[Lnc-business] MOTION Re: Letter from member on AZ ballot issues

Caryn Ann Harlos carynannharlos at gmail.com
Sat Sep 10 16:00:59 EDT 2016


I would add that the very resolution and commitment of monies lays our
cards on the table and expresses solidarity.  Let's not risk this requiring
a 3/4 vote.  Email voting is difficult enough.

On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yes Joshua let's see your new language, and I believe you are right that
> the "solidarity" language approaches public policy.
>
> I will withdraw my prior co-sponsorship so as not to trigger a ballot on
> your prior proposal, and I will await your new wording.
>
> I would hope that David and Daniel and Starchild will co-sponsor your
> amended version once posted.
>
> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 1:52 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Could I ask that David, or any of the cosponsors, forget for a moment to
>> cosponsor so that I can adjust the appeal language?
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 2:45 PM, David Demarest <
>> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, I will co-sponsor Joshua’s version of the Arizona motion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This issue also strikes me as excellent material for a formal LNC PR
>>> release by the chair given his Arizona background.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The War on Majority Rule Cronyism Begins Now*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High and LIVE FREE*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>>
>>> Secretary, Nebraska Libertarian State Central Committee
>>>
>>> Region 6 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (IA, IL, MN, MO,
>>> ND, NE, WI)
>>>
>>> Nebraska State Coordinator, LP Radical Caucus
>>>
>>> Secretary at LPNE.org
>>>
>>> David.Demarest at LP.org
>>>
>>> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>>>
>>> David.Demarest at firstdata.com
>>>
>>> http://www.LPNE.org <http://www.lpne.org/>
>>>
>>> http://www.LP.org <http://www.lp.org/>
>>>
>>> Cell:      402-981-6469
>>>
>>> Home: 402-493-0873
>>>
>>> Office: 402-222-7207
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On Behalf
>>> Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, September 10, 2016 1:38 PM
>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] MOTION Re: Letter from member on AZ
>>> ballot issues
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So we have three on this.  David will you co-sponsor this one?  or
>>> Starchild will you?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> My view of how the Party should proceed as a whole relative to promoting
>>> candidates is that we as the National Party have the duty to insure our
>>> Presidential Nominee is on the ballot in all 50 states as a Libertarian.
>>> We managed to get out nominee on the ballot in all 50 states, but not as a
>>> Libertarian in all 50 states.  This is something we need to work on in the
>>> next cycle and some of which will take care of itself depending on how our
>>> nominee performs in the election.
>>>
>>> From there I think our focus needs to be on insuring that our down
>>> ticket candidates can get the ballot in their respective states as a
>>> Libertarian, and start building our "bench" and our "farm team" for higher
>>> offices as well as getting Libertarians in position to scale back state and
>>> local laws restricting Liberty.   This recent legislation in Arizona seems
>>> to take things in the opposite direction of where I think things need to go
>>> relative to growing our "team".
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with the points that Mr. Katz has made and like Ms. Harlos, I am
>>> more amenable to a motion or resolution that prepares to take action,
>>> letting our Arizona affiliate know "We got their back" beyond words.
>>>
>>>
>>> It is with that in mind that I will Co-Sponsor this motion by Mr. Katz
>>> regarding Arizona.
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel Hayes
>>> LNC At Large Member
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 10, 2016, at 09:11 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Joshua I prefer your motion.  As I alluded to earlier, I was working
>>> behind the scenes on crafting something myself as this is my region, and
>>> one of my issues was "What is the purpose of this Resolution?  Just feel
>>> good? I would rather have some actual action rather than just 'thoughts and
>>> prayers.'"  This does that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I co-sponsor this gladly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> From the discussion here and information I've read elsewhere, I agree
>>> that this law is an attack on our ballot access in Arizona and presents a
>>> significant threat.  More importantly for our purposes, these sorts of
>>> things, left unanswered, have a tendency to spread.  From the "let national
>>> be national" perspective, we can prevent multiple fights by showing the
>>> first time that when laws target us, we fight back.  I oppose acting like a
>>> "super affiliate" but I do not think that's what's happening here -
>>> instead, we are identifying a national interest in this battle being won,
>>> particularly with the battle now in federal court.  Also, the national
>>> party brings some additional resources, such as access to national media
>>> and national organizations.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I do have to admit that some items here remain mysterious to me, such as
>>> the Greens needing one write-in vote to the thousands required for the LP.
>>> I  haven't been able to find anything on this topic.  From what I've seen,
>>> though, it is clear to me that there are hooks for federal litigation.  As
>>> an example, independents under this law count against vote thresholds in
>>> multiple parties, but each independent can only vote in one primary,
>>> leaving aside the interest a party may have in a closed primary.  There is
>>> Supreme Court precedent, by the way, that states cannot dictate governance
>>> matters in parties as Arizona is, although that's not at issue in this suit
>>> from what I can see - it is relevant because, given what the state
>>> requires, attempting to force parties into open primaries is a further
>>> afront on that matter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, I'm having trouble joining this particular motion because it
>>> seems to say more than it does.  The record seems to show that when we pass
>>> such things, we end up later being pushed into things without full
>>> discussion.  I'd rather we say upfront what we intend to do so that it can
>>> be debated fully.  Here is my proposal, on which I seek cosponsors.  I
>>> don't generally write motions in resolution form, but I'm trying to stay as
>>> close as possible the original proposal.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Whereas, The Arizona state government's new statute increasing the
>>> signature requirements for Libertarians and other alternative party
>>> candidates to appear on primary ballots in Arizona by as much as 20-fold or
>>> more is clearly unfair, burdensome, at odds with legal precedent, and
>>> unconstitutional; and*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Whereas, Plaintiffs have limited resources and could use additional
>>> legal support in fighting to overturn this unjust statute, especially if
>>> the federal district court ruling goes against them and an appeal is
>>> necessary; *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Resolved, That the Libertarian National Committee directs its staff and
>>> chair to reach out to groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union,
>>> the Landmark Legal Foundation, the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Electronic
>>> Frontier Foundation, the American Center for Law and Justice, and other
>>> alternative political parties, to invite them to file amicus curiae briefs
>>> with the court or otherwise provide support to the plaintiffs in the
>>> aforementioned case, and to publicize the matter on a national scope if
>>> feasible; and*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Resolved, That the Libertarian National Committee allocates $5,000 from
>>> the "legal offense" line to be used in the event that an appeal become
>>> necessary from the District Court ruling.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>
>>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 11:46 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you David.  For clarity of record, it is Starchild's well-written
>>> resolution with you and I now as co-sponsors.  We need one more.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 9:02 PM, David Demarest <
>>> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Caryn, I will co-sponsor your proposed LNC resolution regarding the
>>> Arizona’s unconstitutional exclusionary ballot access legislation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The War on Majority Rule Cronyism Begins Now!*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High and LIVE FREE!*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>>
>>> Secretary, Nebraska Libertarian State Central Committee
>>>
>>> Region 6 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (IA, IL, MN, MO,
>>> ND, NE, WI)
>>>
>>> Nebraska State Coordinator, LP Radical Caucus
>>>
>>> Secretary at LPNE.org
>>>
>>> David.Demarest at LP.org
>>>
>>> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>>>
>>> David.Demarest at firstdata.com
>>>
>>> http://www.LPNE.org <http://www.lpne.org/>
>>>
>>> http://www.LP.org <http://www.lp.org/>
>>>
>>> Cell:      402-981-6469
>>>
>>> Home: 402-493-0873
>>>
>>> Office: 402-222-7207
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On Behalf
>>> Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
>>> *Sent:* Friday, September 09, 2016 10:53 AM
>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> *Cc:* Bkeaveney <Bkeaveney at cableone.net>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] MOTION Re: Letter from member on AZ
>>> ballot issues
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I hope those links helped.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can we get some more co-sponsors on this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To correct one piece though of misinformation, one Libertarian candidate
>>> made it through the primary, Greg Kelly (Highlands Justice of the Peace)
>>> who did get the nominating signatures - two others did as well and were
>>> successfully challenged out prior to the primary.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Further Arizona does not have "Top Two"- that was defeated in 2012.  The
>>> only state in Region 1 that I am aware of with Top Two is Washington State.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Oliver is involved in his private legal capacity not as LNC counsel.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This seems to me to be something we are going to have to be involved in
>>> at some point, but this Resolution is a great place to start.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So far there is Starchild and myself.  You in?  :)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
>>> - Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Joshua, there are links too here that will help.  The Court case has a
>>> very good summary of the issues fact-specific numbers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://amthirdpartyreport.com/2016/08/08/arizona-ballot-acc
>>> ess-and-denial-of-preliminary-injunction/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
>>> - Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>
>>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Joshua, at this link is my regional report.  Please proceed to page 17
>>> for a detailed explanation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.lncregion1.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/070816R
>>> egion1report.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Starchild I will of course co-sponsor any such motion and was in the
>>> process of working with Barry on language as this is my Region after all.
>>> And I do detail out this situation in my last regional report.  It makes it
>>> more difficult for candidates to even get on the primary ballot (three made
>>> the petitioning threshold but two were thrown out and I am inquiring about
>>> the status of the last candidate in light of the statement that no
>>> candidates made it through) but it also makes it nearly impossible for them
>>> to be write in candidates since the threshold is the same... BUT with a
>>> smaller pool since the AZLP exercises its right to have a closed primary
>>> (yet the percentage pool includes independents, making a situation in which
>>> it is theoretically possible to have every Libertarian write in a candidate
>>> and STILL not meet the burden).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Barry,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for the additional details. I remain a bit confused by the
>>> inclusion in your explanation of the statement that, "not one single
>>> Libertarian candidate received enough votes to survive the Primary
>>> election" – isn't this an effect of the state government's previously
>>> enacted (and also unfair and exclusionary) "top two" law, and not of the
>>> unfair petitioning requirement? My understanding from what I read here and
>>> in the federal court brief at the link you supplied, is that the
>>> petitioning requirement currently being fought by the Arizona LP makes it
>>> much more difficult for Libertarians and other alternative party candidates
>>> to even appear on *primary* ballots, before even having an opportunity
>>> to receive enough votes to overcome the "top two" hurdle and make it to the
>>> general election. (I note in passing that this brief appears to have been
>>> filed by the LNC's counsel, Oliver Hall, although whether this was done
>>> under the aegis of his contract to provide legal assistance to the national
>>> LP, or independently at the Arizona LP's expense or as a pro bono donation
>>> of services by Mr. Hall, I do not know).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regardless however, it seems clear enough that this is indeed an
>>> onerous, unfair, and unconstitutional new requirement which we all have an
>>> interest in getting tossed out before it keeps more Libertarians and other
>>> non-cartel candidates off the ballot and risks spreading to other states.
>>> Certainly your request that the Libertarian Party provide a formal
>>> statement of support and solidarity and reach out to other possible sources
>>> of legal support to assist in fighting this travesty, seems entirely
>>> reasonable and timely, and one that we ought to be able to honor without
>>> undo difficulty.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Therefore I hereby offer the following motion in accord with your
>>> request, and seek co-sponsorship from my LNC colleagues:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -----------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Whereas the Arizona state government's new statute increasing the
>>> signature requirements for Libertarians and other alternative party
>>> candidates to appear on primary ballots in Arizona by as much as 20-fold or
>>> more is clearly unfair, burdensome, at odds with legal precedent, and
>>> unconstitutional; and*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Whereas plaintiffs have limited resources and could use additional
>>> legal support in fighting to overturn this unjust statute, especially if
>>> the federal district court ruling goes against them and an appeal is
>>> necessary; *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee
>>> expresses our support for and solidarity with the Arizona Libertarian Party
>>> and Michael Kielsky in this matter, and urges the United States District
>>> Court for the district of Arizona to find for the plaintiffs in the case of
>>> Arizona Libertarian Party et al v. Reagan; and*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Be it further resolved that the Libertarian National Committee directs
>>> its staff to reach out to groups such as the American Civil Liberties
>>> Union, the Landmark Legal Foundation, the Pacific Legal Foundation, the
>>> Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Center for Law and Justice,
>>> and other alternative political parties, to invite them to file amicus
>>> curiae briefs with the court or otherwise provide support to the plaintiffs
>>> in the aforementioned case.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -----------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please let me know ASAP if you see any issues with the above language,
>>> before it is approved for a vote.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Love & Liberty,
>>>
>>>                                  ((( starchild )))
>>>
>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>>
>>>                                (415) 625-FREE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 8, 2016, at 10:33 AM, Bkeaveney wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To: Starchild, At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Re:  Arizona Libertarian Party et al v. Reagan
>>>
>>> Federal Civil Lawsuit Arizona District Court, Case No. 2:16-cv-01019
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Issue: The new Arizona election law rules that impose unequal, unfair,
>>> burdensome and unconstitutional requirements for Libertarian candidates to
>>> get on the ballot.*
>>>
>>>    - Details
>>>    - Timeline
>>>    - Types of Support Requested
>>>    - A Clarification
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi, Starchild,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for your prompt and thoughtful reply. It’s much appreciated!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To answer your questions, the current* Federal District Court  Case
>>> filed by the Arizona Libertarian Party* *focus on exactly the same
>>> issues* as the recently defeated *State Arizona Supreme Court case
>>> filed by an individual Libertarian candidate, *Mr. Frank Tamburri, who
>>> was excluded from the ballot in his bid in the U.S. Senate race
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The details of that issue are*:
>>>
>>> In 2015, the Arizona legislature approved H.B. 2608 which amended A.R.S.
>>> § 16-322 to* increase the base from which signatures from candidates
>>> must be acquired*, now including Independents as part of that base.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> With an extra cynical bit of math, the percentage of qualified
>>> signatures needed was reduced, from 0.50% to 0.25% the result of this being *the
>>> number of signatures needed by Republicans and Democrats was approximately
>>> the same *(since their base of registered voters about equal to the
>>> number of registered Independents — but now needing half the previous
>>> percentage)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But the number of signatures needed by Libertarians skyrocketed to 20x’s
>>> more, or more, since to now include the tens of thousands of Independents
>>> as part of the base of our tiny political party dramatically increased the
>>> number of signatures we needed ( 20x’s more, or more) — Yet the Democrats
>>> and Republicans could say this was ‘fair’ since the same rules applied to
>>> everyone.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the outstanding Federal Case of the Arizona Libertarian Party, The
>>> (denied) Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary
>>> Injunction sums this up quite well, at:
>>>
>>> http://ballot-access.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Arizona-
>>> Libertarian-primary-injunctive.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What’s at stake is whether these onerous, unfair, unconstitutional, new
>>> requirements for signatures remain the law or not.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Now we know, now we can see the fact that in our Arizona recent Primary
>>> election at the end of last month, not one single Libertarian candidate
>>> received enough votes to survived the Primary election.
>>>
>>> Thus,* not one single Libertarian candidate made it to the General
>>> Election**
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Timeline,*
>>>
>>> From research, I read: Discovery due by 1/27/2017. Dispositive motions
>>> due by 2/10/2017. Motion Hearing set for 4/21/2017 at 03:00 PM in Courtroom
>>> 603, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003
>>>
>>> Unfortunately Courts quite easily change their dates and schedules. The
>>> Party Chairman of the Arizona Libertarian Party would be able to confirm
>>> the most up-to-date information in this regard.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *What type of support I am seeking.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *The simplest action*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. Put an agenda item before the National Libertarian Party expressing
>>> support and solidarity with the Arizona Libertarian Party in this case.
>>>
>>> 2. Passage of that agenda item.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This could be very useful and let the Arizona Libertarian Party know
>>> it’s not fighting this battle all on it’s own.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *More significant action*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3. The National Libertarian Party could use it’s status and position to
>>>  inform and seek involvement of such groups like the American Civil
>>> Liberties Union, the Landmark Legal Foundation, the Pacific Legal
>>> Foundation, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the American Center for Law
>>> and Justice,etc.
>>>
>>> 4. Such groups — or the National Libertarian Party itself — could file an*
>>> amicus curiae* (a 'friend of the court’ brief) perhaps focusing on
>>> broader issues, like how this is a threat to all third parties (by
>>> including Independents as if part of their voter base). Perhaps, too, using
>>> it’s status and position the National Libertarian Party could seek the
>>> involvement and help from all other 3rd parties who would suffer under such
>>> new rules; or at least alert them to this threat.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Ultimate and maybe necessary action*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 5. If the Arizona Libertarian Party loses it’s Federal case there would
>>> be a need for an appeal. If it loses the appeal then efforts would be
>>> necessary to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
>>>
>>>     To do any of that would require legal and financial resources way
>>> beyond what’s available in Arizona for such appeals. So, if appeals are
>>> necessary, for the National Libertarian Party, other 3rd Parties, or other
>>> legal action groups as mentioned above to consider such help if need be.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *If this Arizona law is allowed to stand it could be used to destroy the
>>> efforts of all third parties in all states. It would be replicated. *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Any action the National Libertarian Party might come up with, itself,
>>> would also be good. *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *A **Clarification *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am not speaking for the Arizona Libertarian Party; I am speaking for
>>> myself, as a Libertarian candidate who would have had enough votes to make
>>> it to the General Election this year, under the previous election laws —
>>> but came no where close and was defeated in our recent primary under these
>>> new election laws taking effect for the first time this year.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In that way I’m like Mr. Frank Tamburri, the recently defeated
>>> Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate, who — as an individual — felt
>>> personal distress and harm as to what happened to them, and thus filed his
>>> State case.
>>>
>>> I also feel personal distress and harm at my defeat under these new
>>> election rules so — as an individual — I’m stating my complaint... and
>>> seeking National Party involvement (because I feel it appropriate and
>>> necessary).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *As in my initial and previous emails I make the point*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *More information is available from our Party Chairman.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Something needs to be done.*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our Party Chairman is:
>>>
>>> *Michael Kielsky*
>>>
>>> Attorney At Law
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *480.461.5309 Direct  |  480.461.5300 Main  |  480.833.9392 Fax
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> 1138 North Alma School Road, Suite 101 |  Mesa, Arizona 85201
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *mk at udallshumway.com  |  www.udallshumway.com
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Thanks again for your concern in this matter and for any action that may
>>> result. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Sincerely, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Barry Keaveney <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Former Libertarian write-in candidate for Arizona State Senate, District
>>> 7 <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> 🗽 <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2016, at 7:41 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Hi Barry, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Thank you for letting the Libertarian National Committee know about this
>>> latest anti-democratic outrage from one of the cartel parties seeking to
>>> deny voters the ability to choose Libertarian candidates by imposing
>>> unequal, unfair, and burdensome requirements for our candidates to get on
>>> the ballot. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> According to the Ballot Access News link you include in your message,
>>> the Arizona Supreme Court has shamefully upheld this candidate suppression.
>>> Darryl Perry expresses surprise in the comments at BAN that Clint Bolick
>>> (recently of the libertarian Institute for Justice and now appointed as a
>>> member of that court, iirc) did not issue a dissenting opinion, and I
>>> wonder about that too. But I'm not quite clear from either your message or
>>> from BAN what's at stake in the District Court case that you mention, or
>>> what relation it has to the Arizona Supreme Court case. Can you provide
>>> more information on this, the status/timetable of the case, and what kind
>>> of support you are seeking? <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Love & Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>                                   ((( starchild )))
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>                                 (415) 625-FREE
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> On Sep 6, 2016, at 2:09 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> I present this letter sent to me with concerns about the difficulties in
>>> AZ <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Dear Folks,  <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> I’ve written to some of you before but feel the need to present this one
>>> last summary concerning <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> the crippling of all Libertarian candidates in Arizona, due to new
>>> election laws having now taken effect for the first time.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *THE PROBLEM FOR LIBERTARIANS IN ARIZONA:
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> The Republicans successfully crippled the Libertarian Party in Arizona,
>>> with the passage of HB 2608 last year. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>  Libertarian write-in candidates now, this year for the first time, *now
>>> needing 10x’s to 20x’s more votes in the primaries to try to stay on the
>>> ballot for the general elections*;  <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> (and if collecting signatures to become a candidate, the same increase
>>> applies). <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *This is due to Libertarians now needing to consider all registered
>>> Independents as part of their voter base. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *IN THE RECENT ELECTIONS, LAST WEEK, NO LIBERTARIAN CANDIDATES IN
>>> ARIZONA GOT PAST THIS NEW PRIMARY HURDLE, now needing 10x’s to 20x’s more
>>> votes. (Because Independents now counted as part of their voter base)
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *Less than a week before our Primary on August 30th the Arizona Supreme
>>> Court upheld this new law, in a case similar to the court case filed by the
>>> Arizona Libertarian Party <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> See, information at: ballot-access.org/2016/08/
>>> 28/arizona-supreme-court-upholds-2015-law-that-excludes-all-
>>> but-one-libertarian-from-2016-primary-ballot/
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *People get upset about voter suppression. This is even worse, this is
>>> suppression of what candidates can get on the ballot.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> I don’t see how any Libertarian candidate can get elected if this court
>>> case, Arizona Libertarian Party et al v. Reagan
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Federal Civil Lawsuit Arizona District Court, Case No. 2:16-cv-01019 is
>>> not successful, or appealed even to the Supreme Court if necessary.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *I hope you could offer real support to this. After our recent Primary
>>> Election, there were no Libertarian candidates left.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *If this new election law requirement stands, it’s a death knell, not
>>> just for our State party, but for all 3rd parties when it is copied and
>>> done in other states as well. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *So I make this last effort to raise the alarm: Defeat this new election
>>> law requirements now, before it spreads. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *More information is available from our Party Chairman.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *Something needs to be done. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Our Party Chairman is:  <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *Michael Kielsky <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Attorney At Law <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *480.461.5309 Direct  |  480.461.5300 Main  |  480.833.9392 Fax
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> 1138 North Alma School Road, Suite 101 |  Mesa, Arizona 85201
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *mk at udallshumway.com  |  www.udallshumway.com
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Sincerely, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Barry F. Keaveney (citizenbfk) <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> 150 N. 5th St., #21 <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Show Low, AZ 85901 <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> (928) 207-3026 <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> https://www.facebook.com/citizenbfk <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> https://citizenbfkblog.wordpress.com <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Note: I, personally, just lost my primary bid last week. But in
>>> previous years I would have had enough votes.
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> The new election law, requiring 10x’s to 20x’s more votes in the Primary
>>>  crushed my primary bid, crushed the primary bid of all our candidates last
>>> week. <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> -- <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *In Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> -- <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *In Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> -- <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *In Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> -- <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *In Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> -- <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> *In Liberty, <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos <http://www.udallshumway.com/>*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>   <http://www.udallshumway.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>
>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>
>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>>
>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>>>
>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
<http://www.lpcolorado.org>
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160910/496ab17d/attachment.html>


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list