Put It to The People

With Undergraduate Council presidential elections on the horizon, the council may be putting the most important question about its future in the hands of the students. The pressing issue won't be deciding between the next Progressive or Pragmatist President, but rather the size of the council itself. If successful on Sunday night, the council will put a binding referendum on reducing council size by 15 members on the Presidential ballot, along with the term-bill referendum.

Earlier this year we supported a term bill increase contingent on a council size reduction. A council which is not competitively elected cannot be truly representative of the student body. The bloated membership means less accountability and diffusion of responsibility, recipes for disaster when dealing with budgets and events. This is why we feel that it is only through reducing the size of the council that the council can legitimate itself in the eyes of students.

A majority of the council recognizes this fact and supports the efforts to reduce membership. But while the council has attempted to tighten its collective waistline three times in the last three years, because the vote would require 75 percent of council support as a constitutional amendment, the strongly supported measures have failed. By taking the issue to the students, the council is hoping to trim the fat once and for all. What was disturbing about the debates on Monday night during which the idea of a council size referendum was introduced was the council members' lack of confidence in the student body. Even Presidential candidate Todd E. Plants '01 voiced fears about the student body's decision-making capability saying, "I urge you not to give the student body the opportunity to shoot themselves in the foot." This sort of suspicious and antagonistic relationship between students and council, where neither one trusts the decisions made by the other, is only indicative of the fact that the council is no longer operating as the voice of the students.

One council member, Shai M. Sachs '01 said, "I don't want to hear from the students on this issue." Blatant distrust in and disregard for the democratic process is fostered in the current council environment. Because members don't fear for their reelection, they have the leeway to disregard what students actually think and want.

The fact is, students have no basis upon which to trust the decisions made by students they didn't vote for, or who were the only game in town.

We sincerely hope that a majority of the council representatives are trusting enough in the wisdom of the student body to put this matter to a referendum. It seems that the only way that the council will downsize is if it is forced to do so by its electors. Indeed, this might be the first chance students have had in a long time to directly influence the council's effectiveness. Let's hope it's not the last.