Almost one year after the below editorial was written, there is still much work to be done at Student Union. We would highly encourage newly elected SU executives and representatives to seriously consider the proposals outlined in last year’s editorial. Student Union still needs to focus on providing competitive elections beyond the executive slate candidates. And it must also begin working towards reducing the class council budgets.

Any student outreach programs must also take into account the fact that students are not apathetic towards Student Union per se; they simply have many other priorities that do not make it easy to fit it into their schedules. Any efforts to increase student participation must understand this and a successful outreach effort will minimize the amount of student investment required to be informed about Student Union.

We would also highly encourage Student Union to seriously re-examine the mandatory student health insurance policy. Some health insurance is not necessarily better than no health insurance, and it is not fair to ask students to pay $660 annually for a plan that does not even offer many of the most basic preventative care options.

The David Ader era has at long last reached its conclusion. Student Union inaugurated Paul Moinester as president last Tuesday, officially ushering in the end of the tenure of Ader as president, Pam Bookbinder as vice president, Ed Banti as treasurer and Sally Smith as secretary. For all of the old administration’s successes, there is still much work to be done by the new execs, most notably raising awareness about Student Union (SU).

First, there must be some election reform. It is a disgrace that the Bunny probably got enough write-in votes to earn a Senate seat. If fielding enough candidates continues to be a problem, perhaps it is time to cut some Senate seats instead of letting the first person to decide that SU is a good resum‚-builder get the job without campaigning as hard as everyone else. Competitive elections are vital for any legitimate governing body. By spending so much time campaigning, candidates can prove to constituents that they actually want to serve in Senate, and by having a platform, the candidates have something for which they are accountable. When Senate is composed of write-ins who did not receive student votes, students are not strongly connected to their senators and these write-ins do not have the same mandate to serve dutifully as voted-on senators have. Competitive elections help both SU internally with how senators act and externally with how the student body perceives SU. If this lack of competition continues, SU should not hesitate to cut a couple of seats in the Senate in order to restore competition.

The new SU execs also need to cut the budgets of class councils. This year, SU allotted the Class of 2006 $15,615 and $43,394 in appeals, the Class of 2007 and 2008 got $6,940 each and $5,205 for the Class of 2009. As of this writing, the Class of 2006 had $28,735.22 left over, the Class of 2007 had $1,302.60 left, $5,000.07 for the Class of 2008 and $3,795.32 with the Class of 2009. It is hard to imagine that the Class Councils will be able to use all that money up before the year is over. Some of these funds could instead have been allocated to other student groups. The Gargoyle could have brought more bands to campus or one of the political groups could have tried to bring in a high-profile speaker. There is such a wide array of student groups that do not get enough money from SU, it is almost disheartening to see Class Councils that have so much money that they really do not need.

The most important thing that the new execs need to concentrate on, however, is making students understand why they should care about SU. The bands and the speakers that come to campus, as well as the events put on by Class Councils, and pretty much every event on campus, are funded by students’ money. And that is a lot of money. SU has the ability to take large-scale action on campus that can change the day-to-day life of students. One example of this is the national newspapers delivered daily all over campus. This campus readership program is definitely beneficial, but it hasn’t always been there. People can sit in Mallinckrodt reading the New York Times for free because of SU. Students need to realize that this is their money and should voice how they want their money being spent.

The first and last points go hand-in-hand. If there are competitive elections, people will care about them more and if students can realize the power that SU wields, the SU elections and decisions will be more meaningful.

If a voter has to choose between two candidates, one who thinks more money should be given to the Gargoyle or Filmboard and one who thinks more speakers should be brought to campus, the decision will show SU how the majority of the student body wants their money spent.

Granted, the budgeting process is not that simple, but people will know what SU does and they will care about it. And that is a necessity.

Popularity: unranked [?]

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Friday, April 6th, 2007 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.