[Lnc-business] Motion to suspend Arvin Vohra

Tue Jan 16 04:15:53 EST 2018

One of my states has requested the "cause" language for consideration.

-Caryn Ann

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> I spoke with the Chair of HI.  She supports removal.  Region 1: Utah (no);
> Arizona (recused entirely); Alaska (yes); Hawaii (yes).
>
> Some may object that I have influenced some with my personal opinion.  I
> don't have that much power.  But this is where the issue of us being
> elected for our insight and judgment comes into play - the Chairs want my
> advice.  They can take it or not, but they want it.  And I advise them on
> how to protect their own state if the LNC does nothing.  That is my job.
>
> As promised, this is what Alaska wrote to me:
>
> After discussion with our state board, it is our view that Arvin Vohra
> should be removed from the position of Vice Chair of the Libertarian
> Party.  On an intellectual level, some logic may exist in his arguments,
> however the topics and conclusions he forwards repeatedly result in
> discredit to the LP.
>
>
>
> This cannot continue.
>
>
>
> Our leaders must be ambassadors as well as philosophers.  One role cannot
> exist at the expense of the other.  The LP is not a hermetic association
> for the advanced study of arcane philosophical concepts, but a political
> organization with the intent to guide and influence our government and
> citizenry.  All political correctness aside, earning the credibility to do
> this comes at the cost of tailoring our message to our audience, the
> American people.  Mr. Vohra does not, or perhaps cannot understand this
> fundamental constraint.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 3:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
> > wrote:
>
>> FYI - LPCO has an open email list.  Its time we heard the voices of our
>> members - anyone can follow their discussion
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/lpco-open-business/kPps5ugbr1A
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 3:53 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you Joshua, I am flattered that some of my words were persuasive.
>>>
>>> Let me argue more in favour of a meeting.  If this motion got four
>>> co-sponsors and went to email vote, I am not going to have full word from
>>> region 1 in ten days.  Not gonna happen.  So even though I suspect they
>>> will not favour, this guarantees that there will be no region 1 support.  A
>>> meeting can give more time and can allow me to let the region know they can
>>> attend for public comment.
>>>
>>> (states have told me that they have to wait for a board meeting).  I
>>> have three definite responses.  AZ asked to be recused.  AK is in favour of
>>> suspension (and I will be forwarding their missive to me here).  UT
>>> opposes.  The CO chair supports but the rest of the Board has not weighed
>>> in (FYI I recused myself from the LPCO Board discussion).
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 3:35 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have stated my preference for an electronic meeting.  I also said in
>>>> that email that this is the second time this has come up, and it needs a
>>>> full hearing.  Since then, I have read emails from Ms. Harlos and from Mr.
>>>> Sharpe which have called some of my beliefs on this topic into question.  I
>>>> still am strongly inclined to vote no, but I have been convinced that
>>>> consideration is due.  I believe motions get clearer and better
>>>> consideration when they are actually pending - there is a difference,
>>>> psychologically, between speaking in general, and speaking on a precise
>>>> motion.  (On a side note, I agree with Ms. Harlos that this motion would be
>>>> better if it specified the cause, although I do not think this is
>>>> necessary.)  Therefore, I will cosponsor.
>>>>
>>>> However, I am cosponsoring on the following understanding, and I ask
>>>> the Secretary to correct me if my understanding is incorrect.  According to
>>>> RONR, the maker of a motion may not speak against it in debate (but may
>>>> vote against it), but the seconder may speak against it in debate.  Our
>>>> email ballots generally list everyone who wished to see the motion, the
>>>> original maker and the cosponsors, as "cosponsors."  That notwithstanding,
>>>> it is my understanding that a cosponsor is in the position of a seconder
>>>> and may speak in debate against the motion.
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 4:52 AM, Elizabeth Van Horn <
>>>> elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I make a motion to suspend Arvin Vohra from his position as Vice Chair under Article 6, Section 7 of our Bylaws.
>>>>>
>>>>> ___________________________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> Three of the four state affiliate chairs in Region 3 are now backing this motion. I told Region 3 that I'd need at least 3/4 of the region in accord to make the motion to suspend Arvin.  That percent was reached last night.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I volunteered my time and energy to be a Regional Rep on the LNC, I didn't do it under the circumstances of, "only if convenient".
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm doing this because I care about giving a voice to the many LP members who are running for office, getting out the vote, and spending their hard-earned money working toward electing libertarians.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are the people that make up the Libertarian Party. It is their voice that I represent.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, it is with calm resolve that I make this motion.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>>> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
>>>>> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
>>>>> Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
>>>>> Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
>>>>> http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20180116/0f8f6c5c/attachment-0002.html>