Posted 3:58 p.m. Nov. 20.
The General Assembly will revote on the new Student Confederation constitution after parliamentarian Kyle Harding ruled last week's vote null for procedural reasons.
The ruling came in response to an inquiry from Kaitlyn Keegan, Class of 2005 representative in the GA. She noted that the GA agreed the adjournment time would be 7 p.m., yet voting extended past that time. Keegan asked Harding if the constitution would be null because of this.
"I am forced to rule that this is sufficient to nullify the vote," Harding wrote in a Parliamentary Ruling. "As a special order set for a specific time may interrupt voting, the meeting was adjourned at 7 p.m., no further business could have transpired after that point. Voting was not completed."
Keegan said that she submitted this inquiry last Sunday after the meeting. She said she did not raise questions at the meeting because she "wasn't certain on the procedure of it. I also felt intimidated by the fact that [GA Speaker Richard] Bradbury had said several times that this needed to be passed. After thinking about it and speaking to Mr. Harding regarding filing official inquiries about it, we decided that it was in the best interest of the students to do so."
However, Ben Murray, chair of the Committee on Government Operations, said GA members had the opportunity during the six-hour meeting to raise questions.
"[Bradbury] repeatedly asked if anyone had any concerns, several times [during the meeting]. [Keegan] still did not raise any concerns," said Murray, who wrote the new constitution.
Keegan said she plans to resign at the GA meeting this Sunday due to time constraints. She said her resignation has nothing to do with the constitution.
Another inquiry submitted to Harding anonymously asked, "Is it appropriate for the speaker, an unbiased leader of the assembly, to solicit or threaten members to vote one way or the other? Is it out of order? Is it impeachable?"
Speaker Richard Bradbury told the assembly last Sunday, "If we do not pass a constitution by the end of this meeting ... we will not exist. We have to get this through in some form or another," the Eagle reported Nov. 15. However, it is not clear if this is to what the inquirer referred.
Harding said that according to procedural rules "the Speaker shall remain impartial in all matters coming before the assembly." This is in accordance with a subsection of Robert's Rules of Order, which the GA uses to govern its meetings.
"Solicitation of votes would run contrary to the impartiality imposed on the speaker by the bylaws. As a violation of the bylaws solicitation of votes is clearly out of order," Harding said in the ruling.
Bradbury said that he was informing the GA that Student Activities had mandated that a new constitution pass. Student Activities has said that the SC will be dissolved if they do not prepare a new constitution for ratification this fall, to take effect next spring.
"Some people raised the issue with me that they felt I was intimidating them in my earlier comments. This was not me throwing my line in the sand for my own gratification, this was just a reiteration of a policy that has already been in effect, already been voiced, and already been raised for the past five months," Bradbury said. "I didn't say that this constitution has to pass. I said that a constitution must pass ... People also seem to forget ... where I said that if we're getting to a point where it looks like the constitution might not pass, or people still have concerns, we're not done yet. We still have amendments to make, we still have debate to have and compromises to make."
GA member Meghan Mahoney supported Bradbury.
"[Bradbury] was stating a fact; that fact was that Student Activities required that we pass a new constitution or the Student Confederation would cease to function. This was and is not debatable," Mahoney said. "The Speaker has done a superior job in this office since the Assembly elected him last spring. He has always offered guidance and help to any member who needed it without taking any sides."
Murray is against the "accusations."
"We all know that [the constitution] is supposed to pass. Saying that [Bradbury's comments were] an attempt to coerce people is completely unfounded," Murray said. "There's a huge factor of ridiculousness in these accusations"
