Jon, this forum does not support attachments but you're welcome to include content in the bodies of messages you post.
-TLP --- In [email protected], Jon Roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > By now most of you have heard that most of the 63 2004 Platform planks > were deleted. However, some of you have immediately lept to the > conclusion that this was done as an ideological act. It was not. It was > almost entirely a procedural matter. I asked a random sample of the > delegates how they were voting on plank retention, and almost every one > of them said they were voting not to retain planks they had not had an > opportunity to read, and that they couldn't vote for planks without a > copy of the platform to read, which was not provided in the convention > package. Had copies been printed and placed in the folders along with > other materials, I have no doubt the outcome would have been completely > different. > > I am a member of the Platform Committee, but was added only a few days > before the Convention. > > With the exception of a handful of planks with which many members were > familiar from memory, the only planks that were retained were those that > were the result of the Platform Committee consolidating planks, which > were presented to the body and approved. > > The Platform Committee spent almost all its time on consolidating a few > planks, and although it did revise some planks for constitutional > compliance, those planks did not become part of the group of > consolidated planks presented to the Convention, so they got deleted > along with the others. > > The plan was for the revised and many of the more important other planks > to be introduced as floor motions, and various of us duly filed those > with the Secretary according to the rules. The last two hours of the > Orders of the Day on Sunday were devoted to hearing such motions. Four > of mine, the first on *juries,* were next in line to be brought up when > Jim Duensing of Nevada, who was aggravated by a motion just made by > Aaron Starr of California and rejected, made a motion to adjourn the > Convention, with an hour and a half to go, and that motion, which is not > debatable, passed, cutting off consideration of the more important > planks, which by being thus introduced by motion, would allow reading by > the members present. > > My proposed planks are attached. The first two, on juries and immunity, > would have replaced the planks on juries and "individual sovereignty", > and the second two would have added language to begin to get > Libertarians to take positions on constitutional construction, something > I think it is important they begin to do, and not just take policy > positions. If some of you do not get the attachments, send me a a > message and I will send them in a reply. > > I doubt that if the members had known what was about to be introduced, > they would not have voted to adjourn, but they didn't know. The result > will be a strangely skewed platform for the next two years, and one that > is sure to generate a lot of intense controversy in the Party, perhaps > diverting us from more important issues. Of course, this also opens the > way to developing a completely reworked Platform for 2008 that will > hopefully strike a balance between the aspirations of Libertarians and > the needs for a tool to focus debate, educate the public, and get > candidates elected. > > However, at the 2008 Convention I intend to introduce an amendment to > the By-laws that a motion to adjourn is out of order before the > expiration of all elements of the Orders of the Day (Agenda). This would > be an override of Robert's Rules of Order, but a necessary one. An > alternative would be to make motions to adjourn debatable, but I think > it better to require a motion to suspend the rules to amend the orders > of the day to end the scheduled items before cutting them off by a > premature adjournment. This would give people an opportunity to inform > the body of what will be introduced that they might want to consider. > > I agree with the decision to go to a two-day convention agenda, but if > we are going to make it work conferees are going to need to make some > adjustments to the ways they conduct themselves, and cooperate in not > extending debate on trivia as though the Convention has all the time in > the world to take up everything it needs to do. > > I also suggest that if the Convention is going to try to conduct > balloting as complex as a plank retention, they should adopt ballot > forms that can be marked and actually scanned by a machine so we are not > delayed by hand-counting. Standard forms and scanners are available, the > latter for rent, at a not excessive cost, with only a little setup to be > done to assign blocks on the form to items to be decided. The legend > mapping the blocks to the issues could be displayed on the screens so > that they wouldn't have to be printed and distributed. The alternative > would be to set up several voting computers with software that would > allow the members to vote in several lines, but this would be more > expensive and might not save much time. > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [TxSLEC] 2006 Platform Committee - Guy McLendon's Preliminary > Report to Texas > Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 01:25:22 -0500 > From: Guy McLendon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > CC: George Squyres <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Fellow Platform Committee Members, > > > > I am sending this report via BCC to many folks in Texas, and am doing > BCC to avoid an endless email chain. Feel free to forward. > > > > * * * * * * * * * * * * > > Status Report > > * * * * * * * * * * * * > > *_Platform Committee Work:_* > > The 2006 Platform Committee work focused on two areas - consolidation, > and constitutional consistency. The consolidation planks combined 11 > planks down to 5 planks, and these 5 were approved by Convention in a > single vote. Multiple other planks were considered on a plank by plank > basis. Approved Platform Committee planks included Sexual Rights, > Immigration, Government Debt & Conscription. In addition, this partial > list of planks were also moved forward to 2006 from the 2004 Platform: > Right to Bear Arms, War on Drugs & Freedom of Communication. For info > on the consolidation, please see attachment, or HTML table below. > > > > Without having exact numbers in hand, the following is based partly upon > remarks from the Platform Committee Chair: as compared to past > Conventions, the Convention passed roughly about 50% more planks in much > less time than previous conventions. Considering the results of the > subsequent retention vote, it is fortunate the Platform Team had a > relatively high productivity. The Convention voted to retain the 2006 > Platform Committee as a special Committee that will continue working > until the 2008 Platform Committee is named. Since most members are also > involved in campaigns for the coming Nov election, we plan to resume our > work in earnest beginning in Jan 2007. > > > > *_Retention Vote:_* > > By now, many of you have heard that over half of the 62 planks from the > 2004 National Platform were rejected by the 2006 Convention. The last > word that I heard from the floor was that our 2006 Convention is > expected to contain 17 planks, but my figures seem to suggest only 15 > survived ... Please be patient while the convention secretary works to > get the info to George Squyres - the Platform Special Committee Chair, > and for him to get a copy to me & the webmaster. Hopefully, the lp.org > website will be updated before too long. > > > > The decision by the delegates to not retain the full platform was > unprecedented in the history of the LP. Although their decision may > seem shocking at first, I believe in hindsight we will all decide the > overall impact was very positive. While the 2006 Platform will have > some gaps during the next two years, there are nonetheless real benefits > to our current situation. For instance, the Committee's consolidation > work eliminated the verbiage that had been misconstrued as saying the LP > supports sex services for minors ... which, of course, we don't. > > > > Please do not be needlessly alarmed about the notion that the platform > has been gutted. Yes, there are a few gaps in the 2006 Platform. > However, anyone wanting to know the LP's positions can always refer to > our Statement of Principles, and consider his/her application. All 2006 > Platform planks are compliant to the Statement of Principles, and > contain a section "Solutions" [long term vision]. It is in this > designated location where our party's long term vision is intended to > reside. So long as our Statement of Principles remains, the platform > can never truly be "gutted". > > > > Yours in Liberty, > > Guy McLendon > > Texas Member to Platform Special Committee > > ~ > > Convention Handout Information: > > *The following planks are recommended to be combined:* > > > > *The platform committee also recommends changes to the following planks:* > > II.6 Monopolies and II.7 Subsidies merged into "Corporate Welfare, > Monopolies and Subsidies" > > > > I.22 Sexual Rights (renamed Sexuality and Gender) > > IV.D.3 Space Exploration, IV.C.3 Unowned Resources, I.12 Property Rights > merged into "Property Rights" > > > > I.18 Immigration > > I.2 Crime and I.3 Victimless Crime > > > > II.2 Taxation [Did not pass Convention] > > III.13 Postal Service and II.9 Public Utilities, with a suggested new > name of "Government-provided Services" > > > > II.5 Government Debt > > III.5 Population and I.20 Women's Rights and Abortion merged into > "Reproductive Rights" > > > > I.17 Conscription and the Military > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 > 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/XISQkA/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
