I assume that everyone has read the September 2004 issue of the Bulletin. In it, AMC Chair Dr. Becker's "Con-Jean-ially speaking" column illogically compared AML with AARP, the outfit that purports to uphold the interests of retired people. Dr. Becker sees American Mensa and AARP as almost identical, with advantage to AARP. That's like claiming that apples and squid are virtually indistinguishable life forms, with similar purposes, feeding habits, appearance, flavor, habitat, etc. Both squid and apples are, after all, carbon-based life forms.
AARP is a superb example of a nonprofit corporation with a specific, stated purpose. It is coincidentally designed to generate sheltered income and handsomely reward those who manage and distribute that income. Unlike Mensa, it rewards its dues-paying members with real value in the form of a wide variety of discounts. Those members, incidentally, have absolutely no say in how AARP is run, or what its goals are. This appears to be how Dr. Becker sees the future of American Mensa: a society of dues payers obedient to the will of their managers.
Dr. Becker states in her column, "We have always allowed [emphasis added] individual members to vote and accorded them full rights and privileges, with no requirement to do anything at the local level." "Allowed"? Is voting on Mensa matters a special privilege accorded the members by "we"? Who is "we" — AMC? Dr. Becker and the rest of AMC would not be there had the members not voted them into office. We, the members, own AML: Witness the recent necessity of a "yes" vote by a majority of corporate owners to amend our bylaws.
As for our "rights and privileges," those are spelled out by our constitution and bylaws and the U.S. Constitution. AML may not encroach on the Bill of Rights, though it is attempting to do so under the guise of risk management, which is making it increasingly difficult for volunteers to function locally. Suggested topics for risk management, at least those we've learned of, include room sharing, ride sharing, food handling, alcoholic beverages, what local group newsletters may publish, etc. That "et cetera" includes all the items hired risk managers have identified, but which the general membership knows nothing of because, according to AMC, telling us would add risk.
Why have I picked on Dr. Becker, who has only one personal vote on AMC? Because she wrote that appalling column. Because she is the AMC Chair. Because as AMC Chair she appointed several unelected but voting AMC members who, presumably, will vote in accordance with her wishes in return for the perks of office.
Despite putative control of a block of votes, Dr. Becker has not had things entirely her way on AMC. That she admits to disagreement on AMC regarding allocation of funds and the direction in which to take Mensa is a possible indication that many on the AMC may be reluctant to fall in line with her on vital issues.
Perhaps it is time to revisit the AML Constitution and Bylaws. We know that mistakes were made in writing the current documents; witness the recent all-out effort to get votes enabling the continuance of Mensa business. Incidentally, that "yes" vote by a majority of the members belies the idea that the vast majority of our members are uninvolved.
Recent Mensa history and applications to the Nominating Committee this year demonstrate that AMC officers expect to climb toward the Chair in a step-by-step process. The claim is made that this ensures continuity within AMC; no need to reconstruct everything after each election. Yes, continuity within AMC has value, but it also facilitates the continuance of cliques, of power blocs; and, if bad policies have been instituted, it guarantees the continuance of those policies.
I submit that bad policy has ruled AMC in recent times. Membership is down from its high in the eighties. More paid staffers deal with the details of fewer members. Under the guise of risk management, all freedom of action is curtailed. Ride sharing, room sharing, food sharing are becoming verboten; sharing involves risk.
But there's hope for the future, and for reminding us of that we can thank Dr. Becker. As she herself stated in her column, we are still "allowed" to vote.