Camille Carr
This is for the Oversight Committee: you got me messed up.
Just as Rachel should not have messed with Jasmine Collins’ money, the Oversight Committee should not mess with the Scot’s Key. All joking aside, I would like to positively acknowledge the work of the five student government leaders who are behind this proposed change. They have done this in hopes of reducing confusion and increasing productivity. From what I observed during the Wednesday night panel on Feb. 5, it is clear that these five students believe they are acting in the best interest of their constituents. My objective in writing this Viewpoint is not to condemn their characters.
However, in light of this proposed change, I mostly feel disappointed, exasperated and frustrated in my student government representatives as they continue to irresponsibly portray this as a wise option. I feel this way for several reasons. But to be mindful of my 600-word limit, I will only focus on my primary concern: the Oversight Committee’s failure to include the student body in the decision-making process. As representatives, it is their responsibility to advocate and make decisions that are representative of the student body. This is what they were elected to do.
I accept that engaging the student body is not always easy. Not every student is going to prioritize keeping up with all of the affairs of Student Government Association and Campus Council and that is okay. No matter how frustrating outreach can be, I still think representatives are obligated to try. As a student who aims to be engaged in the campus community, I cannot say I have seen a significant effort put forth by the Committee.
The Oversight Committee wrote the constitution for this new body early in the semester. They did this without seeking the opinions of all of their constituents. There was no attempt to communicate with the student body about this proposal before the announcement in the Voice on Jan. 31. Why did the Oversight Committee not try to send a survey to the student body? All it would have taken was an email. Even if they got an underwhelming response, they still would have tried. For this reason, in particular, I feel that the Oversight Committee has fallen short in their duty as representatives.
I appreciate the Oversight Committee’s sentiment when they pro- claim their desire for student input in naming this new body. Still, I would have appreciated being included in this decision-making process even more.
I urge my peers to express any concerns they may have as well. I do not doubt that my words may appear aggressive. This new proposal may seem a bit abstract but I assure you, this does matter.