SeattlePioneer

<< In the district, all Cub Scout activities except Day Camp and Webeloree are run by one person. And she tends to run people who want to help off. “New†district Cub Scout leadership will mean more people volunteering on the Cub Scout side in the long term. Short term may take some time for current Cub leader to volunteer on the district level because of the negative past expereinces with the present chair. But again long term I think it will work out fine. More activities for Cub Scouts to do beyond the pack level. Currently 2 district Cub Scout events, and a third specifically for Webelos. While some activities will merge, Pine Wood Derby comes to mind, activities that only one district has, i.e. Cub Spring camp out, Cubmobile, Webeloree,etc, would enhance program.> Frankly, I'd guess that rehashing districts for reason like this would be ineffective. You run a big risk of losing the friendships and associations which keep districts functioning, and you probably aren;t going to EXPAND the number of activities. From this description, I'd say you need some new district leadership. If you Google "Boy Scout Nominating Committee" you will find a procedure that should be followed annually by which district leadership can be evaluated and replaced by an appointed committee of district leaders. The Committee should also be looking at finding new leadership both in existing units and in the wider community. My district has just gone through this procedure, and has found new and excellent leadership that was waiting to be called to duty all the time, but wasn't asked. The nominating committee is continuing to scour units and the community to develope new leadership for the district level. In my view, more districts ought to be taking advantage of this method every year to have an independent assessment of when new district leaders are needed ----and find them!

Read your Machiavelli. Here's a link you can read the short version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niccol%C3%B2_Machiavelli

<<~~As SM, one of your first tasks will be to set this guy straight. Start by explaining your philosophy and how you intend to operate the troop. Specifically point out how the ideas he has espoused in the past are in conflict with your direction. Don't let him weasel away from it. Tell him square up that if he cannot support the SM, he has no function as an ASM. >> Ummm. Sometimes it's a mistake to take the bull by the horns, especially when it isn;t necessary to do so. If you don't want someone to be an ASM, rather than confront them give them a different job as a Committee Member or something. The easiest time to do this is when rechartering, when a registered Scouter can simply be reassigned to a different position and informed about it after the fact. But heck, you can do that at any time. A good method might be for the Committee Chair to tell the person that he really needs help doing Y job, and will the person help with that? It's the gentle art of sneaking up behind someone.... It can be a better approach than being direct and upfront with someone --- something that is overrated.

Qwaze--- Excellent point: << ~~That said, here are some things we ask in scoutmaster conferences, and maybe you want to be sure someone goes over with your scout this month ... What is morality? Where do your sense of morals come from? Why would you want an award that affirms your "Duty to God"? What to you think of other scouts' pursuit of religion? How important is it to ensure another person's practice of religion as he/she sees fit? Do you ever look at everything around you as some kind of miracle? How important is it to you that the best explanation for all things excludes intervention from a higher power? >> This is an issue that should be discussed as part of Scouting over a period of years, not as a last exit "gotcha" question. Helping boys think through the WIDE variety of things a "duty to God" might mean and the WIDE way such an idea can be satisfied in Scouting should help boys come up with a personally satisfying answer to such a question and issue. Personally, I tended to avoid that kind of issue, but perhaps that was a mistake. Talking about it in no threatening ways and exploring the WIDE range of how that issue can be satisfied by BSA is something perhaps we should be more proactive in dealing with. I will again repeat how I dealt with the issue when I was questioned about this issue by the District Chairman: Q: Do you believe in God? A Yes Q Are you a church member? A No. Q Would you like to join my church? A No. Remember: "Be Prepared" is our motto for a reason! Scouts should be prepared to discuss that issue in honest and reasonable ways. If they aren't they might make spontaneous comments that are poorly thought out and might cause them trouble. So I suggest that as Scout Leaders perhaps we have a duty to help boys think through the issue of "Duty To God" so that they will be prepared to discuss it in a suitable way should they be asked about it.

<<~~I was born in Plains, GA during the Carter Administration and was held by Jimmy Carter when I was a baby. His presidency is often thought of as "ineffective" by so many but he was/is a good, honest man. And I would prefer if my elected officials were honest and didn't treat people poorly. But I'm a bleeding liberal, obvi... >> In 1954 the CIA undermined a Democratically elected government in iran that was committed to a radical political program. Instead, we had a pro US Sha of Iran until 1978, when a political cleric threatened to overthrow the Shah and impose a theocracy on Iran. Jimmy Carter took little action to support the Shah, and extended the hand of Friendship to the Ayatola Hjomeni, who promptly bit that hand, invaded the US Embassy and took diplomats hostage. That began nearly forty years of mischief by a radicalized Iran. Carter was a FOOL for failing to make every effort to keep a friend of the United States and of liberal western values in power. As I noted earlier, the Sermon on the Mount is the last word in personal ethics, but it's not the basis upon which ministers of government are given their portfolios. Politics is DIFFERENT than personal morality. If you don't understand that, you are naïve, in my opinion.

Monday we had two new boys at our Tiger Cub Den meeting and a third boy who had his dues paid by his parents for the year. At least one of the new boys was invited by his buddy who is in the Tiger Cub Den. THAT is especially promising! We decorated the stilts we made at the previous den meeting then the boys practiced walking around on their stilts. Our next activity was making simple catapults using a paint stirring stick and then shooting miniature marshmallows for distance and accuracy. Boys winning each shoot got a sticker for their catapult. Personally, I find stickers to be a terrific ways of rewarding performance. Boys love to display a symbol of winning, they are cheap and can be handed out liberally for pretty much any kind of contest. The best way for boys to learn about competition is to experience winning and losing in low stakes but fun kinds of competition. Often when boys are exposed to that kind of competition they can be whiney and pouty when they don't win. But with repeated experience of winning and losing when the stakes are low, they learn to take satisfaction when they win and to look for ways to improve when they lose ----just what you want to see!

<<~~Good news that you found someone. I would have let the Troop try and operate without gear for a while until someone stepped up. Too bad those Life Scouts will never make Eagle, but it's their choice. >> \ Yes, the main method of Scouting is for boys to understand that actions have consequences. If they want to do an outing and the gear isn't ready to use, they would have to do the work of a QM before they leave on a trip. Sucking adults into doing the work of boys is one of the oldest of Scouting methods though --- for boys! Good luck though. I've surely been sucked into that many times.

Several years ago the district chair questioned me about my religious beliefs: Q Are you a church member? A No. Q Do you believe in God? A Yes Q Would you like to join my church? A No. 'Nuff said, I'd say. <> Personally, I don;t think someone needs to declare that they are a "faithful" believer in some faith. Perhaps they have a variety of doubts about their faith. Seems like they are entitled to that. I've heard Catholic's say that the Pope is entitled to have his doubts about God. That seems honest and reasonable. About the only thing likely to cause me to reject a Scout based on religion would be a boy who confidently declared that he was an atheist. I'd avoid asking the question, myself. I don;t see Scouting as a good place to re enact the Spanish Inquisition....

<> Courage, or foolishness? Was giving Richard Nixon a pass really worth electing Jimmy Carter and the other liberal excesses of the late 1970s? This kind of thing is why simply doing "the right thing" isn't an adequate basis for making political decisions for big jurisdictions.

At our Tiger Cub Den meeting two weeks ago, we made stilts from 2x2 stock four feet long with a piece of 2x4 nailed on. The boys decorated their stilts, practiced walking on them and took them home when done. That would probably make a good recruiting night activity to draw boys and families in. Last night we made simple catapults from paint stirring sticks and pieces of 1/2 plastic pipe boys cut using a pipe cutter. Then we spent time shooting miniature marshmallows, with boys getting stickers to put on their catapults when they won a contest. That would make a fun recruiting night activity as well.

<> What's missing here is your plan to KEEP those new boys in the troop. There should be a well thought out plan to do that.

If you really want the job, go for it. But if you don't, this is the right approach: < Have you taken the training “Selecting quality Leaders� http://www.scouting.org/filestore/me...df/522-981.pdf Instead of waiting for someone to volunteer, follow this training and put together a short list of 3 or 4 people who you think would be a good Scoutmaster and ask them to take the position. They don’t even need to currently be in the Troop or even in Scouting.>> A search committee to identify the best person for the job should be formed and that person should be asked. If they refuse, go to the second best person. Waiting around for someone to volunteer is a bad and often futile practice.

Ummm. In the Scout Troops I've been involved with (ten years ago or more) all the Eagle candidates came up with reasonable projects and did them in reasonably good style. I doubt there is much protection available against boys, parents and units with a mind to get the badge with a minimum of effort. Probably not worth the effort to try, I would guess. Scouting is about learning good character. Some people never learn.

<> Heh, heh! That was after a President running for reelection who was desperately ill with heart disease had a Navy doctor state that he was in good health. He died in office three months after being sworn in (FDR) It was also after a candidate for President who has several life threatening chronic illnesses such as Addison's disease and was filled with a variety of drugs daily proclaimed that he was in good health. (JFK) Woodrow Wilson was a helpless invalid for much of his last two months in office, --- the Presidency being run by his wife. Just more evidence that politics and lying tend to go together, for a variety of reasons. Sometimes the truth just wont do, and one of the perquisites of political power is the ability to make a lie into the truth which is accepted by most people. The Scout oath and Scout Law aren't an adequate basis upon which to govern the country. Sorry.

< >> Politics is a VERY high stakes activity. Politics is about compelling people to respect certain values --- at the point of a gun if need be. Becaquse politics is a high stakes activity, it always attracts players whjo will aim to appeal to the passionms and prejudices of their audience, and often to foment hatred of political opponents. That's NORMAL behavior in both political parties in the United States, and throughout history for that matter. Indeed, politics in the United states is still mostly a pillow fight. It's rare for either party to resort to large scale political violence or war against their political opponents. So count yourself lucky --- and cross your fingers that this generosity towards political opponents by both parties continues. Seattle Pioneer

Is it wrong to lie? For private individuals, it's usually a bad and disreputable practice. But it's very common among politicians. Why? Lots of reasons. Sometimes the truth just wont serve. Telling the truth may promote conflict. The truth about what is going on in politics is a valuable commodity. You think you should get it for free? Good luck! The stakes of what happens in government can be enormous. Telling lies might be seen as worthwhile to get desired policies. Just as an example --- In 1965 the United States revised immigration laws which have resulted in massive changes in the population of the United States. Advocates of those changes denied that they would have any such effect. Did they lie about that? If they did lie, were they justified in lying to get what they got? Personal ethics and the ethics of politics seem to me to often be quite distinct. In short, the Scout Oath and Law are fine ideals for individuals, but they aren't adequate to govern the behavior of politicians in government.

<< We've had some success by first recruiting Spanish-speaking Adult Leaders in units where we want to recruit Hispanic families. It's a work in progress.>> After 3 years of trying, I found that this is likely the key to success as well. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a bilingual English-Spanish person to take charge of communicating with new Hispanic families. I may ask the Parish Knights of Columbus organization if they have someone who can help us get started with that.

<<My challenge to these individuals, especially the Eagles, would be for them to take a serious self-evaluation and consider whether they are truly living up to the tenets of the Scout Oath and Law. My personal perception is that the answer is mostly NO; but that is simply my opinion. And that applies to almost the entire membership of our Congress, as well as the Executive and Judicial branches too. Unfortunately, I do not see these comments, if they were even seen by the group, will have much effect. But, if even a small percentage takes it into consideration, it would be a plus.>> Personally, I consider this a ludicrous proposal. Winston Churchill once said "The sermon on the Mount is the last word in personal ethics, but it is not the basis on which ministers of government are given their portfolios." Managing the politics and government of the United States which allows a huge and highly diverse country to live together more or less peacefully is an enormously complex and contradictory process. The Scout Oath and Scout law are not the basis for governing the United States.

<<“We send our eighth-grade students out to businesses,†he said of a successful job shadowing program that gives students a look at various trades and careers. Do those employees need background checks? That’s not clear.>> The usual way to deal with issues like this is to ignore them until a negative incident occurs, and then to hang any person or organization available with liability after the fact. It's a great system!

Of course, all this begins with the news media trumpeting stories of "abuse," compelling institutions to take ever more stringent actions in response. In recent months, the news media has been trumpeting "studies" purporting to report that 40% or more of young women students on college campuses are subjected to sexual "abuse," loosely categorized. I'm expecting that the result of this will be for colleges to start requiring young students to live in sex segregated dorms, to adhere to curfews, prohibit alcohol at parties and so on. Basically, go back to the standards that protected students from harm in the 1950s. That would be an interesting role reversal as women have apparently proven that they can't manage the personal freedom they have acquired on college campuses!

So what group is the Chartered Organization and who is the Chartered Organization Rep? If you don;t know, you can call you District Executive and ask. The Committee Chair and COR can be the same person ----probably is in the situation you describe. In that case, a talk with the leader of the Chartered Organization abiout the issues you mention would be appropriate.

<> Actually, I thought it was smart of the bank to ask for a formal action of the "board" appointing a new Treasurer. While BSA doesn't require such an action before appointing a new Treasurer, I think it's smart for a unit to have an understood procedure for doing so. IF a treasurer starts falling down on the job for one reason or another, you need and should have an agreed upon procedure to appoint a replacement, in my view. Anyway, that's what I've done.

So how does your unit transfer the duties of the unit (Pack or Troop) Treasurer to a new person? As the current unit treasurer, I make it clear to the Pack Committee Chair that these duties can be transferred to a new person by a vote of the Pack Committee. (The bank wants to see a resolution voted on by the Committee to transfer authority over the checking account to a new person.) I propvide the checking account statement to the Pack Committee Chair each month, and a statement of revenues and expenses each quarter to the Pack Committee. Anyone is welcome to ask more questions about the finances of the unit if they wish at any meeting. If the Committee Chair isn't happy with what he sees going on, he knows he can propose a resolution to transfer the responsibilty to someone else. In my view, it's important that the Committee Chair in particular know how the position of treasurer can be changed to a new person if they desire to do so.

<< To remove her as a COR, we'll have to go to the Charter Organization directly. She's afraid to relinquish control of anything to the other leaders of the Pack.>> He/She who has the Recharter Packet defines the leadership --- along with the unit leader (Cubmaster or Scoutmaster). In our district, the District Executive pleads with units to send someone to be trained in how to do the recharter. Not many do. If you show up for that meeting, you can claim the recharter packet. With the packet, you can complete the recharter and appoint who is going to have what leadership position for the next year ---or drop people from leadership positions entirely. Once you have the recharter completed, the unit leader and the person designated as the Institutional Head need to sign the recharter. And you need a check to cover the fees. So one option might be to show up to get the recharter packet. Or you could volunteer to do the recharter at a committee meeting. Those who are concerned about unit leadership should consider offering to be appointed as the Chartered Organization Rep Seattle Pioneer Chartered Organization Rep who also completed the recharter....

Liberals are always APPALLED by hate language. Except their own, of course.