[mountainstate] ACB National Convention - Democracy in ActionwithBoth Good and Questionable Results

[J.Rayl]

From: "Ron Brooks" <ronbrooks67 at gmail.com
Subject: [leadership] ACB National Convention - Democracy in 
Action withBoth Good and Questionable Results
Date sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 12:05:13 -0700

Hi Everyone,



I'm sitting in our hotel room at the Galt House Hotel in 
Louisville, about
half packed and taking a break to check email, Twitter, Facebook 
and all the
rest, and it's a perfect time to reflect on what was a great 
convention for
a number of reasons.



Although I loved the city, the tours, the YAC for the kids, 
spending time
with Lisa, reconnecting with friends, blowing money in Exhibits 
and all the
rest, what really stuck with me was the ACB's commitment to 
democratic
principles.  Throughout the course of the affiliate meetings and 
business
meeting, there were a number of opportunities to witness 
democracy in
action, including a number of hotly debated Constitutional 
amendments,
resolutions and elections, the newly implemented secret balloting 
process
and the decision-making one of the affiliates with whom I'm 
involved used to
decide how to cast votes in the upcoming elections.



Personally, I was generally proud of our leaders and membership, 
and
although I did not agree with every vote, the intention to follow 
truly
democratic procedures was much in evidence.



Nevertheless, I did see one example where I think our commitment 
to
democratic principles fell short, and I worry about the potential 
fall-out.



A resolution was brought before the body which would have 
committed the ACB
to taking a stand against the practice of paying sub-minimum 
wages to some
people with disabilities, and rather than allowing an open 
discussion of the
resolution, it was basically killed due to a lack of a motion 
from the
Resolutions Committee.  To be fair, the Resolutions Committee 
Chairperson
reported that the committee could not reach the resolution's 
author to
discuss it, thus the committee refused to recommend a "do pass" 
which would
have allowed a floor debate.  In addition, any ACB member 
(including me)
could have made a motion for the membership to adopt the 
resolution, and no
one (including me) chose to do that in the time allotted.



Nevertheless, I can't help but think that the real failure was 
systemic.  In
the first place, the resolution's author is from my home state of 
Arizona,
and he told me separately that no messages were ever left, so he 
did not
know he was contacted by the committee.  Second, the committee 
could have
elected to table the resolution or to recommend a referral to 
another
committee for study-as they did with another resolution on a 
different and
equally difficult topic.  In addition, when this resolution was 
read, it
seemed to me that it's disposal was rushed which made it harder 
for the
membership to realize that we needed a motion to get it to the 
floor for an
honest debate.



I realize that there is a lot of strong opinion on both sides of 
this issue
and that most of us have very little and perhaps incomplete 
and/or
innacurate information regarding what is being called the "fair 
wages"
resolution.  Nevertheless, the mere fact that people have strong 
feelings
about this issue necessitates a full and open discussion.  
Furthermore, the
ACB is being hammered in the Twittersphere because of our failure 
to take
the issue on, and since we did not take it on, we look pretty 
bad, and
although this may not be fair, perception is everything when it 
comes to our
members and more importantly, those people who are thinking about 
whether or
not to make ACB their organization of choice.



I know that our leaders understand the potential impact that an 
emotional
issue like minimum wages for all PWD's can have on our members 
and on our
organization, but I'm not sure they realize how rapidly and 
quickly these
perceptions can evolve due to social media.  This fact (whether 
we like it or
not) necessitates us to really think hard before we try to defer 
a
discussion on an issue that we don't want to take on, and it 
necessitates us
to think about a whole new range of potential impacts for every 
action we
take or fail to take.



So far today, I've read perhaps 200 tweets on our debate (or lack 
thereof)
on the minimum wage issue, and if you wish, you can actually 
listen to an
audio clip of the meeting where this debate did not take place.  
I predict
that this rapid circulation of what happened at our business 
meeting
yesterday will prompt this issue to come up in a multitude of 
state and
special interest affiliates, and I can virtually guarantee that 
it will be
back before the Resolutions Committee in 2013.  I can only hope 
that when it
does, we're more ready to engage in a real and meaningful 
discussion.  After
all, that will be much more in keeping with the democratic 
organization I
truly believe we are, which is why I'm proud to be a part.



Rather than closing on this less than positive note, I want to 
say that
everyone, and including those who are upset about the handling of 
the
minimum wage issue, should stop to recognize all of those things 
that were
accomplished in terms of democratic process.  I loved arguing 
about the name
of our newsletter, the campaigning, the secret voting and all the 
rest.  All
of these things served to deepen my appreciation for who we are 
and what we
stand for, and even though we may not always do things quite how 
I think we
should, I know we'll get to the right answers eventually, and 
hopefully by
then, I too will have a better grasp on where I personally stand 
on those
same issues.



Ron Brooks

Phoenix, AZ


_______________________________________________
acb-l mailing list
acb-l at acb.org
http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/acb-l