According to an excellent source, the New Hampshire ballot lawsuit has been authorized by Libertarian National Committee Chair Bill Redpath, and will be filed in the morning (Friday 8/29).
As previously discussed, the lawsuit is expected to seek the removal of George Phillies from the ballot, and the placement of Bob Barr on the ballot. New Hampshire ballot law does not allow for substitution, and George Phillies is currently the LPNH presidential nominee.
Professor Phillies is already ballot-qualified, according to the New Hampshire Secretary of State. However, Professor Phillies says he will not step down, because he feels he has an ethical obligation to those who signed the petitions placing him on the ballot.
LFV will update as more information becomes available.
Last Free Voice 
ENM,
Did you mean to write “because he has an ethical obligation”, or did you mean to write “because he feels he has an ethical obligation”?
IOW, is this news or editorial? it’s not clear.
You are correct, it should read “because he feels he has an ethical obligation”. I’ll fix it, that’s what I get for posting that late at night. Thanks.
Seemed clear enough to me that George Phillies says he has an ethical obligation.
Keep in mind that George says he has an ethical obligation to seek substitution in Massachusetts where he agreed to do so. It boggles the imagination why the LP couldn’t have been bothered to negotiate such an agreement for NH some time ago.
In reference to the very long thread of comments which has Angela Keaton’s notes, I am eager to point out that the LP’s chairman seems to be making this decision to file the suit. It is not clear that a vote of the LNC has taken place. For reasons I detailed in my response to Angela’s questions, I think that’s a poor way to implement policies of great significance.
I look forward to George making this battle one worth watching!
I changed it to make it clearer, but on second glance it was already pretty clear that I was saying George Phillies says he he has an ethical obligation. I don’t think it ever suggested that I personally thought he had an ethical obligation, since I was merely referencing in that sentence what George Phillies said.
Since it has come up though, I have no opinion on whether he has an ethical obligation, because I don’t know what voters were told when they signed the petitions. Were they told they were signing a petition to get George Phillies on the ballot, or were they told that they were signing a petition to get the Libertarian Party on the ballot? I have no way of knowing, because I wasn’t there.
I obviously was not there when most of the signatures were collected, so this is hearsay and circumstantial… However my understanding is that the approach in NH is generally to ask people to help get the candidates named on a petition onto the ballot. Since substitution isn’t allowed, it is the named people that are placed on the ballot.
I know that when I heard George asking people to sign petitions for Barr (He has a stronger stomach than I do…) at the July 4th event in Merimack, NH he was asking for signatures for the named individuals…
ART
Isn’t that nice? George asked people to sign petitions to put Barr on the ballot. Now, can you imagine Barr doing likewise and asking people to sign petitions to put George on the ballot?
For my part, I can’t imagine Barr doing any activist thing at all. I see him as a fat cat politician who sits back and lets the little people do the work, then sues when he doesn’t get his way. What a jerk.
And did the LNC vote on funding this lawsuit, or is Redpath violating the Bylaws again?
Michael,
The LNC did not vote. They also did not show up with a lawsuit. However, sometimes it takes a while to set the wheels in motion.
Interestingly, the LPNH State Chair is citing a phone call from Mary Ruwart as the cause for his sudden change of heart on whether or not he should support the suit.
I was not a participant in the phone call. I would be disappointed to learn that a leader of the Libertarian radical wing is advocating for theft, if it turns out that she did, a matter that I expect will be explored during what I expect will be an extended litigation and political process. However, the leader in question would not be the first person to make reasonable statements that were misinterpreted.
I should remind readers that I had a clear commitment from the LPNH leadership that NH does not have substitution, and I have conducted myself based on that commitment. Also, I am assured that the LPNH State Convention specifically denied the LPNH State Committee the right to substitute for candidates, so the State Committee had to use a State Convention to nominate Sue Newell.
Finally, I went up to the Jaffrey First Amendment Rally last week. I had a fine time campaigning with U.S. Senate candidate Ken Blevens and prospective State Senate candidate Howard Wilson, who both want me to stay on the ballot. A substantial number of Libertarians stopped by, talked, and thanked me for agreeing to run, so that they had a real libertarian for whom they could vote.
The LNC still has not shown up with the lawsuit it worked it so hard to pressure the LPNH ExComm to join, or such is my most recent report from New Hampshire. Thus, so far the outcome of the LNC lawsuit is to cost the LPNH ExComm a member.
I am hard at work taking advantage of the FEC coattailing rules to raise money for the NH Federal and statewide campaigns.
Good for you, George. The Boston Tea Party is enthusiastic about your candidacy. And to hell with the LP leaders who hate choice.
It looks to me like George is doing a great job in NH on the coat-tailing rules – I’ll let him post more details, but a quick and dirty overview is that he is arranging for large numbers of signs of the “bag on frame” design to be printed.
These will have a common design for all LPNH candidates that want to participate, and are relatively cheap to produce, especially if doing a standard design where all that changes is the name and office…
They will definitely have “Vote Libertarian” and probably Lady Liberty on them, so this is an excellent promo for the party as well as the candidate (good for future elections) and the theory is that the common design will have “overlap effects” where signs for candidate A will make it look like candidate B has more signs and vice versa.
Cost to the candidates is just what it costs for the sign printing. LPNH gets to keep the metal frames for future use (note that the frames are one of the biggest expenses for this type of sign).
Sounds like a really terrific plan to me, I wish more areas would do the same sort of thing.
(The only question is whether or not the Barr campaign will join in, or if they are going to try and go it on their own…)
ART
Arthur, thanks for the Kudos, I’m the one behind the sign plan. George has been very supportive, and is doing a fundraiser to help pay for signs. Barr promised publicly in front of a room of NH folks, to match the $3K his PAC gave to Sununu (in this election cycle, folks, that’s right, while sitting on the LNC, he gave to the opposition in one of only 2 races that count for ballot access), but as yet, the crickets are whistling, and no check is in the mail.
Well maybe LPNH should send Barr a bill… I wouldn’t count on him paying anything until the check is deposited and cleared…
Of course, IMHO proper amends for donating to an opponent should be to give MORE than that amount, not just matching the funds…
Good job on the sign idea, it looks like the sort of deal where everybody wins…
I will say that I’m sorry you chose to resign from the LPNH exec board – I can understand your reasons, but I always figured it would be better to stick around and be a PITA, as well as another vote they have to round up to overcome your opposition…
ART
LPMA Operations Facilitator
LPMA Presidential Elector – NOT voting for Barr!
Speaking for myself