In My Opinion

Informed Voters by Walter C. Wright

Most CAS members who watched the first debate between the majorpresidential candidates could probably identify with the problemsthey had trying to debate the numbers underlying tax and budgetissues—most of us have been in similar circumstances trying to explain actuarial numbers to employers or clients. Fortunately, subscribers to the Academy's Contingencies are able to compare the Gore and Bush Social Security proposals, which appear in the September/October issue. The editorial staff of Contingencies deserves credit for pursuing the Gore and Bush campaign staffs and obtaining these articles.

As I prepare this article we are entering the last month of Election 2000. The Actuarial Review does not include political opinions, and therefore the activities and positions of the candidates and parties are off limits. I am free, however, to comment on the recent CAS elections.

The results of this year's CAS election of Board members are announced in this issue. As in past years, the CAS provided members with a list of each candidate's professional activities. For the first time, however, candidates had the opportunity to provide additional biographical information, to explain why they want to be on the Board, and to identify the particular qualities that they would bring to this leadership position.

The decision to distribute additional information about the Board candidates is admirable. Many years ago, it may well have been expected that candidates for the Board would generally be known by the membership. But now, with almost 3,500 members and more than 2,000 Fellows, this expectation is unreasonable. We need information about candidates if we want to elect those who are most able to help steer the CAS through its future challenges.

There are many challenges for the CAS in the years ahead. What role should the CAS play internationally? What should the CAS's relationships be with other actuarial organizations? How should the CAS encourage and support the expansion of members into nontraditional practice areas? What should our profession's relationship be with other professionals who work in the financial arena? How should our examination program be revised to respond to new practice areas and technologies? The manner in which the CAS Board addresses these issues will have a major impact on us, not only in the long term but also in the near future.

I conducted a very small, very informal survey of CAS Fellows, to get a sense of whether the additional information about the candidates had an influence on how they had voted. Most of those whom I polled had read some of the material, and thought it was interesting. Many of them, however, had only read the information about candidates whom they knew personally, and did not read about the other candidates. No one told me that the information had influenced his or her vote. Most discouragingly, some of them had not even bothered to vote.

Of all the Fellows eligible to vote in the 2000 election, only about 40 percent actually did. That may be higher than the percentage of U.S. voters who vote in the presidential election, but it is disappointing for the CAS. Our level of voluntary participation in CAS activities is so high that our low voter "turn-out" is hard to understand. Next year, let's all take a few minutes from our busy schedules to read the candidate information, and to think about who is best suited to guiding the CAS. Our recent voting turnout of only 40 percent may be equal to an average exam pass ratio, but it represents a "failure ratio" for CAS Fellows.