The time has come to dissolve the Student Assembly. The events of the past few days are an appropriate culmination of the chicanery that has plagued SA for the past few years.
It is a true pity that it has come to this point. It is a disappointment for those members who have worked hard as well as for those who have had faith and still have faith in the system. Worst of all, it is a tragedy for Dartmouth that a student forum with such great potential to affect change has become so riddled with inefficiencies and personal agendas so as to make it unsalvageable.
This is not to say that the goals of SA should be discarded with the institution. We believe that the students of Dartmouth would be better served by dispersing the SA's functions among existing groups and creating two better-focused organizations. We suggest the following plan for the replacement of the Assembly:
1) Form a group to take care of the student services aspect of the SA. This group (call it the Student Services Council) would be structured like the Programming Board.
Anyone who wanted to join could and become a voting member after attending 3 meetings. They would get a yearly budget and Clusters/Dorms and other groups could apply to have projects accomplished (e.g. a change machine near the laundry, or computers in the Hop). This organization would also be responsible for the Student Advantage Card, and publications like the Course Guide and the guide to off-campus dining.
The advantage of this organization would be that it separates practical matters of student interest from issues of policy. This group would not be distracted by political agendas or ideological personal crusades and thus would be more responsive to the tangible needs of the students.
2) Shift the role of finding and funding speakers to the Programming Board, an institution already designed for such a task.
3) Create a group to consider issues of student opinion. This group (call it the Student Opinion Forum) would be responsible for providing information about issues to the campus and discerning undergraduate opinion.
They would then draft statements summarizing the student opinions on the subjects for submission to the administrative body concerned. To use some current examples: they would consider the proposed new meal plan, ROTC and the issue of freshmen dorms.
The members of this body would be drawn from existing campus organizations. Two representatives from each of the Class Councils (to be determined either by presidential appointment or a vote of its members), a representative from each of the recognized minority groups (Africaso, La Alanzia Latina, and NAD, to name a few), and one representative each from PanHel, CFS, and the IFC would comprise the group.
Also, when appropriate, there would be up to two open spaces for any special interest groups that might be involved. For example, in the case of the proposed meal-plan changes, two reps from the Meal-Plan Task Force would be asked to join.
This group would not be a standing committee; it would convene only when requested. Should an issue arise, the group would hold an initial meeting in open forum to educate everyone about the issue and to determine a course of action. It would then take a week to gauge student opinion and distribute information (via Blitzmail, open forums, mailings, and other surveys), and finally meet a second time to draft a resolution based on what it has directly from the campus. After this has been accomplished, there would be no further need for it, and it would break up until the next campus-wide issue presented itself.
There are many advantages to the formation of such a group. The minority groups and the class councils would be almost equally represented so that neither could dominate the proceedings.
Student opinion, including the opinions of the usually silent majority, would be more accurately gauged. Issues would be settled quickly instead of dragging on for weeks. Participation would be high because the committee members would be chosen by specific constituencies, thus enhancing accountability.
4) Divide the current SA budget among the four Class Councils, the new Student Services Council, and the Programming Board. The costs of the Student Opinion Forum would be split equally between the Class Councils.
While what we have proposed is not flawless, we feel it would function more effectively than SA has in recent memory, and we doubt the students of this campus think the SA should be allowed to continue as it has in the past.
We have watched in frustration as SA has become more incapacitated with every election. The time has come to replace it with a system that will work.
In closing, we would like to thank all those people who really have worked hard within the SA. We know you are there; your efforts are appreciated.
Good-bye, SA. This campus deserves better.
