burnpac Posted June 4, 2012 Author Share Posted June 4, 2012 Posted on PA Professional today. http://www.aapa.org/news_and_publications/pa_pro_now/item.aspx?id=4436 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted June 4, 2012 Author Share Posted June 4, 2012 Posted on PA Professional today. http://www.aapa.org/news_and_publications/pa_pro_now/item.aspx?id=4436 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 Posted on PA Professional today. http://www.aapa.org/news_and_publications/pa_pro_now/item.aspx?id=4436 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIPPER Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 good reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIPPER Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 good reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIPPER Posted June 4, 2012 Share Posted June 4, 2012 good reading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted June 5, 2012 Author Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. The House of Delegates is a republic style of governance, with representatives (delegates) elected by the fellow members of the AAPA that reside in their jurisdiction. Delegates are empowered to represent their local AAPA members in the policy setting at the House. It has been the long tradition of the House that delegates vote independently, based on the quality of the testimony presented in reference committee hearings on each resolution. This is not a popularity contest, and quantity of testimony one way or the other doesn't matter. Decisions are made by an informed discussion and majority decision. Everyone at the House has the opportunity to be heard. The census results did figure into the decision-making processes of the House and was mentioned in the testimony of many delegates. In the end, C-05 failed because supporters (me, CA, Tx, Glen, and others), couldn't convince a majority of the delegates present and voting that it was the right thing to do. By the way. The vote tally can't be disclosed because it doesn't exist. Decisions are made either by majority (50% + 1) or supermajority (2/3) votes, and are only recorded that way as they are mostly voice votes. The only time votes are counted is when division is called because there is doubt in the ruling of the Speaker as to the outcome of the voice vote. If the raw numbers represent a majority, or supermajority, then the motion carries, and that is what is recorded in the Summary of Actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted June 5, 2012 Author Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. The House of Delegates is a republic style of governance, with representatives (delegates) elected by the fellow members of the AAPA that reside in their jurisdiction. Delegates are empowered to represent their local AAPA members in the policy setting at the House. It has been the long tradition of the House that delegates vote independently, based on the quality of the testimony presented in reference committee hearings on each resolution. This is not a popularity contest, and quantity of testimony one way or the other doesn't matter. Decisions are made by an informed discussion and majority decision. Everyone at the House has the opportunity to be heard. The census results did figure into the decision-making processes of the House and was mentioned in the testimony of many delegates. In the end, C-05 failed because supporters (me, CA, Tx, Glen, and others), couldn't convince a majority of the delegates present and voting that it was the right thing to do. By the way. The vote tally can't be disclosed because it doesn't exist. Decisions are made either by majority (50% + 1) or supermajority (2/3) votes, and are only recorded that way as they are mostly voice votes. The only time votes are counted is when division is called because there is doubt in the ruling of the Speaker as to the outcome of the voice vote. If the raw numbers represent a majority, or supermajority, then the motion carries, and that is what is recorded in the Summary of Actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burnpac Posted June 5, 2012 Author Share Posted June 5, 2012 It's a shame that the delegate vote tally is not disclosed. For example if a state voted in the census 50/50, and they have 4 delegates. then they should get 2 yay and 2 nay votes. No way to know if the delegates voted by representation or voted their own conscience. This would give us some insight into how well constitutents were represented. I have to read the AAPA staff materials. I wonder what the "merits" are that Michael Doll was referring to- perhaps its in the report. The House of Delegates is a republic style of governance, with representatives (delegates) elected by the fellow members of the AAPA that reside in their jurisdiction. Delegates are empowered to represent their local AAPA members in the policy setting at the House. It has been the long tradition of the House that delegates vote independently, based on the quality of the testimony presented in reference committee hearings on each resolution. This is not a popularity contest, and quantity of testimony one way or the other doesn't matter. Decisions are made by an informed discussion and majority decision. Everyone at the House has the opportunity to be heard. The census results did figure into the decision-making processes of the House and was mentioned in the testimony of many delegates. In the end, C-05 failed because supporters (me, CA, Tx, Glen, and others), couldn't convince a majority of the delegates present and voting that it was the right thing to do. By the way. The vote tally can't be disclosed because it doesn't exist. Decisions are made either by majority (50% + 1) or supermajority (2/3) votes, and are only recorded that way as they are mostly voice votes. The only time votes are counted is when division is called because there is doubt in the ruling of the Speaker as to the outcome of the voice vote. If the raw numbers represent a majority, or supermajority, then the motion carries, and that is what is recorded in the Summary of Actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Thanks for the insight Steve It sounds like you are saying that it is the delegates' interpetation of the testimony thay wholly informs their decision My interest is in how this relates to an issue like this where a recent census demonstrates the desires of their constituency Meaning a state could have 75% of their respondents favor an issue and the delegates are still free to vote their choice. Additionally- that state's PAs would have no idea how their delegate voted as their is no record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Thanks for the insight Steve It sounds like you are saying that it is the delegates' interpetation of the testimony thay wholly informs their decision My interest is in how this relates to an issue like this where a recent census demonstrates the desires of their constituency Meaning a state could have 75% of their respondents favor an issue and the delegates are still free to vote their choice. Additionally- that state's PAs would have no idea how their delegate voted as their is no record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Thanks for the insight Steve It sounds like you are saying that it is the delegates' interpetation of the testimony thay wholly informs their decision My interest is in how this relates to an issue like this where a recent census demonstrates the desires of their constituency Meaning a state could have 75% of their respondents favor an issue and the delegates are still free to vote their choice. Additionally- that state's PAs would have no idea how their delegate voted as their is no record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Steve Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Steve Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Steve Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Fascinating..... Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Fascinating..... Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andersenpa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. Fascinating..... Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coloradopa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. I was on the dias. In no way did Alan discourage the vote. He did remind Glen who called for the vote that there had never been a roll call vote in the history of the HOD. Then someone from the floor asked if there had been a second. Alan called for a second and you could hear crickets. In 9 years in the house that was the first time I have seen a motion fail for the lack of a second. Basically he couldn't get one person to support it. Realistically I thought it was pretty Bush. It would have taken more than half an hour to do the vote and wouldn't have changed a thing. As far as accountability, the delegates are accountable to the people that elected them. If you disagree with the way the vote went, get involved and do something about it. If you want to know how people voted then ask your states chief delegate. I'm sure they know how things went. As far as andesenpa's comment on 75% of a state voting, remember that there were members and non-members voting. Even if 75% voted in a state, it may not have been close to 75% of a state membership. A number of states polled their members and from what I heard most of the membership polls were against. Most state board discussed this and the few that took a stand voted as a block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coloradopa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. I was on the dias. In no way did Alan discourage the vote. He did remind Glen who called for the vote that there had never been a roll call vote in the history of the HOD. Then someone from the floor asked if there had been a second. Alan called for a second and you could hear crickets. In 9 years in the house that was the first time I have seen a motion fail for the lack of a second. Basically he couldn't get one person to support it. Realistically I thought it was pretty Bush. It would have taken more than half an hour to do the vote and wouldn't have changed a thing. As far as accountability, the delegates are accountable to the people that elected them. If you disagree with the way the vote went, get involved and do something about it. If you want to know how people voted then ask your states chief delegate. I'm sure they know how things went. As far as andesenpa's comment on 75% of a state voting, remember that there were members and non-members voting. Even if 75% voted in a state, it may not have been close to 75% of a state membership. A number of states polled their members and from what I heard most of the membership polls were against. Most state board discussed this and the few that took a stand voted as a block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coloradopa Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 From my observations on the floor, I do believe there is an option for a roll call vote. If I understand this correctly, each person would be called upon to cast their vote and their vote could be noted. There was a motion on the floor for a roll call vote at one point but NO ONE seconded the motion, especially after the Speaker of the House openly discouraged such a motion. Basically, as far as I could tell, there is very little to no accountability of how the delegate votes. I was on the dias. In no way did Alan discourage the vote. He did remind Glen who called for the vote that there had never been a roll call vote in the history of the HOD. Then someone from the floor asked if there had been a second. Alan called for a second and you could hear crickets. In 9 years in the house that was the first time I have seen a motion fail for the lack of a second. Basically he couldn't get one person to support it. Realistically I thought it was pretty Bush. It would have taken more than half an hour to do the vote and wouldn't have changed a thing. As far as accountability, the delegates are accountable to the people that elected them. If you disagree with the way the vote went, get involved and do something about it. If you want to know how people voted then ask your states chief delegate. I'm sure they know how things went. As far as andesenpa's comment on 75% of a state voting, remember that there were members and non-members voting. Even if 75% voted in a state, it may not have been close to 75% of a state membership. A number of states polled their members and from what I heard most of the membership polls were against. Most state board discussed this and the few that took a stand voted as a block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CAAdmission Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 This discussion will be academic soon. "Impact" will have no impact in a few more years. The AAPA has not been seen as a force for PAs, so they are being pushed aside. Especially now with CAQs, people have more of an affinity for specialty groups. An ER PA is much more likely to go to SEMPA or ACEP beofre taking time off to go to AAPA. It is sad. When I was a "new" PA, I vividly recall going to jammed conferences running five lectures at a clip and all of the rooms were standing room only. I wasn't in Toronto, but I heard a significant number of lectures were cancelled each day. It is has been easy to perceive the AAPA as not listening to members. Now it looks like they don't always have their act together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.