<p>To clarify: the LOA itself does not say that the candidate needs to continue with MOC nominations if they have a presidential nomination. The requirement is only that the LOA recipient receive "a nomination". The benefit to having multiple nominations with a LOA is an administrative one for WP admissions (they have more flexibility in making appointments), there is no benefit to the candidate.</p>
<p>USNA69 - I agree the discussion bears repeating that is why I found the previous post. There are three different facets to this issue.<br>
1. The advantage of multiple nominations to a candidate without a LOA (increases their chances of an appointment – some candidate pools are weaker than others)
2. The advantage to admissions if a candidate without a LOA is "top dog" in more than one nomination pool (Admissions has flexibility is assigning nomination sources)
3. The advantage of multiple nominations to admissions when a candidate has a LOA (Admissions has flexibility is assigning nomination sources)</p>
<p>Of course all of this is moot if as the OP has indicated the MOC will not nominate a candidate who already has a presidential nomination.</p>
<p>Very typical of a congressman to do that.</p>
<p>Well my congressman does not do that....
Mister sinister - how can you possibly make a blanket statement such as that?</p>
<p>There are 435 congressmen and 100 senators - have you surveyed all of the 535 MOC's? By making assumptions you could be influencing a kid not to see a MOC nominations when already possessing a presidential nomination.</p>
<p>The bottom line is to follow the academies instructions. If a third party prevents you from doing so - ie. your MOC then you should be proactive and notifiy academy admissions.
A candidate should never assume that because he/she already has a presidential nomination that he/she should not bother seeking a Congressional nomination.</p>