[Lnc-business] MOTION Re: Letter from member on AZ ballot issues
Caryn Ann Harlos
carynannharlos at gmail.com
Sat Sep 10 15:58:45 EDT 2016
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>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160910/2ba674a7/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list