AAPG Site Search | Home > Leadership > House of Delegates > The Delegates' Voice FEB 2001
|
The Delegates' Voice Newsletter for the House of Delegates of AAPG |
FEBRUARY, 2001 | |
Chairman’s Cornerby Lowell Lischer I have now had the opportunity to meet and speak with delegates at Delegate Breakfasts at the Rocky Mountain Section (28 attendees), Eastern Section (36 attendees) and GCAGS meetings (96 attendees). It was great to have this opportunity to not only address the delegates and other attendees, but to be able to put more faces with names. I thank all of you who have attended so far and certainly want to encourage delegates to attend the Southwest Section meeting in March and Pacific Section in April. I am also working to establish meetings with larger delegations or large gatherings of delegates starting in January. This too will not only give me the added benefit of meeting more of you, but more important to discuss the issues we face this year and answer your questions. Most of this will have been handled through direct telephone contacts or on the Forum. But, there is still time if we need to set up a meeting with your delegation. Please contact me if we need to set up a meeting. At the various breakfast meetings, just as in my last “Chairman’s Corner” I have stressed the importance of being an informed delegate. There is a lot of new information to be digested just in this issue of The Delegates’ Voice and more and more information is appearing on the Forum weekly all the time. I do not feel it can be over-emphasized that if we are going to keep the Denver meeting on task and as brief as humanly possible, it is going to take an effort by all of us to be prepared. ühis issue contains the opinions of the House leadership, Executive Committee, and Advisory Council regarding the matter of COCBAP3. It was important to the deliberations by the House of Delegates that we had some comprehension of how each of these bodies of the AAPG felt regarding this issue. This information does not eliminate the issue of COCBAP3 from our consideration in the House nor does it make the decision for us. What it does do is to ensure all of the delegates have a clear comprehension of the opinion of the three bodies affected by the issue. It should not be necessary to question or debate their positions on the matter as a result. More importantly than how it will serve to alleviate confusion or shorten our meeting in Denver, is what having this cooperative effort means. Certainly there have been points of friction among the three entities over the past several years. I need not dwell on that. What we have in the rendering of the three opinions is a coordinated and cooperative effort by all three bodies to ensure understanding of a legislaNive issue. This is good for the Association and is good for the membership. The Chairman of the House of Dýlegates, as most of you know, serves not only as leader of the House, but on the AAPG Executive Committee as well. With the changes in recent history regarding the Advisory Council, not all of you may be aware that the House Chairman is also an “invited guest” (along with the AAPG President) at all Advisory Council meetings, too. Simply put, this means I had the opportunity to be involved with or observe the deliberations of all three bodies on the matter of COCBAP3. In doing so, I can report that the matter was seriously addressed with comments made and questions asked. None of the three bodies looked at the issue or the question of their offering an opinion in quite the same way. But, in their differences in addressing the issue, the issue recived fair consideration. Best of all was the willingness of the Executive Committee and the Advisory Council to work with the House leadership on this matter. I am genuinely appreciative of their cooperation and I want to extend my thanks to each and every one of the members of the EC and AC for their efforts on the issue of COCBAP3. I ask that each of you, the delegates, take a moment to thank your AC representative or a member of the EC for their assistance. This cooperation I suspect will have gone a long way towards keeping the Denver meeting from getting any longer and probably more peaceful as well. Thanks, members of the Executive Committee and Advisory Council! We have a full slate for Denver. Some of the matters for consideration are still being reviewed, modified and deliberated upon within the Executive Committee and various House committees. Stay tuned to the Forum for updates on these and let other delegates and members know what is coming up. Also, we solicit your comments on the Forum. It is not our intent for the delegates to do the work for those on the committees, but your questions and comments can help the committees add clarity to their explanation of the issues as they prepare you to consider each issue. If I can
be of assistance, answer a question, field a complaint, or help
find an answer, (and, I accept just plain comments, too…How are
we doing?) please let me know. You can reach me at Chairman-elect's Corner return to topby Ed Dolly MEMBER VOTING HABITS I broached the topic of Delegates’ voting habits in my last column, emphasizing our duty to vote on behalf of the AAPG members we represent — on each issue brought before us as Delegates. I received close to two dozen e-mail responses from fellow Delegates in agreement with that premise. No one who responded disagreed. Whether or not a higher percentage of Delegates will vote next time around remains to be seen. In this issue, I’d like to expand on the subject of voting by focusing on a different aspect of it. Neither the AAPG Constitution nor its Bylaws contain any provision regarding a minimum number of votes required to constitute valid election results on any issue brought before the general membership of the organization. Therefore, technically only ONE vote need be cast on any ballot! One vote is not very representative of our 20,000± voting-eligible members, is it? Yes, of course ýhat is an exaggeration. However, should there be a minimum number of votes required to ensure outcome for the greater good of the membership? If so, what number should that be? Or should we simply allow the one person who went out of his or her way to vote make the decisions for those who failed to exercise their right and responsibility to vote? rhis year there is the potential for a proposed Constitutional Amendment to go before the general membership for decision. In order to pass, a two-thirds (2/3) majority vote of the members responding by mail ballot is required. What number of votes do you consider to be the minimum necessary to ensure the majority of the AAPG membership is represented fairly in that or any other election? Keep in mind that the organization is comprised of 20,000 ± voting members and approximately 9,000 non-voting members, associates and students, etc. Do you feel that some minimum number of votes should be required, and if so what number would be appropriate? Or do you feel we should leave the situation as it is and let only those who care to respond speak for AAPG in general elections, even if that leans that only a few make the decisions, whether electing officers or amending the Constitution or Bylaws? I have placed a brief survey regarding this topic on the Delegates’ Forum, as your HOD officers (Lowell, Sandi and I) would like to hear your views on the subject. Leave well enough alone or set a minimum number of votes required to be representative of the members on any ballot issue? The Delegates’ Forum web address is: http//www.aapg/house_of_delegates/ Secretary-Editor’s Corner return to topby Sandi Barber Who is Visiting the Forum? The use of the HOD Forum has increased over the past few months. More of the House committees are using it to communicate directly to the delegates, without waiting for The Delegates’ Voice. And more delegates are visiting the Forum, reading the postings. Several posted messages have been read 100 to 120 times, presumably by different people. If only delegates are visiting, that represents 40% to 50% of the House. There have been few threaded discussions to any of the postings. Evidently none of the information inspired any discussions. Messages are automatically deleted after 60 days. We will re-post important messages after their expiration. If you believe you have missed a posting of interest to you (from content of other postings or comments from delegates), please post a request for information. We, your officers, are only able to see how many people “hit” (i.e., read) each message posted. However, we do not know whom we are reaching through the Forum. Through individuals’ comments to us, we know that several of our international delegates have found the Forum extremely beneficial. But there is no tracking on the Forum that allows us to see whom we are reaching. Since the Forum is open to anyone, we do not know how effective the Forum is in increasing communication to and among the delegates. Therefore, we ask that you let us know if you are visiting the Forum. Please contact Lowell Lischer, Ed Dolly, or me, by e-mail, letter, or phone. This information will assist us in determining the future direction of the Forum. |
In this issue …Constitution and Bylaws Committee Officers Columns: Committee
Reports: Important
Dates: Facts:
|
|
Files with the .PDF suffix represent Portable Document Format files, viewable using an Adobe Acrobat¨ Reader software. Adobe offers a free run-time license to users, the software can be downloaded at the Adobe Web site. |