[Lnc-business] Judicial committee

Caryn Ann Harlos caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Thu Jul 5 20:30:18 EDT 2018


As this is an LNC created committee, I think that committee creation by
larger unrelated bodies is a recipe for disaster.  As a group we can pick
applicants who fill in needed holes and knowledge.  I am not thinking 50
person.  I am thinking 9, 11, or 13.  It is a big issue.

I think some LNC members should be ex officio advisory members only.

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn <elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
> wrote:

> Caryn Ann, I was thinking state chairs or people they appoint.  Which
> could be some of the people you're thinking might be good.
>
> A 50 person committee would be too large (someone from each state
> affiliate), but Regions could send one or two people.  Eight regions and
> two from each, so maybe 16 people.  (Or, could be smaller)
>
> They could work on "improving the election scheduling, balloting, and
> tabulation process", and report sometime in 2019 to see what improvements
> could be made.
>
>
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
> LP Social Media Process Review Committee
> Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
> http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>
>
> On 2018-07-05 20:12, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>
>> It needs a much larger and more diverse committee that doesn't have the
>>    LNC's thumb on it like every other committee.  Many many many qualified
>>    people offered, including former LNC people who have been to this
>>    rodeo.
>>
>>    On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:06 PM, joe.bishop-henchman--- via Lnc-business
>>    <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>      Good questions. My answers would be that the only way this works is
>>      if everyone feels like they have a seat at the table. Timing wise,
>>      this gives them time to collect ideas and feedback while giving us
>>      time to address it if they can't come up with a consensus
>>      recommendation.
>>      It's also more than just technology - it's also whether we do
>>      plurality or IRV or approval, it's whether we do combined ballots or
>>      all separate, it's whether we need three days or four or five.
>>      There's off-the-shelf electronic voting things we can rent - I've
>>      done elections with them before - but I think our Party members
>>      would without buy-in reject them as centralized and potentially not
>>      secure. The solution may just be some new bylaws changes and more
>>      tellers and computers, and no new technology. I'm not sure.
>>      JBH
>>
>>    On 2018-07-05 19:56, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
>>
>>      Why start a new committee? Shouldn't this fall under the purview of
>>      IT?
>>         John Phillips
>>         Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>>         Cell [1]217-412-5973
>>         ------ Original message------
>>         From: [2]joe.bishop-henchman--- via Lnc-business
>>         Date: Thu, Jul 5, 2018 6:32 PM
>>         To: [3][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
>>         Cc: [4][3]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org;
>>         Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Judicial committee
>>      I've been thinking about this since the night of the At-Large/JC
>>      election and I do share Ms. Harlos's frustration. I had perhaps 100
>>      delegates who were going to support me already leave by the time we
>>      got
>>      to the At-Large election. Complaining about how long balloting and
>>      tabulation took is already the #1 feedback topic I'm getting from
>>      Party
>>      members.
>>      That said, I agree with Ms. Van Horn that the Convention did perhaps
>>      the
>>      least worst option under the circumstances. I worry that anything we
>>      do
>>      that departs from that, be it putting our own people on or keeping
>>      the
>>      dead hand of the last JC or sending a mail ballot to all Party
>>      members
>>      or some rump thereof, is even more disconnected from the rules we
>>      should
>>      be following and destined to be viewed as illegitimate and post-hoc.
>>      I would like to fix it for next time, as I know many of you do.
>>      Taking
>>      Mr. Goldstein's suggestion, I took a stab at tackling three birds
>>      with
>>      one stone:
>>      WHEREAS, the Libertarian National Convention on July 3, 2018 voted
>>      that
>>      the top vote-getters in the At-Large race fill all available
>>      At-Large
>>      seats on the LNC; and
>>      WHEREAS, Rule 9 directs that the election of Judicial Committee
>>      members
>>      be conducted as the same manner as specified for at-large members of
>>      the
>>      National Committee; and
>>      WHEREAS, LNC action pursuant to Bylaws Article 7, Section 7 would
>>      clear
>>      all potential doubts as to who the new LNC members are;
>>      THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Joshua Smith, Bill Redpath, and
>>      Alicia
>>      Mattson are added to the LNC as At-Large members for a two-year
>>      term;
>>      and
>>      BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the LNC acknowledges the election of D.
>>      Frank Robinson, Chuck Moulton, Darryl Perry, Ruth Bennett, Geoff
>>      Neale,
>>      Jim Turney, and Tricia Sprankle to the Judicial Committee for a
>>      four-year term; and
>>      BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a special committee be established to
>>      present a consensus recommendation to the LNC by September 1, 2019
>>      for
>>      improving the election scheduling, balloting, and tabulation process
>>      of
>>      LNC elections, with said committee to consist of:
>>      (1) the Party Vice-Chair, who will act as chairperson
>>      (2) the Party Secretary
>>      (3) a designee of the Bylaws & Rules Committee
>>      (4) four Party members appointed by the Party Chair, from among the
>>      various caucuses in the Party.
>>      JBH
>>      On [5]2018-07-05 18:04, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business wrote:
>>
>>      Since we apparently closed the convention without a procedure for
>>         populating the JC, is anyone in the mood for a motion to appoint
>>      the
>>         top seven vote winners as the JC for this term?  I suppose we can
>>      be
>>         anarchists and live without a JC this term or solicit
>>      applications
>>      from
>>         people who were not nominated at convention.
>>         I don't have the top seven names handy, we would have to verify
>>      they
>>         have been members for four years.
>>         --
>>         Sam Goldstein
>>         Libertarian National Committee
>>         [6]317-850-0726 Cell
>>
>>      References
>>         1. tel:217-412-5973
>>         2. [4]http://joe.bi/
>>         3. mailto:[5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>         4. mailto:[6]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
>>         5. tel:2018-07-05 18
>>         6. tel:317-850-0726
>>
>>    --
>>    --
>>    In Liberty,
>>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>>    Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>    Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
>>    - [7]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>>    Communications Director, [8]Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>    We defend your rights
>>    And oppose the use of force
>>    Taxation is theft
>>
>> References
>>
>>    1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    3. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
>>    4. http://joe.bi/
>>    5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    6. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
>>    7. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>    8. http://www.lpcolorado.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/>
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
   As this is an LNC created committee, I think that committee creation by
   larger unrelated bodies is a recipe for disaster.  As a group we can
   pick applicants who fill in needed holes and knowledge.  I am not
   thinking 50 person.  I am thinking 9, 11, or 13.  It is a big issue.
   I think some LNC members should be ex officio advisory members only.

   On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn
   <[1]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:

     Caryn Ann, I was thinking state chairs or people they appoint.
     Which could be some of the people you're thinking might be good.
     A 50 person committee would be too large (someone from each state
     affiliate), but Regions could send one or two people.  Eight regions
     and two from each, so maybe 16 people.  (Or, could be smaller)
     They could work on "improving the election scheduling, balloting,
     and tabulation process", and report sometime in 2019 to see what
     improvements could be made.
     ---
     Elizabeth Van Horn
     LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
     Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
     LP Social Media Process Review Committee
     Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
     [2]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
     On 2018-07-05 20:12, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:

     It needs a much larger and more diverse committee that doesn't have
     the
        LNC's thumb on it like every other committee.  Many many many
     qualified
        people offered, including former LNC people who have been to this
        rodeo.
        On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 6:06 PM, joe.bishop-henchman--- via
     Lnc-business
        <[1][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
          Good questions. My answers would be that the only way this
     works is
          if everyone feels like they have a seat at the table. Timing
     wise,
          this gives them time to collect ideas and feedback while giving
     us
          time to address it if they can't come up with a consensus
          recommendation.
          It's also more than just technology - it's also whether we do
          plurality or IRV or approval, it's whether we do combined
     ballots or
          all separate, it's whether we need three days or four or five.
          There's off-the-shelf electronic voting things we can rent -
     I've
          done elections with them before - but I think our Party members
          would without buy-in reject them as centralized and potentially
     not
          secure. The solution may just be some new bylaws changes and
     more
          tellers and computers, and no new technology. I'm not sure.
          JBH
        On 2018-07-05 19:56, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
          Why start a new committee? Shouldn't this fall under the
     purview of
          IT?
             John Phillips
             Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
             Cell [1]217-412-5973
             ------ Original message------
             From: [2]joe.bishop-henchman--- via Lnc-business
             Date: Thu, Jul 5, 2018 6:32 PM

           To: [3][2][4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
           Cc: [4][3][5]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org;
           Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Judicial committee
        I've been thinking about this since the night of the At-Large/JC
        election and I do share Ms. Harlos's frustration. I had perhaps
   100
        delegates who were going to support me already leave by the time
   we
        got
        to the At-Large election. Complaining about how long balloting and
        tabulation took is already the #1 feedback topic I'm getting from
        Party
        members.
        That said, I agree with Ms. Van Horn that the Convention did
   perhaps
        the
        least worst option under the circumstances. I worry that anything
   we
        do
        that departs from that, be it putting our own people on or keeping
        the
        dead hand of the last JC or sending a mail ballot to all Party
        members
        or some rump thereof, is even more disconnected from the rules we
        should
        be following and destined to be viewed as illegitimate and
   post-hoc.
        I would like to fix it for next time, as I know many of you do.
        Taking
        Mr. Goldstein's suggestion, I took a stab at tackling three birds
        with
        one stone:
        WHEREAS, the Libertarian National Convention on July 3, 2018 voted
        that
        the top vote-getters in the At-Large race fill all available
        At-Large
        seats on the LNC; and
        WHEREAS, Rule 9 directs that the election of Judicial Committee
        members
        be conducted as the same manner as specified for at-large members
   of
        the
        National Committee; and
        WHEREAS, LNC action pursuant to Bylaws Article 7, Section 7 would
        clear
        all potential doubts as to who the new LNC members are;
        THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Joshua Smith, Bill Redpath, and
        Alicia
        Mattson are added to the LNC as At-Large members for a two-year
        term;
        and
        BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the LNC acknowledges the election of
   D.
        Frank Robinson, Chuck Moulton, Darryl Perry, Ruth Bennett, Geoff
        Neale,
        Jim Turney, and Tricia Sprankle to the Judicial Committee for a
        four-year term; and
        BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a special committee be established to
        present a consensus recommendation to the LNC by September 1, 2019
        for
        improving the election scheduling, balloting, and tabulation
   process
        of
        LNC elections, with said committee to consist of:
        (1) the Party Vice-Chair, who will act as chairperson
        (2) the Party Secretary
        (3) a designee of the Bylaws & Rules Committee
        (4) four Party members appointed by the Party Chair, from among
   the
        various caucuses in the Party.
        JBH
        On [5]2018-07-05 18:04, Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business wrote:
        Since we apparently closed the convention without a procedure for
           populating the JC, is anyone in the mood for a motion to
   appoint
        the
           top seven vote winners as the JC for this term?  I suppose we
   can
        be
           anarchists and live without a JC this term or solicit
        applications
        from
           people who were not nominated at convention.
           I don't have the top seven names handy, we would have to verify
        they
           have been members for four years.
           --
           Sam Goldstein
           Libertarian National Committee
           [6]317-850-0726 Cell
        References
           1. tel:217-412-5973

             2. [4][6]http://joe.bi/
             3. mailto:[5][7]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             4. mailto:[6][8]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
             5. tel:2018-07-05 18
             6. tel:317-850-0726
        --
        --
        In Liberty,
        Caryn Ann Harlos
        Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
        Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
     Washington)
        - [7]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
        Communications Director, [8]Libertarian Party of Colorado
        Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
        A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
        We defend your rights
        And oppose the use of force
        Taxation is theft
     References
        1. mailto:[9]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        2. mailto:[10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        3. mailto:[11]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
        4. [12]http://joe.bi/
        5. mailto:[13]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        6. mailto:[14]joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
        7. mailto:[15]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
        8. [16]http://www.lpcolorado.org/

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
   - [17]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
   Communications Director, [18]Libertarian Party of Colorado
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
   2. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
   3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
   6. http://joe.bi/
   7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
   9. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  11. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
  12. http://joe.bi/
  13. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  14. mailto:joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
  15. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  16. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  17. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  18. http://www.lpcolorado.org/


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list