Libertarians File Connecticut Ballot Access Lawsuit

On October 1, the Connecticut Libertarian Party filed a federal lawsuit to get Bob Barr on the ballot. Libertarian Party of Connecticut v Bysiewicz, 3:08cv-1513. The case is assigned to Judge Janet Hall, a Clinton appointee.

The state believes that the Libertarian presidential petition was 280 signatures short, but Libertarian volunteers have found 209 signatures that were erroneously invalidated. The volunteers haven’t finished re-checking all of the rejected signatures. The lawsuit evidence will include evidence of the revalidation work performed so far. The party also believes that while the petition sheets were in the custody of elections officials, 116 petition sheets were lost.


Comments

Libertarians File Connecticut Ballot Access Lawsuit — No Comments

  1. If this petition drive had not been grossly mismanaged the LP of Connecticut would have obtained more signatures and this would not even be an issue right now.

  2. The Green Party failed to get on in Connecticut. The Constitution Party failed to get on in Connecticut. There is something wrong with Connecticut’s procedures. It’s time to stop blaming the victims and start blaming the government of Connecticut. It costs the taxpayers more money to count write-in votes than to count votes for candidates listed on the ballot.

  3. The Constitution Party did not even really try to get on the ballot in Connecticut. Neither did the Green Party.

    The Libertarian Party had the money and the manpower to get on the ballot in Connecticut. The REAL reason that the LP drive failed in Connecticut was due to LP Political Directory Sean Haugh mismanaging the drive. There were two long-time Libertarian petitioners who were in place and ready to go into Connecticut to work, and Sean Haugh blocked them from working there over some petty, meaningless bullshit.

    The two Libertarian petitioners were Jake Witmer and Gary Fincher. Jake was about to depart from West Virginia to Connecticut but as he was about to leave Sean Haugh blocked him from working there. Why? Because Jake had responded to a personal attack from Shane Cory. Gary Fincher was gathering signatures for the Constitution Party in another New England state. I personally informed LP National on several occassions that Gary Fincher was in New England andwas ready, willing, and able to work LP ballot access in Connecticut, Maine, and/or Rhode Island if only they would call him. They never did. Why? Because Gary complained about not getting paid for almost a year on money owed from an LP ballot access drive in Nebraska.

    There were other Libertarian petitioners who could have bailed out the Connecticut drive as well.

    Instead of bringing in actual proven Libertarian petitioners, Haugh chose to use mercenaries (ie-NON-Libertarians who are only out to make a buck) who got bad validity and caused the drive to fail. Suprise, suprise…

    The ballot access failures this year in Connecticut, Maine, West Virginia, and DC were all due to mismanagement and could have been overcome if not for the fact that jerks were running the show.

  4. The Constitution Party in CT did make a real effort. First we had some paper work issues that may have been overlooked had we been Joe Lieberman. This pushed backed when we could start. Second we did have paid petitioners. The party pulled them when we determined that we would not make it even with thier help.
    One of the paid people Lenny was also going to work for the LP but could not figure out what they were doing because of internal conflict over putting Barr on the ballot. He also said that the LP had failed to pay him before. He is a LP member also.

  5. I am the Ballot Access Coordinator for the LPCT. I don’t know who this ‘Andy’ is above. I am aware of the accusations of mismanagement and specifically over Jake Witmer and Gary Fincher. I don’t want to get involved with that argument, whatever merit it may or may not have.

    But, I will tell you that it is a GROSS OVER SIMPLIFICATION of the problems and challenges we had for this entire process to blame it all on a falling out over a few petitioners. There were tons of things that went wrong in multiple places here in Connecticut. If we played the cuda-wuda-shuda game we would have barely handed in any signatures to SOTS.

    The fact is that 4 years ago, we handed in fewer than 11,000 signatures; this time we handed in over 12,900. It was a close call to decide to bring in more petitioners to Connecticut. Frankly, we pulled in more signatures than we planned on. The same thing happened to Christina Tobin, the ballot access coordinator to the Nader Campaign. Her goal was 15,000 for Nader because Nader is a target, and they wanted to have extra insurance. I was there the night before the deadline when someone brought in a couple thousand more signatures that someone stuck under his pillow, much to the chagrin of Christina’s. There is something to be said for submitting too many signatures, and putting your resources too thin in other parts of the country. This costs money folks.

  6. “citizen1 Says:
    October 2nd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
    The Constitution Party in CT did make a real effort. First we had some paper work issues that may have been overlooked had we been Joe Lieberman. This pushed backed when we could start. Second we did have paid petitioners. The party pulled them when we determined that we would not make it even with thier help.”

    I spoke to Allison Potter (national ballot access coordinator for the Constitution Party) and she told me that the Constitution Party decided to throw in the towel in Connecticut because they didn’t think that they were going to make it and they could use the resources that were going there elsewhere.

  7. Richard is correct that Connecticut is a problem because the town clerks make no effort to “find” the signers in their records when verifying signatures.

    But, guess what folks, we know this little detail. It’s been that way for at least 3 decades.

    So, we need to gather more signatures.

    Andrew Rule is wrong to just say that we handed in 11,000 three years ago and 12,900 this time so we should have made it.

    We know that a sincere, qualified, experienced LP petitioner can get 70% to 80% validity at the same location that an ordinary mercinary will get only 40% to 50% validity. And you have the occasional part-time forger who is a mercinary and will mix bad with good and come in with 20% validity.

    It also matters as to which city and town your signatures are from. Even the best petitioners will be lucky to break 50% in Hartford.

    Result. You have to look at who collected and where. The CT LP needs to plan on no more than 40% valid from Hartford and no more than 60% valid elsewhere.

    Looking at these facts this year, my recommendation was for 14,000 sigs to guarantee success. It is the national ballot drive manager for the Barr campaign who failed on these.

    Andy’s comment is 100% correct:

    “The ballot access failures this year in Connecticut, Maine, West Virginia, and DC were all due to mismanagement and could have been overcome if not for the fact that jerks were running the show.”

    The National Barr coordinators of these efforts have failed and should not be allowed to manage future LP ballot drives anywhere.

  8. “Andrew Rule Says:
    October 2nd, 2008 at 4:36 pm
    I am the Ballot Access Coordinator for the LPCT. I don’t know who this ‘Andy’ is above.”

    I believe that I met you back in the fall of 2001 in Massachusetts at Carla Howell’s house during the first End the Massachusetts State Income Tax petition drive.

    “I am aware of the accusations of mismanagement and specifically over Jake Witmer and Gary Fincher. I don’t want to get involved with that argument, whatever merit it may or may not have.”

    Gary and Jake are two of the best and most expierenced petitioners that the Libertarian Party has. Both of them, or even one of them, could have EASILY been the difference maker in the Connecticut ballot access drive. The fact that Sean Haugh blocked them from working for no legitimate reason lead to the Connecticut petition drive failing.

    “But, I will tell you that it is a GROSS OVER SIMPLIFICATION of the problems and challenges we had for this entire process to blame it all on a falling out over a few petitioners.”

    How is this a gross over simplification? Gary and/or Jake could have easily collected the 280 valid signature s that the Connecticut LP fell short of obtaining and they could have done this in 1-3 days, probably one day. If they had simply not been blocked from working the Libertarian Party would be on the ballot in Connecticut right now.

    “The fact is that 4 years ago, we handed in fewer than 11,000 signatures; this time we handed in over 12,900.”

    4 years ago Gary Fincher and Jake Witmer worked on the LP ballot access drive in Connecticut.

    “It was a close call to decide to bring in more petitioners to Connecticut. Frankly, we pulled in more signatures than we planned on.”

    And most of, or maybe even all of, those petitioners were mercenaries (as in NON-Libertarians who are just out to make a buck) who tend to get lower validty than Libertarian petitioning pros like Gary and Jake.

    “The same thing happened to Christina Tobin, the ballot access coordinator to the Nader Campaign. Her goal was 15,000 for Nader because Nader is a target, and they wanted to have extra insurance. I was there the night before the deadline when someone brought in a couple thousand more signatures that someone stuck under his pillow, much to the chagrin of Christina’s. There is something to be said for submitting too many signatures, and putting your resources too thin in other parts of the country. This costs money folks.”

    The Nader campaign is notorious for hiring mercenary petitioners who get crap validity, the same type of people whom Sean Haugh likes to hire for the LP (incidentily, the LP is lucky that their signatures didn’t get challenged in some states this year).

    Paul, Mark, and I, and then later Jake, worked on the Constitution Party ballot access drive in Alabama. We collected all of the signatures and we qualified the Constitution Party for the ballot with LESS signatures than it took the Nader campaign and the Libertarian Party to get on the ballot in Alabama.

    All petition circulators are not equal. Some do a better job than others. Block quality petitioners like Gary and Jake from working and replace them with mercs and bums and don’t be suprised when your ballot drive fails.

  9. “’The fact is that 4 years ago, we handed in fewer than 11,000 signatures; this time we handed in over 12,900.’”

    “4 years ago Gary Fincher and Jake Witmer worked on the LP ballot access drive in Connecticut.”

    And this was exactly my point as well.

    Listen to experience.

    It’s time to build a serious, professional, winning LP.

  10. Hey Andy, again I will say that if we got stuck on the cuda-woda-shuda game, this drive would have failed so badly that it would have been clear that if Gary and Jake were here, it would have made no difference at all.

    I will hand it to you that when Gary and Jake (I know Jake better, and call him sometimes) are great petitioners, and they did good work here in 2004. But, that doesn’t matter. There were soooooo many more problems than just us missing out on Gary and Jake being here.

    I don’t want to get into the problems that we faced here. Part of the reason is that we overcame them and we moved on. It would take all day to list the problems that any one of which has more merit on the reason why we are in this problem right now as missing out on Gary’s and Jake’s help! Another reason is that I don’t want to air dirty laundry in public, or even come close to seeming that way, whether it is about LNC, Barr Campaign, Haugh, me, LPCT, other petitioners or even SOTS.

    Again, there are/were dozens of other problems that have/had more impact on why we are having problems right now than missing out on Gary’s and Jake’s help here in Connecticut; And those reason come from many different people and places.

  11. “citizen1 Says:
    October 3rd, 2008 at 1:26 am
    Andy
    Isn’t that what I said?”

    I suppose that we have a different definition of what a real effort is.

  12. “Paul, Mark, and I, and then later Jake, worked on the Constitution Party ballot access drive in Alabama.”

    Oh yeah, we also got a little bit of help from Christy near the end.

  13. #11

    If you had overcome the problems and moved on, like you said, you wouldn’t have failed in CT.

    It is important to do the “would of, could of, should of, analysis so that we don’t make the same mistakes in the future and fail again.

    But, since we have also succeeded in the past, we should also look at what works versus what fails.

    And this year, we can look at four petitioning failures and one paperwork failure all of which eminate from the same source. So, a little investigation to ferret out the individuals involve and exclude them in the future is warranted.

    There are standard ballot drive management methods, tools and techniques which are known and were not utilized.

    We cannot afford these failures.

  14. #14

    Obviously in the context of the discussion what is meant is that we got this far in Connecticut, that we should have failed given what all the challenges are/were, but we held in there anyway.

    Also, we haven’t fully failed yet. SOTS misplacing 126 petition sheets, among other things, doesn’t help. We have a case in court. There were problems on our part, that is true. If our effort was more over the top, we wouldn’t have this problem right now. I will agree with all of you on that. But, we did the best we could with what we had at the time we had it.

    I firmly agree with you that we should look back at what our failures were and what to do about it next time. That probably is the greatest motivating factor for me to respond in this discussion in emphasizing that the greatest reason(s) for our ‘failure’ up to this point isn’t because Gary and Jake were not here. There were a lot of other problems that were much more important. Some of them we can control and some of them we can not.

    If you want to discuss the problems, come to our SCC meetings, or contact me. I am not going to go over much of them here.

  15. The failure in CT is a nationwide problem and not just a CT problem. We shouldn’t isolate it’s discussion:

    Here is an example:

    1. Why didn’t you photocopy the petition sheets before filing?

    Should photocopying petitions before filing be S.O.P. for ballot drives?

    2. Several professional, proven, quality, experienced, dedicated LP member, hard working petitioners were available to go to Connecticut and petition. They could have been hired first and brought in before others who were hired.

    It is a known, proven fact that professional LP petitioners get much higher validity than mercenaries and local non-LP newbie petitioners.

    National LP or CTLP or the Barr or somebody campaign hired other petitioners.

    Why didn’t they hire the best availaable? Why didn’t they hire proven LP petitioners who were available?

    3. When managing a ballot drive, there are coordinator techniques to determine the quality of signatures being produced so as to determine probable validity prior to filing and to maximize the potential of success and minimize cost.

    Why were such techniques not employed?

    Do any of the 2008 Barr for President campaign staff actually have the training an experience to perform the tasks expected?

    Since the answer is apparently – NO! Why were they hired to begin with?

    You see.

    These things need to be discussed in a National forum.

    Have some courage.

    Spill the beans.

  16. “Another reason is that I don’t want to air dirty laundry in public, or even come close to seeming that way, whether it is about LNC, Barr Campaign, Haugh, me, LPCT, other petitioners or even SOTS.”

    I think that in this case, the dirty laundry NEEDS to be aired in public so that the people in managment who are responsible for causing these ballot access fiascos are removed and these mistakes don’t happen again in the future.

    The only state where the LP has any excuse for failing this year is Oklahoma due to the high volume of signatures needed in that state (although even this could have been possible if the LNC had made obtaining ballot status there a priority and if the drive had been started early (like say in 2007). There is NO EXCUSE for the failures this year in West Virginia, Maine, Connecticut, Washington DC, and Louisiana.

  17. “National LP or CTLP or the Barr or somebody campaign hired other petitioners.”

    The only ballot drive that the Barr campaign had direct involvement in running was the fiasco in West Virginia. The failure in Connecticut was because of LP National, mostly Sean Haugh.

  18. So, if Haugh was responsible for CT:
    QUESTIONS:
    1)Why not photocopy petitions before filing?

    2)Why not hire the best, trained, experienced, tested and proven, dedicated, loyal LP member petitioners, who were available and ready to go?
    Why not hire these people first?

    3)What is Haugh’s training and experience in ballot drives? How many failures has he generated?

  19. Andrew Rule says: “Hey Andy, again I will say that if we got stuck on the cuda-woda-shuda game, this drive would have failed so badly that it would have been clear that if Gary and Jake were here, it would have made no difference at all. ”

    This is an obvious misstatement, if it’s indeed true that the LPCT was only 280 signatures short. I could have done that in ONE DAY. Regardless of other variables, then, I would have been the difference-maker, had I been there for even one day. However, I wasn’t there, the primary reason being gross mismanagement by Sean Haugh (who is NOT a victim, by the way – PULEEAAZE spare me that slap-happy talk.

    Keep in mind that when Fincher petitions CT, CT succeeds in ballot access; when Fincher doesn’t petition CT, CT fails. Just go look at the scoresheet.

    No other cuda-wudas are necessary. Coach refused to play his star quarterback, so he lost the game. Period. End of discussion. Coach needs to be fired.

  20. “Keep in mind that when Fincher petitions CT, CT succeeds in ballot access; when Fincher doesn’t petition CT, CT fails. Just go look at the scoresheet.”

    The same could also be said of Maine, another state where the LP failed this year, and also another state where Fincher has lots of expierence petitioning in and was in place and available to go.

    “No other cuda-wudas are necessary. Coach refused to play his star quarterback, so he lost the game. Period. End of discussion. Coach needs to be fired.”

    You just hit the nail on the head.

  21. “The same could also be said of Maine,”

    Actually, there WAS a drive in Maine that got done without me: in 2000.

    The same cannot be said of Connecticut. In that state, if I’m not in the lineup, the LP fails, plain and simple (as long as I’ve been a player, this is strictly true). Sean should have known this and if he didn’t, it’s still no excuse.

    BTW, Coming Back to the LP, it’s NOT legal, in Massachusetts or anywhere, to make threats to conspire with someone to commit vandalism and fraud.

  22. Andrew Rule says, “There is something to be said for submitting too many signatures, and putting your resources too thin in other parts of the country.”

    LOL, not if you are shooting for low validity. With all apologies to the Oakland Raiders, the LPHQ now has a ‘Commitment to NonExcellence’. Consequently, if you’re going to hold that world view, and make a point to eschew the best quality in petitioning talent, you’ve got to face the facts that you’re going to need way more signatures to avoid failure. You just can’t eschew excellence and then proceed to expect results as if you haven’t.

    Does this even NEED explaining??

  23. “Hey Gary, give Jake a call before you shoot your mouth off anymore please.”

    No thank you. I’m quite capable of independent thought without consulting with someone with fewer years’ experience than I. What are you thinking???

  24. Within the extent of Gary’s knowledge, he is correct. I only slightly disagree because of some things Andy Rule told me in a phone conversation today. (And even then, most of what Gary says is definitely true.)

    That said,

    If the CT SOS maliciously threw out over 100 pages of LP signatures, then (and only then) it might not have mattered if I or Gary had gone to CT (for instance if the State simply “made certain” that they threw out or ‘invalidated’ enough signatures to invalidate our drive).

    I say “might” because perhaps they actually did lose exactly those pages, purely accidentally, in which case it appears that either my presence OR Gary’s would have certainly saved the CT drive (since we both always photocopy our petition sheets). I say _appears_, because Andy has assured me he has additional information about CT that has not yet come out, and that he is not at liberty to divulge with anyone other than Bill Redpath (a neutral and unbiased 3rd party), until after the election.

    However, that does nothing to ameliorate the seriousness of Sean Haugh’s use of his official title to interfere with the employment of high-performance, longtime LP petitioners (to cover up for Scott Kohlhaas’s 2006 instance of fraud in NE, documented here: http://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20070721.pdf see page 14 ).

    Nor does it excuse the unforgivable crime of failing to copy the petition sheets, as “Coming back to the LP” duly noted.

    Sean Haugh is one of the most deceiful, least competent people I have ever met in my life (I have to put him second to Russell Verney, but it’s neck and neck). Kohlhaas has the skill to run a ballot access drive without using Haugh as his expendable dirty work shield (with a fancy title), but apparently not the desire to, this year. 2008 is the “revenge” year for LP HQ hires, I guess.

    …Let’s hope they’ve gotten it out of their system. (For the sake of their future private sector employers.)

    The Arizona LP is now paying through the nose for Sean’s (and George Squyres’) dedication to blackballing me, by getting student “soft registrations” from Scott Kohlhaas (or someone else like him). (Because I’m pretty damn sure noone else will do what I did for them in 2005 in Williams, AZ, and I certainly am not going back there as long as George Squyres has any kind of leadership role in AZ. Nor as long as “thank you’s” from State Libertarian Parties mean less than nothing.)

    The LP (its image, reputation, and integrity) has been seriously tarnished by Sean Haugh. Not only have they lost ballot access in several “give me” States, they have lost their integrity by hiring Haugh, Verney, Dondero, Kohlhaas and Cory and a host of other mercenaries. Of those, only Kohlhaas has any significant competence (unfortunately he’s documented above as being willing to defraud and avoid those who work for him, rather than take a paycut or delayed pay himself).

    And they also lost out in terms of reputation: they hired lower-performing mercenaries over their own people.

    If Haugh (or Cory or Verney) stays hired with the LP, then the LP will rapidly cease to be seen as a credible and moral organization. It will instead be seen as “just another compromised political party” full of people kissing ass and leveraging seniority for pull.

    No doubt, this is what many people would like to see. No doubt, they are the enemies of liberty in America. They can only succeed if we fail to govern ourselves.

    I reject the possibility that petty criminals like Haugh will be able to destroy the LP. Instead, I belive that they will be sent on their way, sometime soon after the election, and that all “big L” Libertarians will be better off for the experience they gained in 2008, minus the actual destructive presences in question.

    If I’m wrong, the LP will rapidly follow the now defunct Reform Party in both form and function.

    There’s a fork in the road. “On and upward” or “down-and-out”?

    Note: I can outcompete Haugh, but I lack the authority to fire him.

    Best of luck to all libertarians in these trying times.

    In Tyranny (Looking Towards Liberty),

    Jake Witmer

  25. Thank you Jake for addressing Gary, and offering to give him my phone number. And, as you know, but I want to make publicly clear, I understand much of what you said above about people in national LP, among others, and I want to stay clear of it and take no sides on these issues that don’t deal with the LPCT (at this time anyway,(and if I did, only if everyone gets a fair hearing out of the facts)).

    Gary, I didn’t want you to take direction, or something like that from Jake; I wanted you to get my phone number from him for you to call me if you want to discuss some of the dynamics of what went on in Connecticut. If you are going to blame people for failures in Connecticut, you need to know the facts first, or you are going to look foolish.

    I tried to explain myself above (without going into detail), but it is clear you were not listening to what I tried to say. If you want to talk about it, call Jake for my phone number.

  26. Andy:

    If the figure I see is correct, I could have been the difference-maker, and it doesn’t matter what other variable is present, short of, as Jake says, the state’s deliberately meaning to destroy enough petition sheets as to make the LPCT fail (which I highly doubt; probably only Sean Haugh would deliberately mean to destroy perfectly good petitions).

    How is it that the LPCT made it other years I was working there? Ask Courtney Hough, Walt Thiessen and Rich Loomis. I worked CT every presidential year since I started petitioning, plus 1998, my streak stopping only this year.

  27. “Gary, I didn’t want you to take direction, or something like that from Jake; I wanted you to get my phone number from him for you to call me if you want to discuss some of the dynamics of what went on in Connecticut. If you are going to blame people for failures in Connecticut, you need to know the facts first, or you are going to look foolish.”

    What about the ballot access failures this year in Maine, Washington DC, West Virginia, and Louisiana? If the Libertarian Party had a decent, competent Political Director it would have achieved ballot status in these places and would be on the ballot in Connecticut as well.

  28. WOW! It is very hard to believe they did not make copies of the signature sheets! Is this standard practice? Were they trying to save ten dollars? That is really a joke! How incompetent can they be? Someone should definitely be fired for that!

  29. Anyone who wants a serious and motivated group of petitioners working on 2012 ballot access is encouraged to contribute financially at http://www.freedomballotaccess.org –As soon as we reach a high enough dollar amount, we will begin working. It won’t take much money, and we’ve already raised 1/40th of what it will take to place AL on the ballot at 1/3 the normal cost.

  30. I work on a lot of petition drives myself, when I was on the road working in Missouri I met a group of guys who were some of the best circulators. they were getting about 300 signatures a day with good validity on the Missouri civil rights petitions with blockers. it was pretty amazing to watch. they were from a company called national solutions. http://www.national-solutions.org. I hope I can work with those guys again soon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.