Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by *AUGUST 1, 2018* at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: *Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate.* You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Yes. I would prefer that this be addressed at a meeting but it cannot wait until Sept and calls for an electronic meeting failed (side note: this makes more even more convinced we need to amend the policy manual to have more frequent e-meetings - at least one between each in-person meeting). Isn't this the same thing that Joe Henchman proposed? No it isn't. It differs in the crucial details that we cannot "recognize" a JC outside the Bylaws and no member or affiliate is required to care. This does not preclude delegates from petitioning this JC to overrule this decision if they don't like it. Where are its flaws? Like Nozick we are unilaterally determining what protection the members shall get and like it but nothing in this situation will be perfect. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 6:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos@gmail.com> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by *AUGUST 1, 2018* at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: *Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate.* You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
-- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* Yes. I would prefer that this be addressed at a meeting but it cannot wait until Sept and calls for an electronic meeting failed (side note: this makes more even more convinced we need to amend the policy manual to have more frequent e-meetings - at least one between each in-person meeting). Isn't this the same thing that Joe Henchman proposed? No it isn't. It differs in the crucial details that we cannot "recognize" a JC outside the Bylaws and no member or affiliate is required to care. This does not preclude delegates from petitioning this JC to overrule this decision if they don't like it. Where are its flaws? Like Nozick we are unilaterally determining what protection the members shall get and like it but nothing in this situation will be perfect. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 6:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1]carynannharlos@gmail.com> wrote: We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [2]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [3]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [4]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com 2. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 3. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 4. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Yes Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
I vote No on this motion. 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered) Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules. Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote:
I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow. Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate. This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes. This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected. An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being. Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
One of the reasons I support this, is that it most closely echoed what I said about a temporary appellate committee until we can confirm an official JC at a Convention. It is the least horrible of the options present. I will also add that we must make sure that we also address the need for election reform in our party so that we never again find ourselves in such a position. Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate On 2018-07-25 18:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again. -- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep) Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018. I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections): Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons Express Abstentions: None Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna For a current tally of 6-2. Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
Correction: Region 4 Representative Hewitt has not voted (incorrectly noted as Region 8). ADDITIONAL NOTE: Newly elected Region 8 Representative Justin O'Donnell has not voted so Alternate Lyons vote stands. On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business > list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: > Harlos, > Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian > National > Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven > vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if > they were elected in the normal course of convention business and > follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is > acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or > affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of > votes > here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business > list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: > Harlos, > Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian > National > Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven > vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if > they were elected in the normal course of convention business and > follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is > acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or > affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of > votes > here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I would like to take this opportunity to urge a yes vote on this motion. While the whole situation is a disaster there are things we can cleanly do to remediate. Nothing in this motion is in violation of our Bylaws - and is in fact a strong act of good faith on the part of the LNC to show that they wish to be accountable. The JC protects the members from us. It is quite convenient for us not to have a watchdog - and it is in our power to voluntarily submit to review and that is what this motion does. It may be argued that choosing these seven is the issue. Well I don't think hardly anyone doubts that it was not the intent of the delegates to be without a JC and for the majority of them, I also think it apparent that they likely thought it would be the top vote-getters. With us voluntarily subjecting ourselves to review, if the delegates in fact do not wish the gatekeepers to be these seven, they now have a body to appeal to. And in fact, no one who has advocated for a JC in the membership has told me that they object to these seven. Why wouldn't we be voluntarily accountable? What has happened is that through the actions of one of us (the convention chair who is also the LNC chair) the JC was constructively dissolved for this term against the intent of the delegates. That is intolerable and we must do what we can in our power to fix it. IF some situation comes up over our term that is hotly contested or controversial it will be forever claimed that we ran roughshod over the the Party. Do you want that? I don't. -Caryn Ann On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 6:00 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Correction: Region 4 Representative Hewitt has not voted (incorrectly noted as Region 8).
ADDITIONAL NOTE: Newly elected Region 8 Representative Justin O'Donnell has not voted so Alternate Lyons vote stands.
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: > > Yes > > Craig Bowden > Region 1 Alternate > >> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >> >> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business >> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >> Harlos, >> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >> National >> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if >> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or >> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >> votes >> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >> We defend your rights >> And oppose the use of force >> Taxation is theft >> >> References >> >> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 5:58 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: > > Yes > > Craig Bowden > Region 1 Alternate > >> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >> >> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business >> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >> Harlos, >> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >> National >> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if >> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or >> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >> votes >> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >> We defend your rights >> And oppose the use of force >> Taxation is theft >> >> References >> >> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I vote yes. In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created. --- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the > LNC-Business > list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: > Harlos, > Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian > National > Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven > vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention > as if > they were elected in the normal course of convention business > and > follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is > acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member > or > affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally > of > votes > here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - > [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject. This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our next meeting. There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or enforcement ability. Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month. Live Free, --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes.
In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: > > Yes > > Craig Bowden > Region 1 Alternate > >> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >> >> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >> LNC-Business >> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. >> Co-Sponsors: >> Harlos, >> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >> National >> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention >> as if >> they were elected in the normal course of convention business >> and >> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any >> member or >> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally >> of >> votes >> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary >> - >> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >> We defend your rights >> And oppose the use of force >> Taxation is theft >> >> References >> >> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I tried to call an e-meeting. But like last term it seems that meeting as few times as possible is what is desired. -Caryn Ann On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.
This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our next meeting. There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or enforcement ability.
Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month.
Live Free,
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes.
In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein > <sam.goldstein@lp.org> > wrote: > I vote No on this motion. > > 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect > the > Judicial Committee > 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by > margins > of at > least 60% of the > delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of > requiring > a majority approval of delegates > 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how > this > pretend JC would function, whether it > would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up > its' > own rules that this motion would > have the LNC be bound to follow > 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the > motion > to > recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted > in favor of but have reconsidered) > > Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire > purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body > that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the > pretend > JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that > the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. > > --- > Sam Goldstein > Libertarian National Committee > 317-850-0726 Cell > > >> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: >> >> Yes >> >> Craig Bowden >> Region 1 Alternate >> >>> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >>> >>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >>> LNC-Business >>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >>> Harlos, >>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >>> National >>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as >>> if >>> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member >>> or >>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >>> votes >>> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >>> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >>> We defend your rights >>> And oppose the use of force >>> Taxation is theft >>> >>> References >>> >>> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
Indeed, less trouble can be caused that way. Much like state legislatures that only meet 30-60 days per year. --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell On 2018-07-31 11:57, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
I tried to call an e-meeting. But like last term it seems that meeting as few times as possible is what is desired.
-Caryn Ann
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:47 AM, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.
This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our next meeting. There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or enforcement ability.
Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month.
Live Free,
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes.
In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
> On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business > <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote: > > It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. > And > IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I > would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already > submitted > it appellate rules. > > Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC. > > -Caryn Ann > >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein >> <sam.goldstein@lp.org> >> wrote: >> I vote No on this motion. >> >> 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can >> elect >> the >> Judicial Committee >> 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by >> margins >> of at >> least 60% of the >> delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC >> of >> requiring >> a majority approval of delegates >> 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual >> of how >> this >> pretend JC would function, whether it >> would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream >> up >> its' >> own rules that this motion would >> have the LNC be bound to follow >> 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the >> motion >> to >> recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted >> in favor of but have reconsidered) >> >> Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The >> entire >> purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body >> that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if >> the >> pretend >> JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that >> the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. >> >> --- >> Sam Goldstein >> Libertarian National Committee >> 317-850-0726 Cell >> >> >>> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: >>> >>> Yes >>> >>> Craig Bowden >>> Region 1 Alternate >>> >>>> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >>>> >>>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >>>> LNC-Business >>>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. >>>> Co-Sponsors: >>>> Harlos, >>>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the >>>> Libertarian >>>> National >>>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the >>>> top-seven >>>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 >>>> Convention as >>>> if >>>> they were elected in the normal course of convention >>>> business and >>>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It >>>> is >>>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any >>>> member >>>> or >>>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual >>>> tally of >>>> votes >>>> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>> -- >>>> In Liberty, >>>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee >>>> Secretary - >>>> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >>>> We defend your rights >>>> And oppose the use of force >>>> Taxation is theft >>>> >>>> References >>>> >>>> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > > > > > > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org > > > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
--
---So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.--- Does an express abstention factor in to the vote total/ratio? Whitney On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.
This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our next meeting. There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or enforcement ability.
Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month.
Live Free,
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes.
In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
<lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org > > > wrote: > I vote No on this motion. > > 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect > the > Judicial Committee > 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by > margins > of at > least 60% of the > delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of > requiring > a majority approval of delegates > 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how > this > pretend JC would function, whether it > would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up > its' > own rules that this motion would > have the LNC be bound to follow > 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the > motion > to > recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted > in favor of but have reconsidered) > > Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire > purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body > that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the > pretend > JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that > the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. > > --- > Sam Goldstein > Libertarian National Committee > 317-850-0726 Cell > > > On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: >> >> Yes >> >> Craig Bowden >> Region 1 Alternate >> >> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >>> >>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >>> LNC-Business >>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >>> Harlos, >>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >>> National >>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention >>> as if >>> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member >>> or >>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >>> votes >>> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >>> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. >>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org >>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >>> We defend your rights >>> And oppose the use of force >>> Taxation is theft >>> >>> References >>> >>> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org >>> >>
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
-- *Whitney Bilyeu* Libertarian National Committee Region 7 Representative 281.433.4966
No --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell On 2018-07-31 13:58, Whitney Bilyeu via Lnc-business wrote:
---So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.---
Does an express abstention factor in to the vote total/ratio?
Whitney
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:47 AM, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote: So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is well less than 50% of the LNC at this time. I think that would be a horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.
This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our next meeting. There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or enforcement ability.
Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month.
Live Free,
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote: I vote yes.
In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee. Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention delegates created.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote: On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we'd be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we'd be mandatorily bound had they'd successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I've seen. It isn't the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting [1] -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again. -- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep) Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com [2] -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft -- _Whitney Bilyeu_ Libertarian National Committee Region 7 Representative 281.433.4966 Links: ------ [1] https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting [2] http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
Yes Susan Jane Hogarth Region 5 Alternate 919-906-2106 (tel:919-906-2106)
On Jul 31, 2018 at 7:58 AM, <Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business (mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org)> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth, Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for the time being.
Alex Merced Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote: I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business > list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: > Harlos, > Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian > National > Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven > vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if > they were elected in the normal course of convention business and > follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is > acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or > affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of > votes > here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
Yes On 2018-07-31 17:38, Susan Hogarth via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Susan Jane Hogarth
Region 5 Alternate
919-906-2106 [1]
On Jul 31, 2018 at 7:58 AM, <Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business> wrote:
REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
Express Abstentions: None
Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth,
Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
For a current tally of 6-2.
Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate
Olsen's vote stands.
You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here:
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business
<lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the
judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we'd be
bound to follow.
Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the
decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would
operate.
This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best
represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the
extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold
their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we'd be
mandatorily bound had they'd successfully been elected.
An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I've seen. It isn't the
LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its
existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for
the time being.
Alex Merced
Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
<lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And
IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I
would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted
it appellate rules.
Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org>
wrote:
I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the
Judicial Committee
2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins
of at
least 60% of the
delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of
requiring
a majority approval of delegates
3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how
this
pretend JC would function, whether it
would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its'
own rules that this motion would
have the LNC be bound to follow
4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion
to
recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted
in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire
purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body
that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the
pretend
JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that
the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
---
Sam Goldstein
Libertarian National Committee
317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
>
> Yes
>
> Craig Bowden
> Region 1 Alternate
>
>> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>>
>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business
>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors:
>> Harlos,
>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian
>> National
>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven
>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if
>> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and
>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is
>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or
>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of
>> votes
>> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> --
>> In Liberty,
>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
>> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>> We defend your rights
>> And oppose the use of force
>> Taxation is theft
>>
>> References
>>
>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
We defend your rights
And oppose the use of force
Taxation is theft
I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens again.
--
In Liberty,
Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate
(Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA
Membership Director
Daniel Fishman for Auditor
Campaign Manager
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
We defend your rights
And oppose the use of force
Taxation is theft
Links: ------ [1] tel:919-906-2106
I also vote no. [as R8 Alternate but also only Region 8 Rep at the moment. Justin ODonnell, who is likely to win the R8 election which closes on July 30th, may choose to vote and change Region 8's position.] I support Sam's reasoning, and I also believe that any election that is procedurally altered after ballots are already cast are no election at all. We need to come up with a better process for this and stick to it next convention. Until such a process is established and supremely adhered to, there is a guarantee that elections will be given the respect they deserve, not being altered by Robert's "rules suspensions" or anything else for the sake of expediency and getting home on time, I will vote no on every motion relating to those elections. Follow the book, don't suspend the rules, do the job right the first time. Elections are the most important thing we do at Convention. -- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep) Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com On 2018-07-25 14:05, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote No on this motion.
1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect the Judicial Committee 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by margins of at least 60% of the delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of requiring a majority approval of delegates 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how this pretend JC would function, whether it would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up its' own rules that this motion would have the LNC be bound to follow 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the motion to recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted in favor of but have reconsidered)
Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the pretend JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
--- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
Yes
Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate
On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
I vote AYE. In Liberty, K. Brent Olsen, Psy.D. Alternate, Region 4 On 2018-07-25 05:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
I vote NO. I'd like to discuss at the upcoming in-person meeting. Whitney Bilyeu On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 7:06 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
I vote yes. I do have misgivings and have gone back and forth. This short motion is worded to satisfy every possible view on the JC issue. It says we are bound by the Bylaws while this motion is arguably a violation of the Bylaws. It says we the LNC are bound by any rulings but party members (which we all are) are not. It puts “JC” in scare quotes, which is not reassuring for our view of their legitimacy. It says their resolution of disputes will be binding but affiliates suing us or individuals who lose cases need not choose to be bound by them. In my view, either we currently have a Judicial Committee or we don’t. If we do, the proper course is to reconsider the acknowledgement resolution which was direct and did not have these satisfying but contradictory sentences. If we don’t, we either live without it or we establish an LNC committee in the Policy Manual with clarity about what we’re setting up and what they can and can’t do. So why vote yes? I think it will have the same effect as the acknowledgement resolution: the top seven will be established and quickly assert their authority without any of the supposed limits we’re putting on them. If they go overboard, this motion gives us the right as party members not to be bound by it. If we have some takeover by Trump or Warren at the 2020 convention, they’ll exist to prevent it which we would support them on. And if history is guide, nothing so horrible will happen that we will call upon them; if it does, it will hopefully be serious enough that their word will stick. If members do want to hold off on this so as to discuss it at the next LNC meeting, I may change my vote to support that out of deference to that request; this is a significant issue and no one should feel rushed about it. But I honestly think we’ve talked through the JC issue extensively and every possible option has been considered. This motion does what we need and has majority support to do it. I personally would like our in-person meeting to be as externally focused as possible on what we can do to promote our candidates and help our affiliates, and not overloaded with unfinished inward-looking business. JBH ------------ Joe Bishop-Henchman LNC Member (At-Large) joe.bishop-henchman@lp.org www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837 On 2018-07-25 08:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Exactly this. Thank you Joe Bishop-Henchman for writing what I was thinking about this motion. It's a mess. (I'll be more blunt than you.) It has no authority, and can't thus be used to hold LNC members accountable. It says, "the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters..." The wording then works to undo any semblance of working, by saying, "It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member...". Since, we're *all* members, it's saying that the 'agreement' isn't binding upon any of us. I've gone back and forth on this issue, both through discussion with Region 3 members and leadership, and the parliamentarian, and it's a untenable situation. Many in my region are fine with having no "JC" for a while. Some think there should be one, etc. Joe, you've come the closest to convincing me to vote "Yes", with your statement regarding wasting time, and having our "in-person meeting to be as externally focused as possible on what we can do to promote our candidates and help our affiliates..." I have until 11:59 PM, so will think about what you've written. --- Elizabeth Van Horn On 2018-08-01 11:46, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote yes. I do have misgivings and have gone back and forth. This short motion is worded to satisfy every possible view on the JC issue. It says we are bound by the Bylaws while this motion is arguably a violation of the Bylaws. It says we the LNC are bound by any rulings but party members (which we all are) are not. It puts “JC” in scare quotes, which is not reassuring for our view of their legitimacy. It says their resolution of disputes will be binding but affiliates suing us or individuals who lose cases need not choose to be bound by them.
In my view, either we currently have a Judicial Committee or we don’t. If we do, the proper course is to reconsider the acknowledgement resolution which was direct and did not have these satisfying but contradictory sentences. If we don’t, we either live without it or we establish an LNC committee in the Policy Manual with clarity about what we’re setting up and what they can and can’t do.
So why vote yes? I think it will have the same effect as the acknowledgement resolution: the top seven will be established and quickly assert their authority without any of the supposed limits we’re putting on them. If they go overboard, this motion gives us the right as party members not to be bound by it. If we have some takeover by Trump or Warren at the 2020 convention, they’ll exist to prevent it which we would support them on. And if history is guide, nothing so horrible will happen that we will call upon them; if it does, it will hopefully be serious enough that their word will stick.
If members do want to hold off on this so as to discuss it at the next LNC meeting, I may change my vote to support that out of deference to that request; this is a significant issue and no one should feel rushed about it. But I honestly think we’ve talked through the JC issue extensively and every possible option has been considered. This motion does what we need and has majority support to do it. I personally would like our in-person meeting to be as externally focused as possible on what we can do to promote our candidates and help our affiliates, and not overloaded with unfinished inward-looking business.
JBH
------------ Joe Bishop-Henchman LNC Member (At-Large) joe.bishop-henchman@lp.org www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
On 2018-07-25 08:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
No. I also wish to have this as an agenda item for the next in-person LNC meeting. --- Elizabeth Van Horn On 2018-07-25 08:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Tom Knapp’s position dovetails with my own and this motion. http://knappster.blogspot.com/2018/08/the-libertarian-partys-constitutional.... We have other things to move on to and I’ve seen no evidence that anyone has anything new to add by waitress no two months. And I asked for a meeting - if people are so anxious to discuss this at a meeting why not join that call for a meeting? It seems very contradictory. Either it needs a meeting or not. And either way it behooves is to dispose and move on since there’s been no argument that waiting will improve anything - it’s been discussed to death. If there were *any* indication that a decision would be improved by waiting I would not have made the motion. Those who want a meeting - join in the call before this expires and I bet most yes votes would turn to no. Otherwise it seems like kicking down the road what we can and should deal with now. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 9:49 AM Elizabeth Van Horn <elizabeth.vanhorn@lp.org> wrote:
No.
I also wish to have this as an agenda item for the next in-person LNC meeting.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn
On 2018-07-25 08:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
I vote no, with a preference to take up discussion at the September meeting. I thought that was the preference expressed when JBH floated a proposal earlier. I don't see it as being particularly urgent. Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks, and I'm not aware of any plans to suspend anyone from the LNC, such that that short appeal time frames would be involved. -Alicia On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
This doesn't violate the Bylaws whatsoever. It helps cure a gross distortion of them. And we seem to be operating in part like this is about *us*. It is not. Two months away from convention IS a long time for delegates who may wish to appeal this action or any other action. Getting 10% of delegates when we don't even get email addresses is time-consuming and expensive. This isn't about us. It is about the members and their rights. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I vote no, with a preference to take up discussion at the September meeting. I thought that was the preference expressed when JBH floated a proposal earlier.
I don't see it as being particularly urgent. Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks, and I'm not aware of any plans to suspend anyone from the LNC, such that that short appeal time frames would be involved.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
Perhaps I could have been more clear with my word choice. When I wrote, "Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks", I wasn't referring to this motion. I was instead referring to a generic future action which someone might wish to appeal as a violation of the bylaws. -Alicia On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
This doesn't violate the Bylaws whatsoever. It helps cure a gross distortion of them.
And we seem to be operating in part like this is about *us*. It is not. Two months away from convention IS a long time for delegates who may wish to appeal this action or any other action. Getting 10% of delegates when we don't even get email addresses is time-consuming and expensive.
This isn't about us. It is about the members and their rights.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I vote no, with a preference to take up discussion at the September meeting. I thought that was the preference expressed when JBH floated a proposal earlier.
I don't see it as being particularly urgent. Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks, and I'm not aware of any plans to suspend anyone from the LNC, such that that short appeal time frames would be involved.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors:
Harlos,
Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
If the By-Laws were set aside when electing them, why would the by-laws matter once they are "voluntarily acknowledged"? I suppose if the LNC really doesn't have any power over the JC, then I guess they could just convene themselves if there were an actual issue. Who are we to stop them? But if you bend the rules once, why can't you do it all the time? In the meantime, I don't believe bending the rules again to put a band-aid on it is an acceptable option. I appreciate how unruly the convention body can be, and agree that the Chair does a phenomenal job in keeping the business moving along smoothly. However, when it comes to these elections, I think there are some lessons to be learned that need to be addressed before we move on. Address the root of the problem first. If it takes too many ballots to elect them, we need to use a better voting system, a more efficient method of counting, or anything that would make it take less time. Start earlier. I see some other ideas floating around already. I think it would be a good idea to suggest that the JC assist or be in charge of counting ballots for the LNC, and free up the Secretary for recording. Perhaps we can discuss and bring all of our ideas to Phoenix and work on a lasting plan as a team. I would much rather discuss further in Phoenix. Still Voting No. Thanks! -- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep) Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com On 2018-08-01 13:31, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote no, with a preference to take up discussion at the September meeting. I thought that was the preference expressed when JBH floated a proposal earlier.
I don't see it as being particularly urgent. Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks, and I'm not aware of any plans to suspend anyone from the LNC, such that that short appeal time frames would be involved.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting [1] -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Links: ------ [1] https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
Fixing the root issues is on the agenda -Caryn Ann On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 10:13 PM Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
If the By-Laws were set aside when electing them, why would the by-laws matter once they are "voluntarily acknowledged"? I suppose if the LNC really doesn't have any power over the JC, then I guess they could just convene themselves if there were an actual issue. Who are we to stop them? But if you bend the rules once, why can't you do it all the time?
In the meantime, I don't believe bending the rules again to put a band-aid on it is an acceptable option. I appreciate how unruly the convention body can be, and agree that the Chair does a phenomenal job in keeping the business moving along smoothly. However, when it comes to these elections, I think there are some lessons to be learned that need to be addressed before we move on.
Address the root of the problem first. If it takes too many ballots to elect them, we need to use a better voting system, a more efficient method of counting, or anything that would make it take less time. Start earlier. I see some other ideas floating around already. I think it would be a good idea to suggest that the JC assist or be in charge of counting ballots for the LNC, and free up the Secretary for recording.
Perhaps we can discuss and bring all of our ideas to Phoenix and work on a lasting plan as a team. I would much rather discuss further in Phoenix. Still Voting No.
Thanks!
-- In Liberty, Jeff Lyons
Region 8 Alternate (Acting Region 8 Rep)
Libertarian Assoc. of MA Membership Director http://www.lpmass.org/join
Daniel Fishman for Auditor Campaign Manager http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
On 2018-08-01 13:31, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business wrote:
I vote no, with a preference to take up discussion at the September meeting. I thought that was the preference expressed when JBH floated a proposal earlier.
I don't see it as being particularly urgent. Surely we can avoid violating the bylaws for a few weeks, and I'm not aware of any plans to suspend anyone from the LNC, such that that short appeal time frames would be involved.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting [1] -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
Links: ------ [1] https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
Dear colleagues: I hope all is well with you. I am writing in my capacity as Region 5 representative to vote "aye" on the motion. As always, thanks for your work for liberty. Take care, Jim James W. Lark, III Professor, Dept. of Systems and Information Engineering Professor, Applied Mathematics Program, Dept. of Engineering and Society Affiliated Faculty, Department of Statistics University of Virginia Advisor, The Liberty Coalition University of Virginia Region 5 Representative, Libertarian National Committee ----- On 7/25/2018 8:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org orSecretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1.https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2.mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc. This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term. -Alicia On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
The motion specifies that things would continue as if elected which means their term would end as per Bylaws. I explicitly anticipated that. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:13 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc.
This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes
here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
[2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
So this pretend JC will serve until 2022? --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell On 2018-08-02 02:22, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
The motion specifies that things would continue as if elected which means their term would end as per Bylaws. I explicitly anticipated that.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:13 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc.
This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term. -Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes
here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
[2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org --
-- IN LIBERTY, CARYN ANN HARLOS Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: _We defend your rights_ _And oppose the use of force_ _Taxation is theft_
Unless the 2020 Convention takes care of the problem, yes. That solves the problem that we - through our chair - inadvertently (but still grievously) caused. The delegates can take it up in 2020 -Caryn Ann PS: the official results will be announced shortly On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 6:44 AM Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote:
So this pretend JC will serve until 2022? --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-08-02 02:22, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
The motion specifies that things would continue as if elected which means their term would end as per Bylaws. I explicitly anticipated that.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:13 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc.
This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes
here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
[2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
"That solves the problem that we - through our chair - inadvertently (but still grievously) caused".... You mean we, the delegates as a whole, caused the problem, correct? In other words, this is not a problem that the LNC caused, specifically...I would like to make sure that is clarified for those watching at home...that quote, if taken out of context, could be misleading. On Thu, Aug 2, 2018, 8:45 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Unless the 2020 Convention takes care of the problem, yes.
That solves the problem that we - through our chair - inadvertently (but still grievously) caused.
The delegates can take it up in 2020
-Caryn Ann
PS: the official results will be announced shortly
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 6:44 AM Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote:
So this pretend JC will serve until 2022? --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-08-02 02:22, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
The motion specifies that things would continue as if elected which means their term would end as per Bylaws. I explicitly anticipated that.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:13 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc.
This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes
here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
[2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
If the 2020 convention takes whatever actions are necessary to populate a JudComm, then it makes the lack of an expiration date in this motion a problem. As Ms. Harlos indicated yesterday, her intent is for it to apply for the duration of the 4-year term that would have existed had a JudComm been elected. If the 2020 convention acts and puts different people in for the remaining 2 years of the term, then this motion becomes in conflict with the delegates. At the Phoenix meeting it is my intention to amend the motion just adopted to add an expiration date which would be the end of this LNC term. -Alicia On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 6:45 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Unless the 2020 Convention takes care of the problem, yes.
That solves the problem that we - through our chair - inadvertently (but still grievously) caused.
The delegates can take it up in 2020
-Caryn Ann
PS: the official results will be announced shortly
On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 6:44 AM Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org> wrote:
So this pretend JC will serve until 2022? --- Sam Goldstein Libertarian National Committee 317-850-0726 Cell
On 2018-08-02 02:22, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
The motion specifies that things would continue as if elected which means their term would end as per Bylaws. I explicitly anticipated that.
-Caryn Ann
On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 11:13 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
It occurs to me that this motion contains no expiration date, which could lead to confusion about whether these 7 people would play this role forever, even in a future LNC term, even after a Judicial Committee is elected, etc.
This motion needs to clarify that it expires at the end of this term.
-Alicia
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:06 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes
here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
-- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
[2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org or Secretary@LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft
References
1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
-- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org> or Secretary@LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia@LP.org
A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft*
participants (17)
-
Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) -
Alicia Mattson -
brent.olsen＠lp.org -
Caryn Ann Harlos -
Caryn Ann Harlos -
Craig Bowden -
Elizabeth Van Horn -
James Lark -
Jeff Lyons -
Joe Bishop-Henchman -
Justin O'Donnell -
Sam Goldstein -
Susan Hogarth -
Tim Hagan -
Whitney Bilyeu -
Whitney Bilyeu -
William Redpath