Like Dean, I continue to stand by what I said. I understand that certain people involved in the AAS were offended by my comments; I want to clarify that my comments were directed at the organization and not its members. The members of the AAS are some of the most competent people I've known at Amherst. Perhaps this is the most frustrating part of all, since seeing so many competent people being so collectively incompetent can make one quickly lose faith.
After speaking with various friends last month, I concluded the only way I could make my voice heard was through my resignation. My comments illustrated a desire to make my frustrations with the AAS known to its members, who have collectively led it so far astray. I am not apologetic for what I said, and hopefully some of the shock and awe of my comments will serve to galvanize the AAS into action. Students on this campus see the organization as bureaucratic and uninterested in their concerns. As a member of the AAS, I often found myself agreeing with their complaints. In fact, the apathy of the student body has become so prevalent that executive board elections are often uncontested and senate seats are either left vacant or filled by students elected with the bare minimum of 17 votes.
Because I, like many other Americans, have grown extremely weary of perpetual negative attacks on President Bush by presidential candidates without suggestion of what should be done differently, I would like to provide a few changes the AAS could make that would help return the organization to relevancy.
First, seats on faculty and trustee committees should be open to non-senators. Many students, especially first-years and sophomores, do not know that students sit on some of the most influential committees at this school. Trustee appointments and changes to academic policy are all approved by committees comprised of administrators, faculty members and students appointed by the AAS. As the AAS constitution currently states, only students serving as senators are allowed to serve on these committees. But, because the major focus of the AAS is wrongly placed on budgetary matters, fewer and fewer students learn about the existence of these important and influential seats.
Furthermore, many qualified students, aware of the requirement to serve as an AAS Senator, shy away from volunteering their service because they do not want to sit in on the weekly meetings of budgetary recommendations and hostile arguments. Often, seats on faculty and trustee committees are left vacant because of lack of interest or the fact that there are not enough senators to fill them all. The persistent refusal of the AAS to allow non-senators to serve on these committees leaves the students without a voice.
Second, the AAS needs to advocate, advocate and advocate. Members of the AAS recognize that apathy cripples the organization and firmly believe that the best way to solve this problem is through more visible action. I agree with this idea; however, the purchasing of goods is not the only means of obtaining this visibility. Examples of such purchases are the "Sounds of Amherst" CD and the Bradley Airport Shuttle. It's not that CDs and the shuttle are bad, but when one of the few things that the student government does is provide goods and services of questionable necessity, it undermines the organization's credibility.
The primary mission of the AAS should be to serve as the student body's advocate for change on campus. The AAS must take ideological stances on issues of College policy when it feels appropriate, and if it were to do so on a regular basis, it would quickly force the administration to work more closely with the AAS. If the AAS were a stronger organization on matters of an ideological nature, President Marx would have known to discuss the smoking ban with the student government instead of making a decision without student input. A lack of advocacy is a major part of the vicious circle that results in the incompetence of the AAS. The administration doesn't have to deal with the organization, cementing the notion among the student body that the AAS isn't useful.
Third, the AAS must hold itself to the same standards that it imposes on the students. This seems like it should be a very obvious tenet for the AAS to hold. However, this is often not the case. The most glaring example comes from the junior class council project, which the senate practically unanimously approved, that purchased upwards of $250 for food for a study-break scheduled at the end of the semester. This occurred despite the fact that the AAS continually denies clubs money to purchase food when it is non-essential.
Such hypocrisy, and the fact that it went largely unnoticed, only further damaged the credibility of the AAS and was a major factor in my decision to resign. How can the AAS defend itself from the common accusation that it is filled with elitist students who simply like to exert power over their peers? As judiciary chair, I found the AAS spent many hours bickering over very specific language that, in the end, had little impact on the student body, and was largely ignored by its members except in cases of personal attack.
Fourth, the AAS needs to stop being so arrogant. This past winter, appeals were cut from the budget, and groups had only one chance to apply for funds. Naturally, once the budgetary committee recommended the budgets to the Senate, hundreds of students descended on the Red Room to contest their allotments. Alas, the Budgetary Comittee had already allocated all available funding, forcing students to justify why they were more deserving than their peers in order to get any. Most students rose above the level of the AAS and refused to impugn the reputations of their fellow students, leaving without any more money. When changes were presented, the BC took them as an affront to its members. Their defensive attitude made it evident that they believed no one else, senator or non-senator, had anything valuable to contribute to the budgetary debate. Making students come to the Senate and hope that they attack their fellow students for additional money is appalling and counterproductive. Moreover, tough choices should be made with everyone's input, even if some students don't have the mandate of 17 votes of support.
Last but not least, the AAS should cosider a name change because seriously, what most call it, including myself, is embarrassing.