USAC says senate will stymie council

Councilmembers raised voices, debated, walked out of the meeting
and used profanity while discussing the proposed senate structure
change during Tuesday’s five-hour undergraduate student
government meeting.

During the Undergraduate Student Association Council session, a
presentation about the fallacies of the proposed senate-structured
student government was given to the council by President Allende
Palma/Saracho and General Representatives Jenny Wood and Tommy
Tseng. It was supported by 11 of the 13 councilmembers.

It was the first time the council has formally discussed the
proposal led by Brian Neesby, chief of staff of the Financial
Supports commission. Neesby’s efforts are independent and not
on behalf of that commission.

Neesby’s proposed constitution seeks to implement new
voting procedures and a division between the legislative and the
executive bodies on the council. The constitution would divide
powers among a five-member executive branch and a 20-member
legislative senate.

The current structure of USAC is three executive officers, three
general representatives and seven commissioners, all of whom
exercise voting power over legislative and executive matters.

Palma/Saracho initiated the discussion session by asking Neesby
why he had not come to the council and made a presentation when he
first had his idea.

Neesby defended his choice, saying that he knew the council had
already established views about such a government structure, so he
thought it would be wiser to approach other groups first.

One argument put forth against Neesby’s proposal included
the majority of the council’s belief that the commissioners
are elected specialists and by adopting a new system under which
they would have no voting power, the commissions would become
weaker and less effective.

Another argument by the council was that collective council
goals such as planning Welcome Week, repealing the Expected
Cumulative Progress requirement and implementing a diversity
requirement could not be worked on because of the diffusion of
responsibility and disempowerment of commissioners.

Wood said the proposed senate system would result in greater
inefficiency and bureaucracy because they believe the structure
would cause delayed, drawn-out decisions. Wood compared the
proposed structure to the state government, where she said it takes
months just for legislators to know if their programs would be
funded.

Another main point that was stressed was that the
senate-structured council would result in less representation
because a candidate would not need to garner a majority of the
students’ votes, but rather a maximum of 5 percent.

Currently, the positions require 50 percent plus one of student
votes to be elected, with the exception of the general
representative position, which has three offices.

Palma/Saracho said he was confused as to why he had to hear
about the proposal through other sources, like the Daily Bruin, as
opposed to hearing what he thought was something so important to
the council from Neesby himself.

Neesby said he was willing to make a counter-argument
presentation in response to the council’s presentation.

“Though there are some good points made, I think some of
my proposal has been misunderstood or misinterpreted,” Neesby
said at the meeting.

The discussion went back and forth as other councilmembers made
it clear that they, too, were strongly opposed to the structure
change.

Eligio Martinez, the Academic Affairs commissioner, raised his
voice and began hitting the table while saying, “I know what
the fuck is going on” in trying to make it a point that he is
well-informed about the proposal and isn’t speaking from
ignorance when he opposes Neesby’s constitutional change.

“I just think this is bullshit because we have more
important things to do. The diversity requirement hasn’t
passed, ECP isn’t finished and now we have to waste our time
to worry about this,” Martinez added, referring to the
Expected Cumulative Progress requirement.

Martinez then walked out of the room for several minutes.

The concern in the room for the issue was furthered by Jason
Avila, the Student Welfare commissioner, who said with a loud voice
that all councilmembers have critically looked into the proposal
and that their opinions were all informed.

In support of Avila’s comment, Wood said it is important
to have the council’s educated opinions communicated to the
student body so that the opposing viewpoint is shared.

With comments thrown across the table on a seemingly crucial
and, for some, emotional topic, councilmembers resolved that Neesby
should present a counter-argument in the following meeting.

Neesby said he was open to doing a presentation to the council
or even a public debate for the student body.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *