| OCR Text |
Show IWY at large delegates expose real motive Few things have ever dominated the public forums of the Salt Lake City daily papers more than the controversry surrounding the International Women's Year (IWY) conventions and delegation. The latest news of nine at-large delegates being assigned to the Utah delegation by IWY higher-ups higher-ups tends to show the whole escapade for what it is-a false facade. The entire purpose of the local state conventions was to collect a representative sample of delegates to attend the Houston national meet. For the national commission to appoint nine delegates to represent the BeeHive State as well, in the name of fairness, is just the opposite. What's the sense in electing delegates at a conference if an outside body can meddle in its makeup? What qualifies the national commission to decide how Utah is to be represented? These questions are above and beyond the most visible argument--Had the elected state group be all Pro-ERA, would the national committee have named the at-large at-large delegates? It has been reported that eight of the nine delegates favor the ERA, support the notion of women's right to have an abortion-all issues the Utah representation had supposedly already established platforms on. If the same post-convention appointing were applied to political conventions and the like, our representative government would no longer be. The end result of the IWY, to reflect a consensus of women's opinions, is certainly suspect, using the at-large delegates as a case in point. But regardless of motive and outcome, the IWY has gotten more women involved in issues and activities they may not have been without it. |
