Senator Jessica Rothschild '06 introduced the amendment concerning the DC by questioning why a committee that decides the disciplinary fates of all students is not currently open to all students. "It didn't make sense to me," she said.
While Senator Avi Das '07 originally found Rothschild's amendment logical, Senator Joshua Stein '08 was more skeptical. He was concerned that by opening the DC to elections, a subculture would be created and too much attention would be paid to this very private committee. "I'm not sure if this is what we want," he said. Senator Patrick Benson '08 agreed. "It's a good idea in theory, but it would be really hard to run [for a position on the DC] … what would you say? How could you have a platform?" he asked.
Senator Robert Cobbs '06 was also worried about making the committee too public. "I'm all for direct democracy, but the DC is a closed-door situation," he said. "I'm concerned that people may think that 'because I ran on this platform, I have to decide this way.'"
Senator Andrea Gyorody '07 wondered if people who have been before the DC due to disciplinary infractions should be allowed to run for a position on the committee. "Having been through the process they would naturally have a bias," she explained. She emphasized the necessity of having impartial, unbiased committee members. Along the same lines, Das felt that possibly only two types of people will run for positions: Those who care very much about the DC and those who want to change the system. He said that he did not find the latter prospect very attractive.
Cobbs further cautioned that there was a chance of having an uncontested election, which could be detrimental to the integrity of the committee. He reminded the senators that uncontested elections are common and that the importance of the DC is such that it shouldn't be open to those types of issues in the first place.
Additionally, Senator Timothy Zeiser '07 said that he felt the current system worked well. "I think that the institutional firewall of the senate is necessary," he said. Rothschild, however, disagreed. "There is nothing about being a senator that makes you more qualified," she said.
When the senate finally voted on the amendment, the motion failed by a vote of nine to 21. Rothschild indicated that she would seek alternate paths to bring her proposal to referendum.
The AAS then moved to the BC recommendations for the week. They discussed the Pre-Business Group's request for $6,800 for their Interterm business seminar at great length. The constitutionality of the request is unclear to the Senate for two reasons: The event takes place during Interterm, a period for which the AAS is not allowed to provide funding, and students have to pay $85 to attend the event, when the constitution dictates that all events for which student activities fee money is used must be free to Amherst students.
The Group claimed they charge Amherst students in order to ensure that attendance is high. Thus, Das felt that if the Group didn't charge, it would jeopardize their ability to put on quality programming; nevertheless, their request was unconstitutional. "This puts us in strange constitutional territory," he said. Senator Emily Silberstein '06 felt that there was no reason why students' money shouldn't be refunded to them if they attended all sessions, and she motioned to force the Group to refund Amherst students' money if they showed satisfactory attendance.
After protracted debate on this point, Treasurer Richa Bhala '07 summarized the situation. "Either we let them do what they want … or we shape the event," she said. "If we're going to fund them, we need to treat them the same way that we do other clubs."
Joseph Maliekel '06, a representative from the Pre-Business Group, pointed out that they always produce a quality product. "We just ask that we receive support as we have in the past," he said.
Bhala noted that the goals of the Pre-Business Group are incompatible with those of the AAS, possibly explaining the inability of the two organizations to work out a solution. "They are a capitalist group operating in a quasi-welfare state," she said. She favored funding them this week and then discussing future funding later. However, Senator David Gottlieb '06 expanded Bhala's metaphor with the intentions of opposing her suggestion. "[Giving them money is] not a sufficient way to wean them off our Communist teats," he said.
Das created a compromise when he suggested committing the Pre-Business Group's budgetary woes to a group of three senators which included himself, Gyorody and Senator Jason Kung '08, in order to come to a mutually pleasing solution. After this, the remainder of the budgetary recommendations allocating $100 to Amherst Dance passed unanimously.