by Ted Elzinga, Far West Regional Vice Chairman
Many elections are taking place these days, but the only official results I have at this time are from Orange County Mensa. Greg De Hoogh takes over as President and Denise Grushon becomes Oracle Editor. Appreciation goes to outgoing President Art Mattson and editor Nancy Hand.
Much has been discussed and debated in Mensa in recent years about authority. My dictionary defines authority as, "The right to command, enforce laws, exact obedience, determine, or judge." When we use this unequivocal denotation, no individual Mensa entity has any authority except that which is given them by those who are governed. In other words, it is Mensa's members who, as a group, have the ultimate authority.
Students of political science realize that the entire membership cannot possibly be concerned with the day-to-day business or government of a society so the voting members elect representatives to do that work for the group. These representatives are vested with limited authority to make decisions congruent with the will of the majority of the members. Accordingly, Mensa bylaws provide for a Board of Directors at the local, national, and international levels.
At times, difficult and controversial decisions must be made, so even the elected representatives must use majority rule to formulate these decisions. At no time should a difficult or controversial decision be made by one person; that would border on autocracy. Thus, the LocSecs, Presidents and Chairmen have no authority on their own to make binding decisions. Their primary function is to conduct business meetings where the elected Board of Directors make those decisions.
Because a majority of the elected representatives rules, this majority is entrusted to make the weighty decisions in Mensa. The exceptions are action committees such as Executive, Nominating, Election, Bylaws, etc. They are authorized to act on their own, within a prescribed mandate, and are subject only to the scrutiny and the possible dissolution by the Board that elected them. These procedures are generally accepted for the efficient and effective operation of a society, because these procedures are best able to implement the will of the members, which must be foremost.
This brings us to the office of Ombudsman, a much misunderstood office. The Ombudsman is in most cases appointed by the Board of Directors, not elected by the members. Therefore, logically, the Ombudsman must answer to the appointers. It should be readily apparent that an appointee is delegated a specific duty. However, an appointee cannot in any case overrule the elected appointers because that too would border on autocracy, the bane of representative government and the surest form of subverting the will of the members.
The very human tendency is to place confidence and validity in the entity that agrees with us. However, good government must provide for all situations without regard to personal expediency. The crucial component of a representative democracy, and the most workable form of government, is power of the majority of the people. The people must have the ultimate control, and in Mensa we exercise that control by way of the ballot box. The progressive-thinking people who formulated our constitution and bylaws understood this and were not hampered by the prejudice that comes from being involved with specific cases.
It is purposely difficult to change bylaws. Members should be wary when proponents seek to change laws, especially if such a move is motivated by a personal involvement in a specific case. Rules are intended as guidelines for all, not as remedies for specific personal issues. Rules are best built on principles not specific to an individual case.
I'd like to respond to portions of a letter that has been published in a couple of Region 9 newsletters. Some possible misunderstandings require clarification.
"The National Office is in shambles." In fact, the National Office is in better shape than it has been in the past 10 years. We have had our share of problems but I am convinced that those are all behind us.
"The expensive new computer system is a festering sore, after a year still barely functional." Again, this could hardly be further from the truth. The new computer system does things that we could never do before. It is so far superior to the old system that the old HP pales in comparison. The transition took a few months but that was expected and predicted. There were no major unforeseen problems.
"Test score evaluation is at a virtual standstill." Not true. It was at a standstill about eight months ago but that is ancient history.
"There are bylaws violations, ignored ASIEs and ignored actions by the Ombudsman..." The Ombudsman recommended violating a bylaw to resolve the violation of a bylaw. The Election Committee and the AMC decided that two violations do not resolve anything and so declined the recommendation of the Ombudsman. There were no ASIEs ignored.