Talk:UMP
From Libertarian Wiki
There is no description of UMP II on this page. As I have now been apprised of the details of UMP II, I can provide the following information, but as it is not official, I wasn't sure if I should add it to the main page. I am not familiar with the exact history of UMP II, who came up with it or why it was proposed, I will only describe how it is being implemented in California.
Under UMP II, the total amount of a member's annual donations to the LNC are not split with the state affiliate. Instead, the LNC splits only the basic minimum $25 dues with the state in accordance with how long that member continues to pay dues and retain their membership. During the first year of a new membership, the $25 dues are split with 75% being retained by the LNC, and only 25% of the dues are forwarded on to the state. If the member renews their membership, then the split is reversed for as long as they remain a member in good standing, and the LNC then forwards 75% of the dues to the state and retains only 25%. This means that during the first 12 months of a new membership, the LNC forwards $0.50 a month to the state where the new member resides. If the member renews their membership, then for the next 12 months (and for every year afterward that the membership is renewed), the LNC forwards $1.50 per month to the state where the member lives. Any additional donations paid by the member beyond the basic $25 dues are retained by the LNC. [67.180.40.246] added this comment
I thought, at least here in California, that under UMP the first years split depended on whether the state or national recruited the member. I am looking into it. Paul Studier 15:25, 8 May 2005 (PDT)
From an old email. Remember, this is California and other states may have a different deal:
From: Daniel Wiener <wiener@zerocall.com>
To: Long distribution list deleted
Subject: Re: Resolution for LPC to withdraw from UMP
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 17:33:06 -0800
Under UMP II, which has been in place for less than a year, whoever recruits a new member (be it the national LP, the state LP, or local regions) receives most of the membership dues for the first year ($18 out of a $25 basic membership, and a much larger percentage for higher membership categories). This finally creates some realistic financial incentives to encourage membership recruitment. It is now feasible for the state party to undertake recruitment projects which previously couldn't possibly have penciled out. Similarly, regions can now recruit new members and keep most of the money. Since members still receive the national and state newsletters (an expense not born by the regions), active regions which add members will be better off financially than if they were entirely independent. The same logic applies to the state party when it adds new members.
If anyone can find a definitive contract, please let us know. Paul Studier 15:38, 8 May 2005 (PDT)
Finally, [1], report of the LNC meeting for March, 2003 in LP News. No longer available online, this is a google cache and might not last very long. Paul Studier 16:04, 8 May 2005 (PDT)
