The Constitution Revision Task Force met last Thursday evening to continue debate on possible revisions to the current student body constitution.
The meeting eventually concluded with a nine to three vote in favor of a newly developed clause that modified the phrase “full-time fee-paying student” to “full-time degree seeking student” in reference to qualifications for student body officers.
In addition, Greg Doucette, proxy for Student Chief Justice Lock Whiteside and life-long education senator, presented a bill concerning allotment of senate seats which prompted much discussion throughout the meeting, concluding with an optimistic view concerning its future in the Senate.
Will Quick, student body president, continually called for stricter language in the proposed legislation concerning eligibility qualifications for student government officers. He looked for ways to promote student involvement with their constituents in the wording.
Tom Stafford, the vice chancellor for student affairs, also mentioned a concern for the current language. Stafford advised the task force on the ability of part-time students to become heavily involved for an excessive amount of time in Student Government.
“Think of some way to address that concern that wouldn’t allow part-time students to get involved and stay involved without any progress towards a degree,” Stafford said.
Stafford focused on the University regulation of “good standing” as an objection to the inclusion of part-time students in the Articles.
Some task force members felt that Stafford’s regulation enforcement was inappropriate.
“A University regulation hanging over our head is counterproductive,” Benton Sawrey, a college of management senator, said in response to Stafford’s continual mention of good standing.
As task force members erupted into heated discord concerning the eligibility requirements, Quick had to ask the group to “quiet down” multiple times.
Stafford did make one point clear, however.
“I don’t have a problem with part-time participation by voting,” he said.
Quick closed the debate on the articles with a vote on Article 1 Section 2 which dictates the credentials students must have in order to run for a student government position.
Despite an amendment motion made by Sawrey to include part-time students, members of the task force decided their recommendation for Article 1 Section 2 would read “Full-time degree-seeking student.”
“We now have a working Article 1 Section 2,” Quick said following the voting results.
Prior to the debate regarding the articles, Greg Doucette submitted a bill for discussion.
His proposal suggested that each of the 12 colleges within the University be allocated two Senate seats a piece. This would secure that there would be an equal number among each individual college. The rest of the Senate seats would be divided among the classes based on the percentage enrolled. Senatorial candidates would have to decide whether to run for their college seat or class seat.
Currently the Senate seats are divided among the colleges and the classes within the college. The Senate Reapportionment Act enacted these guidelines in February 2005. Unlike Doucette’s proposal, this act does not require all colleges to hold an equal number of seats.
“The most active college gets the most seats,” Zach Adams, student senate president, said.
Colleges can encourage their students to take advantage of their class seats as well. The overall reaction to the presented bill was positive.
“This will represent everybody in one way or another,” Quick said.
Adams said he predicted the senate would “strongly support” such a bill.
“They will appreciate giving more equal representation among colleges as well as increasing competition in the Senate elections to get more students involved,” he said.