How Many Anti-Funding Reps Is Enough?

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/04/applicants-sought-for-lnc-vacancy

Tom, it's not accurate to say your LPMO situation was "exactly analogous", because the LPMO bylaws have no rule (like the LPUS does) against running for office under another party.

I ask again: if you're worried that a rogue Secretary might stage a coup by summarily unseating half the LNC on false charges of dues shirking, why aren't you worried about a coup using false charges of non-attendance?  Any such false charges can be appealed to the Judicial Committee, where the rogue Secretary could be easily brought to heel.

I also ask again: is a regional rep immune from any enforcement of the LNC qualification rules other than whatever enforcement the region decides to do?  If so, then what is the point of the rules -- to merely suggest to the region some criteria it might otherwise overlook?

Nobody is saying that being a week late with dues is grounds for keeping somebody off the LNC.  The question is whether not paying your dues has a similar effect under our Bylaws as resigning or missing two consecutive meetings.

Marc Montoni, I too would like the LNC to focus on raising money, and that's why I think the most interesting thing here is the allegation that Wrights publicly suggested that the LP is not to be donated to.  You ask when will enough be enough.  I ask: how many LNC members should we tolerate who publicly suggest that the LP is not to be donated to?  If you think the answer is something other than zero, I'd love to hear your reasoning.

Paulie, I don't recall the Denver delegates electing anybody on a platform of starving the LP of funds.  If that really were the position of somebody seeking appointment to a seat he vacated, don't you think the LNC ought to look for somebody else?