The Rice Thresher

Location: http://the.ricethresher.org/opinion/2006/03/24/student_association_reform

March 24, 2006 > Opinion > Student Association needs serious reform

Student Association needs serious reform

By Kirti Datla | Thresher staff

We are living in an age of reform. The United Nations recently created the Human Rights Council, which will replace the questionable Human Rights Commission. The Jack Abramoff scandals will hopefully prompt legislation on lobbying practices in Washington, D.C. If we can hold the corrupt and inhumane accountable, surely we can do the same for the Student Association.

During the weeks surrounding the recent General Elections, theories explaining the ineffectual nature of the SA abounded. To me, that’s proof positive that students realize the SA exists, as well as what it should be doing and the ways it has failed.

I suggest we stop blaming the entire undergraduate population for its apathy and slothfulness, because the reasons why students do not feel engaged by the SA are more systemic.

Presidential candidate Andrew Chifari, despite his Napoleon Dynamite-esque grumbling, got it right when he poked fun at the SA’s polo shirts. His complaints speak to the SA’s exclusiveness and somewhat inflated self-importance. A small group of students has the power to bring clubs into existence, start programs intended to benefit us, negotiate with the administration on our behalf and more. In return, we are given an e-mail address to write to and the option of attending a weekly meeting.

The student body is not kept up-to-date on the activities of the SA. There is the Thresher’s SA Box, but it gives little detail on the how and why of what happens at the meetings. There is no reason students should have to seek this information out. The SA does not have secret prisons or wiretaps, but apparently we have to go through lengths akin to the Freedom of Information Act to find out what the SA is up to.

As students, we should demand SA senators report to their colleges. SA senator should be a position for students who wish to be involved in the SA and can express the wants and needs of their college. And if a college president does not show up to SA meetings, students should go to their next cabinet meeting and publicly berate him or her.

In addition, the SA accepts a lack of student input as inevitable and incurable. Defying the inevitable is an American tradition, and we should continue it. President-elect Althea Tupper said during her campaign that student input is one of her goals, and we should hold her to that.

During O-Week, when incoming freshmen register for e-mail accounts, they should be given information about how to create an account on the SA Web site, since one is necessary for voting in elections. The SA should post a platform on its Web site with defined, concrete goals so students with an interest can comment. The SA obviously has the ability to tabulate votes, and it should use that system to conduct informal polls throughout the year.

Finally, there is little to no accountability within the SA. If students manage to find out what the SA has spent its budget and time on, we cannot use the ballot box as our voice. The president is usually a senior and leaving anyway.

Instead of a solitary “state of the university” address toward the end of the president’s term, we should mirror parliamentary governments around the world. The SA president should, for half an hour twice per semester — preferably during lunch at a college — take questions from students. These would mirror the “prime minister’s questions,” which those of you who watch C-SPAN should be familiar with. It would allow students to ask, “Why aren’t you doing this?” It would also allow the president to explain himself or herself and in turn question why students are not more involved.

Under this system, instead of complaining about each other, the student body and the SA could come to a consensus about how they should interact.

We are in college now, all grown up — those we elect should be forced to justify their actions or lack thereof. As their constituents, we should demand that we be included and then justify our inclusion with participation. More simply, we should stop claiming the system is inherently flawed and work within it to improve it.

Kirti Datla is a Sid Richardson College sophomore.

End of article

Back to top