It's obvious that we're never going to be perfect. Any student government is going to hear complaints from its constituents; that's the same way it works in any type of government. However, the concerns I've heard from students about the AAS are certainly not unfounded, nor should they be dismissed.
The most pressing concern that has been brought to my attention is the argument that students who serve on the Senate are inherently self-interested and care more about padding their own resumés than about serving the school. There is a general tendency for certain types of people to want to hold more power, and that is clearly not an exception at Amherst. The other complaint I've continually heard is that the Senate overwhelmingly deals with budgetary matters and devotes only a small portion of its time to discussing issues of student life.
I believe that both statements are true to varying extents. Although I honestly believe that every member of the Student Senate is deeply committed to helping the students here at Amherst, there may be some senators whose views simply do not reflect those of the student body. The lack of candidates running every year doesn't do much to help this problem. During the most recent election cycle, the class of 2007 only had five people running for eight spots, meaning that three additional people were elected by write-in votes. The class of 2008 was not much better, with a grand total of eight people running for the eight open spots. People are simply winning by default. Every year, the first-year and sophomore classes have large numbers of students running for Senate while the juniors and seniors have a hard time just getting all eight spots filled. In short, students who have been at the College longer are less likely to want to serve on the Senate.
The Senate Restructuring Amendment last spring attempted to remedy this problem by reducing the Senate's size, but after being brought to referendum, it failed overwhelmingly. It became apparent to me that students did not want to diminish the size of our student government, but rather, wanted to see a different group of students who are more equipped to do the job. Perhaps the solution isn't in diminishing the size of student government but rather delegating the power better among those serving on it.
So here's my proposal: separate the Budgetary Committee (BC) from the Senate. Make them smaller, completely independent entities, with their members voted on separately by the student body. As I see it, they should each have an inherently different role.
During the two years I've spent on the Senate, the vast majority of time during the meetings has dealt with budgetary issues. At the beginning of each meeting, the BC presents its recommendations about funding for certain clubs and activities, and the Senate makes amendments to the recommendations before ultimately voting on them. Debates about funding often ensue, and although these debates are certainly important, there is simply no need to have all 32 members of the Senate sitting in on the discussions. The decisions about funding that the Senate ultimately makes are often identical (or at least very similar) to those that the eight-member Budgetary Committee had already made during their own deliberations. However, the discussions in the Senate about funding often take hours, and by the time debates about budgetary issues are finished and voted on, most Senators are tired of arguing and are ready to end the meeting. Very little time is left to discuss other issues.
As I see it, issues of funding should be left to the BC. The Senate, on the other hand, should work exclusively on improving student life. It should continue to form committees on dining services, parking, etc., but membership on each of these committees should be opened up to the entire student body to encourage more participation. The Senate itself should simply be a group of students that passes legislation and makes recommendations to the administration on how to better represent the interests of the students. Any issues of funding should lie outside its purview.
During the few years of the AAS's existence at Amherst, it has evolved from a governing body to an organization that deals almost exclusively with budgetary issues. In addressing the many concerns that students have about the AAS, perhaps we should take a step back and look at the rationale behind our student government in the first place. According to the preamble to the AAS Constitution, the Student Senate is committed to "articulating student voices for advancing action and change." I believe that every member of the Senate is striving to achieve that goal, yet we still seem to be coming up short. It is clear that something needs to be changed. Perhaps a separation of the Student Senate and the Budgetary Committee is the first place to start.
Raj Borsellino is a sophomore majoring in Political Science. He is a diehard fan of the Iowa Hawkeyes.