Writing a holistic critique of anything is a difficult undertaking. There is a tendency to focus on the negative, to lament the way things have become and to yearn for times past. Such feelings are entertaining to read, and perhaps even more fun to write. As a result, the critic is tempted to ignore the positive and focus of failures, scandals and incompetence.
This temptation is perhaps more present when evaluating this year’s Student Government. To be sure, there have been enough crises since late August to completely occupy an evaluation. Events like the Handverger impeachment trial, election disqualifications and the ultimate cancellations might have led some to expect us to fill our editorial with SG criticisms and nothing more.
But such a critique would be both unfair and unwarranted. To let these scandals capture attention that other areas of SG success deserve would merely discredit the hundreds of hours that our classmates dedicate to the organization. Ultimately, the purpose of such a critique should not be to simply publicly point out flaws. Rather we must focus on ways mistakes can be avoided in the future, while giving equal acknowledgment to accomplishments.
Save for the Founders’ Day Ball, the departments reporting to the vice president actually had an extremely successful year. As models of consistency, both the Kennedy Political Union and the Student Union Board succeeded in bringing thought provoking political guests and popular music acts to campus. Just last week KPU brought together three former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff to Bender Arena. In terms of music, 30 Seconds to Mars this Friday promises to be a great show — we can only hope singer Jared Leto doesn’t get laryngitis.
Women’s Initiative has had an equally impressive year. Each of their major events — Breastival, Vagina Monologues and most recently, Take Back the Night — are all extremely well attended. Originally slotted for major budget cuts, Women’s Initiative escaped last Sunday’s Senate meeting only $1,000 removed from their funds. Hopefully, this allows them to continue putting on events that the student body clearly supports.
However, accomplishments were not limited to these three departments of the SG. President Andy MacCracken’s executive branch made strides in multiple areas. The significance of the combination AU ID-Smartrip cards should not be underestimated, as it is the most progress made toward the perpetual goal of a student Metro discount.
Moreover, MacCracken has demonstrated a genuine concern for student input during his tenure. Perhaps this was made most clear when he held town hall-style meetings on changes to the shuttle system.
It seems fellow SG officials have caught MacCracken’s fervor for student input. The recently launched SG Listening Campaign embodies this new active effort to seek out the views of the AU student body. We hope that what began with MacCracken’s admirable deference toward students becomes a regular practice from SG, ultimately creating an SG that is consistently in tune with student attitudes.
While not quite a success, improvements to the AUTO program were nevertheless a needed change for a program that by the end of fall semester was running on empty. Still, there continue to be delays in registering and retraining drivers that affect numerous groups on campus. Despite the chaos surrounding AUTO’s changes, the SG was able to make vast improvements to the Bike Lending campaign, increasing its visibility and the ease of access. Current SG executive must continue these types of improvements within AUTO to make the complete fleet of vans available to students by Fall 2010.
However, there remained several events that — no matter how they are spun — can be labeled anything other than disappointments. The most obvious was clearly Founders’ Day. As The Eagle has previously editorialized, the future director of Founders’ Day and vice president must adhere to clear, public deadlines to avoid a similar fiasco.
Equally concerning were the multiple problems surrounding this year’s election. The multiple conflicts of interests, candidate suspensions and recantations of suspensions seriously hampered the SG’s reputation as a serious organization. Yet the reason these difficulties arose is the same reason behind the haphazard nature surrounding recent executive suspensions and impeachment trials — a tangible lack of clarity within the SG bylaws.
Without significant bylaw reforms, the student officials run the risk of repeating this past year’s scandals that overwhelmed the SG’s accomplishments. Too many scandals will, and to a certain extent all ready have, given the organization a lukewarm reputation. And despite the skill of AU students, The Eagle believes that the SG must seek outside experts — professors and lawyers, perhaps from the Washington College of Law — to assist in the document’s overhaul.
Some may claim that this is a drastic solution. Yet the SG must admit that during each scandal — the impeachment, the election and the suspension — few involved could identify the proper application of specific procedures, creating a ubiquitous atmosphere of confusion. If the SG is to be an effective institution of student advocacy, each member must understand their roles — a goal that becomes much more reachable once the bylaws are clarified.
Like every year in the SG, both accomplishments and mistakes were made. But as students, we have the opportunity to learn from our errors and those of our peers. It is when we don’t learn from our actions that students groups — like the SG — become truly insignificant.
