Earlier this week, Student Association President Chris Oliver asked for the resignation of two senators who held presidential-appointed positions in other student offices. The move came after a non-binding judgment from the Student Wide Judiciary that the two senators were in a position to be affected by conflict of interest, due to their ties to the executive board.
The senators, Michael Goggin and Adam Baviford, responded to Oliver's request by voluntarily resigning from their positions. Both Goggin and Baviford hold positions appointed by the executive branch - Goggin as treasurer and representative of Sub-Board I, Inc., and Baviford as a member of the SA communications staff.
The possible conflict was raised by an official complaint from losing senatorial candidate Wade Smith. Since the SA constitution is murky at best when dealing with these issues, it was left to Oliver to decide what should be done. By taking action on this issue, he will hopefully pave the way for legal clarity so that similar issues do not tar future Senate elections.
The two replacement senators, Gregory Haynes and Adam Haney, both ran for Senate and were defeated. Haney received the next highest vote count after Goggin and Baviford, but Haynes was further down the list. Haynes, however, served as an SA senator last year and in fact ran against the current administration's party during last year's e-board elections, a testament to his willingness to go against the popular opinion of the incumbent party. As a senator last year, he opposed an amendment mandating that the president and vice president run on the same ticket, which was supported by the executive board. Haynes will bring diversity and fresh ideas to the student government, and it is commendable of Oliver to extend that opportunity to Haynes.
In an ideal world, many aspects of this election would be different. If laws were in place clearly specifying what constitutes a conflict of interest, Goggin and Baviford would not have been allowed to run in the first place, and disputes like this could have been avoided. It is too late for that, however, and ideally there would be another election - and enough time - to replace the Senators. Practically, however, that is a terrible idea. Previous elections have been plagued by apathy and poor voter turnout, so the usefulness of holding another election to replace the senators is doubtful. More importantly, the SA constitution mandates that the SA president appoint senators in the event of unexpected vacancies, a system proven and used by state governments in the event of absences in the state senates.
Faith must be shown in the appointment power vested in Oliver; if that faith should fail, the SA assembly should be strong enough to ratify and approve of his selections. The foresight of the assembly should have blocked this election from ever happening under such circumstances. The assembly has to approve Oliver's appointments and keep a watchful eye towards future unsavory transgressions and they should use the knowledge gained from this experience to ensure it never happens again.
If constitutional laws were in place to prevent members with a vested interest elsewhere from running for Senate, this type of situation could be avoided. Since there is such heavy turnover from year to year, it is important now for governing bodies to take a stance. Five years down the road, the current administration will be forgotten; the experience gained by this year's board will be lost if some kind of written record or constitutional changes are not made. Written guidelines pertaining to these issues would allow future generations to avoid such turmoil.
The integrity of the governing bodies is important and best achieved by full separation of powers. Oliver has taken a good step toward improving responsible governance, and other members of the SA administration must be responsible for ensuring it in future generations.
Photo: Meredith Forrest Kulwicki
