Thu 27 Oct 2005
I received a copy of the LNC Treasurer’s Report from a reliable (yet confidential) source. It is relatively short — I urge you to read it. The report is at:
http://www.smallgov.org/?page_id=113
The treasurer is another one who needs to be booted. According to the treasurer, paid staff refuse to do their job (as defined in the LNC policy manual). They are not preparing required reports (which previous staff prepared without hesitation).
Staff also refuses to follow directives and are putting us in jepoardy of violating FEC regulations. The few reports that they actually deliver seem to have impossible numbers. The treasurer’s report says:
The preliminary September membership report indicated a negative number of new subscribers. This is impossible, but staff defended the report.
Shane Cory, Robert Kraus, and Daniel Cloud must be FIRED IMMEDIATELY!!!
Chair Mike Dixon and Treasurer Mark Nelson must be removed from office IMMEDIATELY.
This cannot be mere incompetence — it can only be destruction of the Libertarian Party by design.
October 28th, 2005 at 4:04 pm
Since the LNC is a federal PAC under the law, Mark Nelson as its treasuer has all the authority he needs to force the LPHQ staff to do their jobs. He can stop their pay checks.
“11 CFR CHAPTER I–FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
Sec. 102.7
(c) No expenditure shall be made for or on behalf of a political committee without the authorization of its treasurer or of an agent authorized orally or in writing by the treasurer.”
October 28th, 2005 at 6:22 pm
And even though he has the authority, he is not doing it. He is not doing his job. He is exposing the organization to unnecessary risk. He needs to be removed immediately!
October 28th, 2005 at 8:58 pm
I have confirmed that the LNC is not reporting the Oath Field from the membership records. While there is another column with words like BASIC SPONSOR PATRON etc., when people are moved from one status to another, on of my sources has identified cases in whcih they have been moved from a nonmember category to a member category. This issue makes it difficult to determine who teh members are.
October 30th, 2005 at 9:56 pm
This is a long comment summarizing financials and related issues. Most of the material is relate to the Treasurer’s report, but I have some analytical comments.
Note in particular that they are now looking at jettisoning the Potomac Palace.
LNC Fiscal Challenges
Income Plummets; Treasurer Reportedly Suggests Consideration of Financial Exigency
FEC filings for the Libertarian National Committee show that its September 2005 income was $82 504, below even its August of $98 956. This is an annual rate of under one million dollars a year, far below the 1.8 million dollars that had been budgeted by the party. National Treasurer Mark Nelson has reportedly suggested “…the LNC discuss declaring a state of financial exigency…” as provided in the Policy Manual. However, UMP payments are being made, state parties from which I have heard having received the October payment at the end of October.
Reports reaching us indicate that: Current LNC expenses exceed revenue, with accounts payable increasing from August to September. Pledge income is well below what it was prior to the installation of the news database system. The proposed changeover from internal to outsourced production of LP News, which apparently had not previously been priced, is apparently more expensive than expected. The nominal financial state of the LNC is apparently improved by some number of UMP checks totaling over $5000 that were not cashed, and that were written off without approval of the write-off by the LNC rather than being replaced.
The National Committee has as of some days ago not yet been presented with a budget by the staff. Proposals were made that the LNC should be forwarded the budget when ready, if it is not ready at its November meeting, and it should then act on the budget via mail ballot, meaning that there would be no real opportunity for amendments or open face-to-face debate within the committee before the vote.
The recent Treasurer’s report to the LNC, visible at http://www.smallgov.org, speaks of an extensive series of frictional points between the staff and the National Committee. The Treasurer lists several points at which the staff has allegedly failed to carry out specific instructions of the cognizant National Committee members to perform or not perform various tasks, including filing required reports to the LNC and placing or not placing various materials in or with LP News.
The Treasurer expressed serious concerns about the monthly fundraising letters. It would appear from his remarks, as forwarded to us not from directly the LNC, that money raised by fundraising letters is being spent on routine operational expenses and not on the purposes for which the money was nominally raised. If true, this would be a very serious charge, indicating that the National Committee’s fundraising operations violate the Statement of Principles.
A significant factor contributing to the financial uncertainties is that the LNC still does not have even a rudimentary purchase order system. As I remarked in my report to the LNC on Ballot Access spending, there is no paper trail: There is no record of who authorized mailing a particular check, why the money was paid, or whether the amount paid corresponds to the amount that had been agreed upon in advance. From the Treasurer’s remarks, the lack of purchase orders leads to another black area. The LNC cannot be certain what it has committed to pay until invoices are received, so in addition to the visible debts based on invoices received and not yet paid, there are also invisible debts relating to purchases and commitments that have been made but not yet invoiced. For example, it seems that someone committed to pay a convention planner an unspecified amount, even though not funds to pay the planner were ever appropriated by the LNC. Similar issues arise on Ballot Access.
October 30th, 2005 at 11:43 pm
I understand that Shane Corey has issued a point by point rebuttal of Nelson’s report, which does not mention Corey, and whose duties appear to have very little to do with the issues Nelson raises.
October 31st, 2005 at 1:23 am
Not even a purchase order system? Haven’t these Bozos (LP Officers) for the last few elections been stressing their “real world business experience?” Isn’t creating a P.O. system task #1 when an organization is bleeding cash? (Isn’t it just good bookkeeping practice, regardless of the financial health of an organization?)
Well, LP National, welcome to part of the ongoing Illinois LP fiasco. Dixon was an officer here, and an E.D., and Nelson was a regional rep. Illinois LP membership is now 1/2 of it was when these guys were “in power,” and the finances are a mess.
It’s a good thing the LP is too screwed up to elect anyone to national public office. These clowns would be just as incompetent as the politicians that are in goobermint now.
After seeing what these guys did on the state level, there are a number of people in Illinois (I’m not one) that agree with a poster here: these people are plants from outside the LP sent in to destroy it. I, personally, just think they’re too lazy, arrogant, and impresssed with titles to build up a party the effective, hard, way: from the precincts on up.
October 31st, 2005 at 2:59 am
[…] […]
October 31st, 2005 at 11:09 am
Not on;y does the LPHQ lack a purhase order papaer trail they also don’t have a hardware inventory. Over the last three LNC terms, over $150,000 worth of hardware including but not limited to laptops, and other digital video equipment has been purchsed by the LPHQ staff. Where is it all? How much has disappeared as staff and “consultants” have turned over?
November 1st, 2005 at 10:25 pm
Even more amusing is the sorry attempt to excuse the dropoff in revenue to forces beyond the control of the current “reformist” cabal; like donor wearout after a year of natural disasters.
November 1st, 2005 at 10:39 pm
Yeah, Straw Man…it can’t be anything THEY’RE doing wrong.
It reminds me of the drop-off in membership the Illinios LP suffered after the 9-11 attacks. One of our “reformers” (currently the state LP Secretary) blamed it on the “unrealistic” LP platform, ignoring the fact that the ACLU membership ballooned during the same time period by promoting basically the same anti-Patriot Act ideas inherent in libertarianism, while the “reformers” were watering-down the LP positions to make them less offensive to the flag-suckers.
November 1st, 2005 at 11:36 pm
John Teschky Says:
October 31st, 2005 at 1:23 am
“…After seeing what these guys did on the state level, there are a number of people in Illinois (I’m not one) that agree with a poster here: these people are plants from outside the LP sent in to destroy it…”
This remark reminds me of a comment of mine:
http://www.smallgov.org/wp-admin/edit.php?p=10&c=1
Comment #33
2005-8-5 @ 3:08:57 am
I think perhaps what has been described in this discussion serves to substantiate my theory.
—The Bikemessenger
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:52 am
The possibility of donor fatigue is plausible. I can’t see any reason to dismiss it entirely.
In any event, the reason is very obvious: “Members” are not contributing, and new “members” are not being found. So, how many of you have contributed and how much? And if not, why?
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:06 pm
I would contribute to a libertarian political party. We have a local one in my area.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:15 pm
I last donated to the national LP in December 2004. The LNC held a dinner for major donors in conjunction with an LNC meeting in DC. I thought it was something the party should do more often, so I made an unsolicited donation at the close of the event.
I personally am not donating to the national LP because the party doesn’t appear to be doing anything worth supporting. There are no credible efforts to gain membership, generate media coverage, recruit candidates, support state affiliates, etc.
There appears to be no articulated strategy, no measurable goals, no vision for victory. Things that used to be measured and reported as a means of determining whether progress was being made (e.g. membership, revenue, media interviews, #candidates, # office-holders, etc.) are no longer being reported and most are not even being measured.
The current LNC (except for Bill Redpath) has demonstrated utter contempt for ballot access. They did finally send out a ballot access fundraising letter, but most of the proceeds will likely be used to pay for the mailing and to repay the phony “debt” in the ballot access fund. The letter is probabaly going to have to raise over $40k before any funds will become available for current ballot drives.
Until I see evidence that the LNC has a realistic agenda and strategy worth supporting, including tangible measurements of progress, I expect my checkbook to remain closed. The only possible exception would be a donation to support Bill Redpath’s ballot access efforts.
November 3rd, 2005 at 4:50 pm
Donor fatigue is plausible but we ain’t nowhere near that yet. Our candidates are doing well; it’s the Party that’s heading over a cliff. The membership senses it.
It is anyone’s guess what will be left by the convention.
November 3rd, 2005 at 4:52 pm
By the way I agree the best strategy is to spend your LP money locally.
Organizing your own county/city/town committee, or even organizing your own precinct, is rewarding and productive.
November 4th, 2005 at 11:40 pm
THe LPMA State Committee unanimously (among the bare quorum present) passed a motion that our regional rep Dan Karlan should submit a motion calling for a return to moderate dues and UMP. I am nota fan of UMP, but moderate dues seem to be a good idea. This motion ahs apparently been forwarded to the LNC. A separate motion is rumored to exist, repealing the zero dues motion and returning to $50 dues. This will be settled on 11/12 or so.
November 5th, 2005 at 1:58 am
The LPMA resolution has been presented to the LNC, calling for $30 dues and the reinstatement of UMP.
The rumored $50 proposal has not been presented to the LNC.
November 18th, 2005 at 1:15 am
The LNC passed 10-5 an Object to Consideration on changing dues again, so dues are stuck at $0. The LNC was surprised by how fast the Treasurer’s report got out. The LNC is very badly in debt. They could not afford to reprint their good issues brochure. I am advised by the LPNC Executive Director that he is still waiting for the UMP payment that should have arrived in October.
November 25th, 2005 at 10:54 am
I am now advised by the LPNC Executive Director that the LPNC received their October UMP payment by the end of the month, after all, contrary to his prior report.
Also, I gather that the difference between the FEC and staff reports for last month matches the major donors contributions.
April 5th, 2006 at 12:15 am
[…] http://www.smallgov.org/?p=114 […]