I speak for international students because I cannot speak for minority students, students with disabilities and nontraditional students, as I understand international students better being one myself. Similarly, GSB senators currently in power do not understand the needs that the four groups of people I just mentioned have.

Rafael Fernandez, the last international senator, has been working with international students on issues that concern us. He has the same concerns we have and therefore works wholeheartedly on these issues. When GSB was looking into asking for an increase in scholarships to offset the increase in tuition cost, they did not care enough to find out that international students are not eligible to receive scholarships that would be created by the increase. Our senator was concerned about that and he worked with us as we looked at alternatives.

My point is that specialty seats do not affect the majority of students at Iowa State and they should not, because the majority of students are represented by the housing and college senators. The minority, on the other hand, is not represented, as they are different. That is why we have an international education service office, a minority students’ office, disability office and all kinds of offices that represent the minority. By removing the specialty seats, GSB is stating that those offices are a waste of time and resources. Those offices are there because the university understands that the residence offices, the department and college offices and the finance offices cannot fully serve minority students, international students, nontraditional students and students with disabilities. The day that those offices can be removed by majority vote is the day that GSB action will be valid.

The GSB defense has been about the outcome of elections. The fact that everyone seems to be overlooking is that the ballot was 100 percent misleading. When I read the question about the removal of specialty seats I did not understand whether “yes” meant remove the seats or keep the seats. That was not because I am from Malawi and have been speaking British English all my life, it was because they phrased the question in a misleading way. If the international senator had not told us the night before that “no” meant keep the seats I would have voted “yes.”

Traditional students, who happen to be the majority of students at Iowa State, had no commitment to vote “no” as they are already represented by the housing and college senators, so if they voted for the removal they were just being unfair. I thank all the traditional students who voted to keep the seats because that is a sign that they are working on some diversity issues and making a difference by learning more about people who are different from them. Those who voted “yes” are at the right school but they need to participate more in diverse activities and get to know people different from them.

GSB needs to reconsider their action. The law decided on the basis of the turnout of a misleading ballot. That is plain wrong.

Miranda Mhango

Senior

Accounting