SG executive officer endorsements

Shyness and brevity is, indeed, not the major issue with SG meetings. What is an issue is that the Senate routinely has the same group of people who speak up. There is a limited circle of outspoken individuals in the Student Government that really are the arbiters of discussion - but this is not a result of their own will, it seems to be just the default position of many individuals in the Senate. I assume that Sharkey and Thompson hope to make people more willing to contribute to the discussion. This is an admirable goal and one which would enrich the Senate's discussion, but I have yet to hear a clearly articulated manner in which they would pursue this goal. It's a little late for that...although, I must admit, I have not fully read their platform, so it may have been explained.

I am heartened by Bielawski's experience and her professed understanding of Robert's Rules. Having an effective chair at the head of SG is critical, but I expect more depth than merely instituting a ten minute rule for most discussions. By all accounts, Grace appears to have a strong enough grasp of the rules to steer Senate discussions in an efficient and productive fashion - but limiting discussion should not be seen as the key to efficiency. Although, I do support the measure in certain instances.

The Editorial Board's description of meeting times as not the right time to "learn and discuss issues" is beyond egregious. Discussion is the only time available to Senators to discuss appropriations and resolutions and question the individual proposing the issue in depth before its passage. The utmost care must be paid to the allocation of student fees - the power of the purse is by far SG's greatest power and it should be exercised with due diligence, even if the discussion drags on longer than some would like. It might be wise for the next SG President to advise members of the Senate to e-mail allocation proposals, "recommendations", or resolutions to all other Senators before the meeting. It would at least give them time to prepare questions and this would certainly expedite discussion. This would allow Senators to contact and question the sponsors of allocations and other issues before it came to Senate floor.

Thompson's proposition to have microphones reflects an understandable desire to propose order and bestow authority upon the Senator who has been recognized to speak, but I believe Diana Kao's current system of requesting speaking Senator's to stand up is sufficient. I don't see a microphone station as being particularly necessary - but the proposal itself reflects a value of authority that is necessary for the Senate to run efficiently.

Finally, I want to say that whether Grace and Dina are the next SG President and Vice President or Bryan and Brittany, I'm certain that SG will have the right leadership in charge. All the candidates possess the spirit of community service and the dedication that such an office demands. The student body will be well served.