"It's shocking to me. I've never seen a student government that has no checks and balances; each branch does it's own job and no one else notices unless there are severe problems," said Haynes. "[The constitution's] not a terrible document, but a tremendous amount of it is not being followed. When most senators don't know it and haven't read it, it can't work."
The vote to form the committee was tabled until next week to allow for further discussion; however, Haynes presented a general outline of what type of government a new constitution should include. He suggested that students elect senate members by class instead of committee, with the president having purely executive duties, such as appointing senators to committees.
Other suggested changes included the complete renovation of the SFC and the inclusion of provisions that allow branches to check one another. Haynes also encouraged the institution of a legislative branch endowed with final decision-making power and led by a president pro tempore who would enforce parliamentary procedure.
"I think there must be changes. But, while we're enacting them, we're functioning better and better," said SGO President Michelle Oliveros-Larsen '02. "We realize there are problems and we're taking responsibility. I think this is an improvement over years when no one was concerned enough to address the problems at hand."
Haynes made his suggestions based on experience rewriting constitutions at two State University of New York schools and his knowledge of student governments across the country, which he said tend to bear greater structural similarity to the national government than Amherst's current system. However, some senators questioned the necessity of the suggested changes.
"The current [committee election] system feels so much more democratic," said Marisol Thomer '03E. "It makes sense to start with students who are competent in one area and they will become interested in senate issues in general. It can work; it has."
Other senators were frustrated by the senate's hesitancy to appoint the committee immediately, citing the need to act quickly to review the government in time for spring elections.
"We can vote for [an SGO constitution review committee] right now. I don't see why we have to wait," said Meredith Block '02. "If we want to change the constitution drastically for the spring election, this committee needs to be formed now."
Haynes advised the senate to act decisively in bringing the government in line with its constitutional responsibilities. He noted that three of the five branches of the government-the SFC, the E-board and the senate-were consistently failing to act constitutionally, as exemplified by the recent investigations into the SFC's handling of the crew team's budget.
"All of the problems with the constitution came to light as a result of legitimate charges by the crew team against the SFC," said Haynes. "The SFC would work fine if it formed the committees that the constitution says it should. If they can't follow the constitution, there needs to be a review and the implementation of something that works for Amherst today."
It appears the SFC will undergo restructuring regardless of the potential changes to the constitution. The resignation of SFC Chair Will Johnson '03 came just before an ad-hoc committee introduced resolutions to follow up on the E-board's initial SFC review. The SFC plans to present constitutional amendments of its own operation at next Monday's meeting.
"As a body, we see very little of what the money is spent on; the SFC chair handles a lot that the sub-chairs don't know about," said Blake Sparrow '04. "We need to review all of the things we aren't familiar with, but the SFC is going to be fine."
Some senators questioned the value of revising SFC operations in light of the complete governmental changes that appear forthcoming.
"If we decide to recreate the entire student government, we won't need to reevaluate the SFC," said Eric Osborne '04. "It's irrelevant when there's going to be a new financial branch."
Because the senate could not decide whether to create one committee to review both the SFC and the SGO or two separate committees, the issue was tabled until next Monday's meeting.
"The fact that this committee wants to expand its mission shows how much we need a committee that looks at bigger issues," said Jun Matsui '03. "But the entire SGO should have input into how this larger committee is formed, as it affects the entire student body."
In related business, Osborne reported that the College Council postponed its consideration of raising the student activities fee in light of the SFC investigation and impending changes.
"We didn't feel comfortable raising the fee until the SFC had been reviewed and restructured," said Osborne.
Haynes said that he decided to take a more active approach in guiding the government's reform efforts because of his and Dean of Students Ben Lieber's concerns that the SGO's problems were beginning to affect particular students adversely, as well as inhibiting action by the student body at large.
"It became apparent to me that the SGO was not being particularly successful in resolving issues and this had been taking a toll on some students, specifically Will Johnson, other SFC members and Michelle Oliveros-Larsen," said Haynes. "Proceedings became personal and unproductive and student groups that were just trying to go about their business were being frustrated, so I talked with the dean of students, and we decided that we couldn't continue to sit by."