USG Constitution To Go To Referendum

By Rachel O'Brien

In what was a rapid push through a potentially complicated and lengthy process, the USG senate voted on and passed a proposed constitution for ratification at the Sept. 20 meeting.

Nathan Shapiro, the Executive Vice President of USG and a writer for The Independent, presented to the senate the constitution that he wrote with the help of USG President Joseph Antonelli.

After no more than 30 minutes of discussion and debate, the senate voted on and passed it with a 12-1 vote. Right now 16 of the 22 senate seats are filled, 13 of which were represented at the meeting. The proposed constitution will have to go to the students for a referenda vote for it to be adopted.

“This is a rare opportunity for us to enact a much-needed change to our government,” Shapiro said to the senators before voting. “We may not have this opportunity again.”

Shapiro explained that if the senate didn’t like a particular section of the proposed constitution, and voted to amend it, the ratification process would be very long. It would have to go back to the executive council, which passed it unanimously, and they would have to re-vote, then it would have to go back to the senate again. It would be a long, drawn-out process, he assured the senate.

John Kriscenski, the only senator who voted against adopting the proposed constitution at the meeting, made several positive statements during debates about the solidity and quality of the document.

“I think this does an excellent job of representing the students,” he said.

Echoing his sentiments, Sen. Steven Elardo said, “It’s fluid. It’s a lot better than the current constitution. I urge my fellow senators to vote yes.”

When asked after the meeting why he then voted against adopting it, Kriscenski said, “There’s a lot of good points. But I think there’s a lot of things that could have been worked on. I thought it would have been good to have more time for debate.”

The proposed constitution would radically alter some offices and powers as laid-out in the current constitution.

The Executive Council, consisting of 11 offices, nine of which are currently filled, would no longer have elected positions under the proposed constitution. Only the president and vice president would be elected, the other positions, some of which would be eliminated altogether, would be appointed by the president, with the consent of a majority of the senate.

The president would appoint the treasurer and any other offices in the executive branch. The offices of VP of communications and public relations, VP of student life, programming and activities, VP of clubs and organizations and VP of academic affairs offices may not even exist, or may exist in another form, all to be decided by the senate. As it stands, the four class representative offices aren’t outlined in the proposed constitution and might no longer exist.

“We were in the executive council meeting and the senior class rep. said, ‘I don’t know what I’m supposed to do,” Shapiro said in a phone interview. “ ‘I have nothing to do.’ She wants to represent the student body but she has nothing to do in her position. The class reps. are designated as a chair of a bureau that doesn’t exist.” These theoretical bureaus are outlined in the current constitution but haven’t actually been established.

“Technically my only duties are senior week and yearbook and there’s not much for me to do right now, “ Gabby Robergeau, senior class representative, said in an interview. “We’re not having a physical yearbook this year…they’re eliminating it. I’ve just been collecting pictures, helping anybody else, helping SAB. Not that there’s nothing to do but what I have to do, I did it already.”

Shapiro explained that the idea of appointing positions comes from the notion that many people are filling offices where they can’t uphold their responsibilities, or simply might be better suited for another office.

“A lot of the people who fill these positions aren’t the best people for that position,” he said. “During summer senate the president appointed everyone and things were getting done, it’s a very effective system and I’d like to be able to carry that over this year.”

The proposed constitution would also give the senate more power. The senate could expel a senator with a two-thirds vote, as opposed to the current constitution that requires a three quarters majority vote in the executive council and a USG supreme court trial.

“You will be able to police yourselves,” Shapiro told the senate at the meeting.

He gave the example of a past impeachment process that took meeting after meeting to complete because of lack of cooperation from the other branches in USG.

“It allows for a much more flexible government where problems can be addressed as they arrive,” Alexander Markow, a senator, said.
Both President Antonelli and Executive VP Shapiro assured senators concerned with the lack of checks in this area that there are ways of appealing the senate expulsion if the expelled senator feels it was done so unfairly.

A two-thirds vote by senate to expel a senator can be appealed to the supreme court; it’s just not a part of the original expulsion process, as is the case with the current constitution.

The proposed constitution will go to the students to vote in a referendum from Oct. 22 to 26. A 2/3 vote of students on SOLAR will be sufficient for passage.