[Lnc-business] Developing a regular process for funding Libertarian candidates and campaigns

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I would have to hear all arguments for and against giving funding
authority.  Frankly, we are not nimble enough or responsive enough to
handle the requests.  I would think a hybrid mode of empowering up to a
certain amount and recommendations for larger amounts to come before the
LNC.  At some point, we can't do it all.  And I have been very happy with
the way that the ASC has been handled with Daniel Hayes voluntarily
conducting it in a very transparent manner.  And I do believe that LNC
members should be paying attention to what these committees are doing and
reviewing the minutes. The buck ultimately stops with us.


-- 
*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 Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:44 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:

> In general, I think subcommittees should report back to the LNC, with
> ultimate power being retained by the committee of the whole. Getting away
> from that model means putting power into the hands of smaller groups of
> insiders and to some extent disenfranchising the representatives elected
> directly by party delegates.
>
> In some cases, late-breaking developments or unforeseen circumstances
> might justify providing funds to a campaign that had not submitted a timely
> request for funding. In some cases, LNC members will be well informed on
> the details of races, perhaps better informed than members of the
> subcommittee.
>
> Once a process for applying for funding is established, I think the
> natural tendency will be for the LNC to look skeptically on requests coming
> outside that process, and to rely heavily on it's subcommittee's
> recommendations for dispersing funds. But cutting the LNC out of the
> decision-making loop would be a bad idea.
>
> Like Caryn, I would expect there to be rules mandating transparency for a
> process such as I've described, and agree that should come first.
>
> Love & Liberty,
>                                  ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>                               (415) 625-FREE
>
>
> On Sep 23, 2016, at 8:27 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> And I largely agree with Joshua.  We have spoken on this quite a bit.  And
> of course, I would never vote to approve such a Committee without
> transparency. The whole motivation behind my recent transparency motion is
> to get to a place where we can craft THIS committee for candidate support.
>
>
> --
> *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 Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:24 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree that a process is needed if we're going to do this, and I largely
>> agree with your suggested format.  I have a few suggestions.  First, I
>> would like to appoint the committee with power.  We should strive to
>> appoint a committee that is well-informed and knowledgable on the topic,
>> and let them decide how to parse out the money we budgeted.  We can't
>> expect the LNC to be informed on the details of these races, and I'm not
>> sure what is added by us listening to people who know more about the
>> question, but then acting on the recommendation instead of letting them do
>> it.
>>
>> At the same time, I'd like the LNC to give broad strategic direction to
>> the committee.  We can tell them our major goals for this process, and
>> where funding candidates fits into the bigger picture, and expect them to
>> act in accordance with those broad ideas.
>>
>> That strategic direction should also, in my view, direct the choice of
>> questions for that questionaire.  I'm not going to go through and note
>> every point of disagreement with the suggested questions because, first, I
>> realize they are only examples, and second, I think figuring out sorts of
>> questions there should be without a more explicit statement of what we're
>> trying to achieve is putting the cart before the horse.
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:15 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I continue to feel inadequately informed to vote on these various
>>> requests for funding, and feel that we ought to try to develop a fair,
>>> equitable, and predictable process for the LNC to handle funding requests
>>> from state affiliates, LP candidates, and so on.
>>>
>>> One aspect of this that occurs to me is that while things like lawsuits
>>> and outreach events can happen unpredictably throughout the year, most
>>> general elections happen in November. For that campaign cycle, at least, I
>>> think a promising method for making funding decisions might be to establish
>>> two or three pre-announced funding periods during which times any LP
>>> candidates interested in obtaining funding from the LNC would be invited to
>>> submit their requests. For instance, we might hypothetically designate the
>>> 2nd week in June (after primaries are generally over), the 1st week in
>>> August, and the last week in September as periods for applying.
>>>
>>> For each of these periods, we could budget a total amount of funds to be
>>> distributed, based on our current resources, and announce the availability
>>> of these funds, along with the requirements and deadlines to apply for a
>>> portion of them. Appoint a committee to review all the applications
>>> received and make recommendations to the full LNC on how to divide up the
>>> pile of funds available for that distribution period among the various
>>> campaigns that applied. Lay out a clear timetable – say a week for the
>>> committee to make its recommendations, and another week for the LNC (to
>>> whom the applications would also be made available as they are submitted)
>>> to meet electronically or in person, debate and vote on any amendments to
>>> the committee's recommended disbursements, and get checks sent out – so
>>> that campaigns would know when to expect the requested funds, if any.
>>>
>>> To apply for funding, campaigns could be asked to fill out a standard
>>> form (available on LP.org and perhaps printed in LP News) providing
>>> information such as name, office sought (partisan or non-partisan),
>>> campaign website, and responses to a number of questions such as:
>>>
>>> • How much money are you requesting?
>>> • How would you plan to spend these funds (be specific)?
>>> • How useful would it be to your campaign if you are only granted a
>>> portion of the funding you request?
>>> • Where do you fall on the Nolan Chart (submit filled-out quiz with
>>> application)?
>>> • What are your three top campaign issues?
>>> • What campaign promises have you made?
>>> • How much press has your candidacy received (include links/clippings)?
>>> • Has there been any polling in your race, and if so, what were the poll
>>> results (sources/numbers/dates)?
>>> • How much money have you raised so far, and on what has it been spent?
>>> • What are the legal restrictions on how much you can raise and spend?
>>> • Who are your opponents and how much have they raised and spent?
>>> • Besides trying to get you elected, what is your campaign doing to
>>> build the Libertarian Party and advance the cause of freedom?
>>> • Please list at least one reference other than a family member who can
>>> vouch for you and your campaign and confirm as much of the information
>>> you've provided here as possible.
>>> • Will you provide to the LNC within 30 days of the election a report on
>>> how your campaign went, and how the money granted to you by the party was
>>> spent (being specific)?
>>>
>>> Some of the above questions clearly relate to candidates and would not
>>> be relevant to ballot measure campaigns seeking to defeat or enact a
>>> particular proposal. For those types of campaigns, there might be other
>>> questions not applicable to candidates, such as:
>>>
>>> • Please provide the text of the measure in question (can be a web link)
>>> • Please provide a list of the groups and prominent individuals
>>> supporting the measure in question, and a list of the groups and prominent
>>> individuals opposing it
>>> • What is your assessment of the impact that passing this measure would
>>> have?
>>>
>>> I would propose that campaigns not be deemed automatically ineligible
>>> for funding as a result of failing to provide any particular requested
>>> information, but obviously the LNC and the members of its appointed
>>> subcommittee would be likely to take the completeness of information
>>> provided into consideration when making their decisions.
>>>
>>> What do other LNC members think of this as a general approach for
>>> general election campaign/candidate funding? Any suggested modifications or
>>> additions?
>>>
>>> Love & Liberty,
>>>                                     ((( starchild )))
>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>>                                  (415) 625-FREE
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 23, 2016, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Hayes wrote:
>>>
>>> The initial request was for $12,000 for a television campaign and now
>>> has been lowered to $5000.  I don't understand how either amount of money
>>> on television can have any demonstrable effect on an election.  While this
>>> opponent may have poor name recognition the Democrat Party has an extreme
>>> hold on the vote process in Massachusetts.  How much money has Mr. Simmon's
>>> raised for his campaign so far? This is always one of the considerations I
>>> use when considering a donation to a candidate.
>>> Also, as Whitney has stated, Mr. Simmons says he needs the entire
>>> $12,000 from National.  That isn't legal.  There are ways around things but
>>> that all takes extra time.  Even if members cosponsored this it would still
>>> be at least a day before it even started being voted on and then would take
>>> up to 10 days after that.  This motion doesn't meet the amount he says he
>>> MUST have from the LNC and doesn't meet his time frame.  I wish luck to Mr.
>>> Simmons in his campaign but I don't think we can help him.
>>>
>>>
>>> Daniel Hayes
>>> LNC At Large Member
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 23, 2016, at 11:01 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Just bringing up the immediate practical concerns.  It takes day to get
>>> co-sponsors, if they can be gotten and ten days for an email vote which
>>> already puts this past any week deadline.
>>>
>>> We need a Candidate Support Committee badly.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:54 AM, Patrick McKnight <
>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am seeking cosponsors of my amended motion to allocate $5,000 in
>>>> support a TV ad for Thom Simmons. Thom is running for Congress in western
>>>> Massachusetts. http://simmons4congress.com/
>>>>
>>>> I am forwarding the attached storyboard for Thom Simmons' proposed ad.
>>>>
>>>> From Thom regarding the storyboard:
>>>>
>>>> "They are looking at three different ads that would cover western
>>>> massachusetts (Berkshire region), which, incidentally, would also spill
>>>> over into NY and VT - which could only help with Alex Merced's Senate race
>>>> and the J/W campaign in Vermont as I do not shy away from the Libertarian
>>>> label. :-)
>>>>
>>>> The first and third require some explanation, as they are unique: they
>>>> are REVERSE attack ads, meaning: at first, they start out dark as if they
>>>> are an attack ad against me, with the voice over saying something such as,
>>>> "he wants to end common core.."  The idea is to get people to say to
>>>> themselves, "yeah, me too!"  and then end by showing people they agree with
>>>> me and the LP after they have already said this on their own heads.
>>>>
>>>> The second ad plays on the print media, which has called my opponent
>>>> "disappearing," "missing" etc, by showing him and then fading out.  It is
>>>> the single biggest factor in this campaign, as the Berkshires - dems, reps,
>>>> Inds...are LIVID at his inattention to that portion of the district.
>>>>
>>>> This could be a gamechanger.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that everyone wants money - and I will be blunt: if we are to
>>>> do this, I need $12,000 for the full campaign from National. And I need to
>>>> know within a week to get into production.
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate it if you could bring this to the attention of the
>>>> powers that be in the LP, and see we can get them to invest in my
>>>> campaign.  The Mass State Cmte is fully aware of, and supports this
>>>> request."
>>>>
>>>> "We're talking five weeks of three ads.  There is no realistic way to
>>>> know what percentage of the electorate will see them, except that the only
>>>> TV in western Mass is Cable and they are working through the Cable system,
>>>> so ANYONE watching TV will see them.  Of course you can see the ad, I can
>>>> not produce the ad without knowing I have the funds to do so!  The
>>>> Storyboards give a general idea...we cant expect scripts or more polished
>>>> ads if we cant guarantee to pay the studio.
>>>>
>>>> Most important, there will NOT be a "sea" of political ads:  NO ONE is
>>>> spending TV time in Massachusetts, as there are NO OTHER CONTESTED RACES in
>>>> western Mass!  The Presidential campaigns are not even spending money in
>>>> Mass."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your consideration of this matter,
>>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>> Region 8 Rep
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Thomas Simmons <simmons4congress at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:59 AM
>>>> Subject: Fwd: Simmons rough storyboard concepts
>>>> To: patrick.mcknight at lp.org, Larry.Sharpe at lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Patrick and Larry,
>>>>
>>>> I am forwarding the very rough storyboard mockups from
>>>> WeThinkAdvertising in Schenectady, NY, with whom I met last week for a
>>>> possible TV Ad campaign.
>>>>
>>>> They are looking at three different ads that would cover western
>>>> massachusetts (Berkshire region), which, incidentally, would also spill
>>>> over into NY and VT - which could only help with Alex Merced's Senate race
>>>> and the J/W campaign in Vermont as I do not shy away from the Libertarian
>>>> label. :-)
>>>>
>>>> The first and third require some explanation, as they are unique: they
>>>> are REVERSE attack ads, meaning: at first, they start out dark as if they
>>>> are an attack ad against me, with the voice over saying something such as,
>>>> "he wants to end common core.."  The idea is to get people to say to
>>>> themselves, "yeah, me too!"  and then end by showing people they agree with
>>>> me and the LP after they have already said this on their own heads.
>>>>
>>>> The second ad plays on the print media, which has called my opponent
>>>> "disappearing," "missing" etc, by showing him and then fading out.  It is
>>>> the single biggest factor in this campaign, as the Berkshires - dems, reps,
>>>> Inds...are LIVID at his inattention to that portion of the district.
>>>>
>>>> This could be a gamechanger.
>>>>
>>>> I realize that everyone wants money - and I will be blunt: if we are to
>>>> do this, I need $12,000 for the full campaign from National. And I need to
>>>> know within a week to get into production.
>>>>
>>>> I would appreciate it if you could bring this to the attention of the
>>>> powers that be in the LP, and see we can get them to invest in my
>>>> campaign.  The Mass State Cmte is fully aware of, and supports this request.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for anything you can do for me.
>>>>
>>>> Thom Simmons
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>> From: Theresa Smolen <tsmediaconsulting at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:24 PM
>>>> Subject: Fwd: Simmons rough storyboard concepts
>>>> To: simmons4congress at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Thom, (We have another Simmons we have dealt with in the past - I
>>>> apologize for my last email with Scott in the greeting!)
>>>>
>>>> Here are three commercial concepts.
>>>> They are very rough at this point. We will need more/better photos of
>>>> you if you have more, so we can put together nicer storyboards for you to
>>>> present.
>>>>
>>>> Let us know what you think!
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>> Theresa
>>>>
>>>> Theresa Smolen
>>>> Project Manager
>>>> We Think Advertising
>>>> 426 State Street, 3rd Floor
>>>> Schenectady, NY 12305
>>>> 518.810.8760 cell
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain We Think Advertising
>>>> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
>>>> copyright belonging to We Think Advertising. This E-mail is intended solely
>>>> for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you
>>>> are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that
>>>> any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to
>>>> the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and
>>>> may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify
>>>> the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of
>>>> this E-mail and any printout.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>>
>>>> *From: *Christopher O'Reilly <coreilly at wethinkauto.com>
>>>> *Subject: **simmons*
>>>> *Date: *September 9, 2016 at 1:12:28 PM EDT
>>>> *To: *Theresa Smolen <tsmediaconsulting at gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christopher J O'Reilly
>>>> President
>>>> We Think Auto
>>>>
>>>> (518) 281-5540
>>>> coreilly at wethinkauto.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> www.wethinkauto.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Website: Simmons4Congress.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20160923/163a3a0f/attachment-0002.html>