[Lnc-business] Motion to Suspend

[Starchild]

Brian,

	Thank you and the members of the Libertarian Party of the Seacoast (New Hampshire) for taking the time to voice your concerns to members of the Libertarian National Committee. While suspending the nomination of a candidate or candidates is a very radical step not to be taken lightly, it is provided for in our party's Bylaws, and I do not think it should ever be "off the table". When our vice-chair introduced a pro-forma motion at the request of a member to remove William Weld from the ticket at the LNC meeting immediately following the Orlando convention, I was the only voting member present who did not vote no (I abstained, on the grounds that we had not been given enough information about the alleged irregularity in the vice-presidential nominating procedure that prompted the motion). 

	But while I, like your regional representative Patrick, definitely share your disappointment with and distaste for some of the non-libertarian messaging coming from our presidential ticket, simply dumping Johnson and Weld at this point does not strike me as a well-thought-out plan. For one thing, suspending a campaign is basically the "nuclear option". I think an official warning from the LNC that we are considering suspension if changes in the campaign's messaging are not made would be in order first. But I'm loathe to take even that step without more indication that our membership feels such a response to statements the candidates have made is warranted. After all, the membership voted (as delegates at our convention) to make Johnson and Weld our candidates knowing they were not hardcore supporters of freedom. Although I was not among those who voted to nominate them, I respect the bottom-up process that led to their selection. The prospect of such a decision being unilaterally overturned by a small body like the LNC, even if done for valid reasons specified in our Bylaws and with the best interests of the party and movement in mind such as candidates going against our Platform, is very troubling to me. How many people who did vote to nominate Johnson and/or Weld now regret that decision and would like to see them suspended? I don't know, but I would want to see evidence that a significant number of former supporters feel that way before even threatening a campaign with suspension. Otherwise we risk disenfranchising our membership, and I think making a habit of that could be even worse in the long run for our party and our cause than an insufficiently libertarian presidential ticket.

	I would also want to see the implications of suspension honestly addressed and a plan of action developed accordingly. For instance, who if anyone would replace the presidential ticket? Would we even be able to put any other names on many state ballots or officially run NOTA? I rather suspect it would be too late for substitutions in most if not all cases. How would that impact our ballot access? Would it affect down-ticket races? Would we be exposing the national party to legal risk? What would be the likely effects of such action on the Libertarian Party generally? These and other questions would need to be answered. There would need to be a well-researched and documented listing of the grounds for suspension drawn up with all the care and diligence of a court brief. In short, this is not something that should be undertaken lightly, and in all honesty, it would take a lot more than I've seen yet to convince me it is the best course of action.

	Frankly I would prefer to see party members who share your disappointment with Johnson/Weld putting their efforts into organizing to make sure Libertarians don't find ourselves in this position again! Here are a few specific suggestions:

(1) Research and write up an amendment or amendments to the party Bylaws that would make it more difficult for candidates who are not libertarian enough to faithfully represent the Libertarian Party to be nominated for president or vice-president, or having received been nominated, to make statements at odds with libertarianism and our party's Platform
  
(2) Identify people willing to serve on the Bylaws Committee who support your amendment(s) and lobby LNC members to get them appointed to the committee; follow up at the next convention by campaigning against those LNC members or Bylaws Committee members who do not support the amendment

(3) Work to organize and mobilize the "libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party" and get more strongly libertarian delegates to attend the 2018 and 2020 LP national conventions

(4) Identify strongly libertarian candidates to run for president and vice-president in 2020 and get their campaigns started early

	For what it's worth, as a member of the Johnson/Weld campaign's Libertarian advisory board, our board has adopted and sent to the campaign (via campaign staffer Steve Kerbel, copied on this email, serving as our liaison) a number of motions urging the campaign to take more libertarian positions on various issues, including gun rights, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, prostitution, taxes, and freedom of association. We've also urged them to be more faithful to our Platform in general, and when their views are not in sync with libertarian views as expressed in the LP Platform, to make clear how their views differ from the Platform. Unfortunately the response from the campaign on the latter was that they were nominated based on their positions and are not willing to make a policy of pointing out differences with the Platform. On the other hand, they have accepted some of our issue advice and other suggestions, such as to mention that they will want included in a Johnson administration individuals from the Libertarian Party and larger libertarian movement who bring a fresh "outside the Beltway" perspective (we urged this in response to a comment from Gary offering Mitt Romney a potential spot in his administration if he's elected). 

	If you have input or advice you'd like us to consider formally passing along, please feel free to send it to me. Examples of specific things Johnson or Weld or their surrogates have said that you find problematic, with documentation (generally a link), and suggestions for specific alternate language, are most helpful. FYI, the Libertarian advisory board members appointed by the campaign are:

Aaron Starr
Arvin Vohra
Austin Petersen (no longer on committee unless he rejoins)
Ben Backus
Caryn Ann Harlos
Danny Bedwell
Doug Craig
Manny Klausner
Starchild
Will Coley

Love & Liberty,
                                   ((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
                                (415) 625-FREE


On Sep 14, 2016, at 10:24 PM, Brian McQuade wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
> 
> Thank you for your quick response, it is appreciated. Article 13 covers for this situation if you can get two co-sponsors. So I suppose the question now is, do two other representatives here have the courage to stand for principle and help you cosponsor the submitted question via email per this bylaw?  Or will you all sit idly by and root for our party like our favorite sports teams such as the Democrats and Republicans do?  I understand this isn't comfortable for anyone, but I propose we be the solution, not the problem with politics in this country.
> 
> Thank you all for your time on this matter.
> 
> Brian McQuade
> 
> Quoting Patrick McKnight <patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com>:
> 
>> Brian,
>> 
>> Thank you very much for reaching out to me. I certainly agree with your
>> frustration about the messaging coming from the top of our ticket.
>> 
>> However the next LNC meeting isn't until after the Election so I'm afraid I
>> am not able to accommodate your request as per Article 14.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Patrick McKnight
>> Region 8 Rep
>> 
>> On Sep 14, 2016 11:56 AM, "Brian McQuade" <chair at lpseacoast.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Patrick,
>>> 
>>> On September 13th at the regular business meeting of the LP Seacoast, a
>>> motion was made and passed to contact you regarding the presidential ballot
>>> of Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. The motion asked that you make a motion to
>>> the LNC to suspend the nomination of both Gary Johnson and Bill Weld as
>>> they do not uphold the principles of the Libertarian Party as both have
>>> openly made statements in support of the use of force. Both candidates
>>> actively avoid using the word libertarian and have demonstrated time and
>>> time again an inability to even grasp what it means to be libertarian. Per
>>> Article 14, Section 5 of the LP bylaws, a candidate’s nomination may be
>>> suspended by a 3/4 vote of the entire membership of the National Committee
>>> at a meeting. We understand that this motion has a low probability of
>>> success, but we’re asking you to show that there are some in the
>>> Libertarian Party who still hold principle above party. Do you have the
>>> principle to stand with those who voice opposition to those without
>>> principles? Will you put forth an effort on behalf of principled
>>> libertarians or will you willingly step back, swallow your principle and
>>> pump the party line? Is this still the "Party of Principle?" Members of
>>> your region are speaking out and the ball is in your court. We will
>>> patiently await your response.
>>> 
>>> Brian McQuade
>>> Chair, Libertarian Party of the Seacoast New Hampshire
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160917/099f0bc3/attachment-0002.html>