Strategic Planning

[June Genis]

The Excom has decided to get rid of the Strategic Planning committee but we have so far not talked about how to functionally replace it. I believe we do need a strategy. Steven Nekaihla has proposed a (somewhat vague) strategy that he wants to advance for the LP nationally but I believe we need one of our own specifically suited to California.

We are a large and diverse state and winning here will require meeting the needs of that diversity. I propose that our strategy follow what the California Ranked Choice Coalition is using for RCV here in CA. That strategy is to implement it in as many local jurisdictions as possible to create a track record of success before attempting statewide implementation.

For us the parallel strategy should be to demonstrate that "Liberty works!". That means showing how local communities have been able to improve conditions for people in their communities without, or even in opposition, to government sponsored solutions. SO....

Are you an active member of some community, religious, ethnic, social, or any other shared value, that has improved things for that community by totally voluntary means? If not, are you willing to become involved in one? I direct this last part particularly to readers here that are NOT on the excom because the truth is that excom members are already inundated with solving a lot of  problems left to us by the previous administration. If you are, please share that information here,

Virus-free.www.avast.com

[Joe Dehn]

On 2025-11-17 10:51, June Genis wrote:

The Excom has decided to get rid of the Strategic Planning committee but we have so far not talked about how to functionally replace it. I believe we do need a strategy. Steven Nekaihla has proposed a (somewhat vague) strategy that he wants to advance for the LP nationally but I believe we need one of our own specifically suited to California.

 

I think this is worth discussing, but I think it's important to remember that the many past efforts to develop, adopt, and implement "strategic plans" in the context of the LP have shown little in the way of results. And I see no reason to think that what Nekhaila is "proposing" will fare better, or be something we can usefully adapt specifically for California.

 

We are a large and diverse state and winning here will require meeting the needs of that diversity. I propose that our strategy follow what the California Ranked Choice Coalition is using for RCV here in CA. That strategy is to implement it in as many local jurisdictions as possible to create a track record of success before attempting statewide implementation.

 

For us the parallel strategy should be to demonstrate that "Liberty works!". That means showing how local communities have been able to improve conditions for people in their communities without, or even in opposition, to government sponsored solutions. SO....

 

The LP is a coalition of people who care about a wide variety of issues.  And those issues, in terms of how government is now involved, range from local to national -- or international. Attempting to focus our efforts on one or even a small set of local issues will not allow us to grow the overall coalition.

 

Just as, if we care about size and influence, we need to some extent try to offer a "big tent" in terms of ideological consistency, I believe we also need to take a "bit tent" approach to issues, and levels of government, and forms of activism.

 

Are you an active member of some community, religious, ethnic, social, or any other shared value, that has improved things for that community by totally voluntary means? If not, are you willing to become involved in one? I direct this last part particularly to readers here that are NOT on the excom because the truth is that excom members are already inundated with solving a lot of  problems left to us by the previous administration. If you are, please share that information here,

 

 

I can see how this might be a useful approach for some people to pursue, but I don't see how it can be the basis for a "strategy" for the party as a whole, because it leaves out too many things that are what motivates people to support us.  Any strategy that makes us less relevant to a large fraction of the people who might otherwise be willing to support us, either with funds or volunteer work, will make it harder for us to achieve the goal of approaching the size of the Rs and Ds.