From the desk of George Phillies
December 5th — I flew off to San Diego to listen to the Libertarian National Committee meeting.
A long description follows. If you have the impression they did almost nothing at great expense, well, I agree with you. However, the LNC goes through over a million a year of libertarian money, so you really should worry about what it is doing with it. Fortunately, the draft LNC minutes are out, and while they contain at least one error, they are a good guide.
The big commotion in advance was over the motion by Stuart Flood to expel Angela Keaton from the National Committee. Every LNC member was present for the meeting; the gallery was filled with 30 spectators. Mike Seebeck with the Libertarian Transparency Caucus videotaped the meeting. Segments are available on the web at http://www.justin.tv/tannim123
.
The first surprise for spectators was mention that David Nolan had prepared a resolution condemning the Barr campaign’s management of its Presidential campaign. Nolan is not an LNC member; the resolution was submitted by Tony Ryan. Motions to delete the Barr and Keaton resolutions from the Agenda failed.
The meeting opens with comments from the gallery. Andy Jacobs protested at some length that the LNC political director had demanded that LPMass burn several thousand signatures for Barr and Underwood. LPMass did not of course burn the signatures, but that was not the issue. Rob Power urged that the LNC should reach out to the left and not just the right, contrary to its past practice.
Chair William Redpath dropped a bombshell. The Barr campaign generated a large list of donors and volunteers. The campaign refuses to share that list with the LNC. They are keeping that list for themselves until they pay off the campaign’s debts, which are close to a quarter million dollars. There was no suggestion that they will share that list with the LNC at a later date.
The Treasurer’s Report indicated that the LNC has more liabilities than cash on hand, but that the money we receive as payments from a bequest will bring us up roughly to zero net available assets. Income next year is expected to fall substantially.
The Convention committee has chosen St. Louis as the site for the 2010 state convention. The hotel is a Marriott. It does not have internet access in the rooms.
Wayne Root was allowed to speak for the better part of 30 minutes. He did not hesitate to take questions. Most important point: The Barr campaign owes him about $20,000 for his expenses, and had lost and ignored his messages to them asking for payment. Most of his speech was in fact the launch of his 2012 Presidential campaign. He did note that he had been vigorous on seeking radio interviews and other media, much more successful than our prior recent VP candidates. He participated in a variety of events, such as the San Francisco Pride festival. Unlike his running mate he had been supportive and effective on getting into a debate with other candidates running for the same office.
The Committee then considered a resolution authored by Party Founder David Nolan condemning the Barr campaign. The Resolution asserted that Barr talked of millions of votes and tens of millions of dollars, and totally failed to deliver, in large part because of incompetence and lack of support of Libertarian principles. The resolution then resolved that the LNC expresses extreme disappointment with the campaign, condemns Russ Verney and Shane Cory as campaign managers, and specifically disavows responsibility for the campaign’s huge debts. A Bill of Particulars noted that Barr had regularly avoided the word “Libertarian”, notably in his literature, massively misspent the money
he did raise, only achieved ballot access in 45 states, insulted Ron Paul, and insulted all of our prior Presidential candidates. The list of ill-spent funds included “Campaign staffers were paid inflated
salaries; money was spent on refurbishing Bob Barr’s Atlanta offices; “political consultants” were paid at least $100,000; $19,000 was spent on limousines. But almost nothing was spent on promoting Barr or the Libertarian Party via paid broadcast or print advertising.” After considerable debate, the motion to adopt the Resolution was defeated.
Staff reports largely focused on ballot access. We have ballot access in Maryland through 2010 and have retained access in North Carolina, an enormous positive outcome. There was a conversation with the Party Attorney in Executive session. Bill Hall was not enthusiastic about continuing as the LNC’s attorney. I have since learned that other candidates for the post are being recruited.
After lunch, Stuart Flood moved to expel Anegla Keaton from the LNC. The resolution, which was not available to the accused the day before the meeting, began
“Whereas, Angela Keaton has engaged in conduct injurious to the Libertarian Party and its purposes; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That Angela Keaton’s membership in the Libertarian National Committee is suspended pursuant to Article 8, Section 5 of the Bylaws of the Libertarian Party; and further be it
RESOLVED, That the aforementioned suspension is hereby rescinded, contingent upon a determination by the Secretary that Angela Keaton has submitted within seven days of the adoption of this resolution a letter for publication in LP News including (and limited to)”
There followed a long list of complaints about her. Noteworthy on the list was “An apology to the members of the Libertarian Party of New Hampshire for attempting on August 21, 2008 to sabotage the party’s attempt to win the right to candidate substitution for future elections.”
The Libertarian Party of New Hampshire had previously expressed an opinion of this complaint, namely in a letter to their LNC representative, Dan Karlan, they wrote
“Mr. Karlan:
LPNH has no grievance against Angela Keaton. The preponderance of opinion among our officers and other active members is that this is foolish, petty, and true to form for LPN. The author of this did not
consult with LPNH, and his attempt to embroil our party in this is contemptible. See to it that any reference to LPNH is removed from this resolution.
– Philip Hodson, LPNH chair”
The letter also went to the LNC Chair and many others. Dan Karlan made no effort during the meeting to remove the false claims from the motion. You will not read in the draft minutes Mr. Wrights’ reminder that if Angela Keaton had supported candidates of another party, than so had
most of the LNC, namely most of the LNC had voted to give material support to the Ron Paul Republican campaign.
A half dozen state committees had sent resolutions urging that the LNC not waste its time on this. The resolutions were entirely ignored.
After an hour and a half of this — you can watch the video — the LNC did not give Keaton the courtesy of a vote on the matter. They instead voted to create a “dispute resolution committee” to review the issues.
Authorial comment: This was transparently a battle between our party’s radical and establishment wings. The radicals had the votes to vote down the original motion and end the issue. They did not have the good sense to do so. They instead guaranteed that the issue would drag out until the Charleston meeting. Ms. Keaton instead has quit the LNC in disgust, meaning that it is fairly likely that she, a radical, will be replaced with an establishment candidate.
The LNC then was offered a motion to consider a new Mission Statement” The mission of the LP is to move public policy in a libertarian direction by building a network of pro-freedom activists who can
effectively support public policy changes and oppose negative changes by working within the political process on an issue-by-issue basis.”
The Motion had not been discussed in detail prior to the meeting. I see contradictory statements as to whether the exact motion had been submitted to the National Committee in advance. An hour was allotted for discussing the motion; at the end, consideration was postponed to the next meeting.
The discussion then turned to a discussion of goals for the rest of the Committee’s term. There was a prolonged discussion of how voting would proceed on goals. On goals:
#1 48 state ballot access. It was clear from discussion that no one had gone through in advance and worked out, state by state, what could actually be done in the next 18 months. Ruwart moved that the committee should in the next 18 months raise 1/3 of the money that will be needed
through 2012 or this purpose. Her amendment was defeated. Further discussion was postponed until March.
#2 18,000 members as of 12/31/2009. Paths to this end were not discussed.
#3) The LNC will ensure that each state has an operational affiliate party by July 1, 2009. Their definition of “Operational state affiliate” is a bit strange, namely it does not include atually doing
any politics. Instead:
* There is a properly maintained website for the affiliate
* There is at least one LP member in the state who actively serves as an official contact for the affiliate in its dealings with the LNC, and there is at least one LP member in the state who actively serves as a contact for the affiliate in its dealings with the state government.
* LPHQ has a copy of the current bylaws and associated documents for the affiliate, along with a copy of the relevant laws of that state regarding political parties and ballot access.
After an hour, the goals discussion got almost no place. Discussion was postponed until the March LNC Meeting. How you can vote a budget when you do not have short term goals is a closely held secret.
There is an ongoing search for an Executive Director. I am quite sure I heard it said that there is no money to hire an Executive Director, and therefore the search is not really going any where, but it is continuing.
We have reached the end of Saturday. I was challenged by a very prominent Libertarian to name one significant thing the LNC had done this day. I clutched at straws, but failed.
The Sunday meeting opened bright and early. The Resolution Committee was named to be: Rachel Hawkridge, Tony Ryan, Mary Ruwart, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Admiral Michael Colley, and Michael Jingozian. Angela Keaton declined to have anything to do with the committee.
The committee moved to discussing the budget. They first went to Executive Session. I have learned that the discussion topic was staff reductions. The compensation line was cut, or so the computer display appeared to me to say, from around $320,000 to under $250,000, but the display was hard to read. There will be reductions. I have not yet learned whom.
The LNC did appropriate $15,000 out of their estimated 1.2 million dollar budget to join the Washington State ‘top two’ litigation, which makes it illegal for third party candidates to run in November in significant races.
There was considerable debate on spending lines, almost none of which was minuted. Membership recruitment by direct mail is estimated to cost $84 a member; we will be doing a lot of it. Membership recruitment via internet will cost far less; Ruwart’s proposal to move money to internet recruiting was in the end not supported even though it made sense.
The final budget included 1.19 million dollars in income, assuming that membership dues will rise from $394,000 to $550,000, and included spending:
LP News will apparently be cut from monthly or so to quarterly.
Nothing for Affiliate Support
Nothing for Ballot Access
Nothing for Brand Development
Nothing for Campus Outreach
Nothing for Lobbying
$500 unspent… toward a reserve fund?
$5,000 for Candidate Support
$6,000 for Media Relations
$28,000 for Member Communications
$35,000 for Litigation
$430,000 for membership recruiting and fund raising
$378,700 for Administrative Expense
$309,800 for Compensation — that’s not the number I thought I saw on the screen, but computer displays are not reliable
The budget passed 10-6. Voting in favor: Michael Jingozian, Aaron Starr, Bob Sullentrup, Michael Colley, Pat Dixon, Tony Ryan, Mark Hinkle, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Stewart Flood, Dan Karlan. Opposed: Angela Keaton, Lee Wrights, Mary Ruwart, James Lark, Julie Fox, Rachel Hawkridge. Bill Redpath as chair did not vote. There was a dispute as to whether the budget had passed, because 2/3 votes are required to pass new material, but the budget was ruled to be the old material, not the details released only at the meeting.
The Platform Committee will be Adam Mayer, Rebecca Sink-Burris, Richard Randall, Brian Holtz, Alicia Mattson, Stephen Gordon, John Roland, Rob Power, Joe Hauptman, and Susan Hogarth. Mattson was appointed as interim chair.
Bill Redpath appointed M Carling as the LNC’s Parliamentarian. Redpath then left.
There was a discussion of the Libertarian National Congressional Committee. The LNCC gave no money to any federal candidates. It gave $500 each to four NH State Rep candidates, namely Morey Strauss, Brendan Kelley, Rich Tomasso, and Lisa Wilbur, who it claimed were running particularly effective campaigns. My sources in New Hampshire say that the first two were campaigning, and the other two were running paper campaigns.
There was discussion of rules for approving participation in lawsuits. After prolonged discussion, the matter was referred to counsel and no action was taken.
The National Director proposed that LNC members sign a volunteer confidentiality statement. Several members refused. The issue was postponed until March.
The LNC passed a resolution condemning violations of the posse commitatus act by the Bush administration. It then went to executive session to discuss the need for legal counsel, and finally adjourned.
28 responses so far ↓
1 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Observe that the dues income requires something like 20,000 members next year, an increase of 1/3 or so from this year.
I believe the plan that assumed that gold bars will fall from the sky has a similar likelihood of success. The LNCC claims to the LNC about the campaigns it supported do not appear to be correct.
2 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Why aren’t people joining the LP? Because, though many repubs love their beliefs, they buy media propaganda that LP activism will accomplish nothing. They’re all pragmatists. Well, giving up on the LP is not something I can recommend, there appears to be some demand for it.
3 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 7:26 pm
The LP doesn’t get any free ride over at neoliberal sites such as dailykos, that’s why I don’t expect us to see that many democrat converts. They just can’t get past that free market thing..
4 TheOriginalAndy // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:01 pm
“#1 48 state ballot access. It was clear from discussion that no one had gone through in advance and worked out, state by state, what could actually be done in the next 18 months.”
Which is an example of why they should not be in charge of ballot access. The same crew that screwed it up this year will screw it up again.
5 TheOriginalAndy // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:03 pm
“If you have the impression they did almost nothing at great expense, well, I agree with you.”
I was thinking the same thing. LOL!
6 Libertarian Joseph // Dec 16, 2008 at 8:08 pm
the federal LP should do nothing but aid in state projects
7 Michael Seebeck // Dec 16, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Thanks, George, great summary. This clearly illustrates why I recommend more than one person twitter the meeting, because you caught details I missed while having technical issues. Thanks for filling in some of my gaps!
8 Ross Levin // Dec 16, 2008 at 9:33 pm
$430,000 for fundraising?
9 VirtualGalt // Dec 16, 2008 at 9:39 pm
It is incomprehensible (to me anyway) that there isn’t a process (I’ll accept there isn’t a plan as yet) to game out how to get 50 (or at least 49) state access for 2012. Meaning, who will do what, by when, and what will be needed (manpower, money, etc). And who will be *accountable* for these things. And what will be the consequences for the point people if they are *not* achieved.
10 Michael H. Wilson // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:34 pm
How is $6K for media relations going to be spent?
“$430,000 for membership recruiting and fund raising” Not how, but why?
11 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:36 pm
$430,000 for fundraising and membership recruitment. $84 per new direct mail recruitment. $3 per new internet recruited member (Stuart Flood made a very sound point about needing to look at how costs for the web pages and other internet efforts were divided across membership recruitment and other internet results, but was sure that the cost per new member was much lower than $84 per new member.
At $84 per new member via direct mail, it takes 6-8 years for donations from that member (remember, many of them leave after each year) to cover the cost of recruiting that member, and that appeared to be assuming a constant dollar. That’s even worse than Project Archimedes, which the LNC Treasurer determined would cost a minimum of 2-3 years per new member to pay for itself.
12 TheOriginalAndy // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:39 pm
“VirtualGalt // Dec 16, 2008 at 9:39 pm
It is incomprehensible (to me anyway) that there isn’t a process (I’ll accept there isn’t a plan as yet) to game out how to get 50 (or at least 49) state access for 2012. Meaning, who will do what, by when, and what will be needed (manpower, money, etc). And who will be *accountable* for these things. And what will be the consequences for the point people if they are *not* achieved.”
The fact that they are only shooting for 48 states instead of 50 states plus DC shows the Losertarian attitude and it one reason why the party does not get anywhere.
Our little group of REAL Libertarian petitioners has a plan to achieve 50 state plus DC ballot access for 2012. We can begin working on it as soon as the funding becomes available (and we can do it cheaper, and do it RIGHT).
13 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Andy,
Perhaps you would care to share the plan with the rest of us. Let me try a simple question: What are the states in which we could be petitioning now, and how many signatures are needed in each of them? A rational analysis would then look at the condition of the Libertarian Party in each state, or the chances of restarting a libertarian party under some name if the local LP has croaked, as it has in parts of America.
14 paulie cannoli // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:55 pm
What are the states in which we could be petitioning now, and how many signatures are needed in each of them?
I have a file from Richard Winger as to which states don’t have start dates on petitioning. It is slightly out of date, but not terribly. The December BAN has the requirements by state, but it looks like some of those were not updated based on 2008 election results for those states which calculate their petition requirements based on number of votes cast. Hopefully January will have the updates.
A rational analysis would then look at the condition of the Libertarian Party in each state, or the chances of restarting a libertarian party under some name if the local LP has croaked, as it has in parts of America.
You would know that part better. If you would like to work together on compiling that info, I have pieces of the puzzle.
15 Michael H. Wilson // Dec 16, 2008 at 10:56 pm
George do you recall what the percentage of returns was for Project Archimedes?
Somethings make me ill and this is one.
16 G.E. // Dec 16, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Pathetic. You guys remind me of an abused wife who keeps coming back for more.
17 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 11:35 pm
“George do you recall what the percentage of returns was for Project Archimedes?”
Does “Negative” count? There is an identifiable date on which PA was launched, and party growth did not accelerate.
18 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 11:39 pm
From “Funding Liberty”, available from Third Millennium 3mpub.com/phillies
Chapter 9
Project Archimedes
…
Project Archimedes was the campaign promise of National Chair David Bergland. As laid out by former National Director Perry Willis, Project Archimedes was supposed to increase Party membership from nearly 28,000 in mid- 1998 to 100,000 or more by the 2000 National Convention. Bergland had promised that if elected he would launch the Project. He was elected. The Project was launched.
To reach its goals, Project Archimedes needed to attract 6000 new members in its first two months, and 6000 or more members every two months thereafter. Project Archimedes failed. Not only did membership not grow 6000 in two months, but membership has never grown by 6000 from the 27,938 it had reached on June 27, 1998. Indeed, after four years of Project Archimedes Party membership is smaller than it was in Summer 1998.
When Bergland became National Chair, party membership was already increasing-up 5000 in the first half of 1998. Project Archimedes was launched. Membership growth immediately slowed. In the second half of 1998, about 600,000 Archimedes letters were mailed (source: December 1998 LNC Minutes) and membership grew by fewer than 2200. In 1999, another 1.7 million or so letters were mailed (We know the number because Willis was paid in total for about 2.3 million letters, of which 600,000 were mailed in 1998). In the first half of 1999, membership grew by another 2300, from 30,065 to 32,377. Tripling the number of letters mailed had almost no effect on the net number of new recruits, raising the question of whether the program was at all effective in recruiting new members. Membership growth then crashed to a halt, and has never reached 33,500. The situation grew worse in the New Year. From November 30, 1999 to December 31, 2000, National Party membership fell by more than 650. For the first time in recent memory, the National Party failed to expand its ranks during a Presidential election year. Party membership went into a steep decline, falling to 24,498 in areas with affiliated parties by the end of July, 2002. ”
NOT TO MENTION
“There is controversy about the financial outcome of Project Archimedes. Some supporters want to claim that the Project was financially successful. It was not. I quote from the Libertarian Party of Massachusetts e-mail list. Massachusetts libertarian activist (and co-founder of the gay/lesbian gun rights action group Pink Pistols) Doug Krick asked: “Does anyone know if the project cost the LP money in the long haul, or did it pay for itself?”
The answer was provided on 14 June 2000 by Mark Tuniewicz, Libertarian Party National Treasurer, writing (note signature block) in his official capacity as the Party’s Treasurer. Tuniewicz’s answer to Krick appeared on the Massachusetts Libertarian email list general@lpma.org, a list since silenced by the LPMA for publishing URLs leading to newspaper articles that were critical of LPMA candidates. Tuniewicz wrote:
“The fast answer is ‘it depends’. Certainly, the project has fallen below most people’s expectations.
Initially, Archimedes was supposed to more than pay for itself—-meaning that every mailing would more than recoup its cost based on the contributions and memberships from that mailing.
This was expanded to include an estimate of what we normally receive as an average contribution per member for the year following receipt of a new membership, the rationale being that those are additional revenues that we never would have had, so should be included as part of the mailing’s return calculation.
More recently, I think some are looking at TWO years worth of returns.
I think that there’s a point at which stretching out those incremental dollars becomes meaningless, though one could approach it on a discounted cash flow basis.
Right now, using the original definition, Archimedes mailings do not pay for themselves. [Emphasis added. GP] But has the project been useful? I think so. We would have been at a substantial membership decrease nationally if we didn’t do direct mail.
The moral of the story is: Archimedes in and of itself is not the answer. Direct mail is just one part of the equation for our success, and we do ourselves a favor by not overly focussing on just one approach.
Best
Mark Tuniewicz
National Treasurer
Libertarian Party”
As of the start of 2000, Project Archimedes was a double failure.
Failure one: National Party membership never reached even 50,000, let alone 100,000 or 200,000. Membership climbed from 27,000 in 1998 to 33,000 members in mid-1999. Membership growth then stopped.
Failure two: Project Archimedes was not self-financing. As witness the above letter from the National Treasurer, the new members did not pay for the cost of recruiting them, even counting the year’s income from those members. Perhaps with two years’ income a membership would pay for itself. But two years’ income from a member (including donations) is more than $100—the cost per member honestly estimated by Gene Cisewski in the 1998 debate. “
19 George Phillies // Dec 16, 2008 at 11:42 pm
To generate $550,000 in member dues we need about 20,000 members next year and 50 new life members. We currently have 15,000 members. The number is seriously optimistic. A more reasonable guess on income is probably closer to one million dollars.
20 Catholic Trotskyist // Dec 16, 2008 at 11:54 pm
Andy’s plan has a good chance of working. Noone ever thought Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy would work at first, and now it has led to/prepared the way for the Obama Revolution and Democratic control of Congress, the majority of governorships, etc.
21 Jeremy Young // Dec 17, 2008 at 1:45 am
I don’t think they’re acting like abused wives. This is their job, and they want to make a living. They don’t have to support the direction the party is going to want to make money off it. Indeed, they could work for Democrats and Republicans (not that these require petitioning help) and still be good libertarians, inasmuch as they are being good capitalists.
It’s true that they have an adversarial relationship with certain LP staffers, but some of those staffers may be leaving in the near future or may be laid off because of the funding crisis. It’s actually a pretty smart idea for them to try to drum up business among Libertarians, since that party is generally still the most proactive about obtaining ballot access on a national level (the exception being the Nader movement, but who knows if that group will even run a candidate in four years).
22 Jeremy Young // Dec 17, 2008 at 1:49 am
Caveats for the post above: I actually know very little about libertarian philosophy beyond what I’ve read on this site (and before this, TPW) over the past year or so. I’ve not read Mises or Rothbard, though I did have a conversation with Roger Pilon’s wife about the political party system several years ago. So if I’ve misinterpreted what it means to be a “good libertarian,” my apologies.
23 paulie cannoli // Dec 17, 2008 at 1:53 am
I don’t see libertarianism as necessarily favoring one economic system or another. Those who want to organize themselves in cooperative or group ownership settings can be just as libertarian as those who seek to engage in trade. Libertarianism just means they should not force unwilling people to do it their way, and that all actions should be mutually voluntary as much as possible.
24 JimDavidson // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:15 am
It sounds like the NH affiliate has cause to seek the removal of Dan Karlan as their rep to the LNC. Maybe some others feel that way?
25 JimDavidson // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:25 am
George writes, “How you can vote a budget when you do not have short term goals is a closely held secret.”
Sardonicism is its own reward.
26 JimDavidson // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:30 am
Jeez, is this all you guys get for a million bux? The Boston Tea Party national has so far spent nothing, got on 3 state ballots, registered its presidential candidate in 10 states as a write-in, formed 12 state affiliates, and recruited nearly 800 members. Are you f#cking kidding me with this million dollars crap?
$378,700 for Administrative Expense
That’s a lot of money for hand jobs.
27 JimDavidson // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:33 am
George, I was very pleased to have the BTP endorse Morey Straus. You have added a spare “S” to the end of his name. Find his page at http://vote.stra.us/ and, yes, I would say he campaigned very actively.
28 JimDavidson // Dec 17, 2008 at 4:37 am
“The National Director proposed that LNC members sign a volunteer confidentiality statement. Several members refused. The issue was postponed until March.”
This proposal is egregious. The LNC are not volunteers working for the national director, they are the governing body of the party. The national director works for the LNC, not the other way around. Asking for confidentiality statements is an attempt to invert the relationship. What a bunch of losers.
29 George Phillies // Dec 19, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Jim,
Endorsing Morey Straus was a good thing. he worked hard on his campaign. Funding paper campaigns is a horse of a different note.
Yes, note. C sharp. H double flat.
Leave a Comment