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

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

U M S L

M C M A

EDITORIAL MISSED POINT OF FACULTY SURVEY

by Steven M. Wolfe

I would like to respond to your editorial about the Student Government Association in the April 27 issue.

First, the approval of the SGA constitution is not as simple as you made it sound. The new constitution has to be approved by the members of the assembly, the student body as a whole and be recommended by the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs before the approval of the chancellor.

Second, it is a fact that the SGA is not a true association. The organizational representatives are merely puppets, not wanting to rock the boat by going against the executive committee's agenda. However, they represent only a minority of the student body.

In order to have a true SGA, at-large representatives from the various schools and colleges - as required by the present constitution - are needed. When only one person filed, write-ins should have been allowed in order to get representation for the various sectors of the University. Why didn't the SGA seek out students like they did to fill the student senate seats? It is because the SGA executive committee would not be able to manipulate these representatives as easily as the organizational puppets.

That is why I filed my grievance. It is on the behalf of all students - not as a sore loser - for a position that does not legally exist. The job of Comptroller does not exist in the present constitution so there should have been no election.

In order to get this grievance settled, I hereby propose that the SGA have an election in September to fill those unfilled representative seats. By the constitution, they have to have a election for new students, so they could also vote on the unfilled representative seats. This was done in September 1996 when there was vacant representative seats after the April 1996 election.

Regarding my second grievance regarding a polling place at Honors. The SGA at the February 1997 meeting approved the election rules and regulations. They are not suggestions to the election committee; they are the procedure that the election is to follow. Those rules are supposed to be followed by the candidates as well as the election committee.

Will the Student Court do anything about my grievances or the recount in the vice presidential election? I seriously doubt it because the justices don't want to rock the boat because they also want to stay in office.

If SGA doesn't fix itself, maybe the student body should demand that SGA be abolished and its funds be refunded to the students. I don't want to see this because SGA can be a vital organization if it represents all students not just the minority of students in organizations. I have pledged my support to see the SGA become a vital voice for all students by serving on the constitution committee.