In my humble opinion, I think it is perfectly reasonable to be opposed to raising student fees to fund CERF. However, I think it should be up to the students to decide. Instead, a bunch of Senators that are "elected" by a tiny majority of the student body (often running unopposed) decided to make the decision, rather than allowing a vote on the issue. That is about the most undemocratic thing I have ever heard.
Senator Steve Dalton, who opposed including the referendum on the ballot, said, "This proposed referendum just shows what I knew from [the beginning]: that those behind its inception wanted to pick the pockets of students with fees and surcharges rather than put in the time and effort to get people to donate voluntarily."
But why not let the students vote? It is not as if their pockets would be picked without their permission. If a majority of students want their fees to go towards CERF, who is Steve Dalton, or anybody else, to tell them that they are wrong?
Senator Dalton also shared with me his view that President MacCracken "should spend more of his time on SG endeavors and less time shilling for CERF."
Drew Veysey, the SG's Director of Environmental Policy, advocated heavily in favor of the referendum. Afterwards he said, "Many in the Senate do not really care about what the student body thinks."
Unfortunately, that seems to be the case.
"Senator Dalton also shared with me his view that President MacCracken 'should spend more of his time on SG endeavors and less time shilling for CERF.'"
ReplyDeleteSooooo true.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat I believe is the most unfortunate casualty of the day, having sat in the meeting as a proxy senator, is the impression given to the student body that there is danger in asking a question, letting the students answer, and allowing the SG to promote the direct will of the student body.
ReplyDeleteNow, I have full confidence that the referendum will move forward as even now, people are going around with referendum petitions that I encourage everyone to sign. However, it is a sad day in the Undergraduate Senate when the students that raise their voices to elect its representatives, have their voices cut down by those same Senate members.
As I stated today in the Senate: one organization, one mission, and one voice should be promoted - the student's voices. If the AUSG doesn't have that, it fails to have any legitimacy.
Regardless of their opinion on the issue, every single Senator had the responsibility to vote in favor of the referendum. There is NO excuse for not putting the issue on the ballot and letting the voters decide.
ReplyDeleteI encourage everyone reading this to help gather signatures and correct the mistake made during Sunday's session. Ask your Senator(s) how they voted on this issue, and remember that vote when the fall elections come around.
Seth Seth Seth,
ReplyDeleteYou are ceaseless in your prostituting for votes for SG President. It is almost disgusting.
A colleague of yours was just called horrendous names by a poster two comments up from you and you don't even take a minute to address/refute the outrageous claims.
How utterly stupid on your part (though not entirely unexpected).
@Anonymous: It's really quite sad that you would think I am "prostituting for votes". That is absolutely not the case and I have no need to do so. My platform and work will speak for itself. Drop me an email if you are truly concerned. Calling people out in public while hiding behind anonymity is the sign of a coward.
ReplyDelete@Seth Rosenstein
ReplyDeleteSo you still will not defend your colleague?
That is low.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHaving known Steve Dalton since his appointment in the 4th Undergraduate Senate in the latter part of 2008, I feel that must defend my friend and colleague.
ReplyDeleteNow, Steve is boisterous, a firestarter, and a fierce advocate for his views and positions; however, no matter what those positions are...he sticks to them, in election season and out of election season. He has evolved into a temperate leader in the Senate, and I believe being elected to his current position of Speaker Pro Tempore of the Senate speaks to that fact.
It is unfortunate and a degradation of common decency when fellow students must resolve to mudslinging and name-calling due to the outcome of the legislative process. There is always more than one way to do anything in the SG, such as gathering signatures for the same referendum, and to devolve into biting at each others heels reflects poorly our ability to conduct the business of advocacy for the students.
As Mr. Dalton said yesterday: it's about respect. Respect to debate fiercely, but civilly, respect to accept the outcome graciously, and respect to then continue to collaborate for the student body unreservedly.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSeth Rosentein would eat bacon and agree to a two state solution to become President of the SG. Its scary people like him, who vote against their conscience in order to pander to constitents who I am afraid of.
ReplyDeleteThe good news is that this race is going to come down to two qualified and engaging leaders, one of who will not be Rosenstein.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe tragedy of the CERF debates - debates that have now sprawled across a month or so of senate meetings - is that a somewhat reasonable debate about policy has been swallowed by personality politics.
ReplyDeleteBut frankly, Mr. Veysey? You're just as responsible as Mr. Dalton for that, if not more. Your repeated insistence on drawing lines in the sand - did you really need to call for a raise of hands for who would support CERF with their own donations? - and on treating the debate as some Churchillian confrontation between good and evil left any hope for simple reconciliation weeks behind us.
Is summoning College Republicans to protest fees any more "hackish" than trooping Ecosense members through public comment for almost an hour? I don't think so.
Student Government isn't despised just for not doing things, or for being generally dysfunctional, but because we like to treat ourselves like we're debating in the big rooms downtown and everything is deathly serious.
Mr. Veysey, I think your comments about Mr. Dalton are hideously overblown, but I hardly think I can get you to retract them. I'll leave you with another thought, though. Why are you angry with Mr. Dalton, who's an engaged and active member of the SG, when you could be angry with the five or six liberal senators who would have happily voted through the referendum or down the CERF bill, but don't show up or speak up?
Nice response Seth. I didn't know that campaigning had started.
ReplyDeleteI recall that more than 15 Ecosense members came to the Senate to support CERF. Nobody from any club came to speak against CERF. And yet the undergraduate Senate, absorbed in their own tiny fiefdom, consistently ignores student concerns - particularly on this issue.
ReplyDeleteThe undergraduate senate gets little done. What it does get done is shameful. It should be abolished.
Mike Mayer removing posts - pandering for Seth Rosenstein.
ReplyDeleteThis is an SG endeavor. Remember how it was created because of our work? The fact that it's been adopted by the University means that it's a successful SG endeavor. I'm not going to stop working on it until it's able to sustain itself.
ReplyDelete"Absorbed in their own tiny fiefdom..." - that's very clever. I'll have to keep that one.
ReplyDeleteIt is rather sad, on a serious note, where the debate has gone on this issue. I thought that, at one time, the Undergraduate Senate and the entire Student Government, really, stood up for student-initiatives instead of dragging it through the mud and muck of student politics and egos. I thought that no matter how its funded, that the Student Government would be united on the support of its existence (or the existence of any grassroots student initiative for that matter) rather than entering and perpetuating a contentious debate on the specifics of a question posed to the student body.
I love the Student Government, and I've taken time to read about its 84 year history at this University, albeit in different forms. It is a tradition on this campus and abolishing any part of it would be dismissing some of the history of this institution; however, when do we turn around and get back to fundamentals?
Student Governments are meant to serve, above all. Through advocacy, through programming, through services like AUTO...or just being that listening ear...the SG is meant to be a organization of servant-leaders? Where are they? Where is the Senate that stands up in the face of the AU Administration on the students' behalf? Where is the Executive Branch that is stable and cohesive?
These questions deserve answers, and the students deserve an organization that works.
I do not pander to anybody. Seth asked to have the comment removed because the BOE told him to, and I thought that was reasonable. I would do the same for Nirvana, Nate, or Anthony.
ReplyDelete