[Lnc-business] report on Oklahoma visit

[Nicholas Sarwark]

None.  The last year anyone could vote for a Libertarian in Oklahoma was 2000.

-Nick

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Roland Riemers <riemers at yahoo.com> wrote:
> In regards to Oklahoma,  what is our current percentages of voter support
> there?   Roland ND
>
> ________________________________
> From: Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com>
> To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 4:19 PM
> Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] report on Oklahoma visit
>
> Mr. Chair,
>
> Thank you very much for the fast response.  Your comments on the matter are
> well-received.
>
> If we have specific people offering to pay for this specific task then I
> suppose there isn't much I can argue against other than it does seem a
> little silly.  While I appreciate the notion that all 50 states would have
> ballot access, my previous questions were against the examination that there
> remains no real purpose to having 50-state ballot access other than it being
> symbolic.
>
> In many ways this is no different than people across the country pouring
> countless funds into gubernatorial races.  To the extent that certain
> percentages need to be met to retain state ballot access I understand, but
> to the extent that a Libertarian is going to win a governor's seat is just
> ludicrous.  Meanwhile there exist much smaller, manageable races across
> those states that with proper funding people actually could win.  I use this
> as a metaphor to the situation that while it's nice to say we have 50-state
> ballot access, I believe the truth is that it really doesn't mean anything
> for the benefit of the party other than some loose bragging rights to the
> 0.5% of the population that even knows what ballot access means.
>
> Still, I would likely support a measure on the mere notion that I am
> representing Oklahoma and of course want to see them succeed.  I merely
> wanted to put it out there to the group that I think we are approaching this
> kind of decision very lackadaisically and I would hope we would be more
> prudent with such decisions if our goal is to actually benefit the LP as a
> whole.
>
> To your question, I don't know exactly where money would go, but presumably
> somewhere that would produce more than a symbolic gesture for the party's
> success.
>
> Thank you again for your response.
>
> -Kevin
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:
>
> The hardest state to get ballot access in the country became less hard
> after decades of lobbying the legislature to reduce the signature
> requirements.  Immediately after that, the pre-eminent ballot access
> guru and Libertarian activist, Richard Winger pledged $30K of his
> money for the specific project of getting on the ballot in Oklahoma
> for the first time since 2000.  We raised another $35K in matching
> funds for this specific project for a total budget already raised of
> $65K.  There are only two LP ballot access drives going on in this
> calendar year, Oklahoma and South Dakota.  Current projections are
> that we can successfully finish the drive with an increase in the
> budget of between $15-30K above what has already been raised and
> earmarked for the project.  The funds already raised are not fungible
> and cannot be spent on other ballot access projects, nor is there
> another ballot access project going this year.
>
> Oklahoma moved from functionally impossible to difficult.  The
> situation on the ground has made difficult into very difficult.  But
> if Oklahoma is completed successfully, we are on track and on budget
> to have 50 state ballot access for the first time since 2000.  If we
> abandon the Oklahoma drive we are guaranteed not to and will not have
> another chance until 2020.  We already have commitments of $65K from
> our donors to get this done, we have new commitments coming in (like
> from Mr. Chastain) of thousands more to make sure it gets done, and I
> am confident that if we commit to finishing the drive, we will be able
> to raise the funds to get it done.
>
> There is a corollary question.  If you call off the drive now and save
> the unspent money (after any refunds to donors who ask for them), what
> do you propose to use it on instead?
>
> -Nick
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Wes,
>>
>> Thank you for this update.
>>
>> I would like to make a request of the LNC body.  Is there a member that
>> could, in a short paragraph or less, explain why we should be focusing so
>> many efforts on Oklahoma?  As the Region-7 rep I find myself in an
>> interesting position with this issue.  On the one hand I am biased to see
>> Oklahoma get additional resources, but on the other hand I am a practical
>> business person who sees numerous flaws with pouring money into this.
>>
>> Do we want ballot access across the country?  Of course!  This doesn't
>> even
>> need to be discussed.  But at what cost are we willing to attain that
>> goal?
>>
>> What is the actual downside of us losing Oklahoma ballot access?  I don't
>> fully understand the loss would affects others running in the state, but
>> even if it entirely prevented their own candidacy, how much do we lose
>> with
>> that?  This isn't meant to be antagonistic, but rather something the LNC
>> should be tasked with carefully analyzing.  There was a lot of
>> conversation
>> that it hurts our brand in Oklahoma (a similar argument was used in
>> Oregon).
>> No doubt this is true, but in Oklahoma specifically, by how much does it
>> hurt us?  Do we raise an exorbitant amount of money in OK each year that
>> we
>> might not see in 2016 if we cut our losses?
>>
>> I will refer back to a point I've made before.  Would any of you
>> personally
>> spend tends of thousands of dollars of your own money on this cause?  I
>> remain extremely frustrated we couldn't even get our own body to commit to
>> $50 / month as top representatives of the Libertarian Party and yet here
>> we
>> are cavalierly about to discuss whether to spend $10s of thousands of
>> additional dollars on a cause which by all accounts we simply may not
>> succeed in.  I feel very strongly this is the kind of difficult decision
>> the
>> LNC **should** have to make and it strikes me that we haven't really
>> analyzed the cost/benefits of it.  Rather we relying upon the notion of:
>> "we
>> believe in ourselves so let's pour more money into this."  ...a la every
>> government pep-talk ever.
>>
>> I will also concede that I fully appreciate and understand the position
>> the
>> party (specifically the Chair) is in for having raised certain monies
>> specifically tied to us making this effort.  I do get that.  But I'm
>> merely
>> wanting us to consider how much more useful that money could possibly be
>> in
>> other areas.  Are we not a political party?  Could we not politick donors
>> into understanding WHY the money they donated was ultimately moved to a
>> different state cause?  Since everyone is a philosopher here, there is
>> very
>> basic Aristotelian logic at play here regarding donation distribution.  In
>> the famed question, "There is a surplus of flutes, to whom do they go?",
>> they go to the flutists as those are the only people who can use them.  My
>> point being that there is simply no sense in us pouring money into a cause
>> we cannot win when that money could be given to states/people who can
>> actually improve the overall results of our Party - rather than MAYBE
>> catch
>> us up to the status quo.
>>
>> So to conclude, I am in no way saying we SHOULD cut our losses.  But I
>> would
>> really like somebody to quantify for me specifically what we lose
>> (objectively) if we don't chase this goal.  Or for that matter if we chase
>> it and fail.  I am asking that because I believe the "goal" right now is
>> far
>> too broad; of course we all want ballot access.  I want to know if what we
>> would lose is tolerable to the body.  That question seems far more
>> relevant
>> in the decision process.
>>
>> Please feel free to email/call/text me any time of day at 512-773-3968
>> with
>> any questions / comments.
>>
>> Thank you much for your time.
>> Kevin Ludlow
>> Region 7
>> 512-773-3968
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>  I went to Oklahoma for two reasons: first, to help with the petition
>>> drive, but second, to get a closer look so I could decide if I thought we
>>> should just shut it down. We are spending about $2,500 a week there, and
>>> we're about to double that rate, so if we are going to cut our losses and
>>> end it, the sooner the better.
>>>
>>> My bottom line report to the LNC executive committee is that I'm
>>> confident
>>> we can ramp up our signature collection rate enough to finish the drive
>>> before the March 1 deadline, but we are going to have to exceed the
>>> $65,000
>>> budget for Oklahoma by $15,000 to $25,000 to finish the drive.
>>>
>>> I'm recommending we try to finish the drive, but it wouldn't be so
>>> unreasonable to end it now if that's what you decide to do. Things have
>>> gone
>>> worse than we had originally planned.
>>>
>>> We initially hoped that we could do this drive for $2 per signature and
>>> that we could finish it by early fall. Recent petition drives in places
>>> like
>>> Arkansas have gone well, and with stories of petitioners fighting over
>>> turf
>>> and demanding the opportunity to work for us in some places, it seemed
>>> like
>>> we might actually be exceeding the market rate for signatures in some
>>> cases.
>>>
>>> But things have been harder than expected in Oklahoma.  On October 27, we
>>> raised the rate in Oklahoma from $2 to $2.50 per signature, and even at
>>> that
>>> higher rate, finding enough people to work has been a challenge.
>>>
>>> Before we started the Oklahoma drive, stalwart libertarian petitioner
>>> Andy
>>> Jacobs warned us that petition drives for initiatives in other states in
>>> the
>>> fall would be competing with us for workers and would drive up our costs,
>>> so
>>> we needed to get it done over the summer. Unfortunately, we didn't start
>>> until the end of the summer.  And while Andy did good work for us in
>>> Oklahoma for several weeks, he, as well as other petitioners, have indeed
>>> left Oklahoma for the higher paying non-Libertarian Party Petition work
>>> in
>>> other states that he warned us about. Although Andy is out of Oklahoma
>>> now,
>>> he does continue to stay interested in our progress and has been generous
>>> with suggestions for improvement. I'm sure he'd be happy to share his
>>> thoughts on our Oklahoma effort with any of you directly if you reach out
>>> to
>>> him.
>>>
>>> One suggestion from Andy is that we should pay more to entice petitioners
>>> back and possibly even pay $5 per signature for door to door petitioning.
>>> Our petitioners have had hard times finding good locations with lots of
>>> the
>>> kind of foot traffic that makes for productive petitioning. Door-to-door
>>> petitioning can give very high validity signatures, so the $5/signature
>>> rate
>>> for 100% validity is not so far off from $2.50 per signature for around
>>> 65%
>>> validity.
>>>
>>> In hind sight, I wish we had started this drive earlier. But I don't
>>> think
>>> right now we need to offer a higher pay rate (not that we could afford
>>> it,
>>> anyway). Instead, we need to focus on recruiting more petitioners, and we
>>> are already seeing success from that.
>>>
>>> Projections I've sent to Bill Redpath and Nick Sarwark show that with the
>>> new workers we've already recruited, we will likely finish the drive on
>>> time. But we also have several more petitioners saying they will probably
>>> be
>>> here soon to help, and if just a couple of those pan out, we could finish
>>> in
>>> January.
>>>
>>> I've heard lots of complaints from petitioners that it's been very hard
>>> to
>>> find good locations in Oklahoma to collect signatures. Petitioners have
>>> told
>>> us the grocery stores won't let them petition, public places like
>>> universities and festival grounds have been hostile, and the Oklahoma
>>> Driver's licensing places are too numerous to have significant people at
>>> any
>>> single location.
>>>
>>> My uncle lives in Oklahoma City. I visited him Saturday night briefly and
>>> was surprised when he told me he had seen petitioners lately at the
>>> grocery
>>> and post office and he assumed they were ours. I asked him exactly which
>>> locations because I wondered about the conflicting reports. He specified
>>> by
>>> name the Crest grocery, Buy For Less grocery, and post office near his
>>> home.
>>> I had hoped to find time to visit those stores myself to ask why they
>>> might
>>> be letting petitioners for other efforts work there but not libertarians
>>> (assuming that was the case).
>>>
>>> I didn't find time for that, but LPOK vice chair Tina Kelly has since
>>> told
>>> me that even she had been personally told by those chains she couldn't
>>> petition there, only to find out later that one of the petitioners she
>>> recruited somehow did get permission at a location of both chains.
>>>
>>> I think some of our stalwart petitioners like Andy are used to finding
>>> locations where they occasionally hit the jackpot and collect over 500
>>> signatures on a single day. That makes up for the more common slow days.
>>> Petitioners who come from out of town usually have transportation and
>>> motel
>>> expenses they pay out of pocket. Locals don't have the travel overhead
>>> and
>>> we are getting a few locals working. They may be slower than someone like
>>> Andy, but they can go slower and still make the economics work. Locals
>>> can
>>> spend more time asking for permission at more places and can afford to
>>> get
>>> chased away from more locations.
>>>
>>> I personally saw the entire batch of petition forms. That was reassuring.
>>> In fact I pulled an all-nighter Monday and scanned all 2,000 sheets in
>>> case
>>> we need help remotely with validation, and because while often hearing
>>> anecdotes of certain petitioners routinely getting better validity than
>>> others, I wanted the opportunity to see for myself.
>>>
>>> LP vice chair Tina Kelly has been indispensable to this drive.
>>> Petitioners
>>> turn in signatures to her, she gives us the counts, we wire funds, she
>>> writes checks, and pays the petitioners. She also visits with the
>>> elections
>>> authorities to find out important rules and procedures for our petition
>>> drive. She has worked to get cooperation from a couple single-issue
>>> groups
>>> doing ballot initiatives. Although results from those cooperation efforts
>>> have been lower than hoped, we’ve gotten a couple thousand signatures
>>> from
>>> the cooperation.
>>>
>>> Tina's son recently put the Oklahoma registered voter database online in
>>> a
>>> searchable format to assist with validity checking. That will be hugely
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> While Tina has done lots of work, it's hard for one person to do all that
>>> she does plus respond to all the complaints from current petitioners and
>>> inquiries from prospective petitioners, not to mention answering frequent
>>> questions about progress from Bill Redpath and me. We recently decided to
>>> have Paul Frankel help with some of the local management assistance. I
>>> had
>>> gone to Oklahoma with the expectation that I might recommend removing
>>> Paul
>>> to save money, but right now I think we should keep him at least for a
>>> month
>>> to make sure new petitioners have someone they can reach quickly any time
>>> of
>>> day. Later we can reevaluate the cost of having him there.
>>>
>>>  Tina invited me and the LPOK officers and activists to a nice restaurant
>>> Tuesday night. I asked who would be a candidate if we got ballot access.
>>> Out
>>> of about ten people, at least 3 indicated interest, including one who was
>>> against attempting this daunting petition drive originally (because it’s
>>> so
>>> much work), but would run if we made it.
>>>
>>> I told the prospect who might be interested in US Senate I'd give $200
>>> towards the $1,000 filing fee if he runs in 2016, and someone else
>>> quickly
>>> offered another $200. I think we’ll get several people to run for office
>>> in
>>> addition to having our candidate for President on the ballot if we get
>>> ballot access.
>>>
>>> (My plane, where I'm writing most of this note, just landed in DC. Final
>>> thoughts below from the office.)
>>>
>>> I’m not counting on legal help to make a difference in time for us.
>>> However, if our counsel or the Oklahoma ACLU is successful in time, of
>>> course that might make things easier.
>>>
>>> I’m also mindful of keeping alive the dream for 50 state ballot access,
>>> and the negative impact giving up in Oklahoma now might have.
>>>
>>> A Libertarian from Austin, Texas, Michael Chastain, donated $4,000 last
>>> week to help the Oklahoma petition drive. That’s in addition to the five
>>> thousand or so we raised online recently:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/serious-help-needed-for-oklahoma-petition-drive
>>>
>>> I rushed out to Oklahoma Saturday partly so I could be back in the office
>>> Wednesday to meet Mr. Chastain in person (he was visiting the D.C. area
>>> and
>>> was interested in visiting the headquarters today--Wednesday).
>>>
>>> I’ll have more good news about support from Mr. Chastain soon.
>>>
>>> The LNC-EC is schedule to meet Monday 12/7/2015, to decide whether or not
>>> to continue the LPOK drive. I’m sending this info to all of you know in
>>> case
>>> you’d like more information before that meeting.
>>>
>>> cc'ing Richard Winger.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Wes Benedict, Executive Director
>>> Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
>>> New address: 1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
>>> (202) 333-0008 ext. 232, wes.benedict at lp.org
>>> facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
>>> Join the Libertarian Party at: http://lp.org/membership
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ========================================================
>> Kevin Ludlow
>> 512-773-3968
>> http://www.kevinludlow.com/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> ========================================================
> Kevin Ludlow
> 512-773-3968
> http://www.kevinludlow.com/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>