9:19 AM (1 hour ago) [Editor:May 20, 2024]
to LNC Business List (Public) Google Group
From: Mark Tuniewicz <mark.tu…@lp.org>
Sent: Monday, May 20, 2024 1:18:52 PM (UTC+00:00) Monrovia, Reykjavik
To: Credentials Committee <credential…@lp.org>; LNC Business <lnc-bu…@lp.org>; chair <ch…@lpf.org>; bpierc…@gmail.com <bpierc…@gmail.com>; jcarman <jca…@lpny.org>; 4eb01eb…@amer.teams.ms <4eb01eb…@amer.teams.ms>; businesslist-forward <businessli…@lp.org>
Subject: The Credentials Committee defines it’s own role, but that includes neither a review of state bylaws nor state meeting minutes
Hello Folks,
There’s been a fair amount of correspondence of late regarding the role of the Credentials Committee. It went so far as to have a member of Credentials ask the LNC Chair about their role, and the Chair then “ruled” on that issue.
If you’re a member of the Credentials Committee, you can safely ignore that “ruling.” The “why” goes like this:
The Credentials Committee is a primary Committee on the same level as the National Committee (Article 7) and the Judicial Committee (Article 8). The Credentials Committee is not a committee of the LNC in the sense that the Historical Preservation Committee is. It is incorrect for an LNC member to refer to Credentials as one of “‘our committees’. It’s not.
The Committee has ‘members’, not ‘representatives’. It is false to claim, as one LNC member did, that the members chosen by the LNC are representatives of the LNC. They are simply members of the Credentials Committee chosen by the LNC, just as are the members chosen by the states.
The LNC chair, in responding to a question about roles, simply gave her opinion but called it a ruling. It’s not a “ruling,” and does not have the effect of one. It has no greater or less value than any other personal opinion offered to the Credentials Committee. …by anyone.
I could just as easily offer that “The role of the Credentials Committee is to review delegate lists submitted by the states to ensure names and complete addresses are provided, and to insure they are sustaining members of the Libertarian Party. In the event of any dispute or controversy, such as a challenge of a delegate or delegation, those disputes found to be credible shall be referred directly to the convention for resolution. The Committee plays no role in determining how a state chooses its delegates, or whether they are complying with their own bylaws. That is the responsibility of each state party.” That opinion is just as valid as the one offered by the LNC Chair, and it would be completely consistent with the letter and spirit of RONR 59:14 Sections 1-8, which also seeks to define the responsibilities of the Credentials Committee.
That said, in many ways Credentials charts its own course.
In doing so, they can also safely ignore the claim made that it is somehow a bylaws requirement that state parties provide them with copies of state bylaws or meeting minutes per Article 5.2. This article relates strictly to the chartering of new affiliates, and describes the provision of a petition form, along with a copy of any constitution and bylaws to the Party Secretary as part of the initial affiliate application process. There is no continuing bylaws requirement to provide these documents to the Secretary, and certainly no requirement to provide same to Credentials. Bylaws only need be provided, per article 5.2 , at the time of application. It doesn’t matter if one feels like we must protect ourselves against some future challenge to our ballot status in some unnamed state by some unnamed person. Article 5.2 is unambiguous and not silent in the least. Bylaws clearly trump (sic) RONR.
In the end, our friends on Credentials get to decide their scope. And I hope they have a quick meeting that decides that scope based on quality work product balanced with speedy results. But that scope doesn’t include obtaining bylaws or meeting minutes from state parties, as is currently being demanded. In fact, continuing to do so would likely provide great fodder for any legal or procedural action against Credentials that relied on these unpermitted requirements in decision making.
I hope that the Committee can move forward more quickly with this additional information, which is offered in the spirit of helpful guidance. Many states are awaiting notice that their delegation lists have been officially credentialed pre-convention. Thanks again to you, the CC members, for all your hard work.
With best wishes,
Mark Tuniewicz (“toon-YEV-ich”)
Region 6 Representative
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
(IL, IA, MN, MT, ND, SC, SD, UT, WI)
LP National Awards Committee
5-time LP public officeholder
Served on 5 LP state affiliate boards
Former LP national Treasurer
