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

Sam Goldstein sam.goldstein at lp.org
Tue Jul 31 11:47:05 EDT 2018


So it just takes a majority of those voting to pass this motion which is 
well less than 50% of the LNC at this time.   I think that would be a 
horrible precedent to set, especially for such an important subject.

This is a very bad idea and should have been open to a debate at our 
next meeting.  There is nothing urgent confronting the LNC at this point 
that would require a pretend JC with no actual Bylaws authority or 
enforcement ability.

Please vote No and let's talk about the situation next month.

Live Free,


---
Sam Goldstein
Libertarian National Committee
317-850-0726 Cell

On 2018-07-31 10:02, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
> I vote yes.
> 
> In practice this is very similar to the idea of an Appeals Committee.
> Seems to be the best solution to the situation that the convention
> delegates created.
> 
> ---
> Tim Hagan
> Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
> 
> On 2018-07-31 04:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>> REMINDER - This ballot will expire on AUGUST 1, 2018.
>> 
>> I have noted the following (please inform me of any corrections):
>> 
>> Voting AYE: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Olsen, Phillips
>> 
>> Voting NAY: Goldstein, Lyons
>> 
>> Express Abstentions: None
>> 
>> Not Voting: Bilyeu/Adams, Bishop-Henchman, Hagan, Lark/Hogarth,
>> Mattson, Redpath, Sarwark, Smith, Van Horn/Nanna
>> 
>> For a current tally of 6-2.
>> 
>> Notes: Region 8 Representative Hewitt has not voted so Alternate
>> Olsen's vote stands.
>> 
>> You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here:
>> https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> 
>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Jeff Lyons via Lnc-business
>> <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>> On 2018-07-25 20:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business 
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the
>>>> judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d 
>>>> be
>>>> bound to follow.
>>>> 
>>>> Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the
>>>> decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would
>>>> operate.
>>>> 
>>>> This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best
>>>> represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to 
>>>> the
>>>> extent such can be discernible with the existing votes.
>>>> 
>>>> This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold
>>>> their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be
>>>> mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected.
>>>> 
>>>> An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the
>>>> LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its
>>>> existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally 
>>>> for
>>>> the time being.
>>>> 
>>>> Alex Merced
>>>> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
>>>> 
>>>>> On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
>>>>> <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> It is better than having zero protection at all for the members.  
>>>>> And
>>>>> IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I
>>>>> would hope would not be re-elected.  This "JC" has already 
>>>>> submitted
>>>>> it appellate rules.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein 
>>>>>> <sam.goldstein at lp.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> I vote No on this motion.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can 
>>>>>> elect the
>>>>>> Judicial Committee
>>>>>> 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by 
>>>>>> margins
>>>>>> of at
>>>>>> least 60% of the
>>>>>>   delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of
>>>>>> requiring
>>>>>> a majority approval of delegates
>>>>>> 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of 
>>>>>> how
>>>>>> this
>>>>>> pretend JC would function, whether it
>>>>>>   would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream 
>>>>>> up its'
>>>>>> own rules that this motion would
>>>>>>   have the LNC be bound to follow
>>>>>> 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the 
>>>>>> motion
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted
>>>>>>   in favor of but have reconsidered)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Please consider my points before you vote on this motion.  The 
>>>>>> entire
>>>>>> purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body
>>>>>> that is not beholden to the LNC.  There is no guarantee that if 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> pretend
>>>>>> JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that
>>>>>> the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Sam Goldstein
>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>> 317-850-0726 Cell
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Craig Bowden
>>>>>>> Region 1 Alternate
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2018-07-25 06:06, 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> In Liberty,
>>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
>>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I could get behind this solution, once we ensure this never happens 
>>> again.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> In Liberty,
>>> Jeff Lyons
>>> 
>>> Region 8 Alternate
>>> (Acting Region 8 Rep)
>>> 
>>> Libertarian Assoc. of MA
>>> Membership Director
>>> http://www.lpmass.org/join
>>> 
>>> Daniel Fishman for Auditor
>>> Campaign Manager
>>> http://www.AuditMassachusetts.com
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> --
>> In Liberty,
>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
>> 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



More information about the Lnc-business mailing list