[Lnc-business] At-Large Elections

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Yes of course formal objections are out of order.  That does not mean
noting real issues for discussion and learning is not (not that you
suggested it was). As you know, I think there were some real problems with
the way we handled it.

Since the Bylaws say the method of voting of At-Large, the issue at present
is the process until such a time those Bylaws are amended.

One thing that is clear in our Bylaws is that there was always intended to
be a system of majority not plurality.  For expediency's sake and not for
any other reason, that has been circumvented at least two years in a row.

Quite obviously we have problems.  And just as obviously these can't just
boil for a month like they did in 2016 and be forgotten.

On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Pursuant to the delegates suspension of the rules at convention after
> overturning the ruling of the Chair, the top five vote-getters are
> properly elected to the At-Large seats on the LNC by the delegates in
> convention.  Objections to the procedure taken by the delegates are
> out of order, as such objections have to be properly raised during the
> convention session.
>
> As to the Judicial Committee, I'll defer to Chuck Moulton's analysis
> and suggest that the LNC pass a motion that acknowledges the top seven
> vote-getters as the Judicial Committee.
>
> There has been a lot of discussion about convention schedules,
> electronic voting systems, errors in tallying, etc. These discussions
> miss the point.  Using approval voting for a multi-member election
> that does not allow for winning by plurality is likely the worst
> possible election method to get At-Large members elected.
>
> In the past, we were allowed to vote for as many candidates as there
> were positions available, and we rarely went to a second ballot.  An
> instant runoff or single transferable system would reallocate those
> votes for candidates with minimal support.
>
> If the goal of At-Large members is to represent interest groups within
> the Libertarian Party, we are using the wrong voting system.  If it is
> merely to determine who is most popular in the party, we are using the
> correct system, but it will continue to produce results like we've had
> two conventions in a row based on the nature of the system.
>
> In short, counting ballots faster doesn't matter if we're still voting
> wrong.
>
> Yours truly,
> Nick
>



-- 
-- 
*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 --------------
   Yes of course formal objections are out of order.  That does not mean
   noting real issues for discussion and learning is not (not that you
   suggested it was). As you know, I think there were some real problems
   with the way we handled it.
   Since the Bylaws say the method of voting of At-Large, the issue at
   present is the process until such a time those Bylaws are amended.
   One thing that is clear in our Bylaws is that there was always intended
   to be a system of majority not plurality.  For expediency's sake and
   not for any other reason, that has been circumvented at least two years
   in a row.
   Quite obviously we have problems.  And just as obviously these can't
   just boil for a month like they did in 2016 and be forgotten.

   On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business
   <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

     Dear All,
     Pursuant to the delegates suspension of the rules at convention
     after
     overturning the ruling of the Chair, the top five vote-getters are
     properly elected to the At-Large seats on the LNC by the delegates
     in
     convention.  Objections to the procedure taken by the delegates are
     out of order, as such objections have to be properly raised during
     the
     convention session.
     As to the Judicial Committee, I'll defer to Chuck Moulton's analysis
     and suggest that the LNC pass a motion that acknowledges the top
     seven
     vote-getters as the Judicial Committee.
     There has been a lot of discussion about convention schedules,
     electronic voting systems, errors in tallying, etc. These
     discussions
     miss the point.  Using approval voting for a multi-member election
     that does not allow for winning by plurality is likely the worst
     possible election method to get At-Large members elected.
     In the past, we were allowed to vote for as many candidates as there
     were positions available, and we rarely went to a second ballot.  An
     instant runoff or single transferable system would reallocate those
     votes for candidates with minimal support.
     If the goal of At-Large members is to represent interest groups
     within
     the Libertarian Party, we are using the wrong voting system.  If it
     is
     merely to determine who is most popular in the party, we are using
     the
     correct system, but it will continue to produce results like we've
     had
     two conventions in a row based on the nature of the system.
     In short, counting ballots faster doesn't matter if we're still
     voting wrong.
     Yours truly,
     Nick

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
   - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
   Communications Director, [3]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:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
   3. http://www.lpcolorado.org/