Re: [Lnc-votes] [Lnc-business] Support for Caryn Ann Harlos' Motion To Rescind
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
To the members of the Libertarian National Committee,
We the members of the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus (LPAC) wish to express our support for the motion to rescind put forth by LNC Region 1 Representative Caryn Ann Harlos. This motion is a call for transparency in light of some troubling aspects of the contract Chairman Sarwark was authorized to negotiate and sign. We feel this is a play at opacity that is not acceptable. There can be an argument made for tactical aspects of keeping the contract hidden during the campaign, but after it is over, members of the LNC should be able to discuss it with their constituents, and members should be able to view the document as the information can be useful in deciding on LNC representatives, or as a benchmark if the bylaw provision for a stock contract comes back around.
We hope that you will choose wisely and support the rescission, not as a personal attack on the Chair, but as a support of transparency to set an example for the old parties.
Thank you,
The Members of The Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus.
Be Audacious!
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
Thank you for your support. Also, you have very appropriately characterized the issue at stake, i.e. member and committee rights and the fundamental principle of transparency and avoiding "back room deals" that are the hallmark of the old parties. I have the additional concerns that this provision was not entered into with full knowledge.Thank you for caring about what is going on with your Party and keeping an eye on the gatekeepers.Chair Sarwark is working with the campaign to see if this provision can be taken out. That will help resolve a great deal of this and then the LNC will have to deal with the intra-LNC issue of whether we should grant such blanket authority in the future. I have come to the opinion we should not have, and that it was unfair of us to put Chair Sarwark in that sole position. It so easily can (and did) turn into a lose-lose for him. This was a responsibility we all should have shouldered.At Large members Daniel Hayes and Starchild have co-sponsored my motion. An additional co-sponsor is needed for this to be heard. And if not passed, the membership would have the right to appeal to the Judicial Committee.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:30 AM, Audacious Caucus <beauda...@gmail.com> wrote:To the members of the Libertarian National Committee,
We the members of the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus (LPAC) wish to express our support for the motion to rescind put forth by LNC Region 1 Representative Caryn Ann Harlos. This motion is a call for transparency in light of some troubling aspects of the contract Chairman Sarwark was authorized to negotiate and sign. We feel this is a play at opacity that is not acceptable. There can be an argument made for tactical aspects of keeping the contract hidden during the campaign, but after it is over, members of the LNC should be able to discuss it with their constituents, and members should be able to view the document as the information can be useful in deciding on LNC representatives, or as a benchmark if the bylaw provision for a stock contract comes back around.
We hope that you will choose wisely and support the rescission, not as a personal attack on the Chair, but as a support of transparency to set an example for the old parties.
Thank you,
The Members of The Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus.
Be Audacious!
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
Surely I'm not the only one who sees the irony of someone using an unsigned email from an anonymously-structured email address to lobby the LNC for transparency. Just sayin'...We have also recently been lobbied to suspend our presidential ticket by a person who later noted he's not even a member of the LP. For all I know, some of these emails could be coming from Trump or Clinton supporters.
-Alicia
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Audacious Caucus <beauda...@gmail.com> wrote:To the members of the Libertarian National Committee,
We the members of the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus (LPAC) wish to express our support for the motion to rescind put forth by LNC Region 1 Representative Caryn Ann Harlos. This motion is a call for transparency in light of some troubling aspects of the contract Chairman Sarwark was authorized to negotiate and sign. We feel this is a play at opacity that is not acceptable. There can be an argument made for tactical aspects of keeping the contract hidden during the campaign, but after it is over, members of the LNC should be able to discuss it with their constituents, and members should be able to view the document as the information can be useful in deciding on LNC representatives, or as a benchmark if the bylaw provision for a stock contract comes back around.
We hope that you will choose wisely and support the rescission, not as a personal attack on the Chair, but as a support of transparency to set an example for the old parties.
Thank you,
The Members of The Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus.
Be Audacious!
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
--
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
Regarding this message posted by Ms Mattson:This isn't the first time somebody on the LNC accused the grassroots of being non-transparent. Please know that the majority of our activity takes place in Facebook groups whose membership lists and internal dialogue are available to anybody who cares to participate.If one wishes to to know the names of the 153 Libertarians represented by the participatory actions of the Audacious Caucus, they may view them here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/905453686158908/members/To learn who is in any particular group, click "Members" at the top of one on desktop. On mobile, it varies per device but is also available. To find a particular group just use the search bar. For example if a message arrived from the LP Bearded Caucus, you would be four clicks and a copy/paste away from learning that it has 40 members and who they are.Chair Sarwark and Representatives Harlos and Sommes are three among you, but not the only three, who exemplify digital engagement with the grassroots. For leadership in this area, you may look to any of them.--
Mike ShipleyPhoenix, AZ
"The most common way people give up their power is by thinking they don't have any."
Thank you for your support. Also, you have very appropriately characterized the issue at stake, i.e. member and committee rights and the fundamental principle of transparency and avoiding "back room deals" that are the hallmark of the old parties. I have the additional concerns that this provision was not entered into with full knowledge.Thank you for caring about what is going on with your Party and keeping an eye on the gatekeepers.Chair Sarwark is working with the campaign to see if this provision can be taken out. That will help resolve a great deal of this and then the LNC will have to deal with the intra-LNC issue of whether we should grant such blanket authority in the future. I have come to the opinion we should not have, and that it was unfair of us to put Chair Sarwark in that sole position. It so easily can (and did) turn into a lose-lose for him. This was a responsibility we all should have shouldered.At Large members Daniel Hayes and Starchild have co-sponsored my motion. An additional co-sponsor is needed for this to be heard. And if not passed, the membership would have the right to appeal to the Judicial Committee.
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
LPAC Members -Thank you for your work in ensuring transparency and integrity in political dealings. These traits will continue to differentiate our party from the Republican and Democrat alternatives. Though at times the powers that be may see such actions as trivial nuisances, it is exactly this effort that is expected by our membership to maintain a healthy political alternative in these united states.Respectfully,Steven M. NielsonRegion 1 Alternate to LPFormer Chairperson 2015-2016,
lnc-...@hq.lp.org
Article 7, Section 12 is the same bylaw I looked at, and all I see there is that the JC can potentially "veto" a decision, thus making it "null and void". Veto power on something the LNC did adopt is not legislative power, such that if the LNC rejects a motion, the JC can enact it.
Alicia,==You keep saying this. Is it your belief that if the LNC refuses to adopt a given motion, the Judicial Committee has some sort of authority to make us adopt it? If so, please cite the bylaw which gives you that impression. Veto power and legislative power are quite different things.==Yes I do. There are members who feel that this process may violate certain sections of the Bylaws. You don't have to agree with them. You don't have to agree whether it would be a fruitful exercise or futile, or trying to unring a bell. They have this right. I personally think the Bylaws should give members more power to appeal, but such is what it is.Article 7, Section 12: Upon appeal by ten percent of the delegates credentialed at the most recent Regular Convention or one percent of the Party sustaining members the Judicial Committee shall consider the question of whether or not a decision of the National Committee contravenes specified sections of the Bylaws. If the decision is vetoed by the Judicial Committee, it shall be declared null and void.I am not going to drop names without permission, but some of the members who feel this way aren't wet-behind-the-ears new people but experienced seasoned members' who's opinion I respect.
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 4:17 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:
Would you like me to ask the members of this group who requested to provide their names and copies of their LP membership cards to prove their bona fides? I didn't think we were in the habit of speculating that concerned members might be old party operatives or taking emails at anything other than face value without some proof they are not what they seem to be just because we don't like what they had to say.
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
On Friday, September 23, 2016, Alicia Mattson <secr...@lp.org> wrote:
-AliciaSurely I'm not the only one who sees the irony of someone using an unsigned email from an anonymously-structured email address to lobby the LNC for transparency. Just sayin'...We have also recently been lobbied to suspend our presidential ticket by a person who later noted he's not even a member of the LP. For all I know, some of these emails could be coming from Trump or Clinton supporters.
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Audacious Caucus <beauda...@gmail.com> wrote:To the members of the Libertarian National Committee,
We the members of the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus (LPAC) wish to express our support for the motion to rescind put forth by LNC Region 1 Representative Caryn Ann Harlos. This motion is a call for transparency in light of some troubling aspects of the contract Chairman Sarwark was authorized to negotiate and sign. We feel this is a play at opacity that is not acceptable. There can be an argument made for tactical aspects of keeping the contract hidden during the campaign, but after it is over, members of the LNC should be able to discuss it with their constituents, and members should be able to view the document as the information can be useful in deciding on LNC representatives, or as a benchmark if the bylaw provision for a stock contract comes back around.
We hope that you will choose wisely and support the rescission, not as a personal attack on the Chair, but as a support of transparency to set an example for the old parties.
Thank you,
The Members of The Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus.
Be Audacious!
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
--In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-bu...@hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org