[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2016-15: Censure John Moore

Whitney Bilyeu whitneycb76 at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 16:05:20 EDT 2016 

For the record...with regard to my previous comment:

While requesting a refund is not enforceable, demanding one is
unfavorable.  We did not, to my knowledge, have Assemblyman Moore sign any
contract upon receipt of said funds; therefore, demanding the money back
would imply that we had an official agreement of expectations and
promises...we didn't.

I do not oppose making a formal request for restitution, then any future
engagements with the Assemblyman would hinge on his response to said
request.

Whitney Bilyeu
Region 7 Representative



On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I would prefer that any action we take to be substantive, and not just
> symbolic.
>
> Does anyone have the answers to Alicia's previously raised questions
> regarding censure of someone not part of the organization calling for the
> censure.  I would also like to point out that 'requesting' that the funds
> be returned is not enforceable.
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Edit - we are involved because we *gave* money given to us in trust.
>>
>> You are very welcome Sean.
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Sean O'Toole <sean at kingfieldcapital.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Caryn.
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Sean O’Toole
>>> sean at kingfieldcapital.com
>>> (816) 739-2737
>>> On 22 Oct 2016, at 12:16, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>
>>> Sean - hats off to you. <slow clap>
>>>
>>> I agree completely.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Brett Bittner <brett.bittner at lp.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I intend to vote on this matter, however I do not intend to do so until
>>>> we've heard from Assemblyman Moore.
>>>>
>>>> Brett C. Bittner
>>>>
>>>> Region 3 Representative
>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>
>>>> brett.bittner at lp.org
>>>> 317.643.2566
>>>>
>>>> **This message sent from my phone. Please excuse any typos.
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 22, 2016 08:44, "Sam Goldstein" <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I vote Yes.
>>>>>
>>>>> This would have been one of the best opportunities to vote on
>>>>> principle and to make
>>>>> a major impact on big government that the LP has had in our history
>>>>> and Mr. Moore
>>>>> failed miserably.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Sam Goldstein
>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>> Member at Large
>>>>> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>>>>> Indianapolis IN 46260
>>>>> 317-850-0726 Phone
>>>>> 317-582-1773 Fax
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Patrick McKnight <
>>>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I vote yes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>>>> Region 8 Rep
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Oct 22, 2016 8:14 AM, "David Demarest" <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thank you Alicia. I agree that the death penalty deserves a separate
>>>>>>> email thread of its own. I also was not aware of the numbers on the death
>>>>>>> penalty plank vote. Nevertheless, I would consider 364 to 105 overwhelming
>>>>>>> but disappointingly not high enough considering the moral implications as
>>>>>>> spelled in the full text of my testimony as follows, which, by the way,
>>>>>>> turned out to be an extraordinary opportunity to publicize the LP in
>>>>>>> Nebraska:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> “Mr. Secretary,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David Pratt Demarest, 10812 Park Meadow Plaza #133, Omaha, NE 68142
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Nebraska and Regional
>>>>>>> Representative on the Libertarian National Committee.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am here today as a private Nebraska citizen to support the
>>>>>>> retention of LB268 that repealed the Nebraska death penalty as confirmed by
>>>>>>> the override of the Governor’s veto. However, I can tell you that Libertarians
>>>>>>> overwhelmingly support the repeal of the death penalty not only for
>>>>>>> practical reasons but more importantly for moral reasons. I am personally
>>>>>>> aware of *NO* Libertarians in Nebraska or across the nation that
>>>>>>> support the death penalty.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Much evidence has been presented today demonstrates the indisputable
>>>>>>> failure of the death penalty as a deterrent compounded by the financial
>>>>>>> burden it imposes on taxpayers and the extended pain and suffering it
>>>>>>> visits on victims. To add insult to injury, victims lose twice and end up
>>>>>>> revisiting the pain, anguish and suffering with no closure because of the
>>>>>>> undue focus on deterrence, punishment and vengeance on the perpetrators
>>>>>>> instead of seeking restitution for the victims. The immoral use of the
>>>>>>> death penalty to obtain false confessions was dramatically illustrated by
>>>>>>> the infamous Nebraska Beatrice 6 case.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am here, however, to speak to the overriding moral issue. In
>>>>>>> addition to the barbaric nature of state-sponsored killing, the risk of
>>>>>>> predictable executions of some innocents is beyond morally unacceptable, it
>>>>>>> is unconscionable! Further, the possibility of the death penalty being used
>>>>>>> as a *political football* to obtain reelection votes raises a host
>>>>>>> of ethical questions. To those who might be tempted to advocate the
>>>>>>> death penalty for political purposes, you need to reexamine your
>>>>>>> conscience and your political, personal and moral priorities.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To voters in the audience, I urge you vote your conscience, vote to
>>>>>>> “Retain” LB268 and vote to uphold the death penalty ban in Nebraska. It is
>>>>>>> not just practical. It is the only moral choice!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have been selected for poll worker duty. I have to vote early and
>>>>>>> have already voted. I am proud to tell you that I voted to retain LB268 to
>>>>>>> ban the death penalty from Nebraska. I hope you will too!”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>>>>> Behalf Of *Alicia Mattson
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 22, 2016 3:15 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2016-15: Censure John
>>>>>>> Moore
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> DD>> In the introduction to my testimony, I mentioned my positions
>>>>>>> with the LNC and the LPNE and I said that while I was there to testify as a
>>>>>>> private citizen, Libertarians are overwhelmingly against the death penalty
>>>>>>> and that I was personally aware of no Libertarians in Nebraska or across
>>>>>>> the nation that support the death penalty. <<DD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not to change the subject or start a debate on the death
>>>>>>> penalty...just addressing a factual detail that came up in the example
>>>>>>> situation.  At the national convention there was a counted vote on the
>>>>>>> adoption of our death penalty plank, and there were 364 in favor and 105
>>>>>>> opposed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 12:44 AM, David Demarest <
>>>>>>> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will delay my vote until we hear from John Moore. It may be that
>>>>>>> merely offering the motion to censure will achieve our intended purpose to
>>>>>>> express our outrage. In the meantime, however, we need to consider Ken’s
>>>>>>> salient point about taking into account an elected official’s duty to
>>>>>>> represent the views of his constituents and the articulate responses by
>>>>>>> Caryn and Alicia.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I must say I am bothered by the reference to the 60% of constituents
>>>>>>> favoring the position that Assemblyman Moore voted for as justification for
>>>>>>> his misguided votes. As Caryn has correctly pointed out, we have a duty to
>>>>>>> reflect the principles of our party. More importantly, we have a duty to
>>>>>>> reflect our personal principles of conscience that hopefully are reasonably
>>>>>>> consistent with our party’s principles. Even allowing for the fact that no
>>>>>>> two Libertarians are going to agree on all details of all principles,
>>>>>>> Assemblyman Moore’s votes go beyond the pale. Here is a recent example from
>>>>>>> my personal experience on the cronyism evils of basing political positions
>>>>>>> and votes on the consensus of constituents regardless of any considerations
>>>>>>> of principles and morals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Last week I testified against the Nebraska referendum to reinstate
>>>>>>> the death penalty at a legally mandated District 2 hearing. The Unicameral,
>>>>>>> with the support of Libertarian Senator Laura Ebke, narrowly overrode
>>>>>>> Governor Ricketts’ veto of the bill that repealed the death penalty.
>>>>>>> Governor Ricketts then used a “substantial” contribution from his personal
>>>>>>> fortune to sponsor the ballot referendum to reinstate the death penalty
>>>>>>> that was the subject of the hearing. In the introduction to my testimony, I
>>>>>>> mentioned my positions with the LNC and the LPNE and I said that while I
>>>>>>> was there to testify as a private citizen, Libertarians are overwhelmingly
>>>>>>> against the death penalty and that I was personally aware of no
>>>>>>> Libertarians in Nebraska or across the nation that support the death
>>>>>>> penalty.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Republican State Senator Merv Riepe, a Ralston High School classmate
>>>>>>> of mine, testified that his opinion poll showed that his constituents
>>>>>>> favored the reinstatement of the death penalty *three to one* with
>>>>>>> the clear inference that he intended to reflect his constituents’ views
>>>>>>> [regardless of any moral considerations]. I looked Senator Riepe squarely
>>>>>>> in the eye and responded with the following passionate testimony:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> “… the possibility of the death penalty being used as a *political
>>>>>>> football* to obtain reelection votes raises a host of ethical
>>>>>>> questions. To those who might be tempted to advocate the death
>>>>>>> penalty for political purposes, you need to reexamine your
>>>>>>> conscience and your political, personal and moral priorities.”
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The point is that reflecting the “consensus of the constituents” for
>>>>>>> obvious reelection purposes is not an acceptable or moral justification for
>>>>>>> Assemblyman Moore’s two egregious votes. Let’s see what Moore has to say
>>>>>>> but keep in mind that our duty is not only to our party’s principles but
>>>>>>> also to our personal principles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On
>>>>>>> Behalf Of *Alicia Mattson
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 22, 2016 1:19 AM
>>>>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2016-15: Censure John
>>>>>>> Moore
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am as upset as the rest of you about the two votes in question,
>>>>>>> but that doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to vote yes on this motion.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Particularly on the stadium vote, Assemblyman Moore held the power
>>>>>>> of the deciding vote.  Had he voted no, it would have failed instead of
>>>>>>> passing.  We had a Libertarian in a position to make a big real-world
>>>>>>> difference, and it didn't happen.  Facepalm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> IF it's true that his motivation was to play to his constituency in
>>>>>>> hopes of getting re-elected, I wonder how he will feel about the votes in
>>>>>>> hindsight in the event that he is not re-elected.  What's the point of
>>>>>>> being there if you can't vote your conscience?  That's why on the LNC I
>>>>>>> also vote the way I think I ought to vote even if other LNC members stage
>>>>>>> organized email campaigns from their friends.  Should we be offended at a
>>>>>>> public official playing to his constituents if we do the same thing as
>>>>>>> party officials?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have several issues with this motion.  I particularly appreciate
>>>>>>> Mr. Moellman's questions, and I think we probably should have had a
>>>>>>> conversation with Mr. Moore before we flung a motion into the wind.  I
>>>>>>> don't think it's sufficient to just hear how other people represent his
>>>>>>> position to us.  We should get it straight from him.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not thrilled about the wording in this resolution.  "...convey
>>>>>>> a strong message to all and sundry..." ?  Who talks like that?  We're
>>>>>>> discouraging others from switching to the LP until they completely agree
>>>>>>> with us?  With which of us?  Because we don't all agree, either.  I
>>>>>>> probably would have added that his vote was effectively the deciding vote.
>>>>>>> Etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Censure is an action taken by a group against a member of that same
>>>>>>> group.  Mr. Moore is not a member of the LNC.  Have we even confirmed that
>>>>>>> he's a member of the national party?  As of the national convention in May,
>>>>>>> our records did not yet indicate he had signed our membership
>>>>>>> certification.  We know he switched his party registration in NV, but that
>>>>>>> doesn't make him a member of the national party.  We wouldn't censure
>>>>>>> Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton because they're not members of the LNC or
>>>>>>> even the LP.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The state affiliate that nominated him has already censured him, so
>>>>>>> what does this accomplish for the LNC to pile on?  We can't make him return
>>>>>>> the money.  Is it just to make ourselves feel better?  Is the LNC going to
>>>>>>> become the purity police that monitors every local/state/federal elected
>>>>>>> official and passes resolutions about them?  I am concerned about starting
>>>>>>> such a trend.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we hadn't already donated the funds, I'd vote to rescind that
>>>>>>> decision.  That ship has sailed.  I wouldn't vote to donate to him again.
>>>>>>> I'm not certain that this motion accomplishes anything productive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Alicia Mattson <
>>>>>>> agmattson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have an electronic mail ballot.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by October 31, 2016 at
>>>>>>> 11:59:59pm Pacific time.*
>>>>>>> *Co-Sponsors:*  Harlos, Demarest, Hayes, Vohra, Starchild,
>>>>>>> Goldstein, Redpath
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Motion:*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a former Republican who in
>>>>>>> January 2016 switched to the Libertarian Party while in office, has during
>>>>>>> the past month voted not once but twice in the span of as many days to
>>>>>>> raise taxes on his constituents, including a vote to support a "More Cops"
>>>>>>> tax which the Libertarian Party of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far
>>>>>>> successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a $750 million subsidy to
>>>>>>> finance a billionaire-owned sports stadium at the expense of, among others,
>>>>>>> indigent persons renting weekly rooms in motels; and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whereas the elected leaders of our state affiliate party in Nevada
>>>>>>> have rightfully voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these egregious
>>>>>>> votes; and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to all and sundry that
>>>>>>> while we welcome sitting legislators in the Republican or Democrat parties
>>>>>>> who decide to switch to the Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we
>>>>>>> do not welcome them if they intend, as members of our party, to continue
>>>>>>> voting and acting like Republicans or Democrats;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>>> hereby censures Assemblyman Moore for his recent votes in support of tax
>>>>>>> increases, requests that he return the $10,000 campaign contribution which
>>>>>>> the LNC this season voted to send him, and admonishes him to henceforward
>>>>>>> be a better champion of the values held by members of the political party
>>>>>>> with which he has chosen to affiliate if he intends to remain a Libertarian.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>> 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/20161022/ef6f4254/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Lnc-business mailing list