h> From: hheagy@delphi.com
 h> Subject: Re: Change isn't Bad
 h> I am not necessarily saying that term limits would be good for
 h> the N.F.B. as there are advantages both ways.  I was merely
 h> pointing out that where the U.S. is concerned F.D.R. apparently
 h> became powerful enough that unlimited terms was something that
 h> was decided to be not in the best interest of the nation.
 h> I just think it should be open-mindedly looked at.  There is
 
I think that term limits are sometimes used to get people out who may not be 
popular with a large minoir minority, but not necessarily a majority.  If I 
was against someone, I might be in favor of term limits, but if he was great 
and doing a good job, then I would be against them.  That isn't the reas on 
to have them.  
 
 h> another change we might consider, and I said, "consider."  I know
 h> we don't like to copy anything the A.C.B. does, but their format
 h> of a general session in the morning and division meetings in the
 h> afternoon may be an idea whose time has come for us.  We are
 h> becoming so big that people with varied interests can't possibly
 h> get to as many division meetings as they would like to.  Perhaps
 h> spreading them out throughout the week would be something that
 h> deserves consideration.  True, we would not be getting as much of
 h> an overview, but we would be able to get more in depth
 h> information about topics of personal interest.  I am not saying
 
Your raise an interesting point.  Yes, it is impossible to get to all the 
division sutff, etc., you would want. but I am not sure what the solution is.
 
Our greatest strength is as a unified national organization.  We can't do 
anything, or should I say, in my opinion we shouldn't do anything, to take 
away from our main strength.  The general sessions are important for that 
unity and strength and shouldn't be reduced.  
 
David Andrews
--- Maximus/2 2.02
---------------