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

Sat Sep 24 12:08:14 EDT 2016

I strongly agree we need a candidate support committee.

Thanks,
Patrick McKnight
Region 8 Rep

On Sep 24, 2016 10:35 AM, "David Demarest" <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
wrote:

> Caryn, I fully agree with your priorities, transparency first to avoid
> creating and staffing more committees not committed to transparency.
> Libertarian rejection of authoritarianism and statism is toothless and
> meaningless without a commitment to transparency.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Libertarianism – Principle and Transparancy Before Party *
>
>
>
> ~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
>
> 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 24, 2016 8:49 AM
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> *Cc:* Demarest, David P. <david.demarest at firstdata.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Developing a regular process for funding
> Libertarian candidates and campaigns
>
>
>
> David,
>
>
>
> This probably got lost among the noise but back at our last meeting, our
> Chair suggested the creation of this committee.  It lit my fire, and
> Joshua's.  We both agreed. We had been having on and off discussions
> off-list about co-sponsoring a motion to create such a committee.  I
> communicated that I could not co-sponsor, and in fact will oppose the
> creation of any future committees without either one of the following:
>
>
>
> 1. A general default transparency policy
>
> 2. That committee voluntarily agreeing to transparency (though that is
> problematic since future committee members are not bound)
>
> 3. A very good reason why that particular committee should be exempt
> (example: the APRC, though I am not convinced that one should be, it is an
> example of an exempt committee)
>
>
>
> To work towards that end, I put forth my general default transparency
> policy proposal.  It is a prerequisite for me to know how to proceed with
> Joshua in making a proposal.
>
>
>
> We are perilously close to re-introducing an entrenched culture of
> secrecy, and I will oppose that.  The expediency of needing a committee now
> will not cause me to sell institutional culture down the river (in my view
> - this is not intended as an insult against those who have good faith
> disagreements).  Just as the expediency of needing a contract didn't.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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 Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 7:34 AM, David Demarest <
> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>
> Caryn, I agree with your support for creating and staffing a candidate
> support committee. I assume that the set agenda for the LNC conference call
> meeting tomorrow evening dictates that discussion of creating a candidate
> support committee will have to wait for our face-to-face LNC meeting in
> Alexandria on December 10-11.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> *Libertarianism - Principle Before Party *
>
>
>
> *The War on Majority Rule Authoritarian Cronyism Begins Now!*
>
>
>
> ~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
>
> 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 23, 2016 10:24 PM
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Developing a regular process for funding
> Libertarian candidates and campaigns
>
>
>
> I am really in favour of a candidate support committee.  I have observed
> the affiliate support committee and been very impressed.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:15 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
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160924/ba681ea0/attachment-0002.html>