USCGA nomination process
I almost hate to say anything, as this topic could easily go ballistic.....
Before everyone jumps to immediate opposition, think about two things.....
#1. You are correct that Congress isn't diverse, but that isn't the issue. The issue is USCGA diversity. Congress isn't diverse, nor is it very representative, because the founding fathers set it up that way! They wanted majority rule...which is NOT the same as representative rule. Those are two very different things. If you really get into political science you can study the difference.....
#2. I think this is really the more important point........let's admit it, the USCGA is not geographically, racially or gender diverse. It also does not attract many applicants from the interior, (midwest, great plains, and/or mountain states). It is apparently the goal of Congress, who does represent us in our political system, to make the USCGA more accurately reflect the demographic makeup of the U.S. as a whole. And again, lets admit that the USCGA is not doing well in this regard. And by most indicators, they are not improving. Congress has expressed their displeasure in the past, but nothing appears to be changing. Eventually they lose patience and start passing legislation to "improve" things.
You can either adamantly oppose any change, which is usually futile, and if this is your approach, when the change comes, you will have no input....or you can accept the change and try to direct it in a more acceptable form. I personally think that simply opposing any change is short-sighted. If an organization decided that opposition to change is their official stance, then they have no recourse or influence when the change is imposed on them. I believe an organization is more effective if it accepts that change will happen, and then be proactive, not reactive.
Anyhow, that is my opinion, and fortunately in this country we all have the right, and I feel the obligation to listen to both sides of an argument, accept that the other side thinks they have legitimate concerns and solutions, try to understand why the other side feels the way they do, then everyone should come to a mutually acceptable solution. If all we do is outright reject any or all opposing arguments, you normally lose in the long-run. And, as a firm supporter of the USCGA, I don't want to see that happen.
Just my opinion.......and I will leave it at that. Have a good one everybody!
I almost hate to say anything, as this topic could easily go ballistic.....
Before everyone jumps to immediate opposition, think about two things.....
#1. You are correct that Congress isn't diverse, but that isn't the issue. The issue is USCGA diversity. Congress isn't diverse, nor is it very representative, because the founding fathers set it up that way! They wanted majority rule...which is NOT the same as representative rule. Those are two very different things. If you really get into political science you can study the difference.....
#2. I think this is really the more important point........let's admit it, the USCGA is not geographically, racially or gender diverse. It also does not attract many applicants from the interior, (midwest, great plains, and/or mountain states). It is apparently the goal of Congress, who does represent us in our political system, to make the USCGA more accurately reflect the demographic makeup of the U.S. as a whole. And again, lets admit that the USCGA is not doing well in this regard. And by most indicators, they are not improving. Congress has expressed their displeasure in the past, but nothing appears to be changing. Eventually they lose patience and start passing legislation to "improve" things.
You can either adamantly oppose any change, which is usually futile, and if this is your approach, when the change comes, you will have no input....or you can accept the change and try to direct it in a more acceptable form. I personally think that simply opposing any change is short-sighted. If an organization decided that opposition to change is their official stance, then they have no recourse or influence when the change is imposed on them. I believe an organization is more effective if it accepts that change will happen, and then be proactive, not reactive.
Anyhow, that is my opinion, and fortunately in this country we all have the right, and I feel the obligation to listen to both sides of an argument, accept that the other side thinks they have legitimate concerns and solutions, try to understand why the other side feels the way they do, then everyone should come to a mutually acceptable solution. If all we do is outright reject any or all opposing arguments, you normally lose in the long-run. And, as a firm supporter of the USCGA, I don't want to see that happen.
Just my opinion.......and I will leave it at that. Have a good one everybody!