Only three days ago, these pages called for the Student Union Executive Board, Tribunal and Senate to give up their authority and concentrate on reforming the Union overall. To do this would have required a sense of purpose and altruism that is apparently beyond this year’s senators. How else to explain their near-unanimous decision to remove their allocation powers while still claiming to operate as a viable branch of student government? The senate’s shirking of responsibility while refusing to address larger issues should either be struck down, or be the final straw before the Union’s complete dissolution.
On the surface, the Senate’s effort to streamline their role in government might seem laudable. Letting the Student Union Allocations Board handle all allocations would cut down on arguing between senators and free up more time for advocacy, which senators claim is the new mission of the body. However, the move shows a lack of both foresight and backbone.
Such an important decision should not have been made lightly. The Senate decided they no longer wanted the responsibility to allocate $16,000 without deciding who eventually should control this not-insignificant sum. It currently resides in the E-Board’s Request Account, but the E-Board will probably not retain permanent control of the money. If Dean of Students Kenneth Elmore approves the proposed budget that lets the Senate discharge their allocating responsibility, student groups that could have been petitioning for money next Monday will have to find other routes to fund their projects on incredibly short notice. The Senate could have decided to give up allocations for a trial period to determine how such an important switch in priorities would impact the student government and the student body, but decided instead to dive headfirst into murky and uncharted waters.
More importantly, relinquishing the ability to allocate shows the Senate’s inability to confront obstacles. Instead of examining their inability to allocate and advocate at the same time, senators decided the quickest way to solve the problem was to eliminate the variables. Elected officials dodging one of the tasks they were voted into office to perform does not seem like a feat that would impress the administration, no matter how good their intentions. The Senate will hardly be able to draw from the pool of talented, capable Boston University students if it has no power to offer them. The Senate may have displayed unity in their near-unanimous vote to avoid introspection and meaningful change, but unity cannot strengthen irresponsibility.
The Senate’s decision is now before Dean Elmore. He should either reject their vote outright, or take their willingness to give up power as an indication that the Union does not want or deserve what authority they have. Corruption and misconduct are problems enough. The last thing BU students need is a government that does not wish to govern.