To the Editor:
The resignation of Daniel Moore '95 and John Honovich '97 would only prove that partisan politics can rule the Student Assembly.
The student body last spring elected Moore as president of the Assembly. She has done exactly what she said she would do in her campaign. It has been a "liberal" agenda, but "conservatives" were aware of that before the election.
Just because she won, however, does not mean that her power should go unchecked. Honovich has found himself in the opposition throughout most of this term.
He has never, however, voted out of spite. He has done exactly what the students elected him to do. His "conservative" beliefs were known before the representative election and the secretary election.
The resignation of both individuals would indicate a failure in the election system and an inability for Dartmouth students to get along. Is it too much to ask that our student leaders hold their heads high for the benefit of the school? Now is a crucial time for Moore and Honovich to put aside policy differences and concentrate solely on salvaging the reputation of the Assembly.
Lastly, Brandon Del Polzo '96 and Scott Rowekamp '97, two of eight to call for Honovich's resignation, should not be allowed to benefit from their blatant attempt to derail the Assembly.
Last year certain elected officials called for the resignation of President Nicole Artzer '94. Was not a lesson learned? Neither Bob Dole nor Phil Gramm have announced any intentions to run for President of the United States. Del Pozo, likewise, has not announced any intentions to run for president of the Assembly. Rowekamp for vice-president? One can only speculate.
It is clear, however, that two people to benefit by the resignation of both Moore and Honovich are Del Pozo and Rowekamp. They would move into the front seats of a sputtering Assembly. Is this how our leaders should be chosen?
We elected Moore and Honovich. I ask you to join me in asking that they do not resign from the Assembly.
