In a message sojacobson@mmm.com typed to All  
 s> Isn't the impact of your comments here that one really can't trust the 
 s> membership?  On the one hand, you are advocating for greater democracy, 
 s> while on the other you are saying that the membership should not have the 
 s> right or power to accept the recommendations of the leadership. 
I think what we are saying is that the convention should have just as 
realistic and reasonable a chance to reject the recommendations of our 
leadership as we do to accept them.  We are not anti national leadership; we 
support it when we feel it is correct and oppose it when we feel it is wrong, 
but in recent years the deck has become too stacked in favor of the national 
leadership and it is getting worse all the time.  I wonder if we had 
electronic voting where each convention attendee could vote any issue up or 
down what would happen.  I think in such a situation the national leadership 
would do well to pass half its agenda.
Harvey 
--- msged 2.07
---------------