Keep in mind that SOPA has been around for about 21 years, and that it is a
fiscally sound organization.  I can't speak for the officers of SOPA, but
as a founding member of the organization and co-chair of the ROPA task
force,  I believe that the primary motivations for SOPA to consider moving
into a closer relationship (as ROPA) with the major American-based
archaeological societies was 1) that sponsorship would constitute a formal
endorsement by those societies that the mechanisms established by SOPA to
promote professionalism are of value to the whole field of archaeology, and
2) that sponsorship would result in a considerably larger percentage of
active professionals becoming RPAs, because the sponsoring societies would
actively encourage (though not require) their professional members to
become RPAs.  Even though the sponsoring organizations would make only
small annual contributions (in both percentage and actual dollars) to the
ROPA budget, these contributions would validate the sponsoring
relationship, and would be of some practical assistance in operating ROPA.
If the SAA and SHA are unwilling to contribute even a small amount to
ROPA, how seriously could anyone take the idea that they are in fact
sponsors?   Keep in mind that the cost of the annual SHA contribution to
the ROPA budget would be a little over $2.00 per SHA member, and that the
RPAs would in fact pay most of the cost of operating ROPA.
 
It seems to me that cost should not be the major issue here.   Surely the
same arguments that are being made about the costs of sponsoring ROPA
(essentially, that not all members of SHA would benefit equally from it,
and that it might not fully solve all the problems arising in a complex but
important area) could be raised about ANY $2.15 item in the SHA's budget
(or any similar organization's budget).
 
Bill Lipe
 
=============
 
>I for one appreciate the considerable effort Bill Lipe has put into this
>discussion.
>
>But I am wondering if there is anyone else out there who supports ROPA.
>Most of the comments have been negative.  I admit I voted for it (SOPA
>election) but am far from comfortable. But then, change is almost always
>uncomfortable.
>
>I also would like to know the rational for having the cooperating
>societies provide so much financial support - why not let the RPAs foot
>the cost?
>
>John
>
>John P. McCarthy, SOPA
>Vice President, Sr. Archaeologist/Historian
>IMA Consulting, Inc.
>Minneapolis