Note: This letter was received in early December, our first letter
for the 2001-2002 term! A reminder that there is always space
available in The Delegates' Voice (approximately 500 word
maximum, please) or on the Delegates' Forum to express your views.
Is the Current
Representation Undemocratic, Unequal or Unjust?
The proportional representation proposal for the Advisory Council,
mailed to members of the HoD and published in several society bulletins,
is essentially the same proposal that was defeated, nearly unanimously,
at the HoD annual meeting in Denver last June 3.
The AC is not a legislative body, as defined in the AAPG Bylaws,
Article V. ADVISORY COUNCIL. Section 1. Jurisdiction reads:
advisory function of this Association shall be vested in an Advisory
Council. The Council shall have no executive authority, but shall
report to the Executive Committee on all matters involving ethics
and discipline referred to it. The Council shall conduct long-range
planning and undertake the necessary studies and investigations
in connection therewith. It shall report to the Executive Committee
on all matters involving constitutional review referred to it.
The Council shall recommend to the Executive Committee nominations
for Association officers and also honors and awards, with the
exception of the Matson Award and the Jules Braunstein Memorial
Award. The Council shall review the organization of the Association
and the standing committee structure of the Association. It shall
also undertake any special projects wherein guidance is requested
by the Executive Committee.
of being legislative, the AC is an advisory group that recommends
officer candidates, honors and award candidates, matters for long
range planning and reports on ethical and disciplinary matters,
to the EC. The AC is comprised of knowledgeable representatives
from sections, regions, divisions, the HoD and past AAPG presidents.
The current AC alignment and composition was arrived upon through
the hard work of a number of well-respected AAPG members by means
of compromise just a few years ago. The author of the current proposal
was a part of that process and the compromise DID in fact acknowledge
the GCAGS size by giving it two (2) representatives on the AC while
every other Section and Region has only one (1). The process leading
to the current AC composition, voted on by the House of Delegates
and accepted, was democratic and deliberated upon fairly and equitably.
The current AC composition is fair, democratic and equal with each
entity within the AC having a voice in the processes for which the
AC has responsibility. No single entity has unfair advantage over
any other and each has the ability to make their nominees and ideas
heard with equal opportunity to be considered and accepted.
THAT is democracy already at work within the AC.
If democracy, equity and justice are truly the question on this
issue, there needs to be an ad hoc committee within the House with
representation of ALL interests including the AC, EC and
HoD. That committee should be given the specific charge to determine,
IF the AC composition requires change, WHAT needs to be changed
and to offer an alternative for HOW it needs to be changed.
Then, the House can deliberate if change is necessary and what option(s)
should be considered.
Past Chairman of the House
In this issue
Awardees for 2001-02
> Visit the Delegates' Forum for Latest Updates
> Annual Meeting
> Deadlines for 2001-02 Business
> Chairman-Elect's Corner
> Secretary/Editor's Corner
> Call for Committee Members
Discussion: Robert's Rules of Order
Note on Committee Discussion
Letter to the Editor
25 & 26 YEARS AGO: House Revisits Emeritus Rules
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
Visit the House
Forum for Updates