[Lnc-business] Fwd: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors

Mon Oct 24 12:08:57 EDT 2016

Forwarded on behalf of David Demarest.

I will have more to write on this topic later, but for now, let me note
that I plan to have a motion to introduce in December.  I don't see any
rush at this point to do it by email ballot.  When I have drafted it, I
will distribute my proposal for comment.

I'll state ahead of time that my support for such a committee is not
conditioned on any other policies being passed, and I do not fully agree
with the comments about transparency for this particular committee either,
at least, at the moment.  Once I've thought through the committee question
more fully, I'll have a more fully developed position on how it should
operate.

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

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Demarest, David P. <David.Demarest at firstdata.com>
Date: Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:31 AM
Subject: RE: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for
co-sponsors
To: "lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org" <
IMCEAMAILTO-lnc-business-bounces+40hq+2Elp+2Eorg at firstdata.com>
Cc: "Cari L. Garcia (GarciaCL at C-IV.org)" <GarciaCL at c-iv.org>, "
ken.moellman at lpky.org" <ken.moellman at lpky.org>, "Starchild (
sfdreamer at earthlink.net)" <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>, "William Redpath (
wredpath2 at yahoo.com)" <wredpath2 at yahoo.com>, "planning4liberty at gmail.com" <
planning4liberty at gmail.com>, "chair at lp.org" <chair at lp.org>, "
vicechair at lp.org" <vicechair at lp.org>, "secretary at lp.org" <secretary at lp.org>,
"Demarest, David P." <David.Demarest at firstdata.com>, David Demarest <
dpdemarest at centurylink.net>

A Candidate Support Committee might encompass the following functions, many
of which are overlapping:

1.       Candidate recruitment

2.       Candidate vetting for endorsement

3.       Candidate endorsement

4.       Endorsed candidate training

5.       Endorsed candidate campaign financial contributions

6.       Endorsed candidate logistical support

7.       Endorsed candidate promotional support

8.       Endorsed candidate moral support

In the wake of Assemblyman Moore’s votes, the question from my perspective
is NOT whether we need such a committee. My question is whether or not the
significant responsibilities and workload suggest that two committees might
be warranted. I recognize, however, that separation of the overlapping
tasks might be more trouble than it is worth. It makes more sense to start
with just one committee, see how that works out and expand to two
committees if necessary.

I would cosponsor a motion to create an LNC Candidate Support Committee
(CSC) with the proviso that the motion to create the committee address
Caryn’s transparency concerns and her objections to creating an opaque
committee. I would be glad to help those who are expert in the wording of
motions develop such a motion.

Thoughts?

*The War on Majority Rule Authoritarian Cronyism Begins Now*

~David Pratt Demarest

*From:* Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
<carynannharlos at gmail.com>]
*Sent:* Sunday, October 23, 2016 10:04 PM
*To:* Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
*Cc:* David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>; lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
William Redpath <wredpath2 at yahoo.com>; Demarest, David P. <
David.Demarest at firstdata.com>
*Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for
co-sponsors

There has been such talk.  Primarily by me and Joshua.  And I will not vote
for or support an opaque committee.  I want this committee, but this
institutional fondness for opacity must be overcome as a condition for my
support.  Of course, I am but one person, but I am laying my cards on the
table.

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

There has been talk of creating a Candidate Support Committee.  I would
suggest that this be a task given to that Committee in future elections.
They will be working directly with candidates. They will have the best idea
of which candidates qualify as both a serious candidate and a "good"
Libertarian.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-23 22:20, David Demarest wrote:

How is candidate endorsement and vetting for endorsement handled by the
LNC? Does the LNC need a candidate endorsement committee?

The LP Radical Caucus has a strong candidate endorsement committee and
process. All candidates requesting LPRC endorsement and campaign
contributions must pass muster with the endorsement committee before their
request is presented to the board where they must receive 100% approval. It
is a stringent process and a responsibility that is taken very seriously.

Thoughts?

*The Invisible Hand of Rational Self-Interest is Mightier Than the Sword of
Government!*

~David Pratt Demarest

*From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On Behalf Of *Ken
Moellman
*Sent:* Sunday, October 23, 2016 8:37 PM
*To:* Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
*Cc:* William Redpath <wredpath2 at yahoo.com>; Demarest, David P. <
David.Demarest at firstdata.com>; lnc-business at hq.lp.org
*Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for
co-sponsors

I do think that larger the lesson here is that this body, in present and
future forms, should do a better job of vetting where money is given. I
think the Candidate Support Committee should be tasked with the creation of
a qualifying checklist for vetting and recommending financial support for
certain races. I think the idea of a candidate contract as a prerequisite
for financial support from the LNC is reasonable (it even provides the
candidates with some cover when the political pressure gets really high).

I try not to dwell on the failures of the past, but on how to avoid them in
the future.  Perform root cause analysis and implement procedures on how to
avoid the problem in the future.  Having everyone get together and scold
someone for a failure is not productive, nor is it conducive to a positive
environment.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-23 20:57, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

A future tyrantatarian LNC will do what it wants anyways.  And we gave
money to this campaign.  This is not at all a grey area and thus the
analogies not even remotely relevant.

The precedent that is being set now is that the LNC will never give money
to another candidate again if we do not retain this right if we want to
talk precedents.

Living in a spirit of fear is the surest way to cripple and ideological
movement.

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 6:52 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

I can point to specific members in the party who would claim:

1A. Anyone who supports mandatory GMO labeling isn't libertarian.

1B. Anyone who rejects GMO mandatory labeling isn't libertarian.

2A. Anyone who supports mandatory vaccination isn't libertarian.

2B. Anyone who rejects mandatory vaccination isn't libertarian.

3A. Anyone who supports keeping abortion legal isn't libertarian.

3B. Anyone who supports making abortion illegal isn't libertarian.

Some of these members find these issues to be single-issue "disqualifiers"
for being a libertarian.  And certainly others exist.

Now, this case isn't as controversial; I'm not sure I know any libertarians
who are pleased about a $750M project. But I fear that the LNC censuring
a candidate is opening Pandora's Box. Think about 10 years from now, when
some faction that's hot-and-bothered about one of these divisive issues
listed above gets a majority on the LNC and decides to start censuring
people under the precedent.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-23 19:01, Starchild wrote:

I agree that the precedent we set here is a matter of concern. The
precedent I'm concerned about is the possibility of a Libertarian
officeholder casting votes like the ones in question and not facing serious
repercussions from the party.

Love & Liberty,

                                   ((( starchild )))

At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee

                                (415) 625-FREE

                                  @StarchildSF

On Oct 23, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

I doubt NV would not support the censure.  A Nevada board member asked me.

This is not blanket precedent.  We have money and it is egregious and we
can't not do the right thing because we fear a tyrantatarian future LNC.

On Sunday, October 23, 2016, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

Thank you on the clarification on who's asking for the censure.  I do think
it would hold a bit more weight if the affiliate was officially asking.
This body's interference in affiliate matters has caused problems before.

My greatest concern, after considering this for days, is the setting of
precedent.  Who's to say that a future LNC might censure for something far
less; for something legitimately disputed in the party or within the
broader philosophy?

I don't recall the LNC ever censuring a candidate.  In 2008, we had an
issue with a candidate in KY.  We took care of it our way, and we didn't
look to the LNC to do anything, though many others did ask the LNC to
intervene.  In that scenario, we were able to block the candidate from the
ballot line and that was that.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-22 00:04, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

The goal is for Libertarian candidates to not completely fundamentally
betray basic principles in such a flagrant manner and sabotaging the
efforts in a specific issue of the Party (the affiliate in this case).  The
Motion itself says what we hope - for the candidate to take Libertarian
stances in the future.  If he cannot, then switching to an affiliation that
accurately reflects his principles is a choice he would have to make. That
isn't our goal.  But it certainly isn't our goal to assist a betrayal of
the affiliate and principles.

I do not know if we have before.  And if there is censurable behaviour to a
candidate that we have spent members' funds supporting, then yes. That is
something we should consider doing.  Once again, we are the "party of
principle" and if voting for a 750 million dollar crony capitalist subsidy
isn't a censurable violation then we have truly lost our way.  Asking for a
bright line rule is once again appropos to my pornography analogy.  There
are a host of factors, and we know it when we see it.

The LPNV has spoken to the candidate.  He has given a public explanation.
This is public accountability.

The affiliate has not officially asked National to censure.  Some LPNV
members have.  As have members elsewhere.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

I would submit that prior to censure, a conversation might be in order to
get more information.  We don't even have all of the facts.  Here's what we
know:

1. We have a candidate who is an elected official, was approved by an
affiliate to run as an L, and to which the LNC gave money.

2. The candidate voted for 2 tax increases, the latter of which is to
entice a franchise in a monopoly to come to his district.

3. The candidate claims 60% of his constituents supported the latter one.

4. The affiliate that nominated him is angry, has censured the candidate,
and has asked National to censure as well.

Now, if the goal is to get Moore to switch to some other affiliation or to
Independent, then certainly censure would be a good start. But I think it
might be good to speak to the elected official first.

And the question about "what's the line for this body?" is extremely
relevant. Has this body ever censured a candidate or elected
Libertarian before? Is this a practice we want this body to make more
regular?

Again, I'm not in favor of this cronyist garbage, and after Cincinnati
signed a similarly-stupid deal with the Bengals, and tied revenue to an
increased local sales tax, I just avoid buying things in Cincinnati when
possible.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-21 23:22, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

And I would distinguish greatly a state candidate from our national
candidate which was ratified and consented to by delegates at a national
convention.  A state candidate is ratified by those delegates (in most
states and in normal circumstances which do not involve a mid-term Party
affiliation switch).  In such a case I give great deference to the
affiliate that welcomed and championed. And once again, Nevada has made
their absolute displeasure and sense of betrayal clear.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:19 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

I find what if's and mining the subjunctives to be unhelpful personally.  I
do not know what kind of transgression would warrant in a "what if"
situation.  I would say yes, we should always be willing.  Our duty is not
to any elected person but to the Party itself and the principles for which
we stand.  This is a clear egregious violation which is somewhat like what
some say about "pornography" - I know it when I see it.  I would ask if
someone commits to be a Libertarian and acts completely against Libertarian
principles and received money from the National Committee of said Party is
that committing fraud against the body?   If the constituents feel
defrauded (particularly since they elected a Republican, not a Libertarian)
then it is up to them to deal with, not us.  Our standing and duty is to
the LP and the members.

This isn't a minor issue.  This was major with a capital M.  And Nevada has
made clear how they feel about it.

The minute was have the "uncensurable" we are doomed.  We are the "Party of
Principle" and we need to have the backbone to at some point say enough is
enough, particularly when we spent $10K of our members' money.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:12 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

I'm glad that the dilemma is understood. And you did bring up the other
question I had, after further consideration; would we, as a body, be
willing to censure an elected Libertarian President Johnson?  If this is
the case, how bad would the transgression need to be before this body
rebukes its own first elected President?

We really need to help give our candidates and elected officials, to the
limited extent that they exist, be successful champions for liberty. And by
"we", I mean every person who says they're a libertarian.  If we can't go
out and help convince other people's minds, then we're failing as activists
and supporters.  IMO, the root problem here is that 60% number.  Why do 60%
of the people in Moore's district support this?

As I further discussed this with a few others this afternoon and evening, I
had another thought.  If someone is elected to represent the people of his
district and fails to do so, would that person be engaging in fraud against
the constituents?

Every candidate and elected official has negatives. I personally prefer to
focus on a candidate's positives, rather than dwelling on their negatives.
If the negatives exceed the positives, then I start looking for an
alternate course of action.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-21 16:05, Demarest, David P. wrote:

Ken,

Thank you for your honest and thoughtful devil's advocate response
regarding the proposed censure of John Moore. We can, however, view
Assemblyman Moore's two egregious votes as an golden opportunity for LNC
members to think outside the box to examine root causes and design short
and long term solutions to the difficult dilemma faced by all Libertarian
politicians. The dilemma is how to reconcile the dictates of one's
Libertarian conscience with the realities of our current political
environment that is rife with the cronyism necessary to get elected or
reelected. The choice is between voting your conscience at the risk of not
being reelected or violating your conscience to get reelected and live to
fight another day in office.

I would submit that Moore's violation of his conscience to get reelected
makes him part of the problem of spiraling cronyism that is inexorably
destroying our way of life and accelerating our economy and society down
the path of destruction that history demonstrates is the inevitable fate of
all compulsory territorial governments. Most of us support Gary Johnson in
spite of specific misgivings because it is obvious that Gary is so much
better than the other choices and would undoubtedly make things far better
than the other candidates. If Johnson is elected, however, we know that
despite his honestly about his platform, many of his decisions will give us
heartburn. Our short-term act of censuring Moore will send a clear and
unambiguous message that statist actions by Libertarian officials to save
political seats are unacceptable violations of conscience that will not be
tolerated. The proposed censure of Moore will serve as an educational
message for all present and future Libertarian officials including those
who switch from other parties.

Long-term solutions require that we understand that cronyism does not fare
well in the competitive context of the free-market. By contrast, cronyism
is aggressively fostered in our current compulsory authoritarian majority
rule system. We as Libertarians face an uphill battle if we choose to rely
solely on a top-down legislative authoritarian approach to rescue us from
the tsunami of cronyism that will swamp our ship of state if we do not
reverse course promptly and with a sense of urgency.

The crushing curse of cronyism will not be reversed until we change the
context of government to minimize instead of fostering cronyism. To get
straight to the point, that change in context to discourage cronyism will
not occur until we achieve competitive governance and competitive social
services. I would further submit that we must supplement our top-down
legislative strategy with a robust, bottom-up entrepreneurial peaceful
freedom revolution fueled by peer-to-peer technology. Then and only then
will we create the political climate necessary to elect Libertarian
officials to all levels of government and establish the environment of
competitive governance and social services that is an absolute prerequisite
if we seriously intend to minimize cronyism and save our way of life for
future generations.

Thoughts?

*The War on Majority Rule Authoritarian Cronyism Begins Now*

~David Pratt Demarest

Region 6 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (IA, IL, MN, MO,
ND, NE, WI)

Secretary Pro Tem, LNC Affiliate Support Committee

Secretary, Nebraska Libertarian State Central Committee

Nebraska State Coordinator, LP Radical Caucus

*From:* Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com
<carynannharlos at gmail.com>]
*Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 12:50 PM
*To:* ken.moellman at lpky.org; lnc-business at hq.lp.org
*Cc:* William Redpath; Demarest, David P.
*Subject:* Re: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors

We have enough cosponsors for a ballot.  I will argue for it in the ballot.

It was an LPNV who last broached this action

with me - I believe it has the support of the aggrieved affiliate - and
members- who's money we spent.

The second vote was expressly against something the LPNV was opposed to
actively for years.

This is a betrayal of the LPNV.  And I certainly did not vote (and I argued
zealously) to support a candidate - out of many worthy candidates - who
would take such crony capitalist anti/libertarian power.

On Friday, October 21, 2016, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

Please allow me to take the Devil's Advocate position, since I probably
won't have a vote that counts anyway.  I realize that this position is
unlikely to be popular.

Politics and philosophy can be a tough balancing act.  Certainly, there
are instances of this problem with our presidential ticket (bake the cake,
for example) and probably every other campaign out there (vaccination
debate, etc.).  Elected officials, and indeed individuals, are faced with
tough decisions between philosophy and reality all the time.  Perhaps the
most famous was Jefferson's opposition to slavery while also owning slaves.

Assemblyman Moore reported that a poll of the constituents of his district
showed that about 60% of the constituents supported the deal, including the
associated taxes. Certainly, there could and should have been a coordinated
effort by the opposition to stop this deal by educating the public. Based
on the level of support reported within Assemblyman Moore's district, those
efforts were obviously unsuccessful.

Even taking what was said above into account, I personally
think Assemblyman Moore's greatest failing in this situation came was in
how he supported the deal.  A statement about "While I personally do not
support this deal, I voted in favor because my constituents wanted me to do
so" could have been a very good moment.  It would have provided an
opportunity to educate the public about the negatives of the deal and
hopefully prevent this type of situation from happening the next time.

So I ask these questions:  Do you think that what John Moore did was driven
by philosophy, or by politics?  Do you believe that John Moore wanted
higher taxes?  As an elected representative, should he represent the people
of his district, or ignore those people in favor of his own philosophy?
Is it more wise to go against the constituency, especially this close to
election day, or is it more wise to fight another day when your "army"
is more organized and can help you win the day?

Just something to think about.  I'm not pleased at the idea of yet another
billionaire getting a taxpayer-funded stadium and I don't believe they
create enough economic activity to offset the costs.  At least the team
name is appropriate.

---

Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee

On 2016-10-21 09:27, William Redpath wrote:

I will also co-sponsor, as I was opposed to the $10,000 motion at the LNC
meeting in July 2016.  Bill Redpath
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 10/20/16, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for
   co-sponsors
 To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 Cc: david.demarest at firstdata.com
 Date: Thursday, October 20, 2016, 9:20 PM

 #yiv9175739729
 #yiv9175739729 --

  _filtered #yiv9175739729 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
  _filtered #yiv9175739729 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15
 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
  _filtered #yiv9175739729 {font-family:Verdana;panose-1:2 11
 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
 #yiv9175739729
 #yiv9175739729 p.yiv9175739729MsoNormal, #yiv9175739729
 li.yiv9175739729MsoNormal, #yiv9175739729
 div.yiv9175739729MsoNormal
     {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;}
 #yiv9175739729 a:link, #yiv9175739729
 span.yiv9175739729MsoHyperlink
     {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
 #yiv9175739729 a:visited, #yiv9175739729
 span.yiv9175739729MsoHyperlinkFollowed
     {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}
 #yiv9175739729 p.yiv9175739729msonormal0, #yiv9175739729
 li.yiv9175739729msonormal0, #yiv9175739729
 div.yiv9175739729msonormal0
     {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12.0pt;}
 #yiv9175739729
 span.yiv9175739729gmail-m-7066241125321024756gmail-m637561545514884297m-
7093137337385855135gmail-s1
     {}
 #yiv9175739729 span.yiv9175739729gmail-im
     {}
 #yiv9175739729 span.yiv9175739729EmailStyle20
     {color:windowtext;}
 #yiv9175739729 .yiv9175739729MsoChpDefault
     {}
  _filtered #yiv9175739729 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
 #yiv9175739729 div.yiv9175739729WordSection1
     {}
 #yiv9175739729 Caryn, I will co-sponsor your
 motion to censure John Moore and request that he return the
 $10,000 campaign contribution from the LNC. Mr. Moore's
 two votes were egregious.   Thoughts?  Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High
 and LIVE FREE!  The Invisible Hand of
 Self-Interest is Mightier Than the Sword of
 Government! ~David Pratt Demaresthttp://www.lpne.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpne.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=ZPO-4J67vwV6ByD7vb8knOZpRMrndul0DsYJwqVwT_0&e=>
 secretary at lpne.orgdpdemarest@centurylink.net
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__centurylink.net&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=37Lwyhxfp0qUBXRvtP01RB9aT0NWx-ASCm0rjSNqLTk&e=>
 david.demarest at firstdata.com
 Cell: 402-981-6469Home: 402-493-0873Office: 402-222-7207  From:
Lnc-business
 [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org>]
On Behalf Of
 Caryn Ann Harlos
 Sent: Thursday,
 October 20, 2016 7:45 PM
 To:
 lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 Subject:
 [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for
 co-sponsors
  Multiple
 party members including region 1 members have acted that the
 LNC take action regarding Assemblyman Moore. While normally,
 I would say that is solely an issue for the state party to
 handle, unless possibly, a Federal candidate, but in this
 case, we spent National Party member's direct monies,
 and thus I do agree this is our responsibility.  As someone
 who advocated for the funds allocation, I believe it is my
 responsibility to address this once members raised a
 concern:
  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.
   --
 In
 Liberty,Caryn Ann
 HarlosRegion 1 Representative,
 Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado,
 Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
 Harlos at LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of
 ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party
 Radical Caucus

 -----Inline Attachment Follows-----

 _______________________________________________
 Lnc-business mailing list
 Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hq.lp.org_mailman_listinfo_lnc-2Dbusiness-5Fhq.lp.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=wWePA5Va1fCm0ttiTeJdIi3OtI4h0gCUBlEZrJ7f0XI&e=>

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hq.lp.org_mailman_listinfo_lnc-2Dbusiness-5Fhq.lp.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=wWePA5Va1fCm0ttiTeJdIi3OtI4h0gCUBlEZrJ7f0XI&e=>

--

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=3CyYsd35iffGrxsilfZ1czCR0oVMAVvw5l_WxZNzv_Y&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=IV7aAHavSnzME6gqttSJKf9UdcwCKTeGCnzR9X5ehTM&s=kihfP26osC5fZJDyE0H_cy-uN_zGxmLOgr0D6_xQQg0&e=>

The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential, and
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from
your computer.

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=sFlBSNJ5YFQLbBKiYgsK710B1u0bKPZMBnBXmPKf97U&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=Dsq0GlrCsMNzgLxjh8U9oFjceY5Hdkt3hubPo2otzcM&e=>

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=sFlBSNJ5YFQLbBKiYgsK710B1u0bKPZMBnBXmPKf97U&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=Dsq0GlrCsMNzgLxjh8U9oFjceY5Hdkt3hubPo2otzcM&e=>

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=sFlBSNJ5YFQLbBKiYgsK710B1u0bKPZMBnBXmPKf97U&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=Dsq0GlrCsMNzgLxjh8U9oFjceY5Hdkt3hubPo2otzcM&e=>

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=sFlBSNJ5YFQLbBKiYgsK710B1u0bKPZMBnBXmPKf97U&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=Dsq0GlrCsMNzgLxjh8U9oFjceY5Hdkt3hubPo2otzcM&e=>

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hq.lp.org_mailman_listinfo_lnc-2Dbusiness-5Fhq.lp.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=SA5Vn7SCygjLg7JTnM7cxeGxFkp3vWWMy1n4GMHg-s8&e=>

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hq.lp.org_mailman_listinfo_lnc-2Dbusiness-5Fhq.lp.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=SA5Vn7SCygjLg7JTnM7cxeGxFkp3vWWMy1n4GMHg-s8&e=>

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=myzIcAU0Ccy0UAdaEQ1yAaLnZJsqiCFiB9NjuKkKD5Y&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=V2xRycyJkisVYX64kf86v2W5J0z1xLE-Wdm85QSqd08&e=>

-- 

*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
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpcolorado.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=myzIcAU0Ccy0UAdaEQ1yAaLnZJsqiCFiB9NjuKkKD5Y&e=>

Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.lpradicalcaucus.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=cCFr4Csdt-oYijwqme17FxwM3RWxW6xmElqiEi0S-0U&s=V2xRycyJkisVYX64kf86v2W5J0z1xLE-Wdm85QSqd08&e=>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20161024/9209e7be/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org