Ted Wilson Elected

[Gregory Matthews]

By refusing to allow for a discussion of the recommendation to elect Ted Wilson, the Chair sent a clear message that the Chruch is not a democratic institution.  I do not doubt that Ted Wilson would have been elected following a fair and free discussion.  There was nothing to lose by allowing such, other than a few minutes of time.  The message sent by the action of the Chair was that a small group of about 15% (not exact) could force their view upon the entire Chruch at large.  This is not indicative of a democratic denomination which the SDA Chruch claims to be.  The Roman Catholic Church has a more democratic process to elect their Pope (the Bishop of Rome) than it seems the SDA Chruch has.

Well, Ted Wilson can go to bed every night for the next three years knowing that while he holds the office, he was not elected by a fair and free process. although I expect that such would have elected him. Will that trouble him.  I will not speculate on that.

In any case the lack of a fair and free process will result in a growing lack of confidence in the SDA denomination by an increasing number of its members and potential converts.

[phkrause]

I agree, he would've been re-elected! But you never know!! Like they say in sports, "that's why they play the game, because you never know!!"

[RonCorson]

The question is not whether the SDA church is democratic, it is not and never has been one member one vote. It is representative to the highest degree. They certainly vote and that can be called democratic but when people say democratic you really have to wonder what definition they are using. In the case of the Executive Committee it is doubtful that there was a refusing to allow for a discussion of the recommendation to elect Ted Wilson. One could make that assumption but what would be the reason to make that assumption. You could wonder about other names that were considered or how many wanted other people, but I can see no advantage to the committee to ever go public with that information. Whether it is was a win by one or an overwhelming victory for the winner there is really no benefit to the working of the conference to say. I would not expect to hear anything public from nominating committees or the executive committee other than the results of their decisions. People of course take what ever they want from the results but that does not mean what they take from them are reality. 

"The second highest governing body of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, after General Conference Session, which occurs every five years. In between Sessions, the Executive Committee is delegated the authority to act on behalf of the General Conference in Session.

It has the power to appoint committees, such as the administrative committee, which reviews, changes and creates working policies to approve strategic plans and programs for the world Church, to employ personnel that may be necessary to execute its work effectively; Elect or remove, for cause, officers, directors, and associate directors of departments/associations/services and committee members and fill any vacancies that may occur in its offices (“For cause” is used in reference to removing a person from an elected or appointed position); Effect the retirement of an elected or appointment position before the expiration of a term for which they have been elected." https://gc.adventist.org/about-us/governance/executive-committee/

[Gregory Matthews]

Of course, the 268 members of the Nominating Committee discussed.    The refusal to allow discussion occurred on the main floor when the delegates were not allowed to discuss the recommendation from the Nominating Committee.

 

[RonCorson]

Do those Delegates then vote on the candidates? As I understand it they don't so any discussion would, I would guess just be speeches for or against candidates, or in other words electioneering to influence the Executive Committee. I know the GC session wastes a lot of time but that would take it to a new level!

[Gregory Matthews]

The Nominating Committee makes a recommendation to the delegates at large who caste the deverbative vote whether or not to accept the recommendation of the Nominating Committee.

There are times in the past when the vote has not accepted a recommendation and it has gone back to the Committee.

 

 

[RonCorson]

Yes, they accept the nomination committees report. they don't vote on the offices though. It looks like the executive committee does nothing in this process the election is all the nomination committee. Interestingly enough the President is first and then his input is used on all the others. It does seem like even a poorer system then I thought. https://www.interamerica.org/2022/05/how-session-works-nominating-committee/

Really does not seem to be an election at all.