[Lnc-business] Issues to inform our discussion regarding the convention

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Thank you to both Mr. Sarwark and Ms. Mattson for this discussion.  Our
bylaws already privilege one group every single time.  Those who have money
and jobs that allow time off.  Now that those of us who have  money and
such jobs might be prejudiced against should give us sympathy for those who
face this every convention.  I think it is somewhat insulting to
povetarians to be concerned about such privilege this year because it now
effects those of us who are more well off.

Substitute the word "constitution" for bylaws and "US government" for LNC
and see if any justifications fly.  If not, I suggest we not to do lest we
prove hypocrites and unable to taste our own wares when push comes to shove.

I will of course listen carefully to all arguments.  But I will not pretend
that any bylaws violations are something other than that and somehow right
when we do it but wrong when the government does it.

*In Liberty,*

* Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
(part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *



On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:59 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> NS:  "Protecting the rights of all of our delegates to meaningfully
> participate and determine the leadership of the party and the standard
> bearers for the election are my paramount considerations."
>
> Let's not conflate delegate choices with delegate rights.  Big difference.
> All delegates have the right to attend and participate, but if they choose
> not to for whatever reason, their rights have not been violated.  If you're
> arguing for having an online convention EVERY year to even the playing
> field, then do that, but to make this argument for only one year is to
> imply that the delegate "rights" are only important this year, but not so
> much in other years.  Every time we choose a location for a convention, we
> "privilege" those who live closer to the site, but it's not a violation of
> delegate rights.
>
> -Alicia
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:42 PM Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Let me start by thanking everyone who has worked so hard to plan our
> > convention in Austin as well as those who have spent a great deal of time
> > and energy coming up with alternatives and contingency plans and
> > researching our options for how to proceed in the current situation. We
> > will have an open and transparent meeting on Saturday where everyone will
> > be heard and our national committee will make some difficult decisions.
> >
> > Before the meeting begins, I wanted to raise some issues that I have been
> > thinking about so that the other members of the committee also have time
> to
> > think about them in advance of our meeting.
> >
> > The legal and practical restrictions on travel during the COVID-19 crisis
> > make it more difficult for some portion of our delegates to attend an
> > in-person convention. This difficulty is different from the normal time,
> > money, and effort needed to attend an in-person convention, in that
> > delegates from certain areas of the country have restrictions placed on
> > their travel into Texas than delegates from other areas of the country
> due
> > to infection outbreaks that are completely outside their control.
> > Additionally, delegates who have either personal or family health
> concerns
> > would be required to take risks to participate meaningfully in an
> in-person
> > convention that are above and beyond the normal requirements to
> > participate. To analogize, the Libertarian position is that anyone should
> > be allowed to choose to shoot heroin or ride a motorcycle without a
> helmet,
> > but it would be a different thing entirely to require someone to do those
> > things in order to have a voice in the organization.
> >
> > Before we get to the question of what is possible under the bylaws, the
> > question of whether the members of the committee want to allow
> credentialed
> > delegates to participate in our convention without being physically
> present
> > needs to be answered. I understand that different members of the
> committee
> > may have different opinions on this underlying question, but bringing
> that
> > conflict out into the open should probably be done prior to dealing with
> > the specific questions of if and how it could be done according to the
> > rules and bylaws. I know there are members of the committee who
> absolutely
> > support to participation of delegates remotely and members who absolutely
> > oppose it, and that has an impact on what options they are willing to
> > consider. A full discussion of those positions and the reasons behind
> them
> > may help us make better decisions.
> >
> > Another consideration that needs to be discussed is whether the
> nomination
> > of a Presidential candidate and the ability to obtain ballot access,
> > campaign, and raise money is more or less important than having an
> > in-person convention and any media coverage that may take place at that
> > convention. The first week in July is roughly six weeks after Memorial
> Day
> > and the cost of extending the nomination contest for six weeks will be
> paid
> > by the eventual nominee and the LNC in ballot access and campaigning
> time.
> > Whether that cost is worth it is a discussion for this committee, but we
> > should recognize that the cost exists.
> >
> > The last thing to consider is that we as members of the board have duties
> > to obey the bylaws and rules as well as fiduciary duties to act in the
> best
> > interest of the goals and finances of the organization. If and when those
> > duties conflict, each member will have to carefully consider which is
> more
> > important and that judgment is personal to each member. A member may
> decide
> > that following the letter of the rules is more important than imposing
> > increased risk of loss on the Libertarian Party, or vice versa. The
> > delegates who elect the next LNC will determine whether the judgment each
> > member comes to is the right one, but there is no clear answer that a
> > member could look up in a rule or law book.
> >
> > Protecting the rights of all of our delegates to meaningfully participate
> > and determine the leadership of the party and the standard bearers for
> the
> > election are my paramount considerations. There are options that would
> > privilege one group of members over another and other options that
> maintain
> > a level playing field. My inclination is to support the latter over the
> > former, but I will carefully listen to all of the discussion at our
> meeting
> > on Saturday.
> >
> > Thank you all for your service, it has been an honor to be your Chair
> over
> > this last term and there is no better group to face these challenges
> with.
> >
> > Yours in liberty,
> > Nick
> >
>