[Lnc-business] Presidential candidates

Thu Oct 1 11:50:57 EDT 2015

Thank you for that clarification.  My objection to the chair's action of
giving exceptions to the criteria stands, on Policy Manual grounds.  If the
exception makes sense to grant because our party opposes the FEC (see
below), then it makes equal sense to simply not have such a requirement -
actually, that makes more sense.

However, I'm not clear that our party has taken such a position.  The
closest I can come to that in our platform is section 3.6.  However,
compare section 2.4, which first calls for the repeal of the income tax,
and then for the abolition of the IRS.  This shows that we know how to say
when we want to abolish an agency; any logic that lets 3.6 imply the
abolition of the FEC would make the abolition of the IRS in 2.4
superfluous.  Since most of the party would likely oppose any effort to
strike the abolition of the IRS from 2.4, leaving the rest intact, it would
seem that most of the party does not believe that 3.6 calls for abolishing
the FEC.

Let me point out that this is not academic.  Polls are being conducted
where the listed candidates are those listed on our website.  State parties
are planning conventions, and it is not inconceivable that some will rely
upon our listing in making invitations.  The media may well rely upon our
listing in deciding which candidates to contact, precisely because of the
difficulty of sorting out serious candidates from the Form 2 filers.  (I
invite anyone who doubts that particular claim to view the list of Form 2
filers.)

Thank you again for clarifying.

Joshua Katz

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:16 AM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> For the information of the LNC members, the criteria to be listed on
> the LP.org list of 2016 Presidential candidates that I've directed
> staff to apply are that a candidate must:
> 1) Be constitutionally eligible for the office of President
> 2) Be a sustaining member of the Libertarian Party
> 3) Have a campaign website
> 4) Have filed an FEC Form 2 indicating that he/she is seeking the
> Libertarian Party nomination, and
> 5) Not be seeking the nomination of any other political party.
>
> Darryl Perry is listed as an exception that I made because he's
> running an active campaign, attending state conventions to campaign
> among prospective delegates, and refusing to file as a protest against
> an agency that our party believes should not even exist.  This is an
> exception to criterion 4 and at some level subjective, but I wanted it
> to be clear to the LNC that I made that judgment call, not staff.
>
> To address the specific issue of Mr. Petersen, he has indicated that
> he plans to file FEC Form 2 indicating that he is seeking the
> Libertarian Party nomination and has not indicated that his present
> non-filing is any kind of protest, rather than just a delay in doing
> the filing.
>
> To address the legal ramifications, should the delegates decide to
> nominate Mr. Perry, any penalties for non-compliance would come down
> on Mr. Perry and/or his campaign staff.  As long as the LNC continues
> to comply with its FEC compliance requirements, any misbehavior on the
> part of a particular candidate, even if the nominee, still falls on
> the candidate.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> Nick
>
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Joshua Katz <joshua.katz at lp.org> wrote:
> > Colleagues,
> >
> > I have been thinking about this for some time, and have decided to
> present
> > my concern to the LNC for your input.  Here is a relevant Policy Manual
> > provision:
> >
> > Party resources shall not be used to provide information or services for
> any
> > candidate for
> > public office prior to the nomination unless:
> > • such information or services are available and announced on an equal
> basis
> > to all
> > Libertarians who have declared they are seeking that nomination,
> > • such information or services are generally available and announced to
> all
> > party
> > members, or
> > • the service or candidate has been approved by the state chair.
> >
> > This leaves open to some interpretation (some would say it leaves a
> > penumbra) a few questions, such as what "declared" means in provision 1.
> > The easiest way to comply with this provision would be to simply not
> > maintain a list of Presidential candidates.  However, this may not be
> > practical, since HQ will be asked who our candidates are, and we might as
> > well have a list.  I would not be opposed to eliminating the list, but
> I'm
> > also not necessarily opposed to having one.  Nor is it practical to list
> > everyone who says they want our nomination, particularly if we wish to
> > appear credible.  A look at the 1175 FEC Form 2 Filers will confirm that
> no
> > party can list all of its "declared candidates" nor take all, or most,
> > seriously.
> >
> > So, I agree with having objective criteria for being listed as a
> candidate,
> > if we are to have a list.  Here are the 2012 criteria:
> >
> > Filed to run for president with the F.E.C. as a Libertarian
> > Seeking the nomination of the Libertarian Party exclusively
> > Dues-paying member of the National Libertarian Party
> > Campaign website is current with contact information
> >
> > Nothing binds us to observe the past requirements, of course, and I tend
> to
> > think, unless the LNC acts, the definition of the criteria belong to the
> > Chair or staff.  I also don't think the LNC should micromanage those
> > criteria; that is, while I would be fine with the LNC saying not to list
> > candidates, I'd be much less enthusiastic about the LNC trying to write
> > criteria.  Here is a statement of the current criteria:
> >
> > The Libertarian Party recognizes 2016 Presidential candidates who have
> > campaign websites, are dues-paying members of the LP, have met all U.S.
> > Constitutional requirements to serve in office as president, and are not
> > running for the nomination of any other political party. They have filed
> > with the FEC, with the exception of Darryl Perry, who has chosen not to
> file
> > as a protest against the FEC, claiming it lacks constitutional authority.
> >
> > Now, Darryl Perry is listed, as noted above.  Not listed is Austin
> Petersen,
> > who meets all criteria, as far as I know, other than filing FEC Form 2.
> I
> > believe that such a loose criteria as one that can be paraphrased as
> "either
> > filed Form 2, or doesn't want to" is, at least arguably, a violation of
> our
> > Policy Manual requirement to make information or services available
> equally
> > to all declared candidates.  This is, in my opinion, not an objective
> > criterion.  Petersen hasn't filed the form - as far as I know, he also
> > hasn't triggered any requirement to do so, and neither has Perry (or,
> > likely, anyone else.)  He is certainly as much a declared candidate as
> > anyone else.  So hasn't he "chosen not to" file it, at least at the
> moment,
> > making him as qualified for listing as is Perry?  Is there a definition
> of
> > "chosen not to" that excludes, well, anyone?
> >
> > In summary, I believe we can meet our Policy Manual requirement by having
> > objective criteria and sticking to them (equally available to all can
> > reasonably be seen as "equally available to all who have done certain
> > things.)  I believe that, at the moment, either non-objective criteria
> are
> > being applied, or they are being applied selectively, and either option
> is,
> > in my opinion, a Policy Manual violation.
> >
> > I cannot make motions, so I am simply bringing this to the LNC's
> attention.
> > It is not my intent to attack any candidate, or any decision, but rather
> to
> > ensure that our rules are followed.
> >
> > Thank you for your time and consideration,
> >
> > Joshua A. Katz
> >
> > Region 8 (Region of Badassdom) Alternate
> > Libertarian National Committee
> >
> > Elected Libertarian
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lnc-business mailing list
> > Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> > http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20151001/bbcfb672/attachment-0002.html>