Re: A troubleing OA Election Team Situation
Branden Morris (bmorris@NEBS.COM)
Fri, 7 Mar 1997 09:21:17 -0500
Aaron Larch <ppp226e@MAIN.CITYNET.NET> wrote:
>I just have one question, isn't it up to the scoutmaster to
>choose those scouts who may be candidates for election?
Not really... it's up to the youth. All the Scoutmaster can
do is 'certify' that each First Class Scout who has had
fifteen days and nights of camping (including one long-term
camp) in the past two years lives the Scout Oath and Law.
>So with the implementation of this new elections procedure,
>it is now up to the Scoutmasters to "screen" the boys who
>are eligable for election.
This part of the procedure didn't change at all. SMs had
that option before the Dec. 28 change; they retain that
right presently.
>This new procedure is not that great of an idea, because
>it pretty much takes the honor out of being in the OA.
Sorry to disagree, but it can be a good idea, and it doesn't
affect the honor of the OA at all.
First of all, we now allow all eligible Scouts _who are
elected by their peers_ to be candidates for the Ordeal.
Before, a Scout might have been perfectly worthy and
eligible, but because of an _arbitrary_ cut-off, they might
have been denied. Because we have had, and will probably
continue to have, the case where a member takes the Ordeal
and we don't ever hear from them, all this does is increase
_slightly_ the pool of members who will become active with
the Lodge.
An informal, unscientific survey conducted on the Arrow-L
list showed between a 3-5% increase in _elected_ candidates;
keep in mind that these candidates aren't even members yet,
so it's hard to judge right now just what kind of impact
this will have on total lodge membership. Predicitions are
it won't get above that 5% mark (figuring that not every
candidate either completes the Ordeal or becomes active
later.)
And about the honor of being in the OA? The members carry
that responsibility, not new candidates. It's up to the
brothers to uphold the integrity of the Order.
>The scoutmaster must approve each individual before they
>can even be considered for election. I guess scoutmasters
>are just going to have to do the filtering like the
>elections used to, but don't do anymore.
I don't understand (or maybe you didn't understand? :)) this
last part -- as I said, before the 28 Dec 1996 change (which
changed only the number of names you put on a ballot from
50% of the eligible Scouts to any number of Scouts) didn't
affect the provision for Scoutmaster approval. Scoutmasters
retained the right to remove a candidate's eligibility due
to Scout siprit violations before the change, and they still
do.
And as the SM retains this responsibility, the new procedure
adds responsibility in two places that needed it the most:
1) The election teams. If they do their job correctly, give
a good presentation, and explain the Order thoroughly, then
that makes it easier for the Scouts to make a "good"
decision (keeping in mind that since it's the Scout's
choice, in their eyes any decision that they make is a
'good' decision).
2) The Scouts themselves. And so far (just as they had done
in the past IMO), they're doing just fine. You will always
have cases of the "popularity contest" and deserving boys
missing election for a year or two, but for the most part
the boys do alright.
This change turned a few heads among some of the "diehard"
Arrowmen on the Arrow-L list when it was first announced,
but so far people seem to be doing well with it. Give it a
chance :)
Yours in Brotherhood,
Branden Morris
Associate Section Adviser, Section NE-1B, Order of the Arrow
Boy Scouts of America
bmorris@nebs.com
morris@net1plus.com
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City | 
