[KV #1] Letter to the LNC - Presidential candidate listings on LP.org

Discussion
1

Members of the Libertarian National Committee,

  I understand there is a significant ongoing controversy over which candidates for president shall be listed on our party's national website, LP.org, and which rules determine those listings.

  While our party’s rules do not unambiguously prohibit the party chair, executive director, or Libertarian National Committee from giving some candidates for the LP presidential nomination an advantage over others, neither do they offer firm support to those who say the LNC — let alone the chair or executive director acting unilaterally — has the authority to arbitrarily exclude candidates they deem “not serious” from being listed on LP.org.

  Bylaw 8.1 states that “The National Committee shall have control and management of all the affairs, properties and funds of the Party consistent with these Bylaws.” But it seems rather a stretch to assume that party leaders taking actions which amount to picking presidential winners and losers prior to the convention is “consistent with these Bylaws”, when our bylaws clearly set forth nomination requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates in Article 14 which do not establish any leadership role in the selection process prior to the presidential nominating convention.

  I believe the spirit, though apparently not the letter, of our bylaws dictates that party leaders must in their official capacities remain strictly neutral in the LP presidential race until the party has is a nominee, and that listing some candidates on the party’s website but not others is a violation of that neutrality.

  However I think the LNC could remain effectively neutral while still providing tools on the website that allow people looking at candidates listed there to do their own filtering, as long as such filtering tools were designed as neutrally as possible. For instance, the section or page of LP.org pertaining to 2012 Libertarian presidential candidates could feature a menu with multiple check boxes including:

[ ] List candidates who are seeking the Libertarian Party presidential nomination exclusively

[ ] List candidates who have filed with the Federal Elections Commission to run as Libertarians

[ ] List candidates with current websites including contact information

[ ] List candidates who are dues-paying members of the Libertarian Party

[ ] List candidates who have signed a statement in support of the Non-Aggression Principle

[ ] List candidates who have signed a statement of support for the current Libertarian Party platform

[ ] List candidates who have raised and reported no less than $2500 in donations, not counting self-donated money or donations from immediate family members

[ ] List candidates who have raised and reported no less than $5000 in donations, not counting self-donated money or donations from immediate family members

[ ] List all candidates who have declared an interest in seeking the Libertarian Party’s presidential nomination

  By checking as many or as few of these boxes as desired, each website visitor could choose his or her own preferred filters before viewing the list of presidential candidates, thus avoiding seeing the listings of any candidates who did not meet his or her chosen criteria.

  I believe this approach, relying on bottom-up choice rather than top-down control to filter less serious or desirable candidates, would preserve the essential neutrality of Libertarian Party officials in the presidential nominee selection process, and thereby avoid going against the spirit of our bylaws.

  I look forward to hearing your feedback.

Love & Liberty,
                                              ((( starchild )))
Libertarian Party of California Executive Committee At-Large Representative*

P.S. - As always when writing the LNC, I welcome and encourage responses from all members, and specifically request responses from my California representatives, to let me know whether they support this proposal or not, and what actions they have taken and/or intend to take on this issue.

*title provided for identification purposes; the views expressed above are my own (though perhaps shared by many party members)

2

I don't think there is a problem with general criteria that are not overly stringent and apply to everyone. And I do think signing the statement on the Non-Aggression principle should be mentioned explicitly with dues-paying member.

However, saying that a certain number of LNC members must approve a candidate for them to appear on the website puts an onus on five people to overcome their and/or the rest of the group's dislike for a candidate and vote for them.

On the other hand, I don't see a problem with a majority of the LNC being permitted to VETO a candidate from the web site for cause, i.e. doing or advocating acts of force, fraud or extremely questionable issue positions, for example: (Wayne Root's favorite) man-boy love, strictly enforced and permanent national taxes, expelling all Arabs from Israel-Palestine and confiscating their land (or any other kind of human rights abuses by foreign governments), federal imposition of a gold standard, etc. The National Committee has the power to take the nomination away from someone by whatever percent vote, so it should have power to veto candidates from the website by a simple majority.

3

Dear Mr. Starchild,

Perhaps you will recall meeting me and talking to me at the 2008 Libertarian National Convention in Denver and the 2010 Libertarian National Convention in St. Louis.

For the past 30 years I have been shifting back and forth between living in either Berkeley or San Rafael California and/or in New York City. Now I am living more or less permanently in San Rafael, California. You are welcome to come to visit my home at any time if you happen to be in the area.

I have been a registered voter in California as a Libertarian Party member for at least twelve years. I have never been a registered voter for any other party in California. I first joined the Libertarian Party in 1973. I have never been a member of any other political party in my entire life.

However, since 2002 the New York Libertarian Party has waged a campaign to stop me and block me from running for any political office. There are two factions of the New York Libertarian Party. One faction keeps nominating me for various political offices, the other keeps filing objections with the New York Board of Elections to kick me off the ballot.

This has happened too many times to even count them. For example, I would have been the Libertarian Party Candidate for Governor of New York in 2011, but Chris Garvey, a member of the opposing faction who usually runs as a candidate for judge, filed objections with the Board of Elections as a result of which I was kicked off the ballot and an anti-Libertarian who is not even in the slightest way a Libertarian and was not a party member became the "Libertarian Party Candidate".

By the way, in the course of doing this, the New York Libertarian Party defrauded the National Libertarian Party by getting the National Libertarian Party to give the New York Libertarian Party $50,000 for "ballot access".

Now, after ten solid years of a faction of the New York Libertarian Party stopping me from running for public office, I have declared myself to be a candidate for US President. This has caused the leader of the opposing faction to threaten me with dire consequences if I do not withdraw my candidacy.

The members of the opposing faction are in contact with the national office. This explains the curious fact that the National Office keeps changing the rules so as to keep me off the list of candidates at lp.org. You have already noticed that every other candidate but me is on the list.

Therefore I especially appreciate your letter below which essentially asks them to explain why every other declared candidate is on their list but mine is not.

Sam Sloan
San Rafael California

4

Dear Mr. Starchild,

Perhaps you will recall meeting me and talking to me at the 2008
Libertarian National Convention in Denver and the 2010 Libertarian
National Convention in St. Louis.

For the past 30 years I have been shifting back and forth between
living in either Berkeley or San Rafael California and/or in New York
City. Now I am living more or less permanently in San Rafael,
California. You are welcome to come to visit my home at any time if
you happen to be in the area.

I have been a registered voter in California as a Libertarian Party
member for at least twelve years. I have never been a registered voter
for any other party in California. I first joined the Libertarian
Party in 1973. I have never been a member of any other political party
in my entire life.

However, since 2002 a faction of the New York Libertarian Party has
waged a campaign to stop me and block me from running for any
political office. There are two factions of the New York Libertarian
Party. One faction keeps nominating me for various political offices,
the other keeps filing objections with the New York Board of Elections
to kick me off the ballot.

This has happened too many times to even count them. For example, I
would have been the Libertarian Party Candidate for Governor of New
York in 2011, but Chris Garvey, a member of the opposing faction who
usually runs as a candidate for judge, filed objections with the Board
of Elections as a result of which I was kicked off the ballot and an
anti-Libertarian who is not even in the slightest way a Libertarian
and was not a party member became the "Libertarian Party Candidate".

By the way, in the course of doing this, the New York Libertarian
Party defrauded the National Libertarian Party by getting the National
Libertarian Party to give the New York Libertarian Party $50,000 for
"ballot access". That $50,000 went to help the anti-Libertarian who
openly stated that he was just running for governor to make money and
would not be doing any campaigning at all.

Now, after ten solid years of a faction of the New York Libertarian
Party stopping me from running for public office, I have declared
myself to be a candidate for US President. This has caused the leader
of the opposing faction to threaten me with dire consequences if I do
not withdraw my candidacy.

The members of the opposing faction are in contact with the national
office. This explains the curious fact that the National Office keeps
changing the rules so as to keep me off the list of candidates at
lp.org. You have already noticed that every other candidate but me is
on the list.

Therefore I especially appreciate your letter below which essentially
asks them to explain why every other declared candidate is on their
list but mine is not.

Sam Sloan
San Rafael California

5

Sam,

  Thanks for writing. I did not have yourself or any other specific candidates in mind when I came up with what I wrote to the LNC below and do not claim to know who the full list of people running may be, but I agree that you should be listed on LP.org along with any other LP presidential contenders.

  From what you say it sounds like there is a whole history there, but if you care to go into it any further, perhaps you can tell me who are the members of this faction you mention, and what are their concerns or reasons for doing the things you describe.

  In any case, I encourage you to get involved with your local Libertarian Party in Marin County if you're living there full-time now. I believe they have an active chapter. I'm copying Paul Kelley on this message; he should be able to provide you with more info. There is also a Ron Paul Meetup in Marin, if you are supporting Ron Paul for the GOP nomination (not a conflict with seeking the LP's presidential nod as far as I'm concerned). You can join that group at <RonPaul-568@Meetup.com>.

  I don't subscribe to the lists you copied on your original message ( LPQC <LPQC@yahoogroups.com>, manhattanlibertarians@yahoogroups.com, lpny_manhattan <lpny_manhattan@yahoogroups.com>, lpny_bronx <lpny_bronx@yahoogroups.com>, lpny_discuss@yahoogroups.com, lpkc <lpny_kings@yahoogroups.com>, Brooklyn_LP@yahoogroups.com, libertarian@yahoogroups.com ), and my emails to them would just bounce, so I removed them from the "cc" list before responding.

  While we're chatting, do you have a website or platform for your presidential campaign? Why are you running, and what do you hope to accomplish?

Love & Liberty,
                                    ((( starchild )))

Copied on original email:

6

Thank you for your prompt response.

I am living in the Marinwood section of San Rafael. My address is:

Sam Sloan
461 Peachstone Terrace
San Rafael CA 94903

I am here serving as the administrator of the estate of a close friend who died.

My campaign website is here:

http://www.anusha.com/sam4pres.htm

Admittedly it is primitive and needs work.

In answer to your other questions, I can tell you that the main people
with a history of attacking me are Jim Lesczynski and Ron Moore,
assisted by Richard Cooper and a few others. I do not have even the
slightest idea why they do this and I wish I knew. All I can tell you
is that it started at the January 2002 State Committee Meeting in
Richard Coopers office in Long Island NY and has been going on ever
since. They have prevented me from getting on the ballot even when
nobody else wanted to run for that office. A mutual friend once asked
Jim Lesczynski why he attacks me all the time and Jim Lesczynski
replied "I just don't like the guy, that's all".

I am most happy that you have copied this email to Libertarians in
Marin County. I look forward to participating in Libertarian Party
events in Marin and in San Francisco.

Sam Sloan

7

Sam,

  Thanks for the additional info. I'm somewhat puzzled though, since I thought I recalled Jim Lesczynski being hardcore libertarian, and from your issues you sound fairly solidly libertarian yourself. If it's just a personality conflict, it seems odd there would be others assisting Jim in attacking you (as you describe it).

  I don't get up to Marin much, since I live in SF and don't own a car. But if you come down to the city sometimes, perhaps I'll see you at our meetings or other happenings here.

  The LPSF meets on the second Saturday each month. We have been meeting from 3-5pm at the main library (corner of Larkin and Grove streets near City Hall), usually in the 4th floor Sycip Room, occasionally in the community meeting room on the 1st floor, followed by a social at nearby Ananda Fuara restaurant (corner of Market and Larkin streets) from 5-6pm or whenever people feel done.

  Recently our new chair Phil Berg wanted to try meeting for only an hour and our new secretary Mike Denny was hoping to host meetings at his house since he has to watch his kids that day. So this coming month we'll be experimenting with that format and location. Mike is at 3329 Cabrillo Street (at 34th Avenue), in the Richmond district.

  You say on your campaign page that you are running because you don't feel any of the other candidates are suitable. Have you felt this way in the past, or only this year? If the latter, what do you think makes this year's field worse?

Love & Liberty,
                               ((( starchild )))

8

Sam has a very interesting blog-spot, dealing mostly with his support for polygamy, gay rights, and other social issues:

http://drtomstevens.blogspot.com/2012/01/sam-sloan-candidate-for-libertarian.html

Marcy

9

Thank you and Happy Valentine's Day

I would like to attend your meetings and join your organization.

According to my calculations the second Saturday of this month was
February 11, so i have missed this months meeting. I will try to
attend next month's meeting.

As to a possible personality conflict with Jim Lesczynski, I have to
rule that out as I did not even know the guy except that I had met him
for only one or two minutes a few days earlier. I was totally
mystified when he started attacking me at the January 2002 State
Committee meeting. I still do not know why he attacked me at the
meeting and would like to find out.

Here are a few examples of what Jim Lesczynski has done since then in
attacking me.

In 2002 the Queens Libertarian Party with Brad Artur as Chairman
nominated me to run for US Congress. When Jim Lesczynski and others
associated with him found out about this a fire-storm erupted. Jim
Lesczynski filed objections with the New York City Board of Elections
and had me kicked off the ballot. The State Chairman, Alfred Dedicke,
resigned over this scandal and Brad Artur left the party.

In 2004 they wanted me to run for US Congress again. Knowing what
would happen if Jim Lesczynski was in the room, they waited until he
had left the room and then nominated me and I was approved by the
State Committee unanimously. When Jim Lesczynski found out about this
he and several others attacked my nomination. Since it takes 3500
signatures to get on the ballot for Congress, I cannot do it without
help and there was insufficient help with Jim Lesczynski attacking me
all the time to get enough signatures to get on the ballot.

In 2010 Jim Lesczynski had dropped out of the party. Since he was not
at the meeting, I was unanimously elected by the Manhattan Libertarian
Party as Manhattan representative to the State Committee. When Jim
Lesczynski found out about this, he rejoined the party and somehow got
himself appointed as one of five members of the County Committee. (I
am not sure how he was able to do this as it did not take place at any
meeting.) He then made a motion that I be expelled from the party.
Expulsion from the party is a serious matter and can only be done
under specific grounds and Jim Lesczynski was unable to provide any of
the required grounds. However, Jim Lesczynski was able to get a 4-1
vote to expel me from the party, thereby removing me as Manhattan
Representative to the State Committee.

Such an expulsion is subject to review by the annual convention. This
year the convention was very lightly attended. There were a lot of
dropouts due to the Warren Redlich scandals. When this issue came up
at the 2011 Manhattan Libertarian Party Convention, the vote was 5-2
in FAVOR of me being reinstated as a member. The only two votes
against me were Jim Lesczynski and Ron Moore. It is a well-known
parliamentary rule that for there to be reconsideration of a decided
matter, it must be brought up by somebody on the winning side in the
previous vote. In other words, somebody must have changed their mind.
Nevertheless, in violation of this rule, Ron Moore, one of the two
votes against me who was also Chairman of the meeting, re-opened the
debate and allowed Jim Lesczynski to speak at length against me and
would not allow me or anybody else to speak in rebuttal. Therefore, in
view of the vehemence of the attack by Jim Lesczynski two voters
changed their minds and the vote became 4-3 against me. Ron Moore was
not even allowed to vote since he was Chairman of the meeting but he
did vote against me any way.

So, you can see that over a period of ten years Jim Lesczynski has
been attacking me all the time and it even seems that the only reason
he stays in the party and comes to meetings is to attack me. When he
is not there the vote is always in my favor. When he comes and
launches into his diatribes against me I cannot win any vote. In all
this time he had never given a cogent reason why he does this and
again I do not have the slightest idea.

Sam Sloan