If you're reading this article, you are probably wondering what complaint I could possibly have: Why would it matter that an organization that does nothing did not meet? Well, here's the paradox: The AAS has very little, if any, credibility among the student body, which upsets the senators; yet, many senators fail to take their positions seriously enough to attend their weekly meeting.
In last week's AAS article in The Amherst Student, one senator not only dismissed the importance of the meeting's cancellation, but dismissed the importance of the meeting altogether. The senator said, "'We didn't have a lot of pressing issues.'" Well, it sure is reassuring to hear that it's premissible to cancel a meeting when there are only a few pressing issues.
The article also contained testimony from several senators, claiming that the lack of senatorial presence at the meeting was "certainly foreseeable." Well, if this was a predicted event, why weren't preventative measures taken? Why wasn't the meeting cancelled and rescheduled in advance?
It is upsetting enough that quorum was not met, but the problem is magnified when non-senators, who have come specifically to the meeting to petition for club funding, are turned away because their representatives have decided to take the night off. Because the senate meets only once a week and must complete an entire week's worth of work in one meeting, I think it's perfectly analogous to a week in the real United States Senate. So my question for you is, what would happen if the United States government decided to take the week off? "Senator Skip Week"? I don't think that would go over very well.
But if you think I'm merely upset about the lack of funding allocation, you're sorely mistaken. Many people equate the AAS with the Budgetary Committee; however, there are many other aspects of the AAS that are completely overlooked. The AAS does more than give clubs money; it is composed of several other committees on which students actually serve the best interests of the student body. The operative word here is "several." Yes, the AAS is far from efficient: Most of the members of the AAS live up to their reputation as lazy, resume padders.
In last week's election, the student body overwhelmingly voted (70-30 percent) in favor of a constitutional amendment that requires individual senators to be responsible for a project a year. Now, many senators are upset, as they do not wish to have to do any real work in order to fill that otherwise white space on their resume; they do not want additional responsibilities, and they certainly do not want to take any initiative for the improvement of the campus. I cannot wait to see how this pans out, how the senators will attempt to subvert the good intentions of the amendment.
Senators, if you don't care enough to show up to your meetings or do any work, maybe you shouldn't be senators.
But even if you do attend the weekly meetings, don't just sit there quietly, thinking that your presence is equivalent to pa\rticipation. And show some respect to both yourself and your constituents. Utter disrespect was exhibited by some attending senators just a few weeks ago, requiring the establishment of a new senate rule to discourage senators from attending meetings while intoxicated. Such behavior displays a disregard for both your fellow senators and the student body. What would happen if U.S. senators tried to go to work drunk?
Every year many first-years run for what seems to them to be a "prestigious position"-to be in the student government. Many of these students probably also served on their high school's student councils, but these individuals have no idea what they're getting themselves into-or maybe it's what they're not getting themselves into. By the time these first-years become upperclassmen, the allure of the senate has long disappeared, and there are typically unfilled seats, even after midterm elections.
A logical remedy is that there should be fewer senators per class, which would weed out the resume padders and provide truly altruistically inspired students to serve on the senate. There should be no more than five senators per class. At other comparable colleges, like Swarthmore College, there are only 11 voting members on the senate. At Duke University, where the average class size hovers around the total size of the Amherst College student population, there are only 11 members of the cabinet.
A more immediate and preliminary solution to establish a relationship and restore credibility with the student body is one suggested in last week's Student editorial. The secretary, in the weekly e-mails, should include a summary of what the senate has been working on. Through this simple measure, students would begin to learn what good some of their senators actually do for them.
When running for office, potential senators made pledges that they would represent the student body and that they would not let them down. Valentine's Day is about love, not abandonment; but this Valentine's Day, the senators abandoned the student body.
Rothschild can be reached at jirothschild@amherst.edu