[Lnc-business] Budget motion

Sun Sep 25 01:13:21 EDT 2016

If national is not going to "be national" and do those things that require
a national level of organization, then, I think, it makes perfect sense for
states to have no use for national.  Why encourage your members to send
money to national, if all you get out it is the hope that the money might
come back, at least partially?  That is exactly the reason for my overall
push - to provide support, for all affiliates and members, in a value-added
way.

Appointing people to federal office is not, of course, the only use of
national.  There is money in the budget for affiliate support.  There is
money for training.  I'm suggesting we do this also.  No affiliate is going
to do this work - not because they lack collective supremacy or because I
have no use for them and think badly of them and am disconnected from them,
but because none of them have offices and staff in DC.  None of them, by
definition, are national organizations.  How, exactly, is it an act of
disconnection to offer a service, which all affiliates can benefit from,
and which I think could enhance our electoral standing and ability to place
our members in office?  Which affiliate will suffer from this party having
more officeholders?

I don't see what it has to do with my motion, but I'm also not going to
apologize for thinking that the LP ought to act like a party and get people
into public office.  There are many libertarian organizations doing great
work, and they don't jump through the regulatory hoops we do.  We point to
Adam Smith and tell people the value of division of labor.  I suggest we
let the party do party things, let boards do board things, and stop trying
to be all things to all people.  We are not the libertarian movement, we
are a small part of it with particular strengths and weaknesses.  Moving
public policy isn't some magic spell, nor is it intended to work magic.
I'm not looking for a magic bullet.  It's simply an observation that those
who win elections do a lot more governing than those who lose, that most of
policy making and politics happens between elections (when, coincidentally,
less people are watching), and that if you intend to repeal laws, it is
best to actually get yourself into a position to do so.

Times can change, but relationships still matter, networking still matters,
and things still happen in politics because of who you know and who you can
call.  What has changed is that people are less likely to go out to lunch
now with members of other parties.  They're more shrunk into their boxes,
unwilling to acknowledge that problems have solutions that require more
than party loyalty.  I think our politics has suffered from this, and I'd
suggest that the LP should try to restore some of that dialogue - from
which we benefit disproportionately at the same time.

Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)

On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 11:50 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
> wrote:

> There are a lot of directions and rationales for national - yet we leave
> our affiliates without strong support. The breath of fresh air in that is
> the work and resources that Andy and affiliate support has provided,  I
> believe this is a misdirected vision.  I do not think - as some
> characterize it - we should be a super affiliate - neither should we be so
> disconnected and basically a DC machine.
>
> Federal candidates come from states.  We need to be empowering and
> supporting these states and not be so disconnected.
>
> If we keep having so little interface and use for the affiliates and the
> proper view of their collective supremacy we shouldn't be surprised when
> they have little use for national.  We are the tail and not the dog.  At
> least that is my view.
>
> I don't quite yet have my finger on what I think the solution is but I
> have made no secret of the fact that I ran partly because I saw a lukewarm,
> at best, opinion of national - and that needs to change,
>
> I am not discounting Joshua's view - but I would like to see the LP be a
> revolutionary force in trying new ways of dealing and not the same old same
> old political power structures.
>
> Times are changing.  DC lunch schmoozing is the old way,
>
> And neglecting our educational mandate is a huge mistake.  We will not
> move any policy of we have not tilled the fertile soil and planted
> libertarian ideas.  "Moving public policy in a libertarian direction" has
> become an invocation in my view that is expected to work magic and little
> time it seems is spent on what exactly means.
>
> Just throwing thoughts out there.
>
> On Saturday, September 24, 2016, Patrick McKnight <
> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Josh,
>>
>> These are two excellent ideas for national to focus on.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Patrick McKnight
>> Region 8 Rep
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2016 12:32 AM, "Joshua Katz" <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Background:  Total actual rvenue less actual cost of support and
>>> fundraising YTD, minus budgeted program expenditures, will be $75,243 if
>>> the two email ballots on the budget pass.  This is money in hand above what
>>> is budgeted.
>>>
>>> I will move to increase the following lines:
>>> Litigation:  add $14,000
>>> Candidate, Campaign, and Initiatives:  add $27,000.
>>> Create a new line item under program expenditures labeled "Appointments
>>> and DC Relations" and budget $20,000.
>>>
>>> The remainder of actual unbudgeted revenue, and much of any additional
>>> revenue that comes in this year, should, in my view, be used to pay down
>>> the mortgage.
>>>
>>> Rationale:  Litigation is going to go over budget if email motions
>>> pass.  Candidate, Campaign, and Initiatives will go over budget if email
>>> motions pass.
>>>
>>> As you know, I favor "let national be national" and doing more of the
>>> things that only a national organization of our size can do.  Here are two
>>> of those things:  court the DC press corps, and get our members appointed
>>> to federal offices.  There is enough money in media, I think, to make an
>>> increased push at the press corps.  In support of getting our members
>>> appointed to federal offices, I'd like to see staff build relationships
>>> with friendly staffers in the Senate.  Similarly, we could host luncheons
>>> at HQ for MoCs and staff.  At the same time, what I'd like to do is build a
>>> database of LP members who seek federal appointed office, are serious about
>>> making a move if an opportunity arises, and have serious, credible resumes
>>> for the positions.  When offices open up, these relationships will mean
>>> staff can quickly get an opportunity to place a serious resume in front of
>>> a staffer working for a Senator on the appropriate committee.
>>>
>>> Service in appointed positions will put our members in positions to
>>> change public policy.  It will also put them in a position to run for
>>> elected office after their service with an additional qualification under
>>> their belts.  Building these relationships and making those appointments
>>> happen is something only a party with a serious structure and a DC presence
>>> can do.  This is the right thing to do.  To make it happen, we need to
>>> budget for the costs of those lunches, for the staff time to do these
>>> tasks, and for associated costs.
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20160925/5a765aff/attachment-0002.html>