Lisabob

scoutldr, I don't want to argue details of health policy but I was struck by your last sentence and the broader implication. Why should access to quality health care be something that must be "earned?" Would you seriously suggest that the child of low-income parents, or of some middle/upper-middle income parents whose jobs suddenly disappear from underneath them for that matter, doesn't deserve health insurance because they haven't "earned" it? Do you feel that people who work their whole lives but are diagnosed at some point with serious illnesses and who have exhausted the benefits offered by many less-than-wonderful health care plans, deserve to be bankrupted by health costs because they haven't "earned" the right to more comprehensive coverage of their illness? That, to me, is a symptom of a major problem in our society, and it is a problem that well-off societies practically everywhere else in the world have already solved. Health care shouldn't need to be earned, it should be a basic right. In my view.

At the cub level, especially the littler guys, you need to sell the parents and leaders as much (more than) the kids. To do that, you need to have a solid understanding of why participation has been so low in the past. A few possible reasons: 1) They didn't know/insufficient lead time - In this case, your approach of hyping events may work pretty well. 2) They can't afford it - around here district and council events tend to be more expensive than pack/den events. If money is an issue, these may be among the first things to go. In this case no amount of hype is going to change things. On the other hand, showing parents how the pack's upcoming fundraisers will cover the cost of attendance might do the trick. If this is the issue then also make sure the fundraisers are set up so that kids without a big family network of donors/buyers of stuff can earn money. (Tap into community, do show& sells for the popcorn, etc.) 3) They don't feel it is a good value for the money - if true (ie, district is notorious for running disorganized, fly-by-the-seat-of-their-pants events) then you will be running against the tide here until your district gets its act together. If not true, you need to sell not just participation, but the benefits/merits of participation beyond just "fun." 4) Transportation is a hassle - our district daycamp used to be at a great facility, except it was 40 miles away and people didn't want to drive that twice a day, plus it didn't fit well with many people's work schedules. We overcame this by setting up carpools for the pack and attendance went up considerably, but there were many parents who couldn't/wouldn't have done the drive on their own. Good luck to you!

OK I know better than to think I'm going to change anybody's minds here, but here are some fairly specific reasons why I support Obama. 1) His stance on education reform makes a lot of sense to me. In general I like his overall approach to education, but I'll mention three specific parts of his plan that I agree with and would be happy to see enacted (if he is elected and can convince Congress, of course). They are: * Emphasis on early childhood education and quality day care, including fully funding and expanding the reach of programs like Head Start, which have all kinds of statistical evidence of improving poor children's likelihood of success in school. Focus here where there's a statistically verifiable "big bang for the buck" means fewer problems (and less money needed) down the road. ** Support for middle school programs targeting "at risk" students to reduce their likelihood of dropping out of school when they hit high school. I live near Detroit, which has the lowest 4-year graduation rate in the nation (about 20%). Many of the first-year college students I teach are among that lucky 20% who actually made it through Detroit Public Schools and the stories I hear from them every single year about who drops out, when, and why, convince me that change has to happen in the early middle school years in order to have any impact on the national H.S. graduation/drop-out rate. So I think Obama's focus here is intelligent and I don't hear anything about this from McCain. ***Obama's plan to offer a $4000 college tuition grant for first-year college students, in exchange for a commitment to community service. Actually as Scouters, I would think we'd all be delighted to see more weight placed on community service. We all know how important it is in developing young people's character and connection to others, as opposed to a "me, me, me" attitude that leads to narcissism, alienation and the breakdown of society. 2) His different attitude toward foreign policy. I've never been overly enamored of the "with us or against us" approach of GW Bush. Aside from the fact that I don't think it works for us, it is also a tremendously costly endeavor to be the world's sole police force and it squanders our "soft power" resources like reputation and true leadership. Just as we all know that the new SPL or PL who attempts to lead through bullying and bossing probably won't succeed with that style of "leadership" in the long run, I think the same can be said of the country. This is not to say we shouldn't/couldn't use military force or the threat of force if the situation demands it, but that force should not be the first option on the table. So I like that Obama is more prepared to use diplomacy and to re-build damaged alliances as first resorts. I also agree in general with the Democratic party on issues such as health care, the environment, and civil rights matters. But those are sort of big-picture ideological sentiments, not the detailed reasons I choose a particular candidate. I will say this about McCain: I voted for him in the Republican primary earlier this year because, of the Republicans running, I felt he was the best option (and because MI's Dem primary was so screwed up that I felt it wasn't worth participating in that one this time around). I don't absolutely dislike McCain's views in the way that I dislike Bush's policies. I think the McCain of 2000 would have been a fine president, in fact, certainly preferable (in my view) to Bush. There are also some things I'm not thrilled about within the Democratic party and some areas where I disagree with Obama in particular. But on balance, I agree more with Obama than McCain on specifics and I agree more with the Democratic party than the Republican party on general ideological matters. That's why I'll be voting for Obama.

that's correct, gwd. She was elected in Nov 06, started her term in Jan 07, and has served a little less than 2 years at this point. One could point to Obama's relative inexperience at the national level in politics and that (to my mind) is a fair critique too. However, he did at least have the distinction of serving 8 years in state government before moving to the US Senate. Palin does not have even that depth of background in state government. She is not someone I can imagine McCain turning to for advice and serious input because she doesn't know Washington and won't be taken seriously there by people in positions of power. That she was in local gov't for some time is great. To my mind, that's where true "citizen politics" works best, when local people, just regular folks, are involved in handling local issues. I worked in local govt (not in an elected position) when I was in college. There were some very dedicated people worked in that local govt too. That doesn't make them VP material though. I now live in a town of a good deal more than 8,000 people (rough size of Palin's town where she served on city council and was mayor). I like our mayor (a Republican) and she's held her post for some time so she's obviously popular. I hardly think that she would be qualified to potentially be president though, even if she had a year and a half of statewide experience to go with her local gov't experience. Nothing against Palin, who could be a true up-and-comer in the Republican party over the next few years. I'm just very surprised and rather dismayed by McCain's choice of an inexperienced, unknown quantity for this very important position. Although I will not be voting for him this time (I might very well have in 2000 or 2004, if given the chance), I have always admired and respected McCain. I thought he had better sense than this though.

Bulldog, No I don't think Bill Clinton suddenly loves Obama. Nor do I think McCain is Bush's number one cheerleader, or vice versa either. But I do think Clinton is smart enough to know that working to further divide Democrats is a certain way to help McCain win. And I think Clinton puts a win for Dems ahead of his personal feelings toward Obama that might linger from Hillary Clinton's defeat. Losing is part of politics and Bill knows that as well as anybody. You mention this: "i haven't heard an obama supporter mention anything about why they like him other than "goosebumps when he (obama) gives a speech" or "yes we can" or "change is good" Well ok, I have to ask - how often do you have serious political conversations with Obama supporters where you ask them to give you details? My experience in attempting to engage people in discussion of their political beliefs is that this doesn't happen very often. We tend to interact only in our own comfortable circles of people who think "like us." When someone who thinks differently joins in, conversation of controversial issues is often kept to a fairly superficial level so as to avoid offense. Result: we don't tend to understand or really seek understanding of why others believe what they do, and we conclude from this that they must be idiots/shallow/easily led/etc.. Not saying that there aren't some people out there who don't ever get past superficiality! Knee-jerk Dems are just as bad as knee-jerk Reps, in my view. But, I just think a lot of the lack of detail has its roots in the way we converse about politics, and not in people's lack of understanding or thought.

I have plenty of reasons for supporting Obama that have nothing to do with "rock star" identity, just as I have always supposed that people who support GW Bush have plenty of reasons to do so other than his "defender of the Christian conservatives" schtick which I've always thought was fairly transparent anyway. People who accuse the other side of being vapid, too often need to take a closer look at themselves and/or give more credit to those who just happen to think differently about the world. I do not think Obama is devoid of substance, and often times the people who make that charge have simply not bothered to do their homework and look at his actual proposals. At the same time, I too find it unlikely that I'm going to sway others to support "my" candidate via comments on a web forum. Consequently, I don't spend a lot of time trying to do that. What I do hope, though, is that people are willing to at least acknowledge that there are smart, thoughtful folks on almost all sides of any debate. As for TheScout's comment - I find that to be racist and offensive, certainly not "scoutlike." It is also funny, in a sad sort of way, that anybody would suggest - given this country's history - that the only reason Obama is getting all this attention is because he's black. Oh Please. From here on out I will be blocking all of your future comments TheScout. It is too bad you haven't learned to do more with your historical education than spew garbage like that.

Perhaps we've been violating all sorts of rules and if so I'll surely bring this up to our committee. However, son's troop practice has been that a boy presents his Eagle project to the committee and it must be approved by said committee, prior to the CC signing off. This is not generally a stumbling block - committee has been quite reasonable and nobody is "out to get" any boy. At least as far as I've seen, it hasn't been an inquisition-style affair. It does mean that there is unlikely to be significant committee division once a project is approved, and avoids a (hopefully unlikely) scenario where a boy tries to "cherry pick" his way to a signature despite having a half-baked plan that really shouldn't go forward.

OK so sure, 72 is the new 52 and blah blah. Still, actuarial tables are not in his favor at this point in his life!

hops I suppose we could debate that. And usually I'd have to agree that the presidential candidate is a zillion times more important than the VP pick. But thinking carefully here, one of the big fears voters (even many Republicans) have about McCain is that he's old and he might die in office. This elevates his choice of VP to a much more important level than normal. All partisanship aside, I don't think that picking someone with such a minimal background and no foreign policy credentials at all, will assuage people's fears on that ground. Further, by choosing someone with such limited experience it effectively hamstrings McCain's attempts to paint Obama as unready to lead. All Obama needs to say back is, "Hey, you picked someone far less qualified (on paper at least) and you seem to think SHE'S ready to lead."

Pandering. That's how this will be viewed by a lot of people. If he thinks Hillary Clinton's supporters will blindly switch over to McCain just because he chose a woman, I think he's seriously mistaken. About the only things Palin and H Clinton have in common are their race and their gender. As for her sterling ethics record, the only reason for this is because she's so darned inexperienced. Her only political experience prior to becoming Alaska governor in 2006 comes from being a member of a city council and mayor of a town of about 8000 people. Th-th-th that's all folks, as Porky Pig might say.

I have yet to meet a liberal who thinks it was a good idea to intern Japanese-Americans during WW II. If the crowd of purported liberals you know cheer for this TheScout, then I can only say you need to associate more broadly with a better class of liberals. (If your point was that people turn a blind eye to some of FDR's, or other presidents', mistakes well then perhaps we can agree on that and while we're at it, maybe we could agree that it would be nice to teach a more thorough version of history instead of lionizing certain personalities and acting as if they could do no wrong. However, on balance I would also say that for all the poor choices that certain past presidents may have made, most also made enough really good choices to present a fairly balanced historical view. I'm not certain that the same will be said of Bush in 50 years. He's just a screw-up through and through, in my decidedly personal opinion.)

Two thoughts: 1) Biden is far from "safe" because you really never know what will come out of his mouth at any inopportune moment. 2) So he chose a white guy, so what? Fact is, the ranks from which to choose are still overwhelmingly populated by white guys. Well ok, three thoughts: 3) As for the Reps, I don't think McC will choose Lieberman, much as I'd like him to (spelling victory for Obama). I think he'll choose Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty or else Mitt Romney. But hey, what do I know, I didn't think Obama would pick Biden either. We'll find out on Friday.

non-member.

"I learned in these kinds of situations with parents that you need to be as specific as possible, say a few words as possible and let them speak their piece. But dont let them lower your standard. " Great advice. Hopefully dad in this scenario will come to his senses but in the meantime, from all that has been written I would say you did the right thing. Stick to your guns on this, all the while being the "reasonable party," and it will most likely work itself out Who knows, even if you lose this young man from your troop, your response may be enough to make him think twice before doing something similar in more serious contexts in the future.

I hadn't heard of this before - let us know how it turns out, will you please? To try to be more helpful to you: since the bags are coming from TE, why don't you email them and ask them what to expect? At the very least they ought to be able to tell you how much popcorn a tin of kernels should give you when popped. If you need to experiment at home, buy a cheap-o bag of kernels at the grocery store and try it out to see how many cups of popped corn bags of the size you have will hold. (This message has been edited by lisabob)

In the original thread tommymcl posts that he is helping to start up a new unit in a poor inner city neighborhood. A big HOO-RAH for him! He mentions that a lot of kids in this neighborhood have never camped outside, have no safe & local outdoor places to play, and don't know how to swim. He mentions as well that fund raising in the local community is a challenge and that one small way others could help out is to donate gently used uniforms. (As an aside, I don't think he mentioned whether it is a cub pack or a troop? For some reason I'm thinking it is a pack though.) My question for all of us readers: We talk about expanding diversity in scouting and being a brother to all scouts. What does that mean to you in concrete terms in situations like this? What specific types of help, brotherhood, assistance, moral support, whatever, do you think would be appropriate to offer, or for the original poster to ask other units for? As an example - in my council we have no central uniform bank that units like this one could draw upon. And while lots of local leaders and units might be happy to donate some uniforms to a struggling new unit, how would I even know they were out there, as a typical Scouter? I have not seen this happen yet but it seems fairly easy for the folks on various district committees to send out a notice to all current leaders that the district has new units who need the following types of support: 1) uniforms 2) outdoor gear 3) offers for joint activities to help kick start the program 4) flags & stands 5) excess craft/game supplies (cubs) 6) connections with local groups like the Y or the local school (university?) pool/athletics complex so these kids can get a taste of those facilities and activities at a rate the unit can afford 7) offers of transportation (if needed) for those new leaders to get them to training/U of Scouting the first year What else???

OK wait, forgive me but now I'm confused. Is laser tag now "ok?" Or is it back to "not ok?" And if the latter, did any groups actually seize the short opportunity to do laser tag while it was (briefly? 10 minutes?) within the parameters of acceptable G2SS guidelines? Seems like this issue has flip flopped more times than a politician running for election. I need a score card.

"diversity" among my fellow Wood Badgers was a bit of a weak point. Truthfully there isn't much racial diversity in large parts of our council, and of course that's the first thing people thought of. So people got a little more fast and loose with interpretations. One of the better ones I saw/knew of was a fellow who went around to various packs and did presentations on how to include scouts with significant cognitive impairments in a "typical" pack. His presentation was really well done and well received in most places. I can't be sure it actually resulted in other units opening their doors to families of scouts with disabilities though. Many of the others were more along the line of what Tokala describes in his first paragraph. Personally I think cross-unit/cross-program contact is likely to be a very weak approach to this ticket item, unless perhaps you are bringing units together from very different social or cultural backgrounds. Just having boy scouts show up at a cub event is not "diversity." One thing I think would be helpful is for WB staffers to have knowledge of some demographic data for the areas where their WB participants are coming from. (US Census data for example - easy to find on the web once you know it is there - look for the "American Fact Finder" and plug in your zip code. There's even a mapping function so you can see where different groups of people live right down to the block-by-block level. Cool stuff) I say this because often time there is significant economic diversity even in an area that appears to be very homogeneous on the surface. People simply are not aware of it because they tend not to go outside their own (closely defined) neighborhoods and because neighborhood schools mean most kids in the same part of town are likely to have similar economic backgrounds.

I have used variations of this game (well before attending WB - there's a whole literature out there on decision making that includes these sorts of models) in some of the classes I teach, where we discuss the problems associated with negotiating international agreements. When a student or handful of students know in advance what is happening, they play the game differently, thus altering the "typical" outcome. This may be good in some regards but it depends on the lesson we are attempting to teach, too. So when this game got started at WB I pretty much knew what was going to happen. And yes, it probably did change what I took away from the game. I don't recall it as being fun or enlightening. In fact I recall thinking it wasn't especially well-executed and didn't really achieve the outcome intended, and was more than a bit heavy handed at the point in the course when it occurred. But maybe my view might have been different if I hadn't known what the point was from the outset.

OK CNY, let's assume that you'll end up as the CC but not the TDL. Since you mention that you've been a CC in the past and it wasn't your cup of tea, it seems worth looking more closely at the good, bad, and ugly sides of this position this time around. So what are your resources: 1) Wood Badge skills related to developing a shared vision/mission for the unit, conflict management, and leadership, which maybe you didn't have the last time around; 2) Wood Badge contacts (did you take WB in your home council?) - the day you accept this position as CC, start emailing and calling those folks from your WB class and your WB association (if you have one) whom you admire, tell them you're taking on a personal challenge to hold a position you struggled with last time, and start asking for specific types of support. Maybe one of them can become the unit UC. Maybe one of them has a boy scout troop that will provide a den chief for a wolf or bear den (forget the Webelos unless/until the WDL either wakes up or leaves). Maybe somebody can be an informal mentor for your new Cubmaster. Maybe you just need somebody to have a weekly/monthly venting coffee(beer? stronger??) session with. Maybe somebody could offer one or more great, sure-fire ADULT committee exercises to build a sense of teamwork here. 3) School contacts, church contacts, etc. Your son's school doesn't have a pack anymore, fine. But are you really telling me that neither you nor your spouse know any of the parents of other 1st grade boys though? Your son didn't have any friends last year in kindergarten? Nobody came over to the house for play dates? No neighbor kids whose dads you've talked with out in the driveway? Call up the most with-it moms and dads of some of those kids your son plays with, and get them to commit to joining the same pack as you. Tell them you can all car-pool. Sell scouting to them personally and then once they're hooked but good, start relying on them to become your Tiger den leaders. Don't rely on the pack to sell them; bring them in the door right along with you. That gives you a core of people you already know you can rely on. 4) New parents you don't know yet, who join the pack this fall. Sure, many of them won't know a darn thing about cub scouts. But with you there to welcome and guide them, that won't last long and you might have a whole group of new, dynamic, positive-thinking leaders. Recruit hard for Tigers and Wolves, where you have no "stuck in their ways" types of leaders to deal with. Get them started strong and on the right path and let them take off. Just because your son is a Tiger does NOT NOT NOT mean you have to end up as Tiger DL. What you do need, though, is to help locate and start a new Tiger DL who can do a good job so that you won't feel burdened or guilty about not doing it yourself. 5) District training options (if they exist). You're a Wood Badger, start pulling those strings. Get the best trainer in the district to come to your pack and deliver some kind of training at a committee meeting. Include the DLs. I know they're not part of the committee but now isn't the time to worry about that - all training is good training when in the situation you describe. If there is no training team or they're all truly awful, you can at least give each and every leader multiple opportunities, reminders, and (eventually) kudos for making use of all the online training they can get their keyboards on, including YPT. For that matter, push YPT to every single PARENT in the pack (not just leaders), who will most likely then become allies in pushing your leaders to at least do that training. Plain and simple, give new leaders every reason to get trained right away, and many will do it. Give older leaders a little push plus indirect pressure from others (parents) and several more will go along with the group. Make it so easy, so natural, so obvious for them that it becomes hard to say no. Some will still avoid it but they'll be outnumbered and dis-empowered. 5) Your new Cubmaster. Invite him out for coffee or over for dinner or whatever. Take the time to talk honestly (BUT POSITIVELY) with him about what cubbing can be, what he hopes to see happen with the pack, why he agreed to be the CM, and just a couple of ideas you have for how to help him. See if you can work as a team. If so then that WDL is going to find himself with no power. Whatever you do, frame it in a positive way. If you can keep it positive, if you can build allies, and if you can recruit new folks who are willing to try it the BSA way first then you can have a solid pack pretty quickly, given the dearth of existing "leadership." If you can't maintain a (mostly) positive approach then I submit that you will be miserable, cub scouting will become a burden, and your son won't enjoy it much either. Not to mention that your spouse will probably get sick of the constant drama and angst. If that's the reality of the situation then my advice is very simple: don't bother with this pack and go find a different one even if it means going outside the school district.

First off, let's not make this yet another thread about insurance - that's not CNY's main issue right now and it is easy to get bogged down. Spin off if you just can't resist picking apart that topic. CNY, here are my questions/concerns for you: 1) Who is the CO? Can they be an asset here, if properly nurtured? Or are they beyond reach and would as soon dump the pack as help get it on track? 2) As CC, and particularly given the rest of the situation and assuming an absentee CO, you would end up playing a very large role in recruiting other adult leaders. It looks like you need (at least) a Tiger DL, 2 Wolf DLs, and possibly a Webelos II DL, not to mention one or more Asst Cubmasters and some committee members. Is recruiting other adults something you are good at? Do you have some adults in mind? Maybe some other parents of Tiger-aged boys, who you know from your son's class? Or other scouters who would be willing to serve for a year even without kids in the pack, just to help things get re-started? If this isn't one of your strengths (and for some it REALLY is not) then I think you're paddling against a strong current here. 3) We know the Webelos 1 DL is a piece of work from your description. Is this fellow likely to stick things out? Supposing he does, he's got a max of about 18 months left in the program. Can you envision waiting him out? The pack my son ended up in had WDLs (W1 and W2) just like this when we joined - well actually the whole situation sounds scarily familiar. One of them stepped down - the other did not, but over the course of about 18 months he became increasingly powerless over the group as people came to see other ways of doing things. His den stuck together and wouldn't be a part of many new things the pack started doing - oh well. Of his entire den of about 9-10 boys, all "crossed over" to boy scouting but only 1 actually joined a troop (not the DLs son either) and even that boy only lasted about 3 months. It was hard watching this happen but there wasn't much that could be done about it at the time. Can you stand having one den that just doesn't mesh with the pack, if this guy will neither change, nor quit? 4) Can you make this fun for your son? If you are up to your ears in all of this, will it be at his expense? I hope you don't take offense at that because none is meant, but I know (from personal experience) that kids are very perceptive and if parents aren't having a good time it can seep into the kid's experience too. I wish you luck, sounds like a tough decision to make.

Re: troop committee challenge, having had the same type of lousy training experience TwoCubDad describes, I find myself encouraging people to do the online version so that they at least get the proper information. However, it does lack the interaction with others that has the potential to make training a great experience. So, if you think that your district's training is suspect, or if there's just no way in the world that your committee members will commit to attending a "live" training, the online version is at least competent and may be a non-threatening starting point. Maybe it could be followed up by a group discussion at a committee meeting (assuming your CC is on board of course).

Our rate was probably around 70-80%, but as BW says it depends heavily on how you follow up, as well as what sort of event this was - a targeted "Join Scouting" night will get you better quality sign-ups than some non-scouting event, but conversely you may get more sign ups at a general event (school, church social, etc.) because you're reaching an audience that maybe hadn't even thought about scouting yet. Generally speaking, people who are interested enough to provide you their contact info, are interested enough to join if you do your part to follow through. The places where that turned out not to be the case were mostly where a parent of an older boy (4th-5th grade in cub terms) decided that the child would be too busy with school that year, or where they had a conflict with meeting nights. In the former, there's little you can do except to let them know that the door is always open if things should change; in the latter, you could still refer them to other packs in the area who might meet on nights they could attend.

I don't have access to any of my books right now but I seem to recall something in the Webelos handbook about the parts of the scout badge, including the overhand knot symbolizing "good turn daily" business. One of the requirements for arrow of light was to describe/explain the parts of the scout badge. Maybe the scouter in question was expecting that a young man who recently (?? guessing here - you didn't mention the age of the scout) earned AoL would already know that? In other words maybe it was intended to be a softball, albeit one that turned out not to be in reality.

Is it the same 6 dads/scouts on a lot of the camp outs? If yes, and if you can (gently) get them to buy into re-orienting themselves, then you have a positive core of folks to work with. Buy your SM and CC a friendly cup of coffee (or whatever) and chat about what you are seeing. Ask for them to help you understand where things are at, what their plans for the troop are, and what you can realistically do to help them move the group back toward "true north." On the other hand, if those 6 dads who go on most of the outings don't want to change and like things just fine the way they are, if they acknowledge that they do things differently because they "know" their way works "better" than the BSA methods, then forget it, they won't change. Then the question becomes, just how far out of bounds are they? Is it that they go camping with the boys because hey, camping is fun, but they more or less leave the boys alone once they get there? Or is it that they are hovering over the kids every minute, pitching their tents, cooking their meals, telling them when to stand and sit, etc.? The first is easier to manage than the second scenario. In the latter case you need to decide whether you can stick it out until/unless the family camping club moves on because you aren't going to change them. (You know the joke about teaching pigs to fly? a waste of your time and just annoys the pig?) And also whether your son is happy with the troop, and whether there is a core of newer guys who are willing to do things differently. 20 scouts isn't that many so the addition of even a few new folks with a common set of expectations can change the group dynamic fairly rapidly. But barring that, it may be that you find yourself pulling back a bit if your son is happy where he is but you are not.