Hello:

Here's some member feedback.

1. By and large, the list is OK with the exception that its composed of all of the normal people you would expect. I've no objections to anyone on the list, they all deserve to be named.

2. Conspiculously underabundant are equally capable and equally high-profile scientists who happen to hold appointments at non-elite but still powerful astronomy and astrophysics departments.

3. Totally absent is anyone who represents the interests of a host of AAS members who hold appointments at smaller institutions; who have a firm grasp of issues facing the bulk of graduate astronomy and astrophysics programs; who regularly teach an astronomy class (the primary source of funding, nationally, that supports astronomy appointments is tuition revenue for astronomy classes); and any younger but well regarded member to represent and advocate the holistic interests facing the next generation of astronomers. I'm sure that there is the possibility that some/all on the committee would disagree with this statement, citing their experiences from years in the past that may no longer be as relevant as we would hope to attend to the job at hand.

Please pass this reply along to the appropriate person(s).

Thanks.