For President Votes Clifford Mishler 5,047 Patricia A. Jagger Finner 3,213 For Vice President Thomas G. Hallenbeck 1* Successful Candidates for Governor Votes Chester L. Krause 5,845 Joseph E. Boling 4,730 Walter A. Ostromecki 4,453 Scott T. Rottinghaus 4,339 Wendell A. Wolka 4,179 J.P. Martin 4,066 Jeff C. Garrett 3,781 Unsuccessful Candidates for Governor Votes Alan Herbert 3,613 Michael L. Ellis 3,111 Jeffrey Swindling 2,703 Thomas A. Palmer, Jr. 2,627 Paul Hollis 2,498 Brian E. Fanton 2,335 Michael S. Turrini 1,961
I'm disapointed that Mike Ellis lost , he's a good man , a man of his word . Hope he runs next time . rzage
Man I cannot believe I didn't win... I was qualified, and was the perfect man for the job. LOL!!!! Congrats to Clifford Mishler
Election is a Process 8,000 votes were cast from 33,000 members total. The way this works is via campaigning. The national bi-annual conventions are a must. People run for the Board immediately after the last election has closed. Sometimes, they run for four years before they win. Tenacity counts. It shows that you really want the job and therefore deserve it. In addition, strong local support in several regions is important. You have to visit clubs and conventions outside of your home area in order to establish visibility. It can be hard. It might not be mandatory if you are from California and work the Pacific Coast for 3500 votes. Basically, however, the winners are those who have national recognition. It is a national club. Publications help. If you are a dealer, then you have customers who recognize your name. Your work for them is validated by their voting for you. (Or not. You have to consider that. Some dealers never leave money on the table. They don't win elections. Elections are popularity contests. Bottom line.) Joseph Boling has been the chief judge of exhibits for many years. It does not matter so much what you do, but you have to do something. A couple of people here have the visibility to serve on the ANA Board if they wish. Mike M. Michael E. Marotta "Knowledge: share it."
I agree. Mike Ellis sat at my table at the banquet tonight. I told him I voted for him and was sorry he didn't win. (I think he is the only one of the seven I voted for that did not win.) Mike said over 4,000 people have told him they voted for him but he only got a little over 3,000 votes! :mouth: Maybe with a little campaigning he can get elected next time. I would certainly vote for him again.
That is how it always is - heck, when it comes to a race like this where only the top few people win, what the newer guys need to ask the voters to do is only vote for a few...such as.... If only the top 6 win - then the people running for election should only ask for you to vote for 2 or 3. It sure does help out the numbers in alot of cases. Speedy
Thanks for the info Speedy. I wonder what new & great things will be forthcoming from these newly elected officials.
Speculations ... Well, that goes to the heart of the question: who wins elections? The ANA has 33,000 members but only 8,000 voted. Many of those (perhaps most) are likely to be people who have actually attended ANA conventions. The voters are typically those people who read Board meeting minutes. They go to the seminars in Colorado Springs. They subscribe to the periodicals. They read their Numismatists sooner or later. (Of course, many who voted have done none of these, but I submit that the generalization holds.) My perception is that Alan Herbert's running was a matter of tradition. He is a writer and that tends to define his preferred communication style. He is not someone who speaks up and speaks out. Walter Ostromecki was elected back to the Board after having been kicked off over his refusal to sit down, shut up and do as he is told. He took the truth to the membership and was censured for that -- and the members returned him to the Board as their expression of dissatisfaction with the governing and general managment of the ANA. Now, Alan Herbert might have been equally distraught, but it is not like him to be bold. He does not have to be. His work on behalf of the hobby is known to all who read about modern American numismatics. That said, Alan Herbert was not returned to the Board by a relatively small margin of votes that I think reflect a percentage of newer active members among whom he does not have that automatic recognition. That might speak to a wider change.
Traders and Guardians; Market and Power Hopefully, nothing. I recommend highly when you get a chance Systems of Survival by Jane Jacobs. Jacobs says that there are two ways of making a living, as a Guardian or as a Trader. This reflects the same broader theme of Murray Rothbard's Power and Market. Even though we buy and sell money for fun, we numismatists often fall into thought patterns that are anti-market and contrary to commerce. The idea of Leadership is one of them. The ANA suffered two reverses as a result of seeking new, bold leadership. The fact is that true, innovative change comes from unexpected people and unpredicted (unpredictable) events. No one asked for the television to be invented. No one asked for home computers or telephones with cameras in them. Someone got the idea and then sold it. So, too, with numismatics. No ANA president decided that Errors were Hot or that Phone Cards are Not. The ANA did not launch National Cherrypicking Month. Collectors had been using third party graders for 15 years before the ANA made one company their official grader -- and as well deserved as that might be, collectors still prefer this or that company for this or that coin based on previous experience. In other words, the Market decides differently than Power does. Traders have preferences that Guardians do not. The Boy Scout Merit Badge for Collecting does not include cracking out a coin and resubmitting it, cherrypicking a dealer, artificially retoning a coin and successfully passing it off as natural in an open club auction, or demonstrating to your troop leader why Red Book pricing is always wrong but always important nonetheless. The point is that Boy Scouting is the paradigm of the Leader or Guardian mode of survival. That model applies to the ANA Board, as well. Too often, we confuse that ability to take care of the status quo with the ability to discover new horizons. None of the world's "great leaders" has done the world much good. Same is true of the ANA. When it comes to leaders, less is more.
Congratulations to all those who ran in the election. I know it's disppointing to those who did not win, but hopefully they'll try again. I voted for three of the folks who did not get elected, mainly because I felt some "new blood" might help the ANA in its fight to remain relevent.
