Susan, Al, Lori, et. al.,
Yes! Great you got this out on pen-l as soon as possible is better.
I've been feeling guilty and depressed about this since I heard - but was
not able (or not up to) to log on for a while.
Lori - Yes, I absolutely agree. This is when we need Roemer, Heibroner,
Galbraith etc. to make a case that this is not the way to run a
professional organization (i.e. to treat members like employees and
dictate conditions to them with no input consultation, warning not to
mention democratic process) Maybe we could scare the "good image" of the
AEA witha legal challenge or just nasty public relations at next meeting.
Anyway its easy to talk...
Al, could you forward letter to Germai and all of us so we have factual
stuff to go on - at least as much as they're willing to share with us
though Al's e-mail appeared to be comprehensive.
Maybe we should write a letter on e-mail and ask Germai to send to all
important URPE members to express their outrage to AEA. An AEA card
burning session in Washington? - maybe that what they want us to do.
I'm thinking out loud here - but I think we need to get something out to
our membership as an urgent emergency message and coordinate with other
groups.
Somebody should call Roemer, Heibroner, Galbraith, I'm thinkingof the
names on Germai's poster -
And I think Al, it seems to me that it would be good if you could call
the AEA and try to talk with them about this before the SC meeting -
maybe get some more dope on how this was done , who's behind it and what
if any appeal process there is , and maybe they have info on the
orginal agreement as well.
Also, we need to contact Frank Thompson and others who have been ASSA
coordinators to see what they know and if there is anything in writing
onthe URPE allotment - although you're probably already trying to do this...
There is also the publicity angle. Should be getting this out in the
press? It might be embarrassing to the ASSA if say the ACLU got into this
or whomever as ideological censorship? Of course we would need to be able
to counter a lot of their psuedo rationales - Maybe I'm just flying off
the handle on this.
Just some midnite meanderings,
Vinceremos !
Ron
**********************************************
Ron Baiman
Dept. of Economics
Roosevelt University Fax: 312-341-3680
430 South Michigan Ave
Chicago, Illinois 60605 Voice: 312-341-3694
**********************************************
On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, L. Johnson wrote:
>
>
> My own personal opinion is that its time for all tenured radicals, and
> otherwise job-secured individuals to make a big stink at the meetings,
> some non-violence clogging of the system (after we exhaust all the
> diplomatic routes)
>
> On Thu, 19 Feb 1998, Fleck_S wrote:
>
> > long post on AEA cutting URPE sessions from 32 to 18 for 1999 ASSA
> > meetings (AND TO 9 FOR 2000)......
> >
> > Hello Pen-lers,
> >
> > I have some dour news that needs some serious thinking and action. Al
> > Campbell, organizer of the Union for Radical Political Economy sessions
> > at the January Economics meetings (ASSA), received a letter from the
> > American Economics Association coordinator of the ASSA indicating that
> > the AEA has deemed it necessary to cut sessions of URPE down to 18 for
> > 1999 in New York, and to 9 by the year 2000. URPE has historically had
> > 30-32 sessions, which has allowed many radical economists to get their
> > way paid to the meetings.
> >
> > Here is part of an email that Al Campbell sent to the URPE Steering
> > Committee on February 10:
> > "The AEA appears to run the ASSA- I just got a letter from the
> > secretary of the AEA, on AEA stationary, annoncing the ASSA is wiping
> > out our slots to the ASSA as we have kown them (signed in his capacity
> > as "ASSA coordinator." ) The letter made very clear they have no
> > intention of considering their decissions (which were made with no
> > input of the affected groups, but of course made in the name of justice,
> > fairness, and so on)
> > "Over 10 years, registration at the ASSA meetings has gone up
> > 3%, while seesions have gone up 27%. That is a crisis as far as they
> > are concerned. (It seems less than crisis proportions ot me, that the
> > number of meetings has gone up 27%) This has caused them two problems,
> > that they sort of throw in to their long letter without being careful on
> > the logic of why their solution is the only solution to these problems.
> > One is that the attendence at some sessions is way down, to what they
> > say is embaraasing to the organizers (one might think the oprganizers
> > could decide that, but they fortunately will decide that for everyone).
> > A second problem seems to be that it is getting harder to get sites for
> > the meetings. They were a little fuzzy on that- they said the larger
> > size makes it harder, and they said that San Francisco and New York are
> > not interested in the ASSA convention in the future, but they did not
> > say that was specidfically because of the size (though they structured
> > the letter to imply that without actually claiming that was the reason)
> > "Anyway, to deal with theis crisis they will cut sessions by an
> > average of 10% this year and 10% next year. URPE will be cut 43.75 %
> > this year and an additional 50% the following year."
> > --end of Al's email...
> >
> > FOR THE MOMENT: The URPE call for papers will proceed, but -in the
> > meantime, before we come to a resolution about the unilateral action and
> > a proper course of action - we can not promise that an application for
> > presentation at a session will be selected. The two organizers of the
> > sessions do not want to be placed in the role of selecting papers - this
> > seems to them undemocratic and unfair.
> >
> > Other groups have also been affected, although the URPE sessions seem to
> > have been affected to a greater extent than others.
> >
> > WE NEED YOUR INPUT: The URPE Steering Committee meets in Washington DC
> > march 7-8, and this will be an important discussion point. (You may
> > attend if you are interested, I'll give details on location where we
> > meet later.) Please send Al and me your comments on what concrete
> > actions can be taken to confront this serious threat to URPEs role in
> > heterodox economics, or _discuss on this list_.
> >
> > POSSIBLE SHORT TERM SOLUTION: URPE will accept proposals and _may_
> > organize poster sessions this year, with 5-6 persons per session.
> > However, each individual _must_ present a formal paper, which has not
> > always happened in the past.
> >
> > POSSIBLE LONG TERM SOLUTION: URPE works with members of ICARE and other
> > affected groups to demand a participatory process in the organization of
> > the ASSA, and possibly (my idea, here) requests that all presenters at
> > ALL AEA/ASSA sessions be allowed to present only once every other year.
> >
> > Looking forward to hearing your input.
> >
> > Susan Fleck
> >
> >
> > PS If you send me private correspondence, please cc to Al, URPE at ASSA
> > organizer. Al Campbell's email is: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > w:(202) 606-5654 x415
> > h:(301) 270-1486
> > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > **********************************
> > My personal opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employer and
> > my postings can not be attributed to my employer.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
