Current editorial fallacies cause concern

I am an avid reader of The Current, and am generally in agreement with the "Our Opinion" section. However, this past week's statement greatly concerns me. On this issue it is quite obvious "The Current" and SGA President Darwin Butler did not do their homework, and I hope have taken an uneducated stance on this issue. A stance, once educated about, they would be willing to change. I propose "The Current" and President Butler are in error in two major areas of this issue.

First, the way campus governance in the UM System is set up. There is a quoted paragraph at the beginning on the Governance Draft. It is legalese for the following. The Curators of the UM System have given the ultimate governing power to the faculty of each campus in all issues regarding education. The Curators have given facilities, non-educational, relations, and budget and planning to the Chancellor. The Curators expect the faculty to advise the Chancellor. It is the faculty's duty to set up the governance system on each campus. Therefore, the faculty at UMSL decide the structure of the governing body on this campus. No where, anywhere, does it say that students get to be part of the governing system. Therefore, being a student senator is not a right--it is a privilege. When the Governance Committee put the draft together, they could have excluded students completely. With this said, I beg the statement, "a blatant attempt to try to strip more decision making power away from the students." They included us in the governing system because they appreciate our input. If they really wanted to strip our power, they would have decreased our representative ratio or excluded us completely. They have done neither.

As a matter of fact, there is the same exact ratio of students in the proposal as currently exist in the Senate. The committees that would fall under the Faculty Council all deal with faculty related topics in the direct realm of education, which is what the Curators have asked of the faculty.

Students will still sit on these committees and influence policy and discussion. The University Council committees all deal with non-educational topics, which affect the campus as a whole. Again, students will also continue to sit on these committees.

Second, the Senate is NOT the final governing body of our campus. In concerns of educational issues, the faculty at large is. In concerns of non-educational issues, the Chancellor is. In the case of the Chancellor, she obtains advice from the appropriate committees and then makes a decision. In the case of the faculty, they have two semi-annual elections of all educational policy recommendations proposed by the Senate. That vote determines if the recommendation becomes a policy. Therefore, all final votes by the Senate are recommendations to the faculty at large or the Chancellor. Only after being approved/accepted by the Chancellor or the faculty at large does the recommendation become policy.

In our campus governance system, students do NOT make any final decisions. But, they do get to influence and affect policy. I do not think it is a good idea to challenge and/or attack the Governance Committee for something they have given us the opportunity to continue to do. Especially, since they have not hurt us in the first place. Additionally, if and when a final and complete proposal is brought to the campus, the Senate can only recommend or not support it. The final vote is by the faculty at large.

Not a single student vote will cast a vote in the final decision of this proposal.

It is "My Opinion" and, hopefully, soon "The Current's" and President Butler's, that students talk to their professors or seek out members of the Governance Committee. Ask this faculty member questions, formulate an opinion, and give your valued and educated student input. This Governance Proposal is a document that could change the way UM-St. Louis operates.

The more we students contribute to it, the more we will get out of it. -Ryan Metcalf Student Senator

-Ryan Metcalf

Student Senator

In days you were poor I just liked you more

I just wanted to congratulate you guys for the best issue I've seen in a long time. Special praise to Ken Dunkin for the comments about the unfortunate state of mainstream St. Louis radio. I was especially pleased by the mention of KNSX 93.3, a station that, although far from perfect, is certainly better than any other station in town. The whole A&E insert this week was inspired. I found Rob Perry's thoughts on the year to date interesting. I suppose any year that produces the successes of Beth Orten and "Election," and the failure of "Wild Wild West," couldn't be all bad. And reading Cory Blackwood's rips on Mesh and Gravity Kills gave me warm fuzzies. Cory and I may differ in opinion a bit on what's good, but I think we can agree on what's bad. I don't always agree with Cory's comments and reviews, but I like the idea that our paper has reviews of non-major releases (for instance, Stereolab this week.) All the movie and album reviews, too, were great.

-Geoff Dobran