Steve G.

Update on demand to burn petitions

In Libertarian on July 3, 2008 at 1:11 am

Massachusetts State Chairman George Phillies has confirmed that LPMass was indeed directed by LP Political Director Sean Haugh to burn the ballot petitions.

Carol McMahon has now advised me that she was in fact told by Sean Haugh to burn the nominating papers in question. She had more useful things to do than to pass his demand on to me before today. I am not sure where Sean Haugh got the idea that he could instruct my state committee to do such a thing.

You may rest assured that we did not destroy the nominating papers in question. Also, we have paid for them in full as I agreed to do at the National Convention.

On the bright side, thanks in part to your hard work, a number of raw signatures that appears reasonably likely to generate enough valid signatures to place on the ballot in Massachusetts Robert J Underwood for US Senate and a slate of Presidential electors has been collected. This number is less than half the number of signatures that would have been needed just to place Bob Underwood on the ballot, if we had major party status.

On another front, some libertarians appear to be citing the case of Commonwealth vs Paul Katisirubis to allegedly show the criminal nature of the demand to burn the petitions.  However, Katsirubis involves presenting forged political petitions to the court, and falsely claiming petitions had been filed when they had not.  As such, the case does not shed legal light on this current controversy.

  1. Separate topic:

    Elf Mamma,

    Do you run this sight now? If so, this note is to you. I’d like to be a contributor to help stir things up, just so long as I feel like this blog remains a decent outlet for Libertarian Party discussion happenings and your readers find my posts interesting.

    My posts will be very opinionated and will reflect my personal views. Although I previously served on the LNC and currently serve as Executive Director of the LP Texas, and I’m also currently a candidate for County Commissioner, my opinions will probably not be restricted to those categories.

    There might be times when commenters feel I’m being abusive and they also vehemently disagree with my views. I’ll probably also sometimes be accused of blatant self-promotion of both myself and my Great State of Texas and those accusations will be fully justified.

    Potential topics I might cover: “The Legacy of George Squyres; LNC Members Profiled #1: Aaron Starr; LNC Members Profiled #2: Angela Keaton; LNC Members Profiled #3: M Carling; Bob Barr Fund Raising Predictions; O’ Libertarian Party of Texas–How Great Art Thou?; Did I Say Members?–We’re a Political Party!–What Members?; Aaron Starr’s Urinating Analogy Analyzed.”

    Elfmama: I can be irritating; I am not a journalist; I am an advocate; I am a self-promoter. Want to take a test drive?

  2. Check your inbox, Wes.

  3. Wes has a great ass.

  4. Why is it that Sean Haugh has yet to be fired? There is “smoking gun” (pun intended) evidence that he’s guilty. Why is LP Naitonal protecting this CRIMINAL?

    If Sean Haugh is not fired over this then we will all know that the Libertarian Party is a corrupt organization.

  5. Sometimes I wonder if it would make more sense to just get rid of National altogether, except maybe as a very small fundraising apparatus, and let the states run the show, as the Greens used to do.

  6. Mr. Orvetti’s suggestion is feasible. Each state party gets a rep on LNC with a vote proportional to its membership. The LNC then elects the officers, not the delegates, and can remove them by majority vote at any time. (Unlike in the major parties, LP convention delegations don’t always get filled, due to costs of travel, etc. so a convention body isn’t truly representative.) Let the growth of the LP depend on the activities of the state parties. National has a newsletter, a media office, a website but the real work is done by state parties. Step one is for state parties to elect Chairs who demonstrate effective leadership at county and lower state positions, not relative walk-ons who raise their hands when no one else cares to be Chair. I don’t see Chambers of Commerce or Rotary Clubs or Churchs collapsing every time one leader dies or finished his term.

  7. The national headquarters has little control and offers only a small amount of help due to its resources. I’ve never felt like National runs the Libertarian Party of Texas. However, I have felt at times that I do. Of course that’s an exaggeration to some degree.

  8. LNC only has power if you believe it does. 99.5% of what they do doesn’t impact state and/or local LP efforts.

    So while some of us rail about the other 0.5% (guilty!), the simple answer is to keep on trucking at the state and local levels. Don’t ignore national, because that can come back and bite, but just keep at it.

    Me, got three more Props to analyze for CA.

  9. I agree with a the plan where each state would send a delegate with votes proportional to its membership.

    I do not think the national party does much to help build the state parties, and I am not su sure that it is due to lack of resources.

    Under the present system it is easy to get a national party which does not represent the national membership.

    But there is another problem. Who is a Libertarian? One can join the party a day before the convention and be in a leadership position. A person might not be a member of the party, work for other parties candidates and still get to be in a leadership position.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: