National Convention Report by Ken Bisson, M.D., Region 3 representative
The week of the July 4th holiday included a
pre-convention meeting of the Libertarian National Committee
(LNC) on July 1st, the National Convention, and a
post-convention LNC meeting on the afternoon of Sunday, July
5th. I'll give my overview of these events here and attach
summaries of the LNC meetings.
The progress in Party building you've observed during
the five years of Steve Dasbach's term as National Chair
will continue and accelerate. The most significant items of
the week were the election of the next National Chair (David
Bergland), and the hiring of the next National Director
(Steve Dasbach). The next two years will demonstrate the
significance of those decisions.
My personal highlight was the powerful presence of the
92 delegates of Region 3 (representing about 10 % of total
national membership). The only Region with more delegates
present was Region 2 (which includes DC and adjacent states)
with 98. Beyond the number of our delegates that traveled
from our Region (IN, MI, OH and KY) was their massive
support of the new Chair. Our 85 votes for David Bergland
amounted to 24 % of his winning first ballot total. To put
that in perspective, Region 1 (representing 20 % of total
national membership, including California) could only muster
42 of their 60 votes for their favorite son.
Region 3 elected Ken Bisson and Barbara Goushaw
without opposition to the two year terms of LNC
representative and alternate. Members from Region 3 were
also elected to two of the five At-Large LNC seats. They
are Bill Hall (MI) and Mary Ruwart (KY). I want to publicly
thank State Chairs Tim O'Brien (MI), Rob Shuford (IN), Jim
Babka (OH) and Tom Wimmer (KY) for their hard work. Leading
a state delegation is an important and stressful job. We've
got the best crew around!
One additional development from last week’s activity
was the re-formation of our Regions. We were asked by West
Virginia to accept them into Region 3 and we are now a five
state Region. In the past, West Virginia has been a member
of our Region and I was happy to welcome them home. It was
a pleasure to meet State Chair John Brown and their entire
delegation.
I would like to invite all members in our Region to
contact me anytime with your questions or concerns about
matters dealt with by the LNC. Your State Chair is an
equally important conduit between you and the National LP.
We will continue to work together to help you benefit most
from our thriving Libertarian Party.
Ken Bisson, M.D.
Region 3 representative
Libertarian National Committee
Back to Contents
HOUSE TO VOTE ON RON PAUL BILLS by From Ballot Access News
U.S. HOUSE TO VOTE ON RON PAUL BILLS IN LATE JULY
CONGRESS IS IN RECESS UNTIL JULY 13; LOBBYING POSSIBLE
LOCALLY
Congress recessed on June 26, and will return on July
13. When the U.S. House is again in session, it will debate
HR 3526, the famous Shays-Meehan campaign finance bill.
Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) has been given permission to
ask the House to attach HR 2477, the ballot access bill, to
HR 3526. Thus, for the first time in the 14-year history of
ballot access bills, each member of the U.S. House will cast
a vote for or against ballot access reform (except,
obviously, those members who aren't voting that day).
The ballot access bill has been repeatedly introduced
in Congress ever since 1985. It never received a hearing,
until February 26, 1998, when it received a very short
hearing. In the current congress, it is HR 2477.
The presidential debates bill probably will also be
offered as an amendment. Currently, the Ron Paul debates
bill is HR 2478. However, the chances that the ballot
access bill will be offered as an amendment are greater than
the chances for the debates bill, since Paul has permission
to try to attach the ballot access bill to six different
campaign finance bills, whereas he has permission to try to
attach the debates bill to only one campaign finance bill, a
bill sponsored by Congressman Tom Campbell.
Shays-Meehan Bill
The Shays-Meehan bill, HR 3526 (by Christopher Shays,
R-Ct, and Martin Meehan, D-Ma), without any amendments,
makes these five changes in federal campaign law:
(1) It bans "soft money" by prohibiting national
political parties, and federal candidates, from raising,
spending or directing soft money. It also prohibits state
parties from spending soft money for federal elections.
(2) It requires anyone who runs a broadcast ad
mentioning a federal candidate within two months of a
general election to submit to existing laws governing
spending by candidates themselves (contributions would be
limited to $1,000 from each donor).
(3) It provides for faster disclosure of campaign
contributions.
(4) It codifies in federal law a past U.S. Supreme
Court decision that allows non-union members who must pay
fees in lieu of union dues to obtain a refund of the portion
of their fees used for political campaigns.
(5) It limits spending of wealthy candidates by barring
political parties from making coordinated expenditures on
behalf of House candidates who do not agree to limit
spending their own money to a limit of $50,000.
Unlike some prominent campaign finance bills in the
recent past, Shays-Meehan does not discriminate for or
against any political party.
Anyone is free to ask his or her member of the U.S.
House to vote for the Ron Paul amendments, no matter what he
or she thinks about the original, unadorned Shays- Meehan
bill itself. It is likely that Shays-Meehan will pass the
House in July or August, although its chances in the U.S.
Senate, where filibusters are permitted, are not considered
good.
It is important that supporters of the Ron Paul
amendments ask their Congressmembers to support the Ron Paul
amendments. Even if it isn't attached, it is important that
it rally a significant number of "Aye" votes. If the number
of "Aye" votes is impressive, it will be much easier for the
bill to get serious consideration on its own in future
congresses.
Ballot Access Amendment
If the ballot access amendment were passed into law,
states would continue to write their own ballot access laws.
However, the number of signatures for statewide federal
office could be no higher than one-tenth of 1% of the last
vote cast, and the number of signatures for district federal
office could be no higher than one-half of 1%.
The one-tenth of 1% standard is similar to the median
petition requirement which existed in the U.S. during the
1920's. See the chart on page two which substantiates this.
Feel free to use the chart, if you communicate with your
member of Congress. This information has never before been
published.
Since most members of Congress will be available in
their district offices during the first two weeks in July,
try to make an appointment to see him or her. If you don't
know where the district office is, your library can help
you, or look in the phone book in the Government Pages under
"Congress".
Point out that in Georgia, the ballot access laws for
U.S. House are so severe that no minor party candidate for
that office has ever appeared on the ballot, since the
existing law was written in 1943. Yet the legislature of
Georgia has repeatedly refused to alter it, and the courts
have repeatedly refused to strike it down. The law requires
any minor party which wishes to run against Speaker Newt
Gingrich, for example, to submit over 25,000 valid
signatures. It would be necessary for a group to collect
50,000 signatures in order to be certain that the petition
contained 25,000 valid signatures, since the validity rate
of petitions circulated in a single district is always very
poor. Many well-meaning signers would turn out to be
residents of a neighboring district.
Debates Amendment
The Ron Paul presidential debates amendment would
provide that anyone who is on the ballot in at least 40
states, must be invited into general presidential debates.
Major party presidential candidates who refuse to debate,
lose general election public financing. The best argument
in behalf of the debates amendment is that, without it, the
Democratic and Republican presidential candidates will never
agree to debate any opponents except each other. In 1996,
President Clinton and Senator Dole refused to debate anyone
else. In response, fewer voters watched the general election
presidential debates in 1996 than any past general election
presidential debates.
NEW TURNOUT LOWS
According to a June 18 report by the Committee for the
Study of the American Electorate, voter turnout in primaries
held so far this year aver- ages only 16.9% of the potential
electorate. This is the lowest turnout in primaries since
before the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965 (however,
1998 data is far from com- plete, since many states haven't
held their primaries yet).
The Committee for the Study of the American Electorate
(CSAE) can be reached at 421 New Jersey Ave., SE.,
Washington DC 20003, phone (202) 546-3221, fax (202)
546-3571.
U.S. SENATOR SUPPORTS DEBATES BILL
U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski wrote a letter on March
10, 1998, saying "HR 2478 (the Ron Paul de- bates bill) is a
worthwhile approach and believe that this issue will be ad-
dressed when the Senate takes up campaign finance reform
this month. When we do debate this issue, I will support it
in the Senate." Murkowski is an Alaska Republican.
Back to Contents
Return to LP of Michigan Home Page
Return to News Archive