Craig,
>What I still find puzzling, however, is that Ernie has always claimed that
>the point of these lawsuits, from his point of view, was to obtain a judicial
>determination that the ALP did not have to follow the election laws. Now,
>at least according to Mr. Aversive, the ALP has done an 180 degree about
>face and is more than willing to follow those laws. Anyone know what the
>explanation is for this?
They are not "more than willing" to follow those laws. My impression is that they are changing their tune because they no longer think they can win a constitutional challenge, and they have thought of a way they can just barely live with the laws. I have not corresponded with Ernie Hancock in some weeks, so I don't know about his personal views, but the people I am talking to on the ALP side are calling it "a bitter pill to swallow." What they are now apparently willing to do is form a statutory organization that obeys the law and does the bare minimum requirements of the state, but keep the real power, money, voice, etc. of the party remaining in a totally private organization. In essence, they now appear prepared to obey the letter of the law without obeying the spirit of it.
--Jason Auvenshine
MailCity. Secure Email Anywhere, Anytime!
http://www.mailcity.com