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

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Well Joshua you and I have different opinions on the benefits or lack
thereof of our kludginess but we both agree with empowered committees with
a slight variation.

But my support will instantly dissipate without transparency.

What you said above - if not accompanied by transparency - will completely
compromise our bottom up ethic and make us a mirror of same old same old.

We must be careful not to get ivory throne-it is.  I'm not saying you did
that.  I am giving a cautionary call and announcing I am immovable when it
comes to retaining cooperative member accountability.

- Caryn Ann

On Saturday, September 24, 2016, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I stand firmly in favor of empowered committees, and here's why.  It's not
> because it's too much work for us to approve expenditures.  It's not
> because we're too slow.  It's because I think the power to budget, and the
> power to spend out of that budget, should be separated as much as
> possible.  One reason for this is institutional, separation of powers, and
> so on.  Another is more practical - the skills involved in the two
> activities are different, and having different people do them allows for
> each to be done by the people who are good at it.  Now, you might say -
> actually, Starchild already did - that, well, the people good at figuring
> out how the money should be spent can do that, then give it to us for
> approval.  On what basis will we approve or disapprove?  We've already
> decided how much money should be spent on the broad category, we've already
> acknowledged that the committee members are better than we are at deciding,
> within that broad category, how it should be broken down, but we want to
> check their work anyway for some reason?
>
> For another thing, while we're not nimble, I have argued on this list
> before that not being nimble is a good thing.  Expanding on that theme,
> boards have important jobs to do.  Organizations of a certain size need
> boards, and they need them to do board-y things.  No matter how smart or
> skilled people are, their minds are not good at switching frequently from
> big picture to small picture.  You can't have your board down in the weeds,
> telling staff how to do their jobs, figuring out the best strategy for a
> small-town city council race, deciding between funding a state rep race in
> Nevada and a Congressional race in Massachusetts, and also expect that same
> board to provide effective board governance.  Small example - if the board
> is involved in those sorts of questions, emotional attachments develop,
> which boil up when that same board tries to create budgets.  These need to
> be separated because the high-level functions are important and won't be
> done effectively if they are not.  Being slow is also part of a board's job
> - the sorts of things a board deals with should not be changed suddenly,
> have large lag-times, and need to be dealt with slowly.  Boards steer large
> ships; let management drive the speedboats.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carynannharlos at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','patrick.mcknight at lp.org');>,
>>>>>> Larry.Sharpe at lp.org
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tsmediaconsulting at gmail.com');>>
>>>>>> Date: Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:24 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Fwd: Simmons rough storyboard concepts
>>>>>> To: simmons4congress at gmail.com
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','coreilly at wethinkauto.com');>>
>>>>>> *Subject: **simmons*
>>>>>> *Date: *September 9, 2016 at 1:12:28 PM EDT
>>>>>> *To: *Theresa Smolen <tsmediaconsulting at gmail.com
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','tsmediaconsulting at gmail.com');>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christopher J O'Reilly
>>>>>> President
>>>>>> We Think Auto
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (518) 281-5540
>>>>>> coreilly at wethinkauto.com
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','coreilly at wethinkauto.com');>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> www.wethinkauto.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Website: Simmons4Congress.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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 <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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 <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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/20160924/90da6761/attachment-0002.html>