Source: Independent Political Report
The following is Starchild’s analysis of the proposals put forth by the LP national bylaws committee. See previous IPR posts and comments here, here, here, here and this post from the York County, PA LP for additional perspective on these proposals.
For those who haven’t heard, the handpicked national LP Bylaws Committee, filled with many of the usual suspects from past years, is surveying members on how they feel about their latest set of proposals. It’s their way of seeing what they can get the delegates at the next convention to roll over for:
On first blush, some of these proposals actually sounded pretty good. Of course the committee seeks to make them sound that way, including only comments in favor of their proposals in the survey, not any arguments against them. But the more I read over them and thought about them, the worse they tended to sound. Although some of them have parts I could support, even the ones trying to accomplish legitimate goals are written in such a manner that I think we’d be better off sending them back to the drawing board and taking another stab at it.I ended up not supporting a single proposal.
Once again, sadly, what we have here is a series of subtle attempts to centralize more authority in the national party, at the expense of the grassroots membership. Many of this year’s crop of bad ideas would make changes that would decrease the power of state affiliates relative to national (i.e. disrupt the LP’s version of the checks and balances of federalism).
I thought yesterday was the last day to complete the survey, but it still seems to be up and working. So if you haven’t filled it out already, I urge you to take a few minutes ASAP to do so while you still can, and help nip some of this stuff in the bud! You’re welcome to crib from (or copy wholesale) my responses, which I’ve copied below along with the survey in its entirety.
Oh, and please also make sure to tell them you want your responses shared with the entire LP membership (or at least any who care to read them), and not restricted to members of the Bylaws Committee. I believe some on the committee are hoping to make the data available only to themselves, and deny the rest of us the ability to hear what our fellow party members are thinking about this stuff.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))