I have learned a lot about national ACS in 5 days
Howard Peters, Ph.D., J.D.
Cupertino, Calif.
I want to thank the Lock Haven Express for publishing my Letter to the Editor on Tuesday about my last-ditch petition effort to become a candidate to rejoin the national ACS Board of Directors.
That publication took some courage to focus on the situation between one old chemist’s voice and the national American Chemical Society (ACS) — the largest scientific society in the world.
What have I learned? Is it true that…
1. The national ACS has rigid rules and regulations for petition candidates for officer elections that appear to not have been reviewed for years, do not mesh and are in not line with those of the electronic age of 2025?
2. I was provided by ACS with only a petition signature route that required online electronics for each of the about 98,000 full ACS verified members who can sign the petition?
3. That public letter published by the Express on Tuesday cannot be posted on a web site of an ACS Division such as the ACS Division of Chemistry and the Law (CHAL) or published in a newsletter of that Division. About 45 years ago I was a cofounder of CHAL within ACS, and I served for years to nurture it to about 700 members. But now, I find that it is forbidden to post that public letter on the CHAL web site or in the CHAL newsletter — even with the explicit words like “this is a public interest announcement,” or “this is not to be construed as an endorsement or any candidate, petition or any ACS entity?
The ACS position is that some ACS chemist readers may still consider the posting as an endorsement…?
4. Has the world changed that much in the past six months? Yes: STEM, Chemistry, Medicine and the Rule of Law have been trashed.
Is everyone now suspicious and afraid? Is that the new norm?
Are my e-mails about my petition and request to ACS colleagues and friends considered to be suspicious and are not returned? Do some recipients consider my e-mail spam — or worse, hacking?
We live in interesting times…don’t we?