ORIGINAL: Stickbuilder
In another thread, I made the statement that I hoped that the new EVP fell on his face, and that the plug would be pulled on the PPP.
I was asked why I didn't follow the good example set by the losing candidate.
My answer is simple. I was not in favor of Mark Smith in the election, and I have not changed my opinion of him. I think that he (with the assistance of a couple of industry heavyweights) ramrodded the PPP down our throats, and I am not convinced that the conflict of interest issue was resolved. In other words, I personally feel that we were sold down the river with respect to the PPP.
I also think that there was too much internal pressure exerted to ensure that Smith won the election. There were still only about 10% of the members who voted, and I do know that the members of the Executive Committee were very active in pushing for their candidate of choice.
Mitchell, you asked why. Them's some of my reasons.
Bill, AMA 4720
Thanks for your comments, Bill.
As I said in my earlier comment to you, I know that you haven't supported PPP from the gitgo, and that is a significant part of the reason you didn't want to see Mark Smith elected. My comment wasn't really related to why you didn't support Mr. Smith, but rather to your reaction to the congratulatory comments directed to him.
It's one thing to disagree with a candidate on one or more issues, and something totally different to hope that he "falls flat on his face" once elected and in office.
If that should happen, then AMA will be the worse for it, regardless of whether it's Mark Smith in the chair or anyone else. I think we share (or at least I hope we share) a desire to see AMA grow and be a strong advocate for it's members. I don't think it's in the best interests of AMA for anyone on the EC to fall flat on their face in terms if effectiveness in office, and that was the reason for my "sour grapes" response to your words.