Washington Notes, February 1986

The number of historians attending the AHA’s 1985 Annual Meeting in New York City was the largest in eleven years. The Chicago meeting in 1974 exceeded the 1985 registered at­tendance of 3,652 by fewer than a hun­dred; one would have to go back to the late sixties and early seventies, with at­tendances of over five thousand, to ex­ceed the turnout for our New York City 101st annual meeting. Of course draw­ing a true balance sheet on an annual meeting, like all exercises in historical interpretation, is more difficult than merely juggling figures, as there were minuses accompanying the numerical pluses.

Our headquarters hotel, the Marriott Marquis, was brand new. We were their first total convention, using all their rooms. While no one could fault the cooperative spirit of its young staff, there was a tinge of verdancy in some of their efforts. Also on the negative side, many of us experienced frustration at not being able to get into the room where a particular session was being held—the crowd of attendees was too great. Waiting for elevators also seems to be an inevitable part of conventions held in multi-story hotels, and in this respect Marriotts, Hyatts, and Bonaven­tures are similar; only a sprawling, less high-rise facility alleviates this com­plaint.

All things considered, however, the Association has reason to rejoice that so many of our members and as many nonmembers turned out for the 1985 Annual Meeting. One felt that in history as in many other areas of contemporary life, “the good old days” were back. And after all, when one is in heaven, it is bad form to grumble that the golden streets are hard on the feet!

In another part of this issue, the many important decisions taken at the annual meeting by the governing Council of the AHA are described. Here we should take note of items of business transacted at the annual business meeting of the Association on the afternoon of Decem­ber 29. The  resolution presented in the December issue of Perspectives (page 5), calling on US historians serving as offi­cers of the International Committee of Historical Sciences to refrain from sponsoring resolutions in that body as­serting any special competence of his­tory or historians to make recommenda­tions concerning political issues, was de­bated at some length before being rejected by a large majority of those present. However, the discussion, and indeed the offering of the resolution itself, served to clarify the role of the Association and of US participants in the CISH.

The business meeting also voted to approve an addition to the Association’s Board of Trustees to fill a vacancy creat­ed by the retirement of one trustee. Richard T. Cunniff was elected to a five year term on the Board. The business meeting also took note of the comple­tion by the Trustees of the divestiture of AHA investments in companies doing business in South Africa, voted by the Council last spring.

With enthusiasm, the meeting also voted to express the Association’s thanks to the chair of the Local Ar­rangements Committee, Marjorie Light­man, and her colleagues and to the chair, John Murrin, and members of the Program Committee.

Another significant development took place both in the Association’s reg­ular meetings and on the margin of its scheduled activities. On December 27th the Council heard an important pro­gress report from past president Arthur S. Link and from President William H.  McNeill on the plans for a commission on the future of history and the social sciences in the schools. On Monday, December 30, the new President, Carl Degler, hosted a working luncheon for the president of the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), Donald Bragaw, and its executive director Frances Haley. Attended by no less than four past, present, and future presi­dents of the AHA, as well as a former president of OAH, the luncheon saw an exchange of views on the priorities of the commission, which is being launched by NCSS with the enthusiastic support of and participation by the AHA and the OAH. All present agreed on priorities and on a rough schedule. Professor Link will continue to repre­sent the AHA and the OAH in the planning and conduct of the commis­sion, an activity whose foundations he helped to lay during his presidency of both organizations.

Prior to the annual meeting, the headquarters staff represented the As­sociation at the annual meeting in Washington on December 16 of the directorate of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), of which the AHA is a founding member. COSSA actively represents the social sciences in lobbying on behalf of our collective objectives and goals. The all day board meeting heard an interesting presentation on the implications for the social sciences of the Gramm-Rudman Act, mandating a balanced federal bud­get in five years by successive and in­creasing cuts. It is clear that as the rules of the new game become clear, all advo­cacy groups will need to sharpen their skills to defend those government agen­cies of importance to scholars. The AHA through the historians own advo­cacy instrument, the National Coordi­nating Committee, through COSSA and through the National Humanities Alli­ance, in which it also participates, will need to maintain a high level of activity and vigilance.

Amid all the many, positive year-end activities, one word of disappointment was mixed. The National Endowment for the Humanities did not endorse the AHA’s proposal for a small challenge grant. We are reapplying for 1986 and by the fact of that reapplication, new gifts of funds since December 3, 1985 and hereafter will be eligible for a feder­al match, if the new grant proposal is successful later this year. The prepara­tions in 1985 for the challenge grant we did not receive had still netted the AHA over $43 thousand; that sum is being transferred to our endowment and gen­eral funds, as we start afresh on the challenge grant route.