Our new "moniker"

[SAR-EMT1]

You say the train already left the station. I never saw Congress officialy change our name.  Or Did the CAP-USAF /CC declare that change during one of the Nat. Board broadcast's crashes?
I'm not attacking you here, but I am asking how far this is going to go.
It started small, and annoying-but insignificant. Now.... I see a Boulder crashing down a mountaintop.
I'll support it if need be, but that doesnt mean I'll like it.

[ColonelJack]

I do not agree with this "moniker " at all. NHQ is already treating it like a new name. If they want anything, threy should go back to USAF -Aux.
I hope AETC nips this in the bud quick.

I am not entirely sure of the necessary span of control here, but I don't think AETC has anything to say about what Civil Air Patrol calls itself.  It would be a "corporate" matter, and thus out of AETC -- and AF's -- control.

Jack

[ColonelJack]

You say the train already left the station. I never saw Congress officialy change our name.  Or Did the CAP-USAF /CC declare that change during one of the Nat. Board broadcast's crashes?
I'm not attacking you here, but I am asking how far this is going to go.
It started small, and annoying-but insignificant. Now.... I see a Boulder crashing down a mountaintop.
I'll support it if need be, but that doesnt mean I'll like it.

"Growl you may, but go you must ..."

Seriously ... is this really such an issue?  I'm not attacking you, either, but I have to ask this of all those who are screeching about adding "U.S." to the name of the organization -- does it matter all that much?  Or is it more rooted in collective dislike of the person who initiated the change?

Let's play "suppose" here -- assume Gen. Courter wins a second term as CV and, next year, succeeds Gen. Pineda as CC.  When she does, if she endorses the U.S. Civil Air Patrol handle, will you then accept it?  Your answer (not just you, SAR-EMT1, but all of us here) will say whether it's the change that bothers you ... or who made the change.

Discuss.

Jack

[jimmydeanno]

The only objection that I have to the name change is that it wasn't done the way it was supposed to be.

As an organization that is "steeped in military tradition" and follows regulations, why can't we follow them for something as simple as changing our name.  If congress made a law that removed freedom of assembly, it would be unconstitutional and deemed invalid.

Our organizations constitution outlines the procedures for changing the organization's name and it was not followed.  This in and of itself is a failure to obey CAP regulations and procedures.  Don't people get "fired" from CAP positions for doing this?

If they want to change the name of the organization, it tells them how it is supposed to be done.  If they want to change the way it's done, follow the rules outlined.

All I ask is that they do it according to the rules.

[SAR-EMT1]

You say the train already left the station. I never saw Congress officialy change our name.  Or Did the CAP-USAF /CC declare that change during one of the Nat. Board broadcast's crashes?
I'm not attacking you here, but I am asking how far this is going to go.
It started small, and annoying-but insignificant. Now.... I see a Boulder crashing down a mountaintop.
I'll support it if need be, but that doesnt mean I'll like it.

"Growl you may, but go you must ..."

Seriously ... is this really such an issue?  I'm not attacking you, either, but I have to ask this of all those who are screeching about adding "U.S." to the name of the organization -- does it matter all that much?  Or is it more rooted in collective dislike of the person who initiated the change?

Let's play "suppose" here -- assume Gen. Courter wins a second term as CV and, next year, succeeds Gen. Pineda as CC.  When she does, if she endorses the U.S. Civil Air Patrol handle, will you then accept it?  Your answer (not just you, SAR-EMT1, but all of us here) will say whether it's the change that bothers you ... or who made the change.

Discuss.

Jack

For myself, I have nothing against our current Commander. My stance, or root problem as it were is that I am fiercely opposed to politics of all forms and oppossed to our 'corporate mentality' even more.
I joined the USAF AUXILIARY I did not join CAP Inc nor the US CAP, which -as I see it, was merely an attempt to head off any proposal to get USAF Aux. Or at least to stall any shift away from the 'corporate para-law enforcement/ homeland security"  side of the house.

In my 'ideal world' we'd have better standards of professionalism, a better handle on recruitment and thus a larger membership. The AF Service Dress, BDUs and Flight suit and the 'heavyweight' equivilents.
Our Grey Epulets and the grey nametag on standard Blues
-or Blue Epulets, with CAP sewn on and hard rank- would be enough to set us aside. We would not have a Flag or a million technocolor patches on the BDU or flightsuit.
We would focus on our three missions - CP, AE, ES, not obscure 'missions for america'  we would have a CC who told us in plain english where to go, and we'd go there.  And - possibly- we would benefit from our newfound goal in life by being awarded the honor of augmenting with the USAF in much the fashion of the USCG Aux.
We would ditch the 'wanna -be ' status we have now and be respected by the Air Force and DoD / Gov't in general for what we are, and what we can bring to the "Domestics" table.

We would not have a million uniforms, a CEO type Commander, any Race Cars, Phone Plans, or Cookie Drives.

[mikeylikey]

When our Constitution is changed......and the Congress votes to approve the national laws regarding CAP, then I will accept it and give Vanguard more money!  Until then, there is NO U.S. CAP.  It legally does NOT exist.  They should legally get the name changed then us the term U.S. CAP  NOT BEFORE!

[LTC_Gadget]

I'm not attacking you here, but I am asking how far this is going to go.
[..]I see a Boulder crashing down a mountaintop.
I'll support it if need be, but that doesnt mean I'll like it.

I didn't take it as an attack.  I'm often very passionate about things, so it's not inconceivable that others are as well.  Elsewhere in this same thread, I've even expressed an opinion to the extent that I didn't think it was necessary, and there are those that disagree with that.  My comment was actually sort of a summation for the way that I have to deal with it personally.  I don't agree with it, I didn't see a need for it.  But the decision's been made way above my head.  There doesn't seem to be much I can do about it.  So, as 'the kids' would say, I have to 'suck it up and deal with it,' or as I've been told in other arenas, 'pick your battles.'  Pick ones that are large enough to be important, and small enough to win. At this point, it would just seem to be an exercise in futility, or at least one of resignation; no, not that  one!  So, I'm basically doing as I suggested in the earlier message; like it or not, I'm 'grinning and bearing it' and opening my checkbook... again.  I'm just trying to concentrate on helping my squadron do what they have to do to get cadets advanced, run a program, do it as well(good?) as possible with the assets available, and keep people motivated and showing up.  I'll try to do that no matter what sign they demand that I hang over the door.  God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference..   Thassall.. 

V/R, 

[Eagle400]

When our Constitution is changed......and the Congress votes to approve the national laws regarding CAP, then I will accept it and give Vanguard more money!  Until then, there is NO U.S. CAP.  It legally does NOT exist.  They should legally get the name changed then us the term U.S. CAP  NOT BEFORE!

Exactly!!!  No one but Congress has the authority to change the name of CAP.  Not AETC, not HQ USAF, not even CAP itself.

It is wrong for CAP to change the name of the organization when such a move is not allowed by Congress.  The CAP Constitution & Bylaws and USC both refer to "Civil Air Patrol", not "U.S. Civil Air Patrol."  Both documents must be changed before Civil Air Patrol can be called U.S. Civil Air Patrol, and only Congress has the power to change them.

If Maj Gen Pineda or any other high-ranking official wants to change the name of Civil Air Patrol, they need to go through Congress.  That means Congress will have to vote to have the name of the organization changed.  There is no other way. 

The corporation has the exclusive right to use the name "Civil Air Patrol" and all insignia, copyrights, emblems, badges, descriptive or designating marks, words, and phrases the corporation adopts. This section does not affect any vested rights.

(a) Volunteer Civilian Auxiliary. - The Civil Air Patrol is a volunteer civilian auxiliary of the Air Force when the services of the Civil Air Patrol are used by any department or agency in any branch of the Federal Government.

Emphasis mine.   

[Al Sayre]

In reality, it's as simple as the corporate lawyers going to the Secretary of State and filing a d/b/a.  There are many corporations that do this, since we are officially a corporation (Civil Air Patrol Inc.) we can too. 

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, only that it doesn't take an act of Congress to become Civil Air Patrol d/b/a United States Civil Air Patrol.

[DNall]

That's true, but somewhat cloudy cause we're a congressionally controlled corp. I'm not saying they'd catch it, but that doesn't mean it'd be legal.

[Al Sayre]

Works for Fannie Mae, Ginnie Mae and a whole host of other federally chartered financial corporations...

[SAR-EMT1]

U.S. Fannie Mae

US CAP - not til Congress says so.

[ColonelJack]

U.S. Fannie Mae

US CAP - not til Congress says so.

Well, maybe so, maybe not.  But as Lincoln once said, "If you call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does it have?  Four.  Calling a tail a leg does not make the name fit."

I have to side with Col. Boyd on this one ... but the way I heard it is, "Ask yourself ... 'Is this the hill you want to die on?'"  I mean, I'm no big fan of the idea either, but hey -- it's done, by the only real standard that matters.  The corporation uses it now.  (And to those who don't like the "corporate" idea, remember -- CAP has always been a federally-chartered non-profit corporation.)

Not trying to be a smart Aleck ... just adding my two kopecks to the mix.

Jack

[SAR-EMT1]

I could never call you a Smart Aleck ... you out rank me 

[ColonelJack]

I could never call you a Smart Aleck ... you out rank me 

That'd be "Colonel Smart Aleck" to you, then.   

Jack

[mikeylikey]

U.S. Fannie Mae

US CAP - not til Congress says so.

Well, maybe so, maybe not.  But as Lincoln once said, "If you call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does it have?  Four.  Calling a tail a leg does not make the name fit."

I have to side with Col. Boyd on this one ... but the way I heard it is, "Ask yourself ... 'Is this the hill you want to die on?'"  I mean, I'm no big fan of the idea either, but hey -- it's done, by the only real standard that matters.  The corporation uses it now.  (And to those who don't like the "corporate" idea, remember -- CAP has always been a federally-chartered non-profit corporation.)

Not trying to be a smart Aleck ... just adding my two kopecks to the mix.

Jack

This just shows the Corporation is NOT DOING THE RIGHT THING!  Just because you can do something, should you really do it?  Whats next now that TP and his band of marauders are getting away with the SMALL STUFF.

I ask again......now that TP and the NHQ knows they can get away with the SMALL STUFF, what will they throw on us next.  This change DOES NOTHING but make each member dish out more money.  ENOUGH I SAY!

[CAP428]

I honestly don't see what the big deal is.  So what if we change our name to US Civil Air Patrol?  We are still the same organization, same missions.

Some say there's no reason for the change...maybe, maybe not but I still don't see how adding a "U" and an "S" onto your uniform or hearing somebody call it the "US Civil Air Patrol" is really going to affect us, adversely or otherwise.

[JC004]

Avoid these confusing things:  Vote for me as your national commander! 

[MIKE]

Some say there's no reason for the change...maybe, maybe not but I still don't see how adding a "U" and an "S" onto your uniform or hearing somebody call it the "US Civil Air Patrol" is really going to affect us, adversely or otherwise.

It will have an effect on your wallet when you have to replace your nametag(s) branch tape(s) etc.  I dunno about you, but I have three pairs of BDUs, service uniforms and service dress.

[Eagle400]

Folks, the real problem is that Civil Air Patrol has usurped the authority of Congress by making an unauthorized change to the name of the organization.  As stated before, only Congress has the power to change the name of CAP.

The only way Congress can change the name of CAP is to vote to change it, and (if it passes) change any reference to "Civil Air Patrol" in the USC.  CAP would then change all references to "Civil Air Patrol" in the CAP Constitution and Bylaws.   

If Maj Gen Pineda wants to have the name of CAP changed, fine.  He can lobby to Congress for them to vote on changing the name.  That's the only legal way to do it.  Maj Gen Pindea has NO authority in this other than being able to lobby to Congress.