The Undergraduate Senate passed a resolution yesterday that will place a proposed amendment to the Student Government constitution on the ballot in this fall’s election. The question before the student body in the referendum will be whether to keep comptroller and secretary as elected offices or break with tradition and empower the SG president to appoint these officials in the future. Although the president has not yet been given the power to appoint these positions, it has been suggested by members of the SG, and also the basic rules of government structure, that the powers would be delegated to the president.
In the interest of democracy — and in order to prevent corruption and cronyism — students should oppose the amendment. They should keep things they way they are. These two positions should remain elected offices, so that those who hold them remain accountable to the student body.
Proponents of changing the constitution and handing appointment power to the SG president make a respectable case. They argue the chief executive can best determine who is fit to serve as comptroller or secretary. They say the president could be the one to best discern who is qualified for these important positions. The president could be the one who needs to figure out who will be effective, they say. The president could be the one to know who will work well with others.
But history shows us this isn’t necessarily true. An appointee does not necessarily serve more effectively than an elected official. This varies from case to case. But there are other problems too. Changing any position from an elected office to an appointed post pulls power away from the student body. It makes our Student Government a little bit less democratic and a little bit less accountable. If these positions become appointed, what’s to stop the comptroller and secretary from feeling more loyal to the appointers than to the student body?
Then there is the issue of the wording of the referendum: “The Comptroller and Secretary of the Student Government are positions that require specific skill sets in order to be done successfully. Do you support making these positions appointed?” This is a blatantly leading question. It’s almost like asking, “To have a viable comptroller, the comptroller must be appointed. Do you support having a comptroller appointed?” Unless the referendum is worded fairly, the SG cannot claim to know the word of the student body.
Before the vote ever takes place, the Senate must change this wording. That way, if students do vote to amend the constitution, this can be seen as legitimate. But students shouldn’t vote that way. For an abundance of reasons, they should vote this amendment down. The Senate should increase its oversight of the comptroller and secretary, but these positions should remain elected.
This editorial was updated Sept. 21 to reflect that the Senate will determine the person or body who would appoint the positions, if the referendum is passed. While some individuals in the SG have explicitly said the job would likely be the job of the president, the SG would be responsible for determining proper appointment protocol, if passed.
