[Lnc-business] Seeking cosponsors - convention motion

Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) alex.merced at lp.org
Thu May 14 07:44:18 EDT 2020 

I second the exact sentiments from Representative O’Donnell, we should work to honor the compromise and I will vote against any move towards any extreme one way or the other.

With such limited time it’s logistically unclear whether an all online convention could be sufficiently executed and with ballot access considerations and uncertainty in Orlando it is unwise to leave the P/VP nominations to July.

Let’s honor the compromise, the hostility among this body is becoming too much of a distraction to members who could otherwise be organizing, campaigning and doings things other than being frustrated and confused by the uncertainty those who want either extreme are creating.

Let’s create certainty for our members by honoring the compromise.

Alex Merced
Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP

> On May 14, 2020, at 12:35 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
> I will co-sponsor.  I want to give my reasons.  The chair is subverting the
> will of the LNC, and the LNC needs to take back its rightful control of its
> own decisions.  I do not know if I am going to vote for it.  But it needs
> to be heard.
> 
> If a concurrent motion is offered to have an acceptable compromise, I will
> definitely vote for this.  But without such I do not know my answer.  But I
> will co-sponsor as a sign of my objection to the usurping of the authority
> of the LNC by one person.
> 
> *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 Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:28 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Mr. Phillips we can concurrently offer the Adams compromise that would be
>> a ballot that expires concurrently with this one or one day later.
>> 
>> *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 Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:28 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> EVH, I think your point has merit.  If this motion passes, I
>>> would re-offer the Erin Adams compromise motion or something very similar
>>> unless someone convinces me that would be unwise.
>>> 
>>> From what I hear from what happened tonight - not the things that will be
>>> fixed with practices - but with the inherent flaws that make this NOT a
>>> deliberative process and our chair's comments about points of order and
>>> parliamentary inquiry, I do not believe we can pull this off and protect
>>> rights.  If that is the route the LNC decides to take, I will respect it
>>> and do my best, but the best at impossible is still impossible.
>>> 
>>> But we did commit to a compromise.  But our compromise where our chair
>>> has vowed to skuttle it is no compromise.  We need one that cannot be
>>> skuttled by the chair.  Ms. Adams' compromise is far superior.  After
>>> getting some advise, I may be seeking co-sponsors for a concurrent ballot
>>> with this one to expire after it that would adopt the Adams motion.
>>> 
>>> *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 Wed, May 13, 2020 at 10:23 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Email ballots do not require four co-sponsors from the winning side.
>>>> The sponsors are like seconds.   I have not decided if I am going to
>>>> support this motion, but I am not going to let it get squashed by
>>>> procedure.  But you are incorrect on the point of order to begin with.  We
>>>> are not in the same session. That requirement for the winning side is only
>>>> in the same session.  A rescind does not require someone on the winning
>>>> side.  If you need the RONR pages, I can provide them.
>>>> 
>>>> *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 Wed, May 13, 2020 at 9:48 PM justin.odonnell--- via Lnc-business <
>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I object to this motion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The purpose of the compromise we came to was to accomodate ballot
>>>>> access deadlines and the recognition that a July date made doing so
>>>>> impossible or impractical. Ignoring those concerns is irresponsible and
>>>>> damaging to the Party. Furthermore, we waited too long to make a decision
>>>>> in the first place, this is on us. We all knew well before last weekend
>>>>> that Memorial Day in Texas wasn't going to fly in the current climate, we
>>>>> have noone but ourselves to blame for letting things get to this point with
>>>>> wishful thinking. Its time to stop acting childish, suck it up, and make
>>>>> the best of the situation we're in.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On parliamentary grounds, a motion to reconsider is required to be made
>>>>> by a member of the prevailing side, I would argue that an email ballot
>>>>> requires 4 valid cosponsors, and thus would require 4 members from the
>>>>> prevailing side to cosponsor in order to be a valid motion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Justin O'Donnell
>>>>> LNC Region 8 Representative
>>>>> 
>>>>> On May 13, 2020 11:04 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I ask for email ballot co-sponsors for the following motion to:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Rescind in its entirety the motion adopted during the May 9, 2020 LNC
>>>>> meeting, which called for a convention to begin on May 22, 2020 with
>>>>> business conducted online.  Instead, in accordance with Bylaw Article
>>>>> 10.1,
>>>>> the LNC calls an in-person convention to occur during the dates of July
>>>>> 8-12, 2020 at Rosen Shingle Creek in Orlando, Florida.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I know that I was on the losing side of a 13-4 motion on Saturday,
>>>>> however
>>>>> after tonight's train-wreck and the information I learned during it, I
>>>>> believe that some LNC members from the other side are ready to change
>>>>> course.  If I did not believe that to be the case, I would not offer
>>>>> this
>>>>> motion.  To preserve options for the LNC, given the 7-day voting period
>>>>> for
>>>>> an email ballot, I want to start this motion now so that it can
>>>>> complete by
>>>>> next Wednesday.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I will have a LOT to say about this soon, as will others, but my first
>>>>> focus is getting the co-sponsors.  Then we can debate.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> <
>>>>> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>> www.avg.com
>>>>> <
>>>>> http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
>>>>> 
>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>

More information about the Lnc-business mailing list