2008 Woodie Awards
The Bengal View:
Constitution Derailed
Ryan Hunter
Issue date: 1/23/08 Section: Opinion
Editors note: This new section of the Bengal is meant to present the views of the editorial staff of the ISU Bengal newspaper. It is not meant to be a statement of fact or a statement of the views of ISU, its students, or its administration. It is, however, intended to stimulate discussion on important topics facing the student body and the University as a whole. Comments and responses are encouraged and will be printed in the Letters to the Editor section of the newspaper.
For most persons following the issue of the constitution proposed last year to replace the current ASISU Constitution, they assumed the April 2 decision by the ASISU Senate certifying that it had not passed was the end of it. Former ASISU President Ryan Sargent, ASISU Vice President Bryan Wheat, and several ASISU Senators, however, have raised the issue from the dead almost a year later in what can only be deemed as a last desperate attempt at railroading the proposed constitution into effect, and they have succeeded.
They have succeeded in overturning the voice of the student body in rejecting the proposed constitution. They have succeeded in subverting and making a complete mockery of the democratic processes designed for such proposals, stating that they are too tough, or that a new constitution is more important than adhering to such "outdated" processes. They have succeeded in securing their places in history as the authors of the "new" ASISU Constitution by way of minority strong-arming.
Over the winter break, the ASISU Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs (Sargent, Wheat, and others) that brought suit against ASISU for not instituting the constitution proposed in referendum in the fall of 2006 and late winter of 2007. While the senate certified on April 2 that the proposed constitution had not met the 15 percent voting requirement previously agreed upon for passage, the plaintiffs in the case contended that it had.
They cited the "tenth day" enrollment numbers initially reported by the University to the State Board of Education as those that should be used in determining whether the proposed constitution had met the 15 percent voting requirement. The tenth day figure, however, is not the number used by the State Board for official purposes concerning the University, and the enrollment figure most accurately representing the actual enrollment at ISU at the time showed that the 15 percent requirement had not, in fact, been met.
For most persons following the issue of the constitution proposed last year to replace the current ASISU Constitution, they assumed the April 2 decision by the ASISU Senate certifying that it had not passed was the end of it. Former ASISU President Ryan Sargent, ASISU Vice President Bryan Wheat, and several ASISU Senators, however, have raised the issue from the dead almost a year later in what can only be deemed as a last desperate attempt at railroading the proposed constitution into effect, and they have succeeded.
They have succeeded in overturning the voice of the student body in rejecting the proposed constitution. They have succeeded in subverting and making a complete mockery of the democratic processes designed for such proposals, stating that they are too tough, or that a new constitution is more important than adhering to such "outdated" processes. They have succeeded in securing their places in history as the authors of the "new" ASISU Constitution by way of minority strong-arming.
Over the winter break, the ASISU Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs (Sargent, Wheat, and others) that brought suit against ASISU for not instituting the constitution proposed in referendum in the fall of 2006 and late winter of 2007. While the senate certified on April 2 that the proposed constitution had not met the 15 percent voting requirement previously agreed upon for passage, the plaintiffs in the case contended that it had.
They cited the "tenth day" enrollment numbers initially reported by the University to the State Board of Education as those that should be used in determining whether the proposed constitution had met the 15 percent voting requirement. The tenth day figure, however, is not the number used by the State Board for official purposes concerning the University, and the enrollment figure most accurately representing the actual enrollment at ISU at the time showed that the 15 percent requirement had not, in fact, been met.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
Allison
posted 1/24/08 @ 9:07 AM MST
I can't tell if this is sour grapes, or a real problem, but it does seem strange that they wait until the following school year to bring it up. People's memories fail, or become "convenient" the longer time passes. (Continued…)
miphi
Mike P
posted 1/24/08 @ 1:41 PM MST
So we have a new constitution? Last I heard, maybe less than a thousand students voted for it out of around 15,000 students... sounds like creative politics to me. (Continued…)
Sarah C
posted 1/25/08 @ 1:27 PM MST
if it was legit why be sneaky about it???
Ryan S. Hunter, News Editor
posted 2/03/08 @ 9:51 PM MST
To all who have commented thus far,
Please stop with the bickering taking place in these comments. It is ridiculous that a comment board meant to offer feedback to the writers and share the views of readers regarding the content of what is written has degraded into immature, irrelevant, and utterly uncalled for fighting. (Continued…)
Post a Comment