I am pleased to report that someone in SGA decided to enforce their own Constitution. This message was just emailed out to several parties, regarding the ratification of the new SGA Constitution:
After further review and a hearing on the complaint filed by Paul Ruddle, the Elections Committee of the Student Government Association in a majority decision decided that the Proposed Constitution of the Student Government Association did not meet the requirements of 10% for ratification. Therefore, the decision stands that the proposed constitution has failed and will not take effect.
For the backstory, see here.
As surprising as this is, maybe this is a positive step forward for the new SGA administration. By having some sort of accountability, some in SGA (read: not President Peper or VP Suber) have shown they want to make SGA a stronger, more student-friendly organization.
But, I think we should all be disappointed in the representation of a few. Outgoing SGA President Peper and VP Suber tried to cover up this matter, deceive students, and were extremely upset that their opinions weren’t final. If they had had their way, the students’ opinions would have been foregone, in the name of what is best for students.
PS – You heard it first at Hatin’ SGA.
{ 6 } Comments
If they had had their way, the students’ opinions would have been foregone, in the name of what is best for students
Which students’ opinions would have been foregone, exactly? The 2,510 people who voted in favor of it? Oh, maybe you meant the 278 who voted against — because certainly the opinion of 278 people should decide things for the rest of us.
For what it’s worth, if all the people who voted at all (11% of the student body) had voted on the Constitution question, even with all those who abstained voting no, it would have passed with a 68.5% vote. (Sorry, those who couldn’t be bothered to take 5 minutes out of a 2-day span to cast a vote knowingly forfeit their opportunity to be part of this discussion. At least normally; evidently, this election is an exception.)
With that in mind, I think it’s ridiculous for Hatin’ SGA to celebrate using “the system” to overrule the very clearly expressed will of the students; isn’t that the type of thing you’ve been bitching about from Day 1?
So. Congratulations for holding SGA accountable to their rules. Awesome job forcing them to stick with an outdated Constitution; that’ll teach ‘em… to, um, serve us better. Yeah! Go Team! Democratic process be damned!
While I don’t see the need to celebrate the non-passage of the constitution, I do feel it was the right thing given that it didn’t actually receive the 10% vote it needed given that was its only major criteria for passing besides having majority support.
Regardless of the non-passage, an overall turnout of 11% is terrible and I think this will be the figurative kick to the groin SGA needs to realize that such a low turnout is not acceptable. Perhaps this will spur some ideas to fight apathy so they can get it passed next time and maybe even get a 20% turnout overall.
I am confident that the abysmal turnout in the recent election is not a “kick to the groin” to SGA. Though the organization was undoubtedly disappointed in the number, the real kick will be to the collective groin of the student body. Noah is correct in saying that the vast, and let me stress the vastness, majority of students are exempt from this discussion. SGA members certainly voted in the election. They need not the reminder that low turnout is unacceptable.
Sorry, buddy, but apparently do. Turnout is at an all-time low. And SGA candidates don’t seem to care.
All-time? Not so fast my friend. I believe elections in the 1990s often drew under 1,000, and if you reach way back, they got 600 in the 1970s.
Regardless of turn-out, we can all agree that the number of canidates this year was pitiful
Post a Comment