Home | Contact Us

Board of Directors Meeting Dockets

Physical Meeting Docket for February 1-2, 2003

AGENDA for Feb. 1, 2003 (Saturday):

                  [A] ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

1. 8:00 – 8:30 a.m. Self Introduction (30 minutes):  

Let's each take a minute to two.  Be sure to mention your name, state, profession, your role at this organization, and what you hope to accomplish during your term of office.  You may want to refer back to your campaign statement. We’ll also have some chapter officers and guests with us.

2. Report by Treasurer of 2002 (10 minutes):  Larry Ho on Income/ Expenditure of 2002

3. Structures of Our Treasury (10 minutes): David Chu on who handles which part of our receipt and expenditure procedure.

4. Membership projection for 2003 (10 minutes):
a. 2002 membership:  Jing-Li Yu.
b. A Rough Projection for 2003:  S.B. Woo

5. Required Meeting Procedure -- Robert's Rules of Order (20 minutes):   S. B. Woo on what one needs to know that will suffice for most meetings

6. Tien Chang-Lin Summer Internship (10 minutes):  S. B. Woo on purpose of the Internship & amount raised thus far.  Larry Ho and Susan Wu of AL were the ones who helped established the fund

7. Budget for 2003-04 and Personnel Matters (15 minutes):  S. B. Woo

8. 80-20's Achievements/Failures in Its Political Endeavors (60 minutes):  S. B. Woo

      Our method of operation is what gave 80-20 its successes.  Thus far we've succeeded in every political endeavor except for one.  The ratio is about 10 to 1.  However, we've not achieved our highest goal set since day one:  equal opportunity in workplaces for all APAs.

9. Fundraising and Endowment Fund (60 minutes):

     a. Fundraising
i. Purpose
ii. Electing a Fundraising Chair (Volunteers for members?)
b. Endowment
i. Purpose for an Endowment
ii Setting up an educational arm (David Chu)
iii. Appointing an Endowment Committee (Volunteers for

10. Membership Expansion (60 minutes):
a. Setting a goal
b. How to achieve the goal
i) How each Board member can help,
ii) How chapters and “Friends” can help, and
iii) How the Tien Chang-Lin Fellowship can help
iv) Creating a pamphlet to recruit members (Any volunteers to             draft and design the pamphlet?) 

11. National/ Chapters Relations (60 minutes):
a. Chapter contributions in the past
i) During presidential election
ii) In Fundraising
iii) In recruiting membership
b. What motivates chapters and where the problems are
c. Are there alternatives?  If not, how to resolve it?? 

12. Election for New Board Members in Nov. 2003 (10 minutes): Kenneth Fong

  13. Election  Related Articles of the Bylaws (10 Minutes): athleen To

14. Our Web Site (20 minutes):  Ying Yang

15. Bylaws Amendments, if any (45 minutes):

16. Adjournment at about 4:30 p.m.

     Special Reception at the Chinese Consulate, hosted by the Consulate General CG Wang from 5:00 p.m. to 5:50 p.m.

DINNER (Social hour at 6:30 p.m., 2 hours)

     Special Guests include officers from our “Affiliates,” and sister orgs.

          AGENDA for Feb. 3, 2003 (Sunday):

                 [B] SERVING OUR COMMUNITY

1. Liaison with The Congress (60 minutes): S. B. Woo
a) Senate
b) House (whose top leader is the Speaker: Dennis Hastert of IL)
        i) The Republican Side:  Tom Delay of TX, Majority Leader
        ii) The Democratic Side:  Nancy Pelosi of CA, Minority Leader

2. Protecting Our Community's Scientists against Wrongful Investigative Tactics (60 minutes):  S. B. Woo

A review of recent series of seemingly wrongful or over-aggressive local and federal investigative tactics used against APA scientists, including the W.H. Lee case, the Bin Han of UC, Davis episode and others.  A common thread of those cases is the following sequence of events: exaggerated charges followed by press leaks; verbal threats to the accused of dire consequences; groundless objection to letting the accused out on bail, and gross failure to prove the case in court.

3. The Presidential Election of 2004 (45 minutes):  S. B. Woo

    a. The Primary Season
i.  What issues do we want our next president to address?
ii. Drafting a letter to the presidential candidates
b. Our Endorsement Convention:
i. A review of our own protocol – electing 1/3 D/I/R, each, .., etc.
ii. Documenting what each party has done for us?
iii. Timing of our Convention:  advantage/disad. of an early or late Convention.
c. The General Election:  Preparing radio, TV, newspaper ads, and group troops.

4. Stepping into Key State & Federal Races where We have Significant Influence?  (30 minutes):  S. B. Woo
Discussion of Advantage/disadvantage

5. A Better Way to Handle Requests for Help? (15 minutes): SB       Currently about 10 requests per weeks for help come to 80-20 from APA individuals.  We always answer, “Given 80-20’s very limited resources, it chooses to focus on macro-level issues with deep impact on the APA community.”  In other words, we say, “Sorry.  No.”  Could there be a better alternative?

6. Other Items/New Businesses      7. Adjournment


2. Report by the Treasurer of 2002 on our 02'

   Income/expenditure:  Larry Ho

To:                  Board of Directors

                        80-20 PAC Inc.

From:    Y.C. (Larry) Ho

                        Treasurer, 10/1998-12/2002

Subject: Report of Financial Operations 2001 and 2002

Date:    Jan. 22, 2003


I have the honor of submitting to you the consolidated financial reports (un-audited) for the years 2001 and 2002 (attached). The financial details have all been reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as required by law and are available for public inspection. The financials for 1999 and 2000 have been previously audited by an independent outside CPA firm and published on the 80-20 web site.

80-20 2002 Financial Report 


3.  Structures of Our Treasury (10 minutes): David Chu

 4. Membership projection for 2003 (10 minutes)

    a. 2002 membership:  Jing-Li Yu

Total Receipts: $137,116.78 received ($138,425 paid)

 Classification           number (dollars)     % of membership    %  Income

1) Family Members: 898 ($24,946.84)            56.4                     18.2

2) Basic Members: 623 ($21,834.87)               39.1                     15.9

3) Life Members: 38($34,944.90)                     2.4                      25.5

4) Family Life Members: 26 ($20,368.80)         1.6                      14.8

5) Honorary Life Members: 3 ($15,000)            0.2                      10.9

6) Honorary Family Life Mem.: 4 ($20,000)      0.3                      14.6

 In addition, 39 families contributed 100 or more dollars each (total: $4,508.33).  Perhaps they can be a source for life member recruitment, if we let them pay their pledge over a # of years.  Note that roughly 5% of our members (those who are Life Members) supported 70% of our financial needs.


   b. A Rough Projection for 2003:  S. B. Woo

Roughly the same number, i.e. 1,600 members, unless the Board/chapters/affiliates make a concerted effort to help recruit members and organize fundraisers.  As of 1/31/03, we have about 700 persons who have paid the 2003 dues.  Of those about 25% are new members.  However, I also anticipate that 25% of the 2002 members may not renew its membership.  For an organization with 600,000 plus families and individuals on its e-mail list, 1600 dues-paying members is NOT enough.  It’s not a flattering comment on 80-20 and our community.


5. Meeting Procedure Specified by 80-20 -- Robert's Rules of Order (20 minutes):  S. B. Woo


Q and A On Robert's Rules of Order  --

Knowing enough to handle most meetings


1) Why does 80-20 emphasize Robert's rules of order in its meetings?

 So that its meetings will be democratic but not chaotic.  That is, although all participants are given a say, the discussions will be focused and efficient.

 2) What are the key motions?

  1. I move to .... (A motion is not valid until it is seconded.  That way unsupportable ideas will be disposed of quickly.  Since can be only one motion on the floor at one time.  The debate is also very focused.)
  2. I second the motion.
  3. I move to amend the main motion ...  (An amendment must basically support the spirit of the motion.  Otherwise, one should vote to oppose the motion instead of amending it)
  4. I move to amend the amendment ... (The chair will normally not permit going beyond amendment to an amendment.)
  5. I move to question or I call for the question.  (i.e. I move to close debate.  It’s non-debatable & requires a 60% vote to pass.  If closing the debate is passed, then the motion on the floor is immediately put to a vote without further debate)

 3) What are the other motions that may come handy?

 ·         I move to table the motion (non-debatable upon a second.  A simple majority will vacate the previous motion.  A vacated motion can be brought back after a second by stating I move to lift from the table ..)

·         Point of order (to interrupt the Chair, if a proceeding seems out of order.  For example, a motion is being debated without a second.)

·         Point of information (to interrupt the Chair to request for information that is necessary for the debate to proceed meaningfully)

·         I move to substitute the motion with ... (non-debatable upon a second; simple majority required to pass.  It is used when the motion on the floor, though seconded is obviously not going to pass.  It is considered an unfriendly motion that should not be used unless there are pressing reasons.)

·         I ask for a roll call vote (automatically granted; votes will identified with names for the record.)

·         I ask for a secret ballot.  (automatic; paper ballots will be distributed)

·         I appeal the Chairman's ruling.  (non-debatable; a simple majority will suffice.  A chair has a lot of latitude.  He/she may rule which side wins the voice vote; whether a certain amendment is germane to a motion and therefore allowing or not allowing it, ..., etc.  The chair is normally given the benefit of the doubt by his/her colleagues.  However, when the chair seems to step out of the line, he/she can be challenged.)

 4) What makes a good Chair?

 All of us may be chairing meetings one day, so it’ll be nice to know. 

 A good chair is one who knows Robert’s rules but let the principle of having a democratic and efficient meeting guide him/her.  A good chair may make a ruling for the benefit of the meeting that is not in strict accord with the Robert’s rules by stating; “If it is without objection, I’ll rule ....”  The Chair should pause for a decent moment for people to voice objections.  Not hearing any, the ruling is sustained by the body.  Respecting the will of the participants is the best way for the Chair to win the respect of the participants.

 He/She should keep the meeting moving by saying things like:  Do I hear a motion?  Do I hear a second?  Do I hear a motion to question? (i.e. closing the debate), .., etc.  He/she’ll normally call for a voice vote by saying: “All those in favor say ‘aye.’”  Pause for the voice vote.  “Against say “nay.’”  Wait for a voice vote.  “Those abstaining raise your hands.” The Chair may then rule by saying “The ayes (or nays) have it.”  If the voice vote is not clear, then the chair may ask for a raising of hands. 

 5) An important maneuver you may want to remember:

For obvious reasons, a motion that has been voted on (whether passed or defeated) cannot be brought back for discussion again.  Otherwise, there is no end to a debate. 

However, occasionally a mistake is made in the handling of a motion.  The mechanism to change a body’s decision is for a member who has voted on the “winning side” to move to bring the motion back for another vote.  [If a motion was defeated earlier, then persons who voted to defeat the motion are persons voting on the “winning side.”]  Hence, if there is a motion that you really want to see passed or defeated, but you know that the other side will win at this particular time, you need to vote with the OPPOSITE side against your own conscience just so that you may move to bring it back for another vote at a later time.


6. Tien Chang-Lin Student Summer Internship (10 minutes):  S. B. Woo   


Susan Wu of Alabama, acting on behalf the National Taiwan University 1955 Mechanical Engineering Class (class in which Chang-Lin graduated), and Larry Yu-Chi Ho were the ones who helped established the memorial fund.

Amount Raised:  About $4,220, as of 1-10-03.  By summer of 2003, the amount raised shall be more than $6000.

Purpose:  To work with our youth and for them to experience the joy and frustrations of providing service for our community.  They will be given 1 to 2 weeks of training in person or via cyberspace and asked to recruit enough dues-paying members in the duration of the fellowship to provide a return equal to or larger than $3K.  That way, the Tien Chang-Ling Fellowship shall be self-perpetuating, as deserving of the name of the Memorial fund.  S. B. Woo is personally committed to make up the $6K amount, if the goal is not reached.

Our incoming staff, Harrison Leong, and S. B. Woo will be in close contact with the 2 student interns on a weekly basis.

Qualification & Stipend: Graduating high school seniors or university students having a passion to serve our community; an outstanding academic record; good letters of recommendation on applicants' character, people skills, and passion to serve the community.  A good academic record is required because it represents a fairly strong evidence that the applicant has strong self-discipline.  Working for a cyberspace organization requires strong self-discipline, because a cyberspace organization can not provide the close personal supervision available otherwise.  The stipend shall be $3K for 3 months beginning June 1, 2003.  Commission should not be applied.  It makes our Fellows seem like salesmen.

7. 2003-04 Budget & Personnel Matters (15 minutes):  S. B. Woo

Explanatory Note 2003 Budget Proposal: 

1) The proposed budget assumes an annual income of $120K, with a surplus of $15 K going into our 2004 war chest. 

2) Normally, 80-20 has two full-time staff.  However, this year we will have only one full-time staff and one part time staff until May, thereby causing a significant decrease in “people money.”

3) Income above $120K will be allocated to the war chest for 2004, when we will need an annual budget of at least $200K owing to the huge cost in making TV, and radio spots and buying the air time.  In addition, we may also give financially to political candidates.  Ideally, we should aim for income of $170K this yr. to boost 2004 war chest..

4) We have a reserve of about $90 K from 2002, which is roughly 2/3 of our annual budget. Ideally, it should increase at a 15% rate each year.



1. Membership Dues

Honorary Life Family Members:  1             $10 K                 2 members

Honorary Life Members: 2                         $10 K                 1 members

Family Life members: 5                            $7.5 K               10

Life Members: 10                                      $ 10 K               10

Family members: 650                               $ 32.5 K         1300

Basic members: 650                                  $ 23 K              650

2. Solicitation to current Life Members       $27 K

Total:                                                 $120 K       2000 members




1. Salary and Benefits

Jing-Li Yu for 12 months, Harrison Leong part time for 4,       

full-time for 7months     $55K

2. Payment to ISPs & e-mail related consultant fee                      $15K

3. Equipment & Postage                                            $5K

4. Meeting Expenses (rough estimate)                                     $5K

5. Printing cost & Phone Bills (conference calls)                            $5K

6. War Chest (radio and newspaper ads, legal fees)                        14K

7. Two Chang-Lin Tien Summer Interns                   $6K

8. Reserve for 2004 war chest                                   $15K

Total:                                                                                 $120K



Personal Matter:  Written evaluation of our staff is for Bd. members only.

8. 80-20's Achievements/Failures in Its Political Endeavors (60 minutes):  S. B. Woo


    80-20’s consistent success in the political arena was due mostly to the fact that we adhere to the “rules of the game” of American politics.  That is, “Leverage is the currency of politics.”

      We did add a twist of our own to 80-20’s modus operandi:  “Apply leverage with the two political parties, but be tolerant & patient with the internal contradictions of the APA community.”  We felt that to forge a unity, we must be willing to take a few knocks from some folks within our own community.  In time, those folks may be shamed into modifying their behavior upon witnessing how tough we are towards the politicians and political parties and how nice and tolerant we are toward them. 

    The second part hasn’t worked yet,  :-) although I still believe that it is the best strategy.  Maybe we ought to count the number of knocks coming from the same individuals.  If the count exceeds a certain number, then we’ll hit back.  However, we should never dwell on internal fights.  That’s not a way to serve our community.

Successes:  For descriptions with exact dates, see


 and         http://www.80-20initiative.net/unity2.html

1. Summer, 1999:  Bill Bradley became the first presidential candidate of 2000 to respond positively to 80-20’s “Declaration to Presidential Candidates of 2000,” henceforth just Declaration.  Leverage: help to his fundraiser in SF & our implied endorsement of his candidacy during the PRIMARY provided that no other Dem. candidate would also respond positively to our Declaration.  In the primary, 80-20 would be neutral towards all candidates who reacted positively to our Declaration. 

Note: While leverage was applied, there was NEVER any explicit discussion along the line of if you give me this, then we’ll give you that.  Such agreements are illegal!  So one needs to learn how to play politics.

2.  Spring, 2000: Gore responded positively to the Declaration a few hours prior to the deadline that 80-20 set.  Leverage: 80-20 would become neutral in the Dem. primary, instead of helping Bradley.

3. Summer 2000:  Urged President Clinton to appoint Norm Mineta to be the historic first cabinet member, as was stated in our Declaration.  Leverage:  Massive e-mails and faxes to remind the Dem Party of the approaching 2000 presidential election.

4. Late Summer 2000:  Bush’s refusal to respond formally and positively to the Declaration.  Leverage:  80-20 subsequently endorsed Gore in the GENERAL election and delivered better than 2 of every 3 APA votes to Gore.  Note:  If the desired goal is NOT attained, but a commensurate response is delivered, then it is still a success.  It builds up 80-20’s future probability of success.

5. Fall 2000:  Forcing the Rep. Party to withdraw its “Daisy” TV ad in one day.  The ad fanned the message of “yellow peril.” Leverage: instead of focusing on getting vote for Gore in CA, where the GOP was not likely to win, 80-20 would go into contested states to work against Bush.

6. Winter 2000: Getting President Bush to ALSO appoint an APA cabinet member.  Leverage:  Demonstrate with massive e-mails and faxes to the Transition Team that if the appointment was not made, then there would be reckoning in the 2004 election.

7.  Summer 2001:  In response to a C-100 survey that revealed a large fraction of our compatriots consider us as foreigners, 80-20 started the July 4th Flag Project.  It was a huge success.  Method: massive communication capability within the APA community and persuasion. 

8. Spring, 2002:  Seattle Times’ second apology on its headline: "Hughes good as gold:  American outshines Kwan, Slutskaya in skating surprise" Leverage:  Massive e-mails to Seattle Times from citizens in Washington and nationwide.

9. Late Spring, 2002: Getting the Abercombie and Fitch to withdraw its new line of 4 T-shirts with derogatory portrayals of Asians in two hours.  Leverage: ....

10. Primary Election Season of 2002:  Seeing racist attacks on APA political candidates, 80-20 took pro-active action to deter future racist attacks on APA political candidates.  Leverage: Commit to spend significant financial resource& use our communication power to defeat the racist candidate in this election or his/her next; also commit to find ways to drive the candidates’ paid political consultant out the political business

11. Winter, 2002:  Helped induce the Republican House Caucus to hold a re-vote on Sen. Lott’s pro-segregation statement which eventually forced Lott’s resignation.  Leverage: Letter to Republican Leadership with hint of our ability to reach 500 k voters in 1 day.

Failure: Our one and only failure

    Fall 2000:  80-20 urged its supporters to fax the White House to give a full pardon to W.H. Lee.  More than 900 faxes, that were also copied to my fax machine, went into Clinton’s White House.  All proudly identified themselves as 80-20 supporters in the fax. 

    The real number of faxes that went to the White House probably went way above 1,000.

    No result.  Why?  (1) We didn’t do careful homework, and (2) we didn’t apply implicit/explicit leverage.  We also failed to follow up.   But it was not a total failure.  The quality and quantity of our supporters who proudly identified themselves with 80-20 in the faxes certainly impressed the White House.

A Significant 80-20 Success in 2002:

80-20 has institutionalized.  All Directors and Officers are directly elected by the dues-paying members.  Anyone can be a dues paying members upon the payment of $35.  From 01/01/2003 onward, 80-20 is no longer subject to the will of one individual or a group of individuals.  It is the written words of our bylaws that count.  Those words can be amended according to a prescribed procedure only. 

All who care about our community must deeply respect the “rule of law” in guiding 80-20. 

80-20 has become a political tool of the community, by the community and for the community.


9. Fundraising and Endowment Fund (60 minutes)

     a. Fundraising

         i. Purpose:  (1) Money talks.  The larger our war chest, the larger our clout.  (2) In politics, money equals support.  (3) 80-20 has not been short of money for the basic things we want to do (e.g. the presidential election), however, it is severely limited in its scope of operation.  We had to say not say no to an average of 10 requests for help per week.

         ii. Electing a Fundraising Chair (Volunteers for members?)

     b. Endowment


A big endowment is a stabilizing element for an organization.  It serves as a magnet that will attract warring internal political factions to stay together.

There are two huge centrifugal forces at work within 80-20. 

1)      80-20, being the first and largest pan-Asian grass-roots organization, faces the immense pressure coming from the immense diversity of the APA community, and

2)      80-20 is extremely political.  However, it must operate in a community that lacks political experience and maturity.

These factors are time bombs waiting to blow 80-20 apart.  Once it gathers a significant endowment, 80-20 will still experience internal explosions periodically, but the losing faction(s) will be unlikely to pick up its marbles and leave 80-20 for one certain reason – not wanting to leave all that money to the sole control of their “contemptible” opponents.”




10. Membership Expansion (60 minutes)

 a.       Setting a goal

I’d like to suggest that we double 80-20’s membership by June, 2004.

    b. How to achieve the goal

i) How each Board member can help,

    As a group of 15, we should be able to recruit 300 or more new members within a year.


        ii) How chapters can help, and

            I hope it can account for 100 additional members within a yr.


        iii) How the Tien Chang-Lin Fellowship can help: 

            The two interns should recruit 200 new members in a summer


        iv) Creating a pamphlet to recruit members (A Any volunteers to

            draft and design the pamphlet?)


            It’s something we need to do.  See below which happens to agree with this view:


Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 07:21:02 -0500

From: Edma55@aol.com

 Dr. Wu,

 Congratulation for 80-20 and all Asian Americans that we have gained recognition little by little and we'll get there, sooner or later.

Thanks to your vision, wisdom, leadership, perseverance and modern technological and publicity skills.

May I suggest that a small brochures about 80-20 to reach out to those who are computer illiterates and motivates them to join us.

All the best

Ed Ma


11. National/ Chapters Relations (60 minutes)

    a. Chapter contribution in the past


           Houston chapter got 10,000 APAs to sign a petition to the then candidate Bush Jr. to endorse the 80-20 Declaration presidential candidates of 2000.  LA held press conferences on behalf of 80-20’s endorsement of Gore, its members helped did exist do exit polls during the presidential election,


           LA chapter did a fundraiser on the eve of 80-20’s Endorsement Committee meeting.  About 700 attended, and netted about $20K out of $55K.  $10K was reverted back to the LA chapter at $5K per year.

          To put things in perspective, 80-20 did a fundraiser in SF where we have 3 Friends but not a chapter, we netted $60K out of $100K.


            When the rule of law spreads to chapters, chapter could be of some help in recruiting members.  Recruiting members is NOT an easy job.  Throughout the nation, whether they are professional or social organization, dues-paying members are decreasing drastically.


        To be the local political king-maker is a strong motivation, because 80-20 is a brand name.  This would be ok if the local endorsement is consistent with the national’s goal to win equal opportunity in workplaces for APAs. 

       A smaller problem is that people without the political experience and the higher ideals often want to endorse local candidates without doing the hard work to back up its endorsement.


 I think a lot of people get the wrong idea when they think they are forming a “chapter.” Because many organizations work from chapter à national (ie, people first join chapter, then national), many people unfamiliar w/ 80-20’s model feel slighted by 80-20’s policies, since for 80-20, the model so far is national à chapter. So maybe a better name than “chapter” would help alleviate misunderstandings.

12. Election for New Board Members in Nov. 2003 (10 minutes): Kenneth Fong


We have five one-yr.  Board member who must face re-election this November.  They are eligible to be elected to two more two-year terms. Our bylaws also require that every elected position must be contested.

The five members are :  Jerry Yang, Richard Mak, Peter Luh, Giga Andreyev, & Adam Chou.


The nomination Committee for the next two years are:

T. S. Chung, Adam Chou, Larry Ho and Peter Suzuki are members. Kenneth Fong is the Chair.

 13. Election Related Articles of the Bylaws (10 Minutes):    Kathleen To


Copies of the INTERIM BYLAWS will be available.   All articles and paragraphs pertaining to election procedures will be reviewed.

14. Our Web Site (20 minutes):  Ying Yang

 The presentation will be made through a video screen.



Our Web Strategy


Web Site and Mirror Sites


Challenges for 2002


Proposed Change for 2003




·         Informing

·         Recruiting

·         Fundraising

·         PR



·         Suggestions to make more out of our web site

15. Bylaws Amendments (45 minutes):

Proposed amendments:  proposed additions are underlined.  Proposed deletions are in ( ).

1) Article 6.2 to:  A chapter must have 25 or more persons who pay both national and local dues.  The amount of the local dues is $5 or more.  A chapter must apply to the Board of Director (alternatively referred to as the National) and be granted recognition after a review of a chapter's bylaws.  A list of a chapter’s members must accompany the application.  The application must be renewed every three years.  Renewal is automatic except for cause, i.e. for violating one or more of bylaws' provisions.  A citation of cause must be in writing and be presented to the Board by the President while inviting a rebuttal from the local chapter.”

Reasons:  There are normally more national dues-paying members than local chapter members in every city and state.  Hence, in order to avoid legal disputes in a controversial issue, it is important to specify who qualify as a chapter members, who can vote for chapter officers, bylaw changes and referendums.  In additional, chapters require a lot of maintenance from the National.  Hence a minimum size must be set.

2) Article 6.2.1 Chapter Privileges to:  The official name of a chapter shall be 80-20xx, where xx shall be the identification of the city, or county or state, depending on what is appropriate, in which the chapter is located.  A chapter may adopt its own bylaws provided that they are not in conflict with those of the National.  It sets its own local dues which should be $5 or more.  For the first two years of a chapter’s existence, national dues of those members who pay local dues are automatically rebated to the chapter provided that it bylaws have been approved by the National and its officers are elected according to the specifications of its own bylaws.  A Chapter may endorse political candidates residing in its state who are not running for the US president.  A Chapter may apply for financial assistance from the National up to the maximum permitted by Federal Election Commission

Reason:  The National needs to be more helpful to chapters during their initial formation period 

1)      David Chu may wish to amend the first paragraph of Article 3.4.2. to:

 “The Nominating Committee shall consist of a chair elected by the Membership in the second week of November every other year, and four members appointed by the Board of Directors in the second week of December after the election of the new directors.  All vacancies shall be filled by appointment by the Board.  No member shall serve more than two consecutive complete terms of service, counting elective and appointed services together. Members of the Nominating Committee shall not be eligible to be nominated as candidates for any elective position, unless they are nominated by the Board.  (A Member of the NC may not nominate him/herself, and must be absent during the deliberation and balloting of his/her candidacy if nominated by other persons.)”  

Reason:  It may be a better procedure than the current version.

16. Others

The following is for information purposes.  The President of 80-20 is empowered by the bylaws to appoint Ad Hoc Committees.  However, SB wants input so as to benefit from your comments.

(1) S. B. intends to appoint an Ad Hoc Awards Committee whose charge is  to recommend a list of 5 persons to be honored by 80-20 during its 2004 Annual Board Meeting.  A banquet is to be organized centered upon that ceremony.  It is to work closely with the Ad Hoc Committee for the next Board Meeting

(2) He’ll also appoint an Ad Hoc Organization Committee for the next Board Meeting, whose charge is to organize the first annual Board meeting accompanied by a fundraiser.

It shall recommend the date and location of 80-20’s next Board meeting, complete with a list of two or more keynote speakers.  The date of the meeting shall be well before the California primary election on presidential candidates.  The first committee report to the Board should be by August 1.

17. Adjournment at about 4:30 p.m.

     Special Reception at the Chinese Consulate, hosted by

       The Consulate General CG Wang from 5:00 p.m. to 5:50 p.m.

DINNER (Social hour at 6:30 p.m., 2 hours)

     Special Guests include officers from our “Affiliates,” and sister orgs.

Agenda Items of Feb. 2, 2003

1.      Liaison with The Congress (60 minutes): S. B. Woo


a)      Senate 

    b)      House


A wonderful opportunity is developing for the APA community in the House of Representatives.  Rep. Tom Delay of TX District 22 has 11% APAs residing in his district.  He is now the majority leader.  Rep. Nancy Pelosi of CA District 8 has more than 33% APAs residing in her district.  She is now the Minority leader.  If Dem. gains the control of the Houses, she could even be the Speaker of the House, who ranks above the Majority Leader. 

Powerful politicians could be arrogant towards a lot of people.

However, they are NEVER arrogant towards their own constituents.  The constituents are the ones who grant the politicians their power.  Hence the motto of all politicians is: “We serve those who elect us.”  Most of the time, elected politicians place the will of their constituents above their own! 

Since the APAs are still struggling for equal opportunity and justice, let us ask ourselves if we could be “wise and tough enough” to put the information above together to create a win-win opportunity for ourselves and the two political leaders. 

Our children's ability to enjoy equal opportunity depends on us.

Note:  The results of the congressional election in 2000, and 2002 are shown below.  One should also be aware that an x% of APA residing in a district should be translated roughly to an x/2 % in voters.

Tom Delay won 60/36 in 2000, and 63/35 in 2002.

Nancy Pelosi won 85/12 in 2000, and 80/13 in 2002.

            Shall we appoint an ad hoc committee in SF and Houston, TX to explore the situation?  Such jobs must go to people with ample political experience.  Otherwise, we could get things off in the wrong footing.  I can not stress more that we must create a win-win situation, while not being cowed by the political leaders.

 2. Protecting Our Community's Scientists against Wrongful Investigative Tactics (60 minutes):  S. B. Woo


There might be three such recent cases:  Wen Ho Lee, Bin Han and the case of JiangYu Zhu and his wife, Kayoko Kimbara.  The first two cases have been adjudicated in court.  The third case is still going on, although Dr. Zhu was already cleared of wrong doing by his employer.

 There seems to exist a common thread in the first two cases.  Both started with exaggerated government charges against the scientists, followed first by press leaks, then verbal threats to the accused of the dire consequences the scientists will face, then groundless objection to letting the accused out on bail, and finally gross failure to prove the case in court.

 I believe that 80-20 has the responsibility of protecting our community's scientists against wrongful investigative tactics.  However, 80-20's human and financial resources are extremely limited.  We can not afford to react to each case while it is still proceeding in court.   Legal cases lasting several years are common. 

 As a result we must adopt a pro-active policy that may deter the investigative arms of our government from future abuse of our innocent scientists and engineers.  You may recall that, after the 2002 primary elections, 80-20 publicized a pro-active policy to protect Asian American political candidates from facing racist attacks by their opponents.  In the general election of 2000, our policy proved to be 100% effective in deterring such attacks. 

 Proposed Motion:

 Upon the application of a scientist/engineer, upon adjudication in court of a verdict vastly against the original charges, and upon the verification by an ad hoc 80-20 investigative committee that the government investigative tactics seem grossly improper, 80-20 shall offer to support the wronged scientist/engineer, including joining the wronged scientist/engineer as a “Friend of the Court” (amicus curiae) in asking for damages and/or offering financial support.  Further 80-20 will use its political assets and considerable communication prowess to press for the censure of the wrongful investigators. 

This motion or a similar motion, if passed, will be posted prominently on our web site for 3 months.  After that it'll be a part of the “Discrimination Watch,” which is a regular subject on our site.

 3. The Presidential Election of 2004 (45 minutes):  S. B. Woo


Reading Article 7 of our bylaws is a must for individuals aiming to participate in the following discussion.  Please do so.  A copy of our “Declaration of 2000” is seen below.  Note that only the 4th of our 4 requests has been substantially achieved.

   Declaration Concerning The 2000 Presidential Election

by The 80-20 Initiative


"With liberty and justice for all."  Thus ends our pledge of allegiance to the flag with a ringing commitment to all citizens.

Unfortunately, liberty and justice remain an unrealized dream for Asian Americans.  A low glass-ceiling hangs instead over our heads, denying us the opportunity to rise to the top of our professions, just as it hung over women and blacks until recently.

Statistical evidence, mostly gathered by government sponsored studies, shows a dismal picture: Asian Americans have only one-third the opportunity of all other Americans to "rise to the top," in the academic world, in corporations, or even in federal government.

To illustrate, Asian Americans represent 3.5% of the population of this nation.  However, of the 875 active federal judges, only 7 are Asian Americans; of the 250 plus cabinet and sub-cabinet positions in President Clinton's Administration in 1998, only two were held by Asian Ams. 

The situation is no better in universities, the so-called bastion of idealism in our society.  University administrators are recruited almost exclusively from the ranks of faculty and professionals already employed in universities.  Hence the ratio of [administrators / (faculty + professionals)], broken down to races, is a measure of the opportunity enjoyed by American citizens of different races.  Nationwide, that ratio for blacks (non-Hispanic) is 0.21.  That is, for every 100 black faculty and professionals there are 21 black administrators.  The ratio for Native American is 0.20; for white (non-Hispanic) is 0.16; and for Hispanic is 0.15.  However, it is only 0.06 for Asian American.

The picture that emerges from the supposedly "enlightened" academic world and federal government is one of inequality and injustice for Asian Americans.  The situation in the corporate world is worse, much worse.  All Asian American CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, with one recent exception, started the companies themselves.

Therefore, we, the Asian American citizens, declare that the time has come for all presidential candidates to commit themselves to the following to realize the ideal of equal opportunity for all Americans:     

 1. If elected, will direct his/her cabinet officers to work with Congress in holding public hearings regarding the validity of the huge amount of statistical data strongly suggesting discriminatory practices against Asian Americans in workplaces today,

2. If the data were shown valid, will issue a public statement to reaffirm your Administration's intention to vigorously prosecute all cases of racial discrimination against Asian Americans in the workplace,    

3. If the data were shown valid, will work to induce the lifting of the glass-ceilings so that Asian Americans will be well on our way to equal opportunity to "rise to the top" within the first term, and 

4. If elected, will give due recognition to the services and talents of Asian Americans by appointing qualified persons to policy-making positions in the Judicial and Executive branches of the federal government, possibly including a historic first cabinet position. The number of appointments will represent a significant improvement upon the current drastic under-utilization of Asian Americans.

Asian Americans have contributed with distinction to the well being of the nation. We work hard at our jobs, we help to run business, we serve in governments, and we are well educated, with bachelor degrees per thousand persons twice that of the nation.  It is time we are finally given equal opportunity for professional advancement, and to serve in the federal government in positions we deserve. 

We ask fellow Asian Americans to join us in our declaration to WITHHOLD financial and other forms of support to any presidential PRIMARY candidates who fail to pledge his/her commitment to our request for equal justice in the workplace. 

During the GENERAL presidential election, a different approach is taken.  To be effective, we shall form a block-vote in favor of the presidential candidate of that political party that will have helped Asian Americans the most in achieving equal opportunity, between now and August 2000.

Our cause is just.  Our requests are fair.  As individuals our voices may be weak; TOGETHER WE SHALL OVERCOME.


    a. The Primary Season

          i.  What issues do we want our next president to address?

       ii. Drafting a letter to the presidential candidates

    b. Our Endorsement Convention:

        i. A review of our own protocol – electing 1/3 D/I/R, each, .., etc.

        ii. Documenting what each party has done for us?

        iii. Timing of our Convention:  advantage/disad. of an early or

            late Convention. 

    c. The General Election:  Preparing radio, TV, newspaper ads, and

        group troops.

4. Stepping into Key State & Federal Races where We have

Significant Influence?  (30 minutes):  S. B. Woo


   Whether 80-20 decides to step into political races other than the presidential election or not, some awareness of the following table is important.  If one wants to raise money from the APA community, please focus on the 5th column from the left.  If one wants to exert political clout, please focus on the last column from the left.  The map on the next page contains a wealth of information.  It is extremely helpful in providing a forest view. 

Advantage/Disadvantage of getting into key federal/state races:


·         More political clout, especially during non-election years;

·         local chapters will enjoy more respect from local politicians;

·         could tie chapters closer to the National



·         Requires more human and financial resources;

·         could create some conflict between the National and local chapters.

5. A Better Way to Handle Requests for Help? (15 minutes): SB

Currently about 10 requests per weeks for help come to 80-20 from APA individuals.  We always answer, “Given 80-20's very limited resources, it chooses to focus on macro-level issues with deep impact on the APA community.”  In other words, we say, “Sorry.  No.”  Could there be a better alternative?

 What could be an alternative?

      One idea may be to publicize that 80-20 will take at least one individual case per year if the request comes from a member.  We'll publicize the frequency of the requests so that no one is mislead into thinking that the chance of getting selected by 80-20 is high.  We'll also state clearly that there is no guarantee of success.  However, once a case is successfully resolved, we'll select another case.  I believe it'll get more of our folks to pay attention to 80-20 and become members.

     If you like the idea, we may want to adopt such a policy for a trial period of 2 years.

 6. Other Items/New Businesses     

 7. Adjournment 

 A QUESTION for Directors:  Do we want to schedule a press conference after the meeting is adjourned? 

My feeling is that if we adopt one or more of the major policies proposed on Sunday, then we may want to schedule a press conference.  I'll survey the Board members early Saturday, because we need to give reporters sufficient time if a press conference is to be held.