Report from the AHA Nominating Committee, 1987

On behalf of the Nominating Com­mittee, I am pleased to report the results of the 1987 election for AHA offices. (Elected candidates are indicated with an asterisk.)

President (one-year term)

*Akira Iriye, University of Chicago (diplomatic)—2842 votes

President-elect (one-year term)

*Louis R. Harlan, University of Maryland-College Park (US)—1746
Gerda Lerner, University of Wiscon­ sin, Madison (US)—1519

Vice-President, Research Division (three-year term)

J. Russell Major, Emory University (Renaissance)—1338
*Richard T. Vann, Wesleyan University (European)—1429

Council Members (three-year terms)

Place 1

*Lawrence W. Levine, University of California-Berkeley (American)—1571
Bertram Wyatt-Brown, University of Florida (American)—1270

Place 2

*Carol Gluck, Columbia University (Japanese)—1497
David Kopf, University of Minnesota (S. Asian)—1227

Divisional Committee Members (three-year terms)

Profession

*Caroline W. Bynum, University of Washington (medieval)—1712
Bonnie G. Smith, University of Rochester (European)—1041

Research

*Ira Berlin, University of Maryland-College Park (US)—1581
Jacquelyn D. Hall, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (US)—1492

Teaching

Abraham Hoffman, Taft High School (US)—1251
*Julia Stewart Werner, Nicolet High School (English)—1344

Committee on Committees (three-year terms)

Place 1

Edith Couturier, National Endow­ment for the Humanities (Latin Ameri­can)—1072
*Louisa S. Haberman, Austin, Texas (Latin American)—1507

Place 2

*John R. Gillis, Rutgers University (European)—1505
Donald E. Queller, University of Illi­nois, Urbana-Champaign  (medie­val)—1215

Nominating Committee (three-year terms)

Place 1

*William B. Cohen, Indiana University (European)—1445
Standish Meacham, Jr., University of Texas-Austin (English)—1295

Place 2

Donna J. Guy, University of Arizona (Latin American)—1198
*Colin A. Palmer, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (Latin American)—1445

Place 3

*Alice Kessler-Harris, Hofstra University (US)—1552
William S. McFeely, University of Georgia (US)—1299

On the positive side the Committee applauds the increase in ballots cast. Approximately 3,600 members chose to vote, or nearly 25 percent more than had done so a year ago. The additional voter participation seems a direct result of the Association’s decision to resume the past practice of mailing ballots sepa­rately rather then enclosing them with Perspectives. We recommend the contin­uation of such separate mailings.

On a less happy note, we apologize for the larger than usual number of glitches that occurred during the elec­toral process. As all of you observed, the ballot was too large for the envelope provided, making it necessary to either fold, mutilate, and spindle, against all the rules, or, with consummate skill, squeeze the offending ballot into the available space. The result, of course, was that countless ballots became stuck to the sealer on the envelope or were torn in the process of being opened. For that reason, and because more than 200 of our colleagues failed to fill in the circles with a pencil (making X’s with pens instead), more then 800 ballots had to be counted by hand, a task completed with remarkably good humor by Duke faculty colleagues and graduate stu­dents.

About ten of you found no ballot at all in your mailing, and a few others re­ceived the mailing far too late to make the November 1 deadline. Although neither the Nominating Committee nor the AHA staff is responsible for these tests of your collective patience, we do regret very much the inconvenience.

The Nominating Committee met this year in Washington from Thursday, February 12 through Saturday, Febru­ary 14. On Thursday evening, we devot­ed all of our discussion to the presiden­tial nominations, considering at one time or another during the evening more than thirty proposed candidates. By the following morning, we had a short list of seven names, and had decid­ed on the nominees by mid-morning.

We spent the rest of the day and part of the evening selecting the nominees for the other positions, as well as nomi­nating candidates for the Association’s award to distinguished senior scholars. By Saturday morning, almost all of the potential nominees had been contacted, with only two declining nomination be­ cause of other professional commit­ments. We are grateful for the care with which  nominees  entertained our re­quest to stand for office, and the over­whelmingly positive response to our re­quest.

As committee chairs have noted in the past, there is always substantial attention devoted during our deliberations to the issue of representation. We systematically consider variables of age, race, gender, field, region, type of history practiced, and variety of institutions from which our nominees come. Still, we fail to satisfy our mandate to repre­sent the complete diversity of the AHA, particularly when it comes to such areas as the various forms of public history, community college or small liberal arts college representation, and geographi­cal sections (e.g. the South Central states).

This Nominating Committee attempted to keep these considerations in mind, but we depend on your continued feed­back, especially in the form of proposed nominations, to facilitate our task. I am pleased to say that more than twenty­-five people took the occasion to send in suggested nominees for next year’s committee, and I hope that in the fu­ture, the number will be even larger.

Finally, a few words of thanks. First and foremost, the entire committee ap­preciated deeply the dedication, humor, and grace of Eileen Gaylard, executive assistant of the Association. She is indis­pensable in every respect, from her guidance on how to avoid mistakes of the past to the wonderful anecdotes with which she spices up moments of relaxation at the end of the day. Sam Gammon, executive director, is always ready to help out, and his counsel dur­ing the year has been very valuable. The candidates themselves, of course, make it possible for the Committee to func­tion, and we are grateful for their devo­tion to our common profession.

To conclude on a personal note, I’d like to express my gratitude to those with whom I have served on the Nomi­nating Committee during these past three years. It has been a joy to work on a committee characterized by such gen­erosity of spirit and camaraderie.