AMA has term LIMITS for EC NOW!

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 04:28:10 -0800 (PST) snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com remarked:

How can you say the AMA has term limits NOW? I rarely see any nominations to run against any incumbent in any elected position in the AMA. What it has appeared to me is that the incumbent gets to stay until he dies or volunteers to quit..

Also, under this term limits proposal being voted on, if at the end of the incumbents 3 terms in office there are no nominations of anyone to replace the incumbent, the incumbent gets to stay another term. How is this limiting our choices?

You say it will force good people out of the EC. It could also force bad people off the EC. The replacement might not be a dud or illiterate. But you take your chances of getting duds or illiterates regardless of whether or not you have term limits in place. Look at some of the duds in place now.

"""The membership VOTE could also force bad people off the EC."""

that is what an election IS...

MEMBERSHIP CHOICE!

term limits COULD be against membership choice...

the membership VOTE is NEVER against MEMBERSHIP CHOICE !!

do you see why it is so bad...

it COULD get things that are against CHOICE...

"""2 (almost 3) on EC now turned out sitting EC members.. """

they DO get voted OUT...

Gene Hemple was unseated while seeking re-election by George Aldrich!!!

it DOES happen !!!

This can only be true when there is not a VP as unethical as the one who nominated 2 or more of his close friends in an attempt to keep others off the ballot. It was the D-VIII AMA VP, one H. Sanford Frank who did that and his place holder nominees declined the nominations once it became the subject of a public discussion. There is a thread or two you can find that will highlight that low life corruption in office. Interestingly enough, I have reason to suspect he has done this since but can't say for sure.

The nomination process is broken when a sitting VP can control the ballot. That makes me wonder if term limits for the AMA might be a good thing even though I am committed against them in most cases.

On Wed, 4 Mar 2009 07:22:09 -0800 (PST) snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com remarked:

It COULD if the voting wasn't limited to only leader members. This issue of term limits SHOULD go before the whole entire membership of the AMA and not just the leader members. THIS concerns EVERYONE, not just leader members. THAT is what I object to.

I happen to not support term limits. I also DON'T support limiting the voting base to just leader members

Vance Howard

Jeeze-o-pete.. not again.

If I were a leader member I would vote FOR term limits only because I am sick and tied of Mr. Frank's stump preaching about it.

Enough is enough. A victim added to the killfile..

I find it both odd and ironic that he, being a leader member, really needed the help of ordinary members but, go figure, they're not allowed to vote. Only allowed to pay dues.

-- Ray