I have never been one to shy away from criticizing the Student Government, so I think that it is only fair that I not shy away from complimenting them when they have finally done something worthwhile for students. I am speaking about the Meal Plan Accountability Act, which the Undergraduate Senate passed last Sunday to educate students about the high cost of their meal swipes compared to paying cash at TDR and the Tavern and about sophomores being required to purchase meal plans. Meal plans are a raw deal for students and it is good to see the SG addressing real student concerns.
While I am glad to see that the Senate has taken a small step in the right direction on this one issue, I do have to wonder why this is only getting done in April instead of November. Moreover, according to Monday's edition of The Eagle, the bill, sponsored by Senator Charlie Biscotto, was actually authored by Brian Brown, a junior in the School of Public Affairs who - get this - is not even a member of the Senate. I find it amusing to think that the best piece legislation to come out of the Senate - not that that's saying much - came from someone who is not even a member of the Senate. Good job, SG.
But the compliments stop there, however, because SG President Kyle Taylor is considering vetoing the bill because he believes that the SG needs to propose options to the university. Somehow I do not think that it is the students' job to propose options. It is, however, the SG's job to be the voice of students and to call upon the administration to provide us with better options when we are dissatisfied. It is not the job of the President to stifle students' voices with his veto power. So yes, Mr. President, by all means. Let us form a committee to issue a report after everyone on campus has graduated. Passing good bills - no, none of that. That would be stupid.
It is times like these when I wonder just why SG executives get paid for what they do. For those of you who were unaware that SG executives got paid at all, check out the bylaws at www.ausg.org. Believe it or not, the President receives $10,200, as do the Vice President, the Comptroller and the Secretary. The Kennedy Political Union and Student Union Board Directors both receive $7,300 and the Student Advocacy Center Director receives $6,400. You can argue that they need that money for housing, but since the university could easily provide them with free housing as a show of goodwill, I think that such sums are a little gratuitous, especially since students pay them and students are not being well served.
Moreover, the budget that the Senate passed last Sunday will make the Women's Initiative Director and the Chair and Vice Chair of the Board of Elections paid positions. Even if you believe that the executives deserve some sort of compensation, does it really seem like members of the BOE deserve compensation? They create ridiculous campaign rules and hassle over-zealous candidates. I would do that for free. How the Women's Initiative Director can be a paid position when it has members just like a club and endorsed candidates in the SG election just like a club - despite ostensibly being a department of the SG itself - is beyond me. Even worse, all three positions are appointed, not elected. Conflicts of interest abound.
In any case, the semester is winding down and everyone is ready for summer. So be it. Nevertheless, I hope that all of the incoming SG executives take these complaints to heart. I always found it laughable when the SG criticized the Board of Trustees for their lack of accountability, transparency and respect for students because the SG lacks those virtues, too. Perhaps if President-elect Ashley Mushnick addresses some of these concerns when her administration begins, then students will have a little more faith in their Student Government.
Jonathan D. McPike is a sophomore in the School of Public Affairs.
