Spring Break
SGA ignores student vote
Megan Henderson
Issue date: 4/28/08 Section: Forum
Real members of the U.S. Senate can spend months working on a bill, only to have it die instantly in committee. That's the way it goes. Tough luck. Maybe if SGA actually had a finger on the pulse of student concerns, the new constitution would have passed in a legitimate, democratic manner.
Part of SGA's job is to be the voice of the students. After all, our fees pay the executive board members' salaries. No matter how dense McClain and Kloeppel think we students are, we spoke. They ignored us, and the senate followed suit.
Interestingly, the constitution they violated to pass the new one carried the same two-thirds requirement (see Article 11, Section 1). There's nothing like violating the very document you're trying to enact.
"We kind of think it's one of our civic duties to make sure students vote and come out for elections," McClain said of voting for the new Student Union in a University News story run last November. Apparently this only applies when the voting goes his way.
The passed resolution is a recommendation to Mel Tyler, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs and Enrollment Management. Maybe he will uphold the process of student voting. Otherwise, what's the point? Can you really blame those students who show apathy and disillusionment with SGA?
Why vote if SGA will just do what it wants anyway?
I heard the People's Party, the executive board for the 2008-09 school year, talk often of their goal to increase student involvement with SGA. The way this year has gone for SGA, the new board has their work cut out for them.
mhenderson@unews.com
Part of SGA's job is to be the voice of the students. After all, our fees pay the executive board members' salaries. No matter how dense McClain and Kloeppel think we students are, we spoke. They ignored us, and the senate followed suit.
Interestingly, the constitution they violated to pass the new one carried the same two-thirds requirement (see Article 11, Section 1). There's nothing like violating the very document you're trying to enact.
"We kind of think it's one of our civic duties to make sure students vote and come out for elections," McClain said of voting for the new Student Union in a University News story run last November. Apparently this only applies when the voting goes his way.
The passed resolution is a recommendation to Mel Tyler, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs and Enrollment Management. Maybe he will uphold the process of student voting. Otherwise, what's the point? Can you really blame those students who show apathy and disillusionment with SGA?
Why vote if SGA will just do what it wants anyway?
I heard the People's Party, the executive board for the 2008-09 school year, talk often of their goal to increase student involvement with SGA. The way this year has gone for SGA, the new board has their work cut out for them.
mhenderson@unews.com
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 40
GET IT RIGHT
posted 4/28/08 @ 4:59 PM CST
SGA did not adopt the constitution in the meeting on April 23, 2008. The item that was voted on were the SGA Bylaws. The Senate voted on the constitution back in March to have it go to a referendum. (Continued…)
Get it right, you're an idiot
posted 4/28/08 @ 5:28 PM CST
Hey Get it right, this isn't a U-News staff editorial, it's the opinion of one person. Also, the fact that Sean and Tara think UMKC students have little knowledge of SGA governing documents, but ask them to vote on them anyway, just goes to show how useless and full of it self SGA has become. (Continued…)
Joshua Seiden
posted 4/28/08 @ 6:50 PM CST
It's a known fact that SGA is worthless. The executive board is a clown convention. When they aren't hemorrhaging student funding, they're embarrassing themselves and their school during SGA "meetings. (Continued…)
JoshueSeidengetsitwrong
posted 4/30/08 @ 8:03 PM CST
Joshua,
If you want to talk about hemorrhaging money, let's talk about the UNews.
How much does your executive staff make when combined with their scholarships? And why don't you ever write anything about that?
JoshueSeidengetsitwrong
posted 5/01/08 @ 1:15 PM CST
A few comments on your response:
"As news editor, I received $110/week each week we published an issue. There were no scholarships or grants involved. (Continued…)
JoshueSeidengetsitwrong
posted 5/01/08 @ 4:15 PM CST
Unews editor in chief and ad managers are just two of the positions that receive scholarships. When combined with their salaries and commissions, they make more than most graduate assistants. (Continued…)
No name, so just deal with it
posted 5/02/08 @ 4:25 PM CST
As a former UNews staff member and editor, I think its great to see Joshua Seidon shooting down misconceptions about the paper. What's not so great, however, is his arrogance in doing so. (Continued…)
JoshueSeidengetsitwrong
posted 5/02/08 @ 5:52 PM CST
What misconceptions did he shoot down? Let's review the facts:
1) The University News receives over $50,000/year in Student Activity Fee money while a recent news editor attempted to parse words to make it appear they did not. (Continued…)
Joshua Seiden
posted 5/03/08 @ 7:06 AM CST
First off, to address the former staffer: yes, name calling is a low road to take. But, I stand by my comments; comments to which I signed my name. Speaking of names, please spell mine right. (Continued…)
JoshueSeidengetsitwrong
posted 5/03/08 @ 2:10 PM CST
Seiden, you're the news editor. Why didn't you ever publish the amounts going to other clubs and organizations? All you had to do was walk over to the Student Life office to obtain that information. (Continued…)
Post a Comment