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

Sam Goldstein goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com
Sat Oct 22 16:55:23 EDT 2016 

I'm pretty sure you cannot divide a motion once voting has started.

Sam

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 4:25 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think it's an interesting question as to whether or not the motion as
> presented is divisible, and I'm unclear as to the proposed division.
> Regardless, the bigger issue is that it is basically impossible to handle
> division of the question by email ballot, leading me to believe it is out
> of order on an email ballot.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Alicia,
>>
>> Is it appropriate/allowable to move to divide this motion?
>> 1) Censure
>> 2) Call for refund/reimbursement/restitution
>>
>> As for the rest of the language in the last two paragraphs, I could do
>> without it.
>>
>> Whitney Bilyeu
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:13 PM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I vote yes.
>>>
>>> A libertarian elected official's duty is to cut government. That's it.
>>> Not to support the tyranny of a misled majority.
>>>
>>> -Arvin
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> 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 <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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Arvin Vohra
>>>
>>> www.VoteVohra.com
>>> VoteVohra at gmail.com
>>> (301) 320-3634
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20161022/c9ac00ec/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Lnc-business mailing list