickly to news cycle events sounds not entirely unlike what I was suggesting at our Alexandria meeting in the context of the election recount issue, except the goal I had in mind was less to do with putting out the libertarian position on issues, and more with looking for opportunities to jump in and make a splash in one way or another. As an example of this kind of "guerilla politics", California Libertarian Robert Imhoff was among the tech industry folks upset over the revelation that computer security firm RSA took $10 million in a secret deal with the NSA to allow the spy agency a "backdoor" to bypass encryption in its products (see http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-rsa-idUSBRE9BJ1C220131220) Learning of a big RSA conference taking place in San Francisco, Robert and his collaborators used crowdfunding to raise over $7000 and "buy out" a nearby Chevy's restaurant for the afternoon (see https://www.tilt.com/campaigns/buyout-chevys-during-rsa-conference) for the express purpose of shutting out paid attendees of the RSA conference from one of the only nearby reasonably-priced food options. Then they stood outside the restaurant turning away conventioneers and handing out fliers explaining the reason. Robert told me their "protest" attracted attention from Fox News and other major media. But having a group to research and prepare short briefs for the LP on issues of the day sounds like a great idea too, if we can find folks willing to do it. One possible way to make this happen that's been suggested would be to create a "shadow cabinet" – appoint people with knowledge, interest, or credentials in specific areas to posts like Shadow Attorney General, Shadow Secretary of State, Shadow Secretary of Education, Shadow Secretary of the Interior, etc. Each of these individuals could function like a committee chair, with his or her "department" preparing briefs or commentary on issues related to that particular policy area, or related to news involving his/her real-world counterpart in the administration. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Dec 28, 2016, at 8:47 AM, Demarest, David P. wrote: > Gotcha – thanks for sticking to your guns! > > ~David > > From: Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 10:42 AM > To: Demarest, David P.; whitneycb76(a)gmail.com > Cc: David Demarest > Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Suggestion/Request from Region 7 Member > > I certainly did not become a Libertarian overnight- am in some areas likely still am not - and that's okay as long as I dint try to make the Party less libertarian and focus on where I am. But that's not how the term generally is used. It generally is used to say that semi-libertarian views are just as perfectly acceptable as SoP conforming views. It is not used to say come on in- let's help you move along and grow you as a libertarian. I am all in favor of the latter but usage trumps my intent. > > None of that has to do with who we welcome - I will welcome a 0/0 on the Nolan chart if they wish to learn. > > The whole big tent terminology is used constantly to say that any remotely liberty view is on equal footing with any other. That's warm and fuzzy but is not what our Bylaws or SoP say. > > I have been beaten about the head too often with tent poles for simply stating that such and such position is not what our SoP aims for to look on the term with any favor. It is used to silence not welcome. > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 9:32 AM Demarest, David P. <David.Demarest(a)firstdata.com> wrote: > > I use big tent in the sense that newcomers may not be in “our tent” yet. None of us became Libertarians overnight (with the possible exception of you, Caryn Ann - J) and all of us come from different freedom-oriented perspectives. I am passionate about > > my Libertarian positions but consistent with your excellent LPRC invitations and welcomes, we need to welcome the > > Libertarian-curious. > > > Regards, > > > ~David Pratt Demarest > Global Application Steward, CFO Enterprise Applications > > O (402) 222-7207 | M (402) 981-6469 | H (402) 493-0873 > David.Demarest(a)FirstData.com > FDGSSolomon(a)FirstData.com > AppSteward(a)FirstData.com > > > > > > > > > > From: Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 10:17 AM > To: Demarest, David P.; whitneycb76(a)gmail.com > Cc: David Demarest > Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Suggestion/Request from Region 7 Member > > > I generally disfavor the use of the word "big tent" as it has become meaningless at best and the exact opposite at worst and semi-libertarian in the middle. > > > The LP has an embedded Statement of Principles. That is our "tent" and our Principles and the only reason given for the LP's existence in the Bylaws. > > > I leave the wrangling over tents and their sizes to the circuses. > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 9:10 AM Demarest, David P. <David.Demarest(a)firstdata.com> wrote: > Hi Whitney, > Good to see you at the recent LNC meeting. I just rediscovered your email below. I echo Caryn Ann’s sentiments and would love to participate in the think tankyou have proposed. Do you need help organizing it? Would your suggested think tank take a big tent Libertarian approach or be more narrowly focused on a particular LNC perspective? I am game to participate regardless. > Thoughts? > > > Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High and LIVE FREE > > > ~David Pratt Demarest > > > Region 6 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI) > Secretary, Nebraska Libertarian State Central Committee > > > Secretary Pro Tem, LNC Affiliate Support Committee > Member, LNC Empowered Future Committee > Board Member and Nebraska State Coordinator, LP Radical Caucus > Cell: 402-981-6469 > Home: 402-493-0873 > Office: 402-222-7207 > > From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org] > On Behalf Of Caryn Ann Harlos > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 8:28 AM > To: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org > Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Suggestion/Request from Region 7 Member > > > Love it. > > > On Monday, November 28, 2016, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Colleagues, please consider the suggestion/request below from a Region 7 member... > > > The media essentially works in favor of the old parties by pumping out constant talking points that feed into the public. This is created out of the never-ending churn of political events and legislation. An example is the TPP. > > The idea I have is to create a group of people committee/think-tank at the national level that could discuss and research issues that come up. As libertarians we talk a lot and have resources that we look at like CATO and Reason, but we do not have something like this of our own. A core group of people that could respond quickly if needed and do the research required to give a solid LP response to the issues of the day. These could be compressed into short briefs with talking points to the state parties that could use them as they wish. > > Many of us get the newsletter from national but a chair or ED cannot respond quickly to everything nor to detailed research on all issues that arise. This group would have that goal. These releases would be internal and the party structure could use them as deemed fit. The team would need to have people capable of looking more deeply into legislation than just a cursory overview and be committed to turnaround times that made us responsive to ongoing events. > > This group would allow us to speak with a more singular and united strong voice against the hailstorm of media people are inundated with every day. > > In general, each brief would be a short synopsis of the subject and the LP position on it. For, Against, Neutral (pro/con). Talking points should be listed. Details can be given further after that as needed but the goal would be to be brief. People simply do not look into the details of the constant stream of information we have in front of us. It's too much. We need to get out a quick tool that can be trusted and add a counter voice in a news market that we are forced to compete with. > > Thoughts? > > Whitney Bilyeu > Region 7 Representative >

1 0

Options for April meeting
by Nicholas Sarwark 28 Dec '16

28 Dec '16

Robert has proposals from hotels in Indianapolis, Oklahoma City, Pittsburgh, Houston, Dallas, and Atlanta (also one from Raleigh that is overly expensive). Does anyone have strong preferences for any of these cities? -Nick

11 19

List of events and dates in 2017
by James Lark 28 Dec '16

28 Dec '16

Dear Wes: I hope all is well with you and your family. In a separate message I shall send you a Word file containing a list of events and dates that may be helpful to you. As I have done for the past several years, I have assembled a list of events and dates in 2017 to which the LP may wish to draw attention. For example, it may be useful for LPHQ to issue press releases concerning some of these events and dates; it may also be useful for state affiliates to conduct outreach efforts on or about some of these dates. I have provided supplemental information regarding some of these events/dates. Several events are included because I know something about them, or because I suspect they will be of interest to people sympathetic to the libertarian perspective. Some events and dates are included at the suggestion (or request) of LP colleagues. Allow me to emphasize that inclusion of an event does not imply that I believe it is particularly important or that the LP should commemorate it in some manner. Similarly, the fact that an event is not listed does not imply I believe it is unimportant or that we should not commemorate it in some manner. Please note that while I endeavored to check the accuracy of the listings, in some cases I did so using sources such as Wikipedia. Hence, if you wish to use information on this list, I strongly suggest that you conduct research to ascertain that the information is indeed correct. (Some events sent to me by Libertarian colleagues evidently did not occur on the dates provided.) Please note also that I shall send the Word file to my LNC colleagues. Since I do not have access to the State Chairs' list, I would appreciate it if you would send the document to that list. I hope those who read the document will review the information and offer suggestions concerning additional events and dates, as well as any corrections that should be made. On a different matter, I hope you and the LNC will join me in thanking Bill Redpath for his petitioning efforts in Ohio. If I understand correctly, he has already gathered over 300 signatures so far (toward a pledge of 750 signatures); he was gathering signatures at the Findlay (Ohio) post office on Christmas Eve. As always, thanks for your work for liberty. Best wishes to you and the family for a great 2017. Take care, Jim James W. Lark, III Dept. of Systems and Information Engineering Applied Mathematics Program, Dept. of Engineering and Society Affiliated Faculty, Dept. of Statistics University of Virginia Advisor, The Liberty Coalition University of Virginia Region 5 Representative, Libertarian National Committee

2 1

Word file containing event/date list
by James Lark 27 Dec '16

27 Dec '16

1 0

April meeting
by Sam Goldstein 27 Dec '16

27 Dec '16

Any decsion yet on a location? Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee Member at Large 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101 Indianapolis IN 46260 317-850-0726 Phone 317-582-1773 Fax

7 8

Re: [Lnc-business] "No preferred flavor of statism" LP press release
by Starchild 27 Dec '16

27 Dec '16

It is good and correct to state that the Libertarian Party does not have a preferred flavor of statism. On that central point, today's Libertarian Party press release from chair Nick Sarwark gets it right. Nevertheless I think this was in several other respects a regrettable communication, especially after I raised the concern at our recent meeting that we should have supported the 2016 election recount effort (at the very least with words, if not with more direct material assistance that could have generated significant funds and publicity for the LP). I urge anyone else involved in crafting this message, as well as the LNC and Libertarians generally, to consider the ways in which today's release may have been damaging: • The release incorrectly presumes that the only reason anyone would support a recount in a situation like this is to help one statist faction or the other, when in fact there are strong reasons to support recounts or audits of the vote whenever there are widespread doubts about the legitimacy of the results, as a simple matter of promoting official accountability and upholding basic tenets of democracy • In presuming that the purpose of the 2016 recount effort was strictly to help the Democrats, it unfairly impugns the motives of Jill Stein and the Green Party, thereby harming future prospects for cooperation among the leading alternative parties in fighting the status quo (If helping the Democrats had been the primary aim of Stein and the Greens, clearly they would not have run a presidential campaign in the first place but simply urged their supporters to vote for Hillary Clinton, since the Stein ticket was obviously competing more with her than with Donald Trump for votes) • By suggesting that we only care about election fraud when Libertarians or the cause of freedom are directly harmed by it, the release makes us look self-serving and undermines our claim to being the "Party of Principle" • The release gives would-be manipulators of the vote greater confidence that they can commit such malfeasance without raising the ire of the Libertarian Party, or (if the malfeasance is directed against us) without the Greens or others supporting us in protesting the fraud, since we've indicated our disinterest in such matters when a contest appears to be between different flavors of statism and signaled that we won't support others in similar cases With the above points in mind, I hope the chair and others involved in putting out future press releases and other communications will work to mitigate any harm, and remove any damaging doubts that may have been created here, by reaffirming in our messaging that: • We recognize there are often good reasons to doubt the integrity of the electoral process in the United States, particularly when electronic voting is involved, and we support reforms to make the system more transparent and less subject to manipulation by insiders or hackers, as well as efforts to audit or recount the vote in cases where there appears to be credible evidence of significant vote-tampering • We are committed to working with other alternative parties and independents in the United States to break the grip of the dominant two-party cartel, and are particularly concerned with demanding action to uphold the integrity of the vote in cases where cartel machinations appear to be aimed at disenfranchising or undermining non-cartel opposition • We strongly oppose election rigging no matter who the beneficiaries are, because it is generally those in power who have the strongest motives and most opportunity to rig the vote, and we understand that failing to consistently speak out against such tactics normalizes them and reduces the political price to be paid by perpetrators, thereby helping dismantle an important roadblock on the road to tyranny I am putting this forward in the form of simple advice rather than a resolution, in the hopes that this will be sufficient to prompt ameliorative follow-up. But if the chair or others think I am off-base here, and that we should not reaffirm where we stand as outlined above, please let us know. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Dec 26, 2016, at 8:03 AM, Libertarian Party wrote: > > > > Dear Libertarian, > > Some folks have asked me why the Libertarian Party is not participating in Jill Stein's recount efforts. > > My answer is that Libertarians don't have a preferred flavor of statism. > > We know that there is no significant difference between the oppressively big government offered by the Republicans and the oppressively big government offered by the Democrats. > > We don't prefer a Democratic War on Drugs or a Republican War on Drugs. We work to end the War on Drugs. > > We don't prefer a Democratic "Patriot" Act or a Republican "Patriot" Act. We work to repeal it and protect Americans' natural right to privacy. > > We don't prefer Democratic cronyism or Republican cronyism. We work to make government too weak to give any company special favors. > > And so on. > > Simply put, Jill Stein's efforts are meant to benefit the Democratic Party. And we don't play that kind of politics. The Libertarian Party stands for liberty, not for helping a big-government political party gain more power or attention. > > That's why the Libertarian Party chose not to participate in Jill Stein's recount efforts. > > We acknowledge the right of any person, including Jill Stein, to fight for her preferred brand of big, wasteful, meddling, intrusive government. But we will spend our time, financial resources, and expertise fighting for liberty instead. > > As 2016 comes to an end, let me update you on our critical projects. > > We are currently in court in Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania, pursuing a fairer playing field for our future candidates. > > We are also suing the Commission on Presidential Debates, towards that same goal. > > We are preparing documents for a court case defending 2nd Amendment rights. > > We are recruiting candidates for the many elections coming up in 2017 and 2018. > > We are upgrading our IT infrastructure at Libertarian Party headquarters, to better serve our members and candidates and improve outreach to voters. > > We are planning various ballot access petitioning drives to make sure that the Libertarian Party is again on ballots in all 50 states and DC in 2018, as we were in 2016. > > This is the meaningful work we are doing right now, as we defend all of your freedoms, all of the time. > > Happy New Year, my friends! > > > > Nicholas Sarwark > Chair > Libertarian National Committee > > > > > > > > > Paid for by the Libertarian National Committee, Inc. > 1444 Duke St., Alexandria, Virginia 22314 > Content not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee. > >

1 1

Convention Committee fully populated?
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Dec '16

26 Dec '16

Can we please know the list of names? I have received an inquiry. -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>

2 3

Govt. now asking travelers for social media accounts – good subject for an LP press release
by Starchild 24 Dec '16

24 Dec '16

According to the article copied below, the program in which travelers are being asked to "voluntarily" provide their social media information has been active less than a week, and this is the first I've heard about it, so it seems like a timely subject for us to address. If staff or the chair decide to do a release on it, I think a good angle in addition to echoing some of the points made by civil liberties advocates quoted in the Common Dreams article would be to draw attention to government's own secrecy, and call for top officials to fill out and release to the media these same forms they're asking travelers to fill out. You're welcome to use the following quote from me: Starchild, an elected representative on the Libertarian National Committee, said the government needs to focus more energy on being transparent itself and less on spying on the rest of us. "Uncle Sam is like a manipulative person you meet online who wants to know everything about you but won't tell you any of his own sensitive information." According to cyber-security reporter Christopher Burgess, "Every year United States government agencies add petabytes of classified information (a petabyte equals 20 million four drawer filing cabinets." (https://news.clearancejobs.com/2013/06/12/the-biggest-problem-in-the-u-s-go…) Another good angle could be describing the program's introduction as an unwelcome "Christmas present" to travelers, or making an unfavorable comparison to Santa. Here's another quote from me you can use: "Knowing who among us is 'bad' or 'good' may be okay when it comes to Santa Claus, but if Santa screws up, the worst that's going to happen is you don't get what you want for Christmas. Santa's elves aren't using what they know to target people in drone strikes, throw them in prison for unconstitutional 'crimes', or break into their homes armed in riot gear and carrying automatic weapons." Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: "Michael Eisenscher" <meisenscher(a)gmail.com> >> To: "UFPJ Activist List" <ufpj-activist(a)lists.mayfirst.org> >> Date: December 23, 2016 at 8:05:38 PM PST >> Subject: [ufpj-activist] US Government Quietly Starts Asking Travelers for Social Media Accounts >> Reply-To: Michael Eisenscher <meisenscher(a)gmail.com> >> >> >> Friday, December 23, 2016 >> by Common Dreams >> US Government Quietly Starts Asking Travelers for Social Media Accounts >> >> Controversial program met with opposition from civil liberties groups when first proposed in June >> >> by Nadia Prupis, staff writer >> http://uslaboragainstwar.org/Article/76965/us-government-quietly-starts-ask… >> >> >> Social media accounts are "gateways into an enormous amount of [users'] online expression and associations, which can reflect highly sensitive information about that person's opinions, beliefs, identity, and community." (Photo: The Hamster Factor/flickr/cc) >> >> The U.S. government has quietly started to ask foreign travelers to hand over their social media accounts upon arriving in the country, a program that aims to spot potential terrorist threats but which civil liberties advocates have long opposed as a threat to privacy. >> >> The program has been active since Tuesday, asking travelers arriving to the U.S. on visa waivers to voluntarily enter information associated with their online presence, including "Facebook, Google+, Instagram, LinkedIn, and YouTube, as well as a space for users to input their account names on those sites," Politico reports. >> >> The U.S. Department of Homeland Security first proposed the idea in June, when it was met with opposition and criticism from rights groups, consumer advocates, and other entities, including the Internet Association, which represents Facebook, Google, and Twitter. >> >> At the time, a coalition of groups including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Center for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), among others, sent a letter to the government warning that many travelers would feel obligated to give their information to border agents and that the program would "fall hardest on Arab and Muslim communities, whose usernames, posts, contacts, and social networks will be exposed to intense scrutiny." >> >> Social media accounts are "gateways into an enormous amount of [users'] online expression and associations, which can reflect highly sensitive information about that person's opinions, beliefs, identity, and community," the letter stated. >> >> But it appears the Obama administration ignored their warnings about the threat to privacy and free expression and finalized the program anyway. >> >> "There are very few rules about how that information is being collected, maintained [and] disseminated to other agencies, and there are no guidelines about limiting the government’s use of that information," Michael W. Macleod-Ball, chief of staff for the ACLU's Washington office, told Politico's Tony Romm. "While the government certainly has a right to collect some information ... it would be nice if they would focus on the privacy concerns some advocacy groups have long expressed." >> >> The "optional" question is part of the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), which visitors on the visa waiver program are required to complete in order to enter the country. The program allows certain travelers to be in the U.S. for up to 90 days without a visa. >> >> Nathan White, senior legislative manager of Access Now, said the program constituted a threat to human rights. >> >> "The choice to hand over this information is technically voluntary," he told Ramm. "But the process to enter the U.S. is confusing, and it's likely that most visitors will fill out the card completely rather than risk additional questions from intimidating, uniformed officers—the same officers who will decide which of your jokes are funny and which ones make you a security risk." >> >> This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

1 0

Membership forms- Airing of a Grievance
by Caryn Ann Harlos 23 Dec '16

23 Dec '16

I wanted to print a bunch of membership forms to bring to our Festivus event tonight and there is no pdf-printable form that we could have people fill out and attach a check or their credit card information - and finding the "join" page is frustratingly difficult. Can we please get a PDF printable form on there? -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>

2 1