I'm just wondering, do the members vote on this issue, or can it only be decided by the EC? I'm not too sure.

Either way, what do you think. Term limits or no term limits.

Right, the 70+ % that voted in favor of term limits are just too damn lazy to learn the issues and vote!

Here's the results of a survey I did back in 11/03. I think it still applies.
Here's the link: http://www.rcuniverse.com/forum/m_12...Climits/tm.htm

Hi Everyone,
First I would like to thank all the DVP’s and Dave Brown for taking the time to respond to my e-mails. The DVP certainly didn’t have to respond since I’m not in their districts. And, to be fair, even though I’m very critical of DB, he did respond quickly, which really surprised me. In fact, all those that did reply to my e-mails did so in less than an hour after they were sent.
Here are the results of my little survey:
I e-mailed all VP’s except D1, which didn’t have an e-mail address, Doug Holland and Dave Brown. I got responses from everyone except Dist 4, 5 and 9, and Doug Holland.
The only person who responded they way I thought the majority would was Bill Oberdieck, DVII who feels that each election is a “ term limit�.
The rest of the VP’s, and DB are in favor of term limits and 3 terms was the length mentioned most. However, the problem they all have with term limits is finding someone qualified to fill the VP’s position once the incumbent has to leave office since there is not a lot of people seeking office in many of the districts. The concern is that a qualified VP would be required to leave with no qualified person to take his place. In many districts it’s very difficult to find volunteers for the various positions, including AVP and the VP position. This concern is justified by the fact that only about 15% of the membership even takes the time to vote. In addition, many of the replies stated the amount of time spent on AMA business and the out of pocket money necessary to do the job as VP, further reducing the incentive to serve. Here in DII we don’t have that problem, as there seems to be enough volunteers, and I’m sure this applies to some other districts as well, but it is a major concern in many districts.
DB’s concern for the Office of President is a candidate running for office without the necessary qualifications/vision of seeing the “big picture� versus a narrow focus of ideas/issues that are important to him. He feels that one of the most important attributes that the President must have is the ability to prevent the EC from becoming “a house divided upon its self� and that type of person is not easy to find.
He has stated in the past, and still feels that the EC should elect a chairman from within its ranks and re-name the position of President to Chairman of the Board. He would re-name the current Executive Director position to President. He also feels that the EVP is the most important position within AMA, and with all the qualifications necessary to carry out the job, it should not be an elected position but a person appointed by EC.
To summarize:
1. I had an excellent response from the leadership of the AMA to my questions.
2. There needs to be a by-laws change before this can take effect.
3. Most members of the EC and DB favor term limits . However, before they can become reality the issue of finding suitable volunteers willing to serve on the EC needs to be addressed. Not an easy problem to solve!
4. The limit should be three consecutive term s
5. DB and several members of the EC feel it’s time to re-vamp the selection of the President and EVP to better reflect the realities that face the AMA today.
In closing I would especially like to thank Dave Mathewson for spending the time on the phone discussing this issue with me.
Regards,
Jon

PS. J_R, no problem. After all is said and done, after we get away from the darn computer, we're all modelers pursuing what we like best, building and flying!

Hey Red-

McSnuze was too lazy to learn the the issues and vote, but term limits imposed by a higher authority than AMA took him out of office.

The plus side of this EC action is that the LM's won't have to strain their brains for a decision. Nice of the EC to do that - and there was also discussion of yet another standing rule at the Apr 06 meeting, which of course obivates a need for LMs to vote on a bylaws change.

Enjoy your nap.

Abel

I don't understand the desire for "term limits" in any elected office. We already have term limits for US Congressmen, Senators, Governors, Mayors, and AMA Executive council members, etc. They run for election and at the end of their term they can run for re-election. Voters can elect them again if they like the job they are doing or elect someone else if they are not performing as expected. These officials are already limited to a term unless the majority of voters re-elect them. Why would you want to force an EC member out of office if the majority of voters in their district continue to elect them?

You know it's funny you say that. Our founding fathers thought the exact same thing as you just stated, except for George Washington who declined to run for a 3rd term even though he would have walked his third term. Up until FDR it was just an unwritten rule, as nobody wanted a king.

The AMA says they don't want term limits because they can't get enough people to step forward for the job. Well that's because it's a catch 22. If I know that some "popular" guy is going to win in a landslide whose been on the ballot for years and won every time, then why would I attempt to run for that office knowing it's almost a waste of time and for a job that doesn't even pay money. But if you invoke term limits, then you will FORCE others to step forward and actually campaign for the position since it won't just be handed to Mr. Popular.

This is why up until someone actually won a 3rd term did they invoke the 2 term limit. It wasn't just to prevent a sovereignty, it was to get people out there campaigning and fighting for the positions.

I can assure you when the institute the term limits MANY more will step forward for the positions, thus eliminating the catch 22.

Dion, et. al. the item has been argued and will continue to be argued. As burtona says, term-limits exist at the ballot. I have run for EVP twice and DVP once all in the past 7 years. They EC brings out all their firepower and those here that are vocal find and dream up countless excuses why I should not be elected. The funny excuse is that I do not work well with the EC. For da_n sure I am not a yes-man like the EC usually is.

Go back in the members-only AMA web and read the records of the '79-81 era and you will find that Pres. Earl Witt and myself were constantly fighting the Ex. Director (then a voting member of the EC) and his yes-men on the EC. You see the Ex. Director had iron-fist control over the Treasurer (now EVP) and the FAI Pattern man, then a DVP, did not get his shirts and caps if he did not toe the mark. Another tidbit concerned some of the office soap-Opera stories so the ED was in control of several powerful EC figures.

Communications were difficult in those days. The ED blasted Earl and myself in the magazine, and of course it was 3 months before we could defend against his garbage. Too late to be effective.

Back to now, there are very few AMA members that want any real change in AMA. Even fewer are going to be a voting member, study the issues, contact the candidates and send a significant vote to the right place. A few years ago, 10,000 votes were reportedly sent back to AMA, rather than the auditor, which could have made a difference. True or not true, no one will ever know. I have as much confidence in AMA's paid auditors as I have in the AMA staff that hid my write-in votes back when AMA counted the votes. In that situation, Earl Witt found them and I was re-elected even though I had been left off the ballot by the nominating committee -- the other DVPs.

Earl and I made a lot of changes but not nearly enough. Yep I made some tracks and the EC will do everything they can to be sure that I never again return there.

Speaking of Leader Members and votes on Bylaws changes. Is anyone here so juvenile and/or naive as to think the current EC would ever chance a vote to change anything that takes from their power and distributes such power to the membership? If they should have a vote, it would be loaded and like many votes taken in my professional life they all came back 70% +/- 2% in favor of those that held the election, 26%+/-1% against with the remaining disqualified for various reasons. Forget it.

There is only one thing that could change things and that is for each and every member go get 10 others, they go get 10 others and so on to vote AGAINST the incumbent and for one of the 3 on the ballot. CHANGE the EC and demonstrate that the membership can be other than simpleton unconcerned morons fighting among themselves.

Oh well time to wake up and face what the EC already knows.

You make a lot of good points on that one Hoss. I especially realized now that since communication is at an all time high, for instance the Internet, the AMA still cannot find a way to utilize and to take advantage of these communication channels. This is where groups like AOPA and EAA shines. Those 2 groups keep you on their respective websites for hours with tons of good resources and tools. If the AMA was smart they would find a way to partner up with RCU somehow. Looks like Great Planes was smart enough to make the move with their new Flatout. RCU tools alone are worth the partnership, but the branding also the branding since RCU has almost double the memberships.

One things for sure, the EC has to do something.

McSnuze may have been taken out of office by a higher authority but his appointed replacement was taken out in a big way by the voting members in D-V. The membership CAN make a difference even where the incumbent will go to no end to perpetuate his dynasty even in the event of his demise as was done in D-V. It takes work, but as has been demonstrated, it can be done.

As a formr elcted official in my state, and as an oficer of my flying club, I am 100% in favor of term limits. People will stand up and run for office,Always, ut not everyone is willing to run against a sitting incumbant because that is Usually an uphill battle to win. However, if the term is u and te seat is open than the playing field would be more level.

Second, there really is sucha thing as burn out. After 6 years on a finance committee I can tell you I was plenty burned out and was glad to step down due to term limits. If you can't get it done in years chances are you can't get it done.

AMA 785243
Chris D"Arpino

Fidel Castro and Saddamy Hussein are two examples of people that have been "re-elected" in "free elections".

That may help with the concept of term limits.

I'm against term limits, but maybe for the wrong reasons.
I consider Term Limits to be a patched solution against idiot voters. The idea is that most voters always vote for the name they are most familiar with, so you have to impose term limits in order to clear the plate and give the new guys a chance. Wasn't there a movie with Eddie Murphy based on that concept? In any case, I guess I was hoping that AMA members were a little brighter than that. If the new guy is a real doorknob, I want the option of picking the incumbent.

However, I hadn't thought that the lack of term limits means fewer people will step up for the seat. That could be an issue.

Is it possible to impose term limits, yet permit the incumbent to stay if nobody steps up?

Well, though I see your point, but if the ability exists to hold the position for as long as noone runs tan that defeats the purpose of clearing the slate and keeping a level playing field. Example... Ted Kennedy has run unopposed more times than not and it is now to the point where noone wants to evn try, now that he is leaving his seat people are popping up everywhere to rrun. As long as a barrier, an incumbant, can stay he will. People will always have a real hard time running a campaign of promises against aperson with a proveb track record. There should be no difference between the AMA and normal elections. A seat wil never stay empty, someone will always step up. Moreover more than one person will usually step up if they feel they have a chance.

AMA785243

Chris D'Arpino