SU Senate brings back reports to Senate floor (Bri Nitsberg | Student Life)

After a semester of contentious resolutions and the veto of Senate’s most recent resolution, Student Union (SU) Senate has shifted their attention to data-driven reports highlighting prominent issues affecting students in hopes of further capturing the University’s ears.

Co-sponsors of Senate’s recent resolution calling to drop suspensions and for Chancellor Andrew Martin’s resignation amongst other acts could have presented the resolution to Senate again within two meetings as per Article VI Section 2 of Student Union’s Constitution. Instead, the senators opted to pursue the resolution’s goals through reports.

This shift doesn’t necessarily mean that the Senate will pass fewer resolutions, as a report can still lead to a resolution. What it can do, according to senator and senior Braeden Rose, is push the Senate to further research not only systemic issues at WashU, but also see how those issues and their potential solutions have impacted campuses across the nation. 

According to Rose, a well-researched report can negate the need for a resolution.

“It’s not often, but on occasion, [if] it’s a pretty simple request, or if SU is putting up the funding for it, administrators won’t even need a resolution,” Rose said.

Senate has several reports such as the results from the Improve WashU survey; however, reports from Senate committees are less common, according to Vice President of Engagement and junior Ashton Lee, and therefore have less precedent surrounding them. Results from these committee reports, although typically geared toward administrators, will likely be accessible to the student body. 

“If Senate committees produce reports, as the head of our social media outreach efforts I am in total support of publishing their findings to the student body online or to [Student Life],” Lee said.

Co-sponsor of Senate’s recent resolution and junior Natalia León Díaz is working on a report demonstrating the precedent and need for a Native American and Indigenous Studies department at WashU. León Díaz also hopes to directly discuss lifting student suspensions with administrators.

“We’d like to leverage our direct communication channels with administrators before we can devise the most effective course of action to advocate for the impacted students and a revision of the Code that includes student feedback,” León Díaz said.

While resolutions have allowed Senate to engage in conversations with WashU administrators regarding dining, according to SU Senate Speaker and junior Ella Scott, reports have a higher likelihood of catching administrator attention.

“[Senators] want to do reports,” Scott said. “There’s an understanding [amongst senators] that the University is more likely to listen to us if we can provide them data.”

Reports have long been part of Senate, but were forgotten last semester due to a high influx of resolutions. These reports, unlike resolutions, do not need to be voted on by the Senate, which has been an outlet for what senators have called a toxic culture in Senate.

In the vote over Senate’s most recent resolution, also known as the Resolution to Drop the Suspensions and Ensure Student Safety, some senators felt pressured to sacrifice their stance on some issues due to the broad scope of the resolution. Several senators also felt that their perspectives were not heard during decision-making processes in Senate.

Senior and SU President Hussein Amuri vetoed the resolution on Sept. 12, and in a letter explaining why, he cited the division the resolution would cause on campus.

“We have an obligation to affirm and validate the stories, identities, perspectives, and experiences of ALL WashU students in our decision-making process,” Amuri said. “Division to me, is the last thing that we need.” 

According to Scott, reports can help foster collaboration in Senate, pointing to their report in progress on a potential Native American and Indigenous Studies department, which is authored by both the Diversity and Inclusion and Academic Affairs committees.

Scott views Senate’s shift to reports as a positive indicator for the future.

“It’s a sign, a really significant sign, of productivity that we’re moving back to working on reports, [researching] specific areas within the University, and being able to do that across committees.”