[Lnc-business] Tonight’s Meeting and the convention

[Susan Hogarth]

 We should also discuss at this meeting (not after, because we’re at the wire here) our contingency plan for the possibility of a shutdown by Florida (or the Rosen).   
  
  
  
  
  Susan Jane Hogarth
  
  Region 5 Representative
  
  Libertarian National Committee
  
  susan.hogarth at lp.org
  
  919-906-2106 (tel:919-906-2106)
  
  
  
  

  
  
>   
> On Jul 3, 2020 at 6:05 PM,  <Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business (mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org)>  wrote:
>   
>   
>   
>  PA now also has a 14 day quarantine requirement. I definitely think the LNC could resolve impossibility for the states with this, and the credentials committee could automatically credential those as instructed by the related state chairs (and the in person delegates can challenge if they disagree). I know it has been suggested that the LNC should just say all remote delegates are automatically credentialled. I don't think we can do that. First of all, I think that violates our bylaws. Second, we don't control the credentials committee. However the credentials committee could decide that. I don't agree they would be right, but that is not my call. I am not on that committee, and I do not know what they think. In any event, the delegates can in person can challenge. The difference is that a challenge requires only a majority to overcome while a bylaws amendment is 2/3. I personally do not believe this way to get a smaller vote threshold is valid. But I do see this a possible  action and wanted to bring this out here. I do not believe there is any chance that remote participation will not pass. A few weeks ago I would have thought differently but not now. I honestly think anyone arguing against it will get booed. *In Liberty,* On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 3:39 PM Caryn Ann Harlos  <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>  wrote:  >  Let's please not argue about an agenda. Leave that to the delegates.  >  There is nothing justifying our taking a stand there.  >   >  Alex, I don't think we can justify a resolution saying impossibility for  >  all remote delegates. If that is true, we could cancel the convention. It  >  isn't true. I do think we can justify it for states with travel  >  restrictions though it is a grey area.  >   >  I believe we argue fairness and comity and the need for us to not have a  >  cloud of suspicion over our next chair to persuade for full remote  >  participation.  >   >  If we really wanted to put our money where our mouths are, any current LNC  >  candidates can refuse to run if remote participation is not allowed. I am  >  not saying we should or I would, I am just saying we should think about  >  that. If there is not remote participation, I do not believe the elections  >  will be entirely fair. I don't want to be re-elected on those terms, if I  >  am lucky enough to be.  >   >  Again this idea just popped into my head and I have not given it enough  >  thought just wanted to throw it out there.  >   >  *In Liberty,*  >   >   >   >   >  On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 3:33 PM Caryn Ann Harlos  <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>   >  wrote:  >   >>  I think that issue can be part of the resolution. I also think the  >>  credentials committee could be justified in simply deciding that the states  >>  with travel restrictions are valid delegates under impossibility and  >>  present them in their initial credentials report. That would be the  >>  judgment of the credentials committee however.  >>   >>  *In Liberty,*  >>   >>   >>   >>   >>  On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 3:21 PM  <john.phillips at lp.org>  wrote:  >>   >>>  I already had planned to ask for at least a resolution.  >>>   >>>  I would ask consideration of the states with travel restrictions be  >>>  taken up under impossibility, but I do not want to spend hours fighting  >>>  over it.  >>>   >>>  John Phillips  >>>  Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative  >>>  Cell 217-412-5973  >>>   >>>  On Jul 3, 2020 4:02 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business  <   >>>  lnc-business at hq.lp.org>  wrote:  >>>   >>>  I believe the LNC should pass an official resolution of support for  >>>  remote  >>>  participation. It has more teeth than mere promises.  >>>   >>>  I do not support a streamlined agenda. The platform and bylaws  >>>  committees  >>>  have busted their ass and deserve to have their work heard. If the  >>>  bylaws  >>>  committee feels otherwise, I respect that, but as chair of the platform  >>>  committee, I know what we have done, and I will not flush other people's  >>>  time down the drain.  >>>   >>>  *In Liberty,*  >>>   >>>   >>>   >>>   >>>  On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 2:41 PM Susan Hogarth via Lnc-business  <   >>>  lnc-business at hq.lp.org>  wrote:  >>>   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  Tonight’s meeting will be key in setting the tone for the next week.  >>>  We  >>>   >  really need to show the membership that we have a plan and some sense  >>>  of  >>>   >  unity going forward.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  Assuming we go ahead with Orlando, we should resolve to support either  >>>  the  >>>   >  Bylaws proposal or some other mechanism for remote participation  >>>   >  (Credentials may be of assistance there, or not). If Orlando doesn’t  >>>   >  happen, of course we will need to have a plan for that contingency as  >>>   >  well.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  Some members are very distressed at the prospect that they may not be  >>>   >  allowed to participate remotely. I’ve seen zero sentiment for that  >>>  here,  >>>   >  and little in general, but a statement from the LNC formally  >>>  supporting  >>>   >  remote participation will go a long way in alleviating fears and the  >>>  anger  >>>   >  those fears produce.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  We should also discuss whether we should advocate for a streamlined  >>>   >  agenda, and discuss how it might be proposed.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  I understand that the delegates have the final say on these matters,  >>>  but  >>>   >  that doesn’t mean that we should not act like leaders and come  >>>  together  >>>   >  as a body and advocate for the best solutions for what is really a  >>>   >  challenging environment. We’ve all spent a lot of time talking and  >>>  thinking  >>>   >  about these things, but the membership at large generally doesn’t have  >>>  that  >>>   >  sort of focus, and when they do take interest, there’s a lot of  >>>  conflicting  >>>   >  information and dissent that they see. Let’s work together to have a  >>>  strong  >>>   >  LNC statement on our vision for a successful convention.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  And then let’s join the CoC in helping to make it happen.  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >  Susan Jane Hogarth  >>>   >   >>>   >  Region 5 Representative  >>>   >   >>>   >  Libertarian National Committee  >>>   >   >>>   >  susan.hogarth at lp.org  >>>   >   >>>   >  919-906-2106 (tel:919-906-2106)  >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >   >>>   >>>   >>>   
>
>