A couple weeks ago I learned there had been (at some point in the past) a complaint of some sort lodged against the LNC and the incumbent treasurer, that the FEC had conducted an investigation, and that the complaint had been dismissed. I did not learn at that time “who” had lodged the complaint, the nature of the complaint, when it was filed… or when the dismissal had occurred.
Shrug. No story there, I thought.
However, last Wednesday evening I learned additional facts about this matter of which I had previously been unaware, and questions have been raised in some circles regarding it.
I had nothing to do with the analysis that led to the filing of the complaint, or the decision to file it. These things happened well before I entered the mix. And again, I was not aware that this matter was in progress at the time I signed on with New Path to run for treasurer.
George Phillies is my friend. If I have any further comment to make about the specifics of this matter, I will deliver those comments directly to my friend. In private.
I would urge the St. Louis delegates to focus on the main issues which I have been articulating for four months:
- My substantive and fact based critique of the LNC’s performance over the last 10 years generally and the last five years in particular; and
- The New Path team’s development and promulgation of a detailed road map for how to move ahead from here – something which none of the other chair candidates or their representatives have produced for us.
I believe the circumstances did warrant some reflection on my part. Upon that reflection, I have decided to stay on as part of New Path. I am not in this to be the New Path treasurer. I am running to be the Libertarian Party’s treasurer!
I am in this race for the good of the party, because of my desire to advance the cause of liberty and freedom… and because I know I have a lot to offer. Our best days lay ahead of us! We have tremendous untapped and unutilized potential. I care about the LP and I care about our future, and am fearful and saddened that that future is being squandered. I am running less because of what we are, and more because of what I know we could become.
I believe the incumbent treasurer needs to step aside – ideally voluntarily, by the vote of the delegates if need be – and that my ideas and what I offer are superior to the incumbent’s record and tenure on the committee, which even an unbiased observer would acknowledge has had its share of challenges and controversies.
I will stipulate for the record: the incumbent treasurer is a fine accountant. I have no issue with his abilities in that regard.
I do, however, believe the incumbent treasurer bears considerable responsibility for creating and participating in the dysfunction we have all witnessed on the LNC during his time on the committee – the penchant for secrecy (which, it must be noted, was a major factor in the decision to pursue the remedies recently pursued), the pie fights, the attempts to oust duly elected committee members, the lack of strategic vision, the parliamentarianism run amok. Not to mention the fact that he needs to be held accountable as a committee member, executive officer and leader of the committee’s dominant coalition for the continuing diminution in the party’s fortunes nationally during his specific time in service.
The incumbent would have you believe he bears no responsibility whatever for these things. He is mistaken.
If our national party were a publicly traded corporation, there would have been a “shareholder revolt” long ago, the existing leadership would have been removed to the last person, and new leaders brought in to try to salvage the situation and start moving in the right direction. It is a mystery why this has not happened yet, but I sure hope it happens in St. Louis.
No rational person would, given a 70 percent decline in real revenues, and a 60 percent decline in the membership, go to the delegates and say, “Haven’t we done a great job? Don’t you think we should be re-elected for another two-year term?”
Yet that is what these people ask of us!
The only appropriate answer to them is: “Thank you for your service, and best of luck in your future endeavors.”
Over the last four months, I have offered the incumbent members of the committee every reasonable opportunity to answer some very simple questions of mine. In the end, only five of the LNC members seeking election to At-Large and Regional positions chose to engage in any dialogue whatever with me about matters concerning our party (some more so than others): Mary Ruwart, Lee Wrights, Rachel Hawkridge, Pat Dixon and Dan Karlan. I believe these people deserve favorable consideration for re-election.
This does not change the dire state our Party is in under the current LNC, but it does show that these committee members are at least willing to communicate to some degree with a credible outside officer candidate.
As far as everybody else presently on the LNC is concerned, I will gladly hold the door open for them as they exit. This is the main reason I am staying with New Path – that we recognize that our party needs a lot more than a new face at the top. The numbers and results show that the committee, the system and the process are fundamentally distressed.
I have extraordinary respect, affection, and admiration for Carolyn Marbry and Rob Power. My opinion of them has grown daily throughout the last few months. They are honest-to-goodness Libertarians and believe in our cause with every fiber of their beings. Regardless of what anyone believes about me personally, I urge and implore the delegates to seat Carolyn and Rob on the committee!
I continue to support George Phillies for chair. Whether I believe the matter in question could have been dealt with in some other way, is not relevant. In the end, we need to focus on the big picture and the substantive nature of the entire argument we have all been making.
Previously I have stated that I will accept the delegates’ verdict on the chair’s race, and would serve as treasurer regardless of who the delegates chose to be chair. I reaffirm that stand.
To the extent I have reservations about any of the other gentlemen’s candidacies, I am open to hearing how they (or their supporters) would address my concerns, and will remain open to so hearing up until the time of the vote Sunday.
My critique of all the individuals in question has been substantive and 100 percent limited to their public political actions. And it will remain so. I am strictly opposed to making an issue out of matters not germane to people’s public actions with respect to the Libertarian Party or the national committee. I do not need to be on the committee so badly, that I would sacrifice my own principles to do so. I would rather lose with dignity than win ugly.
If some people need to be “power brokers in the Libertarian Party” so badly that they would resort to personal attacks, that says a lot more about them than it does about the people they are attacking.
In short, I hope to be involved with the LP for a long time. I also hope what is called the “LP” is something that is worth my while to be involved with. I am amply qualified by educational credentials and professional experience to hold the position I seek, and I amply count as a “Libertarian” by any measure that has thus far been devised.
I’m going to win being who I am – warts and all – or lose being who I am. I never said I was perfect. I’ve had more than my share of challenges in my life the last five years, and I have survived them and come out the other side stronger than ever. That, in itself, is a skill the LP needs now more than ever, in my opinion.
Over the last four months, I have made a reasoned, substantive and fact-based critique of the committee’s public actions. I have offered my diagnosis, my services, and a vision for a way forward – a vision consistent with the objectives of the New Path team. None of the people in the committee’s dominant coalition (with the partial exception of Pat Dixon and Dan Karlan) have chosen to engage with me, or offer any substantive defense or explanation of their actions (and inactions) while in our collective service.
And guess what, people? They’re not going to. They’re going to hope that another convention will pass, that they will be safely returned to office, the deck chairs on the Titanic will be re-arranged yet another time, and that I will just go away.
Well, let me say this as clearly as I can:
I’m not planning on going anywhere.