DoD May Revise Hazing Definition - Should CAP?

[FW]

^That's a good thing.  Hopefully, no one gets hazed in CAP.  The fact we are even having this discussion points to a need to "clear things up".  Like it or not, times and the general culture change over time.  So do definitions, boundaries, and sensibilities.  We need learn to recognize this.  It's not about becoming a nation of "pansies", it's about staying current, and "age appropriate". 
We all must "deal" with cadets at times.  Fear of "crossing lines" goes away with clear direction, dialog, and continuing education. 

BTW; my wing stands to lose about 200 members in the next year because of state mandates.  We have a tough job....

[Luis R. Ramos]

What "state mandates" would result in Civil Air Patrol losing 200 members? Does your state pays membership of CAP members???

[NIN]

What "state mandates" would result in Civil Air Patrol losing 200 members? Does your state pays membership of CAP members???

2 words: Jerry Sandusky

[Майор Хаткевич]

What "state mandates" would result in Civil Air Patrol losing 200 members? Does your state pays membership of CAP members???

2 words: Jerry Sandusky

Ok...aware of the case...what's the impact to CAP membership?

[lordmonar]

What "state mandates" would result in Civil Air Patrol losing 200 members? Does your state pays membership of CAP members???

2 words: Jerry Sandusky

Ok...aware of the case...what's the impact to CAP membership?

IIRC Pennsylvania went off the deep end after that.....and imposed a whole bunch of background checks and training for all youth organizations in the state.  It impacts CAP because say....you go to PAWG to help out with their encampment....you have have to pay for your own Penn State background check.   Same if you go staff Hawk Mountain.   Less sure if it would apply for a SAR or SAREX in PAWG but maybe would apply.

How that is going to affect 200 members....I don't know unless that is the number of people who refuse to pay for the new background check.

[FW]

The process is free for PA residents, however some need to get fingerprinted again. This seems to be the final straw.

Note: Many other state legislatures are thinking about this too. Get ready...

[Eclipse]

The process is free for PA residents, however some need to get fingerprinted again. This seems to be the final straw.

Note: Many other state legislatures are thinking about this too. Get ready...

We should be re-upping everyone's background every 5 years, or ten at the outside.  If that's a bridge too far, especially assuming no expense.
there's the door.

A >lot< can happen to people after they get their "once and done" background check. A lot CAP needs to be aware of.
NHQ could process those checks automatically based on time without the member even being aware, and these days it's a simple, automated process.

CAP lost a lot of people, most with good reason, during the last "great purge", if this is the next one, so be it.

[PHall]

The process is free for PA residents, however some need to get fingerprinted again. This seems to be the final straw.

Note: Many other state legislatures are thinking about this too. Get ready...

We should be re-upping everyone's background every 5 years, or ten at the outside.  If that's a bridge too far, especially assuming no expense.
there's the door.

A >lot< can happen to people after they get their "once and done" background check. A lot CAP needs to be aware of.
NHQ could process those checks automatically based on time without the member even being aware, and these days it's a simple, automated process.

CAP lost a lot of people, most with good reason, during the last "great purge", if this is the next one, so be it.

Just costs money...

[RRLE]

The USCG Auxiliary implemented back ground checks in 2003. The phase in lasted until 2006. The National leadership predicted about a 10% loss in membership. The actual result at the end of the three years was almost 1/3 of the membership disappeared. Except for a few outlying "blip" years, membership had continued to decline. The impact on the financials was severe. I don't know CAP's funding but the bulk of Aux funding comes from membership dues (#1) followed by members buying "stuff" from the national and district stores and teaching PE. The latter declined as the number of instructor member declined. The Aux has been unable to raise the missing money from other sources and has had to raise dues - which usually leads to further membership declines.

Aside from the usual reasons that people objected to and did not participate in the background checks was the cost. There was no cost to the member but official numbers put the start-up cost at $3 million dollars and upwards of $1 million a year after that - borne by the USCG. What members were objecting to was the severe underfunding of Aux operations by the USCG, which all of a sudden could find a million or more a year to spend on background checks, which most of the members didn't think were necessary.

The losses so effected the Aux, that eventually the USCG allowed the Aux to lower the requirements for certain checks. The latest debacle is that checks for recruits are taking upwards of a year or more and many recruits don't re-up before their background check is done.

I wouldn't be so cavalier about increasing background checks in CAP, the result could be more severe than your worst nightmare - as the USCG Aux experience shows.

I'm very familiar with the Aux membership numbers since I have been tracking them since 2003 and I do an annual thread on the subject on an Aux board. The Aux makes that easy since all memberships renew at the end of the year.