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

Sat Oct 22 18:46:55 EDT 2016

As far as censure outside the organization? First we do not know if he is a
national member.  If he isn't - shame on each of us who voted for not
insisting on it.  Fool me once...

However - he identified as Libertarian and sought  the support of our
affiliate.  That places him in a relationship to the Libertarian Party and
our agenda. And he voluntarily received our financial support.

If not a member it isn't an intra-society disciplinary proceeding-and it
wasn't my intent to be precisely that but to function as public statement
of disapproval which we are certainly entitled to - and I would say -
obligated to - make.

By analogy - a state affiliate could censure a national candidate- even
though that national candidate is not a member of the state affiliate.
There are common connections, goals, and identifications.  Analogously,
this is a member of our state affiliate with common connections, goals, and
identifications- with the further issue that we have given funds and funds
were accepted.   The whole tone and tenor of that meeting for the
contribution was that he joined our cause - and many of us strongly stated
he use the word Libertarian on his page to identify (and he did at that
time).  It certainly was not the tenor and argument that this was some
unrelated outsider.  We entered into a relationship when we offered, and he
accepted, funds.

If we deem this then to be something we can't speak on in this manner
future votes or the establishment of a committee to spend future monies
will be seriously prejudiced because I certainly - and I imagine others -
will not be eager to give away member money while being squeamish about
accountability.

On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Whitney I understand.
>
> But you say you think a request for restitution is appropriate.
>
> And that is what is done in this resolution.
>
> On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','carynannharlos at gmail.com');>> wrote:
>
>> Alicia,
>>
>> And that is an absolutely disjunctive comparison.
>>
>> Thank you for stating that it is not anything that I have done here.
>>
>> I will respond in another thread as stated. This isn't the first time
>> member input has been discouraged and made unwelcome - thus important
>> enough to pursue in its own thread.
>>
>> I will post a link to the Google groups topic for future readers as it
>> will in one sense touch upon here - the false equivalency.
>>
>> On Saturday, October 22, 2016, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Caryn Ann,
>>>
>>> I have not alleged that the email campaign tactic has been used on THIS
>>> motion.  Mike Shipley is the only person outside the LNC who has contacted
>>> me on this issue, and my comments about that tactic were made before I
>>> received his email.
>>>
>>> I am comparing a tactic that has been used to try to influence the LNC
>>> on other topics with what we're being told by others was allegedly
>>> Assemblyman Moore's motivation.
>>>
>>> -Alicia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alicia, thank you for your thorough reply. Though one point touched
>>>> upon this Moore situation, in all I think it a tangent we both went on, so
>>>> I will respond in a fresh thread so as not to distract here.
>>>>
>>>> But I need to get something really clear here as it has been alleged
>>>> two times, and it is not correct.  *I categorically did not have any
>>>> email campaign to have anyone write anyone about this motion, * so I
>>>> would appreciate it if that was not said.  A member wrote me prior to my
>>>> motion, and I advised him to contact his regional representative as he was
>>>> not in my region.  After that, region 1 members indicated their desire, and
>>>> I heard from a Nevada board member.  All I did on this, is what I do on *every
>>>> single item of business before the LNC*, I post a notice in several
>>>> groups with a link to the discussion.  My encouragements for members to
>>>> write *are general and ongoing and not tied to any specific matter of
>>>> business* with few exceptions - those being the Motion to Rescind as
>>>> their rights were being violated.
>>>>
>>>> I have been at outreach and sign waving all day.  I will respond to
>>>> your email later tonight in a new thread when I am refreshed.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Whitney, it was a request, specially worded so in the resolution, not
>>>>> a demand.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:25 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
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *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>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *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
>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.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>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
*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/20161022/226d1506/attachment-0002.html>