Back in the 1990s, the APA wanted to start engaging directly in political lobbying, but such activities would not be legal under the APA's nonprofit charter, so it spun off a new organization with a different legal to do political lobbying on its behalf, the APAPO. Clinicians, for whom most of the lobbying was done, had to pay a hefty extra fee, in addition to their APA membership fee, to support the APAPO. This caused a ruckus in the early 2000s which led to a lawsuit, which APA settled out of court by paying millions of dollars back to the members who had paid the fees, without admitting any wrongdoing. If you're interested in more detail, it is covered in my and Robin Cautin's December 2017 American Psychologist article about the history of the APA.
Best, Chris ....... Christopher D Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, ON M3J 1P3 43.773759, -79.503722 [email protected] http://www.yorku.ca/christo > On Feb 8, 2018, at 10:56 PM, Michael Palij <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > One of the Divisions that thinks I am a member of it, > sent out the message below from Frank Worrell who > is a member of APA board of directors. I'm not sure > what it all mean (I am also not sure why I keep receiving > practitioner relevant emails from APA since I have never > been a clinician, just an academic and a researcher). > > Any practitioners on Tips know what is going on? > > -Mike Palij > New York University > [email protected] > > > Note Town Hall Meetings: > > Practitioner Town Hall Meeting, TODAY, February 8, 2018 at 7 p.m. ET. > To register, go to > https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/7788848400694268675 > > Scientist/Educator Town Hall Meeting, February 13 at 730 p.m. ET. > To register, go to > https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6321832707915751939 > > Public Interest Town Hall Meeting, February 15 at 630 p.m. ET > To register, go to https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/38998966431677699 > Dear Division 52 Members, > I am not sure you have heard about this, but there’s an interesting > development at APA that seems to be beneficial to the field at large. APA is > requesting public comment, so please take the chance to have your voice > heard, whether you agree or disagree with this change > > Here’s the proposal: > > Some of you may know that APA has a companion organization (referred to as > APAPO) that is a C6 organization (can engage in unlimited lobbying) focused > on lobbying for practitioner needs, and a limited set of education issues, > that was distinct from regular APA (a non-profit C3 organization). APA > recognizes now that having the C6 organization focus almost exclusively on > practice activities limits the degree to which APA can engage in lobbying on > behalf of science, education, and public interest issues as well (which is > perhaps needed now more than ever in this very troubling political climate!). > Thus, APA is proposing to expand the scope of this separate organization > (and rename it APAIP) to now also include advocacy in all areas of > psychology, including lobbying for more science funds! > > The good news is that the new version of this advocacy organization will not > cost members more – APA wants to use member dues such that everyone is > automatically joining both organizations for the same price as it used to > cost for joining just the regular (C3) APA. This means no more “practice > assessment.” Also, all dues will remain flat for at least the next three > years. > > There’s a useful slide deck > (http://psyciq.apa.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/PublicSlidesFinal.pdf) for > more info. As you can imagine, there are a lot of opinions about this > change. So, please speak up! I think it is a great step to include advocacy > for the field in a much broader and inclusive way than was done in the past, > including for education and science issues! This change could be significant > because advocacy is something APA does well, and they have the power to > actually make a difference on a variety of issues (like NIMH funding levels, > funds for training grad students, etc.). > > To offer an opinion, please visit the public comment site at the following > url: (http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/4139840/PublicMemberComments) – it just > takes a second, and it will be important for APA to hear whether this is > something you want or not. This site also has links for frequently asked > questions and a webinar if you want more information about the proposed > change. > > Also, if you have any comments for me directly that you want me to know > about, please email me directly at [email protected]. > > Frank C. Worrell, Ph.D. > Member-at-Large > APA Board of Directors > > > --- > > You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe click here: > http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62bd92&n=T&l=tips&o=52085 > > (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) > > or send a blank email to > leave-52085-430248.781165b5ef80a3cd2b14721caf62b...@fsulist.frostburg.edu > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=52086 or send a blank email to leave-52086-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
