Endorsement process

Starchild wrote:

> As it is, we will be voting without having heard from the
> candidates for Treasurer, City Attorney, and Assessor-Recorder,
> and with most of us knowing little or nothing about them,
> because we have not made a proper investigation a part of our
> process. I suspect that most of our group will simply abstain or
> not recommend a vote for any candidates, thereby avoiding blame
> for any bad decisions, but this in my opinion is really
> shortchanging our members. They deserve to hear informed
> recommendations from us.

I wonder if forming a committee in the future would help. The
committee would be responsible for organizing events outside of
regular meetings and then scheduling each proposition and race for
consideration at a regular meeting, maybe reporting specific
recommendations, possibly spread over multiple regular meetings,
probably more than one month before the election, and then writing
the official position statements to appear in the newsletter and
on the website.

I wonder if the requirements in the current bylaws have actually
made us complacent, making them less likely to be met. What has
the experience in previous years been? I'm actually imagining
striking all mention of endorsements from the bylaws in order to
give the committee the flexibility to be effective.

By the way, what was the reasoning behind the provision for proxy
voting? I'm uncomfortable with the idea, because any proxy votes
would not have the benefit of any debate that occurs during the
meeting. I'm also uncomfortable with the distinction between
"endorsements" and "recommendations"... If the Party doesn't
approve of someone strongly enough to give an endorsement, it
seems to me that giving a "recommendation" would just be
confusing.

Cheers,
Justin

Thank you to Starchild and Justin for their input regarding the
endorsement/recommendation process. I would like to add to their
good suggestions:

1. "We will be voting without having heard from the
candidates....". True. In the past we sometimes had "Candidates'
Night", to which a few if any candidates showed up, and even fewer
activists attended. However, in spite of this challenge, we managed
to inform ourselves on our own and came to the endorsement meeting
ready to vote. This said, there is no reason why activists who
prefer the Candidates Night approach could not arrange for one.

2. "I wonder if forming a committee in the future would help.." In
the past we had an "Election Chair", Gerald Cullen, who has retired
from active duty in the LPSF. I found his contribution extremely
useful.

3. "I'm actually imagining striking all mention of endorsements from
the bylaws..." I would suggest that the bylaws continue to provide
the guidelines.

4. "What was the reasoning behind the provision for proxy voting?"
An effort to attract members by allowing them to vote without being
physically present at meetings.

5. "I'm also uncomfortable with the distinction between endorsements
and recommendations." Since we cannot ignore the LPCA Bylaws ("No
candidate for public office may be nominated for endorsement who ...
is not a member of the Libertarian Party"), we might consider
recommending everyone of whom we approve and endorsing no one.

Now for a general personal opinion: Rules, bylaws, and other
documents can serve as guidelines, and are useful as such; but they
do not automatically translate into action. Action comes from people
who want to just go out there and do. So, please go out there an
read some stuff on the ballot measures and on the candidates. A
summary is on the Files Section of this Activist List.

See you all, ready to vote, on Ocrober 8.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-activists@yahoogroups.com, "Justin T. Sampson"
<justin@k...> wrote:
> Starchild wrote:
>
> > As it is, we will be voting without having heard from the
> > candidates for Treasurer, City Attorney, and Assessor-Recorder,
> > and with most of us knowing little or nothing about them,
> > because we have not made a proper investigation a part of our
> > process. I suspect that most of our group will simply abstain or
> > not recommend a vote for any candidates, thereby avoiding blame
> > for any bad decisions, but this in my opinion is really
> > shortchanging our members. They deserve to hear informed
> > recommendations from us.
>
> I wonder if forming a committee in the future would help. The
> committee would be responsible for organizing events outside of
> regular meetings and then scheduling each proposition and race for
> consideration at a regular meeting, maybe reporting specific
> recommendations, possibly spread over multiple regular meetings,
> probably more than one month before the election, and then writing
> the official position statements to appear in the newsletter and
> on the website.
>
> I wonder if the requirements in the current bylaws have actually
> made us complacent, making them less likely to be met. What has
> the experience in previous years been? I'm actually imagining
> striking all mention of endorsements from the bylaws in order to
> give the committee the flexibility to be effective.
>
> By the way, what was the reasoning behind the provision for proxy
> voting? I'm uncomfortable with the idea, because any proxy votes
> would not have the benefit of any debate that occurs during the
> meeting. I'm also uncomfortable with the distinction between
> "endorsements" and "recommendations"... If the Party doesn't
> approve of someone strongly enough to give an endorsement, it
> seems to me that giving a "recommendation" would just be
> confusing.
>
> Cheers,
> Justin

SPONSORED LINKS

[U s government grant](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=U+s+government+grant&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=U+s+government+student+loan&w5=California+politics&c=5&s=114&.sig=46y6ULHvC1K7UWYyT6_nJA) [California](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=California&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=U+s+government+student+loan&w5=California+politics&c=5&s=114&.sig=t0WI39Ad6uCvaGD2aU9b4Q) [Activist](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Activist&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=U+s+government+student+loan&w5=California+politics&c=5&s=114&.sig=4ByCWi03twUc71POcy8zfQ)
[U s government student loan](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=U+s+government+student+loan&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=U+s+government+student+loan&w5=California+politics&c=5&s=114&.sig=lunB1IXkW25giNNSjXwduA) [California politics](http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=California+politics&w1=U+s+government+grant&w2=California&w3=Activist&w4=U+s+government+student+loan&w5=California+politics&c=5&s=114&.sig=ehCbO4a23lr_0u_Q0TOlFQ)