Home General Oral Argument Set in Reform Party Battle over National Party Officers
formats

Oral Argument Set in Reform Party Battle over National Party Officers

Published on November 9, 2009, by in General.

A U.S. District Court in Long Island, New York, will hear oral arguments in MacKay v Crews, 2:09-cv-02218, on December 4, 2009, Friday, at 11 a.m. The Judge is Joseph F. Bianco, and the courthouse is in Central Islip, New York. This case had originally been filed in state court in New York, but was transferred to federal court earlier this year.

The case originated after a state court in Texas had taken jurisdiction of the national Reform Party’s matters and called a special national convention to settle who the proper officers were. That convention was supervised by a court-appointed special master. It resulted in the election of David Collison as the new national chair. Afterwards, people in the Reform Party who were dissatisfied with that filed a new lawsuit in New York state. The first-named Defendant in the New York case is Kay Crews, who is not a member of the Reform Party but who had been appointed by the Texas court to oversee the national convention.

13 Responses

  1. i really never got this whole conflict. why are they fighting over a party that generally doesnt even exist anymore.

  2. Richard

    Last year the Reform Party name was fought over because Frank MacKay was helping John McCain in the presidential election. He sent out a press release saying the Reform Party endorsed John McCain.

  3. BuckeyeKned

    what a waste of time and money. Sounds like egos gone wild. “Legends in their own minds”. Glad they are not in the Libertarian Party, we have our own issues.

  4. Pray, and pray diligently. For example Fascist Zionists John Blare, John Coffey, John Bambey and Valli Sharpe Giesler conspired to the premeditated destruction of the Reform Party USA national email blog and the monthly print house organ. Why, because the publisher [Don Lake] and the rest of the editorial staff wished to include an oft told tale of the Israeli attack on the non combatant USS Liberty.

    Frank MacKay’s authority [moral ethical structurally] ???? A personal check [bribe ????] for $500 was given to Bambey in Sacramento [California]. Semi automatically, MacKay became “Reform Party CEO” [a non existent office, manufactured on the spot for his payment]!

    Yes the Libs, Bible Thumping [so called] Constitutionalists, Greens have their own specific set of problems. But the out right corruption and dysfunction of the American Reform Party, the Frank MacKay [so called] Independent Greens and Independent Parties, and miscellaneous [so called] reformists is the sad, sad poster portrait of the one time [Perot, almost 20%, P1992] votal and vibrant protest serge.

  5. ETJB

    The Reform Party had a nice name and good potential early on of being a serious centrist third party but fell victim to the right-wing, quasi-fascist populism of the Buchanan Brigade.

    Now, I doubt very much that anyone is going to take the party seriously….unless it spends lots of time and money gettings its house in order and looking to be a socially liberal/fiscally responsible centrist party,

  6. Outside of Perot’s millions and Ventura’s name recognition the Reform Party was no more successful than other third parties. Unfortunately to be successful at the nation level the way that the laws and media are you almost need to be a billionaire. More local candidates can do it on name recognition without as much money but too often it is not about policy.

  7. The Reform Party had other successes. In 1996 it won ballot access cases against Arkansas, Maine and Ohio, which caused an improvement in ballot access laws in those states. It had state legislators in California and North Carolina (they switched their party registration to Reform and tried to get elected in the next election as Reform Party nominees, but they lost, but at least the Reform Party had a handful of state legislators for a while). The Florida Reform Party won a surprising victory in federal court in 2006 to get its gubernatorial nominee into a televised debate with the two major party candidates. And by qualifying for general election funding in 2000, it became the first party (other than the Democratic and Republican Parties) to experience that largess. It also met the vote test for ongoing party status in states that no other minor party had met in decades, such as Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Virginia (in 1994), and Washington.

  8. ETJB

    Um, yeah “Zionist (read: Jewish) conspiracy theories are just what I was talking about. The Pat Buchanan faction took over the party and drove it redefiend it into a right-wing populist party that was going to go after a laundry list of people for being different or belonging to a minority. Beyond the fact that the party’s platform and philosophy went from being fairly centrist, to trying to dig up Hitler…

    Yeah, the party had some success stories and some potential.

    If you want to blame anyone for its downfall look at Ross Perot who managed to micromanage the party down to the needle in a haystack and then pretty much lost interest.

    Or former Republican Pat Buchanan who helped to kill a party that was blamed (rightly or wrongly) for helping elect and relect Clinton.

    Jesse Ventura and the Independence Party washed their hands of the Reform Party when Pat became involved with it.

    Donald Trump and Hulk Hogan were rumored to consider presidential runs under the party’s label but they would have also been centrist-socially liberal/fiscally responsible candidates and lost interest when the party took a nose dive.

    Frankly, John H (Natural Law Party) was probably the only thing that could have saved the party and maybe even built a broad based independent coalition.

    Yes, we was a but odd and probably a bit dishonest but he would have been better for the party then where it went to.

  9. Since 2002, the Reform Party has been working specifically to emphasize our stances of fiscal conservatism, reduced foreign interventionism, and social neutrality (if not actual moderation).

    Politics is, in large part, about two things: fundraising ability and brand recognition. People vote for GOP and DEM often not because of the candidate’s specific stances, but because they associate the candidate with the brand, and the brand with an ideology.

    Given the right political climate and a concentrated fundraising effort, you could easily see a resurgence in the Reform Party based on past brand recognition.

    My job, whether I want it or not, is to build and maintain a structure for that possibility.

    David Collison
    RPUSA Chairman
    Elected Dallas 2008 Court-ordered Convention

  10. Well Dave, speak up on corruption then! Blood spurting from my nose trying to keep order in tele conferences. The USS Liberty mess. Frank MacKay’s $500 bribe to Bambey and Blare.

    Brand names don’t do a lot of good in the middle of poison pills and ethical scandals ……….

    Sounds like you are going to do rebuilding with out much ‘heavy lifting’. If the reform movement does not provide a necessary service to society then it does not deserve to exist!

  11. Jeffrey McCloskey

    It continues to amaze me to this day the people who insist on blaming Ross Perot for “micromanaging” things. I guess comforting excuses are hard to let go of. The reality? Ross Perot stepped back from the Reform Party after his 1996 Presidential run guaranteed the party both convention and candidate funding for the 2000 Presidential Election, and turned it over to us. WE then proceeded to self destruct.

    From 1997 on, the party was filled with political novices who knew nothing about party building, but who thought they knew it all. They thought they could hold a national convention, adopt a platform, then sit back and be carried into office by the public because “we’re right”. Then when the public didn’t automatically vote us into every office in the land, party members started pointing fingers and seeing conspiracies everywhere, the infighting started, and the great plunge into the abyss began.

    It’s not hopeless, the true reality is the average voter has no clue who the Reform Party even is, and the same probably holds true for most of the minor parties out there. So to say our reputation is forever ruined is a far stretch, to say the least. We need to get the house in order, get rid of those who just want to sit around and fight amongst ourselves, and then get out there and start selling what we believe in.

  12. Jeffrey McCloskey

    OK, the suit. Back in 2005, a small group decided to hold a convention in Yuma, AZ. It’s believed about a dozen attended. This was in opposition to the much larger National Convention held earlier in the year in Tampa, FL.

    Last year, several Reform Party state parties filed suit, claiming the Yuma convention was improperly called, since several state parties were unilaterally declared “disaffiliated” in the absence of a convention, which is the only body that can do so. The states received NO notice that the convention was taking place, also in violation of the party rules.

    An offer was put forth to the Yuma group to call all this off if everyone would just get together, hold a joint convention to elect new officers, and move on. The Yuma group refused. The judge in Texas agreed a joint convention was required, and ordered one to be held. The Yuma group boycotted that one as well, everyone else showed up. The judge then ruled convention valid, and David Collison the properly elected chairman.

    AFTER the convention was ordered, Frank MacKay, of the NY IP, filed a suit supposedly on behalf of the RPUSA, trying to get a NY state court to effectively overrule a Texas state court, something they can’t do. How’d they get away with it? They told the NY court nothing was pending in Federal Court on the matter, but failed to mention the order from NY. The NY judge issued an emergency, ex parte injunction, without notice to any of the defendants, and it’s been in effect ever since without a single hearing.

    Just a few months ago, the plaintiffs ( NY IP, etc) FINALLY got around to providing a complaint for a case initiated a good YEAR AGO, and the defendants immediately moved the case to Federal Court. The hearing in December is on a motion to dismiss the suit, based on the simple premise that the Texas court already adjudicated the case, the verdict is no longer appealable, and the NY courts never had jurisdiction to begin with. In short, it’s an effort to FINALLY bring the suits to an end, and let actual party building finally move to the forefront.

  13. “The judge in Texas agreed a joint convention was required, and ordered one to be held. The Yuma group boycotted that one as well, everyone else showed up”

    ********* FALSE, I personally, as the national print house organ publisher, did not get an invite or notification! Others were in a similar situation! This was even tho I had made formal complaints against Blare and others for misconduct. The FLorida, Texas, Mississippi cabal purposely set information on limited list serves and blogs —– Not that John Blare and the Californians did not do the same thing earlier! In Texas various folks left early including the entire FLorida delegation.

    *********** Frank MacKay’s legal lawful part in all this ?????? Not much if any ………..

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Protected with SiteGuarding.com Antivirus