Because the Coast Guard didn't sell its service academy soul to the political devils maybe.
And because of that, competition is equal, independent of Congressional district or state.
However I think the intent of the law was assure that all geographies were represented more or less evenly was it not? With roughly half the class of most SAs coming from each district, and half coming from a national list that ignores geography, it doesn't sound too unbalanced to me... Especially when you consider that there is still a minimum criteria in place that the SA's have 100% control over.
I guess I never thought our MOCs were so petty as to write a federal law that might impact one seventeen year old from their district per year. You are a far better judge of that than I will ever be. So I defer to you.
And maybe I'm seeing throug rose-colored glasses.
I guess I never thought our MOCs were so petty as to write a federal law that might impact one seventeen year old from their district per year. You are a far better judge of that than I will ever be. So I defer to you.
But either way, as long as the SA's still have their hand on the "quality valve" by controlling the minimum requirements, then it seems like it's pretty fair overall; no matter the class size. As long as all of them are coming from a highly qualified pool, then I think it's ok that the particular make up of half the class is chosen based on geography/MOCs.
I have seen your posts before and I am in agreement with you. The process that I went through to gain an appointment was difficult as it was but to realize in the end that preferences exists for some whimsical balancing act, made me sick. Though but 18 years old, I will never get over this political betrayal.
Again I hear what you are saying and agree. I am sure that there are many qualified candidates. Getting the recipe right in the end is a fine goal. I work for many years to ensure that I would have a uber high WCS to compete in the national pool in the event I could not secure a MOC nom (which I didnt). My naive understanding is that if you draw 3 venn diagrams of candidates around each academy, the area of intersection should be huge and I would be in that area. The USNA turned me down as I did not have a MOC nom. BTW I did get accepted at many great schools.
I may be jaded because I'm 2-3 miles from the Capitol and 2.5 blocks from the White House, but I don't know how much thought went into it beyond "if Congressman Joe Blow gets two kids into a school, I better get my folks in too... let's write a bill!"
And that's for schools with thousands in a class. What about the tiny (but not smallest) USMMA?
The Congressional/Senatorial nomination process adds another screening process and is not merely favoritism. Having gone through the process more than once, I assure you at least from our district-it is pretty competitive and at least on paper-fair. You submit to their requirements and sit in front of a panel consisting of SA alumni and other community leaders. USCGA may have cadets that are from mostly coastal areas and areas close to major rivers and lakes.(rare to have someone from North Dakota) The SA I've visited and my DS and DD attend represent all the fifty states and other territories. If it were solely a matter of selection from a national pool, there's a tendency that some areas may not have any representation. I believe that the Congressional/Senatorial nomination process as it is today is good but not perfect.
It's very sad that your view of the process is a joke. A multitude before you went through the process and many more after you will do the same. The majority of young men and women that inquire on this forum need a much more positive and constructive outlook. There are plenty of alumni and active service members that have a more encouraging slant and do not share your cynicism.
Whether or not you agree with LITS there are a few things you should remember:
1) This post is on the USCGA Forum thread where the nominations are not required so stating that the men and women who inquire of this forum "need a much more positive feedback and constructive outlook" is incorrect. if they are looking to apply to USCGA, they need not have any outlook on the appointment process.
2) If we give every post a "more encouraging slant" and "do not share [our] cynicism" we do every single person who comes to this website a disservice. We are not here to be the vocal cords of the service academies and spout off propaganda and advertisements, we are here to provide a realistic approach and look at them. We don't mollycoddle anyone with things they want to hear. I don't understand why it would be any different when talking about the appointment process than it would be when talking about Beast, Swab Summer, or Boot.
3) A multitude of people can do something because it has to be done whether or not they agree with it. Just because a bunch of people in the past have done it does not qualify it as good, it merely means that a lot of people have put up with a flawed system because the ends justified the means.
4) Finally, keep in mind that LITS is a graduate of a US Federal Service Academy, has been a commissioned officer in the United States Military and is entitled to have his opinion and to have it respected on this forum. It's difficult for the opinion of a parent of a C4C (freshman) to compare with his in my humble opinion.
Just to be fair now, I will tell you that I am a cadet first class at the United States Coast Guard Academy. That is my credential. I have endured 3.86 years at this fine institution and am slated to commission in a month. You may challenge my assertions at will.
1)Why shouldn't an applicant have any outlook on the appointment process? Many applicants don't just apply to one SA.
2)I leave it up to any individual to ascertain what is useful or trash. A balanced and realistic approach without sugarcoating is best.
3)If the end justifies the means? Are the current appointees any less deserving because the appointment/nomination process is flawed? These young men/women that are considering service through the military where it's all about order and discipline- should they have to belittle and discredit the bureacracy that they have to go through?
4)Everyone is entitled to their opinion. By no means should a difference in opinion be a sign of disrespect. You can feel entitled to anything you want.
I am not going to stoop and flash my credential or rank. I'm actively participating in a discussion of which the last time I checked was what this forum is for.