USPSA Presidential Election

According to my Geekish Spidey-Sense (and the USPSA By-Laws), we in the United States Practical Shooting Association are soon to begin the process of electing a new President.


I remember the Presidential Debate which took place at the 1999 Limited Nationals in Las Vegas, Nevada. Michael Voigt was the winning candidate, and he is completing his second term in office.

According to the USPSA By-Laws, the president is elected for a four-year term of office ... which suggests that campaining should begin next year (2007) and the new President should take office in the following year (2007).

ARTICLE 6 - ELECTION OF PRESIDENT AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS: 6.1 The President:

The President shall:

i.) be elected by vote of the individual membership, one vote per member,

ii.) be elected for a term of four years,

iii.) take office on January first following the year of his election,

iv.) serve until his successor is elected and takes office,

v.) be a resident of the United States Region, and

vi.) be Life Member to hold office.

Therefore, by my figuing, we should be looking at a new campaign season in 2007, with the elected president to take office in 2008.

It's not too soon for us to begin thinking about what we want in a new USPSA president. I haven't been thinking about this for too long, so the following list may be a little thin, but it seems to me that the criteria for a new president should include the following (Note that when I speak of "He/Him/His", I do so in the general sense of gender-nonspecificity; I'm certainly not suggesting that a female candidate would be less qualified, and if one should be proposed the future discussions would use the pronouns "She/Her/Hers"):

• The goal of a president should be the advancement and improvement of 'Practical Pistol' (and by extention 'Practical Firearm') competition within the United States of America Region of IPSC.
• Personal/Professional advancement or aggrandizement should not be a reason for his candidacy.
• Candidates should be able to identify and define specific goals which would lead to the advancement of USPSA competition and the organization.
• Milestones and timelines (eg: establish active programs to recruit juniors should result in the increase of membership by x number of new junior competitors by 20**) should be identified and should be a reasonable goal.
• Specific steps to achieve these goals should be defined.
• One of the primary planks in the candidate platform should be a determination to establish and fund new marketting efforts.
• Candidates should be able to define "growth" activities without reference to "creating new competitive Divisions" to "attract new shooters whose (gun, magazines, caliber, etc.) have not yet been separately been acknowledged". We already have so many divisions it is almost impossible to field sufficient competitors in the 'niche' divisions to justify distributing awards. The goal should be to encourage more mainstream shooters, not to diversify to the point of absurdity ... which we may already have done.
• The relationship between IPSC and USPSA has (tentatively) been re-defined to allow USPSA to maintain IPSC Regional certification without ignoring traditional values and legal restrictions in USPSA. The next president should be able to start with this concept and establish a formal relationship without conceding valued USPSA priorities.

Some of the planks I've mentioned may not seem important to you as an USPSA member. Others may not be clear, because I haven't done a good job of defining them.

There may be other planks which you think are important indicators of a viable candidate for USPSA president, but I haven't mentioned.

If any of these situations define your priorities, I encourage you to comment here. The goal is to achieve a consensus of what a viable candidate for USPSA President should look like BEFORE we begin to evaluate the resumes of the candidates.

Also, this may be a good start for candidates to consider what the 'hot button' issues of this election may be, and begin to consider how their own priorities fit with the General Membership.

I know this isn't a "forum" context, as it doesn't really allow for full comentary. However, you may choose to take this concept to another website (such as the USPSA Forum or the Brian Enos Forum) and discuss it there.

You will note that I haven't even mentioned competition rules. It is my expectation that a presidential candidate who meets the criteria already mentioned will also be able and willing to negotiate a reasonable next-version of the USPSA Rule Book with IPSC, to the satisfaction of all concerned parties.

Don't agree?

Tell me why!

PS: I don't want this to sound like a criticism of the tenure of Michael Voigt. He has served honorably and productively for two terms, and among his many accomplishments are both the glastnost ("openness) and perestroika ("restructuring") between IPSC and USPSA.

NB:
I apologise for appearing to suggest a similarity of relations between IPSC and USPSA with those between the "World Community" and USSR. The situations are not similar, but the terminology is remarkably appropriate even though the sociological / political division was much more pronounced for the USSR.