I know this thread has kind of died out, but I wanted to comment about nominations. Some believe that some MOC's are playing their own game with nominations. Especially Principal nominations. Getting someone in who "possibly" wouldn't have gotten in with a normal nomination. The truth is, the academy is playing that same game too. This is why NONE of the appointments are actually charged against the slate, until basic training is over. The academy looks at who will actually start the academic year, and they figure out what slots to fill. But, sometimes the academy wants an individual in the academy, but that individual wasn't able to get an appropriate nomination.
Example. An individual they want, has a presidential nomination. That's the only nomination they have. But another individual who has a presidential nomination, also has a number of other nominations. The academy gives the 2nd applicant an appointment, but doesn't use their presidential nomination. They use the MOC's nomination. This way they can use one of the 100 presidential slots where THEY WANT THEM.
This isn't as much of an issue today as it use to be just a few years ago. Not too long ago, it was common for the academy to give appointments to those that had presidential nominations, or other NON-MOC nominations in October-November. This is BEFORE the moc's even interviewed and gave nominations. But many times, the academy would CHANGE where they charged an appointment. The person still received their appointment that they got in Oct-Nov, but in January, the academy would TAKE BACK the charge to the presidential nomination for this individual, and change it to the MOC. This way they could re-allocate the presidential slot to someone they wanted who didn't receive a nomination from their MOC.
As an ALO, this was difficult. Was my allegiance to the academy or to my MOC. My MOC's started catching on to this scam. They realized that if an individual actually had an APPOINTMENT in Oct-Nov, (NOT AN LOA, but an ACTUAL APPOINTMENT), then the MOC's agreed to NOT GIVE that person a nomination. This way the state got at least their 3 appointments, plus one of their constituents got an appointment with the Presidential. So they had 4. Instead of only 3 because the academy changed it around. When my son received his appointment, our MOC hadn't really figured out this game yet. My son had an actual appointment at the end of Oct, beginning of November. Our Representative and senators called for him to interview for nominations. I went and spoke with them and told them that my son ALREADY HAD AN APPOINTMENT. And that they were guaranteed 3 more appointments if they DIDN'T give my son one. But if they gave my son a nomination, there was a good chance that the academy would SWAP his Presidential nomination which got him the appointment, with one of the MOC's nomination and using the Presidential some other place. Thus, leaving the state with only 3 appointments instead of 4. They understood what I said, and they agreed that my son didn't need another nomination. Mind you, this only applied because he an an actual appointment. Not an LOA or other "Conditional" situation.
Because of the high unemployment and such, the academy doesn't really offer early (Oct-Nov) appointments any longer. But this isn't to say that they don't move around nominations. Obviously they can't use a nomination on someone who didn't receive it. E.g. Can't use a representative nomination from georgia, on a kid from Florida. But that's not to say that they don't move around charges for individuals who receive more than 1 nomination. They do.
You definitely need to apply for all the nominations you can get. In the end, you need to worry about you. Don't worry about your state, MOC, other applicants, etc. Get as many nominations as you can and increase your chances for an appointment. But I'm all for the Representatives and Senators having as much say so as possible in getting appointments. The academy already has 100% control over 50% of the incoming class. I don't want the academy to have 100% control. This is the senator's and representative's responsibility. They need to be accountable. And they need to be able to have a tool at their disposal that allows them to choose a principal nominee if they think they have a definite stand-out applicant who they believe deserves to be at the academy; and they want to ENSURE that they get in. No possibility of not being selected.
I know there are some that think the Principal nomination basically encourages associated forms of nepotism. That the MOC is going to "Sell" the Principal nomination to a high donor, or to a friend's child, etc. But the truth is, while this is possible, the few MOC that use the Principal nomination, use it for the right reason. Because of out of the 10 applicants they are nominating, they have one that they truly believes is the "Best of the Best", and they want to ensure that S/He gets an appointment and isn't passed over because of the academy's "Motives". Whatever they may be.
