A Better National Committee?

My second governance reform is speculative. It might be inferior to what the LP has today.

Currently, the LP elects part of its central committee (the LNC) as at large representatives of the national convention and part of the committee as regional representatives, representing clusters of state parties. This provides a committee with nationally known internal celebrities as well as activists who are known to their respective states. All well and good.

A problem I saw when I was on the LNC was that it was too big. 17 members results in each member averaging 3.5 minutes/hour of speaking time. Figure in time used for voting and parliamentary wrangling and the real figure drops to less than 3 minutes.

More people on the committee results in more skills on the board and more factions represented, but it also results in clumsiness of operation.

One possibility would be to split the board into two boards.

Operations board. This board would see to the finances, database management, FEC compliance, materials distribution, and intra-party governance. This board is a good place for regional representatives, who represent the state parties.

Political board. This board would oversee the actual politics done by the national committee. Literature, outreach programs, press releases, etc. would be governed by this board. This is a good place for LP celebrities, such as former prominent candidates, and authors of libertarian books.

The executive committee members could sit on both boards to provide connectivity, as well as rule on which issues go to which committee.

There would be tricky details to work out, such as which issues go where. It may be necessary to form a committee of the whole to work out budget issues. Perhaps even the executive committee should divide. I’d put the Chair on the political board and the Vice Chair on the operations board. (Party Chair is the position that the party would show to the world, and the political board could act as a shadow cabinet.) It might be optimal to have both boards meet at the same time in separate rooms and then form together near the end of a weekend meeting.

Note that the political board I have in mind is not the same thing as the old publications review committee that the LNC used to appoint. I would give such a board more positive powers beyond making sure all the literature conformed to the platform. Instead of the platform being comprehensive, with all literature referencing the platform, the elected political committee would be an “organic platform,” authorized to make statements as issues arose. The convention’s platform would be more on the order of general principles and resolutions.

Once again, do note that this idea is not entirely thought out. There are critical details to consider, and it might not be workable.

Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | Next

Copyright 2007, Carl S. Milsted, Jr. All rights reserved.