 |
|
|
Thursday, 4/19/2001
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday, 4/19/2001
|
|
 Fault doesn't lie completely on PSGI would like to clarify the recent happenings in Purdue Student Government so everyone can understand the situation better. As a senator, I did not consider the Internal Review Committee's proposal a report because the committee did not provide several documents that were crucial to the debate and because the committee suggested changes that they were not chartered to make. They had presented the new constitution to the senate at the beginning of the senate meeting, right before deliberations began, which did not provide adequate time to review. Most importantly, the new set of bylaws had not even been written. Did you know that you voted on a new set of bylaws that does not yet exist? Also, there were not enough legal signatures to place the referendum on the ballot. 1,500 signatures were needed. 204 of the signatures obtained were illegal. That means that the number of legal signatures obtained were well short the required number. Therefore, the referendum should never have been put on the ballot. The senate did not just throw out the decision made by the students. The proposals have been brought back before the senate so that the constitutionality and the practicality of the ideas can be reviewed. This is an effort to protect the students from changes that could drastically affect them. It is never a good idea to accept changes to the way the government is run in a lump sum. It is necessary to review the proposal more thoroughly before any changes are made. I agree that there needs to be a change in PSG. However, change for the sake of change is a poor solution to a problem. David J. Purpura |
Overruling shows inadequacy of PSG
Fault doesn't lie completely on PSG Chalkings promote events, diversity People seek equality, acceptance Jischke fails to meet expectations Parents may misuse fountain fences
OPINIONS DESK PHONE: Opinions editor:
|
|||||||
|
| ||||||||
