[Lnc-business] A last-minute argument

[Joshua Katz]

Fellow LNC members:

I am sad that I will not be in New Orleans this weekend, both because I'm
missing the meeting and because I've heard it's a fun town.

As I am not present in person, I would like to make one last argument
against a proposal to modify the Policy Manual to eliminate or lower the
requirement to pay down mortgage principal in odd-numbered years.

I understand that the purchase of the "building," to many, was seen as a
way to enhance cash-flow.  But this benefit still exists in even-numbered
years.  In any event, I view picturing a mortgage that way as an act of
financial irresponsibility.

We serve 2 year terms on the LNC.  If this provision is changed, it is
likely that many of us will not be on the LNC when the balloon payment
comes due.  For us to kick to a future board responsibility for a large
payment, because we didn't want to chip away at it previously, seems to me
to be on par, at a smaller scale, with precisely the way the Democrats and
Republicans write this nation's budget.  We promise to be different, to be
better.  Why should any voter believe us that we will manage this nation's
resources in a better way if we choose to kick our own expenses down the
road?

The financial aspects should be clear.  We're not just talking about a
balloon payment vs. chipping away at the amount owed.  We're also talking
about a large difference in interest payments.  A reduction in the
principal every odd-numbered year will make a dramatic difference to this
party long-term.  Do we intend for this party to be around for the
long-haul, or to fold up and disappear?  I intend for the former, and think
we should look at the long-term health of this party rather than short-term
cash-flow.  Even those who want this modification agree with this in
principle - every time we decide to spend money on ballot access,
advertising, or much anything else, while in a cash-flow crunch, we are
prioritizing the growth of the party over current cash flow.  Why should
taking care of our debts be the only victim of a need for more cash?

America did not get into its financial hole in one fell swoop.  It happened
over time - it happened by, one time after another, pushing the can down
the road, raising the debt ceiling, and so on.  As a voter, I am supposed
to believe that the Libertarian Party can do better after watching us walk
down the same path?

To eliminate this policy manual provision is to put ourselves in the
position of the credit card user who, realizing he has spent too much
money, decides to make only the minimum payment.  We all know this is not
financially wise.

I disagree with the basic premise that the "building" should be used as an
ATM in the first place, but at least this policy manual limits our use of
it that way to even-numbered years.

The most successful Libertarian campaigns, such as Aaron Starr for Oxnard,
have focused precisely on financial responsibility.  If we were talking
about a newly-purchased federal park or building, and Congress exempted
itself from making principal payments that had helped secure passage,
Libertarians would be lining up around the block to denounce this action as
yet another reason not to trust the two old parties and to elect
Libertarians.  We'd be absolutely right to do so.

Yes, eliminating this would make it easier to have a balanced (or even
surplus) budget - and we really need a surplus budget to build reserves
going into a Presidential year.  I understand that.  I urge that we find
other ways, find other expenses to cut, before we consider not paying a
self-imposed financial responsibility.  There is little fat to cut, so
balancing the budget, or creating a surplus, requires cutting into muscle.
You will say, correctly, that I'm not there for these hard choices.  I have
passed suggestions about difficult decisions to LNC members who will be
there.  I urge that we make these hard choices now, not in 10 years.

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20141211/92c5bac5/attachment-0001.html>