Funding Liberty! Table of Contents
Funding Liberty!
Chapter 23
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 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
1) 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.
2) 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.
3) 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.
The Executive Committee further voted a "recommendation" that no action be taken to involve the Libertarian Party in any other project proposed or managed by Browne or Willis, until the full LNC had acted. Dehn as author of the resolution placed into the record of the meeting what his own motion meant: '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.' No member of the Executive Committee demurred from Dehn's statement about his own motion. Steve Givot, speaking on the motion for which he later voted, said 'in his view, the right thing is doing no business with these people'.
Under the resolution, the staff was to refer proposed LNC involvements to the Executive Committee, an absolute majority of which had just recommended that no action—an ExComm vote is an action—be taken until the full LNC was satisfied with the situation. One could consider to what extent the ExComm Resolution bound the National Chair as Party CEO. However, when you 'recommend' to yourself what is to be done, unless you have a difficulty with split personality you have said what you are going to do. Until reversed, the ExComm "recommendation" appears to close the door on ExComm approvals of business dealings prior to the next LNC meeting.
And now we reach the next ExComm Meeting. On May 30, 2001, the LNC Executive Committee Meeting held another teleconference, on very short notice, to re-examine their resolution. LNC ExComm members present were James Lark, Dan Fylstra, Deryl Martin, Steve Givot, Ken Bisson, Joe Dehn, and Michael "MG" Gilson de Lemos (MG joined the teleconference after it had started)
LNC members who listened in on the call were Lois Kaneshiki (PA), At Large Representative; Mike Dixon (IL), Region 1 Representative; Ben Scherrey (GA), Region 4 Alternate (joined the meeting at 1:00 PM); and Richard Schwarz (PA), Region 5 Representative. Staff members present were Steve Dasbach, National Director and Bill Hall, General Counsel.
Fylstra moved (and Bisson seconded) a resolution which after several friendly amendments read:
"To clarify the intent of, and expand upon its resolution of May 23 2001, the Executive Committee hereby
1) Recommends that the LNC censure Perry Willis for his acknowledged violation of LNC policy in 1995-96 in working for the Browne campaign while being employed by the LNC.
2) Recognizes that while Harry Browne was the head of the campaign, it is presently unclear to what extent he or others were involved in Willis' actions or decisions.
3) Requests that Harry Browne provide a public statement to the LNC to clarify the circumstances surrounding Willis' actions, and any lessons that may be learned therefrom.
4) Requests that all persons having any information relating to Willis' actions, or any other intentional violation of LNC policy by other persons, provide that information to the LNC Chair no later than August 18, 2001.
5) Clarifies that its resolution of 23 May 2001 requires the national staff to seek Executive Committee approval before entering into new business dealings with Willis or Browne, but is not per se a blanket prohibition against such dealings.
6) Sets a goal that any and all questions related to these matters be resolved to the satisfaction of LNC members by the time of, and be reflected in the minutes of the LNC's August meeting, and asks all LNC members and other persons to work together to achieve resolution by that date.”
According to the ExComm Minutes, Fylstra advanced several reasons for proposing his resolution, notably his belief "that the previously-adopted resolution has left many people with the impression that there is a blanket prohibition against doing business with Willis or Browne." Clarifying on this point, National Director Dasbach expressed doubts 'as to what extent the resolution applied to persons other than Willis or Browne'. Dasbach also summarized his conversations with various Executive Committee members, saying that he found 'there was a lack of clear consensus regarding which requests for list rental, running ads in LP News, or other transactions would require prior approval from the Executive Committee.'
The motion was divided. The first part of the divided motion—to adopt points (1), (3), (4), (5), and (6)—passed by a vote of 5 to 0. The second part of the divided motion—to adopt point (2)—passed by a vote of 3 to 2. Bisson, Givot, and Martin voted for the motion. Dehn and MG voted against the motion.
Fylstra's discussion only makes sense if 'new business dealings' might now possibly be approved by the ExComm, contrary to the prior resolution's recommendation that 'no action be taken to involve the party' prior to action of the full LNC. There have since been claims by LNC members that the second resolution did not invert a ban present in the first. Readers may judge for themselves what the record shows about this question.
The second resolution also asserted that it was 'unclear' to what extent Browne or others 'were involved in Willis's actions or decisions'. The reader will recognize that invoices do not commonly pay themselves. If Willis had in fact received payment for the Invoice, as he claimed, it was extremely clear that someone was involved in agreeing to the February Contract and paying the invoice.
My contacts associated with the Browne campaign report that Browne was a truly excellent small-business manager. He was closely aware of all the details of his campaign's activities. Could he have been unaware of events? Why was there an interest in suggesting that Browne might be absolved of responsibility, in the absence of a denial from Browne that he had been aware of events, and an explanation as to how he could have remained unaware?
Under the second resolution the penalties against Browne and Willis were apparently reduced. Under the May 23 resolution, it was recommended that Browne, Willis, and their associated organizations could not rent the LPUS mailing list or advertise in LP News until the full National Committee had acted . "recommended" may sound unclear, but Dehn’s words in the Minutes indicate what his fellow LNC members had heard him say as the motion’s author. Under the May 30 resolution, Browne, Willis, and their entities only needed permission of the Party Executive Committee to establish such business relationships.
The July 2001 LP News includes a full-page article 'LNC Starts Investigation into Willis Policy Violation'. The article is announced in a box on page 1, but its opener appears in the lower right on page 3, with most of the material on pages 16 and 17. There is a reasonable explanation of LNC Executive Committee actions to date, as well as the text of the two Executive Committee motions. While Willis's confession and its URL (www.harrybrowne.org/policy) are noted, Willis's most spectacular claim is omitted: There is no hint in this LP News article that Willis claimed that his acts gave Browne the nomination, and that without his acts someone would have beaten Browne and become the Party's presidential nominee. The article does feature a claim that I have never seen elsewhere about the Dean, Spear and Associates arrangement, namely that is was Willis who "apparently directed" that his payments be passed through that firm "so that there would be no public trail". No other source that I know asserts that the financial conduit was originated by Willis rather than the Browne campaign. Finally, at a time when most people involved in the event were refusing to talk, LP News was able to secure an interview with Willis and publish several quotes from him, notably
"There were no instances that I'm aware of, including the letters in question, where anyone in the national office used their official position or a unique LNC asset to influence the outcome of the nomination."
Willis clearly did not count himself as a unique asset of the National Office. Willis's claim would still appear to be untrue. The Browne campaign received both a substantial loan and then a direct subsidy from the assets of LNC, Inc.
Party efforts to investigate what had happened continued. In Summer 2001 Browne and others in his campaign were sent emails by National Chair James Lark. By report most of them did not answer at all. Lark sent a second message, asking if they would at least acknowledge receipt of the message. He reports receiving a single answer, a terse response indicating receipt, from David Bergland. At the same time, Editor Bill Bradford of Liberty Magazine—the only newsmagazine other than my own Let Freedom Ring! that consistently covers Libertarian Party internal politics—telephoned Harry Browne. According to Bradford, Browne indicated that he would not answer Bradford's questions and hung up. The only press outlet to interview a participant successfully was LP News with its quotations from Perry Willis. However, the LNC does not appear to have asked if there were also unpublished notes on the interview in the possession of LNC staffers.
Lark also contacted a much wider circle of Libertarian activists who might have had knowledge of the events. Lark's full report, including all responses, was available as of this writing at www.dehnbase.org. Highly reliable sources not connected with the Libertarian National Committee provided me as editor of Let Freedom Ring! with a response from former LPUS Treasurer Mark Tuniewicz to Lark, answering Lark’s inquiries as to what Tuniewicz knew about the Browne scandal, and providing Tuniewicz’s recommendations to the National committee. Tuniewicz wrote in part:
“...First, I'd like to express my deep concern and disappointment relative to Harry Browne's refusal to cooperate in this inquiry. As a contributor and volunteer for Browne's campaigns, I feel betrayed.
“In my view, unless Mr. Browne fully cooperates with the inquiry prior to the August LNC meeting, the Committee should vote to permanently and prospectively cut all ties to Mr. Browne, his campaign & business associates, and related organizations using the broadest possible interpretation. For example, this would include a ban on list rentals to the American Liberty Foundation, web development by Jack Dean's firm(s), and support of any type to campaigns that involve Michael Emerling Cloud. Hopefully, the prospect of such a ban (and pressure from these related entities) will bring Mr. Browne to the table to answer the question that everyone wants to hear: What did Harry know, and when did he know it. And why didn't he disclose it when he found out?
“The honesty and integrity demanded by libertarian ethics demands no less...particularly for someone who holds themselves out as a standard-bearer.
“Second, I'd like to suggest that the Committee also take strong actions against Mr. Willis in this matter. While you may have been led to believe that Mr. Willis's deceit is not actionable, I'd be happy to refer the Committee to litigators who would be happy to take the case and pursue money damages, small that they may be. I think it's important that the Committee show the same dogged determination that Mssrs. Dasbach & Bergland showed in the matter of Gene Cisewski in this similar breach-of-trust situation.
“Third, I urge the Committee to view with an extremely critical eye the responses to this inquiry provided by Steve Dasbach. While I've not been privy to his responses, I suspect a blanket denial on his part as to any knowledge of the matter.
“My experience is that Mssrs. Willis & Dasbach enjoy an intimate working relationship, and have since the early 1990's when Mr. Dasbach became Mr. Willis' boss. During the 2000 Browne campaign, for example, I'd often observe that Mr. Dasbach was far more familiar with the details of that campaign's strategy and direction than any member of the LNC, indicating to me and others a continued intimacy with Mr. Willis...
“Fourth, you asked for feedback relative to the manner of the inquiry itself.
“With all due respect to the efforts of the Chairman and the intent of the Committee, this inquiry is pointless in its current form. No respondent with anything to hide would give information that would implicate them, as evidenced by Mr. Browne's lack of cooperation.
“I strongly recommend that in August the Committee vote to employ a private investigation firm to obtain full and complete facts regarding the many important questions raised here, and insure that someone other than the national office (perhaps Bill Hall) be the person involved directly with the ongoing work of the investigators, rather than the national office staff.
“An investigation firm might have the ability to track other financial payments made by Mr. Dean's entities to other staff members, for example. We have no other way of getting this type of information.”
In the letter, Tuniewicz continued by responding to questions of Lark about his own knowledge of the matter. With respect to Willis’s secret work for Browne prior to the 1996 National Convention, Tuniewicz said that he had “...observed repeated representations made by Mssrs. Willis & Dasbach that no work took place...”
*
The National Committee did not take Tuniewicz's advice on dealing with matters.
In a letter dated July 10, 2001 Dan Fylstra announced his immediate resignation as Vice Chair. He claimed overwork as his reason. He was reported to have been unhappy with what he viewed as the unfair treatment that Harry Browne had received at the hands of the National Committee. Dan Fylstra became the second National Officer to resign during the year, again reducing National Committee membership to 17. The National Committee was to fill the vacancy at its next meeting, in Las Vegas in late August.
Writing of his replacement, Fylstra said
“It's often said that if you're going to resign a position, you should be prepared to recommend a successor. For Vice Chair, the one person I can recommend without hesitation is Dr. Ken Bisson. Ken has the ability, the dedication, and the respect of his colleagues needed to fulfill the role of Vice Chair. Moreover, he has the considerable advantage of knowledge and continuity because he has been serving on the EC this term. It is up to the full LNC, of course, to vote upon the appointment of a new Vice Chair. But I'd like to ask my LNC colleagues to support my recommendation and vote for Ken to fulfill this role."
The National Committee Acts
The LNC met in August. It dealt at length with the Browne issue.
Willis sent a written apology. Jim Babka read it to the LNC meeting. Babka said that he had received the message by FAX from Willis the day prior to the meeting. By report, the FAX read
"To the members of the Libertarian National Committee:
As you gather this weekend to do important work for the party, I wish to express my heartfelt regret for the distraction, stress and anxiety that my violation of the LNC employment policy has caused you.
I was motivated by a driving passion to see the party succeed, and I continue to believe that the policy that I violated was counterproductive to that success. At the same time I recognize the necessity of an organization such as ours to operate as a team and that my personal vision of how things ought to be cannot always carry the day. Likewise I understand that the LNC must demand respect for its policies.
As a former employee, I submit that I should have respected the employment policy, and I apologize to each of you individually and as a group for not having done so. Due consideration for the thoughts and reactions of many people - most notably Ken Bisson, Marshall Fritz, and Steve Dasbach - has helped me realize the full consequences of my willful disobedience and subsequent denial of that disobedience. My great fear is that the current controversy may serve to undo all that we have accomplished in the past few years, and nothing could cause me greater remorse. So I expand my apology to cover the unintentional contribution I have made to the potential unraveling of our past successes.
It is my sincere hope that the party will soon be able to move forward again, and that all of us will be able to concentrate on productive work for our cause.
Again, my deepest and humblest apologies for the strain this has caused and for my role in it.
I wish you my best as you pursue the work that has been entrusted to you.
Sincerely,
Perry Willis"
At 8:05 AM on August 26, 2001, the LNC began its debate on the Willis-Browne issue.
Eli Israel moved adoption of a resolution. Dan Karlan seconded. The resolution in its initial form read:
"Whereas John Famularo has presented evidence to the Libertarian National Committee on April 21, 2001 that Perry Willis, while National Director of the Libertarian Party, performed work for the 1996 Harry Browne for President campaign in violation of LNC rules,
"And whereas Perry Willis subsequently admitted that he had indeed performed such work, in contradiction to his previous statements,
"And whereas no additional evidence has been presented to the Libertarian National Committee on this matter concerning Perry Willis or any other Libertarian.
"Therefore, the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Perry Willis for performing said work on the 1996 Harry Browne for President campaign while employed as Libertarian National Director, and for denying to his employer that he had done so.
"We also resolve that neither the Libertarian National Committee nor the National Director shall engage Perry Willis directly as either an employee or a contractor for a minimum period of two (2) years.
"We further resolve that Perry Willis and organizations with which he may be affiliated may only purchase advertising in LP News and/or rent the Libertarian national mailing list subject to the terms and conditions required by the LNC Policy Manual for external customers.
"The Libertarian National Committee further resolves that this issue is closed, and no further action shall be taken unless additional credible evidence is presented to the committee."
According to the LNC Minutes,
"Israel said that the purpose of the resolution is to make clear that the violation of LNC policy is unconscionable, unallowable, and that we do not approve of it. He said that the motion is intended to address matters where we have direct evidence, but not allegations where we have only speculation of wild claims. He said that this is intended to demonstrate that the LNC will not employ Willis until a time when it can be shown that his trustworthiness has improved. He said that we do not intend to stop other organizations which may employ him. He said that the motion intends to put this matter behind us."
Discussion clarified that the penultimate paragraph had no time limit. Willis and affiliated organizations would henceforth be required to buy LP News ads and rent LP mailing lists as external customers.
Joe Dehn took strong exception to the motion saying according to the Minutes that "he considers the motion an insult to the work of the Chair as well as others that have put time and effort into investigating this issue. He said that the statement that no other evidence has been presented is blatantly false." In response to questions, Lark indicated that he did not believe that the motion would be personally insulting.
Several minor amendments were then accepted as friendly amendments or passed: Dixon moved to add "or any business controlled or owned by him" after 'Perry Willis' in the fifth paragraph. Dixon then moved to amend the fifth paragraph, increasing the specified time period from two years to five years, thereby extending the ban to include a Presidential election cycle. The amendment passed on a voice vote. Givot provided an amendment, accepted as friendly, to remove "on April 21, 2001". He noted that he was not aware of Famularo's document until after the April meeting ended.
Gaztanaga said he agreed with Dehn, and moved to strike the third paragraph. Scherrey seconded. After a debate that largely does not appear to speak to the question of whether or not additional information had been presented, the amendment passed. Dehn, who originally objected to the paragraph in question, abstained. The debate did establish that most LNC members had reviewed in detail the timeline presented at the lp2000 web site by John Famularo.
Dixon then offered an amended motion, replacing the two paragraph series opening 'We also resolve that...' with two new paragraphs reading
"We also resolve that neither the Libertarian National Committee nor the National Director shall engage Perry Willis or any business owned or controlled by him (collectively "Willis organizations") directly as
either an employee or a contractor for a minimum period of five (5) years. Willis organizations may not directly advertise in LP News and/or rent the Libertarian national mailing list during such time period.
"We further resolve that organizations (other than Willis organizations) with which Willis organizations may be affiliated or act as campaign manager may only purchase advertising in LP News and/or rent the Libertarian national mailing list subject to the terms and conditions required in the LNC policy manual for external customers."
On being questioned, Dixon specified that the LNC would decide which organizations were 'Willis Organizations', but that Presidential Campaigns run by Willis would be treated as 'Willis Organizations'. Dixon's amendment passed on a voice vote, Dehn again specifying that he was abstaining.
The Committee then took a recess. Following the recess, Scherrey moved a substitute resolution:
"Whereas, Perry Willis had agreed, as part of his continued employment consideration as National Director and, in accordance with LNC policy, to no longer work on behalf of individual pre-nomination candidates for public office;
"Whereas, Mr. Willis has for several years thereafter denied, and knowingly allowed others to deny on his behalf, performing such prohibited work;
"Whereas, upon confrontation with evidence presented by John Famularo, Mr. Willis has since admitted to having continued to perform such prohibited work which he has hereunto been denied; and
"Resolved, that said actions and allowance of actions have caused great damage to the integrity and credibility of the Libertarian Party, and the Libertarian National Committee, and those individuals who, upon his bad faith assurance, made honest efforts to defend his person against such accusations;
"Resolved, that said actions are just grounds for termination for cause, and are a violation of the LP prohibition of initiation of use of force through fraud which Mr. Willis has affirmed as part of his
membership in the LP;
"Order, that Perry Willis is hereby CENSURED by this Libertarian National Committee for said violations and betrayals; and
Order, that the Libertarian Party immediately cease, and further prohibit entering into relationships with, the utilization of Libertarian Party assets for, and further associations or transactions with Mr. Willis, and organizations where Mr. Willis has significant governance of and/or financial interest."
Givot seconded.
The Committee then discusses the merits of the substitute motion. According to the Minutes, "Scherrey said that he believes that the sense of the body is that the motion currently on the floor is inadequate and that subsequent attempts to amend it fall short of what is needed." Israel opposed the motion on the grounds that it went 'far in excess of the precedents set in the Cisewski matter.' He urged that 'the LNC should use the Cisewski matter as a precedent'. Givot disagreed, saying that 'Willis was in the highest position of trust', that Willis 'abused that position of trust' and that he 'permitted others to defend him when he knew he was, in fact, guilty.' Gaztanaga is cited in the minutes as saying that 'from what he has observed, there seem to be one or two individuals in the party who seem to have a "birthright" to earn a living from the party.' Gaztanaga felt that Scherrey's substitute motion addressed the issue, which does not refer to current LP employees.
Don Gorman, present as a candidate for election to the LNC, warned that 'there are people leaving the party because of this matter.' He proposed a panel of inquiry be established, to consist of one pro-Willis person, one anti-Willis person, and a hired outside professional mediator or arbitrator. The panel was to review facts and recommend actions.
The motion failed 8-8, with Dehn, Gaztanaga, Givot, Hoch, Kaneshiki, Milsted, Scherrey, and Turney in favor, and Bisson, Dixon, Israel, Karlan, Lieberman, Martin, Nelson, and Rutherford against. Lark abstained. Under Roberts' Rules of Order, Lark's abstension was equivalent to a "No" because it caused the motion to be defeated.
The main motion now read:
"Whereas John Famularo has presented evidence to the Libertarian National Committee that Perry Willis, while National Director of the Libertarian Party, performed work for the 1996 Harry Browne for President campaign in violation of LNC rules,
"And whereas Perry Willis subsequently admitted that he had indeed performed such work, in contradiction to his previous statements,
"Therefore, the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Perry Willis for performing said work on the 1996 Harry Browne for President campaign while employed as Libertarian National Director, and for denying to his employer that he had done so.
"We also resolve that neither the Libertarian National Committee nor the National Director shall engage Perry Willis or any business owned or controlled by him (collectively "Willis organizations") directly as either an employee or a contractor for a minimum period of five (5) years. Willis organizations may not directly advertise in LP News and/or rent the Libertarian national mailing list during such time period.
"We further resolve that organizations (other than Willis organizations) with which Willis organizations may be affiliated or act as campaign manager may only purchase advertising in LP News and/or rent the Libertarian national mailing list subject to the terms and conditions required in the LNC policy manual for external customers.
"The Libertarian National Committee further resolves that this issue is closed, and no further action shall be taken unless additional credible evidence is presented to the Committee."
The main motion, as amended, passed 11-3 with Bisson, Dixon, Hoch, Israel, Karlan, Lieberman, Martin, Milsted, Nelson, Rutherford, and Turney in favor, Gaztanaga, Kaneshiki, and Scherrey against, and Dehn, Givot, and Lark abstaining.
National Secretary Givot then offered a further resolution:
"Whereas no later than 1998 John Famularo was in possession of and aware of evidence indicating that former National Director Perry Willis had violated LNC policy in 1996;
"And whereas John Famularo freely chose to withhold that evidence from the officers and members of the Libertarian National Committee for at least three years;
"Therefore, the Libertarian National Committee expresses its gratitude to John Famularo for bringing evidence of wrongdoing by Perry Willis to the attention of the Committee.
"Furthermore, the Libertarian National Committee expresses its regret that John Famularo freely chose to withhold this information - an act which may have led the Committee and one or two national conventions to make different decisions than they may have made had Mr. Famularo made this information available when he first discovered it."
The motion failed on a voice vote. Gaztanaga and Scherrey specified that they abstained.
Scherrey then moved a further resolution. After friendly amendment, the resolution read:
"Whereas, Harry Browne acted to and did finally achieve the nomination by the Libertarian Party for President of the United States in 1996;
"Whereas, Mr. Browne contracted the services of the National Director at that time for purposes of this campaign and against LNC policy;
"Whereas, when said violation of policy was made public, Mr. Browne did act to hide further such violations by funneling further contracts with Mr. Willis through Jack Dean's company;
"Whereas, when asked to respond to inquiries by our Chair for purposes of investigating this matter, Mr. Browne refused to cooperate with said investigations;
"Order that Harry Browne and Jack Dean are hereby admonished for their participating in aiding Mr. Willis to violate LNC policy and willfully seeking to impede said investigation, and Call upon Mr. Browne, fellow campaign staff and committee members Sharon Ayers, David Bergland, Michael Cloud, and contractor Jack Dean to publicly denounce this violation of LNC policy by Perry Willis and specifically his declaring 'the best interests of the LP' as justification for the violation."
Prior to the friendly amendment, Dasbach said that he 'publicly denounced the violation of LNC policy by Perry Willis', so his name was removed from the motion.
There was then a debate as to what standard of evidence should be used to support the statements in the resolution. The question of legal liability was raised. After a meeting in executive session, Gaztanaga moved to amend the resolution to read
"Whereas, Harry Browne acted to and did finally achieve the nomination by the Libertarian Party for President of the United States in 1996;
"Whereas, Mr. Browne contracted for the services of the National Director Perry Willis at that time for purposes of this campaign and against LNC policy; Whereas, it appears from the evidence submitted to this Committee that when said violation of policy was made public in late 1995, Mr. Browne then may have cooperated with Mr. Willis to hide further such violations by funneling further contracts with Mr. Willis through Jack Dean's company;
"Whereas, when asked to respond to inquiries by our Chair for purposes of investigating this matter, Mr. Browne refused to cooperate with said investigation;
"It is ordered that Harry Browne and Jack Dean are hereby admonished for their participation in aiding Mr. Willis to violate LNC policy and willfully seeking to impede said investigation, and
"Call upon Mr. Browne, fellow campaign staff and committee members Sharon Ayers, David Bergland, Michael Cloud, and contractor Jack Dean to publicly denounce this violation of LNC policy by Perry Willis and specifically his declaring "the best interests of the LP" as justification for the violation."
Givot noted two choices, namely saying that 'we do not like this conduct' (for which the amendment sufficed) or alternatively making a strong statement by considering 'not doing business with these people until they respond to the Chair's inquiry to the satisfaction of the Committee'.
The amendment passed on a voice vote. The main motion passed 10-6, with Dehn, Dixon, Gaztanaga, Givot, Kaneshiki, Karlan, Milsted, Nelson, Scherrey and Turney in favor, Bisson, Hoch, Israel, Lieberman, Martin, and Rutherford against, and Lark abstaining.
The LNC then moved on to other business.