Many students have asked me why I wrote a 15-page constitution
that incorporates a senate into the Undergraduate Students
Association Council governance structure.
Why would my colleagues and I waste hours of our lives poring
over eight other constitutions, researching 13 different types of
voting systems and deliberating with professors and students? The
answer is that a senate system allows for true representation by
increasing the diversity of opinions, empowering independents and
distributing tasks into two specialized branches.
Since a council system ““ in one form or another ““
has existed at UCLA for 86 years, its antiquity could be reason
enough for change. USAC has never been truly representative,
despite having three different constitutions over the years ““
all of which have been confined to an oligarchical council
structure.
We are working to implement a new system that has proven
successful at every other University of California campus and
countless universities across the country. The advantages of a
senate system are numerous.
It is perhaps obvious that more elected officials translates
into greater representation. With larger involvement in student
government, there exists a greater diversity of opinions,
backgrounds, political agendas and ideas. This interaction of
different viewpoints facilitates a larger and more comprehensive
deliberation on policy initiatives.
Plus, the senate creates an impetus for independents and average
students to run for public office; the voting constituency needed
to win a senate seat is substantially reduced. Nevertheless, the
argument for a separate legislative body goes well beyond a simple
numbers game.
Currently, USAC combines legislative and executive functions of
government into one all-encompassing body. In our proposal, there
is a specialization of these tasks into two separate branches of
government. The executive branch deals mainly with implementation
and programming, while the senate is relegated to legislative
considerations.
This division of tasks goes a long way in rebutting the
oft-repeated assumption that “a senate is less
efficient.” When immediate action is necessary, expeditious
procedures may be undertaken by the executive branch, which has
mechanisms for rapid response. On the other hand, legislative
matters, such as base budget allocations and resolutions, require
greater consideration and merit a more deliberative system. It is
noteworthy that the most efficient form of government is a
monarchy.
Additionally, this senate proposal is strengthened by the use of
a proportional voting system, called the Hare system. I would like
to quote Liz Hall, the UC Berkeley Associated Students of the
University of California external affairs vice president, who wrote
a letter to the editor on Feb. 3: “It is not the ASUC’s
(senate system) that is particularly representative of the
diversity of experiences of Berkeley students, but rather the
voting system utilized in our elections.”
In a blatant effort to dissuade the average student from
thinking that there is a causal relationship between
Berkeley’s diverse and representative governing body and its
senate system, Hall fortuitously heralds our proposal’s
voting system as “more representative.” I found this
piece to be quite humorous, since I practically plagiarized
Berkeley’s constitution when articulating the voting system
itself.
In any case, Hall is correct. The Hare system we are using is
uniquely representative. This voting system was used heavily in the
United States prior to World War II, but was discontinued because
it worked “too well.” In Cincinnati in 1957, the Hare
system was abandoned because it appeared that the mayor would be
black.
We aim to give voice to under-represented groups. When the
council is dominated year after year by a single ideology, when 43
registered student organizations receive no base budget allocations
with little opposition, when closed sessions are held without the
watchful eye of the press and public, it can only be concluded that
a more representative system is long overdue.
Neesby is a fourth-year political science student.