[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS

Elizabeth Van Horn elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
Wed Aug 1 12:13:50 EDT 2018


Exactly this.  Thank you Joe Bishop-Henchman for writing what I was 
thinking about this motion.  It's a mess.  (I'll be more blunt than 
you.)

It has no authority, and can't thus be used to hold LNC members 
accountable.  It says, "the Libertarian National Committee agree to be 
bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters..."

The wording then works to undo any semblance of working, by saying, "It 
is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member...".

Since, we're *all* members, it's saying that the 'agreement' isn't 
binding upon any of us.

I've gone back and forth on this issue, both through discussion with 
Region 3 members and leadership, and the parliamentarian, and it's a 
untenable situation.  Many in my region are fine with having no "JC" for 
a while. Some think there should be one, etc.

Joe, you've come the closest to convincing me to vote "Yes", with your 
statement regarding wasting time, and having our "in-person meeting to 
be as externally focused as possible on what we can do to promote our 
candidates and help our affiliates..."

I have until 11:59 PM, so will think about what you've written.

---
Elizabeth Van Horn


On 2018-08-01 11:46, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business wrote:
> I vote yes. I do have misgivings and have gone back and forth. This
> short motion is worded to satisfy every possible view on the JC issue.
> It says we are bound by the Bylaws while this motion is arguably a
> violation of the Bylaws. It says we the LNC are bound by any rulings
> but party members (which we all are) are not. It puts “JC” in scare
> quotes, which is not reassuring for our view of their legitimacy. It
> says their resolution of disputes will be binding but affiliates suing
> us or individuals who lose cases need not choose to be bound by them.
> 
> In my view, either we currently have a Judicial Committee or we don’t.
> If we do, the proper course is to reconsider the acknowledgement
> resolution which was direct and did not have these satisfying but
> contradictory sentences. If we don’t, we either live without it or we
> establish an LNC committee in the Policy Manual with clarity about
> what we’re setting up and what they can and can’t do.
> 
> So why vote yes? I think it will have the same effect as the
> acknowledgement resolution: the top seven will be established and
> quickly assert their authority without any of the supposed limits
> we’re putting on them. If they go overboard, this motion gives us the
> right as party members not to be bound by it. If we have some takeover
> by Trump or Warren at the 2020 convention, they’ll exist to prevent it
> which we would support them on. And if history is guide, nothing so
> horrible will happen that we will call upon them; if it does, it will
> hopefully be serious enough that their word will stick.
> 
> If members do want to hold off on this so as to discuss it at the next
> LNC meeting, I may change my vote to support that out of deference to
> that request; this is a significant issue and no one should feel
> rushed about it. But I honestly think we’ve talked through the JC
> issue extensively and every possible option has been considered. This
> motion does what we need and has majority support to do it. I
> personally would like our in-person meeting to be as externally
> focused as possible on what we can do to promote our candidates and
> help our affiliates, and not overloaded with unfinished inward-looking
> business.
> 
> 
> JBH
> 
> ------------
> Joe Bishop-Henchman
> LNC Member (At-Large)
> joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
> 
> On 2018-07-25 08:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business
>>    list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: 
>> Harlos,
>>    Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian 
>> National
>>    Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven
>>    vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as 
>> if
>>    they were elected in the normal course of convention business and
>>    follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is
>>    acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or
>>    affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of 
>> votes
>>    here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>>    --
>>    In Liberty,
>>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
>>    [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>    We defend your rights
>>    And oppose the use of force
>>    Taxation is theft
>> 
>> References
>> 
>>    1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>>    2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org



More information about the Lnc-business mailing list