SHOW vs. USE (Revisited)
I imagine most of the readers of this blog are tired of the discussions covering the Plaintiffs Proposed Bylaws which will be voted upon at the convention. I too am weary. However, I received the mailing from Marjorie Hazelwood in the mail today (it apparently was sent out in November) and so I have had a chance to read the arguments in favor of completely overhauling the Board of Directors. I have also went back and re-read the posted Revised Plaintiff Proposal on the AMHA website. Despite a number of changes, it is this Proposal which I understand we will be voting upon.
There was one statement in the Hazelwood letter (Paragraph 5) which appears completely at odds with my reading of the published proposal. The quote is: “ONLY members who decide to run for the board will be required to declare their category”. The Revised Proposal at the AMHA website clearly states that Everyone applying for membership has to declare whether they are a Show or Use member. Has there been yet ANOTHER revised proposal!? I really want to know this, as that fundamentally changes the thrust of the Proposal. She then goes on to state that voters are free to vote for whoever they think will do the best job. Well, the revised proposal does not specifically spell that out anywhere that I can see. If that is indeed the case, then why do we all have to declare our category? This categorization of members/voters lies at the heart of the divisiveness I foresee from this proposal. Our national politics are poisoned by labels such as “Librul, Repug, Elitist, RINO.” Why would we ever want to introduce that vicious labelling into the heart of our breed? Why not only require that those members running for a position on the Board have to make a choice of which category they are going to run in? Believe me, if someone declares they are a USE candidate and they have shown anywhere or taken any money in the past 3 years, someone will pop up and point that out, so the category choice will be pretty forthright.
Someone help me out here (GoMorgans? AMHA?) I am a retired attorney-I read and interpret insurance policies for a living and there is no way that I can read the Revised proposal as NOT requiring members to declare their category.
Once again: I agree there are fundamental problems with representation of all members in AMHA. I might even be willing to support a board which contained Directors who were clearly declared either Show and Use. However, I absolutely resist forcing me to categorize myself when my interests vary widely. Why does it matter what MY interests are if my vote can be freely designated for the Director I wish? Would I vote for a USE Director-damn right I would if I felt they were the best person for the job.