All Material in this article is taken from my book Funding Liberty, available at 3mpub.org.
Chapter Twenty Three
Apocalypse 2001
As Richard Nixon discovered in an earlier scandal centered in the same Watergate Building, it is a challenging task to keep quiet an elaborate conspiracy. The task is complicated by the correlations: Peculiar events occur in clusters. Nixon’s plumbers did not stop with visiting the Watergate Building once. If they had, they might have gone unnoticed. The list of interesting acts of the Nixon administration was long indeed. Once the ball of twine that was Nixon’s interlocked interesting acts began to unroll, clues to each of the acts began to reveal aspects of all the others. In the same way, for the Libertarian Party in early 2001 the elaborate schemes of the last half-decade began to unravel.
The LNC Executive Committee Acts on the Browne Scandal
Within a month of Famularo’s revelation, Perry Willis published his long defense of his interactions with the Browne Campaign. It might have been possible for a determined National Committee to ignore the Willis Invoice as presented by John Famularo. After all, that Invoice was printed from an electronic file that lacked even a digital signature. These was no direct evidence produced by Famularo that the invoice had been sent, let alone that the Browne campaign had paid for Willis’s services. The National Committee could have proclaimed that the electronic file was not credible, because it bore no direct evidence of its authenticity. They would then have had to cope with Famularo’s full timeline and this book—which I had already started to write—but the Willis Invoice might not have been make or break evidence. Willis’s statement removed all doubt about part of his involvement in the matter. Willis’s statement made continued National Committee inaction indefensible, if it had ever been contemplated.
The May 2, 2001 LNC Executive Committee teleconference took note of the Famularo document. Major events in that meeting are summarized by its minutes that at the time were available at archive.lp.org. Present in the meeting were ExComm members James Lark, Deryl Martin, Steve Givot, Ken Bisson, Joe Dehn (CA), and Michael “MG” Gilson de Lemos, as well as LNC members Lois Kaneshiki, Dan Wisnosky, Sara Chambers, and Richard Schwarz, and National Director Steve Dasbach.
As part of a discussion of a proposed lawsuit against the FEC, National Secretary Steve Givot identified as an issue ‘whether or not Perry Willis violated LNC policy in working for the Browne campaign in February 1996 and other months’. Givot gave his interpretation of the policy in place at that time, namely that it ‘required Willis to have prior approval of any such employment’. Readers of earlier Chapters will recall that this was also my reading of the policy resolutions in question. Givot appears to have been one of very few participants in this debate to have given careful attention to the actual LNC policy in place at the time. Givot went on to say that ‘he understands that no such approval was granted’. According to the same Minutes, Dasbach said that, ‘based on his recent contact with Willis, we should proceed under the assumption that Willis did work for the Browne campaign during that time period in violation of LNC policy.’ Dasbach did not actually confirm that Givot’s understanding about the lack of approval was correct.
On May 23, 2001 the LNC ExComm again met by teleconference. ExComm members present were James Lark, Dan Fylstra, Deryl Martin, Steve Givot, Ken Bisson, and Joe Dehn. Other LNC Members present included Lois Kaneshiki, Mark Nelson, Dan Wisnosky, Ben Scherrey, and Richard Schwarz, as well as Steff Members Steve Dasbach, Ron Crickenberger, and Bill Hall,
Dehn moved (and Bisson seconded) a resolution, which after modest changes in language became:
“In light of information recently made available concerning violation of LNC policy by Perry Willis and the possible concealment of information about this violation by other persons associated with the Harry Browne campaign, the Executive Committee hereby
- Recommends that no action be taken to involve the Libertarian Party in the lawsuit against the FEC proposed by Browne and Willis, or any other project proposed or managed by them, until all related questions have been answered to the satisfaction of the full LNC.
- Directs the national staff, until such time as the matter can be addressed by the full LNC, to not enter into any business relationships, including but not limited to rentals of the LP mailing list or advertising in LP News, with Browne or Willis or any entity of which either of them is an officer, director, or employee, without prior approval of the Executive Committee.
- Expresses its appreciation to those individuals who have been willing to assist the LNC by bringing forward information about this matter and requests that anyone else who may have relevant information make it available to the LNC without delay.”
Speaking of his own resolution, Dehn is summarized by the Minutes as saying ‘it is also important to make it clear that any other business dealings with these people should be postponed until this matter has been fully addressed by the LNC.’
In response to a question from Steve Dasbach as to whether ‘adoption of the resolution would prohibit purchasing additional copies of Browne’s book Why Government Doesn’t Work from Liam Works, given that neither Browne nor Willis has a financial interest in the company’, Steve Givot expressed the belief ‘that the resolution would direct staff to avoid any transaction which might give rise to the impression that the LP was doing business with Willis, Browne, or any organization they control’ .
Dasbach asked that the record show that, except for ‘accepting LP News ads from these people or purchasing Browne’s book’ ‘he had already implemented a policy of not engaging in any such business relationships (ex: renting the LP mailing list) without first getting Executive Committee approval’.
With respect to the proposed LNC Lawsuit, Givot said ‘he could no longer support LNC participation in the proposed FEC lawsuit if Willis has any involvement whatsoever with any organization which is a party to or otherwise involved in the lawsuit’; Martin said ‘he had voted in favor of the motion to participate in the lawsuit and that he is currently “uncomfortable with that vote.” ‘, and Bisson said that ‘he agrees with Givot and Martin but feels that no further action is required at the present time.’ Fylstra expressed concern that ‘it is our job to move the Party forward—to make progress’ and that ‘the Party is spending energy and time spinning its wheels investigating allegations about what has taken place in the past.’
With some further discussion, the motion passed by a vote of 4 to 0. Fylstra and Lark abstained.
The record at this point is clear. The Executive Committee voted that the National Staff was not to enter into business relationships with Browne, Willis, or any entity of which they were officer, director, or employee, without prior approval of the Executive Committee. The record does not clarify whether ‘director’ was to be broadly or narrowly construed.
Be First to Comment