encouraging boaters to vote

[Myron_Sleeva]

Al Waters commented: "the toughest part is getting people out there to vote. That is what we need to concentrate on."

Can I offer two reasons that perhaps the voter turn out is what it is- generally poor.

1. People are like water in that they take the path of least resistance. If an issue is not really that important to them, they will do what is easiest - nothing. Take for example, voting for the executive. I would venture that the best turn out is from the areas that actually know the candidates. To someone who is seperated by geography, what is the difference as to "who" gets elected as the voters feel alienated. Same goes for rule changes - " it's just one vote, what can it matter!"

Factor in the concept that change is difficult - new governments gnerally do not get elected but rather old ones get defeated. The odds are always with the encumbent. In order for a change to have any chance, the voters must dislike the old. When it comes to rule changes, the old guard can keep the status quo much easier than another can initate and then motivate voters to participate and bring about the new ideas.

The ones that are passionate or efficacious (feel they can make a difference) will be the voters.

2. Lack of secrecy. Why is it necessary to mail in the ballot to the home office? Who has the responsibility to do the count there and does the entire membership trust that individual to maintain their individual secrecy as to who they did or did not support? Since the current system forces the voter to identify themselves, rather than hurt someone's feelings, no vote is cast. Does the person doing the count have a hidden agenda? The point here is not to question the integrity of the person but just to think out loud. This is also more work than is necessary for any single person.

Why are the votes not cast locally, at a meeting for example or even at a race, right at the driver's meeting, for those fortunate enough to have the good weather. A representative of each club could be the returning officer or even have two for audit purposes. They could prevent stuffing of the ballot box and they would offer ONE secret ballot to each member to be marked discreetly and submitted right there. No mailing of ballots from the home office or printing off the net. No need to a lick stamp, stuff an envelope and go to the mail box to mail in the vote. Make it as easy as possible. The results could be counted and the final tally submitted. The ballots could be forwarded, if deemed necessary by the powers that be, as a final audit but ultimately, what is wrong with just trusting the local returning officer(s)? Certainly there must be at least TWO honest boaters in any given club! ! (there are some that believe the words "honest" and "boater" cannot be used in the same sentence) <LOL> The whole process could take 5 minutes. It's worth a try - bet you an In and Out double double burger you will at least double the participation. (been toooo long since I had one of those! )

Does anyone see any downside? Does this seem do able?

This scenario in itself can be a test case - will there be any change or will it be same old, same old.

Myron

 

[Spraguepsycho1]

Myron, I think you had some very valid points there. I'm not a member of any boating organizations "YET", but have seen similar problems with other types of organizations I've been involved with over the years. The next big question left to be answered would be "To change the current voting practices, would it be required to have the proposed changes voted upon using the old system at the organizational level?" It's a catch 22 if you ask me. lol

Oh and I haven't had a double double since I moved away from So Cal in '94 (I do miss those) lol

 

[Al Waters]

Myron,

On your first point, I will agree with you that it is harder to move out the incumbant unless that person has messed up. But your other points would not apply to the voting of a NAMBA President. And there are plenty of past examples. I think the bottom line is the people who do not vote are mostly lazy because they do not want to get involved and be informed.

On your second point, I really hope that you are not directing your comments towards NAMBA voting as you are really out of line by questioning the credibility of the secretary. Everyone with membership has the right to vote whether they belong to a club or not, whether they race or not.

If you want to call what I have done in the past stuffing the ballot box, so be it. I have single handedly swung a vote by politicking for or against proposals. I go after the boaters that don't judge at races, don't cd, or help in anyway. They are the ones who usually don't vote. But they like to complain! It's the nature of the beast I guess.

Al Waters

NAMBA Vice President

NAMBA Scale Unlimited Chairman

Southern California Scale Thunderboat Association

 

[Myron_Sleeva]

Al Waters said:

"On your second point, I really hope that you are not directing your comments towards NAMBA voting as you are really out of line by questioning the credibility of the secretary. Everyone with membership has the right to vote whether they belong to a club or not, whether they race or not. "

I was quite specific and careful when I said I was not questioning the person at NAMBA. No mention was made of ANYONE. I was just repeating what I had heard amongst club members at one time or another. I said I was just thinking out loud.

Al further seemed insulted and added:

"If you want to call what I have done in the past stuffing the ballot box, so be it. I have single handedly swung a vote by politicking for or against proposals. I go after the boaters that don't judge at races, don't cd, or help in anyway. They are the ones who usually don't vote. But they like to complain! It's the nature of the beast I guess."

The phrase "stuffing the ballot box" applies to having the same people making SEVERAL votes each. Lobbying or campaigning for or against any issue or person is certainly acceptable and practised in all elections, be they at the club level or the community level or the state or national arenas.

I was just trying to propose an alternative to the current system which, on the pragmatic level, seems cumbersome and partially contributory to the voter turn out being what it is. I carry no status within NAMBA. These are my opinions only and I might add, opinions that seem to be causing consternation to at least one NAMBA executive. The issue was raised by yourself and I was just offering up SOME opinions, which BTW. I am very entitled to have and still hold.

I thought you would like to hear some feedback. Guess I was wrong there too. Oh well, have been wrong before and will probably be so in the future.

Myron

 

[Al Waters]

Myron,

Then I apologize because when you make reference to questioning the "home office" where ballots are sent to, they go to only one person so that must mean that you belong to another boating organization or if you were NAMBA, you don't understand the voting process.

I have always been careful about repeating what others (club members) have said ............or it looks like it could be coming from me. I have another philosphy. If somebody asks me if something is true (for example a rumor), I ask them who told them that. If they say they don't know.............I tell them not to bother asking me the question.

.......and I am not sure how the voting procedures are done where you come from but it is virtually impossible to have someone vote mulitiple times in NAMBA. The electoral vote is used at District level and the popular vote at NAMBA level.

You have expressed your opinions and I mine. My opinions closely mirror the reality of the current system. I have not seen anyone else jump on this topic with different ideas so if you would like to see changes.............you know what needs to be done. I can move on now. Thank you.

Al Waters

NAMBA Vice President

NAMBA Scale Unlimited Chairman

Southern California Scale Thunderboat Association

 

[Myron_Sleeva]

Al,

Not to belabor the point but I too will make one last post.

You initially made the comment that work needed be done to improve voter participation. This prompted my response as to some reasons why people do or do not vote. I did not want to bring this up initially for reasons that will be obvious once I do BUT I do have post secondary education in the political sciences. More importantly, as a by-product of being self employed, I have long been a student of human behavior.

This discussion was not meant as an indictment of anyone but rather was directed at the system.

And for the record, our club was affiliated with NAMBA for a number of years until a month ago but that is another issue and not germain to the matter at hand.

Being a long time member of our club executive, I know that ballots are expected to be mailed to the home office of NAMBA. I did not know for certain that only one person did the actual count. I was just suggesting reasons why the ballots were NOT being sent. Does it matter WHO originally was skeptical? If someone shares something with me , in confidence, I do not break that trust. You said it yourself, one member, one vote - equal.

Some additional thoughts ( and for the record, mine ) - do you have to put your name and social security number on your ballot when you vote for your country's President? Are the matters more pressing within NAMBA hence the need for identification??

Yes, under the current system, stuffing of the ballot box IS impossible but so is the notion of privacy as to who votes for whom. I was just presenting the scenario that would protect the secret ballot AND prevent stuffing the ballot box with a possible added benefit of increased voter participation if ALL voting was done on the local level . NAMBA can have either secrecy or control but not both. The current system favors control over protecting the individual's rights to privacy, which is very important too many. It has been written this can take precedence over participation.

Is there no merit in any of the suggested procedural amendments?

In your final paragraph you concluded: "You have expressed your opinions and I mine. My opinions closely mirror the reality of the current system. I have not seen anyone else jump on this topic with different ideas so if you would like to see changes.............you know what needs to be done. I can move on now. Thank you."

By inference, you feel my opinions DO NOT mirror reality. How can you say that? I was offering up opinions as to why the current system appeals to less than half the boaters, since less than half vote. As far as personally wanting to see change, nothing can be further from the truth. To be blunt, I do not give a rip what happens within NAMBA. Our ENTIRE club (yes 100%) voted to go elsewhere consequently I have NO vested interests whatsoever.

Maybe no one else chose to "jump on the topic" could be the result of the reception that my comments got. As I stated, before, I have no status in NAMBA but was just trying to share what I have learned. Any system must be examined if it does not appear to be serving the needs of those it was designed to serve. The flip side is if NAMBA thinks that everything is ideal, then by all means, protect what exists. But remember, you yourself originally raised the issue.

I operate my businesses on a user friendly system - if something is no longer producing the results budgetted for, I find it prudent to reflect towards the inside for solutions. It would be much simpler and easier on the ego to just dismiss the turn of events as being the fault of those **** customers. Then again it depends on what is important and we take the approach that being viable is the most important. In that regard, consideration is given to ALL comments/suggestions from existing customers and even the most junior employees. As the man once said, you gotta break an egg to make an omelette. My father, self employed all his life, taught me that to be a viable long term enterprise, one must sometimes slaughter a few sacred cows along the way.

More often than not, there can be multiple reasons why something might no longer be working but the inability or unwillingness to change is a big part. But ALWAYS, the very root of the problem is not being willing to LISTEN.

When less than half the membership participate in the voting, is it beyond the realm of possibility that the system of voting be reviewed or is it now perfect? I believe that Terry Keeley's signature line once read ( I apologize to Terry if it was not) something to the effect that if you keep doing what you are doing, you will always have what you already got. In other words, one cannot expect different results if one keeps doing things the same way.

On this voter issue, there are mutiple influences at play. I do not for a minute believe, as you said that, it's simply that "people who do not vote are mostly lazy". It follows than that you must then believe that most of NAMBA is lazy.

Myron,

Former NAMBA member who, in an attempt to be a contributor, chose to ignore that dogma of not discussing politics and will now join the lazy, silent majority.