John Sims
On the issue of "groups" taking positions on government action, this seems to me to be a US tradition. Consider the role of Unions in government. While I am not a fan (in general) of unions, there is an expression that I like that says: "If you got a Union, you probably did something to deserve it". If the government does not take into consideration the public's point of view then collective bargaining is something to be considered. Yes/No?
John
Hey John,
So yes, groups often take positions. The ACLU. The Republican Party platform. But they (groups) often don't take positions as groups. Not every group has, as part of its mandate or purpose, collecting data and/or formulating positions in an effort to influence government decisions. I think that groups as politically and ideologically diverse as many discussion boards are (like WZ) go down that road at their peril -- bad feelings, resignations, etc. Think about some of the topics we've had -- wag bags, the Whitney permitting system -- and how it would play out if WZ was to start taking official positions as a group on such things, in an effort to influence government decisionmakers. Of course, if that is what the board of WHA decides (once the board is operational again), that is its prerogative. But I'd like to know that -- speaking only for myself, I join groups like this for advice and information, not for political engagement, and not to have an entity speak on my behalf. So that is relevant information.
In any event, from the emails above, I don't think that is what is contemplated. Does not sound like WHA's board has made a decision to take a position on either the process issue or the substance.
Thanks.
