H o m e

N e w s

S p o r t s

O d d s & E n d s

E d i t o r i a l s

C l a s s i f i e d
A d s

L e t t e r s t o
t h e E d i t o r

S t a f f

L e g a l

B u l l e t i n
B o a r d

R a t e O u r
P a g e s

U M S L

M C M A

NEGATIVE COLUMN AND CARTOON CONFUSES STUDENT SENATOR

by Gail Babcock

I am writing in response to Bill Rolfes' comments in the March 30 issue, "Questioning Validity of SGA Committees." Bill mentioned in the article that there was talk of a student advisory board meeting as a result of Tonya Hutchinson and me "riling up" students over fee increases and the Performing Arts Center. What was actually proposed at the SGA meeting was a town hall forum where students could meet to discuss viable means of including their voices in decisions impacting our educations and wallets. Although I admit that no e-mails were sent, the time and proposed location of that town hall meeting was published in you paper. I'm sorry that Bill missed it. The turnout at the meeting was shockingly poor, a result that was also reported in your paper.

I am somewhat confused by the intent of both your article and the cartoon describing the new student members of the Senate (to which both Tonya and I were elected) as "Blanche's robots with battery packs." If the intent of the paper is to encourage the participation of more students in campus organizations and issues, I find it hard to believe that any students considering such a future move would be encouraged by the implication that anyone attempting to affect campus politics is a mere robot. Given that the new student members of the Senate have only attended one meeting, I would think judgment might be withheld until we have at least had an opportunity to participate.