Three representatives of the Alumni Governance Task Force attended an information session hosted by the Student Assembly Wednesday night to answer questions about the controversial proposed alumni constitution.
Jim Adler '60, Martha Hennessey '76 and Joe Stevenson '57 first briefly outlined the new constitution before opening up the session for questions. While only 16 students and one alumnus attended the event, many audience members asked several questions and made frequent comments to the panel, causing the forum to last nearly two hours.
Adler commented on the heated nature of the debate near the end of the meeting, saying that Dartmouth is different from other Ivy League universities because of the passion inspired by changes in the alumni constitution.
"You think they're getting all fired up about stuff like this down at Brown?" he said.
Students repeatedly expressed apprehension over the fact that affiliated groups ---- which are characterized as representing alumni minorities that "have been historically marginalized"---- would be given more representation than others under the proposed constitution.
"A basic tenet of democracy is one person, one vote," Dan Linsalata '07, editor of The Dartmouth Review, said in reference to the fact those groups would be given additional representation.
The panel in turn reminded students that under the current constitution, affiliated groups do have extra representation and that they were hesitant to cut that in the new one.
Joe Malchow '08, who writes a conservative weblog, suggested that the AGTF should not give different groups extra representation and used the United States Electoral College as an example of the way votes should be "carved out." He also explained that the four additional amendments present on the ballot would allow the constitution to be voted down without the prospect of returning to the exact current constitution after voting.
The panel responded that the percentage of representation given to groups would not change significantly.
"Listen, we didn't want to take representation away from anyone," Hennessey said.
At points, the alumni expressed frustration with the audience's comments.
"I will concede that you and others will be able to come up with all kinds of ways to give an example of someone getting even eight votes," Adler said after Linsalata postulated that 100 writers from The Dartmouth Review could attempt to become an affiliated group that has been marginalized. "I can't make an Assembly fit exactly what you are looking for.
"We sat down in Boston listening to two eggheads," Adler said in reference to having consulted various experts in drafting the constitution. "They said no system is perfect; you can 'game' any system."
Hennessey added that the voting procedures the AGTF eventually settled on ---- aiming for head-to-head one-vote races ---- is the "least able to be 'gamed.'"
Tim Dreisbach '71, who is not a member of the AGTF, attended the discussion and voiced concern that the new constitution would not in fact guarantee head-to-head races and would do little to increase democracy in the Alumni Association's proceedings. He also addressed the students and asked them to question why there was no one from "the other side" on the panel.
The discussion had to be cut short due to time constraints, with no real conclusion being reached.
