By: Chase McDonough
Student Congress is a notoriously droll subject. Filled with liberal egocentric bureaucrats, student Congress rarely comes on students’ radars. Indeed, being primarily the non-biased distributers of campus funds, their political power really ought to be almost non-existent, and only when their bloated self-importance leads them to ridiculous assertions of power, do they typically even merit our attention. This year, however, there was a latent hope that somehow things would improve.
Speaker Zach De La Rosa, followed by Finance Committee Vice-Chair Greg Steele, the Chair of the Oversight Committee our very own Mark Seelinger, and Congressman Jared Simmons, all assured us they were tired of fees over $940 a semester, and the leaders of this year’s Student Congress vowed to attempt to stem the tide of ever increasing student fees. Hearing Mr. De La Rosa and Mr. Seelinger talking about their plans to cut fees by $50-100 I was rather pleased. It was a solid idea coming from Student Congress, a very pleasant change. It is ridiculous that students, many of whom are working hard to pay their way through college, should have to pay close to two thousand dollars a year for discretionary, often wasteful, spending items. Moreover, in a manner similar to our own national spending, Student Congress has continued to approve increase after increase to these fees and at some point intervention is necessary before fees became larger than tuition itself.
In the eyes of Speaker De La Rosa, this semester was an extremely productive one for student congress. Between 1993 and 2009 only title 3 of the Student Code had been edited, and in one semester his congress consolidated the number of documents pertaining to the executive committee from 20 to 5, edited the entire student code regarding election laws, and edited the section pertaining to the judicial system. To a large extent, the edits were simply for the sake of brevity and to a casual observer the only major change would be that one is no longer required to testify against oneself in our judicial system. Regarding the completely rewritten election law, Speaker De La Rosa claims that “the rules are more liberal” and will allow for a greater freedom for the candidates to campaign. For major campaign infractions, instead of a fine system there will be a strict rubric and point system that allows for the actual possibility of a candidate being removed from the race. To some within Student Congress, these changes may come as real victories. Perhaps this is what aggravates so many students: what member perceive as meaningful has, in reality, little relevance to the student body. Moreover, with something like the election law it really seems as though no real progress was made, as if these changes were but for the sake of change. With the likelihood of being removed from the race a more real possibility, the petty attacks between candidates will only increase in an effort to thin the competitive field. If Student Government wants to be taken more seriously they need to take themselves a little less seriously. The election code needs to have fewer rules, and more common sense. Instead, we get a whole new system where the only meaningful difference is that candidates have the incentive to go after each other and try to kick each other out of the race. Speaker De La Rosa even hinted at the ridiculous possibility of each candidate having to have their own lawyer to deal with the new system.
The real misfortune of course is that so much of Student Congress’s effort was spent on relatively meaningless aspects of student code. Even in matters which actually have a serious effect on the student body, this 93 congress has also been somewhat of a disappointment. Student fees are lower, but by no discernible difference. Likewise, the move to reject funding for Ann Coulter demonstrated the petty politics of Student Congress at their very worst. In those few things that student congress could actually have well served the student body, they were once again largely a failure. In large part, these disappointments cannot be blamed on the speaker or the conservative leadership within congress. Student Congress remains a liberal entity and there is only so much sense that you can engender within such an organization. Nonetheless, this year has been truly sobering a number of accounts. Perhaps the most sobering aspect of this year’s student congress is that a few sensible people are not enough to make a sensible Student Congress.
If we wish to reasonably distribute funds to our conservative clubs, to curtail student fees, and to rationally govern the student body elections, we will need dozens of reasonable students to suffer through the inane political mess that is student congress. For many, perhaps this is not worth it, but following the almost unprecedented move to refuse funding for the College Republicans, perhaps this will be a service that some of our Carolina Review readers may be willing to perform. More importantly, however, this year’s student congress, which has to this point largely been lost in the minutia of the Student Code, is a reminder of how easily political figures can lose sight of the big picture. Before their term in office, it easy to promise big achievements, (or in the case of Student Congress, less ambitious ones), but so rarely are these promises realized. In part, this is due to the fact that one simply cannot achieve all that one might desire due to opposite political pressures. Nonetheless a lack of vision allows politicians to fixate on details while failing to enact the more important legislation. They have stances and make many promises, but one struggles to see what is at the heart of their vision and for what they would actually risk their reputation in order to see their vision enacted. Without a clear presentation of this vision, one wonders exactly what these students will choose to do in office. Members of Student Congress have made promises for this coming semester, including the removal of the $20 per student fee decrease that would stem from removing student funding from all the red phones you see in each classroom.
As Speaker Zach Delarosa commented, “it’s kind of useless considering we all have cell-phones now.” Also, it is likely that Student Congress will vote for whether or not they will allow a student referendum to pull out of ASG, promising for a heated debate. Student Body Mary Cooper favors our involvement in this ridiculous organization, and many members of Student Congress are oddly horrified at the idea of allowing students to vote for their own involvement in the organization. Nonetheless, for those sane members of Student Congress, do not forget the big picture. Do not surrender the fight to reduce student fees or remove ASG in favor of some smaller and perhaps easier battle.
