Bowman, Jensen and Hightower
|
Bob Bowman, Dee Jensen and Stephanie Hightower — the known candidates for president of USA Track & Field — have responded to a 10-question email interview I sent a couple weeks ago. They all have deep USATF backgrounds and serious track credits. Their answers were revealing, especially when it came to masters track. In Bob’s Q&A, he says he’ll commit to doubling the Masters T&F Committee budget “if we have the money and masters T&F presents a good case for the use of the money.” In Dee’s Q&A, she suggests that USATF might help pay entry fees, supply uniforms and ship implements for U.S. masters entered in world masters championships. In Stephanie’s Q&A, she pledges “to continue to support the aims of masters track.”
Bob is a little coy, referring several times to the chair of Women’s Track & Field. That chair is Stephanie Hightower. For her part, Stephanie is a lot more concise in her replies than when she spoke by phone to Jimmie Markham at thefinalsprint.com.
Bob, Dee and Stephanie addressed more general concerns about USATF in their audio interviews with Jimmie, which are archived as podcasts. Check ’em out:
Bob’s interview went online Oct. 7.
Stephanie’s interview went online Oct. 8.
And Dee’s interview went online Oct. 9.
The voting membership of USATF will choose among these three (and any late entries) on Friday, December 5, at the Reno convention. But you can express yourself here as well. Feel free to vote and post a comment.
FYI: Click here to see links to all three of my interviews.
10 Responses
After reading the Q & A my personal opion is that a vote for High tower is a vote for the status qou- I don’t see one statement that leads me to believe that she will do anything, but the minimum for the Masters program.I have had experience dealing with the high performance program each year and every year we have to fight to get the Masters Invitational events into the Open Indoor and Outdoor National Championships.This should not be the case, but it happens every year– I have not seen where Stephanie Hightower was ever a strong proponet of the Masters program. It’s easy to say anything when your running for office–I tend to look at a person’s record and their actions, which has not shown strong support for the Masters program.Dee Jensen is very ethical, but I didn’t really see a strong commitment to Masters in her answers to the Masters program. Bob Bowen seems to have a balanced approach and at least is willing to give some stronger support to our program in his responses. It’s a free country vote how you wish–but I think Bob Bowen is a stronger advocate for the interests of Masters Track & Field.
Opps! I meant Bob Bowman
Disclaimer – I am a supporter of Stephanie Hightower so I am admittedly biased. That being said, Bob Bowman committed to “doubling the budget if the money is there”. However, if you’ve attended any of the budget meetings, you’ll know that the money simply is not there for Masters. How can Bob, or anyone, promise something that does not exist?
It’s not prudent, in my mind, to base my vote on how much money someone will promise us. If that’s your impetus for voting then I urge you to take a page from Youth and start working on making Masters a separate entity like the Youth Committee has.
But, if you need someone to work with the Chair and Executive Committee and leverage her national fundraising experience and contacts, then Stephanie is the obvious choice. She raised over $11 million dollars for capitol improvements and empowerment growth for the college she works for. NO ONE else in this race has demonstrated the ability for nationwide community outreach like Stephanie Hightower.
Aditional thoughts – We need to get away from the mindset of “what will USATF do for us”. Let’s face it, NO ONE is going to do anything for us. As a sports committee, we hold our own economic future in our hands. WE need to start devising ways to raise more money for ourselves!
I agree with Mark’s comments. After reading the Q & A’s of all three candidates, Bob came across as at least understanding the issues surrounding masters track and field, and will hopefully try to address many of them.
Personally I still think that the evolution of the USATF will lead it to become the a professional track organization with it’s only interest being in elite athletes and the Olympic/World games. Where does that leave youth and masters…on their own. It’s time to explore moving masters T&F to the NSGA. We’d all be better served by the separation.
I personally know that both Men’s and Women’s Chairs over the past eight years have been strong advocates for the Masters events being entered into the Championships. Both John Chaplin and Stephanie Hightower have always voted to have them included. However, the perception that Mark has that he has to fight to get Masters invitational events into the National Championships stems from the real issue of the national office notifying the chairs of the events in a timely manner and where to place them on the schedule.
I’m sorry Dexter but you have no idea the conversations that have taken place. You should know, that it required George Mathews going to Craig Masback and Bill Rowe to get those chairs to reverse their decision to not have the Masters events in the Nationals. I know what I am talking about, it is fact not my qoute un quote perception. I have been around the sport for 30 plus years and around the board for almost a decade, I know what goes on. It’s not pretty we don’t get respect from most of USATF.The high performance chairs find it a hassle to have our events in their National Championships.I had a very nasty conversation with Mr. Chaplin before the Olympic trials- trust me he has no respect for the Masters.
Ted the Youth programs are safe because they are the feeder program for the Olympics–we on the other hand will have to see how things go– I predict that we will need to form our own organization in 3 to 5 years based on the direction things seem to be going.
I don’t have the inside perspective of some of these other posters, but I did read the statement of support for Ms Hightower on the TAFN site and I noted with astonishment her claim to have been involved in supporting racewalking.
This is a pants-on-fire sort of claim. In endorsing it, Ms Hightower presumably calculated that only racewalkers would know for sure that it wasn’t true, and that there aren’t enough racewalkers to matter. Both calculations are no doubt correct, but taken together they portray an individual who may not be suitable to head USATF.
Quick Silver
Hong Kong
Mark, if you go back and read my comment I said that Stephanie and John have voted to have Masters included in the Nationals. These conversations that you refer to were apparetnly were between George Mathews and the national office. If the national office does not want Masters in the Nationals, how is that Stephanie and John’s fault? They take their direction from the National Office as well.
As for Quick Silver’s assertion that Stephanie does not support racewalking is kind of odd considering that racewalking is part of the Track & field program as it pertains to national and international team competiton. Incidentally, she’s engaged to a racewalker.
My point in my original comment is that it appeared that Mark was supporting Bob Bowman because he committed to DOUBLING the Masters budget. That’s an empty promise at best. NO ONE ELSE HAS DOUBLED MASTERS BUDGET! You know why? Because there’s no money! Stephanie was simply being forthright in saying I can’t commit to doubling the budget but will do all I can to assist you in enhancing your revenue stream.
Clearly, we will remain on both sides of this issue but if you’re going to vote for someone, vote based on the facts.
Dexter,again you missed my point–I am telling you that John and Stephanie were the one’s in many cases dragging there feat and in some years against having the Masters Invitational races in the Open Championships. They played political games with the situation.I have first hand knowledge because I was dealing with those situations–It required going over their heads to get our events back into the Championships one year. It had nothing to do with National office and everything to do the the High performance people–they either approve or deny our events-National office stays out of it.You clearly do not know the history, but I will be more than happy to give you the run down at the
convention.I am not voting for Bob Bowman because he talked about doubling a budget. I liked his responses most to the Q & A. He will be fair to all segments of our sport not just focusing on the Olympic athletes. Stephanie can say what she wants but I know she has that bias coming out of the Olympic program her self. I am not saying that it’s good or bad. I do think, however that selecting Bob would be a better choice for the Masters program.Your right we will remain on different sides of this issue because of our different personal experiences.
Leave a Reply